The Vice Presidential Debate

MrMister

nagilum2 wrote: »

Most of the media consensus is that it was overall, a draw.

That's because the media is scared to death of calling an issue like it is. They always do it. "The Republicans say this, the Democrats say this so let's call it a tie."

That debate was pretty much one way traffic. Biden was dominant throughout and now the Republicans are whining. You can always tell which side lost by who complains about the other side's "behavior" and "demeanor".

Amerika

Corkfeen wrote: »

So the GOP are just going to ignore the accuracy of Biden's arguments.....

Not at all. We should all feel confident the same people who advise the president and claimed (according to Biden) the attack on the consulate in Libya was brought about because of some video are the same people that claim Iran poses no near threat. And isn’t it great... people making $250,000 now don’t have to worry about increased taxes from this current administration, because Biden claimed only people making more than $1,000,000 will be targeted with higher taxes.

hooradiation

Be like Nutella wrote: »

Romney would eat a baby, live on TV, if it guaranteed him the White House.

Romney is pretty much The Smiler from Transmetropolitan.
He believes in nothing save for that he ought to be president.

Amerika

hooradiation wrote: »

People viewing this world through a prism of pure madness?

That ‘prism of pure madness’ wouldn’t happen to be called 'television' would it? I kinda expected the headlines this morning to read: ANGRY OLD ASSHAT YELLS AT PAUL RYAN FOR 90 MINUTES.

Mjollnir

Amerika wrote: »

That ‘prism of pure madness’ wouldn’t happen to be called 'television' would it? I kinda expected the headlines this morning to read: ANGRY OLD ASSHAT YELLS AT PAUL RYAN FOR 90 MINUTES.

LOL! Yes, but there is nothing Biden could have done such that people like you would have thought anything other than Ryan was bullied, Biden was boorish and spoke over him, Ryan actually had facts, etc...

But that's the world you live in.

I found it amusing how every time Ryan said he and Romney said they were the team unafraid to make the 'hard choices', he ran away from any specifics of his planned cuts, elimination of loopholes, etc....

MrMister

Mjollnir wrote: »

I found it amusing how every time Ryan said he and Romney said they were the team unafraid to make the 'hard choices', he rain away from any specifics of his planned cuts, elimination of loopholes, etc....

The Republican party is a busted flush. They have no ideas except tax-cuts for the wealthy.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

hooradiation wrote: »

People viewing this world through a prism of pure madness?

That ‘prism of pure madness’ wouldn’t happen to be called 'television' would it? I kinda expected the headlines this morning to read: ANGRY OLD ASSHAT YELLS AT PAUL RYAN FOR 90 MINUTES.

This is pure gold. Romney interrupts Obama and the moderator constantly and he's confident and taking control of the debate. Biden does and he's rude and boorish. Pure gold.

Do you know why Biden interrupted so often? Ryan was wrong a lot. Almost constantly in fact, this needed to be pointed out.

I'm even happier with Biden's performance after reading your posts. If all you can find to pick at were his manners he must have been great.

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

I'm even happier with Biden's performance after reading your posts. If all you can find to pick at were his manners he must have been great.

You threw me off with the name change at first (does everyone named Brian abhor me? ) I’m sure the base and party faithful loved Biden’s performance. But isn’t it what the independents and undecideds think that really counts? And my perception of him pretty much seems to match what they felt. Yes Romney did go after Obama, but in a much more respectful manner... dare I say 'presidential' fashion . And in politics, isn't perception everything?

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

Brian? wrote: »

I'm even happier with Biden's performance after reading your posts. If all you can find to pick at were his manners he must have been great.

You threw me off with the name change at first (does everyone named Brian abhor me? ) I’m sure the base and party faithful loved Biden’s performance. But isn’t it what the independents and undecideds think that really counts? And my perception of him pretty much seems to match what they felt. Yes Romney did go after Obama, but in a much more respectful manner... dare I say 'presidential' fashion . And in politics, isn't perception everything?

Romney was a tad more respectful alright, but then he was interrupting the President of the Unites States.

What independents should have seen last night was a man of substance, experience and energy swatting away a challenger with none of them.

Perception matters far too much IMO, this country would be far better off listening than looking.

hooradiation

Amerika wrote: »

That ‘prism of pure madness’ wouldn’t happen to be called 'television' would it? I kinda expected the headlines this morning to read: ANGRY OLD ASSHAT YELLS AT PAUL RYAN FOR 90 MINUTES.

