keylock71: MFL: keylock71

Seems like the Obama Administration has been playing the GOP like a fiddle for the last few months...

If that were true he'd be winning.

He's not?

...or are you using Republican Math?

It's still early; the polls won't mean much until after the conventions, but Romney's got a tough choice to make. He needs a VP pick that will appeal to the base AND a VP pick that will prove to independents that he's not being controlled by the Tea Party. I predict that he'll choose both Herman Cain AND Olympia Snowe to be his co-VPs.

/If he can be both pro-life and pro-choice, why can't he have two running mates?

HighOnCraic: keylock71: MFL: keylock71

Seems like the Obama Administration has been playing the GOP like a fiddle for the last few months...

If that were true he'd be winning.

He's not?

...or are you using Republican Math?

It's still early; the polls won't mean much until after the conventions, but Romney's got a tough choice to make. He needs a VP pick that will appeal to the base AND a VP pick that will prove to independents that he's not being controlled by the Tea Party. I predict that he'll choose both Herman Cain AND Olympia Snowe to be his co-VPs.

/If he can be both pro-life and pro-choice, why can't he have two running mates?

Sounds like he needs to do something big to switch the contest around. A game changer, if you will. I'm sure that will work out great, right?

Gosling:

The thing about 'any President would have pulled the trigger on bin Laden' is that it's demonstrably wrong. Obama did. Bush, who had it happen on his watch and who had twice the time Obama did, failed to pull the trigger.

I'm joining in the chorus of this being 'how DARE you have a spine and campaign on it!'

You know, while there is a valid point in there, it would be easier to see if you didn't cloud things up with partisan hackery. While GWB did fail to nail OBL, Clinton DECLINED an offer by Sudan to arrest that SOB. OBL was a slippery little fark, and I don't think GWB really had a decent shot at him, other than turning the area around the Afghan/Pakistani border into a glass parking lot... which, upon further consideration...

Glenford: HighOnCraic: keylock71: MFL: keylock71

Seems like the Obama Administration has been playing the GOP like a fiddle for the last few months...

If that were true he'd be winning.

He's not?

...or are you using Republican Math?

It's still early; the polls won't mean much until after the conventions, but Romney's got a tough choice to make. He needs a VP pick that will appeal to the base AND a VP pick that will prove to independents that he's not being controlled by the Tea Party. I predict that he'll choose both Herman Cain AND Olympia Snowe to be his co-VPs.

/If he can be both pro-life and pro-choice, why can't he have two running mates?

Sounds like he needs to do something big to switch the contest around. A game changer, if you will. I'm sure that will work out great, right?

You betcha! (Winks)

GWB needed Osama alive as a continual threat to the US - to scare people into line. No way would GWB take out Osama.

Likewise Osama needed GWB to promote a foreign policy that was openly hostile to Muslims - so that the fundamentalist Muslims could recruit new members.

GWB and Osama were working in each other's best interests. Though It would be stretching things to call them friends (even though their parents were friends).

GeneralJim: Gosling: The thing about 'any President would have pulled the trigger on bin Laden' is that it's demonstrably wrong. Obama did. Bush, who had it happen on his watch and who had twice the time Obama did, failed to pull the trigger.

I'm joining in the chorus of this being 'how DARE you have a spine and campaign on it!'
You know, while there is a valid point in there, it would be easier to see if you didn't cloud things up with partisan hackery. While GWB did fail to nail OBL, Clinton DECLINED an offer by Sudan to arrest that SOB. OBL was a slippery little fark, and I don't think GWB really had a decent shot at him, other than turning the area around the Afghan/Pakistani border into a glass parking lot... which, upon further consideration...

Had he not held back two thirds of the armed forces from Afghanistan so he could bomb the wrong country for no reason, yeah, we could have got him in 2001/2002.

If Obama hits that bulls-eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate.

mrshowrules: Romney has the edge in the white males in the 65+ age demographic.

Lets hope they can stay alive until November and vote for the Liberal from Massachusetts!

/Vote Republican

keylock71
Seems like the Obama Administration has been playing the GOP like a fiddle for the last few months...

MFL: If that were true he'd be winning.

qorkfiend By what measure is he not winning?

Pretty much all of them.

