USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
- Thread starter Kepler
- Start date
- Status
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
I like wonky. He could have just answered the question when Chris Wallace asked it. Instead he didn't. I want to know. Just give me one.
I like wonky. He could have just answered the question when Chris Wallace asked it. Instead he didn't. I want to know. Just give me one.
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
The situation in Iran now and back during the hostage crisis is similar in some ways, different in others. But I can tell you that the uncertainly over what Reagan would do once he got into office factored in their decision to let our people go.
You'll recall, they were actually freed during Reagan's inaugural address. And for the only time in my career, we received a two word "Flash" from AP: "Hostages freed." I've still got that piece of paper.
The situation in Iran now and back during the hostage crisis is similar in some ways, different in others. But I can tell you that the uncertainly over what Reagan would do once he got into office factored in their decision to let our people go.
You'll recall, they were actually freed during Reagan's inaugural address. And for the only time in my career, we received a two word "Flash" from AP: "Hostages freed." I've still got that piece of paper.
Last edited:
duper
Well-known member
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
Of course, in MOST cases, murder (and most federal criminal offenses) are charged at the state level. But it amused the heck out of me to read that there is no federal law against murder.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
if there is already a state law against murder, and murder would occur IN a state..... why would you need it?
Of course, in MOST cases, murder (and most federal criminal offenses) are charged at the state level. But it amused the heck out of me to read that there is no federal law against murder.
if there is already a state law against murder, and murder would occur IN a state..... why would you need it?
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
Every time the GOP alludes to 47% as a dog whistle for "urban black," the Dems should pound them right in the face with the 47% as "rural, white, patriot."
Certainly, it underscores the callousness (as well as the head-up-rectumness) of Romney's statement. R-R can either (1) lie that they never said it (that would be a bit much even for them), (2) lie about the meaning, far more likely, (3) pivot to something else, thus ceding the point, or (4) own it, embrace it head on, and double down (which we're secretly hoping and which we think on their own either is probably tin-eared enough to do, but which their handlers have fitted them with suicide vests which they will detonate on first sign of going rogue).
Every time the GOP alludes to 47% as a dog whistle for "urban black," the Dems should pound them right in the face with the 47% as "rural, white, patriot."
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
Channeling Bob Shrum again, I see. Or maybe Steffanie "Okay, it's not 5 trillion dollars" Cutter. Your analysis omits the option Romney chose, to say the remarks were "totally wrong." And suggesting Republicans might bring up 47% is like Jack Kennedy saying (maybe a million times) "My religion shouldn't be an issue." Yeah, like there's a chance Nixon would have mentioned it. Similarly, any mentions of "47%" will come exclusively, repeatedly and boringly from His Ineptness. Your racialist fantasies are revealing, however.
Channeling Bob Shrum again, I see. Or maybe Steffanie "Okay, it's not 5 trillion dollars" Cutter. Your analysis omits the option Romney chose, to say the remarks were "totally wrong." And suggesting Republicans might bring up 47% is like Jack Kennedy saying (maybe a million times) "My religion shouldn't be an issue." Yeah, like there's a chance Nixon would have mentioned it. Similarly, any mentions of "47%" will come exclusively, repeatedly and boringly from His Ineptness. Your racialist fantasies are revealing, however.
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
wait racialist fantasies are bad now?
wait racialist fantasies are bad now?
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
Snap CNN poll shows Ryan with a slight lead on the "who won the debate" question. These polls have significant methodological problems (time frame, time zones, people at home, etc) that other polls don't have. But it seems like the respondants got it about right: no big winner. no big loser.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...-on-debate-winner-ryan-48-biden-44/?hpt=hp_t1
Assuming he had a plan, it occurs to me that Biden's behavior may have been an effort to portray Ryan as too young, and in over his head, etc. It might work. On the other hand, people just might conclude he was being an a*shole.
Snap CNN poll shows Ryan with a slight lead on the "who won the debate" question. These polls have significant methodological problems (time frame, time zones, people at home, etc) that other polls don't have. But it seems like the respondants got it about right: no big winner. no big loser.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...-on-debate-winner-ryan-48-biden-44/?hpt=hp_t1
Assuming he had a plan, it occurs to me that Biden's behavior may have been an effort to portray Ryan as too young, and in over his head, etc. It might work. On the other hand, people just might conclude he was being an a*shole.
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
Nice job by Biden. How do you know who won the debate? The post debate spin of course. Two points. 1) Dems calling it a big Biden win while Republicans calling it a draw. While both sides are putting their take on it, Biden did his side more good. 2) Partisan analysis. To a person righty pundits were bringing up Biden gestures. Hilarious because last week same pundits were taking Obama to task for lack of passion?!? Umm...which one is it people? Dems are all over Biden showing up Ryan over multiple stimulus requests which I thought was the best zinger of the night. Made him look completely dishonest.
