CBS Poll: Romney Wins 65-34 on Economy; CNN Poll: Romney Wins 54-40 on Economy, 49-46 on Health Care, 51-44 on Taxes, 59-36 on Deficit, 49-46 on Leadership, All in Favor of Romney

CBS Poll: Romney Wins 65-34 on Economy;
CNN Poll: Romney Wins 54-40 on Economy,
49-46 on Health Care,
51-44 on Taxes,
59-36 on Deficit,
49-46 on Leadership,
All in Favor of Romney

You now, as far as "Debate Winner" it's pretty close with those registered voters. CBS gives it to Obama, among registered voters 37-30. CNN's registered voters gives it to Obama 46-39.

But on actual issues -- the ones that will determine this election -- Romney destroyed him.

CNN's focus group claimed they thought Obama "won." They had it something like 14 for Obama, 15 draw, 6 Romney.

But even that group said this-- on the question of "Who offers a better vision for the future?," Romney edged Obama 18-17.

Now that's very slim. I wouldn't read too much into that.

But consider: More people think Romney presents a better vision for the future -- the quickest possible shorthand for "who should be President?" -- and yet he didn't "win" the debate?

You always have to question what the criteria people are employing when you ask them who "won." I think people are rating the performance. And narrowly saying, on performance, it was a close thing, but edge to Obama.

But ask about who actually reached them on the most important issues, and it's Romney, all the way.

So they seem to be distinguishing between performance and substance.

Romney wins the substance, pretty clearly.

I'll take it. And give Obama his charity performance points.

More: Foreign policy, Obama edges 49-47.

But this is amazing: Did Obama offer a clear vision for solving the country's problems?

38% Yes

61% No

61% No. Wow.

How about that asked about Romney?

49% Yes

50% No

A Specatator Culture: Americans have gotten pretty sophisticated about judging performance, especially after 10 years of American Idol.

We shouldn't assume that when people answer the question "Who won the debate?" they confuse that question with "Who did you find more persuasive?"

They might actually be offering a sophisticated analysis: "I think this guy won on debate performance points."

But then ask them "Who actually persuaded you?," and they might answer a completely different way.

It certainly appears that's what happened here tonight.

More: NumbersMuncher has even more of the below-the-topline polling questions.

Romney wins.

Posted by: Ace at 12:01 AM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 I just saw the replay of Rose Garden, and Mitt did flub it.. Still more damning to ADMIT you called it terror, THEN back off it, THEN change again later once you can no longer hide behind a crappy video..

Posted by: JarvisW at October 17, 2012 12:03 AM (E7Iyp)

2 And Romney was right on the Rose Garden Speech. Crowley wrong. Obama lied, of course.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 17, 2012 12:04 AM (PHb2k)

3 This is a big fucking deal...

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna at October 17, 2012 12:04 AM (9+ccr)

4 Rejected comment from liveblog (*sniff sniff*):

It really doesn't matter how dedicated partisans like us and libs (I shudder to put us in the same category) think Obama or Romney did. We will vote for our guy no matter what. I believe what the inexplicably mushy middle saw during the first debate was an in-charge Romney and a feckless SCOAMF, during the VP debate was a derangedly boorish Choo Choo Hair Plugs, and today - I don't know cause I only caught half of it and on the radio. But it seemed Romney continued his streak of appearing knowledgeable and competent.

[Added here] Methinks SCOAMF is toast.

Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at October 17, 2012 12:05 AM (6zgse)

5
One big problem that SCOAMT now has is explaining not only the confusion over whether the Libya murders were the result of an act of terror, but now the confusion over where the buck stops.

Posted by: HtP at October 17, 2012 12:05 AM (jx2j9)

6 Oh and stumpy from the previous thread... fuck you...

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna at October 17, 2012 12:05 AM (9+ccr)

7 "Who won?" is a stupid poll question for voters. That's a question for pundits to bandy about. The question for voters is, "Who persuaded you?" But our media doesn't ask that because they're more caught up in J-school nonsense.

Posted by: C.T. at October 17, 2012 12:06 AM (bBHCm)

8 Watching CNN now
Here's a thought, the reason why Anderson Cooper has been more fair: He read Stevens diary- he knows that Stevens et al wanted and needed more security. He knows the administration is and was lying.

Posted by: blb at October 17, 2012 12:06 AM (4gjb7)

9 Wow.... I'm stunned... I honestly thought that Obama brought his A game, which admittedly means that after a week of not doing his job he was able to spew BS, lies, half-truths, and stale rainbows all over the place in a friendly environment.

Here are my full thoughts:
http://tinyurl.com/9p8j67b

Posted by: A Conservative Teacher at October 17, 2012 12:06 AM (idosS)

10 Momma needs to come home and feed us! She promised after enabling Obama she would be right back! Us kittehs watched the debate and Momma was wrong about Barry's Rose Garden lie! For shame Big Momma!

Posted by: Candy's 30 Cats at October 17, 2012 12:06 AM (OiC7K)

11 The big thing is that Obama can say whatever the fuck he wants about the economy, his record speaks for itself.

His vague BS played well in 2008. It does play well after 4 years of his policies being enacted.

It's hard to defend failure.

Posted by: taylork at October 17, 2012 12:06 AM (ppNDn)

12 Asskicking Redux. Nice. Ok, can go to bed happy tonight.

Posted by: StuckonStupid at October 17, 2012 12:06 AM (f/0ub)

13 So they seem to be distinguishing between performance and substance.

Remember your lesson about the pref cascade earlier. They just need a little nudge of "I am not alone".

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 17, 2012 12:07 AM (PHb2k)

14 It makes no difference who "won" any debate. SCOAMF will lose the election because he's a SCOAMF. Not because he didn't "win" debates.

Posted by: Dr. Slotkin at October 17, 2012 12:07 AM (1crPI)

15 Foreign Policy next week. I hope Romney hammers Knob with Crowley's admission. That would be DELICIOUS.

Posted by: Jason M at October 17, 2012 12:07 AM (1eIIS)

16 CNN panel giving due props to Romney for performance.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at October 17, 2012 12:08 AM (piMMO)

17 what were the time splits for speaking?

Posted by: joeindc44 at October 17, 2012 12:08 AM (Z3ckx)

18 Obama probably thinks he did awesome on Libya. Among people who have been paying attn, they know he's full of shit. Among people who haven't been, it's too insignificant an issue for his blustering to appear more than just that.

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at October 17, 2012 12:08 AM (Y5I9o)

19
Just like the Biden-Ryan debate, this is another one that lefties are going to like a lot more tonight than next week.
Obama looked like he didn't know what he was talking about on the federal lands issue as well as digging himself a new hole in Benghazi.
The preference cascade continues unabated. See the Luntz group.

Posted by: TallDave at October 17, 2012 12:08 AM (lNW+B)

20 Yeah, Romney won on ALL the issues but somehow mysteriously lost the debate, or tied or something

F*ck Candy

Posted by: Isaac Davis White at October 17, 2012 12:08 AM (Dll6b)

21 Almost 4 min longer than Romney.

Posted by: NWConservative at October 17, 2012 12:09 AM (M1gmo)

22 One of the things I noticed is how much angrier Obama seemed compared to Romney. That didn't do Bush any favors in the first debate ("what about Poland?") and it's not doing Obama any favors now.

Posted by: taylork at October 17, 2012 12:09 AM (ppNDn)

23 Obama had 3 minutes more--- of course

Posted by: Isaac Davis White at October 17, 2012 12:09 AM (Dll6b)

24 This election is based on economic issues. Mitt will have another opportunity to reframe foreign policy issues. And I bet the next debate will have poor ratings.

Posted by: Liberty Lover at October 17, 2012 12:09 AM (QQcJv)

25 18
Obama probably thinks he did awesome on Libya. Among people who have
been paying attn, they know he's full of shit. Among people who haven't
been, it's too insignificant an issue for his blustering to appear more
than just that.

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at October 17, 2012 12:08 AM (Y5I9o)I think he is living in some sort of alternative universe...

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna at October 17, 2012 12:10 AM (9+ccr)

26 I thought President Romney did well tonight but his young challenger, that senator from Illinois, was enthusiastic in criticizing the President's policies over the last four years.

Wait, what?

Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 12:10 AM (B/yDO)

27 Oh dear bejeepers. Can we please get a sort or a reverse chrono order on comments?

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at October 17, 2012 12:10 AM (piMMO)

28 Mama Cass, I mean Crowley, has not aged very well.

Posted by: tofer732 at October 17, 2012 12:10 AM (m5Iwq)

29
At first and after the debate I thought Romney failed on the Libya thing, and maybe he didn't mean to play it that way, but at the end of day everybody is still going to be talking about Libya. And that's bad for Ofeckless.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 17, 2012 12:11 AM (PHb2k)

30 So basically Romney is Led Zeppelin and Obama is NSync.

Posted by: Uncle Milty at October 17, 2012 12:11 AM (sCI7M)

31 This was a television show--especially in this jerkoff format. More the few real undecideds who will actually vote, Romney looked good on the issues that people care about: THE ECONOMY, THE ECONOMY and...

the economy, stupid

Posted by: Isaac Davis White at October 17, 2012 12:11 AM (Dll6b)

32 The Luntz focus group was devastating for Obama--1 ol' dude even complained about Ogabe "BULLSH!TTING the public!!" I almost fell off my chair.

And now these snap polls crush Ogabe, too.

Ogabe's problem is a variant of the Bradley/Wilder effect...Now, more and more guilty white people are feeling they have permission to vote against that clean, eloquent, empty-headed President who happens to be 1/2 black...The tipping point has been passed for Ogabe.

Look for Mitt to get 56-57% at the end...

Posted by: JewishOdysseus at October 17, 2012 12:11 AM (WCzJ6)

33 Any video of the Luntz dunce calling out Obama for bullshitting us for four years?

Posted by: Methos at October 17, 2012 12:11 AM (6LvlL)

34 Obama looked like he didn't know what he was talking
about on the federal lands issue as well as digging himself a new hole
in Benghazi.
The preference cascade continues unabated. See the Luntz group.

Posted by: TallDave at October 17, 2012 12:08 AM

Barry had no clue about drilling on public lands, just like he has no clue about energy production, or um uh manufacturing stuff, which you cannot do with wind power and solar power because they are too expensive to use for making um uh stuff, making the costs prohibitive even without the union wages and benefits. Barry is a SCOAMF.

Posted by: huerfano at October 17, 2012 12:12 AM (bAGA/)

35 This election is over. Romney gets 320 electorial votes. Wins popular vote by 5 or 6 %.

Posted by: Hammer at October 17, 2012 12:12 AM (5buGz)

36 ...aaaaaaand... Let's move on.

Posted by: Herpaderp Crowley at October 17, 2012 12:12 AM (38ReL)

37 Any video of the Luntz dunce calling out Obama for bullshitting us for four years?

Posted by: Methos at October 17, 2012 12:11 AM (6LvlL)

Gateway Pundit has it up.

Posted by: Adam at October 17, 2012 12:12 AM (/YJYi)

38 It makes no difference who "won" any debate. SCOAMF will lose the election because he's a SCOAMF. Not because he didn't "win" debates.

I disagree, to an extent. The first debate in particular made a huge difference. Obama spent millions trying to paint Romney as some extremist. Romney countered all of that in the first debate without spending a dime, and picked up a ton of momentum to boot.

This debate, well Barky did "better" than he did last time, but he walked into a huge bear trap with that lie about the Rose Garden speech and that will bite him in the ass hard very soon I'm sure.

It's never the big lies that get you. All that "the economy would be a wreck if not for me" BS is to hard to prove cause you got to get super wonky to prove it wrong.

But the little lies, like that one? The ones you can easily prove are bullshit? Sink a campaign.

Posted by: StuckonStupid at October 17, 2012 12:12 AM (f/0ub)

39 Style > substance in those "who won" polls. The Libya exchange pollutes the imagery tremendously.

Same thing with the media. They don;t care about what's said, it's about how it looks.

Posted by: Doc at October 17, 2012 12:12 AM (3HsdR)

40 Obama had 3 minutes more--- of course

.....

As usual, doing less with more.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at October 17, 2012 12:13 AM (piMMO)

41 8 Watching CNN now
Here's a thought, the reason why Anderson Cooper has been more fair: He read Stevens diary- he knows that Stevens et al wanted and needed more security. He knows the administration is and was lying.
Posted by: blb at October 17, 2012 12:06 AM (4gjb7)

Plus they both were/are teh ghey. I mean, c'mon.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC in Johnson County laughing at Cook County at October 17, 2012 12:13 AM (79QkM)

42 Ace are you going to put up the Luntz focus group video:

A Frank Luntz focus group made up mostly of former Obama voters say they now support Mitt Romney.

"Forceful, compassionate, presidential," one participant said.
"Confident and realistic," said another.
"Presidential," another told Luntz.
"Enthusiastic," another reacted.
"Our next president," one man said.
"Dynamo, winner," said one more.

Posted by: Raquel at October 17, 2012 12:13 AM (IJOxR)

43 Again, as with Biden, the aggressive contempt seems impressive at first, but it wears off quickly and leaves a bad taste.

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at October 17, 2012 12:13 AM (Y5I9o)

44 I think Romney, again, established his Presidential "gravitas". I think it would have been a take away had Candy Crowley not saved Obama's butt in the debate over Benghazi.

And I wonder when Sarah Hoyt will step into Moronville and be finally, truly, Liberated!

Posted by: Quilly Mammoth at October 17, 2012 12:13 AM (Soe3/)

45 Yeah, I call it a draw too. But Romney has the Big Mo, and I don't see this stopping it.

TFG has had 4 years to practice his lies so he recited them pretty well this time around. He did a good job of dumping most of his uhs and ums.

Candy Mongogram ought to get several assists, one of which was to get out of that chair without destroying it.

Posted by: GnuBreed at October 17, 2012 12:13 AM (ccXZP)

46 News Flash:

Idiot debate crowd believes GW Bush is running for a third term against Obama and MSM head explodes

Bush/Ryan 2012

Posted by: Jimi at October 17, 2012 12:14 AM (6sLo8)

47 Erin Burnett not at her sexiest or sauciest tonight

Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 12:14 AM (B/yDO)

48 I feel like I do after the Biden debate; and the lefties are crowing the same.
Shit.
Ryan won but the leftie thought Biden.

But, Romney's numbers went up after that.

My concern is that the polls that showed Romney won, and Ryan won, show Obama won.

I guess the hope I'm holding is A) the Luntz group is accurate and B) far fewer watched.

I ain't cheering, I ain't too depressed.

Posted by: RoyalOil at October 17, 2012 12:14 AM (imtbm)

49 In that format, that biased stooge East German Television atmosphere full of libtard plants, with that fat lefty cow 'moderating', Romney did Good

Could have done better, but did good. As for Libya, I think he was going to go at Obama but held back on purpose: He wanted Obama on record with that stupid comment, knowing that it would be examined over and over again

Posted by: Isaac Davis White at October 17, 2012 12:14 AM (Dll6b)

50 Unfortunately this was a win for BHO, not because he actually won, but because he didn't lose. Not delivering a knockout here will slow Romney's momentum. Media are all in the tank for dear leader and are already reporting about how Obama "won." Candy was total bullshit and many of the questions seemed planted, but nothing can be done about that now. I fear that Romney needs another very strong performance next Monday to win.

Posted by: BHO at October 17, 2012 12:15 AM (eD7No)

51 All I can say about obamas performance tonight .... EPIC FAIL

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna at October 17, 2012 12:15 AM (9+ccr)

52 Holy crap--

59% Romney

36% Obama on the deficit.

Sometimes a deficit is so large it is a national security issue.

Make that connection and Romney should win that soon as well.

Then there is the next debate....

Posted by: tasker at October 17, 2012 12:15 AM (r2PLg)

53 35 This election is over. Romney gets 320 electorial votes. Wins popular vote by 5 or 6 %.
Posted by: Hammer at October 17, 2012 12:12 AM (5buGz)

I've been saying for some time: Obama will get 47.0% of the popular vote.

Posted by: Dr. Slotkin at October 17, 2012 12:15 AM (1crPI)

54 For those about to rock we Sununu you!

Posted by: Linlithgow at October 17, 2012 12:15 AM (Gim9y)

55 Since TFG didn't assume a fetal position and suck his thumb, most media will call it a win.

Posted by: BignJames at October 17, 2012 12:15 AM (HtUkt)

56 I just ripped this post off and posted the numbers on Facebook. Hope you don't mind.

Posted by: T at October 17, 2012 12:16 AM (esIfP)

57 *strikes a thoughtful pose*

It's like Mitt has faced such challenges before.

