Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   And the first fact check of the debate comes from a Romney advisor: No, our healthcare plan will not cover pre-existing conditions at all   ( tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line
    More: Fail, pre-existing condition, University of Denver, Massachusetts Health Care  
•       •       •

6951 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Oct 2012 at 1:21 AM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



474 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-10-04 04:19:51 AM  

Z-clipped: Lionel Mandrake: And this round definitely goes to Romney. I doubt he moved anyone out of Obama's camp, but he probably picked up some undecideds. Hard to guesstimate how many, though, since anyone who is still undecided defies all logic.

It doesn't matter. The intersection of "undecided" and "likely voters" is too low for them to decide the outcome of this election. They're not the main focus of the debates or the campaigns in general at this point. The strategy here is not for either candidate to sway people's opinions. It's to motivate the voters that have already decided on their candidate.

The polls are hugely in Obama's favor right now. Eating Romney's lunch for him in every debate isn't going to motivate people to vote. I know this might sound strange, but it's going to make them feel like Obama can handle Romney on his own, without any help from the voters. If Democrats see Romney getting away with lying on the podium and looking like he has a chance to turn things around, they're going to be more motivated to make sure he doesn't win.

Obama's best strategy is to say his piece, and play out line. Romney will either crash and burn on his own, demotivating the Republican base, or look halfway electable, motivating the Democratic base. He can always pull out the big guns and get aggressive later if he needs to. Romney was already flirting with some forays into gaffe territory tonight. He flipped between obviously contrary logical positions throughout the entire debate, threatened the job of the moderator, and offered to axe Big Bird from the airwaves. He may have succeeded in giving Obama a bloody nose, but Obama got the proverbial girl after the fight was over.


Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.
 
2012-10-04 04:25:05 AM  

muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.


How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?
 
2012-10-04 04:28:01 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.

How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?


How about how this country is still failing, even though he promised you unicorn farts. Oh wait, it's someone else's fault he didn't deliver your fragrant flowery shiat pie, right? I'm sure he'll have it to you the next time. Don't stop believing.
 
2012-10-04 04:30:09 AM  

muck4doo: Lionel Mandrake: muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.

How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?

How about how this country is still failing, even though he promised you unicorn farts. Oh wait, it's someone else's fault he didn't deliver your fragrant flowery shiat pie, right? I'm sure he'll have it to you the next time. Don't stop believing.


Why do you hate Anerica?
 
2012-10-04 04:30:46 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.

How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?


The idiot world=getting elected means success.
 
2012-10-04 04:31:33 AM  

Fart_Machine: muck4doo: Lionel Mandrake: muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.

How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?

How about how this country is still failing, even though he promised you unicorn farts. Oh wait, it's someone else's fault he didn't deliver your fragrant flowery shiat pie, right? I'm sure he'll have it to you the next time. Don't stop believing.

Why do you hate Anerica?


I don't hate Anerica. I have never even been there.
 
2012-10-04 04:32:28 AM  

muck4doo: Lionel Mandrake: muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.

How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?

The idiot world=getting elected means success.


Well winning an election by electoral votes and not popular vote means you have a mandate from the masses, so yea, getting elected means you're pretty successful.
 
2012-10-04 04:34:05 AM  

Z-clipped: I know this might sound strange, but it's going to make them feel like Obama can handle Romney on his own, without any help from the voters. If Democrats see Romney getting away with lying on the podium and looking like he has a chance to turn things around, they're going to be more motivated to make sure he doesn't win.


eh, maybe...I don't know enough about the success/failure of various debate strategies to have an opinion on that, but I would at least agree that a "don't make waves" strategy makes sense for Obama. When you're in the kind of lead that Obama is, there is no need for high risk / high reward strategy., as there is for Romney.

Romney may have "won" tonight, but this, and two more "wins" like this won't be nearly enough to win in November. And blatantly tossing out falsehoods that need to be immediately corrected by his own staff won't help him either. That's just giving the Obama camp ready-made campaign spots.
 
2012-10-04 04:34:11 AM  

Summoner101: muck4doo: Lionel Mandrake: muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.

How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?

The idiot world=getting elected means success.

Well winning an election by electoral votes and not popular vote means you have a mandate from the masses, so yea, getting elected means you're pretty successful.


