Debates: Obama vs Romney, Round 1

[DarrinS]

lol Darrin watches MSNBC

I did tonight and it was delicious.

[Clipper Nation]

Obama must have lost his script.

Obama had the worst presidential debate performance in my lifetime.

LOL at Y:lolni suddenly coming out of hiding when his boy Willard is now only seen as 98% idiotic and unelectable instead of 100%....

[hitmanyr2k]

This was Rocky III all over again. Romney came into that debate as if he were training like Clubber Lang. He's hungry for that title. Obama came in like he didn't give a fuck riding momentum and expecting an easy ride. Romney didn't get the knockout but he landed some hard blows. I'm interested to see how Obama will come out in the 2nd debate. He'll be on his home turf in the town hall format because he needs that audience interaction to get the juices flowing. He knows how to relate to people. Interacting with people is not Romney's style. He's stiff and awkward and couldn't fake empathy to save his life. He's more of a boardroom cutthroat type which is why this debate was right up his alley.

[ChumpDumper]

I did tonight and it was delicious.Red Team!

[Clipper Nation]

As soon as the GOP runs a candidate that has a realistic immigration, tax, social security, spending, energy, and insurance policy we'll talk...

http://www.dvorak.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/ron-paul.jpg

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

LOL at Y:lolni suddenly coming out of hiding when his boy Willard is now only seen as 98% idiotic and unelectable instead of 100%....
:lmao

[hitmanyr2k]

http://www.dvorak.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/ron-paul.jpg

He did say realistic :lol

[Koolaid_Man]

Even the loons over at MSNBC concede that Romney won.

when Obama's wins I'm jacking off all over my computer screen; specifically on your avatar...wish I could bust one in your eye...

[DarrinS]

Oh no, tingles has lost that loving feeling.

I hate when he does that.


Z303YXnQDKU

[DarrinS]

when Obama's wins I'm jacking off all over my computer screen; specifically on your avatar...wish I could bust one in your eye...

Uh, eww

Will you clean yourself with Obama food stamps?

[ChumpDumper]

Uh, ewwWell, that's what you're doing now.

[Clipper Nation]

when Obama's wins I'm jacking off all over my computer screen; specifically on your avatar...wish I could bust one in your eye...

:lol 'Sup Homeland Stout...

[Nbadan]

This needs its own thread...while not a Ron Paul hater, I believe his gold policy is stupid, so is over fiscal easing though...so far, despite many posts here to the contrary, inflation has been managable....could that be because of 2% growth.....

in Fact...2-3% growth used to be considered a healthy economy...while 5% growth would do wonders for the 8+ million unemployed, it would also be inflationary..

[DarrinS]

Well, that's what you're doing now.

Not so much. I'm not that big of a Romney fan.

Obama just sucks

[ChumpDumper]

fap fap fap

[SA210]

His affair aside...John Edwards could have taught Obama about having some balls and debating opponents.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItdN2BYwA-8


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbhVFAAVJ98


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bi3_CCLv4No

[DarrinS]

Obama is not used to being challenged. What does that say about our press?

[SA210]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8GiLTOz23w

And this one was just Gold..was the most progressive candidate, first bold plans that shaped that entire 2008 platform
(but of course Obama then fucked it up after copying his speeches and policies)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlGlQrqP7PE

He fucked a stupid bitch and that somehow made him unfit to run a country lol. Well how's Obama's nicing opponents to death working out? lol

And most importantly, Poverty hasn't been made an issue ever since

[Clipper Nation]

This needs its own thread...while not a Ron Paul hater, I believe his gold policy is stupid, so is over fiscal easing though...so far, despite many posts here to the contrary, inflation has been managable....could that be because of 2% growth.....

in Fact...2-3% growth used to be considered a healthy economy...while 5% growth would do wonders for the 8+ million unemployed, it would also be inflationary..
Any inflationary monetary policy is morally wrong and hurts the purchasing power of the middle class, tbh....

There's a reason why the gold standard is not only now in the platform of a major American political party but also under consideration in Germany and China: it's because people are beginning to realize how stupid it is to let people keep printing money without any limits whatsoever...

[Nbadan]

There's a reason why the gold standard is not only now in the platform of a major American political party but also under consideration in Germany and China: it's because people are beginning to realize how stupid it is to let people keep printing money without any limits whatsoever...

I don't consider the tea party a 'political party'...they are a well-funded, anti-tax the rich wing of the Republican party who like every movement to each party is to easily compromised.....the tea party is dangerous though...not as a movement, but to the next 10-2o years of the GOP's and the US's future...

[DarrinS]

We have a couple more debates to look forward to and I expect Obama to have a much stronger showing next time. He may want to work on his jaw clenching and looks of contempt -- not flattering.

[Juggity]

Obama is not used to being challenged. What does that say about our press?

^ :lol is this a joke?

He's been challenged at every turn by congressional obstructionists for years. Their stated goal is to make him a one term president, not to serve the country, etc.

[Clipper Nation]

I don't consider the tea party a 'political party'...

The GOP is a political party though, and the gold standard is now a plank in their platform....

[Nbadan]

There's a reason why the gold standard is not only now in the platform of a major American political party but also under consideration in Germany and China: it's because people are beginning to realize how stupid it is to let people keep printing money without any limits whatsoever...

I'll believe it when I see it...not gonna happen

[Nbadan]

The GOP is a political party though, and the gold standard is now a plank in their platform....

So is God.

[Clipper Nation]

So is God.
Isn't God also mentioned in your beloved DNC's platform?

[DarrinS]

^ :lol is this a joke?

He's been challenged at every turn by congressional obstructionists for years. Their stated goal is to make him a one term president, not to serve the country, etc.


I think I was pretty specific about the press. Yes, he was challenged by Repubs on a massive govt takeover of health care when the country was hurting for jobs.

[Clipper Nation]

I'll believe it when I see it...not gonna happen

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2012/09/24/signs-of-the-gold-standard-are-emerging-from-germany/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2012/10/01/signs-of-the-gold-standard-emerging-in-china/

[Jacob1983]

I laugh at people that complain about the GOP doing whatever it takes to make Obama a one term president. Hypocritical much? Besides, the party that is not in power always tries to hurt the party that is in power. That's American politics, brah.

[Nbadan]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2012/09/24/signs-of-the-gold-standard-are-emerging-from-germany/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2012/10/01/signs-of-the-gold-standard-emerging-in-china/

Op eds are not policy...Germany and China are as vulnerable to the world banks as the U.S...

[SA210]

Reality Check: Who Is Behind The Commission on Presidential Debates? Are The Debates Rigged?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDQsIKbQLFY

[Nbadan]

Isn't God also mentioned in your beloved DNC's platform?

Dems remove all references to 'God' from 2012 party platform

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765601592/Dems-remove-all-references-to-God-from-2012-party-platform.html

[z0sa]

I thought it was tactical by Obama

:lol unintentional gold

[Nbadan]

:lol unintentional gold

Gotta give credit to Mitt though, I haven't seen anyone duck and roll like that since OJ...

[z0sa]

Gotta give credit to Mitt though, I haven't seen anyone duck and roll like that since OJ...

I actually don't think he did too much ducking and rolling, at least not more than any politician ever does. The ducking and rolling will be next debate since Obama has to do better IMHO. For example, Romney doesn't have a national plan for replacing Obamacare, but he wants to leave it to state legislatures, not Capitol Hill, so it's not really a duck n roll. More like just a straight up I don't know we'll find out later :lol Kinda reminds me of Hope n Change :lol

[DMC]

We have a couple more debates to look forward to and I expect Obama to have a much stronger showing next time. He may want to work on his jaw clenching and looks of contempt -- not flattering.

He needs to revert to his 2008 move of looking down his nose at his opponent during the discussion instead of looking at the camera or the audience.

There's a major issue in having a debate with the President of the US. You cannot tell him to shut up, you cannot just cut him off even though that old coot tried a couple of times, and the roll eyes by coot was unbecoming of a host.

The "3 minutes total" speech and subsequent question lasted about 3 minutes.

[Nbadan]

I actually don't think he did too much ducking and rolling, at least not more than any politician ever does. The ducking and rolling will be next debate since Obama has to do better IMHO. For example, Romney doesn't have a national plan for replacing Obamacare, but he wants to leave it to state legislatures, not Capitol Hill, so it's not really a duck n roll. More like just a straight up I don't know we'll find out later :lol Kinda reminds me of Hope n Change :lol

I'm not sure how you can say that with a straight face...many of Romney's finer points tonight were quite contrary to the policies his been campaign under....

[Jacob1983]

I was thinking what would happen if Obama and Romney went out for drinks and buffalo wings after the debate but then I remembered that Romney is a Mormon. However, Romney is filthy rich and might have a drink every once in a while.

[ElNono]

Dan in full spin that shit mode...

[z0sa]

I'm not sure how you can say that with a straight face...many of Romney's finer points tonight were quite contrary to the policies his been campaign under....

I know I know, if someone says anything even remotely resembling a compliment for "the other guy" it's joke material. Like I said earlier, dude is a fuckhead, for a variety of reasons. Doesn't change my opinion about him ducking and rolling anything in this debate. Like I also said/implied, next debate I'm sure Blue Team will be calling him out on a few things that will actually force some ducks and rolls. Obama just didn't bring it tonight.

[Nbadan]

Dan in full spin that shit mode...

Call it spin if you want, but the GOP will really have to stretch the context to find gold material in Obama's performance tonight...while Romney..he was gold..

[ElNono]

This is what I expect in the next couple of days:

Option A) Polls tick up for Mitt a little and the media goes full blast on the "comeback" narrative

Option B) Polls don't move or move towards Barry and the media goes full blast on the "what's wrong with the GOP" narrative

[z0sa]

I was thinking what would happen if Obama and Romney went out for drinks and buffalo wings after the debate but then I remembered that Romney is a Mormon. However, Romney is filthy rich and might have a drink every once in a while.

something along the lines of ":lol America" while Obama smoked a stogie and Romney sipped his bottled natural spring water.

[ElNono]

Call it spin if you want, but the GOP will really have to stretch the context to find gold material in Obama's performance tonight...while Romney..he was gold..

Don't think you posted this much on a thread since the last election, tbh

[Nbadan]

This is what I expect in the next couple of days:

Option A) Polls tick up for Mitt a little and the media goes full blast on the "comeback" narrative

Option B) Polls don't move or move towards Barry and the media goes full blast on the "what's wrong with the GOP" narrative

Romney is on life support, so any uptick will seem like a gain to the punditry...

[Nbadan]

Don't think you posted this much on a thread since the last election, tbh

I've been busy. but it's election time!

[DMX7]

^ :lol is this a joke?

He's been challenged at every turn by congressional obstructionists for years. Their stated goal is to make him a one term president, not to serve the country, etc.

Exactly. He was probably shocked at how many times Romney agreed with him on policy issues. The differences almost seemed manufactured with a few exceptions, of course.

[Jacob1983]

Obamney!

[Mikesatx]

Obama has been sheltered by the media since his first run in the primaries. He has proven that if the topics are given and his words scripted he is masterful. If he has to think on his feet there is a huge drop off. I thought he was weak at the convention but it was overshadowed mainly by Clinton. Obama can not win these debates talking about the issues. Expect to see the talking points from Obama if Romney is able to repond he should do well. It is scary to think how much influence the debate moderators could have in the coming debates.

[Nbadan]

M itt Romney Gives Obama All The Lies He Needs to Hang Him With



Mitt Romney’s lie based strategy couldn’t measure up to Obama, and gave the president all the rope he needs to hang the Republican nominee.

The first question was about jobs, and Obama framed the question as about the future direction of the country. Romney starts off with an immediate lie that he is not going to cut taxes on the rich, and launched into his stump speech five point plan that provides no details. Eight minutes into the debate, Romney’s main pitch was “trust me” on the economy. (Romney looks nervous and like he might throw up.) Romney then broke off a lie and said that he doesn’t have a $5 trillion tax cut. Romney then tried to paint himself as the candidate of the middle class, with the claim that middle income families are being crushed under Obama. Romney promises to drill on government land for oil and natural gas, and touts drill, baby drill. Romney sprinkled a little fairy dust and claimed that he isn’t raising taxes on the middle class. Obama hits Romney by telling the truth that Romney has been pushing a $5 trillion tax cut. Obama blasts Romney for not delivering specifics on what deductions and loopholes he would close.

It took less than 16 minutes for Romney lose his cool and interrupt the moderator. Romney followed up by contradicting his own running mate’s claim that Romney is going to cut taxes 20% across the board for all income earners. Obama brought Romney back to reality by telling him that his tax plan doesn’t add up. Obama touted cutting taxes 18 times, and cutting taxes for the 98%.

Obama hit Romney for defining millionaires and billionaires is small business. Mitt Romney delivered some highly deceiving statistics about small businesses. According to Washington Monthly the Romney/Republican definition includes, “Many of those 750,000 small businesses aren’t small at all. Some, like Bechtel Corporation, are positively enormous. The Democratic and Republican figures come from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation. But numerous think tanks and government organizations have examined the data and come to similar conclusions: First, that letting the Bush tax cuts on the top two brackets of “small-business” income would impact a tiny percentage of those businesses; and second, that many of the “small businesses” that would be impacted are actually giant companies — which explains why such a tiny fraction of them can account for half of small business income.”

-snip-

Full article here: http://www.politicususa.com/mitt-romney-obama-lies-hang.html

[angrydude]

Democrats response: if you don't agree with me you're a liar

[Jacob1983]

a bigot, homophobe, and a racist.

[InRareForm]

How do Democrats ever lose elections? Promise everything and say tax the rich. Foolproof strategy.

[Jacob1983]

When Democrats lose elections particularly presidential elections, they get ass whooped by Republicans. Just sayin'. Republicans suck ass just as much as Democrats but Nixon, Reagan, and Bush 41 all won in land slides.

[Wild Cobra]

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/251161_452847431425614_614598763_n.jpg
Trying to give us all alcohol poisoning?

[Jacob1983]

http://dollarvigilante.com/sites/default/files/images/Shhh.jpeg

[SA210]

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/548743_285677228198944_176508529_n.jpg

[rascal]

The fallacy with Romney's plan is the rich don't hire with lower taxes. They have had lower taxes since the Bush tax cuts and have not increased hiring. Taxes don't make a big impact on hiring.

[rascal]

The voucher system for medicare. Can someone explain this.

Seems to me this will eventually phase out the current medicare system. can medical providers opt out of the current Medicare system when the voucher system gets implemented? Do the wealthy get higher vouchers than the middle and lower classes? All those under 55 this will affect you.

[CosmicCowboy]

The voucher system for medicare. Can someone explain this.

