my job is is not to worry about those people
September 17, 2012 4:00 PM Subscribe

As internal leaks from the Romney camp suggest a campaign in serious disarray, and poll-of-polls meta-analyses show him with little time to recover his position before November, Mother Jones has acquired video from a private Romney fundraiser at which the candidate said of Obama supporters: There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. Ezra Klein puts aside the political ramifications and crunches the numbers about who does and doesn't pay income tax in America. The Romney camp responds to the leak.
posted by gerryblog (5751 comments total) 185 users marked this as a favorite

Romney: "Our message of low taxes doesn’t connect…so my job is is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

Welp. That's a line that's going to play in attack ads or the debates.
posted by jaduncan at 4:03 PM on September 17, 2012 [29 favorites]

"As the governor has made clear all year, he is concerned about the growing number of people who are dependent on the federal government"

The Romney campaign then went on to explain that that particular minute and seven seconds was recorded on opposite day and "la la la, I can't hear you!"
posted by sendai sleep master at 4:03 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

Romney goes on to say that those people pay no taxes. I don't know about any other health-care supporters, but I pay a higher percentage of my income into taxes than Mitt Romney does. And that's in the year he'll tell us about. But he's right about one thing: He will never get my vote.
posted by tyllwin at 4:05 PM on September 17, 2012 [167 favorites]

At 13% over the past few years Romney barely pays income taxes.
posted by 2bucksplus at 4:05 PM on September 17, 2012 [11 favorites]

I'm still miffed that with a Republican majority in the house and senate, that it's still a blame game with Obama. Did Obama really veto every good idea that the Republican majority supported?
posted by filthy light thief at 4:06 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

Too bad his moment of honesty had to be on hidden camera.

At least those 49 percent of people know what republicans think of them now.
posted by Ad hominem at 4:06 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

This is a damning video. I sincerely hope it gets widespread attention. I got a popup to donate $5 to Mother Jones... if this is what they are presenting, damn right I will.
posted by HuronBob at 4:07 PM on September 17, 2012 [19 favorites]

I'd love to hear about these people that aren't dependent on the federal government. Do they have their own standing military? Do they hire out someone to test all their medications before they take them? Certainly they use private aircraft (since they don't drive on federally-funded interstate highways), but what private service is doing air traffic control for them? It must be a very interesting life.
posted by 0xFCAF at 4:07 PM on September 17, 2012 [409 favorites]

This is a campaign in full circular firing squad mode right now.
posted by 2bucksplus at 4:08 PM on September 17, 2012 [25 favorites]

At 13% over the past few years Romney barely pays income taxes.

Given the Bain tax writeoff model (high risk, but write off the losses in one company and keep the gains in another), it's arguable that he received more in tax rebates than he paid. Certainly a comparison of the Bain and Romney accounts would be interesting. He's a Bain equity holder, so it's easily calculated.
posted by jaduncan at 4:08 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

At least those 49 percent of people know what republicans think of them now.

Lots od protestation that that's the OTHER people Mitt is talking about would be what I would expect.
posted by Artw at 4:09 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

we're getting into "live boy, dead girl" territory
posted by telstar at 4:09 PM on September 17, 2012 [35 favorites]

The "entitled to food" bit should be played on repeat every commercial break that the Obama campaign can afford.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:11 PM on September 17, 2012 [88 favorites]

The mantra of a "personal responsibility" magically divorced from social structure is the central delusion of the contemporary right wing.
posted by Rumple at 4:11 PM on September 17, 2012 [160 favorites]

So this Republican party they have in the USA, they don't think people are entitled to food, housing and health care? God damn.
posted by Sternmeyer at 4:11 PM on September 17, 2012 [51 favorites]

They left off the "...and I would've gotten away with it if it wasn't for you pesky kids!" at the end of that response.
posted by PenDevil at 4:11 PM on September 17, 2012 [27 favorites]

I voted for Obama. I also paid income tax. I will show my tax returns if Romney will show his.

(seriously)
posted by Flunkie at 4:11 PM on September 17, 2012 [71 favorites]

He's "concerned about the growing number of people who are dependent on the federal government"? Certainly has a weird way of showing that concern, given that he's trying to make their lives worse.

... Oh, wait, I see. Concerned about them, not concerned for them. It's hard to keep up with all this (unconscious?) dogwhistling; sometimes it looks like English for a minute before I remember how to translate it.
posted by RogerB at 4:12 PM on September 17, 2012 [28 favorites]

"Our message of low taxes doesn’t connect…so my job is is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

I don't see how this will bother Republican voters one bit, it appears to be exactly what they already think.
posted by Cosine at 4:12 PM on September 17, 2012 [24 favorites]

I'm still miffed that with a Republican majority in the house and senate

The Senate is majority Democratic.
posted by Flunkie at 4:13 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

It's sad that Romney can't catch a break.

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHA!
posted by uraniumwilly at 4:13 PM on September 17, 2012 [18 favorites]

Man. It's looking more and more that the Romney campaign has already written-off the independents and has decided to whip the hard right into a froth, in hopes of getting them to turn-out in big numbers. That would explain Mitt's dive into the deep end of the nutjob pool.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:14 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

I just posted this comment about 45 mins ago in the last open Romney thread, glad someone could make an FPP out of it (I'm too scared to make a US Politics FPP, esp as my first haha). The story is starting to get picked up by the news outlets, it will be interesting to see how he spins this one "it was taken out of context" etc. etc.
posted by 1000monkeys at 4:14 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

I love that, flunkie. Someone should make that a thing: I, too, am willing to disclose my taxes if Mitt Romney Romney will disclose his in exchange.
posted by tyllwin at 4:15 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

I voted for Obama. I also paid income tax. I will show my tax returns if Romney will show his.

I can't imagine that not being a lot of people's reactions.
posted by Artw at 4:16 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

Being concerned about the number of people dependent on the federal government can come out quite different, depending on if you put the emphasis on "number" or "people"
posted by ckape at 4:16 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

The Romney camp already released a statement in response. It barely addresses it at all; the statement is more or less "Romney cares about everyone! Obama's economy sucks." It doesn't in any way attempt to explain, deny, or modify the original comments.
posted by Justinian at 4:17 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

The extra bizarre thing is that, even if you accept the false premise that 47% of Americans don't pay taxes, that 47% includes a lot of Republicans who will vote for Romney no matter what, and a lot of folks who are up for grabs.

He didn't just slag off a bunch of poor Democrats, he slagged off a bunch of poor Republicans and independents, too.
posted by gurple at 4:17 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

I... confess. In the deepest, darkest corner of my heart, I admit that I believe I am entitled to you-name-it.

I am glad I said that. I feel free, liberated.

Next, could I have some food and housing? Winter is coming.
posted by GenjiandProust at 4:17 PM on September 17, 2012 [63 favorites]

They'll probably be looking at what the polls are saying. If it looks like I'm going to win, the markets will be happy. If it looks like the president's going to win, the markets should not be terribly happy. It depends of course which markets you're talking about, which types of commodities and so forth, but my own view is that if we win on November 6th, there will be a great deal of optimism about the future of this country. We'll see capital come back and we'll see—without actually doing anything—we'll actually get a boost in the economy. If the president gets reelected, I don't know what will happen. I can—I can never predict what the markets will do. Sometimes it does the exact opposite of what I would have expected. But my own view is that if we get a "Taxageddon," as they call it, January 1st, with this president, and with a Congress that can't work together, it's—it really is frightening.

So basically Romney really has no economic plan beyond appeasing the confidence fairy by giving a sacrifice to them job-creators?
posted by the cydonian at 4:17 PM on September 17, 2012 [33 favorites]

It has only just dawned on me that the GOP is running a Dickens villain for president.
posted by meadowlark lime at 4:18 PM on September 17, 2012 [232 favorites]

I posted this extended Twitter post from Ezra Klein in another thread, but I'll repost it here since I feel it adds context with the Klein piece from the OP:

Here’s the policy two-step behind Romney’s remarks: Republicans have spent years cutting income taxes and increasing things like the Child tax Credit. This means fewer people pay income taxes. So whenever you hear a stat like "47% don't pay income taxes," remember: Reagan and Bush helped build that. These tax cuts for the poor were partly in order to make further tax cuts for the rich political palatable. But now that fewer people pay income taxes as a result of GOP policies, they’re being called lazy and dependent. And thus the GOP's tax cuts are being used to make a case that the rich are overtaxed and that the less-rich are becoming dependent. Which thus leads to a policy agenda of tax cuts for the rich and cuts to social services for the non-rich.

posted by zombieflanders at 4:20 PM on September 17, 2012 [142 favorites]

It has only just dawned on me that the GOP is running a Dickens villain for president.

This is not the punch line. The punch line is that he is the most electable guy they had out of an -array- of Dickens villains.
posted by Archelaus at 4:21 PM on September 17, 2012 [175 favorites]

Message: I could care less
posted by slapshot57 at 4:21 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

A classic gaffe; Romney caught saying what he truly believes.
posted by 2bucksplus at 4:22 PM on September 17, 2012 [45 favorites]

The elderly skew Republican.

The elderly also make up a large chunk of the 0% taxers.

Did Romney just call a good chunk of his base moochers and parasites?
posted by bonehead at 4:22 PM on September 17, 2012 [19 favorites]

To protect the confidential source who provided the video, we have blurred some of the image, and we will not identify the date or location of the event, which occurred after Romney had clinched the Republican presidential nomination.

I'm sure they've figured it out. And I wouldn't want to be that person tonight.

. I didn't realize it. These guys in the US—the Karl Rove equivalents—they do races all over the world: in Armenia, in Africa, in Israel. I mean, they work for Bibi Netanyahu in his race. So they do these races and they see which ads work, and which processes work best, and we have ideas about what we do over the course of the campaign. I'd tell them to you, but I'd have to shoot you.

HA HA HA HA ha ha oh you're not joking

without actually doing anything—we'll actually get a boost in the economy

I knew he had a plan!

Hoo doggie. This kind of thing is almost never heard outside those small clusters of donors. And it's kind of a big deal.
posted by Miko at 4:22 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

"Entitled to food" -- it's almost too good to be true!
posted by Houstonian at 4:22 PM on September 17, 2012 [10 favorites]

It has only just dawned on me that the GOP is running a Dick~~ens villain~~ for president.

You had a typo there.
posted by uosuaq at 4:22 PM on September 17, 2012 [21 favorites]

Lots od protestation that that's the OTHER people Mitt is talking about would be what I would expect.

I think the 47 percent he is talking about know he means them. I think a certain percentage of people agree with Romney. I don't think everyone else will agree with Romeny's philosophy, which boils down to "fuck those mooches, thinking they deserve gruel and a hot grate to sleep on"
posted by Ad hominem at 4:22 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

I pay for all my own food and health care (through my employer), but I still think I'm entitled to it, regardless of having a job. I also pay tons of federal income taxes, but I voted for Obama anyway because I am capable of abstract thought and realizing that it's not worth having a moron for a President so I can pocket a few extra thousand dollars at the end of the year. God, the level of disdain this guy has for the average working man is substantial. Are really not, as American citizens, able to expect that we are entitled, yes, entitled, to food and basic health care?

I hope this video gets traction.
posted by gagglezoomer at 4:23 PM on September 17, 2012 [46 favorites]

"My werk is nie te bekommer oor die mense."

As I thought, it sounds just right in Afrikaans.
posted by Kinbote at 4:23 PM on September 17, 2012 [18 favorites]

I read this MJ article earlier today and was astounded. I think we have all wondered what politicians really think, and here it is; most Americans are beneath Romney's consideration. Most Americans are money-grubbing pigs just begging for handouts. Not quite the picture of America that you usually see in Republican ads.

I also loved this bit of Romney-speak: What he's [Obama] going to do, by the way, is try and vilify me as someone who's been successful, or who's, you know, closed businesses or laid people off, and is an evil bad guy. And that may work.

Huh. You mean the truth might actually work? Well, well. I sure hope so.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:24 PM on September 17, 2012 [10 favorites]

Obama2012 has tweeted a response: Messina on Romney: "It’s hard to serve as president... when you’ve disdainfully written off half the nation.” OFA.BO/Qkjfn6
posted by maudlin at 4:25 PM on September 17, 2012 [51 favorites]

Also, I'm interested to see if this goes higher up the news cycle than internet discussions. The video is on YouTube, so it could go viral, and the MSM likes it's "viral" subjects, because they can link back to it, poll interactions on twitter, and other soft pseudo-news, instead of going out of the office and talking to people.

A Google News search for "romney video" shows that at the very least it's on the blog sections of ABC, CNN, the Washington Post, the WSJ, CBS, Time Magazine, the NYT, USA Today, and a bunch of larger city papers.

I don't see this as the bombshell that a lot of people are thinking it is.

Maybe, but with Obama at 48%-49% of likely voters, Romney has to capture pretty much everyone who's undecided. This doesn't help that.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:25 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Really, that might be the least presidential thing someone has ever said.
posted by Ad hominem at 4:26 PM on September 17, 2012 [59 favorites]

Also, remember that one of Romney's attacks against Obama is that he's dividing the country. This steps all over that.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:27 PM on September 17, 2012 [10 favorites]

I don't see this as the bombshell that a lot of people are thinking it is.

I agree. Anyone who hasn't already decided not to vote for Romney doesn't think he's talking about them. It's not sporting of him to insult a big chunk of his base, and yes, that's what he's doing, but the people who support him think he's insulting someone else entirely.
posted by town of cats at 4:27 PM on September 17, 2012 [11 favorites]

Is this likely to mean that the Republicans won't have a stranglehold over the House of Representatives, and the ability to obstruct Obama over the next 2-4 years, though?
posted by acb at 4:27 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Did Romney just call a good chunk of his base moochers and parasites?

Worse. He called them Obama voters.
posted by cortex at 4:28 PM on September 17, 2012 [23 favorites]

It has only just dawned on me that the GOP is running a Dickens villain for president.

SCROOGE MCDUCK 2012
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 4:28 PM on September 17, 2012 [28 favorites]

That would explain Mitt's dive into the deep end of the nutjob pool.

Everybody knows you never go full nutjob. Check it out. Richard Nixon, 'Tricky Dick,' look nutjob, act nutjob, not nutjob. Wiretapped offices, covered up. Evil, sho'. Not nutjob. You know Ronald Reagan, 'The Gipper.' Slow, yes. Alzheimers, maybe. Star Wars in his head. But he charmed the pants off the nation and won two elections. That ain't nutjob. George W. Bush, "Dubya." Infantile, yes. Nutjob, no. You went full nutjob, man. Never go full nutjob. You don't buy that? Ask John McCain, 2008, "Sarah Palin." Remember? Went full nutjob, went home empty handed.
posted by The Card Cheat at 4:28 PM on September 17, 2012 [151 favorites]

@KagroX: Well, Romney insulted 100% of the British, so the trendline is looking good.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:29 PM on September 17, 2012 [11 favorites]

It also makes the election become more about how he keeps fucking stuff up rather than about how the economy isn't where Americans would like it to be.

I think this is a big one. Romney is starting to look like a fuck-up. No one wants to vote for a fuck-up.

And his whole campaign is about how he's a competent businessman. Constant displays of incompetence undermine that message.
posted by mr_roboto at 4:29 PM on September 17, 2012 [24 favorites]

Of course the totally whacked out people who are already decided to vote for Romney are still going to vote for Romney despite this. But it might help some of the non-whacked-out-but-not-really-paying-attention-yet people to decide their vote sanely.
posted by Flunkie at 4:29 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

States Vary Widely in Number of Tax Filers with No Income Tax Liability

Take a look at the map.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:30 PM on September 17, 2012 [43 favorites]

People earning so little that their taxes net out to zero -- those lucky bastards. Somebody needs to make sure they have less money.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 4:30 PM on September 17, 2012 [71 favorites]

I honestly don't see how this is going to hurt Romney with the crazy base. They think he's talking about somebody else, even when they themselves fall into that bullshit 47% number. I mean, I am related to a lot of those people, and they really think he's talking about Them. (Them being defined as "people I don't like and/or fear" for various really unpleasant, bigoted reasons.)
posted by skybluepink at 4:31 PM on September 17, 2012 [15 favorites]

> It has only just dawned on me that the GOP is running a Dickens villain for president.

It's even better than that; he's a blaxploitation villain. Wouldn't he be great in Craig T. Nelson's role if they remade Action Jackson?
posted by The Card Cheat at 4:31 PM on September 17, 2012 [9 favorites]

I honestly don't see how this is going to hurt Romney with the crazy base

I agree it won't hurt him with most of the base. I agree that it will hurt him with the fair-minded middle, the people he admits think Obama's "not a bad guy."
posted by Miko at 4:32 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

This is like one of the classic Nintendo game end-bosses. Romney Takes His True Form!

...and it is the the twenty-times forwarded e-mail my aunt from South Carolina sends me weekly about people buying lobster with food stamps.
posted by gagglezoomer at 4:32 PM on September 17, 2012 [14 favorites]

Republican philosophy frequently borrows from feudalism, where serfs, cotters and villeins paid shares to the landowner, who probably felt like he supported them, by allowing them to work for him, which in fact defines entitlement. The irony is that Romney doesn't acknowledge that the money supply is a public mechanism that is entitled to its taxes based on profit, not share. If only most Democrats knew this as well (who see it the way Romney does, but with added charity for relief).
posted by Brian B. at 4:33 PM on September 17, 2012 [24 favorites]

If it looks like I'm going to win, the markets will be happy. If it looks like the president's going to win, the markets should not be terribly happy. It depends of course which markets you're talking about, which types of commodities and so forth, but my own view is that if we win on November 6th, there will be a great deal of optimism about the future of this country. We'll see capital come back and we'll see—without actually doing anything—we'll actually get a boost in the economy. If the president gets re-elected, I don't know what will happen. I can– I can never predict what the markets will do. Sometimes it does the exact opposite of what I would have expected.

God what a mealy-mouthed dickwad. "If Obama is re-elected, this bad thing is going to happen. Maybe. It just depends. Maybe the opposite will happen. I'm not very good at predicting this stuff."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:34 PM on September 17, 2012 [35 favorites]

I don't think anyone is arguing that this leak will hurt Romney with his base. But he needs a solid chunk of independents (sorry, "independents"), and while many of those are Republicans with paper bags over their heads, the way this leak emphasizes his campaign's twin themes of arrogance and incompetence is going to make grabbing that chunk even harder.

Nobody loves or fears Robocop when he keeps slipping on banana skins he drops in his own path.
posted by maudlin at 4:34 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

"Entitled to food" -- it's almost too good to be true!

Yes. I wonder how airtight Mother Jones' sourcing on this is. Anyone remember the Bush National Guard ratfuckery that cost Dan Rather his job? That story came only slightly earlier in the campaign season and gave the Republicans something to distract the media with right up until the end of the campaign. This late in the game, I trust no one.
posted by vibrotronica at 4:34 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

Add the fact that he thinks the middle class makes 200-250k a year, top 3% territory and you have a man who is in this for only personal gain and self aggrandisement. He will probably lose but what does he care? He's still stinking rich. Keep in mind he "only" made 374k in speaking engagements in 2010.

Republicans have gone so far off the rails it's pure spectacle to watch. It won't get better in 2016 either, Christie, Jeb, who do they have?

OT: I see the Flanders' are out in force!
posted by Max Power at 4:34 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

the markets should not be terribly happy

I'm no economist but I'm not sure this is even true. Continued Obama leadership is great for certain industries. And he's a known quantity, equalling some measure of stability in his fiscal policies. There's not much left to cut - I'm honestly not sure how much more budget and debt slashing will goose production and get money flowing through people who can spend it, which seems like our real issue.
posted by Miko at 4:37 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

people buying lobster with food stamps.

In the old days, you knew a kid was poor because he brought lobster for lunch. Those rich kids had sandwiches with store-bought bologna.
posted by ifandonlyif at 4:37 PM on September 17, 2012 [19 favorites]

...his campaign's twin themes of arrogance and incompetence...

Oh, that's perfect.
posted by mr_roboto at 4:37 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

The 47% figure is bunk, by the way. That's Federal income tax. It doesn't count payroll taxes.
posted by unSane at 4:37 PM on September 17, 2012 [14 favorites]

There we go... it just hit the top result in Google News. Looks like we'll be seeing this for a few cycles at least.
posted by Kinbote at 4:39 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Yes. I wonder how airtight Mother Jones' sourcing on this is.

You're wondering if the video is authentic?
posted by mrnutty at 4:39 PM on September 17, 2012 [17 favorites]

It's as if Romney has alien-hand syndrome. The conscious part of him wants to be president, the unconscious part really fucking doesn't want to.
posted by ifandonlyif at 4:40 PM on September 17, 2012 [31 favorites]

Anyone remember the Bush National Guard ratfuckery that cost Dan Rather his job?

Video feels like a different story. "That's a Mitt Romney impersonator, it's all an elaborate ruse!" is not a credible outcome. The context is clearly contemporary. What's the ratfuck angle? What's the sourcing surprise?

The possibility that the outcome will be a shrug certainly exists, but upending the presumed authenticity of the video doesn't seem to.
posted by cortex at 4:41 PM on September 17, 2012

Nobody loves or fears Robocop when he keeps slipping on banana skins he drops in his own path.

Hey! Leave Robocop out of this!
posted by Artw at 4:41 PM on September 17, 2012 [16 favorites]

All the "retooling the message" stuff makes me nervous. I keep waiting for them to play the homophobia card like Bush II did (was that 2004?). God, that sucked to see work. I wish I felt that it wouldn't work again.
posted by Morrigan at 4:41 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Yes. I wonder how airtight Mother Jones' sourcing on this is. Anyone remember the Bush National Guard ratfuckery that cost Dan Rather his job? That story came only slightly earlier in the campaign season and gave the Republicans something to distract the media with right up until the end of the campaign. This late in the game, I trust no one.

From the MJ post (emphasis mine):

Mother Jones has obtained video of Romney at this intimate fundraiser—where he candidly discussed his campaign strategy and foreign policy ideas in stark terms he does not use in public—and has confirmed its authenticity. To protect the confidential source who provided the video, we have blurred some of the image, and we will not identify the date or location of the event, which occurred after Romney had clinched the Republican presidential nomination.

Now, apparently these have been posted to Daily Kos over the last couple months by an anonymous poster in bits and pieces, which is why it hasn't gained any traction prior to this. However, I'm pretty sure the staff at MJ and David Corn were aware of the Rathergate precedent and did a ton of due diligence, and although I would be lying if I said I'm not a little bit worried myself I have a much better feeling about this one.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:42 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Speaking as a Brit who was 100% insulted by Romney and didn't give a toss - which, I feel, is all of us - the take-away from that incident was "what a maroon" followed up, some time later, by "he said we couldn't run the Olympics but, eh, I think we did".

I don't know for sure how the US saw the Olympics, but I'd hope that we weren't seen as incompetents. If anyone feels like comparing his analysis of how it was going to go against how it actually went, feel free...
posted by Devonian at 4:42 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

Hey! Leave Robocop out of this!

Dead or alive, you're voting for me!
posted by cortex at 4:42 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

Just like clinging to guns and religion, right?
posted by Ideefixe at 4:43 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Way to take people's attention away from your Libya bungle, Mittens!
posted by Mister_A at 4:43 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

I think this is the only time that I've heard even a smallest spark of passion in Romney's voice. The only time that I didn't think he was parroting talking points, spending most of his effort to get the words out correctly rather than feeling that the words were his. This is really the only time that I believe that he believes what he's saying. It's really rather of remarkable that he hasn't mustered even this small amount of passion for anything except for a politically toxic rendering of standard GOP points. Terrible at lying, only delivers passion when it hurts him... how'd he ever get into politics?
posted by Llama-Lime at 4:44 PM on September 17, 2012 [18 favorites]

The thing is, they're obviously aiming their campaign right at the crazy base, hoping to drive turnout, and score one last mean-white-people victory. If we go by the 27% crazification factor standard, that may only be 27% of the population, but it's a bigger chunk of the people who always vote.
posted by skybluepink at 4:44 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

I don't know for sure how the US saw the Olympics, but I'd hope that we weren't seen as incompetents. If anyone feels like comparing his analysis of how it was going to go against how it actually went, feel free...

Not to derail, but I don't think so. You had awesome music and James Bond and the Queen and a mayor named Boris. We were mainly pissed at NBC's coverage of it.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:45 PM on September 17, 2012 [13 favorites]

Ho Lee Shit.
posted by KathrynT at 4:45 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

This story is on the front page of www.nytimes.com now.
posted by Ike_Arumba at 4:45 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

The Card Cheat: "> It has only just dawned on me that the GOP is running a Dickens villain for president.

It's even better than that; he's a blaxploitation villain. Wouldn't he be great in Craig T. Nelson's role if they remade Action Jackson?"

And with his prior history as a prep-school bully, he's like the middle-aged version of the standard teen-movie villain! He's hitting ALL the well-known tropes!

All he needs to do now is turn into a giant snake on Election Night...

(In which case, we can mark off BOTH "Disney villain" and "Buffy villain" on our bad-guy bingo cards.)
posted by Strange Interlude at 4:45 PM on September 17, 2012 [49 favorites]

ROMNEY/ZABKA 2012
posted by The Card Cheat at 4:47 PM on September 17, 2012 [9 favorites]

There was a time back about November when the other Republican candidates were talking about the candidate they really didn't like - Mitt Romney. I always wondered what could make him more odious to Bachmann than Newt (or vice versa). I guess we are finally seeing his soulless pettiness.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 4:48 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

This kinda reminds me of the haircut thing.
posted by ethansr at 4:49 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Devonian
Wife and I thought the opening was an adorable tongue-in-cheek affirmation of England's role in western culture. Good show!

But yeah, I don't see how this video stops the bleeding of the romney campaign. Next disaster: Funding will dry up as Wall Street hates a loser.
posted by slapshot57 at 4:50 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

The always disgusting Reince Priebus backs up Romney, saying that he was "on message".
posted by maudlin at 4:50 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

i come from a poor area and i grew up poor so most of my social group from that time was/is also poor. my facebook wall is constantly filled with people who i know benefited from welfare (some for multiple generations) talking about those people who don't work hard and don't earn their own living and just want free handouts. i've never found a way to reliably wind someone out of that particular maze. i imagine i'll see my wall filled with support for the things said in this video.
posted by nadawi at 4:51 PM on September 17, 2012 [28 favorites]

FTFMJA: Describing his family background, he quipped about his father, "Had he been born of Mexican parents, I'd have a better shot of winning this."
posted by laconic skeuomorph at 4:52 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

On a more serious note, fuck you Mitt Romney. You are a parasite. You are projecting your loathsome sense of entitlement on the people who work long hours at shit jobs to keep a roof over their heads. You are not a builder-- you're a thief and a destroyer.
posted by Mister_A at 4:53 PM on September 17, 2012 [118 favorites]

Romney and Obama are exactly the same. There are no differences between them.

#ISayThatJokingly
posted by Ironmouth at 4:53 PM on September 17, 2012 [9 favorites]

I think this is a big one. Romney is starting to look like a fuck-up. No one wants to vote for a fuck-up.

And now, the Obama campaign needs to throw Romney an anchor. They need to keep needling him, keep him making the stupid statements. It needs to be obvious that the GOP is going to lose, period, come November.

Why? Because that's one of the things that not only swings voters -- nobody likes voting for a known loser -- but suppresses the base of your opponent, because nobody wants to even bother voting for a loser.

And if they aren't there voting for Romney, they aren't there voting for anybody else. It's why the Dems were shellacked in 2010.

Throw anchors. Throw *many* of them. You want to shatter Mitt Romney's chances.
posted by eriko at 4:55 PM on September 17, 2012 [49 favorites]

Ann Richards' quote about being born on third base and thinking he hit a triple has rarely been so on point.
posted by immlass at 4:55 PM on September 17, 2012 [72 favorites]

i come from a poor area and i grew up poor so most of my social group from that time was/is also poor. my facebook wall is constantly filled with people who i know benefited from welfare (some for multiple generations) talking about those people who don't work hard and don't earn their own living and just want free handouts. i've never found a way to reliably wind someone out of that particular maze . . .

I'm from the poorest state in the nation (or #49, depending on what AL is doing this year) and it's the same way with me. The explanation is plain and ugly, though: racism. What's worse is that they would deny that with every breath in their body, and would do so honestly. It is a hell of a trick.
posted by Countess Elena at 4:56 PM on September 17, 2012 [43 favorites]

"Let them eat cake," said Mitt Romney.
posted by sallybrown at 4:56 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

States Vary Widely in Number of Tax Filers with No Income Tax Liability

Take a look at the map.

That there is a fascinating map, really worth taking a look. Why the fuck doesn't the south pay taxes? There's some kind of important truth about American politics in there, but I can't quite wrap my head around it.
posted by Slarty Bartfast at 4:57 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

I don't see this as the bombshell that a lot of people are thinking it is.

It remains to be seen how this will be picked up by the MSM media. So far FoxNews is ignoring it, why ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN link to it on their homepage, though not prominently. This may or may not become a thing.

I'd love to see Obama bring a DVD player to the debates and just start off by playing the video.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:59 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

The always disgusting Reince Priebus backs up Romney, saying that he was "on message".

What else is he going to say? "We done fucked up"?
posted by PenDevil at 4:59 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

When I picture "entitled to food," I picture Simon's Cat opening his maw and pointing.
posted by mudpuppie at 5:01 PM on September 17, 2012 [63 favorites]

Sorry I don't have a link handy, but studies have shown that many (most?) people who receive government assistance, including unemployment benefits, social security payments, and medicare, do not believe that they receive any government assistance. I'm not quite sure how to square that, except via willful ignorance.
posted by LastOfHisKind at 5:01 PM on September 17, 2012 [19 favorites]

I honestly don't see how this is going to hurt Romney with the crazy base.

It won't, but the crazy base isn't nearly as large as you think it is. It is very *loud*, but it's not large. If the crazy base, and only the crazy base, votes for Romney, it will be one of the most sickening beat downs in the history of US Presidential Elections.

Indeed, it would look a lot like 1980 and 1984.

You need your base active, but you need your base active and encouraging others to vote. Because the people who need a little encouragement are who win the elections.

Of course the GOP base will be out there, in force. So will the Dem base. It's the people who identify GOP or Dem who *aren't* automatically going to vote that you need to convince.

And having your candidate write off nearly 50% of the population to save his base? Bad. Very bad.
Mondale bad.
posted by eriko at 5:01 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

Of course, what's the Free Republic reaction?

"It needs to be said. If he loses the election for speaking like this then we have to face the fact that the country is over. Demographics are not in our favor."
posted by KathrynT at 5:02 PM on September 17, 2012 [9 favorites]

Actually, I'll go one step further. When I picture a Romney presidency, I picture this Simon's Cat video, except that the ending would be more like Romney wrestling the baseball bat away and turning it on the cat.
posted by mudpuppie at 5:05 PM on September 17, 2012

Bloomberg: Today, Mitt Romney Lost the Election
posted by 2bucksplus at 5:05 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

This video where Romney talks about a sweat shop Bain Capital purchased in China appears to be from the same event. The portion of the video where he believes that the barbed wire and watchtowers are to keep potential low wage workers out and not to intimidate workers is particularly startling.
posted by Public Policy at 5:06 PM on September 17, 2012 [26 favorites]

A Facebook friend just posted, "A Republican can't enjoy his dinner unless he knows somebody else is hungry."
posted by Senor Cardgage at 5:06 PM on September 17, 2012 [149 favorites]

This bit from the NYTimes piece just makes me wonder about the utter cluelessness of Romses and his campaign managers

Mr. Romney’s figure of 47 percent may come from the Tax Policy Center, which found that 46.4 percent of households paid no federal income tax in 2011. But most households did pay payroll taxes. Of the 18.1 percent of households that paid neither income taxes nor payroll taxes, the center found that more than half were elderly and more than a third were not elderly but had incomes under $20,000.

posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:06 PM on September 17, 2012 [31 favorites]

Hey, and someone notes a big category of people who don't pay taxes and are completely dependent on federal money.

US Military in combat zones.

Romney just called them leeches.

It needs to be said. If he loses the election for speaking like this then we have to face the fact that the country is over.

Good! Yes! Exactly what we want them to think. Despair is their enemy. The more depressed they are, the less of them vote. Let the party of voter supression supress their own vote in disgust.

Bloomberg: Today, Mitt Romney Lost the Election

Rats always flee a sinking ship.
posted by eriko at 5:06 PM on September 17, 2012 [20 favorites]

The explanation is plain and ugly, though: racism. What's worse is that they would deny that with every breath in their body, and would do so honestly. It is a hell of a trick.

oh, yes, absolutely. my state is always somewhere between 45-48 on poverty rankings/low education/high teen birthrate/stds/etc. i would say that it's 75% racism, 25% self-classism/temporarily embarrassed millionaire syndrome. sometimes i wonder if they unknowingly keep that 25% to keep convincing themselves it isn't simple racism.

it's also not just the crazy base. someone who i consider moderate to liberal finds himself talking ignorantly about welfare and drug testing and "the wrong element" moving in. he's a non-voter, but i know people who are similar who do believe obama has sullied the office and will vote against him - people i know have voted democrat in the past.
posted by nadawi at 5:07 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

ABCnews.com is headlining the story now as is The Drudge Report. The latter links to a New York Times article that has the video.

Ok, this might just stick around for a while.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:07 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Of course, what's the Free Republic reaction?

Well, At least we get som hillarious spin on Free Republic. That 47% aren't dependent on government just because they are losers, Obama has enslaved them. Romney is a secret freedom fighter!
posted by Ad hominem at 5:08 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Fuck the doomed."
posted by charlie don't surf at 5:08 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

It's worth noting that even without the 47-percenter comments, there's other appalling shit in these videos. He makes a racist joke about being more electable if his parents were Hispanic instead of White, he says that he's sharing his consulting staff with Netanyahu (who is at this moment trying to force the US into a war with Iran before Election Day by publicly calling him out), he shows an appalling lack of sympathy towards people in Chinese sweatshops that Bain was possibly involved with, and he refutes his "we built that" comment by saying Americans start out with a huge advantage.
posted by zombieflanders at 5:10 PM on September 17, 2012 [25 favorites]

Loving the comments at the NYTimes blog: So this would-be president despises 48 or 49 percent of all Americans. This just in: It's mutual!
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 5:10 PM on September 17, 2012 [25 favorites]

Romney doesn't sound like a Dickens villain, he just sounds like an everyday right-wing blogger or commenter. I've seen that nonsense about half the country not paying any taxes repeated hundreds of times on Redstate.com and their ilk.
posted by octothorpe at 5:10 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

I have to admit Romney is right on one point: I do feel entitled to healthcare. Being a human and all.
posted by DU at 5:10 PM on September 17, 2012 [24 favorites]

"A Republican can't enjoy his dinner unless he knows somebody else is hungry."

"I'm thankful that I have everything I want and that no one has anything better." Betty Draper...or Mitt Romney?
posted by sallybrown at 5:10 PM on September 17, 2012 [16 favorites]

"him"=Obama
posted by zombieflanders at 5:11 PM on September 17, 2012

Can I take this opportunity to encourage EVERY ONE OF YOU to please double check their voter registration status and make sure they are active?

I have not had any changes to my name or address, have voted in the past year, and learned today that I was expunged from the voter registry in Virginia - a swing state.

My brother moved - we share the same unusual last name, and I did not/have not lived with him, nor was I registered at one of his addresses. Somehow, for some reason, he got a notice at his new address asking ME to confirm my registry. I stop by the voter registration counter today, only to learn that I have been removed from active registry, even though none of my personal information had changed whatsoever, and I have been an active voter.

Please please please double check. You can do it online usually, or stop by the DMV - at the DMV I went to, they had a totally separate counter just for this stuff, and I did not need to stand in line or take a number.

It IS worth your time.
posted by raztaj at 5:11 PM on September 17, 2012 [153 favorites]

Awaiting the 'We are the 53%' tshirts to emerge.
posted by knapah at 5:12 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

@joshtpm: Today's news is like back in 2008 when they finally found the Michelle/"Whitey" tape & proved Barack was Huey Newton's live child #ohwait
posted by zombieflanders at 5:12 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

it's also not just the crazy base. someone who i consider moderate to liberal finds himself talking ignorantly about welfare and drug testing and "the wrong element" moving in. he's a non-voter, but i know people who are similar who do believe obama has sullied the office and will vote against him - people i know have voted democrat in the past.

Yes, this. "Crazy base" didn't really reflect what I meant, and was a poor choice of words on my part. (Late, typing quickly, apologies.) I think more what I'm getting at is "crazy base + people who are NOT going to vote for Obama, no matter what."
posted by skybluepink at 5:14 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think the most damning quote is the implication that if you pay no income tax that you don't take personal responsibility for your own life. Basically, its just a big "Fuck you if you're poor." Not cool.
posted by gagglezoomer at 5:17 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

All I can think of is what the late, great Molly Ivins said about George W. Bush: poor George. He was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple. I can't help but think this of Mittens right about now.
posted by NoMich at 5:18 PM on September 17, 2012 [10 favorites]

Awaiting the 'We are the 53%' tshirts to emerge.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2932545/posts?page=8#10
posted by mrnutty at 5:18 PM on September 17, 2012

Lemme do that again:

Awaiting the 'We are the 53%' tshirts to emerge.
posted by mrnutty at 5:19 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Why is this a surprise to anyone? His VP pick Paul Ryan has been saying that half the country doesn't pay income tax and is freeloading off people who work for a living pretty much nonstop. It's bullshit, of course. 82% of the people pay taxes, and the majority who don't are either elderly or very poor, with incomes under $20K.

Perhaps this "revelation" will force people to listen to what the GOP ticket has already been saying.
posted by zarq at 5:19 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

I think the 47 percent he is talking about know he means them.

No, they don't. The 47% ratio concerns federal income tax, but has been presented as "47% don't pay taxes at all". So anyone who pays state taxes but not federal taxes will consider themselves part of the 53% that "supports" the other "lazy, leeching" 47%.
posted by ymgve at 5:19 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

The Card Cheat: "ROMNEY/ZABKA 2012"

SWEEP THE ELECTION, JOHNNY!
posted by Strange Interlude at 5:20 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

If only I were a working class stiff or a conservative Catholic Latino so I could vote for someone from a party that considers me their base but has utter contempt for me
posted by availablelight at 5:20 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

What ever happened to government for the people?
posted by ChuraChura at 5:21 PM on September 17, 2012

What ever happened to government for the people?

no way that's dirty socialism
posted by elizardbits at 5:22 PM on September 17, 2012 [21 favorites]

Not to mention using a definition of "people" that Romney and company might not fully be on board with.
posted by Flunkie at 5:23 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

What ever happened to government for the people?

Shit, throw in "by" and "of" while you're at it.
posted by mudpuppie at 5:23 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

Just like clinging to guns and religion, right?

Except the point of that statement in context, which no one ever seemed to follow through with when discussing it, was that he was making a sympathetic statement about the difficult situation many people were in. This is very much the opposite of that.
posted by psoas at 5:24 PM on September 17, 2012 [20 favorites]

No, they don't. The 47% ratio concerns federal income tax, but has been presented as "47% don't pay taxes at all". So anyone who pays state taxes but not federal taxes will consider themselves part of the 53% that "supports" the other "lazy, leeching" 47%.

I don't think people parse stuff that way. I don't think people who Rebublicans have been trying to vilify for years are suddenly going to think "Oh, he doesn't mean me." people just see more of the same shit piled on higher and higher.
posted by Ad hominem at 5:25 PM on September 17, 2012

This will absolutely cost him votes. I know a number of people who are turned off by the Republican ticket's general social attitude but were open to the idea of giving a new person the chance to fix the economy. ("Obama's plan just hasn't worked and Mitt, while a douche, is a reputable businessman," that sort of thing.) These people look a little more askance each time Mitt tumbles into exactly this kind of easy to avoid error. Basically, each gaffe makes Mitt look dumber and thus less capable of fixing a complex economic situation, makes these particular swing voters question whether Mitt is smart enough to take the reins.
posted by sallybrown at 5:26 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

The people who need help are the same people Romney and Bain have been laying off in droves!
posted by snsranch at 5:26 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

What ever happened to government for the people?

"People" means "the right kind of people." Not the commoners, by gum.
posted by Joey Michaels at 5:26 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

I typed a bunch of angry WHRGRBL, but really, it boils down to this: his either deliberate mischaracterization or inadvertent underestimation of both Obama supporters and undecided voters will not help his campaign.

I pay a MUCH higher percentage of my taxes than you did, Mr. Romney. If you won't invest in this country yourself, why the hell should you think you should run it?
posted by smirkette at 5:27 PM on September 17, 2012 [28 favorites]

relevant
posted by elizardbits at 5:28 PM on September 17, 2012 [15 favorites]

Why the fuck doesn't the south pay taxes? There's some kind of important truth about American politics in there, but I can't quite wrap my head around it.

At a guess, I'd say that's in large part due to the economic legacy of the Civil War and the abolition of slavery. I think Ta-Nehisi Coates wrote something about that sometime in the past few years. I am actually supposed to be working right now, so no time to find a cite for that just now.
posted by yasaman at 5:28 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

The fact that America doesn't believe its poor are entitled to food, health care or shelter is pretty evident isn't it? If you're lucky you can get them, but not everyone is lucky.
posted by bleep at 5:29 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Reposts from the old thread:

The Freeloader Myth, Ramesh Ponnuru, The National Review, 28 November, 2011

Conservatives Embrace Romney's 47% Remarks, Rosie Gray, Buzzfeed Politics, 17 September, 2012

That Romney video was leaked to gin up our base. Bookmark this tweet.— Kyle Raccio (@kyleraccio) September 17, 2012
Raccio later explained in an interview with BuzzFeed that "it only serves to excite the conservative base into knowing that Mitt Romney understands the situation we’re facing in the country."

"Mitt Romney needs to be vocal about that because I don’t believe the majority of Americans want so many people on the government dole unchecked," Raccio said.

posted by ob1quixote at 5:29 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

"As the governor has made clear all year, he is concerned about the growing number of people who are dependent on the federal government"

The Romney campaign then went on to explain that that particular minute and seven seconds was recorded on opposite day and "la la la, I can't hear you!"
posted by sendai sleep master at 4:03 PM

No, if you'll notice he's concerned about the growing number, not the people.
posted by JauntyFedora at 5:29 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

So I posted in one of the political threads already that while I haven't voted since the 2000 election (for a lot of different reasons, some maybe good, most of them probably lame, don't yell at me), the DNC speakers had reinvigorated my desire to be a part of the decisions that get made for me. Even though I live in Texas, which likely skew to Romney, I will get out to vote this time and vote for Obama (and for probably any other non-GOP candidate which might be running).

I even went out almost two weeks ago to the public safety office, got my driver's license updated and got the voter registration card dealie. When I check CanIVote.org, it tells me I'm good to go, so that is excellent news.

Seeing this leaked video just buttresses my arguments to myself that at the age of 30, it's time to get involved again. No more excuses for sitting these things out like I've been doing.

I remember in a thread a while back when someone was trying to convince me to vote and pointed me to some kind of awesome nonpartisan fact sheet that was probably from the League of Women Voters, but I can't remember. If anyone can point me to such resources (either by replying here or by MeMail), I would really appreciate it.
posted by King Bee at 5:30 PM on September 17, 2012 [41 favorites]

I pay about half my upper-middle-class anywhere-but-NYC (alas where I live) income in federal, state, and city taxes. I also gave the max to Obama in 2008 and am doing so incrementally this year too. Canvassed too and will again. I'm proud to pay four times Mitt 's tax rate, the moocher.

Entitle yourself, you clueless arrogant richie rich prick.
posted by spitbull at 5:30 PM on September 17, 2012 [26 favorites]

Can I take this opportunity to encourage EVERY ONE OF YOU to please double check their voter registration status and make sure they are active?

Click canivote.org to find out if your registration is in order. You can also change your address or register at this website if you need to.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 5:32 PM on September 17, 2012 [24 favorites]

Why is anyone surprised that Romney says things to Republican fatcats that are in line with what we know Republican fatcats want to hear? Romney would praise the tenderness and palatability of roasted infant if he thought that was what his audience wanted to hear. He is the epitome of the empty suit who stands for nothing.

And I'm just not convinced that there is such a thing as an "undecided voter" at this point. I think there are a bunch of people who hem and haw when asked about voting who have no intention of voting anyways.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 5:32 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

'Romney shot himself in the foot this week, then re-loaded, and shot the other foot'
posted by ricochet biscuit at 5:32 PM on September 17, 2012 [11 favorites]

"Our message of low taxes doesn’t connect…so my job is is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

Fuck you, Romney.

I've never been inclined to talk about money but fuck it. Our household earns within the top 1% (just barely) and we would happily pay much, much higher taxes. We consider that taking responsibility, for the country. That country you purport to care so much about that you want to lead? That one?

Shit, I'm not even a citizen, although I've been eligible to apply for many years now. So I am saying, I'll happily pay much higher taxes without even having the ability to vote (for Obama).

In conclusion, fuck you.
posted by gaspode at 5:32 PM on September 17, 2012 [58 favorites]

Remember that part in the Bible where Jesus refused to heal the sick or feed the crowd, and said, "YOU PEOPLE always believe you're entitled to something"?
posted by NorthernLite at 5:33 PM on September 17, 2012 [152 favorites]

I found this helpful to unwind the '46%' figure.
posted by tayknight at 5:34 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

The T-shirt I'm picturing goes something like:

hey Mitt
I feel entitled
TO SOME RESPECT
posted by uosuaq at 5:34 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

'Romney shot himself in the foot this week, then re-loaded, and shot the other foot'

Swear to God, I'm starting to think that the Republicans want to throw this Presidential election, while they focus on the state and local elections. Because the mistakes Romney's campaign are making is simply ridiculous. I

f you wrote this shit into a movie, it wouldn't sell, because everyone would say "No way a Presidential campaign would repeatedly be this dumb. No way. Rewrite this script and stop sending me this hack crap."
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:40 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

'Romney shot himself in the foot this week, then re-loaded, and shot the other foot'

At the rate he's going, he's going to manage to shoot a third foot by Thursday.
posted by eriko at 5:40 PM on September 17, 2012 [18 favorites]

Comment of the night so far: "Is it 47% on a likely-voter basis? Or among all adults?" -- Nate Silver
posted by Zonker at 5:41 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

I can not wait for the gold that comes out of Steve King's mouth on this one.
posted by jason_steakums at 5:42 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Well the thing is, I don't think who pays taxes really matters. In my opinion, this goes back many years to the Welfare Queen myth of the Reagan era, Maybe I am the real racist here, but the key part is not the taxes but the remark about people being "entitled" and comments opining he would win if he was mexican. He isn't really asking for rational thought on who pays taxes. He is saying all non-whites and some unspecified number of white trash at losers, beneath his contempt. Guys like Romney always like to say that if minorities just took responsibility and stopped feeling entitled they would stop being poor. They really believe Mexicans get special treatment denied to white people. This is just more of the same. Plenty of people see right through it.
posted by Ad hominem at 5:44 PM on September 17, 2012 [15 favorites]

This is down to Romney's utter lack of empathy.

He is absolutely incapable of grasping how people who aren't like him to three decimal places will feel when they hear him say things like this. Hell, he couldn't even understand how David Cameron-- who is like him-- would feel when he criticized British handling of the the Olympics.

We have reached a dangerous moment.

An opponent who is not prepared to accept defeat but sees a checkmate coming will try to overturn the board... or worse.
posted by jamjam at 5:45 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

It has only just dawned on me that the GOP is running a Dickens villain for president

And it just dawned on me that this is pretty much Mitt's Sideshow Bob moment:

Sideshow Bob (after evidence is presented that he committed voter fraud: "Because you need me, Springfield. Your guilty conscience may move you to vote Democratic, but deep down you long for a cold-hearted Republican to lower taxes, brutalize criminals, and rule you like a king. That's why I did this, to save you from yourselves."
posted by FJT at 5:46 PM on September 17, 2012 [13 favorites]

f you wrote this shit into a movie, it wouldn't sell, because everyone would say "No way a Presidential campaign would repeatedly be this dumb. No way. Rewrite this script and stop sending me this hack crap."

This. And yet, even so, just about half the electorate is apparently still planning to vote for the guy. Amazing.
posted by Forktine at 5:47 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Every Republican running for office this year needs to be asked on camera if they agree with what Mitt Romney said here and with their own party Chairman having his back on it.
posted by jason_steakums at 5:47 PM on September 17, 2012 [25 favorites]

I'm not a Rachel Maddow fan, but she's got David Corn (the author of the original article) on tonight at 9e.
posted by zombieflanders at 5:51 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

'Romney shot himself in the foot this week, then re-loaded, and shot the other foot'

Heh, that was on Friday. Before this came out. If we're playing by hangman rules, this is an arm. The Democrats were smart to play the word "Barack", as everything I see on the web implies that the Republicans can't spell it.
posted by Lemurrhea at 5:52 PM on September 17, 2012 [10 favorites]

But wait....if the goal is lower taxes, i.e. paying less in taxes, then wouldn't the people who pay the least in taxes be the ones to be praised and emulated?

Lower taxes are good, but people who pay no taxes are bad?

(I am mostly be rhetorical here. You don't actually have to answer that question.)
posted by gingerbeer at 5:52 PM on September 17, 2012 [15 favorites]

I can not wait for the gold that comes out of Steve King's mouth on this one.

PREDICTION:

Romney owes America an apology, because fetuses don't pay taxes, but obviously fetuses don't vote for Obama, because fetuses are patriots.
posted by Flunkie at 5:52 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

I wonder if Ann Romney pays income taxes.
posted by akgerber at 5:54 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

How Jimmy Carter's Grandson Helped Leak the Secret Romney Fund-raiser Video
posted by Knappster at 5:57 PM on September 17, 2012 [16 favorites]

This reminds me quite a bit of The Beast from Transmetropolitan saying that he considers his job as President well done if 51% of the country has food to eat.
posted by jason_steakums at 5:57 PM on September 17, 2012 [10 favorites]

Like jamjam, I do feel worried about what Romney's people will try when they get desperate. Political hail-marys can be very ugly.
posted by benito.strauss at 5:58 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Ta-Nehisi on the tape:
One theme in Chris Hayes book Twilight of The Elites is the notion that an elite cut off from the rest of society actually degrades. It comes to think of itself as intrinsically better than the rest of society, that it's success is a strict matter of providence. Effectively the elite becomes divorced from reality. What is most jarring about Romney's comments here is that divorce, that sense that Romney's grasp of America is so thin, that he believes that half of it is dismissible strictly on the grounds of laziness.

I don't really know what to say about a man who believes that one in two Americans believe that the government has a responsibility to care for them." Romney is right. Obama does start off with a big lead, but that is because he would never enter the race conceding that fully half the country was beyond his reach. A politician conceding that sort of field-position is an embarrassment to himself, and his political party.
posted by FJT at 5:58 PM on September 17, 2012 [18 favorites]

Drudge headline: ROMNEY GETS REAL: OBAMA SUPPORTERS 'DEPENDENT ON GOVERNMENT'

Fox News still isn't mentioning on its homepage. CNN is now presenting it prominently, as is CBS News.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:59 PM on September 17, 2012

And yet, even so, just about half the electorate is apparently still planning to vote for the guy. Amazing.

Unfortunately it is the team mentality. Many people identify themselves as "Republican" and no matter how poorly their team is playing this year, they will continue to root for them.

And once again I am left wondering what it is about America that Conservative Politicians "love", because it sure as hell isn't the people. They are contemptuous of the poor, homosexuals, women, non-Christians, non-whites and "Ivory Tower pin-heads" Anybody from California or New York. Anybody who accepts "entitlements." By my estimation that leaves about, what....3 people living in Alabama?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:59 PM on September 17, 2012 [13 favorites]

David Corn on Hardball earlier today.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:00 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

I work providing legal services to low-income people, essentially helping them get their supposed "entitlements": social assistance of various forms, preventing evictions. So that's shelter and food (being Canadian, health care is sorted, and I haven't had one of the weirder health care cases).

And I will admit that occasionally, VERY occasionally, there are people who work to scam the system, who are not willing to try. It's a fact of life that it'll happen, there will always be a few. But the thing I've noticed is that it's always for peanuts, and the efforts to suss them out costs more than is saved, and there is serious collateral damage (cf the guy I'm dealing with now who has been assessed as owing $1000 because he made exactly $1200. If he made $1201 he wouldn't owe that. Seriously?)

And even more, the people who are doing this, to a person, have a back history of serious child poverty, abuse, mental health issues, etc. So you know what? They're damn well entitled to it, because we as a society have failed them in the past and continue to fail them.

So yeah. Food, shelter, health care: we are all entitled.
posted by Lemurrhea at 6:00 PM on September 17, 2012 [74 favorites]

Yeah, Rachel Maddow is leading with the video.
posted by tommyD at 6:01 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

You wish they weren't entitled to food, Mitt Romney. Then they would just do you the favor of dying off—and wouldn't be around to laugh in horror at your car elevator and to vote for a black guy. I bet he's legitimately confused as to why he's doing this badly.
posted by theredpen at 6:03 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Of course, what's the Free Republic reaction?

posted by KathrynT

"May I add that despite some people’s views, the contrast between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama couldn’t be greater. Has anyone seen bigger moochers than the Obama family? Golfing, jet setting, living large... all on the taxpayers’ backs. And thumbing their noses at us the whole time. All they did was win a game show, and then turn the levers of power over to their commie handlers. Mitt Romney on the other hand, really is a successful man by any rational measure. No comparison whatsoever."
posted by Sebmojo at 6:05 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Gordon Gekko for president
posted by ninjew at 6:06 PM on September 17, 2012

How Jimmy Carter's Grandson Helped Leak the Secret Romney Fund-raiser Video

A minor point, but I kind of weirdly love the fact that the grandson of a former president is describing himself as out-of-work and working stuff like this to get a job. As compared to being handed a cushy position from party people, and all that.* It's small, but it's something.

I'm aware that he might be getting various advantages from his family's income - that he can afford to be out of work and such. But it's something.
posted by Lemurrhea at 6:06 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

So apparently there's more left to be leaked. I hope so, and I hope they make it a steady drip drip drip into October.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:06 PM on September 17, 2012

f you wrote this shit into a movie, it wouldn't sell, because everyone would say "No way a Presidential campaign would repeatedly be this dumb. No way. Rewrite this script and stop sending me this hack crap."

Don't be stupid, be a smarty!
Come and join the Grand Old Party!
posted by acb at 6:07 PM on September 17, 2012 [14 favorites]

@blakehounshell: Romney statement a big deal for this main reason: Obama camp will say it denigrates the elderly, troops.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:08 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Hey, remember when Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from her house and we thought that was the craziest shit that could happen in a presidential campaign?

I guess we're going to spend the next two months finding how much fun it is to watch Obama beat Romney like a pinata.
posted by dry white toast at 6:08 PM on September 17, 2012 [10 favorites]

Why the fuck doesn't the south pay taxes? There's some kind of important truth about American politics in there, but I can't quite wrap my head around it.

Many of the poorest Americans live in the South. I imagine the counties of California's Central Valley also have a large percentage of people who don't pay Federal Income Tax.
posted by oneirodynia at 6:09 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Did anyone get the name of the guy David Corn said was hosting the event? And WTF is up with the weird orgy fundraiser connection?
posted by zombieflanders at 6:11 PM on September 17, 2012

Marc Leder hosted the May 17th dinner that was recorded.
posted by gladly at 6:13 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Why the fuck doesn't the south pay taxes? There's some kind of important truth about American politics in there, but I can't quite wrap my head around it.

Yeah, not sure where you're going with that, but the map of Filers with No Income Tax Liability seems to me to superimpose relatively neatly with both this map and this one. I think they might be related for historical reasons in a way that's not extremely difficult to understand, and that might not be deserving of fury aimed at the entire region, but maybe that's just me.
posted by mediareport at 6:14 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

So I guess the security on the private fundraisers is going to triple, eh?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:15 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Mrs. Romney: "...[Mitt Romney's father, George] was on relief, welfare relief for the first years of his life...."

So, if I am following all this correctly the young George Romney, believed he was a victim, and would vote for Obama if he could ?
posted by taro sato at 6:15 PM on September 17, 2012 [27 favorites]

So I guess the security on the private fundraisers is going to triple, eh?

Until they perfect robot and/or monkey butlers, someone still has to serve the food.
posted by gladly at 6:15 PM on September 17, 2012

So, if I am following all this correctly the young George Romney, believed he was a victim, and would vote for Obama if he could ?

It's getting harder all the time to believe that he'd vote for his son.
posted by yoink at 6:17 PM on September 17, 2012 [16 favorites]

someone still has to serve the food

Was anyone else thinking before reading that link that Jimmy Carter's grandson turned out to be a kid waiting tables at the fundraiser who had his phone handy?
posted by mediareport at 6:19 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Hey, remember when Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from her house and we thought that was the craziest shit that could happen in a presidential campaign?

In the name of pedantic accuracy, it was actually Tina Fey who said that. Of course, the scary (and hilarious) part is that it is so believably a Palin utterance, that's how it's gone into our collective memory.

Doesn't make any of the rest of this circus less cray-cray. Excuse me, Mr. Would-Be President, your veneer of competence is crumbling.
posted by Superplin at 6:20 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

That there is a fascinating map, really worth taking a look. Why the fuck doesn't the south pay taxes? There's some kind of important truth about American politics in there, but I can't quite wrap my head around it.

I had a long winded rant all ready to go, but on preview, what mediareport said
posted by ElGuapo at 6:20 PM on September 17, 2012

Well, I certainly wouldn't buy a used car from that man.
posted by scruss at 6:21 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Phone call from 30 minutes ago:
[Cell phone: RINGRINGBUZZZ!]
Hello?
"Hello, is Mr. Herr Doktor there?"
Speaking.
"Hi, I'm John Smallberries for [some organization]--"
Please, would you put me on your do-not-call list?
"Sure. I'm really sorry to bother you."
It's not that, it's just that somehow my cell number has gotten on all these lists. I don't mean to be rude-- what does your organization represent?
"Well, I'm calling to find out how you intend to vote in the upcoming election. To see if you plan on voting for Obama."
What is your organization's position?
"We're trying to see if there's anything we can do to encourage you to vote, and see if there's anything we can provide in terms of information to help you make a decision."
Ok, but what is your organization's position? You'll have to excuse me, but I've gotten a lot of calls, and sometimes it's not clear what they're really representing. Who do you plan on voting for?
"I'll be voting for Obama. Our organization is working in support of Obama."

Now, up to this point, I've been pretty curt, because like I said, I've gotten a lot of calls on my cell phone, and sometimes it's from someone working for some organization, and they ask if you're voting for X when they're really in support of Y, and it's annoying as fuck. I felt pretty crummy cuz I realized how much of an asshole I was sounding like, but as soon as I heard that he was clearly in support of Obama, I just lost my shit and starting laughing. I get back into the conversation:

Well, sorry if I sounded rude. Have you seen the video released today of Romney? The one that was secretly recorded at some dinner?
"No, I've been here all day."
"Wait... I think I heard of it. Did he say something about Mexicans?"
Man, it's almost 9! You've GOTTA look this up. Go to motherjones.com. Watch the video. I think you'll understand why I'm laughing and can't keep a straight face right now, and you'll know what my position is.
"Ok... what is your position?"
You HAVE to look this up. But yeah, no, my position is that it's pretty tough to vote for someone who thinks half the country are a bunch of losers. Anyway, sorry for being curt earlier. I'll be voting for Obama, like I did last election. Take it easy, and good luck man!

I cannot wait for election day. I'm taking that day and the day after off just so I can watch this insufferable asshole lose.
posted by herrdoktor at 6:21 PM on September 17, 2012 [41 favorites]

I have never been so excited for a presidential debate!
posted by triggerfinger at 6:22 PM on September 17, 2012 [10 favorites]

CNN is now presenting it prominently, as is CBS News.

USA Today. Wall Street Journal. Washington Times (though unsurprisingly editorialized). Yep, it's out there.
posted by psoas at 6:23 PM on September 17, 2012

So, if I am following all this correctly the young George Romney, believed he was a victim, and would vote for Obama if he could ?

Considering that the older George Romney was an early supporter of civil rights (as a Republican!), supported labor unions relatively often, did a lot to advance affordable housing for the poor, and was critical of the Vietnam War, he could have been Obama's running mate.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:23 PM on September 17, 2012 [19 favorites]

I thought is was very significant that Netanyahu refused to criticize Obama this last weekend on Meet the Press and said that Obama & Romney's positions were essentially the same with regard to Iran. Netanyahu hates Obama and has been very critical of the President and supportive of the more aggressive rhetoric from Romney (who is also a close friend and with whom he shares political consultants). Netanyahu went beyond being non-commital to actually providing a little cover for Obama with the pro-Israel lobby. That says to me that many of Romney's allies have already written off any chance of him winning and are now moving in to the panic mode where they try to make nice before the election so they arn't totally shut out for the next 4 years.
posted by humanfont at 6:23 PM on September 17, 2012 [13 favorites]

The Worst Thing Romney Has Said About Americans Yet
posted by homunculus at 6:24 PM on September 17, 2012 [10 favorites]

Kudos to the person who took and leaked this video.
posted by Eyebeams at 6:26 PM on September 17, 2012 [21 favorites]

Into every politician's life a few bad misspeaks or awkward moments of truth are revealed. Romney just seems to sprout them like he was planted in fertilizer. The seer number of unforced errors that man makes, makes him look like a fucking amateur. The real story at this point should not be the fact that Romney is going to lose, and at this point they may as well cancel the debates and let Ryan concentrate on retaining his House seat, but that so many people will vote for him anyways.

Romney is just too reactive, too slow to learn the rules of a General Election game, too full of panic and lashing out without any sense of coherence, too much of a self-entitled asshole, too unlikeable to win at this point. The Obama campaign must be choking with all the gift wrapped red meat Romney throws to the floor.
posted by edgeways at 6:28 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

The Worst Thing Romney Has Said About Americans Yet

When Pierce is on a tear, he is on a tear:

We are coming rapidly toward a devastating confluence of two colliding panics. The Romney campaign is panicking about itself, and the Republicans are panicking about the Romney campaign. He cannot come back from this, honestly. This is who he is. This is what he believes the world to be. Half the electorate already thinks he's a fake, which means he's not a very good one. There's really only one campaign left to him now.

Unfortunately for American politics, that means only one thing. It's going to get extraordinarily dirty extraordinarily fast. There is going to be pale birtherism and barely covert racism. The body of Ambassador Christopher Stevens is going to be exhumed and used as a bludgeon. There is going to be poor-baiting, and gay-baiting, and ladyparts-baiting, and probably baiting of things I haven't thought of yet. The polite part of the campaign is going to be Romney's effort to convince You that he was really talking about Them when he was calling people moochers and sneak thieves. He wasn't talking about Your Medicare or Your Social Security. Naw, he was talking about Their greed for what You have. That's going to be the polite part of the rest of the campaign, reinforced in the lower registers by a few million in ads to make sure You remember who They are.

