The Biden v. Ryan Debate Thread

"mitt romney's a car guy."

A MAN'S MAN

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbrchgmEHR1qz581wo1_400.gif

hypnotic

lol ryan trying to say romney misspoke when he he said let detroit go bankrupt IN A NEWSPAPER EDITORIAL

That was so absurd.

it was a typo

I'm somewhat amazed Glenn Greenwald deigned to write about the debate. I've never linked to him before, but I think this is pretty accurate in terms of how hard it is to know what the independent/undecided/whatever reaction to Biden last night will be:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/12/vice-president-debate-reaction

wow, kinda shocked he wrote something like that

a C-SPAN caller:

http://pdfob.tumblr.com/post/33408636830/a-caller-on-c-span-after-the-vp-debate-classic

Dying at that.

greenwald finally corrupted by the washington media elite rip

lol ryan trying to say romney misspoke when he he said let detroit go bankrupt IN A NEWSPAPER EDITORIAL

he didn't just say it in a newspaper editorial...that was the title! was disappointed biden didn't jump on that.

not only is it hack political writing, but it's not even particularly good hack political writing!

For years, Paul Ryan has been the shining champion of some really terrible ideas, and of a dystopian vision of the political commonwealth in which the poor starve and the elderly die ghastly, impoverished deaths, while all the essential elements of a permanent American oligarchy were put in place. This has garnered him loving notices from a lot of people who should have known better. The ideas he could explain were bad enough, but the profound ignorance he displayed on Thursday night on a number of important questions, including when and where the United States might wind up going to war next, and his blithe dismissal of any demand that he be specific about where he and his running mate are planning to take the country generally, was so positively terrifying that it calls into question Romney's judgment for putting this unqualified greenhorn on the ticket at all. Joe Biden laughed at him? Of course, he did. The only other option was to hand him a participation ribbon and take him to Burger King for lunch.

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/paul-ryan-debate-joe-biden-13626962#ixzz2963FWxlO

some good burnin' in there

http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2012/10/12/the-veep-debate-and-what-commentators-dont-understand-about-who-watched-it/

Here’s some breaking news: the kind of people who choose to watch a vice-presidential debate instead of baseball or football or a cooking show are not sensitive souls who curl up into a ball at the first sign of disagreement between politicians. People who choose to watch political conflict can deal with it. Those who can’t—or just aren’t interested in the first place—are watching something else. Research by political scientists Kevin Arceneaux and Martin Johnson shows this.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbrafefpqw1qbiko3o1_250.png

weirdly my students were kind of psyched to watch this.

lol

I knew Biden won when all Hannity and McConnell could say about the debate was how mean he had been to Eddie Munster

Kevin Arceneaux and Martin Johnson--oh, they're good (to quote John Travolta in Saturday Night Fever).

A second Greenwald post, about Raddatz's typical MSM-journalist assumptions (Soc Sec & Medicare are going broke). I though thes closing grafs were interesting too:

One more note about Raddatz: near the end of the debate, she asked the two Catholic candidates how their religion influences their views on abortion. This was a reasonable question unto itself, but also reflects standard DC assumptions on these issues.

It is often noted that the Catholic Church stridently opposes reproductive rights. But it is almost never noted that the Church just as stridently opposes US militarism and its economic policies that continuously promote corporate cronyism over the poor. Too much emphasis on that latter fact might imperil the bipartisan commitment to those policies, and so discussion of religious belief is typically confined to the safer arena of social issues. That the Church has for decades denounced the US government's military aggression and its subservience to the wealthiest is almost always excluded from establishment journalistic circles, even as its steadfast opposition to abortion and gay rights is endlessly touted.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/12/raddatz-debate-objectivity

Martha Raddatz's ABC segments are often unwatchable: she so identifies with the military industrial establishment.

if the catholic church wanted to promote its steadfast opposition to military aggression above its views on birth control, it wouldn't need a media mandate

I'm not sure; Obama/Biden's steadfast opposition to Big Bird's death is more media-friendly than their presumed (but nearly silent) opposition to climate catastrophe.

if obama/biden wanted to promote its steadfast opposite to climate catastrophe, it wouldn't need a media mandate

maybe ppl just like sex police more than assistance vs those who will starve or drown them.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/the-vice-presidential-debate-joe-biden-was-right-to-laugh-20121012

Fun with details and some corny jokes

One last thing, did you get this song stuck in your head last night?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9Mse62NFl4

Specifically around the 3:20 mark?