Not to say that Ryan sucked. If you're a Republican you're probably happy he got through it, while annoyed that Biden didn't say something stupid. This sets up a big debate next week.
Finally, CNN's coverage blows. Nothing to do with their leanings or this and that, but their analysis is terrible. Lets see you have Alex Costanales (sp?), Paul Begala, Carville's wife who looks like a corpse and some new guy who worked for Obama and seems way too nervous to be there. None of these people bring anything up that the respective campaigns don't want them to. If I wanted partisan analysis I'd turn on Fox on MSNBC.
Nice job by Biden. How do you know who won the debate? The post debate spin of course. Two points. 1) Dems calling it a big Biden win while Republicans calling it a draw. While both sides are putting their take on it, Biden did his side more good. 2) Partisan analysis. To a person righty pundits were bringing up Biden gestures. Hilarious because last week same pundits were taking Obama to task for lack of passion?!? Umm...which one is it people? Dems are all over Biden showing up Ryan over multiple stimulus requests which I thought was the best zinger of the night. Made him look completely dishonest.
Not to say that Ryan sucked. If you're a Republican you're probably happy he got through it, while annoyed that Biden didn't say something stupid. This sets up a big debate next week.
Finally, CNN's coverage blows. Nothing to do with their leanings or this and that, but their analysis is terrible. Lets see you have Alex Costanales (sp?), Paul Begala, Carville's wife who looks like a corpse and some new guy who worked for Obama and seems way too nervous to be there. None of these people bring anything up that the respective campaigns don't want them to. If I wanted partisan analysis I'd turn on Fox on MSNBC.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
It's all they have. Biden beat Ryan senseless on Afghanistan, Syria, and economics. The GOP pundits are left with clutching their pearls for Biden having the temerity to call Ryan out whenever he tried to ooze by on his half-truths (or no truths).
bronconick
Yep, still here
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
Having watched the Tigers instead, we'll have to go with the next best way of judging TV content known to man. Facebook wall.
Unlike last week, it looks like a Biden win by decision. A bit of wishing he'd shut up and the moderator actually moderate, a bunch of "burns" and utter silence from the pro-Romney folks of last week and most importantly, the ones who earlier today were "looking forward to Ryan cleaning his clock."
Sadly, this might be preferable to actually watching the debates outside of the Town Hall format, just on the off chance some audience member gets off a smartass question.
Having watched the Tigers instead, we'll have to go with the next best way of judging TV content known to man. Facebook wall.
Unlike last week, it looks like a Biden win by decision. A bit of wishing he'd shut up and the moderator actually moderate, a bunch of "burns" and utter silence from the pro-Romney folks of last week and most importantly, the ones who earlier today were "looking forward to Ryan cleaning his clock."
Sadly, this might be preferable to actually watching the debates outside of the Town Hall format, just on the off chance some audience member gets off a smartass question.
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
I always give credit for righties ability to hit their talking points in unison, but if Biden laughing and smiling too much is so offputting for Ryan perhaps that's a sign the Congressman isn't ready for the bigtime.
I always give credit for righties ability to hit their talking points in unison, but if Biden laughing and smiling too much is so offputting for Ryan perhaps that's a sign the Congressman isn't ready for the bigtime.
ExileOnDaytonStreet
Drunkard
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!
At a certain point, I thought someone might have been holding a silly stuffed animal off-camera in the background.
Biden was prepared, and performed well. Still won't get much out of him to defend the outrageous spending (and "Hey, it could've been worse" isn't a great answer), though.
On the other side, I thought Ryan was personable, but I'm still not sure where his math is coming from. We get how the lowered tax rates will "broaden the base", as he likes to say, and the additional tax-payers will help bridge the gap. But I would seriously like to know what loopholes and deductions that he and Romney plan on closing, because they would have to be seriously large (read: commonly used ones) to make a big difference.
To be fair, it got so excessive that I was pretty sure Biden might have been off his meds.
At a certain point, I thought someone might have been holding a silly stuffed animal off-camera in the background.
Biden was prepared, and performed well. Still won't get much out of him to defend the outrageous spending (and "Hey, it could've been worse" isn't a great answer), though.
On the other side, I thought Ryan was personable, but I'm still not sure where his math is coming from. We get how the lowered tax rates will "broaden the base", as he likes to say, and the additional tax-payers will help bridge the gap. But I would seriously like to know what loopholes and deductions that he and Romney plan on closing, because they would have to be seriously large (read: commonly used ones) to make a big difference.
- Status