There ain't no goin' back, as the song goes, when the foot of pride comes down. Ain't no goin' back.

posted by zombieflanders at 6:29 PM on September 17, 2012 [39 favorites]

Obama campaign just sent the video to the whole email list as well.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:32 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Wow, zombieflanders, that was one amazing quote. Dead on.
posted by Superplin at 6:33 PM on September 17, 2012

Frank Rich: My Embed in Red - A week steeped in right-wing media reveals a Republican Party far more despairing than the lamestream knows.
posted by homunculus at 6:34 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

Marc Leder hosted the May 17th dinner that was recorded.

Who apparently doesn't hew to Traditional American Values:

According to the New York Post, Leder throws a pretty mean party.

His “wild end-of-summer bash was the talk of the Hamptons this year,” the Post reported last December. “At the Bridgehampton home that Leder rented for a whopping $500,000 a month, guests cavorted nude in a pool and performed sex acts, while scantily clad Russian women danced on platforms. Dancers at the party also twirled flaming torches to booming beats.”

Obama campaign just sent the video to the whole email list as well.

And posted them to the official Twitter account.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:34 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Hahaha fox news is critical of Obama for "seizing" on the video. Probably have people lined up to tut-tut over Obama's disgraceful politicizing of the issue.

Man, I thought Romney's Libya stuff was bad, but it just gets worse and worse, it is like a nightmare for that guy. Rolling Stone and Chris Mathews are right, this is worse than the typical " food stamp president" nonsense because now Republicans are talking shit about white people.
posted by Ad hominem at 6:36 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

I have never favorited so many comments in one post in my life.
posted by 4ster at 6:37 PM on September 17, 2012 [16 favorites]

Nothing will keep the media chasing the bouncing ball like a good old fashioned sexy-party!
posted by slapshot57 at 6:37 PM on September 17, 2012

You mean those folks who receive government checks?
posted by edgeways at 6:39 PM on September 17, 2012

You know if Romney just sews his mouth shut he still might be able to win this thing.
posted by shakespeherian at 6:41 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

This reminds me quite a bit of The Beast from Transmetropolitan saying that he considers his job as President well done if 51% of the country has food to eat.

Warren Ellis commented a while back that his Twitter feed keeps filling up with Transmetropolitan references every time a new Romney story breaks. Looks like he won't be getting much chatting done until November, dunnit?
posted by howfar at 6:42 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

If Romney sews his mouth shut it's be a fun debate.
posted by edgeways at 6:44 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

This is good news for Mitt McCain.
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:44 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

Superplin, do you mean specifically about seeing Russia "from her house?" Because she did say one can see Russia from Alaska (which seems only marginally less stupid as a claim of expertise in foreign relations than being able to see Russia from one's house).
posted by AwkwardPause at 6:44 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Ladies and gentlemen, it's not even a Dickens villain. It's 1990s Farley-Spade feel good comedy villain Ray Zalinsky.

TOMMY: But the Callahan Factory has been in my family for seventy years; you can’t just shut it down.

ZALINSKY: Son, you gotta look at it from my point of view: Callahan’s a premium name, that’s what I’m buying. I can make the parts in one of my factories, put them in a Callahan box, and sell them in my stores at a premium price. Why keep your factory going when all I want’s the damn box?

TOMMY: I’ll tell you why, because there’s a town involved here. Callahan Factory’s the only thing keeping it alive.

ZALINSKY: Look, believe it or not, I’m providing a service, I’m thinning the corporate herd. The weaker animals always go. So the kids cry when you tie old tiger to a tree and shoot him, but that’s life. America’s in a state of renewal. We’ve gotta have the strength to tie a few factories to a tree and bash them with a shovel. Meanwhile, if I can grab your share of the market, put a little coin in my pocket, by being the asshole, well, what the hell? Know what I mean?

TOMMY: Boy, you sure are different in your TV commercials.

ZALINSKY: What the American public doesn’t know is what makes them the American public, alright? Hell, folks believe me when I tell them: we’re not just building automotive components here, we’re adding horsepower to American industry. Yeah, television’s been good to me, son. “I make car parts for the American working man, because that’s what I am, and that’s who I care about.” Heh! The truth is: I make car parts for the American working man, because I’m a hell of a salesman, and he doesn’t know any better.

posted by deanklear at 6:45 PM on September 17, 2012 [60 favorites]

Yes, AwkwardPause, I meant the specific "I can see Russia from my house" comment. Which, as you point out, is only very slightly dumber than what she did say, but with so much of this campaign season being about misquotes and misleading statements, I figured we should try to be as specific and accurate here as possible.

God knows there's still plenty left to mock, anyway.
posted by Superplin at 6:47 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

I think the key bit of news is that Romney's campaign staff was already willing to talk shit about him before this story even broke (see the Politico link in the FPP). If his staff, brain trust that it is, collapses before the debates, he might really flame out. I think he's probably done, but certainly done if a staff exodus begins.

Honestly a lot of this sort of inside baseball trash talking showing up even in otherwise relatively places like Politico reminds me a lot of the McCain campaign after the Palin announcement turned really south.
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:47 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

Judging from a very unscientific poll based on the a couple of people I went to high school with that I haven't blocked on Facebook yet, Romney is speaking right to his sweet spot. They are disgusted with "Them," the ones who feel entitled to food and housing, and I think what they ultimately want is for "Them" to die. This is thinly-veiled ethnic cleansing rhetoric, at the grass roots. I don't think it's what the GOP is talking about, but it's what the base is taking away from it, and it is what they are just about ready to start talking about out loud if they continue to be encouraged.
posted by Lyn Never at 6:48 PM on September 17, 2012 [13 favorites]

relatively friendly
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:48 PM on September 17, 2012

LA Times:

Romney’s problem in the days to come will be that it revealed a public figure who is not just disdainful of the size of the American bureaucracy, but of the millions of people who stoop to relying on, say, unemployment benefits. That brings in quite a few more of our fellow citizens who merely fell on hard times, hardly lifetime chiselers.

The Republicans have been playing "despise the poor" card for so long that they have become enured to their own message and so have had to up the stakes by adding in the middle class, elderly, and unemployed-- all of whom receive "entitlements." I don't really understand how they can reconcile the Pro-Family stance with the "you are scum because you don't pay any Federal Income Tax." Children are a big tax deduction and the family of four, living in their own home might be a Leave-it-to-Beaver 50's ideal apparently beloved by the Far Right, but that house and those kids are big tax right-offs for the middle class.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:50 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

To me, Mitt Romney is a stone cold businessman who doesn't give two shits about you unless you are wealthy and powerful. When people complain about things Obama does that aren't enough or that go against what they'd like to see done, I sympathize but I think it is fairly clear that Obama actually genuinely cares that you are dissatisfied.

Unless you are dripping with wealth and power, I don't feel it is exaggerating to say that Mitt Romney could not care less about you. He would really rather you did not exist. You're a speck of dirt to be swept away.

America is not a business and there are people who need help. Wealthy people want breaks - they don't need them. But it is pretty clear that the wealthy is who Mitt aims to help, because he sees himself in them. That's why he sounded that way in the video, because he felt like he was amongst other wealthy people.

Mitt Romney is absolutely not running for president to help anyone who needs it, or frankly to do anything but the bare minimum for the non wealthy. Him and Ann have given off quite the vibe that they think he should be king. And the more they talk and give interviews, the more they come off as annoyed that they can't just have him appointed president without a vote from these lower classes of people.
posted by cashman at 6:50 PM on September 17, 2012 [15 favorites]

It's as simple as this. The widespread delusion that one's success is owed to one's own merit, diligence, intelligence, or effort *justifies* and rationalizes privilege and hierarchy. Wealth, in other words, is an entitlement of the fittest. Thus is capitalist class structure presented as a natural fact, inflected with racial hierarchy, and sold back to the masses as their fate to be transcended in the sweet fucking hereafter. And working people keep falling for it. Or having it shoved down their throats with a healthy side order of fear.

Romney believes he is better than you unless you have more money than he does. He believes he "inherited nothing," just made the best of being the son of a governor/CEO who went to the finest schools and lived in a basement apartment until he figured out how to make 300 HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS AND YOU CAN TOO! The entire ideology has the verisimilitude of an infomercial.

In reality, he's no more intelligent or charismatic or hard working than the guys who used to cut his grass before he fired them for being more Mexican than his dad for pete's fucking sake. Probably less on all three scores, just better educated and capitalized.

He's a class warrior. Look how at ease and natural he seems in these comments, not at all his stiff and awkward presence when talking to riff raff. Here he fluently says what he believes which is that he's rich and so are his friends in that room and if you aren't it's your own fault for being stupid, lazy, unhealthy, insufficiently faithful, or born the wrong color, gender, sexuality, or class.

I loathe this man every bit as I loathed George W. Bush, maybe more adjusting for comparable points in their histories.
posted by spitbull at 6:51 PM on September 17, 2012 [50 favorites]

God Save the United States of America and its Constitutional foundation. Based on the majority here, He may be the only one who can.
posted by crushedhope at 6:51 PM on September 17, 2012

Mitt Romney Is The 47%, According To Mitt Romney
posted by zombieflanders at 6:51 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

i wonder what romney feels about his fast offerings and those who receive that help.
posted by nadawi at 6:52 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think a big part of the 99 percenter Republican issue is that they don't realize that they don't pay taxes, and if they do, could not even tell you what they paid in taxes last year.
posted by Brocktoon at 6:56 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

And with apologies to Brian Blessed: This has been Mitt Romney's worst week in politics since last week.
posted by Zonker at 6:59 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

In case anyone's interested in reading a reaction from the other side there are a couple of interesting things and a couple of eye-rollers in Jonah Goldberg's take.
posted by mediareport at 7:01 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

I think food is entitled to housing in my mouth.
posted by mccarty.tim at 7:01 PM on September 17, 2012 [21 favorites]

I wonder if Obama ever imagined that he could win this election by pretty much not saying much of anything at all or, when he does say something it can be something pretty much totally uncontroversial to normal people like "women deserve equal rights!" and see his approval ratings skyrocket. The GOP is doing all the work for him.

Part of me almost thinks this is some sort of elaborate troll by the GOP so to set themselves up for a sweep in 2016.
posted by triggerfinger at 7:02 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

oh my god mittens you can't just ask people why they're poor
posted by elizardbits at 7:03 PM on September 17, 2012 [27 favorites]

If Scrooge McDuck himself watched that video I do believe even he'd do a facepalm.
posted by Podkayne of Pasadena at 7:03 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Ladies and gentlemen, it's not even a Dickens villain. It's 1990s Farley-Spade feel good comedy villain Ray Zalinsky.

I seriously googled "Romney Ray Zalinsky" the other day to see if anyone else had made that connection. Nice one deanklear!
posted by Sreiny at 7:04 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

triggerfinger - my thought since the primaries has been that the gop isn't actually attempting to win the presidency. they're trying to stack congress/state positions with frothy-mouth conservatives to lay groundwork for 2016.
posted by nadawi at 7:04 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

mrnutty: "Awaiting the 'We are the 53%' tshirts to emerge."

Colonel Shikishima: Memories are short.
posted by mkb at 7:04 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

To me, Mitt Romney is a stone cold businessman who doesn't give two shits about you unless you are wealthy and powerful

I was thinking earlier about why people get into politics. Palin, god love her-- actually got onto the city council because she was interested in her town. Obama, has his community organizer background. Plenty of state, local, and national politicians are interested in making their part of the world a better place (albeit according to their personal definition of "better.") With Romney, I don't get that feeling at all. As we have seen he has no definition of "better." He can be for public healthcare or not, pro-life or pro-choice. He really doesn't give a shit. It's whatever, dude, just so long as he gets elected. I'm not even convinced that he will be catering to the desires of his rich buddies. What he really wants is the prestige of the office. The prize. The historical recognition of his life. That is a really, really bad reason to become President.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:05 PM on September 17, 2012 [58 favorites]

He has to double down really. He can't back down, we know how he feels about apologies. I'm sure the campaign will do the calculus itself and realize the only way out is go full top hat and monocle. Change the campaign song to Puttin on the Ritz. Do all appearances with a cravat and a huge diamond stickpin. White kid gloves, the whole works. Even better if he can produce a 75 foot schooner off some cape somewhere or another. The only problem is he has to ditch the Utah trappings and embrace the blue-bloods. This may backfire and they may see him as not only a cad but a bounder. This really is the most interesting race since the guided age.
posted by Ad hominem at 7:07 PM on September 17, 2012 [13 favorites]

to set themselves up for a sweep in 2016.

They won't have to wait that long; Republicans are poised for a sweep of the Senate in 2014, when 20 of the 33 seats up for election are Democratic seats.
posted by mediareport at 7:07 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

The thing about blowing the presidency, nadawi, is that if no one turns out to vote for your guy, they also don't vote for your other guys downticket. This is just a disaster for them, full stop.
posted by emjaybee at 7:08 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

David Corn is on Lawrence ODonnell now: some new things out in Mother Jones tomorrow.
posted by madamjujujive at 7:08 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

@ezraklein: From the reporters who were there, "No Apology" sounds like a fair summation of Romney's hasty presser.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:08 PM on September 17, 2012

@hollybdc: Romney says his argument wasn't "elegantly stated" but suggests he stands by the jist of his message in the video

@hollybdc: Romney walks away when asked if they are "core convictions" and what he believes. Just three q's
posted by zombieflanders at 7:10 PM on September 17, 2012

The (negative) impact of this is greatly exaggerated. This is what 100% of Republicans and a large fraction of independents believe. I'm sure we all have relatives who post crap like this on their Facebook walls to dozens of "likes."

If anything, I could see this energizing the Republican base.
posted by dirigibleman at 9:34 PM on September 17 [+] [!]

I'm inclined to agree with you, what with all the "surely, this..." stuff that's happened in the past, but I have faith that my fellow Americans will see, as I have, how much of a dick this man is, hear the dickish things he has to say in an obscenely earnest dickishness, understand that sometimes dicks win, but then realize that with this video, his campagin's response, and the fallout in the media, that he's also a loser. Some people like dicks. Nobody likes a loser.
posted by herrdoktor at 7:11 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

In the link above there is the response from the Romney cam which says, "Mitt Romney wants to help all Americans" and all I can think when I see that response is "Its a Cookbook!"
posted by Podkayne of Pasadena at 7:12 PM on September 17, 2012 [47 favorites]

emjaybee, if you convince the liberals and the middle that the presidency is won, and keep stoking the hate fires, you'll get enough conservatives out to shore up what needs to be shored up.

and yeah, media report - exactly - keep getting congress (and states) more conservative so that most government actions are either stalling or moving towards the right, while playing the victim about the presidency.
posted by nadawi at 7:12 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

The historical recognition of his life. That is a really, really bad reason to become President.

Every time I try to figure out the reasons Mitt is running, for some odd reason I visualize the MeFi Deleted Posts Greasemonkey scripts and all the various reasons FPPs get the axe that don't cut the mustard. Then his candidacy sort of makes sense for a bit and but then it doesn't. Very weird.

I am sure it isn’t this way, but I also toy with the idea that Mitt, if actually elected, would get to the WH and just not know what to do with himself. Like getting there was all the fun but the destination just did not hold the charm that the brochures promised.
posted by lampshade at 7:13 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

To SERVE the people... to?
posted by blue_beetle at 7:14 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

The (negative) impact of this is greatly exaggerated. This is what 100% of Republicans and a large fraction of independents believe. I'm sure we all have relatives who post crap like this on their Facebook walls to dozens of "likes."

If anything, I could see this energizing the Republican base.

Mayyyyybe, but see the thing is, clicking "like" on Facebook doesn't actually cost anything. It seems likely to me that there are a significant number of people who express views against their interest in public, and even in polls, who will not actually turn out to vote against that interest when push comes to shove. Human beings are remarkably good at managing cognitive dissonance, and, while there are undoubtedly plenty of lemming Republicans, I suspect that there are also quite a few people who'll applaud this rhetoric and then weirdly find themselves too busy to vote come polling day.
posted by howfar at 7:15 PM on September 17, 2012

but I also toy with the idea that Mitt, if actually elected, would get to the WH and just not know what to do with himself. Like getting there was all the fun but the destination just did not hold the charm that the brochures promised.

Kind of like when Palin won the governorship of Alaska and quit after less than 2 years. To this day I'm convinced that she quit because it was a lot more hard, dull work and a lot less glamor than she thought it was going to be. Plus FOX news was calling and what she really wanted to do was travel around and wave to cheering crowds and sign autographs and stay at 5 star hotels and what the job required her to do was read a lot of reports and listen to a lot of people drone on about policy and so she said "Fuck it."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:18 PM on September 17, 2012 [38 favorites]

Completely non scientific, no basis in anything but speculation: I think Mittens wants to be president because he has daddy issues, he wants to achieve something his dad would be proud of him for. He just seems like such an over-compensating asshole to me, not to terribly unlike Bush Jr.
posted by edgeways at 7:19 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

I'm just glad long term that a second Obama term means we can have a chance at a semi sane Supreme Court for a few decades to counteract the shifting right wing.
posted by mccarty.tim at 7:20 PM on September 17, 2012 [9 favorites]

Don't count on it. They are some stubborn old coots and and the justices that everyone thinks are getting ready to retire may decide to hang on for another 4 or 5 years.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:23 PM on September 17, 2012

"Energize the base" is the last refuge to which a scoundrel clings.
posted by davebush at 7:26 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

yeah it'll probably be tough to pry any of the conservatives off the court but a couple more of the liberal votes might not mind retiring and being replaced by someone with a few more years to go
posted by slapshot57 at 7:28 PM on September 17, 2012

50 days left and Romney's still shoring up the base.
posted by 2bucksplus at 7:28 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

From the AP, Mitt made the following statements:

"Republican Mitt Romney says a video clip in which he called nearly half of Americans "victims" was "not elegantly stated" and was "spoken off the cuff." But he says President Barack Obama's approach is "attractive to people who are not paying taxes."
Romney spoke to reporters Monday evening in a hastily called news conference after the emergence of a video in which the GOP presidential nominee told donors that almost half of American voters "believe that they are victims."
The Republican nominee did not disavow the comments but said they were made during a question-and-answer session. He said it was indicative of his campaign's effort to "focus on the people in the middle."
posted by HuronBob at 7:29 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

I wonder how Mitt would characterize these supporters of his campaign in Mississippi, who admit to deserving welfare and hating Obama (because they are white, they say).

Unfortunately, many people will believe Romney's numbers, because they heard it on the news, and because they don't understand what he was really doing with his bogus analysis.
posted by Brian B. at 7:31 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

How does that statement improve the situation for Romney in any way at all?
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 7:31 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

So this Republican party they have in the USA, they don't think people are entitled to food, housing and health care? God damn.

That's not just "the Republican party in the USA", that is the whole basis of Capitalism: you're out of high school and you don't have a job? Well then fuck you, you have not earned the privilege of getting the basic necessities of life (which all other life forms on this planet get automatically). We're the apex predators, we have to pay for it!.
posted by SarcasticSeraph at 7:33 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

This is starting to remind me of that scene in The Dead Zone when Sheen uses that baby as a human shield.
posted by 4ster at 7:33 PM on September 17, 2012 [14 favorites]

If this Redditor isn't working for OFA, someone needs to get on it pronto:

This should be Obama's next ad. I call it "Victim."

Narrator: At a private fundraiser, Mitt Romney recently said the following:

Romney: There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims.

Narrator: Really, Mitt? Anyone who votes for Obama is dependent on the government?

Person X: I'm a doctor.
Person Y: I'm an engineer.
Person Z: I'm a small business owner.

Person X: I paid more taxes than Mitt Romney.
Person Y: I paid more taxes than Mitt Romney.
Person Z: I paid more taxes than Mitt Romney.

Person X: I voted for Barack Obama.
Person Y: I voted for Barack Obama.
Person Z: I'm voting for Barack Obama.

Narrator: Sadly, Mitt, it seems like the only person who believes they're a victim...is you.

posted by zombieflanders at 7:35 PM on September 17, 2012 [94 favorites]

Maybe Mitt hasn't learned the First Rule of Holes: When you are in one, quit digging.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 7:36 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

@NickKristof What will Romney do for an encore? Condemn people who don't save enough for a weekend house? Use #RomneyEncore hashtag

@degreesofgray The bottom 47% expect the government to pay for their car elevators #RomneyEncore

@Granniegal If i ever find out which one of you lowly half-millionaires is taping my private speeches I will Bain you #47Percent #Romneyencore

@prof_rebuke "I'm speaking to the real Americans, the ones who pulled themselves up by their boat shoes..." #RomneyEncore

@nrothstein First debate : 'I'll bet you the million in my pocket that your voters don't pay income taxes'-- Romney #romneyencore

@BenJoBubble "You people don't even take proper care of your Cadillacs." #RomneyEncore
posted by madamjujujive at 7:36 PM on September 17, 2012 [13 favorites]

How does that statement improve the situation for Romney in any way at all

Fox news will spin it as having closed the book on the matter, and Romney will begin trying to say that he's already addressed it and doesn't have to keep talking about it.
posted by tyllwin at 7:36 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Nosing around, the reaction among conservative bloggers is interesting:

1. It's ironic that Obama's campaign, which wrote off working class white voters as a planned part of its 2012 strategy ("The 2012 approach treats white voters without college degrees as an unattainable cohort") is decrying Romney for attacking working class voters.

2. Despite all the excitement among press monkeys and partisan political junkies, most of these oh-so-election-making gaffes pass unnoticed by the average voter.

I can find something to agree with in both of those.
posted by mediareport at 7:38 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Maybe Mitt hasn't learned the First Rule of Holes: When you are in one, quit digging.

Personally, I'm buying the guy a backhoe.
posted by HuronBob at 7:38 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

Lemurrhea: "The Democrats were smart to play the word "Barack", as everything I see on the web implies that the Republicans can't spell it."

_H_U_S_S_ _ _
posted by notsnot at 7:38 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ezra Klein, longform tweeting again:

What I like least about Romney's comments is the idea that the working poor don't "take responsibility for their lives. The thing about not having that much money is you have to take responsibility for things the rich take for granted. That's the thing about being rich: it buys you services and ease. You get to focus on what you want to focus on. The problem for the poor, often, is they don't have time or energy to focus on the things that make you rich. Romney was able to sell his dad's stock to pay for school. He didn't have to work to support his sisters at age 17. And good for him! That's the dream. But to look at the working poor and say they don't take responsibility? It's backwards. And that matters, as if Romney is president, his understanding of what stands between the poor and prosperity will inform national policy.

posted by zombieflanders at 7:40 PM on September 17, 2012 [71 favorites]

Of course they're decrying Romney's attack. Driving a wedge between a candidate and their base is like skunking someone in cribbage. Not always possible and never necessary, but damn satisfying.
posted by Orange Pamplemousse at 7:41 PM on September 17, 2012

Althouse: I don't see anything bad in there at all.
posted by unSane at 7:41 PM on September 17, 2012

This is really late in the game to still be shoring up your base. "Your base" doesn't win elections, it keeps you from losing them horribly while you work the middle.
posted by edgeways at 7:45 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

@jesseberney: Every time something horrible happens to Romney, remember he must think it's not as bad as releasing his taxes would be.

@neeratanden: For those thinking that all statements blow over, just remember "macaca" happened in August.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:46 PM on September 17, 2012 [12 favorites]

Republican Mitt Romney says a video clip in which he called nearly half of Americans "victims" was "not elegantly stated" and was "spoken off the cuff.

Do you know what helps with that problem, Mittens? A teleprompter.
posted by Lemurrhea at 7:46 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

The Real Romney Captured On Tape Turns Out To Be A Sneering Plutocrat
posted by zombieflanders at 7:48 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

I think the tax return point there is a good one. Not only does it make it look even more like his tax returns contain something on par with having taken the tax evasion amnesty in 2009, it also keeps the subject alive.
posted by feloniousmonk at 7:50 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

This is the ugly other side of the coin of the pervasive "My wealth and priveleged family and I pulled ourselves up by our bootstraps" narrative which dominated the conventions.

The logical continuation and practical effect of that argument as it translates into policy is:
"We pulled ourselves up by our bootstraps, why the FUCK can't you?"
posted by cacofonie at 7:53 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

I want to thank Mitt for making me reconsider my answer to the George W. Bush "Miss Me Yet?" billboard.

The answer's still the same, but I did reconsider.
posted by Mad_Carew at 7:55 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

This is a woman who came to the states with 4 children and no money, and was able to feed them only because of government help. Your tax dollars paid for her (and her children) to go to school. She works for an auto company, so every year during the plant furlough, she applies (and gets) unemployment.

This is what I want to hear more of. Like that Craig T. Nelson clip where he says "Nobody helped me...I went on welfare!" or whatever. And like the Daily Show clip where they expose the Fox News host who was all upset about a lack of Maternity leave...then turned around a few months later and suddenly took the opposite position.

When these folks that you know chime in to echo these statements and you have direct knowledge of when they themselves needed a hand, I'd love it if you challenge them and report what happens.
posted by cashman at 7:57 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

Yzma: It is no concern of mine whether or not your family has... what was it again?

Peasant: Umm... food?

Yzma: Ha! You really should have thought of that before you became peasants! Take him away!
posted by SPrintF at 7:58 PM on September 17, 2012 [13 favorites]

I know it's tempting to gloat over Romney's Terrible, No Good, Very Bad Week, but remember that he's pretty much playing to peoples' worst tendencies. As the past ten years have so painfully taught us, that's seldom a bad bet.

Just remind her that she's going to need Medicare soon. If you can't appeal to envy and selfishness appeal to self-survival.
posted by Talez at 7:58 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Warren Ellis commented a while back that his Twitter feed keeps filling up with Transmetropolitan references every time a new Romney story breaks.

Today Ellis has been focused on a friend who was arrested at the Occupy anniversary: #freemollycrabapple
posted by homunculus at 8:00 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Nobody fucks a chicken like Mitt Romney.
posted by bardic at 8:03 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

Oh the debates are going to be delicious
posted by asockpuppet at 8:03 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Gawker's Jezebel weighs in: Mitt Romney is so mad that he could just storm onto a private jet and fly to the Cayman Islands and punch some money. He's so mad that he feels like going into his car elevator with an endangered tiger's bladder full of single malt scotch and slowly pour it onto the floor. He's so mad he could just buy Oakland and sell it to China and then bomb China. That's how mad he is that the poor people who don't pay taxes feel entitled to food. How fucking dare they.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:07 PM on September 17, 2012 [61 favorites]

How!
Rich!
IS HE??!
posted by cashman at 8:09 PM on September 17, 2012

The Real Romney Captured On Tape Turns Out To Be A Sneering Plutocrat
posted by zombieflanders at 10:48 PM

The comparison to Obama's 2008 leak is really an eye-opener.
posted by cacofonie at 8:09 PM on September 17, 2012

""We pulled ourselves up by our bootstraps, why the FUCK can't you?""

Huh, maybe because the phrase was originally coined to describe something that's patently impossible...
posted by notsnot at 8:10 PM on September 17, 2012 [24 favorites]

> Gawker's Jezebel weighs in:

"Like the time he contributed to the American economy by keeping his money in tax havens like Switzerland and other places Bond villains ski."
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:15 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

It will be news to most people that almost half of Americans pay no federal income tax.

Disclaimer: This is an opinion. Just because you may disagree does mean it is a "troll".
posted by republican at 8:16 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

emjaybee, if you convince the liberals and the middle that the presidency is won, and keep stoking the hate fires, you'll get enough conservatives out to shore up what needs to be shored up.

But that side was already pretty fired up just on the basis of being the challenging party - And as a generally nervous democrat, I don't think too many of us think anything is "won" yet, no matter how deep a hole Mitt digs - What this might do is get both disillusioned progressives and moderate/conservative Democrats who may not like Romney but were feeling pretty "meh" on Obama to open wallets and ballots - Who knows? We'll find out soon enough.
posted by jalexei at 8:16 PM on September 17, 2012

He's saying that "those people" don't want to work (but could) and are just such lazy amoral sloths that they're voting for Obama just to keep the free whiskey and fried chicken. How does he propose to get those inferior subhumans out there earning and paying taxes? And what will he do to them if they won't perform up to snuff? In Romneyworld they're not even "entitled" to food!
posted by robbyrobs at 8:19 PM on September 17, 2012

It will be news to most people that almost half of Americans pay no federal income tax.

I'm inclined to agree with you - a smart Democratic strategy would then strive to show "most people" who those folks generally are (retired, poor, military, etc) - Would it work? It could certainly blunt the impact significantly.
posted by jalexei at 8:20 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Kind of like when Palin won the governorship of Alaska and quit after less than 2 years.

And four years ago John McCain ultimately decided that Sarah Palin would make a better VP than Mitt Romney.

Yeah, IMO, looking evil isn't what hurts Mitt here, it's looking like a fuckup. Americans will vote for evil; they won't usually vote for fuckups. And his mealy-mouthed apology only exacerbates his troubles, failing as it will to satisfy his opponents while frustrating his supporters.
posted by octobersurprise at 8:21 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

The Dems need to hang that around the necks of every GOP politico running for office at every. damn. level.

That is what that party stands for these days, that is what they think, how they plead with their donors. Bury them with it.
posted by Slackermagee at 8:21 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

It will be news to most people that almost half of Americans pay no federal income tax.

What's really news is that Romney apparently doesn't understand that these people still pay taxes, just in other ways: sales tax, payroll tax, state and county-level taxes, etc. He apparently believes that 47% are moochers in some Randian dystopia. That's news.
posted by mek at 8:22 PM on September 17, 2012 [24 favorites]

Supposed Gaffes and the 2012 Presidential Polls:

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Hasn’t the 2012 campaign taught us not to jump the gun with various “gaffes”? (Yes, I will be using scare quotes throughout.) In fact, didn’t the 2008 campaign teach us this too?

[check his two graphs comparing so-called major gaffes with the lack of subsequent polling movement in 2008 and 2012. Note "the private sector is doing fine" and "you didn't build that" in the 2nd graph]

No discernible or certainly consequential movement because of Obama’s two “gaffes.” The only movement after Romney’s comments about the Libya attack is in his favor, thanks largely to the probably inevitable tightening after Obama’s convention bump.

The best case for saying that “gaffes matter” is that actual voters are persuaded to change their minds because of the gaffes. If they don’t, then it’s tough to argue that “gaffes” are really “game-changers.”

...Many a news cycle was built on a “gaffe” with a remarkably short shelf life.

That's from the polling blog The Monkey Cage (which Nate Silver called an "outstanding blog" last year, in case anyone needs a quick credibility check).
posted by mediareport at 8:22 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

Was a VP slot something that 2008 Mitt would've been interested in?
posted by box at 8:23 PM on September 17, 2012

"Was a VP slot something that 2008 Mitt would've been interested in?"

2008 Mitt gave 13 years or so of tax returns to John McCain's campaign during VP vetting, and McCain's camp went with Palin.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 8:26 PM on September 17, 2012 [17 favorites]

Was a VP slot something that 2008 Mitt would've been interested in?

He showed his apparently toxic tax returns to the McCain campaign in hopes that he'd get it.
posted by Flunkie at 8:26 PM on September 17, 2012

What's really news is that Romney apparently doesn't understand that these people still pay taxes, just in other ways: sales tax, payroll tax, state and county-level taxes, etc.

The talking point that republican is selling you as 'opinion' is easier for a dumbed-downed public to swallow as fact, than your complex, nuanced, and most importantly correct observation. Facts do not matter, which is why this 'gaffe' will probably blow over quickly.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 8:27 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

"We'll see capital come back and we'll see—without actually doing anything—we'll actually get a boost in the economy."

I have long held that the biggest problem for the current administration was that the people who can invest and should invest in America just took their toys and went home when Obama was elected. Because it didn't work out the way they wanted it to, America had to be punished.

It's nice to hear confirmation of this fact from the candidate.
posted by halfbuckaroo at 8:28 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

Hunter S Thompson used to accuse Richard Nixon of being a werewolf. Romney might not be a werewolf, but if he keeps screwing the pooch like this much some day he'll probably father one
posted by Kiablokirk at 8:29 PM on September 17, 2012 [15 favorites]

Oh the debates are going to be delicious

Obama should answer everything via a Romney puppet with a tape recorder inside, full of Romney's own ridiculous words, a'la GOB and Franklin Delano Bluth.
posted by jason_steakums at 8:34 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

Disclaimer: This is an opinion. Just because you may disagree does mean it is a "troll".

I am assuming this is a typo, but things will go much better here if you just comment in good faith and take concerns about the community directly to MetaTalk.
posted by jessamyn at 8:39 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

Man, this really is going to be the best The Aristocrats joke ever.
posted by dry white toast at 8:41 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

It will be news to most people that almost half of Americans pay no federal income tax.

So ?
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 8:41 PM on September 17, 2012

Personally, I think he’s a kind, decent man who says stupid things because he is pretending to be something he is not — some sort of cartoonish government-hater. But it scarcely matters. He’s running a depressingly inept presidential campaign. Mr. Romney, your entitlement reform ideas are essential, but when will the incompetence stop? - David Brooks in tomorrow's NYTimes.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:41 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Kind? DECENT?

I... I can't.
posted by These Birds of a Feather at 8:43 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

Personally, I think he’s a kind, decent man who says stupid things because he is pretending to be something he is not

Kind decent people don't strap their dog to the top of their car and, when the terrified animal loses control of itself, hose it off and keeps on driving.

Even since that factoid came out I knew all I needed to know about Romney as a person.
posted by winna at 8:44 PM on September 17, 2012 [41 favorites]

Hey, I didn't say it. David Brooks did. I think he's an ass.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:45 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Romney's response to the leak. slyt
posted by annsunny at 8:46 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Just like clinging to guns and religion, right?

Here's the guns and religion quote. Obama was saying that some people have a very hard life, due in part to being ignored by the government, and so are bitter about it and "cling to guns and religion" in response. Obama was saying that he wants to help those people. It was politically damaging, but it was both truthful and, in fact, sympathetic. Obama actually wants to improve people's situation regardless of their political background.

Romney was saying, in regards to anyone who doesn't earn enough money to pay a certain progressive tax right now, including elderly people who have paid that tax all their lives, fuck them. They will never "take personal responsibility and care for their lives".
posted by East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 at 8:46 PM on September 17, 2012 [34 favorites]

This isn't a single gaffe. It's a treasure trove of them, and full of ones that match a popular impression of the man that is echoed by the media. It also seems inept. Which means it's the kind of gaffe that might stick. We'll see, maybe it'll blow over, but Romney's a tetch behind and has been for a while. He needs these little blowups to happen to the other guy to win.

I'd be more sympathetic, since it's the kind of dynamic that doomed Gore, except that I think he'd be a terrible president.
posted by feckless at 8:47 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Hey, I didn't say it. David Brooks did. I think he's an ass.

What was hilarious was that I misread the comment at first and thought NOOOO roomthreeseventeen, what has occurred?! But then I reread it and realized it was Bobo.
posted by winna at 8:48 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

More leaks out and it's priceless - Mitt Romney: " I have inherited nothing. Everything Ann and I own we earned the old fashioned way"
posted by Podkayne of Pasadena at 8:49 PM on September 17, 2012 [10 favorites]

Podkayne, I don't think that one's new. I read it earlier this evening.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:51 PM on September 17, 2012

More leaks out and it's priceless - Mitt Romney: " I have inherited nothing. Everything Ann and I own we earned the old fashioned way"

Yep - through 3rd-party-managed trusts careful to have no individual name attached to them, right? And I suppose selling someone else's stock to finance school isn't technically "inheritance" either(?)
posted by jalexei at 8:52 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

Romney's response to the leak. slyt

Wow, it's like he's an android or a replicant or something.
posted by KokuRyu at 8:54 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

"...we earned the old fashioned way"

Fucking over as many people as possible.

(yeah it sounds like there is a few news cycles of this yet to come. Gonna be another long week for Rom-E v.9.17xxx - just when they where going to re-re-re release the New ~~coke~~ and improved Rom-E. Man...that must be where all that $ is going, paying all those programmers for daily patches and reboots
posted by edgeways at 8:54 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

If it looks like I'm going to win, the markets will be happy. If it looks like the president's going to win, the markets should not be terribly happy.

"U.S. stocks are coming off a surge last week that sent the S&P 500 to its highest level in nearly five years."
posted by kirkaracha at 8:56 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

"the old fashioned way"
posted by Flunkie at 8:56 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

Wow, it's like he's an android or a replicant or something.

I certainly think it's time for him to retire
posted by East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 at 8:56 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Wow, it's like he's an android or a replicant or something.

Like tears down the drain
posted by Podkayne of Pasadena at 8:57 PM on September 17, 2012 [12 favorites]

I have long held that the biggest problem for the current administration was that the people who can invest and should invest in America just took their toys and went home when Obama was elected. Because it didn't work out the way they wanted it to, America had to be punished.

Absolutely. Because this small group of people who have accumulated exponentially more wealth than your typical American have done so because they were also exponentially more productive. The recession, occurring once and since these pillars of economic strength were slighted can be completely attributed to their inactivity, and unwillingness to participate in such a dire economic climate.

This is of course completely bullshit, and the current economic climate, if anything, has only contributed to further the gap between the productivity of and the wages earned by the average American worker. The highest marginal tax rate is minimal compared to earlier periods of great economic strength, not to mention the ease of these extremely rich people skirt those rates as evidenced by this presidential candidate's lack of releasing his own returns.

I don't know where you got this Randian idea that somehow these extremely wealthy and powerful people who have been driven only by the motivation to collect more wealth and more power, somehow lose that incentive based on a few more percentage points on the taxes they're skirting anyway, or the election of a President who at least in his words makes an attempt to appeal to the hard working middle class Americans who actually turn the crankshaft of this fucking country.
posted by clearly at 8:57 PM on September 17, 2012 [10 favorites]

The "wanting to buy a Chinese Sweatshop" should be good for a few chuckles somewhere in there.
posted by edgeways at 8:57 PM on September 17, 2012

I've been on unemployment compensation in the past so I qualify as one of those "freeloaders". But even then I was never tempted to vote for someone who promised more assistance. Maybe Romney isn't polished but I would much rather hear straight talk than pandering.
posted by republican at 8:59 PM on September 17, 2012

Romney's Hidden-Video Fundraiser Host In June: Economy Is “Not Too Bad”

Romney "47 Percent" Fundraiser Host: Hedge Fund Manager Who Likes Sex Parties
posted by madamjujujive at 9:01 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Romney Just Saying He Grew Up Poor In Memphis Now
posted by Sreiny at 9:02 PM on September 17, 2012 [14 favorites]

If you don't want to hear pandering you must really dislike Romney then, dude is widely criticized by all sides of the spectrum from liberal to ultra conservative for being on all sides of the issue depending on the race, and depending on the people asking the questions.
posted by edgeways at 9:02 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

If you qualify as one of the freeloaders, Romney's written you off.
posted by shakespeherian at 9:04 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

I have inherited nothing. Everything Ann and I own we earned the old fashioned way

Well, Romney's dad was alive when he gave them $60,000 in stocks (in 1969 dollars; about $377,000 today).
posted by kirkaracha at 9:04 PM on September 17, 2012 [11 favorites]

For those thinking this won't hurt Romney because people agree with this, I have to disagree. First and foremost, this makes Romney look like a LOSER, a guy who will LOSE the election. And that is deadly in America. The one thing we don't forgive is losing. Rove famously said that a big chunk of voters will just break for whoever is winning and that is true.

Second, the polling shows people DO NOT agree with him. They think that the rich should be taxed more, not less. And they are for almost all of Obama's platform.

For weeks, worryworts and pundits have been telling Mitt to give more specifics. He cannot. Obama has taken smart positions that are good for America and America agrees with him. The people of the US do not believe that 47% of the population are "chizellers." They think, rightly, that America is a land of good people working hard to make a better life. Since his base is nuts, Mitt has to take positions which obviously rely on nonsensical beliefs. Positions which most people don't agree with. And lo and behold Romney is losing, has been losing, and will continue to lose. Do you realize it has been 10 months since Romney had any kind of lead in the Real Clear Politics polling average? People are for Obama because he's taken solid, smart, American positions that most Americans, when asked independent of the question of whether the white guy or the black guy should be president, support in large numbers.

Romney's incompetence is highlighted because he's in a position where he has to be perfect to win. And that's because America agrees with the President.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:06 PM on September 17, 2012 [46 favorites]

Maybe Romney isn't polished but I would much rather hear straight talk than pandering.

Is that the straight talk before or after he said he didn't say what he said?
posted by octobersurprise at 9:06 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

Talking to a bunch of rich people about how poor people are lazy entitled freeloaders isn't pandering?
posted by rtha at 9:08 PM on September 17, 2012 [28 favorites]

That's pretty well said, Ironmouth.
posted by HuronBob at 9:09 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

"This man is a lout. A shameless lout, who, among the supposed privacy of close supporters, reveals that he can conceive of no idea larger or more profound than self-interest. As he believes first and foremost in Mitt Romney and his ambitions, he can’t conceive that others would believe in anything larger than themselves or their possible personal gain. He stands here, now, his own emptiness laid bare by his own cynical critique of others who will not follow him in selfishness. It is not that Mr. Romney is merely unfit to serve us as president. Based on this latest revelation, it may go much deeper. If he believes what he told that group in private, he may well be unfit to serve us as a fellow citizen." - David Simon
posted by vidur at 9:09 PM on September 17, 2012 [56 favorites]

I did not understand the news conference Romney had after the video became public. What was that all about? Trying to clean his shoes of the shiat he stepped in or what??
posted by robbyrobs at 9:09 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what…These are people who pay no income tax.

Romney went on: "[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

This, to me, unambiguously says that he's against any form of welfare, period. Are you somehow against unemployment benefits that you say you've received in the past?
posted by the cydonian at 9:10 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

And what was with the hair tonight? Did they pull the guy away from his bedtime chocolate milk and pb&js?
posted by octobersurprise at 9:11 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

The David Simon quote is especially appropriate since today's gaffe was essentially caught by ... a Wire.
posted by Podkayne of Pasadena at 9:11 PM on September 17, 2012 [11 favorites]

This man is a lout. A shameless lout, who, among the supposed privacy of close supporters, reveals that he can conceive of no idea larger or more profound than self-interest

That's a wonderful summary. Perfect.
posted by the cydonian at 9:11 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

"And I suppose selling someone else's stock to finance school isn't technically "inheritance" either(?)"

One of the largest wealth-transfers that the upper-middle classes and above make is to pay for their children to attend college (and, more rarely, grad school). They definitely don't think of this as part of an "inheritance," even though it functions quite similarly to inherited wealth in terms of limiting social mobility. And to be fair, it's such a natural next step after high school for these kids, who've been told since birth that they were going to college, that it doesn't feel much different to them than going to high school. They know, intellectually, that it's a generous gift, but their lived reality is that it's the next phase of schooling in which their "job" is getting good grades and learning things. Romney doesn't strike me as so reflective a man that he'd have thought about "paying for school" as a significant form of wealth transfer.

This actually helps a lot to realize when you're trying to talk about, like, education loan policies with executives who grew up comfortable enough for their parents to pay for college. They're not dumb; they just haven't thought about it. When you point it out, a lot of them actually think about it.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 9:11 PM on September 17, 2012 [37 favorites]

Brooks apparently suffering an attack of plain dealing.
posted by Miko at 9:18 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

If you qualify as one of the freeloaders, Romney's written you off.

I don't see it that way. A politician that insults me but can get me a job is worth more to me than a politician that panders just to get my vote. It seems that the latter is the one who has written me off.
posted by republican at 9:18 PM on September 17, 2012

just laid down $700 to attend the non-wedding commitment ceremony of my sister-and-law and some hardcore republican dude who can't have a wife because the shared income would eliminate his lifelong ssi disability benefits for epilepsy. i'm relieved to find out he's not one of those freeloaders.
posted by fallacy of the beard at 9:20 PM on September 17, 2012 [27 favorites]

Romney still hasn't articulated a plan to get anyone a job. I don't believe he has any idea how to do it.
posted by Miko at 9:21 PM on September 17, 2012 [13 favorites]

Would you like to serve fries with that job?
posted by Podkayne of Pasadena at 9:21 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Maybe Romney's a uniter, not a divider. An American friend of mine of Facebook has been scathing about Obama (from the left) for ages, but she's been posting more and more about Romney lately. Tonight, she shared a picture of Romney-Ryan captioned "And God Bless Half of America!" that was attributed to the Re-Elect President Obama page. The latest bit of content on that page? A lengthy excerpt from the Brooks column mentioned above.
posted by maudlin at 9:22 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

A politician that insults me but can get me a job...

wow, sounds like that whole 'taking personal responsibility' shit just went right by you. no president ever got me a job, and i never expected one to.
posted by fallacy of the beard at 9:22 PM on September 17, 2012 [48 favorites]

Romney still hasn't articulated a plan to get anyone a job. I don't believe he has any idea how to do it.

If he's elected, by definition he can't solve the jobs crisis. Anyone who he helps as President will be a government freeloader.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:22 PM on September 17, 2012 [12 favorites]

A politician that insults me but can get me a job is worth more to me than a politician that panders just to get my vote.

A politician who has at least some idea about getting you a job is worth more to everyone than a politician who insults you and then panders just to get your vote.
posted by ilicet at 9:23 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

He is going to stand up to china who will then give the jobs back I think.
posted by Ad hominem at 9:24 PM on September 17, 2012 [24 favorites]

I'm also tired of this particular vacuous and unspecific "jobs" rhetoric intended to drum up support for the cuts that would supposedly cause the rich to stop sitting on their investments -- as though the best solution here is to create a nation of serfs, working for giant employers. Though activating certain large employment sectors would really help, I'd much rather see policy focused not on reducing perceived costs for already-wealthy giant corporations, but on building a healthy ad secure enough middle class that people could borrow 5 grand from a few relatives and start a useful business of their own. It's pretty pathetic that we're being asked to vote on an 'American Dream' that is essentially none other than wage slavery for the family up in the big house.
posted by Miko at 9:25 PM on September 17, 2012 [45 favorites]

I'm relieved that he doesn't worry about me. That's a big load off my mind.

Pretty soon I hope to not worry about him, either.
posted by mule98J at 9:25 PM on September 17, 2012 [17 favorites]

Maybe Romney isn't polished but I would much rather hear straight talk than pandering.

The Obama crew does a lot of pandering, but this speech is in no way "straight talk". It's a confused guy pulling numbers out of his ass that prop up the Randian fantasy in his audience's heads. Claims that half the country doesn't pay taxes are something that normally come out of an extremist right-wing think tank, not a Presidential candidate.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 9:25 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

> I don't know where you got this Randian idea that somehow these extremely wealthy and powerful people who have been driven only by the motivation to collect more wealth and more power, somehow lose that incentive based on a few more percentage points on the taxes they're skirting anyway, or the election of a President who at least in his words makes an attempt to appeal to the hard working middle class Americans who actually turn the crankshaft of this fucking country.

They are investing in America, but doing it by sponsoring more teabag nutjobs who will make them pay lower taxes on money they are earning abroad and through their established means. They are past the point of every day economic fluctuations could effect them. Now they want to distance themselves from the screaming masses further and ensure that their ideas, counter to all logic, are the best way for the economy to work. Well, it makes *them* more money on their balance sheets anyway, since they are minimizing their externality costs like taxes.
posted by mrzarquon at 9:26 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

He is going to stand up to china who will then give the jobs back I think.

We're gonna love those jobs. Hope you like your new dorm! Breakfast is at 4:45. You'll have plenty of time, because it's not your day to have a shower.
posted by Miko at 9:26 PM on September 17, 2012 [24 favorites]

A politician that insults me but can get me a job is worth more to me than a politician that panders just to get my vote. It seems that the latter is the one who has written me off.
posted by republican at 12:18 AM on September 18 [+] [!]

If the idea is to set people up for some sort of arguing with a literal straw man false equivalency thing, then I ask you to please stop hurting America. Otherwise, If you are in good health and of the ages 18-35, I suspect the Romney Administration will gladly create a great job for you in the field of carrying a rifle in a war of choice and dying in some oven hot desert.
posted by feloniousmonk at 9:27 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

Nobody fucks a chicken like Mitt Romney.

Well, in my defense, I was young, and drunk, and I needed a place to sleep for the night.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:27 PM on September 17, 2012 [59 favorites]

Maybe Romney isn't polished

The thing is that he IS polished, though. He is very smooth, very comfortable, very fluid with these folks. They're in the club together. He measures up. He's talking their language. This is not lack of polish - this is what polish looks like.

But of course you can't expect the plebes to appreciate these finer nuances.
posted by Miko at 9:28 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

I don't see it that way. A politician that insults me but can get me a job is worth more to me than a politician that panders just to get my vote. It seems that the latter is the one who has written me off.

Please explain how Romney's going to get more jobs. The problem is consumption. Consumers aren't buying. Yet his plan isn't to increase demand--he's for putting more money in the hands of the rich so they can invest--despite the fact that we are already flush with cash to invest--interest rates are at historic lows. Meanwhile cutting government spending cuts jobs government hires for, like road construction, etc.

His plan is plain dumb.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:28 PM on September 17, 2012 [27 favorites]

blue_bottle wrote: "To SERVE the people... to?"

Kang and Kodos?
posted by smcameron at 9:29 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Meanwhile cutting government spending cuts jobs government hires for, like road construction, etc.

...and misses out on leveraging that government investment for the ancillary boost to income for suppliers, nearby businesses, etc. - the priming of the pump that gets cash moving again.
posted by Miko at 9:30 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

I kind of would like to know how Romney plans on creating jobs as well? Because he sure hasn't articulated it very well.
posted by edgeways at 9:30 PM on September 17, 2012

Romney will create 12 million jobs not 14 million or 10 million but 12 million where are those jobs coming from??
posted by robbyrobs at 9:34 PM on September 17, 2012

Economic forecasters vary on job growth predictions: The Congressional Budget Office predicts employment growth of 9 million jobs by 2016, but Moody’s Analytics, an economic research firm, forecasts growth of 12 million jobs. So it’s hard to tell whether Romney’s promise to create 12 million jobs is a bold pledge or a plan to take credit for what may happen anyway.
posted by Miko at 9:35 PM on September 17, 2012 [18 favorites]

> ... but my own view is that if we win on November 6th, there will be a great deal of optimism about the future of this country. We'll see capital come back and we'll see —without actually doing anything—we'll actually get a boost in the economy

The Romney Bubble will stimate the economy for a while.
posted by de at 9:35 PM on September 17, 2012

[that's a quote from the article, forgot to indicate that]
posted by Miko at 9:36 PM on September 17, 2012

out his ass is my best guess.

But all the "job" he is claiming he will magically create is frankly what the American economy is expected to add anyways, absent any congressional fucking around.

(or, er, what Miko says)
posted by edgeways at 9:36 PM on September 17, 2012

Also, do these cute icons help?
posted by Miko at 9:36 PM on September 17, 2012

Make that 'simulate'.
posted by de at 9:37 PM on September 17, 2012

Cute icons always help.
posted by shakespeherian at 9:40 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Even the stabby shears which show up twice?
posted by Podkayne of Pasadena at 9:41 PM on September 17, 2012

The National Review used (coined?) the word Rompocalypse. With that, I'm going to bed!
posted by HuronBob at 9:41 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

Also, do these cute icons help?

Each time I land on Republican campaign site, which is approximately once every four years, makes it starkly obvious that graphic designers skew Democrat.
posted by clearly at 9:41 PM on September 17, 2012 [16 favorites]

I've been thinking about this segment on Fresh Air since I heard it a month ago. It's a great discussion of the shifting definition/connotation of "entitlement" in US politics.
"But bear in mind that "entitlement" doesn't put all its cards on the table. Like a lot of effective political language, it enables you to slip from one idea to another without ever letting on that you've changed the subject."
posted by atomicstone at 9:42 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

Romney will create 12 million jobs not 14 million or 10 million but 12 million where are those jobs coming from??

If you look, that's the exact number of jobs that the economy is expected to create organically over the next 4 years...he literally has to do nothing, and 12 million jobs will just appear.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:42 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Look, cute icon creation has got to be at least three jobs.
posted by shakespeherian at 9:42 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

I'm certain you were not lazy and undeserving of help. But he'll let you believe that the majority of people who got the same benefits you did were.

All politicians lie and pander. So why would it bother me if he called me lazy? I'm only concerned with results.
posted by republican at 9:43 PM on September 17, 2012

Even the stabby shears which show up twice?

One of those clasped hands appears to have blood on it. Could there be a connection?
posted by Pudhoho at 9:44 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

For everyone saying this fired up the conservative base... It just as effectively (possibly more so) fires up the left.
posted by drezdn at 9:44 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

Romney still hasn't articulated a plan to get anyone a job. I don't believe he has any idea how to do it.

Yeah, he did. It was in the leaked video. His plan to create jobs is to get elected. Though, to be fair, he also admitted he wasn't very good at predicting the market, so it's not the most solid of plans.
posted by effwerd at 9:44 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

looks like:

flat tax, cut regulation (aka environmental/labor protection), MORE NAFTA plz (no wonder Romney luvs him some Clinton), bosses over workers, something something technology and drown the government int he bathtub.

YAY

jobs!!!
posted by edgeways at 9:45 PM on September 17, 2012

Results like Massachusetts dropping to 47th place in economic rankings under his watch?
posted by drezdn at 9:45 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

A politician that insults me but can get me a job is worth more to me than a politician that panders just to get my vote. It seems that the latter is the one who has written me off.

Funny you should say that, given that Romney has been caught saying the following:

We speak with voters across the country about their perceptions. Those people I told you—the 5 to 6 or 7 percent that we have to bring onto our side—they all voted for Barack Obama four years ago. So, and by the way, when you say to them, "Do you think Barack Obama is a failure?" they overwhelmingly say no. They like him. But when you say, "Are you disappointed that his policies haven't worked?" they say yes. And because they voted for him, they don't want to be told that they were wrong, that he's a bad guy, that he did bad things, that he's corrupt. Those people that we have to get, they want to believe they did the right thing, but he just wasn't up to the task. They love the phrase that he's "over his head."

Romney clearly was "verbally expressing are merely for the purpose of drawing support up to and including votes and do not necessarily reflect [his] personal values.". Wonder if there's a single word that expresses that notion effectively.
posted by the cydonian at 9:48 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm only concerned with results.

Since 2/3rds of private sector job growth in the past 50 years came under Democratic presidencies I assume that you will be voting for Obama then?
posted by Podkayne of Pasadena at 9:48 PM on September 17, 2012 [23 favorites]

In previous elections, I'd get agitated by political signs, but this year, whenever I see a Romney sign I just sort of laugh. He was the best candidate the Republicans had this year? Really?
posted by drezdn at 9:50 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

This is absolutely not new -- such contempt for America's underclass above and beyond mere contempt for programs that benefit them is becoming party orthodoxy. See the disgusting pan-Republican reaction to Warren Buffet's NYT op-ed as documented by the Daily Show (part one, part two), which boils down to "The poor aren't really poor, some even have air conditioning! We must tax these moocher parasite animals more." (Or as Stewart sums up at the end after a series of increasingly dehumanizing punditry: "Yeah. Fuck those people. The poor.")

See also Rolling Stone's illuminating "How the GOP Became the Party of the Rich" for a lengthy exploration of how people like Romney actually don't give a shit about lowering taxes as long as you're only talking about the poor or the middle class.

And it just dawned on me that this is pretty much Mitt's Sideshow Bob moment:

More like this Sideshow Bob moment, amirite.
posted by Rhaomi at 9:51 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

He is going to stand up to china who will then give the jobs back I think.

Maybe he can just ask nicely for the ones he gave them a while back.
posted by brennen at 9:52 PM on September 17, 2012 [13 favorites]

And on the sign thing, driving along the interstate this weekend I saw three Romney signs that were made to look "hand-painted" several miles apart. Each one had the exact same oddly sized "Os"
posted by drezdn at 9:52 PM on September 17, 2012

I cannot use Intrade. If I could, I would, and would make a decent amount of money when Romney doesn't win this fall. It is over. Beyond over. It would take a World War Three-level error to change things at this point.
posted by andreaazure at 9:53 PM on September 17, 2012

gaffe

All right, I am going to pull out a standard definition of gaffe:

An unintentional act or remark causing embarrassment to its originator; a blunder: "an unforgivable social gaffe"

These comments of Romney's were in no way unintentional. To call it a gaffe does not do it justice.

This was not a Romney gaffe. This was Romney belief. That he was formerly unwilling to say these things in public suggested that he was at least aware that most people think this belief is horrible and wrong.

The worst of it - and there is fierce competition for this title - is the bit about how he'd be winning if only he were Mexican. Seriously, Mitt, fuck you with a tire iron.
posted by Joey Michaels at 9:53 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

He was the best candidate the Republicans had this year? Really?

but they went through all that trouble--santorum, bachmann, gingrich, cain, perry, trump--they dragged us through all that crazy for purpose of making him look reasonable.
posted by fallacy of the beard at 9:55 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

A not insignificant number of those not paying income taxes have got to be students as well. Thanks to Romney being willing to do whatever seems okay at the time, for instance, my girlfriend is currently on free health care in MA while she is in law school. Of course in the future she'll pay far more into the system than she took out, and be happy to do so.

Maybe we could win over these insane people if we just changed the wording. It's not entitlements, it's National Angel Investment!

I wish we could successfully tie the safety net to the nationalist tendencies in people. If we're the BEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD than we better make sure our people have better health care than those filthy EUROPEANS!
posted by haveanicesummer at 9:55 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

Fair enough--so then my follow up question is what in his message suggests that he'll deliver results?

His resume is good enough for me. There are no guarantees that he can duplicate that as President but I know that what Obama is doing isn't working. Obama doesn't seem to like the drudgery of actually governing. He likes to campaign.
posted by republican at 9:59 PM on September 17, 2012

republican, you seem to want to be having a different conversation than the one that is actually happening in this thread. Please be mindful that the thread is not a referendum on who you are voting for in the election. Thank you.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:01 PM on September 17, 2012 [9 favorites]

Duplicate what? Breaking up America into pieces to sell off to the highest bidder? I don't think we need that kind of "help."
posted by rtha at 10:04 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

Y'all responding to a guy who isn't basing his opinion on reason, or facts, or... anything really. Single sentence responses that have no content in them. It's almost as if he is made... of dried grass.
posted by danny the boy at 10:06 PM on September 17, 2012 [16 favorites]

Yo, man, you gotta come in to this Metafilter thread! You punch Mitt Romney and favorites come out. It's like a pinata in heaven!
posted by sendai sleep master at 10:07 PM on September 17, 2012 [49 favorites]

Obama doesn't seem to like the drudgery of actually governing. He likes to campaign.

wow, it's like you're randomly pulling lines out of like scripts of 'west wing' or something...
posted by fallacy of the beard at 10:07 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

What's really news is that Romney apparently doesn't understand that these people still pay taxes, just in other ways: sales tax, payroll tax, state and county-level taxes, etc.

I'd be willing to bet that a clear majority of people who don't pay federal income tax actually see federal income tax taken from each and every one of their pay stubs. They just get a full refund, is all. Or more than full if they get the EITC.

It's such brilliant horseshit -- you can see the taxes withheld, so you know it's not YOU, even if it is.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:11 PM on September 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

I know that what Obama is doing isn't working. Obama doesn't seem to like the drudgery of actually governing. He likes to campaign.

What factual support do you have for these three assertions?
posted by sallybrown at 10:12 PM on September 17, 2012

I don't think you are even trying there republican. The arguments seems fairly...er... sophomoric and simple.

His resume? what part of it? The outsourcing? the firing? You do realize government and business are two incredibly different things correct? That is why the last time we elected a businessman as president the economy completely tanked. You don't make a country more profitable by firing half it's population, you don't return things to solvency by selling all the public assets off. And frankly I don't really know how you can trust Romney. Which era of his resume do you refer to? His "more liberal than Kennedy", or his "moderate" phase, or his pre/post etch a sketch moments?

there is nothing in his resume to suggest he knows how to run a country... nothing. He certainly doesn't have the diplomacy skills to handle foreign relations, when you piss off the USA's closest allies something is amiss.

You might as well just say it, you are not really voting FOR Romney, you are voting AGAINST Obama, for whatever reason...
posted by edgeways at 10:12 PM on September 17, 2012 [9 favorites]

Getting back to the video ... I think everything you need to know about the guy is right there. There is a guy who says (in a private fundraiser where we shouldn't have been able to hear) that he intends to discount 47% of America. He doesn't intend to worry about almost half of Americans (at least as he perceives them).

That's not in any way Presidential material. That's not anyone you want to unite the country because he says flat out that he discounts 47% of it. Being stupid enough to say such a thing in even a private fundraiser where this sort of candid camera shenanigans has taken place the past 3 elections... just goes so beyond naivete and bespeaks a lack of sophistication that you definitely do not want in the Oval office.
posted by Podkayne of Pasadena at 10:14 PM on September 17, 2012

It's such brilliant horseshit -- you can see the taxes withheld, so you know it's not YOU, even if it is.

I feel like I'm missing something here. Since when has fulfilling a tax obligation, only to receive a refund for lack of meeting an income threshold become worthy of derision?
posted by clearly at 10:22 PM on September 17, 2012

If he's elected, by definition he can't solve the jobs crisis. Anyone who he helps as President will be a government freeloader.

Corporations are people too!
posted by carsonb at 10:25 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

It's such brilliant horseshit -- you can see the taxes withheld, so you know it's not YOU, even if it is.

I feel like I'm missing something here. Since when has fulfilling a tax obligation, only to receive a refund for lack of meeting an income threshold become worthy of derision?
posted by clearly

I think the point is many of those people don't think of themselves as those who pay no taxes, and deride others for doing something they themselves do.
posted by haveanicesummer at 10:27 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Like tears down the drain

"I've... Bought things... That you people wouldn't believe."
posted by Artw at 10:27 PM on September 17, 2012 [38 favorites]

I'm thinking the best reason to not elect Romney is that based on his effectiveness on the campaign trail it would not be unreasonable to think that if he tries to nuke Iran he will accidentally hit New York.
posted by srboisvert at 10:28 PM on September 17, 2012 [29 favorites]

Seeing this video actually made me kind of happy. Mitt's always been this man of mystery, a puzzle and an enigma. What is truly the beneath the facade? With this video you finally see him at ease, and speaking somewhat freely and naturally. It gives a sense of resolution to get some hard data about what he is like, rather than having to make educated guesses based off the surfaces he tries to show in his more public appearances.