Nah!!!

Posted by: eman at October 17, 2012 12:16 AM (+XD7n)

58 50
Unfortunately this was a win for BHO, not because he actually won, but
because he didn't lose. Not delivering a knockout here will slow
Romney's momentum. Media are all in the tank for dear leader and are
already reporting about how Obama "won." Candy was total bullshit and
many of the questions seemed planted, but nothing can be done about that
now. I fear that Romney needs another very strong performance next
Monday to win.

Posted by: BHO at October 17, 2012 12:15 AM (eD7No
BS, You are so full,of shit.... obama Lost big time..)

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna at October 17, 2012 12:16 AM (9+ccr)

59 Turns out the lady who asked the assault weapon weapon questions is a registered dem....who'd of thunk it?

Posted by: Bret at October 17, 2012 12:17 AM (HSVXo)

60 Obama lied, Crowley denied.

Posted by: PC14 at October 17, 2012 12:17 AM (PFIGD)

61 One thing that was reinforced while listening to the debate on the radio, even while awake and passionate/angry, Obama just can't help stuttering. And no, it didn't come across as an "intellectual stutter."

Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at October 17, 2012 12:17 AM (6zgse)

62 News Flash:

"Stock Price of Marshmallows skyrockets after Candy Crowley stops by local Walmart."

Posted by: Jimi at October 17, 2012 12:17 AM (6sLo8)

63 I just loved when Romney told Obama (paraphrasing here): "So you're going on record saying you called Benghazi a terror attack from the start? That you called it a terror attack in your Rose Garden speech? You REALLY want to claim that?"

That made me BEAM.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit and ABO supporter at October 17, 2012 12:17 AM (CA2NO)

64 The president always gets close to the last midterm popular vote for their party. TFG got 46%.

Posted by: NWConservative at October 17, 2012 12:18 AM (M1gmo)

65 >>>Unfortunately this was a win for BHO, not because he actually won, but
because he didn't lose. Not delivering a knockout here will slow
Romney's momentum.

dude. The numbers are the numbers. It was a blowout on the most important question, and nearly as bad on the other ones.

Posted by: ace at October 17, 2012 12:18 AM (LCRYB)

66 _______________________________

Excellent summation, Ace. Thanks.

I had already concluded that per issue Romney had made a better impression on voters. But until you delved into and summed up the post debate polls in your above post: I hadn't realized that it was another route.

Posted by: _Dave_ at October 17, 2012 12:19 AM (/nxRb)

67
It is insufficient that Obama not lose, he had to win. He had to convince people that Mitt is so wrong, so scary that the choice is the devil you know vs. the devil you don't.
Mitt kept his cool and did not look stupid nor angry. Obama and the moderator teamed up on him but he didn't fold. Expect Obama's slide to continue.
My prediction, Mitt +3 in the polls by Friday.

Posted by: Warthog at October 17, 2012 12:19 AM (OixJo)

68 Ha busted�.

One of the so-called �undecided voters� was really a media coordinator for Code Pink http://is.gd/GcvdKf

Posted by: gonzotx at October 17, 2012 12:19 AM (4CQjf)

69 But even that group said this-- on the question of "Who offers a better vision for the future?," Romney edged Obama 18-17.

CNN Poll results: Brain-dead / blind liberals vote Obama no matter what.

Posted by: LC LaWedgie at October 17, 2012 12:19 AM (0It32)

70 >>>I just ripped this post off and posted the numbers on Facebook. Hope you don't mind.

I just want credit. I want to see my NAME in lights on the Great White Way, twenty feet talllll...!

Posted by: Norma "Ace" Desmond at October 17, 2012 12:20 AM (LCRYB)

71 Turns out the lady who asked the assault weapon weapon questions is a registered dem....who'd of thunk it?

Posted by: Bret at October 17, 2012 12:17 AM (HSVXo)

I thought it was hilarious when Crowley said "This is a good question because we get this question from our viewers all the time". Yeah your 100,000 viewers are worried.

Posted by: Adam at October 17, 2012 12:20 AM (/YJYi)

72 59 Turns out the lady who asked the assault weapon weapon questions is a registered dem....who'd of thunk it?
Posted by: Bret at October 17, 2012 12:17 AM (HSVXo)

______________

Gawd--that might have been the worst one.

I'm undecided--what about gun control!

I'm undecided what about the unfair workplace environment for women.

I'm undecided what about outsourcing?

As if Obama has done anything about that...

Posted by: tasker at October 17, 2012 12:20 AM (r2PLg)

73 Romney opened up a lot of wounds tonight and prepared the field for the foreign policy debate. Crowley has already admitted she was wrong on Benghazi.

Romney is going to continue to own this punk.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 17, 2012 12:20 AM (TMB3S)

74 As others have pointed out: the JEF didn't gain any voters tonight, he did, however hold hose he already had.

But, it is too little, too late.

He and Bidens performance would have been great if they were well ahead.

Bu it's too late for that now.

Posted by: RoyalOil at October 17, 2012 12:20 AM (imtbm)

75 Fat chicks that don't age well (at all) really shouldn't use the moniker..... "Candy".

Just sayin'...

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC in Johnson County laughing at Cook County at October 17, 2012 12:21 AM (79QkM)

76 Romney could have decimated Obama on Libya and instead scored an own goal.

I care a lot about foreign policy and am outraged at this lame cover-up, in part because of its lameness.

But from the above polling and Luntz's focus group, I may have been judging on the wrong curve. The undecided voters expected the President to step up and shine, and all he did was fight his challenger to a draw, after losing decisively last time.

So a tie really did go to Romney, because people want a change due to the economy and Romney and Ryan both come across as at least as capable as the current administration.

Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 12:21 AM (Db+Gl)

77 Where is the link to the CNN poll with internals?

Posted by: chris not rock at October 17, 2012 12:21 AM (YLqOu)

78 News Flash:

Candy Crowley, distant relative of Aleister, diagnosed with hoof-n-mouth disease

Posted by: Jimi at October 17, 2012 12:21 AM (6sLo8)

79 70 >>>I just ripped this post off and posted the numbers on Facebook. Hope you don't mind.

I just want credit. I want to see my NAME in lights on the Great White Way, twenty feet talllll...!
Posted by: Norma "Ace" Desmond at October 17, 2012 12:20 AM (LCRYB)

__________________

LOL! gawd I'm reading your hash lately as--

le Cry-Bebe

Posted by: tasker at October 17, 2012 12:21 AM (r2PLg)

80 Ace, I want to believe you. And I agree with you, But after you admitted to towing the McCain line a few post ago I have my doubts...

Posted by: taylork at October 17, 2012 12:22 AM (ppNDn)

81 So now Byron says obama say Mitt screwed up?WTF???

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna at October 17, 2012 12:22 AM (9+ccr)

82 **65
>>>Unfortunately this was a win for BHO, not because he actually won, but
because he didn't lose. Not delivering a knockout here will slow

Romney's momentum.

dude. The numbers are the numbers. It was a blowout on the most important question, and nearly as bad on the other ones.**

what kind of handicapping do you think sitting presidents get?

Posted by: joeindc44 at October 17, 2012 12:22 AM (Z3ckx)

83 Tomorrow the White House will issue a statement denying any and all claims that the White House ever said anything about a video causing the Benghazi attacks.

Posted by: eman at October 17, 2012 12:23 AM (+XD7n)

84 Honestly, the most important thing has nothing to do with Obama and everything to do with Romney. Romney's favorability has been trending up, that is the biggest thing that's changed since the first debate and the reason he's winning now. Nothing happened tonight to reverse or stop that trend.

Posted by: Uncle Milty at October 17, 2012 12:23 AM (sCI7M)

85 I've been saying for some time: Obama will get 47.0% of the popular vote.
------------------------------

Yes. I see 4% undecided.

3% will go to Romney, 1% to Obama on election day.

53-47 Romney.

Posted by: Bomb Syria......With Kindness at October 17, 2012 12:23 AM (AzwZn)

86 What was the context of the Rose Garden speech?

Posted by: Jimi at October 17, 2012 12:23 AM (6sLo8)

87 Re: Donna and ace: I certainly hope you're right, but it doesn't bode well when front and center on the CNN and CBS websites is "breaking news" of Obama's "win" tonight. The media is going to do everything it can to get the president reelected, and I think it will be very difficult for Mitt to get past that. In the last debate, Romney's win was so decisive that nobody in the media could claim BHO won. My fear is that news of BHO's "win" will be all over the MSM in the next few days and it will be business as usual, there goes the Romney surge.

Posted by: BHO at October 17, 2012 12:23 AM (eD7No)

88 Has anyone confirmed that Obama said--

When I am President...?

Posted by: tasker at October 17, 2012 12:24 AM (r2PLg)

89 Why the f*ck was the town hall debate with "undecided" voter questions held in a solid blue state? Shouldn't this type of debate be held in a swing state?

Republicans need to pull their heads out of their asses and start calling out this bullshit from the so-called "neutral" debate commision. I'm not saying there wouldn't still be plants, but at least it would have the appearance of being somewhat fair.

Posted by: not the mama at October 17, 2012 12:24 AM (kzCIn)

90 You're right uncle, Romney's favorables are higher than Obama's now.

Posted by: NWConservative at October 17, 2012 12:24 AM (M1gmo)

91 >>>One of the so-called �undecided voters� was really a media coordinator for Code Pink http://is.gd/GcvdKf <<<<

Wow. Not surprised, yet wow.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 17, 2012 12:24 AM (PHb2k)

92 Romney could have decimated Obama on Libya and instead scored an own goal. I care a lot about foreign policy and am outraged at this lame cover-up, in part because of its lameness. But from the above polling and Luntz's focus group, I may have been judging on the wrong curve. The undecided voters expected the President to step up and shine, and all he did was fight his challenger to a draw, after losing decisively last time. So a tie really did go to Romney, because people want a change due to the economy and Romney and Ryan both come across as at least as capable as the current administration.

---------

You're still pushing this shit when fucking Crowley has backed down. Refuse to admit you were wrong on Libya, I see.

Posted by: Rich at October 17, 2012 12:25 AM (pnHKr)

93 It's easy to only lose to romney 60 40 when romney's not allowed to answer you and you publically lie about president to presidents benefit.

romney left issues on the table, RISP, and still won.

Posted by: joeindc44 at October 17, 2012 12:25 AM (Z3ckx)

94 86What was the context of the Rose Garden speech? Posted by: Jimi at October 17, 2012 12:23 AM (6sLo

Something about some youtube video.

Posted by: Mr. Mojo Risin at October 17, 2012 12:25 AM (xXhWA)

95 87
Re: Donna and ace: I certainly hope you're right, but it doesn't bode
well when front and center on the CNN and CBS websites is "breaking
news" of Obama's "win" tonight. The media is going to do everything it
can to get the president reelected, and I think it will be very
difficult for Mitt to get past that. In the last debate, Romney's win
was so decisive that nobody in the media could claim BHO won. My fear is
that news of BHO's "win" will be all over the MSM in the next few days
and it will be business as usual, there goes the Romney surge.

Posted by: BHO at October 17, 2012 12:23 AM (eD7No)I can't speak for obama, but I don't think this is gonna help Barry..

Name: *

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna at October 17, 2012 12:25 AM (9+ccr)

96 Uncle Mitty, I knew Romney's favorability numbers would catch up to his share of voters' preference.

That is huge. The Obama campaign revolved around making Mitt unlike-able.

What's plan B?

Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 12:25 AM (Db+Gl)

97 Oh look, every single network is talking about Benghazi and what Obama did or didn't say. An issue that none of the msm wanted to talk about before tonight.

Yea, huge flub by Romney.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 17, 2012 12:26 AM (TMB3S)

98 My best guess is that most of the truly undecideds out there are people waiting for a Good Reason to NOT vote for Obama. Tonight, Romney gave them one; gave them permission

A lot of undecided were given permission after the last debate; this debate won't be as dramatic, but will move people into the R column

Posted by: Isaac Davis White at October 17, 2012 12:26 AM (Dll6b)

99 Re: Donna and ace: I certainly hope you're right, but it doesn't bode well when front and center on the CNN and CBS websites is "breaking news" of Obama's "win" tonight. The media is going to do everything it can to get the president reelected, and I think it will be very difficult for Mitt to get past that. In the last debate, Romney's win was so decisive that nobody in the media could claim BHO won. My fear is that news of BHO's "win" will be all over the MSM in the next few days and it will be business as usual, there goes the Romney surge.

----

I think I've said this about 100 times, but if you guys are going to put all of your hopes in how the media reports shit, just give up now, because it's going to get worse. Stop caring wtf CNN and CBS say and "report."

Posted by: Rich at October 17, 2012 12:26 AM (pnHKr)

100 Romney won. He exuded strength and confidence. Obama's voice would get high-pitched, and he just has an unpleasant air about him. Obama's problem is the same as Biden's - personality.

Posted by: Baldy at October 17, 2012 12:26 AM (opS9C)

101 Rumors were that the ambassador was gay. I bet Anderson Cooper knew this on a personal level (via friends in common).

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at October 17, 2012 12:26 AM (ZPrif)

102 Some assholes, just a moment ago, pulled the Romney sign out of our yard and threw it in the street. So they've got that going for them. I didn't get out there fast enough, all I heard was the squeal of their wheels.

Posted by: jakeman at October 17, 2012 12:26 AM (96M6e)

103 Ace,

One of the so-called "undecided voters" was really a media coordinator for Code Pink http://is.gd/GcvdKf

Posted by: Raquel at October 17, 2012 12:27 AM (IJOxR)

104 There's a kind of wired dynamic going on from Romney supporters on his debate performance. There is a great deal of disappointment over his Libya answer because it was not as powerful as we wanted, myself included. It was a missed opportunity. I wanted a an answer on Libia that drew blood. What I really wanted was for Mitt to hammer Obama on the lack of security pre-attack more so than what happened afterward. I don't care whether the WH was specifically asked for more security or not. It was a clusterfuck, State may not be part of the WH, but it is part of the Administration and it is a glaring example of piss poor management on the part of TFG. Also, great tie in opportunity to his lousy attendance at his own security briefings.

But a missed opportunity does not mean Romney did poorly. The fact that he could have knocked out TFG, does not change the fact that overall Romney was better and won on overall points. And the fall out goes to Romney because the issue of Libia is elevated once again and so is FF though not as much.

Posted by: JBS at October 17, 2012 12:27 AM (lZE/o)

105 "All liberal members of the Media should be taken out and shot, or maybe hung from the lamp-posts to serve as an example of their failed philosophy and the destruction it has wrought since the 1960's."

Hey!? Who typed this on my computer? It sure wasn't ME! I don't even know how to spell 'wrought'.

Posted by: BeckoningChasm at October 17, 2012 12:27 AM (i0App)

106 >>>You're still pushing this shit when fucking Crowley has backed down.

People watched the debate. Crowley's "backdown" means next to shit. She successfully had her thumb on the scales.

And she was wrong in part, however, Obama did in fact use the term acts of terror on 9/12, talking in general terms about Benghazi.

Then, yes, he pushed the lame video lie for two weeks. Which is what Romney should have focused on.

Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 12:27 AM (Db+Gl)

107 97
Oh look, every single network is talking about Benghazi and what Obama
did or didn't say. An issue that none of the msm wanted to talk about
before tonight.

Yea, huge flub by Romney.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 17, 2012 12:26

From your mouth to God's ears.... not!

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna at October 17, 2012 12:28 AM (9+ccr)

108 Now we are all talking about Bengazi. Instead of the debate. Not how the Obama campaign wants to end up at...

Posted by: NWConservative at October 17, 2012 12:28 AM (M1gmo)

109 Ace,

Was �Undecided� Questioner Catherine Fenton Former Media Coordinator of CodePink Long Island?

http://is.gd/GcvdKf

Posted by: Raquel at October 17, 2012 12:28 AM (IJOxR)

110 Romney did well in a debate format stacked against him, with a liberal audience, a liberal moderator, and left-wing activists plants asking questions.

Obama should have crushed him.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at October 17, 2012 12:29 AM (ZPrif)

111 Friend,

Tonight I hope you saw exactly what's at stake in this election.