1. 8.5% unemployment, 1.8 % GDP,17 trillion dollar deficit.
2. His coalition is shrinking. Obama's current strategy of pitting Americans against one another is a complete reversal of his 2008 strategy of wanting to unite people and is an admission that his prior coalitions have fallen apart.
3. Beyond that, in 2008, enthusiasm was greatly in favor of the Democrats, yet Obama only got to 52.9% of the vote. In the 2010 midterm elections, the enthusiasm advantage was held by Republicans to great effect. The same dynamic will hold true this year even if not to the same degree.
4. His biggest legislative accomplishment will be deemed unconstitutional.
5. He will let the Bush tax cuts expire and he is actively campaigning for tax increases. The last 8 Presidential winners have campaigned for tax cuts - as Obama did 4 years ago. No winners in the last 8 have campaigned for tax increases.
6. At the end of 2007 there were over 146 million people working. At the end of 2011 that number had dropped to 140 million even though the number of working aged people increased by 7.75 million. Polish that turd.
7. No incumbent president in recent memory has been this far behind at this stage of the game yes being tied is like being behind if you're an incumbant at this stage in the game.
8. Everything costs more than it did 3 years ago.
9. No budget in 3 years.
10. Leadership Deficit: He has no plans for our major problems and instead chooses to blames others. That is decidedly un-presidential after 4 years.
11. The end of a tough primary fight is usually the low point for the out party. Yet Romney is polling neck and neck with the president.
12. Romney is underrated as a candidate. Obama is overrated as a president.
13. Consumer confidence is too low.
14. Voters want direction not excuses - a plan not vague promises. Obama has never given an agenda to the American people, he just enforces his agenda many times over their objections
15. He has to sell his record to the public which is harder than getting them to buy a Volt.

By what measure is he? And please don't give me some skewed CBS/NYTimes poll.

mrshowrules: If Obama had ever traded arms for hostages he would have been successfully impeached within a month.

Another one -- If Obama's (or any Democratic President's) family had business dealings and personal friendships with the bin Laden family, the investigations would. never. stop.

And we'd be hearing about it forever.


/....................... forever

MFL: keylock71
Seems like the Obama Administration has been playing the GOP like a fiddle for the last few months...

MFL: If that were true he'd be winning.

qorkfiend By what measure is he not winning?

Pretty much all of them.

1. 8.5% unemployment, 1.8 % GDP,17 trillion dollar deficit.
2. His coalition is shrinking. Obama's current strategy of pitting Americans against one another is a complete reversal of his 2008 strategy of wanting to unite people and is an admission that his prior coalitions have fallen apart.
3. Beyond that, in 2008, enthusiasm was greatly in favor of the Democrats, yet Obama only got to 52.9% of the vote. In the 2010 midterm elections, the enthusiasm advantage was held by Republicans to great effect. The same dynamic will hold true this year even if not to the same degree.
4. His biggest legislative accomplishment will be deemed unconstitutional.
5. He will let the Bush tax cuts expire and he is actively campaigning for tax increases. The last 8 Presidential winners have campaigned for tax cuts - as Obama did 4 years ago. No winners in the last 8 have campaigned for tax increases.
6. At the end of 2007 there were over 146 million people working. At the end of 2011 that number had dropped to 140 million even though the number of working aged people increased by 7.75 million. Polish that turd.
7. No incumbent president in recent memory has been this far behind at this stage of the game yes being tied is like being behind if you're an incumbant at this stage in the game.
8. Everything costs more than it did 3 years ago.
9. No budget in 3 years.
10. Leadership Deficit: He has no plans for our major problems and instead chooses to blames others. That is decidedly un-presidential after 4 years.
11. The end of a tough primary fight is usually the low point for the out party. Yet Romney is polling neck and neck with the president.
12. Romney is underrated as a candidate. Obama is overrated as a president.
13. Consumer confidence is too low.
14. ...

And yet, he still holds a commanding lead in electoral votes, according to well-known communist Karl Rove.

Lord Dimwit: Pincy: Pretty much anything the Democrats do or say is a trap for Republicans because the Republicans just can't stop being batshiat stupid crazy insane.