Now I just hope that we get to see the tax returns in my lifetime. I've been waiting for them so long that the build up is killing me. There are dozens of people who must have seen the returns (accountants, IRS, Cain campaign), surely it can't be too long before one of them leaks to the public?
posted by Balna Watya at 10:29 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

To be fair. I think we now know what Romney truely believes so we can dispense with the previous hedging he has been doing and get down to brass tacks.

He thinks 47% of America's employees are dead weight, they keep drawing a paycheck but they have no skin in the game. Right sizing to reduce expenditures will cut down on the red ink, especially in this tough economic climate. It may be tough but we will have to learn to do more with less. The market realigns on a continuous basis these days and we must adapt to the new normal while keeping sight of our core principles and growing our business mix.

I think it is pretty clear really.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:37 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

Man that guy's a dick.
posted by HotPants at 10:38 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

It will be news to most people that almost half of Americans pay no federal income tax. Disclaimer: This is an opinion. Just because you may disagree does mean it is a "troll".

It your an opinion that it will be news or your opinion that half of Americans pay no tax, or perhaps both? It seems that the position that half of Americans pay no Federal income tax is an easily verified statement that is either true or false based on public data. The position that it would be "news" seems more a matter of opinion.

Another dimension of this statement is the presumed value judgement against the 47% of allegedly non-tax paying households. Originally the Income tax only applied to a small minority of the population who had shifted their assets from land and trade to earning their income from trusts and other financial instruments. It was only later that the federal income tax base was expanded beyond the ultra-wealthy and onto the middle class. Why do 53% of households pay to bail out bankers and tycoons; while those same tycoons and bankers pay only a pittance in return.
posted by humanfont at 10:46 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Serf the people.
posted by Serf at 10:47 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

"I have inherited nothing. Everything Ann and I own we earned the old fashioned way"

Mitt Romney: A Human Being Who Built That
posted by homunculus at 10:53 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

We laugh. We think the things he says are despicable and will alienate everybody. We think Obama will beat Mittens like a cheap piñata come November.

What if enough of the American People are such horrible sociopaths that they will hear this, give a thumbs-up, go "Right on, Mitt!" and vote for him?
posted by dunkadunc at 11:02 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

So this Republican party they have in the USA, they don't think people are entitled to food, housing and health care? God damn.

Well, properly speaking I'm a libertarian rather than a Republican, but no, I don't think people are entitled to food, housing and health care. Can you explain why you do? To me, those are things that can be earned, and are valuable because of that.

What's really news is that Romney apparently doesn't understand that these people still pay taxes, just in other ways: sales tax, payroll tax, state and county-level taxes, etc.

One of the main problems with people who do not pay federal income tax is that they then often have no investment in how that money is spent, or in reining it in. For example: if we had to pay WWII-era taxation to sustain the Afghanistan or Iraq wars, we'd have been out of that five years ago.

Another dimension of this statement is the presumed value judgement against the 47% of allegedly non-tax paying households.

It's not a value judgment on the 47% who don't pay taxes - it's a value judgment on those who don't pay taxes, enjoy entitlements, and are willing to vote for people who are bad for the country in order to keep those entitlements rolling.

I know this may not be the most popular thing to say, but our entitlement culture is a problem for many of us - and many of us feel it is just as morally wrong as many democrats seem to think that people not having healthcare is morally wrong.

I don't know if I'll be voting for Romney or not, but I really hate how there's this expectation that you have to cater to the MFing mob in order to get elected in this country. Yes, Mitt Romney was once not as wealthy, but the expectation that he has to talk about it in order to get elected? BS.

I would rather vote for someone who spent more time learning how to govern than struggling in life. I am sick of the fact that people have to hide their experience at learning how to manage a company or govern a people, because of class-based hatred against "the rich." Vile, vile, class-based hatred.
posted by corb at 11:05 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

That press conference is worse for him than the video, I think. You kind of suspect/expect that he woud behave like that with his funders, but the conference makes him look stupid.
posted by carter at 11:07 PM on September 17, 2012

I think republican has made his position pretty clear: it doesn't matter what Romney does or says, as long as he's not Obama.

It's pretty hard to argue with that viewpoint.
posted by dazed_one at 11:07 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

The thing that I love most about Mitt Romney is that he's somehow manage to make American liberals forget how disappointed they are in Obama. A pretty impressive accomplishment, if not exactly the one he was aiming for.
posted by no regrets, coyote at 11:08 PM on September 17, 2012 [10 favorites]

Romney believes in welfare. Just for the rich.

Are there any particle physicists in here? I have a plan to build a ray that will send Mitt Romney back to 1792 France in a frilly shirt and a very large wig.
posted by dunkadunc at 11:09 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

What if enough of the American People are such horrible sociopaths that they will hear this, give a thumbs-up, go "Right on, Mitt!" and vote for him?

People have done that before - Thatcher for instance successfully articulated something very base at the root of the British psyche for years. But she owned that message; Romney just looks evasive and incompetent.
posted by carter at 11:09 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

Well, properly speaking I'm a libertarian rather than a Republican, but no, I don't think people are entitled to food, housing and health care. Can you explain why you do? To me, those are things that can be earned, and are valuable because of that.

Aside from, you know, human decency, I think it's pragmatic to provide a social safety net including food, housing, and health care, because dealing with the consequences of people going without those things appears to be a huge drain on our society and possibly more expensive to all of us.
posted by chrchr at 11:09 PM on September 17, 2012 [101 favorites]

I am sick of the fact that people have to hide their experience at learning how to manage a company or govern a people, because of class-based hatred against "the rich." Vile, vile, class-based hatred.
posted by corb

What about all the business-people that we like? Or the people who are in that class that dislike Mitt Romney? That argument just doesn't add up.
posted by haveanicesummer at 11:10 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

"people who do not pay federal income tax is that they then often have no investment in how that money is spent"

Or, ya know, they're over 65 living on a fixed income and spent four to five decades paying into Federal coffers, keeping America strong, and they deserve to retire in dignity, with decent health care, and without having to open up tins of cat-food to survive.

My god Libertarians really are fucking children, intellectually and morally.

"Vile, vile, class-based hatred."

Your side has been shitting on the poor since Reagan. If Republican cuts to food assistance, job, and health programs aren't "class-based hatred" aren't just that I don't know what is.

Sorry, but your man Mittens (although it's adorable how Glibs will try and hide their tracks) laid it out for America to see on that video -- it's nothing but "vile, vile class-based hatred all the way down," despite your pearl-clutching.
posted by bardic at 11:13 PM on September 17, 2012 [102 favorites]

Well, properly speaking I'm a libertarian rather than a Republican, but no, I don't think people are entitled to food, housing and health care. Can you explain why you do? To me, those are things that can be earned, and are valuable because of that.

So if you can't earn them because there are no jobs, what? You should graciously starve to death? Your kid gets sick and you can't pay for treatment, too bad? Honest, what should happen to the poor and the sick (I've always wondered)?
posted by 2bucksplus at 11:13 PM on September 17, 2012 [22 favorites]

Honestly though corb, if you don't think everyone in the world should be entitled to food. That we should just let them starve to death if they can't do otherwise, I'm not sure how to even engage with you on anything whatsoever. America is a rich nation, and providing food for our people seems like quite literally the least we could do.
posted by haveanicesummer at 11:13 PM on September 17, 2012 [71 favorites]

Well, properly speaking I'm a libertarian rather than a Republican, but no, I don't think people are entitled to food, housing and health care. Can you explain why you do? To me, those are things that can be earned, and are valuable because of that.

They can be earned by those who have the ability and opportunity to do so. There are many people in this country who are physically and/or mentally disadvantaged, who do not have the education or skills for the few jobs that are available to them in this economy, and cannot afford the education and training (or relocation costs) to make themselves employable. Just to name a (very) few barriers that exist.

Without a public safety net to ensure that even our weakest citizens don't starve to death or perish of disease in the street, we are not actually a country at all. Just a bunch of people who happen to inhabit the same land mass. Recognition of the importance of joining together to establish systems and infrastructures that strengthen the community, at all levels, is a big part of what is generally meant by the term "civilization."
posted by Superplin at 11:15 PM on September 17, 2012 [84 favorites]

corb: Vile, vile, class-based hatred.

That's exactly what I thought when I heard the recording of Romney saying that 47% of Americans--most of whom aren't anywhere close to wealthy--believe they are victims and are dependent upon the government. Senior citizens, college students, and full-time job-holders who are still under the poverty line, or close enough to it that they don't end up paying federal income tax, who are white, Latino/a, African-American.... the only thing that they have in common is that they are not of a certain class.

Vile, vile, class-based hatred.
posted by tzikeh at 11:15 PM on September 17, 2012 [50 favorites]

no, I don't think people are entitled to food, housing and health care. Can you explain why you do? To me, those are things that can be earned, and are valuable because of that.

For me, I consider it more valuable to make sure that people are fed and housed and kept well than I do to make sure they earned it. That's just a core aspiration: I think people having not-terrible lives is about the most important thing. I think the vast majority of people who benefit from social nets, or who would benefit from better ones, are decent, kind, reasonable human beings at heart who are just in a bad position and need help. They're not perfect people, anymore than people well off by hard work or by good luck are perfect, but they're people, and people deserve in any sane world to have an okay life.

And, you know, there's a few horrible sons of bitches out there who are also on the skids and with the benefit of a safety net would be just horrible sons of bitches still who aren't so badly off. I'm comfortable with that dark lining on the otherwise silver cloud of taking care of people. Lord knows there's a few horrible sons of bitches who have more money than they know what to do with, so I figure it balances out.
posted by cortex at 11:16 PM on September 17, 2012 [271 favorites]

Plutocrat is not a planet anymore and the Earth doesn't revolve around you.
posted by twoleftfeet at 11:16 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

I think cortex encapsulated my view on welfare in a beautiful and succinct manner.
posted by dunkadunc at 11:17 PM on September 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

My job is is not to worry about those people.

Self-fulfilling prophecy.
posted by WalkingAround at 11:18 PM on September 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

It doesn't bother me that Romney is Mormony. It bothers me that he is More Money.
posted by twoleftfeet at 11:19 PM on September 17, 2012

I should add that when I say "weakest citizens," there is also implicit recognition of the fact that any of us might, at some point, fall into that category. See this thread and elsewhere for examples of generally self-reliant people who have needed government assistance at some point in their lives. Hell, I'll be paying off my student loans until I die, but in the meantime I'm making a contribution to society and paying taxes and all that jazz. I certainly don't think the government should be helping some of us get an education while cheerfully letting others die because they are seen as "less productive" members of society.
posted by Superplin at 11:19 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

And this is the utter hilarity of Glibertarians (who, as mentioned, are just Republicans with slightly better vocabularies) -- nobody deserves food or medicine or shelter. Nobody deserves education or the internet or Federal highways. Nobody deserves a fire department or a police department of milk that isn't tainted with poison.

But a poor person can't really get by without the shame of needing the immediate things, nor can their kids who, in Paul Ryan's Glibertarian Fun-house, are punished for the serious crime of being born poor. Hence, the need for food and housing and medical assistance.

But hey, drive to work on a road you didn't pay for, start a company thanks to that sharp college education you got (even private schools receive tons of Federal aid), use the internet to sell metric fuck-tons of widgets to similarly educated people who can afford your goods and services and lo and behold: YOU ARE NOW GLIBERTARIAN HE/SHE-MAN!!!

Congrats! The rest of us will be over here voting for Obama and, like well-adjusted adults, realizing that life is part hard work and part luck. Fucking over the less fortunate is a breech of the social contract that we cannot abide and, yes, please move the fuck to Somalia asap.
posted by bardic at 11:21 PM on September 17, 2012 [33 favorites]

Here is my capitalist take on feeding people. Why it is our best interest as a country. We never know who will invent the next lightbulb, computer, or cellphone. We owe it to ourselves to invest in every last citizen, because some kid who is starving right now may be the one. We should educate everyone who wants an education for the same reason.

Even if we are wrong on a few, or a lot, fuck it, we have the money to invest in the future of America don't we? We do care about the future of America more than saving a couple bucks letting people starve right?
posted by Ad hominem at 11:21 PM on September 17, 2012 [24 favorites]

The thing that I love most about Mitt Romney is that he's somehow manage to make American liberals forget how disappointed they are in Obama.

It would be very interesting to see if there is any hard numbers to back up the general feeling that Dems are now enthused.
posted by Ripper Minnieton at 11:23 PM on September 17, 2012

Are. Are!
posted by Ripper Minnieton at 11:24 PM on September 17, 2012

I think it's pragmatic to provide a social safety net including food, housing, and health care, because dealing with the consequences of people going without those things appears to be a huge drain on our society and possibly more expensive to all of us.

I see that argument made a lot, but I am curious as to the details of that. For example: I've seen people say that paying for preventative healthcare is important, because otherwise, people go to hospitals anyway and the state winds up paying for them. But from my perspective, it would be easy to avoid that by simply not having the state require that everyone be admitted to hospitals. I understand there are moral concerns there for some people, but purely from a pragmatic sense, does this go further?

If Republican cuts to food assistance, job, and health programs aren't "class-based hatred" aren't just that I don't know what is.

This isn't about hate - it's just about not wanting to pay for these things. For example - I see homeless people all the time. Sometimes I give them money, sometimes I don't, depending on a variety of factors. But I don't hate the ones I don't choose to give money to - I just don't feel like I want to support them personally. This, writ on a larger scale, seems to be what this is about.

Here is my capitalist take on feeding people. Why it is our best interest as a country. We never know who will invent the next lightbulb, computer, or cellphone. We owe it to ourselves to invest in every last citizen, because some kid who is starving right now may be the one. We should educate everyone who wants an education for the same reason.

I can see that logic - but wouldn't that tend to apply only to merit-based scholarships and suchlike?
posted by corb at 11:24 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Does it bother anyone else here that the people who hate Obama hate him for all the wrong reasons? I would frigging love to have a Kenyan Muslim Socialist for President.
posted by dunkadunc at 11:24 PM on September 17, 2012 [21 favorites]

If it helps to put it in a purely self-protection sense, when you feed people and keep them healthy, provide them with unemployment when they don't have a job, or education when there is the opportunity, they are less likely to turn to crime or violence or any of the other myriad issues that poverty creates. Keeping people out of poverty is literally good for everyone, even self interested wealthy people.
posted by haveanicesummer at 11:25 PM on September 17, 2012 [18 favorites]

But from my perspective, it would be easy to avoid that by simply not having the state require that everyone be admitted to hospitals.

Your ideology has driven you mad.
posted by murphy slaw at 11:26 PM on September 17, 2012 [123 favorites]

corb: "I can see that logic - but wouldn't that tend to apply only to merit-based scholarships and suchlike?"

Don't you get it? Every human being has merit.
posted by dunkadunc at 11:26 PM on September 17, 2012 [99 favorites]

"and the state winds up paying for them"

No, you and I and everyone else pay more in the form of inflated health insurance costs.

"I understand there are moral concerns there for some people"

Ya think Mr. Galt? Ya really think so?
posted by bardic at 11:26 PM on September 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

Also, because it needs to be said: I really, really appreciate those of you who are providing your perspectives in a really awesome and thoughtful way. Even (and perhaps particularly) when it is difficult to understand.
posted by corb at 11:27 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

But from my perspective, it would be easy to avoid that by simply not having the state require that everyone be admitted to hospitals.

It would be easy to avoid budget overruns on running fire departments by simply not having the state hire firefighters to save people in houses that are burning.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:28 PM on September 17, 2012 [18 favorites]

corb: it would be easy to avoid that by simply not having the state require that everyone be admitted to hospitals.

Yes, and those people with diseases who are barred from hospitals/medicine/care then go home, or to work, or to the library or the movies or the DMV or the supermarket and suddenly Plague! Good plan!
posted by tzikeh at 11:28 PM on September 17, 2012 [15 favorites]

corb, I assume if someone you knew was hurt or sick, you'd want to help them. I'm assuming, but it seems likely this is the case. Now imagine you can help them, and essentially only by giving up a fairly small amount of your decent comfortable income. We don't even really have to put in any effort to help them, it takes care of itself.

To many of us here, we don't have to know the person to want to help them. We want to help them because we can, and the crazy part is how easy it is. We can live whatever lives we want to lead and still help them, we don't have to devote ourselves to the cause or anything. We can help them just by participating in the system that is already in place.
posted by haveanicesummer at 11:33 PM on September 17, 2012 [47 favorites]

I think the vast majority of people who benefit from social nets, or who would benefit from better ones, are decent, kind, reasonable human beings at heart who are just in a bad position and need help.

I don't know if I think this of the vast majority. But then, this isn't class-based - I'm not sure I think the vast majority of human beings are decent, kind, reasonable human beings. From my experience, even people that you might think were decent, kind individuals - people who love their girlfriends, cats, or grandmothers, and donate money to charity every month - will torture when the situation arises. Or kill innocent people when the situation comes up. Or shoot dogs "for fun."

That said, though, I do think many people who are fundamentally good and amazing human beings are down on their luck from time to time and can use a helping hand. But personally, I want to be able to choose whether or not I want to provide that helping hand. What's hard for me is the idea that I don't get to choose - that my time and work are taken from me without my consent with the intent of providing for people that I didn't get to choose. And that even if I want to withdraw my consent (say, by leaving), my time and work will still be taken from me for at least a decade, if not longer.

For you, is there a major difference between private and public charity? If so, is there a reason why the one is more laudable than the other?
posted by corb at 11:34 PM on September 17, 2012

I'd love to meet one of these mythical libertartians who could offer us a rundown of his or her life story showing us how you, you special little Randian snowflake you, at no point ever benefited from a) a road b) the internet and/or c) an education that at any level benefited from public dollars (public or private, since the latter often do receive ed. money) or d) a hospital (maybe you have gold-plated private insurance, great, but the overall benefits of infrastructure are as large as they are invisible).

Oh, and please include your parents and grandparents in this stirring, Alger-esque tale as well, because if they hadn't benefited from public largesse you'd be unborn or simply dead from typhoid.

And this is all just for starters.

I'll be standing over here by my unicorn, eagerly awaiting your wisdom.
posted by bardic at 11:34 PM on September 17, 2012 [43 favorites]

Can we move on from the libertarian derail? It's starting to make Romney look like a well-adjusted and empathetic human being.
posted by 2bucksplus at 11:36 PM on September 17, 2012 [47 favorites]

But personally, I want to be able to choose whether or not I want to provide that helping hand.

"I want to decide who lives and who dies." -- Crow T. Robot
posted by chrchr at 11:38 PM on September 17, 2012 [46 favorites]

Consider health care. If we stop giving poor people free treatment for TB and social workers to followup and make sure they take the pills; then what do you think is going to happen?
posted by humanfont at 11:38 PM on September 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

From my experience, even people that you might think were decent, kind individuals - people who love their girlfriends, cats, or grandmothers, and donate money to charity every month - will torture when the situation arises. Or kill innocent people when the situation comes up.

And do you know what leads to those "situations"? That's right, poverty and hunger!
posted by junco at 11:39 PM on September 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

Yeah, you're right. Let's talk about how barring sick people from hospitals might be a moral issue worthy of discussion.
posted by bardic at 11:39 PM on September 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

Disregarding the moral aspect of healthcare and safety nets is kind of like those physics problems where you disregard the effects of friction or assume a spherical cow. Sure, you might be able to generate some interesting theories, but if you actually try to build your house that way, it will end badly.
posted by Scattercat at 11:41 PM on September 17, 2012 [18 favorites]

I'll say this for that video, it's the most honest and forthright and real, I've ever heard the Mittser sound. So, it's got that going for it, at least, but God the stuff he's saying is like right out of some sort of Ayn Randian playbook, and the sort of swill the very wealthy on Wall Street tell themselves about anyone who's not like them, and it's very very off the mark.

47% of people may not pay any federal tax, but that doesn't mean it doesn't get taken out of their paychecks and it doesn't mean that they don't pay federal taxes on other expenditures, or that they don't pay State, City and local tax and sales tax and on and on it goes.

He's spewing out different bullshit for a different audience here, and even though it's the most confident and forthright, I've ever heard the Mittser sound, the tone of his voice is really quite blood chilling.

He sounds like some sort of enforcer or very patronizing, and very cruel bastard. He's presenting himself as the tough proxy manager, the man who's going to teach these freeloading 47%-ers, what's what and who's what, and who in the words of Eastwood "owns this country."*

It doesn't take much to extrapolate that that ownership applies to the people as well. The people as human capital, as creators of capital, as consumers of capital, as a freely and easily accessed pool of labor. In other words: The wealthy old white men of this country, the Kochs, the Adelson's, the Equity Managers, the CEO's etc... own the people of this country.

This is naked and raw power being sold to the highest bidders, and being presented as an act of vengeance and vindication.

A sadism tinged righting of all the "hurts and wrongs and name-calling and shame" the wealthy, and the 1% have had to put up with since the economy went belly up in 2008, due to their very own destructive and irresponsible acts.

See, the ultra-wealthy don't think they should ever be held accountable be made to fee bad for anything ever. They're the chosen, they're the "job creators" and they've had the run of this country for their own enrichment at the price of the middle class for 30 years now and it's not going to change on their watch. Fuck the middle class and the working poor. If they don't like their lot in life and they can't change those conditions, well then, them's the breaks.

*We own this country, you and I.

-Clint Eastwood's "Empty Chair" Speech / Speaking to the delegates at the 2012 Republican National Convention

posted by Skygazer at 11:41 PM on September 17, 2012 [16 favorites]

On the pragmatism of free health care: Malaria costs Africa at least $12 billion every year in lost productivity.

Sick people are pretty bad at being job creators or pulling themselves up by their bootstraps or any of that stuff.
posted by chrchr at 11:44 PM on September 17, 2012 [17 favorites]

We as a nation are only truly free if our hospitals can forbid us entry if we are having a heart attack, or a stroke, or are massively hemorrhaging due to a car accident*.

*or if we're black, or gay, or the wrong religion, or the wrong political party.
posted by dirigibleman at 11:45 PM on September 17, 2012 [11 favorites]

But personally, I want to be able to choose whether or not I want to provide that helping hand.

And to think that it was the conservatives who were so worried about "death panels"...
posted by hermitosis at 11:46 PM on September 17, 2012 [56 favorites]

I don't think people are entitled to food, housing and health care. Can you explain why you do?

Are you familiar with Maslows' hierarchy of needs? The idea is, before anyone can reach self-actualization certain fundamental needs must be met. If you spend your entire life struggling just to meet your basic needs, you can never reach your full potential.

People like Mitt Romney were born into loving caring families, their health and safety and yes their food were provided by their parents well into their early adult years. With this great advantage they were able to become enormously successful.

Unfortunately, in America, millions of people are born into broken families, their health and safety in constant danger. Constant hunger and fear of violence become the entire focus of their life. Of course some are able to overcome and eventually will succeed but the vast majority of them struggle their entire lives.

However, I believe that if the government can provide a basic safety net, those who wish to will more easily reach self-actualization and the high levels of productivity and creativity that drive our economy. A greater number of healthy, creative, educated people will be the engine of growth for the future of the US economy.

Of course some will abuse the system, but on the other hand you have people like Congressman and Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan who have become enormously successful with government assistance.

I think help should be available, it should be of the highest quality and I believe yes, people should have to work for it. I believe it's in the best interest of society for all to be provided safe shelter, food and education.

I know someone told you that people should be treated no differently than animals on the Serengeti. But why shouldn't we help our brothers and sisters to reach their potential? Are we mere apes? Or are we something more? Your comment suggests you believe our shared society should allow our fellow human beings starve and die in the streets. To me, that sounds like a great recipe for escalating violence and human slavery and suffering.

I believe Libertarianism is a lie told to well meaning people. It says if there were less government and fewer regulations society would magically thrive. What I hear when someone says "Libertarian" is, "Golly, if only we could get rid of these pesky laws preventing me from employing all these 12-year-olds in my lead paint factory I could fly around to fabulous tropical paradises in my gold plated jet. Fuck you! I got mine!"

Beyond that, I think there's a lack of understanding of economics. I keep hearing people say "if only businesses could get tax cuts they'd have more money to hire people." Except businesses don't hire people because they have money, they hire people because there's demand for their product and they need to expand.

But I'm rambling now.
posted by j03 at 11:50 PM on September 17, 2012 [108 favorites]

I'd love to meet one of these mythical libertartians who could offer us a rundown of his or her life story showing us how you, you special little Randian snowflake you, at no point ever benefited from ... the overall benefits of infrastructure

Bardic: I think you're going to snark no matter what I say, but I'm going to make a try at answering the essential thrust behind your question.

I accept that at various points in my life, I have benefited from structures funded by public funds, because, as you say, they are impossible to separate from anyone who lives in the system right now. But I don't love that - and I wish that they hadn't existed and that other options had been possible. Which I think is what a lot of us feel - that the public teat is a mass of tentacles right now that reach almost everything - and that is a bad thing. But it's hard to correct, because the government has a monopoly on a lot of items.

I served in the US military - funded by taxpayers, without their consent, in a war that did not have their consent.* And I think that's terrible. I wanted to defend my home and country, but I would have vastly preferred to have been able to be part of a private group, funded only by the consent of voluntary participants. But that wasn't possible - because the government owns a monopoly on force and violence, and on the weapons of force and violence.

I've called the police, in situations where I would have vastly preferred to be able to call a pay-for-play guy to come over and protect me. Or a friend. But the police have a monopoly on the use of force - so the police can beat up and drag out the guy that assaulted me, while my buddy goes to jail if he does.

We work within the options and limitations that we are given, and are saddened by the world we live in - much like other people of every other political stripe. I don't think anyone gets to live in the world they want to live in, and to me, that's partially because everyone is trying to get everyone else to live in theirs.

* And also, that war was made of bullshit.
posted by corb at 11:53 PM on September 17, 2012

I love the mixed messages:

We need to lower income taxes, for everyone! Income tax is bad! Best not to have any income tax at all! But the 47% of people paying no income tax are lazy moochers.

And if you're born in the US, 95% of your success is already in place!
But you can still claim that you built everything 100% yourself.

Although I guess all of this might make sense to some people, in an evil twisted kind of way.
posted by sour cream at 11:54 PM on September 17, 2012 [16 favorites]

Romney: "I have inherited nothing." He remarked

I guess his esteemed father didn't have a Rolodex...

/snort
posted by Skygazer at 11:57 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Also, keep in mind that masses of the starving without access to medical care tend to, y'know, contract plague. Plague tends to cross income barriers. Pretty easily, in fact. Just something to add to your many calculations.
posted by sexyrobot at 11:57 PM on September 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

I suddenly realized in the middle of reading about this that there won't be a Daniel Schorr commentary.

.
posted by Killick at 12:00 AM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

corb, you can have the ability to make all the choices you say you want. But you'll have to leave this country, because America is not only about your personal choice. You can read it in page 1:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

posted by benito.strauss at 12:05 AM on September 18, 2012 [80 favorites]

Does it bother anyone else here that the people who hate Obama hate him for all the wrong reasons? I would frigging love to have a Kenyan Muslim Socialist for president.

A bumper sticker I saw for sale on the web: "Obama is not a foreign-born socialist who gives out free health care. That would be Jesus."
posted by Killick at 12:05 AM on September 18, 2012 [57 favorites]

We all know the Bible loves people getting paid for their services. Thus the constant lauding of Judas. They can't get enough of that guy!
posted by haveanicesummer at 12:07 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Except no, libertarians sincerely believe they'd be happier with poor people dying around them, their houses on fire, the lamentations of their women, etc. It's not an issue of explaining yourself well enough, and they'll get it; people simply don't share the same basic values.

I only wish they would just go make their own country already. I'd certainly be happier if we all only had to deal with the consequences of our own ideologies.
posted by danny the boy at 12:08 AM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

Masses of the hungry, poor, and hopeless also tend to violently overthrow the ruling class (see the French Revolution and, more recently, the Arab Spring, just for starters), so the practical reason for giving out food aid and other aid is to protect our capitalist system (and our libertarian supermen, natch) from whatever redistributionist schemes a revolutionary government would set up.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 12:16 AM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

That said, though, I do think many people who are fundamentally good and amazing human beings are down on their luck from time to time and can use a helping hand. But personally, I want to be able to choose whether or not I want to provide that helping hand. What's hard for me is the idea that I don't get to choose - that my time and work are taken from me without my consent with the intent of providing for people that I didn't get to choose. And that even if I want to withdraw my consent (say, by leaving), my time and work will still be taken from me for at least a decade, if not longer.

For you, is there a major difference between private and public charity? If so, is there a reason why the one is more laudable than the other?

First of all, when we pay taxes, just because some of that money goes to provide a social safety net, doesn't necessarily equal "public charity". We're not giving money to help a downtrodden individual, we're paying to maintain a functioning society.

And I don't even know why I'm chiming in, because it's damn near impossible to change a fundamental worldview in this way, but just to help you understand why I support a robust social safety net, it boils down to this...

To me there is no difference between my taxes going to fix roads, fund military defense, support education, or provide food assistance to a poor family. All of those things and so many more make our society as a whole a better place. And the better society as a whole operates, the better life is for me personally. I feel this way, because I've been to places with no social safety net.

There's no way I can stand on a street corner in a 3rd world slum, and watch children barely old enough to walk forage for food in an open sewer and think. "Yup, this is how society is supposed to work!"

I've been to places where there is no "monopoly on the use of force". Those places are terrifying. And so much less safe than here. You really want to buy a house or start a business where the guys riding around in pickup trucks with ak-47s are for sale to the highest bidder?

The worst part of the standard argument libertarians make is that their utopia already exists. And yet I don't see libertarians jumping at the chance to go live in Haiti, or the slums of Manila, or Nairobi. I hear Somalia is really nice this time of year.

Everyone's a billionaire in Zimbabwe.
posted by billyfleetwood at 12:18 AM on September 18, 2012 [130 favorites]

Scattercat: Disregarding the moral aspect of healthcare and safety nets is kind of like those physics problems where you disregard the effects of friction or assume a spherical cow. Sure, you might be able to generate some interesting theories, but if you actually try to build your house that way, it will end badly.

Exactly. Building on what j03 said above, I find that Libertarianism is an interesting thought experiment, but in order for it to work, it requires suspending much of the reality of messy, lived experience. People get sick--even deserving, excellent, "high-performing" people. They lose their jobs, make unfortunate choices, have bad luck. A "survival of the fittest" mentality in which any one of these circumstances could lead to a life of misery, violence, death, and harm to others is what those of us who support public infrastructures see as not just morally reprehensible, and harmful to the collective good, but ultimately a barrier to other, more fortunate individuals achieving their potential, or even just living out their lives peacefully.

Libertarianism fails to take into account the complex interdependencies that are inherent in any social network, such as a community. Many are taught in the United States that "personal responsibility" means that we should never rely on anyone else for anything, and that our achievements are our own. But this idea of some sort of individual path distilled from the positive or negative effects resulting from the aggregate of many other individuals having their own experiences, making their own choices, and in turn affected by others' actions ignores an entire body of scientific evidence dedicated to understanding that, quite literally, no man is an island, and nothing happens in a vacuum. No matter how independent any of us might strive to be, we cannot help but be affected by others'. It is therefore in our own best interest to contribute to the general welfare, to ensure that our own life decisions are made in a favorable environment.

Corb, you say you feel uncomfortable about ever having had to rely on any kind of public service, even for police assistance. That you would have preferred to pay for private police service, one that wasn't funded by taxpayers. That way, anyone such as yourself who did not see the inherent value in having officers of the public order could be off the hook for their funding, and officers of the law would operate on a freelance or other paid basis.

Imagine for a moment that the world is the way you envision. You find yourself in a situation in which you need protection. Thankfully, you can afford it. Those who can't afford it are forced to live in an environment with a much higher risk of violence, and little recourse except to resort to violence of their own. This means they have to dedicate time and energy to self-defense rather than, say, getting an education, providing for their children, trying to improve their lives to the point where they, too, can afford to pay for protection and escape the loop.

Imagine, too, the police officers themselves. The more violence there is, the greater the demand for their services, so the higher their rates. Some might see this situation as a business opportunity, and strategically foment dangerous behavior to drive up the market. There may come a point where even you, a hard-working citizen who is willing--and has, up to this point, been able--to pay for private protection can no longer afford the going rates. Grocery shopping, getting to and from work, and protecting your property are no longer as easy and safe as they were before. You have to dedicate more time and energy to them, at greater risk. And so the network effects have caught up to you, and you find yourself gradually caught up in the same cycle of violence as those who started out at a disadvantage.

It's an extreme scenario, sure. But the point is, it is not a character flaw or failure of independence to create systems to keep people safe, healthy, educated, and fed. It is a recognition of the scientific fact that, like it or not, our own ability to survive and succeed does depend to a large extent on factors outside ourselves, including trying to maintain a minimal level of well-being of our fellow citizens.
posted by Superplin at 12:22 AM on September 18, 2012 [49 favorites]

Romney also said that the campaign purposefully was using Ann Romney "sparingly…so that people don't get tired of her."

Um...
posted by Skygazer at 12:26 AM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

A bumper sticker I saw for sale on the web: "Obama is not a foreign-born socialist who gives out free health care. That would be Jesus."

Yeah, but that's why they nailed him to a cross.
posted by sour cream at 12:32 AM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

corb the society you propose is without a doubt a dystopia. Starving people in the street who aren't provided health care or protected by the private security forces because they can't afford to pay. Presumably they are also uneducated because education is private and expensive, so what recourse do they have to feed themselves besides violence and crime?

See, this piece I do find confusing. A lot of people here in this thread have talked about how important it is to them that other people be fed, housed, have medical care, etc. But then the idea is floated that without the government demanding the money, everyone would be living in a terrible situation. But wouldn't people still have the ability to contribute exactly as much as they would want to, to whatever charity they would like? So individuals who are saying that they would gladly pay more taxes would still have the ability to make other people's lives better, they just would need to contribute it directly to the charities that they find valuable.

Thus, if there are enough people who would voluntarily contribute to these things, these things will still exist - rather than it being a slim majority forcing a slim minority to provide the things they believe in.

I think, to a more watered down perspective, this is essentially the conservative position (and perhaps Romney's position) on many of these things: that private charity is more meaningful because it is voluntary, while still having the ability to be very effective.

The Mormons, for example, of which Romney is a member, have one of the most amazing charity/mutual aid networks I've ever seen for members of their congregation, even though no one is forced by law to tithe - and even if they don't tithe, they're not expelled from membership. Food, housing, healthcare support, all these things, you name it - but voluntary contributions. In fact, Mitt Romney himself, despite a reputation for a hard heart for the poor and unfortunate, has given over $18 million in charity for said poor and unfortunate.
posted by corb at 12:35 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

While great in theory, I feel that this perspective flies in the face of the very reasons social safety nets are provided by governments in the first place. Not to be glib, but have you read A Christmas Carol?
posted by feloniousmonk at 12:37 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

There are also some things that are necessary for society but cannot effectively be privatized. I mean nobody can make money on them.

Lets say your neighbors paid for alien invasion warning service, but you don't believe in aliens so you dont. A week later you see all your neighbors who paid packing up the car and getting the fuck out. What do you do? You never paid for alien invasion warning services but you got the warning anyway, since you saw everyone leave. You get the hell out too, you dont want to die because you didn't pay $29.29

So it was a false alarm, everyone returns and you tell your neighbors "I saw you leave and left as well" your neighbor now feels like an idiot, she paid $29.29 and you fucking mooched her warning. Same thing happens all over town. Next thing you know everyone unsubscribes, and no more alien invasion warnings.

Stuff like the emergency broadcast system is a Common Good. It must be handled by the government because there is no way for a private emergency broadcast system company to compel people who didn't subscribe to die just cause they didn't pay. Nobody would pay because they figure some other guy is paying.
posted by Ad hominem at 12:37 AM on September 18, 2012 [17 favorites]

But what about those who are not members of a tithing religion? Or who don't happen to fall into a category addressed by a "popular" charitable organization, and so fall through the cracks?

I think the difference boils down to this: you see private charity as more equitable because it focuses on satisfying the needs and preferences of the donors, whereas those of us who see public charity as more equitable concentrate on the fact that it is nondiscriminatory in its disbursement, and therefore privileges the needs and preferences of recipients.

If you feel that "fair" means that the haves should be able to decide which have-nots they're willing to help fund, then a Libertarian perspective seems more just. If you feel that "fair" means that everyone--even the "undeserving"--should be eligible for assistance in a given circumstance, then your idea of justice is necessarily quite different.
posted by Superplin at 12:41 AM on September 18, 2012 [28 favorites]

I think it's important to note also that the government can't turn you down because the stock markets are having a down month or they missed their numbers and got a shitty bonus that quarter or because you're gay or an atheist etc.
posted by feloniousmonk at 12:42 AM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

Obama's intrade price is now more than double Romney's.
posted by telstar at 12:52 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

It's the top story on the HuffingtonPost and it just broke 75,000 comments (4:00 AM EST) and counting.

(Making it the biggest thread I've ever seen there by far. Can it hit a quarter million comments by noon??)
posted by Skygazer at 1:07 AM on September 18, 2012

Man, I'm going to vote so hard, the old lady in the booth next to me is going to feel the thunder.
posted by Malice at 1:08 AM on September 18, 2012 [27 favorites]

But wouldn't people still have the ability to contribute exactly as much as they would want to, to whatever charity they would like? So individuals who are saying that they would gladly pay more taxes would still have the ability to make other people's lives better, they just would need to contribute it directly to the charities that they find valuable.

Also, while it's true that many of us would be willing to pay higher taxes, overall as a society you are more likely to see the classic effect of just where good intentions typically lead. There are always reasons to not donate quite so much right this minute. I mean, I just had a lot of exceptional expenses, so for me personally, it'd definitely be more convenient to skip a few months of payroll deductions. But that's a selfish perspective that doesn't take the greater good into account, and would potentially force others to pick up my slack. And we're back to considering different definitions of fairness.

Having a tax system in place ensures a baseline level of income for services and infrastructures that's not entirely up to the whim and schedule of contributors. It's impossible for programs to enact long-term planning without some sense of when, and how much, they can expect in terms of funding, and that's much easier to provide via regular taxation than through random voluntary contributions.
posted by Superplin at 1:10 AM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

It is also worth bearing in mind that the economic basis of libertarianism is questionable at best. This blog does quite a good job of mapping out the intellectual - as opposed to moral - reasons why I am not a libertarian. For example, free market double standards. Or why libertarianism is an ideology built on neoclassical economics.

I'm trying to look at it quite cold-bloodedly here. Even if you support libertarianism, the case for it is far from open-and-shut. You can't convincingly argue that it is "tough love", a route to a better society. The logic and the evidence contradict that argument.

Which means it doesn't make sense to jump into extreme social measures of the kind that Romney and the Republican party advocate: they are calling for radical changes that the evidence of the last 30 years suggests actually lead to bubbles, then economic collapse.

As for the moral issue, it is far more dignified to receive an entitlement (i.e. something you are entitled to) from the state than to receive charity at the whim of a private citizen, and we should respect the human dignity of our fellow man.

I would also note that there has been an enormous propaganda effort against the Welfare state over the past fifty years, attempting to paint citizens getting together to insure each other against risk as somehow being mooching vermin. I strongly suspect that this is because a welfare state does not serve the interests of a small number of very rich people who want to evade tax. But the fact that a welfare state might wind up supporting a few people who aren't very nice or are a bit lazy does not mean that it is not an excellent idea that gives a sense of security to millions.
posted by lucien_reeve at 1:21 AM on September 18, 2012 [25 favorites]

and even if they don't tithe, they're not expelled from membership.

But I believe after the annual interview to make sure they tithed (gave 10% even if they are filing for bankruptcy), if they fell short then they lose their Temple Recommend. I'm not sure about the implications of that, but I think it's like being excommunicated temporarily until they pay up. At any rate, there are repercussions for not tithing.
posted by Houstonian at 1:29 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Mormons, for example, of which Romney is a member, have one of the most amazing charity/mutual aid networks I've ever seen for members of their congregation, even though no one is forced by law to tithe - and even if they don't tithe, they're not expelled from membership. Food, housing, healthcare support, all these things, you name it - but voluntary contributions. In fact, Mitt Romney himself, despite a reputation for a hard heart for the poor and unfortunate, has given over $18 million in charity for said poor and unfortunate.

A large part of the controversy over the Romney video is the implication that half the country doesn't pay any taxes. Which is a falsehood, a twist of language.

Similarly, Romney donated a significant chunk of that $18 million to a non-profit outfit — a religious organization (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) — not to a charity. But the false implication is made and sticks in public perception.

The LDS may have charitable operations, but it spends a much of its tithed/"donated" money to facilitate the political agenda of its leadership.

Donating — making the bulk of donations — to a non-profit which is aligned with your political mission and which lowers your tax exposure may be win-win, but it is not actually the same as donating to a real charity, in order to further personal ideals of selflessness.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:35 AM on September 18, 2012 [14 favorites]

So at least one Libertarian thinks a society based on 100% privatized social services, especially for things like personal protection, is a good thing? (What's extra-adorable is how Glibs always assume that they're the ones who won't be immediately held up at gun-point and robbed and left in a shallow ditch somewhere). Even though you admit you'd probably be dead by now if it wasn't for those "small" goverment services like clean water and a military and roads and literally thousands of other invisible goods we derive from living in the wealthiest country on earth (and with the lowest tax rates compared to those socialized hell-holes of Canada and Germany and Sweden)?

As mentioned, Somalia would be a good fit. So would building a time-machine and moving back to the 17th century.

Like I said, the morality and intellects of children.

And if the whole Glib thing is a de-rail, sorry but Paul Ryan has been crystal-clear where he stands on this and he might be one heart-beat from the presidency.

So yeah, it absolutely matters.
posted by bardic at 1:53 AM on September 18, 2012 [11 favorites]

Insurance isn't charity. Investment isn't charity. Recognizing and mitigating risk, using the economies of scale, none of that is charity. Describing it as charity is disingenuous at best.

If you don't want to profit another day from this socialist dystopia, if you want to be free to mix your metaphors and imagine teats with tentacles, Somalia is sunny this time of year.

If you want to live in the developed world, with the rest of us citizens, you should maybe realize that libertarianism is a lie you tell yourself to feel special, a Lockean fantasy indulged far after it ceases to bear any resemblance to how people choose to actually live.

Thracymachus makes some good points, but we want the Republic.
posted by klangklangston at 1:56 AM on September 18, 2012 [39 favorites]

I think the difference boils down to this: you see private charity as more equitable because it focuses on satisfying the needs and preferences of the donors, whereas those of us who see public charity as more equitable concentrate on the fact that it is nondiscriminatory in its disbursement, and therefore privileges the needs and preferences of recipients.

I think that's close. I see private charity as more just because it focuses on the consent (which I take to be of a bit higher importance than mere 'preference') of those who are contributing, whereas those who see public charity as more just concentrate on the fact that it is more impartial in its distribution.

Donating — making the bulk of donations — to a non-profit which is aligned with your political mission and which lowers your tax exposure may be win-win, but it is not actually the same as donating to a real charity, in order to further personal ideals of selflessness.

I think down that road goes no good. What defines a "Real charity"? By that standard, any donation to any charity could be mocked and devalued. Everyone donates to organizations that in some standards align with theirs politically, or they would likely not donate to them. Even innocuous-seeming organizations take stances on various political problems. I would argue you would be hard-pressed to find a nonprofit that was not in some way political. Also, in addition to pure church contributions, Romney made contributions for a host of non-religious children's charities. It just seems kind of mean-spirited to criticize him on a history of charitable giving that outspends most of us.

It is also worth bearing in mind that the economic basis of libertarianism is questionable at best. This blog does quite a good job of mapping out the intellectual - as opposed to moral - reasons why I am not a libertarian. For example, free market double standards. Or why libertarianism is an ideology built on neoclassical economics.

I think a lot of those free market double standards you quote are strawmen - for example, many libertarians do support the right of people to form unions. They just don't support the government's enforcement of certain labor law concerning said unions. Or the section on taxation, which ignores the fact that high rates of taxation are a relatively modern invention - around the beginning of the past century.

Somalia is sunny this time of year.
As mentioned, Somalia would be a good fit.

You guys do realize that Somalia is not actually a libertarian country, right? And that appeals for libertarians to "go to Somalia if they don't like it" are not functionally that different than "Why don't you go to Cuba/the USSR, ha ha ha ha" rhetoric?
posted by corb at 2:32 AM on September 18, 2012

What's hard for me is the idea that I don't get to choose - that my time and work are taken from me without my consent with the intent of providing for people that I didn't get to choose.

oh, for pete's sake

you were BORN without your consent - you will DIE without your consent - and in between, many things will happen without your consent, some caused by the government and your fellow human beings, some not

that's life - and being taxed is hardly the most unpleasant thing you have to face - you may even be deprived of your ability to work without your consent and need help from others

at which point, you'll probably take it and tell yourself you earned it and remain in denial about how little that happens in the world around you has to do with you and what you choose
posted by pyramid termite at 2:34 AM on September 18, 2012 [78 favorites]

But wouldn't people still have the ability to contribute exactly as much as they would want to, to whatever charity they would like? So individuals who are saying that they would gladly pay more taxes would still have the ability to make other people's lives better, they just would need to contribute it directly to the charities that they find valuable.

Where are you getting this idea that rich people would contribute more or equal amounts in to the system to make for a better society - via charities - if only the mean ol' government didn't "force" them to? There are plenty of wealthy folks that have such an obscene amount of money that, even after paying all of their taxes, could probably afford to pool some money together for "charity" and help fix a lot of the schools. Why hasn't this happened yet? Are they too drained by taxes? They only have $80 million left to their name now that the tax man came and lord knows if they're going to make it through winter?

You are conflating "charity" with "policy". What makes you think that if people pick and choose which charities to donate to, certain sectors won't go completely neglected?
posted by windbox at 2:39 AM on September 18, 2012 [11 favorites]

corb: "many libertarians do support the right of people to form unions. They just don't support the government's enforcement of certain labor law concerning said unions. Or the section on taxation, which ignores the fact that high rates of taxation are a relatively modern invention - around the beginning of the past century."

Would you PLEASE quit this worthless libertarian derail shit? I don't believe this FPP was about Mitt and his club embracing libertarian ideals (and yours are, therefore, irrelevant in the context of this discussion)
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 2:44 AM on September 18, 2012 [13 favorites]

"You guys do realize that Somalia is not actually a libertarian country, right?"

Well, I'm curious as to what you would define as a libertarian country. The US, for example, has one of the lowest rates of taxation among the wealthiest nations. Libertarians/Republicans love to harp on about those "socialist, over-taxed" northern European countries and guess what? Speaking from anecdote, people who live in Sweden and Denmark and the like do pay more, and generally they're happier to do so because they believe it's important for their neighbors to have a strong safety net. Hell, women get months of paid maternity leave. Why? Because (again, can't speak for every person living there) they put a value on every member of the society growing up healthy and smart. Because healthy and smart people are cheaper in the very long-term. Indeed, they're more likely to work hard and innovate in ways that benefit everyone, both financially and socially.

So until you lay your cards on the table, yes, asking you to spend some time in Somalia or Lagos or a Brazilian favela is a perfectly valid thought experiment (certainly more valid than Libertarianism itself).

You admitted you benefited from the "invisible" perks of living in an advanced, wealthy society. Why not go a step further and see what it's like somewhere where those "burdensome" things like taxes and working sewers and cops who won't club you to death if you don't give them a hundred bucks works out. You lament the fact that by birth you must "opt in" to the social contract, and we're simply pointing out how easy it would be for you to entirely "opt out" if you had merely the courage of your convictions.

Barring that, I invite you to take a ride on Libertarian Airlines.
posted by bardic at 2:45 AM on September 18, 2012 [16 favorites]

This is becoming all about one poster again, and pretty far off from the post topic. Perhaps fighting over one person's political leanings can be done via email and this can go back to open discussion among various participants about the original subject.
posted by taz (staff) at 2:52 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Corbett, what Romney was caught saying sis "vile class based hatred" worse than anything you will hear from a Democrat. Obama has never said anything nearly as critical ..... Here is some class hatred 4 ya -- of the lazy fucking rich who accumulate capital by exploiting the labor of the poor.

Republicans accusing Democrats of "class warfare" is, pardon the pun, mighty rich. destroying collective bargaining rights, outsourcing jobs, destroying the safety net --- that shit is nuclear class warfare.

Once again, GOP stands for hypocrisy.
posted by spitbull at 2:57 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

The original subject is that the man who might be the next US president told a crowd of billionaires that he thinks half of Americans are "dependent" moochers. His VP pick happens to be a dyed-in-the-wool Libertarian. It seems perfectly appropriate to discuss the fact that a crazed, fanatical vision that had long fallen out of style as the childish, illogical, Randian He-man drivel that it is is no longer a fringe part of a major US political party, but quite literally at the center of it.

As of 2012 there is very little sunlight between the GOP and Libertarianism, simple as that. How is that a derail?
posted by bardic at 3:01 AM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

BTW a lot easier to give a lot to your church when you pay 13% in income taxes. And we all know he paid less than that or he'd release his returns.

Since my federal income tax rate is about 30% I hereby accuse Mitt Romney of being a vile, vile freeloader sponging off the rest of his with his entitlement to the carried interest deduction and offshore tax havens.

Dude is talking a dangerous game for someone with so much tax evasion and cheating to hide.
posted by spitbull at 3:03 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Via Bardic's link to "Libertarian Airlines":
People who care more about free market ideology than human life prove themselves remarkably undeserving of either.

Perhaps the best one sentence demolition of thick libertarian illogic I've yet seen.
posted by Skygazer at 3:17 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

“Despite a high unemployment rate, anemic economy, and upside-down right track/wrong track, Obama is being kept afloat by a solid base of support among African-Americans, Hispanics, liberals, single and college-educated women, and union households,” said longtime Christian conservative strategist Ralph Reed. “Those groups alone add up to about 46 percent of the electorate.”

Ah. Now it's clear.
posted by spitbull at 3:25 AM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

BTW a lot easier to give a lot to your church when you pay 13% in income taxes. And we all know he paid less than that or he'd release his returns.

Romney has talked about not wanting to release tax records specifically because of church contributions. This may have some validity - assuming 10% of his income in tithes, plus additional charitable contributions for his foundation, both of which are tax-deductible, and you are closer to twenty-five to thirty percent.

However, when it comes to 47% of individuals paying no Federal income tax, there are interesting points to be had about how far Romney's tax plan and Paul Ryan's differ. Paul Ryan has called for a two-tiered flat tax which would eliminate any percentage of individuals not paying tax. (And Romney has appeared sympathatic to flat tax recently) What remains to be seen, though, is whether people would vote for lower tax rates throughout their lifetime, in exchange for no longer having an income bracket where they did not have to pay any tax at all.
posted by corb at 3:25 AM on September 18, 2012

That's his excuse. I think it's more about Geneva than Salt Lake City.
posted by spitbull at 3:31 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Also, we don't count tithing as "taxes" in America. Funny that.
posted by spitbull at 3:31 AM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

spitbull: "“Obama is being kept afloat by a solid base of support among African-Americans, Hispanics, liberals, single and college-educated women, and union households,”

Ah. Now it's clear."

Yes, for the sake of the country (and the Job Creators who know best) we must work diligently and swiftly to disenfranchise all of those evil types of people who are only out for themselves and their selfish needs for food, shelter, and healthcare.

Mitt: Which Cadillac did Ann take to go shopping? OK, that one.. Which of the negro drivers did she select today?
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 3:35 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Charity is about choosing who you get to help, yes. And often that's "the people who look/act/think like me."

That's the point of having the government do this "charity". It helps *everyone*, regardless of what they look/act/think like.

The people who want government to do this job want the government to act as an objective source of assistance based on need and on public good, not on preference. Saying you're upset that you don't get to help the people you "choose" reeks of veiled prejudice, because by definition that means there are people you do not choose, for some arbitrary reason based on your own opinions and experiences (and privilege). And while perhaps you are an entirely objective altruistic individual who actually wants to help everyone, we cannot rely on our charity-giving population at large to be that way. They are more likely to keep helping the people they "choose", which of course means the people who look/think/act like them. (Like, say, other Mormons, who in the US are predominantly white) Which means some groups would receive far less charity than others, despite their similar need. Which means not everyone would have equal merit, not everyone would be given a fair shot at the same sorts of opportunities others have to succeed in this country. So certain demographic groups would be disproportionately represented in the poorest populations in a self-perpetuating cycle, as the ever-altruistic charity-giving classes keep saying they don't want to help THOSE people if they're not "taking personal responsibility."

Relying on charities and churches to provide safety nets is simply not feasible in a diverse society of 300M people. You won't get equal coverage across that broad spectrum of people. So the US government, the government of the wealthiest nation on the planet, in my opinion has an obligation to provide that net. Because that's the thing, right? We all, conservative, liberal, libertarian, can mostly all agree that there should be a safety net. We just disagree on who ought to be providing it. And my vote, quite literally, is for the option that provides the least prejudice and the most equal coverage of my fellow citizens, because I don't consider myself or any other individual qualified to arbitrate between who "deserves" my help and who doesn't.
posted by olinerd at 3:36 AM on September 18, 2012 [23 favorites]

olinerd: That's the point of having the government do this "charity". It helps *everyone*, regardless of what they look/act/think like. "

That sounds like socialism! Why do you hate the USAs job creators? Didn't you hear Mitt speak about how he was providing a living and a meaningful existence for all those Chinese girls who worked in Bain's first sweatshop?
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 3:43 AM on September 18, 2012

It isn't charity to make sure all kids get a decent education or we have enough firemen or the bridges don't fall down or your grandmother doesn't starve or cancer doesn't ruin you economically. It's long term investment in human capital and infrastructure so businesses have customers and workers and new people want to live and invest here.

You know, good business sense.

Oh, unless the human capital is black/brown of course. In which case it's lazy people entitled to charity. Your own kids' student loans or your dad's social security -- they earned that! That road to your business? You built that! That federal aid to your winter Olympics? The FDIC bailout of your failed business deal? The fact that you can expect your airplane to be inspected before it flies? Safe food and drugs? All fine as long as minorities aren't benefitting. Because they're lazy, unlike you big fat executive on the golf course before dinner at the steak house.

Underneath even the class warfare this is still mostly about Rublicanism as racism. Be honest.

These people don't work harder than poor people. Nthey work far less hard than most poor people.
posted by spitbull at 3:55 AM on September 18, 2012 [19 favorites]

*Republicanism* as racism. Worth getting it right and saying twice. This entire election is mostly about putting that uppity black president in his place along with all his black-loving supporters, and everyone who knows anything about America can see that plain as day. The "entitled poor" stereotype only works when limited to a non-white image, which is why "47%" is going to haunt Romney, because no matter how you slice it that number includes a lot of white people who aren't despised coastal elite liberal pussies like me, with all them fancy degrees and shit. You just called Bubba a freeloader, Richie Rich.

Amerikkka, fuck yeah. It's still here. The racist fuckheads are still here. One more generation before they're outnumbered completely, keep fighting!
posted by spitbull at 4:02 AM on September 18, 2012 [13 favorites]

Was this video intentionally leaked by someone within the Romney campaign? Because there are a dismayingly lot of commenters tonight (check out the NYTimes threads) who see nothing wrong with what he said and are going "Damn straight!" Maybe someone within the campaign unilaterally thought this was a better angle of attack for Romney.
posted by newdaddy at 4:08 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

When I talk about politics online, I try not to use swear words and off-topic insults.

Do you know why? Because whenever I see someone who disagrees with me doing that, it just makes me really angry at them and I ignore everything they're saying.

I don't want people to ignore my ideas in similar fashion.
posted by victory_laser at 4:15 AM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

Good question about the leak, although surely it would have been intended to harm, not to help. The base may be all 'yay!' but they were going to vote for him/against Obama anyway. If Romney carries the base and no one else, he loses bad. Real bad.
posted by Ripper Minnieton at 4:20 AM on September 18, 2012

Sorry if it's been said upthread, but now his selection of Paul Ryan is making more sense to me, as a man in line with Romney's values
posted by angrycat at 4:26 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

However, when it comes to 47% of individuals paying no Federal income tax, there are interesting points to be had about how far Romney's tax plan and Paul Ryan's differ. Paul Ryan has called for a two-tiered flat tax which would eliminate any percentage of individuals not paying tax.

Let's break this down--you talk about the federal income tax, but then talk about "individuals not paying tax," implying that 47% of people pay no federal taxes. This canard has always ignored the payroll tax. When that is factored in, only 16-18% of people pay no federal tax and the majority of them are elderly. Many people pay a higher proportion of their income in payroll taxes than Romney does in income tax.

That's why that figure is pure bullshit and always has been. And that's why Romney's lines are pure bullshit too.
posted by Ironmouth at 4:26 AM on September 18, 2012 [28 favorites]

The base is fiercely defending Rmoney's career-ending gaffe only because they are desperate to try to save a doomed candidacy. Read Brooks, Klein, Halperin, and all the other Serious White Men today, to a one they say this is probably fatal.

I love watching republicans twist in the wind.
posted by spitbull at 4:27 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Also, remember, a "safety net" isn't a net. It's not something you fall into. It's a foundation, a platform you build from.

As a part of a civilization that affords you comfort and luxury undreamed of, you must contribute to society. By setting a high baseline for human necessity, you, personally, have a platform that allows you to reach further and climb higher. It may seem in your best personal interest to dismantle that platform, as you aren't resting on it at the moment - but this is folly. It's the foundation of your success. It allows you as a free individual to aspire and to achieve. To trade it away for a tax break on people you don't know and who don't need it is... kind of self-destructive. It weakens your place in society, it undermines your personal success.
posted by Slap*Happy at 4:28 AM on September 18, 2012 [20 favorites]

victory_laser - I kind of agree with Billy Conolly on swearing SLYT (NSFW. Obviously.)
posted by humph at 4:31 AM on September 18, 2012

One feeds people, clothes them, keeps them dry and healthy so that they can make the world better and more beautiful for others -- and also for you, when through disease, age or misfortune, you can no longer provide for yourself but must instead be provided for.

It's still all about "quid pro quo" but it's not at the personal level, it's at the level of society. From each according to their capabilities, to each according to their needs.

Human beings -- and many other creatures -- are social animals, refined through millions of years of evolution to help each other that the tribe might thrive.

And, also, because when life sucks and you trip, it's nice to have a smile and a friendly hand up rather than a sneering demand for a dollar and fuck you stay in the mud if you haven't got one.

Those who are unable to see the benefit of a kind and generous society and how it elevates every one of its members, from rich to poor, are to my mind, somehow sick.
posted by seanmpuckett at 4:35 AM on September 18, 2012 [25 favorites]

I haven't read all the above comments yet, but nobody seems to have noted this birther dogwhistle:

"There is a perception, 'Oh, we were born with a silver spoon, he never had to earn anything and so forth.' Frankly, I was born with a silver spoon, which is the greatest gift you can have: which is to get born in America."
posted by rory at 4:39 AM on September 18, 2012 [12 favorites]

Mother Jones is releases another video:

SECRET VIDEO: On Israel, Romney Trashes Two-State Solution

[A] donor asked Romney how the "Palestinian problem" can be solved. Romney immediately launched into a detailed reply, asserting that the Palestinians have "no interest whatsoever in establishing peace, and that the pathway to peace is almost unthinkable to accomplish."

Romney spoke of "the Palestinians" as a united bloc of one mindset, and he said: "I look at the Palestinians not wanting to see peace anyway, for political purposes, committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel, and these thorny issues, and I say there's just no way."

"And I look at the Palestinians not wanting to see peace anyway, for political purposes, committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel, and I say there's just no way."

Romney was indicating he did not believe in the peace process and, as president, would aim to postpone significant action: "[S]o what you do is, you say, you move things along the best way you can. You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem…and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it."

Romney did note there was another perspective on this knotty matter. He informed his donors that a former secretary of state—he would not say who—had told him there was "a prospect for a settlement between the Palestinians and the Israelis." Romney recalled that he had replied, "Really?" Then he added that he had not asked this ex-secretary of state for further explanation.
[...]
On his campaign website, Romney, whose foreign policy advisers include several neocons known for their hawkish support for Israel, does not explicitly endorse the peace process or a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But the Republican Party platform does state unequivocal backing for this outcome: "We envision two democratic states—Israel with Jerusalem as its capital and Palestine—living in peace and security." The platform adds, "The US seeks a comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East, negotiated between the parties themselves with the assistance of the US."

In public, Romney has not declared the peace process pointless or dismissed the two-state solution. In July, when the Israeli newspaper Haaretz asked Romney if he supports a two-state solution and the creation of a Palestinian state, he replied, "I believe in a two-state solution which suggests there will be two states, including a Jewish state."

posted by zombieflanders at 4:39 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

I recommend this debunking of the "half of Americans pay no income taxes" myth.
posted by Eyebeams at 4:41 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

It isn't charity to make sure all kids get a decent education or we have enough firemen or the bridges don't fall down or your grandmother doesn't starve or cancer doesn't ruin you economically. It's long term investment in human capital and infrastructure so businesses have customers and workers and new people want to live and invest here.

THIS.

By setting a high baseline for human necessity, you, personally, have a platform that allows you to reach further and climb higher.

ALSO THIS.

It's also stuff that business aka "The invisible hand of the market" wants nothing to do with. Bob's plumbing supply doesn't need to worry about expectant mothers getting proper nutrition and health care so they'll eventually have a healthy worker that isn't brain damaged 20 years down the line. We pay taxes and have the government do that work because preventing birth defects makes good economic sense. So does providing access to basic nutritional requirements, healthcare and education.

Failure to provide these basics as a society is a colossal waste of human potential.
posted by j03 at 4:42 AM on September 18, 2012 [18 favorites]

Those who are unable to see the benefit of a kind and generous society and how it elevates every one of its members, from rich to poor, are to my mind, somehow sick.

But some of those people are the wrong color?! Surely that changes your opinion.

I hear that self sufficiency nonsense all the time, though in my economic substrata it's always people who would, quite literally, die without government assistance.
posted by winna at 4:44 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mother Jones is releases another video:

It's like they've got Romney's campaign held hostage and they're sending it home one ziplock bag at a time.
posted by murphy slaw at 4:49 AM on September 18, 2012 [39 favorites]

I cannot wait to see what's in the final ziplock bag.
posted by Houstonian at 4:52 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

And here's a sekrit video from the other side (not really) Obama raps to MC Hammer in mash-up of "You didn't build up" With many FLOTUS dance moves.

posted by angrycat at 4:52 AM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

I recommend this debunking of the "half of Americans pay no income taxes" myth.