This race is neck and neck. What happens in the next three weeks will determine which side wins.

That's in your hands -- I'll be fighting as hard as I can, but I can't do this without you.

Thanks,

Barack

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at October 17, 2012 12:29 AM (piMMO)

112 Yeah, so now the discussion is not Romney said this about Obama (whatever, things get said in debates), but what did Obama actually say after the attack? Not going to be favorable for Obama...thanks Candy!!!

Posted by: Uncle Milty at October 17, 2012 12:29 AM (sCI7M)

113 Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 12:25 AM (Db+Gl)

maybe you can Shoot bammy a Line & Blow him

Posted by: Evilpens at October 17, 2012 12:29 AM (ck76k)

114 "Romney won. He exuded strength and confidence. Obama's voice would get high-pitched...."

Yes, I remarked on that during the live debate. Romney seemed very alpha, and Obama try-hard.

Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 12:30 AM (Db+Gl)

115 The Line we NEED to push.... its stolen... but....

I'm voting for Romney based on the "Content of his Character"!

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 17, 2012 12:30 AM (lZBBB)

116 Samwise, for your own sanity, I think you have to let it go. Anyone with half a brain cell (functioning or otherwise) that watched or listened knows that Obama gave an incredibly irrelevant non-answer in response.

Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at October 17, 2012 12:30 AM (6zgse)

117 People watched the debate. Crowley's "backdown" means next to shit. She successfully had her thumb on the scales.
---

So if you're going to claim that "scoring an own goal" is based, in part, on the moderator falsely covering for the president, what difference does it make what Romney said? She could just as easily lie about anything else he said.

And no, his acts of terror comments were not directed at Benghazi, even in general terms.

Posted by: Rich at October 17, 2012 12:30 AM (pnHKr)

118 One of the so-called "undecided voters" was really a media coordinator for Code Pink http://is.gd/GcvdKf

She couldn't decide if she wanted to let Obama in the front or the back door, IYKWIMAITYD.

Posted by: Blanco Basura at October 17, 2012 12:30 AM (xKC/c)

119 My impression is that Romney was in total command the first half when probably most voters were paying attention. The last half I think was more inside baseball type questions that many probably had their eyes glaze over.

Posted by: Jaydee at October 17, 2012 12:30 AM (E5DLT)

120 Anderson Cooper knows all about gangbangers

Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 12:30 AM (B/yDO)

121 He just basically responded with, "How DARE you!"

Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at October 17, 2012 12:30 AM (6zgse)

122 I just saw people tweeting and posting on other blogs that Intrade has just narrowed the gap. So tell me again, what did Obama win?

Posted by: lowandslow at October 17, 2012 12:31 AM (GZitp)

123 obama.... EPIC FAIL ... and more...

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna at October 17, 2012 12:31 AM (9+ccr)

124 Dead Kittens!!!!!

Obama is the master of what I call the "dead kittens" style of debating. Whenever he is pretty sure he'll have the last word on a subject, just as time runs out, his voice will rise, the tempo of his speech increases and he'll say something outrageous like, "My opponent likes to eat dead kittens for breakfast! Raw! Without catsup!"

And of course that f-word c-word moderator helped him do. Re-watch the debate and you'll see what I'm talking about. As the debate went on each time the clock for Obama would tick down to red I'd turn to my wife and say "Dead Kittens time!". And sure enough Obama would oblige.

Posted by: Jaylord at October 17, 2012 12:31 AM (Y6qC4)

125 Did you see Luntz's Dunces from Steve Wynn's property? Romney simply crushed Obama and they sounded pretty business savvy. I have to say I was shocked by the lopsidedness in favor of Romney.

Cascade is Tsunamiing.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at October 17, 2012 12:32 AM (eHIJJ)

126 Fine, that's some condolence... Romney can still win this election and make up for my 70 bucks lost on the 2nd debate. (I still call shenanigans on CNN's overall poll)

Posted by: Malaysian Neocon at October 17, 2012 12:32 AM (PXGSj)

127 109
Ace,

Was �Undecided� Questioner Catherine Fenton Former Media Coordinator of CodePink Long Island?

She was the most obvious plant to me. Anyone who asks about wage inequality is not an undecided voter.

Posted by: Uncle Milty at October 17, 2012 12:32 AM (sCI7M)

128
Romney, much like the Last Starfighter, appears to be equipped with some sort of 'Death Blossom' multi-vectored defense mechanism.

Biased crowd, planted questions, SCOAMF, Crowley the Hutt and the entire Kodan armada came after him...and he held them off.

Posted by: El Kabong at October 17, 2012 12:32 AM (HWj39)

129 Election over. Lets all practice saying President Romney.

Posted by: Drew in MO at October 17, 2012 12:32 AM (ZgvAc)

130 Rich, nobody is putting hopes in how the media reports, but to deny its importance in the election is just silly. The vast majority of the outlets are in the tank for O, that's just how it is. But even the NYT needs to appear somewhat impartial...the only way for Romney to counteract their influence is if they cannot credibly say anything bad about him (or anything very good about the president).

Posted by: BHO at October 17, 2012 12:32 AM (eD7No)

131 Ace, I've conducted a scientific poll.

52% say I won't come in your mouth.

So, do you have plans for Friday night?

Posted by: Scobface at October 17, 2012 12:32 AM (IoNBC)

132 Line to push....

Obama won this debate... just like unemployment numbers are down, inflation isn't happening, and Global Warming is still rising....

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 17, 2012 12:33 AM (lZBBB)

133 Next week, y'all, Romney will run the tables. It is all on foreign policy. He set the stage for a bloodbath.

So far, this is what I learned from The Won on the economy:
1) Gas prices were low in 2008 due to bad economy. Say what?
2) He saved 1000 jobs for tires or something imported from China. This is one of his great accomplishments.

I have decided when the word "math" is stated Barry thinks "meth."

I was watching the peoples. When Mitt was speaking they were taking in every word. With Barry...well,there was worship of King Putt, no doubt, but there was also eyes wandering and pffft not connecting. Or maybe that was me.

This was the debate I was the most concerned about. I think Mitt did fine. He missed a few jugulars, but maybe saving them for next week's finale of
"Barky Goes Bananas."

Posted by: ChristyBlinky, unbanned, ready to get this done at October 17, 2012 12:33 AM (baL2B)

134 >>From your mouth to God's ears.... not!

Watch and see. If you think Benghazi is going away your delusional. Even if you think God is listening to you.

Real people actual care when Americans get slaughtered and our President goes to fundraisers.

There are actually real people who don't comment on blogs who pay attention to this stuff.

But what do I know, I only said a year ago Romney would be our nominee and would win this election.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 17, 2012 12:33 AM (TMB3S)

135 >>> My impression is that Romney was in total command the first half when probably most voters were paying attention.

Agreed.

>>> The last half I think was more inside baseball type questions that many probably had their eyes glaze over.

Hopefully. However, Romney could have riveted their attention with strong educational statements on F&F and the Benghazi cover-up, scoring a total knockout if he'd better practised this and was willing to.

Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 12:33 AM (Db+Gl)

136 127 109
Ace,

Was �Undecided� Questioner Catherine Fenton Former Media Coordinator of CodePink Long Island?

She was the most obvious plant to me. Anyone who asks about wage inequality is not an undecided voter.
Posted by: Uncle Milty at October 17, 2012 12:32 AM (sCI7M)

_____________

Actually Orin Kerr--I know Orin--is questioning it.

Spelling difference and the age might not match.

Posted by: tasker at October 17, 2012 12:33 AM (r2PLg)

137 OK. So I am a chick (as my moniker indicates). Do any non-neurotic non-feminazi chicks out there actually feel oppressed by the man? I'm serious.

Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at October 17, 2012 12:33 AM (6zgse)

138 . Romney seemed very alpha, and Obama try-hard.
Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 12:30 AM (Db+Gl)

agree. Romney was the alpha

Posted by: Avi at October 17, 2012 12:33 AM (51xVX)

139 Election over. Lets all practice saying President Romney

.....

Way ahead of ya

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at October 17, 2012 12:34 AM (piMMO)

140 Election over.

Still have a formalities, like getting off our asses and voting.

I'll be looking for some broken glass to crawl across come Nov 6th.

Posted by: Blanco Basura at October 17, 2012 12:34 AM (xKC/c)

141 Vot is mit all deze noombers, Mr Ace? Is looking like ze maths, so harrrd.

Posted by: E Mindflood Webwhittler at October 17, 2012 12:35 AM (lBpVP)

142 In the Rose Garden Speech:

["Acts" of Terror]-plural and only in context of 09-11-01.

I'm shocked...the propaganda machine almost fooled me.

Everybody has a duty to force your political opponents to listen tot speech in reference to the debate tonight, and don't let them get away with trying to claim Romney was wrong on this topic. PERIOD!

Posted by: Jimi at October 17, 2012 12:35 AM (6sLo8)

143 Who would've thought that Libya, apparently only a fifth the size of tiny ass Syria, would command this amount of attention?

Trust me, my internet friends, this ain;t going away and will popup for more than a 4 minute segment next debate.

Posted by: taylork at October 17, 2012 12:35 AM (ppNDn)

144 87

It really doesn't matter. Romney proved he was competent in the first debate, and that's all he needed to do to get people who are unhappy with the economy to pull the lever for him. He didn't do anything in this debate to undermine that. Nothing Obama did here tonight and nothing the press says about it changes the fundamentals of this election: a) Obama is the incumbent b) it's the economy, stupid, and the economy sucks. Obama is a failure, and everybody knows it except hardcore liberals who actually know it deep in their hearts but can't admit it even to themselves because it would be a crushing blow to their psyche.

Posted by: not the mama at October 17, 2012 12:36 AM (kzCIn)

145 Oops!

I did it again!

Posted by: C. Crowley at October 17, 2012 12:36 AM (jKE+Z)

146 Jakeman-- that's what desperate people do. Sounds encouraging to me!!

Posted by: LASue at October 17, 2012 12:36 AM (gjIQF)

147 Bambi was on defense all night while playing from behind.

Only Norv Turner or Andy Reid would play prevent defense when they're down by two touchdowns.

Posted by: Uncle Mikey at October 17, 2012 12:36 AM (8qoXL)

148 Rich, nobody is putting hopes in how the media reports, but to deny its importance in the election is just silly. The vast majority of the outlets are in the tank for O, that's just how it is. But even the NYT needs to appear somewhat impartial...the only way for Romney to counteract their influence is if they cannot credibly say anything bad about him (or anything very good about the president).

-----

So basically you're saying Romney has to be perfect 100% of the time. Again, if that's the case, let's just give up because it's impossible. The New York Times has long given up on appearing impartial. So has CBS and NBC. They do not matter anymore.

I mean the New York Times, just today, said with a straight-face that the Video had "something to do with it." Based on nothing. They've showed you just today that they are willing to say anything in order to push the narrative. Where is the appearance of impartiality in that? That's a flat-out, bald-faced lie.

Posted by: Rich at October 17, 2012 12:36 AM (pnHKr)

149 This is a critical time for Obama. This is when his madness can strike.

Full, unbridled, undiluted failure stands ready to slap what's left of his sanity right into the toilet.

He is about to lose the race for President of the United States.

Posted by: eman at October 17, 2012 12:36 AM (+XD7n)

150 Who would you rather have as a bowling partner

Romney 78%
Obama 22%

Posted by: Lemmiwinks at October 17, 2012 12:36 AM (SkyIE)

151 But Intrade has Obama up by 20%!!!!!!!

Posted by: In before the troll at October 17, 2012 12:36 AM (Rhie+)

152
Actually Orin Kerr--I know Orin--is questioning it.

Spelling difference and the age might not match.

Posted by: tasker at October 17, 2012 12:33 AM (r2PLg)
______________________________________________________________

Right, but this is what you ask presidential candidates in a debate? That just seemed like a total "War on Women" setup question.

Posted by: Uncle Milty at October 17, 2012 12:37 AM (sCI7M)

153 >>> Romney seemed very alpha, and Obama try-hard.
Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 12:30 AM (Db+Gl)

> > > agree. Romney was the alpha
Posted by: Avi at October 17, 2012 12:33 AM

Women instinctively pick up on that and it influences their visceral (and genital) feelings.

Romney won a huge swing in female support after his first debate. His alpha demeanor, and Obama's beta, was a massive factor.

Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 12:37 AM (Db+Gl)

154 If those polls among undecideds are even close to right, Mitt wins by 4+. I don't think he will, but I'll settle for 51-49; 300-240 Willard wins.

Posted by: Naj at October 17, 2012 12:37 AM (tAHf5)

155 In 2001, the Giants scored more runs than the Angels, and still lost the World Series.

Posted by: logprof at October 17, 2012 12:38 AM (jKE+Z)

156 One thing you can take away from tonight (even more than before) is Romney is no McCain. Can you see Juan bringing up the president going off to a fundraiser right after a terrorist attack?

Posted by: Adam at October 17, 2012 12:38 AM (/YJYi)

157 In the first debate, Romney set such a high bar while Obama set such a low bar, so it only stands to reason that a majority of viewers would think Obama "won." However, when it came to the important issue (i.e., the economy), which will determine the winner of the election, viewers thought Romney clearly won. Obama barely winning some of these post-debate polls by small margins is the consolation prize and due primarily to diminished expectations for Obama based on his performance in the first debate (as well as unrealistic expectations for Romney after his spectacular performance in the first debate).

Posted by: Slappy at October 17, 2012 12:38 AM (LTbLf)

158 OK. So I am a chick (as my moniker indicates). Do any non-neurotic non-feminazi chicks out there actually feel oppressed by the man? I'm serious.

I do! I'm so oppressed, I just can't get out of bed.

Posted by: Sandra Fluke at October 17, 2012 12:39 AM (gfPwZ)

159 Right, but this is what you ask presidential candidates in a debate? That just seemed like a total "War on Women" setup question.
Posted by: Uncle Milty at October 17, 2012 12:37 AM (sCI7M)

_________________

Oh trust me I hear you on that.

Hell your undecided--can't find a job--but that's your concern?

I think a lot of people will see through Candy Crowley picking that question.

The girl was young--the electorate at home caring enough to watch up to that point--not so much.

Posted by: tasker at October 17, 2012 12:39 AM (r2PLg)

160 CNN also admitted That almost all of the audience had voted for Obama on 08'. How the fuck does this shit keep happening at these debates.

Posted by: JBS at October 17, 2012 12:39 AM (lZE/o)

161 Can we please call Candy Mrs. Creosote?

Posted by: Evilpens at October 17, 2012 12:39 AM (ck76k)

162 OK. So I am a chick (as my moniker indicates). Do any non-neurotic non-feminazi chicks out there actually feel oppressed by the man? I'm serious.

......

There remain some very ass-backwards, good-ol'-boy's clubs out there and some really shitty management at some companies but, generally, that claim has run its course.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at October 17, 2012 12:40 AM (piMMO)

163 Here's what I learned from tonight...

1) Obama is really uncomfortable talking about Benghazi. His pissy, indignant response and 'politicizing the death of four americans (which we're lying about' was all the proof Romney should need to shithammer him on it next week.

2) Obama really doesn't want to talk about Fast and Furious. Right after Romney lowered the boom on it, he immediately started rambling about schools and community colleges. Then kept rambling and demanding more time when Crowley was trying to get to another topic. Why? BECAUSE HE DIDN'T WANT ROMNEY TO BRING IT UP AGAIN.

3) If Romney needed some sort of catalyst to go after the MFM's Praetorian Guard schtick, Crowley gave it to him. Obama lied about what he said the day after Benghazi (without refuting that yes, he had a fundraiser to get to a few hours later), Romney calls him on it, Crowley interrupts Romney and backs up the lie, then allows the crowd of circus seals to clap and hoot their support of President Champagne Tower.

Apparently, that's 'control' to the MFM.

Posted by: El Kabong at October 17, 2012 12:41 AM (HWj39)

164 >>> Next week, y'all, Romney will run the tables. It is all on foreign policy.

My fear is that Romney doesn't actually FEEL as competent/confident on foreign policy (despite his in fact being vastly more competent than this administration), and won't take advantage of this the way he should.

My feeling on this was definitely reinforced by what I saw tonight.

I agree with you that that's what Romney should do. I'm not that sure he will.

Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 12:41 AM (Db+Gl)

165 Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 12:37 AM (Db+Gl)

this is not just a woman thing.... but a HUMAN thing...