You mean stolen electoral votes, don't you? Say it!
 
2012-10-04 04:35:47 AM  
Okay, time for IHOP.
 
2012-10-04 04:37:08 AM  

muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.


The most reliable polling analyst in the country has Obama forecast as up by 101 EVs and 4% of the popular vote, with an 86% of winning. The actual current (non forecast) numbers are even worse for Romney. So yes, when the choir overwhelmingly outnumbers the congregation, you preach to the choir.

Romney has to turn out voters in record numbers to even have a chance at winning. The odds of every single necessary event occurring for him to win in every battleground state is incredibly low, and on top of that, his chances hinge on Obama failing to turn out voters. He can't win, unless Obama drops the ball.

Sorry, I know it rankles your little troll-heart, but that's the way it is.
 
2012-10-04 04:38:09 AM  

muck4doo: Summoner101: muck4doo: Lionel Mandrake: muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.

How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?

The idiot world=getting elected means success.

Well winning an election by electoral votes and not popular vote means you have a mandate from the masses, so yea, getting elected means you're pretty successful.

You mean stolen electoral votes, don't you? Say it!


Why would I bring up something controversial when not bringing it up makes my point just as well while not giving you the "God, libs just won't let it go!" line?

/You'll probably use it anyway
 
2012-10-04 04:39:14 AM  
Of course Romney won. It was a presidential debate, not a basketball match.
 
2012-10-04 04:39:31 AM  

muck4doo: Fart_Machine: muck4doo: Lionel Mandrake: muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.

How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?

How about how this country is still failing, even though he promised you unicorn farts. Oh wait, it's someone else's fault he didn't deliver your fragrant flowery shiat pie, right? I'm sure he'll have it to you the next time. Don't stop believing.

Why do you hate Anerica?

I don't hate Anerica. I have never even been there.


I hate touchpads. :(
 
2012-10-04 04:42:02 AM  

muck4doo: Lionel Mandrake: muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.

How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?

How about how this country is still failing, even though he promised you unicorn farts. Oh wait, it's someone else's fault he didn't deliver your fragrant flowery shiat pie, right? I'm sure he'll have it to you the next time. Don't stop believing.


He never promised any such thing, and I never expected any such thing. This is why "conservatives" will lose in November and scratch their heads bemusedly: because your party is campaigning against an Obama that only exists in your own little minds. Normal people don't see an America-destroying Muslim Kenyan-zilla.

With any luck, Republicans will jump on board the Reality Express next time around and offer a realistic view of the current and future world and a non-robotic plank of wood or frenzied, paranoid, evangelical anti-intellectual loon as a candidate.

But I doubt it. More likely they'll conclude they weren't "conservative" enough, and go full retard even harder. And lose even harder.
 
2012-10-04 04:42:26 AM  

Jim_Callahan: - Obama repeatedly baited Romney into saying shiat that centrists (the majority of actual undecided voters) absolutely farking hate in the simple guise of "pointing out some differences" in a way that a Republican finds inoffensive and an independent... does not. At all.


Could you elaborate on this one? I'm not sure what Romney said will be so offensive to moderates.
 
2012-10-04 04:43:49 AM  

muck4doo: Lionel Mandrake: muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.

How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?

The idiot world=getting elected means success.


yes...in an election, being elected does indeed mean success.

You get a gold star for the day, Timmy!
 
2012-10-04 04:44:04 AM  

James F. Campbell: Could you elaborate on this one? I'm not sure what Romney said will be so offensive to moderates.


He wants to eviscerate Big Bird and stuff him with breading!!!
 
2012-10-04 04:45:08 AM  

Hetfield: Of course Romney won. It was a presidential debate, not a basketball match.


Yes but it was no Dressage competition either..
 
2012-10-04 04:49:48 AM  

Bontesla: MaudlinMutantMollusk: GAT_00: snowjack: But Romney won anyway because "facts don't matter" in debates.

No, Romney won because the President didn't engage.

THIS^

/WTF Obama?
//I'm truly baffled

I don't get it at all.
What was Obama's goal? I doubt he underestimated Romney but - I admit that I did. Was Obama hoping to juxtapose his calmness to Romney's erratic and rude behavior? Because Romney just trampled our Commander in Chief. Yikes.