Seems to me this will eventually phase out the current medicare system. can medical providers opt out of the current Medicare system when the voucher system gets implemented? Do the wealthy get higher vouchers than the middle and lower classes? All those under 55 this will affect you.

Of course we will get higher vouchers than the regular people. We paid more taxes and deserve better health care....:lol

[CosmicCowboy]

Gotta give credit to Mitt though, I haven't seen anyone duck and roll like that since OJ...

:lmao

Talk about ducking and rolling...Obama gets asked what he is going to do about jobs and he totally ignores the question and talks about education instead...Jim Leher was an awful moderator and Obama rolled him.

[rascal]

Of course we will get higher vouchers than the regular people. We paid more taxes and deserve better health care....:lol

So healthcare is for the rich and the rest can go fend for yourselves.

[rascal]

Of course we will get higher vouchers than the regular people. We paid more taxes and deserve better health care....:lol

WE You making more than 1/4 million a year?

[CosmicCowboy]

So healthcare is for the rich and the rest can go fend for yourselves.

:lol

Anyone that stupid should be denied healthcare and just allowed to die.

[Yonivore]

LOL at Y:lolni suddenly coming out of hiding when his boy Willard is now only seen as 98% idiotic and unelectable instead of 100%....
Who's in hiding?

I get criticized for only coming out during the election cycle (untrue) so, I demonstrate I'm able to let you guys wallow around in your own vomit for a while and I get accused of hiding.

98% idiotic. Obama showed he is completely without a clue on his own policies. All we heard were the same old tired rhetoric he's managed to commit to memory. Hell, even "Tingles" Matthews and "Million Dollar" Maher wondered what the fuck happened to The One. It was fun to watch Obama get what I knew he would in a forum where he didn't have the benefit of a teleprompter. So, I thought I'd drop in and rub some noses in it. Worst Presidential debate performance in my lifetime. As one columnist put it, he made Jimmy Carter look presidential -- and that's an insult to Jimmy Carter.

:lmao

[Drachen]

Sorry for the late response, bad wording. According to many on the right, CNN stands for Communist news network and is super left wing. Well, they are not saying that "their" guy won. They aren't even mincing words. It was straight up "romney won".

[MannyIsGod]

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/548743_285677228198944_176508529_n.jpg

lol slave

[clambake]

how was the debate?

[MannyIsGod]

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/

[CosmicCowboy]

how was the debate?

Here is the cliff notes version

dKMUHcgsbag

[clambake]

are you saying mitt won the debate?

[CosmicCowboy]

are you saying mitt won the debate?

Hell, even Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Michael Moore, etc. are saying Obama got his butt kicked.

[clambake]

Hell, even Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Michael Moore, etc. are saying Obama got his butt kicked.

they're not on fox.....so i don't get to hear them.

you sayin that mitt could win based on this?

[CosmicCowboy]

they're not on fox.....so i don't get to hear them.

you sayin that mitt could win based on this?

I doubt it, but here are the results of an overnight CNN poll...


Denver, Colorado (CNN) – Two-thirds of people who watched the first presidential debate think that Republican nominee Mitt Romney won the showdown, according to a nationwide poll conducted Wednesday night.

According to a CNN/ORC International survey conducted right after the debate, 67% of debate watchers questioned said that the Republican nominee won the faceoff, with one in four saying that President Barack Obama was victorious.

"No presidential candidate has topped 60% in that question since it was first asked in 1984," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

While nearly half of debate watchers said the showdown didn't make them more likely to vote for either candidate, 35% said the debate made them more likely to vote for Romney while only 18% said the faceoff made them more likely to vote to re-elect the president.

[CosmicCowboy]

Michael Moore had some pretty funny tweets...


"Get This Obama spoke FOUR minutes longer than Romney did tonight! Didn't feel that way, did it? That sorta says it all."


"If Romney keeps this up...Obama is going to vote for him!"


"Is Bill Clinton coming in to sub next quarter? O! Wake up! Attack! That is not Joh McCain over on that podium!"


"This is what happens when u pick John Kerry as your debate coach."

[boutons_deux]

Many commentators said the challenger often "wins" the first debate.

Barry's biggest problem was not challenging Gecko's repeated lies.

Gecko denied he'd cut taxes by $5T, but his 20% tax cut for all brackets does exactly that over 10 years. And alleged deficit-hawk Ryan's twice-passed budget plan increases the deficit by about the same amount.

[DarrinS]

How Obama was Clobbered

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-hill/how-obama-was-crushed_b_1938118.html




If you believe Barack Obama distinguished himself favorably in the first debate, you won't like the following rampage one bit. Those who judge debates on quality of information and truthfulness might have kept different score. But in the realm of making an impression, and in winning the lightning-quick emotional judgments that people make of each other, Obama suffered from ineloquence, hesitation, rambling, old material (the grandmother again, really?), and inadvertent signals of weakness.

Obama's painful defeat was foreshadowed by the president's first response, when he utterly ignored moderator Jim Lehrer's question and delivered a prepared opening statement. All political debaters bring prepared material to the podium. But without the slightest reference to the question in framing his answer, or allusion to Lehrer's topic within the answer, Obama's opening segment bristled with nonchalant disrespect for the audience. And Romney trounced him by buckling right down to his first volley of highly energized and precisely relevant bullet points.

The bizarre opening play could be forgotten if the president had snapped out of his rote recitation quickly thereafter, but Obama's entire performance conveyed the impression of a candidate whose staff had failed to inform him that the event was a debate. He appeared flummoxed by questions, baffled and wounded by his opponent's attacks, peevish, and overwhelmed by Romney's passion.

The body language was as unpresidential as it gets. Obama looked exhausted, and perhaps he was -- the man is running the country and managing responses to world affairs, while also struggling to keep his job. Governor Romney's only job is to prepare for campaign events. So it was understandable when Obama appeared to be performing a chore -- scowling, withdrawing, stuttering, going through motions.

Still, his job for 90 minutes was to perform in a nationally broadcast TV show that serves an important function in the democracy. If this had been an audition for a dramatic role as president, President Obama wouldn't get a call-back. He was sluggish; his responses amorphous and dissolute. Romney was quick and precise.

Memo to Obama campaign staff: Get a grip on your man and eliminate the following habits:
•"Wanna." First of all, he should stop saying "wanna" entirely. Failing to pronounce words is unpresidential. More important, in a debate, saying you want to do something is weak compared to saying you will do something. Obama is accused of failure. His assertions should be filled with "I did" and "I will do." Romney did not "want" anything in this debate. He intended. That is a presidential attitude.

•"Four years ago." This is whining. Whining is also unpresidential. Everyone knows Obama was elected at a difficult historical moment. Complaining affirms accusations of failure.


•Nodding. It is inadvisable to nod your head when the opposing candidate is blasting you mercilessly! Humility is fine, and so is acknowledgment that you're listening. But on TV, it looks like you are agreeing.


•Tighten the hell up. Does the president believe the eloquence myth? Because although Barack Obama is an outstanding writer, and a great orator when working from a script, he is not often an eloquent man off-script. Viewers had time to check scores on ESPN while he gathered his woolen thoughts in long preludes to halting replies. The president's sentences were strung together in wide, spacious nets of speech that allowed the viewer's attention to slip through and crash to the ground. Obama worked the game like a slow pitcher in baseball who walks halfway to the infield and back between pitches, trying to break the batter's rhythm. In this case, it just gave Romney time to reload.


•"I believe." Less theory, more declamation, please. The president's most potentially powerful remarks were undermined at the end by the repeated weak-kneed disclaimer: "That's not what I believe." Against Romney's passionate engagement and purposeful language, Obama's intellectual musing sounded as if a political science professor had taken the president's place on stage.


Obama's listless closing statement might be explained as a natural consequence of the thrashing he had just endured. Here, and at other times, the president seemed to credit Americans with the progress made during the first term. That is flattering, and of course everyone wants a president who doesn't get too carried away with himself. But constant deflection of credit invites people to muse over this question: "Well, then, what do we need you for?"

Here's hoping the president gets more sleep before the next debate.

[MannyIsGod]

Here is the cliff notes version

dKMUHcgsbag

Wow Romney is such an amazing American. Check out that music. Now, bonus points if you can answer how many of the statements said by Mitt in that clip were flat out lies.

[CosmicCowboy]

Wow Romney is such an amazing American. Check out that music. Now, bonus points if you can answer how many of the statements said by Mitt in that clip were flat out lies.

Meh. The lies were pretty evenly balanced on both sides.

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/

[boutons_deux]

You knew it was coming, but of course not from MSM


10 Most Shameless Romney Debate Lies -- Debunked

The verdict is in: Mitt Romney handily won last night’s debate, and did what he needed to do to have a fighting chance at winning the election. But what he didn’t do, predictably, was tell the truth.

Romney’s debate performance was chock full of lies, recalling his running mate’s address to the GOP convention, which was also chock full of lies. Hopefully, just as Ryan’s address was dissected and debunked by some media outlets, Romney’s claims are as well, so the debate can move to substantive issues instead of stylistic ones.

Here are ten of Romney’s fact-challenged claims from last night:

1. An ‘Unelected Board’ Controlling Your Health Care

Despite President Obama trying to push back on this lie, Romney made this claim a few times last night. Obamacare, according to Romney, “puts in place an unelected board that's going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have.” In reality, as the Associated Press points out (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h8-59cSVraXgkCpqJfUugxUjqMXA?docId=273bdad10d854291bc 4a5e7767102e8b) [3], the board that is tasked with bringing down Medicare costs is prohibited from “rationing care, shifting costs to retirees, restricting benefits or raising the Medicare eligibility age. So the board doesn't have the power to dictate to doctors what treatments they can prescribe.” This Romney claim also hearkened back to Sarah Palin’s lie that Obamacare created “death panels,” which was a straight up lie.

2. A Bipartisan Record

Romney referred to his alleged “bipartisan” record in Massachusetts as governor during the debate. But what’s the real story on this? ABC News calls (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/fact-checking-the-presidential-debate-in-denver/) [4] the claim “not quite factual.” Indeed: Romney’s health care plan was enacted with the help of a Democratic legislature. But in general, the body was “frustrated” with Romney “because he wanted to govern like a ‘CEO’ and ‘didn’t pay heed to the legislature and they resented that,’” according to the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation’s Michael Widmer.

3. Dodd-Frank Labels Banks as ‘Too Big to Fail’

One contrast between the candidates that emerged during the debate was over Dodd-Frank, the weak Wall Street reforms and regulations passed after the 2008 financial collapse. Romney wants to repeal Dodd-Frank, and part of the reason why is his claim that the bill designates banks as “too big to fail” and therefore gives them “a blank check.” But as ThinkProgress notes, (http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/10/03/953591/thinkprogress-liveblog-of-the-first-presidential-debate/) [5]this is far from the truth: “the law merely says that the biggest, systemically risky banks need to abide by more stringent regulations (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/04/21/173907/ryan-tbtf-banks-video/) [6]. If those banks fail, they will be unwound by a new process in the Dodd-Frank law that protects taxpayers (http://www.thenation.com/article/167083/ryan-budget-takes-aim-resolution-authority) [7] from having to pony up for a bailout.”

4. Obamacare Leads to Loss of Healthcare

Governor Romney claimed that the passage of the Affordable Care Act will lead to 20 million people losing health insurance. He based this claim on a Congressional Budget Office report. But according to PolitiFact, Romney “cherry picked” the CBO report and mislead viewers on why people would “lose” coverage.

PolitiFact’s final verdict on the claim is: “That number is cherry-picked, and he’s wrong to describe it as only including people who ‘like’ their coverage, since many of those 20 million will be leaving employer coverage voluntarily for better options. Romney also ignores that under the status quo, many more people today ‘lose’ coverage than even the highest, cherry-picked CBO estimate. We rate his statement False.”

5. The Failure of the Obama Economy

Romney hammered Obama on the economy’s performance over the past four years. One claim Romney made was this: “[We have] 23 million people out of work...The proof of that is that 50 percent of college graduates this year can't find work.”

But here’s the AP breakdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h8-59cSVraXgkCpqJfUugxUjqMXA?docId=273bdad10d854291bc 4a5e7767102e8b) [3] of the facts on this claim: “The number of unemployed is 12.5 million, not 23 million. Romney was also counting 8 million people who are working part time but would like a full-time job and 2.6 million who have stopped looking for work, either because they are discouraged or because they are going back to school or for other reasons.”

And on the college graduate claim, Romney was also wrong. Back to the AP: “A Northeastern University analysis for The Associated Press found that a quarter of graduates were probably unemployed and another quarter were underemployed, which means working in jobs that didn't make full use of their skills or experience.”

6. Obamacare Cuts Billions From Medicare

This was one of Romney’s favorite attack lines last night: the notion that the Affordable Care Act is siphoning off funds from Medicare. The specific claim is that $716 billion was cut from Medicare because of the Affordable Care Act. In reality, this claim is highly misleading. What the number refers to is money that is saved “primarily through reducing over-payments to insurance companies (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/29/paul-ryan/paul-ryan-said-president-obama-funneled-716-billio/) [8] under Medicare Advantage, not payments to beneficiaries. Paul Ryan’s budget plan keeps those same cuts (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/08/15/693731/how-mitt-romney-would-quickly-bankrupt-medicare/) [9], but directs them toward tax cuts for the rich and deficit reduction,” ThinkProgress notes. (http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/10/03/953591/thinkprogress-liveblog-of-the-first-presidential-debate/) [5]

7. Gas Prices Increase

Romney said that “gasoline prices have doubled under the president. Electric rates are up.” This is true--but to blame it on the president is highly misleading. Gasoline prices have little to do with individual policies carried out by a president. Instead, as the Associated Press states, “Gasoline prices are set on financial exchanges around the world and are based on a host of factors, most importantly the price of crude oil used to make gasoline, the amount of finished gasoline ready to be shipped and the capacity of refiners to make enough to meet market demand.”

The AP also skewers Romney’s claim on electric rates going up: “Retail electricity prices have risen since Obama took office — barely. They've grown by an average of less than 1 percent per year, less than the rate of inflation and slower than the historical growth in electricity prices. The unexpectedly modest rise in electricity prices is because of the plummeting cost of natural gas, which is used to generate electricity.”

8. Health Care Costs Rising Under Obama

Romney’s made this statement on the campaign trail--and if it was wrong then, it’s wrong now. Last night, Romney claimed that “health care costs have gone up by $2500 a family.”

But FactCheck.org was on this false claim back when Romney used it on the campaign trail in September. Their take: (http://factcheck.org/2012/09/romneys-stump-speech/) [10] “Romney says health insurance premiums have gone up $2,500 under Obama. The actual increase has been $1,700, most of which was absorbed by employers and only a small part of which is attributable to the health care law.”