Note, that Romney has led in the MAN vote all along..... which is a story the MSM doesnot want to touch....

Go figure.... Girly Man Metro, who puts forth a Gay agenda, and wants men to pay for abortions even when they didn't have anything to do with the act (through taxes).... and constantly dis's the Military????

Yeah.... he's soooo gonna get the MAN vote...

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 17, 2012 12:41 AM (lZBBB)

166 NDH, that's what I thought. Just like there are still virulent racists out there, they aren't exactly crawling all over the place.

Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at October 17, 2012 12:41 AM (6zgse)

167 I work in a VERY male dominated industry and have since I was 19. Except for the occasional douchey misogynist, I have always been treated well for my abilities and qualifications. My inability to move up further is in direct correlation with my lack of a college degree. That's on me, not them.

Posted by: Agent P at October 17, 2012 12:42 AM (Vb+OK)

168 158 OK. So I am a chick (as my moniker indicates). Do any non-neurotic non-feminazi chicks out there actually feel oppressed by the man? I'm serious.

Sheeeeit...I'm gettin' pressed into da mattress right now, bithchez....

Where de birth control at?

Posted by: Blazing Fluke at October 17, 2012 12:42 AM (79QkM)

169 Well, I got punked. I always thought the Overnight Open Thread was the last of the evening. Then I saw that the comments there went dead and realized that there must be a new thread. Surpise, suprise, there are two new threads! Why is Ace of Spades fucking with my head? That ain't nice!

Posted by: can i haz cheezbooger? at October 17, 2012 12:42 AM (Q2wni)

170 160
CNN also admitted That almost all of the audience had voted for Obama on
08'. How the fuck does this shit keep happening at these debates.

Posted by: JBS at October 17, 2012 12:39 AM (lZE/o)
_________________________________________________________Romney camp should have seen "Long Island" as the spot for the town hall debate and said "fuck no, do it in Manchester NH or some other swing locale"

Posted by: Uncle Milty at October 17, 2012 12:42 AM (sCI7M)

171 Obama can't have done that well....no appearances from Greggywegs at all.....

And poor old Gumby at HA was reduced to pinning everything on a PPP poll...

Posted by: AussieMarcus at October 17, 2012 12:42 AM (8Spmv)

172 And I don't know what kind of talking heads calling this a win for Obama thought Obama's answer of pap smears, birth control and mammograms will help women compete in the work force was a full of win answer.

I think Obama's greatest gift is he bores people to death--so that they do not listen to the content of his answers.

Posted by: tasker at October 17, 2012 12:42 AM (r2PLg)

173 >>> this is not just a woman thing.... but a HUMAN thing...
Posted by: Romeo13 at October 17, 2012 12:41 AM

Hey, if your "genitals" were stimulated, more power to you, man.

j/k

Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 12:42 AM (Db+Gl)

174 Did you see Luntz's Dunces from Steve Wynn's property?

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at October 17, 2012 12:32 AM (eHIJJ)

Wynn is PISSED big time with Obama and the Democrats.

The fallout from that ought to be fun...

Posted by: The Political Hat at October 17, 2012 12:42 AM (sZTYJ)

175 It would be beyond sweet if come election day Obama gets 47% of the electorate to Mitt's 53%

Posted by: blb at October 17, 2012 12:43 AM (4gjb7)

176 Did anybody think that Al Gore, George W. Bush, John Kerry, or John McCain could be their president based on debate performance?

Mitt Romney is seen, even by centerish Democrats, as presidential caliber. That's huge

Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 12:43 AM (B/yDO)

177 Obama supporters are just thrilled that Obama showed up and acted like a jerk. Everyone else is kind of put off by him being a jerk. Oh! And that he lied.

Posted by: HtP at October 17, 2012 12:44 AM (jx2j9)

178 Fast and Furious, bitchez!

Posted by: paper sack at October 17, 2012 12:44 AM (Iumd9)

179 OK. So I am a chick (as my moniker indicates). Do any non-neurotic non-feminazi chicks out there actually feel oppressed by the man? I'm serious.

Nope! I've never felt any kind of oppression, repression, or marginalization because of my gender. Has it happened? Who knows? Maybe? I find that any imaginary hurdles I may have placed in front of me because of my womaniness are easily jumped by just being competent at what I do, and learning how to do things with which I'm unfamiliar. Oh, and not whining.

I love men. They're always there to kill the spiders when I scream in terror.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit and ABO supporter at October 17, 2012 12:44 AM (CA2NO)

180 I like how Obama thinks that being in Rose Garden and speaking is a proper response for how he's handled the Libya situation

Posted by: Uncle Milty at October 17, 2012 12:45 AM (sCI7M)

181 Candy is dandy but dicker is quicker!

Posted by: anderson pooper at October 17, 2012 12:45 AM (vDl/w)

182 171 Obama can't have done that well....no appearances from Greggywegs at all.....

And poor old Gumby at HA was reduced to pinning everything on a PPP poll...
...........

From Gumby:
1/1000th of the people who heard the original slapping down of Romney heard her �correction.�

The damage is done. That�s reality.
Obama wins... It's over.
gumbyandpokey on October 17, 2012 at 12:10 AM

_______________________________________

What a complete fucking tool

Posted by: Raquel at October 17, 2012 12:45 AM (IJOxR)

183 Um, the "Katharine" Fenton that asked a question was jailbait.

Definitely not a Code Pink chick, because she was A) hot and B) hot only if over the age of 18, which is questionable.

Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 12:45 AM (B/yDO)

184 OMG - Susan Estrich looking weirder than ever....

Posted by: George W Beagle at October 17, 2012 12:45 AM (JwW4z)

185 Hmmm.... interesting thought....

Fast and Furious IS about illegaly letting guns get to Mexico.... ergo it IS A Foreign Policy Issue...

Next debate may be realllllyyyyy fun...

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 17, 2012 12:46 AM (lZBBB)

186
Oh, so Crowley has no admitted she was wrong about the 'Rose Garden Terrorist Attack' thing. It's always nice to admit you were wrong after it actually matters.

The issue isn't even the lie. It was her interrupting Romney then covering for President Candyass and letting the crowd applaud the lie.

Posted by: El Kabong at October 17, 2012 12:46 AM (HWj39)

187 179
OK. So I am a chick (as my moniker indicates). Do any non-neurotic
non-feminazi chicks out there actually feel oppressed by the man? I'm
serious.

Nope. Never have. Men obey me and I take no prisoners. This is some throwback to the 70's and Gloria Steinham woman hear me roar. Boring.

Posted by: ChristyBlinky, unbanned, ready to get this done at October 17, 2012 12:46 AM (baL2B)

188 The undecided voter who asked the question about women's pay, you mean? Whether or not she's the same one, that one had "plant" all over it. Everything about the woman, everything about the way she posed the question, the tone, etc. was just so perfectly scripted it wasn't funny.

They didn't do so well on the assault-weapons question, though. And the black guy who asked Obama why he should be given four more years? Looked mighty pissed off.

Posted by: perturbed at October 17, 2012 12:46 AM (hYRDX)

189 Everytime, in modern history, that a Democrat "wins" a debate, he leaves turds that end up smelling later. I think one that's overlooked is gun control.

Want to lose Ohio? Support gun control.
Want to lose Iowa, Wisconsin and probably Michigan and Pennsylvania? Support gun control.

Al Gore found this out the hard way and Democrats didn't mention gun control for a decade.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 17, 2012 12:46 AM (xSegX)

190 So in my vagina influenced option obama FAILED!

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna at October 17, 2012 12:46 AM (9+ccr)

191 @162

i always tell my fianc� i like him cuz he's just like theoretical physics: tough, indispensable, and 100% male :3

that being said, like you say, outside of some bad management at some small businesses -- cuz the corporate world has gone full-on affirmative action -- i think places where woman are "underrepresented", like physics and finance and football-biz, are just places that women really don't want to be.

Posted by: jimi ray at October 17, 2012 12:47 AM (79EF9)

192 Anyone else think Obama pardons the Blind Sheikh before he moves out in Jan?

Posted by: Cheney at October 17, 2012 12:47 AM (66rv5)

193 First off, Republicans need to kill off this debate format. period. It was exactly as everyone predicted, plants in the audience, a biased moderator, etc. The entire premise is absurd and feeds into a liberal mindset of everyone coming to the President with their hand out for some government solution.

I think Romney won tactically, especially on economic issues which is what this election is going to be decided on. And Libya is going to be the subject for the next few days, the WH can't be happy about that,

I will admit I was frustrated with Romney on a few things. I think he should have dialed down the confrontation with the moderator and he said some choice openings that he fumbled (like Libya, Fast and Furious) Why not focus on the State Department ignoring extra security requests instead of his speech the day after?

How great would it have been if Romney had commented on Obama paying his female staffers less than their male counterparts? that would have been a shiv that stayed in a while.

I will say this, how great is that Romney is the only person that's willing to get into Obama's face and talk down to him? You can tell Obama has never experienced that in his life. McCain certainly never had the balls to do that in a debate.

Posted by: Jeepers at October 17, 2012 12:47 AM (XDRsa)

194 What about the Palestinians?

Posted by: Mr. Mojo Risin at October 17, 2012 12:48 AM (xXhWA)

195 Luntz group, if you missed it

http://tinyurl.com/9amfvjb

Posted by: MTF at October 17, 2012 12:48 AM (bDUMn)

196 Mitt doesn't have to be perfect 100% of the time, but damn close to it. Let's face it, he is up against some pretty tough odds. Everyone here knows that Obama has been a terrible, terrible president but he has still been winning the race the entire time - even though he is incompetent. Mitt will need to run the table with OH, NC, VA and FL to win. The undecided voters in those states are not political junkis...they are not reading this blog, or Kos, or HuffPo, or Michelle Malkin, or whatever...all those people have already chosen. I doubt these undecideds are really taking the time to get very well informed, but they will see all the front pages of the newspapers on the rack proclaiming Obama has won, they will see the MSM news as they flip the channels, etc. I hope for the best here but fear for the worst. We'll see, in any case.

Posted by: BHO at October 17, 2012 12:48 AM (eD7No)

197 Romney at least tied... Big losses for obama...

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna at October 17, 2012 12:48 AM (9+ccr)

198 183 Um, the "Katharine" Fenton that asked a question was jailbait.

Definitely not a Code Pink chick, because she was A) hot and B) hot only if over the age of 18, which is questionable.
Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 12:45 AM (B/yDO)

_______________

And The Q cuts through the shit like a knife through butter

Posted by: tasker at October 17, 2012 12:48 AM (r2PLg)

199 176 Did anybody think that Al Gore, George W. Bush, John Kerry, or John McCain could be their president based on debate performance?

Mitt Romney is seen, even by centerish Democrats, as presidential caliber. That's huge
Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 12:43 AM (B/yDO)

Excellent point. Those would be the ones upping Romneys' poll numbers.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC in Johnson County laughing at Cook County at October 17, 2012 12:48 AM (79QkM)

200 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlGTCXvCKJw Bullshittin' The Public!

Posted by: Country Singer at October 17, 2012 12:48 AM (+r4NB)

201 Ace, check out the Frank Luntz post-debate focus group of Nevada voters...video posted at Politico.

Posted by: Sgt. York at October 17, 2012 12:49 AM (c4j2o)

202
Most here probably understand this already, but in an incumbent referendum with a veryvulnerable incumbent(exactly what we have this cycle), the challenger mostly has to appear to be an acceptable alternative. Dry and mechanistic and sort of empty, but logical - and pretty much exactly the truth.

Romney achieved that in the first event. Similar to 1980, but with a few things that amplified the impact. It's a very different media environment today, but a far worse one. We have a preposterous incumbent whose skills, accomplishments, and ability wouldn't have carried him to county executive in a serious country with an actual press. The challenger in this media environment is as maligned and distorted as Reagan was in 1980, if not more so. And in a huge contrast to 1980, the incumbent ran an extensive (and un-presidential, and boorish, and pathetic) smear campaign against the challenger for months before the real start of campaign season.

So when Mitt was his smart, attractive, impressive self the first time - and the incumbent was sad, droopy, and pathetic - the needle moved dramatically. He was "acceptable". And his opponent was confirmed as unacceptable. Bell rung - cannot be un-rung, by just about anything. Some portion of that huge, huge viewership for the first event - openly or inwardly - sighed and decided the new guy deserved a try and as for the incumbent, they "had to let him go".

And debate "performance" really can't help the incumbent with those (probably as high as 55- 57% of the actual electorate) who are variously furious/discouraged/disappointed with him and his administration. So I think it was probably going to be a robust victory for Romney all along, based on fundamentals. The first debate just triggered all sorts of movement that was inevitable, or revealed movement that had already taken place.

It's fun to obsess over these events and each twist and turn of a campaign.

But I think this thing has been over for months. Now the only question is the amplitude of the wave, and how much havoc it can wreak down-ballot and in normally challenging districts for the GOP.

Akin wins. CA's tax initiatives get crushed (again). Brown wins easily. Dems lose all or all-but-one of their Senate incumbents now running. GOP picks up House seats. And that's with what I see as the current wave amplitude. It could well get worse (better) in the next few weeks. This country is a collection of coiled springs. They will be released in November. Of course then the real hard work begins - but I will be astonished far beyond my 2008 disgust/incomprehension if this thing is not a big, big, big landslide.

Posted by: non-purist at October 17, 2012 12:49 AM (UViC2)

203 Candy's Going Bad

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe65DB1ZPyw

Candy took the pearls, got ahead of the girls
Got on top and found the secret entrance
Are you satisfied?

Through neon doors across killing floors
She got sucked into a champagne desert
Are you satisfied?

Daddy said "I'll break your bones
If you come home dressed in peacock clothes"
Mother said "Quit the show"
She didn't want the neighbors to know
Candy had to quit the show

Posted by: GnuBreed at October 17, 2012 12:49 AM (ccXZP)

204 >>>193 First off, Republicans need to kill off this debate format. period. It was exactly as everyone predicted, plants in the audience, a biased moderator, etc. The entire premise is absurd and feeds into a liberal mindset of everyone coming to the President with their hand out for some government solution.

The Dems will kick and scream to hang onto this very format.

What would've happened if Crowley wasn't there? If the crowd of highly suspicious 'undecideds' hadn't been there?Obama would've been trounced and Romney would've been the clear winner.

They have become completely dependent on the media to cover for them. It's not long just bias, it's complete dependency.

Posted by: El Kabong at October 17, 2012 12:49 AM (HWj39)

205 PS...

Country singer just posted the link immediately above my comment above...seriously, check it out.

Posted by: Sgt. York at October 17, 2012 12:50 AM (c4j2o)

206 ______________________________

The unfortunate Benghazi exchange was on opportunity for Romney to clobber Obama - to potentially finish him off.
But Crowley's horrible judgment to weigh in and call the "facts" in favor of Obama threw Romney off a bit. And then debated moved on without a chance for followup on the most intense exchange in the debate. (Notice Crowley didn't play fact checker on Obama's lame denial that he had not cut oil drilling permits by half.)

Anyway, in the very shortest run, I think this helped Obama. (Obama even took time on the spot to thank Crowley for bailing him out.)

But now the Administration's original claim that the attack was actually just a protest-become-spontaneous-riot has been thrust directly into the spotlight of voters' minds. How can the media avoid properly covering the story now?

Voters are going to want to know, "Hey what the hell was that all about?".

Also, the media - sensing that Romney stumbled as he attempted to exploit Obama's Achilles heel - will instinctively dig into the story. They simply won't be able to resist punching that Tar Baby because they'll be convinced it somehow hurts Romney. After all, one of their own (Crowley) put Romney in his place regarding just exactly what the facts was!
But this is the last story that Team Obama wants the media digging into. The media has simply avoided giving much attention to the story because it's been bad for Obama. (Note that administration's a-factual Benghazi claims have not yet appeared on the front page of the New York Times. It's as thought the administration never said anything worth mentioning.)

But now the the media will feel compelled to actually cover the story. And they can give it all the Obama-sympathetic slant they want. It will be impossible for them to not mention that the administration had claimed there was a protest that never happened which led to a riot that never happened. - All of which was the cause of our embassy being invaded and burned and our ambassador being assassinated along with the killings of three other Americans - all of which did happen.

If the media can't resist slugging that Tar Baby (and I don't think they can), then Team Romney essentially will be given media time to followup and properly exploit Obama's Achilles heel.

