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)   The best zingers from last night's Presidential Debate (w/video)   (core.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 16
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

3184 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Oct 2012 at 8:42 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-10-04 09:41:19 AM  
2 votes:
I thought Obama did great at keeping his composure during the debate. Romney always comes across as a nervous-sounding speaker. Unfortunately, I can see how it looked like a Romney win to low-information voters. Romney was repeatedly calling Obama a liar throughout the debate. Obama didn't really come back with anything along of the lines of "No, it's actually true because..." or "You're lying about...".

Also, Obama really needs to shorten his responses. He covers so many things in each response, I don't think most of it sticks. What I was constantly waiting for was for him to just say "I just have one question for Gov Romney. Exactly what deductions and loopholes would you try to close to make up for your tax cuts?" That's it. Don't throw his inability to name specifics right in the middle of a five-minute speech. Ask a short, direct question.
2012-10-04 09:31:33 AM  
2 votes:

Dr Dreidel: I tried very hard to watch the debate last night as a low-information voter. Not nonpartisan, but I tried to forget all the things I knew about the campaign.

Romney destroyed Obama.


Except that Romney came off like a teenager spinning blatantly untrue promises in an election for high-school student government and couldn't wipe that stupid smirk off his face, whereas Obama did at least come off as an adult, albeit a long-suffering one getting a bit annoyed that he has to put up with this adolescent bullshiat.

Neither was particularly terrible, neither was particularly great. Romney exhibited maybe a bit more force of personality, but fell into basically every trap that Obama set to get him to say something that would make him sound stupid, sleazy or useless under later analysis. Because the thing about the debates is that they don't mark the entirety of the low-information voter experience. They mark the _start_ of it. Meaning that the people that see the debates as the beginning of election season are still going to see all the analysis and fact-checking (since they're paying attention now) pointing out Romney's gaffes, offensive statements, and blatant falsehoods over the next few days, where Obama didn't really give them any sound-bytes to play with.

The big bird bit already has wings, for instance (heh). I'm betting that the 5 trillion in spending increases becomes a common-knowledge thing, too, since they went back and forth on it enough that every newspaper and show in the US is going to go over it.
2012-10-04 09:04:45 AM  
2 votes:

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Kind of disappointed that Obama didn't really call him out on the obvious stuff. Although the shear volume of lies would have been tough to keep up with.


The one thing I wish Obama would have said (and I don't subscribe to the idea that Obama should have had an argumentative debate, it would have made him look petty to do a tit-for-tat, but...) is that he should have hit Romney on this 'taxation hurts jobs' idea. It's an easy lie that's believable by people who don't understand business and economics, and if true (which it's not) then the anti-tax ideals of Republicans are reasonable.

He could have said simply: "Look, corporate taxation doesn't affect jobs. Demand affects jobs. Businesses are taxed on their profits. If they hire someone else, that money is an expense, uh, not a profit, and is deducted. Businesses hire when demand dictates no matter what the tax rate."
2012-10-04 10:23:55 AM  
1 votes:
"If that's true, I need a new accountant."

- Mitt Romney in response to tax breaks for moving factories overseas.
2012-10-04 10:07:59 AM  
1 votes:

TheDumbBlonde: hillbillypharmacist: TheDumbBlonde: hillbillypharmacist: TheDumbBlonde: hillbillypharmacist: TheDumbBlonde: hillbillypharmacist: TheDumbBlonde: thurstonxhowell: TheDumbBlonde: How can I tell you weren't a finance major?

Because he can speak in complete sentences?

No, because he is obviously does't comprehend the difference between income and profit.

I believe it is the republicans who like to pretend that investment and payroll come out of profits. If that were the case, then it makes perfect sense to reduce those taxes as much as possible. Of course, it's not the case.

Where do they come out of? Losses?

Please tell me you are trolling.

I'll admit I'm trolling when you admit you don't know the difference between a P&L and income statement.

"The statement of profit and loss follows a general form as seen in this example. It begins with an entry for revenue and subtracts from revenue the costs of running the business, including cost of goods sold, operating expenses, tax expense and interest expense. The bottom line (literally and figuratively) is net income (profit). "

Payroll is an operating expense. It does not come out of profit.

Son, expenses are subtracted from profit. Did you fail math?

Not profit. Revenue.

When did revenue come into this discussion?


When a customer writes you a check for $100, it's revenue. If you spent $90 to provide the service (including payroll), your profit is then $10.

Taxes are assessed on $10, not $100.
2012-10-04 09:37:03 AM  
1 votes:

TheDumbBlonde: How can I tell you weren't a finance major?


