Death of a Salesman

CBS went to an Amway convention (or wherever else people dumb enough to still be undecided hang out), CNN went to a Republican debate party, and PPP went to a key party to find some swingers. All of them agreed that Obama won last night’s debate by 30, 8 and 11, respectively.

There’s a lot of talk about how Moderate, Give Peace a Chance Mitt spent a good part of the debate agreeing with Obama, so perhaps he should have repeated Sean Hannity’s favorite talking points so voters would have a clear choice. But every time Strict Conservative Warmonger Mitt came out, he got stomped, most notably with the horses and bayonets remark. Obama also won the “who loves Israel more” exchange, and the media is still unpacking whatever idiocy Martial Mitt uttered about Ahmadinejad and verbal genocide.

Joe Patrice thought that Grandpa Bob did a decent job, but that’s the soft bigotry of low expectations. Martha Raddatz was the gold standard for a sit-down debate, and Scheiffer was nowhere near that mark.

As for substance, what an awful mess. For example, the choice we have in the next election is either drones, with Obama, or filling the sky with drones, with Romney. Maybe in 2016 we can actually have an intelligent discussion about the size of our military and our role in the world, one that mentions something other than the Middle East and Mali.






116 replies
  1. 1
    Dave says:

    Maybe in 2016 we can actually have an intelligent discussion about the size of our military and our role in the world, one that mentions something other than the Middle East and Mali.

    Keep dreaming. That discussion would mean making hard choices, something that most politicians (and voters) are unwilling to do.

  2. 2
    arguingwithsignposts says:

    Maybe in 2016 we can actually have an intelligent discussion about the size of our military and our role in the world, one that mentions something other than the Middle East and Mali.

    It’s a little early in the day to be drunk, isn’t it mistermix?

  3. 3
    Punchy says:

    Didnt see a minute. Saw my Bears winz and hated, hated Cards get curb stomped. Hear O did OK. Hope that keeps CO (Colofuckinrado! ! !) in the blue ledger.

  4. 4
    J. says:

    I move that for the 2016 presidential debates only women reporters (who do not work for Fox), Jon Stewart, and/or Will McAvoy be allowed to moderate. Anyone second my motion?

  5. 5
    BudP says:

    Mitt is like a box of chocolates. He’ll say anything to get elected.

  6. 6
    aimai says:

    I couldn’t read the guardian live blog because it was so filled with bitchery. They seemed eternally surprised that Obama’s function during the debate was to win over voters too stupid to actually read a policy paper or understand US history. So whining and complaining that Obama didn’t give a lecture on the evils of imperialism and capitalism while simultaneously renouncing bourgeois values and divorcing his wife seemed to be their mode of analysis. Yes: the groundrules of modern American politics is that actual policy is for losers–manly chest bumping is the order of the day.

    aimai

  7. 7
    owlbear1 says:

    We need to work very hard to get this AUMF revoked, or at least seriously altered in the next 4 years.

  8. 8
    RedKitten says:

    Maybe in 2016 we can actually have an intelligent discussion about the size of our military and our role in the world, one that mentions something other than the Middle East and Mali.

    Because an intelligent discussion would require letting go of the asinine idea that increasing the size of the military = MOAR PATRIOTISM!

  9. 9
    Gary says:

    After the debate, Dick Nixon called Romney. He’d like his sweat glands back.

  10. 10
    Killjoy says:

    Maybe in 2016 we can actually have an intelligent discussion about the size of our military and our role in the world, one that mentions something other than the Middle East and Mali.

    While we’re wishing for impossible things, I’d like two weeks of wild passion with Kate Upton and Scarlett Johansson, please.

  11. 11
    General Stuck says:

    There seems to be a relatively small cadre of white voters that may have voted for Obama last time, and are now pining for a great white hope to replace the blackety black they’ve been looking at for 4 years now.

    And if you read much of the village analysis of the debate last night, and general state of play, you can see it put in clever terms by the usual suspects. Such as all Romney had to do was show up and not fuck up, and the so called Mittmentum would carry on. That it didn’t matter that Obama won the debate.

    I have no idea if there are enough of these voters to put Romney over the line, like in Ohio, or wherever. But it gives me the willies to watch other white minds work this way in national media. It feels like a conspiracy in prejudice to me, like all the cool kids in high school holding staff meetings behind closed doors. Or maybe I’m just paranoid and delusional

    But to elect this man president, would be like electing Al Capone for being a snappy dresser. And a good business man.

  12. 12
    Schlemizel says:

    @BudP:

    Yes, Willard is like a box of chocolates – this one:
    http://orangecow.org/pythonet/sketches/crunchy.htm

  13. 13
    mish says:

    @J.:
    Seconded! Absolutely!

  14. 14
    jwb says:

    Yes, Romney set out his foreign policy as what Obama is doing only more recklessly. The memo went out to the MSM before the debate that they were to say that Mitt looked presidential no matter what he said or did at the debate. So presidential it is, I guess, even if in fact he spent the evening looking like he had a bayonet jammed up his ass. God, I hate the media.