9. Oil and Gas Production Increases Only on Private Land

The former Massachusetts governor said last night that “all of the increase in natural gas and oil has happened on private land...Your Administration has cut the numbers of permit and licenses in half.”

But ABC News says (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/fact-checking-the-presidential-debate-in-denver/) [4] Romney is playing loose with the facts. Data from the Bureau of Land Management shows that “the number of drilling permits on federal lands approved during the fiscal years President Obama has been in office has decreased somewhere between 20 and 37 percent compared to the years before he became president - not the 50 percent Romney claimed.”

10. No Tax Cuts for the Rich

To fend off the perception that he’s only concerned about the wealthy, Romney made sure to emphasize that his economic plan would not lower tax rates on rich people.

Think Progress has the details on that claim: “If Romney were to actually implement (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/08/01/620561/tpc-romney-study-taxes/) [11] his plan to reduce tax rates by 20 percent while eliminating tax deductions in order to pay for it, taxpayers with more than $200,000 would certainly see a tax cut. But everyone else — 95 percent of Americans —will see their taxes increase.”

[MannyIsGod]

Meh. The lies were pretty evenly balanced on both sides.

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/

Which is why no one should be saying either of these two assholes won. Its pretty sad how everyone just writes off that they were lied too for 90 minutes so they can cheer on their team.

[MannyIsGod]

Also, a video titled "smirk" is hilarious. For a second there I thought that they might show Romney's face, too since he had a smirk on the entire fucking night. At least then didn't title it uppity.

[CosmicCowboy]

Which is why no one should be saying either of these two assholes won. Its pretty sad how everyone just writes off that they were lied too for 90 minutes so they can cheer on their team.

I'm not voting for either one but Obama definitely got his ass kicked.

[DarrinS]

Also, a video titled "smirk" is hilarious. For a second there I thought that they might show Romney's face, too since he had a smirk on the entire fucking night. At least then didn't title it uppity.


I thought it looked more like Mitt was in love with Obama. Creepy, tbh.

[clambake]

i just hope all the voter fraud doesn't decide the winner.

[Th'Pusher]

Meh. The lies were pretty evenly balanced on both sides.

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/

There is only one lie that people should be concerned with as it goes to the heart of Romney's economic campain. We are $16T in debt and Romney has an 'impossible plan" to pay for $5T in addition tax cuts unless of course you assume completely unrelistic growth rates. For that reason alone, I will vote for Obama.


$5 Trillion Tax Cut
The president said Romney was proposing a $5 trillion tax cut and Romney said he wasn’t. The president is off base here — Romney says his rate cuts and tax eliminations would be offset and the deficit wouldn’t increase.
Obama: Governor Romney’s central economic plan calls for a $5 trillion tax cut — on top of the extension of the Bush tax cuts.
Romney: First of all, I don’t have a $5 trillion tax cut. I don’t have a tax cut of a scale that you’re talking about.

To be clear, Romney has proposed cutting (http://www.mittromney.com/issues/tax) personal federal income tax rates across the board by 20 percent, in addition to extending the tax cuts enacted early in the Bush administration. He also proposes to eliminate the estate tax permanently, repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax, and eliminate taxes on interest, capital gains and dividends for taxpayers making under $200,000 a year in adjusted gross income.
By themselves, those cuts would, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, lower federal tax liability by “about $480 billion in calendar year 2015 (http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/romney-plan.cfm)” compared with current tax policy, with Bush cuts left in place. The Obama campaign has extrapolated that figure out over 10 years, coming up with a $5 trillion (http://www.barackobama.com/buffett-rule/tax-fairness/#citation-4) figure over a decade.
However, Romney always has said he planned to offset that massive cut with equally massive reductions in tax preferences to broaden the tax base, thus losing no revenue and not increasing the deficit. So to that extent, the president is incorrect: Romney is not proposing a $5 trillion reduction in taxes.


The Impossible Plan
However, Romney continued to struggle to explain how he could possibly offset such a large loss of revenue without shifting the burden away from upper-income taxpayers, who benefit disproportionately from across-the-board rate cuts and especially from elimination of the estate tax (which falls only on estates exceeding $5.1 million (http://www.irs.gov/uac/In-2012,-Many-Tax-Benefits-Increase-Due-to-Inflation-Adjustments) left by any who die this year). The Tax Policy Center concluded earlier this year that it wasn’t mathematically possible (http://www.factcheck.org/2012/08/romneys-impossible-tax-promise/) for a plan such as Romney’s to cut rates as he promised without either favoring the wealthy or increasing the federal deficit.

Except for saying that his plan would bring in the same amount of money “when you account for growth,” Romney offered no new explanation for how he might accomplish all he’s promised. He just repeated those promises in some of the strongest terms yet.
Romney: My number one principal is, there will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit. … I will not reduce the taxes paid by high-income Americans. … I will lower taxes on middle-income families.

But he didn’t say how he’d pull off all those things at once.


‘Six Other Studies’
When the president referred to the Tax Policy Center’s criticisms, Romney claimed it was contradicted by several others.
Romney: There are six other studies that looked at the study you describe and say it’s completely wrong.

That’s not quite true, as we previously reported (http://factcheck.org/2012/09/romneys-economic-exaggerations-2/) when the count was at five. We found that two of those “studies” were blog items by Romney backers, and none was nonpartisan.

The only one of those “studies” by someone not advising Romney was done by Harvey Rosen (http://harveysrosen.com/), a Princeton economics professor who once served as chairman of President George W. Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers.
Rosen concluded that Romney could pull off his tax plan without losing revenue assuming an extra 3 percent “growth effect” to the economy resulting from Romney’s rate cuts. That’s an extremely aggressive assumption, and in conflict with recent experience. Despite Bush’s large tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, for example, real GDP grew by 3 percent or more for only two of his eight years (http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=9&step=1) in office. The average of the year-to-year changes was just over 2 percent.

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

[Juggity]

When Democrats lose elections particularly presidential elections, they get ass whooped by Republicans. Just sayin'. Republicans suck ass just as much as Democrats but Nixon, Reagan, and Bush 41 all won in land slides.

The demographic shift makes electoral landslides pretty close to impossible now

[MannyIsGod]

I'm not voting for either one but Obama definitely got his ass kicked.

But Romney fucking lied his ass off! How the hell does one kick someone's ass in a debate when they lie their ass off? Off of style? If its a style based analysis that is swaying everyone then who really gives a shit?

[LnGrrrR]

While I think Romney looked better, only an idiot would buy the idea that he will somehow cut he deficit while improving education, not cutting the military, keeping parts of Obamacare, increase jobs etc etc. does he have a magic wand? Has he even mentioned what entitlements he would cut?

[LnGrrrR]

Also, that fact checker sucks balls too. As I mentioned in the other thread, if a politician is saying hell cut taxes but he'll "offset rate cuts", until he says which rate cuts I think it's fair to assume he's lying.

Romneys lies seemed to be of greater magnitude/importance.

[ElNono]

They both lied to the teeth... but that's seemingly standard procedure these days...

[Th'Pusher]

Also, that fact checker sucks balls too. As I mentioned in the other thread, if a politician is saying hell cut taxes but he'll "offset rate cuts", until he says which rate cuts I think it's fair to assume he's lying.

Romneys lies seemed to be of greater magnitude/importance.

+1. Romeys lies to to the core of his economic platform.

[z0sa]

Assuming Romney has lied because of a lack of information and him actually having lied are two different things, though I'm sure he is lying on some things (haven't been watching/listening too closely tbh). I'd like to see Barry bring it hard in the next debate concerning the many gaps in Romney's 5 part plan.

[jack sommerset]

Now that the dust has settled its been determined by most that Romney handed it to Obama. My brothers, Obama can't win a debate. Obama has history now. 4 years worth of it. He can't run or hide from it. Obama spoke a little longer than Romney and we are watching nothing but Romney clips on all the channels. All the channels including msnbc. Obama look like a deer in headlights. He made big promises and he was called on them, that shut him up. That would shut anyone one up. Obama looked like a fool. God bless

[jack sommerset]

Obama keeps blabbing about 5 trillion dollars. The msnbc fact checkers said both Obama and Romney are right and both romney and Obama are wrong. Silly. God bless

[Fpoonsie]

But Romney fucking lied his ass off! How the hell does one kick someone's ass in a debate when they lie their ass off? Off of style? If its a style based analysis that is swaying everyone then who really gives a shit?

You're talking about a nation that treats wiki articles as indisputable fact.

Of course Romney won. Stop fucking kidding yourself.

[boutons_deux]

Here's a WHOPPER

“And these [clean energy] businesses, many of them have gone out of business, I think about half of them, of the ones have been invested in, have gone out of business.”

At a time when the U.S. clean energy industry is supporting thousands of innovative businesses in every state (many of them small businesses (http://www.smallbusinessmajority.org/news-and-events/press-room-view.php?id=176)), hundreds of thousands of jobs (including tens of thousands (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/05/03/476055/ignoring-the-64000-green-jobs-in-his-state-romneys-campaign-claims-clean-energy-isnt-creating-jobs/) in Romney’s home state of Massachusetts), and leveraging tens of billions (http://grist.org/politics/obamas-stimulus-package-was-a-ginormous-clean-energy-bill-says-michael-grunwald/) in private capital, Romney casually tried to claim that “half” of businesses that received federal incentives have gone out of business. That’s not even remotely close to the truth.

Okay, let’s throw the Romney camp a bone. To the small number of people who actually monitor this topic, it was clear that he probably meant the loan guarantee program — a tool that provides government backing of private loans (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/09/16/321226/video-primer-on-how-loan-guarantees-work/) in order to leverage capital for “first of a kind” renewable energy projects

After numerous tweets (https://twitter.com/MikeGrunwald/status/253683439251906562) last night calling Romney out, Time Magazine’s Michael Grunwald confirmed today (https://twitter.com/MikeGrunwald/status/253871246855528448) via twitter that the campaign was backtracking: “Now Romney camp tells me he misspoke, only meant to single out loan program.”

So let’s narrow Romney’s statement down to the loan guarantee program. Are we getting closer to the truth? No.

The loan guarantee program Romney referenced supported dozens of companies. Of those companies, four recently went bankrupt due to difficult market conditions. But that’s out of 33 companies that received loan guarantees or commitments for loan guarantees. That translates to a 10 percent failure rate representing roughly 2 percent of budgeted funds for the program — a big difference from the 50 percent failure rate that Romney claimed.

At the same time, the program has supported (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/09/10/819121/us-solar-pv-installations-jump-116-percent-over-q2-2011-driven-partly-by-loan-guarantees/) some of the largest wind and solar projects in the world, helping double (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/08/29/765131/renewable-electricity-nearly-doubles-under-obama-i-think-theyre-the-future-theyre-worth-fighting-for/)generation of U.S. renewable electricity in four years.

In fact, an independent review of the loan guarantee program found that it will cost $2 billion less (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/02/10/423270/doe-loan-guarantee-program-will-cost-2-billion-less-than-expected/) than actually budgeted for. (Yes, the program is designed to accept a certain level of failure, which is an important part of supporting innovative projects that need help accessing private capital).

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/10/04/960231/the-biggest-and-least-discussed-lie-of-the-debate-romneys-false-claim-about-clean-energy-bankruptcies/

But Gecko refuses to touch any $Bs of tax breaks, subsidies for carbon companies, and says he LOVES COAL.

[boutons_deux]

Romney Doesn’t Dispute Plan To Increase Military Spending By $2 Trillion (http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/10/04/960551/romney-debate-military-spending/)


http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/romney_defense_1.jpg1.png


OBAMA: Now, Governor Romney’s proposal that he has been promoting for 18 months calls for a $5 trillion tax cut on top of $2 trillion of additional spending for our military. And he is saying that he is going to pay for it by closing loopholes and deductions. The problem is that he’s been asked a — over a hundred times how you would close those deductions and loopholes and he hasn’t been able to identify them.

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/10/04/960551/romney-debate-military-spending/

[DarrinS]

Dems put out video portraying Romney as a bully

:cry

qTFJTm4t5Mw

[Winehole23]

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/545773_531594270188568_1479759273_n.jpg

[z0sa]

:lmao PBS memes are killing me at work

[gameFACE]

At best Hello Mitty hit a double and the Prez a single. No home runs, slam dunks or crushing game changing blows. But the Prez needs scoreboard next time or he'll be working from behind.

[boutons_deux]

Gecko trashing communist/socialist Big Bird/PBS is the bully trying to win his colors with the sociopathic conservative gang. What a Tough Guy

[rascal]

I'm not voting for either one but Obama definitely got his ass kicked.

Not on content. Romney said nothing basically and you are buying it. Your still a fool that believes lower taxes on the rich creates jobs.

Still waiting for the answer on the vouchers. Nobody seems to know.

[SA210]

lol slave

yup

[CosmicCowboy]

Not on content. Romney said nothing basically and you are buying it. Your still a fool that believes lower taxes on the rich creates jobs.

Still waiting for the answer on the vouchers. Nobody seems to know.

Anyone that makes specific promises on anything that has to be negotiated with and approved by the house and senate is a fool.

[SA210]

Hell, even Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Michael Moore, etc. are saying Obama got his butt kicked.

lol John Edwards predicted Obama would get his soft ass kicked over 4 years ago

[DarrinS]

It was the altitude

:cry


jm9BoM2Q81c

[Fpoonsie]

Your still a fool...

This still makes me chuckle, each and every time.

[boutons_deux]

Meh. The lies were pretty evenly balanced on both sides.

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/

False equivalence. Facthcheck shows Gecko lying more and more egregiously, without even getting into the ones my link listed.

Repugs really insult people when they spew non-stop lies with the expectation that the people will swallow them without hesitation or question.

[SA210]

Dems put out video portraying Romney as a bully

:cry

qTFJTm4t5Mw


:lmao:lmao:lmao

pussies

[SA210]

Hell, even Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Michael Moore, etc. are saying Obama got his butt kicked.


John Edwards warned the pussy time and time again that you couldn't nice them to death...but noooooo...lol

To Obama..."It's gonna take fight, strength and backbone, you cannot nice them to death"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItdN2BYwA-8


On Obama... "You cannot nice them to death, they will drive through you like a freight train"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bi3_CCLv4No


And 4 years and so many bad policies later....

[MannyIsGod]

yup

You're using the word slave wrong.

[MannyIsGod]

John Edwards was certainly right on that account.

I was really pissed when I watched Frontline's special on the financial crisis a few days ago. Its well worth watching, BTW. Anyway, they were talking about how Obama had a meeting with the bank leaders early on in his presidency and they came in basically ready to be fucked because of what they had done. They basically walked in holding their ankles. What did Obama do? Let them completely off the hook. Dude really doesn't have a back bone at all.