Reading this link, Eyebeams, there isn't actually any debunking in there - just a lot of moralizing. It goes in depth into how a large percentage of that 47% are people who are covered are very poor, but that's not actually, I think, disputed by anyone.

According to the Tax Policy Center, HALF (50.2 percent) of those who don't pay income taxes would not pay even if you stripped every 'tax break' out of the system and left only exemptions and standard deductions

Exemptions and standard deductions are tax breaks. They've been entrenched so long that they may seem untouchable, but they're still absolutely tax breaks.
posted by corb at 4:52 AM on September 18, 2012

From the new one: If I were Iran, if I were Iran—a crazed fanatic, I'd say let's get a little fissile material to Hezbollah, have them carry it to Chicago or some other place, and then if anything goes wrong, or America starts acting up, we'll just say, "Guess what? Unless you stand down, why, we're going to let off a dirty bomb." I mean this is where we have—where America could be held up and blackmailed by Iran, by the mullahs, by crazy people. So we really don't have any option but to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:53 AM on September 18, 2012

See, this piece I do find confusing. A lot of people here in this thread have talked about how important it is to them that other people be fed, housed, have medical care, etc. But then the idea is floated that without the government demanding the money, everyone would be living in a terrible situation. But wouldn't people still have the ability to contribute exactly as much as they would want to, to whatever charity they would like? So individuals who are saying that they would gladly pay more taxes would still have the ability to make other people's lives better, they just would need to contribute it directly to the charities that they find valuable.

Did you not read the Mitt Romney quote? He doesn't give a damn about the poor. So when you deregulate an economy and all of the wealth rushes to the top, where all of the rules are now made, what do you think happens to charitable donations?

Is that freedom for you? Forcing anyone who falls on hard times to beg the rich for enough resources to live?

Thus, if there are enough people who would voluntarily contribute to these things, these things will still exist - rather than it being a slim majority forcing a slim minority to provide the things they believe in.

This is why your argument doesn't appeal to anyone. "Believing" in helping your fellow man is a human trait that the vast majority of people have, in the same way that they have a desire to protect children, or forage for food. It's part of every major religion, and a part of almost every government platform that I'm aware of. You speak of health care and hunger statistics as if you're a detached alien staring at a model of an alien economy, instead of the real economy, where real, actual, living, breathing, struggling, yearning, hoping, hurting people exist. They matter. Each person matters.

You get all "hurf-durf, bleeding heart liberal" but the opposite of valuing human existence is the devaluation of human existence, which is usually totalitarianism. Is that what you want?

I think, to a more watered down perspective, this is essentially the conservative position (and perhaps Romney's position) on many of these things: that private charity is more meaningful because it is voluntary, while still having the ability to be very effective.

Fitting your imaginary idea of "pure" charity is a hell of a lot less important to me than actually helping people. Every government in the world that has low poverty rates, low crime, and happy citizens has a progressive tax system that builds infrastructure, provides cheap or free education and healthcare, and genuinely expresses the idea that people are more important than money. And humans are certainly more important than ridiculously narrow, and frankly, juvenile ideological constructs, especially ones that refuse to compromise in the face of mountains of scientific data that say the constructs Do. Not. Work. in reality.

Right now I'm trying to imagine how to raise a child in a purely libertarian environment. "No, I let Timmy beat the crap out of Steve and take his lunch money, because who am I to enforce my will upon another human being? If he really wants to succeed in this life, Steve will find a way to hire a thug to beat him up, or come back with a weapon and try harder." Hopefully Steve doesn't find a gun.

It seems like it would lead to a lot of useless violence, and without security, you can't get to ideas like gender equality, or the Americans with Disabilities Act, or to any society that I would care to be a part of. I am frankly blown away every time I hear a fundamentalist libertarian try to argue their points, because they are so outside of any accepted norms of human behavior, all I can think is, "This person needs therapy."
posted by deanklear at 4:58 AM on September 18, 2012 [44 favorites]

Continuing his tradition of foreign policy and military ignorance, a "dirty bomb" requires no sophistication whatsoever to assemble, just access to medical waste and a willingness to be poisoned to death in the name of whatever cause you have in mind. Oh and maybe a truck full of fertilizer.

My suspicion is we'll see a dirty bomb from a white supremacist group long before we see one from a nation that has any reason to fear nuclear retaliation.
posted by spitbull at 4:59 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

I re-recommend this debunking of the "half of Americans don't pay income taxes", and I further recommend that you not be fooled by corb's claim that it is nothing of the sort. Read it and judge for yourself.

Also, check out this map of where most of the non-taxpayers live. You'll never guess.
posted by Eyebeams at 4:59 AM on September 18, 2012

Corb, it's not like the South looked more kind (or, if you insist, economically efficient at dispersing profit) with the sharecropping system. It looked like plantation houses while others went malnourished.
posted by jaduncan at 5:06 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm particularly entertained by the idea that Libertarianism is some kind of untried philosophy.

It's been 'tried' throughout most of recorded history. It always coalesces into something else -- warlordism, feudalism, banditry, monarchism, oligarchy, democracy. The history of humanity is the history of libertarianism evolving into other societal forms.
posted by unSane at 5:07 AM on September 18, 2012 [41 favorites]

Would you really argue that the black sharecroppers weren't working hard enough to be rich?
posted by jaduncan at 5:07 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

So, what percentage of Americans pay no income tax? Don't include people whose tax benefits outweigh their contribution, unless you count it for the wealthy.

I pay income tax, state income tax, & FICA. My FICA is a bigger %age of my income, by farrrr, than Mitt's. It doesn't just benefit me, it benefits people who are disabled, and others.

As a Blue Star Mother of a son serving in Afghanistan, I assure you that it's predominantly the children of the middle and lower classes who enlist. That's what they call the economic draft. It's also a path to education, leadership training, and opportunity for a lot of people, and a path to citizenship. At my son's graduation from Basic Training, there was a naturalization ceremony; very moving. And it can be a path to injury, death, suicide, PTSD, etc. What do we call that tax?

Romney just blew off and disrespected a huge proportion of Americans. He made obvious what we knew already. What a complete and utter asshole.
posted by theora55 at 5:08 AM on September 18, 2012 [24 favorites]

The Tax Policy Center has the clearest, simplest, relatively non-ideological 3-pie-chart debunking of the "47% of Americans pay no taxes" bullshit. Bottom line:

Who Paid Neither Income Nor Payroll Taxes?

- More than half are elderly

- Over one-third are nonelderly with income under $20,000

- Only about 1 in 20 is nonelderly with income over $20,000
posted by mediareport at 5:09 AM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

"[S]o what you do is, you say, you move things along the best way you can. You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem…and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it." -

Hooooly crap. What else does he want to kick down the field and hope someone else resolves?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:15 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

It's been 'tried' throughout most of recorded history. It always coalesces into something else -- warlordism, feudalism, banditry, monarchism, oligarchy, democracy. The history of humanity is the history of libertarianism evolving into other societal forms.

This is exactly what I was typing out before preview. History shows us exactly what happens when Libertarianism is the order of the day: Life was brutal. Brutal. Old people cast off to die because they no longer could feed themselves. Widows starving or becoming prostitutes. Children working in factories or turning to prostitution. Business men polluting the environment and/or selling toxic wares. The list goes on. It's my idea of hell on earth and I find it hard to believe anyone wants to return to those days.

But then I do know when people imagine themselves back in history they always imagine themselves as part of the upper class and never the serving class, working class, or starving class.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:16 AM on September 18, 2012 [27 favorites]

So, you know how to get more people to pay income tax? Pay them more. If industrialists like Romney are upset that workers are not making enough money to owe federal income tax, then give them all raises so that they do.
posted by octothorpe at 5:18 AM on September 18, 2012 [15 favorites]

I keep seeing the money quote as including the statement that the [mythical] 47% are dependent on government, think they are entitled, etc., but to me the worst part is where he says that he'll never convince those [poor] people to "take personal responsibility and care for their lives".
What an unbelievably stupid, arrogant and vile thing to say.
posted by Eyebeams at 5:18 AM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

Would anyone really be surprised at this point if Mitt proposed monetizing the poor by transforming them into some kind of commercially available nutritious snack?
posted by unSane at 5:23 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Life was brutal. Brutal. Old people cast off to die because they no longer could feed themselves. Widows starving or becoming prostitutes. Children working in factories or turning to prostitution. Business men polluting the environment and/or selling toxic wares. The list goes on. It's my idea of hell on earth and I find it hard to believe anyone wants to return to those days.

You know, there is a lot of the world where this is the present. With no hyperbole. I keep feeling like I should write more detail, but it makes me heartsick. The US is one of the wealthiest nations in the world. Surely, AT LEAST for all of its own citizens, ensuring the provision of food, shelter, and healthcare should be something that is beyond debate?
posted by bardophile at 5:24 AM on September 18, 2012 [18 favorites]

Exemptions and standard deductions are tax breaks.

Oh precisely. So I take it you are in favor of doing awaw with the Carried Interest deduction, the non-taxability of certain structured foreign holdings (like, for example, shell corporations in the Caymans), deductions for Olympic horses as a "business," property tax and mortgage deductions in states like, say, California, dependent tax credits (as in, an incentive to get married and have a family, just as easily viewable as a tax on single people though), the deductibility of a certain level of social security income, and of course the imposition of a high value added or national sales tax on all transactions (including medical care and food) to make sure those dirty poors pay their fair share, right?

I mean, let's go over this again. Mitt Romney has actually said that his ability to avoid paying more than he was absolutely legally oblgated to pay in federal income taxes is a qualification for the presidency, and that voters would deem him unintelligent for doing less. So by that logic, everyone who combines a child deduction, a mortgage deduction, a childcare deduction, and maybe an IRA to avoid current income taxes is just being smart, and if it leads them to a zero income tax rate (or even a negative one, let's say they take the EITC, as not a few military families do, along with all those brown poor civilians this is all really about), maybe that makes them smarter and more presidential than Mitt Romney? Cuz after all, he assures us, he has never paid less than a 13 rate (although he won't specify that he means a 13% federal income tax rate, or offer any proof of that dubious claim, especially dubious since the one year he has released shows that rate, so that's the one he's proud of).

I'm serious. I pay north of a 30% federal income tax rate, and I don't take advantage of any number of things that could lower that for all kinds of ethical reasons and personal reasons. I don't begrudge it. It's my stake. My buy in to this society. I work 70 hour weeks routinely. I own stocks. I have small but not insignificant personal business income too, as an author and speaker. I am educating the next generation of bright kids who need to solve the problems we are leaving them, and making half of what I could have made if I had followed an equally promising career path into a particular private business in which I was successfully rising (my backup career) in my 20s, although I hasten to say that I make more now than I ever thought I would, and more than enough to have achieved my life goal of not having to think much about money at all except to make sure the bills are paid.

I got here through a combination of lucky birth, great public schools, radically liberal upbringing, student loans for college, hard work (I paid my own college tuition and r&b after my freshman year by working full time as a student in the aforementioned business, and I had to drop out and work as a mover and contracter and cook to save more for my education; I finished paying off my student loans at 30, and it was hard to do.) I went to graduate school on a competitive national fellowship but maintained a full-time taxable income-generating job (as a pro musician) all through grad school too, so unlike many of my grad school peers I was paying significant income taxes in my 20s too.

Did I bust my ass? Yeah, I did. But I know mechanics and laborers and soldiers who busted their asses so much harder, for so much less economic reward, and starting with much less social advantage, and every day I see amazing young students who would not be my students in an elite university were it not for the public investments made in their public schools, their communities, etc. -- or more pointedly, in those of their parents by generations who came before us. One side of my family came over on the damn Mayflower, the other side fleeing persecution and poverty in Eastern Europe in the late 19th century. Both sides acquired social and economic capital only because of collective investment that actualized the value of hard work and self-discipline, and that allowed for failure and disease and weakness as parts of the human condition and as things an otherwise healthy society can withstand (and even encourage, no success without failure, folks) through collective mutual assistance.

Our ancestors knew this. No human society operates without reciprocity at its core, without generational reinvestment, without good governance rooted in the compromise between present and future interests, between those that have and those that need, between winners and those who hope someday to win, which doesn't make them losers for accepting assistance from those who have *more than they will ever need to be safe and happy and keep their families safe and happy into an indefinite future, not in a gated walled compound on a hill, but down in the valley, where all the regular people are.

The thing that saddens me the most is the way the Draconian, selfish, destructive, hateful ideology of rightwing liberatarian selfishness has been stitched into a slipcase of pseudo-Christianity. Jesus said as you do unto the least of my children, you do unto me. What part of that can you leave out of the claim to be representing Christ on earth?

That, and the racism, which I think is deeper even than the class warfare from the right. The social contract and all its implied reciprocity was fine as long as Browns were a minority and knew their place, the Wimminfolk were submissive and knew their place, the Queers were terrorized and knew their place, and the Illegals didn't expect more than starvation wages and no stake in the society they were helping to build and maintain.

I'm not even going to get started on the place of war in all this.

That all of this was unleashed with such fury after having been so exhausted and discredited so many times already in 2008 really can lead to only one conclusion, and that is that they hate President Obama because he black, and they hate the President's constituents (we're not just his voters, and your his constituent as an American citizen whether you voted for him or not) because they support a black man. All of this, every last bit of it, is really cover for the white supremacist ideology that has held power in this country from the beginning and is now finally facing its demographic comeuppance, within the next 20 years. They are standing atop history screaming STOP! This is not about improving other peoples' lives, now or in the future. It is about holding on to white power.
posted by spitbull at 5:30 AM on September 18, 2012 [105 favorites]

Would anyone really be surprised at this point if Mitt proposed monetizing the poor by transforming them into some kind of commercially available nutritious snack?

In other news, the GOP has just announced their new vision for America. Titled, "To Serve Man" the new party platform declares its firm support for kitchen staff nationwide and promises, "A Moocher In Every Pot."
posted by zarq at 5:31 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Only about 1 in 20 is nonelderly with income over $20,000

And his name is Mitt.
posted by schoolgirl report at 5:34 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

I should also point out that being self-sufficient in America has a traditional avenue that is no longer available: frontiersman. People who were misfits and could not fit into society for whatever reason or who were willing to work hard to carve out a place for themselves could also move to the fringe, squat on unclaimed land, build themselves a log cabin, hunt for gold, trap beavers, hunt and fish. Those avenues are now closed. There is no unclaimed land. There are no unpolluted streams. The fish and game have disappeared.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:35 AM on September 18, 2012 [12 favorites]

You know, there is a lot of the world where this is the present. With no hyperbole. I keep feeling like I should write more detail, but it makes me heartsick

If you want a modern example of what a libertarian US would look like, it's probably the Gulf you should be considering. A large proportion of people below the poverty line, a significant monied class, basic infrastructure failings for ordinary people, religious conservatism and extremism providing the heart of a heartless world, quickly leading to the return of social and legal authoritarianism. It's not Somalia we should be recommending as a destination to libertarians, it's Saudi Arabia.
posted by howfar at 5:40 AM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

People who were misfits and could not fit into society for whatever reason or who were willing to work hard to carve out a place for themselves could also move to the fringe, squat on unclaimed land...

That's a pretty chilling disregard for Native American history.
posted by fraula at 5:40 AM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

Brilliant point, Secret Life. The whole imagery of "self-sufficiency" is rooted in that mythology, which was never even really true. Frontier society depended totally on reciprocity (and white supremacy, but that's another song). Very few individuals ever became lone frontiersman living entirely off the land. It's all in the movies.

Now, to be "self sufficient" requires that you make money selling something to other people. They aren't products of nature, but of society. Henry Fucking Ford knew this. Mitt Romney, apparently, does not. You aren't hunting Elk, you're hunting customers. And the only ones worth hunting went to good schools and have decent living wage jobs.
posted by spitbull at 5:41 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

In two short days, Romney has demonstrated that his plans for both jobs growth and the Israel-Palestine question are entirely vacuous and non-serious.

And I don't mean to say policies I disagree with; I really mean empty plans. He apparently says, on the Palestine question, "You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem…and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it."

Aka, nothing, nada, zilch.

Someone who wants to be the Commander-in-Chief of the world's most powerful army has no plan in mind for the peace process.

I'm shocked. Absolutely stunning.
posted by the cydonian at 5:43 AM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

Isn't entitlement to food, housing, and health care something we Americans provide for people in jail?
posted by mkultra at 5:44 AM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

(That was from TPM, btw)
posted by the cydonian at 5:45 AM on September 18, 2012

That's a pretty chilling disregard for Native American history.
posted by fraula

Oh yes, oh yes. That's why I mentioned the reliance of "frontier society" on the mythology of White supremacy ("manifest destiny" comes to mind).

Build a society on genocide and it's sick at the core.
posted by spitbull at 5:48 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

That all of this was unleashed with such fury after having been so exhausted and discredited so many times already in 2008 really can lead to only one conclusion, and that is that they hate President Obama because he black, and they hate the President's constituents (we're not just his voters, and your his constituent as an American citizen whether you voted for him or not) because they support a black man.

This is not the only conclusion that can be made, not nearly, not at all, and I think it's just as incredibly dismissive of half the country as many commentators are arguing Mitt Romney's remarks were. Many people have genuine moral concerns with Obama's presidency that have nothing to do with his race whatsoever. People have fury because they feel like they're losing too much because of Obama, and they're in danger of losing the war altogether.

Isn't entitlement to food, housing, and health care something we Americans provide for people in jail?

This is not as uncontested as you may think it is.

As a Blue Star Mother of a son serving in Afghanistan, I assure you that it's predominantly the children of the middle and lower classes who enlist.

This is somewhat true, ma'am, but generally only because those children of the upper middle and upper classes who sign up for the military have already completed four-year school and choose to enter as officers.

I hope your son gets home safe.
posted by corb at 5:55 AM on September 18, 2012

Vile, vile, class-based hatred.

Says the person who advocates letting people who can't afford food to starve.
posted by Flunkie at 5:56 AM on September 18, 2012 [28 favorites]

So this Republican party they have in the USA, they don't think people are entitled to food, housing and health care? God damn.
posted by Sternmeyer at 4:11 PM on September 17 [40 favorites]

Geese people put down the KoolAid and step away from the pitcher. Fact is that a full 47% of USAians do not pay any income tax. Fact is that Romney pays taxes on monies he has already been taxed on. Fact is that Romney needs to clarify his approach. Take his foot out of his mouth and state simple facts without injecting opinion or his "concern". Fact is that since 2008 the SS and SSDI rolls have increased by a higher percentage than ever before. Mostly attributed to Boomers leaving the job market early because of chronic unemployment. Fact is that since 2008 Welfare spending has increased by $193 Billion and through 26 separate government programs Obama has effectively eliminated Clinton's welfare reforms by relaxing standards and encouraging states to keep people on the dole with guaranteed Federal dollars for doing so.
posted by Gungho at 5:58 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

they feel like they're losing too much because of Obama,

Explain the "because of Obama" part.
posted by spitbull at 5:59 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

This is somewhat true, ma'am, but generally only because those children of the upper middle and upper classes who sign up for the military have already completed four-year school and choose to enter as officers.

umm... proportion of officers in harm's way relative to enlisted?
posted by bardophile at 5:59 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

As far as I'm concerned, corb, you've already laid out the contradiction in terms that explains why libertarianism will never produce a worthwhile society. To quote you:

wouldn't people still have the ability to contribute exactly as much as they would want to, to whatever charity they would like?
...
I'm not sure I think the vast majority of human beings are decent, kind, reasonable human beings.

So what makes you think that people would, out of the goodness of their heart, all support each other? That sounds like a fairytale.
posted by jacalata at 6:02 AM on September 18, 2012 [23 favorites]

(Please)

Yeah, there are legitimate reasons you could be opposed to Obama. Heck I have dozens of friends on the left who are furious at him about drone strikes and Guantanamo and no torture prosecutions, things that disappoint me greatly too, to say the least (that and why the fuck are we still in Afghanistan?).

But the GOP only wins if they conjoin that small number of people whose opposition to Obama is principled (from the left or right) to that significant portion which hates him because he is black. Say it isn't true all you want, but it is. Otherwise, why this birth certificate shit? Why this lying welfare innuendo? Why all this talk of the Preseident as unAmerican or foreign or "Muslim" when all of that is demonstrably laughably bullshit? Where is Romney's denunciation of Kansas recently nearly considering dropping the President from the November ballot over yet more trumped up birther bullshit? Why doesn't he clarify that the majority of non-taxpayers are elderly white folks he needs -- because of their residual racism from having grown up in the 40s and 50s -- to win? Why no mention that red states are net benficiaries of federal largesse? Why is the image of dependency always couched in dog-whistle racial terms?

Everyone knows it's about racism. It's one of those things that is so obviously true that it is easily discounted, like the air we breathe. It's been a structural fact in this country since the beginning, and it has only begun to be challenged in the last century, really, within the living memory of many of Romney's strongest supporters and in the places where he runs the strongest in the polls. His vote is almost exclusively white, and decidedly elderly. Why is that?
posted by spitbull at 6:05 AM on September 18, 2012 [15 favorites]

"Warren Ellis is writing the presidential campaign. Alan Moore wrote Anonymous and a good part of Occupy. We are living in a comic book universe."
posted by zombieflanders at 6:06 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

Geese people put down the KoolAid

The belief that there is a secret cabal of Kool-Aid quaffing communist Goose-Men who meet to plot the downfall of capitalism actually makes more sense than everything else in that comment.
posted by Shepherd at 6:07 AM on September 18, 2012 [49 favorites]

Moonorb: I spent all day at work today buried in that paper (link downloads pdf file). It's written by Bruce Meyer of the University of Chicago and James Sullivan of the University of Notre Dame (it was released last week, I think). The paper documents improvement in poverty gaps and deep poverty in the U.S., but mostly looks at how consumption measures better identify who is impoverished than do income measures and concludes that government programs have been effective in combating poverty and decreasing the number of impoverished Americans. It finds that tax policies (particularly those favorable to families, like the earned income tax credit), SNAP (food stamps) and Social Security have most benefited the poor.

I found it kind of ironic to come home to the internet and this random Romneyism after spending the day with this.
posted by crush-onastick at 6:08 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Many people have genuine moral concerns with Obama's presidency that have nothing to do with his race whatsoever. People have fury because they feel like they're losing too much because of Obama, and they're in danger of losing the war altogether.

As an outside observer, I've gotta say then that those who feel as such need to do a whole lot better at actually articulating these moral concerns, and what exactly, and how much, they are losing because of Obama, and what war it is they think they are fighting. Because those of us in the other developed Western countries, with our socialised health care and what not, are at a bit of a loss to understand what the problem is, if it isn't just about mendacious greed.
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 6:08 AM on September 18, 2012 [23 favorites]

If you want a modern example of what a libertarian US would look like, it's probably the Gulf you should be considering. A large proportion of people below the poverty line, a significant monied class, basic infrastructure failings for ordinary people, religious conservatism and extremism providing the heart of a heartless world, quickly leading to the return of social and legal authoritarianism.

But wait! They built the tallest building in the world!!!!
posted by eriko at 6:09 AM on September 18, 2012

corb: "One of the main problems with people who do not pay federal income tax is that they then often have no investment in how that money is spent, or in reining it in. For example: if we had to pay WWII-era taxation to sustain the Afghanistan or Iraq wars, we'd have been out of that five years ago... It's not a value judgment on the 47% who don't pay taxes - it's a value judgment on those who don't pay taxes, enjoy entitlements, and are willing to vote for people who are bad for the country in order to keep those entitlements rolling."

Sorry, corb, but this is an old canard that needs to be put to bed.

Like every single non-salaried person in the United States, I don't pay income taxes. I pay payroll taxes which are deducted from my paychecks and which go to the federal government instead of income taxes. Please note this important and salient fact: aside from a few people rich enough to afford to find loopholes, almost every single working person in this nation pays some form of taxes on the money they earn. Even people who make less than the income required to be taxed usually have payroll taxes deducted anyway.

Moreover, even people who don't have a job pay taxes. There are taxes on the things we buy, on the property we own. The homeless guy down the street pays taxes on every pack of cigarettes and 40 of malt he buys, and frankly he pays a hell of a lot higher percentage on those things than you do on most of the things you buy.

So, for one thing, your shorthand (and Mitt Romney's, and the right's in general) about "47% of people who don't pay taxes" is flat wrong. Every single person in this nation pays taxes. If it's shorthand about taxes on income, it's still wrong, because it's a fuzzy-math exaggeration that ignores many working people. And lastly, please note that the number of people paying taxes on their income approaches 100%, give or take some millionaires who find dodges and the tiny proportion of illegal workers. If you want more people to be paying taxes on income, the only way to do that is to increase the number of jobs.

But don't give us bullshit that assumes that there is somehow some huge mass of Dem-voting people in the US that have income they don't have to pay taxes on, that soak the government for "entitlements," and that don't pay any taxes at all. We're all paying taxes. And those who don't have jobs or income to pay income taxes from are very unlikely to vote anyway. Which is lucky, because the right doesn't seem to care at all about getting anybody back to work at all.
posted by koeselitz at 6:12 AM on September 18, 2012 [45 favorites]

But wait! They built the tallest building in the world!!!!

And filled it up with geese steppers!

More Kool-Aid, Vicar?
posted by Wolof at 6:13 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

This might be my schadenfreudiest day ever!
posted by diogenes at 6:15 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

I find it amusing too that liberatarian-leaning righties tell us on the one hand that selfishness is human nature and society needs to accomodate it, and then in the same breath tell us that without a public infrastructure for things like unemployment insurance and education loans, the natural charitable instincts of the rich would be unleasehed to take care of us all.

In fact, the middle class is far more charitable, by percentage of total income, than the upper classes, even given that for the upper classes "charity" of many kinds is so fundamentally motivated by tax advantages.
posted by spitbull at 6:26 AM on September 18, 2012 [11 favorites]

Politician tells people what they want to hear. News at eleven.
posted by quillbreaker at 6:28 AM on September 18, 2012

"Geese people put down the KoolAid."

I am a proud Goose Person. Join me, fellow Anserine-Americans!
posted by Eyebeams at 6:28 AM on September 18, 2012 [12 favorites]

Explain the "because of Obama" part.

Many Americans, particularly in certain areas, (especially rural ones) have been frustrated at what they see as taking money out of their community and putting it into other communities. This isn't just a rich white thing - this is one of the things the Black Panthers complained about. In fact, it is particularly the case with people who consider themselves a minority for whatever reason. This includes racial minorities, religious/ethnic minorities, and also population minorities. Effectively, any group which considers themselves discriminated against because of their small voting population - like, as many of the NYC crowd here may recall, when Staten Island attempted to secede. Though they voted overwhelmingly in favor of it, they were prevented from doing so by larger voting blocs of the other boroughs.

Obama was elected on what seemed a majorly populist upswing after frustrations many, from left and right, had with Bush. Since then, he's begun making a lot of populist promises that seem, for many people, to promise more of the same: an urban population majority-voting rural life out of existence. He seems, to many, to symbolize the assault on that rural life - from his comments about guns, to the single-payer healthcare idea, to his rhetoric against the rich that surfaces again and again.

And that scares people, just as any minority is necessarily scared when the people making the decisions about its future are not from the community and radically outvote them. The federal government, in many of these circumstances, tries to take care to make sure that this doesn't happen - minority districts are carved out and due is paid. But this doesn't happen with people who are a minority by population rather than ethnicity or creed. There is nowhere they can turn with their fear.

And that has nothing to do with race. That has to do with ideology.

I think people shorten these things to dismissive statements too sometimes, and it makes it hard to listen to real concerns. There's a lot of "lolz they're scared of the socialism," but few people take the time to pause and ask why someone might be concerned about what appears to be a minority of individuals taken advantage of for the benefit of a looming majority that seems to be threatening violence. Particularly people who actually lived through times where that was a reality in many places in the world.
posted by corb at 6:29 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

*gooses you*
posted by Wolof at 6:29 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I also want to point out that this is a textbook example of how to use opposition research in a campaign. The way this video was patiently dribbled out by anoynymous sources over a period of weeks before being given the adrenaline shot of David Corn's confirmation yesterday -- the swirling conspiracy theories about it, the way the posted of the video was banned from liberal websites for potential false-flagging, all of it.

I wonder if (and hope that) the Obama campaign had a hand in orchestrating its release, which continues in slow drips today. There goes another week for the hapless fools in Boston.
posted by spitbull at 6:31 AM on September 18, 2012

Threatening violence? Really? What gives you that impression? I fear violence from the right, not the left.
posted by spitbull at 6:32 AM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

an urban population majority-voting rural life out of existence.

And wtf does this mean? Now you are the one engaging directly in dog-whistle racism.
posted by spitbull at 6:33 AM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

in the same breath tell us that without a public infrastructure for things like unemployment insurance and education loans, the natural charitable instincts of the rich would be unleasehed to take care of us all.

The fact that American libertarianism has its ethical foundation in the childish prosperity theology inherent in the American Dream is hardly surprising, but continues to be depressing. The goodness of the wealthy and the malignity of the poor is a necessary article of faith, never mind that it makes no sense.
posted by howfar at 6:34 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Right, an end to corn and sugar and ethnanol subsidies would begin to balance the net transfer of urban wealth to rural states.
posted by spitbull at 6:34 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Single payer healthcare is an 'assault on the rural population' how?
posted by unSane at 6:34 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Since then, he's begun making a lot of populist promises that seem, for many people, to promise more of the same: an urban population majority-voting rural life out of existence. He seems, to many, to symbolize the assault on that rural life - from his comments about guns, to the single-payer healthcare idea, to his rhetoric against the rich that surfaces again and again.

I find your whole comment almost totally incoherent, but this paragraph takes the cake. Given that Obama has NOT been making ANY promises about single-payer health care at all, how the hell does single-payer threaten rural life? Keep in mind I am typing this in Canada, where single payer health care got its start in the heavily rural province of Saskatchewan.
posted by maudlin at 6:35 AM on September 18, 2012 [22 favorites]

I presume Corb is in favor of removing all those subsidies and letting farmers go to the wall.
posted by unSane at 6:36 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Many Americans, particularly in certain areas, (especially rural ones) have been frustrated at what they see as taking money out of their community and putting it into other communities.

You lost me right around here. Example?

an urban population majority-voting rural life out of existence

Uhhhhhhhh what.
posted by windbox at 6:36 AM on September 18, 2012

Mitt Romney: Born on third base thinking he hit a triple. Caught trying to steal home.
posted by srboisvert at 6:37 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

victory_laser: " Because whenever I see someone who disagrees with me doing that, it just makes me really angry at them and I ignore everything they're saying. "

You know what finally turned me from the path of Self-Righteous Republicanism? Someone saying, to my face, "For such a nice guy, you sure are an asshole."
posted by notsnot at 6:38 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

More of the video has been released today: Romney says that Palestinians are "committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel" and that the prospects for a two-state solution to Middle East peace were dim.

"You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem, and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it," Romney said.
posted by jontyjago at 6:38 AM on September 18, 2012

I've seen people say that paying for preventative healthcare is important, because otherwise, people go to hospitals anyway and the state winds up paying for them. But from my perspective, it would be easy to avoid that by simply not having the state require that everyone be admitted to hospitals. I understand there are moral concerns there for some people, but purely from a pragmatic sense, does this go further?

Sick people are a drain on the economy; they cannot contribute as much as they could if they were not sick. If they had gone to the doctor for early treatment of hypertension, they could still be working - earning money and spending it - but instead, because they had to choose between medical bills and rent/car payments/gas money, they are now disabled from heart disease. Allowing sick people to go untreated (and ignoring entirely the public health aspect wrt communicable diseases) is penny-wise pound-foolish, because everyone will end up paying somehow.

A lot of what happened during the Arab Spring is a great example of what you get when a large portion of your citizens are educated but jobless (or even just jobless), and are divorced from the economic and political culture of the nation.
posted by rtha at 6:38 AM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

There's a lot of "lolz they're scared of the socialism," but few people take the time to pause and ask why someone might be concerned about what appears to be a minority of individuals taken advantage of for the benefit of a looming majority that seems to be threatening violence.

The vast majority of suggestions of violence I see come from the right wing. People threatening to kill doctors who perform abortions, people running for sheriff threatening to kill women who have abortions, people threatening to break out their guns if Obama is re-elected, people actually shooting other people at places of worship because they're not white, people claiming rape is only legitimate in certain circumstances, state governments threatening to rape women who are even considering an abortion, big-name sheriffs threatening immigrants because they're not from here...
posted by zombieflanders at 6:39 AM on September 18, 2012 [38 favorites]

Charity is an interesting thing. In the Anglo-Australian background I'm from, you would only accept 'charity' when you have no other choice. On the other hand social security is, within bounds, simply looking out for one another. You know, smoothing out the bumps we're all going to hit on life's journey. This includes both the formal (i.e. government based assistance) and the informal (i.e. paying for a friend's drinks when they need a night out, when you have the cash and it's not really going to be a big deal for you. Because they'd do the same, and have, if the situations were reversed.)

Charity has become such a loaded term.

And on preview, There's a lot of "lolz they're scared of the socialism," but few people take the time to pause and ask why someone might be concerned about what appears to be a minority of individuals taken advantage of for the benefit of a looming majority that seems to be threatening violence. Particularly people who actually lived through times where that was a reality in many places in the world.

What?
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 6:39 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mitt Romney: Born on third base thinking he hit a triple. Caught trying to steal home.

Caught trying to steal second.
posted by drezdn at 6:40 AM on September 18, 2012 [17 favorites]

I used to be an Objectivist, too, but then I realized that those libertarian ideals don't actually work in any large policy setting. There are limits to what government can provide for people, but stable health care, food, and housing (among other things) are pretty basic requirements for a functioning society.
posted by thirteenkiller at 6:41 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

(I was a moody teenager.)
posted by thirteenkiller at 6:41 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Threatening violence? Really? What gives you that impression? I fear violence from the right, not the left.

Well, in this thread alone there have been multiple commentators arguing that if progressive taxation isn't enacted, crime will increase, and people will attempt to take money or food from the more fortunate by force - "pitchforks and torches" have been mentioned.

Many Americans, particularly in certain areas, (especially rural ones) have been frustrated at what they see as taking money out of their community and putting it into other communities.
You lost me right around here. Example?

Well, partially this is the tax issue. Taking taxes from one area and moving the revenues from them to another. The only two I personally can think of offhand are the Eastern/Western Washington split and the Upstate/Downstate New York issue. I'm not even saying this is right, or accurate - I'm saying this is the perception among many. You see it both ways, too - the cities which produce a lot of money complain about subsidizing the rural areas, and the rural areas which, while they have poverty, have a lot less of the backbreaking kind, less homeless, less need for extensive social services, complain about subsidizing city poverty services.

I presume Corb is in favor of removing all those subsidies and letting farmers go to the wall.

Actually, I'm a city girl who finds farm subsidies also undesirable. I think they also play a lot of havoc with our food. But that's a story for another thread.
posted by corb at 6:42 AM on September 18, 2012

"[...] and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it," Romney said.

Oh god, that's an ACTUAL quote. I thought it was a sarcastic-Onionish quote when I saw it upthread.
posted by AugieAugustus at 6:42 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

(I was a moody teenager.)
posted by thirteenkiller at 9:41 AM on September 18

Eponysterical...or creepy?
posted by zombieflanders at 6:43 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Metafilter: I was a moody teenager.
posted by Lemurrhea at 6:44 AM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

RE: This being an attempt to win in 2016... Unless if there's something I'm overlooking, if Obama is re-elected it would be very very difficult for the right to overturn the ACA health care law before 2016.

It'll probably be even harder to overturn it post-2014 when it has been fully implemented. If the Republicans are serious about wanting to get rid of "Obamacare," this will be their best chance post-Supreme Court ruling.
posted by drezdn at 6:45 AM on September 18, 2012

"Well, in this thread alone there have been multiple commentators arguing that if progressive taxation isn't enacted, crime will increase, and people will attempt to take money or food from the more fortunate by force - "pitchforks and torches" have been mentioned. "

I think what's being argued is that when part of society is in want of food or is lacking other basic necessities of survival, and then sees another part of society that has way more than it's ever going to be able to spend, violence is likely to happen.
posted by bardophile at 6:46 AM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

Well, in this thread alone there have been multiple commentators arguing that if progressive taxation isn't enacted, crime will increase, and people will attempt to take money or food from the more fortunate by force - "pitchforks and torches" have been mentioned.

Corb, time and again you try to pull this shit, and it doesn't work ever. Why not just quit? Predicting violence as a result of inequality is not the same as threatening it from an ideological position. You have given no reason to believe that the predictions in this thread are accurate ones, and they are useless as examples of threats.
posted by howfar at 6:47 AM on September 18, 2012 [16 favorites]

There is nowhere they can turn with their fear.

There are places they can turn away from that will help alleviate fear: Fox News and right wing talk radio, which are in the business of stoking fears and disseminating false information.
posted by madamjujujive at 6:47 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Seriously, how has nobody mentioned this yet?

We're not talking about rocket surgery here people. Just a tiny bit of history.
posted by Blue_Villain at 6:47 AM on September 18, 2012

Romney's Israel/Palestine Plan

1. "Kick the Ball Down the Field."
2. ???
3. Resolve it
posted by drezdn at 6:47 AM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

Well, in this thread alone there have been multiple commentators arguing that if progressive taxation isn't enacted, crime will increase, and people will attempt to take money or food from the more fortunate by force - "pitchforks and torches" have been mentioned.

But no major population is actually threatening others with that, as you claimed. Not to mention, this is a grossly misleading interpretation of the comments here.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:48 AM on September 18, 2012

drezdn, it's let someone else resolve it. Duh!
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:48 AM on September 18, 2012

Mittens is hardly in a position to accuse any of us in not paying taxes. How do we know what he paid, if anything, for past few years?
posted by Postroad at 6:48 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

I said this in another thread a while back, but my closest friend and musical mentor in my 20s, with whose family I remain extremely tight 25 years later, lives in the deep backwoods of a southern state. The last half hour to his house is a dirt road for which you need a 4x4 a lot of the time, which is how he likes it. He is a genius mechanic, a Christian, a volunteer fireman (in his late 60s), and a brilliant musician, and would happily self-describe as a "redneck" and sometimes even a "hillbilly."

We shoot deer off his back porch when I visit, drink beer and smoke and play country music late into the night. He believes Jesus is coming back someday (and that a lot of self-professed Christians are in trouble for hypocrisy when he does), sings gospel music, and he could live off the land if he had to, and does to some extent (his wife cooks the best damn venison sausage ever). He owns a lot of guns and we differ sharply on gun control issues, but he sees a lot of politics pretty much from the same perspective as this liberal, urban, northeastern hippie professor does.

He voted for Obama, admittedly to the surprise of many of his friends, in 2008 because of what Iraq had done to his son, who served several tours there in the infantry and came back messed up from it like so many others in his community (whereas, I will point out, none of the Romney boys has served, nor has their dad). He's likely to be voting for Obama again because he sees Romney as a plutocrat who would happily take us back into more wars and he (correctly in my view) sees that as more important than any economic argument for the future of this country. He might stay home, but he won't vote for Mitt Romney. He's a better judge of character than that.

Don't stereotype rural people along with city people. It's already obvious that "urban" means "black" to Republicans. But rural doesn't necessarily mean what you think it means. My friend is white, and grew up in the racist south. He's one of the least bigoted people I know today, up to and including professing and practicing tolerance for LGBT people, which makes him a real isolate in that world, but a position he has the character and fortitude to hold publicly, like real leaders should do with their principled stands (Hello, Mitt?)

He's a "real American" of the Sarah Palin sort, who drives a pickup truck with a gun rack, but he would have the time of day for that woman and he would never vote for a snake oil salesman like Romney.
posted by spitbull at 6:48 AM on September 18, 2012 [35 favorites]

(*wouldn't* have the time of day for Palin, whoops)
posted by spitbull at 6:50 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'll buy the idea that charity works best when it is only private and voluntary the day someone can show me a country where that's actually fucking come to pass.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 6:51 AM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

Obama was elected on what seemed a majorly populist upswing after frustrations many, from left and right, had with Bush. Since then, he's begun making a lot of populist promises that seem, for many people, to promise more of the same: an urban population majority-voting rural life out of existence. He seems, to many, to symbolize the assault on that rural life - from his comments about guns, to the single-payer healthcare idea, to his rhetoric against the rich that surfaces again and again.

Red states were more likely to get a bigger cut of federal spending. Of the 22 states that went to McCain in 2008, 86 percent received more federal spending than they paid in taxes in 2010. In contrast, 55 percent of the states that went to Obama received more federal spending than they paid in taxes. Republican states, on average, received $1.46 in federal spending for every tax dollar paid; Democratic states, on average, received $1.16.

Most Red States Take More Money From Washington Than They Put In

Why not tell them the truth instead of lying to them for their vote? Is the truth unimportant when it clashes with your ideology?

Do you know who benefits the most with single payer healthcare? Everyone. It's cheaper to treat the mentally ill in hospitals than it is to keep throwing them in jail. It's cheaper to pay for kidney dialysis on a regular basis than it is to just pay for emergency room visits. It's cheaper to hire tons of Primary Care physicians than it is to overstaff emergency clinics. It's cheaper to have people go to the doctor early an often than it is for them to wait until it's late in the game to get something treated.

Actually, things like single payer don't help those who believe that anyone who is critically ill and doesn't have money or insurance should die in hospital parking lots. Which, thankfully, is close to zero people.

I personally know people who have died because they waited too long to get healthcare. Not because they were stupid, or because they were trying to game the system, but sometimes you find yourself at the end of decisions you had made carefully, but then you lose your job. Then you or one of your parents or your kid gets sick. Your car breaks down, or is stolen and your insurance company finds a way to not pay you.

Why are libertarians so enamored with the idea that anyone who suffers a calamity like that should just die nobly because Freedom? It doesn't make any sense to me.

If there is a single purpose for government, it's to ensure that people can make it through tough times and come out the other end as a still productive member of society, instead of as someone who has to beg in the street for sustenance that is too emotionally damaged to participate without a miracle or years of therapy. Government exists to protect citizens from outside enemies, and from much more common abuses like predatory business practices, or straight scams, or from thugs who try to run neighborhoods. Government is the entity that executes democratic influence on society, and wouldn't you know it, most people believe that government power should protect the weak instead of the powerful.

Do you really not understand that?
posted by deanklear at 6:52 AM on September 18, 2012 [52 favorites]

I'll buy the idea that charity works best when it is only private and voluntary the day someone can show me a country where that's actually fucking come to pass.

Nineteenth century England before the Poor Laws is not far off.
posted by unSane at 6:54 AM on September 18, 2012

frontiersman. People who were misfits and could not fit into society for whatever reason or who were willing to work hard to carve out a place for themselves could also move to the fringe, squat on unclaimed land, build themselves a log cabin, hunt for gold, trap beavers, hunt and fish.

And those people weren't self sufficient either because they needed the US army and government to kill off the Indians and/or steal the Indian's land so they could "claim" it.
posted by nooneyouknow at 6:54 AM on September 18, 2012 [12 favorites]

Many Americans, particularly in certain areas, (especially rural ones) have been frustrated at what they see as taking money out of their community and putting it into other communities.

Those Americans would be wrong. Since FDR rural areas and states have been net winners on the question of tax money. Just look at the five or six graphs pointing out where the 47% who pay no federal income tax live--the South.

I grew up in Illinois and constantly, downstaters would claim all their money was going up to Chicago. And every few years the facts would come out and the cities were paying a lot more in taxes than they were getting and the rural areas were claiming far more in government expenditure than they were paying out. This is because the cities are where money is made.

Why do they believe this? Because they are constantly bombarded with artfully gussied up racist talk by politicians who want their vote.
posted by Ironmouth at 6:55 AM on September 18, 2012 [31 favorites]

I imagine I'm just echoing one of the gobs of comments above, but: I predict this will have minimal impact on the election. Nobody actually thinks Romney would be a good president on his own merits except maybe his family. This election is entirely about whether enough Americans just plain can't stand Obama, and those folks will vote for pretty much anyone the Republicans cough up regardless of what utter tools they obviously are.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 6:55 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'll buy the idea that charity works best when it is only private and voluntary the day someone can show me a country where that's actually fucking come to pass.

Nineteenth century England before the Poor Laws is not far off.

Perhaps one ought to read The Making of the English Working Class before one asserts how great charity was back then.
posted by Ironmouth at 6:57 AM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

I predict this will have minimal impact on the election.

I disagree. For those for whom voting starts today, this is the last piece of information about Mitt Romney they get.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:57 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Seriously Corb, read some history. Start with the French revolution. Starvation leading to anarchy. Perhaps even look at the Russian revolution, where the Bolsheviks made so much gravy with the slogan "Peace, Bread, Land." These aren't 'threats', they are simply observations of what happens when wealth in whatever form it takes ends up being inequitably distributed. You can ignore that if you like, but hungry, desperate people don't act "rationally," they're hungry. Again, these aren't threats, they're observations.
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 6:57 AM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

So, you know how to get more people to pay income tax? Pay them more.

but then they couldn't be kept in poverty, so when we do away with those nasty entitlement programs, we couldn't make them beg us for our charity in return for running their lives like plantation slaves

it's about control - and we can't control people if we pay them more
posted by pyramid termite at 6:58 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Paul Ryan has called for a two-tiered flat tax which would eliminate any percentage of individuals not paying tax. (And Romney has appeared sympathatic to flat tax recently)

("two-tier flat tax" *twitch*)

When these guys talk about flat tax what they really mean is abolishing taxes on capital gains and dividends. Income tax becomes wage tax. So... the percentage of people paying no income tax would still exist, but it would consist of guys like Mitt Romney. And then their heirs.

(Strange how the "we built it" party has such a perennial boner for getting rid of the estate tax.)
posted by fleacircus at 6:59 AM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

On the other hand this really IS good news for John McCain.

Who the hell would have ever thought he dodged a bullet by picking Sarah Palin for VP?
posted by unSane at 6:59 AM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

These kinds of conversations always make me think of two West Wing quotations.
#1: from He Shall, from Time to Time-when they're working on the SOTU.
Bartlet: What's on your mind?
Toby: The era of big government is over.
Bartlet: You want to cut the line?
Toby: I want to change the sentiment. [pause] We're running away from ourselves and I know we can score points that way, I was a principal architect of that campaign strategy right along with you, Josh. But we're here now, tomorrow night we do an immense thing; we have to say what we feel, that government, no matter what its failures in the past and in times to come for that matter, government can be a place where people come together and where no one gets left behind. No one...gets left behind. An instrument of good. I have no trouble understanding why the line tested well, Josh, but I don't think that means we should say it. I think that means we should change it."

and #2: from 20 Hours in America (Part II)
MATT: You got kids?
TOBY: No.
MATT: Wait till you take your oldest to look at colleges. It's an incredible feeling. You wish they'd go to college across the street from your house, but you know...
TOBY: Yeah.
TOBY: A Jack Daniels rocks.
BARTENDER: Yeah.
TOBY: My boss went to Notre Dame.
MATT: Beautiful campus. I've never seen anything like it. She-she's not going to get to sleep tonight. You see what happened in the market today?
TOBY: Yeah, I-I saw. You invested?
MATT: Ehh... Mutual fund that's supposed to send her to college. I never imagined at $55,000 a year, I'd have trouble making ends meet. And my wife brings in another 25. My son's in public school. It's no good. I mean, there's 37 kids in the class, uh, no art and music, no advanced placement classes. Other kids, their mother has to make them practice the piano. You can't pull my son away from the piano. He needs teachers. I spend half the day thinking about what happens if I slip and fall down on my own front porch, you know? It should be hard. I like that it's hard. Putting your daughter through college, that's-that's a man's job. A man's accomplishment. But it should be a little easier. Just a little easier. 'Cause in that difference is... everything. I'm sorry. I'm, uh, I-I'm Matt Kelley.
TOBY: I'm Toby Ziegler. I work at the White House. Have a minute to talk? We'd, uh... like to buy you a beer.
posted by atomicstone at 7:00 AM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

And those people weren't self sufficient either because they needed the US army and government to kill off the Indians and/or steal the Indian's land so they could "claim" it.

Oo yeah, let's talk about the Homestead Act, arguably one of the most important bits of legislation to America's unique capitalist success (exceptionalism, even), also a government handout.
posted by thirteenkiller at 7:01 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

1. Rural areas have disproportionate representation in Congress (for example Wyoming and Alaska have as many Senators as New York and California).

2. If you find "class warfare" so offensive why are you supporting the guy who thinks that half of America is mooching off the government *and will never change* no matter what he says and does. He says his job isn't to worry about them.

3. Mitt Romney may be the worst serious Presidential candidate in my lifetime. The guy has terrible political instincts and no one likes him, not even his own party.
posted by leopard at 7:01 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Rural Eastern Washington and Upstate New York would look like Haiti if not for Seattle and New York City subsidizing their health care, housing, roads, and schools and buying their agricultural products. Get your facts straight.

This isn't about me saying they are right and the citydwellers are wrong. This is me answering your direct question of how anyone could feel threatened by Obama's policies while still not being a racist. I have answered your question; it'd be nice if you could stop being belligerent about it.

Perhaps even look at the Russian revolution, where the Bolsheviks made so much gravy with the slogan "Peace, Bread, Land." These aren't 'threats', they are simply observations of what happens when wealth in whatever form it takes ends up being inequitably distributed.

I think people are interpreting this as though I were saying that the poor in this country were directly, with their own voices, threatening others, and saying, "Give me social services or I will do violence upon you." If that is the impression, I apologize for appearing to have said that. I do not believe that is the case.

What I do believe is that someone could reasonably feel threatened by this scenario. That someone could reasonably feel threatened by a large group of people who are voting to take away their lifestyle or hard-earned savings, particularly with the added bonus that analysis says if they don't get those things, violence may erupt.

Does that make sense as a difference?
posted by corb at 7:03 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

corb, it's interesting that you specifically call out Eastern Washington/Western Washington as an example of rural areas being drained to support urban areas.

The exact opposite is the case.

You really need to get your facts straight.
posted by palomar at 7:03 AM on September 18, 2012 [26 favorites]

This is naked and raw power being sold to the highest bidders, and being presented as an act of vengeance and vindication.

I think of myself as a pretty cynical person where it comes to the great and the mighty and still, that video stunned me. For unbridled contempt and entitlement on display, I can't think of its equal. And its contempt for half of this country made me think of this passage from Whittaker Chambers' review of Atlas Shrugged, in National Review, of all places. Read the whole thing, as they say; it's all on topic. But this part is most relevant to the moment:

"In Atlas Shrugged, all this debased inhuman riffraff is lumped as 'looters.' This is a fairly inspired epithet. It enables the author to skewer on one invective word everything and everybody that she fears and hates. This spares her the plaguey business of performing one service that her fiction might have performed, namely: that of examining in human depth how so feeble a lot came to exist at all, let alone be powerful enough to be worth hating and fearing. Instead, she bundles them into one undifferentiated damnation.

'Looters' loot because they believe in Robin Hood, and have got a lot of other people believing in him, too. Robin Hood is the author’s image of absolute evil — robbing the strong (and hence good) to give to the weak (and hence no good). All 'looters' are base, envious, twisted, malignant minds, motivated wholly by greed for power, combined with the lust of the weak to tear down the strong, out of a deep-seated hatred of life and secret longing for destruction and death."

I've called the police, in situations where I would have vastly preferred to be able to call a pay-for-play guy to come over and protect me. Or a friend.

I've never been in an emergency situation where a hired-gun or a friend with a gun was preferable to the police. What you're longing for here isn't a free, secular, civil society, it's tribalism, at best; at worst a mafia.
posted by octobersurprise at 7:04 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

Thankfully for the people of rural Washington State, the Seattle metro area isn't libertarian.
posted by deanklear at 7:05 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

In fact, Mitt Romney himself, despite a reputation for a hard heart for the poor and unfortunate, has given over $18 million in charity for said poor and unfortunate.

From the article corb links:

Of the bunch, the following are Mitt Romney’s top 10 favorite philanthropic targets in terms of total dollars awarded by the Tyler Foundation since 2000:
1. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints: $4,781,000
2. Brigham Young University: $525,000
3. The United Way: $177,000
4. Right to Play: $111,500
5. The George W. Bush Library: $100,000
6. Operation Kids: $85,000
7. Center For Treatment of Pediatric MS: $75,000
8. Harvard Business School: $70,000
9. City Year: $65,000
10. Deseret International: $50,000
Weber State University: $50,000

I love how the "poor and unfortunate" include the Mormon church, BYU, Harvard Business School, and the George W Bush Library. That's like 90% of the donations on this list. What compassion!
posted by leopard at 7:06 AM on September 18, 2012 [20 favorites]

Fair enough, but

What I do believe is that someone could reasonably feel threatened by this scenario. That someone could reasonably feel threatened by a large group of people who are voting to take away their lifestyle or hard-earned savings, particularly with the added bonus that analysis says if they don't get those things, violence may erupt.

Who is taking away your lifestyle?
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 7:07 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

corb, it's interesting that you specifically call out Eastern Washington/Western Washington as an example of rural areas being drained to support urban areas.

The exact opposite is the case.

corb did say "I'm not even saying this is right, or accurate".

If we all agree that 1) money goes from urban areas to rural areas and 2) the people in those rural areas think the opposite is the case, then I guess we're done here.
posted by dfan at 7:08 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

And I say that who doesn't have any hard earned savings, as I invested it all in a small business.
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 7:09 AM on September 18, 2012

This isn't about me saying they are right and the citydwellers are wrong. This is me answering your direct question of how anyone could feel threatened by Obama's policies while still not being a racist.

No, you were the one who said "[m]any people have genuine moral concerns with Obama's presidency that have nothing to do with his race whatsoever," but are now trying to backpedal.

What I do believe is that someone could reasonably feel threatened by this scenario. That someone could reasonably feel threatened by a large group of people who are voting to take away their lifestyle or hard-earned savings, particularly with the added bonus that analysis says if they don't get those things, violence may erupt.

Does that make sense as a difference?

No, because there is no way they could "reasonably" feel threatened. Perhaps its just imperfect wording, but they don't have really have a reason for this, as others have pointed out. They could certainly feel threatened, and many apparently do, but it's more because of sentiment or misinformation than actual reasoning.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:10 AM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

So is he saying that those big businesses who don't pay taxes are also a bunch of moochers in the 47%?

Tell me more.
posted by stormpooper at 7:10 AM on September 18, 2012

If we all agree that 1) money goes from urban areas to rural areas and 2) the people in those rural areas think the opposite is the case, then I guess we're done here.

But pretending that racism isn't a factor in that misperception is just disingenuous. All this talk of "could feel threatened" in some hypothetical case ignores the people who really feel threatened and their real reasons for feeling like that.
posted by howfar at 7:10 AM on September 18, 2012

That someone could reasonably feel threatened by a large group of people who are voting to take away their lifestyle or hard-earned savings, particularly with the added bonus that analysis says if they don't get those things, violence may erupt.

I absolutely agree. I could not agree more! I personally feel incredibly threatened that the Republican Party is threatening to take away my right to marry whomever I choose. I feel deeply personally violated that the Republican Party is threatening to remove my right to reproductive choice. I feel sickened and nauseated that fringe actors of that party have chosen to murder and terrorize doctors and clinicians across the nation who work tirelessly to support my right to reproductive freedom.
posted by elizardbits at 7:11 AM on September 18, 2012 [77 favorites]

tl;dr you best check yourself lest you wreck yourself
posted by elizardbits at 7:13 AM on September 18, 2012 [16 favorites]

Listening to a conservative talk show guy this morning; normally I don't, but the Romney gaffes have turned this activity into a fascinating chance to observe conservative meltdown as it happens.

Anyhow, this morning the guy was talking quite solemnly about why this election was important. Because while he disliked Clinton and Carter, he thought of them as politicians with ideas he happened to disagree with.

This president, however, was a much bigger threat; he was going to "change our very nation into something different."

It doesn't take much thinking to come up with the one thing that most differentiates Obama from previous Democrat presidents. But the way he just left it open like that, never being specific about that one thing and what it was...amazing.
posted by emjaybee at 7:13 AM on September 18, 2012 [13 favorites]

Isn't entitlement to food, housing, and health care something we Americans provide for people in jail?

For now.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 7:15 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Perhaps Mitt's just a big fan of The Thick of It and is paying homage with his very own Romneyshambles.
posted by howfar at 7:15 AM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

In a last ditch attempt to wrest back the narrative and appeal to the disenfranchised, poor, young and minority voters he has offended, while remaining on-message, the Romney campaign has adopted a new theme song.
posted by unSane at 7:18 AM on September 18, 2012

"pitchforks and torches" have been mentioned.

I was suggesting that the super-rich in this country study history for clues as to where their proposed policies have led in the past. The French revolution, the Russian revolution, any of several Mexican revolutions, the list goes on. I don't want to see America destabilized by the sort of extreme polarization that we're heading for with the trickle-up economy that Romney and his ilk would provide for us. It would be a giant loss to us to undergo that sort of upheaval -- I do not recommend or threaten it in any way. I suggest to them that they consider steps to avoid it, such as not allowing the populace to starve.
posted by Devils Rancher at 7:19 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

elizardbits, I agree with you completely. That is an absolutely shitty thing and you are one hundred percent right to feel threatened and upset by it. I certainly do. I just also feel threatened and upset by the Democrats as well. Just because I like some things that Republicans stand for doesn't mean I like everything they do. In fact, sometimes I feel in a shittier position, because I have very, very few even half-decent choices. And every time you vote for the lesser evil, you're still voting for evil.

Who is taking away your lifestyle?

I'm not rural, personally. Things stated above are things I've heard from friends and loved ones. My lifestyle is threatened by Democrats and taxes, but it's more in the inheritance/gift and gun-control areas. I am personally upset by my tax dollars going to things I don't support or believe in, but those aspects don't rise to the level of taking away my lifestyle.
posted by corb at 7:19 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Eh, he'd be better off with Gangnam style.
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 7:20 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I love the mixed messages:

We need to lower income taxes, for everyone! Income tax is bad! Best not to have any income tax at all! But the 47% of people paying no income tax are lazy moochers.

Perhaps they are just ahead of the curve.

Anyway, this argument is the tax equivalent of the way working mothers should be staying at home with their kids because that is destroying the family, but women who stay home all day are just too lazy to get a job.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 7:20 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

I am getting really nervous about the gathering consensus that it's over for Mitt. We have 48 days until the election and a gigantic media complex whose main goal is for the story to not get dull. It will be very tempting for bored reporters & bloggers to create a comeback narrative out of whatever dross they can gather (in the name of being objective) and then let it self-perpetuate. I honestly thought that the desire for a compelling narrative was a huge factor behind the front-runner musical chair game that happened in the Republican primaries.
posted by yarrow at 7:20 AM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

My lifestyle is threatened by Democrats and taxes, but it's more in the inheritance/gift and gun-control areas.

I'm sorry, where are the Democrats actually taking away your guns and inheritance?
posted by zombieflanders at 7:21 AM on September 18, 2012 [17 favorites]

If Democrats are taking away peoples' guns they are pretty bad at it what with the frequent public shootings from individuals with arsenals and whatnot.
posted by shakespeherian at 7:23 AM on September 18, 2012 [15 favorites]

I'm also personally upset about my tax dollars going to things I don't personally support. Like invading foreign countries for funnies. But eventually I got over it, realising that I live in a democratic society where I don't always get my own way.
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 7:23 AM on September 18, 2012 [16 favorites]

As for people piling on Corb, conservatism, from its roots in Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France has basically said screw you rationality, humans are complex and the irrational prejudices of human beings are something that ought to be watered and fed.

Hence its state today--in today's tape, Romney spends all of his time rambling on about what Obama thinks, as if he has mind-reading powers, claiming Obama thinks he can charm the Putins of this world. Obama never said anything like that. Its a ball of Romney's prejudices, just like this 47% thing.

So the same with Corb's belief (or her explanation of other's belief) that rural areas are getting screwed by cities through taxes, when it has been the opposite for the last 80 years. The facts don't ever matter to them. They are not a reality based community--they vote their prejudices. Since the 1880s, the well-off seized the then-dominant GOP and saw it as the vehicle for hitching pro-business, pro-monopoly, low-tariff, low-tax policies to these types of prejudices. The Republicans changed themselves from the party explicitly helping the black man to one thriving on prejudice against them.

And now their Gottdammerung has come--it is hard to be the anti-rationalist party and win. Look at their positions--in a time of extremely low interest rates and plentiful money for investment, but with low consumption, employment and record-low taxation, they claim that even lower taxation will spur the economy because of investment. It is literally non-sensical.

This is the party of irrationalism.
posted by Ironmouth at 7:24 AM on September 18, 2012 [39 favorites]

OWNER
You must mean two other trees. You
had me worried. One of the oldest
trees in Pottersville.

GEORGE
(blankly)
Pottersville? Why, you mean Bedford Falls.

OWNER
I mean Pottersville.
(sharply)
Don't you think I know where I live?
What's the matter with you?
posted by newdaddy at 7:25 AM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

Saying that opposition to Republican policies that would decimate the social safety net that is every darn bit as important in rural America as it is in cities is tantamount to "threatening violence" and destroying the rural way of life (in which, by the way, I have spent my entire adult life immersed as a social scientist who studies rural communities around the US) is "beligerent," in my view, corb.

You really keep digging deeper into a hole of hypocrisy, rather like your candidate.
posted by spitbull at 7:26 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

The New Deal, by the way, was the single best thing that ever happened for rural America in the aggregate, back when that included a lot more people than it does today who were a lot closer to poverty than those communities are today. There would be no rural America as we now know it had the federal government not ridden to its rescue in the 1930s. Period.
posted by spitbull at 7:28 AM on September 18, 2012 [17 favorites]

Oh, come on folks. Romney's said it was inelegantly stated. He can't get any more apologetic or humble than that.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 7:31 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

My lifestyle is threatened by Democrats and taxes.

There is a door, you know. Unless of course you'd be happy with a one-party system, even when that one party isn't yours.
posted by Blue_Villain at 7:32 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm sorry, where are the Democrats actually taking away your guns

I live in NYC. I own guns that live in Washington State. I can't bring them home, because a Democratic-controlled NYC has decided to outlaw them. So technically, yes, they don't object to me owning guns as long as they never enter the city, but they have effectively taken away my use of them.

If I want to apply for a permit, the process is literally years long, and I would have to get entirely new guns and follow NYC's incredibly restrictive process.

This is perhaps outside the scope of the tax discussion, though.
posted by corb at 7:33 AM on September 18, 2012

Well yeah they finally got electricity, 20 odd years after the city dwellers if at all.
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 7:33 AM on September 18, 2012

What do you need them for?
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 7:35 AM on September 18, 2012

Varmits?
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 7:36 AM on September 18, 2012 [11 favorites]

This is perhaps outside the scope of the tax discussion, though.

