2012 Election Thread

[gah]

of course, if the NYT showed Romney eating babies for breakfast, it would be the liberal media at it again

Exactly.

ETA:  I'm pretty sure he really does eat babies for breakfast btw.

Chinese babies at that. They taste better. I think it's the all organic straight from the fields rice diet they're fed. Mmm-mmm, chinese baby. Marinated in a soy based sauce, slow cooked over some apple wood chips....chinese baby back ribs indeed!

[twatts]

of course, if the NYT showed Romney eating babies for breakfast, it would be the liberal media at it again

Exactly.

ETA:  I'm pretty sure he really does eat babies for breakfast btw.

Chinese babies at that. They taste better. I think it's the all organic straight from the fields rice diet they're fed. Mmm-mmm, chinese baby. Marinated in a soy based sauce, slow cooked over some apple wood chips....chinese baby back ribs indeed!

He better watch out for all the arsenic!

Terry

[VDB]

Fox News is jizzing themselves over this new Pew poll that gave Romney good news yesterday.

Meanwhile, Nate Silver is taking a much more nuanced view and is actually paying attention to all the polls that came out yesterday. He still puts Romney at a 25% chance of winning the election. But, you know, he's just some egghead liberal elite who uses -- pfft -- data and analytics to put together pretty charts for his commie overlords at the New York Times.

[sls.stormyrider]

I think it's fair to say the debate helped Romney - no surprise.
Apparently, the Big Bird ad is going to air in Ohio.
Have they aired any ads showing the Romney flip flops from the primaries to the general, like the vids on the other thread?

they don't spend too much cash for the Presidential here in MA.

[runawayjimbo]

I think it's fair to say the debate helped Romney - no surprise.
Apparently, the Big Bird ad is going to air in Ohio.
Have they aired any ads showing the Romney flip flops from the primaries to the general, like the vids on the other thread?

they don't spend too much cash for the Presidential here in MA.

An ad about Big Bird? That doesn't seem desperate at all.

Also, could someone tell me which loopholes Obama is going to close to lower the corporate tax rate that he mentioned in the debate? Because for all the clamor over Romney's lack of specifics, people seem to be overlooking the fact that Obama was very much style and not much substance in the debate as well. His style just kinda sucked.

ETA: Romney's speech at VMI yesterday was despicable, BTW

[Hicks]

Pretty sure he specifically called out ending tax breaks for moving operations overseas as a loophole he would close.

Also, tax breaks for oil companies.

[sls.stormyrider]

that's the only one I recall him mentioning.

and, if it was up to me, I can think of many other ads beside for I would run if I was in charge.
thankfully, I'm not

[mattstick]

[runawayjimbo]

Pretty sure he specifically called out ending tax breaks for moving operations overseas as a loophole he would close.

Also, tax breaks for oil companies.

Hmmm, where I have heard that before? Oh yeah...

You know, unlike John McCain, I will stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas, and I will start giving them to companies that create good jobs right here in America.

To help working families, we'll extend our middle-class tax cuts.  But at a time of record deficits, we will not continue tax cuts for oil companies, for investment fund managers, and for those making over $250,000 a year.  We just can't afford it.

So, if the only two loopholes Obama mentioned are the ones he's been talking about since the last election, I'm not sure how anyone can take him seriously. 4 years (2 with a Democratically controlled Congress) and I don't even think either of those have even been formally considered by Congress. And please, PLEASE don't cry GOP obstructionism on this. If Obama couldn't get 1 GOP senator to break the filibuster - no Susan Collins? Olympia Snowe? Dick Lugar, who liberals suddenly realized they LOVED after he lost to a Tea Partier - he is an even more ineffective leader than I thought he was. The reason none of this ever moved was because he had absolutely no interest in moving it other than to use it as a campaign prop (much like his tough talk to the teachers unions, sls).

