Reply With Quote
So when your opponent is a buffoon and you barely win, what does that really say about you?
mutha in' hat trick.
So when your opponent is a buffoon and you barely win, what does that really say about you?
I don't know how anyone would be proud to have to choose between giant s and turd sandwiches every 4 years...and yet here we are, doing it again.
A CNN survey of registered voters who watched the debate and had previously agreed to be interviewed found Paul Ryan the winner, 48 percent to 44 percent, but that was well within the survey's five percentage point margin of error. Respondents also said they thought Ryan communicated more clearly than Vice President Joe Biden, by a 50 percent to 41 percent margin, and that Ryan was more likable, 53 percent to 43 percent.
Those margins likely reflect the underlying partisan composition of the debate viewers that CNN interviewed. The cable network reported that slightly more Republicans viewed the debate (33 percent) than Democrats (31 percent), while 34 percent identified as independents.
The candidates performed similarly on whether respondents thought they were qualified to be president: 60 percent thought Ryan qualified and 38 percent did not. They said Biden was qualified by a 57 percent to 42 percent margin.
Fifty-five percent of CNN respondents said Biden performed better than they expected, 26 percent said he did worse, and 18 percent said he did the same as they expected. Ryan also impressed, with 51 percent saying he performed better, 19 percent worse, and 28 percent said he performed the same.
CNN surveyed 381 registered voters who had participated in a previous CNN poll, watched the debate, and agreed to be interviewed.
A CBS News poll of uncommitted voters using an online panel found that both candidates made solid impressions, but that more of those voters felt that the debate was a win for Biden. The survey found that 50 percent thought Biden won, 31 percent that Ryan won, and 19 percent that the debate was a tie.
Biden saw a big increase from before the debate in the percentage of respondents who thought he had the ability to be an effective president if necessary. Prior to the debate, 39 percent said he had the ability to be an effective president, while 56 percent said so after. Ryan saw a smaller increase on this measure, from 45 percent before the debate to 49 percent after.
Biden also impressed respondents with his knowledge of the issues. After the debate, 85 percent of respondents said Biden was knowledgeable on the issues, while 75 percent said so of Ryan.
The candidates were more closely matched on whether respondents said they could relate to them. Before the debate, 34 percent of respondents said they could relate to Biden, while 55 percent said so after. Ryan's rating on the measure increased from 31 percent to 48 percent.
The CBS News poll was conducted using the GfK KnowledgePanel, a representative Internet panel, to interview 431 uncommitted voters who watched the debate, and had a five percentage point margin of error. The CBS "uncommitted voters" include those who were either totally undecided before the debate or who were leaning to a candidate, but said they may still change their minds. According to CBS, 58 percent of respondents identified as independents, 17 percent as Republicans, and 25 percent as Democrats.
Although Mr. Obama got a distinctly poor poll in Florida, which showed him seven points behind there, the rest of Thursday’s state-level data, like a series of polls by Quinnipiac University and Marist College, were reasonably good for him. In surveys of compe ive states that were released over the course of the day, he held the lead with 11 polls to Mitt Romney’s 6.
538
Still trending towards Romney, though..
Since when did the VP even matter? Johnson, that's the last time. There are very few instances where a VP could have EVER won an election on their own. Gore was the VP during one of the most pronounced presidencies of all time, and he couldn't even carry his own ing state.
You lie.
The internet bubble popped in mid-2000. head came into office saying repeatedly after the election how ty the economy was getting to make sure the blame stuck to Clinton.
Now, the obstructionist, austerity-loving Repugs blame the Banksters Great Depression economy exclusively on Barry.
The inference that you know how or why people vote on polls like this is part of the myopia. Plenty of people expressed they don't buy what Biden or Ryan (or Barry/Mitt) are selling, and thus the vote might reflect a different criteria entirely (ie: I pointed out the 'style points' before). As a matter of fact, quite a few people that voted Biden now, voted Romney in the previous poll.
The NBA analogy doesn't really apply to what I pointed out, because I don't disagree that there's bias. My argument is that having a certain bias doesn't automatically make you a drone that's encapsulated into the red or blue team. There's plenty of people that have differing leaning based on different topics. It's not necessarily rare to find people that are, for example, fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Inferring that a person is a democrat or a republican in such a case can be an exercise in futility.
That's exactly what I pointed out. IIRC, historically speaking, even presidential debates have shown bounces, but not necessarily a major swing when all is said and done.
100% agree with this.