And doesn't have much to do with Obama who has had a pretty states' rights approach to gun control for the most part and has seen gun and ammo sales go through the roof during his presidency. The down side to states' rights is that they can make independent decisions about this sort of thing the way NY did which can be a bear in New England where some states (including mine) are much more "anything goes" and some other states are much more restrictive and you might drive through three or four of them on your way anywhere.
posted by jessamyn at 7:36 AM on September 18, 2012 [14 favorites]

Is anyone else wondering just how many more tapes are going to released, and how much worse this could get?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:36 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Not a Romney fanboy, but it sounded to me like he just said that poor people vote for candidates who pander to their self-interest ... just like rich people. What's shocking about that?
posted by ZenMasterThis at 7:37 AM on September 18, 2012

It's demonstrably not true?
posted by howfar at 7:38 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

If want to apply for a permit, the process is literally years long, and I would have to get entirely new guns and follow NYC's incredibly restrictive process.

You're totally free to leave New York City.

Evidently, there are things there that you enjoy and find beneficial, though. You've made the rational decision that you'd rather take the benefits of NYC than trade them off to live in Washington State. Your fellow citizens find that establishing restrictions on gun use in the city helps create that beneficial climate which seems to be holding you there.

I wanted to defend my home and country, but I would have vastly preferred to have been able to be part of a private group, funded only by the consent of voluntary participants

I don't want this kind of defense. I don't want you representing me. I have absolutely no access to participation in that system, and that isn't fair to me.

I've called the police, in situations where I would have vastly preferred to be able to call a pay-for-play guy to come over and protect me.

Under what other conditions might a private party call for private "protection?" When they don't like the friends at my barbecue? Don't like the color of the people who moved next door? Don't like the guy their daughter is dating?

I want to resist this discussion because I do think the entire Libertarian philosophy, as has been capably shown in this thread, is unrealistic, morally bankrupt, ahistorical, based in fantasies, and profoundly naive. It is, in fact, kind of a derail except in that it's sort of a pale defense of Romney's way of thinking. But really, it is so hard for me to believe this rhetoric - the words make sense, but the reasoning is so, so poor.
posted by Miko at 7:38 AM on September 18, 2012 [59 favorites]

Would anyone really be surprised at this point if Mitt proposed monetizing the poor by transforming them into some kind of commercially available nutritious snack?

Well, if corporations can be people, why shouldn't Soylent Green?
posted by Strange Interlude at 7:39 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

a Democratic-controlled NYC has decided to outlaw them

NYC gun control laws were put into effect in 1911. The Democratic and Republican parties of 1911 are completely different from the parties of today - the most I would say is that Tammany Hall is keeping you from your guns.

Michael Bloomberg has run as a Republican and as an Independent on the Republican ballot line. If Bloomberg wanted to 'give you your guns back,' he could. The previous mayor of NYC is Rudy Guiliani. He is also a Republican. A Republican is keeping you from your guns. There is no serious Democratic push for federal gun control, and there is no serious Democratic push for state gun control. NYC gun control laws have nothing to do with Democrats vs. Republicans.
posted by muddgirl at 7:41 AM on September 18, 2012 [58 favorites]

Is anyone else wondering just how many more tapes are going to released, and how much worse this could get?

The second release (concerning Israel/Palestine and Iran) that I linked to above seems to suggest that there will be at least one more:

But at this fundraiser, Romney received several queries related to national security—and was afforded the opportunity to tell his financial backers what he does not (and will not) tell the public.

Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if there were several more, since the fundraiser was an hour long and we've only seen ~10 minutes of it.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:42 AM on September 18, 2012

I've called the police, in situations where I would have vastly preferred to be able to call a pay-for-play guy to come over and protect me.

Clearly, you're not on the same side of the 47/53 split as Mittens then, are you?

Because as far as I can tell this is something that all middle class americans making between 200 and 250k a year can and should be providing for themselves.

But not their families, I think. I'm pretty sure he would see that as a handout.
posted by Blue_Villain at 7:42 AM on September 18, 2012

Is anyone else wondering just how many more tapes are going to released, and how much worse this could get?

Obama has been projected to have an Electoral College majority since June, at least. Romney can't even make it close to 270, which is needed to win.

So from where I'm sitting, things have been looking pretty good in the Presidential race. The only bad part is the weight gain from all this popcorn that Romney is providing.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:45 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Paul Ryan's "6-8%" Body Fat? He didn't build that.
posted by drezdn at 7:46 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

I wanted to defend my home and country, but I would have vastly preferred to have been able to be part of a private group, funded only by the consent of voluntary participants

That's called "wanting to be a pirate."
posted by octobersurprise at 7:46 AM on September 18, 2012 [63 favorites]

Well, if corporations can be people, why shouldn't Soylent Green?

Okay, Jesus, spoiler alert.
posted by shakespeherian at 7:46 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Ugh, I immediately regret responding seriously to this derail.
posted by muddgirl at 7:48 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Paul Ryan's "6-8%" Body Fat? He didn't build that.

That one was obvious- people with a body fat percentage that low look like they'd kill you with one blow of their sinewy arm for a twizzler.
posted by winna at 7:49 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

Is anyone else wondering just how many more tapes are going to released, and how much worse this could get?

Corn is milking this, getting all cryptic on Twitter.
posted by Ironmouth at 7:51 AM on September 18, 2012

Doesn't it strike you that the need for such weapons makes a mockery of the fact that you need those weapons. If everything was going good you wouldn't need em. That's not your problem. Your problem is that you need an automatic weapon to feel safe. That's fucked up.
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 7:51 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

And doesn't have much to do with Obama who has had a pretty states' rights approach to gun control for the most part and has seen gun and ammo sales go through the roof during his presidency.

There is no serious Democratic push for federal gun control, and there is no serious Democratic push for state gun control.

I'm not sure I would credit Obama in a positive sense for the gun/ammo sales going through the roof, given that they're mostly people desperation buying because they think he's going to ban things, but I see your point. However, the Democratic Party has just put in a national push to reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban in their party platform.

Paul Ryan's "6-8%" Body Fat? He didn't build that.

I may be going out on a limb here, but I don't think Paul Ryan is the only person in the country who exaggerates about his weight.
posted by corb at 7:52 AM on September 18, 2012

I've called the police, in situations where I would have vastly preferred to be able to call a pay-for-play guy to come over and protect me.

You might want to look into such international getaways as Helmand Province, where the local warlords will be happy to provide the services you require. You may have to sacrifice certain other luxuries to which you have no doubt become accustomed, but hey, that's what freedom is all about, right?
posted by elizardbits at 7:53 AM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

I immediately regret responding seriously to this derail.

Me too. It's become a thread about one person, and it's not Mitt Romney.
posted by Miko at 7:53 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

In 2008, the only income bracket that Obama lost was $50-74,999, 48%-49%. He won half the vote from people with $100,000 and over. McCain won 37% of those earning $15,000-29,999, and 25% under %15,000. Cite.
posted by no regrets, coyote at 7:54 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

However, the Democratic Party has just put in a national push to reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban in their party platform.

You're right, I should have specified non-Assault Rifle gun control, but even then, I don't consider "putting it in their platform" to be "a serious push for."
posted by muddgirl at 7:54 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

To be frank I've always thought the name 'Mitt Romney' was just a little bit too American.
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 7:55 AM on September 18, 2012

Late to the party but...my take is that this will strengthen Romney's base support. Why? Because this could be an exact quote from my Republican friends (when there aren't any blacks or women around). This is what those true believers really believe.

I currently am doing alright, but when I share with these/privileged/lucky/ambitious/job creator folks that - yes - I actually used EIC and WIC and AFDC when I was a young man - you can tangibly feel the disdain. My inclination is to tell them to fuck right off. My kid first was born healthy and strong, we struggled a little, but survived in the early years, and since, I've paid plenty into the pool. Everyone in the game is better off: me, the kid, the family, my community, and society at large. That's what some of these entitlement programs pay for - a better world.

Progressives need to keep pulling to the left just to maintain status quo, much less improve things. Check your registration, send a little cash to Elizabeth Warren, vote (especially in down-ballot races).
posted by j_curiouser at 7:55 AM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

Randy Newman Writes The Last Romney Reboot Campaign Ad
posted by maudlin at 7:57 AM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

I think, to a more watered down perspective, this is essentially the conservative position (and perhaps Romney's position) on many of these things: that private charity is more meaningful because it is voluntary, while still having the ability to be very effective.

Corb: I don't think anybody is disagreeing that private charity is more meaningful because it's voluntary, but the economic reality is private charity isn't enough. Non-profits are currently going through funding shortages and cannot provide anywhere close to an effective amount of service to those in need. In addition, private charity dries up fast in times of recession, which is oftentimes when their services are needed the most. In addition, it's more difficult to rebuild the capital (both machinery and human) than it is to maintain it.

But from my perspective, it would be easy to avoid that by simply not having the state require that everyone be admitted to hospitals. I understand there are moral concerns there for some people, but purely from a pragmatic sense, does this go further?

Well, it depends on how far you want to go with this "no health care" thing. Now, are you talking about just not being admitted to hospitals, or are you going further to say that every visit and treatment is out of pocket from blood transfusions to vaccinations? Because, removing any morality, we'd still have economic and public health concerns. In terms of economics, it would be a bit more like China. Meaning, less mobility, both geographical and social. Since people will be less likely to want to apply to new jobs (since their health care may change or be gone) and families will save more money because the burden will shift on them which means less consumption and investment. From a public health perspective, some people may start opting out of essential treatments and it's possible that diseases and sickness would linger in populations more because people will opt for alternative remedies or just delay treatment.
posted by FJT at 7:57 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Okay folks, quit making it personal and this gun control derail needs to wrap up I guess. Sorry for participating in it. You can all MeMail each other or just wind this down. Thanks.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:01 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm not sure I would credit Obama in a positive sense for the gun/ammo sales going through the roof, given that they're mostly people desperation buying because they think he's going to ban things, but I see your point.

Neither would I, given that Obama can't just "ban things" on a whim. I'd credit the guys who claim that Obama will 'destroy' gun rights and 'erase' the second amendment in his second term even though Obama has loosened gun restrictions during his first term.
posted by ultraviolet catastrophe at 8:01 AM on September 18, 2012

sorry, didn't see jessamyn's comment on preview
posted by ultraviolet catastrophe at 8:02 AM on September 18, 2012

There should be a "Chuck Norris" style lampooning of Paul Ryan and all his claims.
posted by edgeways at 8:03 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Additional anecdata: I have hardcore repub friends who own and run a seriously drought-affected ranch. Over the last two years, they've applied and received a substantial amount of agricultural govt aid. But, no, they aren't moochers leaning on the govt to keep an unprofitable business alive. The cognitive dissonance is astounding.

(For the record, I support and am glad they get the aid. Family farms are the shiz.)
posted by j_curiouser at 8:03 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

You know what worries me? My country people dying in pointless wars for another 8 years for some second rate version of the 'special relationship.' It's not lie you guys are going to come swooping down to save Brisbane; Fuck, I can't really see much point to saving Brisbane, and I have a bunch of family there.
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 8:05 AM on September 18, 2012

high rates of taxation are a relatively modern invention - around the beginning of the past century.

Ah, you mean at the dawn of the Great Impoverishment, when all those Western nations foolishly taxed themselves back to the Dark Ages? When the West swarmed with plagues and suffered through the existential paralysis of stunted intellectual and technological development? When the legacy of Unconsented Extractions was seen in the form of desolate roadways and piles of the bodies of orphaned five-year-olds, worked to death in factories?

I have read accounts of this stain on human history, and I pray that we have the good sense to change course before the Government leaves no witness to its unholy reign of blood and disease.
posted by Rykey at 8:06 AM on September 18, 2012 [11 favorites]

Check your registration, send a little cash to Elizabeth Warren

For anyone who's interested, Princeton Election Consortium professor Sam Wang (read the election blog!) has a list of good "bang for your buck" races via an ActBlue page if you want to make several donations at once.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:06 AM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

I have read accounts of this stain on human history, and I pray that we have the good sense to change course before the Government leaves no witness to its unholy reign of blood and disease.

Income tax was implemented during World War I. 50% of American budget expenditures go towards the military these days.

It would be really, really great to get rid of income tax.
posted by KokuRyu at 8:07 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

my take is that this will strengthen Romney's base support.

Even if this is true—I'm not wholly convinced that it is—is it likely that this base is numerous enough to win the race? I think it isn't and I think the GOP knows that it isn't. If it were, Romney would've been saying these kinds of things in public from the very start.
posted by octobersurprise at 8:09 AM on September 18, 2012

Income tax was implemented during World War I.

The first income tax was instituted in 1862 to fund the Civil War.
posted by muddgirl at 8:10 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

I would think owing a % of your crops/production to the King would be an income tax
posted by edgeways at 8:13 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Income tax was implemented during World War I. 50% of American budget expenditures go towards the military these days.

It would be really, really great to get rid of income tax.

It would be better to get rid of the military expenditure, surely?
posted by unSane at 8:14 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

I have inherited nothing. Everything I earned I earned the old fashioned way: conjuring myself forth from the cosmos to emerge from a privileged, wealthy vagina in a prosperous country during an anomalous boom period.

P.S. poors are pussies!
posted by Senor Cardgage at 8:14 AM on September 18, 2012 [17 favorites]

My point isn't specifically about income tax. It's that the greatest leap in human history--in terms of health, technology, education, wealth, and security--didn't exactly happen without the help of the governments in question.
posted by Rykey at 8:15 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

It would be really, really great to get rid of income tax.

It would be better to get rid of the military expenditure, surely?

We don't have to choose!
posted by corb at 8:15 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Governments have taxed for war since time immemorial. In the old days, they'd just take your food and horses, and possibly your daughter as well.
posted by unSane at 8:15 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Governments have taxed for war since time immemorial.

Not W. He just "borrowed" it from us.
posted by Mental Wimp at 8:17 AM on September 18, 2012

First Brooks, now Bill Kristol. Looks like even the barely-reasonable conservatives might finally be getting sick of Romney.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:18 AM on September 18, 2012

corb: But from my perspective, it would be easy to avoid that by simply not having the state require that everyone be admitted to hospitals. I understand there are moral concerns there for some people, but purely from a pragmatic sense, does this go further?

I'm not sure how much the whole Hippocratic oath thing plays into medical practitioners' lives, really I'm not, but I feel like most people who have chosen a path that's guided by the following words would have problems with this sort of thing. I don't know how nicely that fits into the purely from a pragmatic sense caveat you tacked on there but it seems worth mentioning is all...

...I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure...*

I'm good with those aims, I wish there was more out there just like it actually.
posted by RolandOfEld at 8:18 AM on September 18, 2012

It would be really, really great to get rid of income tax.

No it wouldn't!

Income tax, when structured and used properly, is a great way to tie taxation directly to ability to pay and to remedy systemic imbalances caused by generational wealth hording and the born-on-third-base-syndrome in our society generally. And in our past, military service (for better or worse) was one of the surest paths to social mobility for the truly impoverished, so even from its beginnings income tax has functioned as an economic opportunity-broadening tool in our system.

What would be really great is to use less of the income tax for military purposes, and stop using the military as our primary wealth redistribution mechanism.

Income tax may be a tool we need to learn to use more effectively, but it's a tool we definitely need in our toolbox, IMO. Every other tax scheme is in some sense regressive.
posted by saulgoodman at 8:20 AM on September 18, 2012 [15 favorites]

Written about George W, but the breathtaking lack of empathy Romney exhibited in those comments put me in mind of it. John Prine:

Some humans ain't human
Some people ain't kind
You open up their hearts
And here's what you'll find
A few frozen pizzas
Some ice cubes with hair
A broken Popsicle
You don't want to go there

Also, the Randy Newman song maudlin links to above is worth checking out.
posted by Killick at 8:20 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

I understand there are moral concerns there for some people, but purely from a pragmatic sense, does this go further?

Isn't the death of someone due to denying treatment for a curable disease a pragmatic problem? Or do I misunderstand how you use the word?
posted by Mental Wimp at 8:30 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

LIBERTARIAN: I have a poor understanding of the social contract and I misread the Constitution and I want to keep more of my stuff.

MANY PEOPLE: Yes, but that's not how civil society works because facts, data, arguments, quotes from political philosophers, also Jesus.

LIBERTARIAN: My stuff!

MANY PEOPLE: Clips from Dickens, kabuki version of Tragedy of the Commons, personal appeal from ghostly barbershop quartet of Jefferson, Lincoln, FDR, Eisenhower.

LIBERTARIAN: MINE!

(Please feel free to copy and paste this early in the next libertarianism derail in order to save valuable blue space for other topics.)
posted by gompa at 8:32 AM on September 18, 2012 [175 favorites]

Weird Al predicted all of this
posted by beavil knievel at 8:34 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Here's one of "those people" from Democracy Now this morning:

My name is Stephanie Ware. I work. I make minimum wage. I keep pushing and pushing to improve myself. I have a new job I start this Monday. I get up early in the morning faithfully. I may not have to be to work until ten, but I am out that there at 8 and 7:30, waiting to catch my bus, because I don't be late for anyone.

What am I do to when all I have is the bus?

Please, please don't take our transportation away. That's all we have. Thank you.

Mitt Romney wants to deny government help to neighborhoods that he is too afraid to drive through. If that's your idea of a President, I don't even know what to say.
posted by deanklear at 8:36 AM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

Corb, you might want to dial it back, and go for a walk or something relaxing.
posted by computech_apolloniajames at 8:38 AM on September 18, 2012

Corb, you might want to dial it back, and go for a walk or something relaxing.

Meh, I don't think Corb has gotten heated. I mean, I disagree fundamentally and vehemently with close to everything she's said in this thread, but she's not doing anything other than asserting her position calmly and is in fact ignoring some of the more personal comments directed at her.
posted by sallybrown at 8:44 AM on September 18, 2012 [30 favorites]

Corb: But from my perspective, it would be easy to avoid [emergency care being used as an alternative to preventative care] by simply not having the state require that everyone be admitted to hospitals.

Yes -- you're correct. If all moral and ethical and pragmatic discussions are put aside, it is cheaper to not allow dying people into the hospital for emergency care. This type of situation has come up with the somewhat infamous for-pay fire department in TN.

I understand there are moral concerns there for some people, but purely from a pragmatic sense, does this go further?

We'd still have to charge someone for the corpse disposal. In all seriousness, what you're describing is a "penny-wise, pound foolish" approach to keeping a civilization running. Having a reasonably healthy population is just as essential to the smooth operation of a modern economy as consistent law enforcement and property rights. Maintaining those things (all of them, not just health) takes money and resources.

Building a system in which only those who already have resources can enjoy the basic societal services is a bad idea from a pragmatic standpoint. Even if you don't believe that there is any moral responsibility to care for people because they're people, look at society as an incubator for economic innovators. Healthy, educated, well-fed people come up with better ideas and execute more successfully. The more of them we have, the better we do in the long term. Those who have not already achieved wealth are also the least likely to challenge the status quo and attempt innovative, creative/destructive shifts: they aren't trying to defend an already-built business.
posted by verb at 8:44 AM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

Frankly I've always been a bit puzzled why Libertarians (at least the more vocal Libertarians) seem to favor Republicans. Especially in the modern age. On social grounds it makes no sense, - Restrict freedom of choice, - More religion in government - Denial of civil rights to people who are gay, - Attempt at limitations on voting rights - Strong subset of racism - Long protracted engagements in wars

And fiscally it all seems to hinge on some belief that at some point they will be rich enough that the government will want a bigger slice of their income, because there is no freaking way Republicans as a party are anything like fiscally conservative (GWB was certain not, GHWB raised taxes, Reagan saw a huge explosion of federal spending, who the fuck knows about Ford, Nixon was more liberal than 85% of the current Democratic party... and if you have to go further back then that frankly you are not talking about the Republican party of today in any shape or form other than the same name. I would argue there is no such thing as a fiscal conservative in government, it is just a matter of where you want to spend money.

So why do Libertarians prefer Republicans? And why do so many republicans pretend to be Libertarians.
posted by edgeways at 8:46 AM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

I'm not sure which part of "don't make this personal" is confusing for people but this thread will go better if everyone helps. And again, please consider taking side conversation to email with the people who you are specifically talking to so that this thread remains available to everyone. MetaTalk is an option.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:46 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Those who have not already achieved wealth are also the least likely to challenge the status quo--

Yeah, just reverse that. Bad editing job. Sorry!
posted by verb at 8:47 AM on September 18, 2012

Okay, so if there are more videos out there...what is Mitt going to say on them? He's already said "47% of the country are worthless p00rs" and "Israeli/Palestinian conflict: kick the ball down the road," so what is next on the conservative hit list? "Pay for your own birth control, whores"?
posted by sallybrown at 8:52 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

So why do Libertarians prefer Republicans? And why do so many republicans pretend to be Libertarians.

Wish I had a good answer for this question. This recent episode of Point of Inquiry addresses this.
posted by Kitty Stardust at 8:54 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

I think that last has been covered pretty well, sallybrown.
posted by Mister_A at 8:54 AM on September 18, 2012

So why do Libertarians prefer Republicans?

Because libertarians don't really want to live in a libertarian society, they just want to masturbate to the notion that if a libertarian society were to actually exist, their superior physical and intellectual faculties would allow them to rise to the top of the heap and look down their noses at the stupid, infantile 'inferiors'. Basically, 16-year-olds.
posted by gagglezoomer at 8:54 AM on September 18, 2012 [21 favorites]

I was thinking about this. My mother voted for Obama. Romney is going Yo Mama on me!

Yo Mama is so democrat she won't take personal responsibility for nobody!

Yo Mama is so democrat she expect the guvment to pay her! Shee-it!
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 8:54 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Corb, you might want to dial it back, and go for a walk or something relaxing.

Meh, I don't think Corb has gotten heated. I mean, I disagree fundamentally and vehemently with close to everything she's said in this thread, but she's not doing anything other than asserting her position calmly and is in fact ignoring some of the more personal comments directed at her.

I agree--she's been calm cool, collected and wrong. That doesn't mean she needs to dial anything back.
posted by Ironmouth at 8:55 AM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

Okay, so if there are more videos out there...what is Mitt going to say on them?

Full-on birther.
Something about guns / rise up in rebellion.

Damn, where's Johnny Carson when we need him?
posted by Lemurrhea at 8:55 AM on September 18, 2012

But from my perspective, it would be easy to avoid that by simply not having the state require that everyone be admitted to hospitals. I understand there are moral concerns there for some people, but purely from a pragmatic sense, does this go further?

Except sick people make other people sick. It is the basic mechanics of how disease and infections spread. If you want to be healthy, you must ensure the sick are treated. Otherwise they become super efficient incubators and carriers of disease and will make you and everyone else sick.

Many Americans, particularly in certain areas, (especially rural ones) have been frustrated at what they see as taking money out of their community and putting it into other communities.

Except that their underlying assertion about money being taken from their rural community to go to some other community isn't true. Just look at the tax flows.
posted by humanfont at 8:58 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

So why do Libertarians prefer Republicans?

I think, honestly, some of the reactions that have been appearing in this thread are kind of a good example of why many Libertarians prefer Republicans - because Republicans are the only ones giving them any kind of seat at the table, and talking about the points they are in agreement on more than the ones they disagree.

When you show up, say, "I'm a libertarian," and are immediately met with invective, it's kind of hard to feel welcome in a party. Even if you agree on a lot of positions - like the anti-war, and the reproductive choice, and the "marry whoever you want." It tends to get heated in a way I still don't fully understand.

This is one of the reasons I think we need an actual third party in this country. (Or a fourth party! Or a fifth party!)

I agree--she's been calm cool, collected and wrong. That doesn't mean she needs to dial anything back.

Thanks, guys. I disagree with you politically, but I do have this crazy idea that if we talk about stuff and listen we can understand each other and better world and blah blah blah. :)
posted by corb at 8:59 AM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

Dear David Corn, I know you are busy promoting your book, but you should just post all the videos now.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:59 AM on September 18, 2012

Dear David Corn, I know you are busy promoting your book, but you should just post all the videos now.

What? No. Let there be a steady leak all the way through October. Don't give the media a chance to let stuff go down the memory hole because a Kardashian popped out a baby. Every day that Romney has to defend himself is one day less he has to attack Obama.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:02 AM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

From way upthread:

> We owe it to ourselves to invest in every last citizen, because some kid who is starving right now may be the one. We should educate everyone who wants an education for the same reason.

I can see that logic - but wouldn't that tend to apply only to merit-based scholarships and suchlike?

A kid won't ever be able to compete for a merit-based scholarship if he can't get the application mailed to him becuase he's homeless, or if he starves to death before he starts high school because his family doesn't have food.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:03 AM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

howfar, see #RomneyShambles
posted by memebake at 9:03 AM on September 18, 2012

Romney's said it was inelegantly stated.

i can't believe he thinks there was an elegant way to say it
posted by pyramid termite at 9:04 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Eh, perhaps Libertarianism is difficult to take seriously in political arenas because it doesn't work? Show me one place where all the good free people willingly give up their weekends building roads, give so much to charity that no person dies for lack of basic medical care, work out their boundary issues with words instead of war. Where all the drugs are legal without those messy social consequences. Show me the country that prospers under no government.

I'm all for every social liberty, but complex human groups just don't work like that.
posted by Kitty Stardust at 9:05 AM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

I think, honestly, some of the reactions that have been appearing in this thread are kind of a good example of why many Libertarians prefer Republicans - because Republicans are the only ones giving them any kind of seat at the table, and talking about the points they are in agreement on more than the ones they disagree.

When I hear people talk about dismantling the country that generations of my family has shed blood, sweat, and tears to build up, I get mad. And make no mistake about it, that's what libertarians advocate: the dismantling of America.
posted by entropicamericana at 9:05 AM on September 18, 2012 [20 favorites]

Thanks, guys. I disagree with you politically, but I do have this crazy idea that if we talk about stuff and listen we can understand each other and better world and blah blah blah. :)

I'm sure it's just a coincidence that this idea basically guarantees that any conversation you participate in will wind up becoming all about you explaining and restating your beliefs over and over again.
posted by hermitosis at 9:05 AM on September 18, 2012 [13 favorites]

So why do Libertarians prefer Republicans? And why do so many republicans pretend to be Libertarians.

The Republican party deliberately provides pandering narratives that sound good to libertarians. Mostly on the fiscal conservatism front: many libertarians take personal responsibility with a good deal of emotional investment, and are proud of whatever extent they have their personal finances' debt structures under control. With the tendency to discount the importance or even reality of larger social structures, they project their understanding of their own individual structures to understand larger more complex ones. Therefore, the mind-boggling numbers (and let's face it, trillions of dollars are pretty boggling even and especially if you're not innumerate) involved in government debt are categorically bad, debt happens when you outspend your income, and therefore there's strong appeal in narratives that we desperately need to get government spending under control. (This tends to break down in notions of how to go about it, usually in "defense" in conjunction with the authoritarian streak that runs through a lot of libertarians, and the extent to which they respect or geek out about the capacity for projection of force, but consistency isn't the point here.)

Because it's ideologically based (it got mentioned up yonder somewhere there's definite parallels to prosperity theology, and yeah), having friendly pandering narratives secures some loyalty straightaway. It doesn't actually matter all that much that the demonstrable actions of the party don't match that narrative--the GOP does not and has never cared about actual fiscal responsibility in the real world sense of rationally balancing revenue and expenditures, treating debt structures as sometimes dangerous but useful tools instead of a priori bad, using cost-benefit evidence-based analysis of what rational budgets would entail etc, but they say they do so there you go. So the libertarian votes Republican because they at least partially say things they like to hear. The brighter ones realize there's more than little cognitive dissonance involved in that sort of thing, so you get the uncomfortable things about lesser-evils before changing the subject.
posted by Drastic at 9:06 AM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

That's called "wanting to be a pirate."

Unlike Republicans, pirates knew the value of providing health coverage.
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:07 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

you are saying that people like my grandmother

Right, or that people like 3 of my grandparents and my father shouldn't have had access to the benefits of their military service, including the GI bill programs that got my grandfather his master plumber's license and allowed him to own a home and his own businesses, and my other grandparents their home, and my father his engineering training and access to home ownership and now VA care, all of which combined brought my family from out of the rural and NYC-urban working (starving, in the 30s) class to a middle class existence, with its stability, access to education, safety and health, from which I still benefit today. Now I'm in graduate school, making good money, paying my taxes. Happily. I received opportunities from my country, and my family made sacrifices to be able to take advantage of them, and I'm very grateful that my talents have been able to find expression thanks to all this.

It is, after all, kind of personal when you get right down to it.
posted by Miko at 9:07 AM on September 18, 2012 [21 favorites]

When you show up, say, "I'm a libertarian," and are immediately met with invective, it's kind of hard to feel welcome in a party.

In my opinion it's because while Libertarians and Democrats (or, maybe liberals is a more accurate term (or maybe I'm just kidding myself that those two are different)) share some of the same end goals, they hold opposing world views. The central philosophy that drives my life calls for a world where each of us works to better life for others at the same time we work to better life for ourselves, and the only way to do that in an organized, relatively cost-effective, and non-discriminatory fashion is through a democratically-elected government. The idea that each of us is and basically should be in this alone, free to help others privately but not required to bear his or her responsibility as a citizen to care for others is so strange to me that I find it disturbing and harmful, and it's hard for me not to get angry about Libertarian arguments that run along these lines.

(I sincerely don't mean this to be one of those false set-up arguments where I'm basically describing myself as a "good" person and labeling all Libertarians as selfish, so I hope it doesn't read that way.)
posted by sallybrown at 9:07 AM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

I knew that this would turn into corb vs. the world.

Look:

I really hate how there's this expectation that you have to cater to the MFing mob in order to get elected in this country.

Singapore. It's a country. You can move there. It's run by a wealthy connected elite for the good of "the people."

The USA is a democracy. Don't like that the politicians need to look out for the well being of everyone, at least in name? Tough luck. That mob you refer to is your fellow people and citizens who you are, believe it or not, responsible for. I realize that you have personal reasons why you basically don't like voters, but please don't project your trauma on to the political system of the rest of the country.
posted by deanc at 9:09 AM on September 18, 2012 [22 favorites]

Also there's something about the Libertarian insistence on fighting all forms of "coercion" (i.e. taxes, inconvenient laws) that reminds me of a child screaming "I didn't ask to be born!" upon being notified that she/he too has obligations to the family.

You may not have asked, but here you are and this is what it takes to make things function, so take out the trash.
posted by Kitty Stardust at 9:10 AM on September 18, 2012 [24 favorites]

Okay, so if there are more videos out there...what is Mitt going to say on them?

The Romney-cocoon will split asunder, revealing the adult form of the candidate. Wealthy donors will minister tenderly to their new Romney-queen, feeding it stacks of $100 bills that it will chew into a thick paste for building its nest. As confused elderly, lured with the promise that things can go back to being the way they always were, are led into the room for sacrifice, the video goes dark. It ends with 16 minutes of chanting and horrible, horrible lip-smacking sounds.
posted by logicpunk at 9:10 AM on September 18, 2012 [41 favorites]

When I hear people talk about dismantling the country that generations of my family has shed blood, sweat, and tears to build up, I get mad. And make no mistake about it, that's what libertarians advocate: the dismantling of America.

I hear you, but do you understand on a fundamental level that this is what many of the Opposition probably believes about your party? No matter what party or political position this is. This is exactly what Republicans think about Democrats, and vice versa. This is what everyone thinks about everyone.

In my opinion it's because while Libertarians and Democrats (or, maybe liberals is a more accurate term (or maybe I'm just kidding myself that those two are different)) share some of the same end goals, they hold opposing world views. The central philosophy that drives my life calls for a world where each of us works to better life for others at the same time we work to better life for ourselves, and the only way to do that in an organized, relatively cost-effective, and non-discriminatory fashion is through a democratically-elected government.

I think that actually members of probably all parties would argue that everyone works to better life for others at the same time as they work to better life for themselves - but I think you're right in that people have different ideas about how "the only way to do that" is, or even about what "better life" is, or who the "others" that they're bettering are.
posted by corb at 9:11 AM on September 18, 2012

When you show up, say, "I'm a libertarian," and are immediately met with invective, it's kind of hard to feel welcome in a party.

We have vastly different and opposing political philosophies. There is really very little such think as genuine "libertarians" (in the sense of being anarchists). There are basically a lot of Republicans who would like to smoke pot legally and wish that the legal system was more heavily tilted in favor of property. So when I hear "libertarian", I generally hear, "dude willing to support wars because he likes tax cuts but doesn't want me to think he's a fundamentalist evangelical."
posted by deanc at 9:12 AM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

I dunno, I certainly don't think Democrats see Republicans as wanting to dismantle America in the same way as Libertarians do. And the same is probably true of most Republicans for Democrats.
posted by ominous_paws at 9:13 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think libertarianism contains within it some good elements, if you focus mainly on the social aspects there is some common ground. Where it falls down, and I suspect this is the case for most people here as well, is when we start talking fiscal libertarians, to me that just seems flat out based on selfishness and a willingness to let other people (and whole systems) suffer (and die) as long as individuals get to remain individual.
The Republican party completely ignores the first part, but seems to use the political rhetoric of individualism, in regards to taxation, to try and convince people that ... what...? The Republicans are in favor of less taxes, do you think your life will be truly better without the infrastructure, education, employment, protection, environmental management... taxation provides? because that is just... I dunno... a really friggen huge disconnect.

A seat at the table sounds good, I see how people would be excited about that, but your seat is also being used to legitimize discrimination and a whole host of really regressive social initiatives. Is some vague promise of less regulation and less taxation worth culled voting records, back ally abortions and the continuation of civil rights repression? Is it really worth that? Because Barney Frank said something about those Log cabin republicans that might be applicable.
posted by edgeways at 9:14 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

As confused elderly, lured with the promise that things can go back to being the way they always were, are led into the room for sacrifice, the video goes dark. It ends with 16 minutes of chanting and horrible, horrible lip-smacking sounds.

What have you done to him? What have you done to his eyes?
posted by shakespeherian at 9:15 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

I hear you, but do you understand on a fundamental level that this is what many of the Opposition probably believes about your party?

In what way would you say that "the Opposition" sees Democrats as "dismantling America?"
posted by Miko at 9:17 AM on September 18, 2012

I hear you, but do you understand on a fundamental level that this is what many of the Opposition probably believes about your party? No matter what party or political position this is. This is exactly what Republicans think about Democrats, and vice versa. This is what everyone thinks about everyone.

Libertarians and neocons advocate dismantling New Deal Programs that are now about 70 years old, give or take. In my eyes, that is like advocating for the restoration of slavery in the 1930s. That is a lot different than Eisenhower Republicanism. The modern GOP is a dangerous, reactionary party.
posted by entropicamericana at 9:19 AM on September 18, 2012 [12 favorites]

Folks, please take the "talk to corb about Libertarianism" derail and questioning to MeMail. She's been totally decent here, but the blog structure makes this seem like a pile-on and it's far afield from the topic here.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:21 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

Indeed, the Democrats have really become the conservative party in the sense that they're the ones fighting to maintain the longstanding public sector that enabled so many great national achievements -- the Hoover Dam, Social Security, rural electrification, the Interstate Highway System, the Internet, men on the moon, etc. Whereas the GOP are the ones now pushing for sweeping change in service of an increasingly radical ideology.
posted by Rhaomi at 9:23 AM on September 18, 2012 [14 favorites]

Thanks, Jessamyn. I am totally up for Memail if anyone is actually curious/wants to discuss offline. If you are in NYC I may even extend it to beer if I ever actually get out for a meetup ever.
posted by corb at 9:23 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

There nothing if not quick:

Obama Ad about the 47% "gaffee"
posted by edgeways at 9:24 AM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

In what way would you say that "the Opposition" sees Democrats as "dismantling America?"

I subscribe to a lot of conservative and Republican mailing lists, news feeds, etc. I would say that they see Democrats as "dismantling America" in every conceivable fashion. It is an article of faith that Democrats are in the process of tearing apart the fundamental core of the country that has made or society strong, effective, and good.

I disagree with them, obviously, but corb's point is a fair one. MetaFilter has a lot of varied and interesting perspectives on a lot of things, but there's no disputing that there aren't a lot of conservative and/or libertarian voices when political issues come up. I don't think it's fair to say that she's "making the conversation about her" or whatever when she's just engaging in the same kind of discussion that everyone else does on MeFi. She's just the outlier in the group with a particular viewpoint, and she's discussing these issues with a degree of clarity and respect that I would hope we can all muster.

I think the ideas she advocates would result in the destruction of civilization as we know it, but then, that's what makes the discussion so interesting!
posted by verb at 9:24 AM on September 18, 2012 [12 favorites]

I didn't love the Obama ad, admittedly because I think I'm further to the left and don't have to worry about being misquoted and such.

Good that they're playing a whole bunch of the actual clip. Get it out there. But the reaction comments were kind of bland. "Out of touch", "I wouldn't vote for him", etc. I wanted something more like "of course people are entitled to food, I volunteer at my church's soup kitchen for that reason."

Although the dude with the kid talking about class division as a bar for the presidency was good.
posted by Lemurrhea at 9:29 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

romney's responsibility map
posted by changeling at 9:30 AM on September 18, 2012 [12 favorites]

Who doesn’t pay taxes, in eight charts
posted by zombieflanders at 9:32 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Where I work I see a lot of people who are applying for government programs (especially ones they don't financially qualify for) who have enough resources to make sure they get extra social services, all the while often decrying Obama specifically and Democrats generally. These people pay almost no taxes, but live in upscale gated communities, have nice late model cars, often have savings & investments that make my Humanities mind boggle, yet they are "indigent" on paper so that the government will pay for their doctors, home health aides, etc. These people are surely squarely in that demonized 46%, but don't recognize that fact. For some reason, it's only government assistance when it goes to brown people.
posted by Kitty Stardust at 9:32 AM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

Where Libertarian philosophy fails is that it cannot allow for a power vacuum. The notion that if you got rid of government people would make good choices has never been borne out historically. There are a few reasons for this.

First - governments will form. Sometimes they are cultural (no white shoes after labor day!) sometimes they are religious (No meat on Fridays!) sometimes they are economic (if you don't kick up to Tony Soprano, you're gonna get your knees broken).

You can never be free of government.

Second. Individually optimal decisions can have sum total sub-optimal outcomes. Littering, for example. Or exiting a burning building. Often, it is better to have a higher level of organization than the individual.

Third, the conceit that rational self interest actually exists. Nobody is perfectly rational all the time, and most people aren't terribly rational all that often. And then they can mis-assess what their best interests actually are.

I have never met the libertarian who even acknowledged these effects. But they are real - any cursory study of human history will provide ample examples of the failures of libertarian policy.

But you know what they say about learning from history....
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 9:32 AM on September 18, 2012 [11 favorites]

Wow, that Romney's Responsibility Map image is fierce.
posted by overglow at 9:37 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

I have to say, I am not a big fan of how the Obama campaign is using the 47% quote. It’s really obvious he’s talking about the fact that he’s not going to go after their votes. It’s sort of a “you didn’t build that” rehash, which is silly.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:39 AM on September 18, 2012

Just like clinging to guns and religion, right?

Obama's "guns and religion" comment was also made at a fundraiser, but the difference is that Obama was trying to explain white Republican working class voters to the limousine liberals who would sneer at them, whereas Romney really has nothing but contempt for any voting bloc who doesn't vote for him.
posted by jonp72 at 9:39 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

It’s really obvious he’s talking about the fact that he’s not going to go after their votes.

Romney said that he'll never be able to convince them to take responsibility for their lives.
posted by shakespeherian at 9:40 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

It tends to get heated in a way I still don't fully understand.

IME, because libertarianism, especially libertarianism of the purist variety, manages to combine pie-in-the-sky utopian schemes with a complete indifference to the effect those schemes might have on people in the real world.

Regards the topic, even Matt Welch writing at Reason thinks Romney blew it, even from a libertarian point of view:

"[Romney's description of the 47%] is economic determinism at its worst, going against the very message the Republican Party was trying to sell to the world during its quadrennial national convention last month. Over and over again, we heard speakers there talk about how their immigrant grandparents came to this country, worked hard, built "that," never asked for a handout, and as a result their descendants have enjoyed the American Dream of ever-upward mobility. What the 53/47 dividing line says, to the direct contrary, is that income status is a permanent political condition, defrocking all Americans of agency and independent thought.

Most people at some point will be part of the 47 percent (indeed, nearly most already are). When my friends and I were comparatively poor, as people often are in their 20s and early 30s, we (for the most part) didn't "believe" that we were "victims," didn't "believe the government has a responsibility" to care for us, and didn't vote for Democratic political candidates "no matter what." We mostly took personal responsibility and care for our lives, and acted according to our idiosyncratic individual values and whims.

I should theoretically be the target audience for this stuff. I never took out a federally guaranteed student loan, never enjoyed the mortgage-interest deduction; I worry all the time about government spending and entitlements, and I am not unfamiliar with the looter/moocher formulation. But this kind of reductionism does not reflect individualism (as David Brooks charges), it rejects individualism, by insisting that income tax is destiny. It judges U.S. residents not as humans but as productive (or unproductive) units. (Though as long as people are thinking that way, is there any category of resident less taker-y than illegal immigrants with fake Social Security cards who file income taxes?) And it prematurely valorizes one class of government-gobbling Americans while prematurely writing off another."

posted by octobersurprise at 9:40 AM on September 18, 2012 [11 favorites]

Romney said that he'll never be able to convince them to take responsibility for their lives.

Sure, but that’s not the same as saying they don’t matter.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:43 AM on September 18, 2012

When you show up, say, "I'm a libertarian," and are immediately met with invective, it's kind of hard to feel welcome in a party. Even if you agree on a lot of positions - like the anti-war, and the reproductive choice, and the "marry whoever you want." It tends to get heated in a way I still don't fully understand.

Let me just quote you and try to explain.

Well, properly speaking I'm a libertarian rather than a Republican, but no, I don't think people are entitled to food, housing and health care. Can you explain why you do? To me, those are things that can be earned, and are valuable because of that.

What you have just said is that you think that at least two of my friends should have been allowed to literally starve to death years ago (before I met them in both cases) due to a mix of mental health issues and bad luck. What you have just said is that some of my friends should have been made homeless in the last year. What you have just said is that my little sister should have never received the heart surgery she had three months ago.

You are literally saying that some of my friends should be dead, my little sister should be dead, and a couple of my other friends should be sleeping on the streets, in one case either with young children also on the streets or being forcibly removed from her children.

You literally want my real life friends and family dead. And you wonder why things get heated?
posted by Francis at 9:43 AM on September 18, 2012 [81 favorites]

It’s really obvious he’s talking about the fact that he’s not going to go after their votes.

In case it's not clear, Romney literally said

I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

posted by muddgirl at 9:43 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I love the fountain pen nib shirt that the gentleman is wearing in the above linked above linked video. That is all.
posted by RolandOfEld at 9:43 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

It is an article of faith that Democrats are in the process of tearing apart the fundamental core of the country that has made or society strong, effective, and good.

I understand that's the rhetoric, but I would like to hear the specifics. What, specifically, are Democrats supposed to be tearing apart?

Because when I think of "dismantling," I think of Republicans seeking to dismantle the social structures and systems built over the 20th century that have been responsible for the US becoming a leading nation. There is something there to dismantle, if you want to.

What is it Democrats could be described as "dismantling?" What programs or structures are they imagined to be taking apart?

I suspect "traditional marriage" is one thing on the list, but most Democrats who favor marriage equality aren't trying to dismantle it at all - just ending discrimination.
posted by Miko at 9:43 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

corb I haven't said this publicly, and it's pretty uncomfortable. I have ovarian cancer. We've known about it since May, which is when I started searching for a doctor where I was who would take an uninsured self pay patient. None would, except one who could schedule an appointment for the end of June. I have had no biopsy and haven't been able to see a gynecologist in that time.

My yearly exam (that I paid for! In January!) didn't cause my provider at that time to be concerned a gyn issue, despite my having brought a list of concerns that, in hindsight, fit. I thought it might be Hashimoto's Thyroiditis because that runs in my family and is pretty easy to treat. I planned to move to be closer to family and to live with my boyfriend. I did legwork in advance of the move and had a job lined up. The job disappeared when I moved. I had set up a doctor appointment for post move. Then I didn't have a job (as you may recall). So I needed to be seen in the county health clinic, and I felt fairly urgently, since this is cancer. So the new doctor tells me that my pap is from January and that more than 6 months is too old for a referral to a gynecologist,m according to the rules. I have to get new pap smear and new bloodwork. For $100. Which I don't have because I don't have a job. So then my phone gets turned off, because I don't have a job. Finally, in August, I get a job, and make an appointment for the repeat tests. 4 days before the repeat tests, I find myself in excruciating pain. Cannot stand up, crying, terrified. I've been warned that this might be my ovary being twisted by the weight of the tumor. Cutting off the blood supply and causing the tissue to die. A dead ovary is not something you leave in an abdomen.

But I've had worse pain. I describe this as an 8 out of 10. I want to lie down. Why? Because I can't pay. And it's a Sunday afternoon. I cannot go get an ultrasound on my own to check out if it's twisted, if I go anywhere, it's the ER. And I think of the ER as a place for people in dire straits- gun shots and heart attacks. I don't think of the ER as the place to go for cancer. I don't think of myself as a person going to the ER for medical care. Also, I have recently gotten a job. A job that offered health insurance which would cover a yearly max of two days of hospitalization! They got an Affordable Care Act exemption on the minimum amount of coverage required. Because they asked nicely.. A job I don't want to lose by missing the next day. The pain might pass. Pain usually passes, right? Just give me some advil and this will pass after a nap.

And my boyfriend is frustrated. He says to me, "I'm tired of this, and sometimes I think I'm more tired of this than you are." He grew up with money. He is used to these kinds of things just getting taken care of. You go to the doctor, the bill comes later, insurance pays it and the rest you just write a check for. He felt like if I just wanted health care badly enough, I could just go out and get it. And if this were a friend of mine, I'd tell her to go.

So. We go to the ER. I get the ultrasounds that show there is no twisting. They offer no explanation for why I might be in so much pain. Because this is not defined as a surgical emergency, they send me home with prescriptions for pain and anti nausea medications. The pain continues to come in waves for days, and the doctor who collects my pap sample looks at my date of last period and tells me the pain is from ovulating (about 30 seconds after we review that I am still taking my birth control pills that prevent ovulation). I've ovulated before. I know from mittelschmertz. This is not ovulation.

A few days later I call work back to check in, because the pain is finally starting to be manageable without the narcotics they prescribed (because they could tell I was really in pain). I'm told by the assistant manager that I'm not being put back on the schedule. Not because of the health thing. But because I'm just not a good fit with the team.

A few days after that, the manager of the place calls my boyfriend's cell, doesn't leave her name or a number or her connection to me and just says "bilabial told me she's in the emergency room, you're her emergency contact person, can you have her call me." So I'm confused, but we talk and it turns out I'm unfired because she didn't know he'd fired me. I go in the next day to work. A week after that I'm fired for real because she doesn't like my attitude while she slams around the place complaining that she can't train us to do our jobs better because we suck so bad at our jobs. The workplace was toxic, but I needed the money, so I was desperate to stay.

And you're going to tell me that you don't think you want to contribute $200 or $20 or even $2 a year so that folks in my situation can get health care? That my inability to get a job in this crappy economy is my fault? That my not having family to pay my medical bills ought to doom me to slow death by cancer or necrotic tissue? That the pain of this tumor (which even before the ER was constantly at a 4 or a 5, making walking or even standing up uncomfortable most of the time, and making me cry when I am alone) is something I should just endure while I continue to search for a way to pay to have it taken out and investigated? That if I need chemo or radiation I should just die instead?

Thanks. I'll keep that in mind while I'm trying to find a doctor to cut this cancer out of my guts. If I'm lucky, I'll find one who will bother to see if they can leave the ovary. But I can't be picky. Taking the whole ovary is faster, and a few people have reminded me that you only need one....

I am one of the faces of this election. Getting and keeping a job is nearly impossible as a person with depression. Add cancer and pain and a crappy economy and folks who are all about the bootstraps and just work harder and just think yourself out of your mental illness and just find a way to pay for surgery that isn't leaning on the public dole and what is this, I don't even.
posted by bilabial at 9:44 AM on September 18, 2012 [240 favorites]

It’s really obvious he’s talking about the fact that he’s not going to go after their votes.

That's part of the message, true. But he also confounds Obama's 47% of the voting base with the 47% paying no federal income taxes -- really muddy, that. Too bad the Obama video cut off the sentence right after that recording: "I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

That contempt is ugly and thoroughly deserves to be called out.
posted by maudlin at 9:44 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Sure, but that’s not the same as saying they don’t matter.

"[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

If that's not saying "they don't matter", then it's a very serious misstatement indeed. I think it's very reasonable to parse this to mean, "I can't help people who won't help themselves."
posted by muddgirl at 9:45 AM on September 18, 2012

> Romney said that he'll never be able to convince them to take responsibility for their lives.

Sure, but that’s not the same as saying they don’t matter.

Technically, no. But it's actually kind of worse.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:46 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I get what you guys are saying. I just think the cut out map is not very well done.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:47 AM on September 18, 2012

Clint, Libya, '47%': It doesn't get any rougher than this.
posted by ericb at 9:51 AM on September 18, 2012

I can see that logic - but wouldn't that tend to apply only to merit-based scholarships and suchlike?

And do you even know who gets the bulk of "merit" scholarships?

Middle class or well to do white kids. Who had the background of lots of books in the home and connections to science museums and field trips and an encouragement of their curiosity. And enough food on the table that their tiny elementary school brains could focus on learning instead of worrying about hunger.
posted by bilabial at 9:52 AM on September 18, 2012 [11 favorites]

corb I haven't said this publicly, and it's pretty uncomfortable. I have ovarian cancer.

I am trying to adhere to Jessamyn's request that we stop the libertarian derail, but I didn't want you to think I hadn't read this. I am so sorry that you have cancer. I hope that you make it out okay, and I'm sorry you had a terrible-boss work experience on top of that.
posted by corb at 9:56 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

I understand that's the rhetoric, but I would like to hear the specifics. What, specifically, are Democrats supposed to be tearing apart?

Because when I think of "dismantling," I think of Republicans seeking to dismantle the social structures and systems built over the 20th century that have been responsible for the US becoming a leading nation. There is something there to dismantle, if you want to.

What is it Democrats could be described as "dismantling?" What programs or structures are they imagined to be taking apart?

The rhetoric usually falls into three categories. I'll outline them as I hear them -- there's usually a LOT of densely packed assumption in each of these tracks, but they come up so frequently that I think it's safe to say that they're consistent themes.

Democrats are trying to dismantle our nation's military, ceding our position of strength and influence in the wider world.
Democrats are trying to dismantle the economic and social assumptions about success, perseverance, and equality that have made our country great. By extracting wealth from those who work hard and succeed, then giving it to those who do not, they create perverse incentives and threaten the "engine" of American society.
Democrats are trying to dismantle the moral and societal structures that made America cohesive and strong for centuries. ("America is great because she is good," etc.)

None of those are explicit policy objections. Rather, they're a framework for understanding Democratic and progressive policy -- a way of perceiving the things you describe as "Building up a society" as tearing down that same society. That kind of fundamental semantic disconnect is really troubling to me, and I think that we're in a very dangerous place as a country. High-stakes political campaigns, where most incentives favor fight-til-you-win give-no-ground rhetoric, are the only time we seem to have society-wide discussions about these issues. That all but ensures the underlying disconnects get treated as a feature rather than a bug.
posted by verb at 9:58 AM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

David Brooks: Thurston Howell Romney.
posted by ericb at 10:01 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

David Brooks: Thurston Howell Romney.

Holy shit! David Brooks says something intelligent.
posted by Mental Wimp at 10:06 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

The contempt here for libertarianism is the same as the contempt those arguing for a flat earth. Reason, evidence and science are not going to change the libertarian's positions. It is hard not to be frustrated when things like reason, evidence, history and science are proscribed from the discussion and instead we are left with a litany of unproven assertions, race baiting, anecdotes, narrowly crafted hypothetical scenarios and whose uopian fantasy world is better.
posted by humanfont at 10:06 AM on September 18, 2012 [11 favorites]

"Romney is the most opaque presidential nominee since Nixon, and people have been reduced to guessing what his true feelings are. This video provides an answer: He feels that you're a loser. It's not an answer that wins elections."*
posted by ericb at 10:07 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

"My job is not to worry about those people"

In a way-- he's right. That's not his job. It's much more important than whatever his job is. It is his duty. As an American citizen and as a human being.
posted by goHermGO at 10:07 AM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

Must be his magic tingly leg (Brooks saying something intelligent)
posted by edgeways at 10:08 AM on September 18, 2012

In my experience, the majority of "I got sick" stories end with a "terrible work-boss experience" of some kind or another. That's why I support subsidized health care plans that are completely divorced from who you work for or whether you work for someone at all. It's also great for businesses who are no longer forced to walk the fine line of make hiring/firing decisions based on the health of their employees without breaking any laws.
posted by muddgirl at 10:08 AM on September 18, 2012 [33 favorites]

Pundits: Mitt Romney Fundraiser Comments His 'Darkest Hour,' 'Utter Disaster' (VIDEO).
posted by ericb at 10:09 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Come on, if we didn't have a government, private charities would happily cough up millions of dollars for your treatment! Isn't that blindingly obvious?
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:11 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

verb, that sounds about right. Now, I know the regular membership believes those points lock, stock and barrel. But what do the elites, the broadcasters, policymakers, movers and shakers think? Are they self aware of their hyperbole or is there some sort of ourorboros thing goes on that they believe their own hype?
posted by FJT at 10:12 AM on September 18, 2012

Has any pundit broken down what percentage of Romney's own base is included in that 47% of people who don't pay federal income tax? Considering that it includes students, retirees, military, and some middle-class families with children, it's got to be a number that Romney's campaign staff has at the front of their minds this week.
posted by muddgirl at 10:13 AM on September 18, 2012

Bilabial, irrespective of anything else in the thread I just wanted to say I'm sorry to hear of your situation, thank you for writing about it and I hope things get better.
posted by edgeways at 10:16 AM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

I am quite tired of people saying destructive, damaging things - true or untrue, though with the recent Republicans they have often been based on lies - then acting as if there is no way that their words could have affected other people's temperaments.
Suggesting people should die if they can't afford the price of living is an offensive idea, not just 'another point of view', and is strongly akin to one of my other personal bugbears, which is people demanding tolerance for their intolerance. If someone's views are intolerant, then it is not an act of intolerance in return to not accept them.

That's not even touching the advancement of ideas and then quickly backpedaling, a very 'Some people say...' tactic particularly beloved of Fox News.
posted by gadge emeritus at 10:17 AM on September 18, 2012 [17 favorites]

I should say some students, retirees, and military members.
posted by muddgirl at 10:18 AM on September 18, 2012

There's a partial answer to that question (muddgirl) in the comment by no regrets, coyote.
posted by Eyebeams at 10:18 AM on September 18, 2012

Sure Brooks is right but it is always sad when pundits have to point out that some people on welfare might be white so he better watch what he says in public.

Say what you want about Mittens but that guy is looking good. I think the press conference was just to show off his tan. I wonder if his check shirts are just brooks brothers or some rich guy brand I don't even know about. He kinda reminds me of this read dickhead salesman I used to work with who was always pleading poverty because he couldnt sell one of his houses after construction on his mansion had finished.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:18 AM on September 18, 2012

corb: "corb I haven't said this publicly, and it's pretty uncomfortable. I have ovarian cancer.

I am trying to adhere to Jessamyn's request that we stop the libertarian derail, but I didn't want you to think I hadn't read this. I am so sorry that you have cancer. I hope that you make it out okay, and I'm sorry you had a terrible-boss work experience on top of that."

A laudable sentiment. However, proper taxation and healthcare means you have to rely on hope a lot less.
posted by Happy Dave at 10:18 AM on September 18, 2012 [34 favorites]

Mother Jones to release full video today.
posted by ericb at 10:18 AM on September 18, 2012

David Brooks: Thurston Howell Romney.

When the Republican has lost David freaking Brooks...
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:25 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mother Jones to release full video today.

In response to Romney's requests. He sure knows how to keep his bad press going for another news cycle.
posted by grouse at 10:25 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

It's as simple as this. The widespread delusion that one's success is owed to one's own merit, diligence, intelligence, or effort *justifies* and rationalizes privilege and hierarchy.

There were two maggots, on the blade of a shovel. Someone picked up the shovel, slung it over his shoulder and started down the road. As he walked along, the shovel was jarred with each step. The maggots hung on for dear life, but ultimately, they fell off. One fell into a crack in the pavement, and the other fell into a cat - a very large, very dead cat - lying beside the road. The one who fell into the dead cat, immediately began to eat. He ate and ate and ate. Finally after three days, when he couldn’t eat anymore, he humped himself up over the edge of the road and began to look for his brother. He came to the crack in the highway, and peered into it.
“Are you down there brother?” he called.
“Yes, I’ve been down here for three days without a bite to eat or a drop to drink and I am nearly starved to death. But you, you are so sleek and fat! To what do you attribute your success?”
“Brains and personality, brother, brains and personality.”

posted by mikepop at 10:26 AM on September 18, 2012 [36 favorites]

Isn't entitlement to food, housing, and health care something we Americans provide for people in jail?
posted by mkultra

I had a distant relative who was a habitual repeat offender for this very reason... womp womp.
posted by the littlest brussels sprout at 10:31 AM on September 18, 2012

All I know is that David Corn has earned himself all the delicious sammiches he can eat for his entire life
posted by angrycat at 10:40 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Yeah I'm not sure what else there could possibly be left to say if the person on the other side of the discussion literally* believes people who can't afford food or to go to the hospital, should simply die.

At that point I don't really believe there's any common ground. There certainly isn't "common decency". Depressingly, this comment isn't (just) about corb.

* Yes, literally.
posted by danny the boy at 10:42 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

If you ever tune into NPR and it sounds like James Woods is portraying a GOP strategist character for Diane Rehm, that's David Brooks.

He's about as establishment-Republican as one can get. This is the end of the Romney Campaign, and its failure is already being laid at the feet of the Objectivists, Libertarians and Tea-Partiers. I don't think there's anything they can do - Ailes and Lindbaugh and Norquist rule the party too completely. The only solution is to break away, and try to nestle into the Democratic party as "Moderates."
posted by Slap*Happy at 10:42 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

It’s interesting that the person who taped the video initially went after Rachel Maddow, and the Maddow show decided they’d never be able to confirm it as real.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:43 AM on September 18, 2012

All I know is that David Corn has earned himself all the delicious sammiches he can eat for his entire life

As has Jimmy Carter the IV.

It’s interesting that the person who taped the video initially went after Rachel Maddow, and the Maddow show decided they’d never be able to confirm it as real.

What?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:44 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I like how Donald Trump's ad for Romney continues the "rage against an empty chair" leidmotif of Eastwood's speech. SYNERGY!
posted by klangklangston at 10:46 AM on September 18, 2012

The Washington Post reports on Romney's hastily called press conference in response to the video:

A handful of reporters were brought in a few minutes too early, while aides were still assembling four flags (two U.S. and two Californian) and the blue curtain backdrop, and Gorka told the reporters to leave. The journalists waited in a nearby interior room, where the cellphone signal was so spotty that network television producers struggled to coordinate with their production desks in New York and Washington. The news conference was so hastily arranged that there was not time for the networks to arrange to carry it live. They would have to play it old-school, by feeding a tape.

A few moments later, at about 7 p.m., Romney, in a dark suit and a blue striped tie, stepped out to the podium. He made a short statement, looking down occasionally. Kevin Madden, his senior most aide traveling with him here, stood behind the dark curtain, looking anxious as he peeked out to watch.

posted by overglow at 10:47 AM on September 18, 2012

What

They intially uploaded a lo-rez clip under a fake Rachel Maddow account to YT. Maddow & co couldn't confirm that it was really Romney so didn't run with it. Was on last night's show.
posted by unSane at 10:47 AM on September 18, 2012

Wait. Jimmy Carter's grandson helped leak the video?

That makes me feel like Carter has been playing some kind of twelfth-dimensional chess since the 1980 election.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:47 AM on September 18, 2012 [48 favorites]

Brandon, per the Maddow show last night, when the video was originally uploaded to YouTube, it was under the name “RachelMaddow”, presumably to get her attention, I guess. It GOT her attention, and she said she spent a long time trying to authenticate it, and decided they’d never be able to.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:47 AM on September 18, 2012

According to the article ericb linked, Mother Jones is posting the full video (40-50 minutes) in two parts at 2:30 PM and then Neil Cavuto of Fox News is interviewing Romney at 4 PM. For those of you who want to time your corn-popping correctly.

I am almost more excited to hear the kinds of questions the fundraising attendees ask Romney than I am to hear Romney's answers...
posted by sallybrown at 10:48 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Despite the faint praises above, even when David Brooks is right, he's wrong.

I let it slide when you lumped him in with the Dickens villains. I bit my tongue when you brought in Scrooge McDuck. But I cannot stand by and let anybody taint the name of Thurston Howell, III in name of Romney-bashing. Howell knew something about loss (the Great Depression turned them from billionaires to millionaires!) Sure, he was a New England Yankee elite, but he was also a real life job creator (how often did he and Lovey employ Gilligan for something or another) -- and speaking of Lovey, Mrs. Howell, as wikipedia reminds us, had a deep sense of noblesse oblige. In the worst of conditions, the Howells were the best type of wealthy people.

I have no doubt that the Romneys would trade you to the stereotypical natives or feed you to the smoke monster before you could say 'three hour tour.'
posted by MCMikeNamara at 10:51 AM on September 18, 2012 [16 favorites]

In America, you don't vote for the person you want, you vote against the person you don't want. What a country!
posted by blue_beetle at 10:51 AM on September 18, 2012

Haven't had time to keep up with the wingnut response to all this, but I'm gonna call it now... "Liberal media seizes on Romney gaffe to deflect attention from terrorism against US embassies. Don't worry about the details of either story, just trust us that Romney hates the same welfare cheats that you do, and Obama apologizes to terrorists."
posted by Rykey at 10:52 AM on September 18, 2012

I am almost more excited to hear the kinds of questions the fundraising attendees ask Romney than I am to hear Romney's answers...

