Joe Biden: “I have had it up to here with that notion of 47 percent.”
Posted: October 11, 2012 Filed under: 2012 presidential campaign, U.S. Economy, U.S. Military, U.S. Politics | Tags: Joe Biden, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, the 47 percent, VP debate 2012 44 CommentsI thought Joe Biden won the debate tonight because he was able to bring Mitt Romney’s 47% comments up and elaborate on them in an emotional way at least three times. It might have been four, I’m not sure. He said that Romney was talking about Biden’s parents, the soldiers serving overseas, and so on. He rubbed Ryan’s face in it and on top of that he brought up Ryan’s 30% of Americans are takers comments.
I also loved the way Biden focused on Mitt Romney, not Paul Ryan. He brought everything back to Romney and the issues Romney has committed himself to.
I thought Biden hit all the right notes, and he wasn’t afraid to be expressive. Ryan, on the other hand, mouthed talking points and fell back on his usual verbal tics, like “What we’re saying is…” I thought Ryan was especially bad when he was talking about Iran, Afghanistan, and Syria. He looked like a fool claiming that the Iranians already have five nuclear weapons, and Biden spell out the facts pretty clearly. On Syria, Ryan offered no specifics about what Romney and he would do differently, and on Afghanistan he was simply incoherent.
I’m sorry I missed the open threads. I watched the debate with my brother and sister-in-law. But I plan to read all the comments tonight and tomorrow to see what you all thought.
Here are a few links to reactions to the debate in case anyone wants to keep discussing it. I will probably be up for another hour or so.
TPM: Biden Pins Ryan Down on Taxes — ‘Oh, Now You’re Jack Kennedy?’
Joe Biden came ready to talk taxes during Thursday’s vice presidential debate, charging at Paul Ryan full speed over his campaign’s vague answers as to how they would pay for a 20 percent tax cut across all income brackets that nonpartisan analysts claim is mathematically unworkable.
Moderator Martha Raddatz began by pressing Ryan on the issue, saying he’s “refused to offer specifics” on how he would pay for the cuts.Ryan responded that “we want to have a big bipartisan agreement” and would work out the details later, citing Ronald Reagan’s 1986 reforms as a model.
“We want to work with Congress on how best to achieve this,” he said.
“Let me have a chance to translate,” Biden said. “I was there with Ronald Reagan. He gave specifics in terms of tax expenditures.”
I had to hand it to Martha Raddatz on that one. I suppose the Republicans will be outraged, and I say good! Let them clutch their pearls and retire to the fainting couch. Let’s have more women moderators!
Salon: Biden: Ryan “sent me two letters” asking for stimulus.
That was another good line for Biden!
NBC News: Biden plays aggressor in debate as Ryan makes GOP case.
Politico: Ryan camp not satisfied with Raddatz.
Oh, boo hoo…
Have you seen any good reactions? I’ll keep looking around. I’m too hyped up to sleep right now.
Obviously, this is an open thread!
Live Blog 2: Laughing Joe and Smirking Paul Veep Show
Posted: October 11, 2012 Filed under: 2012 elections, 2012 presidential campaign, Live Blog | Tags: Biden, Romney, VP Debate 84 Comments
Well, they are really going at it.
Vice President Joe Biden and Rep. Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin each went immediately on the attack at the opening of their debate on Thursday night, sparring over Libya, Iraq and terrorism.
Responding to a question on the fatal attack last month on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, Biden assailed Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney on a range of national security matters.
“Whatever mistakes were made will not be made again,” Biden said of the attack in Libya before pivoting to Romney’s support of the war in Iraq.
Biden credited President Obama for ending the Iraq war, saying Romney thought “we should have left 30,000 troops there.” He faulted Romney for objecting early on to Obama’s setting a 2014 deadline for withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan, and for saying he “wouldn’t move heaven and Earth” to capture Osama bin Laden.
Ryan, the Republican nominee for vice president, said he mourned the death of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevensand three other Americans in the Libya attack, then criticized Obama’s response to the attack.
“It took the president two weeks to acknowledge that this was a terrorist attack,” the Wisconsin congressman said.
Ryan said a Romney administration would provide Marines protecting an outpost like the one in Benghazi.
“If we’re hit by terrorists, we’re going to call it for what it is — a terrorist attack,” he said.
Ryan also castigated Obama’s administration for its evolving accounts of the Libya attack. “This is becoming more troubling by the day,” he said.
WAPO says they have “different styles”.
The first 45 minutes showed two men with widely divergent styles: Ryan, the House Budget Committee chairman, was precise and self-contained, marshalling numbers and policy issues.