  15. 15
    Sly says:

    As for substance, what an awful mess. For example, the choice we have in the next election is either drones, with Obama, or filling the sky with drones, with Romney.

    We also only have a choice between a guy who got a law degree from Harvard and a guy who got a law degree and a business degree from Harvard, which is about as relevant as drones to the vast majority of Americans whose security depends on who gets sworn in on January 20th.

  16. 16
    Jorge says:

    As a Puerto Rican, I was at first a bit insulted that Latin America did not get a headline subject. But then realized that would have meant hearing stuff like, “Columbia is Venezuela’s pathway to the sea so we should be at war with both those countries”, “When I’m President we’ll start a trade war with Brazi?”, and “We will not consult the Mexican government if we decide to start bombing narcotraficante compounds.”

  17. 17
    Kay says:

    I wonder what the media narrative would have been had Obama sweated as much as Romney did. Literally, he was pouring sweat when he was questioned on things he knows nothing about. I honestly think that would be in every headline and every analysis.

  18. 18
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    Maybe in 2016 we can actually have an intelligent discussion about the size of our military and our role in the world

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    – breath –

    So many fails in this. The American people don’t want to have an intelligent conversation about drones. They want to go to sleep at night, wake up the next morning, and do whatever it is they do to get through the day. And they will punish which ever Democrat is president that fails to do that allow that to happen.

    The best place for this discussion is on Congress, you know, the place that keeps giving its power to the President so they can avoid hard decisions.

    And I’m one of those who thinks that for the most part Obama has been using drones correctly.

  19. 19
    dr. bloor says:

    Maybe in 2016 we can actually have an intelligent discussion about the size of our military and our role in the world, one that mentions something other than the Middle East and Mali.

    I’m beginning to get a sense of why you come across as being chronically unhappy and dissatisfied with life.

  20. 20
    Kane says:

    Maybe in 2016 we can actually have two presidential candidates instead of just one who knows how to read a map and who understands that Syria is not Iran’s route to the sea.

  21. 21
    Elizabelle says:

    @RedKitten:

    The defense industry is the only American jobs program that Republicans care about, or will support.

    Dwight Eisenhower knew his party.

    Your military-industrial-political Christian complex is here.

  22. 22
    jibeaux says:

    All I know is I hope the trebuchet gets some long-overdue attention as a result of this debate.

  23. 23
    Linda Featheringill says:

    FSM knows I carried the banners for lots of lost causes during my life, so maybe I have no right to cast stones. But that drones thing is truly a lost cause. You might as well rail against gunpowder.

    Once weapons are developed, they never really go away. Never have and never will.

  24. 24
    rikyrah says:

    said it before, and I’ll say it again:

    don’t give two shyts about drones.

    my choice is quite clear. The President’s foreign policy is more than drones.

  25. 25
    Linda Featheringill says:

    @jibeaux:

    Trebuchets are truly amazing machines.

  26. 26
    RedKitten says:

    @Elizabelle:

    The defense industry is the only American jobs program that Republicans care about, or will support.

    I think you’re exactly right. And it wouldn’t surprise me if a lot of them would be only to happy to solve the unemployment problem by way of conscription.

  27. 27
    Xecky Gilchrist says:

    @rikyrah: The President’s foreign policy is more than drones.

    Indeed it is. But isn’t it fascinating to have seen a whole new breed of single-issue voter spring into being?

  28. 28
    Quincy says:

    I actually think the 2016 Dem primaries could get real interesting. The frontrunner(s) won’t want to touch drones because they’ll want to be pro-drone in the general. But any third/fourth place candidate that wants to raise hos or her profile could make a lot of hay with drones. Not enough to win, but hopefully it can force the issue onto the agenda.

  29. 29
    El Cid says:

    Outside of it being such a crucially though weirdly important political event, the debate didn’t actually address a single issue with any depth or intelligence.

    These are sporting events, live performances, jousting matches, but it has absolutely nothing to do with examining any foreign policy issues.

    Not that I think it could happen in any better way in our stupidest of stupidest political cultures, but it is disgusting whenever I step back and peer beyond the enjoyment of the whole ‘horses & bayonets’ type moments to notice that it’s just impossible to expect some intelligent foreign policy discussion on the national stage.

    And I really, really hate these idiot ‘undecideds’ brought on afterwards.

    Really — why do I, who have a job and other typical responsibilities, have to examine issues and think about them, and they just get to blankly watch how a candidate makes them ‘feel’ during one debate?

    Why do I have serious citizenship responsibility to understand issues and try come to sensible conclusions and they merely have to use the Force?

  30. 30
    Shawn in ShowMe says:

    @General Stuck:

    But any third/fourth place candidate that wants to raise hos or her profile could make a lot of hay with drones.

    By 2016, drones will be seen as standard operating equipment by the American public. Like horses and bayonets in the days of yore.

    I hope I live long enough to see the poutrage lobby rail against cloaking devices.

  31. 31
    Culture of Truth says:

    Obama also won on China, Russia, Libya, getting bin Laden, and the Countries With Coastlines lightning round.

  32. 32
    EconWatcher says:

    OT, but did anyone see Drum’s post about the Italian scientists who were convicted and are to be imprisoned for failing to predict an earthquake? Wild.

    http://www.motherjones.com/kev.....earthquake

    As screwed up as things are here, I am consistenly impressed by the ability of Italians to be even weirder and more screwed up than we are. Italy is one messed up place. Nice place to visit, though….

  33. 33
    Sly says:

    @Xecky Gilchrist:

    But isn’t it fascinating to have seen a whole new breed of single-issue voter spring into being?

    No. Fascinating would be an election wherein first world libertarians didn’t latch on to a transparently pet cause in order to provoke a cadre of progressive enablers who should know better into betraying their political allegiances.

  34. 34

    He forgot Poland, er I mean IRAQ!

    Can you imagine the right wing outrage if Obama called Syria “Iran’s route to the sea,” completely overlooking the country of Iraq that stood between the two? The calls for Obama’s impeachment would be deafening.

  35. 35
    Donut says:

    @J.:

    I’ll be down with that because It freezes out Jim Fucking Lehrer, if nothing else. The other three mods all were able to keep control of their debates, at least. Schieffer let Romney get off track too often, veering into his stump speech bullshit, and some of his questions were, uh, lacking, but at least he kept some control. In the end, that led to the most striking thing I take away from last night — which is how many of Obama’s attacks Romney had no answer for. He just let almost all the toughest shots land and pivoted to talking points. The media ought to be all over him for it. I’m not holding my breath.

  36. 36
    barath says:

    Exactly – we need to seriously start to scale back the global empire before it falls apart under its own weight. I have to believe (maybe I’m naive) that Obama recognizes this.

    Greer, who’s a brilliant student of history among other things, has been writing a series of posts starting with this one (and then each subsequent week’s post) on the parallels he sees with the end of other empires in history and our empire now.

  37. 37
    Comrade Jake says:

    Not sure if anyone mentioned this yet, but I don’t think Mitt brought up the subject of veterans once. Obama, by contrast, went out of his way to mention vets several times.

    There is a choice in this election.

  38. 38
    TS says:

    @EconWatcher:

    Is it so different to southern states that want to charge women with murder if they perchance have a miscarriage

    Natural events – in both cases – must be controlled!

  39. 39
    SenyorDave says:

    I live in Maryland, the bluest of blue states, so I never see presidential political ads. It seems to me that a good ad for Obama would be Romney as a far right conservative (bomb Iran, elimate regulations, get rid of Planned Parenthood), Romney as a liberal (when he ran against Kennedy for senate he campaigned to the left of Kennedy), and now Romney as a moderate. Does anyone know if there is any such ad?

    I never though I’d say this, but Romney is the worst candidate at the top of the ticket in my lifetime.

  40. 40
    WarMunchkin says:

    I kind of felt the same way. Obama won that debate, no trouble. But if you actually give a crap about foreign policy, the entire debate was a rancid turd.

  41. 41
    Violet says:

    @General Stuck: I think the real undecided voters that Obama has problems with are white men. The lines for men on CNN were consistently lower than women’s when Obama spoke. And when the President called Romney on his crap the men’s lines dropped. Only thing I can figure is race. Black man being uppity to white man.

  42. 42
    Donut says:

    @Southern Beale:

    At the very least they’d be gloating moronically about how dumb Barry Obummer is, especially without his, der her, teleprompter, and now everyone can FINALLY see it and it’s GAME OVER for soshulism and commie-coddling!1!1!1!

  43. 43
    Kane says:

    @Comrade Jake: In three debates and a convention speech, Romney never once said the word veteran. And in the 23 policy areas on his campaign website, he fails to address veterans and veteran’s issues. And in his “Plan for Jobs and Economic Growth” there’s not a single word about how he intends to help veterans and their families.

  44. 44
    Napoleon says:

    @SenyorDave:

    Ohio reporting in here – consider yourself lucky. We have been carpet bombed with ads for 9 months now.

  45. 45
    Yutsano says:

    @Kane: Pfft. Veterans. Why should they get treated so specially? It’s not like they’ve ever done anything for Willard.

  46. 46
    Shawn in ShowMe says:

    @barath:

    Exactly – we need to seriously start to scale back the global empire before it falls apart under its own weight. I have to believe (maybe I’m naive) that Obama recognizes this.

    If tbe American public is ready for 20% unemployment while we transition from a perpetual war economy to a peacetime economy, this is totally doable.

    I don’t think they’re ready. The war hawks will make sure that they’re not ready, by calling the anti-empire crowd traitorous, job-destroying weaklings. It’s a game plan that’s worked flawlessly for 60 years and dick-waving has only increased in popularity since then.

  47. 47
    Paul says:

    @General Stuck:

    There seems to be a relatively small cadre of white voters that may have voted for Obama last time, and are now pining for a great white hope to replace the blackety black they’ve been looking at for 4 years now.

    What makes it especially galling is that the white man in this case is a 1 percenter who has explicitly stated that he will get rid of medicare, all kinds of deductions (such as the mortgage deduction) likely start a war with Iran with money we don’t have etc etc.

    These white folks who may put Romney in the White House must really hate blacks in charge since they very much will be voting against their own economic interest. Good luck to them. They will need it.

  48. 48
    chopper says:

    @Southern Beale:

    yeah, when i heard that i was all ‘aroo?’ iran has a nice long coastline. know what it doesn’t border? syria.

    that’s some palin-strength idiocy there, mitt.

  49. 49
    Anya says:

    MSNBC had a panel of idiots (undecideds) and when the NBC guy asked them: who won the Commander in Chief debate? On of the idiots said: They were the same because they agreed on everything. What a blethering idiot.

    I think some of the undecideds are people who agree with Obama’s economic and social policies but can’t get over wanting a white president. And some of them are just attention whores.

  50. 50
    gene108 says:

    @Kane:

    Syria is not Iran’s route to the sea

    How many Persian invasions of Constantinople and Europe have been thwarted by Iran’s lack of a Mediterranean port? How long did the Dardanelles defend Christiandom from the Ottomans and Persians?

    You clearly do not understand how badly Iran needs Syria to launch their Mediterranean naval invasion of Europe and undo thousands of years of failed attempts at European conquest.

    You clearly do not grasp the endless struggle between Persia and Greece and later Persia and Rome for control of the Near East.

  51. 51
    Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism says:

    Just got a call from the RNC about early voting in NC. They got the start date wrong for the site they were directing me to, but it will be open that day, so I guess I can’t call shenanigans. I do wonder if they’re just being more subtle about it, trying to overcrowd the sites more likely to have minorities and poors voting at it.

  52. 52
    chopper says:

    i guess we don’t have to worry about mitt attacking iran, since he apparently can’t find it on a map.

  53. 53
    Kane says:

    @Anya: At this point, I’m convinced that the undecideds are frustrated people who haven’t yet found a way to get selected for a reality show.

  54. 54
    The Moar You Know says:

    Nobody but nobody gives a shit about drones.

    The other 99% of the country would like at least a sporting chance at a job that offers more than the prospect of slowly starving to death and eventually dying of an easily treatable medical condition.

  55. 55
    Peter says:

    That conversation is never going to happen – or, at least, not happen in the way you want it to – until the Cold War generations die off. The Cold War ended more than twenty years ago but it had such a culturally distortional effect that it trained whole generations to think about the military and war and foreign policy in a certain way, and that programming doesn’t go away. It changed target, but not content.

    Of course, even after the cold war’s effects recede, we may not be able to have that conversation. Some of it may just be human nature. But I guarantee that until that point, it will be absolutely impossible.

  56. 56
    beltane says:

    @Violet: There is definitely some weird identification/inferiority complex these undecided white men have going on with Romney. When they see Obama going after Romney they see their own shortcomings being highlighted. Women are not like this. If Michelle laced into the insufferable Ann, there would be plenty of white women out there identifying with Michelle.

    Maybe it’s not a myth that there are a lot of white men out there with secret issues with sexual insecurity. Too bad their personal issues have to spill over into politics this way.

  57. 57
    SFAW says:

    Youse guys should give Mitt a break on this whole “Iran doesn’t border Syria” thing. Romney’s clearly two steps ahead of you libtards:

    When he’s C-in-C, he’ll command William Tecumseh Sherman to March from the Sea or something. With the massive increase in Defense spending on horses and bayonets, Sherman should feel right at home.

    Now, as long as Iran doesn’t have any kind of coastline, on, say, the Persian Gulf or the Gulf of Oman, there should be smooth, er, sailing.

    So, suck it, libtards!

    The preceding has been an unpaid political announcement on behalf of Pule-itical Absurder, our own resident moron.

  58. 58
    Ash Can says:

    Full disclosure –I didn’t actually watch the debate, I just followed live blogs and commentary while watching Cardinals, Giants and Bears, oh my. But the fact that the entire studio didn’t fall out of its collective chair and laugh Romney’s punk ass clear out of the building after his little creative geography lesson disappoints me.

  59. 59
    Cacti says:

    Drones bad.

    Gun control bad.

    Foxconn not so bad.

    This message has been brought to you by Mistermix.

  60. 60
    Anya says:

    @Kane: I really think most of them are attention seekers. The way they pretend they’re struggling with their decision but nothing they say conveys serious thought or even an issue they’re undecided about.

  61. 61
    1badbaba3 says:

    @Killjoy: Just two weeks? C’mon, live a little.

  62. 62
    ...now I try to be amused says:

    @Anya:

    I think some of the undecideds are people who agree with Obama’s economic and social policies but can’t get over wanting a white president.

    I agree. In that respect, Romney’s sudden agreement with many of Obama’s policies might help him. It won’t be anything new, either. The Republican Party have been scaremongering Medicare and Social Security for decades, and they hate those programs.

  63. 63
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    KGO radio this morning:

    “Mitt Romney and his running mate Ron Paul will be campaigning in…’

    That was good for a chuckle during the morning drive.

  64. 64
    barath says:

    @Shawn in ShowMe:

    Yeah, you’re right. The trap we’re in there—that we have to scale back because it will fall apart eventually, but that nobody wants to scale back on their watch—reminds me of what Tom Murphy calls the energy trap, where switching to renewable energy will take significant available energy (and money) to do it, and as a result will never be a politically favored strategy.

  65. 65
    mdblanche says:

    “Maybe in 2016 we can actually have an intelligent discussion about the size of our military and our role in the world, one that mentions something other than the Middle East and Mali.”

    For that, you’re going to need to change the moderators more than the candidates.

    @aimai: So, just your average day at The Guardian.

  66. 66
    Joel says:

    @Anya: I think the ones that appear on TV are basically the latter and the latter exclusively.

  67. 67
    Applejinx says:

    I’d like to make the point that the Mitt of the debates is ‘what you’d get’ (poorly) if he was elected.

    He has tacked savagely to the Left, bigtime, in an attempt to win a majority vote. He wants gun control, the same foreign policy as Obama, he wants womens’ rights… though not as sincerely as Obama does. It IS a front to win favor, sure.

    But you know if he won he would want re-election, so even though it’s a front, THAT is what you’d get for four years.

    I’d like the wingnuts to think about that one for a while. Glenn Beck is right about him: he does not have the collective wingnut back. Or if he does, it’s with a bayonet.

    They should stay home. They blew it in the primary, frankly.

    The danger for them is the ‘only Nixon could go to China’ thing. Everybody’s used to resisting Obama. If Romney got in, he’d start doing that stuff and it would be ‘okay since done by a Republican’- a Republican more willing than EVER before to slice and dice policy to get votes- votes he clearly believes are liberal, or he wouldn’t have swung to the left of Obama in the debates.

  68. 68
    General Stuck says:

    I’ve heard it all now. Romney swings from us needing to bomb Iran, to now having Achmininnyjob arrested by the UN, to solve the nuke crisis.

    According to Romney senior adviser Eric Fehrnstrom, successfully indicting Ahmadinejad would be more than just a symbolic victory.

    “I think it would remove probably one of the most anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, pro-genocide members of that regime in Tehran,” he told TPM after the debate. As to whether he would actually be arrested: “I’m hoping that he would be indicted and that action would unfold following that indictment. Absolutely.”

    Cool, send in the Mounties to frog march the president of Iran out to the Hague for running his mouth. I feel safer already.

    These clowns must get a fresh batch of fortune cookies every morning to map out the days campaign strategy.

  69. 69
    RSA says:

    @Linda Featheringill:

    Once weapons are developed, they never really go away. Never have and never will.

    Landmines, for example, kill tens of thousands of people every year. We’ve had 15 years to talk about signing an international convention banning their use, but as you say…

  70. 70
    parrot says:

    Maybe in 2016 we can actually have an intelligent discussion about the size of our military and our role in the world

    this has been entombed as my desktop wallpaper … bring it on fair + balanced style

  71. 71
    pk says:

    Maybe in 2016 we can actually have an intelligent discussion about the size of our military and our role in the world, one that mentions something other than the Middle East and Mali.

    Yeah and maybe all the undecided voters will drop dead because they couldn’t decide if drinking water was better than drinking antifreeze.

  72. 72
    Stav says:

    Democrats and Obama supporters better think again about last night’s debate.

    For those of us who pay attention to these things Mitt’s Flop Sweat; his repeated endorsement of Obama policy; his beet red blushes; his 180 degree turn on his past 7 years of FP statements signify a huge defeat…heck the instapolls had Obama winning by scads.

    But, most Americans haven’t been paying attention. All they worry about is “if we vote in Romney will he get us into stupid wars again?” They don’t know that his “war advisor” is the idiot who purposefully let Osama go at Tora Bora. They don’t have any idea that a very likely Secy of State John Bolton believes the military option is the first tool in the diplomacy kit. All they know now is that Mitt wholly backs the President’s successful foreign policy and he is adamant about not “solving problems with a bullet.”

    Job well done Mr. Romney…and if anyone here expects to see a 2nd term for Obama, you had better get to the phone banks and road trip to the swing states pronto.

  73. 73
    El Cid says:

    In fairness, I guess Syrian would be among Iran’s land routes to the Mediterranean.

  74. 74
    The Moar You Know says:

    @General Stuck: I feel bad watching stupid people in action. Ahmadinejad’s a figurehead, and worse, he’s one that’s close to losing both his office and his life as he’s gotten on the bad side of the ayatollahs that actually run every aspect of life in Iran.

    People don’t understand just how much of a figurehead Ahmadinejad is. Arresting the mayor of Duluth would have more of an impact on our country than arresting Ahmadinejad would have on Iran.

  75. 75
    Yutsano says:

    @Stav: Not sure if trolling…

  76. 76
    Cacti says:

    @Stav:

    Democrats and Obama supporters better think again about last night’s debate.

    So, do we wet ourselves before or after we dive under the bed?

  77. 77
    SenyorDave says:

    @Applejinx: It will be interesting if he wins to see if hea ctually screws the hard right. I think he will. I think he truly is the most cynical SOB that has run in my lifetime, and that includes Nixon. If he gets in, what does he do about EPA, Planned Parenthood? And then there is the 800 pound gorilla in the room – Obamacare. He knows all too well that he can’t have the good parts only, and he is smart enough to know that the mthical free market does not exist with respect to health care.

    He is now offically on record as moderate, almost certainly to the left of the blue dogs.

  78. 78
    Chris says:

    @El Cid:

    I know exactly how you feel.

  79. 79
    Bulworth says:

    Purposely missed the debate but how many times did Mittens say ‘Apology Tour’?

  80. 80
    Hal says:

    One comment Mittens made sums up the inability to have an authentic discussion about military size and funding:

    Well, my strategy is pretty straightforward, which is to go after the bad guys, to make sure we do our very best to interrupt them, to — to kill them, to take them out of the picture.

    Bad guys? This isn’t the fucking Avengers. It amazes me that anyone would seriously vote for someone who basically looks at foreign policy from am amazingly cartoonish point of view.

    Romney’s comments were silly and uninformed and he looked amazingly uncomfortable. No, he did not win and he did not tie, and I think the majorities of people watching these debates saw that, media be damned.

  81. 81
    Bubblegum Tate says:

    Jebus, they’re saying Obama won by 30 at an Amway convention? Mittens got his ass kicked even worse than I thought.

  82. 82
    General Stuck says:

    @The Moar You Know:

    The stupid people that matter are any tote bagging indy voters who believe that kind of swill. They don’t know anything about Iranian politics, all they know is them getting nukes is icky, and more war is ickier still. So let’s arrest the mouthy figurehead and pretend all is well.

    Romney has obviously decided to turn himself into Dr Phil for the last leg of the race. From the right wing firebrand he has talked like the past 2 years. But positing the solution is an arrest of a powerless mouthpiece like Achminijob, is in loony land territory.

  83. 83
    Randy P says:

    @Linda Featheringill: I’ve heard they’ve been quite effective in the War on Drugs. For the drug lords. The US builds a big fence, the smugglers throw bales of marijuana, etc, over it with catapults.

  84. 84
    gypsy howell says:

    @SenyorDave:

    But isn’t the real issue whether he would veto the rightwing plutocratic garbage being hurled out of congress? I don’t think he would.

    So it comes down more to what you think Congress will look like (and do) in the event of a Romney win, and what awful crap they’ll gin up to screw over us 99%-ers. Not to mention the horror show that will be the Supreme Court for the next generation or two.

  85. 85
    Mr Stagger Lee says:

    @Elizabelle: And don’t forget the prison industry, cheap wages and a captive audience, no sir no unions there!

  86. 86
    Bubblegum Tate says:

    @Bubblegum Tate:

    Oh, ha, you were joking about the Amway thing. I get it now. That’s what I get for PBC (Posting Before Caffeination).

  87. 87
    FormerSwingVoter says:

    The thing that I find most remarkable about this entire thing is how R-money not knowing where Syria is (or that Iran has, like, coasts) has gone completely unreported by the mainstream press.

    Liberal media bias!

  88. 88

    I don’t think anyone’s said it yet, so: Mistermix BRILLIANT blog post title.

  89. 89
    Paul says:

    @SenyorDave:

    It will be interesting if he wins to see if hea ctually screws the hard right. I think he will. I think he truly is the most cynical SOB that has run in my lifetime, and that includes Nixon. If he gets in, what does he do about EPA, Planned Parenthood? And then there is the 800 pound gorilla in the room – Obamacare. He knows all too well that he can’t have the good parts only, and he is smart enough to know that the mthical free market does not exist with respect to health care.

    Right now it looks like the Dems will control the senate, which means that the ACA will remain in place. And once in place, it is pretty impossible to remove it.

  90. 90
    sgrAstar says:

    @aimai: Ditto, aimai! Richard Adams is usually so clever, but last night was a total faceplant. Maybe they’re just sick of American politics.

  91. 91
    Jay C says:

    @General Stuck:

    “I think it would remove probably one of the most anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, pro-genocide members of that regime in Tehran,” he told TPM after the debate. As to whether he would actually be arrested: “I’m hoping that he would be indicted and that action would unfold following that indictment. Absolutely.”

    Right, Eric: let’s “arrest” Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (how exactly, we don;t know, but why quibble over details?) – He’s sure to be replaced in Tehran by a pro-American, pro-Israel secularist liberal, right? Who’ll open up the oil taps so gas will go back to $1.75/gal at the pump?

    Assclown.

  92. 92

    @Kane:
    I’m pretty sure that the core of Romney’s Jobs for Veterans programs is “Reenlist! There are plenty more wars to fight.”

  93. 93
    Herbal Infusion Bagger says:

    Q: Why does Ann Romney have difficulty reaching orgasm?