"What if we use these freeloaders you speak of as food? Surely they can be sanitized to a standard worthy of feeding to the help, or dressage horses, family pets and the like. I have heard it said they taste like chicken."
posted by eyeballkid at 10:52 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Blogger Andrew Sullivan gets a tad angry, when a reader compares Romney's gaffe to Obama's 2008 "cling to guns and religion" statemate:

"[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

He did not say: "I'll never convince them they should vote for me." He accused 47 percent of Americans of choosing not to "take personal responsibility and care for their lives." He's describing half the country as parasites, bleeding the productive half dry. Half the country. He includes me, an Obama supporter, who pays three times the tax on my income that Romney does, who immigrated at 21, whose parents never went to college, and whose blog now employs five people.

You know what, Mitt? Fuck you.

posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:53 AM on September 18, 2012 [14 favorites]

Quote from Jimmy Carter IV (the grandson):

But Carter also confirmed there is a personal side to the backstory of the campaign video: he was especially motivated, he said, because of Romney's frequent attacks on the presidency of his grandfather, including the GOP candidate's comparisons to the "weak" foreign policy of Carter and Barack Obama.

"It gets under my skin -- mostly the weakness on the foreign policy stuff," Carter said. "I just think it's ridiculous. I don’t like criticism of my family."

The whole story, of out-of-work Carter grandson doing oppo research on Twitter and tracking down the mysterious video-er, then getting it exposure...that's a great story.
posted by emjaybee at 10:54 AM on September 18, 2012 [17 favorites]

"What if we use these freeloaders you speak of as food? Surely they can be sanitized to a standard worthy of feeding to the help, or dressage horses, family pets and the like. I have heard it said they taste like chicken."

YOU MAY REMOVE YOUR SHOES! YOU MAY REMOVE YOUR WIGS!
posted by sallybrown at 10:55 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ann Richards' quote about being born on third base and thinking he hit a triple has rarely been so on point.

Ann Richards: "Poor ~~George~~ Mitt. He can't help it. He was born with a silver foot in his mouth."
posted by ericb at 10:55 AM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

A rant on a completely different part of that video:

One of my biggest 'political correctness' pet peeves is when a relatively privileged (usually white dude) says "So-and-so would be so much easier if I was a minority!" It is almost never true, and it is shameful pandering to the powerfuls' irrational feelings of inadequacy.
posted by muddgirl at 10:57 AM on September 18, 2012 [13 favorites]

the public teat is a mass of tentacles right now that reach almost everything

What country is this? It certainly isn't the United States. Romney makes similar statements that are not true.

If the likes of Romney/Ryan gain power, the States will become a sort of Westeros.
posted by juiceCake at 11:02 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Wow, Scott Brown fell behind Warren in the polls. How did this happen? He was at 55% to win on Intrade the last time I checked and now he's at 42%.
posted by Golden Eternity at 11:03 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Looks like Scott "Truckasaurus" Brown has to refuel that truck and get driving! If he drives by EVERY voter in MA with his truck, we might vote for him!

Does Warren even drive a truck? Can we trust her to vote on any potential truck based votes that come up in the senate?
posted by haveanicesummer at 11:07 AM on September 18, 2012

Wow, Scott Brown fell behind Warren in the polls. How did this happen? He was at 55% to win on Intrade the last time I checked and now he's at 42%.

Trickle-down Romneynomics
posted by sallybrown at 11:08 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

I miss Ann Richards! What a witty, sharp and intelligent person she was!
posted by ericb at 11:08 AM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

I keep seeing Romney's vile comments dismissed as "exciting his base." But it's after the conventions -- the time a presidential campaign traditionally seeks to reach out to more moderate voters. If Romney is still preoccupied with throwing his base red meat, their either he has access to what Karl Rove called "the numbers" -- that is, he sees overwhelming base turnout as the key to victory -- or, more likely, his campaign is simply doomed.
posted by Gelatin at 11:10 AM on September 18, 2012

Who are Mitt Romney’s ‘47 percent’?
posted by ericb at 11:11 AM on September 18, 2012

Wow, Scott Brown fell behind Warren in the polls. How did this happen?

1) Warren has a great ground game - lots of shoes on pavement.

2) The conventions were big, really big. It got a lot of fence-sitters and equivocators to get up and pick a side by demonstrating that both sides were not the same.

3) The rats are leaving a sinking ship... Brown is seen as a libertarian sweetheart, and those are rapidly becoming as anathema to the mainstream. Political doom awaits those even remotely connected to Romney or what will most assuredly be labeled Romneyism before too long.

The Dems might just retain the Senate by running candidates that are demonstrably non-nuts - be sure to thank the Tea Party, Focus on the Family and Romney.
posted by Slap*Happy at 11:12 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

"The overall impression of Romney at this event is of someone who overheard some conservative cocktail chatter and maybe read a conservative blog or two, and is thoughtlessly repeating back what he heard and read."-Rich Lowry at National Review Online
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:16 AM on September 18, 2012

Did anyone else think of Lonesome Rhodes' career-ending moment?

Saw the movie again a couple of weeks back and at the time I doubted whether such an unveiling could ever be possible nowadays (assuming that it was possible at the time "A Face In The Crowd" was filmed - after all, it was only a movie, right?).

I'm feeling a little more cheerful now that, well, I guess it is!
posted by Currer Belfry at 11:16 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

At this rate pretty soon we'll hear Akin demand that Romney step aside for the good of the party.

(shamelessly stolen)
posted by edgeways at 11:18 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

(I use the USA as an example of the failure of private charity because the USA has a great culture of charity, and puts its money where its mouth is with powerful financial incentives for people to give to charity, not just powerful social incentives. And yet private charity here is still such a dismal failure compared to public programs I've lived under. The USA also seems to be the developed country that is most reliant on private charity)
posted by anonymisc at 11:19 AM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

I think the Senate stays D and the house stays R (perhaps with a reduced majority). 2014 we are kinda fucked in the Senate however.
posted by edgeways at 11:19 AM on September 18, 2012

It all makes sense now. Mitt is applying pick up artist techniques to the election and is negging potential voters.
posted by drezdn at 11:22 AM on September 18, 2012 [17 favorites]

Wow. I hope this hurts him. FU, Mitt.
posted by agregoli at 11:27 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh man, I hope Mitt tells me he thinks I look so much prettier without so much makeup on because too much makeup makes me look like a slut. Then I can throw my drink at him, making sure to aim for the iphone in his shirt pocket.
posted by elizardbits at 11:27 AM on September 18, 2012 [11 favorites]

Speaking of Akin, looks like his push to convince women he isn't an ignorant woman hating jackass includes campaign appearances by none other than Phyllis Schlafly... that certainly is a message of going forward.
posted by edgeways at 11:29 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Then I can throw my drink at him, making sure to aim for the iphone in his shirt pocket.

Either that or his motherboard.
posted by clearly at 11:30 AM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

Up top someone wondered why Romney wanted to be president anyway. Here in a short scene is how I imagine Mitt Romney deciding to run for president:

EARLY APRIL, 2011. MITT AND HIS TAX GUY BOB ARE SITTING IN BOB'S OFFICE. BOB: Mitt, your write-downs from '08 zeroed out your Federal taxes for the last couple of years, but there's no way we can get your payment for 2010 under about 13%. MITT: Phooey on that! That's 13% fewer jobs I can create. Find a way. BOB: Sorry, Mitt, but even after hiding a hundred million dollars in your IRA, you just have too much income to shelter completely. The rates are low on carried interest and capital gains, but they're not zero. MITT: Could we make them zero? BOB: ...what? MITT: Could we just make the tax rate on my income zero? BOB: Well, no, Mitt, only the Congress can do that, and the President would have to sign it into law. I don't think that's going to happen. MITT: BY ALL THE GODS OF KOLOB, IT WILL!
posted by nicwolff at 11:30 AM on September 18, 2012 [17 favorites]

I think the Senate stays D and the house stays R (perhaps with a reduced majority). 2014 we are kinda fucked in the Senate however.

The House still has a tiny potential to swing D and if people work at it, it can happen. Especially now.

What I think hardcores are missing is that Romney wasn't a candidate Dem-leaning people were excited to beat before; he was a dull technocrat, and nobody really gets hepped up about beating a dull technocrat. However, Romney has just said (or as good as, anyway) FUCK YOU, YOU'RE PARASITE SCUM to the entire Democratic base and half of the country. Romney just made it personal, and that never is good, especially when you're behind. Voter suppression techniques only work when the base isn't desperate to vote, and now they will jump through any hoop to vote against Richie Mitt, and that means the downticket races benefit as well.
posted by mightygodking at 11:30 AM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

Sooo, just wondering, whatever happened to that bitcoin "auction" for romneys tax returns?...followed the links inside, but really can't make heads or tails of bitcoin...did the quota get met? are we going to see them? Is it total b.s.?
posted by sexyrobot at 11:31 AM on September 18, 2012

Voter suppression techniques only work when the base isn't desperate to vote, and now they will jump through any hoop to vote against Richie Mitt, and that means the downticket races benefit as well.

Unless they think it's already sewn up and they don't need to.
posted by corb at 11:32 AM on September 18, 2012

I think the Gore fiasco took care of that. People seem to be in a mood where Mitt is clearly a colossal screwup, someone we don't want to elect, the President has the lead, but there is way too much at stake to sit at home. I keep seeing posts from people saying they weren't going to get involved, and were just going to vote, but the more Mitt talks, the more people decide the have to actually get involved and campaign and help out.
posted by cashman at 11:37 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

We've had 70 years to judge the efficacy of Social Security for the elderly and the profoundly/permenantly disabled vs private charities that came before. At some point one should set aside sophistry for empirical evidence. Don't be upset if we look at you as a lunatic when you persist.
posted by humanfont at 11:38 AM on September 18, 2012 [13 favorites]

Man blames more than 100,000,000 US citizens for the fact that he is losing an election. Says they won't take personal responsibility for their lives.
posted by airing nerdy laundry at 11:40 AM on September 18, 2012 [15 favorites]

Mother Jones just released the full 49-minute video of the private fundraiser
posted by prinado at 11:41 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Mother Jones just posted the whole video!
posted by grapesaresour at 11:41 AM on September 18, 2012

When will Mother Jones release the whole video?!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:42 AM on September 18, 2012 [17 favorites]

Oh I can't wait for the debates.
posted by Theta States at 11:44 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

I keep seeing posts from people saying they weren't going to get involved, and were just going to vote, but the more Mitt talks, the more people decide the have to actually get involved and campaign and help out.

And too, stuff like this is a reminder to get off your ass and register to vote. If even I, someone who believes incredibly strongly in my duty and obligation as a citizen to vote, was getting lazy about re-registering since moving counties, I know there are thousands of others who have similarly put off registering because it just wasn't urgent enough yet. This news about Romney made me fill out the damn form and mail it in rather than waiting until the last minute, because Romney just made it even more personal than it already was.
posted by yasaman at 11:48 AM on September 18, 2012

How is Mitt as a debater?
posted by drezdn at 11:48 AM on September 18, 2012

The House still has a tiny potential to swing D...

Sure, but it is also possible the Senate swings R.

I hope the House swings and we can get rid of a lot of Tea Party deadwood, that would be fantastic, I think it is an outside chance at best, not completely impossible, just unlikely.

Unless they think it's already sewn up and they don't need to.

ayup, new numbers out of Virginia though should collapsing enthusiasm amongst Republican voters for Romney. he is now not only polling about 8 points behind Obama, but is underwater in the Very Enthusiastic category (45% to Obama's 61% ). Dunno how it plays out in other states but Virginia is looking more and more like a lost cause for Romney, which makes his path to victory really flipping hard. With the strong/favors/leans Obama wins already.. and if he wins WI Obama can give up both FL and OH and still win the election.

And oh... my kingdom to see a new, well conducted poll of GA, because it was just a 3 point difference pre conventions.
posted by edgeways at 11:48 AM on September 18, 2012

How is Mitt as a debater?

Masterful.
posted by Lemurrhea at 11:50 AM on September 18, 2012 [16 favorites]

The House still has a tiny potential to swing D and if people work at it, it can happen.

Whaaa? I thought the House staying Republican was pretty much a done deal? Odd that Democrats aren't pushing to take back the House.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:50 AM on September 18, 2012

drezdn:
"How is Mitt as a debater?"

He's a master debater.
posted by charred husk at 11:50 AM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Odd that Democrats aren't pushing to take back the House.

The R landslide in 2010 let them gerrymander the country rather effectively.
posted by drezdn at 11:51 AM on September 18, 2012

Mitt Romney masterbates. <-- ziiiiing -- Ha!
posted by mazola at 11:54 AM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

But that's not to say some aren't pushing: Speaker Pelosi Project
posted by mikepop at 11:54 AM on September 18, 2012

It's hard to imagine Romney's staff could prepare for a significant event as poorly as they did for his acceptance speech at the convention, but I'm expecting to see a repeat performance at the debates, especially if people start jumping ship. These are clearly not people who are going to realize they are going astray, introspect, and change direction as a result of it. They're going to double down on what won them the nomination and I think there is definitely the potential for it be a spectacular disaster.
posted by feloniousmonk at 11:54 AM on September 18, 2012

This video is kind of telling, for those who are paying attention. It looks like it was shot from the servant's table, by one of the servant employees. The shot is framed by Golden Chalices. You hear the silver clank on the plates as they eat their meal while the servants buzz about, food and wine bottles in hand. Mitt just has no humility in his demeanor, an apparent side effect of his opening babbling about trying to come from a position of strength. You just need Cube or Dre's voice going "Here's what they think about you" interspersed in the clip every so often.
posted by cashman at 11:56 AM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

So, half an hour later, there's NOTHING else in this 49 minute video that someone can point out?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:56 AM on September 18, 2012

In the full video he accuses Obama of carrying a "tiny stick". I think the most interesting point is that for a fair amount of the video people are just chowing down on their 50k prime rib, and some even seem to be carrying on their own conversations. While Mitt is talking about missle testing, he just seems stranded up there like some opening act. Pretty clear he is the water carrier in that room.
posted by Ad hominem at 11:56 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

drezdn:
"The R landslide in 2010 let them gerrymander the country rather effectively."

Have I bitched enough about the gerrymandering in northern Ohio? I don't think do. Marcy Kaptur's district could be used in a textbook illustration.
posted by charred husk at 11:57 AM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Mitt is known as an excellent debater on any subject he is able to prepare well on, but to have difficulty speaking off the cuff.
posted by kyrademon at 11:57 AM on September 18, 2012

There are low expectations for Romney at the debate. All he has to do is show up and make a decent point or two and people will say "Hey, he's not so bad."

Obama has to show up and absolutely shine, in order for people not to say he's lost his edge.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:58 AM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Man, I hate the debate-expectation game. "Well, Bob, since my candidate did not actually panic and devour his own shoe, as popularly predicted, this counts as a clear win."
posted by kyrademon at 12:01 PM on September 18, 2012 [34 favorites]

Obama has to show up and absolutely shine, in order for people not to say he's lost his edge.

Someone made that point in a previous thread, and I agreed. But I did see a reuters report a week or two ago that actually put it on Mitt to knock it out of the part, citing his having gone through debate after debate after debate this year - something like 15 debates, while the President has not stepped on a debate stage in 4 years.

So really, Mitt should look pretty good in these debates, from this year's practice.
posted by cashman at 12:02 PM on September 18, 2012

I think Romney has too much ground to cover for detailed prep. I agree that he is a fine speaker when he is on script, but I think he has too many weaknesses to have a script to cover every opportunity. He is bound to make a significant mess somewhere and if I had to bet, it'd probably be in relation to Iran or the region.

I expect to see a more concerted effort than usual to reduce, eliminate, or somehow pre-determine the debates.
posted by feloniousmonk at 12:02 PM on September 18, 2012

He is bound to make a significant mess somewhere and if I had to bet, it'd probably be in relation to Iran or the region.

Given the way he's run his campaign, if, as president, he did ever have to invade Iran, he'd send the Marines to Nebraska.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 12:05 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

"Mitt Romney is better toned because he came off 20-plus primary debates. President Obama has not been on a debate stage in four years," Schroeder said. [NPR]
posted by cashman at 12:07 PM on September 18, 2012

Mitt Romney did not win ANY of those debates. That's a stupid quote.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:10 PM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Romney's big problem in the debates is that his campaign isn't honest. His strategy so far has been to criticize Obama for fostering a culture of dependency and for constantly apologizing for American values. Meanwhile he has an unspecified plan to "create" jobs. This approach barely works when you're preaching to the converted (or talking to an empty chair), it's simply not going to stand up when the other guy is in the room and is ready for you.

The most effective political attacks are grounded in the truth. That's why the out-of-touch private-equity guy who doesn't care about ordinary people is struggling now.
posted by leopard at 12:10 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

So, half an hour later, there's NOTHING else in this 49 minute video that someone can point out?

I figure if there were anything super-quotable in it, it would have shown up in my Twitter feed by now.
posted by dfan at 12:11 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm not sure how Romney is going to prepare to counter the multitude of possible attacks available.
-Taxes (personal)
-Unwilling to talk much about his religion
-Tax plan, lack of specifics
-Inability to name loopholes to trim
-Poor foreign policy forays
-Trying to capitalize on Diplomat's death
-Dismissive to 47% of population
-Etch a Sketch
-Money in off-shore accounts
-Bain, Outsourcing, firing
-ROMNEYCARE
-Anti Choice
-Gay rights
.
.
.

Romney has to look and sound Presidential, he also has to WIN the debates which means attacking and being nimble on your feet, he can attack somewhat but nimble? The gyroscopic ankle retrofits are not available on the model.
posted by edgeways at 12:11 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

His other big problem in the debates, as the Ezra Klein link says, is that debate seem not to matter in terms of moving the electorate.
posted by gerryblog at 12:12 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

dfan, that's what I figure, too. Oh, well.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:12 PM on September 18, 2012

Someone made that point in a previous thread, and I agreed. But I did see a reuters report a week or two ago that actually put it on Mitt to knock it out of the part, citing his having gone through debate after debate after debate this year - something like 15 debates, while the President has not stepped on a debate stage in 4 years.

Yeah, the President has only had to field reporter questions and make speeches pretty much every day. I bet he's gone all soft!

I've never seen "good in debates" Mitt, but then maybe I couldn't in the carnage of crazy that was the Republican debates. I do remember him offering to bet some large sum...1,000 or 10,000?...if some other candidate would prove something or other, and people rolling their eyes, because don't we all have a few grand in our pockets?

But hey, maybe he'll score points right and left in the debates and leave Obama reeling. I have difficulty picturing that, but I could be wrong.
posted by emjaybee at 12:13 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh, and those debates where a bunch of folks clamoring on how tough they are, and how they deserved the votes of a small rabid primary voting base. No nuance all big dick talk, and even there he did mediocre. I kinda doubt the same strategy will work on a GE debate and if there is one thing Mittens has shown is he just doesn't grok how to run a GE campaign.
posted by edgeways at 12:16 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mitt Romney masterbates.

Oddly, of all the things people have said about Romney, I find that the hardest to believe.

I heard the Mother Jones guy talking this up on yesterday's Rachel Maddow (I find the whole thing so depressing I can only take it filtered through left wing rah-rah), and he was saying something about Romney's speech video and an orgy of some description? Can anyone expand on that? I was having flashbacks to the last reel of Society.
posted by Grangousier at 12:17 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

A bit of a derail, but something I like to put out there:

I am a small business owner. I have paid taxes. I have been on food stamps and unemployment benefits. I have scraped-by on such a small amount of money at full time 2-dollars-above-minimum wage-jobs that I have gotten significant tax returns under the Earned Income Tax Credit that (I believe) George W Bush felt I deserved. I have felt I was "gaming the system" by stretching out my welfare benefits long enough to build a business that's now paying all sorts of taxes and insurance, and buying things and creating jobs. I still fear tax time every year, but not as much as I fear getting sick or injured under my not-great medical insurance, and I'd gladly pay more taxes if it meant something better.

There are many different types of poverty, many different types of welfare recipient, and many different types of "success" stories. My blue state presidential vote isn't gonna count for much this year, but it's still getting cast against Romney.
posted by elr at 12:18 PM on September 18, 2012 [31 favorites]

This is the second time in a week that I have been able to watch a political campaign absolutely implode in real time. It is simply astounding. If I were a Republican, or if this was a Democratic candidate, I would by aghast. How do actual Republicans feel about this? Do they understand the actual damage being done here (I know some of their pundits seem to), or are people still buying the "media lies/stabbed in the back/conversation with ourselves" narrative that we've seen so far?

Given the way he's run his campaign, if, as president, he did ever have to invade Iran, he'd send the Marines to Nebraska.

Well...Omaha and Isfahan sound so much alike.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 12:19 PM on September 18, 2012

an orgy of some description

Marc Leder, the host of the party at which Mitt gave the 47% speech, is a fan of bunga bunga parties.
posted by sallybrown at 12:21 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

In the video:

talking about how the hostage crisis and the failed rescue mission Desert One were pervasive issues through the 1980 election. “if something of that nature presents itself I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity.”

(I bet he nearly creamed his pants with joy when the Libyan embassy was attacked)
posted by edgeways at 12:21 PM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

Around 2:50 into the second video, one of the attendees is challenging Mitt, and makes an example of saying 'it costs 4 cents to make a penny - why doesn't American stop making pennies? Canada just did. Round it to the nearest nickel. I want to see you take the gloves off and start talking to people who care about knowing the facts, and knowledge is power - as opposed to people that are swayed by what sounds good at the moment'

He then says something I can't quite make out - "if you turned it into a" ....something skill? "...it'd be a landslide in my opinion".

Mitt's response? "Well I wrote a book, and there is stuff on my website. I don't really think that stuff will have much of an impact."

Mitt then expounds on how his advisers have worked on campaigns around the world and how essentially they are just crafting ads that work.

Nice, Mitt. Like screw having any kind of a personal identity, Mitt, or having principles you believe in, or an approach that you bring to the table. He just wants to win the election. You could take him out and substitute Santorum, or Gingrich, or a pair of cartoon rocks.

And for you guys who are clamoring about the video and what's in it, watch it and transcribe it, or please don't just gum up the thread with nonsense chattering about what you think is or isn't in it. It just got released.

It's a great look at Mitt just wanting to have the title "President". You can see he isn't thinking anything about the middle class, or really anything but becoming president. He simply lacks the humility to realize he would be in charge of leading the country, and have to visit poverty stricken areas, clean up after disasters, or live with knowing policies he put in place resulted in the deaths of military members or old folks. I wouldn't expect him to show every single emotion in this one video, but almost all of his videos contain that same demeanor - a sense that he'd just like to hurry up and get the title, please. That all this process is annoying and these messy people are annoying, and that he wants to be president so he can go to fundraisers and hobnob as the president, and be able to cavort with other rich folks where he can now look down his nose at even them.
posted by cashman at 12:23 PM on September 18, 2012 [15 favorites]

And they worked on campaigns in Albania? Did I hear that right?
posted by jrochest at 12:24 PM on September 18, 2012

“if something of that nature presents itself I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity”

Wow, that's disgusting.
posted by sallybrown at 12:25 PM on September 18, 2012

The first debate is going to be great. Instead of an opening statement, Romney is going to have a Jimmy Stewart hologram ridicule a credenza.
posted by benito.strauss at 12:25 PM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

The Mitt-Romney-pretty-good-debater camp basically says that Mitt knew his job in the primary debates, which was to show up and stick to the script -- establish right-wing bonafides, take down whoever was the not-Romney that week, and then sit back and let the circular firing squad do the rest, leaving him still the frontrunner when the dust cleared. The "$10,000 bet" thing was a major screw-up, yes, which is one of the reasons it's said he's not so good with the improvising.

The conventional wisdom is that if he can "stick to the script" in the presidential debates, he'll do his job and look fine, but if he gets thrown off by something, he might flounder.
posted by kyrademon at 12:28 PM on September 18, 2012

It remains to be seen how this will be picked up by the MSM media.
It was one of the main stories on the local (non-cable) news in Chicago last night. Teasers all through the premier of Evolution and then a lead story. I guess there wasn't enough shootings to fill the newscast per usual yesterday.
posted by Bunglegirl at 12:28 PM on September 18, 2012

Well there is a lot of what you would expect in the video. He says, in effect, the president is leading a divisive campaign against the rich. Back in the olden days poor people never wanted anything from the rich, they just wanted to be rich themselves. Some minorities are ok because they know their place, like Marco Rubio, who incidentally agrees that the poor are mooches.

There are some funny bits where he gets outright given what for by rich ladies.

I'm sure I am missing a lot over the din of silverware clattering against fine china. I would love to have 50k to sit 10 feet from Obama and be able to finger wag at him.

Just watch it. It is a fascinating look at something most of us will never attend even if there are no more gotcha moments.
posted by Ad hominem at 12:29 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Marc Leder, the host of the party at which Mitt gave the 47% speech, is a fan of bunga bunga parties.

To be fair, I like a little bunga bunga now and then so I don't want to slam the guy for his extracurriculars. On the other hand, I'm not hosting campaign events in my home for the presidential nominee of a party that paints itself as being morally superior to bunga bunga, so...
posted by palomar at 12:32 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

"Mitt Romney is better toned because he came off 20-plus primary debates.

Recall Jon Stewart's remark following Romney's performance at the CNBC "Your Money, Your Vote" debate: "How bad is it at this point? In our coverage of Romney's clinching debate, we need not even show you highlights of Romney, but merely the spontaneous combustion of his opponents."

Man, I'll bet Herman Cain is watching Romney right now and just cold shouting "Nein! Nein! Nein!"
posted by octobersurprise at 12:32 PM on September 18, 2012

Fact Check: Mitt Romney's '47 Percent' Claims Wildly Inaccurate.
posted by ericb at 12:32 PM on September 18, 2012

Mitt Romney's '47 Percent' Includes Real-Life Millionaires.
posted by ericb at 12:33 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

To be fair, I like a little bunga bunga now and then so I don't want to slam the guy for his extracurriculars.

I concur. Ain't nothing wrong with a little nude pool-cavorting!
posted by sallybrown at 12:34 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

I feel for Tim Pawlenty. Dude dropped out way too soon.
posted by Ironmouth at 12:34 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Politico: '47 percent' recording may be illegal
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 12:35 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

When a Plutocratic Dinner Doomed a Presidential Campaign
(Spoiler alert: 1884)
posted by Horace Rumpole at 12:35 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Give you good odds Timeh runs against Franken in two years for the Senate seat.
posted by edgeways at 12:36 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I feel for Tim Pawlenty. Dude dropped out way too soon.

I understand all of those words individually but in this context they are somehow meaningless
posted by mightygodking at 12:38 PM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

And they worked on campaigns in Albania? Did I hear that right?

No, he said Elbonia.
posted by entropicamericana at 12:41 PM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

Obama/Biden have released a campaign commercial regarding Romney's 47%.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 12:44 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

That's the same ad as this morning, for anyone reading the thread.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:45 PM on September 18, 2012

Politico: '47 percent' recording may be illegal

I do hope that Mit or the GOP presses charges.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 12:47 PM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

I feel for Tim Pawlenty. Dude dropped out way too soon.

*Droopy Dog voice*

What about Jon Huntsman? Everyone always forgets Jon Huntsman.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 12:49 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

I feel for Tim Pawlenty.

I feel for Jon Huntsman. Attractive, charming, funny, smart; he was the Republican Obama. I still think he could've had the country eating from his hand, if he'd made it through the primaries.
posted by octobersurprise at 12:49 PM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Who would they press charges against? Anne Nonymous?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:49 PM on September 18, 2012

If the Obama team is going to be so rapid response, next time Mitt says something unbelievable I'm going to have to 'casually' walk slowly from the train past their HQ so I can give my 'man on the street' response... though I guess it's likely it might happen on my way home tonight too.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 12:50 PM on September 18, 2012

[off topic: I ran out of favorites in this thread. I didn't think it was possible, always seemed like people were joking when they wished for more faves to dish out. ]

on topic, the thing that has always pissed me off when Romney and others paint this picture of people who use government assistance as moochers and freeloaders is that they are so fucking out of touch with the world they're criticizing that it's not even funny.

I can assure you that those of us who ate the government cheese and relied on a host of other social programs to prevent our lives from descending into absolute hell were not sitting around laughing about how we sure were putting one over on Uncle Sam and the U.S. taxpayer. We *hated* that shit. We hated the food, we hated the shame of paying with food stamps, we hated every aspect of it.

Romney and libertarians should listen to the music that comes from the percentage of the population they deride. Go listen to the old blues and country songs: you'll hear more than a few laments about the fact that the singer is trying hard to find a job and can't find anything. Rap musicians have been making fun of people on welfare since the art form took its first steps.

It just doesn't make any goddamn sense to vilify people in need of assistance like this. Sure, a few people are going to game the system but why does the thought of poor folks and Others scamming the government produce blue hot rage in the hearts of Romney and so many others while tales of corporate fraud elicit, at most "Yes, they shouldn't do that and they should be held accountable" spoken with flat affect?
posted by lord_wolf at 12:51 PM on September 18, 2012 [33 favorites]

Further proof of the Romney/Zalinsky connection.
posted by deanklear at 12:55 PM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

Odd that Democrats aren't pushing to take back the House.

- The R landslide in 2010 let them gerrymander the country rather effectively.

Anyone who wants to learn more and hasn't seen it yet, the main link in this post from early Monday morning is a detailed analysis of why it will be hard for Dems to defend the Senate in 2014, let alone re-take the House:

Republicans’ dominance in races throughout the country in the 2010 elections eviscerated the Democrats’ farm teams in state after state...It is difficult to overstate how much damage Democrats suffered in 2010 and how much it cost the party in terms of governorships and control of state legislatures, as well as the next generation of Democratic leaders across the country.
posted by mediareport at 12:56 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Mitt Romney is better toned because he came off 20-plus primary debates. President Obama has not been on a debate stage in four years," Schroeder said. [NPR]

This is of course why we had those landslides by Presidents Mondale, Dole and Kerry.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 12:57 PM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

Via Andrew Sullivan's site:

“Running for president in the YouTube era, you realize you have to be very judicious in what you say. You have to be careful with your humor. You have to recognize that anytime you’re running for the presidency of the United States, you’re on.”

Mitt Romney, 2007. Apparently, he flip flopped on that opinion as well.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 12:57 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

Can anyone tell what the attendee is saying in the second video at 3:24? What strategy he is saying would result in a landslide in his opinion? I can't quite tell.
posted by cashman at 12:57 PM on September 18, 2012

(oops...link)
posted by MCMikeNamara at 12:57 PM on September 18, 2012

"Mitt Romney is better toned because he came off 20-plus primary debates. President Obama has not been on a debate stage in four years," Schroeder said. [NPR]

I could probably gain lots of confidence playing 20 pick-up basketball games against fifth graders, which would quickly evaporate once I tried playing a game against former NBA players.
posted by perhapses at 1:01 PM on September 18, 2012 [14 favorites]

This is of course why we had those landslides by Presidents Mondale, Dole and Kerry.

Mitt has been debating a good amount of this year. Nobody said it would win him the debate or the election. 20+ debates is not like 3, or 4. Mitt sounded confident in the video about his debate skills, and the President has not stepped on a debate stage in years. I'd love for Obama to wipe the floor with Mittens, since Mitt seems to not care about being president to help the country. However, Obama is rusty, and Mitt has had lots of practice. Those are just the facts. It doesn't mean Mitt will win the first debate, but it does mean that he should fare pretty well. It doesn't mean Obama will lose the first debate, but it does suggest that he will fail to capitalize on some opportunities, and in general, look rusty debate-wise.
posted by cashman at 1:04 PM on September 18, 2012

One more thing about the video. Some people are rich because they really are smart. One guy in particular recomends that Romney attack from the left by painting Obama as beholden to entrenched elites. He proposes doing this by aligning OWS and the tea party, in their hatred for corruption and selling to the same elites who are being protected by telling them that if there were sudenly a free-for-all, they could make tons more money as the government is no longer protecting their enemies.He says pretty much you can get everyone together to tear down the government, each for their own personal reasons.

His recommendation for Romey's first act as president, fire the SEC and FTC.

Can anyone tell what the attendee is saying in the second video at 3:24?

I got the jist as kill them with cold hard fact, stop pandering to the moment. I don't think he said anything about skill, I heard something like "go in for the kill". I think Romney dissmissed him with the book, and how awesome his peeps are because Romney thinks you can't get elected treating voters as adults.
posted by Ad hominem at 1:04 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Barney Frank Blasts Mitt Romney's 'Galling' Attack On 'Disabled Veterans, Elderly'.
posted by ericb at 1:09 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I could probably gain lots of confidence playing 20 pick-up basketball games against fifth graders, which would quickly evaporate once I tried playing a game against former NBA players.

I hope Romney knows that Obama can't dribble to his right.

oh no i've said too much
posted by mcstayinskool at 1:10 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I got the jist as kill them with cold hard fact, stop pandering to the moment.

Yeah I got the gist of it when he spoke - he made it pretty clear with his examples, and I knew Mitt would run from any approach that required facts and presenting a critiquable case, but I'm interested in just what phrase he used. What terminology that was.

I just listened again - it's the phrase "eat what you kill". So kind of again speaking to the idea of a leaner government, back to the cutting out the 4 cent penny, et cetera.
posted by cashman at 1:12 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

perhapses: I could probably gain lots of confidence playing 20 pick-up basketball games against fifth graders, which would quickly evaporate once I tried playing a game against former NBA players.

Not to mention all he had to do with that circus troupe of fifth graders was outflank them on the Right with policies Attila the Hun would approve of (self-deportation anyone?).

Playing nuance and trying to appear compassionate and center-ish right moderate with a stone cold disciplined debater like Obama is going to result in spastic commentary from the Mittser that's going to me internet gold methinks.

I, honestly don't know how the Mitt-Bott doesn't spazz the fuck out and overload / blow out his cyborg brain unit.
posted by Skygazer at 1:13 PM on September 18, 2012

“if something of that [hostage crisis] nature presents itself I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity.”

Um... wow. I was suspicious this was taken out of context, but I just listened to the bit in the video where he said it. Wow.

The Libya comments and the Scrooge McFundraiser schtick, fused into a transcendental singularity of campaignfail.

Too perfect. Can't process. Should have sent a poet.
posted by saturday_morning at 1:13 PM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

He didn't even WIN against the 5th graders.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:14 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

I just listened again - it's the phrase "eat what you kill". So kind of again speaking to the idea of a leaner government, back to the cutting out the 4 cent penny, et cetera.

Ahhh.. makes perfect sense. You can't spend unless you cut.
posted by Ad hominem at 1:15 PM on September 18, 2012

My white male millionaire friend is voting for WHO!?!.
posted by ericb at 1:16 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

Post-moocher bounce?
posted by zombieflanders at 1:22 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Who would they press charges against?

Hopefully the intertubes. ALL OF THEM.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:23 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think Mittens wants to be president because he has daddy issues, he wants to achieve something his dad would be proud of him for. He just seems like such an over-compensating asshole to me, not to terribly unlike Bush Jr.

Yep. And he really isn't all that interested in governing.

Romney was such a failure as a governor. He's running away from his signature achievement: Universal Health Care for residents of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. It's called 'Commonwealth' for a reason!

Many were/are upset that Romney went around the country dissing Massachusetts during his last year of Governor. He only ran for 1 term, so as to put it on his résumé and then could say that he successfully ran for public office. Transparent opportunism.

His performance was lackluster. In his previous run for President Flip Romney tried to downplay his poor performance as governor ... and made many disparaging comments about Massachusetts in the process.

As well, "[i]n 2006, his last year as governor, Romney spent all or part of 212 days [58%] out of state, laying the foundation for his anticipated presidential campaign."* "[He] [v]isited 35 states; built a national network [for his run for President].*

HE HAD NO INTEREST in running the State. He was using his governorship as a springboard for his Presidential ambitions. The guy has no 'core.' No 'center.'

Oh, and another tidbit: "The cost of the Governor's security detail for out-of-state trips increased from $63,874 in fiscal year 2005 to a cost of $103,365 in the first 11 months of fiscal year 2006."
posted by ericb at 1:25 PM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

Cashman: I'm not hearing "eat what you kill." However, here's what I get:

(finishes up a discussion about pros/cons of minting pennies, then...) I want to see you take the gloves off and talk to people that [sic] actually read the paper, read a book, and care about knowing the facts and... knowledge is power! As opposed to people that [sic] are swayed by, you know, what sounds good at the moment. You know, I, if you turned into an ebrew chakel it'd be a landslide, in my humble opinion. Heh, heh, heh.

Which is to say, nothing. Maybe a noun. Something "smart" because "knowledge is power!" and Mitt, in his opinion, should really take of the gloves and do the hard work of addressing people who read, not those other people.

I see there was wine, so maybe that explains the slurred speech.

I also wonder if the video was taken from the service table, which would mean that all the rich folks who never see "the help" anyway didn't notice that the help was taping them. Would be awesome if true.
posted by Houstonian at 1:25 PM on September 18, 2012

As governor, Romney faced similar economic situation as Obama -- with similar results..
posted by ericb at 1:25 PM on September 18, 2012

Cashman and Houstonian - how about "evil shrill"? That's what I thought I heard, and it works in the context of Houstonian's transcription - and would explain the kind of jokey attitude toward the end? Very hard to hear clearly though ....
posted by cdalight at 1:31 PM on September 18, 2012

I also thought that a few times - I saw a server "deliberately" - stay out of the way of the camera while doing what they needed to at the table the camera was on.
posted by cdalight at 1:32 PM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'm pretty sure the attendee says "Eat whatcha kill".
posted by cashman at 1:33 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I also thought that a few times - I saw a server "deliberately" - stay out of the way of the camera while doing what they needed to at the table the camera was on.

Oh for sure - you could also see someone come and adjust the golden chalices to make sure there was a clear view.
posted by cashman at 1:34 PM on September 18, 2012

if something of that nature presents itself I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity

So he anticipated the crisis and still fucked up his response.
posted by kirkaracha at 1:35 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Just went back and listened again - I agree Cashman, he does say "eat whatcha kill"
posted by cdalight at 1:37 PM on September 18, 2012

One Million Strong Against Mitt Romney in 2012.
posted by ericb at 1:37 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

From Romney's interview on Fox News today: "I think people would like to be paying taxes."

Yes, that's the message your party has been hammering on for years!
posted by perhapses at 1:38 PM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

The issue's not what Mitt Romney said or whether he hunts people for sport
posted by hap_hazard at 1:41 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

"Eat what you kill" makes sense to me because I have heard it in a business context ( it is also used in pool, you get high or low ball based on what you sink first, but that is neither here nor there). It always means we have a fixed budget and if we want to "eat" new expenses, we have to kill another expenditure first

I also thought that a few times - I saw a server "deliberately" - stay out of the way of the camera while doing what they needed to at the table the camera was on.

I think they all knew it was there. I am pretty sure they will just question the entire catering staff and catch someone.
posted by Ad hominem at 1:42 PM on September 18, 2012

Ooh, how I hate the phrase "Eat what you kill"! Every time I have had a boss or manager use that phrase in a workplace environment, it translated into "I am going to exploit the hell out of and then not pay you a cent, and all of your co-workers are going to do everything in their power to screw you."
posted by vibrotronica at 1:45 PM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Charlie Pierce is writing like some kinda goldanged avenging angel or something
You wanted me to be authentic and you got it, both barrels, gold-plated with a lovely mahogany stock, perfect for killing varmints. Put me on a podium in front of an auditorium full of mouthbreathers I wouldn't hire to park my car and I turn into an ice sculpture. But put me in a room with sentient piles of currency, and I can relax and explain the way the world works in the only language they understand, the only language that counts. I speak Money, bitches, and if you didn't learn it when you were young, there ain't no Rosetta Stone you can use to play catch-up now. We spoke Money at home. We spoke Money at prep school. Parlez-vous franc? Sprechen sie Deutschmark? You don't speak Money, you don't speak to me, because, well:
I'm Mitt Romney, bitches, and I'm all you got left.
posted by hap_hazard at 1:46 PM on September 18, 2012 [12 favorites]

They need to claim the video was shot by Ms. Bunbury and I'll love them forever.
posted by winna at 1:47 PM on September 18, 2012

s a detailed analysis of why it will be hard for Dems to defend the Senate in 2014, let alone re-take the House:

538 is currently predicting a good chance that the Democrats will retain the Senate, although Silver admits that it is very volatile.
posted by muddgirl at 1:49 PM on September 18, 2012

This seems relevant to some of the discussion here:

The background to so much of the politics of the past four years is the mood of apocalyptic terror that has gripped so much of the American upper class.

Hucksters of all kinds have battened on this terror. They tell them that free enterprise is under attack; that Obama is a socialist, a Marxist, a fascist, an anti-colonialist. Only by donating to my think tank, buying my book, watching my network, going to my movie, can you - can we - stop him before he seizes everything to give to his base of "bums," as Charles Murray memorably called them.

And what makes it all both so heart-rending and so outrageous is that all this is occurring at a time when economically disadvantaged Americans have never been so demoralized and passive, never exerted less political clout. No Coxey's army is marching on Washington, no sit-down strikes are paralyzing factories, no squatters are moving onto farmer's fields. Occupy Wall Street immediately fizzled, there is no protest party of the political left.

The only radical mass movement in this country is the Tea Party, a movement to defend the interests of elderly incumbent beneficiaries of the existing welfare state. Against that movement is a government of liberal technocrats dependent on campaign donations from a different faction of the American super-rich than that which backs Mitt Romney himself.

From the greatest crisis of capitalism since the 1930s, the rights and perquisites of wealth have emerged undiminished - and the central issue in this election is whether those rights and perquisites shall be enhanced still more, or whether they should be allowed to slip back to the level that prevailed during the dot.com boom.

Yet even so, the rich and the old are scared witless! Watch the trailer of Dinesh D'Souza's new movie to glimpse into their mental universe: chanting swarthy mobs, churches and banks under attack, angry black people grabbing at other people's houses.

It's all a scam, but it's a spectacularly effective scam. Mitt Romney tried to make use of the scam, and now instead has fallen victim to it himself.

I guess it makes sense to at least be paranoid and self righteous if you're actually rich. Because you're isolated, deluded, and only listening to an echo-chamber.

But if you're not actually rich and are making these arguments as though you're coming down from on high to lecture us peasants on how it really is, then you're either blind, dishonest, and/or much less informed than you should be.
posted by deanc at 2:02 PM on September 18, 2012 [16 favorites]

This bit from the NYTimes piece just makes me wonder about the utter cluelessness of Romses and his campaign managers

Cluelessness doesn't really capture the Romney campaign: Romney tells 533 lies in 30 weeks.
posted by filthy light thief at 2:06 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

10 more comments to 1,000. I just want to say good luck Metafilter, we're all counting on you.
posted by mcstayinskool at 2:06 PM on September 18, 2012 [12 favorites]

Surely you can't be serious?
posted by zombieflanders at 2:10 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

muddgirl: "s a detailed analysis of why it will be hard for Dems to defend the Senate in 2014, let alone re-take the House:

538 is currently predicting a good chance that the Democrats will retain the Senate, although Silver admits that it is very volatile"

That's for 2012. The point is that 2014 looks tough for Democrats in the Senate, mostly because 20 of the 33 seats up for election are Democrats, and 6 of those 20 are in red states.
posted by Perplexity at 2:10 PM on September 18, 2012

I'm totally serious. And stop calling me Shirley.
posted by mcstayinskool at 2:11 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

Leaked `47 percent’ video is awful politics for Romney (emphasis in original)

Some conservatives are claiming the controversy gives Romney an opportunity to sharpen the ideological contrast with Obama. As one put it: “it worked! the media are talking about how 47% pay no income taxes.”

The flip side of this, as Kevin Drum and Ed Kilgore point out, is that conservative repetition of Romney’s argument will force a public debate over whether America is really divided between “makers and moochers,” which can’t possibly help Romney.

So who’s right? Fortunately, we have polling that can help shed light on this.

In July, Pew asked Americans what they think about the amount lower income people pay in taxes. Only 20 percent think they pay too little, versus 34 percent who say they pay a fair amount and 37 percent who say they pay too much — a total of 71 percent.

Pew also tells me that only 23 percent of independents, and 18 percent of moderates, say low income people pay too little in taxes, while big majorities of both say they pay a fair amount or too much.

Are these numbers are skewed by the large number of respondents who pay low federal income taxes or none at all? Guess what: Only 22 percent of self-described middle class people think lower income folks pay too little, versus 69 percent who say they pay their fair share or too much.

Meanwhile, the reverse is true about rich people. A majority, 58 percent, say the wealthy pay too little in taxes, while only 26 percent say they pay their fair share. Fifty six percent of independents, and 69 percent of moderates, say the rich pay too little.

What about the broader debate over the role of government and the safety net? As Jim Tankersly points out, polling suggests that swing voters actually disagree with the fundamental ideological case underlying Romney’s videotaped remarks.

posted by zombieflanders at 2:12 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I hope, when they find the waitstaff that did the taping -- and they will, they'll hunt that person down -- I hope that person says something like this:

"6895 hours and 30 minutes. At minimum wage, that's how much time I would have to work to pay for the $50,000/plate meal they ate while tossing around ideas and listening to a pontificating jerk.

15,080. That's how much I gross each year at minimum wage, working 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year. They were enjoying prime rib and a nice Bordeaux. I was picking up plates and filling glasses. And listening to them call me shiftless because no, at $15,080/year you don't pay much in federal income tax. You do pay a lot in sales taxes and fees though, when you live in a state with no state income tax, like Florida.

9,750. That's how much I don't pay income tax on, same as all single people under 65. Same as Mitt. The first $9750 is tax-free. However...

20 million. That's less than Romney makes in a year. It's also the number of Americans without a job. Clearly we need to pay more in taxes so that we can prove we're not only wanting handouts, and to give poor Romney and his ilk a break."
posted by Houstonian at 2:12 PM on September 18, 2012 [54 favorites]

That's for 2012. The point is that 2014 looks tough for Democrats in the Senate

Whoops, yeah. Apparantly even 1 Sudafed is enough to affect my reading comprehension skills.
posted by muddgirl at 2:14 PM on September 18, 2012

The Distress of the Privileged:

Once you grasp the concept of privileged distress, you’ll see it everywhere: the rich feel “punished” by taxes; whites believe they are the real victims of racism; employers’ religious freedom is threatened when they can’t deny contraception to their employees; English-speakers resent bilingualism — it goes on and on.

And what is the Tea Party movement other than a counter-revolution? It comes cloaked in religion and fiscal responsibility, but scratch the surface and you’ll find privileged distress: Change has taken something from us and we want it back.

posted by maudlin at 2:14 PM on September 18, 2012 [27 favorites]

The Twitter handle that produced the Romney video is threatening to release his tax returns if he doesn't.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 2:15 PM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

The dancing on Mitt's campaign's grave, as deliciously schadenfreude-ey as it may feel, may be awfully premature. We have a "October" surprise coming from the Romney campaign (though they're not waiting for October, nor is it actually coming from the Romney campaign [officially, anyway]).

Citizens United Obama film to air on TV

This movie — set to start airing on Tuesday and run through Nov. 6 on six cable and six broadcast networks — features forty Democratic and independent voters who backed Obama in 2008 and have since become disillusioned. Much of the film consists of the voters talking, with an overlay of world events over the last four years.

The movie’s wide release — backed by a large advertising campaign behind it — was part of the goal of the Citizens United court case that was decided in 2010 by the U.S. Supreme Court and helped to dramatically alter the landscape for political donations by allowing the unfettered flow of corporate cash into campaigns.

“This (the court case) is why I did ‘Citizens United,’” David Bossie, the group’s president said. “This would have been a criminal act under McCain-Feingold before my court case.”

Yeah, this is not over by a long shot.

And fuck Citizens United.
posted by tzikeh at 2:16 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'd be worried about that film, but if it's playing opposite Honey Boo Boo they are screwed.
posted by mcstayinskool at 2:19 PM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

mcstayinskool - while your comment gave me an honest out-loud laugh, the film is going to run *constantly* between today (premiere date) and election day.
posted by tzikeh at 2:22 PM on September 18, 2012

I feel for Tim Pawlenty.

As a Minnesotan, I ask you, please don't.
posted by Mental Wimp at 2:22 PM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

This movie is already available and didn't seem to be particularly powerful when it was unveiled at the convention. Is there something new about it?

Also, they did a nice job at hyping up the 6 network thing, but here's the details on the second page. "The movie will run in its 60-minute entirety in an agreement with six cable networks like HDNet Movies and FamilyNet, along with local stations in Louisiana, Colorado, Indiana, Hawaii and Louisiana."
posted by feloniousmonk at 2:23 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

There's a Citizens United press release at http://www.citizensunited.org/press-releases.aspx?article=6267

The movie will show on "HDNet Movies, AXS TV, RFD-TV, FamilyNet, and Rural TV." I have never even heard of most of those. Are there really a lot of voters in swing states who are going to want to watch a 60-minute political ad?
posted by grouse at 2:25 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Is there something new about it?

Running it daily is quite a bit different than running it once at a political convention. More chances for more eyeballs, etc.
posted by tzikeh at 2:26 PM on September 18, 2012

tzikeh - I only joke because I'm crying on the inside. I fully endorse your call to Fuck Citizens United. Possibly the worst Supreme Court ruling of our lives, given the implications of what it will do to drive propaganda during elections. I really, really, hope that something like that movie doesn't tip the scales towards this a-hole.
posted by mcstayinskool at 2:26 PM on September 18, 2012

Yeah, in NYC, I'm pretty sure we don't get any of those channels.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 2:28 PM on September 18, 2012

The movie will run in its 60-minute entirety in an agreement with six cable networks like HDNet Movies and FamilyNet, along with local stations in Louisiana, Colorado, Indiana, Hawaii and Louisiana.

So good it's playing in Louisiana twice!

But seriously, that's two relatively low-viewer cable networks and unnamed local stations in two swing states, one safe GOP state (twice! OK, OK...), and one safe Democrat state.
posted by zombieflanders at 2:30 PM on September 18, 2012

I'm... skeptical about the claims made in that Politico article and the press release about the anti-Obama movie. For example

reaching 130 million cumulative households, over the next few months

Really? 130 million homes in the US (which is the country that matters)? Unless their definition of 'homes' is different than mine, I'm pretty skeptical of this number. That is every "housing unit" in the entire country.
posted by muddgirl at 2:30 PM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

If my cable guide's order is any indication AXS TV used to be called HDnet. Interestingly, this is Mark Cuban's network. HDnet is the sort of network which provided me the opportunity to DVR the entire series of JAG a few years back, to give you some idea of its prestige.
posted by feloniousmonk at 2:32 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

"The movie will run in its 60-minute entirety in an agreement with six cable networks like HDNet Movies and FamilyNet, along with local stations in Louisiana, Colorado, Indiana, Hawaii and Louisiana."

Both Louisianas? We're fucked.

But, seriously, that's a really odd selection of states to run in. I don't see Hawaii or either Louisiana being in play, while Indiana was probably not going to tip to Obama again anyway. Only Colorado seems to be a true swing state.
posted by maudlin at 2:32 PM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

Eat what you kill...

That sounds like what Bain's strategy was towards the companies it took over, fired most or all of the employees, dismantled factories and shuttered them or moved them to China and (this is key) leveraged as collateral for special interest rate government loans to use on acquiring other companies and dismantling them, special government grants, leveraged the pension accounts to fudge Bain money into and on and on it went, Bain parasitically inhabiting a company from the inside, turning it into it's host, eviscerating it, killing and eating it. Ka-ching ka-chang!

That's business when you don't make anything of real value.

I think Romster would do that to the whole country, but on a massive massive scale...there's so much intrinsic value in this nation and so much that can be sold off. Value that's been built into the nation over time, and with the taxes of hundreds of millions of people, from the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, for the common good. For the civic fiber and the ideals. For the general welfare...parks and forests and other protected lands. Highways, and by-ways and dams, and power plants and electrical grids and distribution systems.

All that stuff would be sold off for pennies on the dollar, as would the human capital of the country: the most skilled, educated, advanced and valuable workforce the planet's ever seen made available to billionaires, capable of landing a robot-supercomputer truck on mars in one piece, dismantled and reduced to desperation to pay off it's debts available for the worlds diehard Capitalists for a fucking song...

Man, this country better stand up to leeches like Romney and take stock of itself and be proud of itself, because all Romney, and the billionaires he seeks to serve as POTUS, see is a big fat goose ready for the slaughter....ready for turning billionaires into trillionaires, and ready to put it's indelible stamp of ownership upon it once and for all, and obedient, cowering fearful people, bowing to and brainwashed into doing the whims of the ultra-rich...

That's what Mitt sees...he sees weakness.

Clinton used to say: "There's nothing wrong with America, that can't be fixed by what's right with America..." And he was right...it's a process and one worth it, in spite of the problems, to keep moving forward...the arc of the universe bends towards justice, as MLK said...

But for Romney that phrase would be something like: Half of America is permanently broken, and the only thing to do is kill it and eat it.
posted by Skygazer at 2:33 PM on September 18, 2012 [26 favorites]

It sounds less like a list of places they want to show it and more like a list of places they were able to show it.
posted by feloniousmonk at 2:34 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

130 million homes in the US (which is the country that matters)? Unless their definition of 'homes' is different than mine, I'm pretty skeptical of this number. That is every "housing unit" in the entire country.

Maybe it works just like Romney inflating his book sales numbers by requiring institutions he deals with to buy thousands of copies. If big banks can put TVs in all the households they've foreclosed on and tune them to Citizens United whenever it's on, those numbers are going to go way up, baby.
posted by grouse at 2:35 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Also, "reaching 130 million cumulative households", even if that number is accurate, is quite a bit different than households actually watching the thing. Let's say they get 1 out of 100 of those ficticious households to watch the movie. That's 13 million. How many of those are viewers aren't already pitchfork-and-torch carrying Obama haters?

I'm not so worried now.
posted by mcstayinskool at 2:35 PM on September 18, 2012

Yeah, the way the Politico article is worded, it sounds like it'll be airing every day on ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, and HBO. Very inflammatory!
posted by muddgirl at 2:37 PM on September 18, 2012

Much of the film consists of the voters talking, with an overlay of world events over the last four years.

Of all the people I know, the only person who would watch a 60 minute long piece of explicit political propaganda is me, and I'd just watch it to tear it to tiny comical threads.

I doubt anyone watches much of it.
posted by winna at 2:37 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Local stations in "Colorado, Indiana, Hawaii and Louisiana." three of those states don't matter shit in this election, they are not contested. Obama is not winning LA or IN, and Romney isn't winning HI. Colorado... well lets say CO matters, but it isn't a game changer, even if the Movie wins Romney CO he has to ALSO win so many more states as well.

As to "HDNet Movies, AXS TV, RFD-TV, FamilyNet, and Rural TV." WTF. What cable package carries these? I've honestly have not heard of any of them, and does one think anyone is going to watch an hour long dry as white toast poly ad on disillusionment? That frankly sounds like the garbage they play on Local Access TV already.

Man.. the air war is nearly over. Saturation is near peak much more and you risk just flat out annoying people, 49 days is time for the ground war to start, and does Romney himself have a viable plan for that other than relying on churches and the waning ranks of enthused volunteers. Boots on the ground time
posted by edgeways at 2:38 PM on September 18, 2012

I was surprised to learn that our digital cable package carries FamilyNet, and ATT Uverse and DirectTV packages have HDNet. They're channels at the very end of the programming guide that you always skip through because they tend to show reruns of movies that TBS wore out 5 years ago.
posted by muddgirl at 2:42 PM on September 18, 2012

A 60-minute film about politics is 59:55 too long for any American swing voter to pay attention to.
posted by Rykey at 2:43 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Gop Sen. Scott Brown Denounces Romney, As Do Others.
posted by ericb at 2:44 PM on September 18, 2012

Romney Tries Appealing To Women, Unveils "Dear Daughter" Ad..
posted by ericb at 2:46 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

HDNet Movies and I guess AXS, if that's a renamed HDNet, are available on Dish Network as well.

FamilyNet and Rural TV might be available via Dish as well, if I ever looked at the rest of the channels instead of just using a list of favorite channels in order to skip the interminable lists of sports, shopping and religious channels.
posted by rewil at 2:47 PM on September 18, 2012

Gop Sen. Scott Brown Denounces Romney, As Do Others.

GOP Senator Scott Brown is terrified of losing his Senate race in Massachusetts.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 2:48 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Poll: Optimism Grows About Obama's Path.
posted by ericb at 2:49 PM on September 18, 2012

"If somebody is dumb enough to ask me to go to political convention and say something, they're gonna have to take what they get,"

Ok, 24 RomneyPoints to the first person to identify this quote.
posted by edgeways at 2:52 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Tim Pawlenty, ah T-Paw, right. As much as we make fun of Mittens at least Mittens committed his money and time to wanting to be something, President of the United States. While T-Paw just wanted to be something without any serious commitment at all. Barely good enough for Minnesota and not good at all for the larger electorate. Seriously, you want someone who wants to DO something not just BE something.
posted by jadepearl at 2:53 PM on September 18, 2012

Clint Eastwood, edgeways. I expect my points.
posted by Joey Michaels at 2:53 PM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

According to Wikipedia, RFD-TV seems to be an obscure rural-themed channel with stellar original programming such as "Horse Sense", "HorseCity.com TV", "Horse Babies", "Horseman's Edge", "Horse Master", and "The Roping Show". Rural TV is apparently an even more obscure sister channel of RFD-TV's that has vacillated between being a UK version of RFD-TV, a programming block on another horse-related channel, a 24-hour online-only channel, and now finally a channel that's only on Dish Network. As long as Citizen's United capitalizes on Romney's pro-horse stance I think they are poised to pick up dozens of single issue equestrian-oriented voters.
posted by burnmp3s at 2:53 PM on September 18, 2012 [16 favorites]

Isn't Romney anti-horse though? He mocked his wife for owning one during the Olympics. Big Horse can't be trusted here.
posted by feloniousmonk at 2:55 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Clint Eastwood, edgeways. I expect my points.

And what a ringing endorsement THAT was... See Paul "the muppet" Ryan for the awarded points, I'm sure he'll have at least something to give you just as valuable.
posted by edgeways at 2:57 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

The 47 Percent: Here's Who Pays No Federal Income Tax.
posted by ericb at 2:58 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Wait, nobody said anything about Bad Horse.
posted by Artw at 2:59 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

Bad Horse is awesome. Its about a Palomino who finds out he has cancer and decides to make as much money for his family as he can by getting into the dangerous glue trade.
posted by Joey Michaels at 3:02 PM on September 18, 2012 [27 favorites]

Houstonian: ""6895 hours and 30 minutes. At minimum wage, that's how much time I would have to work to pay for the $50,000/plate meal they ate while tossing around ideas and listening to a pontificating jerk."

Low wages are a tax, too. They go directly towards subsidizing your boss.
posted by dunkadunc at 3:08 PM on September 18, 2012 [14 favorites]

In case you want to be launched into an uncontrollable rage at around 8 eastern, Bill O'Reilly's website tells me that his "talking points memo" tonight is titled "Mitt Romney speaking the truth on the entitlement nation." Charles Krauthammer will help with the analysis!
posted by King Bee at 3:09 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

130 million cumulative households

Possible silly math explanation: size of network subscriber footprint * number of airings in that network, for each of the planned viewer constituencies. You run a film fifty times on a station a million people receive, there's fifty million cumulative household-subscriber-reception events, or some such shit.

I'd be curious about the actual math.
posted by cortex at 3:21 PM on September 18, 2012

If the Republicans want the rich to pay low taxes, then surely the poor would pay no taxes.
posted by PenDevil at 3:22 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Oh my god, that "Dear Daughter" ad... I don't even know what to say. I know political ads are usually corny and transparent all, but wow.
posted by sonmi at 3:24 PM on September 18, 2012

Keith Olbermann posts a Special Comment on the Romney 47% Video.
posted by ob1quixote at 3:24 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

I thought it was the ill-conceived Paul Rodgers/Neil Young-led super-supergroup.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 3:27 PM on September 18, 2012

For some reason I am getting a lot of laughs out of the idea that the "Dear Daughter" ad is actually an homage to Tupac's "Dear Mama." I hope this isn't ruined by accidentally seeing it.
posted by feloniousmonk at 3:28 PM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

I'd be curious about the actual math.

You mean arithmetic.
posted by clearly at 3:31 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh my god, that "Dear Daughter" ad... I don't even know what to say. I know political ads are usually corny and transparent all, but wow.

The smarmy soft voice he uses at the end SELLS IT TO THE MAX.

I'm totally making that a ring tone. It is a mission!
posted by winna at 3:33 PM on September 18, 2012

Oh my god, that "Dear Daughter" ad... I don't even know what to say.

Doesn't you? Was you distracted by the wittle baby, is dat it den? Izit? Izitden? Look at the pretty widdle bayyybbbeee! Look at de babykins!

I'm Mitt Romney, and I approve this message.
posted by howfar at 3:39 PM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

130 million cumulative households
Nielsen measurement has roughly 114mm tv households in the US from what I've read. So those 130mm numbers are clearly bunkum.

I'd posit that the Citizens United people have included gross figures in their release. Common methods are by adding the individual network reach figures together (and thus not allowing for presence of multiple networks in any one household) and grossing up total reach opportunity of all households across all time periods they're running their piece (so if a household has reach potential on all fourteen days of coverage it's counted 14 times. MAGIC expanding viewership!).

These are sadly common errors in media measurement (though sometimes i've seen it done accidentally on purpose for greater effect). It pisses me off no end that it can be difficult to get clarity on exactly how they've mangled the data.

Caveat: I'm more familiar with non-US media measurement so could be talking out of my arse, I am assuming the errors/tendencies to inflate are going to be a global trait.
posted by pymsical at 3:43 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Moonorb, that my friend is the great sucking sound of a rudderless campaign unable to deal with it's ADD as it circles the drain
posted by edgeways at 3:45 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

There are hundreds of TV Channels out there. I can't imagine anyone but true believers are going to watch a documentary for or against either candidate this late in the game. This sounds like a monumental waste of money. Indeed, this sounds like a folly of almost Quixote-esque proportions.

Come to think of it, Romney would stand a better chance if he last name were Quixote.
posted by Joey Michaels at 3:47 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Well, I don't think he's too crazy about windmills.
posted by box at 3:51 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

"Yay capitalism! Screw the poor!"

When reached for comment, Romney expressed confusion.

"Out of what?"
posted by Orange Pamplemousse at 3:54 PM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

Depends, whatta they got?
posted by edgeways at 4:12 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Meanwhile, Obama was, believe it or not, scheduled to be on Letterman tonight, so he gets to make his first comments about his opponent's video opposite a friendly comedian. (When I saw the commercial for this shortly after seeing the Romney clip last night, I couldn't believe the luck) It's an easy no-guarded lay-up, but he nails it:

“I don’t know what he was referring to,” the president told David Letterman in an interview on CBS’ Late Show. “But I can tell you this. When I won in 2008, 47% of the American people voted for John McCain. They didn’t vote for me. What I said on election night was even though you didn’t vote for me, I hear your voices and I’m going as work as hard as I can to be your president.”