That's awesome but of course it sounds nothing like Jed Bartlet who was an ARDENT free marketer. Also, here's 85 reasons why Sesame Street is going to be ok

[Guyute]

Sesame Street (children's television workshop) has requested Obama not to use Big Bird in the ads as they are a non-partisan organization.   
Now between that and the Liar Liar ads Obama looks desperate when he doesn't need to be.   They are actually starting to turn voters away as a result.

The best line I heard today was a woman I work with telling me that Romney is a bully and he bullied Obama during the debate and she doesn't want a bully for president.  To which I replied "So you are telling me that the leader of the free world was bullied during a debate by Mitt Romney?  Do I want someone who can be bullied in that easy of  a setting for president?"   Of course it was just to make a point, but I found it amusing.

[Hicks]

You asked which loopholes he said he would close during the last debate and I told you the ones he mentioned, simple as that.

Are you really going to sit there and minimize the obstructionist tactics in the Senate?  I mean it took an all out battle that lasted months just to get some money for 9/11 responders for chrissake.  So maybe it might be a tad more difficult to close loopholes that armies of lobbyists would be deployed to defend if there was even a hint that they were going away.   Not to mention that some of the assholes in Congress probably directly benefit from them too.

[alcoholandcoffeebeans]

Sesame Street (children's television workshop) has requested Obama not to use Big Bird in the ads as they are a non-partisan organization.   

Already aired twice and got yanked... I caught it.

[runawayjimbo]

You asked which loopholes he said he would close during the last debate and I told you the ones he mentioned, simple as that.

So, to summarize, when Romney talks about policies he (in your estimation) has no intention of following through on he is a liar; when Obama speaks of policies he either can't or won't (but certainly hasn't) pass, we'll hey, at least he's out there talking about doing them. Is that about right?

Are you really going to sit there and minimize the obstructionist tactics in the Senate?  I mean it took an all out battle that lasted months just to get some money for 9/11 responders for chrissake.  So maybe it might be a tad more difficult to close loopholes that armies of lobbyists would be deployed to defend if there was even a hint that they were going away.  Not to mention that some of the assholes in Congress probably directly benefit from them too.

To be sure, the GOP have at times stood against Obama for purely political gain. But that doesn't change the fact that Obama has shied away from fights on policies he was elected on because he didn't want to suffer the electoral/fundraising consequences of it. It doesn't make it right, but it's a game both sides play equally.

Overall, I think the Obama's problem has been that his campaign has been so concerned with telling you why you shouldn't vote for Romney that they've forgotten to make a case for why you should vote for him. They are running the Bush 2004 playbook of fear and distortion to a T  - he'll cut taxes for the wealthy (which means he'll raise your taxes!!), he'll roll back regulations on Wall St (even though everyone who's been paying  the slightest bit of attention knows that Dodd-Frank is bullshit), he'll take away your "free" contraceptive and ultimately your right to choose (remember when only Republicans stoked the culture war flames?). But anytime he talks of what he wants to do it sounds like it's been lifted from his campaign 4 years ago, and I think people (particularly Independents who voted for him last time) do not believe a second term will yield any more progress on these fronts than his first.

Overall, I think he's in serious trouble. There's plenty of time for Romney to say something else inexplicably stupid and the market is still close to multi-year highs, but Obama has to do something to stop the bleeding soon, and it doesn't appear to me that he or his campaign have any clue in how to do that.

Intrade = Omaba 62.2%
RCP Average - Romney +0.8 (a 4+ pt swing in a week)
FiveThirtyEight - Obama 71.2% (down 13.5% from a week ago)

[VA $l!m]

so, i avoid the political boards here like the plague, but thought id just pop in to say:
we are all doomed if this fuker gets elected.

and by fuker i mean the antichrist mormon sonof abitch.

[Hicks]

so, i avoid the political boards here like the plague, but thought id just pop in to say:
we are all doomed if this fuker gets elected.

and by fuker i mean the antichrist mormon sonof abitch.

He ain't gonna win, but a sick part of me thinks this country deserves him. . .