    A: Because Mitt has to change position every few seconds.

  94. 94
    Brachiator says:

    As for substance, what an awful mess. For example, the choice we have in the next election is either drones, with Obama, or filling the sky with drones, with Romney. Maybe in 2016 we can actually have an intelligent discussion about the size of our military and our role in the world, one that mentions something other than the Middle East and Mali.

    Let’s see. You’ve got Romney laughingly implying that he would be happy to plan out a war against Iran with his BFF Bibi Netanyahu, and mistermix thinks that the biggest foreign policy issue is which candidate has the bigger hard on for drones?

    On the other hand, we do have on tape Romney’s remarks that he would love nothing more than to ignore the conflicts between Israel and Palestine, so maybe that counts as “something other than the Middle East.”

    @Bulworth:

    Purposely missed the debate but how many times did Mittens say ‘Apology Tour’?

    Not too often, since Obama slapped him down hard on this one.

    Still, I heard post-debate banter on a morning talk show in which the conservative leaning hosts kept railing against Obama over this. I am surprised, but shouldn’t be, over how big an issue this is for wingnuts, who greatly prefer an “Amerika Uber Alles” kind of man for president.

  95. 95
    FlipYrWhig says:

    There wasn’t a single question about Bradley Manning!

  96. 96
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Brachiator: The idea of an “apology tour” would be a lot more convincing if there had been any apologizing. I don’t even know what the fuck they imagine was said. They’re a bunch of crazy people reinforcing each other’s craziness. Like an asylum organized by crab-bucket principles.

  97. 97
    Paul says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    The idea of an “apology tour” would be a lot more convincing if there had been any apologizing.

    Not only that; a very quick google search revealed that Reagan apologized plenty of times for America. Could skin color have something to do with why they get upset when Obama doesn’t apologize vs Reagan who actually apologized.

  98. 98
    Brachiator says:

    @RSA:

    RE: Once weapons are developed, they never really go away. Never have and never will.

    Landmines, for example, kill tens of thousands of people every year. We’ve had 15 years to talk about signing an international convention banning their use, but as you say…

    There is this:

    Cluster munitions are prohibited for those nations that ratify the Convention on Cluster Munitions, adopted in Dublin, Ireland in May 2008.

    Of course, even though at least 73 nations have ratified the convention, cluster bombs continue to be used, most recently in Syria.

  99. 99

    @FlipYrWhig:

    The idea of an “apology tour” would be a lot more convincing if there had been any apologizing.

    Convincing to people who know the facts, but those people aren’t swing voters. The “apology tour” bullshit is based on the unfortunately accurate belief that persuadable voters don’t know the truth and the media will be too toothless to stand up and call it a lie loud enough for the swing voters to hear. It’s just one more part of the Romney Post Truth Tour.

  100. 100
    amk says:

    You have been hanging out with that bernard kid again, haven’t you, mm?

  101. 101
    Jay in Oregon says:

    @RedKitten:

    And it wouldn’t surprise me if a lot of them would be only to happy to solve the unemployment problem by way of conscription.

    It solves two problems at once: it gets those lazy black poor people contributing to society, which decreases the likelihood that rich peoples’ kids get sent off to die.

  102. 102
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    Amway convention? Those things are tent revival meetings for Mammonism. They’re going to be overwhelmingly worshipers of the vile creature that is Rmoney.

  103. 103
    Chris says:

    @barath:

    Thanks for the article (plan to read the whole series); I think he’s wrong about one thing, though. There was an American aristocracy with a history of sending its children into battle – Robert E. Lee and, I believe, plenty of those other Confederate generals came from good landed families of slave owners. Actually, the Officer-Gentleman class of the South liked to style itself as the professional core of America’s military before the Civil War.

    (For all the good it did them. While the South was investing in Officer-Gentlemen, the North was investing in factories. Guess how that turned out).

  104. 104
    taylormattd says:

    DRRROOOONNNNNNEEEEEZZZZZZZ.

  105. 105
    Chris says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    The idea of an “apology tour” would be a lot more convincing if there had been any apologizing.

    It would be nice if somebody had apologized. You know? Or maybe not. What’s the number of dead Iraqis after the invasion? Upward of a hundred thousand? How many people have similarly suffered because of our Iran policy in 1953, or our Israel policy today? “Apology” doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of covering what we owe the world.

    But no, we can’t even talk about that, because you can’t even talk about the ridiculously weak notion of an apology (which hasn’t even happened) without at least half the country dissolving into tears and screaming like five year old babies.

    And people wonder what kind of person would practice Holocaust denial. The same kind of people who read the National Review, watch Fox News and download PJMedia, folks.

  106. 106
    Higgs Boson's Mate says:

    @gypsy howell:

    So it comes down more to what you think Congress will look like (and do) in the event of a Romney win, and what awful crap they’ll gin up to screw over us 99%-ers. Not to mention the horror show that will be the Supreme Court for the next generation or two.

    No matter who gets elected, or what the composition of Congress, you can bet the ranch that they’ll find some very creative ways to avoid sequestration. There will be no significant cuts to defense and absolutely no increased taxes on the wealthy. We’re more likely to see projected trillion dollar savings from recycling staples and printing on both sides of the paper.

  107. 107

    @beltane:

    Maybe it’s not a myth that there are a lot of white men out there with secret issues with sexual insecurity.

    It’s sure as Hell true, and it’s one of our most powerful cultural problems, but it’s not limited to whites and it has very little to do with reproductive organ size. The brutal social and often physical punishment inflicted on (especially adolescent) males who don’t project the image of successful sexual predators is behind more of our problems than I care to think about. Switch to a different cause for the insecurity, and all your predictions will still play out nicely, even down to ‘Oh, no, is that minority guy more manly than me?!’

  108. 108
    flukebucket says:

    @Frankensteinbeck: Let me tell you. I have been a white male for 54 years and it can be a hell of a problem.

  109. 109
    Triassic Sands says:

    Martha Raddatz was the gold standard for a sit-down debate…

    With no disrespect for the job Raddatz did, I think a good part of her success came from the fact that both Biden and Ryan listened to her.

    At one time or another (and many times for Romney) both Romney and Obama argued with their moderators, and in those circumstances the moderator is in a lousy situation. (That should not be taken as an excuse for Jim Lehrer, who is, for a variety of reasons, a terrible debate moderator. His problems didn’t suddenly appear this year; he has sucked in previous presidential debates (for the same reasons) and he’s always lousy doing interviews on The News Hour. I’m pretty sure he’s never seen or listened to his BBC counterparts doing interviews.)

  110. 110
    Bubblegum Tate says:

    My beloved wingnuts are already at the “nuh-uh, Romney totally won!” stage of denial:

    I listened, watched and was befuddled by the pundits calling the debate for Obama. From a debating standpoint Romany had facts and presented them when appropriate. Obama had opinion and rambled when cornered. Obama’s condescension in several exchanges would lose him points (bayonets and horses; investing in a company that ships jobs overseas; investing in Chinese companies that did business with Iran).
    __
    An amateur debater; Obama telegraphed his “gotcha” and Romney was waiting for it. The issue was Libya; in the beginning of the debate note how many times Obama went back to the subject trying to draw Romney into any statement so Obama can spring his A-HA! moment. I don’t know what his handlers had prepared but it was so obvious Romney danced away several times; the error in this is that Romney should have sprung the Benghazi trap in his closing statement when Obama had no chance to respond. Unfortunately, the closing statements are rehearsed and Romney wouldn’t know in advance if he had the last word, or if Obama would have an opportunity to poison the Benghazi subject beforehand.

  111. 111
    Chris says:

    @Bubblegum Tate:

    I don’t think either of them particularly came out on top, maybe it’s just me.

  112. 112
    bcinaz says:

    Maybe in 2016 we can actually have an intelligent discussion about the size of our military and our role in the world

    Here’s why that will not happen:
    1. We will basically have the same media and GOP in 2016 as now.
    2. It will take longer than 4 years to reverse Citizens United and amend the Constitution.
    3. Americans worry about too much money in politics, yet do not support publicly financed elections.
    4. Military-Industrial Complex. Private industry interests protected by Real American Marines.

    Also too, repeat number 1.

  113. 113
    Herbal Infusion Bagger says:

    I’m pretty sure he’s [Lehrer] never seen or listened to his BBC counterparts doing interviews.

    British politicians are terrified of the BBC’s Jeremy Paxman. But even their second-stringers (even Katty Kay on the news the BBC makes for PBS) are on top of the subject and ask follow-ons and try to search for the truth.

    Wheras the convention in U.S. journalism is to passively sit back and let one side recite their talking points, and the other to recite their talking points. And then the U.S. news industry wonders why it’s losing revenue and eyeballs.

    However, in fairness, there’s not much of an alternative to the BBC in the UK (except Channel 4 News) in terms of coverage. So UK politicians, much as they might hate having to answer a BBC journalist’s questions, have to suck it up. Wheras in the U.S., if the Snooze Hour ask probing questions and hurt a politician’s fee-fees, said politician goes on an ideologically sympathetic channel and gives them the access and story instead.

  114. 114
    truthdogg says:

    I am heartened by undecided voters.

    I consider them to be Republicans that are gaining a modicum of intelligence, but haven’t fully awoken yet.

  115. 115
    opiejeanne says:

    Amway convention, lol.

  116. 116
    Original Lee says:

    @General Stuck: This. I’ve been looking at these last undecided voters, and I think you’ve found the reason why the white folk are still undecided. They are trying to figure out how bad things will get FOR THEM if Romney is elected. If they decide they will be fine, they will vote Republican. If they are worried about their health care, jobs, or food prices, they will vote Democratic.

    As for the folk of color, I think there is some of the above, but I also think there’s a big dash of homophobia and no-magic-ponyism (depending). I suspect the crazification factor works well within subgroups, as well.

Comments are closed.