Then the final debate on foreign policy will come, and even if the media has displayed real discipline by continuing to show only passing interest in Obama's bogus Benghazi claims: he will not be able to hide.
He got lucky tonight. A one-off question where the ref saved his sorry ass and then the game moved on to other topics.

Romney's going to get his meat-cleaver razor sharp for that last debate on foreign policy. And when Mittens is done, his meat-cleaver will be dripping with the words "You deceived Americans about Benghazi".
Obama can duck weave for a minute or two on one passing question in a debate where the moderator steps in and blows the whistle.
But he can't hide for an entire debate.

Posted by: _Dave_ at October 17, 2012 12:50 AM (/nxRb)

207 187
179

OK. So I am a chick (as my moniker indicates). Do any non-neurotic

non-feminazi chicks out there actually feel oppressed by the man? I'm

serious.

Nope. Never have. Men obey me and I take no
prisoners. This is some throwback to the 70's and Gloria Steinham woman
hear me roar. Boring.

Posted by: ChristyBlinky, unbanned, ready to get this done at October 17, 2012 12:46 AM (baL2B)

I'm also a chick (my nic is actually the dog's name...) - and an older one at that. Never felt oppressed, was always "the boss" even in my early twenties, and made at least as much in salary as men in equivalent positions - in the seventies and eighties. There are a whole lot of people out there living in an alternate reality of their own making... and that just makes it harder for people - men and women - with legitimate gripes to make any progress...

Posted by: George W Beagle at October 17, 2012 12:50 AM (JwW4z)

208 But when will the poll featuring the honey boo boo endorcement come out?
20 point bounce!!!!

Posted by: Navycopjoe at October 17, 2012 12:50 AM (fR6i8)

209 Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 12:45 AM (B/yDO)

could it been her daughter?

Posted by: Evilpens at October 17, 2012 12:50 AM (ck76k)

210 Next debate may be realllllyyyyy fun...

Some of that stuff that Mitt 'left on the table' will still be there. Might have gotten sharpened, as well.

Posted by: fluffy at October 17, 2012 12:50 AM (z9HTb)

211 195 Luntz group, if you missed it

http://tinyurl.com/9amfvjb

Posted by: MTF at October 17, 2012 12:48 AM (bDUMn)

--Does that link have the hottie in the red dress?

Posted by: logprof at October 17, 2012 12:51 AM (jKE+Z)

212 My fear is that Romney doesn't actually FEEL as competent/confident on foreign policy (despite his in fact being vastly more competent than this administration), and won't take advantage of this the way he should.

He may have overgamed it a bit. I noted that he was "golly gee whiz, what is this Fast Furious thing" and he knows far more about it than he was letting on. The FP debate is the easiest to prepare for.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 17, 2012 12:51 AM (xSegX)

213 Crowley's assist to Obama on Benghazi is getting a lot of buzz right now, and libs will try to use it to discredit Romney for the coming news cycle, but Obama's throwaway line in the Rose Garden is a mirage that will fade away in the harsh light of the facts. Let's face it, we all knew Crowley was going to find some way to help Obama. If it wasn't that it would have been something else. End of day, what will continue to move votes to Romney is his absolutely devastating indictment of Obamanomics using easy to digest stats that rang true to everyone listening.

Posted by: csmats at October 17, 2012 12:52 AM (pOSGo)

214 @101

uh, it's no rumour, j chris stevens was definitely, openly gay.

i commented last month about how quick the liberals were to throw a member of their second-most-protected interest group to the dogs -- near-literally -- in order to try to defend the muslim pigs' rape and murder of the amb is being "provoked" by a YOUTUBE.

Posted by: jimi ray at October 17, 2012 12:52 AM (79EF9)

215 >>> So in my vagina influenced option obama FAILED!

Well if you ever want a *positive* influence in that respect, let me know. I'm about more than hairy toes and round doors (no pun intended).

Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 12:53 AM (Db+Gl)

216 I don't know. On one hand, Romney seems like he knows what he's talking about sometimes, but on the other, he put a dog on the roof of his car and I just don't think I can't trust that. Also he lies and hates women.

Posted by: Undecided Voter at October 17, 2012 12:53 AM (6JMZR)

217 Thank you lovely fellow 'ettes. Just as I thought, and your responses match my experience too. Libs don't feel complete unless there are victims around, preferably themselves. Unless they are lily white beta males, and then they are only to ready to embrace the "victimhood" of others.

Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at October 17, 2012 12:53 AM (6zgse)

218 202 "And in a huge contrast to 1980, the incumbent ran an extensive (and
un-presidential, and boorish, and pathetic) smear campaign against the
challenger for months before the real start of campaign season."

I may have been drunk for most of that year, but I distinctly remember a heavy anti-Reagan campaign aimed at scaring voters that he might just nuke the whole world.

From the convention in July:

"They live a in a fantasy world, where some politicians shoot first and ask questions later." - Jimmy Carter

Remind you of anyone? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jjTkVDzKA8

Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 12:53 AM (B/yDO)

219
FWIW I think the fact that O keeps playing to his base when he has to know that a lot of those issues turn off indies is a sign of desperation. He's given up on the indies and mods and is hoping his base will turn out in huge numbers. Ain't gonna happen.

I really have been amazed at how tone deaf his campaign has been. Clinton was smart enough to triangulate. O is just plain stupid or else self-destructive. Third possibility is that he really is a diehard leftie.

Posted by: obie doobie at October 17, 2012 12:54 AM (Q2wni)

220 Looks like curtains fo da Zero.

Posted by: maddogg at October 17, 2012 12:55 AM (w2iaX)

221 Not just that Obama lied. That's a given.

It's that, this time, the bigshot CNN mediator was caught backing up Obama's bullshit. This should make people wonder if there's other stuff that's not being reported on in American izvestiya outlets.

Posted by: boulder hobo at October 17, 2012 12:55 AM (QTHTd)

222 Ace, check out the Frank Luntz post-debate focus group of Nevada voters...video posted at Politico.

Posted by: Sgt. York at October 17, 2012 12:49 AM (c4j2o)

Good news for Nevada, along with Wynn being pissed at Obama.

The problem for Romney in Nevada is twofold:

1st: The Dems registration lead after '08 had schrunk to only 35K from nearly 100K before, as of the June primary... but the Dems registered tens of thousands to increas their lead by 250% in a matter of months (someone please have the Romneuy people look into possible fraud).

2nd: The Nevada state GOP Central Committee, and the Clark County GOP central committee (home of Las Vegas & 70% of the state's voters) are run by Ron Paul cultists who have openly and literally declared that they want to see Romney, Heller, Heck, &c loose for not being "Ron Paul pure." Not only does Romney and Heller have to fight the Harry Reid machine, but also the Republican Party!

*Sigh*

Posted by: The Political Hat at October 17, 2012 12:55 AM (sZTYJ)

223
There are a whole lot of people out there living in an alternate reality of their own making... and that just makes it harder for people - men and women - with legitimate gripes to make any progress... Posted by: George W Beagle at October 17, 2012 12:50 AM (JwW4z)

The left's whol philosophy comes from Antonio Gramsci, the idea that the bourgeois oppresses different groups according to their minority status. Freedom is an illusion, we all live in the matrix, and theyre the clever ones who took the red pill.

Posted by: Mr. Mojo Risin at October 17, 2012 12:55 AM (xXhWA)

224 Heard the MSNBC focus group went for Romney too. JEF being panned everywhere?

Maybe no need for 3rd debate?

Posted by: Cheney at October 17, 2012 12:56 AM (66rv5)

225 219

FWIW I think the fact that O keeps playing to his base when he has
to know that a lot of those issues turn off indies is a sign of
desperation. He's given up on the indies and mods and is hoping his base
will turn out in huge numbers. Ain't gonna happen.

I really
have been amazed at how tone deaf his campaign has been. Clinton was
smart enough to triangulate. O is just plain stupid or else
self-destructive. Third possibility is that he really is a diehard
leftie.

Posted by: obie doobie at October 17, 2012 12:54 AM (Q2wni)

Fourth possibility - he's a complete narcissist who KNOWS he's the most brilliant being ever to set foot on the planet...

Posted by: George W Beagle at October 17, 2012 12:56 AM (JwW4z)

226
Looks like Ace is planning to pull another all-nighter.

Posted by: maddogg at October 17, 2012 12:56 AM (w2iaX)

227
First, check out Frank Luntz group from Las Vegas of former Obama supporters....overwhelmingly they preferred Mitt. And they also agreed with CBS with those Economy numbers. Mitt crushed Obama on the Economy, which is the BIGGEST ISSUE every time. Libya was cut off because of Crowley...who fundamentally now says Mitt was right....pretty pathetic!! But when you see Registered Voters (which I am sure was more Dem as usual) picking Romney on the Economy that is big. I agree Ace "won" is about performance. But these numbers on the economy and taxes were not good for the President.

When you see 61 percent of Registered Voters telling you Obama does not have a better vision for America or have answers THAT IS TERRIBLE! What would it be under Likely Voters???

People that are undecided have already decided against Obama...Mitt continues to sell himself very well on the issues that matter most: MONEY, TAXES, JOBS and ECONOMY!! As he does that the polls will move more and more to Mitt. Obama needed to knockout Mitt and he did not come close. When you win on points but lose on the issues that Voters decide votes on then you have nothing.

Sorry when you see Obama losing in Dem Polls on the Economy that is bad!! It is the Economy Stupid...we always hear that. Libya has dropped the President from his Foreign Policy Perch..remember he was at over 70 percent approval and that is down to 49 percent with Registered Voters? Not good....that means it is closer to 45 percent with Likely Voters or less...

When 61percent of people tell you that Obama DOES NOT offer answers to the problems or a better vision in a Registered Voter Poll....that is horrible....and he is President....that tells you Obama will not be re-elected.

Mitt has done very well presenting himself as someone that can help and run the economy. Listedto the responses from the Luntz Panel in Vegasof former Obama supporters and you hear it left andright...Mitt is better for jobs and economy!! And one man nailed Obama for saying the same things back in 2008 that he is saying now!!

One other note....Obama's answer for the price of gas now vs 2009 was PATHETIC the price of Gas in 2009 was low because of a bad economy....HECK THEN TODAY it should be 25 Cents a gallon with his bad economy!! good grief!

Posted by: bluerose75 at October 17, 2012 12:56 AM (HDcKc)

228 Daddy is such a liar and demagogue I couldn't vote for him! So much will come out in my book!

Posted by: Malia in DC at October 17, 2012 12:57 AM (OiC7K)

229 224 Heard the MSNBC focus group went for Romney too. JEF being panned everywhere?

Maybe no need for 3rd debate?

Oh no, we need one. To send a message.

Posted by: El Kabong at October 17, 2012 12:57 AM (HWj39)

230 "Luntz group, if you missed it"

I just watched it, two of the Obama supporters were women that are scared Romney is take away all women's rights, right's they fought hard to get. Good fuck'n grief.

Posted by: lowandslow at October 17, 2012 12:57 AM (GZitp)

231
Amish, so right about gun control. It is the plutonium of electoral death to Dems - hence their silence/avoidance on the issue (which I think goes way back to the mid-90s, even before Gore's run).

I'm hoping the gun control content of the SCOAMF's remarks tonite are enough to put together some ads, which could be run in, oh, I dunno, say ..... PA, MI, WI, MN, OH, IA ......

Then again - the SCOAMF had one of his biggest mega-gaffes (and that's saying something) on gun control in 2008, and of course it had zero apparent impact. But this time, without the degraded hysteria that forever beclowned the greatest country in the world, the broken-glass turnout numbers of the rural gun nuts MIGHT be relevant in a few of those states.

Posted by: non-purist at October 17, 2012 12:58 AM (UViC2)

232 I am not worried about the next debate. Barry should be worried, however. His foreign policy may stink even more than his domestic policies. We still have not heard from that lack of "intelligence" Old Joe smirked about. The CIA may be fixin' to have a throw down on that subject.

As I said, this was the one I was the most concerned about. It may be a tie. Polls may show (on WaPo, etc) that Barky is back. But he was scared tonight. A few times Mitt stared him down and he retreated like a fairy to his stool. Mitt got under his thin skin. Of that there is no doubt. Mitt scored some major points regarding the economy while Barry floundered with his stale talking points. Mitt was not perfect, but he will be ready next week for Fast and Furious Benghazigate Missing RPG's in Libya and weapons falling to bad guys in Syria. Al Qaeda is not dead.

Barky Goes Bananas on October 22nd on live teevee. Be there.

Posted by: ChristyBlinky, unbanned, ready to get this done at October 17, 2012 12:58 AM (baL2B)

233 @206

anderson cooper opened up for the media by fact-checking crowley's little reffereeing...with a pro-romney conclusion!

i, for one, welcome the attention to this issue! not only, like you say, will the media have practically no avenue whatsoever to put a positive spin on the event for obama, but i think that some media folks are getting tired of covering for an incompetent president that looks increasingly like an inevitable lost cause!

i really do think human psychology likes to be on the winning side...even if that just means making themselves feel "honest" about calling a sinking-ship campaign on its BS for the first time in four years...

Posted by: jimi ray at October 17, 2012 12:58 AM (79EF9)

234 OT : Extreme Cheapskate
Best Show Ever?

Posted by: garrett at October 17, 2012 12:58 AM (HWUYs)

235 And Obama didn't even answer the GODDAMN BENGHAZI QUESTION!

The question was: 'who in your administration refused these requests for more security?'

Obama: Well, I have to meet coffins and hug widows and there are community colleges that need funding, plus everything Gov. Romney just said was untrue.

Posted by: El Kabong at October 17, 2012 12:58 AM (HWj39)

236 PS, re: debate format

I actually thought Jim Lehrer (inadvertently) did a tremendous job.

I want two candidates to attack and defend against each other, with the moderator doing just that - moderating.

The other two have tried to interject themselves and the journalistic profession as the demigods of thought. That does little to reveal differences between candidates, and especially how candidates would react under pressure.

Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 12:59 AM (B/yDO)

237 219
FWIW I think the fact that O keeps playing to his base when he has to know that a lot of those issues turn off indies is a sign of desperation. He's given up on the indies and mods and is hoping his base will turn out in huge numbers. Ain't gonna happen.

I really have been amazed at how tone deaf his campaign has been. Clinton was smart enough to triangulate. O is just plain stupid or else self-destructive. Third possibility is that he really is a diehard leftie.
--------------------

Duh.

Posted by: Fradgan at October 17, 2012 12:59 AM (ex+u8)

238
230 "Luntz group, if you missed it"I just watched it, two of the Obama supporters were women that are scared Romney is take away all women's rights, right's they fought hard to get. Good fuck'n grief.
Posted by: lowandslow at October 17, 2012 12:57 AM (GZitp)

And they're obviously not undecideds. And just like in the last debate the people that did change their position smacked down their pathetic talking points.

Posted by: buzzion at October 17, 2012 01:00 AM (GULKT)

239
OK. So I am a chick (as my moniker indicates). Do any non-neurotic
non-feminazi chicks out there actually feel oppressed by the man? I'm
serious.

Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at October 17, 2012 12:33 AM

No oppression here. Although I do have to cook and do the laundry.

Posted by: huerfano at October 17, 2012 01:00 AM (bAGA/)

240 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlGTCXvCKJw

Bullshittin' The Public!

Posted by: Country Singer at October 17, 2012 12:48 AM (+r4NB)

Yep. It's about time this was said on a major outlet. Fox has redeemed itself a bit - if it was inadvertent.

Barky did nothing but lie his ass off. As usual. But when Romney asked him anything directly, Barky reverted back to the same retarded post turtle that he was at the last debate. barky can only mouth lines that he learns to memorize, phonetically.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at October 17, 2012 01:00 AM (X3lox)

241 .even if that just means making themselves feel "honest"

____________

Never thought of that angle --of it before but that does make sense/

Posted by: tasker at October 17, 2012 01:01 AM (r2PLg)

242 2nd: The Nevada state GOP Central Committee, and the
Clark County GOP central committee (home of Las Vegas 70% of the
state's voters) are run by Ron Paul cultists who have openly and
literally declared that they want to see Romney, Heller, Heck, c
loose for not being "Ron Paul pure." Not only does Romney and Heller
have to fight the Harry Reid machine, but also the Republican Party!