[SA210]

John Edwards was certainly right on that account.

I was really pissed when I watched Frontline's special on the financial crisis a few days ago. Its well worth watching, BTW. Anyway, they were talking about how Obama had a meeting with the bank leaders early on in his presidency and they came in basically ready to be fucked because of what they had done. They basically walked in holding their ankles. What did Obama do? Let them completely off the hook. Dude really doesn't have a back bone at all.


That promise of hope was really a farce. He just made things more hopeless. Mitt Romney will start more war and accommodate special interests if elected, and Obama will do exactly the same because he has no spine and he is a corporate whore himself. This is why I backed Ron Paul, not because I agree with all his view points, but he is CLEARLY different from these two jackasses on that front, by far.

I predict the media wants an Obama comeback big-time. They will try their best to spin the next debate that way, if they can.

Let's be honest, nobody really won. Romney was basically able to "win" by convincing America that his lies are better for them last night than Obamas lies, and that's the truth.

Through all that, he aggressively manhandled Obama the way John Edwards said the Republicans and special interests would.

I think Mitt will continue to manhandle him (regardless of facts), because it's in Obamas nature to be manhandled as long as the msm isn't protecting him and he doesn't have a speech or teleprompter to help him.

Lying ass Mitt is now in his head the same way OKC ended up getting in the Spurs heads lol. Obama is already weak to begin with, now that he knows all of America knows he got his ass whooped he'll be a desperate pussy next time around. He also let Mitt Romney steal his own lie about uniting Democrats and Republicans that he was famous for always lying about :lol

Now any chance Obama has at attacking Mitt on stuff, Mitt can talk about how Obama is a divider now, and not Presidential and just back on his heels lol.

And it all doesn't matter anyway, they are both liars and none of this shit matters anyway as they both don't give a shit about any one of us regular people, It's all theater.

At the end of the day it's all an illusion of choice. I'm not not voting for either fraud.

[boutons_deux]

Another HUGE GECKO LIE

Romney’s Sick Joke

OK, so Obama did a terrible job in the debate, and Romney did well. But in the end, this isn’t or shouldn’t be about theater criticism, it should be about substance. And the fact is that everything Obama said was basically true, while much of what Romney said was either outright false or so misleading as to be the moral equivalent of a lie.

Above all, there’s this (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/03/us/politics/transcript-of-the-first-presidential-debate-in-denver.html?pagewanted=all):
MR. ROMNEY: Let — well, actually — actually it’s — it’s — it’s a lengthy description, but number one, pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan.

No, they aren’t (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/10/who-would-be-left-out-of-romneys-preexisting-conditions-plan-about-89-million-americans/). Romney’s advisers have conceded as much (http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/107049/romney-pre-existing-condition-obamacare-repeal-gregory-meet-the-press) in the past; last night they did it again (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/top-romney-adviser-states-will-have-to-cover-people-with-pre-existing-conditions-under-president-rom.php?ref=fpa).


I guess you could say that Romney’s claim wasn’t exactly a lie, since some people with preexisting conditions would retain coverage. But as I said, it’s the moral equivalent of a lie; if you think he promised something real, you’re the butt of a sick joke.
And we’re talking about a lot of people left out in the cold — 89 million (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/10/who-would-be-left-out-of-romneys-preexisting-conditions-plan-about-89-million-americans/), to be precise.

Furthermore, all of this should be taken in the context of Romney’s plan not just to repeal Obamacare but to drastically cut Medicaid.

So enough with the theater criticism; Romney needs to be held accountable for dishonesty on a huge scale.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/04/romneys-sick-joke/

[Th'Pusher]

Anyone that makes specific promises on anything that has to be negotiated with and approved by the house and senate is a fool.

You mean like Romney promising to cut taxes by 20%?

[boutons_deux]

"Anyone that makes specific promises on anything that has to be negotiated with and approved by the house and senate is a fool."

Ryan's budget as already passed the House twice, and Gecko's people said Gecko would have signed it if he were Prez.

[boutons_deux]

At Last Night’s Debate: Romney Told 27 Myths In 38 Minutes

Pundits from both sides of the aisle have lauded Mitt Romney’s strong debate performance, praising his preparedness and ability to challenge President Obama’s policies and accomplishments. But Romney only accomplished this goal by repeatedly misleading viewers. He spoke for 38 minutes (http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/smartpolitics/2012/10/romney_makes_the_most_of_his_4.php) of the 90 minute debate and told at least 27 myths:

1) “[G]et us energy independent, North American energy independent. That creates about 4 million jobs”. Romney’s plan for “energy independence” actually relies heavily on a study that assumes the U.S. continues with fuel efficiency standards set by the Obama administration. For instance, he uses Citigroup research based off the assumption that “‘the United States will continue with strict fuel economy standards that will lower its oil demand.” Since he promises to undo the Obama administration’s new fuel efficiency standards, (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/08/28/744811/romney-opposes-fuel-efficiency-standards-actually-moving-us-toward-energy-independence/) he would cut oil consumption savings of 2 million barrels per day by 2025.

2) “I don’t have a $5 trillion tax cut. I don’t have a tax cut of a scale that you’re talking about.” A Tax Policy Center analysis of Romney’s proposal for a 20 percent across-the-board tax cut in all federal income tax rates, eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax, eliminating the estate tax and other tax reductions, would reduce federal revenue $480 billion in 2015. This amount to $5 trillion over the decade.

3) “My view is that we ought to provide tax relief to people in the middle class. But I’m not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high-income people.” If Romney hopes to provide tax relief to the middle class, then his $5 trillion tax cut would add to the deficit. There are not enough deductions in the tax code that primarily benefit rich people to make his math work.

4) “My — my number-one principal is, there will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit. I want to underline that: no tax cut that adds to the deficit.” As the Tax Policy Center concluded (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/08/01/620561/tpc-romney-study-taxes/), Romney’s plan can’t both exempt middle class families from tax cuts and remain revenue neutral. “He’s promised all these things and he can’t do them all. In order for him to cover the cost of his tax cut without adding to the deficit, he’d have to find a way to raise taxes on middle income people or people making less than $200,000 a year,” the Center found (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/mitt-romney-floats-17000-limit-on-tax-deductions.php).

5) “I will not under any circumstances raise taxes on middle-income families. I will lower taxes on middle-income families. Now, you cite a study. There are six other studies that looked at the study you describe and say it’s completely wrong.” The studies Romney cites actually further prove (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/09/10/819411/romney-tax-studies-five/) that Romney would, in fact, have to raise taxes on the middle class if he were to keep his promise not to lose revenue with his tax rate reduction.

6) “I saw a study that came out today that said you’re going to raise taxes by $3,000 to $4,000 on middle-income families.” Romney is pointing to this study (http://www.aei.org/files/2012/10/01/-a-simple-measure-of-the-distributional-burden-of-debt-accumulation_210316287852.pdf) from the American Enterprise Institute. It actually found that rather than raise taxes to pay down the debt, the Obama administration’s policies — those contained directly in his budget — would reduce the share of taxes (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/10/03/953041/romney-debunk-middle-class/) that go toward servicing the debt by $1,289.89 per taxpayer in the $100,000 to $200,000 range.

7) “And the reason is because small business pays that individual rate; 54 percent of America’s workers work in businesses that are taxed not at the corporate tax rate, but at the individual tax rate….97 percent of the businesses are not — not taxed at the 35 percent tax rate, they’re taxed at a lower rate. But those businesses that are in the last 3 percent of businesses happen to employ half — half of all the people who work in small business.” Far less than half (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/07/10/514032/speaker-boehner-small-business-lies/) of the people affected by the expiration of the upper income tax cuts get any of their income at all from a small businesses. And those people could very well be receiving speaking fees or book royalties, which qualify as “small business income” but don’t have a direct impact on job creation. It’s actually hard to find a small business (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/08/03/636501/boushey-small-business-tax-cuts/) who think that they will be hurt if the marginal tax rate on income earned above $250,000 per year is increased.

8) “Mr. President, all of the increase in natural gas and oil has happened on private land, not on government land. On government land, your administration has cut the number of permits and licenses in half.” Oil production from federal lands is higher, not lower (http://www.eenews.net/assets/2012/04/03/document_gw_01.pdf): Production from federal lands is up slightly in 2011 when compared to 2007. And the oil and gas industry is sitting on 7,000 approved permits (http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/upload/Final-Report.pdf) to drill, that it hasn’t begun exploring or developing.

9) “The president’s put it in place as much public debt — almost as much debt held by the public as all prior presidents combined.” This is not even close to being true. When Obama took office, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/16/iowa-debate-fact-check/). Now the national debt is over $16 trillion. That $5.374 trillion increase is nowhere near as much debt as all the other presidents combined.

10) “That’s why the National Federation of Independent Businesses said your plan will kill 700,000 jobs. I don’t want to kill jobs in this environment.” That study, produced by a right-wing advocacy organization (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/national-federation-independent-businesses), doesn’t analyze (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/07/17/fact-check-industry-financed-study-gets-president-s-tax-cuts-wrong) what Obama has actually proposed.

11) “What we do have right now is a setting where I’d like to bring money from overseas back to this country.” Romney’s plan to shift the country to a territorial tax system would allow corporations to do business and make profits overseas without ever being taxed on it in the United States. This encourages American companies to invest abroad and could cost the country up to 800,000 jobs (http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/economy/report/2012/07/16/11935/romneys-new-tax-incentive-for-outsourcing-u-s-jobs/).

12) “I would like to take the Medicaid dollars that go to states and say to a state, you’re going to get what you got last year, plus inflation, plus 1 percent, and then you’re going to manage your care for your poor in the way you think best.” Sending federal Medicaid funding to the states in the form of a block grant woud significantly reduce federal spending for Medicaid because the grant would not keep up with projected health care costs. A CBO estimate (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/11/08/363892/romneys-medicaid-proposal-falls-in-line-with-ryans-plan-beneficiaries-could-face-limited-access-to-care/) of a very similar proposal from Paul Ryan found that federal spending would be “35 percent lower in 2022 and 49 percent lower in 2030 than current projected federal spending” and as a result “states would face significant challenges in achieving sufficient cost savings through efficiencies to mitigate the loss of federal funding.” “To maintain current service levels in the Medicaid program, states would probably need to consider additional changes, such as reducing their spending on other programs or raising additional revenues,” the CBO found.

13) “I want to take that $716 billion you’ve cut and put it back into Medicare…. But the idea of cutting $716 billion from Medicare to be able to balance the additional cost of Obamacare is, in my opinion, a mistake. There’s that number again. Romney is claiming that Obamacare siphons off $716 billion from Medicare, to the detriment of beneficiaries. In actuality, that money is saved primarily through reducing over-payments to insurance companies (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/29/paul-ryan/paul-ryan-said-president-obama-funneled-716-billio/) under Medicare Advantage, not payments to beneficiaries. Paul Ryan’s budget plan keeps those same cuts (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/08/15/693731/how-mitt-romney-would-quickly-bankrupt-medicare/), but directs them toward tax cuts for the rich and deficit reduction.

14) “What I support is no change for current retirees and near-retirees to Medicare.” Here is how Romney’s Medicare plan will affect current seniors (http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/healthcare/report/2012/08/24/33915/increased-costs-during-retirement-under-the-romney-ryan-medicare-plan/): 1) by repealing Obamacare, the 16 million seniors receiving preventive benefits without deductibles or co-pays and are saving $3.9 billion on prescription drugs will see a cost increase, 2) “premium support” will increase premiums for existing beneficiaries as private insurers lure healthier seniors out of the traditional Medicare program, 3) Romney/Ryan would also lower Medicaid spending significantly beginning next year, shifting federal spending to states and beneficiaries, and increasing costs for the 9 million Medicare recipients who are dependent on Medicaid.

15) “Number two is for people coming along that are young, what I do to make sure that we can keep Medicare in place for them is to allow them either to choose the current Medicare program or a private plan. Their choice. They get to choose — and they’ll have at least two plans that will be entirely at no cost to them.” The Medicare program changes for everyone (http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/08/24/739271/seniors-will-pay-60000-more-for-medicare-under-romneyryans-plan-report-finds/), even people who choose to remain in the traditional fee-for-service. Rather than relying on a guaranteed benefit, all beneficiaries will receive a premium support credit of $7,500 on average in 2023 to purchase coverage in traditional Medicare or private insurance. But that amount will only grow at a rate of GDP plus 1.5 percentage points and will not keep up with health care costs. So while the federal government will spend less on the program, seniors will pay more in premiums.

16) “And, by the way the idea came not even from Paul Ryan or — or Senator Wyden, who’s the co-author of the bill with — with Paul Ryan in the Senate, but also it came from Bill — Bill Clinton’s chief of staff.” Romney has rejected (http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/992671#.UG17403A8oM) the Ryan/Wyden approach — which does not cap the growth of the “premium support” subsidy. Bill Clinton and his commission also voted down these changes to the Medicare program.

17) “Well, I would repeal and replace it. We’re not going to get rid of all regulation. You have to have regulation. And there are some parts of Dodd-Frank that make all the sense in the world.” Romney has previously called for full repeal (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/08/15/694591/romney-deregulate-wall-street/) of Dodd-Frank, a law whose specific purpose is to regulate banks. MF Global’s use of customer funds (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-12-22/mf-global-probe-said-to-weigh-illegal-use-of-funds-for-margin.html) to pay for its own trading losses is just one bit of proof that the financial industry isn’t responsible enough to protect consumers without regulation.

18) “But I wouldn’t designate five banks as too big to fail and give them a blank check. That’s one of the unintended consequences of Dodd-Frank… We need to get rid of that provision because it’s killing regional and small banks. They’re getting hurt.” The law merely says that the biggest, systemically risky banks need toabide by more stringent regulations (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/04/21/173907/ryan-tbtf-banks-video/). If those banks fail, they will be unwound by a new process in the Dodd-Frank law that protects taxpayers (http://www.thenation.com/article/167083/ryan-budget-takes-aim-resolution-authority) from having to pony up for a bailout.

19) “And, unfortunately, when — when — when you look at Obamacare, the Congressional Budget Office has said it will cost $2,500 a year more than traditional insurance. So it’s adding to cost.” Obamacare will actually provide millions of families with tax credits (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/07/05/511486/obamacare-is-a-major-tax-cut-for-middle-class-families/) to make health care more affordable.