I don't know how many lies Joe Biden told last night but there were three whoppers (Okay, one whopper and two statements that were either whoppers or reveal an incompetence worse than a lie):
1) "We did not know the Consulate in Benghazi was requesting more security." For 's sake, there had been dozens of security incidents at the consulate over the previous year, the anniversary of 9-11 was approaching, the mid-east has been in an agitated state for over a year and this administration not only wasn't aware the consulate in Benghazi wanted more security -- THEY DIDN'T EVEN THINK TO ASSESS AND HAVE A BASIC UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WAS THE SECURITY SITUATION IN THAT PART OF THE WORLD? I find that hard to believe. Throwing the State Department under the bus on that issue, last night, will come back to haunt the President and Vice President.
2) "We were only repeating what the Intelligence Community was saying about what caused the violence in Benghazi." According to Congressional testimony, the Intelligence community and the State Department knew withing 24 hours (after suspecting as much since the Consulate was breached) that the assassination of our Ambassador and the assault on the facility was the work of terrorists -- probably al Qaeda yet, the President and his spokesman continued, for almost a week, to advance the narrative that the violence was a spontaneous protest by people upset over a YouTube video.
3) “With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear. No religious ins ution—Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital—none has to either refer contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact. That is a fact.” No, It is not a fact. Here, let the U. S. Conference of Catholic Bishops explain...
If the man was willing to spew bald-faced lies on those three things when the truth is already known by most of the general public, about what else was he lying that, perhaps, the rest of us aren't so versed?
Last night, the following statement was made during the Vice Presidential debate regarding the decision of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to force virtually all employers to include sterilization and contraception, including drugs that may cause abortion, in the health insurance coverage they provide their employees:
This is not a fact. The HHS mandate contains a narrow, four-part exemption for certain “religious employers.” That exemption was made final in February and does not extend to “Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital,” or any other religious charity that offers its services to all, regardless of the faith of those served.
HHS has proposed an additional “accommodation” for religious organizations like these, which HHS itself describes as “non-exempt.” That proposal does not even potentially relieve these organizations from the obligation “to pay for contraception” and “to be a vehicle to get contraception.” They will have to serve as a vehicle, because they will still be forced to provide their employees with health coverage, and that coverage will still have to include sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients. They will have to pay for these things, because the premiums that the organizations (and their employees) are required to pay will still be applied, along with other funds, to cover the cost of these drugs and surgeries.
USCCB continues to urge HHS, in the strongest possible terms, actually to eliminate the various infringements on religious freedom imposed by the mandate.
Combine that with his juvenile demeanor -- throughout the debate -- and I think he did the President no favors last night. Someone counted nearly 20 times that Biden interrupted Paul Ryan -- and then he had the gall to complain to the moderator that he wanted a chance to respond?
Biden's a joke.
I am speaking of how polls reflect bias, not why anecdotal examples of fliers disagree.
The term "plenty of people" is meaningless if it doesn't change the numbers in the poll. The reason why bias affects judgement is the same reason why bias effects polls since polls are based often on snap judgements and not long, thought out decisions. They might not accurately reflect how the person will vote given time to consider the options, but you cannot really deny that party leanings affect poll responses on who won. It's not dishonesty, it's just bias.Plenty of people expressed they don't buy what Biden or Ryan (or Barry/Mitt) are selling, and thus the vote might reflect a different criteria entirely (ie: I pointed out the 'style points' before). As a matter of fact, quite a few people that voted Biden now, voted Romney in the previous poll.
You're pointing out the exceptions and I am pointing out the rule.The NBA analogy doesn't really apply to what I pointed out, because I don't disagree that there's bias. My argument is that having a certain bias doesn't automatically make you a drone that's encapsulated into the red or blue team. There's plenty of people that have differing leaning based on different topics. It's not necessarily rare to find people that are, for example, fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Inferring that a person is a democrat or a republican in such a case can be an exercise in futility.
Really great revisionist history. The banking issues weren't internet bubble related, and the internet bubble had nothing to do with the POTUS. There was nothing there that justified those stock prices, and that was predicted and some people knew it, sold and got out. It's the EMU thing x infinity. People got too caught up in the stocks without even considering they weren't really backed by anything. It's like needing electricity and paying a million dollars for a piece of conduit and thinking you have a million dollar system because of it.
Biden won in being creepy. Ryan was clearly more hydrated as the debate progressed.
10 Best Biden Put-Downs of Paul Ryan in Veep Debate
1. “A bunch of malarkey.” Moderator Martha Raddatz of ABC News opened the debate with a question about last month’s attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya, to which Ryan responded with a claim that the Obama administration was cutting defense spending to dangerous levels, and that it had put the Benghazi consulate in danger by failing to provide enough security.
“With all due respect,” Biden replied, “that’s a bunch of malarkey...