The one time he did call Romney out on it Romney got a bit flustered, but then he backed off. Romney basically promised a figurative "moon base" in what he has promised because it is impossible unless you explode the deficit or screw the working class.
 
2012-10-04 04:57:48 AM  

muck4doo: How about how this country is still failing


Well well well, when Texans puss out, they sure puss out BIG don't they?

My wife started her first small business three weeks ago, and she's already got more clients than she can handle, so fark you and the narrative you rode in on, Hoss.
 
2012-10-04 05:03:17 AM  

James F. Campbell: Could you elaborate on this one? I'm not sure what Romney said will be so offensive to moderates.


The most blatant one was getting him to state outright that he didn't have a plan and thought that winging it once he was in office was better for the country. People that don't have a strong opinion on what someone's plan is tend to have stronger feelings about whether or not the candidate is competent or hard-working enough to come up with a plan or do basic analysis period.

Another one was the firing Big Bird bit, which to be fair wasn't so much something he was baited into as just being a terrible public speaker coming naturally. The general theme of "hey, what programs would you cut" was schmuck bait and Obama put it on the hook, though. Most government-funded social programs that aren't the military, i.e. things that Republicans will cheer if you propose cutting, are either relatively popular or considered a necessary evil by the centrist, so even had Romney not gone for the worst example humanly possible like some sort of fail-seeking missile he was bound to go for the "name random social programs" that worked so well for him in the primaries and alienate some of the undecideds.

Another was Obama refusing to actually directly correct Romney's 700 million dollars from Medicare comment, but instead present the refutation one bit at a time so that Romney, being on the stage with a spotlight in his face, didn't notice in time and kept using the incorrect number about five minutes after the audience realized it had been refuted.

And the meta-example was turning a two-minute question on Education into like half the damned debate. Once Obama realized that Romney hadn't prepared a goddamned thing beyond "Massachusetts has good schools" and "I like schools" he just kinda put it in park and kept Romney talking about how he had nothing for on the order of half an hour. Which, again, tends to be a sticking point with the undecideds since they care more about having a plan than what the plan is.

Basically Obama knew the audience, or at least the audience whose votes are typically in play this far in, better than Romney and was playing the "give him just enough rope to hang himself with" game the whole time, with Romney politely obliging. Basically the only bait Romney didn't take was getting defensive about his time at Bain, the rest of the hour and a half was de facto moderated by the president.

//Note the continual polite references to how awesome Romneycare is and how it was a model for Obamacare, as well, though that may have been genuine snark more than an actual attempt to take Romney down a few points with the GOP base. Obama does seem to genuinely dislike Romney, which was the one thing playing against him on this one.

//All that said, it's not like Obama was absolutely destroying Romney either. I think mostly because not only is he winning, but because he genuinely wants the debates to be more informative than adversarial since he (correctly) thinks that his policy is the obvious logical choice (since Romney doesn't have one) and he's at a greater and greater advantage the more the arguments are left to stand on their merits.
 
2012-10-04 05:10:35 AM  
Oh boy, when they get desperate, Obama voters seem to cling to current polling numbers and Nate Silver. The election is gonna get fun now! "But.....but......but look, Mr. Silver said POTUS will win by 500 electoral votes! It has to be true. Fivethirtyeight has predicted every election since the Greeks founded democracy"
 
2012-10-04 05:12:08 AM  

Jim_Callahan: The most blatant one was getting him to state outright that he didn't have a plan and thought that winging it once he was in office was better for the country. People that don't have a strong opinion on what someone's plan is tend to have stronger feelings about whether or not the candidate is competent or hard-working enough to come up with a plan or do basic analysis period.

Another one was the firing Big Bird bit, which to be fair wasn't so much something he was baited into as just being a terrible public speaker coming naturally. The general theme of "hey, what programs would you cut" was schmuck bait and Obama put it on the hook, though. Most government-funded social programs that aren't the military, i.e. things that Republicans will cheer if you propose cutting, are either relatively popular or considered a necessary evil by the centrist, so even had Romney not gone for the worst example humanly possible like some sort of fail-seeking missile he was bound to go for the "name random social programs" that worked so well for him in the primaries and alienate some of the undecideds.