Biden was looser and more familiar, chuckling in seeming exasperation several times at Ryan’s arguments, and interrupting the Republican in mid-argument. Eventually, Ryan seemed frustrated with a debate in which the two talked over each other.
“Mr. Vice President, I know you’re under a lot of duress to make up for lost ground,” Ryan said. “But I think people would be better served if we didn’t keep interrupting each other.”
One of Ryan’s best early moments came in response to the debate’s first question, about the attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed the U.S. ambassador and three others. Ryan recounted how the White House’s account of the attack had shifted, and cast it as a signal of a broader problem.
“What we are watching on our TV screens is the unraveling of the Obama foreign policy, which is making…us less safe,” Ryan said.
For Biden, the sharpest moment may have been when he picked up on the theme that President Obama did not touch in the first presidential debate. He recalled a Romney speech that was secretly recorded, in which the Republican candidate described 47 percent of Americans as people who considered themselves primarily victims.
“I’ve had it up to here with this notion that, ‘Forty-seven percent, it’s about time they take some sort of responsibility here,’” Biden said.
What do you think about this assessment?
For political junkies and decided voters, this is a great debate. For the rest, it’s everything they hate about politics #vpdebate
Live Blog I : VEEP PEEP Show
Posted: October 11, 2012 Filed under: 2012 elections, 2012 presidential campaign | Tags: Biden, Debates 2012, Ryan, Vice President 88 CommentsHere we go!
Just thought I‘d drop this CSM article on the faux right wing outrage over the debate moderator tonight in as our first topic on a live blog series tonight. She’s actually a war correspondent but you know, it’s part of the lower expectations game.
On Wednesday, the conservative Daily Caller posted a blog about Ms. Raddatz, alleging bias because of her short-lived marriage in the 1990s to an Obama administration appointee, Julius Genachowski, the head of the Federal Communications Commission.
This shot comes on the heels of an avalanche of criticism aimed at last week’s presidential debate moderator, Jim Lehrer, ranging from GOP commentatorLaura Ingraham to Democratic contributor Bill Maher.
“There have always been questions about moderators,” says Atlanta-based GOP strategist David Johnson, who consulted on Bob Dole’s 1988 presidential campaign. Targeting moderators is simply a political strategy, he says, giving “each side a way to say, the debate was stacked against them if their candidates don’t do well.”
Mounting such a strategy before the debate even starts, Mr. Johnson adds, “makes the moderators go out of their way to be evenhanded.”
In one of the GOP debates earlier this year, CNN’sJohn King took withering heat for asking Newt Gingrichabout allegations made by his second wife. A variety of sources challenged Gwen Ifill’s objectivity in 2008 because she had written a book related to Barack Obama.
Now, both ABC News and the Commission on Presidential Debates have dismissed charges of bias against Raddatz, a senior foreign affairs correspondent. As reported in Politico Wednesday, The Washington Post’s conservative Jennifer Rubin tweeted that “this whole mini flap was obnoxious, dumb.”
VP Debate Thursday: Pre-Live Blog Politicizing!
Posted: October 11, 2012 Filed under: 2012 elections, 2012 presidential campaign | Tags: Romney Ryan Debate, VEEP debat 29 Comments
Here we go again!
It’s VP Debate Time!
Here’s some punditry projections and hope-a-cizing!
The outcome of the debate is likely to hinge on whether Biden can hang Ryan’s past positions around his neck, or Ryan is able to dodge and wiggle away from the positions he’s held during seven terms in the House of Representatives.
For his part, Biden enters the debate in the immediate aftermath of Mitt Romney’s post-debate bump in the polls, and needs to have a strong performance to regain some momentum. Obama’s actual performance wasn’t that awful – a snap-poll of 500 undecided voters conducted by CBS at the end of the debate found that a majority thought it was either a draw or that Obama won – but the media narrative following it has been, and Biden needs to change the conversation.
TO: VPOTUS
FROM: Robert Reich
RE: Debate
Beware: Paul Ryan will appear affable. He’s less polished and aggressive than Romney, even soft-spoken. And he acts as if he’s saying reasonable things.
But under the surface he’s a right-wing zealot. And nothing he says or believes is reasonable – neither logical nor reflecting the values of the great majority of Americans.
Your job is to smoke Ryan out, exposing his fanaticism. The best way to do this is to force him to take responsibility for the regressive budget he created as chairman of the House Budget Committee.
Ryan won’t be able to pull a Romney — pretending he’s a moderate — because the Ryan budget is out there, with specific numbers.
It’s an astounding document that Romney fully supports. And it fills in the details Romney has left out of his proposals. Mitt Romney is a robot who will say and do whatever he’s programmed to do. Ryan is the robot’s brain. The robot has no heart. It’s your job to enable America to see this.