If this is what you're seeing when you turn on your television, I'd have it replaced.
It seems to be tapping into some other universe, a bizzaro world where calling people on their lies is makes one an "asshat".

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

Perception matters far too much IMO, this country would be far better off listening than looking.

I’m sure that will be a comforting thought when you’re forced to watch Romney being sworn in on Inauguration Day.

Amerika

hooradiation wrote: »

If this is what you're seeing when you turn on your television, I'd have it replaced.

I did recently, with a 55" HD one… and seeing Biden’s constant sneering, laughing, smiling, snickering and interrupting for the first 75 minutes of the debate in high definition was rather unsettling to say the least.

It seems to be tapping into some other universe, a bizzaro world where calling people on their lies is makes one an "asshat".

Would that world be called 'reality?'

jank

Brian? wrote: »

Romney was a tad more respectful alright, but then he was interrupting the President of the Unites States.

What independents should have seen last night was a man of substance, experience and energy swatting away a challenger with none of them.

Perception matters far too much IMO, this country would be far better off listening than looking.

a) You have no idea what independents saw last night as you are not one of them.
b) this country, do you live in the US?
c)Perception is key I agree, hence the pictures of Biden smirking and laughing while Ryan spoke may not be the best thing to turn voters.

vetinari

Overall I thought Biden won but Ryan equipped himself well enough.
Certainly more even that last week's debate.

Biden I thought landed a lot of clean blows. The letters Ryan sent to Biden asking for stimulus money to create jobs was a real kick in the teeth for Ryan. Also, I'm sure to the dismay of republican strategists, Ryan essentially said that a Republican administration would try to overturn Roe v Wade. I guess Ryan isn't as good as Romney at changing his positions The moderator did a good job of hemming Ryan in on the deductions they would cut. He seemed really uncomfortable in answering that.

All in all, a good night for the democrats. The abortion issue coming back would have been the last thing Romney wanted.

Brian?

jank wrote: »

a) You have no idea what independents saw last night as you are not one of them.
b) this country, do you live in the US?
c)Perception is key I agree, hence the pictures of Biden smirking and laughing while Ryan spoke may not be the best thing to turn voters.

Yes, I live in the US. I know what independents saw last night because I watched the debate. Joe Biden was laughing and smiling at the ridiculousness of what he was hearing, whether independents perceive it that way is another thing.

Amerika

Let me just say... Overall I thought each candidate did what was expected of them. Biden pleased his base and might have just applied a tourniquet to the bleeding, and Ryan held his own. I don’t think the debate will do much to change the needle though.

I don't think the next presidential debate, which is a Town Meeting format, lends itself to counter attacks though.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

I’m sure that will be a comforting thought when you’re forced to watch Romney being sworn in on Inauguration Day.

Given the poll numbers and my actual connection to reality I doubt that will happen. It's good to see you admit there is nothing more to Romney than perception. Very big of you.

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

Yes, I live in the US.

Let me guess... one of those west left coast states?

Brian? wrote: »

Given the poll numbers and my actual connection to reality I doubt that will happen. It's good to see you admit there is nothing more to Romney than perception. Very big of you.

Only a 'connection' eh?

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

Let me just say... Overall I thought each candidate did what was expected of them. Biden pleased his base and might have just applied a tourniquet to the bleeding, and Ryan held his own. I don’t think the debate will do much to change the needle though.

I completely agree that this debate will actually change nothing in the long run. I found it hugely entertaining and really enjoyed Biden's performance but these debates never actually change the course of an election.

I don't think the next presidential debate, which is a Town Meeting format, lends itself to counter attacks though.

Should be better, Romney will have to walk and talk at the same time. I'm not sure Grover Norquist can program him to do both at the same time before the debate.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

Let me guess... one of those west left coast states?

Wrong-oh. Arizona, as red a state as they come.

Only a 'connection' eh?

Yup, unlike your I am actually connected to reality. Do you need me to explain a connection to you?

Brian?

Brian? wrote: »

Wrong-oh. Arizona, as red a state as they come.

For the sake of clarity: I am an Irishman living in Arizona. So feel free to discount everything I say because I'm a euroweenie and not a red blooded American.

IvySlayer

Hats off to the moderator. She was good.

Biden wiped the floor with Ryan. He managed to answer every question and make his point. Obama can learn from him.

MrMister

Amerika wrote: »

Would that world be called 'reality?'

No, because reality has a liberal bias.