*Sigh*

Posted by: The Political Hat at October 17, 2012 12:55 AM (sZTYJ)

Consider it payback for "Republicans for Reid"

Posted by: schizoid at October 17, 2012 01:01 AM (Q9IKH)

243 I wonder if the judgement on "who won the debate" gets influenced by the concept "did the person succeed in what he set out to do."

And since Obama flopped so badly in the first, his grading point was "did he do any better, at least give a semblance of actually being there?" Therefore graded on a curve of his own widening, and falling above a F = he won.

But when judging on topics, you're hefting one argument in your left hand, one in your right, seeing which has the more weight. It's a scale and not a bell curve. With that, Obama was weighed in the balance and found wanting.

Posted by: sistrum at October 17, 2012 01:01 AM (SUlmX)

244 Ugh - here comes the repeat... I'm out of here. Good night, all!

Posted by: George W Beagle at October 17, 2012 01:01 AM (JwW4z)

245 207 "her daughter?"

Maybe.

I'm just calling into question the idea that a good looking girl could have any association with Code Pink.

Those things and their visits to the Mideast are the justification the Taliban uses to oppress all women. Hideous creatures

Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 01:01 AM (B/yDO)

246 You're right, everyone.

Obama wasn't talking about Benghazi when he referred to "acts of terror", he was referring to 9/11/01 and other terrorist attacks.

The White House has been disingenuously conflating the two. Shocka.

Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 01:02 AM (Db+Gl)

247
Mitt was the consummate professional he has always and always will be.
But then again, I've been in his camp since 07.

Posted by: concrete girl at October 17, 2012 01:02 AM (y2Ojs)

248 Obama comes across as that buddy you moved out with a while back because it was going to be such a great time and be so awesome. Only things didn't turn out so well, but your buddy don't get it. He is trying to convince you that Ramen noodles are good and"really, those candles were pretty cool" when the electric got shut off when a new X-box won out over paying the electric bill. He is the roommate that spends the cable bill money at the titty bar over the weekend.."but its okay dude, cuz you get paid friday and can cover it right?" and you are going to have to cover his rent this month because he lost his job "cuz his boss was a total dick".Romney did a great job at coming across as the Dad you call to bail you out, screw your head back on straight, and let you come back home where you ate better and shit always worked and you had plenty of pocket money to spend on games for that X-box...because youare totally gonnatake it with you when you move...

Posted by: Gicod at October 17, 2012 01:02 AM (Q2Hbv)

249 "No oppression here. Although I do have to cook and do the laundry."

prolly a small load, just do it by hand.

Posted by: Modgi at October 17, 2012 01:03 AM (3xuDv)

250 Luntz's group of undecideds were heavily in favor of going with Romney even though Obama was more aggressive tonight than the last time.
Reason given: Obama didn't promote his own policies, he just attacked Mitt. Mitt promoted his own policies.
http://tinyurl.com/9amfvjb

Posted by: nerdygirl at October 17, 2012 01:03 AM (jLiVY)

251 maddogg: "Looks like Ace is planning to pull another all-nighter."

Then it'll be the best two minutes of his day since around today's lunch. IYKWIMAITYD.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at October 17, 2012 01:03 AM (eHIJJ)

252 And another impression people will have after watching this. Romney wasn't trying to run out the clock like Obama. Hell it looked he would rather it have gone for another hour and a half. Especially when he was done, he hung around taking pictures and shaking hands as confident as ever.

Posted by: lowandslow at October 17, 2012 01:03 AM (GZitp)

253 Dd mitt come across as competent, sincere, and decent? That's all he needed to allow people to project him as presidential. You have to keep in mind that much of what people hear if they arent paying close attention is through the filter of the msm.

Liv's think Romney is evil and hateful and rich and horrible. When they see a decent guy that is knowledgable and compassionate they will allow the preference cascade to overtake them.

Posted by: California red at October 17, 2012 01:04 AM (DXTKe)

254 ack, I seriously had that all spaced and paragraphed, wtf.

Posted by: Gicod at October 17, 2012 01:04 AM (Q2Hbv)

255 huerfano is a chick???

Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at October 17, 2012 01:04 AM (6zgse)

256
Posted by: Modgi

Was that her name?

Posted by: garrett at October 17, 2012 01:05 AM (HWUYs)

257 @248 Classic
Same roommate who borrows/steals your stuff and then tries to tell you, you told him to take it.

Posted by: blb at October 17, 2012 01:05 AM (4gjb7)

258 >>huerfano is a chick???

Yep...never know from the handle, though.

Posted by: garrett at October 17, 2012 01:05 AM (HWUYs)

259 Also, many of the Luntz people had voted for Obama the last time.

His demeanor was better than the last time, when he looked like he wished he were on a golf course. But he didn't sell his policies.

Posted by: nerdygirl at October 17, 2012 01:05 AM (jLiVY)

260 And that's with Candy doing everything short of giving him a BJ.

Posted by: nerdygirl at October 17, 2012 01:06 AM (jLiVY)

261 By not running on his record Obama is transmitting LOSER to the entire world. And when he answered some of the surprisingly thoughtful questions by basically saying, "Oh, no, you're life is better. Swearzies!" it makes it clear that he is out of gas.

He didn't make an effort to answer any of the decent questions at all.

Even idiot undecideds pick up on that.

Posted by: runninrebel at October 17, 2012 01:06 AM (N/1Dm)

262 But this time, without the degraded hysteria that
forever beclowned the greatest country in the world, the broken-glass
turnout numbers of the rural gun nuts MIGHT be relevant in a few of
those states.

Posted by: non-purist at October 17, 2012 12:58 AM (UViC2)

Seeing as how there is no longer any substantive debate on "gun control" (note how even Obama managed to choke out a "for personal defense" reasoning for the basis of the 2A, which must have just about hare-lipped him), we, the heretofore reffered to as gun nuts, prefer the term "armed intelligentsia" be used. Thanks for your understanding.

Posted by: StPatrick_TN at October 17, 2012 01:06 AM (lJJMb)

263 PS, re: debate format

I actually thought Jim Lehrer (inadvertently) did a tremendous job.

I want two candidates to attack and defend against each other, with the moderator doing just that - moderating.

Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 12:59 AM (B/yDO)

I couldn't agree more. Lehrer did jump in on Barky's side a few times in the beginning, but for the great bulk of the debate he just let it be a real debate between Romney and the Indonesian Imbecile. Well ... I don't know if it was so much of a "debate" as Romney was making points and interrogating the Indonesian Imbecile, who was just standing there like a post turtle.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at October 17, 2012 01:06 AM (X3lox)

264 Well, the optics were certainly bad for Barky.

And that's what a lot of people will remember.

Barky came across as whiney and blustery....trying to bullshit his way through it.
He never answered a question.
He just launched into his usual soundbites...like those are the only thing he's programmed to say.

While Mitt wasn't as forceful as I wanted him to be, he got in some good digs.

It goes without saying, that the deck was totally stacked against Mitt.
The Republican party has simply got to stop letting this crap happen to our candidates!

Posted by: wheatie at October 17, 2012 01:07 AM (ipkPX)

265 I did love Romney's backhanded compliment for Obama on Benghazi: "Thank you, Mr. President for accepting full responsibility for what happened."

Now, it's all on your head, asshole.

Posted by: El Kabong at October 17, 2012 01:07 AM (HWj39)

266 Do any non-neurotic

non-feminazi chicks out there actually feel oppressed by the man? I'm

serious.
__________
I was told privately that the owner of the large company I worked for would not abide a woman in the role of financial controller. In 1987. I moved on to greener pastures, became CFO of another company, and am now a paid board member of a bank headed by a woman 2 years my junior.

That jerk's loss, not mine. I did what I intended to do. No one stopped me.

Posted by: Derak at October 17, 2012 01:07 AM (lkjWK)

267 The Luntz group gave the SCOMAF a hobo-grade ass-kicking.

Posted by: Huusker at October 17, 2012 01:07 AM (PaKLC)

268 >>I seriously had that all spaced and paragraphed, wtf.

Spaces and Paragraphs are only available to AoS Prime Members. And then only on odd numbered days.

Posted by: garrett at October 17, 2012 01:07 AM (HWUYs)

269 Posted by: Gicod at October 17, 2012 01:02 AM (Q2Hbv)

I liked that.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 17, 2012 01:08 AM (xSegX)

270 @254

i always put double-spaces in-between every sentence to try to make my lack of caps more readable.

every time i post, they go to one space. they have told me it's not the comments section here, it's just an html thing...though gmail leaves my double-spaces in, and i do select html encoding, so who knows! @.@

Posted by: jimi ray at October 17, 2012 01:08 AM (79EF9)

271 260. You don't know that.

Posted by: California red at October 17, 2012 01:08 AM (DXTKe)

272 BTW, did anybody notice that Romney brought up his religion? The balls on that guy.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 17, 2012 01:08 AM (xSegX)

273 I heard a liberal this morning describe Bidet's performance as that of a buffoon.

Posted by: nerdygirl at October 17, 2012 01:08 AM (jLiVY)

274 So, who picked the "relevant" questions? It wasn't just Crowley in on the game here. There was some pretty dubious foliage cultivated behind the set and, ultimately, escorted to the front of it.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at October 17, 2012 01:08 AM (eHIJJ)

275 Best part of the debate was when Mitt sent Obama back to his seat.

Posted by: garrett at October 17, 2012 01:08 AM (HWUYs)

276 Liv's think Romney is evil and hateful and rich and
horrible. When they see a decent guy that is knowledgable and
compassionate they will allow the preference cascade to overtake them.

Posted by: California red at October 17, 2012 01:04 AM (DXTKe)
======And with the Benghazi story-changing, so flagrant that even the MSM must pay at least token attention, heard as background music, at least some of them have to go "looks like he might be lying there, looks like his ads were lying about Romney..." and each doubt reinforces the other.

Posted by: sistrum at October 17, 2012 01:09 AM (SUlmX)

277 Three more weeks. Dangerous times. But the real danger may be after November 6th when he has nothing to lose, until 01/21/13.

Keep in mind, many of the viewers watching are not political junkies like us. Most have never heard of Fast and Furious until tonight. Many may have not paid a bit of attention to the lies of Libya. Most do not know that 20,000 RPG's are missing in Libya and guns have fallen to the bad guys in Syria. Next week Romney has the chance to reveal all of this in more detail, the epic failure of appeasement.

I can rattle off dates and stuff on Benghazigate. Ask me anything. I remember dates, facts and all kinds of stuff on this subject the past month. I watched all four hours of the Congressional hearing. There were 234 attacks in Libya in the last year. Twenty percent were in Benghazi. On September 4th Egypt warned Israel and the USA about chatter and stuff they learned of attacks coming for US and Israeli embassies. September 5th was the last briefing The Won attended in person----until September 14th. He left on the fundraiser to Las Vegas less than four hours after his Rose Garden appearance with Hillary...or about 14 hours or so after he knew his ambassador was dead. Mitt raised that optic.

The media will now be forced (sort of---the NYT won't) to rebut these statements or not on Fast and Furious and Benghazi and the lies told by this WH and State Dept.

And we still wait patiently to hear from the intelligence community thrown under the bus with Hillary.

Posted by: ChristyBlinky, unbanned, ready to get this done at October 17, 2012 01:09 AM (baL2B)

278 275
Best part of the debate was when Mitt sent Obama back to his seat.

Posted by: garrett at October 17, 2012 01:08 AM (HWUYs)

Oh, yes sir. That was epic. He looked like he was going to his time-out stool!

Posted by: ChristyBlinky, unbanned, ready to get this done at October 17, 2012 01:11 AM (baL2B)

279 lotta 'ettes in here...
still. I'mnot putting any pants on.

Posted by: garrett at October 17, 2012 01:11 AM (HWUYs)

280 I was against Mitt, I liked Gov Perry. I live in Las Vegas but have worked in SLC Ut for 31 months, I go home one weekend a month. I've missed a lot of life with my family. I could never embrace LDS but I was wrong about Romney, I was concerned he'd be a McCain'ish RNC Establishment guy, I enjoy admitting I was wrong. He's fighting his ass off and I am happy to be wrong.

Posted by: Modgi at October 17, 2012 01:11 AM (3xuDv)

281 I heard someone in New Hampshire say that they are happy and feel lucky that someone of Mitt Romney's calibre and character is even interested in being President. i agree 100%.

Posted by: LASue at October 17, 2012 01:12 AM (gjIQF)

282 >>>274 So, who picked the "relevant" questions? It wasn't just Crowley in on the game here. There was some pretty dubious foliage cultivated behind the set and, ultimately, escorted to the front of it.

The 'unbiased crowd' appeared to be a middle-aged lesbian theater group they found next door.

Assault Weapons ban, plant. Who the fuck cares about guns right now? (except for 300 dead mexicans.)
Women's pay, plant. (War on Women)
Outsourcing, plant. (Bain Capital)
Immigration, plant. (Hi, President! *starry eyes*)
President Bush. (Worst President Evah, Inherited this Mess.)

Posted by: El Kabong at October 17, 2012 01:13 AM (HWj39)

283 ChristyBlinky: "But the real danger may be after November 6th when he has nothing to lose, until 01/21/13."

True. However, Romney can advertise that when he steps in, all those Lame Duck agreements, appointments, EO's, and treaties will be declared null and void.

The bigger mandate Romney has, the more obnoxious he can be about it though, ultimately, he won't be obnoxious. He can do it all pragmatic- and business-like.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at October 17, 2012 01:14 AM (eHIJJ)

284 huerfano is a chick???

Rancher, or some such, IIRC.

Not a shrinking violet.

Posted by: fluffy at October 17, 2012 01:14 AM (z9HTb)

285 275 Best part of the debate was when Mitt sent Obama back to his seat.
Posted by: garrett at October 17, 2012 01:08 AM (HWUYs)

Yup.
It was also cool the way Romney never backed up...when Barky was trying to 'act intimidating' by advancing towards him.

The optics were bad for Barky, throughout this thing.

Posted by: wheatie at October 17, 2012 01:14 AM (ipkPX)

286 >>>>>>>>>CBS gives it to Obama, among registered voters 37-30.

Add in the 33 percent who said it was a tie, and that's 63 percent who said Romney won or Obama didn't win.

Not very impressive even for a performance.

Posted by: Llarry at October 17, 2012 01:15 AM (ydx+F)

287 162
OK. So I am a chick (as my moniker indicates). Do any non-neurotic
non-feminazi chicks out there actually feel oppressed by the man? I'm
serious.

Older woman here, in a traditionally (though changing toward more female demographic).

When training 30 yrs ago I was subjected to plenty of good ole boys crap. Some of which bordered on sexual harassment/assault. (think groping). At that time felt powerless to say anything. Powerful he said against, me - insignificant she said. Stirring up shit would have just labelled me and kept me from getting future positions.

It has gotten much better, I don't think females starting today have the same obstacles.

Posted by: someone at October 17, 2012 01:15 AM (bqjJT)

288 >>He looked like he was going to his time-out stool!

He gets that same look whenever I refuse to push in his stool, too.
He can really be a petulant little bottom bitch.
But he's my bottom bitch.

Posted by: Reggie Love at October 17, 2012 01:15 AM (HWUYs)

289 I like this football analogy

Would you renew a head coaches contract after he went 3-13 for 4 seasons with a bunch of crap assistant coaches and players he wouldn�t replace and running the same plays over and over?

Posted by: roy at October 17, 2012 01:15 AM (ROUVS)

290 As bad as Crowley's amateur fact-checking bullshit was, at least there is a foreign policy debate coming up to get to the bottom of it.

Also, Obama never answered the question of who was responsible for refusing requests for more security at Benghazi. That might come up again, if Romney forces the issue.

Posted by: Daryl Herbert at October 17, 2012 01:16 AM (SV+xh)

291 ChristyBlinky, unbanned, ready to get this done at October 17, 2012 01:09 AM (baL2B)

You forgot to mention the part where Zawahiri produced a video on September 10th calling for attacks for vengeance for the death of Abu Yahya al-Libi. Rough translation, the Libyan dude.

Hell, I saw the video, you'd think Obama might have noticed.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 17, 2012 01:16 AM (TMB3S)

292 Someone hobo on this website must have a connection somewhere to the Romney campaign, right?
Give them this
http://tinyurl.com/8hb484y
It's Colunel David Hunt going into detail on Friday for 24 minutes as to how the WH and State and about even other command centers listened as Benghazi burned.
I've tried Breitbart, Fox, NR, Weekly Standard, dear God someone get this to them.
They (WH) cannot say they didn't know it was a terror attack even though they never called it that after listening to Hunt break it down.

