MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus:         Newsletters 
Wednesday, October 1, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 49.0° F  Overcast
Collapse Photo Bar

Impressions of the Debate

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Stebben84 » Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:11 pm

Meade wrote:
Stebben84 wrote:But hey, lets here what the pundit fuckwads have to say.

But we just did, pundit.


None of which apply to me LarDog.

A pundit is someone who offers to mass media his or her opinion or commentary on a particular subject area (most typically political analysis, the social sciences or sport) on which they are usually knowledgeable (or can at least appear to be knowledgeable). The term has been increasingly applied to popular media personalities.[1] In certain cases, it may be used in a derogatory manner as well, as the political equivalent of "ideologue."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pundit_(expert)

You're batting zero right now.
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4863
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby david cohen » Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:16 pm

Meade you fucking tool, you have no idea who I am and in what % I am associated with. New Media Meade my ass. More like unfermented Mead- all sugar, no kick.
david cohen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1365
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:48 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Slick Willy » Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:18 pm

Honestly, I think both candidates came off as too aggressive. Neither candidate made themselves very likeable, just respectable to a certain degree. Don't get me wrong, Obama needed to bring an aggressiveness, but undecideds want to be able to relate to a candidate and maybe get a taste of humor and humility. Neither candidate did that. Even though he's already on the job, Obama still needed to bring a vision for the future. Too late for that now, but at least he finally mentioned the 47%. It almost looked like he wouldn't mention that again this time, and I was gonna give up on Obama if he did.
Slick Willy
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 366
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:54 am
Location: Madison, WI (Allied-Dunn's Marsh Neighborhood)

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Stebben84 » Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:21 pm

Slick Willy wrote:Neither candidate made themselves very likeable, just respectable to a certain degree.


I do think it's a product of the town hall format. The same happened to McCain. The whole getting up and circling around and cutting off the other candidate is a bit unflattering. I don't think the town hall lends itself well to the debates.
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4863
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Huckleby » Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:31 pm

I am thrilled by Obama's performance. He killed on Libya and Immigration, for starters.

Romney is a very smart and able man. He had another good night.

Overall, things turned out better than I had dared hope for.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6635
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Ned Flanders » Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:38 pm

pjbogart wrote:I'm frankly astonished that Republicans are still going full throttle on the Libya tragedy. The message is completely muddled, it's unclear exactly what they're complaining about. But most importantly, the impression for voters is that Romney's campaign considers nothing off-limits in their politicking. Videos of grieving parents are fair game. Capitalizing on tragedy is dangerous business and I don't think Republicans have been very effective in their attacks.

No, unfortunately, it's very clear: Obama and his gang tried, for weeks, to pin this attack on a non-existent "protest" and bogus video even when they clearly knew it was a planned terrorist attack that they had been warned about--9/11 duh.
Ned Flanders
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 13285
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 2:48 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Huckleby » Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:48 pm

Ned Flanders wrote:No, unfortunately, it's very clear: Obama and his gang tried, for weeks, to pin this attack on a non-existent "protest" and bogus video even when they clearly knew it was a planned terrorist attack that they had been warned about--9/11 duh.


You are repeating the right wing spin that is factually incorrect. That false spin started to unravel tonight when Obama very publicly confirmed that the Administration recognized the possibility of a terrorist attack right from the start.

The administration never, ever blamed the attack on the video (why you call it "bogus" is curious.) They always, from the start, said that extremist groups were involved, and they always, from the start, said a final determination awaited a full investigation.

Your Great Libya Hope is dead, the full truth is coming out, and the FOX news anchors look more depressed than Obama in the first debate.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6635
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Huckleby » Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:53 pm

http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=288148
CNN polling of registered voters following the presidential town hall showed 46 percent of respondents believed US President Barack Obama won the debate, while 39% believed Republican challenger Mitt Romney won.

http://www.cbsnews.com/
In CBS News Instant Poll, 37 percent say President Obama won the second presidential debate, 30 percent say Romney won with a margin of error of 4 points

:)
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6635
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby pjbogart » Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:54 pm

Ned Flanders wrote:No, unfortunately, it's very clear: Obama and his gang tried, for weeks, to pin this attack on a non-existent "protest" and bogus video even when they clearly knew it was a planned terrorist attack that they had been warned about--9/11 duh.


Ah, Ned is pointing out that Bush was to blame for 9/11 due to their previous warnings about bin Laden's intention to attack US targets. Oh wait, I think actually Clinton was to blame for that. But not Hillary, she's a hero for throwing Obama "under the bus". I'm still trying to get all of the talking points lined up, Ned.

So your assertion is that the State Department's normalization policy in Libya led directly to the deaths of four Americans, including an ambassador? And, logically, that policy came directly from Obama (which I actually consider completely plausible).

Question: do you blame the President for each and every death that occurs in the military? Might some decisions about security detail be decided by people further along the chain of command? Perhaps even non-appointed career State Department employees?

