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.

(The New Yorker)   Mitt Romney set a new personal best during his Town Hall debate. Unfortunately, that personal best was faking empathy   (newyorker.com) divider line 121
    More: Fail, Mitt Romney  
•       •       •

3945 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Oct 2012 at 5:43 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-17 10:20:47 AM

sprawl15: FeedTheCollapse: I'm not the one who originally asked the question, but I guess I should ask this: did Obama then plan for a complete turn-around in polls after the first debate? That seems like an awfully huge risk. Sorry, but I see the "Long game" as a completely unlikely scenario.

As I've said before, I think that that was the general plan (be a bit weak on the first one to come out stronger later, underdog story, etc) but the Obama team didn't expect Romney to go full bulldozer on the first debate and were taken by surprise.


My theory is simpler.

A) Obama realized that the first debate would be the first time many viewers (Conservative viewers) would see him unfiltered by Fox News for instance, so he wanted to layout his vision without appearing unpresidential in attacking Romney.

B) He was caught off guard by Romney changing his platform and Romney brought his A-game

C) Obama did not what to destroy Romney until after the VP debate.
 
2012-10-17 10:21:57 AM

Tyrone Slothrop: jack21221: By the way, did anybody notice that Mitt thought he was saving the middle class a lot in taxes by saying "We'll eliminate taxes on interest on your savings?" I don't know about you, but I made approximately 3 dollars on my savings last year. I checked around with friends and family, and not one person told me they made more than 10 dollars from their savings. Interest rates on savings accounts are in the 0.25% to 1% range.

It just goes to show you how out of touch he is. He actually things that if you make enough money on your savings that the tax is noticeable, you're "middle class." Just like if you want to pay for college, ask your parents for money! *headdesk*

Yeah, and not paying taxes on my capital gains of $0 will really help things too.


If you've never filled out a schedule D...vote for me, and you'll never have to!
 
2012-10-17 10:22:25 AM

mrshowrules: sprawl15: FeedTheCollapse: I'm not the one who originally asked the question, but I guess I should ask this: did Obama then plan for a complete turn-around in polls after the first debate? That seems like an awfully huge risk. Sorry, but I see the "Long game" as a completely unlikely scenario.

As I've said before, I think that that was the general plan (be a bit weak on the first one to come out stronger later, underdog story, etc) but the Obama team didn't expect Romney to go full bulldozer on the first debate and were taken by surprise.

My theory is simpler.

A) Obama realized that the first debate would be the first time many viewers (Conservative viewers) would see him unfiltered by Fox News for instance, so he wanted to layout his vision without appearing unpresidential in attacking Romney.

B) He was caught off guard by Romney changing his platform and Romney brought his A-game

C) Obama did not what to destroy Romney until after the VP debate.


Also, I should add that Obama was way ahead in the polls so attacking Romney too aggressively could back-fire. He was trying to hold ground. What was truly unexpected was home many voters were looking for any excuse to vote for Romney.
 
2012-10-17 10:39:22 AM

mrshowrules: My theory is simpler.

A) Obama realized that the first debate would be the first time many viewers (Conservative viewers) would see him unfiltered by Fox News for instance, so he wanted to layout his vision without appearing unpresidential in attacking Romney.

B) He was caught off guard by Romney changing his platform and Romney brought his A-game

C) Obama did not what to destroy Romney until after the VP debate.


Your theory is simpler by taking my theory and adding a third part? OK.
 
2012-10-17 10:46:15 AM

mrshowrules: mrshowrules: sprawl15: FeedTheCollapse: I'm not the one who originally asked the question, but I guess I should ask this: did Obama then plan for a complete turn-around in polls after the first debate? That seems like an awfully huge risk. Sorry, but I see the "Long game" as a completely unlikely scenario.

As I've said before, I think that that was the general plan (be a bit weak on the first one to come out stronger later, underdog story, etc) but the Obama team didn't expect Romney to go full bulldozer on the first debate and were taken by surprise.

My theory is simpler.

A) Obama realized that the first debate would be the first time many viewers (Conservative viewers) would see him unfiltered by Fox News for instance, so he wanted to layout his vision without appearing unpresidential in attacking Romney.

B) He was caught off guard by Romney changing his platform and Romney brought his A-game

C) Obama did not what to destroy Romney until after the VP debate.

Also, I should add that Obama was way ahead in the polls so attacking Romney too aggressively could back-fire. He was trying to hold ground. What was truly unexpected was home many voters were looking for any excuse to vote for Romney.


My theory is simpler....
 
2012-10-17 10:47:20 AM

sprawl15: mrshowrules: My theory is simpler.

A) Obama realized that the first debate would be the first time many viewers (Conservative viewers) would see him unfiltered by Fox News for instance, so he wanted to layout his vision without appearing unpresidential in attacking Romney.

B) He was caught off guard by Romney changing his platform and Romney brought his A-game

C) Obama did not what to destroy Romney until after the VP debate.

Your theory is simpler by taking my theory and adding a third part? OK.


My theory is simpler than the "long game" or any theory involving Obama deliberately throwing the first debate.

Glad you agree.
 
2012-10-17 10:47:31 AM

sprawl15: markfara: On a related note: Someone told me that Candy Crowley was named after her favorite food. I googled that but couldn't find anything. Does anyone out there know whether this is true or not?