20) “[I]t puts in place an unelected board that’s going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have. I don’t like that idea.” The Board, or IPAB is tasked with making binding recommendations to Congress for lowering health care spending, should Medicare costs exceed a target growth rate. Congress can accept the savings proposal or implement its own ideas through a super majority. The panel’s plan will modify payments to providers but it cannot “include any recommendation to ration health care, raise revenues or Medicare beneficiary premiums…increase Medicare beneficiary cost-sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and co- payments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility criteria” (Section 3403 of the ACA (http://housedocs.house.gov/energycommerce/ppacacon.pdf)). Relying on health care experts rather than politicians to control health care costs has previously attracted bipartisan support and even Ryan himself proposed two IPAB-like structures (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/07/13/267697/table-ryans-2009-health-plan-included-two-ipab-like-boards/) in a 2009 health plan.

21) “Right now, the CBO says up to 20 million people will lose their insurance as Obamacare goes into effect next year. And likewise, a study by McKinsey and Company of American businesses said 30 percent of them are anticipating dropping people from coverage.” The Affordable Care Act would actually expand health care coverage to 30 million Americans, despite Romney fear mongering. According to CBO director Douglas Elmendorf, 3 million (http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/10/04/958801/at-last-nights-debate-romney-told-27-myths-in-38-minutes/%E2%80%9Dhttp://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/09/13/318103/cbo-director-health-reform-wont-lead-large-numbers-of-employers-to-drop-coverage/%E2%80%9D) or less people would leave employer-sponsored health insurance coverage as a result of the law.

22) “I like the way we did it [health care] in Massachusetts…What were some differences? We didn’t raise taxes.” Romney raised fees, but he can claim that he didn’t increase taxes because the federal government funded almost half of his reforms (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/06/26/romneycare__a_revolution_that_basically_worked/?page=4).

23) “It’s why Republicans said, do not do this, and the Republicans had — had the plan. They put a plan out. They put out a plan, a bipartisan plan. It was swept aside.” The Affordable Care Act incorporates many Republican ideas including the individual mandate, state-based health care exchanges, high-risk insurance pools, and modified provisions that allow insurers to sell policies in multiple states. Republicans never offered a united bipartisan alternative.

24) “Preexisting conditions are covered under my plan.” Only people who arecontinuously insured (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/06/12/498156/romney-confirms-he-will-deny-insurance-to-millions-with-pre-existing-conditions-if-obamacare-is-struck-down/) would not be discriminated against because they suffer from pre-existing conditions. This protection would not be extended to people who are currently uninsured.

25) “In one year, you provided $90 billion in breaks to the green energy world. Now, I like green energy as well, but that’s about 50 years’ worth of what oil and gas receives.” The $90 billion was given out over several years and included loans, loan guarantees and grants through the American Recovery Act. $23 billion (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/factchecking-the-first-presidential-debate-of-2012/2012/10/04/9d47934e-0d66-11e2-bb5e-492c0d30bff6_blog.html) of the $90 billion “went toward “clean coal,” energy-efficiency upgrades, updating the electricity grid and environmental clean-up, largely for old nuclear weapons sites.”

26) “I think about half of [the green firms Obama invested in], of the ones have been invested in have gone out of business. A number of them happened to be owned by people who were contributors to your campaigns.” As of late last year, only “three out of the 26 recipients (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2011/12/06/media-ignore-report-undermining-their-solyndra/184694) of 1705 loan guarantees have filed for bankruptcy, with losses estimated at just over $600 million.”

27) “If the president’s reelected you’ll see dramatic cuts to our military.” Romney is referring to the sequester, which his running mate Paul Ryan supported. Obama opposes the military cuts and has asked Congress to formulate a balanced approach that would avoid the trigger.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/11943-at-last-nights-debate-romney-told-27-myths-in-38-minutes

[rascal]

This still makes me chuckle, each and every time.
And your an asshole. That makes me chuckle.

[DarrinS]

:downspin:

[rascal]

Anyone that makes specific promises on anything that has to be negotiated with and approved by the house and senate is a fool.
Still have no answers on the vouchers.

[boutons_deux]

First Post-Debate Poll Numbers Show Presidential Race Essentially Unchanged (http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/10/04/965081/first-post-debate-poll-numbers-show-presidential-race-essentially-unchanged/) |

A Reuters/Ipsos poll of voters taken after Wednesday’s presidential debate shows only minor movement. In the poll’s last pre-debate survey, President Obama lead Mitt Romney by seven points. After the debate, Obama’s lead remains five points, 48 percent to 43 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/04/us-usa-campaign-poll-idUSBRE8931E420121004).

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/10/04/965081/first-post-debate-poll-numbers-show-presidential-race-essentially-unchanged/

[rascal]

First Post-Debate Poll Numbers Show Presidential Race Essentially Unchanged (http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/10/04/965081/first-post-debate-poll-numbers-show-presidential-race-essentially-unchanged/) |

A Reuters/Ipsos poll of voters taken after Wednesday’s presidential debate shows only minor movement. In the poll’s last pre-debate survey, President Obama lead Mitt Romney by seven points. After the debate, Obama’s lead remains five points, 48 percent to 43 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/04/us-usa-campaign-poll-idUSBRE8931E420121004).

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/10/04/965081/first-post-debate-poll-numbers-show-presidential-race-essentially-unchanged/

2 points is a lot for 45 minutes of lies and nonspecific promises.

[CosmicCowboy]

Still have no answers on the vouchers.

What answer do you want? It's a general proposal. Details would have to be worked out if they were elected. You can't expect them to give every detail now.

Hell, remember Pelosi on Obamacare? "You have to pass it to see whats in it!"

[Trainwreck2100]

Romney's doing what Obama did 4 years ago promising shit that he won't be able to do, but it sounds good so fuck it.

[CosmicCowboy]

It's still gonna be a pretty shitty next 4 years economically no matter which one wins and I honestly don't understand why either one of them wants the job that bad...I realize the perks are good but the job sucks.

[CosmicCowboy]

It IS pretty cool to have Marine One and Air Force One though...I'm sure Romney has nicer houses...:lol

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

It's still gonna be a pretty shitty next 4 years economically no matter which one wins and I honestly don't understand why either one of them wants the job that bad...I realize the perks are good but the job sucks.
Herein lies the problem....there are smarter, better men for the job than Obama or Romney. Those men unfortunately have much better alternatives to being president and are smart enough to know that being president ages you 20 years and sucks :lol

[Th'Pusher]

What answer do you want? It's a general proposal. Details would have to be worked out if they were elected. You can't expect them to give every detail now.

Hell, remember Pelosi on Obamacare? "You have to pass it to see whats in it!"

If he can propose a specific 20% tax cut the onus is on him to show us how it will not increase the deficit. He is specific on the candy, but not the medicine. That should be a red flag for any fiscal conservative.

[boutons_deux]

Gecko used self-confidence, aggression, non-stop to spin his LIES, and his breath-taking etch-a-sketh flip-flop from what he and Ryan have been saying the past year or more.

Are all Mormons so ethically depraved?

We know from people who dealt with Gecko in takeovers that his word was worthless.

[rascal]

What answer do you want? It's a general proposal. Details would have to be worked out if they were elected. You can't expect them to give every detail now.

Hell, remember Pelosi on Obamacare? "You have to pass it to see whats in it!"

Go back to the previous page and answer the questions i posed on vouchers. Just as I thought, you have no answer because you don't know.

So Romney basically said nothing specific on his plan yet everyone claims he won the debate because he was more aggressive with the moderator, had a better confident debate delivery and made sure to get the final word on every topic.

[Fpoonsie]

And your an asshole. That makes me chuckle.

Agreed. My assholeishness is quite refreshing.

"Your" idiocy is equally amusing.

[rascal]

Agreed. My assholeishness is quite refreshing.

"Your" idiocy is equally amusing.

You better edit your post because it makes you look bad.

[Fpoonsie]

You better edit your post because it makes you look bad.

Lulz. Irony.

[Capt Bringdown]

http://www.truthdig.com/images/made/images/cartoonuploads/October3rd2012-500_363_419.jpg

[cheguevara]

why they want the job? because some egocentric assholes like to be called "Mr. President"

of course there are about 100,000 other americans that most definitely would do a better job. But let's face it, to be president you need to be chosen by the secret bi-party comitte that picks presidents

:lol ppl thinking this is not pre-arranged

[Big P]

Stupidity...Romney was more aggressive tonight...the President, more reserved...

but, Obama has a record to run on, Romney...nothing but empty promises

Four years of failure is a record to run on? His only plan is the same thing he's done for the last four years and it hasn't worked out..in fact it has gotten a lot worse. obungle wasn't more reserved last night, he didn't have his teleprompter in front of him to save his ass....he is used to getting his ass kissed and he wound up getting dismantled which caught him completely off guard and he never recovered...now we will probably see him overreact at the next debate and really make a fool of himself, but before that lets not forget the Ryan- biden debate..that's going to be epic.

[Big P]

12 Obama Debate Lies And Counting…

At Last Night’s Debate, Obama Had Trouble With The Facts

LIE #1: OBAMA SAYS HIS PLAN REDUCES THE DEFICIT BY $4 TRILLION

THE CLAIM: Obama: “I’ve Proposed A Specific $4 Trillion Deficit Reduction Plan.” OBAMA: “I’ve proposed a specific $4 trillion deficit reduction plan. … The way we do it is $2.50 for every cut, we ask for $1 in additional revenue.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Denver, CO, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: “Virtually No Serious Budget Analyst Agreed With This Accounting.” “But virtually no serious budget analyst agreed with this accounting. Obama’s $4 trillion figure, for instance, includes counting some $1 trillion in cuts reached a year ago in budget negotiations with Congress. So no matter who is the president, the savings are already in the bank.” (Glenn Kessler, “Factchecking The First Presidential Debate Of 2012,” The Washington Post‘s The Fact Checker, 10/4/12)

THE FACTS: Obama’s $4 Trillion Figure Includes Money From Legislation Enacted With Republicans And From War Savings That Would Occur Anyway. “In promising $4 trillion, Obama is already banking more than $2 billion from legislation enacted along with Republicans last year that cut agency operating budgets and capped them for 10 years. He also claims more than $800 billion in war savings that would occur anyway. And he uses creative bookkeeping to hide spending on Medicare reimbursements to doctors.” (Calvin Woodward, “FACT CHECK: Presidential Debate Missteps,” The Associated Press, 10/3/12)

“Take Those ‘Cuts’ Away And Obama’s $2.50/$1 Ratio Of Spending Cuts To Tax Increases Shifts Significantly More In The Direction Of Tax Increases.” (Calvin Woodward, “FACT CHECK: Presidential Debate Missteps,” The Associated Press, 10/3/12)

Obama “Twisted The Truth” With The $4 Trillion Figure. “Obama also twisted the truth when he repeated the claim that his proposals would reduce the 10-year deficit by $4 trillion. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office found that Obama’s budget would increase cumulative deficits by well over $2 trillion over that time period.” (Meghan McCarthy, Katy O’Donnell, Amy Harder, and Catherine Hollander, “Fact Checking The Presidential Debate,” National Journal, 10/3/12)
LIE #2: OBAMA CLAIMED HE WOULD RETURN AMERICA TO TAX RATES UNDER CLINTON

THE CLAIM: Obama: “We Should Go Back To The Rates That We Had When Bill Clinton Was President.” OBAMA: “But I have said that for incomes over $250,000 a year, that we should go back to the rates that we had when Bill Clinton was president, when we created 23 million new jobs, went from deficit to surplus, and created a whole lot of millionaires to boot.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Denver, CO, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: “Obama Repeated A Favorite Talking Point” But Americans Will Pay More Under Obama Than Clinton Due To New Taxes In ObamaCare. “Obama repeated a favorite talking point, saying that his tax plan would return rates for the wealthy back to where they were during economically prosperous times under President Bill Clinton. But those making over $250,000 a year would actually pay more than they did under Clinton due to new taxes imposed on upper-income people to pay for the health care law.” (Brooks Jackson, Eugene Kiely, Lori Robertson, Robert Farley, D’Angelo Gore and Ben Finley, “Dubios Denver Debate Declarations,” Factcheck.org, 10/4/12)
LIE #3: OBAMA SAYS ROMNEY’S MEDICARE PLAN WOULD COST SENIORS $6,000 A YEAR

THE CLAIM: Obama: “The Problem Is That Because The Voucher Wouldn’t Necessarily Keep Up With Health Care Inflation, It Was Estimated That This Would Cost The Average Senior About $6,000 A Year.” OBAMA: “The problem is that because the voucher wouldn’t necessarily keep up with health care inflation, it was estimated that this would cost the average senior about $6,000 a year. Now, in fairness, what Governor Romney has now said is he’ll maintain traditional Medicare alongside it .” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Denver, CO, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: The Washington Post ‘s The Fact Checker: “He Still Clung To An Outdated Estimate Of An Earlier Version Of The Plan, Claiming It Will Cost Seniors An Extra $6,000 A Year. (He Had Previously Earned Two Pinocchios For This Claim.)” “In the debate, Obama acknowledged that the GOP Medicare plan, authored by Romney running mate Paul Ryan, has been changed. But he still clung to an outdated estimate of an earlier version of the plan, claiming it will cost seniors an extra $6,000 a year. (He had previously earned Two Pinocchios for this claim.)” (Glenn Kessler, “Factchecking The First Presidential Debate Of 2012,” The Washington Post‘s The Fact Checker, 10/4/12)
LIE #4: OBAMA SAYS ROMNEY’S PLAN WOULD RAISE TAXES ON MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES

THE CLAIM: Obama: Under Romney, “The Average Middle-Class Family With Children Would Pay About $2,000 More.” OBAMA: “And that’s why independent studies looking at this said the only way to meet Governor Romney’s pledge of not reducing the deficit — or — or — or not adding to the deficit, is by burdening middle-class families. The average middle-class family with children would pay about $2,000 more.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Denver, CO, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: “Romney Says His Plan Wouldn’t Raise Taxes On Anyone, And His Campaign Points To Several Studies By Conservative Think Tanks That Dispute The Tax Policy Center’s Findings.” “Romney says his plan wouldn’t raise taxes on anyone, and his campaign points to several studies by conservative think tanks that dispute the Tax Policy Center’s findings. Most of the conservative studies argue that Romney’s tax plan would stimulate economic growth, generating additional tax revenue without shifting any of the tax burden to the middle class.” (Calvin Woodward, “FACT CHECK: Presidential Debate Missteps,” The Associated Press, 10/4/12)
LIE #5: OBAMA SAYS HEALTH CARE PREMIUMS ARE BECOMING MORE AFFORDABLE

THE CLAIM: Obama Said “Health Care Premiums Have Gone Up — It Is True — But They Have Gone Up Slower Than Any Time In The Last 50 Years.” OBAMA: “The fact of the matter is that when Obamacare is fully implemented, we are going to be in a position to show that costs are going down. Over the last two years, health care premiums have gone up — it is true — but they have gone up slower than any time in the last 50 years. We are already seeing progress.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Denver, CO, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: Obama Was Wrong To Say That Care Premiums Have “Gone Up Slower Than Any Time In The Last 50 Years.” “Obama wrongly said that over the last two years, health care premiums have ‘gone up slower than any time in the last 50 years.’” (Brooks Jackson, Eugene Kiely, Lori Robertson, Robert Farley, D’Angelo Gore and Ben Finley, “Dubios Denver Debate Declarations,” Factcheck.org, 10/4/12)