And yet about half of the country will vote for them, because having absolutely insane people is better than having (a) someone who won't cut taxes even more, (b) someone who might give medical vare to someone who needs it, (c) someone who's black, or (d) all of the above.

I know so many otherwise reasonable people who will vote for demonstrably wrong and insane people with all of the contingent damage they could bring to the country because of one of those reasons.

You forgot

(e) they're liberal.

"Sticking it to the liberals" seems to be one of the most important things to a GOPer.

TFA: YES! NO! MAYBE!

/CAPSLOCK biatchEZ

mrshowrules: mrshowrules: qorkfiend: mrshowrules: qorkfiend: If Rule #1 in politics isn't "Never talk about your opponent's strengths or successes", it should be.

The Rovian rule which got Dubya re-elected is precisely the opposite. You most certainly attack an opponent on his strengths and successes. You simply frame them as weaknesses and failures (by lying).

-Kerry was a coward
-Obama is trying to co-opt the credit of Bush and the Navy Seals for getting OBL
-the milk you put on your cereal in the morning cereal comes from cats

I had thought the Rovian strategy was take your weaknesses and project them on to your opponent.

All part of the Rove strategy rainbow. What you said is also standing operating procedure. I think it all derivative of the "big lie" strategy. Make a lie big enough and people will believe there is at least an element of truth to it. I would attribute that to someone else but I don't want to Godwin the thread.

Here's a good article on it.

Link

Also, always best to get your opponent on the defense. This demonstrates that better than anything in the universe:

Link

Thanks for that link.

GeneralJim: Clinton DECLINED an offer by Sudan to arrest that SOB.

Remember that this was before USS Cole, before 9/11 and all the hindsight that gives us. He hadn't been promoted to Satan-on-Earth quite yet.

GeneralJim: ...glass parking lot... which, upon further consideration...

... is the kind of knee-jerk boneheaded chest-thumping nonsense that's characteristic of today's Repubs, illustrating one of many reasons why they can't be trusted with the reins of power.

Sargun: [fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net image 600x491]

The cartoon is pretty spot on. Int he GOP's eyes, only they can celebrate foreign policy victories or use fear tactics. No one else, especially not democrats, can do that.

GeneralJim: Gosling: The thing about 'any President would have pulled the trigger on bin Laden' is that it's demonstrably wrong. Obama did. Bush, who had it happen on his watch and who had twice the time Obama did, failed to pull the trigger.

I'm joining in the chorus of this being 'how DARE you have a spine and campaign on it!'
You know, while there is a valid point in there, it would be easier to see if you didn't cloud things up with partisan hackery. While GWB did fail to nail OBL, Clinton DECLINED an offer by Sudan to arrest that SOB. OBL was a slippery little fark, and I don't think GWB really had a decent shot at him, other than turning the area around the Afghan/Pakistani border into a glass parking lot... which, upon further consideration...

Link

Below are the 5 major decisions and non-decisions made by Bush that allowed the 911 attacks to succeed and, had he treated terrorism seriously and took only the most basic and common sense actions in the face of the information he was given, could have and would have prevented the 911 attacks.

1. THE DEMOTION OF RICHARD CLARKE.

The first thing Bush did with regards to terrorism after taking office was demote Richard Clarke, head of anti-terrorism for the 3 previous U.S. presidents, demoting him and his office of anti-terrorism from the cabinet level position Clarke held during the Clinton Administration to a sub-cabinet position, removing his direct access to the president.

2. THE DISSOLUTION OF THE PRINCIPALS MEETING.

Bush dissolved the Principles Meeting on Terrorism. This was a daily meeting that took place during the Clinton Administration and chaired by Richard Clarke, where the cabinet heads of every agency related to counter terrorism, CIA, FBI, the Attorney General, ATF, Immigration and others would sit in a conference room and share all the information related to terrorism collected by their respective agencies in the previous 24 hours and discuss its significance and what if anything to do about it.
...