Another was Obama refusing to actually directly correct Romney's 700 million dollars from Medicare comment, but instead present the refutation one bit at a time so that Romney, being on the stage with a spotlight in his face, didn't notice in time and kept using the incorrect number about five minutes after the audience realized it had been refuted.

And the meta-example was turning a two-minute question on Education into like half the damned debate. Once Obama realized that Romney hadn't prepared a goddamned thing beyond "Massachusetts has good schools" and "I like schools" he just kinda put it in park and kept Romney talking about how he had nothing for on the order of half an hour. Which, again, tends to be a sticking point with the undecideds since they care more about having a plan than what the plan is.

Basically Obama knew the audience, or at least the audience whose ...


Fair points -- but, friend, if the undecideds were intelligent enough to grasp anything you just said, they wouldn't be undecided.
 
2012-10-04 05:12:59 AM  

muck4doo: justtray: Please read my above Asimov quote, it applies to you as well.

Asimov would shiat on you. I'm surprised you even know how to spell it right. Heinlein shiats on you even more, you derptastic authoritarian. You're the perfect example of ignorance leading to authoritarian douches in charge. Anyone who disagrees with you is anti-intellectual, and must be put down. I don't know who made you the intellectual one other than your own stupid opinion of yourself.


You realize that Asimov was liberal, pro-gay rights, feminist, and pro population control, right?
 
2012-10-04 05:13:40 AM  

Jim_Callahan: //All that said, it's not like Obama was absolutely destroying Romney either. I think mostly because not only is he winning, but because he genuinely wants the debates to be more informative than adversarial since he (correctly) thinks that his policy is the obvious logical choice (since Romney doesn't have one) and he's at a greater and greater advantage the more the arguments are left to stand on their merits.


Good point.
 
2012-10-04 05:14:59 AM  
Well I guess the next step is for Obama to do a post debate counterstrike. Damage Control of course, Maybe a expected excuse to as he faltered, but he needs to remind everyone Mitt is just a wolf in sheep's clothes. http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/411/532/5f2.jpg
Don't let this happen...
 
2012-10-04 05:15:18 AM  

DubyaHater: Oh boy, when they get desperate, Obama voters seem to cling to current polling numbers and Nate Silver. The election is gonna get fun now! "But.....but......but look, Mr. Silver said POTUS will win by 500 electoral votes! It has to be true. Fivethirtyeight has predicted every election since the Greeks founded democracy"


You know what I found interesting? Republicans have been discounting the effectiveness of polls for weeks but the post-debate online polls showing a Romney win were sacrosanct.
 
2012-10-04 05:17:35 AM  

DubyaHater: Oh boy, when they get desperate,


jolieodell.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-10-04 05:18:14 AM  

Leishu: muck4doo: justtray: Please read my above Asimov quote, it applies to you as well.

Asimov would shiat on you. I'm surprised you even know how to spell it right. Heinlein shiats on you even more, you derptastic authoritarian. You're the perfect example of ignorance leading to authoritarian douches in charge. Anyone who disagrees with you is anti-intellectual, and must be put down. I don't know who made you the intellectual one other than your own stupid opinion of yourself.

You realize that Asimov was liberal, pro-gay rights, feminist, and pro population control, right?


And, of course, Heinlein was a psuedosocialist. It amazes me how ignorant you are concerning pretty much everything you talk about, Muck.
 
2012-10-04 05:19:43 AM  

James F. Campbell: Fair points -- but, friend, if the undecideds were intelligent enough to grasp anything you just said, they wouldn't be undecided.


They won't notice the rhetorical maneuvering because they're stupid. But they will likely (at least subconsciously) notice that Romney's complete lack of any kind of real agenda was being pounded into their head for half an hour, and being stupid they're unlikely to suspect spin as a factor since it was Romney himself doing the pounding, whereas being arbitrarily skeptical they might be more prone to disbelieve the impression if it actually came from his opponent.

Like I said, Obama knows his audience, and knows at this point that it's the appearance of competence rather than actual competence that matters. Which is why he was more baiting Romney for blatantly empty pandering and soundbites for the media to run with rather than really making a serious effort to confront his ideas on logical grounds.