Posted by: blb at October 17, 2012 01:16 AM (4gjb7)

293 In the 2008 election, Obama promised everything to anyone, going so far as to promise to stop the rise of the oceans and to heal the planet. To a point, Obama is getting beaten up by his false promises now, including on specific numbers like the employment rate and deficit.

Mitt's doing some of that, but not so much specifics. So if he wins this thing, he'll be in a better position come reelection time politically.

Posted by: Samwise Gamgee at October 17, 2012 01:17 AM (Db+Gl)

294 *Colonel *seven

Posted by: blb at October 17, 2012 01:17 AM (4gjb7)

295 New blog post:

Ms. Crowley, is your integrity dead?" ♬ ♪

"At this most recent Presidential debate, Gov. Romney came across as an adult who was willing to point out the administration�s bulls**t. Pres. Obama, in contrast, acted like the petulant spoiled child that he is. Ms. Crowley, who �moderated� the debate, more than once practically told Pres. Obama what his response ought to be.

"This prompted the poster �Beserker� over at the AoSHQ to invoke a possibly recognizable tune"

http://politicalhat.com/?p=234

Hat Tip, of course, to Beserker...

Posted by: The Political Hat at October 17, 2012 01:17 AM (sZTYJ)

296 @277

O.O

dang! you've got even us "normal" political junkies beat by a mile, girl!

you ought to write an email to the romney campaign distilling a couple of those facts for easy presentation -- you have *seriously* done your homework!!! kudos!

Posted by: jimi ray at October 17, 2012 01:17 AM (79EF9)

297 lotta 'ettes in here...

still. I'mnot putting any pants on.

Posted by: garrett at October 17, 2012 01:11 AM (HWUYs)
Is this a good or a bad time to mention again that I like teh ginger ladies?

Posted by: Country Singer (likes teh ginger ladies) at October 17, 2012 01:17 AM (+r4NB)

298 @280: He's fighting his ass off and I am happy to be wrong.

Posted by: Modgi at October 17, 2012 01:11 AM (3xuDv)

My personal politics still align with Gov. Perry more than they do Mitt, and they probably always will. That said, ever since the Ryan pick, which I think was a bold statement that the Romney campaign was going to go big, I've moved from an anti-Obama voter to a solid pro-Romney voter. I was in before the 1st debate, and nothing changed tonight. At this point, I'm not in the "he's better than the asshole in the office" mode - he's made the case that he's the best man for the job. I've sent cash and signed up to volunteer. Anybody else? If you're in a swing state (I am not), you can make a difference.

Posted by: StPatrick_TN at October 17, 2012 01:18 AM (lJJMb)

299
StPatrick @262, of course I was being completely sarcastic in my use of "gun nuts". Apologies if there was any misunderstanding. And love your "armed intelligentsiya" line - excellent!
Not rural, but a dangerous gun-owning type myself. In fact, hoping that scheduling works out so that I can take two enthusiastic friends to the range on Friday to introduce them to the pleasures of the M1 (both kinds), Mosin-Nagant, 1911, Model 66, and XD9. And once the house mod projects are done or under control, I've noticed it's time to crank up the reloading bench again and replenish my scary (but shiny and nice) "stockpile" of ammo. I won't be out of HXP for a while, but look forward to the new twists of reloading a bottleneck cartridge, as all I've done are handgun calibers (and 30 carbine, which is basically a handgun round for reloading purposes).

Posted by: non-purist at October 17, 2012 01:19 AM (UViC2)

300 Posted by: Country Singer (likes teh ginger ladies) at October 17, 2012 01:17 AM (+r4NB)

Sorry, man. I'm a brunette.

Posted by: garrett at October 17, 2012 01:20 AM (HWUYs)

301 "158 OK. So I am a chick (as my moniker indicates). Do any non-neurotic non-feminazi chicks out there actually feel oppressed by the man? I'm serious."

Hell no. I've had more problems in the workplace from women than from men. And I'm talking about my, as a childless woman, having to take up the slack for moms. What pissed me off was the women who took time off during the work day to take their kids to doctor and dentist appointments, when I scheduled mine for late in the afternoon.

And I've seen nasty, foul, mean-spirited behavior from groups of women toward someone they didn't like, that I have never seen from men.

There was one group of 3 women who were just plain out to get this other woman that they took a dislike to. Their victim ended up leaving for another job.

And I had two female supervisors who were bat shit crazy. Okay, one was bat shit crazy, the other was semi nuts.

I'm not saying most women are like this, but I've never encountered this kind of crappy behavior from men in the workplace.

Posted by: nerdygirl at October 17, 2012 01:21 AM (jLiVY)

302 So, those polls indicate:

1) Most people (or a plurality, anyway) think that most people will think that Obama did better. And they're wrong, because...

2) Most people think that Romney did better.

And there you go.

Posted by: Whoever this is, it's definitely not Michael at October 17, 2012 01:23 AM (JVCVF)

303 Posted by: garrett at October 17, 2012 01:20 AM (HWUYs)

Damn, strikes one and two...

Posted by: Country Singer (likes teh ginger ladies) at October 17, 2012 01:23 AM (+r4NB)

304 JackStraw: "Hell, I saw the video, you'd think Obama might have noticed."

Could've been in a PDB, but I don't have an Adobe Reader plug-in to read such files. And if I did have Adobe's Reader, I've never even heard of a PDB? Ask Gibson. And if I read it, well it was too non-specific. And if it was specific, I delegated the power to Hillary!

Bit you can't fault me on my sports brackets, so, Nyah!

Posted by: SCoaMF at October 17, 2012 01:23 AM (eHIJJ)

305 bitchez, romney came so prepared that even debating obama and crowly he was better

Posted by: joeindc44 at October 17, 2012 01:25 AM (Z3ckx)

306 Posted by: The Political Hat at October 17, 2012 01:17 AM (sZTYJ)

Live version, so the 'rons and 'ettes can sing the new words over it, but Randy Rhoads still gets to do his (amazing) thing: http://tinyurl.com/9p4gwbk . And it's cheesy as hell, but still...give the man credit. He was 5'3" and managed to not be a carney.

Posted by: StPatrick_TN at October 17, 2012 01:26 AM (lJJMb)

307 "158 OK. So I am a chick (as my moniker indicates). Do any non-neurotic non-feminazi chicks out there actually feel oppressed by the man? I'm serious."

Also, I've never felt sexually or physically threatened by a man. And that includes when I was a young, stupid college student who would put myself into situations where I could have been in trouble. You know, meet some guy at a party, go off with him to listen to his new Bob Dylan album. Never had a problem with them.

Jeebus, we'd go out drinking and walk around all hours of the night, all around the campus. The worst thing that happened is that we saw a flasher one night. We thought it was hilarious, called a cop and had a big laugh telling him all about it.

Posted by: nerdygirl at October 17, 2012 01:27 AM (jLiVY)

308 301...And I've seen nasty, foul, mean-spirited behavior from groups of women toward someone they didn't like, that I have never seen from men.

Oh yeah, definitely.
I hate that.
Raised with boys...I guess I missed out on the 'bitch classes' that some women seem to have attended.

But I also learned how to break someone's nose with one punch.

Posted by: wheatie at October 17, 2012 01:28 AM (ipkPX)

309 There's a book called "Women Don't Ask: Negotiation and the Gender Divide" by Linda Babcock and Sara Laschever that is an interesting analysis of the gender pay gap. Basically their research showed that one of the big reasons for the pay difference is that women tend to be less aggressive in general when it comes to negotiation. For example, women are less likely to try to negotiate a higher salary or better benefits when they are looking for their first job after graduation. They are more likely to simply accept a company's first offer, without asking for more. As a result, their average starting pay is less than that of men. Pay raises and cost of living adjustments that follow are then applied to lower starting salary, and they are less likely than men to ask for raises or promotions. The result is that throughout their careers the gap keeps getting bigger.

Made a lot of sense to me (a chick who doesn't feel repressed by the man, but definitely found myself exhibiting the womanly behaviors described in the book.)

Posted by: not the mama at October 17, 2012 01:29 AM (kzCIn)

310 Heard the MSNBC focus group went for Romney too.

You know Obama is in trouble when Romney is flipping DNC and SEIU shills

Posted by: @PurpAv at October 17, 2012 01:30 AM (ytJ01)

311 I just can't believe that the media hasn't picked up on the facts and strung it together. The President had near-realtime intelligence from Benghazi and Cairo. If he didn't, it's pure incompetence. There's no way he could not have had coverage in those areas. A report last week said flatly that the requests for military relief were denied at the highest levels. The Administration knew as it occured that this was an Al Qeda attack.
They could not have concluded otherwise. They knew from the get-go, they were fucking watching.

Everything they said was a lie. Because they allowed an Al Qeda terrorist attack on American soil through incompetence and foolishness.

So they lied. And jailed a dude for blasphemy.

They should just be able to put that shit together in an afternoon. It'd make someone's bones. Why come they no do?

Posted by: Inspector Asshole at October 17, 2012 01:30 AM (jZn+7)

312 "Liv's think Romney is evil and hateful and rich and horrible. When they see a decent guy that is knowledgable and compassionate they will allow the preference cascade to overtake them.
Posted by: California red"

This is why Romney got such a bounce after the first debate. What people saw was nothing like the BS caricature that they had been fed by the liberal media. The MSM overplayed their "hate Romney" hand and it backfired.

Posted by: nerdygirl at October 17, 2012 01:31 AM (jLiVY)

313 I gotta be honest:

The BOOSH~! question was an awesome question and a blessing in disguise.

A lot of moderates, independents, and Democrats (and all of us vis a vis domestic policy) hated what Bush did over his 8 years, and Romney's answer was tremendously effective in separating the two.

Romney listed 5 points (and there's more than that: remember yesterday's "Reagan foreign policy, not Bush FP"), and TFG only went after 1 of the 5.

Obama has more in common with GWB than Romney. That's partially why Romney may be a great president.

Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 01:32 AM (B/yDO)

314 38

It's never the big lies that get you. All that "the economy would
be a wreck if not for me" BS is to hard to prove cause you got to get
super wonky to prove it wrong.

But the little lies, like that one? The ones you can easily prove are bullshit? Sink a campaign.

Posted by: StuckonStupid at October 17, 2012 12:12 AM (f/0ub)

======
I call those the "ugly ass shoes" lies. OJ in the civil trial, when asked (IIRC) if he owned a pair of the brand of shoe that left a footprint at the scene, said "I would never wear those ugly ass shoes."But someone trawling through the many media appearances OJ had made in the past managed to find a shot of him wearing, yes, the same kind of footwear as those in question.Now, he could have said "Not recently" or even "No". But he had to say "would NEVER wear"...something with a far better chance of being disproved absolutely. (Even with a picture of him wearing them found, it could have been explained away as provided by the program's dresser, not personal property.)
And when that was done, even though having those shoes was but circumstantial evidence on a very minor order, it now became Evidence of Perjury. And THAT trial did not go his way.

Posted by: sistrum at October 17, 2012 01:32 AM (SUlmX)

315 They should just be able to put that shit together in an afternoon. It'd make someone's bones. Why come they no do?
Posted by: Inspector Asshole at October 17, 2012 01:30 AM (jZn+7)

Why do you imagine the press was fooled. Nobody believed the movie lie. Everyone knew it was spin. The Pres, the press, and sadly for them, the American People.

Posted by: Oldcat at October 17, 2012 01:34 AM (rzSn3)

316 299

StPatrick @262, of course I was being completely sarcastic in my use
of "gun nuts". Apologies if there was any misunderstanding. And love
your "armed intelligentsiya" line - excellent!
Not rural, but a
dangerous gun-owning type myself. In fact, hoping that scheduling works
out so that I can take two enthusiastic friends to the range on Friday
to introduce them to the pleasures of the M1 (both kinds), Mosin-Nagant,
1911, Model 66, and XD9. And once the house mod projects are done or
under control, I've noticed it's time to crank up the reloading bench
again and replenish my scary (but shiny and nice) "stockpile" of ammo. I
won't be out of HXP for a while, but look forward to the new twists of
reloading a bottleneck cartridge, as all I've done are handgun calibers
(and 30 carbine, which is basically a handgun round for reloading
purposes).

Posted by: non-purist at October 17, 2012 01:19 AM (UViC2)
.There was no offense to be taken - I was just planting the flag, my friend. When a progtard president has to admit that the 2nd Amendment allows for self-defense, as opposed to their normal puling about hunting or target shooting, we can furl up the flags and leave the battlefield. We've won. It's the 4th quarter. Time to run the ball and drive a couple more touchdowns down their throats to make sure they understand just how complete the victory has been. I'm not rural either, but I recently added a Russian capture k98 to the collection (which is far more modest than yours, congrats on that) which I've yet to shoot. Got some milsurp ammo, should be fun. My Mosin is a 1894 frog receiver rebuilt into a Finn M39 in '42. Who loves bolt guns? We love bolt guns! Do you have a CZ 452?

Posted by: StPatrick_TN at October 17, 2012 01:35 AM (lJJMb)

317
Re: 280

I was a Perry girl too, then fell back for Mitt.
He was also my guy in 07 because I felt he'd be the man we needed.
Alas, McCain won the nom so I voted for him, only because on the morning he announced Sarah I leapt off my bed and jumped for joy.

Posted by: concrete girl at October 17, 2012 01:35 AM (y2Ojs)

318 The United States government sent four US Marshals to pick a dude up for the functional equivalent of blasphemy.

This was part of the coverup. He's willing to jail people for being unpleasant to foreigners just to keep his political ass clean.

It's an ugly, ugly detail.

Posted by: Inspector Asshole at October 17, 2012 01:37 AM (jZn+7)

319 The United States government sent four US Marshals to pick a dude up for the functional equivalent of blasphemy.

This was part of the coverup. He's willing to jail people for being unpleasant to foreigners just to keep his political ass clean.

It's an ugly, ugly detail.
Posted by: Inspector Asshole at October 17, 2012 01:37 AM (jZn+7)

Liberals only mind when they pay the price. Underlings or unknowns don't count.

Posted by: Oldcat at October 17, 2012 01:40 AM (rzSn3)

320 Watching the replay of it....
Comrade Crowley is even worse than I remembered.

Question on now, about the 'inequality in women's pay'.

Now, wasn't there an article...earlier this year...about the lack of women in Barky's white house staff?
And also, that the ones that were there were being paid less than men?

Posted by: wheatie at October 17, 2012 01:40 AM (ipkPX)

321 313
I gotta be honest:

The BOOSH~! question was an awesome question and a blessing in disguise.

Posted by: The Q at October 17, 2012 01:32 AM (B/yDO)

No kidding. The Obama campaign has been trying to paint Romney as a Bush clone since forever. This gave Romney a chance to address the question directly and he hit it out of the park.

Posted by: schizoid at October 17, 2012 01:42 AM (Q9IKH)

322 Question on now, about the 'inequality in women's pay'.

Now, wasn't there an article...earlier this year...about the lack of women in Barky's white house staff?

And also, that the ones that were there were being paid less than men?

Posted by: wheatie at October 17, 2012 01:40 AM (ipkPX)

This whole thing could have been totally destroyed by Mitt, as I'm sure he knows that the 72% pay gap figure is full-on BS, but wisely chose not to attack it. I give him credit for not going after the bogus stat, but it sure would've been fun if he compare his "woman friendly" cabinet to O's WH and campaign staff, just to see the MSM try to spin it.

Posted by: StPatrick_TN at October 17, 2012 01:44 AM (lJJMb)

323 @319

to be fair, the guy MIGHT have been jailed for violating terms of his parole. constitutionally-granted rights can actually be suspended for those on parole/probation...things like hanging out in certain places and engaging in certain constitutionally protected activities are examples of legal activities that can get parole revoked.

if they told this guy he could not make provocative films and he did it to spite them, he sorta deserves to be punished for blatantly flaunting the terms of his parole.

not saying that's what happened, but if it is, then jailing him was fully within their rights.