3. IGNORING INTELLIGENCE WARNINGS.

In July of 2001, George Tenant requested an emergency meeting with Condoleeza Rice at the White House. His concern was the messages contained in the Al-Qaeda chatter that the CIA had intercepted. In the meeting Tenant and the head of his counter terrorism group at the CIA told Rice that the intercepts of Al-Qaeda chatter have not only spiked to an all time high, but indicated the intercepts showed that the U.S. was going to be hit by a major Al-Qaeda attack and that the attack was "imminent". The head of CIA counter terrorism said he told Rice, " this country has to go on a war footing right now" with regards to Al-Qaeda. Both Rice and Bush dismissed them and took no action. Rice was so disinterested she testified at the 911 Commission hearings that she didn't even remember the meeting taking place and even denied they took place but White House logs prove that it did. Rice was either so dismissive of terrorism that she honestly didn't remember the meeting or she was lying. As Richard Clarke himself said in a new Smithsonian documentary on 911, "talking to the Bush Administration about terrorism was like talking to a brick wall".

4. JULY AND AUGUST INTERCEPTS OF AL-QAEDA MESSAGES
...
5. THE AUGUST 6, 2001 PDB.
...

MFL: keylock71
Seems like the Obama Administration has been playing the GOP like a fiddle for the last few months...

MFL: If that were true he'd be winning.

qorkfiend By what measure is he not winning?

Pretty much all of them.

[Statistics and opinions follow]

By what measure is he? And please don't give me some skewed CBS/NYTimes poll.

Sorry, didn't see any "measure" showing he was losing. I saw a shiatload of opinion, but no actual metrics of winning/losing.

Let's try Rasmussen, which isn't exactly skewed in his favor:

Thursday, May 03, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows President Obama earning 47% of the vote and Mitt Romney attracting 45%. Three percent (3%) would vote for a third party candidate, while four percent (4%) are undecided.
...
In the Core Four states of Florida, Ohio, North Carolina and Virginia, the president has a three-point edge over Romney. These states have 75 Electoral College votes, and Romney probably needs to carry all four to win the election.

Sure, it's close...but so was the last Super Bowl, and we still referred to whatever team was ahead during the game as "winning," right?

qorkfiend: If Rule #1 in politics isn't "Never talk about your opponent's strengths or successes", it should be.

They got too cocky when they successfully made being a war hero with three purple hearts a bad thing back in 2004.

Men get arrested. Dogs get put down.

mrshowrules: bugontherug: qorkfiend: If Rule #1 in politics isn't "Never talk about your opponent's strengths or successes", it should be.

Naw. Mittens had to hit back. I agree with this part of the article:

Either way, Team Mitt had to hit back: This brouhaha is only tangentially about bin Laden, says Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo. Modern campaigns are "meta-battles over power, masculinity, and dominance," and by smacking Romney across the face, hard, Team Obama is trying to "unman" him. Romney's only real response in "this sort of schoolyard power play" was to hit back, or risk getting "owned" by his rival.

The bolded part is why "Mittens" is a great taunting nickname to use. It emasculates Romney, turning him into a girly mon.

So "I would have done it to" is manning up? Mittens (I do like the term) really had no way to handle this gracefully. Spiking the ball (is a bullshiat statement) but what is funny in the simple mind on the GOP base it actually reinforces that Obama actually won. Above all else, Americans like a winner. Let's call it 2-0 for Obama. He gets a point for his success and one for the rebound after Romney fumbled. Your turn Mittens.

/I'm certain I've screwed up the sports analogy somewhere but whatever

I think it was a losing fight for Mittens, no matter what. But I think he had to engage, if for no other reason than to counter his previous criticism of going into Pakistan to get bin Laden. Now that it's been done, he really just can't allow himself to be painted with the proposition that he wouldn't have done the same thing. That alone would almost ensure his defeat.

MFL: keylock71
Seems like the Obama Administration has been playing the GOP like a fiddle for the last few months...

MFL: If that were true he'd be winning.

qorkfiend By what measure is he not winning?

Pretty much all of them.