//I suspect the reasoning was something like, "Romney's been doing all the work of putting me in the lead so far, might as well save my campaign some money by letting him keep the job".
 
2012-10-04 05:22:10 AM  

DubyaHater: Oh boy, when they get desperate, Obama voters seem to cling to current polling numbers and Nate Silver. The election is gonna get fun now! "But.....but......but look, Mr. Silver said POTUS will win by 500 electoral votes! It has to be true. Fivethirtyeight has predicted every election since the Greeks founded democracy"


Your boy had a good night... But nothing is over. I think the jobs report Friday will be telling, if it is good news, Obama will be back on top, if it is very poor, Obama may be in real trouble.
 
2012-10-04 05:24:55 AM  

themindiswatching: Obama probably could have been stronger, but honestly, this probably won't hurt him.


Nixon vs Kennedy.
 
2012-10-04 05:28:31 AM  

Bontesla: MaudlinMutantMollusk: GAT_00: snowjack: But Romney won anyway because "facts don't matter" in debates.

No, Romney won because the President didn't engage.

THIS^

/WTF Obama?
//I'm truly baffled

I don't get it at all.
What was Obama's goal? I doubt he underestimated Romney but - I admit that I did. Was Obama hoping to juxtapose his calmness to Romney's erratic and rude behavior? Because Romney just trampled our Commander in Chief. Yikes.


Either I haven't watched enough reality television to warp my brain into a dustbin for brainless melodrama and blind acceptance of meaningless narrative, or you guys weren't watching the same debates I was. Romney did not "win" anything. Put the pundits on mute--the only reason this election is "almost even odds, a real nail biter" is because they feel they need to frame it like that in order to stay employed.
 
2012-10-04 05:33:10 AM  
I must have tuned to the wrong channel, and watched the wrong debate. because i didn't see any of the big, exciting debate some of the rest of you apparently saw.
I saw a dull, empty recitation of stuff we already knew they would say, and with neither candidate looking especially good or bad. It was boring, and won't change any minds.
Both of them seemed bored and annoyed they had to be there.
But i guess people have to spin this to where they can inject some excitement into it.
At least journalists have the excuse that they get paid to hype this shiat - I don't know why regular people would want to do it.
 
2012-10-04 05:38:23 AM  

gadian: Sounds like Obama was being Presidential.


I think that was EXACTLY his strategy, let Rmoney run his mouth.
The problem is, people don't pay attention to the words coming out of your mouth, they look at how you act. Rmoney acted like a an angry, babbling, rambling coke head and Obama didn't look strong.
 
2012-10-04 05:39:21 AM  

jso2897: Both of them seemed bored and annoyed they had to be there.


Romney looked like he was on meth, not bored.
 
2012-10-04 05:40:29 AM  

muck4doo: cameroncrazy1984: muck4doo: cameroncrazy1984: muck4doo: cameroncrazy1984: muck4doo: logistic: muck4doo: Quickly Fark! To the TPM machine!

Excellent retort. I like it because it was so full of intellect and stuff.

Hey, go get those Think Progress links lined up too. Ignore me.

So you have no problem with what the link actually says?

I don't pay attention to sites I disagree with. That shouldn't be a concept lost on the Fark Lib crowd. I won't even give it a click. :p

Enjoy continuing to be ignorant then. You know damn well the reasons that Townhall et. al. are not worth a click. TPM isn't even in the same galaxy.

Oh, I know. They don't agree with your ideas, where as TPM does. Different galaxies indeed. :p

What's funny is you don't understand the difference between opinion and fact. Or you want to sound like you do so that you can believe that both sides are the same.

I get it. Your and your shared ideologues are fact, everyone else is opinion. TPM, Think Progress, and others that agree with you aren't political hacks, because they agree with you. You have the truth. I've heard it before.


In this case TPM has actual journalism and exclusive quotes from one of Romney's advisors contradicting the candidate's statements from the debate:
"With respect to pre-existing conditions, what Governor Romney has said is for those with continuous coverage, he would continue to make sure that they receive their coverage," said Eric Fehrnstrom, referring to existing laws which require insurance companies to sell coverage to people who already have insurance, or within 90 days of losing their employer coverage.