“I will be very specific,” Biden said. “Number one, this lecture on embassy security -- ** the congressman here cut embassy security in his budget by $300 million below what we asked for, number one. So much for the embassy security piece.
“Number two, Governor Romney, before he knew the facts, before he even knew that our ambassador was killed, he was out making a political statement which was panned by the media around the world. And this talk about this **this weakness. I don't understand what my friend's talking about here.”
2. “Betting against America.” Pivoting on Ryan’s claim that the U.S. is signaling weakness through defense cuts, Biden added: “Look, I just -- **I mean, these guys bet against America all the time."
3. Dissing Grover the Great. It has long been the case that in order to ensure the goodwill of right-wing donors, Republican candidates for Congress have felt compelled to sign [4], under pressure from Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist, a pledge that they will not raise taxes under virtually any cir stances. Ryan is no exception. During a discussion of tax policy, Biden invoked Norquist’s name.
“[I]nstead of signing pledges to Grover Norquist not to ask the wealthiest among us to contribute to bring back the middle class,” Biden said, “they should be signing a pledge saying to the middle class we're going to level the playing field; we're going to give you a fair shot again; we are going to not repeat the mistakes we made in the past by having a different set of rules for Wall Street and Main Street, making sure that we continue to hemorrhage these tax cuts for the super wealthy.”
4. “Stop talking about how you care about people.” As part of the tax policy discussion, Biden let loose with a riff that painted Republican resistance to taxing the wealthiest as a form of disregard for the rest of the country, telling Ryan that if Republicans would “just get out of the way” of passing a jobs bill, things would get better for the middle class.
“Stop talking about how you care about people,” Biden said. “Show me something. Show me a policy. Show me a policy where you take responsibility.
He continued: “And, by the way, they talk about this Great Recession if it fell out of the sky, like, 'Oh, my goodness, where did it come from?' It came from this man voting to put two wars on a credit card, to at the same time put a prescription drug benefit on the credit card, a trillion-*dollar tax cut for the very wealthy. I was there. I voted against them. I said, no, we can't afford that. And now, all of a sudden, these guys are so seized with the concern about the debt that they created.”
5. The 47 percent and a bridge for sale. About this time last week, liberals and progressives were scratching their heads, wondering why Obama, in his debate with Romney, never mentioned the governor’s infamous comments, made in secretly recorded video obtained by Mother Jones [5], suggesting that 47 percent of the American people are moochers who “believe that they are victims” and feel “en led to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it.” Biden was all too happy to pick up the slack.
After Obama deprived Romney the opportunity to apologize for those remarks during the presidential debate, Romney appeared on Fox News Channel’s Hannity show to say he had been wrong to say what he did -- that it had been a big mistake.
Biden was having none of it. “The idea,** if you heard that **that little soliloquy on 47 percent and you think he just made a mistake, then I think you're **--** I think **I got a bridge to sell you,” he said.
It was the capper to Biden’s comments about Romney, Ryan and the middle class, viewed through the prism of Romney’s opposition to bailout loans for the auto industry, and mortgage refinancing for people who are about to lose their homes. Throughout the debate, Biden referred to Ryan as “my friend.”
“Romney said: ‘No, let Detroit go bankrupt,’” Biden said. “We moved in and helped people refinance their homes. Governor Romney said: ‘No, let foreclosures hit the bottom.’ But it shouldn't be surprising for a guy who says 47 percent of the American people are unwilling to take responsibility for their own lives. My friend recently in a speech [6] in Washington said 30 percent of the American people are takers.
“These people are my mom and dad,** the people I grew up with, my neighbors,” Biden went on. “They pay more effective tax than Gov. Romney pays in his federal income tax. They are elderly people who, in fact, are living off of Social Security. They are veterans and people fighting in Afghanistan right now who are, quote, ‘not paying any tax.’"
6. “A bunch of stuff” -- and more malarkey. In an exchange on Iran’s efforts to obtain a nuclear weapon, Ryan took Biden to task, alleging that the administration has not been tough enough, and sought to weaken the economic sanctions against Tehran that are currently in place. What followed is priceless enough that a bit of transcript [7] is required to appreciate the full effect:
BIDEN: This is a bunch of stuff. Look, here's the deal.7. “By the way, can you send me some stimulus money?” Ryan’s opposition to the Obama administration’s stimulus spending is legendary; he even termed it “crony capitalism” in the debate. Biden was ready for him, citing two letters sent by Ryan to the Department of Energy, requesting a share of stimulus dollars for companies in his district in Wisconsin.
RADDATZ: What does that mean, a bunch of stuff?
BIDEN: Well, it means it's simply inaccurate.