I get "the buck stops here". In fact, I tend to agree with it. But aren't there times when "the buck stops here" means simply that you intend to hold people accountable for their mistakes? And hindsight is 20/20, it's easy to say there was a mistake now that there are four people dead, including an ambassador, but does that necessarily mean that the normalization policy was incorrect at the time? Well-intentioned, bad results?

Surely you don't consider the ability to see the future as a job prerequisite for the President or State Department employees.
pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6161
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Stebben84 » Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:55 pm

Ned Flanders wrote:9/11 duh.


Thanks Giuliani.
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4863
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Meade » Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:57 pm

Huckleby wrote:
Ned Flanders wrote:No, unfortunately, it's very clear: Obama and his gang tried, for weeks, to pin this attack on a non-existent "protest" and bogus video even when they clearly knew it was a planned terrorist attack that they had been warned about--9/11 duh.


You are repeating the right wing spin that is factually incorrect. That false spin started to unravel tonight when Obama very publicly confirmed that the Administration recognized the possibility of a terrorist attack right from the start.

The administration never, ever blamed the attack on the video (why you call it "bogus" is curious.) They always, from the start, said that extremist groups were involved, and they always, from the start, said a final determination awaited a full investigation.

Your Great Libya Hope is dead, the full truth is coming out, and the FOX news anchors look more depressed than Obama in the first debate.


Sorry, Huckleby, but Ned is exactly correct on this. Romney muffed the point in the debate because of confusion over the words "acts of terror" used in an "official" transcript and a "nonofficial" transcript. The fact is that Obama, Rice, Hillary, Axelrod, Carney - the administration - spent the next two weeks trying to paint the attack as a reaction to that video - not an act of terrorism. Thanks to that moment in the debate, the question will now become focused (even for those of you who prefer to go back to sleep): Why does Obama want us to believe the so-called "Global War on Terror" is over?

The answer is: for his own political gain and hold on power.
Meade
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby kurt_w » Wed Oct 17, 2012 6:27 am

There is exactly one person whose response to the Libya events ought to immediately disqualify them from the presidency:

Mitt Romney wrote:It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.


It's shameful that Mr Romney would try to profit from the Benghazi attack. It's doubly shameful that he'd employ absurd, obvious falsehoods in seeking that profit. Mr Romney chose to put himself at approximately the same level as those who suggested that Dick Cheney orchestrated the destruction of the WTC to create an excuse to attack Iraq.

That's normal behavior for a Flanders-style internet troll. It's not normal or acceptable behavior for a major party's presidential candidate. Has Romney apologized for that yet? Or did his campaign decide to just hope people forget about it?
kurt_w
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 5122
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 3:11 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby kurt_w » Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:13 am

Stebben84 wrote:I do think it's a product of the town hall format. The same happened to McCain. The whole getting up and circling around and cutting off the other candidate is a bit unflattering. I don't think the town hall lends itself well to the debates.


I'm glad that most people seem to believe that Obama "won" this debate. Here are his margins in all the nationwide post-debate polls that Nate Silver could find:

* CBS News/Knowledge networks poll (undecided voters): 7 points
* CNN poll (likely voters): 7 points.
* Battleground poll (swing states only): 15 points.
* Google Consumer Surveys (registered voters): 17 points.

But ...

Truth be told, I'm actually not enamored of the whole "debate" thing myself. It's not even just the "town hall" format, and not just this election -- I've always found election debates incredibly annoying to watch. But I guess most people like them, and we seem to be moving in the direction of more rather than fewer debates. In the 2008 Democratic primary there were, what, a couple dozen debates? And the same thing for the GOP primaries this past year, too (27 debates?!?).

That's a lot of debates.
kurt_w
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 5122
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 3:11 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Huckleby » Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:20 am

Meade wrote:The fact is that Obama, Rice, Hillary, Axelrod, Carney - the administration - spent the next two weeks trying to paint the attack as a reaction to that video - not an act of terrorism....The answer is: for his own political gain and hold on power.

I know you believe this to the same extent that you suspect that the sky is blue. There is plenty of evidence to support this point of view, and right wing media has been replaying this version of events 24x7, so conservatives are adament that it is right.

I've studied the situation intensely, obsessively. There is another side to the story. It is not credible that the administration could "cover up" what happened in Libya, they had little to no control over information, and they are not political fools. The core message the administration consistently sent-out was that a final determination awaited further investigation. This message has been lost by selective editing in the FOX "timelines." Now, this message itself was politically expedient, but it was also true. The administration NEVER said the crisis in Libya was just a reaction to a video, they consistently implied terrorists groups were involved. The real point of contention was the degree of planning.

Keep thinking the Republicans are gonna ride the Libya train all the way to the White House - that strategy is already back-firing.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6635
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby fisticuffs » Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:59 am

Mormons shouldn't ever talk about looking through binders full of women:
Image
fisticuffs
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 7809
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Slightly outside of Madison

PreviousNext

Return to National Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar