|
|
On October 13 2012 01:19 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 01:14 xDaunt wrote:On October 13 2012 01:05 Recognizable wrote:On October 13 2012 01:04 Erik.TheRed wrote:
Anyone else think it's funny that Sean Hannity and other Fox News hosts seem genuinely appalled that Biden would interrupt and speak over someone else? I think it's sad. They can't even see they are being hypocrits. Just look at O'Reilly. So we're going to hold cable commentary pundits to the same level as presidential and vice presidential candidates? Please. Democrats and liberals bitch all of the time about how the right has dragged down the level of public discourse. Last night, Biden showed open contempt and disrespect for Paul Ryan on national TV by interrupting him constantly and talking over him. I honestly am appalled that so few people around here understand why what Biden did was wrong. It was unprecedented, and something that politicians just don't do for good reason. I think in previous debates-including even four years ago-Biden wouldn't have done this because he wouldn't have perceived nearly as many direct lies to the American people.
He would have been publicly crushed for slamming a woman on national TV.
Also, for all of you who think that Biden's "win" last night is going to have the same significance as Romney's in the first debate, you're in for a rude surprise. Though I agree that Biden narrowly won on substance (and there are a lot of people who would disagree with me on that), his style didn't do him and Obama any favors. In contrast, Romney clearly crushed Obama on all counts.
|
|
|
On October 13 2012 01:00 logikly wrote:
I fail to understand why people are so upset because Ryan/Romney doesn't know specifics yet. In order to do something one comes up with a general plan and then take in account everything that needs to and then design a plan from there. If you really believe you can come up with a plan in such a short time on how to fix the economy while taking care of all the responsibilities you have, then your arrogance astounds me. I would much prefer someone who takes their time, sorts things out and then comes up with a plan. The amount of hypocrisy by the People of today makes me wish I was born in another time; The people scream at politicians for saying they are going to do something and then not do it. When Romney says here is my general idea I dont have specifics yet people are upset with him. You cant have it both ways. For the Fact Checking both Ryan and Biden made mistakes but I believe the ones that were the biggest were the issues on Middle east. Does one not take into account professionalism? Biden sure lacked a lot of that during the debate last night and Martha Raddatz was just an awful mediator by not keeping Biden in check.
Oh, nobody is serious about this. Democrats are just enjoying the turnabout after the exact same criticisms were leveled at Obama in 2008.
Most of the people who say they want details are the kind of people that will complain about anything. In a word, fans.
Although the Romney campaign did mess up by making overly aggressive claims about their tax plan while leaving big holes. They need to reveal the growth figure that they're projecting out and give a feel for why the economy will invest and produce more from lower taxes and lower regulations under a Romney presidency than it has with relatively low taxes and regulations but no prosecutions under the Obama presidency.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
in this case, it is not just a case of details. it is possibility.
it is literally impossible to cut taxes by 20% without shifting the burden, especially with a republican administration.
|
On October 13 2012 01:00 logikly wrote:
I fail to understand why people are so upset because Ryan/Romney doesn't know specifics yet. In order to do something one comes up with a general plan and then take in account everything that needs to and then design a plan from there. If you really believe you can come up with a plan in such a short time on how to fix the economy while taking care of all the responsibilities you have, then your arrogance astounds me. I would much prefer someone who takes their time, sorts things out and then comes up with a plan. The amount of hypocrisy by the People of today makes me wish I was born in another time; The people scream at politicians for saying they are going to do something and then not do it. When Romney says here is my general idea I dont have specifics yet people are upset with him. You cant have it both ways. For the Fact Checking both Ryan and Biden made mistakes but I believe the ones that were the biggest were the issues on Middle east. Does one not take into account professionalism? Biden sure lacked a lot of that during the debate last night and Martha Raddatz was just an awful mediator by not keeping Biden in check.
The problem is that Romney HAS given some specifics. Namely, specifics about what he would NOT cut (and in cases like the military, what he would increase spending on).
Because of everything he has said he WON'T cut, it has allowed independant sources to do the math and discover there is ZERO FUCKING POSSIBILITY of his plan working without major hikes in what the middle class pays or dismantlment of large parts of the govt as a whole. The latter would require Romney giving up power, which won't happen.
|
On October 13 2012 01:39 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 01:00 logikly wrote:
I fail to understand why people are so upset because Ryan/Romney doesn't know specifics yet. In order to do something one comes up with a general plan and then take in account everything that needs to and then design a plan from there. If you really believe you can come up with a plan in such a short time on how to fix the economy while taking care of all the responsibilities you have, then your arrogance astounds me. I would much prefer someone who takes their time, sorts things out and then comes up with a plan. The amount of hypocrisy by the People of today makes me wish I was born in another time; The people scream at politicians for saying they are going to do something and then not do it. When Romney says here is my general idea I dont have specifics yet people are upset with him. You cant have it both ways. For the Fact Checking both Ryan and Biden made mistakes but I believe the ones that were the biggest were the issues on Middle east. Does one not take into account professionalism? Biden sure lacked a lot of that during the debate last night and Martha Raddatz was just an awful mediator by not keeping Biden in check. The problem is that Romney HAS given some specifics. Namely, specifics about what he would NOT cut. Because of everything he has said he WON'T cut, it has allowed independant sources to do the math and discover there is ZERO FUCKING POSSIBILITY of his plan working without major hikes in what the middle class pays or dismantlment of large parts of the govt as a whole. The latter would require Romney giving up power, which won't happen.
The plan works if the economy grows at 3%.
|
On October 13 2012 01:11 TheTenthDoc wrote:
If I genuinely believed my opponent was directly lying to the entire country on a national stage I would interrupt his lies 100% of the time. I don't care about civility or professionalism. Ryan could have and should have done the same to be honest.
Would you also smile and laugh like the whole thing was amusing to you?
|
On October 13 2012 01:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 01:39 On_Slaught wrote:On October 13 2012 01:00 logikly wrote:
I fail to understand why people are so upset because Ryan/Romney doesn't know specifics yet. In order to do something one comes up with a general plan and then take in account everything that needs to and then design a plan from there. If you really believe you can come up with a plan in such a short time on how to fix the economy while taking care of all the responsibilities you have, then your arrogance astounds me. I would much prefer someone who takes their time, sorts things out and then comes up with a plan. The amount of hypocrisy by the People of today makes me wish I was born in another time; The people scream at politicians for saying they are going to do something and then not do it. When Romney says here is my general idea I dont have specifics yet people are upset with him. You cant have it both ways. For the Fact Checking both Ryan and Biden made mistakes but I believe the ones that were the biggest were the issues on Middle east. Does one not take into account professionalism? Biden sure lacked a lot of that during the debate last night and Martha Raddatz was just an awful mediator by not keeping Biden in check. The problem is that Romney HAS given some specifics. Namely, specifics about what he would NOT cut. Because of everything he has said he WON'T cut, it has allowed independant sources to do the math and discover there is ZERO FUCKING POSSIBILITY of his plan working without major hikes in what the middle class pays or dismantlment of large parts of the govt as a whole. The latter would require Romney giving up power, which won't happen. The plan works if the economy grows at 3%.
1. This is the assumption, which is true if everything happens as expected. What is the "plan" though? Isn't that the whole point? Romney doesn't have a plan other than rhetoric.
2. I haven't seen a reasonable souce say that they think a 3% growth is plausible so quickly.
3. Herein lies the Republican problem. Rather than do the sure thing, numbers wise, and raise taxes on the wealthy, they are willing to gamble the entire US economy on the chance they can do the improbable that they claim they can during a campagin season.
|
|
|
Maybe, just maybe, politicians promise things that they can't deliver because they know it sounds good. You know, like saying "I'm gonna change how Washington does business" or "I'm gonna cut 20% and it won't cost us a dime" or "Obamacare is actually going to reduce the deficit and no one will lose their insurance"...
etc.
|
Rather than do the sure thing, numbers wise, and raise taxes on the wealthy,
You mean just like how the luxury tax on yachts was the "sure thing"?
California for the last 40 years was the "sure thing"?
Raising taxes on the wealthy = sure thing to control deficits is the least sure thing imaginable.
|
On October 13 2012 00:11 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 23:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
so, i don't know how valid these numbers are, but:
supposedly, Biden interrupted Ryan 82 times during the debate. that's about one interruption per minute. let's say that Ryan made (or attempted to make)... 20 points in the debate. that means he was interrupted 4 times every time he tried to make a point. perhaps more damning:
the moderator, Martha Raddatz, interrupted Ryan 31 times. which means that Paul Ryan was interrupted about 111 times in 90 minutes. more than once a minute. The debate really was a joke. I'm not surprised that the liberal blogosphere is happy with Raddatz's performance. She clearly was in the tank for Biden to the point where it was embarrassing. As for the interruptions, most of them happened during the middle 30 minutes of the debate. There was a prolonged period of time where Ryan basically didn't get to say anything. Oh well, and as I mentioned last night, really it all comes down to how the public perceived Biden and the moderator. They're either going to care or they're not. I tend to think that they probably won't, particularly because it is a VP debate. As for the presidential debates, I doubt Obama would be able to get away with what Biden did. For one, I think it would be highly out of character for him. Biden could make it work (sorta) because he's Biden. More importantly, Romney wouldn't let Obama get away with it. Ryan was too respectful last night. Romney will put his foot down.
I agree it wasn't fair. However, I think a lot of that is Ryan's fault.
Raddatz didn't want to be another Lehr. She didn't want to get walked over and that was clear from the early parts of the debate. So she tried to exert force. However Biden was pretty much uncontrollable while Ryan was very passive, which made him easier for her to cut off. My guess is that Raddatz unintentionally gave more room to Biden because of his style. At the same time Ryans approach cost him her "respect."
|
Hey guys I have this plan to get rid of America's debt. I can't tell you the details but if you elect me president I assure you we can get it done.
|
On October 13 2012 01:48 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +Rather than do the sure thing, numbers wise, and raise taxes on the wealthy, You mean just like how the luxury tax on yachts was the "sure thing"? California for the last 40 years was the "sure thing"? Raising taxes on the wealthy = sure thing to control deficits is the least sure thing imaginable.
This is a red herring. How the money is used is a completely separate issue. The fact of the matter is one gives you X amount of money. The other is a pipe dream that needs everything to go right in order to work. And if it doesn't? You're shit out of luck.
My biggest problem with Romney's plan is that we aren't in complete control of our GDP growth. In a globalized world there are so many things that can go wrong which we have little to no control over (EU anyone?). It's is irresponsible to put all of our chances on such a volatile thing.
|
On October 13 2012 01:52 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 00:11 xDaunt wrote:On October 12 2012 23:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
so, i don't know how valid these numbers are, but:
supposedly, Biden interrupted Ryan 82 times during the debate. that's about one interruption per minute. let's say that Ryan made (or attempted to make)... 20 points in the debate. that means he was interrupted 4 times every time he tried to make a point. perhaps more damning:
the moderator, Martha Raddatz, interrupted Ryan 31 times. which means that Paul Ryan was interrupted about 111 times in 90 minutes. more than once a minute. The debate really was a joke. I'm not surprised that the liberal blogosphere is happy with Raddatz's performance. She clearly was in the tank for Biden to the point where it was embarrassing. As for the interruptions, most of them happened during the middle 30 minutes of the debate. There was a prolonged period of time where Ryan basically didn't get to say anything. Oh well, and as I mentioned last night, really it all comes down to how the public perceived Biden and the moderator. They're either going to care or they're not. I tend to think that they probably won't, particularly because it is a VP debate. As for the presidential debates, I doubt Obama would be able to get away with what Biden did. For one, I think it would be highly out of character for him. Biden could make it work (sorta) because he's Biden. More importantly, Romney wouldn't let Obama get away with it. Ryan was too respectful last night. Romney will put his foot down. I agree it wasn't fair. However, I think a lot of that is Ryan's fault. Raddatz didn't want to be another Lehr. She didn't want to get walked over and that was clear from the early parts of the debate. So she tried to exert force. However Biden was pretty much uncontrollable while Ryan was very passive, which made him easier for her to cut off. My guess is that Raddatz unintentionally gave more room to Biden because of his style. At the same time Ryans approach cost him her "respect."
It is the moderators job to moderate. It is not their job to participate in the debate, interrupt those debating and have a bias towards one person.
|
I'm in favor of raising any tax that I don't have to personally pay. I don't smoke, so I don't care how much you tax the smokers. Make it $500 a pack. I'm not rich, take all their fucking money. Take their kids money while you are at it. I never commute across the New Jersey turnpike, make the toll $100.