“One of the things I’ve learned as President is you represent the entire country. And when I meet Republicans as I’m traveling around the country, they are hardworking family people who care deeply about this country. And my expectation is if you want to be president you’ve got to work for everybody, not just for some.”

posted by MCMikeNamara at 4:13 PM on September 18, 2012 [56 favorites]

New lease on life for this photo.
posted by Flunkie at 4:16 PM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

I know Sullivan is pretty unpopular in these parts, but this is the best line I've heard on the whole thing:

"So there are two possibilities: this is the real Romney, a callous cynic with contempt for half the country, the weaker part; or that Romney is a man so empty of human qualities he even has to fake cynicism."
posted by lattiboy at 4:20 PM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

Of course, Romney can counter to say he meant it wasn't job to worry about getting them to vote for him. But if he brings focus back to the full quote that extends into him thinking he'll "never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

And Obama covers that on Letterman too:

“There are not a lot of people out there who think they’re victims. There are not a lot of people who think they’re entitled to something. What I think people want to make sure of, though, is you’re not writing off a big chunk of the country. This is a big country… And people disagree a lot, but one thing I’ve never tried to do, and I think none of us can do in public office, is suggest that because someone doesn’t agree with me that they’re victims or they’re unpatriotic.”
posted by MCMikeNamara at 4:21 PM on September 18, 2012 [9 favorites]

Man.... are we sure Romney isn't a secret mole cultivated 4 years ago? This week is a complete bust for Romney and he gets to set up the president to be all ultra patriotic ''I am a president for everyone'' without sounding incredably cheesy or contrived.
What will happen next week? Release of tax forms?
posted by edgeways at 4:24 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

The "$10,000 bet" thing was a major screw-up, yes, which is one of the reasons it's said he's not so good with the improvising.

FRIENDLY ADVICE FOR MITT: The peons are obsessed with money and impressed by those who have it, so it would've gone over better with them if it weren't for such an absurdly low amount. Go higher next time!
posted by Flunkie at 4:32 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

130 million cumulative households

Doesn't it mean that it will be shown multiple times? So 13 million households 10 times? Or one lucky household trapped in sko Sapphire and Steel endless timewarp of 130 million repetitions?
posted by Sebmojo at 4:35 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney Apologizes To Nation's 150 Million 'Starving, Filthy Beggars'
posted by TwoWordReview at 4:38 PM on September 18, 2012 [12 favorites]

"Believe in half of America"
posted by cashman at 4:44 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Maybe the Citizens United doc will be shown on prison networks, really sew up the few felons who can still vote.
posted by klangklangston at 4:44 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama was, believe it or not, scheduled to be on Letterman tonight

It's funny, watching Letterman last night, I wondered if Romney would appear on the show. Because as everyone knows, the road to the WH goes through Dave.
posted by octobersurprise at 4:46 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ive been trying to like Randy Newman for over a decade and his satire always seems dull and leaden to me.
posted by Senor Cardgage at 4:51 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney is playing the "I have a video too!" card.

It's 14 years old but it proves Obama is a socialist redistributor-in-chief or something.
posted by TwoWordReview at 5:04 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I gave up years ago. I remember hearing his song on TOY STORY and thinking "Wow, what an annoying voice".
posted by unSane at 5:06 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

I hope for his sake Romney isn't opening the door to scrutiinizing what he thought about, say, abortion in 1998.
posted by unSane at 5:07 PM on September 18, 2012

Quick! Can Romney's Campaign find a junior GOP congresscritter (preferably one about to lose their seat) who they can drug and dump naked in a gay bar toilet in Topeka?
posted by PenDevil at 5:08 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Bill O'Reilly says, "What is the controversy?"

He then put up a graphic titled "ENTITLEMENT STATS", which had:

46.7 million on food stamps

8.8 million on disability

106.6 million receiving government aid

Romney should simply show the stats to the Obama campaign, he said, to show the people that Obama is building a "nanny state."

Then, he said, Romney is simply telling the truth about entitlement culture.

Now, I watch Bill a lot. I don't know why. Maybe a know your enemy thing? Maybe because I'm trying to get back into political things, and I think that watching something like his show gives me a perspective on what a large group of people think? I really don't know. What I do know, is that his opening "talking points memo" segment is usually his pithy, glib, holier-than-thou time. He was speaking very loudly this time. Pleading. Knowing his candidate was done, even while claiming his candidate was doing the right thing.
posted by King Bee at 5:09 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

If this proves as disasterous to Romney's campaign as a lot of people seem to think it will be, what will the new verb be? Kerry got swiftboated... did Romney get motherjonesed? Caterergated? Fifty-thousand-dollar-dinnered? Corned?
posted by oulipian at 5:15 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama was, believe it or not, scheduled to be on Letterman tonight

Yup. They just (already) ran a clip on BBC World News.
posted by Flashman at 5:16 PM on September 18, 2012

If this proves as disasterous to Romney's campaign as a lot of people seem to think it will be, what will the new verb be? Kerry got swiftboated... did Romney get motherjonesed? Caterergated? Fifty-thousand-dollar-dinnered? Corned?

He did it to himself. Romney got Romneyed.
posted by Flunkie at 5:17 PM on September 18, 2012 [16 favorites]

Fatal auto-romneycism.
posted by feloniousmonk at 5:19 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

Mitt Romney will probably get 95 electoral votes from ‘moocher’ states. Obama will probably get 5.
posted by homunculus at 5:24 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

James O'Keefe is saying Mother Jones was unethical in obtaining the footage as their source may have broken the law.

He is an expert on this matter, as he is on probation for attempting to mess with an elected official's phones, and is famous for filming people without their knowledge or consent.

I'm sure he's working on a tweet bemoaning the unethical nature of Glenn Beck and Breitbart for giving him a platform.
posted by mccarty.tim at 5:31 PM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

1. My ad would be a side-on shot of Romney addressing a crowd. As he says "My fellow Americans", 50% of the faces in the crowd are removed. "my job is not to worry about those people" appears in text at the bottom of the screen.

2. Really, I just wanted to comment so I could say "I WAS HERE!"
posted by peacay at 5:34 PM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

Do we get to call this Mittendämmerung yet? While I am generally reticent to allow for even the faintest hope, I'm invariably over-eager to make puns.
posted by tzikeh at 5:36 PM on September 18, 2012 [13 favorites]

106.6 million receiving government aid

What does this mean exactly? We all receive government aid don't we? public schools, clean air, clean water, relatively safe transportation... I wonder how many conservatives work for the defense industry or underneath other government agencies and directly/indirectly make a living off of taxpayers.
posted by Golden Eternity at 5:45 PM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

Metafilter: invariably over-eager to make puns.
posted by emjaybee at 5:58 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Do we get to call this Mittendämmerung yet? While I am generally reticent to allow for even the faintest hope, I'm invariably over-eager to make puns.

Romnarök?
posted by zombieflanders at 5:59 PM on September 18, 2012 [17 favorites]

@daveweigel Romney campaign trying to get media obsessed with 1998 Obama clip. It's like Lacey Chabert in "Mean Girls" trying to make "fetch" happen.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:04 PM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

Romney Campaign Sends In Champion Of The Poor Paul Ryan For Damage Control
posted by Cookiebastard at 6:07 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Um, guys...

"The issue's not what Mitt Romney said or whether he hunts people for sport"

I might have caused that one.
posted by Cyrano at 6:10 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

James O'Keefe is saying Mother Jones was unethical in obtaining the footage as their source may have broken the law.

What is this Republican obsession with blatantly accusing your opponents of things that you do? I am waiting for the day that Romney accuses Obama of being a "rich, white Mormon."
posted by Joey Michaels at 6:13 PM on September 18, 2012 [43 favorites]

Bill O'Reilly says, "What is the controversy?"

He then put up a graphic titled "ENTITLEMENT STATS", which had:

46.7 million on food stamps

I read that stat and I wonder-- not why we are a nation of moochers, not how has Obama turned us into a Nanny state-- no I wonder why in the hell are so many people paid so little that they qualify for food stamps. Fuck that shit. We are the richest nation on earth but some people are hogging more than their share. Loosen your goddamn pocketbooks you cocksuckers, and pay your employees a living wage so they don't have to apply for food stamps.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:18 PM on September 18, 2012 [69 favorites]

Joey, thanks. I really needed that laugh.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:19 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

As long as Citizen's United capitalizes on Romney's pro-horse stance I think they are poised to pick up dozens of single issue equestrian-oriented voters.

Yeah! Romney just needs to take it to the limit a little more!
posted by mannequito at 6:42 PM on September 18, 2012

James O'Keefe is saying Mother Jones was unethical in obtaining the footage as their source may have broken the law.

No one called O'Keefe unethical for surreptitiously filming anyone. We called O'Keefe unethical for presenting the video under false pretenses and heavily, selectively editing the videos to imply felonies that never occurred.

That's why no liberal sources would show this video without vetting it, first. Because of ethical considerations. Which Brietbart and Fox News did not consider.
posted by muddgirl at 6:46 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

Be careful or he'll show up to one of the debates on a gray horse named Traveller. (Totally coincidental name!)
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:47 PM on September 18, 2012

That O'Keefe thing just kind of breaks my brain a little
posted by edgeways at 6:48 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

He doesn't actually believe it - he just thinks the two situations are exactly analogous because he doesn't understand either law (where both may be illegal) and ethics.
posted by muddgirl at 6:52 PM on September 18, 2012

(I mean he doesn't actually believe that MJ was acting unethically - he thinks he's turning left-wing criticisms back on us)
posted by muddgirl at 6:53 PM on September 18, 2012

What sweet revenge taping that. After all the damn snooping the government wants to do on its citizens. Well, one of the citizens got their own back. Brilliant work, whoever you may be. Thank you. Thanks for the history changing smarts and courage to tape that, then get the info into the right hands at the right time. Excellent transparency and truth sharing.

From that same video is a segment where Mitt Romney describes buying slave labor in China, 20 thousand people working in a factory. You can just hear this despicable twit's revved up excitement, talking about all those poor overworked young girls in dormitories, fenced in with 1 bathroom for 10 rooms. And then how LUCKY they are to be working. The fence is not to keep the girls in but to keep potential other workers out.

I can't help thinking this racist/classist bastard wants to whiplash the 47% he despises for thinking they can get food, health care. He'd probably want to see that 47% in dormitories, groveling for food, working for a pittance like the workers in China. I suspect his rabid ire is for the 6.9% non-elderly who earn less than $20 thou a year.

Map of the 47%, who they are and how they vote.

Enjoyed this vid about the 47%.
posted by nickyskye at 6:56 PM on September 18, 2012 [14 favorites]

"The issue's not what Mitt Romney said or whether he hunts people for sport"
I might have caused that one.

Well played. I love me a "Most Dangerous Game" reference and they're all too rare.
posted by Miko at 7:03 PM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

James O'Keefe is saying Mother Jones was unethical in obtaining the footage as their source may have broken the law.

How much Keefe is in this movie?
posted by octobersurprise at 7:18 PM on September 18, 2012 [12 favorites]

Mitt Romney has Lucky Ducky envy.
posted by palindromic at 7:19 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Among the many things that are interesting in the Romney Exposed vids are the ones discussing his thoughts about the Mideast.

Is it true that US taxpayers paid more to Israeli defense budget than Israelis?
posted by nickyskye at 7:19 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

I er... don't really understand this, there is something floating around saying Romney borrowed $20 Million pre convention using already raised GE funds as collateral (which he could not tuch at the time) so he could essentially fight the GE while still not being officially "The Nominee" so... they may actually be in debt right now due to paying back that loan.

I'm not sure how accurate that is, but, if it IS accurate to say they are in debt, that is kind of a tricky cu-de-sac for them to be in while trying to argue for fiscal responsibility.
posted by edgeways at 7:46 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

You can't use general election funds until you're nominated, the debt is just a loophole to get around that. No big deal.
posted by leopard at 7:54 PM on September 18, 2012

NYT: It may prove a fleeting anxiety: national polls show the race remains close, even though Mr. Romney trails in some key swing states.

Still, a flustered adviser, describing the mood, said that the campaign was turning into a vulgar, unprintable phrase.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:54 PM on September 18, 2012

On Maddow tonight they showed a clip of from the republican debates where Mitt proclaimed that the past 2 years if it weren't for capital gains tax, he would have paid nothing in taxes. Nothing.

At this point, it's clear Mitt is a fraud. So now just comes the gnashing of teeth and facepalm moments where reporters go through lines at Romney events, asking the people questions and then talking about Mitt, and watching as they twist themselves into knots trying not to look like suckers.

If you want to just be evil, hoard resources, and basically just say you got yours and fuck everybody else, okay fine. But I feel bad for those people who are about to get caught out there because they might not have chosen to attend the event or support Romney had they been informed.
posted by cashman at 7:56 PM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Mitt Romney probably has $20 Million between his (many, Corinthian leather) sofa cushions. Is there some sort of law against him just paying for his own campaign?
posted by Flashman at 7:57 PM on September 18, 2012

I understand the loopholedness to get around the spending restrictions, but the article seems to suggest they have negative funds and have to campaign to pay off the debt they are using to run the campaign. Which must seriously constrict their spending ability
posted by edgeways at 7:57 PM on September 18, 2012

I don't think they like to pay for campaign debt if they can possibly avoid it
posted by edgeways at 7:58 PM on September 18, 2012

Flashman

Well, not a law, but a rule most players try to follow.

"Never put your own money in a show."

The second rule is similar:

"NEVER PUT YOUR OWN MONEY IN A SHOW!"
posted by The Confessor at 8:00 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

I used to have DirecTV and they had the RFD Channel. Well worth watching for this commercial that they aired all the time. I don't sleep, people.
posted by artychoke at 8:02 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

These comments didn't cost Romney the election, because he was never going to win in the first place. If anything, his shitty convention sealed the deal. Then there were the comments about the embasy attacks, which also sealed the deal. And now these, which are just taking the deal and casting it in bronze or something.

If it were possible to triple lose, then that's what would be happening here.

What's amazing is that these comments were actually recorded months ago, after Romney sewed up the republican nomination (i.e. when he was obviously the winner, not after the convention)

So if it's the case that these comments really will cost him the election, they've been a ticking time bomb sitting around for months.

Also, it's amazing. How fucking stupid do you have to think you can get away with saying shit like this. Romney really thought he could just say whatever the fuck he wanted at a fundraiser and not have it leak out? Pretty ridiculous.

I never thought he would win, but I've been amazed how incompetent he's been.
posted by delmoi at 8:21 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Does sort of beg the question what else may be lurking out there.
posted by edgeways at 8:22 PM on September 18, 2012

Does sort of beg the question what else may be lurking out there.

Is it even worth mentioning the tax returns? If they were ever to be released, it could only be anti-climactic at this point, right? I mean... nope, I can't think of anything that could be in his tax returns that would truly be shocking.
posted by tzikeh at 8:26 PM on September 18, 2012

begs the question
posted by nadawi at 8:30 PM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

Call me a laissez-faire linguist then I suppose.
posted by edgeways at 8:31 PM on September 18, 2012

'raises the question' when in doubt
posted by unSane at 8:38 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

How fucking stupid do you have to think you can get away with saying shit like this. Romney really thought he could just say whatever the fuck he wanted at a fundraiser and not have it leak out? Pretty ridiculous.

It just illustrates his "us against them" mentality, with "us" being the rich white people he considers on his team and "them" being the great unwashed victims and government moochers. When you feel all safe and cozy with your high roller contributors, no need to guard your speech, just let how you REALLY feel fly.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 8:40 PM on September 18, 2012

Colbert's on fire. "And of course, the liberal media went after Romney like a poor person going after a basic need."
posted by saturday_morning at 8:41 PM on September 18, 2012 [38 favorites]

Still, a flustered adviser, describing the mood, said that the campaign was turning into a vulgar, unprintable phrase.

Flustered wonk dubs Romney funk "clusterfuck"
posted by burnmp3s at 8:42 PM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

Lucrefuck.
posted by unSane at 8:45 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I can't help but think if the tax returns don't show up sometime this week that he must have used some sort of special rich guy tax form where he claimed killing a newlywed couple and three kittens for a deduction.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 8:48 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Does Mitt Romney Want Your Vote? The GOP candidate’s “47 percent” comments in flowchart form.
posted by homunculus at 8:49 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

Filthy lucrefuck.
posted by Joey Michaels at 8:49 PM on September 18, 2012

I will say "THIS DOOMS ROMNEY" is more fun than "This will probably cost him two or three points that he can't afford," but I'm not sure this is as big a deal it reads in this thread.
posted by klangklangston at 8:49 PM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

But the substance, the very quintessence, of the campaign for presidency is symbolism, which is only fitting given the largely symbolic impact of the office.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 8:57 PM on September 18, 2012

An amusing vid. They don't like him either. What the Conservatives think of Mitt Romney.
posted by nickyskye at 9:12 PM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

Is it even worth mentioning the tax returns? If they were ever to be released, it could only be anti-climactic at this point, right? I mean... nope, I can't think of anything that could be in his tax returns that would truly be shocking.

The Romneys had at least one Swiss bank account at the time of the whistleblower incident a few years back. Americans who were found to have been evading taxes either faced criminal prosecution for tax evasion or paid a fine under an amnesty program.

Failing to apply for the amnesty and then getting charged by the IRS would have been both financially and politically disastrous.

from the comments on the Slate link:

After dinner we were having a few drinks and discussing the election. The topic of "would Romney release any more tax returns?" came up. My friend laughed and said "ill bet you a years pay that no matter how much heat he takes he won't release a single year more" and then laughed.

All of us there knowing he spent several years at the IRS pushed him "why? what do you know?" we asked with a joking smile.

He paused then took a drink and looked at us and said "because, if he did he would have to show everyone that he took amnesty for a crime at the very least, and I can't imagine he would have a snowballs chance in hell of being elected if that came out" then he took a drink and refused to elaborate.

posted by triggerfinger at 9:16 PM on September 18, 2012 [32 favorites]

I can't help but think if the tax returns don't show up sometime this week that he must have used some sort of special rich guy tax form where he claimed killing a newlywed couple and three kittens for a deduction.

Ah, the 27bstroke6.
posted by drezdn at 9:18 PM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

I had RFD, but it was on a weird cable tier where you had to specifically request it beyond any of the normal advertised packages. I got it to see "I Love Toy Trains." It wasn't worth it.
posted by drezdn at 9:20 PM on September 18, 2012

This wasn't Romney's Sideshow Bob moment. It was his Gabbo moment.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 9:24 PM on September 18, 2012

I disagree the WhiteSkull this was his Ron Burgundy moment.
posted by humanfont at 9:37 PM on September 18, 2012

"Libertarian" is truly more of an anti-social psychological disorder than it is an actual political philosophy, and it drives them absolutely bonkers when you point out the obvious. (Seeing as how they consider themselves to be the smartest kids in the class, without exception.)

But I eagerly await further "principled" and "serious" arguments as to why, alas, their hands shall be forced to pull the lever for Romney despite their misgivings.

Scratch one and a Republican bleeds.
posted by bardic at 9:42 PM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

7,000 Millionaires Paid No Income Taxes in 2011
posted by Artw at 9:54 PM on September 18, 2012 [7 favorites]

While this was the first segment on CBS Nightly News tonight and all over other news sources, I have to agree with klangklangston: the "47%" bit is terrible, but there are still 49 days to go. Sure, the Romney camp is trying to use words from Obama in 1998 (14 years old, what a gotcha!) to contrast himself as a Man for the People who want to be Enterprising, vs That Socialist Obama, but there are enough people for who Romney's words ring true. They're the same sort of unfortunate forgetful people, like snickerdoodle's mother, who can (or try to) ignore where they came from and how government assistance got them where they are today, and look down on lazy people who don't get jobs and pay taxes like the rest of us. Or there are people who focus solely on the economy, ignoring that once the economy rebounds (and eventually it will), Romney has no plan for the future (and the present) beyond cutting deals for businesses at the cost of everything else.

I was going to point to his lack of actual plans, but I read through his solutions to energy issues. First, he has to mention how Obama has failed, because that jerk never gets anything right. Then, he talks about how it'll be great to cut back regulations. You know, for the jobs. Because our future is only about jobs. How about that environment, where we live, how we breath, where we get our drinking water?

On his website, under Issues, the Environment page is blank*. Seriously, there is nothing. Not a 404 error, just the word Policy, and nothing. OK, MittRomney.com: six pages of results, but none are actually about the environment. "Environment for Jobs" and job creation, great. But the actual environment? Let's go back to the Energy page: it's all about building energy projects, not really ensuring they're built right. Screw renewables, "the United States is blessed with a cornucopia of carbon-based energy resources"! Drill, baby, drill! Green house gases? Amend Clean Air Act to exclude carbon dioxide from its purview!

* Ah, feck. His "Dogs" issue page has the same layout. Ditto cats, clowns, and hunt people for sport.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:54 PM on September 18, 2012 [8 favorites]

Artw: 7,000 Millionaires Paid No Income Taxes in 2011

"You can attribute some of those 7,000 non-tax payers to investment choices they made, like tax exempt bonds," [Roberton Williams of the Tax Policy Center] told me, "but a lot of this might be unfortunate happenstance. A tornado tore through your home, you got a very expensive form of cancer, you lost hundreds of thousands of dollars in an investment. Those aren't choices people made, they're just legal deductions under the law."

Another reason that universal health care Just Makes Sense: if healthcare can cost a millionaire enough that they don't have to pay taxes, think about what that would do to someone who is only making a moderate income, not to mention living on minimum wage.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:01 PM on September 18, 2012 [6 favorites]

"Those aren't choices people made, they're just legal deductions under the law."

Translation: IOKIYAR
posted by unSane at 10:05 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Filthy Light Thief, if there's nothing on those policy pages on MittRomney.com it means Mitt's giving his complete and tacit approval to the item.

I found these: Eating babies, Eating what you kill, homicide. genocide, matricide, fracticide, sleeping with other men's wives, pedophilia and last by not least...enslavingmoochers....and this one is a bit of a shock to me: MetafilterRocks...
posted by Skygazer at 10:12 PM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

"but there are enough people for who Romney's words ring true."

Look, we've always got the hippies, they've always got the shitheads, every election just comes down to how the moron vote splits.
posted by klangklangston at 10:16 PM on September 18, 2012 [10 favorites]

On his website, under Issues, the Environment page is blank*

Well he did say "We have a website that lays out white papers on a whole series of issues that I care about. "
posted by carsonb at 10:17 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

He is being green by reusing his white papers. By making them entirely blank, they are 100% recyclable.
posted by feloniousmonk at 10:18 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

if there's nothing on those policy pages on MittRomney.com it means Mitt's giving his complete and tacit approval to the item.

The man can't even fail elegantly.
posted by carsonb at 10:22 PM on September 18, 2012

NBC has the full transcript for those who don't want to watch the videos.

At one point, responding to a donor complaining about the "corruption" in various offices in Washington, DC, Mitt lets slip this gem:

I wish we weren't unionized so we could go a lot deeper [in rooting out "corruption"] than you're actually allowed to go.

Lovely. It's like Scott Walker all over again.
posted by dhens at 10:30 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

NYT: It may prove a fleeting anxiety: national polls show the race remains close, even though Mr. Romney trails in some key swing states.

Bullshit. Romney's campaign has been over, arguably, since the conventions. Does anyone on the planet think he is going to out debate Obama? Come on.

I've seen a lot of people in the "MSM" already calling Romney's campaign a lost cause, but in general they usually don't do that, even when its' obvious from the polls who's actually going to win. They'll only hint at it or use innuendo. "Romney has a tough road ahead" or "He's looking shaky in some key swing states". All you have to do is check Five thirty eight every few days if you actually want to know what's going on.

If you go back to '08, McCain never had a chance (he did get a convention bounce, for a very short period, until people discovered Sarah Palin)

It's been clear that Romney had basically lost - baring unexpected events - even before the conventions. Now we've had unexpected events, and they've all been bad for Romney.

I will say "THIS DOOMS ROMNEY" is more fun than "This will probably cost him two or three points that he can't afford," but I'm not sure this is as big a deal it reads in this thread.

Well, the problem here is that you can't doom a dead man. There have been three catastrophic problems that all doomed him at once:
1) Lack of convention bounce vs. Obama
2) Embassy comments (actually the worse this, IMO)
3) Now these comments.

The problem with saying that this dooms Romney is that he was, IMO, already doomed. The guy can't be double doomed. When Romney loses, people will go back and try to say it was this or that one thing. But I think if Romney was ahead in the polls, and this came out, it might hurt him but probably wouldn't cost him the election alone. If Obama was way behind in the polls, people would just say this was a desperation play from the Obama campaign, the way Hillary tried to capitalize on the "bitter clinging" comments from Obama.

But because this fits so perfectly with the "Romney is a serious fuckup, in part due to his being out of touch with average Americans" - it fits in with the "Campaign narrative"

I think the embassy comments were a bigger deal because they revealed he was incompetent on foreign policy, and in the same way bush was. On the other hand, these comments were just completely in line with what I expected from him.

And even without all the fuckups, he was still going to lose. It's that pressure that's causing him to panic, which in turns causes more fuckups, which in turn causes worse polling, more panic, etc. It's pretty entertaining to see.
posted by delmoi at 10:30 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

I keep finding more and more interesting web pages on MittRomney.com...this right here is a little strange....
posted by Skygazer at 10:33 PM on September 18, 2012 [4 favorites]

pretty clearly a route that takes the /issues/* as a param, so it acts as /issues?topic=*.

It is a drupal site, and there is a lot of javascript on the page, probably other tricks it will do.

I wish we weren't unionized so we could go a lot deeper [in rooting out "corruption"] than you're actually allowed to go.

hahah Sure, they are worried about corruption. That was when they were talking about firing the SEC.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:34 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Does Mitt Romney Want Your Vote? The GOP candidate’s “47 percent” comments in flowchart form.

Totally wrong. According to that, he doesn't want your vote if you don't pay income tax. They forgot the "Because you pay capital gains instead?" and "Because you keep your money in the cayman islands?" branches

Sure, the Romney camp is trying to use words from Obama in 1998 (14 years old, what a gotcha!) to contrast himself as a Man for the People who want to be Enterprising, vs That Socialist Obama

The entire quote is actually pretty reasonable. I suppose the republicans will harp on "I actually believe in redistribution" (right after comments indicating he only means a small amount). But honestly, I have never even understood why the republicans continue to make these "he's a socialist" comments. A) It's so played out and B) overall, when you poll the specific policies, people do actually believe in some "socialist" policies anyway. Why there is this assumption that the vast majority of Americans are diehard opposed to "redistribution"?

I mean, didn't Romney just say 47% of the population is for it?
posted by delmoi at 10:40 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mittsy, you can put your Concession_Speech on this page.
posted by Skygazer at 10:41 PM on September 18, 2012 [3 favorites]

All you have to do is check Five thirty eight every few days if you actually want to know what's going on.

They've been giving Romney better and better odds the last few days.
posted by Artw at 10:53 PM on September 18, 2012

My prediction for next year.
posted by vverse23 at 11:10 PM on September 18, 2012 [2 favorites]

Intrade and 538 are starting to converge now. 538 had Obama at like 81% and Intrade at %60 a few days ago.
posted by Golden Eternity at 11:23 PM on September 18, 2012

I've been trying to follow this thread but it's now 1148 comments and I have other things to do.

Last year the Sarah Palin thread got 5555 comments, which was interesting not just for the volume but also the uncanny coincidence of four digits of five.

I don't think this election year will be as interesting, partly because elections run against incumbents are not as interesting as those where the choice is between two novel candidates, and also partly because I think it's pretty obvious already, and has been for a while, that Romney is going to lose. Each successive gaffe just hammers this home, sucking all potential for surprise out of this election year.
posted by twoleftfeet at 11:27 PM on September 18, 2012 [1 favorite]

I keep finding more and more interesting web pages on MittRomney.com

Romney is always happy to serve up a response that matches whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear. Should we expect anything less from his web site?
posted by Lazlo at 11:34 PM on September 18, 2012 [5 favorites]

They've been giving Romney better and better odds the last few days

Yeah, because their model, in its infinite wisdom, has decided that Obama's flattening numbers is what is to be expected, and therefore, expects his numbers to perform even better to improve his probability of victory. There's also this concept of using econometric variables in the model along with poll numbers which, at least according to Sam Wang at Princeton Election Consortium, sort of double-counts things quite a bit.

(I personally find this argument persuasive; it is my view that it's better to add like quantities together, rather than do a complicated simulation of stuff based on every single metric you can measure. There's a strong whiff of overthink there)

Which is not to say fivethirtyeight is all bunk - I mean, if you're an Obama supporter, you should be at least a bit concerned about the flattening of the post-convention "bounce". In fact, fivethirtyeight is absolutely great for its "now-cast"; that's a neat calculation of where the race is at the moment.

I think the embassy comments were a bigger deal because they revealed he was incompetent on foreign policy, and in the same way bush was. On the other hand, these comments were just completely in line with what I expected from him.

So here's what I'm thinking: if his Libya comments show his absolute lack of awareness of how to respond to developing crises, the revelations about his views (rather, the lack of them thereof) on Israel - Palestine shows a lack of ideas on foreign policy.
posted by the cydonian at 11:48 PM on September 18, 2012

Is it just me, or are the politics threads of this election a lot less vitriolic than they were in 2008? Mittens, uniting us all in opposition.
posted by Phire at 12:01 AM on September 19, 2012

The Comeback Speech Romney Should Be Giving
posted by homunculus at 12:18 AM on September 19, 2012 [8 favorites]

Charlie Pierce is a national treasure.
posted by bardic at 12:52 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Which is not to say fivethirtyeight is all bunk

It isn't bunk, but it also isn't necessary to do all that analysis to predict elections. Nate got 49 states out of 50 correct last election. But the thing is, as Nate himself will say, anybody paying attention in the least knew who was going to win 46 states. That left 4 actual toss-ups. You could randomly guess the winner of the last 4 states and expect to be correct on 48 out or 50. A quarter of people would expect to equal Nate's 49 out of 50. And one in eight would have gotten all 50, bettering Nate's performance with the highly scientific "wild ass guess" method.

I love 538 for poll analysis and the like but it is certainly overthinking a plate of beans in a lot of ways.
posted by Justinian at 1:08 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

There’s a new 18 minutes of Romney talking at the start of the leaked video that Mother Jones didnt post until a few hours ago. Day 3. Boom.

Full Transcript of the Mitt Romney Secret Video with some telling moments you may not have heard about yet.
posted by nickyskye at 1:11 AM on September 19, 2012 [5 favorites]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the GOP has completely lost the hispanic vote for 100 years, if not longer.

Nice work fucking that chicken, Willard.
posted by bardic at 1:31 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh! How to lose the Hispanic vote in one comment! From the transcript nickyskye just linked to: "[If] you have no skill or experience…you're welcome to cross the border and stay here for the rest of your life."

And then there's this interesting tidbit:
Envisioning a pre-election hostage crisis, à la Iran and Jimmy Carter: "If something of that nature presents itself, I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity."

That second one is interesting. Reagan did take advantage of the Iran hostage affair, but stating -- nay, possibly relishing -- crisis political plans in advance... that would possibly end the Republican party if it did come to pass after a comment like that.
posted by Houstonian at 1:34 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

A strongly-worded New York Times editorial re the leaked tapes, Mitt Romney, Class Warrior : Mr. Romney spoke with a bone-chilling cynicism and a revolting smugness.
posted by nickyskye at 1:38 AM on September 19, 2012 [4 favorites]

So, I've been working on a rap format that involves sampling statements by politicians and injecting just spaces and line breaks. I just did this one for a tiny bit of the Romney video. (original source).

Regis is gone.
I've done the night, the evening shows. I've been on Letterman a couple of times.
I've been on Leno more than a couple times, and now Letterman hates me
because I've been on Leno more than him.
They're very jealous
of one another
as you know.
And there's, I was asked to go on Saturday Night Live.
I did not do that,
in part because
you want to show that you're fun and you're a good person,
but
you also want to be presidential.
And Saturday Night Live has the potential of looking slapstick and not presidential.

But The View is fine.

Although

The View is high risk

because of the five women on it, only one is conservative.

Four are sharp-tongued and not conservative, Whoopi Goldberg in particular.

Although last time I was on the show, she said to me, "You know what? I think I could vote for you." And I said, "I must have done something really wrong." [Audience laughs.]

I had to sit down and—oop, Darlene, you get the last word.
posted by twoleftfeet at 1:45 AM on September 19, 2012

From one who knows a thing or two about politics, Alastair Campbell, has written pretty accurate and devastating account of the mess Romney has created for himself.
posted by vac2003 at 1:46 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

And they worked on campaigns in Albania? Did I hear that right?

Well, of course...we're going to war with Albania. It's true. I just saw it on the internet.
posted by sexyrobot at 1:46 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Envisioning a pre-election hostage crisis, à la Iran and Jimmy Carter: "If something of that nature presents itself, I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity.""

Just when you thought someone was as loathesome as it is possible to be, he comes out with this.

Is the underlying implication that they might create such an opportunity?

/adjusts tinfoil hat

/remembers Romney's pathetic attempts at taking "advantage of the opportunity" following the death of Christopher Stevens in Benghazi. Puts hat back in cupboard.
posted by humph at 1:57 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

The media has really been pushing this meme of how Willard is honestly gosh-shucks a darn nice fellow who simply had to run hard right to get the GOP nod.

Guess we can put that one to bed now. Turns out he's actually a mile-wide, shit-smeared asshole at heart. And a racist buffoon to boot.
posted by bardic at 2:09 AM on September 19, 2012 [8 favorites]

"Envisioning a pre-election hostage crisis, à la Iran and Jimmy Carter: "If something of that nature presents itself, I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity.""

Romney deep down hasn't evolved since high school. "Gosh darn it, I've worked hard for this school and it's my turn to be Class President. I was on the Prom Committee in Salt Lake City and everything went peachy keen, and it would be neato if I were Class President. My Dad would be proud. My opponent, on the other hand, was caught lighting a fart. I think it's pretty clear which course of action our student electorate should take, in my estimation."
posted by twoleftfeet at 2:13 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

This is seriously disturbing, chilling. The job creators who are going to save us, just look at the type of jobs that resonate with their interests:

"Back in my private equity days, we went to China to buy a factory there, employed about 20,000 people, and they were almost all young women between the ages of about 18 and 22 or 23.... the pittance they earned.... You've seen them."

Audience member: "Oh, yeah."

"And around this factory was a fence, a huge fence with barbed wire, and guard towers.... this is to keep other people from coming in. Because people want so badly to come work in this factory that we have to keep them out, or they'll just come in here and start working and try and get compensated."
posted by Houstonian at 2:17 AM on September 19, 2012 [11 favorites]

Now the first flush of 'OMG he's Toast" has passed, how bad is this?

Well, the polls taken around the time of the Libya incident are just showing up now, so the public response to this gaffe won't be known until the weekend at the very earliest, probably more like next week. So Romney's got October and some change left.

In that time, neither can his tax issue blow up, nor can his debate or his running mate's debate go badly, because if any of those things happen, the Romney campaign is back on the defensive, and there's less time to do his job.

His job is to compete, on a tough map, with a talented incumbent who is personally popular and has successes he's allowed to campaign on. If nothing else goes wrong, he has 4-5 weeks to do it in: this would be difficult for a talented politician.
posted by Ripper Minnieton at 2:45 AM on September 19, 2012

The more I read of the whole transcript, the more I think, "There's something in here for almost everyone." Not everyone, but almost everyone, can find themselves at strong odds with something that he said.

The Obama campaign can just start slicing this whole video up into commercial-size pieces, playing specific pieces in different areas depending on demographics. They don't need to do anything else. Easiest gig in town.
- Southern states: Play the "you're a whining bunch of shiftless takers" video.
- States with a high number of retirees: Same as the one for Southern states.
- States with a high number of Latinos: Play the "the immigrants we have are the stoopid ones" video.
- States with a high number of Asians: Play the "I ran a factory that fenced in the workers" video.
- States with a high number of Muslims from the Middle East: The Palestine video. Plus the dirty bomb comment and the Iran hostage affair plan.
- States with a lot of military: It's a goldmine. Play any of the videos in which he clearly has no clue about foreign policy. Plus the dirty bomb comment and the Iran hostage affair plan. Include the part where he's chumming up to Kissinger. Apparently even the people attending this dinner stopped eating when he dropped that name.
- States with a high number of unemployed college students: Play that one where he says that if you get an education and work hard, that's enough to get along.
- States with women: Play the "women don't watch debates, you have to get on the talk shows -- hey, I was on The View twice and I'm 'using' Ann sparingly and Hilary has to eat her beets" video.
- States with people who don't think $20 million a year is small potatoes: Play the "I'm as poor as a church mouse" video.
posted by Houstonian at 2:52 AM on September 19, 2012 [15 favorites]

I like the idea someone up above had to show a side profile of Mitts giving a speech and 47% of the audience slowly disappearing. That's a brilliant idea for an ad. It could be called: Romney's America.

Who's comment was that??
posted by Skygazer at 3:03 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Skygazer, that was peacay.
posted by barnacles at 3:09 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

I don't think this has been linked yet? Also from Mother Jones: Who Was at Romney's "47 Percent" Fundraiser?. They have a list of possible people, based on Florida donors who have given $50,000 between May 1 - 17. The companies seem to be what you'd expect, except for this: the husband/wife team of Publishing Executive and Publisher/CEO of Paisano Publications.

Since it's a video and they are in the publishing world, I looked it up. Wholly-owned subsidiary of Easyriders Inc, publisher of the ever-classy Easyrider Magazine. "The grandaddy of biker publishing." Did not expect that.
posted by Houstonian at 3:13 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Came across this (I'm not sure of it's accuracy though):

This fundraiser was given by the owner of Sun Capital.

Sun Capital is a private equity firm.

They own 25 companies.

1 out of 5 or 20% have declared bankruptcy.

Friendly's Restaurant was INTENIONALLY forced into bankruptcy so Sun Capital could avoid paying the employee's pensions.

There was a federal investigation and Sun Capital was forced to pay a hefty fine.
posted by Skygazer at 3:17 AM on September 19, 2012 [4 favorites]

Barnacles: that was peacay.

Thanks Barnacles!
posted by Skygazer at 3:25 AM on September 19, 2012

States with a high number of Muslims from the Middle East

Oh, they don't even have to be from the Middle East.
posted by bardophile at 3:49 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

20% is high but some PE firms specialize in companies which have stumbled in some way and are hurting, and try to salvage them, which is what Sun might be doing. Some buy companies with steady business but no growth, fire a shitload of people to increase profits, leverage the company and give themselves huge bonuses. Some huge PE firms like KKR have bankrupcy and liquidation rates lower than average because they are so good at negotiating and specialize in that kind of stuff. It isn't really like the Gordon Gecko style corporate raiding of the 80s anymore.

It is like any business. Some of them are terrible people who want to strip companies. Some see an opportunity to aquire a sound but undervalued company and sell it for absurd profits. How do you think Warren Buffet makes money now?
posted by Ad hominem at 3:58 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

I love the Thurston Howell Romney (also linked above) editorial by David Brooks. Brooks, the GOP guy, basically says their candidate is clueless. The contrast with Obama on Letterman last night is stark.
posted by caddis at 4:08 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

I keep finding more and more interesting web pages on MittRomney.com...this right here is a little strange....

To be fair, that is what it looks like when you shake up an etch a sketch.
posted by vewystwange at 4:16 AM on September 19, 2012 [5 favorites]

Looking at this from the other side of the Atlantic, the stunning thing is that, after this video, Romney is still a candidate. The "entitled to food, housing and healthcare" line alone would have killed any European politician. He would be dead and buried, with his own party urinating on the grave. Even in the UK, David Cameron (not exactly a friend of the working classes) would have swung the axe to any minor local Tory politician caught uttering anything similar.

Is there any major party in the UK (or most countries in Europe) that doesn't believe in climate change, evolution, LGBT rights, and social services? I thought the Tories were basically only slightly to the right of the median Democrat.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:31 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Skeptic, you do realize that the line out of the Romney campaign is that President Obama's supporters are more European in outlook, don't you?

I have no idea how that squares the Kenyan socialist rhetoric but I can't waste my time trying to figure this shit out. Maybe all foreigners are socialist?
posted by rdr at 4:36 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

zombieflanders: "Is there any major party in the UK (or most countries in Europe) that doesn't believe in climate change, evolution, LGBT rights, and social services? I thought the Tories were basically only slightly to the right of the median Democrat."

Pretty much, if you look at their written platforms. In reality there are some pretty hardline bigots, racists and free market fundamentalists in the Conservative party and they have, unfortunately, taken some heart from the rise of the Tea Party and are quite viciously setting about welfare and healthcare over here. The difference is that they pretend they're not and pay lip service to the welfare state and the NHS. Even when Mittens is 'on message' that would be anathema to him and the Republicans.

But yes, in general being a UK centrist is being hard left-wing in the US, and being a European centrist or centre-leftist is basically so left of the Overton Window of American politics it would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
posted by Happy Dave at 4:40 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

I thought the Tories were basically only slightly to the right of the median Democrat.

Wrong. There's this general perception that European politics are shifted to the left with respect to the US. Truth is more complicated. In Germany, for instance, even center-left politicians may have a more restrictive view on abortion rights than US moderate conservatives. Most European mainstream politicians are more fiscally conservative than both US mainstream parties. But the actual entitlement to food, shelter and healthcare is one of the issues where the European (or at least Western European) political mainstream is unanimous. In some countries those three rights are even written down in the constitution.
posted by Skeptic at 4:41 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Well, at least Romney makes me feel better about that guy in the sweater who's running Canada at the moment.
posted by dazed_one at 4:41 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Kenya's one of the nicest parts of Europe- especially in the fall.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 4:42 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

From my friend Alan: "When you look at what happens to Obamas opponents the idea that he is the Antichrist becomes more and more plausible."
posted by unSane at 4:44 AM on September 19, 2012 [12 favorites]

The odd thing for me is that there's no socially liberal, fiscally conservative party in the US yet.

I mean there's Ron Paul, but - yknow, Ron Paul.

That's what the UK Tories have tried to do, although the kicking and screaming from the right can be heard from space and you never really know how genuine it is.

In Canada, Harper has been forced into a sort of centrist pragmatism by the politics of it all.
posted by unSane at 4:47 AM on September 19, 2012

Have you heard of the Democrats?
posted by leopard at 5:00 AM on September 19, 2012 [9 favorites]

If you think either the GOP or the Dems are fiscally conservative there's a bridge in Brooklyn etc
posted by unSane at 5:05 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Rule of thumb - politicians craft message to audience. Doesn't mean they believe what they say, and sure as hell doesn't mean they're going to act on what they say.

(This applies across the board, so no jumping down my throat. I dislike both candidates about equally, though for different reasons.)
posted by IndigoJones at 5:08 AM on September 19, 2012

Looking at this from the other side of the Atlantic, the stunning thing is that, after this video, Romney is still a candidate.

Even if they wanted to, I don't think that there's anything that the Republican Party can do about it right now. Romney won the primaries and got the most delegates so he's their candidate.
posted by octothorpe at 5:09 AM on September 19, 2012

The problem for Romney is that this looked a lot like a 'mask slipped' moment.
posted by unSane at 5:10 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Looking at this from the other side of the Atlantic, the stunning thing is that, after this video, Romney is still a candidate.

With Alan Keyes, Donald Trump and Herman Cain warming up in the bullpen, I'm not sure they have any choice but to keep him at the plate.
posted by unSane at 5:12 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Is there any major party in the UK (or most countries in Europe) that doesn't believe in climate change, evolution, LGBT rights, and social services?

Plenty of Tories dispute climate change, and they're not alone in Europe: the current Spanish PM, for instance, once poured ridicule on the notion (although he currently keeps mum abou the subject). And former Socialist French minister, Claude Allègre, is one of the loudest voices in the denialist lobby. With respect to LGBT rights, look again: same-sex marriage is still impossible in most European countries (and not about to happen anytime soon in, say, Poland, Italy or Ireland). Evolution is particular: its rejection in the US is very directly tied to the influence of evangelical churches, which are vanishingly small in Europe. The real difference, indeed, are social services.
posted by Skeptic at 5:17 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

The odd thing for me is that there's no socially liberal, fiscally conservative party in the US yet.

I mean there's Ron Paul, but - yknow, Ron Paul.

FWIW, it's hard for me to describe Ron Paul as "socially liberal." It's more that he thinks socially restrictive laws should be left up to the states, not the feds.... Except abortion, which he voted to ban at the federal level. He gets a lot of support from some social liberals because they only hear the, say, "End the federal drug war" part, or the "repeal DOMA" part, but don't hear the second part, which was "lets states pass whatever laws they want."

(Also, there is a small socially liberal, fiscally conservative wing of the Republican party. We just don't hear from them on social issues much.)
posted by muddgirl at 5:38 AM on September 19, 2012 [9 favorites]

The View is high risk because of the five women on it, only one is conservative. Four are sharp-tongued and not conservative, Whoopi Goldberg in particular.

Romney's scared of Whoopi!

But really, "sharp-tongued?" What is this, 1900? How dare these shrews unleash their sharp tongues on their providers? Go back to your washing, women!
posted by Miko at 5:39 AM on September 19, 2012 [29 favorites]

there is a small socially liberal, fiscally conservative wing of the Republican party

There's room for a pragmatic, very contemporary, solutions-oriented coalition.
posted by Miko at 5:40 AM on September 19, 2012

(Also, there is a small socially liberal, fiscally conservative wing of the Republican party. We just don't hear from them on social issues much.

David Frum.
posted by KokuRyu at 5:44 AM on September 19, 2012

The odd thing for me is that there's no socially liberal, fiscally conservative party in the US yet.

It's called the Democratic Party.
posted by deanc at 5:50 AM on September 19, 2012 [14 favorites]

How dare these shrews unleash their sharp tongues on their providers? Go back to your washing, women!

Wait, wait!

Who's going to do the ironing?!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:53 AM on September 19, 2012

FWIW, it's hard for me to describe Ron Paul as "socially liberal."

Yeah that landed with a thud for me, too, mudgirl. So many times I've heard Ron Paul touted as some revolutionary new brand of progressive. It's never a woman talking.
posted by applemeat at 6:01 AM on September 19, 2012 [15 favorites]

If you think either the GOP or the Dems are fiscally conservative there's a bridge in Brooklyn etc

Is that the bridge you bought when someone told you that Ron Paul was socially liberal?

Rule of thumb - politicians craft message to audience. Doesn't mean they believe what they say, and sure as hell doesn't mean they're going to act on what they say.

(This applies across the board, so no jumping down my throat. I dislike both candidates about equally, though for different reasons.)

I totally agree. This video of Romney is totally cancelled out by the video of him speaking to Occupy Wall Street calling for higher taxes on the evil Wall Street fat cats who caused all our problems. Everything in the universe is in total cosmic balance.
posted by leopard at 6:15 AM on September 19, 2012 [7 favorites]

Looks like the official line is going to be "malicious editing." Adjust your outrage accordingly!
posted by gerryblog at 6:19 AM on September 19, 2012

Breitbart doesn't count as official anything.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:26 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Many Kentuckians who rely on federal aid expected to support Romney.
posted by T.D. Strange at 6:32 AM on September 19, 2012

Also, there is a small socially liberal, fiscally conservative wing of the Republican party.

They're called old-school Republicans.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:34 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Also, there is a small socially liberal, fiscally conservative wing of the Republican party.

They're called old-school Republicans.

I believe they're on the endangered species list, however. Their numbers have been decimated by poachers and parasites. Now they tend to huddle together in carefully hidden shelters, so can be difficult to locate. There is some hope that this is only a temporary (though lengthy) period of hibernation to replenish the herd, and at some point they will re-emerge and mingle openly with the other political species once more.
posted by Superplin at 6:49 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

And there were old-school Democrats in Texas, before Karl Rove turned Texas into a Republican state.
posted by filthy light thief at 6:52 AM on September 19, 2012

Isn't Ron Paul's whole deal that the Federal government should get out of the way state governments ability to be socially regressive, in part because he's a massive racist?
posted by Artw at 6:53 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ann clarifies: "Mitt doesn't disdain the poor" The leaked video was all taken out of context.

"Mitt wants to bring better economic oportunities to the country. ... It's what we're facing in America. More and more people will become dependent on the government, and he doesn't want that.

... Women are coming to me. I have a lot of time to talk. They are hoping that Governor Romney will have answers.

[Mitt] doesn't need to do this for a job, he honestly believes he can help many Americans by getting in there... and bring more certainty to women.

The one story I love for people to know... [Mitt visited with a family who had a boy dying of leukemia, and Mitt was there, you know, as a human friend]"

Oh man, this is a precious follow-up to Mitt saying "We-- we-- we use Ann sparingly right now so that people don't get tired of her or-- or start attacking."

Certainty for women: no more abortions! Mitt Romney 2012!

Humans for Romney: he'll watch your son die!
posted by filthy light thief at 7:02 AM on September 19, 2012 [10 favorites]

Rule of thumb - politicians craft message to audience. Doesn't mean they believe what they say, and sure as hell doesn't mean they're going to act on what they say.

That's the thing that's interesting about American politics. People say that about Liberals who promise to do good things, and Republicans who say they'll do terrible things. But at the end of the day, what am I going to vote for? The guy with the plan I approve of who may fail me, or the guy who explicitly says he's going to do shitty things that will hurt lots of people?
posted by verb at 7:11 AM on September 19, 2012 [35 favorites]

The leaked video was all taken out of context.

....this is a first line of defense. This is what you say at the rushed, 10pm press conference. You can't start by saying "I spoke poorly but I stand by everything I said", and then try later to claim "I don't stand by everything I said."

Well, I mean you can. If you want to look like a flip-flopper.
posted by muddgirl at 7:12 AM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

triggerfinger: They're called old-school Republicans.

They're the old guard, who signed a deal with the devil (aka evangelical fundamentalists) in 1988. The evangelicals wanted Pat Robertson to become president that year. The old guard wanted GHW Bush to become president. In 1988, the evangelicals threatened to take their votes elsewhere, unless the Republican party agreed to support an anti-abortion, hardline fundamentalist platform.

Barry Goldwater, in 1994: Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.

I'd like to apologize to America for the tiny part I may have played in '88. I campaigned for Robertson in '88, before I'd reached voting age, and I acted as an informal page at the RNC in New Orleans, delivering secret missives between the fundamentalist power brokers who successfully maneuvered took over the Republican party at that convention.
posted by syzygy at 7:18 AM on September 19, 2012 [29 favorites]

I wonder what the supposed context is. "Ha! Got you! Of course, only a massive plutocratic asshole would believe anything like that!"
posted by unSane at 7:19 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Because people want so badly to come work in this factory that we have to keep them out, or they'll just come in here and start working and try and get compensated."

Yeah, because there's zero chance they'd lie to you, Mitt. After all, you haven't been lying to the American people to curry their favor, have ya, big fella.
posted by Mental Wimp at 7:20 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

....this is a first line of defense.

Ha, that's so true. "I killed him in self-defence. No, wait, I wasn't even there."
posted by unSane at 7:20 AM on September 19, 2012 [12 favorites]

And more from Goldwater, one of the true, old-guard Republicans. Shame they're a dying breed today:

-- When you say "radical right" today, I think of these moneymaking ventures by fellows like Pat Robertson and others who are trying to take the Republican Party away from the Republican Party, and make a religious organization out of it. If that ever happens, kiss politics goodbye.

-- The big thing is to make this country, along with every other country in the world with a few exceptions, quit discriminating against people just because they're gay. You don't have to agree with it, but they have a constitutional right to be gay. And that's what brings me into it.
posted by syzygy at 7:27 AM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

Barry Goldwater, in 1994:

Any recommended reading for someone who would love to read and grasp a better understanding of the timeline of how/when Republicans shifted from old to new guard (as this thread has labeled it)? Books are better than blog posts I guess but either would suffice. Bonus points for less vitriol and more objective observation. Feel free to memail if a derail is a concern.
posted by RolandOfEld at 7:28 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Flip-flopper? That's so 2004.

Now, if you switch your position depending on the time of day, the potential audience, and if you think anyone will actually try fact-checking your statements? You're a Mitt Romney!

As for the "out-of-context" defense, I really want interviewers to push Mitt and co on that. "So, you do you or do you not think that, and I'll quote you here, "47% of the people who will vote for the president no matter what, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims." Do you really believe that almost half of the country views themselves as victims? Are you sure that almost half of the country is dependent on the government?

Hit Romney with his own words, and make him "clarify" his way out of it.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:28 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Hit Romney with his own words, and make him "clarify" his way out of it.

Nope. Then it just looks like a pile on. Time to move on.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:34 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

they have a constitutional right to be gay

Are you sure? Mitt wants to stick to the constitution as originally written, penumbras and emanations be damned. What was ratified in June 21, 1788 is as good today as it was then! Let's go back to the days of the founding fathers! Oh wait, the Bill of Rights, first ratified on December 15, 1791, kind of points to the founding fathers realizing what they had written wasn't as all-inclusive as it could have been.

Thomas Jefferson, at the time serving as Ambassador to France, wrote to Madison advocating a Bill of Rights: "Half a loaf is better than no bread. If we cannot secure all our rights, let us secure what we can."

Let us move forward, and continue to secure the rights due to all people.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:41 AM on September 19, 2012 [4 favorites]

The missing two minutes: "…so that's my detailed, specific plan to rebalance the economy, boost jobs growth, improve education and infrastructure, and make sure we never get in this mess again. Now, it looks like we've got a little time left, and you've all paid a lot of money to be here, so how about you ask me some questions, and I answer them as if I'm a cretinous, craven bellend?"
posted by dudekiller at 7:41 AM on September 19, 2012 [32 favorites]

Flip-flopper? That's so 2004.

Adjusted for 2012: Mitt-flopper.
posted by Rykey at 8:02 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Many Americans, particularly in certain areas, (especially rural ones) have been frustrated at what they see as taking money out of their community and putting it into other communities.

Well, I for one would prefer my money go to taxes -- preferably taxes that fund local programs -- than go into the pockets of people who will squirrel it away in the Caymans.

My parents work hard and run a small business, and they taught me to save my money. But they also taught me that money isn't worth much if it's not doing something, which can range from "earning interest" to "paying to put a roof over your head." When I see that corporations are sitting on piles of cash like Smaug, or that many of Americas's richest people turned down Bill gates's challenge to just do something with their too-big-to-ever-spend fortunes, it makes me froth little.
posted by wenestvedt at 8:10 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

[Mitt visited with a family who had a boy dying of leukemia, and Mitt was there, you know, as a human friend]"

Two thoughts: Ha, even his wife has to qualify him as human.
and: Print that out on a $20 bill lady and it'll actually be worth something.
posted by edgeways at 8:18 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ugh, more damaging footage for Mitt.
posted by applemeat at 8:20 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mitt Romney Week From Hell Prompts Republican Freak-Out.
posted by ericb at 8:22 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ugh, more damaging footage for Mitt.

What am I missing?
posted by RolandOfEld at 8:23 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mark McKinnon on Why Time Is Running Out for Mitt Romney.
posted by ericb at 8:24 AM on September 19, 2012

Mitt was there, you know, as a human friend

These people were folks from my town and they spoke at the RNC about this episode where Mitt seemed to actually be able to put his horrible stilted persona aside and really be there for the couple and their dying son. It's really weird that it sounds so creepy coming out of Ann Romney's mouth, but unlike the Mitt on the campaign trail this really does seem to have been a decent thing he did. Which, of course, they're exploiting for all it's worth which brings us back to where we are today.
posted by jessamyn at 8:26 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Jon Stewart Slams Romney's 47 Percent Comments (VIDEO).
posted by ericb at 8:28 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Yeah, his story of visiting his human friend "Leukemia" would be more compelling if there weren't the story of him as bishop giving a woman shit in the hospital for aborting a dangerous pregnancy.
posted by klangklangston at 8:28 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'm curious as to whether the reaction from the GOP will be "Fuck it, we'll just start gearing up for 2016, thanks for playing, Mitt" or "Fuck it, just start telling people you'll get gas down to 99 cents a gallon and cut taxes by 50% for everybody, and you've converted from Mormonism to Christianity, and we'll deal with the fallout after you're in office."
posted by Rykey at 8:33 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Lance Mannion: "[G]ood luck persuading any Republicans that Mitt was including them as targets of his contempt. More likely it will encourage them to be more enthusiastic in expressing the contempt they share with Mitt for . . . those people.

One of the more pernicious things about “movement conservatism” has been its appeal to the worst in people by encouraging them to distrust and despise their fellow Americans. And one of the more depressing things about it has been how eagerly so many people have been to do so."

James Wolcott tweets: Just wait til the tape comes out of Mitt Romney doing Alec Baldwin's monologue from GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS. #CadillacEldorado #setofsteakknives
posted by Eyebeams at 8:38 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Republican Freak-Out.

Again with Shunting scene from Society. That movie is seeming more and more like a documentary about the Republican party.
posted by Grangousier at 8:45 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

James Wolcott tweets: Just wait til the tape comes out of Mitt Romney doing Alec Baldwin's monologue from GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS. #CadillacEldorado #setofsteakknives

It occurred to me that maybe Romney's speeches were being written by David Mamet, but then I realized that if that were true he'd be much more articulate.
posted by Faint of Butt at 8:48 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Maureen Dowd: Let Them Eat Crab Cake.
posted by ericb at 8:49 AM on September 19, 2012

Barry Goldwater, in 1994: Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem.

By '94 Goldwater was an admirably independent, salty old dude, but it's worth pointing out that it was the younger Goldwater who sought Thurmond's help in '64 precisely to reach the same demographics the preachers would appeal to 30 years later. Not saying Goldwater was a hypocrite, necessarily, but he definitely had a hand in creating the very beast he'd later deplore. Worth noting, too, that it was exactly the northern Republicans like Rockefeller and (George) Romney, who eventually stood to lose the most from the "southernization" of the GOP.
posted by octobersurprise at 8:50 AM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

It occurred to me that maybe Romney's speeches were being written by David Mamet, but then I realized that if that were true he'd be much more articulate.

Or at least much more profane.
posted by harkin banks at 8:54 AM on September 19, 2012

Heh.
Now That My Campaign Is Over, I'd Like To Talk To You All About The Church Of Latter-Day Saints
posted by gaspode at 8:54 AM on September 19, 2012 [8 favorites]

Maureen Dowd: Let Them Eat Crab Cake.

Who wrote that stupid headline? Here in Maryland, crab cakes are decidedly nonpartisan (unless you count fried vs. broiled).
posted by Faint of Butt at 8:54 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

So far, it seems like the reaction from the GOP has been to blame Romney and start looking out for their own skins.

Check out this searing missive from Peggy Noonan:

It’s time to admit the Romney campaign is an incompetent one. It’s not big, it’s not brave, it’s not thoughtfully tackling great issues. It’s always been too small for the moment. All the activists, party supporters and big donors should be pushing for change. People want to focus on who at the top is least constructive and most responsible. Fine, but Mitt Romney is no puppet: He chooses who to listen to. An intervention is in order. “Mitt, this isn’t working.”

Noonan tries to offer some constructive criticism:

Romney should go out there every day surrounded with the most persuasive, interesting and articulate members of his party, the old ones, and I say this with pain as they’re my age, like Mitch Daniels and Jeb Bush, and the young ones, like Susana Martinez and Chris Christie and Marco Rubio—and even Paul Ryan. I don’t mean one of them should travel with him next Thursday, I mean he should be surrounded by a posse of them every day.

but she also gives the reason this isn't going to happen: "Some of them won’t want to do it because they’re starting to think Romney’s a loser and they don’t want to get loser on them."

And, according to Politico, big donors are starting to get the jitters:

But GOP donors, especially, are growing nervous.

Several told POLITICO that concern has been on the rise over the past couple of weeks following the Republican convention, where Clint Eastwood’s surreal performance left many questioning the direction of what had been a tightly controlled campaign narrative. As Romney slipped in the polls last week and continued to take heat from some over his handling of protests at U.S. foreign outposts and the death of a U.S. diplomat in Libya, the disquiet has intensified.

“There seems to be growing frustration,” said one Romney bundler, who’s spoken to other donors in recent days. “He fumbled the ball on the Libya response. … People are a little frustrated and they just feel like we do have an opportunity to win this cycle, and we’re just … imploding.”

posted by overglow at 8:55 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Maureen Dowd: Who wrote that stupid headline?
posted by RogerB at 8:58 AM on September 19, 2012

OH! I'm watching the Jon Stewart video and he has a clip of Romney's mom saying that Romney's dad was a refugee on welfare. What?! Is this legit?
posted by Houstonian at 9:01 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Houstonian -- Yes. Though "refugee" is not quite the right term. He was born to Americans in Mexico, and they moved to the U.S., and were on welfare here.
posted by tzikeh at 9:06 AM on September 19, 2012

Jon Stewart would not make that up. George Romney's Wiki page says:

"Romney was born to American parents living in the Mormon colonies in Mexico; events during the Mexican Revolution forced his family to flee back to the United States when he was a child. The family lived in several states and ended up in Salt Lake City, Utah, where they struggled during the Great Depression."

I wonder what welfare program this was (presumably in the 1920s-early '30s) ?
posted by Eyebeams at 9:08 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

I knew about the Mexico part, but somehow totally missed the "on welfare" part. Interesting!
posted by Houstonian at 9:09 AM on September 19, 2012

Something I find interesting that folks don't seem to be commenting on is how Romney justifies his inability to reach that 47%:

47% of Americans pay no income taxes. So our message of low taxes doesn't connect.

In other words, the reason he can't bring that 47% over to the Republican side is that the party's core message is simply not relevant to them. The implication here is that beyond tax cuts, the Republican party's got nothing. "Values", small government, a muscular foreign policy, law and order -- all the other things that traditionally animated the American right are off the table. They might be given lip service here and there, but they're reduced to mere placeholders; from here on out, it's taxes and... well, pretty much it's taxes. This seems a pretty damning indictment of the depth of the party's platform. It's one thing to hear Obama make "got a toothache? there's a tax cut for that!" gags. It's another thing entirely when the Republican candidate for president explicitly confirms it.
posted by multics at 9:11 AM on September 19, 2012 [44 favorites]

If someone wanted to read opinion from the Hispanic press on these comments, what are the big journals? I'm using google news but don't know which of the newspapers and sources are reputable.
posted by winna at 9:20 AM on September 19, 2012

octobersurprise:
"How much Keefe is in this movie?"