Obama Incorrectly Suggested That ObamaCare Was Responsible For The Slower Growth In Health Spending. “That’s true of health care spending, not premiums. But even if Obama had worded the claim correctly, he still would have been off in suggesting the Affordable Care Act had caused the slower growth in spending.” (Brooks Jackson, Eugene Kiely, Lori Robertson, Robert Farley, D’Angelo Gore and Ben Finley, “Dubios Denver Debate Declarations,” Factcheck.org, 10/4/12)

THE FACTS: Modern Healthcare Magazine Says “The Drop In Healthcare Cost Growth Is Primarily Attributable To The Great Recession’s Impact On Employment, Private Health Insurance, Government Revenues And Budgets.” “Obama tried to attribute a 50-year decline in health costs to the health-care law, but much of it has not yet been implemented. Most economists say the slowdown is more likely because of the lousy economy. ‘It’s tempting to think that provider initiatives are truly denting costs, but it’s hard for changes in provider behavior to influence costs before they occur,’ said a recent article in Modern Healthcare magazine. ‘Instead, the drop in healthcare cost growth is primarily attributable to the Great Recession’s impact on employment, private health insurance, government revenues and budgets.’” (Glenn Kessler, “Factchecking The First Presidential Debate Of 2012,” The Washington Post‘s The Fact Checker, 10/4/12)

THE FACTS: “For Now, There Is Little Evidence That The Affordable Care Act Has Made Healthcare Any More Affordable For The Vast Majority Of Americans.” “President Obama reiterated a claim that his healthcare law will reduce costs, a promise he made when he started pushing for an overhaul as a candidate four years ago. Then, Obama said he would cut family health insurance premiums by $2,500 by the end of his first term. Today, this stands as one of the president’s biggest unfulfilled promises. In fact, the average employee share of an employer-provided health plan jumped from $3,515 in 2009 to $4,316 in 2012, an increase of more than 22%, according to a survey from the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research & Educational Trust. The total cost of an average employer-provided family health plan – shared by the employer and the employee -reached $15,745 in 2012. When the law is fully implemented in 2014, some low- and middle-income Americans will qualify for government subsidies to help them afford health insurance. And other provisions of the law could help slow the growth in healthcare costs over the long term. But for now, there is little evidence that the Affordable Care Act has made healthcare any more affordable for the vast majority of Americans.”(Noam N. Levey, “Fact Check: ‘Obamacare’ Hasn’t Yet Reduced Health Insurance Costs,” Los Angeles Times’ Politics Now, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: “Premiums For Job-Based Family Coverage Have Risen By Nearly $2,400 Since 2009 When Obama Took Office, According To The Nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation.” “Premiums for job-based family coverage have risen by nearly $2,400 since 2009 when Obama took office, according to the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. In 2011, premiums jumped by 9 percent. This year’s 4 percent increase was more manageable, but the price tag for family coverage stands at $15,745, with employees paying more than $4,300 of that.” (Calvin Woodward, “FACT CHECK: Presidential Debate Missteps,” The Associated Press, 10/4/12)

THE FACTS: “When It Comes To Insurance Rebates Under Obama’s Health Care Law, Less Than 10 Percent Of People With Private Health Insurance Are Benefiting.” “When it comes to insurance rebates under Obama’s health care law, less than 10 percent of people with private health insurance are benefiting. More than 160 million Americans under 65 have private insurance through their jobs and by buying their own policies. According to the administration, about 13 million people will benefit from rebates. And nearly two-thirds of that number will only be entitled to a share of it, since they are covered under job-based plans where their employer pays most of the premium and will get most of the rebate.” (Calvin Woodward, “FACT CHECK: Presidential Debate Missteps,” The Associated Press, 10/4/12)
LIE #6: OBAMA SAYS GOV. ROMNEY’S PLAN IS A $5 TRILLION TAX CUT

THE CLAIM: Obama Said “Gov. Romney’s Central Economic Plan Calls For A $5 Trillion Tax Cut.” OBAMA: “Gov. Romney’s central economic plan calls for a $5 trillion tax cut – on top of the extension of the Bush tax cuts, that’s another trillion dollars – and $2 trillion in additional military spending that the military hasn’t asked for. That’s $8 trillion. How we pay for that, reduce the deficit, and make the investments that we need to make, without dumping those costs onto middle-class Americans, I think is one of the central questions of this campaign.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Denver, CO, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: Obama “Is Off Base Here.” “The president said Romney was proposing a $5 trillion tax cut and Romney said he wasn’t. The president is off base here – Romney says his rate cuts and tax eliminations would be offset and the deficit wouldn’t increase.” (Brooks Jackson, Eugene Kiely, Lori Robertson, Robert Farley, D’Angelo Gore and Ben Finley, “Dubios Denver Debate Declarations,” Factcheck.org, 10/4/12)

THE FACTS: “Romney Is Not Proposing A $5 Trillion Reduction In Taxes.” (Brooks Jackson, Eugene Kiely, Lori Robertson, Robert Farley, D’Angelo Gore and Ben Finley, “Dubios Denver Debate Declarations,” Factcheck.org, 10/4/12)

“ The Obama Campaign Has “Extrapolated” Figures To Come Up With $5 Trillion. “By themselves, those cuts would, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, lower federal tax liability by ‘about $480 billion in calendar year 2015′ compared with current tax policy, with Bush cuts left in place. The Obama campaign has extrapolated that figure out over 10 years, coming up with a $5 trillion figure over a decade.” (Brooks Jackson, Eugene Kiely, Lori Robertson, Robert Farley, D’Angelo Gore and Ben Finley, “Dubios Denver Debate Declarations,” Factcheck.org, 10/4/12)

THE FACTS: “Obama’s Claim That Romney Wants To Cut Taxes By $5 Trillion Doesn’t Add Up.” “Obama’s claim that Romney wants to cut taxes by $5 trillion doesn’t add up. Presumably, Obama was talking about the effect of Romney’s tax plan over 10 years, which is common in Washington. But Obama’s math doesn’t take into account Romney’s entire plan.” (Calvin Woodward, “FACT CHECK: Presidential Debate Missteps,” The Associated Press, 10/3/12)

Romney’s “Goal Is A Simpler Tax Code That Raises The Same Amount Of Money As The Current System But Does It In A More Efficient Manner.” “Romney proposes to reduce income tax rates by 20 percent and eliminate the estate tax and the alternative minimum tax. The Tax Policy Center, a Washington research group, says that would reduce federal tax revenues by $465 billion in 2015, which would add up to about $5 trillion over 10 years. However, Romney says he wants to pay for the tax cuts by reducing or eliminating tax credits, deductions and exemptions. The goal is a simpler tax code that raises the same amount of money as the current system but does it in a more efficient manner.” (Calvin Woodward, “FACT CHECK: Presidential Debate Missteps,” The Associated Press, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: ABC’s Jon Karl: Obama’s Claim That Romney Has A $5 Trillion Tax Cut Plan Is “Mostly Fiction.” KARL: “Okay, so, the big thing there, and he came back to it several times, is Governor Romney has a $5 trillion tax cut plan. I rate that mostly fiction.” (ABC’s “Your Voice: 2012Presidential Debates,” 10/3/12)

[Big P]

LIE #7: OBAMA SAYS HIS PLAN IS BALANCED IN THE MANNER OF SIMPSON-BOWLES

THE CLAIM: Obama Claimed His Deficit-Reduction Plan Was “Balanced.” OBAMA: “Now, we all know that we’ve got to do more. And so I’ve put forward a specific $4 trillion deficit-reduction plan. It’s on a website. You can look at all the numbers, what cuts we make and what revenue we raise. And the way we do it is $2.50 for every cut, we ask for a dollar of additional revenue, paid for, as I indicated earlier, by asking those of us who have done very well in this country to contribute a little bit more to reduce the deficit. And Governor Romney earlier mentioned the Bowles-Simpson commission. Well, that’s how the commission — bipartisan commission that talked about how we should move forward suggested we have to do it — in a balanced way with some revenue and some spending cuts. And this is a major difference that Governor Romney and I have. (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Denver, CO, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: “Obama Made The Deficit-Cutting Plan He’s Offered Sound Comparable To The Plan From The Chairman Of The Simpson-Bowles Debt Cutting Commission. But It’s Not….” “Obama made the deficit-cutting plan he’s offered sound comparable to the plan from the chairmen of the Simpson-Bowles debt cutting commission. But it’s not: his proposal doesn’t save as much money as Simpson-Bowles and doesn’t offer the kinds of detailed entitlement cuts the panel’s leaders did. The president’s $4 trillion plan, including $3 trillion in spending cuts and $1 trillion in tax hikes from allowing the Bush-era tax cuts to expire, is spread over 10 years-a year longer than Simpson-Bowles. It sounds like a minor difference, but cuts and spending balloon in the so-called out years. Also, Obama doesn’t touch Social Security in his plan. And the tax changes and war spending are accounted in ways that make Obama’s plan substantially less aggressive.” (Josh Gerstein and Darren Samuelsohn, “Fact-Checking The Denver Debate,” Politico, 10/4/12)

Obama’s Plan “Provided Only About Two-Thirds Of The Savings” Of The Simpson-Bowles Plan. “‘The president’s budget falls well short of the savings claimed by the [Simpson-Bowles] commission,’ according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. The committee, the kind of wonky group Obama loves to cite, said Obama’s plan provided only about two-thirds of the savings Simpson-Bowles proposed over a comparable period with comparable assumptions.” (Josh Gerstein And Darren Samuelsohn, “Fact-Checking The Denver Debate,” Politico, 10/4/12)

THE FACTS: “Obama Often Claims That His Plan Has The ‘Balanced Approach’ Of The Simpson-Bowles Deficit Commission Proposal, But The Simpson-Bowles Plan Is Actually Quite Different.” “Obama often claims that his plan has the ‘balanced approach’ of the Simpson-Bowles deficit commission proposal, but the Simpson-Bowles plan is actually quite different, calling for tough spending cuts and substantial tax reforms – not the faux proposals contained in the president’s budget.” (Glenn Kessler, “Fact Check: Obama’s Faux Deficit Plan,” The Washington Post’s Fact Checker, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: “When The Two Plans Are Compared Apples To Apples, Simpson-Bowles Yields About $6.6 Trillion In Deficit Reduction – 50 Percent More Than Obama’s Plan.” “For instance, Simpson-Bowles envisioned $4 trillion in debt reduction over nine years; the president’s plan would spread the cuts over 10 years. A good chunk of the savings from deficit reduction piles up in that last year. When the two plans are compared apples to apples, Simpson-Bowles yields about $6.6 trillion in deficit reduction – 50 percent more than Obama’s plan.” (Glenn Kessler, “Fact Check: Obama’s Faux Deficit Plan,” The Washington Post’s Fact Checker, 10/3/12)

“Moreover, The Administration Is Also Counting $848 Billion In Phantom Savings From Winding Down The Wars In Iraq And Afghanistan… Independent Budget Analysts Were Not Impressed And Called The Maneuver ‘A Major Budget Gimmick.’” “Moreover, the administration is also counting $848 billion in phantom savings from winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, even though the administration had long made clear those wars would end. In other words, by projecting war spending far in the future, the administration is able to claim credit for saving money it never intended to spend. (Imagine someone borrowing $50,000 a year for college-and then declaring that they have an extra $500,000 to spend over the next decade once they graduate.) Independent budget analysts were not impressed and called the maneuver ‘a major budget gimmick.’” (Glenn Kessler, “Fact Check: Obama’s Faux Deficit Plan,” The Washington Post’s Fact Checker, 10/3/12)

LIE #8: OBAMA SAYS HE MADE ADJUSTMENTS TO SIMPSON-BOWLES FOR HIS OWN PLAN

THE CLAIM: Obama Said He Had Made Adjustments To The Simpson-Bowles Commission Recommendations. JIM LEHRER: “Governor Romney, do you support Simpson-Bowles?” MITT ROMNEY: “I have my own plan it is not as Simpson-Bowles. But in my view the President should have grabbed it. If you have some adjustments, make it, take it to Congress, fight for it.” BARACK OBAMA: “That’s what we’ve done. Made some adjustment to it. Putting it before Congress right now. $4 trillion plan.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Denver, CO, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell: “Just Ask Alan Simpson Or Erskine Bowles Whether President Obama Embraced Them In The Rose Garden.” MSNBC’S ANDREA MITCHELL: “And then President Obama saying that he went with Simpson Bowles. Well we know that he didn’t. You know I flew out on the same plan as Alan Simpson. Alan Simpson is on the debate commission. Just ask Alan Simpson or Erskine Bowles whether President Obama embraced them in the Rose Garden. Instead he walked away and sort of gave them a pat on the back.” (MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” 10/4/12)

THE FACTS: When Simpson-Bowles Failed To Come To The Floor, “The White House Looked The Other Way.” “Obama, answering a challenge from Romney, said that he did take an adjusted version of the Simpson-Bowles deficit-reduction framework to Congress, and that he has proposed $4 trillion in deficit reduction. Not quite. After the Simpson-Bowles commission failed to get the necessary votes needed to introduce its plan–which would reduce deficits by $4 trillion over 10 years through a combination of discretionary spending cuts, broad tax reform and entitlement savings–to the floor in December 2010, the White House looked the other way. (Meghan McCarthy, Katy O’Donnell, Amy Harder, and Catherine Hollander, “Fact Checking The Presidential Debate,” National Journal, 10/3/12)

“He Did Not Endorse Some Of The Politically Troublesome Recommendations, Such As Trimming Popular Tax Deductions Like The One For Home Mortgage Interest.” (Calvin Woodward, “FACT CHECK: Presidential Debate Missteps,” The Associated Press, 10/3/12)

LIE #9: OBAMA REPEATS THE WAR SAVINGS “FISCAL FICTION”