Pressed by TPM's Evan McMorris-Santoro, Fehrnstrom said those who currently lack coverage because they have pre-existing conditions would need their states to implement their own laws - like Romney's own Massachusetts health care law - that ban insurance company from discriminating against sick people.

"We'd like to see states do what Massachusetts did," Fehrnstrom said. "In Massachusetts we have a ban on pre-existing conditions."


As for the rest of your bullpoop, the minority of Farkers, who are seriously selective about which sites they'll visit, usually say things like "I won't reward those [invective] with a click, could somebody tell me what the article says?" They don't post a dozen comments without showing even a hint of interest in the subject.

I know you're not an idiot, so why do you choose to act like one?
 
2012-10-04 05:41:01 AM  
Farkers like to pride themselves on being "above it all'. Super-wise, and hip.
In reality, when the pundits have a rotten fish to sell you, 90% of you buy it sight unseen.
Nothing happened last night.
The "debate" was an inconclusive, crashing bore.
Both candidates came off grumpy and tedious.
Not a single vote will change.
The pundits want you to believe otherwise, because if they can get the whole cage full of you hooting and throwing your feces, they make more money for saying words.
They need the "close race" narrative - we don't.
 
2012-10-04 05:42:06 AM  

amiable: Your boy had a good night... But nothing is over. I think the jobs report Friday will be telling, if it is good news, Obama will be back on top, if it is very poor, Obama may be in real trouble.


Um... back on top? Has there really been another round of polls between now and 11pm yesterday that showed that Romney actually gained any points whatsoever? Because 5 hours is a pretty good turnover for calling people in the middle of the goddamned night.

//If we're seriously going by what the talking heads with billions in ad revenue laying on the race being a nail-biter over the next month are saying rather than polling data, I have a bridge in San Francisco to sell you. It's very nice, comfortable orange color, goes well with your eyes. Goes for a couple million, but I like you so I'll let it go for 100k$.
 
2012-10-04 05:43:58 AM  

muck4doo: Fart_Machine: muck4doo: Lionel Mandrake: muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.

How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?

How about how this country is still failing, even though he promised you unicorn farts. Oh wait, it's someone else's fault he didn't deliver your fragrant flowery shiat pie, right? I'm sure he'll have it to you the next time. Don't stop believing.

Why do you hate Anerica?

I don't hate Anerica. I have never even been there.


See how low America has sunk? We have to get trolls from Mexico.
 
2012-10-04 05:44:19 AM  

Leishu: muck4doo: justtray: Please read my above Asimov quote, it applies to you as well.

Asimov would shiat on you. I'm surprised you even know how to spell it right. Heinlein shiats on you even more, you derptastic authoritarian. You're the perfect example of ignorance leading to authoritarian douches in charge. Anyone who disagrees with you is anti-intellectual, and must be put down. I don't know who made you the intellectual one other than your own stupid opinion of yourself.

You realize that Asimov was liberal, pro-gay rights, feminist, and pro population control, right?


Didn't realize I said all the things you wish I said. But let's play with your own stupid strawmen. I have nothing against population control. I endorse it for the far left who cheer it. They should be able to abort all their babies. It is a good thing that they do. I can't find a thing on the internet saying Asimov was pro-gay rights, but if you want to believe that. Go for it. I couldn't care less either way. Feminism? Some guys will say anything to get laid. Liberal? He worked for a living. I doubt he would support you modern wannabe intellectuals expecting a government hand out as your birth right.
 
2012-10-04 05:45:44 AM  

ghare: muck4doo: Fart_Machine: muck4doo: Lionel Mandrake: muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.

How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?

How about how this country is still failing, even though he promised you unicorn farts. Oh wait, it's someone else's fault he didn't deliver your fragrant flowery shiat pie, right? I'm sure he'll have it to you the next time. Don't stop believing.

Why do you hate Anerica?

I don't hate Anerica. I have never even been there.

See how low America has sunk? We have to get trolls from Mexico.


LOL! Ghare, you are always the witty racist. :)
 
2012-10-04 05:45:49 AM  

quatchi: jso2897: Both of them seemed bored and annoyed they had to be there.

Romney looked like he was on meth, not bored.