RYAN: It's Irish.
BIDEN: It ** it is. We Irish call it malarkey.
RADDATZ: Thanks for the translation. Okay..
BIDEN: I don't know what world this guy's living in.
RYAN: Thank heavens we had these sanctions in place. It's in spite of their opposition.
BIDEN: Oh, God.
“And I love my friend here,” Biden said, with a flash of teeth. “I'm not allowed to show letters, but go on our Web site -- he sent me two letters [8] saying: ‘By the way, can you send me some stimulus money for companies here in the state of Wisconsin?’ We sent millions of dollars...
“I love that,” Biden went on. “I love that. This was such a bad program and he writes me a letter saying --** writes the Department of Energy a letter saying: ‘The reason we need this stimulus, it will create growth and jobs.’ His words. And now he's sitting here looking at me.”
8. Forcible rape. As the debate drew to a close, the candidates were asked to articulate their positions on abortion in the context of their shared Catholic faith -- a rather inappropriate way to do so, but, whatever. Biden quickly pivoted from his own position (personally opposed to abortion, but believes it should be legal), to Ryan’s most extreme articulation of his own, which puts him in a league with Missouri senatorial candidate Todd Akin, with whom Ryan co-sponsored anti-abortion legislation that would have redefined rape [9] to a narrower definition for the purpose of closing the exception to the ban on Medicaid-funded abortions for women whose pregnancies are the result of sexual assault.
Without ever mentioning Akin’s name, Biden implicitly tied Ryan to Akin’s notorious remarks about “legitimate rape.”
“[M]y friend says that he **-- well, I guess he accepts Governor Romney's position now, because in the past he has argued that there was there's rape and forcible rape,” Biden, who authored the Violence Against Women Act, said. “He's argued that in the case of rape or incest...it would be a crime to engage in having an abortion. I just fundamentally disagree with my friend.”
9. You’re no Jack Kennedy. In the 1988 vice presidential debate between the seasoned Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, D-Texas, and the callow Sen. Dan Quayle, R-Ind., Quayle made the fatal mistake of comparing his tenure in the Senate to that of the late President John F. Kennedy. “Senator, I knew Jack Kennedy,” Bentsen retorted [10] (video). “Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. And, Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy.”
In the 2012 debate, the seasoned Biden subtly invoked the memory of that line when his much younger opponent wandered into the same territory as had Quayle. From the transcript [7]:
RYAN: You can ** you can cut tax rates by 20 percent and still preserve these important preferences for middle* class taxpayers...10. But you may be Sarah Palin. During a discussion of the Obama administration’s changes to Medicare via the Affordable Care Act, Ryan tried to paint a commision established by the bill as panel created to ration health care.
BIDEN: Not mathematically possible.
RYAN: It is mathematically possible. It's been done before. It's precisely what we're proposing. BIDEN: It has never been done before.
RYAN: It's been done a couple of times, actually.
BIDEN: It has never been done before.
RYAN: Jack Kennedy lowered tax rates, increased growth. Ronald Reagan--
BIDEN: Oh, now you're Jack Kennedy?
“You know, I heard that death panel argument from Sarah Palin,” Biden replied. “It seems every vice presidential debate I hear this kind of stuff about panels.”
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-pol...ns-veep-debate
Well, no, you're projecting what you infer as bias to encapsulate a poster (in this case ploto) into a party.
But it did change the numbers in the poll. I count 6 votes for Biden in this poll, that went to Romney in the previous poll.
I'm also not sure what you mean by 'party leanings'. Perhaps it's because I didn't grow up within this system, so I don't necessarily subscribe to either party.
Well, I would agree it's a minority (exception sounds like a very tiny portion, and I don't agree to characterize it like that). I think it's pretty well known neither party base can win an election on their own, thus that minority certainly has a big impact.
That is also why you have to ask who was watching to answer the polls.
Surely then, you took the time to see how many lies Ryan said, right?
hockey sucks so even though i want to see the humor i just cannot. its like making jokes about bus-fires.
Oh wait.
That he voted to authorize BOTH wars he claimed to have voted against, for instance?If the man was willing to spew bald-faced lies on those three things when the truth is already known by most of the general public, about what else was he lying that, perhaps, the rest of us aren't so versed?
The only joke, and it is a dark, sad one, is how much your candidates are willing to lie to get elected. I kinda knew Obama was bluffing about during his initial election, and know a lot better than to trust him now, but I have been truly taken aback at how low your party and its candidates are willing to stoop to get the White House back.
It fits with the "winning at all costs" mentality that has been fevering your brains since the late nineties.
I didn't hear Ryan lie. Do tell.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