THE CLAIM: Obama: It’s Important “That We Take Some Of The Money That We’re Saving As We Wind Down Two Wars.” OBAMA: “I think it’s important for us to develop new sources of energy here in America, that we change our tax code to make sure that we’re helping small businesses and companies that are investing here in the United States, that we take some of the money that we’re saving as we wind down two wars to rebuild America and that we reduce our deficit in a balanced way that allows us to make these critical investments.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Denver, CO, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: The Washington Post ‘s The Fact Checker: “This Is Fantasy Money.” “ This is fantasy money. The administration is counting $848 billion in phantom savings from winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, even though the administration had long made clear those wars would end. In other words, by projecting war spending far in the future, the administration is able to claim credit for saving money it never intended to spend. And Obama would still be borrowing [sic] the money to ‘rebuild America’ (Imagine someone borrowing $50,000 a year for college-and then declaring that they have an extra $500,000 to spend over the next decade once they graduate.)” (Glenn Kessler, “Factchecking The First Presidential Debate Of 2012,” The Washington Post‘s The Fact Checker, 10/4/12)

“Now That The Wars Are Winding Down, The Obama Administration Is Happy To Project Costs Far Into The Future, Because It Artificially Inflates The Potential Deficit Reduction. Funny How That Works.” (Glenn Kessler, “Factchecking The First Presidential Debate Of 2012,” The Washington Post‘s The Fact Checker, 10/4/12)

THE FACTS: “ This Oft-Repeated Claim Is Based On A Fiscal Fiction… Stopping Them [The Wars] Doesn’t Create A New Pool Of Available Cash.” “This oft-repeated claim is based on a fiscal fiction. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were paid for mostly with borrowed money, so stopping them doesn’t create a new pool of available cash that can be used for something else, like rebuilding America. It just slows down the government’s borrowing.” (Calvin Woodward, “FACT CHECK: Presidential Debate Missteps,” The Associated Press, 10/4/12)
LIE #10: OBAMA SAYS HE HAS CREATED 5 MILLION PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS

THE CLAIM: Obama: “Over The Last 30 Months, We’ve Seen 5 Million Jobs In The Private Sector Created.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Denver, CO, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: “That Statistic Tries To Obscure The Fact That The Overall Job Record So Far In This Presidential Term Has Been Negative.” “He claimed 5 million jobs have been created in the private sector in the past 30 months; that statistic tries to obscure the fact that the overall job record so far in this presidential term has been negative.” (Glenn Kessler, “Fact Check: Obama’s Jobs Stat,” The Washington Post’s Fact Checker, 10/3/12)

Five Million Private Sector Jobs Is “Weak By Historical Standards” For Economic Recoveries. “After the economy plummeted in late 2007 and throughout 2009, the United States has gained 4.6 million private-sector jobs since the labor market bottomed in February 2010 – or 5.1 million under preliminary revisions released last week that are not part of the official tally by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Still, that’s weak by historical standards. Under President George W. Bush, the private sector also added 5 million jobs in the 30 months after employment hit bottom following the 2001 downturn, and the pace of private-sector gains in the previous two recoveries was far stronger.” (Paul Davidson, Tim Mullaney, Gregory Korte, and Susan Davis, “Fact Check: A Closer Look At Some Claims,” USA Today, 10/4/12)


LIE #11: OBAMA MAKES FALSE ACCUSATIONS ABOUT GOV. ROMNEY’S ECONOMIC PLAN

THE CLAIM: Obama Attributed The Financial Crisis To Policies That Governor Romney Supports. OBAMA: “The approach that Governor Romney’s talking about is the same sales pitch that was made in 2001 and 2003, and we ended up with the slowest job growth in 50 years, we ended up moving from surplus to deficits, and it all culminated in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Denver, CO, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: The Washington Post ‘s The Fact Checker: “Here, The President Comes Close To Repeating A Line That Just This Week Earned Him Three Pinocchios.” “Here, the president comes close to repeating a line that just this week earned him Three Pinocchios. In a new television ad, Obama said that tax cuts and deregulation led to the crisis. But in the debate he broadened his language, bringing in the impact of the Bush tax cuts on the deficit and not directly linking the policies (‘it all culminated’ versus ‘led to’) to the financial crash.” (Glenn Kessler, “Factchecking The First Presidential Debate Of 2012,” The Washington Post‘s The Fact Checker, 10/4/12)

“Obama Comes In Either Last, Second-To-Last Or In The Bottom Half Among Presidents Since The Great Depression.” “But as we have previously demonstrated, Obama comes in either last, second-to-last or in the bottom half among presidents since the Great Depression, depending on which way you look at the numbers.” (Glenn Kessler, “Factchecking The First Presidential Debate Of 2012,” The Washington Post‘s The Fact Checker, 10/4/12)

THE CLAIM: Obama: “Governor Romney Has A Perspective That Says If We Cut Taxes, Skewed Towards The Wealthy, And Roll Back Regulations That We’ll Be Better Off.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Denver, CO, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: This Is “A Claim That Earned Him [Obama] Three Pinocchios This Week.” “The President also suggested that Romney would adopt the same policies as the bush administration -cut taxes and roll back regulation-that led to the economic crisis, which is a claim that earned him Three Pinocchios this week.” (Glenn Kessler, “Fact Check: Obama’s Jobs Stat,” The Washington Post’s Fact Checker, 10/3/12)
LIE #12: OBAMA SAYS SOCIAL SECURITY IS “STRUCTURALLY SOUND”

THE CLAIM: Obama Claimed That Social Security Is “Structurally Sound.” OBAMA: “Social Security is structurally sound. It’s going to have to be tweaked the way it was by Ronald Reagan and Speaker — Democratic Speaker Tip O’Neill. But the basic structure is sound.” (President Barack Obama, Presidential Debate, Denver, CO, 10/3/12)

THE FACTS: MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Said That “But According To The Congressional Budget Office, Social Security Will Run Into Financial Trouble Too.” MSNBC’S ANDREA MITCHELL: “President Obama said that unlike Medicare Social Security does not have to be fixed to remain solvent but according to the Congressional Budget Office, Social Security will run into financial trouble too. By 2030 the amount Social Security pays out will exceed the tax revenue coming in. So in about 20 years the program will not be able to pay for itself through the payroll tax that’s we all pay in. So Brian, the debate will continue on twitter and everywhere else as these facts are checked and counterchecked.” (NBC, 10/3/12)

Mitchell: “What Does That Mean?…We All Know That’s Not True Looking Into The Future.” MITCHELL: “President Obama said he would tweak Social Security. What does that mean? Saying that Social Security is in good shape, fundamentally sound. We all know that’s not true looking into the future.” (MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” 10/4/12)

[ElNono]

^ didn't need the spam to know both lied through the nose, tbh

[Big P]

^ didn't need the spam to know both lied through the nose, tbh

So it was ok when boutons posts the 27 myths about Romney sourced from a typical lib blog (with no type of sources)..then I post 12 lies and counting from fbo, (with sources)....now I am the one that is spamming....typical lib, tbh....and it's not spam if its the truth..I know it hurts, but suck it up.

[Fpoonsie]

So it was ok when boutons posts the 27 myths about Romney sourced from a typical lib blog (with no type of sources)..then I post 12 lies and counting from fbo, (with sources)....now I am the one that is spamming....typical lib, tbh....and it's not spam if its the truth..I know it hurts, but suck it up.

No one takes boutons seriously. Suck it up.

[z0sa]

I actually appreciated Big P's response to Boutons, not because it was anything better than boutons, but because the dude needs to just shut the fuck up already. Both are liars, Boutons. You are a shill. Stop thinking you aren't.

[possessed]

But Romney fucking lied his ass off! How the hell does one kick someone's ass in a debate when they lie their ass off? Off of style? If its a style based analysis that is swaying everyone then who really gives a shit?

Pretty much how Obama won 4 years ago. Irony...

[Nbadan]

Four years of failure is a record to run on? His only plan is the same thing he's done for the last four years and it hasn't worked out..in fact it has gotten a lot worse.

I'm not sure how saving us from catastrophic economic failure and the collapse of the dollar can get worse, but if you say so...

Knuckle head

[possessed]

Wait until the Sept. job numbers are released. LAWLS will ensue.

[Nbadan]

Nobody left gives a shit about the unemployment numbers..

[possessed]

Nobody left gives a shit about the unemployment numbers..

I guess you've already put the jobless in Obama's camp. Believe it or not, some people want to work. Sadly, they probably won't be voting for your guy.

[Nbadan]

But Romney fucking lied his ass off! How the hell does one kick someone's ass in a debate when they lie their ass off? Off of style? If its a style based analysis that is swaying everyone then who really gives a shit?

Warped isn't it? Most red staters are so used to be lied to so often that they are jaded and it doesn't even faze them anymore..these are the same asshats who complain about politics and how crooked the system is....but as long as its their guy telling the lies, all is well...

[Nbadan]

I guess you've already put the jobless in Obama's camp. Believe it or not, some people want to work. Sadly, they probably won't be voting for your guy.

You think the jobless are going to over-whelming vote Romney?

Now that's desperate...

[ElNono]

So it was ok when boutons posts the 27 myths about Romney sourced from a typical lib blog (with no type of sources)..then I post 12 lies and counting from fbo, (with sources)....now I am the one that is spamming....typical lib, tbh....and it's not spam if its the truth..I know it hurts, but suck it up.

It's never ok when boutons does it too. But if you feel like you need to be another boutons/Yoni..... well... go ahead, I guess...

[Nbadan]

Nate Silver, who came within 1 electoral vote of correctly predicting 2008 has Obama increasing his chance of winning up to 87.1%

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/author/nate-silver/

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Wait until the Sept. job numbers are released. LAWLS will ensue.

The only LAWLS is you not keeping up with current news. About a day ago or so a major payroll company estimated that jobs for September grew only 120k versus 180k from August. If it drastically changes from the DoL report I guess it will be news but otherwise its already known.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So it was ok when boutons posts the 27 myths about Romney sourced from a typical lib blog (with no type of sources)..then I post 12 lies and counting from fbo, (with sources)....now I am the one that is spamming....typical lib, tbh....and it's not spam if its the truth..I know it hurts, but suck it up.

No you are a typical bipolar political moron. He said he didn't need your spam to come up with the conclusion that Obama is full of shit anymore than he needs boutox's spam to know Romney is full of shit.

The issue here is that while ElNono doesn't disagree with you any semblance of noncooperation in your GOP dicksucking results in you labeling him as a 'liberal.' He clearly said that both men were full of shit.

There are more and more people that are rejecting BOTH parties. There are droves of people bailing from both the GOP, Democrats, and the shitty political system they force down our throats. this is especially true amongst younger adults. Get used to it. Try understanding that not everyone fits into your bipolar notion of political possibilities.

[Nbadan]

Gallup has it at a seasonally adjusted 7.9% for September...and has Obama at a record high 54% approval rate

[CosmicCowboy]

Guess another few million quit looking for work. The unemployment number is such a fucking joke.

[boutons_deux]

Gallup has it at a seasonally adjusted 7.9% for September...and has Obama at a record high 54% approval rate

Serious Americans don't blame Obama for the Banksters Great Depression.

[boutons_deux]

Debate Victory Validates Romney Strategy of Nonstop Lying


Taking a victory lap after their candidate’s win in the first Presidential debate Wednesday night, Romney campaign insiders today attributed his success to his strategic use of relentless lying.

“We worked for hours on this during the practice debates,” said the campaign manager Matt Rhoades. “We were, like, ‘Mitt, if you find yourself on the verge of saying something true, bite your tongue.’ ”

Mr. Rhoades said that the nominee was allowed to say his real name and acknowledge that he used to be a Governor, “but other than that, he was on a very short leash, truth-wise.”

While Mr. Romney’s talent for lying was in evidence during the Republican primary debates, it was nothing like the “mad skills” he displayed Wednesday night, the campaign manager said.

“All the hard work and practice lying really paid off,” Mr. Rhoades said. “Plus hanging out with Paul Ryan.”



http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2012/10/debate-victory-validates-romney-strategy-of-nonstop-lying.html#ixzz28RL1Ym9L

[djohn2oo8]

lol Romney's momentum gone
lol Repugs only talking point GONE
LOLz

[Clipper Nation]

Willard never had any actual momentum, the media just pretended he "won" the "debate" in order to get high ratings for the next "debate".....

[boutons_deux]

to get high ratings for the next "debate".....

for the media, it's all about selling viewers to advertisers and fabricating false tension and excitement.

the n!gg@ is is doing rope-a-dope. Fool Barry once, shame on Gecko, fool Barry twice er, uh, hmm ... whatever dubya said. :lol

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Son, please.


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_rKQyh_zpNzE/TQuT2e7cbUI/AAAAAAAAC5w/RC13a0oDBXU/s1600/llorona+4.jpg


BTW, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner and her husband are the best presidents we have had since the return of democracy in our country. (not that they had a lot of competiton, but still...)


Quite possibly the dumbest fucking comment I've read on Spurstalk... quite disappointing tbh, I had you pegged as someone who knew his shit...

[DAF86]

Quite possibly the dumbest fucking comment I've read on Spurstalk... quite disappointing tbh, I had you pegged as someone who knew his shit...

I've noted before we're not in the same page politically but still, with a hand in your heart tell me who out of Alfonsin, Menem and de la Rua is better than Nestor and Cristina Kirchner.

These last two have a lot of faults but not as many as the other three, imho.

[z0sa]

for the media, it's all about selling viewers to advertisers and fabricating false tension and excitement.

the n!gg@ is is doing rope-a-dope. Fool Barry once, shame on Gecko, fool Barry twice er, uh, hmm ... whatever dubya said. :lol

LOL not putting GecKKKo because you don't want to seem like a total ignorant racist dumbass.

[djohn2oo8]

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/s480x480/403985_505243769500975_56363996_n.jpg

[ElNono]

I've noted before we're not in the same page politically but still, with a hand in your heart tell me who out of Alfonsin, Menem and de la Rua is better than Nestor and Cristina Kirchner.

These last two have a lot of faults but not as many as the other three, imho.

I haven't lived in the country since El Turco basically kicked me out during his 2nd term, but I do have family there. Frankly, with the exception of De la Rua, most 1st term Presidents haven't been bad (that includes Carlos), the problem is when they fall in love with power and thus 2nd terms become a clusterfuck. What adds insult to injury is that they get so out of touch, they think peeps wants them to stay there forever.

I think that's what happening with Cristina. It rarely ends well.

What they've done with the US dollar is terrible considering how much money they're printing. I just came back two weeks ago, and prices are incredibly expensive for everything. Completely different than when her husband was President. At least Nestor didn't spend like there was no tomorrow.

[jack sommerset]

Serious Americans don't blame Obama for the Banksters Great Depression.

Brother, you are a serious American and I am very pleased because of your contributions you make to this forum. I never feel you are appreciated enough so I wanted to take the time to thank you for sharing all the information you gather from all the other sites you visited. You give us a look inside politics like no other. God bless

[Brazil]

so who won the debate tbh?

[DAF86]

I haven't lived in the country since El Turco basically kicked me out during his 2nd term, but I do have family there. Frankly, with the exception of De la Rua, most 1st term Presidents haven't been bad (that includes Carlos), the problem is when they fall in love with power and thus 2nd terms become a clusterfuck. What adds insult to injury is that they get so out of touch, they think peeps wants them to stay there forever.