Amerika wrote: »

I don't think the next presidential debate, which is a Town Meeting format, lends itself to counter attacks though.

No, but it's likely to take Romneybot off script and he doesn't do well when he has to think on his feet.

Amerika wrote: »

Ryan held his own.

Ryan was schooled.

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

For the sake of clarity: I am an Irishman living in Arizona. So feel free to discount everything I say because I'm a euroweenie and not a red blooded American.

And I’m in Pennsylvania, near where Joe Biden hails from. I’ve been lax in filling out my Ireland Foreign Births Register, which I’ll need to have in case I need to skedaddle out of here in the event Obama gets a second term. Does that make me an AmerIroweenie?

hooradiation

Amerika wrote: »

I did recently, with a 55" HD one…

If that's meant to impress, it doesn't.
However, I'd have it sent back. You're seeing things that aren't there. Artifacting is a thing, but this is an extreme case.

Amerika wrote: »

and seeing Biden’s constant sneering, laughing, smiling, snickering and interrupting for the first 75 minutes of the debate in high definition was rather unsettling to say the least

It's good that you've focused on this imagined slights, it shows that there is nothing of substance for you to get stuck into.

Aww, Biden was mean, was he?
Well I hope for Ryan's sake that the ticket he's part of goes nowhere, if he can't handle Joe Biden calling him on his lies, lord help him on the international stage.

Amerika wrote: »

Would that world be called 'reality?'

Evidently not.

IvySlayer

Biden was laughing and smirking at Ryans bull****. Have you noticed Biden countered every argument with FACTS and FIGURES.

Paul Ryan hasn't heard of either.

IvySlayer

Biden: Can I translate?

LOL

MrMister

nagirrac

Biden did what he had to do, exposed the Romney/Ryan platform for what it is, a bunch of "malarkey" - great use of the word, confused the fcuk out of Ryan. Biden's only flaw was in overdoing the laughing bit which is getting too much media attention instead of Ryan's failure to give any specifics on his budget (other than "Republicans and Democrats will work out the details", lol yes of course they will Paul, what planet are you on). Ryan shot both feet off on the abortion issue stating clearly that the issue should not be left to "unelected justices" i.e. the Supreme court. Yes, lets dispense with judicial review and have religious nutters like Ryan decide what is a "legitimate" rape and whether people should have access to contraception. Ryan was on the defensive all night, did OK overall but Biden has now given the template for Obama to go on the offensive next debate.

Amerika

Hmmm... You all seem to think I’m not happy with Biden’s performance. From my side of the political fence, I rather liked his act. His utter disrespect in the debate only hurt the Obama/Biden ticket were it matters most… with independents and undecideds. And Ryan did just fine and helped his ticket IMO. He showed he is presidential regarding that proverbial ‘one heartbeat away from the presidency' thing.

Duck Soup

nagirrac wrote: »

Ryan was on the defensive all night, did OK overall but Biden has now given the template for Obama to go on the offensive next debate.

Yep, I've been thinking about that. Obama's never been the go-on-the-attack type. He knows the policies and details, but it's how you present them.

Romney said fcuk all in the first debate, but said it with vigour. Biden put forward countless numbers and stats, but did so with animation and, yes, aggression.

It remains to be seen whether they can ever turn Obama around into an energized debater - which is what all his supporters want - but they'll settle for a cool rebuttal of the specious claims Romney uses as his stock-in-trade.

Can't see Obama ever doing what both Romney and Biden did - cutting across your opponents arguments and dominating the debate. That's not lowering expectations - expectations couldn't be lower at this point - but a realistic look back at how he performed against both McCain and Hillary.

What I'd prefer to see is Obama look into the camera with a straight back and a clear voice and calmly eviscerate the Romney positions and misrepresentations.

Apparently, the leak out of the Obama campaign was that Obama thought he could 'stand above the fray' in a do-no-harm policy in the first debate. Effectively, try to undercut the appearance of Romney as an equal by not engaging him. That just ceded the entire debate.

So stylistically obviously, Obama won't be using Biden's fire, but substantively he can learn a lot from the simple device Biden used of not letting a single BS point slide by unchallenged.

On things like the 47% remark, Biden got the digs in early so Obama doesn't need to. Obama just needs to keep his eye on the policy prescriptions.

The other notable success that Biden had was to get in Ryan's face to get specific. Every time he was asked, Ryan - the wonkiest of wonks - came up with nothing (not necessarily Ryan's fault as he's been told to keep his gob shut on the specifics).