I suggest you hold up a copy of the Ryan budget in front of the cameras. You might even read selected passages.
Emphasize these points: Ryan’s budget turns Medicare into vouchers. It includes the same $716 billion of savings Romney last week accused the President of cutting out of Medicare – but instead of getting it from providers he gets it from the elderly.
It turns Medicaid over to cash-starved states, with even less federal contribution. This will hurt the poor as well as middle-class elderly in nursing homes.
Over 60 percent of its savings come out of programs for lower-income Americans – like Pell grants and food stamps.
Yet it gives huge tax cuts to the top 1 percent – some $4.7 trillion over the next decade. (This is the same top 1 percent, you might add, who
have reaped 93 percent of the gains from the recovery, whose stock portfolios have regained everything they lost and more, and who are now taking home a larger share of total income than at any time in the last eighty years and paying the lowest taxes than at any time since before World War II.)
As a result it doesn’t reduce the federal debt at all. In fact, it worsens it.
The deeper we drilled into the regulations in Ryan’s plan, the more they sounded like the very plans he was arguing against.
For instance, he didn’t like that in Obamacare, “You’re having a person design how insurance can be sold.” Then how does his plan make sure people aren’t sold defective products? “In the Patient’s Choice Act, we do an actuarially equivalent minimum in each exchange that’s equal to the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Standard Option.” Well, isn’t that pretty much what Obamacare does?
What followed was health-care word salad. “The Senate bill goes a lot further than that. You need to define what insurance is. I agree with that. But what we’re trying to achieve here is a system in which the patient is the driver of it, not government bureaucrats.” Then how come you’ve got government bureaucrats deciding what insurance is?
In effect, Ryan’s plan and Obama’s plan would regulate insurance products sold through the exchanges in pretty much the same way. But Ryan didn’t want to say that. So he basically offered a lot of convincing sounding words on the topic. If you parse his response, it’s not terribly convincing. But you really need to know the issues to parse his response. The fact that you’ve caught Ryan in a bit of a contradiction doesn’t mean he’s going to admit it.
That said, Ryan is very good at admitting when you’ve got a point. He doesn’t do this when you’ve got a point that undermines his point, but he does it, and generously, when you’ve got a point that he can agree to. He’s also very good at admitting when Republicans have strayed from conservative ideals in the past. You can see that in our discussion of the economy, where he suggests he’s eager to fight Republicans over paying for their budget promises, even though he himself was one of those Republicans voting not to pay for anything in the Bush years.
The result is that, while he’s a highly ideological thinker, he doesn’t come off as particularly ideological. He comes off as an affable, decent, conservative guy who holds strong views, but recognizes that he doesn’t have all the answers and that his party hasn’t always lived up to its promises.
ABC’ Sarah Parnass on “Getting to Know ABC News VP Debate Moderator Martha Raddatz”:
Martha Raddatz was named senior foreign affairs correspondent for ABC News in November 2008 after serving as White House correspondent during the last term of President George W. Bush’s administration. She first joined ABC News as the State Department correspondent in January 1999. Before that, she covered foreign policy, defense and intelligence issues for National Public Radio.
Her coverage has won numerous awards, including the Fred Friendly First Amendment Award this spring.
In her acceptance speech for that award, Raddatz said she wants “people to know about the world.”
“I want people to remember,” she said. “I want people to feel. I want people to question.”
Raddatz has traveled to Iraq to cover the conflict there 21 times. She is the author of a New York Times bestselling book about her experiences there, “The Long Road Home — a Story of War.”
After decades of reporting on foreign affairs, Raddatz said she is honored to sit down with two men who have devoted so much of their lives to public service. Both Rep. Ryan, R-Wis., and Biden first came to Washington in their 20s and have remained there ever since.
NBC News and 10 things to watch for:
Biden told reporters last week that his top priority in preparing for the Thursday debate was a thorough review of Ryan’s budget and policy proposals.
“What I’ve been doing mostly quite frankly is studying up on Congressman Ryan’s positions on the issues,” he said. “And Governor Romney has embraced at least everything I can see.”
Foremost among those positions espoused by Ryan are those contained in the two budgets he authored as House Budget Committee chairman. Several aspects of the original 2011 Ryan budget – which includes a complete overhaul of Medicare – are staples in Biden’s stump speech. He gives visceral examples, telling audiences to imagine their 80-something mothers using “coupons” to shop around for a good insurance deal.
What are you looking for tonight?
ONE hour to go!
Meanwhile you cn watch this great YOUTube by Joseph Cannon our friend at Cannonfire:









Recent Comments