Man is thread quiet today: the opposite of the aftermath of last week's debate.

bucketofwarmpiss-itis

I hope Barry can reach even close to the high bar Joe just set

Obama doesn't do this, ever:

http://images.politico.com/global/2012/10/121011_biden_arms_debate_ap_605.jpg

Wish he would.

Man is thread quiet today: the opposite of the aftermath of last week's debate.

My guess: uncertainty about what's happening. Those (like me) who want Obama to win are experiencing something akin to the horror-film trope where you walk slowly through the empty house, waiting for you're not sure what. (Does not apply to iatee, lagoon, and Shakey Mo Collier.) The few posters who desperately want him to lose are biding their time.

I like that Biden's been so out-and-out disdainful/incredulous, because it gives Obama room to be a 'good cop', with extra zingers. That tumbleweed sound emanating from "independent" trolls eg. my mom was also quite nice today. IMO, independents don't generate right-wing talking points.

Does anyone here actually desperately want him to lose? I thought the Morbius end of the discussion was on some
"They're both as bad as each other!" shit.

was just about to say the same thing.

i srsly doubt that a single non-lurking ilxor is sincerely rooting for romney to win.

Maybe "desperately"'s an overstatement. But I don't think Morbius's indifference to Obama/Romney translates to indifference over who wins--he can speak for himself, but I think he'd get much more enjoyment out of a Romney win because of the fallout on the other side.

Morbz wants Romney to win because he wants things to get so bad America has some collective "scales falling from the eyes" moment

no, too stoopid a fucking country for that

i think there's truth that obama, as a black man, couldn't do the things biden did last night without america losing its shit

yep, though very few people could do what biden did last night. biden's rep as a guy who says inappropriate things and has gaffes and speaks his mind (or whatever the rep is) actually plays to his favor in debates because hey, it's just joe being joe. i don't think anyone expected (or expects) obama to do what biden did last night, they just expect him to not look like he just got in a terrible argument with his wife that involved the smashing of a wedding photo against a wall, and to speak up and make a few good points every once in a while.

Yes. He's got four days to figure out some workable middle ground.

I agree with somebody I read who said the town-hall format will be tough for Obama, or at least tough if you need to push back some. That's where you're supposed to do what Clinton did (so well) in '92, remember questioner's names and get all Oprah when necessary. The first debate was where he had the freedom to play completely to the camera (audience present, but instructed not to react) and be a little more aggressive. Town halls are different.

Of course Obama will do well next debate, just like Biden "won" last night. That's been his "narrative" since 2007: after listless performances, he gets even.

biden's rep as a guy who says inappropriate things and has gaffes and speaks his mind (or whatever the rep is) actually plays to his favor in debates because hey, it's just joe being joe.

ya this is key & i think it applies in general at this point. i wonder if one of the reasons he was picked is because he essentially has carte blanche to say any old shit and everyone just goes "ahh, that joe!"

If we stop watching cable news or reading Nate Silver, it's still amazing how well how predictable this race has been. Obama and Romney are now neck in neck -- same as it ever was in July and August. Obama stank in the first debate, his veep picked up the slack, and will likely rally next time. The horserace part of this shit is so godddamn stupid that it corrupts everyone who follows -- and I don't exclude myself.

it's still amazing how well how predictable this race has been

Could not disagree more with this. I was surprised by Romney's level of ineptitude as a candidate, surprised when Obama began to pull away (without any major changes in economic conditions), and right now I'm baffled by this latest turn of events. I'm surprised by things all the time. You and iatee are not.

well, no, I WAS surprised at how well Obama was polling from the end of August through most of September. I figured it couldn't last because Romney would at some point get the convention bump he didn't get.

btw because of the, well, precarious nature of Florida right now I'm probably going to follow Chomsky's advice.