Really? I saw no real animation or conviction coming from him. Just grumpy, defensive ill-humor and mechanical recitation.
Obama seemed passive-agressive and resentful that he even had to be there. I don't entirely blame him. By the end of the debate, I resented the time spent, too.
 
2012-10-04 05:48:09 AM  

Jim_Callahan: amiable: Your boy had a good night... But nothing is over. I think the jobs report Friday will be telling, if it is good news, Obama will be back on top, if it is very poor, Obama may be in real trouble.

Um... back on top? Has there really been another round of polls between now and 11pm yesterday that showed that Romney actually gained any points whatsoever? Because 5 hours is a pretty good turnover for calling people in the middle of the goddamned night.

//If we're seriously going by what the talking heads with billions in ad revenue laying on the race being a nail-biter over the next month are saying rather than polling data, I have a bridge in San Francisco to sell you. It's very nice, comfortable orange color, goes well with your eyes. Goes for a couple million, but I like you so I'll let it go for 100k$.



I wasn't very clear: I think this debate didn't change the electoral landscape much but it clearly did two things:

1. It moved the Romney candidacy out of the "complete joke" category and
2. Gave him some momentum.

If he can build of that momentum (if there is a bad jobs report), Obama has cause for concern.
 
2012-10-04 05:51:27 AM  

jso2897: Obama seemed passive-agressive and resentful that he even had to be there.


To be fair, I imagine I'd kind of resent being stuck in a room with that gibbering moron for two hours, too. But yeah, he could have done a better job hiding it.

I think McCain spoiled him a bit, having an opponent actually worthy of your respect is an increasingly rare occurrence since the GOP decided the asylum would run more efficiently by putting the inmates in charge. Er, I mean deregulating the ideological free market by empowering the ideology creators away from the overweening hand of oppressive "big sanity". Or whatever they're calling the TP and the religious right these days.
 
2012-10-04 05:53:57 AM  

amiable: Jim_Callahan: amiable: Your boy had a good night... But nothing is over. I think the jobs report Friday will be telling, if it is good news, Obama will be back on top, if it is very poor, Obama may be in real trouble.

Um... back on top? Has there really been another round of polls between now and 11pm yesterday that showed that Romney actually gained any points whatsoever? Because 5 hours is a pretty good turnover for calling people in the middle of the goddamned night.

//If we're seriously going by what the talking heads with billions in ad revenue laying on the race being a nail-biter over the next month are saying rather than polling data, I have a bridge in San Francisco to sell you. It's very nice, comfortable orange color, goes well with your eyes. Goes for a couple million, but I like you so I'll let it go for 100k$.


I wasn't very clear: I think this debate didn't change the electoral landscape much but it clearly did two things:

1. It moved the Romney candidacy out of the "complete joke" category and
2. Gave him some momentum.

If he can build of that momentum (if there is a bad jobs report), Obama has cause for concern.


Concern is bad on Fark. Accept Obama and his message, and be happy with it.
 
2012-10-04 05:55:42 AM  

ghare: muck4doo: Fart_Machine: muck4doo: Lionel Mandrake: muck4doo: Keep preaching to the choir waiting for their hope and change? Sounds like an awesome plan.

How will you judge the plan's awesomeness? By the number of electoral votes beyond 270 that Obama gets, or is simply winning sufficient to declare a plan awesome?

How about how this country is still failing, even though he promised you unicorn farts. Oh wait, it's someone else's fault he didn't deliver your fragrant flowery shiat pie, right? I'm sure he'll have it to you the next time. Don't stop believing.

Why do you hate Anerica?

I don't hate Anerica. I have never even been there.

See how low America has sunk? We have to get trolls from Mexico.


Why not? Already got a Mexican candidate running for office.
 
2012-10-04 05:57:51 AM  

jso2897: Really? I saw no real animation or conviction coming from him. Just grumpy, defensive ill-humor and mechanical recitation.


You're kidding, right? Mittens was dancing as fast as he could out there tonight.

It was like he was pleading for his political life albeit with false bravado and lies in place of actual passion.

Obama seemed passive-agressive and resentful that he even had to be there.

That's certainly the narrative being spun but that's not what I saw.
 
2012-10-04 05:58:24 AM  

charlestonteaparty.org

1.bp.blogspot.com

 
Displayed 50 of 474 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report