No, I heard that she's a relative of Aleister Crowley, making her half satanic on her father's side.


Wasn't Barbara Bush Crowley's daughter? Google 103,000 results for Barbara Bush Alestier Crowley

Lets pick one Link
 
2012-10-17 10:56:11 AM

mrshowrules: My theory is simpler than the "long game" or any theory involving Obama deliberately throwing the first debate.


A) Obama realized that the first debate would be the first time many viewers (Conservative viewers) would see him unfiltered by Fox News for instance, so he wanted to layout his vision without appearing unpresidential in attacking Romney.

^ both 'long game' strategy and deliberately appearing softer in the first debate.
 
2012-10-17 11:00:08 AM
ok, i've had my coffee now. You can talk to me and probably not be killed for it.
 
2012-10-17 11:15:00 AM

Brick-House: Im just gonna leave this here for all you libtards...

[cdn2.mamapop.com image 850x351]


You might want to hang on to that.

Your boy got killed in the debate and came off as an evasive, smug bastard. He is also behind in electoral votes.

Yeah, you just go ahead and keep the tube.
 
2012-10-17 11:20:24 AM

Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: Mitt cares OH SO DEEPLY about the 4 dead Americans. Then he turns around and uses their deaths to score cheap political points against the President. fark YOU MITT ROMNEY.


Probably better than referring to the murdered corpses of your own diplomatic staff as "bumps in the road".
 
2012-10-17 11:48:53 AM

jack21221: By the way, did anybody notice that Mitt thought he was saving the middle class a lot in taxes by saying "We'll eliminate taxes on interest on your savings?" I don't know about you, but I made approximately 3 dollars on my savings last year. I checked around with friends and family, and not one person told me they made more than 10 dollars from their savings. Interest rates on savings accounts are in the 0.25% to 1% range.

It just goes to show you how out of touch he is. He actually things that if you make enough money on your savings that the tax is noticeable, you're "middle class." Just like if you want to pay for college, ask your parents for money! *headdesk*


LOL yes - I think I shouted something like "gee, thanks for the $2.50 in savings a$$wipe" from my couch. I'm hoping other people caught that too....
 
2012-10-17 12:02:38 PM

sprawl15: mrshowrules: My theory is simpler than the "long game" or any theory involving Obama deliberately throwing the first debate.

A) Obama realized that the first debate would be the first time many viewers (Conservative viewers) would see him unfiltered by Fox News for instance, so he wanted to layout his vision without appearing unpresidential in attacking Romney.

^ both 'long game' strategy and deliberately appearing softer in the first debate.


I disagree. This approach made sense even if there was only ever going to be one debate. He did not want to lose or appear soft.
 
2012-10-17 01:16:14 PM

Polly Ester: Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: Mitt cares OH SO DEEPLY about the 4 dead Americans. Then he turns around and uses their deaths to score cheap political points against the President. fark YOU MITT ROMNEY.

Probably better than referring to the murdered corpses of your own diplomatic staff as "bumps in the road".


What could he have said exactly that would have satisfied you?

That we will now destroy Libya because four Americans were killed?

That we will now leave Libya because four Americans were killed?

Should he have mentioned how Islam is a false faith that leads to killing Americans?
 
2012-10-17 01:49:19 PM

spongeboob: Polly Ester: Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: Mitt cares OH SO DEEPLY about the 4 dead Americans. Then he turns around and uses their deaths to score cheap political points against the President. fark YOU MITT ROMNEY.

Probably better than referring to the murdered corpses of your own diplomatic staff as "bumps in the road".

What could he have said exactly that would have satisfied you?


Something other than referring to the murdered corpses of his own diplomatic staff as "bumps in the road".
 
2012-10-17 02:16:57 PM

spongeboob: What could he have said exactly that would have satisfied you?


"Aw lawdy, Missuh Mitt, this presnintin' is so hard!!!!! I barely has time to lie around and eat all day! Would you be so kind as do this presnintin' for me while I goes back to Chicago?"
 
2012-10-17 03:09:49 PM

WhyteRaven74: [sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 850x874] 

In case anyone thinks he's any good with anything to do with relating to people


That spot pretty much says it all. This ad should be playing EVERYWHERE.
 
2012-10-17 03:12:05 PM
Btw linky goodness (Cheryl, teacher): Link
 
2012-10-17 03:25:10 PM

fusillade762: This is empathetic?

[i1159.photobucket.com image 850x471]


Kind of my thoughts, too. I got to hear a snippet, and I heard anger in his tone, but I didn't hear anything before or after that beyond fake warmth. It's part of why I really find him creepy. He practically screams 'I am faking a warm and caring demeanor', and I have to wonder just why he does it. Normal emotions seem a bit more human.
 
2012-10-17 07:43:00 PM

SpectroBoy: Yeah, you just go ahead and keep the tube.


He's STILL posting that? Jesus, every f*cking thread.
 
2012-10-18 06:49:39 AM

fusillade762: He's STILL posting that? Jesus, every f*cking thread.


I think it's part of the GOPs strategy of projection.

His butt must REALLY hurt.
 
Displayed 21 of 121 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report