Posted by: jimi ray at October 17, 2012 01:45 AM (79EF9)

324 Me 'n' Mitt:
Actively rooted against him in the beginning. Found him a creepy RINO. Like I didn't even want to be in the same room with him.
Voted for him in my primary as the lesser evil.
Listless, mostly anti-Obama until the convention. That began the turning point.
Shocked and very pleasantly surprised by the Ryan pick. THAT was the big pivot.
Did a lot of "Oh wow, I didn't know that!" during the primary.
Completely impressed during Debate One, to the point of wanting to jump on the stage and hug him for doing so well.
Tonight: "Hey, you know, he has a pretty sexy voice..."

I mean, that's a pretty impressive sell job in his part.

Posted by: Filly at October 17, 2012 01:47 AM (247Qj)

325 318
The United States government sent four US Marshals to pick a dude up for the functional equivalent of blasphemy.

This was part of the coverup. He's willing to jail people for being
unpleasant to foreigners just to keep his political ass clean.

It's an ugly, ugly detail.

Posted by: Inspector Asshole at October 17, 2012 01:37 AM (jZn+7)

And that, even after they had full knowledge that the "offensive" video had nothing to do with the coordinated assault on the Benghazi consulate! The Maine earthquake was probably the result of a founder spinning in his grave at the absurdity of their whole damned and ridiculous premise.

Posted by: StPatrick_TN at October 17, 2012 01:48 AM (lJJMb)

326 *during the convention, not primary.

Posted by: Filly at October 17, 2012 01:48 AM (247Qj)

327 When Obama said "we will find those responsible" Romney should have said, "yeah, and the first guy you found 'responsible' was an American exercising his First Amendment right to upload a video to youtube."

Posted by: schizoid at October 17, 2012 01:49 AM (Q9IKH)

328 323.....if they told this guy he could not make provocative films and he did it to spite them, he sorta deserves to be punished for blatantly flaunting the terms of his parole.

He had been convicted of fraud, over the internet....and also identity theft.

He wasn't supposed to be going on the internet, as a condition of parole.

It's not known, that he violated that.
His video could've been uploaded by someone else.

Posted by: wheatie at October 17, 2012 01:51 AM (ipkPX)

329 The Obama campaign has been trying to paint Romney as a Bush clone
since forever. This gave Romney a chance to address the question
directly and he hit it out of the park.

Romney has been underexposed, where he can speak for himself without a media filter and editing. Obama has been overexposed since...forever.

I'm not sure the Obama camp has that figured out.

Posted by: @PurpAv at October 17, 2012 01:52 AM (ytJ01)

330 327
When Obama said "we will find those responsible" Romney should have
said, "yeah, and the first guy you found 'responsible' was an American
exercising his First Amendment right to upload a video to youtube."

Posted by: schizoid at October 17, 2012 01:49 AM (Q9IKH)

Agreed. Tough to push that message to the undecideds, however. That's a hard argument to make in 30 seconds, akin to the religious freedom argument against the O-care contraception / sterilization / abortifacient mandate. They can't be done in a soundbite, but I hope the RNC et al. give it a shot, just to prove me wrong. There's a ton of Catholics / evangelicals in Iowa, Ohio, and PA.

Posted by: StPatrick_TN at October 17, 2012 01:53 AM (lJJMb)

331 The video was a Patsy

Posted by: Jimi at October 17, 2012 01:53 AM (6sLo8)

332
StPatrick, amazing that you ask - in fact the only gun (honest, really) that I have on my mental list right now is ..... a CZ 452! Mostly because I am deplorably lax in having only one .22 (a Single Six) - and my oldest brother (the gun brother) always says "you can't have enough .22s".

I figure the 452 would be good cheap rimfire practice for the bolt rifle thing. Thing is, at about $0.17/round for Soviet 7.62X54R milsurp,the "real thing" isn't that expensive either .....

I have several Mosins - all Soviet, two ex-dragoons (pre-1930), an M38.Your Chatellerault/Finn oughta be both high quality and desirable. I refinish my stocks but otherwise try to learn to use them "as is" and as designed - no photos of a 50-cent piece covering my 100-yd groups will be emerging .....

Posted by: non-purist at October 17, 2012 01:54 AM (UViC2)

333 Okay think I found Susan Katz though not 100% sounds like her, looks enough like her that it's a definite maybe
Here at 42: 52 http://tinyurl.com/93mbjqr
Here at Twitter http://tinyurl.com/9hjsax2
Here at her webpage --spoiler--she's a growth coach http://tinyurl.com/8jnk5dt
If so, boy her make-up was a lot better on her webpage

Posted by: blb at October 17, 2012 01:54 AM (4gjb7)

334 @328

thanks for the learnin'. i clearly hadn't done my homework.

sure seems a LOT less potentially defensible now that i know the facts.

and i'm surprised they can totally suspend one's right to even ACCESS the internet! seems pretty draconian, even if they guy had used the internet to do ill in the past. restricting the activities he was engaging in to commit fraud, ok. but access? :/

Posted by: jimi ray at October 17, 2012 01:54 AM (79EF9)

335 What are the odds there will be a raid on the Libyan terrorists before the next debate? It seems like a fairly obvious move given the way O thinks and acts.

Hopefully people in CIA, State or military will find a way to throw a monkey in the wrench, doubt any of them are willing to help O get re-elected.

Posted by: Mayday at October 17, 2012 02:00 AM (F3s39)

336 Didn't read the whole thread but listened live on radio in Hawaii, and the most striking thing to me was Obama's strained voice. Higher pitch than usual, while Romney sounded the same. High pitch under pressure indicates stress on OBummers part or a subconsious <sic> acknowledgement of a lie. A Poker tell.

Posted by: MRB at October 17, 2012 02:02 AM (6d8Dk)

337 332

StPatrick, amazing that you ask - in fact the only gun (honest,
really) that I have on my mental list right now is ..... a CZ 452!
Mostly because I am deplorably lax in having only one .22 (a Single Six)
- and my oldest brother (the gun brother) always says "you can't have
enough .22s".

I figure the 452 would be good cheap rimfire
practice for the bolt rifle thing. Thing is, at about $0.17/round for
Soviet 7.62X54R milsurp,the "real thing" isn't that expensive either
.....

I have several Mosins - all Soviet, two ex-dragoons
(pre-1930), an M38.Your Chatellerault/Finn oughta be both high quality
and desirable. I refinish my stocks but otherwise try to learn to use
them "as is" and as designed - no photos of a 50-cent piece covering my
100-yd groups will be emerging .....

Posted by: non-purist at October 17, 2012 01:54 AM (UViC2)

At this point, I've got one of everything (almost, but you're even closer), so take this seriously - the 452 Lux is my favorite gun, period, bar none. Go out today and get a CZ 452 - it's cheap, and shoots with $1k plus guns with little to no mods - it will run neck-and-neck with an Annie all day. If you like iron sights (as I do) get the Lux - the stock is perfect for a cheekweld with the low mount irons, and the ladder rear works as advertised. If you like optics, get the 452 American (no irons, but no drop on the stock, so perfect eye-relief for a scope). Either way, get one yesterday, as the market is drying up as CZ is putting out the "improved" 455. It's certainly improved for calibers other than .22lr, but for .22, the 452 is better according to the experts at rimfirecentral.com. One caveat - make sure if you're scoping it that you get the correct rings - most 452s have an 11mm mount, while others (e.g. the American) have "English" (I think 3/

mounts. Yes, I love parentheses and em-dashes. Bedtime, get one now, goodnight.

Posted by: StPatrick_TN at October 17, 2012 02:05 AM (lJJMb)

338 and i'm surprised they can totally suspend one's right to even ACCESS the internet!

Tech access restrictions have been going on since the Kevin Mitnick and Captain Crunch phone phreaking era before there even was an internet.

2600 rulz!

Posted by: @PurpAv at October 17, 2012 02:06 AM (ytJ01)

339 Romney did well in a debate format stacked against him, with a liberal audience, a liberal moderator, and left-wing activists plants asking questions.

Obama should have crushed him.
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at October 17, 2012 12:29 AM (ZPrif)

What's ironic is that since nobody in the US except libearals care about assault bans, asking Romney about it is a waste of time. There's nothing to be gained by pinning him down on that.

Even if you disagree, it is a meh. Jobs, or Foreign Policy, you might trap him. Abortioin or Gun controi, never,

Posted by: Oldcat at October 17, 2012 02:17 AM (rzSn3)

340 Mitt doesn't have to be perfect 100% of the time, but damn close to it. Let's face it, he is up against some pretty tough odds. Everyone here knows that Obama has been a terrible, terrible president but he has still been winning the race the entire time - even though he is incompetent. Mitt will need to run the table with OH, NC, VA and FL to win. The undecided voters in those states are not political junkis....
Posted by: BHO at October 17, 2012 12:48 AM (eD7No)

They aren't polling three of those four states because Romney has won them already.

Posted by: Oldcat at October 17, 2012 02:18 AM (rzSn3)

341 I just now seached "cnn" on yahoo to find out who won the debate. The 1st hit was "barackobama.com" with the headline Obama wins debate

Posted by: steve at October 17, 2012 02:19 AM (AQfbp)

342 If I may bastardize a famed woman's libby kind of quote: "To get ahead in the eyes of the media, a Romney has to work twice as hard as an Obama. Fortunately, it is not difficult."

Posted by: sistrum at October 17, 2012 02:34 AM (SUlmX)

343 So this means that Romney's uptick in the polls should continue apace.

In other news, Romney's numbers from earlierare virtually unchanged on Intrade, so the debate was definitely NOT won by O.

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at October 17, 2012 02:40 AM (KL49F)

344 The real poll is happening now and will be counted on Nov 6.

That is all that matters.

Obama is going down in a landslide.

Posted by: currently at October 17, 2012 02:57 AM (flA6l)

345 As for the babe in the red skirt in the background on Hannity:

PICS OR IT DID NOT HAPPEN.

Posted by: logprof comes up with this too late, alas at October 17, 2012 03:39 AM (jKE+Z)

346 Posted by: currently at October 17, 2012 02:57 AM (flA6l)

ITA about Romney winning in a landslide. These polls have been oversampling Dems all along so Mitt's been leadning ALL this time; now that Mitt is visibly leading, imagine what his REAL lead is! I like the visible lead, too, because it encourages that cascade

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at October 17, 2012 03:50 AM (KL49F)

347 137
OK. So I am a chick (as my moniker indicates). Do any non-neurotic
non-feminazi chicks out there actually feel oppressed by the man? I'm
serious.

Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at October 17, 2012 12:33 AM (6zgse)

At the DMV, yep. Doesn't everyone?

Posted by: Amy Shulkusky at October 17, 2012 06:48 AM (uMfFZ)

348 The point is that Obama admitted last night that he knew the day after the attack that it was an act of terror. Yet 5 days later he sent Susan Rice out to tell the American people on 5 different media venues that it was a spontaneous attack in response to a stupid video. By admitting to his next day knowledge Obama has implicated himself in the cover-up. In coordination with the campaign to reelect him - the president conspired to mislead us.

Posted by: ljm at October 17, 2012 07:17 AM (oDtjh)

349 279
lotta 'ettes in here...

still. I'mnot putting any pants on.

Posted by: garrett at October 17, 2012 01:11 AM (HWUYs)

That's OK, I don't have my glasses, so I can't see nuthin, no how ;-P

Posted by: Amy Shulkusky at October 17, 2012 08:24 AM (uMfFZ)

350 So...Romney won decisively on all the issues but lost the debate?
Explain, please.

Posted by: sgmstv at October 17, 2012 08:29 AM (T0dFH)

351 We've got a lot of dumb MFers in this country.

Posted by: fused at October 17, 2012 09:07 AM (PnNAy)

352 Hmm. These instant polls seem to be saying that Obama may have won this little debate battle (on some points), but Romney is winning the war.

Posted by: Restless at October 17, 2012 09:44 AM (puVrC)

353 308
301...And I've seen nasty, foul, mean-spirited behavior from groups
of women toward someone they didn't like, that I have never seen from
men.

Oh yeah, definitely.

I hate that.

Raised with boys...I guess I missed out on the 'bitch classes' that some women seem to have attended.

But I also learned how to break someone's nose with one punch.

Posted by: wheatie at October 17, 2012 01:28 AM (ipkPX)

Me, too: brothers, no sisters. Sons, no daughters. I know men. I like men. I sort of think like a man (and recent studies show the mothers of son's get some testosterone via placentas). I actually do not "get" some women who play games, etc. or who back stab each other. Men like me because of that (after being blinded by my aging supermodel exterior). My husband, who was really blinded as I was only 22 when he met me, said he liked the way I thought and was not a phoney, like his former girlfriends all over parts of Long Island. He had never met a Southern girl from the SEC, bless his heart. He did not know what hit him.I have noted, in this experiment of life where all people I meet are studied, women who have both sisters and daughters are the most confused bunch about men. They honestly think their brand of handbag matters to men (I guess) and flock to parties selling the off brands but think they are getting real designer bags. My sons and husband would not know a designer bag if it ran over them. Men notice two things: exterior and your character (if you are a Cutter woman vs Meghan Kelly or any other FOX reporter). They notice if you have a sense of humor. My criteria for a good man? Apparently, based on who I chose: sweet, listens to me, sense of humor (very important), handsome (this was a bonus point but not the most important), Christian, a provider like my Dad who would protect me (hey, I ain't no libber and can protect myself, but I like it), and he liked babies and showed it when we were dating (single guys: this is as important as liking puppies).
I have never had a problem with men making more money than me, as I was a nurse and if it happened I was not aware of it. I also did not take any nonsense from doctors, lawyers or Indian Chiefs. I don't care who you are, I will tell you what I think and not shy away like Barky running to his stool. I am not sure if it was ingrained as the daughter of a US Marine, genetic, or environmental and playing sports with brothers and the friends of brothers, but I have always had men friends and don't get this "inferior" stuff. Maybe men did get paid more, once, than women...but I think this is a stat that confused wimmens keep harping on along with their free birth control. I am surprised they don't claim voter suppression and laws forcing them to cover up the legs of their piano as in the Victorian days.

Posted by: ChristyBlinky, unbanned, ready to get this done at October 17, 2012 10:43 AM (baL2B)

354 Um, excuse me but CNN, the source of almost all these flash polls, acknowleged that the sampling was designed to be split evenly three ways among Dems, Goppers and Indies. They also acknowledged that this was NOT reflective of the actual electorate which leans heavily toward registered Dems. One must therefore look at these results as inherently skewed to the right by design. Why would CNN do that, I wonder?
Karma is not in the GOPs favor, nor are the fundamentals of the electoral math. In the end, Romney din't do jack.

Posted by: demman at October 17, 2012 12:00 PM (c7c5n)

355 Jimi Ray:
if they told this guy he could not make provocative films and he did it to spite them, he sorta deserves to be punished for blatantly flaunting the terms of his parole.

not saying that's what happened, but if it is, then jailing him was fully within their rights.***

How is that condition legal as a parole term? You are far too accepting of unreasonable strictures.

Posted by: Klawnet's iPhone at October 17, 2012 12:35 PM (AYfPj)

356 Romney has been mowing down the perceived Obama advantages like a check list. The only one really left is national security, and thats the next debate. Libya ought to be fleshed out further, and its gonna take a lot more moderator help to whitewash it on that stage.

Regarding the media and the moderators... how have we gotta this far into the election with two debates and nobody has asked Obama to outline any of his plans? He's the friggin sitting president, and all the oxygen has gone to forcing Mitt to defend his plans. Whats the presidents big picture tax plan? Deficit? Entitlements? The whole thing is farce, but that is the 9 trillion pound elephant in the room. Seriously- 'Mr President, what do you plan to do with entitlements?' See, not very hard.

Posted by: Mark Buehner at October 17, 2012 01:08 PM (H4otT)

357 How's that bindery-womeny thingie workin out for ya, Mitt?

Posted by: Leigh at October 17, 2012 01:19 PM (OkFCC)

358 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

Posted by: steevy at October 17, 2012 02:12 PM (6o4Fb)

Processing 0.07, elapsed 0.0722 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0186 seconds, 367 records returned.
Page size 221 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.

CBS Poll: Romney Wins 65-34 on Economy;CNN Poll: Romney Wins 54-40 on Economy,49-46 on Health Care,51-44 on Taxes,59-36 on Deficit,49-46 on Leadership,All in Favor of Romney

Comments

CBS Poll: Romney Wins 65-34 on Economy;
CNN Poll: Romney Wins 54-40 on Economy,
49-46 on Health Care,
51-44 on Taxes,
59-36 on Deficit,
49-46 on Leadership,
All in Favor of Romney