But it's something that worked really well for Biden and I'd like to see Obama continue - keep pressing for specifics, politely and continuously. There's a huge hole at the centre of the Romney-Ryan platform where the details should be. Point it out and keep Romney off his stride, as Biden did with Ryan.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Amerika

nagirrac wrote: »

Biden did what he had to do, exposed the Romney/Ryan platform for what it is, a bunch of "malarkey" - great use of the word, confused the fcuk out of Ryan.

LOL Nope! That was two good old catholic boys of Irish heritage dukin' it out up there. Ryan new exactly what that meant, and with the 'bunch of stuff' comment. Guess Ryan just had more respect for the debate process.

nagirrac

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Biden's point is that the two wars, regardless of whether they were justified or not, were not paid for. In the history of the US all wars had been paid for by tax increases, in the case of Bush/Chaney they did the opposite and reduced taxes on the wealthy at a time of war. The wealthy get a double benefit, their sons and daughters will never have to serve and they don't have to pay to send other people's kids to their deaths. Bring back the draft and see how keen they are on going to war.

Amerika

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

And the same credit card that Obama has maxed out?

nagirrac

Amerika wrote: »

LOL Nope! That was two good old catholic boys of Irish heritage dukin' it out up there. Ryan new exactly what that meant, and with the 'bunch of stuff' comment. Guess Ryan just had more respect for the debate process.

Ryan could do with a bit of respect for the "truth" process

Amerika

nagirrac wrote: »

Ryan could do with a bit of respect for the "truth" process

I hear the Left has hired an army of private detectives and has targeted Ryan with a "confessional watch" ahead of Sunday’s Mass. :pac:

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

MrMister

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I was equally amused by Ryans position on the stimulus, saying how it was wasteful, bad for the economy and how it wouldn't create jobs or growth, yet it was revealed that Ryan himself had asked for stimulus spending for his state because it would create growth and jobs.

Are there two greasier politicians in America than Romney and Ryan?

IvySlayer

nagirrac wrote: »

Biden did what he had to do, exposed the Romney/Ryan platform for what it is, a bunch of "malarkey" - great use of the word, confused the fcuk out of Ryan. Biden's only flaw was in overdoing the laughing bit which is getting too much media attention instead of Ryan's failure to give any specifics on his budget

I disagree.

It worked perfectly, everyone is talking about his laughing, and and why he was laughing.

nagirrac

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.will just accelerate this.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

20Cent

Good piece by Matt Taibbi about the debate. Makes the point about Ryan not being able to answer a yes/no question regarding how they intend to pay for the tax cuts.

MS. RADDATZ: You have refused yet again to offer specifics on how you pay for that 20 percent across-the-board tax cut. Do you actually have the specifics, or are you still working on it, and that's why you won't tell voters?

REP. RYAN: Different than this administration, we actually want to have big bipartisan agreements. You see, I understand the –

MS. RADDATZ: Do you have the specifics? Do you have the math? Do you know exactly what you're doing?

REP. RYAN: Look – look at what Mitt – look at what Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill did. They worked together out of a framework to lower tax rates and broaden the base, and they worked together to fix that. What we're saying is here's our framework: Lower tax rates 20 percent – we raise about $1.2 trillion through income taxes. We forgo about 1.1 trillion [dollars] in loopholes and deductions. And so what we're saying is deny those loopholes and deductions to higher-income taxpayers so that more of their income is taxed, which has a broader base of taxation –


Laughing i the correct response to these spoofers, no intellectual depth or basic honesty.

The Vice Presidential Debate: Joe Biden Was Right to Laugh

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/the-vice-presidential-debate-joe-biden-was-right-to-laugh-20121012?stop_mobi=yes

Black Swan

The format for the VP debate was obviously different from the 1st presidential debate, being more relaxed, with each candidate sitting down next to each other on a shared table; i.e., hence the more conversational interaction that occurred, rather than the formality of a podium. The 2nd presidential debate will also be in a more relaxed atmosphere when compared with the first; i.e., "Town meeting." This makes me wonder why they call it the 2nd presidential debate, when the typical guidelines that are to be used in a debate are not followed in a "Town meeting?" In any case, I would expect that both Romney and Obama will attempt to interrupt and not wait their turn speaking during this "Town meeting," but we will know for sure this coming Tuesday when it's held in the States.

nagilum2 wrote: »

He has always been "pro-choice" as a legislator...