1. 8.5% unemployment, 1.8 % GDP,17 trillion dollar deficit.
2. His coalition is shrinking. Obama's current strategy of pitting Americans against one another is a complete reversal of his 2008 strategy of wanting to unite people and is an admission that his prior coalitions have fallen apart.
3. Beyond that, in 2008, enthusiasm was greatly in favor of the Democrats, yet Obama only got to 52.9% of the vote. In the 2010 midterm elections, the enthusiasm advantage was held by Republicans to great effect. The same dynamic will hold true this year even if not to the same degree.
4. His biggest legislative accomplishment will be deemed unconstitutional.
5. He will let the Bush tax cuts expire and he is actively campaigning for tax increases. The last 8 Presidential winners have campaigned for tax cuts - as Obama did 4 years ago. No winners in the last 8 have campaigned for tax increases.
6. At the end of 2007 there were over 146 million people working. At the end of 2011 that number had dropped to 140 million even though the number of working aged people increased by 7.75 million. Polish that turd.
7. No incumbent president in recent memory has been this far behind at this stage of the game yes being tied is like being behind if you're an incumbant at this stage in the game.
8. Everything costs more than it did 3 years ago.
9. No budget in 3 years.
10. Leadership Deficit: He has no plans for our major problems and instead chooses to blames others. That is decidedly un-presidential after 4 years.
11. The end of a tough primary fight is usually the low point for the out party. Yet Romney is polling neck and neck with the president.
12. Romney is underrated as a candidate. Obama is overrated as a president.
13. Consumer confidence is too low.
14. ...

tldr

Three statisticals..

1. 30% of Hillary supporters for McCain
2. 1 in 7 undecided
3. Silent Majority

McCain wins. You guys are gonna be sooo pissed off.

there.

Lionel Mandrake: I don't know if it was a trap, but whining about an incumbent in an election year highlighting a great accomplishment is just plain pathetic, and reinforces the GOP as the Pussy Party.

But, I have little doubt that Obama is more than happy to let these pussies keep reminding people what administration took the fkr out.

.

You mad Bro?

I don't know, I kind of think it's more of a pussy to be said incumbent and turn a country victory into a douchefest campaign moment, especially when you hate Hilary and Bush for doing it to you,

1nsanilicious: Lionel Mandrake: I don't know if it was a trap, but whining about an incumbent in an election year highlighting a great accomplishment is just plain pathetic, and reinforces the GOP as the Pussy Party.

But, I have little doubt that Obama is more than happy to let these pussies keep reminding people what administration took the fkr out.

.

You mad Bro?

I don't know, I kind of think it's more of a pussy to be said incumbent and turn a country victory into a douchefest campaign moment, especially when you hate Hilary and Bush for doing it to you,

Its how elections are won. Now that Obama logically cannot use his successful 'Hope' campaign, he needs to find a new way to connect with America's majority, and shiat-smearing seems to be the best way to do that.

/hypocrisy isn't necessarily relevant at this point; how sad

1nsanilicious: I don't know, I kind of think it's more of a pussy to be said incumbent and turn a country victory into a douchefest campaign moment, especially when you hate Hilary and Bush for doing it to you,

So you're saying that the GOP's attempt to minimize Obama's role in taking down OBL wasn't a douchefest moment?

Really?

Really, really?

I just had you down as a BSAB troll but you're worse than that, aren't you?

/Grey5. Re-farkied "douchefest BSAB troll".

if the US economy moves back into a stretch of growth that's too slow to generate jobs, Obama can be in deep shiat very easily.

however, if Mittens is forced to spend time and money in Georgia and South Carolina, may the lulz commence.

New Farkin User Name: he needs to find a new way to connect with America's majority, and shiat-smearing seems to be the best way to do that.

The fact that you see the death of bin Laden as "shiat smearing" reminds me why I've banned all your alts, dickweed.

He's free to talk all he wants to about the killing of Osama bin Laden... After...

1) He apologies for telling a bald faced lie about what Romney would do in the same situation.

2) Admits that the intelligence that led up to the OBL raid was collected for years before Obama was in office, under the Bush administration

A few of my facebook friends are passing this around today...."Thanking Obama for killing Bin Laden is like going into McDonalds and thanking Ronald McDonald for the burger. It's the guy COOKING the burger that should get the credit, not the clown. Thank you SEAL Team 6."

Why did all of the fun, blowjobbing whores turn conservative?

randomjsa: 1) He apologies for telling a bald faced lie about what Romney would do in the same situation.

Good one.

Are you gonna try the "Mitt did not say not to bail out GM" one next?

That one slays as well.

At least you guys are figuring out that if you ever start telling the truth you will be dead in the water.