What's new
By:

The Debates

Romneyites are rushing to his defense over the Big Bird. They have now stressed the importance that Romney wasn't looking to necessarily cut into the deficit... But was merely suggesting the elimination of non-essential programs for which we'd have to borrow from China to fund.

Make sense?
 
Can't we put somebody much more exciting than Big Bird as the face of Romney's PBS dislike? I was thinking that codger Charlie Rose works nicely.
 
https://realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

Recent polls (released today) have Romney up in Florida and Virginia and tied in Ohio* That has to be worrisome for Obama. These debates came at a perfect time for Romney. 32 days left and 2 more debates and a V.P. debate.

* Does anyone know anything about WeAsAmerica? Not sure about them...

Also Obama is kicking the crap out of Romney in Hawaii lol. 32% lead...ouch.
 
franklin said:
Obama campaigned against an individual mandate in his primary race, among many other flip flops. It's necessary to win the primary and general election, & I actually want the candidates to lie to their absurd wings before gravitating back toward center in the general election.
Click to expand...

If Obama is now saying that the individual mandate is the best way to provide health insurance coverage, I would agree that is a flip-flop. If he's saying its the best option he could get through Congress,but a single payer system woulod be better still, would you call that a flip-flop?
 
Stoked said:
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/obama-romney-truth-debate-article-1.1174495

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/03/debate-fact-check_n_1937831.html

https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/fact-checking-the-presidential-debate-in-denver/

Like I predicted. It is a mixed bag where both candidates distorted the truth.
Click to expand...



Here's my question about the $5 trillion number: Every source I've seen bends over backwards to call it "half true" because they're grading Obama's statement there is a $5 trillion hole created and dinging him for not taking into account unspecified breaks as a "net number." In essence they ceded Romney's framing.

How would they grade the Romney statement that he doesn't cut taxes by $5 trillion? In my mind that seems to a "pants on fire" level lie given that the 20% decrease in marginal rates position is on his campaign website. Doesn't the grade here depend on the direction of the claim graded?

Liberal media my ***. Although I did thoroughly enjoy this Chris Wallace Q&A with Paul Ryan re: the $5 trillion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PM66-SxHDu0&feature=player_embedded#!

Wallace asks him 7 times and Ryan never answers the question Wallace actually asked. He goes through every deflection tactic in the book. In my mind when he says "I won't get into a baseline argument with you" he's effectively saying "I have no intention of answering this question." The study that the Romney campaign is saying has been "thoroughly discredited" both by Ryan in this video and by Romney in the debates is a study commissioned by the Tax Policy Center. Politifact rated Romney's claim that it's been discredited as "mostly false" noting that some conservatives have taken issue but the number has been widely accepted.
 
Yeah the 5 trillion disclaimer seems like a stretch until ROmney gives details on how he offsets that, if he ever does.
 
Stoked: Keep in mind most polls are taken over a rolling 7-day timeline so many polls released today will actually only include one day worth of polling taking the debates into account and six days of pre-debate data.

Thought I'd give a cite to the "there are not many studies discrediting the Tax Policy Center study" point. Per Factcheck.org:

"When the president referred to the Tax Policy Center’s criticisms, Romney claimed it was contradicted by several others.


Romney: There are six other studies that looked at the study you describe and say it’s completely wrong.

That’s not quite true, as we previously reported when the count was at five. We found that two of those “studies” were blog items by Romney backers, and none was nonpartisan.

The only one of those “studies” by someone not advising Romney was done by Harvey Rosen, a Princeton economics professor who once served as chairman of President George W. Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers.

Rosen concluded that Romney could pull off his tax plan without losing revenue assuming an extra 3 percent “growth effect” to the economy resulting from Romney’s rate cuts. That’s an extremely aggressive assumption, and in conflict with recent experience. Despite Bush’s large tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, for example, real GDP grew by 3 percent or more for only two of his eight years in office. The average of the year-to-year changes was just over 2 percent.

Furthermore, Bush’s cuts reduced the total tax burden on the economy because they were not offset by base-broadening measures. In theory, at least, Romney’s revenue-neutral rate cuts would have even less of a stimulative effect than Bush’s cuts did."
Click to expand...

https://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/
 
Sirkickyass said:
Stoked: Keep in mind most polls are taken over a rolling 7-day timeline so many polls released today will actually only include one day worth of polling taking the debates into account and six days of pre-debate data.

Thought I'd give a cite to the "there are not many studies discrediting the Tax Policy Center study" point. Per Factcheck.org:



https://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/
Click to expand...

Very interesting. Romney is right that the studies are there. He just oh so nicely left out that they are biased towards him in obvious ways. Lol damn politicians.

About the polls- That would indicate that Romney was starting to move the polls in his direction before the debate. The debate performance by Obama will only accelerate that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top