I think that's what happening with Cristina. It rarely ends well.

What they've done with the US dollar is terrible considering how much money they're printing. I just came back two weeks ago, and prices are incredibly expensive for everything. Completely different than when her husband was President. At least Nestor didn't spend like there was no tomorrow.

I think there's a huge difference, if anything for the human rights policy alone. I'm also not a fan of the privatization policy that Menem implemented. Then there's the shady AMIA situation. Not to mention that corruption was in an all-time high during his period.

[LnGrrrR]

What they've done with the US dollar is terrible considering how much money they're printing. I just came back two weeks ago, and prices are incredibly expensive for everything. Completely different than when her husband was President. At least Nestor didn't spend like there was no tomorrow.

Well, you know women... always spending... :lol

[ElNono]

Well, you know women... always spending... :lol

:lol

[ElNono]

I think there's a huge difference, if anything for the human rights policy alone. I'm also not a fan of the privatization policy that Menem implemented. Then there's the shady AMIA situation. Not to mention that corruption was in an all-time high during his period.

what the hell are you talking about? :lol

Carlos 2nd term was terrible (and IMO undid anything good he did before), but during his 1st term, there was actual growth an investment. As far as corruption goes, I haven't noticed much change. Same cronies handing their family cozy government jobs, same government programs buying up votes, any governor that doesn't align with the federal government gets their funding cut, any businessman speaking against the government gets a visit from the AFIP, high profile government employees growing their fortunes 50-fold on a short time... the usual banana republic stuff.

[DAF86]

what the hell are you talking about? :lol

Ending that bullshit "Punto final" law that Menem enforced, gay marriage, the "gender identity" law, etc.

[jack sommerset]

so who won the debate tbh?

Romney. God bless

[Th'Pusher]

This thread went for us presidential debate to Argentinian politics :lol

[LnGrrrR]

what the hell are you talking about? :lol

Carlos 2nd term was terrible (and IMO undid anything good he did before), but during his 1st term, there was actual growth an investment. As far as corruption goes, I haven't noticed much change. Same cronies handing their family cozy government jobs, same government programs buying up votes, any governor that doesn't align with the federal government gets their funding cut, any businessman speaking against the government gets a visit from the AFIP, high profile government employees growing their fortunes 50-fold on a short time... the usual banana republic stuff.

Wait, are you still talking about Argentina or the US? :lol

[ElNono]

Wait, are you still talking about Argentina or the US? :lol

Right? :lol

It's much more facist over there though... like they're not even trying to hide it. Not only that, their equivalent to "PBS" runs pro-goverment political ads all the time.

[Big P]

It's never ok when boutons does it too. But if you feel like you need to be another boutons/Yoni..... well... go ahead, I guess...

You didn't call boutons post spam, but when I put up the facts, all of a sudden I'm "spamming" and you feel the need to let me know...ya'll are so easy to spot....and I don't need to be another boutons, it's a two way street...he's gonna post his shit about Romney and I'll post shit about obungle if no one else is going to dispute him. Let the liberal butt-hurt flow.

[ElNono]

You didn't call boutons post spam, but when I put up the facts, all of a sudden I'm "spamming" and you feel the need to let me know..

I called out boutons/Yoni spam at various times. I don't do it everytime they post otherwise I would be spamming myself.

Listen, there's nothing I can do to stop you or boutons or Yoni from pasting walls of text followed by walls of more text. But I sure will let you know how I feel about it. Feel free to ignore it.

It has everything to do with having LESS boutons, tbh


ya'll are so easy to spot....and I don't need to be another boutons, it's a two way street...he's gonna post his shit about Romney and I'll post shit about obungle if no one else is going to dispute him. Let the liberal butt-hurt flow.

I didn't even disagree with you or your post.

AFAIK, other than you and boutons, nobody really reads boutons posts. If you want to go that route too, feel free.

[ploto]

I thought that Bill Maher made an interesting point tonight. He said that during the debate, there was the one real instance where Obama kind of called Romney on his bullshit. What happened -- that was the point on the little scale with the focus group where Obama got his lowest rating of the entire night. So is there a bias that the white guy is seen as aggressive while Oabma would be seen as an angry black man? People asked why he did not do this more, but maybe that is the answer right there.

[boutons_deux]

Americans were suckered, conned, by Gecko's aggressive, strong statement of his 30 LIES. He's a fucking crooked, corrupt salesmen selling a shitty product, and will tell any lie to close the deal.

[ploto]

... will tell any lie to close the deal.
The thing is that it seemed to work, so now he is using it as his main strategy.

[boutons_deux]

Romney Health Care Debate Claim Gets Corrected By His Own Staff

Independent fact checkers (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/oct/03/fact-checking-denver-presidential-debate/) have not been particularly kind to Mitt Romney since Wednesday's first presidential debate in Denver. But one of the candidate's claims turned out to be so far off the mark that he had to be corrected by his own aides — a fact not unnoticed by the Obama campaign.

Romney's claim was this, part of what turned out to be a highly detailed discussion (http://www.npr.org/2012/10/03/162258551/transcript-first-obama-romney-presidential-debate) of health care: "No. 1, pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan."

By pre-existing conditions, Romney was talking about the ability for people who already have medical problems — diabetes, for example, or even things like allergies — to buy health insurance. Starting in 2014, the federal Affordable Care Act (http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/01/20110118a.html) says insurance companies can no longer reject people with bad health histories — nor can they charge them more.

That's already true in Massachusetts (http://www.diffen.com/difference/Obamacare_vs_Romneycare) under the law Romney signed as governor. But Romney's current plan (http://www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care) for the nation, should he be elected president, wouldn't necessarily guarantee that same protection.
"Actually, governor, that isn't what your plan does," President Obama told Romney at the debate Wednesday. "What your plan does is to duplicate what's already the law."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/10/06/162404662/romney-health-care-debate-claim-gets-corrected-by-his-own-staff?sc=17&f=1001

and Gecko/Ryan health plan leaves 70M+ moochers without health insurance.

[djohn2oo8]

The thing is that it seemed to work, so now he is using it as his main strategy.

The jobs report absolutely neutered ol Williard's attacks/policy stance.

[boutons_deux]

Gecko's staff said Gecko lied about pre-existing conditions, and now Gingrich says Gecko lied about his tax plan.

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/romneyquotes.png\

Gingrich acknowledged the clear inconsistency, saying “I think it’s clear he changed.” He described the change as “good politics.”

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/10/07/972301/gingrich-concedes-romney-misled-about-his-tax-plan-during-debates/

YES! Lying and doing a bait-and-switch is good (standard Repug) politics. Gecko for President (of the 1%)! :lol

Romney Told 27 Myths In 38 Minutes (http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/10/04/958801/at-last-nights-debate-romney-told-27-myths-in-38-minutes/)


http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/10/04/958801/at-last-nights-debate-romney-told-27-myths-in-38-minutes/

I see nobody is denying Gecko lied, but pushing the false equivalence the Barry also lied. :lol

and Gecko's dishonest move to center-right is blatantly at odds with what the extremists Ryan and Repugs have been pushing hard for in Congress.

Gecko as Pres would certainly be extremist, too, and backed by JINO SCOTUS.

[boutons_deux]

GOP Strategist Says Romney Is Withholding Details Of His Tax Plan To Avoid Criticism (http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/10/07/972501/gop-strategist-admits-romney-is-witholding-details-of-his-tax-plan-to-avoid-criticism/)

Here is the problem. You guys won’t give him any credit for closing loopholes, because like you guys, he won’t name the loopholes. Why? Because you’ll attack him for doing it. You attack him for not giving you a little target… and then you attack him when you get the target.

Murphy’s argument is that if Romney is transparent with the American people about what tax loopholes he would close to offset the roughly $5 trillion (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/10/04/959181/at-first-debate-mitt-romney-admits-that-he-would-absolutely-not-support-his-own-tax-plan/) such a 20 percent tax cut would cost — those proposals might be subject to scrutiny and criticism.


What sort of “loopholes” might Romney include? Murphy suggested perhaps it might include reductions (http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/mitt-romney-suggests-cutting-mortgage-interest-deduction-on-eve-of-presidential-debate-1.4066809) in how much families with mortgages can deduct their interest payments from their taxes.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/10/07/972501/gop-strategist-admits-romney-is-witholding-details-of-his-tax-plan-to-avoid-criticism/

Gecko is a serial LIAR, and felony tax evader, the ideal candidate for the 1%.

[boutons_deux]

George H.W. Bush Press Secretary in 1984: Lying During Debates Is a Republican Strategy (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/must-read/george-hw-bush-press-secretary-lying-during-debates-republican-strategy)
"You can say anything you want during a debate and 80 million people hear it,'' observed Peter Teeley, press secretary to Vice President Bush. If reporters then document that a candidate spoke untruthfully, ''so what?''

''Maybe 200 people read it or 2,000 or 20,000,'' he said.

2 Approaches to a Candidate's Image: Showing the Message or Speaking It

November 1, 1984

By Fay S. Joyce

LOUISVILLE, Ky., Oct. 31

'Who do you believe,'' Groucho Marx once asked, ''me or your own eyes?''

When Walter F. Mondale quoted that line in his second debate with Ronald Reagan, he went to the heart of the difference between his campaign and Mr. Reagan's. The President is counting on the conviction that people do believe their own eyes, relying in large measure on carefully staged and persuasive pictures to tell his story. Mr. Mondale relies more on the strength of his words.

And as they present their cases to the American public, they are not merely arguing in two different ways. They are also offering different versions of reality: the United States as a country with serious problems that must be tended to, or one that is essentially well off. ''It's either the Land of Oz,'' said one analyst, ''or Kansas.''

Mr. Reagan has largely bypassed the big-city newspapers by making extensive use of hundreds of local newspapers and television stations.

Small Controlled Gestures

And in him the Republicans have a candidate who has mastered the small controlled gestures of television: the cock of the eyebrow, the turn of the head, the soft voice that arrests and hold the attention of the viewer and establishes a sense of intimacy.

In their view, by using television so well Mr. Reagan is simply communicating clearly and effectively his personality and his message of optimism, patriotism and approval of the current economic prosperity for those who are experiencing it.

The Republicans are unabashed in their discussion of their ability to use the television medium.

''You can say anything you want during a debate and 80 million people hear it,'' observed Peter Teeley, press secretary to Vice President Bush. If reporters then document that a candidate spoke untruthfully, ''so what?''

''Maybe 200 people read it or 2,000 or 20,000,'' he said.

''They know a majority of Americans don't agree with them on a lot of stuff,'' he added. ''People overwhelmingly don't agree with their platform. But rather than fight it out on detail, they would rather sketch it out in broad themes and tie Reagan to the flag.''

James David Barber of Duke University, an authority on the Presidency, is one of those who believes the candidates are offering different versions of reality to the public.

And the press, he says, by analyzing debates and campaign appearances in terms of style and political gain rather than on substance, has tutored the public to believe that what the candidates say, and finding out what is true, is not important.

''We've become a nation of theater critics,'' lamented ''We have not succeeded in establishing even an elementary base to discuss the facts. I find that appalling.''



http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/must-read/george-hw-bush-press-secretary-lying-during-debates-republican-strategy

[TeyshaBlue]

lolz

Pew: Romney leads Obama among likely voters
http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2012/10/08/romney-obama-pew-poll-debate/1621309/

[ElNono]

lolz

Pew: Romney leads Obama among likely voters
http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2012/10/08/romney-obama-pew-poll-debate/1621309/

That's interesting. Not even Rasmussen has him that high.

[ploto]

Rasmussen now has them tied.

[ploto]

The Pew poll has a different finding than Gallup's daily tracking poll. In a seven-day rolling average Oct. 1-7, Obama led Romney among registered voters, 49% to 45%, according to Gallup.

Gallup, however, found that Romney pulled even with Obama in two days of surveys taken Thursday and Friday after the debate. Obama apparently did better over the weekend after the jobless rate for September went below 8%, as reported on Friday.

[TeyshaBlue]

Better bump from the debate than was anticipated I guess

[ElNono]

Better bump from the debate than was anticipated I guess

Probably a bounce. Those abound during the debates. I was reading a while ago that the largest swing historically after debates was 4 points. Normally they don't affect the race that much.

[Nbadan]

Now polls are OK?

[Nbadan]

From Nate Silver today


How much difference did the Pew poll make? We had Romney win % rising to 24.4% from 21.6% today. Without Pew, he'd have made no gain at all.


So the Pew poll really is a huge data point for Romney. But his polling today was pretty mediocre without it

[Nbadan]

According to numbers reported by Pew, Democrats fell from 37 percent in the September poll to 32 percent in October while Republicans rose from 28 to 33 percent among registered voters. With such numbers and high support for the nominee among partisans, it's no surprise that Romney leads Obama. With the same partisan breakdown in October as in September, Obama would still be leading, even among likely voters.

So what's behind the Republican surge in party identification? As far as I can tell, the September-October shift is the largest recorded by the Pew trend line. But is it a real surge? If so, Republicans would have scored a partisan realignment of sorts, all in the wake of a terrific debate performance. That seems far-fetched. More likely, the sample for the October poll just ended up with more Republicans and fewer Democrats than before. ..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/helmut-norpoth/pew-poll_b_1949879.html?utm_hp_ref=

[Wild Cobra]

That's interesting. Not even Rasmussen has him that high.
Does Rasmussen use the "likely voter" sample too?

[ElNono]

Does Rasmussen use the "likely voter" sample too?

yep...

Daily tracking results are collected via telephone surveys of 500 likely voters per night and reported on a three-day rolling average basis.

[Wild Cobra]

Just asking. I haven't really cared what's happening.

[boutons_deux]

conman liar Gecko has a dozens of electoral votes to switch.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

When a single debate by blatant, frantic, proven, serial liar and conman swings Americans so easily, just more proof that America is fucked and unfuckable.

[Agloco]

Well, you know women... always spending... :lol

Amen Sarge.

:lol

[Agloco]

Better bump from the debate than was anticipated I guess

It's troubling that a single event would sway so many voters. It's especially troubling to me that this particular event caused it.

[TeyshaBlue]

Now polls are OK?

Pew is one of the better polling orgs out there, imo.

[TeyshaBlue]

It's troubling that a single event would sway so many voters. It's especially troubling to me that this particular event caused it.

I think a lot of media hay was made over the perceived performance disparity. Most likely a knee-jerk bump.

[boutons_deux]

(Prez) campaigns, lasting fucking years, are above all a media business, and hyped by the media to sell ads (selling consumers to corporations).

The Business of America is Business (not democracy).