I could solve this deficit problem overnight, I call it "voting in my own interest."
|
On October 13 2012 01:43 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 01:40 xDaunt wrote:On October 13 2012 01:39 On_Slaught wrote:On October 13 2012 01:00 logikly wrote:
I fail to understand why people are so upset because Ryan/Romney doesn't know specifics yet. In order to do something one comes up with a general plan and then take in account everything that needs to and then design a plan from there. If you really believe you can come up with a plan in such a short time on how to fix the economy while taking care of all the responsibilities you have, then your arrogance astounds me. I would much prefer someone who takes their time, sorts things out and then comes up with a plan. The amount of hypocrisy by the People of today makes me wish I was born in another time; The people scream at politicians for saying they are going to do something and then not do it. When Romney says here is my general idea I dont have specifics yet people are upset with him. You cant have it both ways. For the Fact Checking both Ryan and Biden made mistakes but I believe the ones that were the biggest were the issues on Middle east. Does one not take into account professionalism? Biden sure lacked a lot of that during the debate last night and Martha Raddatz was just an awful mediator by not keeping Biden in check. The problem is that Romney HAS given some specifics. Namely, specifics about what he would NOT cut. Because of everything he has said he WON'T cut, it has allowed independant sources to do the math and discover there is ZERO FUCKING POSSIBILITY of his plan working without major hikes in what the middle class pays or dismantlment of large parts of the govt as a whole. The latter would require Romney giving up power, which won't happen. The plan works if the economy grows at 3%. 1. This is the assumption, which is true if everything happens as expected. What is the "plan" though? Isn't that the whole point? Romney doesn't have a plan other than rhetoric. 2. I haven't seen a reasonable souce say that they think a 3% growth is plausible so quickly. 3. Herein lies the Republican problem. Rather than do the sure thing, numbers wise, and raise taxes on the wealthy, they are willing to gamble the entire US economy on the chance they can do the improbable that they claim they can during a campagin season.
1. i don't understand this point. "the plan" is what Dems are calling a $5T tax-cut.
2. i haven't seen any reason why it isn't.
3. we disagree over what constitutes a "sure thing" and a "gamble".
|
On October 13 2012 01:52 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 00:11 xDaunt wrote:On October 12 2012 23:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
so, i don't know how valid these numbers are, but:
supposedly, Biden interrupted Ryan 82 times during the debate. that's about one interruption per minute. let's say that Ryan made (or attempted to make)... 20 points in the debate. that means he was interrupted 4 times every time he tried to make a point. perhaps more damning:
the moderator, Martha Raddatz, interrupted Ryan 31 times. which means that Paul Ryan was interrupted about 111 times in 90 minutes. more than once a minute. The debate really was a joke. I'm not surprised that the liberal blogosphere is happy with Raddatz's performance. She clearly was in the tank for Biden to the point where it was embarrassing. As for the interruptions, most of them happened during the middle 30 minutes of the debate. There was a prolonged period of time where Ryan basically didn't get to say anything. Oh well, and as I mentioned last night, really it all comes down to how the public perceived Biden and the moderator. They're either going to care or they're not. I tend to think that they probably won't, particularly because it is a VP debate. As for the presidential debates, I doubt Obama would be able to get away with what Biden did. For one, I think it would be highly out of character for him. Biden could make it work (sorta) because he's Biden. More importantly, Romney wouldn't let Obama get away with it. Ryan was too respectful last night. Romney will put his foot down. I agree it wasn't fair. However, I think a lot of that is Ryan's fault. Raddatz didn't want to be another Lehr. She didn't want to get walked over and that was clear from the early parts of the debate. So she tried to exert force. However Biden was pretty much uncontrollable while Ryan was very passive, which made him easier for her to cut off. My guess is that Raddatz unintentionally gave more room to Biden because of his style. At the same time Ryans approach cost him her "respect."
I don't mind that Raddatz didn't clamp down on Biden. I'd rather that the moderators let the candidates speak than interfere. What I blame Raddatz for is interrupting Ryan repeatedly herself and cutting him off midpoint -- particularly when he was about to skewer Biden (the best example of this is when Ryan was about to hammer Biden on the Catholic Church's lawsuit) -- while simultaneously giving nearly sycophantic deference to Biden and almost never interrupting him.
|
On October 13 2012 01:54 RonNation wrote:
Hey guys I have this plan to get rid of America's debt. I can't tell you the details but if you elect me president I assure you we can get it done.
Derp.
At least Romney has a plan to reduce the deficit. So did Obama in 2008. Look where he's gotten us.
Hope and change - Romney 2012. 
|
3% growth a year seems not unreasonable for the usa.
They come from a deep hole, so they have some catching up to do.
It still is the most competitive economy in the world, and eventually the monney printing of the fed will grow the economy by inflation alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