Because he can speak in complete sentences?
2012-10-04 09:20:41 AM  
1 votes:

TheDumbBlonde: hillbillypharmacist: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Kind of disappointed that Obama didn't really call him out on the obvious stuff. Although the shear volume of lies would have been tough to keep up with.

The one thing I wish Obama would have said (and I don't subscribe to the idea that Obama should have had an argumentative debate, it would have made him look petty to do a tit-for-tat, but...) is that he should have hit Romney on this 'taxation hurts jobs' idea. It's an easy lie that's believable by people who don't understand business and economics, and if true (which it's not) then the anti-tax ideals of Republicans are reasonable.

He could have said simply: "Look, corporate taxation doesn't affect jobs. Demand affects jobs. Businesses are taxed on their profits. If they hire someone else, that money is an expense, uh, not a profit, and is deducted. Businesses hire when demand dictates no matter what the tax rate."

How can I tell you weren't a finance major?


"Sir, our employees can't keep up, and we are weeks behind on providing our services, and customers are getting upset. I think that another skilled worker would be appropriate, and net us about 180% of his salary."

"But we'd have to pay tax on the extra profit he brings in, right? Well screw that. You're fired."
2012-10-04 09:18:57 AM  
1 votes:

quatchi: timswar: Franken should raise hell over Romney stealing his "not entitled to your own facts" line.

Especially when Romney was using it too pass off lies.

Romney basically alternated between calling Obama a liar and telling lies himself all night.

Admittedly with all the passionate intensity of a carnival barker/ginsu knife salesman at a local Fair.

Surprised that people fell for it at all, much less in the numbers I'm seeing.

Watching American media achieve "consensus" is some eye opening stuff for a simple forest dweller like myself.


I tried very hard to watch the debate last night as a low-information voter. Not nonpartisan, but I tried to forget all the things I knew about the campaign.

Romney destroyed Obama.

To anyone who's been paying attention, Romney looked like he had a new platform, though. I have no idea if that's going to sink him (the teabags are NOT happy today, assuming they actually heard what Romney said), but Romney stood in front of the American people, divorced himself from his party and from parts of his campaign, told a few bald-faced lies, and absolutely won the presentation game.

// son of a biatch
// Chris Hayes was spot-on in his analysis last night, too:
// Obama is absolutely welded to a professorial, not-directly-confrontational style in debates, and saves the attacks for ads
2012-10-04 09:13:39 AM  
1 votes:

TheDumbBlonde: How can I tell you weren't a finance major?


So, you feel that businesses would hire just for the hell of it if they get a tax break...even if there were no demand?
2012-10-04 09:07:31 AM  
1 votes:

The zinger about "And I've got to tell you, Governor Romney, when it comes to his own party during the course of this campaign, has not displayed that willingness to say no to some of the more extreme parts of his party." was pretty good. Likewise "And now, five weeks before the election, he's saying that his big, bold idea is, `Never mind.'"

Romney didn't really zing. But in the interest of fairness, I thought Romney had some good points about Too Big to Fail.

Sorry, but that's just not -- that's just not the facts. Look, we have to have regulation on Wall Street. That's why I'd have regulation. But I wouldn't designate five banks as too big to fail and give them a blank check. That's one of the unintended consequences of Dodd-Frank. It wasn't thought through properly. We need to get rid of that provision because it's killing regional and small banks. They're getting hurt.


It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that zing. And that just doesn't have a zing.
2012-10-04 09:06:42 AM  
1 votes:
"All right, fine. If you want an experienced public servant, vote for me. But if you want to believe a bunch of crazy promises about garbagemen cleaning your gutters and waxing your car, then by all means, vote for this sleazy lunatic."

i187.photobucket.com
2012-10-04 09:04:12 AM  
1 votes:

scarmig: So was the circus good, guys?
Did it engage you?
Do you feel emotionally involved in the conflict of the protagonists?
Was there enough moral gray area to keep you entertained?
Pepsi or Coke? Final answer.


i3.kym-cdn.com

That's good stuff, I'm going to have to remember that.
2012-10-04 08:50:49 AM  
1 votes:
So was the circus good, guys?
Did it engage you?
Do you feel emotionally involved in the conflict of the protagonists?
Was there enough moral gray area to keep you entertained?
Pepsi or Coke? Final answer.
2012-10-04 08:50:04 AM  
1 votes:

Vodka Zombie: The proper term is "other-agitated."


Implying that us elders are stereo-typically frustrated? YOU'RE AGEIST!
2012-10-04 08:48:57 AM  
1 votes:
Sigh. We should've realized that "zingers" was something the media came up with to give themselves something to report after each debate.
2012-10-04 08:46:28 AM  
1 votes:
Franken should raise hell over Romney stealing his "not entitled to your own facts" line.

Especially when Romney was using it too pass off lies.
 
Displayed 16 of 16 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  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