Has Mitt Romney ever occupied the elected position of "a legislator?" He attempted to become one in 1994 when he ran for the US Senate and lost to Ted Kennedy. Governors are not "a legislator." They are a part of the executive, and do not legislate, only signing or vetoing bills placed before them from the "legislators." There is a good reason for this, justifying why the executive is separated from legislation; i.e., part of the separation of powers as a check-and-balance built into their constitutional system.

nagilum2

Black Swan wrote: »

The format for the VP debate was obviously different from the 1st presidential debate, being more relaxed, with each candidate sitting down next to each other on a shared table; i.e., hence the more conversational interaction that occurred, rather than the formality of a podium. The 2nd presidential debate will also be in a more relaxed atmosphere when compared with the first; i.e., "Town meeting

Has Mitt Romney ever occupied the elected position of "a legislator?" He attempted to become one in 1994 when he ran for the US Senate and lost to Ted Kennedy. Governors are not "a legislator." They are a part of the executive, and do not legislate, only signing or vetoing bills placed before them from the "legislators." There is a good reason for this, justifying why the executive is separated from legislation; i.e., part of the separation of powers as a check-and-balance built into their constitutional system.

Fair point. Supplant with "elected official". In any case, I don't think anyone really thinks Romney is some kind of pro-life crusader.

If the republicans had nominated almost anyone else, Ryan's hesitation on the abortion question at the end would be a much bigger deal.

nagirrac

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The poor dears, how did they manage at all on less than $30,000 per week. Nice selective data there, between 2007 and 2009 the stock market dropped by over 50%. As a high % of the income by the highest earners comes from investments, the decline you reference is to be expected, although it was short term as the market has recovered well since (under Obama). The point however is they didn't need a tax break in 2001 and they don't need a further tax break now.
Do your own research, every economic study shows that since 2001 the proportion of wealth held by the top 1%, and in particular the top 0.1%, has continued to increase while middle class wages have stagnated and poverty has increased. No amount of trickle down BS will reverse that trend.

joseph brand

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

What a silly thing to say. In the face of rampant unemployment, many poor folks get lured into the US military, which has a steady pay cheque and benefits. (apart from the whole 'War' part)

I wonder how the wealthy avoid this? Obviously the wealthy aren't personally sending the poor off to fight their wars, it's done by proxy.

Didn't that Republican Ted Nugent crap his pants just to avoid going to war, yet he's full of fightin' talk these days. Quite the tough guy now. 'All bark and no bite' as they say.

“He wasn’t even close to going to Vietnam,” Cenk said. “It wasn’t like he couldn’t. He could have. In fact, he actively avoided it. But that’s not the most interesting part of the story, it’s how he did it.”

Cenk then explained that Nugent had dodged the draft by avoiding personal hygiene, eating as much junk food as he could and eventually defecating and urinating on himself before his Draft Board Physical.

“He literally crapped his pants when he had a chance to go to war.”

Mitt Romney's pants were cleaner and more magical while he sipped sparkling water in Paris, thus avoiding the draft for Vietnam. But let's not let facts get in the way.

What I can not stand, is the hypocrisy of sending men off to get seriously maimed or die, when you've done everything in your power to avoid going yourself! It's fine for poor Americans, but not for Romney!

Joe Biden didn’t just win the debate. Joe Biden invented a new way to debate liars.

The whinging from the Rep supporters on here put a smile on my face. Joe Biden dealt with Ryan in the same manner in which I would deal with a petulant child selling me tall stories. Biden doesn't suffer fools gladly.

Paul Ryan, for all intents and purposes, looked like he was still wet behind the ears, while he got schooled by the very experienced Biden. It wasn't a fair contest in all fairness. But Biden saw the funny side of debating a man who looks like he's about 30, has no plans and treats Romney as a father figure. I would have laughed at the silliness of it all too.

Biden: "What?" "Him?" "I'm debating him?" /laugher ensues

jank

joseph brand wrote: »

What a silly thing to say

It may be silly in your opinion but Permabear is right. There is no draft now so NOBODY is forced by the government to join the military. So it is 100% factualy correct whatever spin you like to put on it.

jank

Brian? wrote: »

Yes, I live in the US. I know what independents saw last night because I watched the debate. Joe Biden was laughing and smiling at the ridiculousness of what he was hearing, whether independents perceive it that way is another thing.

Yes, they will in all intents and purposes perceive differently than you, therefore you cannot post as if you are representing them.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.