Miles O'Keefe.
C'mon, people, show some respect for the classics!
posted by charred husk at 9:32 AM on September 19, 2012 [19 favorites]

I'd like to think that in an earlier era, a Presidential candidate expressing contempt for half of his base would immediately doom his candidacy, and the fact that this has not happened only confirms my long held belief that the modern Republican base is the most self-deluded bunch of numbskulls ever.
posted by Eyebeams at 9:41 AM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

47% of Americans pay no income taxes. So our message of low taxes doesn't connect.

Of course it does. Paying no income taxes = taxes that are pretty damn low already. The Republican response to this "47 percent pay no taxes" business should be "That's a good start."
posted by emelenjr at 9:47 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

In other words, the reason he can't bring that 47% over to the Republican side is that the party's core message is simply not relevant to them. The implication here is that beyond tax cuts, the Republican party's got nothing.

Excellent point, multics. Romney's not only given up on half the population, he's also given up on most of the Republican party's positions. He has nothing to propose, on any aspect of governance, besides cutting taxes and waiting for opportunities to score points if something happens.

Pretty damned damning, from both sides.
posted by Superplin at 9:50 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mitt Romney and the Infinite Sadness
posted by RogerB at 10:05 AM on September 19, 2012 [8 favorites]

odinsdream: "Literally the candidate should withdraw. That this hasn't happened is very, very disturbing."

This is a nice thought, but I'm not sure how the Republicans would field another candidate if Willard Mitt Romney decided to spend more time with his family. They can't ideologically just say "whew! good game!" and give high fives to the DNC as they pile their stuff into the van. It's a death march.
posted by boo_radley at 10:07 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Oh, and the other thing that I should have mentioned: the people who are still stumping for Romney at this point are basically pallbearers.
posted by boo_radley at 10:13 AM on September 19, 2012 [5 favorites]

Is there an mechanism for him to just withdraw? Is it even possible? Any history buffs know of any time that has ever happened?

I kinda lean towards him faking a health scare or maybe being hospitalized for exhaustion and letting Ryan take over. They didn't nominate Ryan though, do they have to hand it to the runner up? Could they just drop an unknown in there?
posted by Ad hominem at 10:15 AM on September 19, 2012

Mitt Romney and the Infinite Sadness

If you can get Wes Anderson, I would fund a kickstarter for this film.
posted by drezdn at 10:16 AM on September 19, 2012 [5 favorites]

Is there an mechanism for him to just withdraw?

In 1972, the Dems switched their VP candidate, but even if it's possible, it would probably tank the party's chance of winning (though maybe it would help the down ticket races).
posted by drezdn at 10:21 AM on September 19, 2012

This race is not over. I know I'm the doom-and-gloom rep around here, but even taking everything that's happened in the past week for poor Mittens, there are still plenty of people ready and willing to vote the guy into office.

I want Obama to win. I hope he wins. I'm voting for him. But if you follow fivethirtyeight (which is the best way, IMO, to keep up with all of the various polls, trends, news, and stats), the last two weeks have shown nothing but a decline in Obama's chances and a rise in Romney's. I know people will point to it and say "yes, but the chances aren't *close* chances," but we have no idea how this is going to go down on the day. Voter suppression is going to be a major force--and it's one we can't yet factor into the outcome because we haven't begun voting. The SuperPACs have put too much money into Romney to not fight with everything they've got, even if it's down-and-dirty-and-likely-illegal, to get their man into the job.

I hate election years, and it feels like every year is an election year, nowadays.
posted by tzikeh at 10:21 AM on September 19, 2012 [14 favorites]

If you could switch candidates, you'd need someone amazing, someone who the American public knows and likes across party lines.
posted by drezdn at 10:22 AM on September 19, 2012

Is there an mechanism for him to just withdraw? Is it even possible?

You guys are jumping waay ahead of things. Again. There was a lot of the same talk about Mitt dropping out when the tax stuff was in the news. That didn't appear to even make a dent in his polling, and honestly, I don't think this will either. At least 48% of voters are going to vote for Mitt come hell and high water. This isn't nearly bad enough to change their minds.
posted by chrchr at 10:24 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

But if you follow fivethirtyeight (which is the best way, IMO, to keep up with all of the various polls, trends, news, and stats), the last two weeks have shown nothing but a decline in Obama's chances and a rise in Romney's.

...because Obama had a higher-than-expected "convention bump". If you look at the expected outcome before the Democratic election, while Romney was still in his lower-than-expected 'convention bump', it still looked pretty good for Obama.

I'm not saying that Obama supporters shouldn't take this opportunity to get energized, to volunteer, donate, etc. But I also think part of being energized is being optimistic about his chances - Obama is looking pretty good right now.
posted by muddgirl at 10:24 AM on September 19, 2012

But if you follow fivethirtyeight (which is the best way, IMO, to keep up with all of the various polls, trends, news, and stats), the last two weeks have shown nothing but a decline in Obama's chances and a rise in Romney's.

Romney definitely still has a shot (if something catastrophic happens), but hasn't Obama's chances actually went from 60% to 80% in the last month on 538?
posted by drezdn at 10:24 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

(...before the Democratic convention, not election)
posted by muddgirl at 10:25 AM on September 19, 2012

(And by "right now" I mean even before this September Surprise)
posted by muddgirl at 10:25 AM on September 19, 2012

On some baseball sites, after a game there will be a graph showing how different events influenced the outcome (it uses a stat called WPA- Win Probability Added). Using changes in polling data, I'd love to see one of these done post election.

If Obama wins, I actually think the biggest turning point will have been Bill Clinton's convention speech.
posted by drezdn at 10:31 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Sample WPA graph.
posted by drezdn at 10:31 AM on September 19, 2012

Romney definitely still has a shot (if something catastrophic happens), but hasn't Obama's chances actually went from 60% to 80% in the last month on 538?

Yeah, paying too much attention to the top-line national numbers (and the horserace media narrative more generally) is causing people to misread things. Nate's projections run the fundamental variables of the race through thousands of simulations, and Obama's currently the prohibitive favorite.

Liberal learned helplessness drives me crazy. "Mitt's humiliating accidental release of his heinous and unpopular views has us right where he wants us!" Obama's winning. Democrats have won* all but one presidential election for twenty years.

* for certain definitions of "win"
posted by gerryblog at 10:33 AM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

A major percentage of people out there did not notice this happened, or heard "something" about it but barely took notice. It's entirely possible for things that seem enormous in the moment to be forgotten a week later, and there are still many weeks to go in this thing. I doubt he's considering withdrawal.

People apparently like voter ID laws, and while Romney's losing, he is still strongly supported in some states. The Thurston Howell joke led to a "gilligan" response from some on the right. If foreign policy and econ stuff continue to be difficult, people could definitely just vote against Obama. Plenty of the people voting are just not that invested in the race, or are not going to pay much attention beyond their pet issues...

Really what I find most interesting about this is the dissolution of any real "back room dealings". A camera could be anywhere - so politicians will always have to act like it might end up on youtube... Not sure the older generation is used to that yet.
posted by mdn at 10:34 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

I agree with tzikeh. I too want Obama to win, and my worthless blue-state vote will be cast for him, but it simply doesn't matter how the vast majority of Americans (including all of Metafilter) responds to this video. It still comes down to - what, maybe a million? - 'undecided' voters in states that are in electoral college contention.

Do the comments on this recording sway those voters?
posted by These Premises Are Alarmed at 10:38 AM on September 19, 2012

Any recommended reading for someone who would love to read and grasp a better understanding of the timeline of how/when Republicans shifted from old to new guard (as this thread has labeled it)?

RolandofEld: Rick Perlstein's Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus. I'd follow it up with Nixonland, by the same author.
posted by Atom Eyes at 10:38 AM on September 19, 2012 [10 favorites]

Apparently the campaign has already pulled the "Mitt Doesn't Disdain the Poor" video, though it's been grabbed elsewhere.

they're the old guard, who signed a deal with the devil (aka evangelical fundamentalists) in 1988.

By '94 Goldwater was an admirably independent, salty old dude, but it's worth pointing out that it was the younger Goldwater who sought Thurmond's help in '64 precisely to reach the same demographics the preachers would appeal to 30 years later.

Yeah, I have a hard time hearkening back to the grand old-school days of the Grand Old Party, because 25 years before 1988 they offered American racists another deal with the devil to break up the solid South and win over alienated racist Democrats. That's when they first learned the dogwhistle, and they really never looked back. I know there used to be a liberal/moderate wing of the Republican Party that cared more about fiscal conservatism than what I'll call 'lifestyle issues,' and was actually pretty fair-minded about access to opportunity, and there may be a few stalwart survivals, but by 1965 it was functionally dead, killed, overtly, by people like Goldwater and Atwater and Nixon.

One of the more pernicious things about “movement conservatism” has been its appeal to the worst in people by encouraging them to distrust and despise their fellow Americans. And one of the more depressing things about it has been how eagerly so many people have been to do so."

Ab - so - lutely. It's profoundly sad that people have found it so easy to alienate themselves, hatefully and with anger, from their fellow citizens. It's like we've lost all sense of being in it together.

So far, it seems like the reaction from the GOP has been to blame Romney and start looking out for their own skins.

That's why all the rightie pundits are falling all over themselves to separate themselves from him. They can read the writing on the wall. This, to me, is a surer sign of his impending loss than any poll numbers. They smell blood in the water, and if they felt they had anything to gain by aligning with him, they certainly would. But they don't. In fact, it's interesting how much clearer a repudiation and distancing this is than happened with McCain's and Palin's troubled moments in '08 - the "That One" moment in the debate, the general disintegration of Palin - even that didn't send the pundits off the ship in such droves as we see today.
posted by Miko at 10:38 AM on September 19, 2012 [17 favorites]

You guys are jumping waay ahead of things

I don't think he will, or even can. I don't think there is anyone to replace him on the R side.

I don't agree this is a blip on the radar. I think this is the new dean scream. It is vastly different but I think the media response will be the same. They will play it so often that after a week they will have to start talking about their own coverage.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:42 AM on September 19, 2012

I know there used to be a liberal/moderate wing of the Republican Party that cared more about fiscal conservatism than what I'll call 'lifestyle issues,' and was actually pretty fair-minded about access to opportunity, and there may be a few stalwart survivals, but by 1965 it was functionally dead, killed, overtly, by people like Goldwater and Atwater and Nixon.

They're not in any sense dead. They're the mainstream of the modern Democratic Party.
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:50 AM on September 19, 2012 [9 favorites]

Here is a bit more detail about the kind of welfare George Romney's family got when returning to the US. In the sources listed are a couple of other things, like a news article about the 100th anniversary (this year) and a Mormon account of the refugees' arrival.
posted by Miko at 10:50 AM on September 19, 2012

They're not in any sense dead. They're the mainstream of the modern Democratic Party.

I agree with to some extent, but my point is that as Republicans, they are indeed dead.
posted by Miko at 10:51 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Romney definitely still has a shot (if something catastrophic happens), but hasn't Obama's chances actually went from 60% to 80% in the last month on 538?

Yeah, paying too much attention to the top-line national numbers (and the horserace media narrative more generally) is causing people to misread things. Nate's projections run the fundamental variables of the race through thousands of simulations, and Obama's currently the prohibitive favorite.

Liberal learned helplessness drives me crazy. "Mitt's humiliating accidental release of his heinous and unpopular views has us right where he wants us!" Obama's winning. Democrats have won* all but one presidential election for twenty years.

* for certain definitions of "win"

Dropped back down to 70% of late. The polls are getting weird, as widely differing likely voter screens are applied. An AP poll late last night had Obama up one nationally amongst likely voters, and up 10 amongst registered voters.

something is happening--either the race is going back to the neck and neck, or the Dems are about to crush the GOP. The Senate polling is absolutely glorious for the Dems right now. Its only the trackers and that AP poll that seem to be going the other way.

There's a new poll out from Marquette Law School of Wisconsin. Obama is up 14 in that poll and Tammy Baldwin went from down 9 to up 9. You'd think they were crazy, but they were spot on for the Walker recall. An 18 point swing seems insane though . . .
posted by Ironmouth at 10:52 AM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

For some reason, Obama's opponents have this tendency to just implode. Jack Ryan had to drop out (because newspapers requested his divorce transcripts), Alan Keyes was Alan Keyes, Clinton wasn't ready for the ground game of OFA, McCain picked Palin partially to appeal to disgruntled Clinton voters, and Romney just keeps digging to the right when he needs votes from the center.

Either Obama is phenomenally lucky or a 33rd level secret master of political aikido.
posted by drezdn at 10:53 AM on September 19, 2012 [5 favorites]

For some reason, Obama's opponents have this tendency to just implode. Jack Ryan had to drop out (because newspapers requested his divorce transcripts), Alan Keyes was Alan Keyes, Clinton wasn't ready for the ground game of OFA, McCain picked Palin partially to appeal to disgruntled Clinton voters, and Romney just keeps digging to the right when he needs votes from the center.

Either Obama is phenomenally lucky or a 33rd level secret master of political aikido.

well, in a sense, one of these things isn't like the other, in that the Ryan thing is really the only luck and you're screwed when your main guy drops out. Having the ground game is just being a winner.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:56 AM on September 19, 2012

Yes, but Obama has faced McCain/Palin (after Bush, who by the end of his term was one of the most unpopular Presidents ever) and Romney/Ryan — so I agree with drezdn. Obama has been pretty fortunate in his oponents.
posted by Eyebeams at 11:02 AM on September 19, 2012

Maybe he was speaking out of self-hatred, as well as hatred of others?

His mother says at :54 that Romney's dad was a refugee from Mexico and on Welfare the first years of his life.

Romney’s great-grandfather fled to Mexico in 1885 to escape America’s anti-polygamy laws. Romney's father was born in Mexico, making his father a Mexican citizen by birthright. “My dad had been born in Mexico and his family had to leave during the Mexican revolution. I grew up with stories of his family being fed by the U.S. Government as war refugees.” His Mormon relatives in Mexico are not so happy with Mitt the racist, classist twit.
posted by nickyskye at 11:05 AM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

Obama is incredibly lucky but I think a large part of his success lies in his demeanor. Being calm and unflappable in practically every circumstance means your opponents gaffes and missteps, and then their frantic attempts to fix such gaffes, get magnified by comparison.

As a plus, such calmness makes your opposition very very nervous and they try to throw everything, including the kitchen sink, trying to find any opening at all. And that just makes the opposition look weak and unfocused.

Not trying to discount his skills at multidimensional chess but I think this is a big factor in how Obama creates his own luck. McCain, Romney, Rove, et al, have no idea how to deal with such a tightly disciplined man.
posted by honestcoyote at 11:08 AM on September 19, 2012 [29 favorites]

I think that's a great point, honestcoyote. Another thing that seems to have helped this election is that the right has attacked him with so many over-the-top smears that the legitimate complaints get lost in the noise.
posted by drezdn at 11:13 AM on September 19, 2012

Romney's father was born in Mexico, making his father a Mexican citizen by birthright.

Not really: "A two-term Michigan governor, George Romney faced questions about his eligibility to run for president in 1968 because he wasn't born in the United States. Yet, George was born a U.S. citizen, not Mexican, because his parents were U.S. citizens. And in those days, Mexico didn't grant dual citizenship so the parents had to choose one country or the other."
posted by peeedro at 11:13 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ta-Nehisi Coates just said it better than I did:

I think there is something about this particular moment in liberalism wherein we attribute magical powers to the letters G and O and P. There seems to be a popular sense that Sheldon Adelson is an archlich, and the Koch brothers are the Crimson Twins. Maybe it's the 2000 election, I don't really know.

I am not making predictions, but I am going to gush here: I think Barack Obama is a gifted politician, and a ruthless campaigner. That his opponents (and even some of us) don't really get this, that we think he is merely lucky, only heightens the joy I feel watching him do work. I don't expect to ever feel like this again in my life. The good times are so rare. As a liberal, I see nothing wrong with looking at the math, and then enjoying the moment. It does not preclude voting, nor making sure friends and family vote. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I'll move on.

posted by muddgirl at 11:15 AM on September 19, 2012 [17 favorites]

With Tax Comments, Romney Wades Into a Conservative Rift

For a long time, cutting taxes for the poor was a major emphasis of the Republican Party. One reason that many poor people no longer pay federal income taxes is that they qualify for credits such as the earned-income tax credit, which has its roots in conservative thinking and has long been supported by members of both parties as a way to help the poor without increasing welfare payments or raising the minimum wage.
posted by Golden Eternity at 11:22 AM on September 19, 2012 [8 favorites]

McCain, Romney, Rove, et al, have no idea how to deal with such a tightly disciplined man.

I think this is right on, and I also think that the Republicans in general don't know what to do when a Democrat doesn't cower before them. They're so used to Democrats curling up into a ball and begging for mercy that "LOL, no" and a crooked grin in response to their bullshit sends them into a Yosemite Sam-esque sputtering, impotent fit.

I often wonder what American Presidential campaigns look like from the outside. Even leaving aside the latest turmoil and the tax return issues, we have here a Republican candidate who

- Had a disastrous foreign trip where he insulted one of America's closest allies
- Perpetuated nasty stereotypes about Jewish people
- Told a Republican running for office to drop out of a race only to have that candidate stop just short of telling him to fuck off
- Continuously and repeatedly demonstrates an inability to connect to average people
- Has people in his own party talking about how hard it was to like him
- Emerged from a primary where the voters made it clear they were trying desperately to back anyone else but him

and the race is still somehow close, and people are still claiming that Romney can somehow win.

What does it say about our country that Democrats must run nearly perfect campaigns while Republicans can rumble, bumble, and stumble their way toward November with a decent shot at winning no matter what they do? Is it *just* the media's horse-race narrative, which sells air time, or is something else going on in this country?
posted by lord_wolf at 11:38 AM on September 19, 2012 [21 favorites]

My guess is that it's part of the constant 'lesser of two evils' dynamic produced by the two-party system, for various subjective definitions of 'evils.' Things being as they are right now, approximately half of the country will never, ever vote for a Republican, no matter how terrible the Democratic candidate is; the other approximate half will never, ever vote for a Democrat, no matter how terrible the Republican candidate is. And there are any real 3rd options at the national level, so every terrible presidential candidate will still wind up with something like 48.6% of the popular vote.
posted by shakespeherian at 11:48 AM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

MoonOrb: Also, rich/non-poor women should stay home to care for their children, but poor women MUST work outside the home.
posted by Eyebeams at 11:54 AM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Twitter is rife with suggestions for what's on the missing two minutes of tape.

Couple of corkers:

David Waldman ‏@KagroX
Restarted in safe mode. #missing2min

Eric Kleefeld ‏@EricKleefeld
Romney ends with his new slogan, "The Aristocrats!" #missing2min
posted by unSane at 12:00 PM on September 19, 2012 [11 favorites]

What does it say about our country that Democrats must run nearly perfect campaigns while Republicans can rumble, bumble, and stumble their way toward November with a decent shot at winning no matter what they do?

It's partially the narrative, since the media needs a story to work with.

It's partially the fact Obama is the incumbent and there are lots of people who really want to vote against him and will do so even if they can't stand Romney.

And then there's the silliness about race. It's hard to believe that in the 21st century, a majority of non-rich white Americans over 40 can't bring themselves to vote for a non-white candidate even though Obama's opponent publicly and vocally hates everything about this class of people.

And then there's the trope about "conservatives fall in line" which is generally true. Romney may be the worst presidential candidate in the post-war era, but around 27% of the general public (meaning almost half of the people who show up to vote) will vote for him because of the "R".

Those are some pretty decent advantages the Republicans have. They're probably not going to be good enough for a win, but it does mean Democrats have to work harder than they should, considering the actual content of the Republicans' message.

And if Obama was white with a "normal" name, I think this election would possibly be as close to a Democratic landslide as we can get with a sharply polarized right. If you're looking for an overall message, it would be that older white people in the 99% economic class will, as a group, put racial identity ahead of their own interests. And that's quite sad and idiotic.
posted by honestcoyote at 12:08 PM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

I often wonder what American Presidential campaigns look like from the outside.

Well, normally I would say that your country amusingly appears to have it's collective head up it's collective ass, but then we elected Harper so I can no longer be all smug.
posted by WinnipegDragon at 12:13 PM on September 19, 2012 [7 favorites]

My favourite #missing2min

"10 yrs of taxes, specific jobs plan, comprehensive Middle East peace plan, thanking troops, & 2 black folk there VOLUNTARILY"
posted by WinnipegDragon at 12:15 PM on September 19, 2012 [5 favorites]

Re: Obama's unflappability

I heard an interview with the guy who wrote the latest Obama book, who hung out with O and played basketball with him and all this cool shit.

W/r/t the basketball thing, it was really striking that the guys he plays with are like top college b-ball players, but they don't get invited back if they defer to the Prez in any way -- by passing him the ball when there's a better player available, for example. Obama wears a mouth guard 'cause sometimes people's teeth get knocked out, including possibly his.

The idea being, he rejects the idea of Barack Obama as an exceptional person in this amazing way that it is sort of hard to wrap my head around. He's curtained off himself in some pretty amazing ways. That is just incredibly appealing, and especially so when contrasted with Romney and all of his money and his frantic gyrations.

The other thing was when the writer asked Obama if the bad shit said about him affects him adversely; the writer said Obama laughed at him, like, what a wacky idea, and then Obama said that what is said about him, good or bad, has to do much more with the speaker than Obama himself.
posted by angrycat at 12:26 PM on September 19, 2012 [10 favorites]

Felix Gilman ‏@felixgilman
#missing2min a waiter appears to be expecting a tip of some kind. everyone goes quiet and stares at their food until he goes away
posted by angrycat at 12:29 PM on September 19, 2012 [14 favorites]

If you could switch candidates, you'd need someone amazing, someone who the American public knows and likes across party lines.

Someone like Clint Eastwood?
posted by vibrotronica at 12:29 PM on September 19, 2012

bardic: pull the lever for Romney

For the drop? I think there would be a long line for that.
posted by dunkadunc at 12:32 PM on September 19, 2012

If you could switch candidates, you'd need someone amazing, someone who the American public knows and likes across party lines.

Someone like Clint Eastwood?

I'm trying to think up any possible way, alien invasion that wipes out the current GOP, Zombie Infestation that reduces the USA to just the northeast, anything, that causes Bill Clinton to run.
posted by Ad hominem at 12:36 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Things being as they are right now, approximately half of the country will never, ever vote for a Republican, no matter how terrible the Democratic candidate is; the other approximate half will never, ever vote for a Democrat, no matter how terrible the Republican candidate is. And there are any real 3rd options at the national level, so every terrible presidential candidate will still wind up with something like 48.6% of the popular vote.

Part of this is how awful everyone who's voted for a third party candidate has been treated. Remember Perot? Nader? Each time, angry, angry people pointed out that "those damn third party/independent votes" had Cost The Election. It's gotten to the point where even if someone believes in a third party and thinks there's a good candidate, they're reluctant to vote for them because "got to keep THOSE guys out of office, y'know!"

They're not in any sense dead. They're the mainstream of the modern Democratic Party.

The idea that the modern Democratic Party has anything to do with fiscal conservatism is mind-boggling. In what way is this at all the case? No, those Republican refugees fled to the Libertarian Party.
posted by corb at 12:37 PM on September 19, 2012

Mitt Romney Offers Full-Throated Attack On Obama's 'Redistribution'.
posted by ericb at 12:37 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Nice to know it's business as usual in DC, though: Senate Republicans today rejected the Veterans Job Corps Act, which sought to help returning veterans find work. The bill was fully paid for, and bipartisan. It needed 60 votes to advance. The final tally was 58 to 40, and all 40 opponents of the proposal were Republicans.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:39 PM on September 19, 2012 [16 favorites]

Gop Frets Romney Is Blowing Race
posted by ericb at 12:39 PM on September 19, 2012

The idea that the modern Democratic Party has anything to do with fiscal conservatism is mind-boggling. In what way is this at all the case? No, those Republican refugees fled to the Libertarian Party.

Really? Again, the facts say otherwise. Clinton balanced budgets. When the GOP controlled everything, they immediately ran the deficit way up. These are facts. And what does Obama want to do? Raise taxes like Clinton to balance the budget.

You can pretend all you want, but those are the facts.
posted by Ironmouth at 12:41 PM on September 19, 2012 [37 favorites]

Even though I called this election for Obama back when Herman Cain* was the Republican frontrunner, here are the two reasons at this point I'm fairly sure Obama is going to walk away with this thing.

1. Clint was right!! The Republicans are running against an imaginary opponent. Republicans still think this thing should be a slam dunk for Romney because of [insert bizarre straw man argument here]. A classic example is the "you didn't build that" meme. It's one thing to play up a supposed gaffe for a few news cycles or as a gotcha moment. But to make a cornerstone of your campaign and a theme of your convention something the other guy didn't actually say? Everything from the economy to the culture war stuff is all rooted in fantasyland. It's like how boxers talk all kinds of smack against their opponents before a fight. No matter how weak you say your opponent is, you have to train for actual guy who can knock you out with one punch.

2.They're behind the times. Bush2004 was the precursor, but Obama 2008 was the first truly modern campaign. Until there's another major shift in demographics, technology and culture, the only way to win the white house will be running an "Obama 2008" campaign. Relying on what worked for Reagan 30 years ago, or conventional wisdom from the 90's will not cut it.

*Any national party that let's Herman Cain carry the baton for even a minute is not to be taken seriously. The republican primary this year was little more than a thinly veiled cry for help.
posted by billyfleetwood at 12:41 PM on September 19, 2012 [10 favorites]

Part of this is how awful everyone who's voted for a third party candidate has been treated. Remember Perot? Nader? Each time, angry, angry people pointed out that "those damn third party/independent votes" had Cost The Election. It's gotten to the point where even if someone believes in a third party and thinks there's a good candidate, they're reluctant to vote for them because "got to keep THOSE guys out of office, y'know!"

I think actually it's more to do with how the vast majority of states parcel out their Electoral College votes on a winner-take-all basis which makes that 'splitting the vote' scenario possible. Which isn't to say that yeah, Nader votes are to blame for Gore's loss, but rather that the system isn't currently set up to accommodate more than two candidates who, regardless of their actual policy views, are necessarily cast as polar opposites.
posted by shakespeherian at 12:44 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama said that what is said about him, good or bad, has to do much more with the speaker than Obama himself.

He's fundamentally classy. That reminds me of this little throat-lumper.
posted by Miko at 12:47 PM on September 19, 2012 [12 favorites]

Mitt Romney Offers Full-Throated Attack On Obama's 'Redistribution'

This always seems to be such a losing strategy to me, because it's so easy to counter. "Romney wants to redistribute income too: he just wants to redistribute it upward. That is, take your labor and your earning power, and adjust tax policies so that the biggest share of the rewards of your labor ends up going to the fat cats, instead of to your pocket where it belongs. That's why we see the top 5% of people earning more and more year after year, while your wages keep staying the same. You earned those extra profits for them, while they kept pushing down your wages and refusing to invest their wealth back in industries that would grow. Those profits are what should have been years' worth of your raises, your job growth, your training."

Seems like a pretty easy argument to make, but I don't hear it often enough. On one level it's highfalutin theory, but on another level it's the gut truth.
posted by Miko at 12:53 PM on September 19, 2012 [24 favorites]

I have to ask, If the Libertarian party is so great why isn't Ron Paul in it?
posted by Artw at 1:00 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Which president has raised spending the least in the past 50 years?
posted by drezdn at 1:03 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

The idea that the modern Democratic Party has anything to do with fiscal conservatism is mind-boggling. In what way is this at all the case? No, those Republican refugees fled to the Libertarian Party.

Put another way, when was the last time a Republican Administration reduced the deficit?

G.W. Bush Added $803,424,990,821 to the deficit
Clinton Subtracted -$164,787,361,848 from the deficit
G.H.W. Bush Added $34,326,854,936 to the deficit
Reagan Added $106,541,043,476 to the deficit
Carter Subtracted -$4,328,272,827 from the deficit
Ford Added $69,190,733,924 to the deficit
Nixon Added $17,581,577,773 to the deficit
LBJ Subtracted -$2,146,225,006 from the deficit
Kennedy Added $10,051,478,10 to the deficit
Eisenhower Subtracted -$17,259,422,929 from the deficit
Truman Subtracted -$294,348,329,939 from the deficit
FDR Added $296,963,393,318 to the deficit.

That's right, Eisenhower. When was the last time a Dem did it? Well EVERY DEM from LBJ to Clinton did. Only JFK, who lowered taxes, raised the deficit, not including FDR who was fully engaged in destroying our enemies.

So the idea that the Republican's cut the deficit is countered by the facts, which show ruinous tax cuts when they get in office, causing the deficit to go up. Meanwhile, the Dems, nearly every time, reduce deficits.

Conservatism, as Burke, its founder, pointed out, is not based on facts.
posted by Ironmouth at 1:04 PM on September 19, 2012 [65 favorites]

Can we please not do this?
posted by muddgirl at 1:14 PM on September 19, 2012 [17 favorites]

Nader did cost the election. And over 100,000 Iraqi civilians died because of it.

Let me assure you, Ironmouth, in case you thought I somehow forgot, I am intimately and painfully familiar with the costs of the Iraq War.

But to claim that it was due to Nader, due to people daring to think that we could have a different system than this every-four-years-being-screwed by one of the two major parties...that is so awful I don't even know what to say to that. Yeah, people. Should have known your place was not to dream of a better world.
posted by corb at 1:15 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

But to claim that it was due to Nader, due to people daring to think that we could have a different system than this every-four-years-being-screwed by one of the two major parties...that is so awful I don't even know what to say to that. Yeah, people. Should have known your place was not to dream of a better world.

If Gore was elected, we don't invade Iraq. Its that simple.
posted by Ironmouth at 1:18 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

~~Nader~~ The Supreme Court did cost the election. And over 100,000 Iraqi civilians died because of it.

Fixed that for you.
posted by Potsy at 1:19 PM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

For fuck's sake can we not Nader this thing up.
posted by cortex at 1:21 PM on September 19, 2012 [39 favorites]

> Should have known your place was not to dream of a better world.

Exactly. Focus on a better United States.
posted by de at 1:21 PM on September 19, 2012

Skip the Nader derail please.
posted by benito.strauss at 1:22 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Where's cortex's admin badge? The world is broken!
posted by drezdn at 1:22 PM on September 19, 2012

That only shows up in Metatalk.
posted by shakespeherian at 1:23 PM on September 19, 2012

All is right with the world again!
posted by drezdn at 1:26 PM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Oh for --

Okay, Nader's involvement was NOT what cost Gore the election, number one, and number two, someone being angry at Nader does NOT mean that they "don't want to dream of a better world." One of those accusations is false and the other is just plain mean.

And while we're at it - a vomitorium was not for ancient Romans to throw up in, Mrs. O'Leary's cow did not cause the Chicago Fire, you can't see the Great Wall of China from space, and yes, there are times when size does matter.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 1:28 PM on September 19, 2012 [11 favorites]

Christ... you know most complicated things have more than one originating cause.

Nader definitely contributed to the loss, the Supreme Court definitely contributed, Gore's campaign style (including distancing himself from the most popular president the Dems have had in a Loooong time) contributed, Florida's fucked election system contributed. Biggest problem, imo, is that our SYSTEM is kinda shitty. the EC is outmoded and clunky at best and allows for someone to win the popular vote but not win the election, that is crap.

And frankly thinking a third party is somehow going to be magically better then established parties is a bit naive. We've a 3rd party here in MN, they even won the governorship a few cycles back, let me tell you they where no great shakes. It is not so much parties that are the problem, but how the system is constructed and maintained, so even when a third party wins something they actually have no real incentive to actually change things, third parties are JUST AS partisan, corrupt, inept and full of good/bad ideas as any other party. In Canada they have a jackass in power in part because of the flaws of multiple party systems, And I say this as someone who WANTS two or three more parties
posted by edgeways at 1:29 PM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

and yes, there are times when size does matter.

For the last time, I'm not going to be the one to stick my hand in the garbage disposal, even if my hands are smaller! Use a wooden spoon or some tongs!
posted by muddgirl at 1:31 PM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

(Avoiding a pointless Nader flamefest starts with you)
posted by muddgirl at 1:32 PM on September 19, 2012 [13 favorites]

"But to claim that it was due to Nader, due to people daring to think that we could have a different system than this every-four-years-being-screwed by one of the two major parties...that is so awful I don't even know what to say to that. Yeah, people. Should have known your place was not to dream of a better world."

Third parties can be tremendously effective in local elections, and can even make for competitive statewide races.

However, having a basic knowledge of civics and history does show that they're not the best way to achieve a better world, and that their supporters are often startlingly naive and ignorant of the likely outcomes of third party involvement.

Third parties have acted primarily as spoilers for the last 100 years, in part due to the structural constraints of American elections. (Briefly, the winning party wins, the party in second will try harder next time, the party in third is unable to retain support.) In order to be successful, they've often required a strong personality that makes actual party building difficult (Nader did fuck all for the Greens in terms of building an institutional machine) and require much more investment than a similar amount put toward an established party.

Because all of this is common knowledge, and because there are other, more effective ways to influence electoral politics, it's pretty true that third party voters are misguided at best and intentional spoilers at worst.
posted by klangklangston at 1:33 PM on September 19, 2012 [7 favorites]

Has anyone mashed up footage of Mitt walking with sad Charlie Brown music?
posted by drezdn at 1:36 PM on September 19, 2012 [9 favorites]

I agree that a certain percentage of the potential electorate will always vote for Romney (due to his status as "Not Obama"), but what about the actual electorate? If Romney's campaign keeps projecting this corpse-like stench of Loserdom, won't a number of "Not Obama" people just stay home rather than a cast a vote they feel is largely symbolic? And if Romney continues to piss off the Democratic base, won't that encourage people to get out and vote against him even if they feel he will lose, basically as a "fuck you, Romney" gesture? Perhaps that could result in more of a landslide scenario than we think possible currently.
posted by sallybrown at 1:38 PM on September 19, 2012

Why would anyone insult Charlie Brown that way?
posted by bardophile at 1:38 PM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

Does anyone think it may be possible for some future president to be elected by 60% or more of the popular vote? Or is it going to be 47% vs. 47% until societal collapse?
posted by charred husk at 1:44 PM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Re: Third parties... Just don't look at what happened in the UK when the Lib Dems suddenly became relevant.
posted by Artw at 1:46 PM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

I think you could see 60% for a second term president after some demographic changes.
posted by drezdn at 1:49 PM on September 19, 2012

like when all the bad people die of terminal jerkitude?
posted by elizardbits at 1:52 PM on September 19, 2012 [5 favorites]

Does anyone think it may be possible for some future president to be elected by 60% or more of the popular vote? Or is it going to be 47% vs. 47% until societal collapse?

We are absolutely headed in that 60% direction, I'd say by 2020. Long-term, major progressive shift. It's kind of in the cards already, but obviously there are a few staunch holdouts/lost causes in that regard.
posted by Miko at 1:54 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Aren't the conservatives on the brink of sweeping the entire lower government apparatus? Fat lot of good that 60% does then.
posted by Artw at 1:55 PM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Well, the first post-Honestygate poll numbers are in, from the Gallup tracker: 43 percent of registered voters were unswayed by the leaked video ... A fifth of registered voters said the former Massachusetts governor’s comments made them more likely to support him, compared to 36 percent who said it makes them less likely to support him.
posted by saturday_morning at 1:58 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm not talking about this cycle, talking about a generational total shift expected in 2020-maybe as late as 2040.
posted by Miko at 1:59 PM on September 19, 2012

Boo_Radley: Oh, and the other thing that I should have mentioned: the people who are still stumping for Romney at this point are basically pallbearers.

Yeah, the modern day GOtP is all about necrophilia. They can't seem to get a grip and stop harassing the rotten corpse of Ronald Reagan, who somehow in his sanctified and hyper-deified manner makes any arrogant, cold, inhumane, vicious policy the GOtP comes up with, and Romney has been annointed the King of that, as somehow not only palatable, but even gives it an air of "compassion" and "wisdom."

This, modern Republican party, circa 2012, is fucking crazy.
posted by Skygazer at 2:00 PM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

We are absolutely headed in that 60% direction, I'd say by 2020. Long-term, major progressive shift. It's kind of in the cards already, but obviously there are a few staunch holdouts/lost causes in that regard.

This is not going to happen, because parties shift. If a party thinks that they're in danger of slipping below 45% of the population, they will shift their policies until they are back up to that magical half of the voting population again.

Look back - ideas have historically shifted over the last forty years, but the Republicans and Democrats have existed all the same. They are monolithic parties, and they have no intentions of letting go.

On an amusing, topical note, though, because I think I'm possibly the only one here who gets Romney advertising emails, his new thing is, "Let's put America back to work by putting Barack Obama and his liberal allies out of work."
posted by corb at 2:10 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

It's happened at least twice before, so I could definitely see it happening again.
posted by drezdn at 2:13 PM on September 19, 2012

Yeah, in a first past the post two-party system like we have in the United States you don't generally get 60/40 splits long term. What happens is that the parties fracture and re-align slightly further towards the 60% side of the equation and it reverts back to a near 50/50 split.

Two party systems are just as much coalition based as parliamentary systems, it's just that the coalitions are formed inside the parties before the elections rather than between parties after elections. If the center of gravity of the electorate shifts the coalitions shift in response.
posted by Justinian at 2:15 PM on September 19, 2012 [7 favorites]

Looking at this from the other side of the Atlantic, the stunning thing is that, after this video, Romney is still a candidate.

Even if they wanted to, I don't think that there's anything that the Republican Party can do about it right now.

Actually, I was considering how the GOP could possibly swing the "campaign narrative" back to to their side again, making Mitt a strong and statesmanlike figure, and I thought of one way they could try. That idea was so ugly that I didn't want to type it out, but then I remembered that they already made the movie.

Liberal learned helplessness drives me crazy. "Mitt's humiliating accidental release of his heinous and unpopular views has us right where he wants us!" Obama's winning. Democrats have won* all but one presidential election for twenty years.

I'll admit to being a little worried, if only because I don't want to see the Democratic base become complacent, or the right-wing base become any more violently deranged. Also, it's pathetic to see a grown man soil himself on the stage of history. But deep down, my feelings about this whole thing are purely butt dance butt dance
posted by Countess Elena at 2:16 PM on September 19, 2012

Well, the first post-Honestygate poll numbers are in, from the Gallup tracker

But the only interesting numbers are the ones about the independents.

While a majority of independents — 53 percent — said the comments would have no impact on their vote, 29 percent said it would make them less likely to back Romney, according to a Gallup poll. Fifteen percent said it would make a Romney vote more likely.

In all honesty, however, without knowing quite a lot more about these
"independents" and their prior voting habits, numbers like these are verging on the meaningless. The other important number, that of those who won't bother to vote at all because of these remarks, is even harder to measure.

It looks like this has hurt Romney, but I'm not sure how easy it is to quantify how much.
posted by howfar at 2:18 PM on September 19, 2012

I'm not talking about this cycle, talking about a generational total shift expected in 2020-maybe as late as 2040.

I'm not so sure. As discussed earlier on MetaFilter, the GOP and the tea party have a great ground game and are able to recruit motivated college age prospects into service. This seems to have the unfortunate side effect that the most idealogical conservatives end up running the party - like Karl Rove, Grover Norquist, Ralph Reed, all of whom were Young Republicans I believe. It doesn't seem that the Dem's are able to attract as many motivated people to actually work in politics. It helps that FOX News (the most watched news progam the last I checked) is basically a GOP propaganda channel. If they take over lower government, the GOP can disenfranchise more Democratic voters. The red states are very religious even if demographics are changing. Medicare/medicate and higher education costs are exploding and if interest rates go up the deficit will be a huge problem. The middle class may be shrinking. There are very problematic global economic and political issues. The "military-industrial complex" generally hates the Dems. I'm sure there are many other obstacles.
posted by Golden Eternity at 2:20 PM on September 19, 2012

Thread derails are the third-party candidates of online discussion. Who are you to say I should only support one of the preapproved topics?
posted by Riki tiki at 2:21 PM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Justinian: Yeah, in a first past the post two-party system like we have in the United States you don't generally get 60/40 splits long term. What happens is that the parties fracture and re-align slightly further towards the 60% side of the equation and it reverts back to a near 50/50 split.

It's unclear to me who the Republicans are going to team their shrinking pool of evangelical white Christians and angry white men up with after at least a decade or so of strategy based primarily on antagonizing every other group out there.

I mean this seriously - who can they add to their core constituencies? Romney's in Florida today, trying to win over a few Latino voters after having loudly espoused several positions that the majority of them seem to find offensive, in a bid to sound tough for the angry white men segment of his constituency.

Who wants in to the Republican tent?
posted by syzygy at 2:22 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

This is pretty surprising to me:

Similarly, 92 percent of Republicans said they planned to vote for Romney, and 44 percent of them said the video makes them more likely to back the challenger.

Only 44%? Sure, only a tiny percentage (5%) of Republicans are less likely to vote for Romney because of the video, but that 44% makes it sound to me like it's not playing very well to the base either, or at least the base is aware enough of the reaction to the video that they don't want to be considered as supporting it.
posted by sallybrown at 2:23 PM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Golden Eternity: I'm not so sure. As discussed earlier on MetaFilter, the GOP and the tea party have a great ground game and are able to recruit motivated college age prospects into service.

The problem for the GOP is that their core constituencies, based almost 100% on white people, are shrinking, in demographic terms. If the GOP can't bring anyone else into their tent, 100% of all white people will eventually still not be enough to win most elections for them.
posted by syzygy at 2:25 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh man, I love the wingnuts. Here's a real bombshell: an "unearthed" 1995 video in which Obama speaks up for those radical leftist ideas, "democracy" and "the common good."
posted by neroli at 2:32 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Look back - ideas have historically shifted over the last forty years, but the Republicans and Democrats have existed all the same. They are monolithic parties, and they have no intentions of letting go.

I'll stand by this. I'm not talking so much about parties here, but about the conservative/progressive line and which way that's going to move. The US is going to get a lot less conservative over the next 20 years. Which parties capitalize on that in which ways is yet to be determined, but I don't think a landslide is ever out of the question, especially with ideologies out of control which create overconfident and nonstrategic planning.

The problem for the GOP is that their core constituencies, based almost 100% on white people, are shrinking, in demographic terms. If the GOP can't bring anyone else into their tent, 100% of all white people will eventually still not be enough to win most elections for them.

The main thing. Also, some of the lifestyle topics are going to be flat rejected by younger groups as the massive baby boom dies off.

If GOP leaders aren't already trying to figure out how to move back to the middle, they should be. What I'm more interested to see is how they handle the utter obvious failure of hardline marketeer fiscal philosophies, and the evidence that tax cutting doesn't seem to be what boosts economies. Whatcha got now?
posted by Miko at 2:38 PM on September 19, 2012 [4 favorites]

"It's unclear to me who the Republicans are going to team their shrinking pool of evangelical white Christians and angry white men up with after at least a decade or so of strategy based primarily on antagonizing every other group out there."

Asians first, then Latinos. At least here in California, there's a decent split between Latinos who have been in the US for generations and the more recent immigrants. I worked briefly for the ACLU during that whole Show Us Your Papers law and heard a lot of stuff that would sound just crazy racist coming from white people, except that it was directed at Latinos by Latinos.
posted by klangklangston at 2:43 PM on September 19, 2012 [4 favorites]

What I'm more interested to see is how they handle the utter obvious failure of hardline marketeer fiscal philosophies, and the evidence that tax cutting doesn't seem to be what boosts economies. Whatcha got now?

They don't need tax cutting to help the economy. They need tax cutting to win the next election. The campaign doesn't end just because you win.
posted by Joey Michaels at 2:52 PM on September 19, 2012

Poll Shows Biggest Obama Lead Yet.
posted by ericb at 2:56 PM on September 19, 2012

A Mood of Gloom Afflicts the Romney Campaign -- "In low-volume, out-of-the-way conversations, a few of [Romney aides] are now wondering whether victory is still possible and whether they are entering McCain-Palin ticket territory."
posted by ericb at 2:58 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Miko: If GOP leaders aren't already trying to figure out how to move back to the middle, they should be.

I have no idea how they could hope to do this when such a large part of their current core is so unlikely to budge on some of the core issues - abortion, fiscal policy. Unless the Dems can win and demonstrate social programs that work, appealing to pragmatism. I'm trying to do my part here, explaining how much better life in Vienna, Austria is than life in Texas, was - the benefits of a social safety net to society, as a whole, in the form of reduced desperation at all levels. Reduced crime, reduced stress. The benefits, as I see it in real life every day, are worth paying a slightly higher tax rate for. I try to communicate this with fiscal conservatives who are willing to listen. I have no idea how to reach the fundamentalist evangelicals, on the other hand. Totally lost.

What I'm more interested to see is how they handle the utter obvious failure of hardline marketeer fiscal philosophies, and the evidence that tax cutting doesn't seem to be what boosts economies. Whatcha got now?

Honestly, I think a large number of their voters take Heritage Foundation reports as more truthful than Congressional Research Service reports, even when the pandering and desperation of the HF reports is just blatant. It seems, to me, that a number of these people are simply not interested in complicated facts - simple narratives sell better to them.

On the other hand, I sincerely believe that Republican policies will lead to a dystopian society, and I'm not even sure what the Roves pulling the levers are thinking. It seems to me that the policies they're after will, in the long run, be bad for even the wealthy interests they're coddling. I mean, as someone said above, we need consumption, and right now, the consumers are short on cash. The wealthy are flush with cash to invest, but that's not going to get our economy moving. It seems to me that Republican policies will simply exacerbate this phenomenon over time, eventually hurting the wealthy their policies are supposed to favor.

klang: Asians first, then Latinos.

Sad to hear. I sincerely hope the democrats are able to win and put in place effective social programs that convince these and other groups of the value of working together as a society. The situation seems pretty bleak to me.
posted by syzygy at 2:58 PM on September 19, 2012 [4 favorites]

Mitt Romney's Secret Fundraiser Remarks Put The Lie To Supply-Side Economics.
posted by ericb at 2:59 PM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

No, those Republican refugees fled to the Libertarian Party.

I can tell you that there are few libertarians in New England. And yet New England went from being a mix of Democrats and Republicans to being a Democratic stronghold. What do you think happened? States like Vermont only became reliable Democratic state in 1992, not because of an invasion of hippies but because the New England staid temperamental conservatism became more associated with the Democratic party than the Republican party, which became a radical corporate/southern evangelical party.

I'll tell you: why do you think Democrats keep talking about "reforming" Medicare and Social Security all the time as part of a "deal" with the Republicans? Because they are socially liberal fiscal conservatives in the Eisenhower Republican model.

There are hardly any members of the libertarian party which is on the verge of being a non-entity. Even the Green Party polls better than the Libertarian Party ever has. The Libertarian Party has never been about fiscal conservatism per se as much pushing for a deregulated state whose laws tilt in favor of property and capital owners.
posted by deanc at 3:00 PM on September 19, 2012 [18 favorites]

Poll: Mitt remarks hurt indie support -- "Almost three in 10 independent voters say '47 percent' makes them less likely to vote for him."
posted by ericb at 3:00 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Thinking well into the future, a consequence of a post-racial society should be that there are many, many non-white conservatives.

Well, there's a real question about that. First, a lot of the generic "whites" now in the Republican (and Democratic) parties were not considered as white 100 years ago. Irish, Italians, Eastern Europeans and Germans have at times been part of persecuted groups that the conservatives of the time pushed out of their realm. Over the course of the 20th century, those people assimilated into whiteness - into the OK kind of immigrant, the kind whose families got here a couple of generations ago.

So as nice as it is to imagine some noble future in which the conservative party does not fight culture battles against people based on their ethnicity, I think that the conservatives of the future may be just as xenophobic, but about different groups. It may be that white, Asian, Latino, and African American conservatives find ways of aligning, in their longtime Americanness, against more recently arrived immigrants from the Middle East, Africa, South and Central America, East and Southeast Asia, etc.
posted by Miko at 3:01 PM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

The red states are very religious even if demographics are changing.

I read something that addressed this awhile back - I don't remember where. It said something along the lines of: while the older, white conservatives will die off over the next twenty years or so and the GOP hasn't really been successful at making themselves as relevant with younger people - the churches have been able to do this to a certain degree. Mega-churches, youth ministries, rock bands, etc. Religion tends to be more conservative and I think when people base their political beliefs on religion, it is very difficult to sway such a fundamental worldview. This combined with immigration - there are enough Catholics and Protestants coming to America from Mexico to have a discernible impact on the congregations of both Catholic and Protestant churches in the United States. So I kind of wonder if this will have any sort of "replacement rate" impact on the shrinking base of older whites.
posted by triggerfinger at 3:28 PM on September 19, 2012

Miko: "It may be that white, Asian, Latino, and African American conservatives find ways of aligning, in their longtime Americanness, against more recently arrived immigrants from the Middle East, Africa, South and Central America, East and Southeast Asia, etc."

Am I naïve to think it'll it at least be harder to discriminate based on ethnicity, once skin color is no longer a meaningful distinction?
posted by Riki tiki at 3:30 PM on September 19, 2012

Almost three in 10 independent voters say '47 percent' makes them less likely to vote for him.

Wow, that is tough to parse. Details on the question, which is unfortunately embedded in an image.
posted by feloniousmonk at 3:30 PM on September 19, 2012

What really leaves me dumbfounded is that Romney was the cream of the crop for 2012. Think of that. Think of Michelle Bachmann as the GOP candidate or Herman Cain, or Rick Perry. The list of primary hopefuls is what really leads me to believe that the Republicans in their current form are a party without a future. Is there anyone far enough to the right, charismatic, smart, AND with clean hands who can step forward to lead the poor old GOP? I'm not saying that Rick Perry or Jeb Bush can't win in 2016, there will always be those who will vote against Democrats, but I am thinking that neither one can help heal the ever widening rips in the Republican Big Tent.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:30 PM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

It may become harder to discriminate on skin color over time, but as the saying goes, discriminators gonna discriminate.
posted by feloniousmonk at 3:31 PM on September 19, 2012

Secret Life of Gravy, I've heard the argument that the 'better' republican candidates didn't think Obama was beatable, and wanted to sit out for four years. That's some serious delayed gratification which is something politicians don't typically seem capable of, though.
posted by These Premises Are Alarmed at 3:37 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

There seems to be a popular sense that Sheldon Adelson is an archlich

I was going to go with Arschloch.
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 3:37 PM on September 19, 2012 [7 favorites]

There are blue dogs you could imagine making the switch given sufficient inducement. If your group becomes too splintered to campaign effectively it seems like an obvious move to try and inflict the same on your opponent.
posted by feloniousmonk at 3:39 PM on September 19, 2012

Taking taxes from one area and moving the revenues from them to another. The only two I personally can think of offhand are the Eastern/Western Washington split and the Upstate/Downstate New York issue.

I'm sure this has been addressed, but corb, you do know that the issue on the Upstate/Downstate New York thing is the HUGE GIGANTIC EPIC amounts of money that flows Upstate from the NYC metro area. In that particular equation -- and I assume the Washington one, too -- we're talking about money leaving the cities and going to the rural areas.

I mean, sure, if the rural folks don't want our money, great. They can go starve and die of a plague or a house fire or whatever while attempting to establish their libertarian utopia, and we'll keep our money.

Perhaps some wealthy NYC folk will deign to donate to charities that bring emergency food aid into rural Upstate New York communities.
posted by Sara C. at 3:40 PM on September 19, 2012 [9 favorites]

Almost three in 10 independent voters say '47 percent' makes them less likely to vote for him.

Not enough it seems. Romney may be on the verge of discovering a long lost art, which is shaming scapegoats to get the respect of those with low self-esteem. Either way he may have a play on his hands. He has taken the election and made it about taxes and entitlements, when to most people it was about a lot more going into it.
posted by Brian B. at 3:42 PM on September 19, 2012

Secret Life of Gravy, I've heard the argument that the 'better' republican candidates didn't think Obama was beatable, and wanted to sit out for four years. That's some serious delayed gratification which is something politicians don't typically seem capable of, though.

The conventional wisdom was that Obama was eminently beatable, up to about the end of last year.
posted by 2bucksplus at 3:42 PM on September 19, 2012

The conventional wisdom was that Obama was eminently beatable, up to about the end of last year.

I think there's a distinction to be drawn about what they were saying in public and what their actions actually reveal. There are a lot of GOP heavyweights who decided not to bother this time around; they didn't do it because Romney is so widely admired.

That said, I think a version of Jeb Bush with the exact same biography but a different last name would have been very difficult for Obama to beat.
posted by gerryblog at 3:45 PM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

Harry Reid slams Romney's "47 percent" remark, again demands tax returns

"For all we know, Mitt Romney could be one of those who have paid no federal income tax," Reid said Wednesday.
posted by Golden Eternity at 3:52 PM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

I've heard the argument that the 'better' republican candidates didn't think Obama was beatable, and wanted to sit out for four years.

I honestly think the biggest problem that the GOP faces is that they have been tugged so far to the right that only people who are hypocrites or insane or lying liars can espouse all of the various party platforms long enough to get elected. Look at John McCain and Romney who both had to completely flip flop on social issues like abortion in order to get the nod. Huckabee is on the right side of the social issues, being a fundamentalist Christian, but can you imagine his foreign policy?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:55 PM on September 19, 2012

Yes, but Obama has faced McCain/Palin (after Bush, who by the end of his term was one of the most unpopular Presidents ever) and Romney/Ryan — so I agree with drezdn. Obama has been pretty fortunate in his oponents.

I'm not so sure about that. Seriously, at this point, do the Republicans have anyone available who is simultaneously acceptable to their base and acceptable to moderates?

I mean, look at the options presented other than Mitt Romney. Newt Gingrich? Rick Santorum? Michelle Bachmann? Herman Cain? Donald Trump? These people are either odious or clowns or both.

Huntsman seems not to fit the odious clown mold, but he's not acceptable to their base - Evolution is real, he claims! Global warming too!

Their only hope was to (A) get some odious clown past the primary voters who like odious clowns, and then (B) hope that the main body of the electorate doesn't notice that he or she is an odious clown. Part B of their plan isn't going too well, but you work with what you've got.
posted by Flunkie at 4:00 PM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

That said, I think a version of Jeb Bush with the exact same biography but a different last name would have been very difficult for Obama to beat.

I have been wondering about the Bush name in regards to Jeb. Hindrance or not? Would the voting public shrug their shoulders and vote for him regardless of his family background? We have never had 3 members from the same family in the White House and I do think he would lose a few votes because of that. This year George W. was noticeably absent from the primaries because I guess they are trying to distance themselves from his Presidency so that might also cost Jeb a few votes as well.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:01 PM on September 19, 2012

Jeb Bush tried to defend his brother a bit at the RNC and a person of a cynical bent could suggest that the goal there was less to make his bro feel good and more to try and pave the ground for his 2016 run.

Out here in Hawaii, the conservative shift seems to be focused on Micronesians and on anyone from a poor part of the island who might be able to get to a more affluent part of the island via rail, should rail be implemented. And, thus, they're against rail.
posted by Joey Michaels at 4:06 PM on September 19, 2012

I had a politically-connected friend try to convince me that George P. Bush was the name to look out for. All of the Republican coattails of the name "George Bush", while also embracing the most rapidly-expanding ethnic demographic in the country.
posted by Riki tiki at 4:17 PM on September 19, 2012

Bernie Sanders: Hard working people don't need to be lectured by millionaires.
posted by Eyebeams at 4:18 PM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

I saw Huntsman as a guest on some cable news show in the past week or so. Perhaps you're right that he would have been rejected by the Republican base. When I dug into his policies during the primaries, I saw he espoused the exact same neo-liberal nonsense as every other Republican. Still, I actually said out loud, "Thank God he didn't make it past the exploratory phase." I think Huntsman could have beaten Obama.
posted by ob1quixote at 4:21 PM on September 19, 2012

The White House’s huge gamble on Paul Ryan.

The Obama trap: Romney discovers what Hillary and McCain already know.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:21 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm not so sure about that. Seriously, at this point, do the Republicans have anyone available who is simultaneously acceptable to their base and acceptable to moderates?

There's an argument to be made, in fact, that the last two Republican nominees have been the most socially moderate candidates who could plausibly have survived the nomination process--people who in the past may not not have toed the fundamentalist line. There's a reason both of them chose VP candidates who appealed to the base. That says a lot about the corner the party has painted itself into--a far tighter one than the special interest capture Democratic candidates were accused of in the 80s.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 4:23 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

> I saw he espoused the exact same neo-liberal nonsense as every other Republican. Still, I actually said out loud, "Thank God he didn't make it past the exploratory phase." I think Huntsman could have beaten Obama.

Democrats should consider themselves lucky that the Republican primary system is damn near designed to weed out anyone who would seem sensible to 51% of voters.
posted by savetheclocktower at 4:25 PM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

I had a politically-connected friend try to convince me that George P. Bush was the name to look out for. All of the Republican coattails of the name "George Bush", while also embracing the most rapidly-expanding ethnic demographic in the country.

My father, a wonderful man who runs with a bad crowd, has been saying this to me for years as well.
posted by gerryblog at 4:28 PM on September 19, 2012

tzikeh: The dancing on Mitt's campaign's grave, as deliciously schadenfreude-ey as it may feel, may be awfully premature. We have a "October" surprise coming from the Romney campaign (though they're not waiting for October, nor is it actually coming from the Romney campaign [officially, anyway]).

Citizens United Obama film to air on TV

This movie — set to start airing on Tuesday and run through Nov. 6 on six cable and six broadcast networks — features forty Democratic and independent voters who backed Obama in 2008 and have since become disillusioned. Much of the film consists of the voters talking, with an overlay of world events over the last four years.

Americans for Prosperity, a Koch-funded group, are already running ads featuring Real People who Voted for Obama, and it's running a lot, at least here in New Mexico. They're also putting on a bus tour, which they call Obama's Failing Agenda Tour. Citizens United are their own little clusterfuck, but Americans for Prosperity has really been active in running a significant number of anti-Obama ads.
posted by filthy light thief at 4:29 PM on September 19, 2012

Well, I tell you what, my tea party brother in law wants to make it very clear to me that this is about: 1) All Obama's got left given his record is to paint Romney as an elitist? 2) and that he not only read the whole transcript, he "UNDERSTOOD IT IN CONTEXT" like I couldn't possibly, "DESPITE" the missing two minutes".

(spoiler: the "context" is that he's a Republican and that I'm a girl.)
posted by padraigin at 4:32 PM on September 19, 2012 [9 favorites]

ads featuring Real People who Voted for Obama

Wasn't there something in another thread about that the other day? Where one of the so-called "voters" was proven to be some random Repub's aide/campaign staffer? Did I dream that?
posted by elizardbits at 4:33 PM on September 19, 2012

Oh elizardbits you crazy fool, that was a different "Democrats hate Obama" ad, a shorter one. This one is a whole freaking hour! Yow. I hope they serve free beer and pretzels.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:36 PM on September 19, 2012

Mistakes may've been made on past editions of Real Voters with Troy McClure, but we can assure you that no mistakes were made in this latest edition.
posted by feloniousmonk at 4:38 PM on September 19, 2012

elizardbits, you are thinking (probably) of this thing from the Akin thread, in which a known employee of the DNC was used in a photo showing how much women really do love Todd Akin.
posted by rtha at 5:01 PM on September 19, 2012

elizardbits: Wasn't there something in another thread about that the other day? Where one of the so-called "voters" was proven to be some random Repub's aide/campaign staffer?

My comment upthread was about a short ad spot featuring people who supposedly voted for Obama in 2008 and now will not in 2012. If it featured aides and staffers, it would be in keeping with the other aid they've run, recycling a debunked story of a Canadian citizen who could have died if it weren't for Good Ol' American doctors .
posted by filthy light thief at 5:01 PM on September 19, 2012

Huntsman's staff misspelled his name on his campaign announcement press release. It was over for him after that.
posted by humanfont at 5:02 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Citizens United Obama film to air on TV -- Yeah, that was discussed last night. Scroll up. There may have been some mockery. Maybe even some japery.

A drop-drip-drip of anti-Obama ads for AFP in the right states and on real tv stations could make a dent. We'll have to see.
posted by maudlin at 5:03 PM on September 19, 2012

filthy light thief: who beyond those that are already converted is going to watch an hour long infomercial for or against Obama? Or attend a political rally?

I think one thing in Obama's favor right now is election fatigue. Seriously, who is going to watch that sort of thing?
posted by Joey Michaels at 5:03 PM on September 19, 2012

elizardbits, here you go:

Dissilusioned Obama Supporter in Romney Ad is actually GOP Staffer
posted by Orange Pamplemousse at 5:09 PM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

"For all we know, Mitt Romney could be one of those who have paid no federal income tax," Reid said Wednesday.

This really would be the finishing move for Romney, I'd think, if after his much-publicized comments from that video about people not paying income tax, it was revealed that he had been one of them during any number of years in the past.

Even keeping the possibility alive in people's minds would seem to be a win-win political strategy, because clearly whatever's in those tax returns is massively damaging to him, but refusing to make them public and keeping people wondering and guessing might be nearly as bad.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:18 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Well, I tell you what, my tea party brother in law wants to make it very clear to me that this is about: 1) All Obama's got left given his record is to paint Romney as an elitist? 2) and that he not only read the whole transcript, he "UNDERSTOOD IT IN CONTEXT" like I couldn't possibly, "DESPITE" the missing two minutes". ""

"So, what's the context for saying that people who don't pay income tax see themselves as victims and live off the government? Romney doesn't pay income tax, does he?"

I find just asking questions until the other person wants to stop to be pretty effective in situations like that.

"What kind of context would make it OK to say that people in the army have no personal responsibility?"

"Aren't you for people not paying taxes? Isn't that the ideal?"

"Don't you feel like blaming Obama is shifting the personal responsibility off of Romney?"
posted by klangklangston at 5:21 PM on September 19, 2012 [14 favorites]

I find just asking questions until the other person wants to stop to be pretty effective in situations like that.

Yeah, my last response to him was something like "Do you think the missing two minutes are about how much he loves women and poor people and minorities and dogs?"
posted by padraigin at 5:28 PM on September 19, 2012

The only way the missing two minutes could change anything is if Mitt goes "Here's a character I've been working on for my improv routine. He's called 'Mr. Moneybags' and it goes a little something like this..."
posted by drezdn at 5:31 PM on September 19, 2012 [22 favorites]

Yes it can get worse.
posted by drezdn at 5:53 PM on September 19, 2012

Obama's reaction to Romney's videos
posted by growabrain at 6:18 PM on September 19, 2012

I have to imagine the Obama camp is preparing the one-liners for the debate. I mean Mitt is just all over the place, doubling back over his own words and contradicting himself. Just two weeks until the first debate on October 3rd at the University of Denver!

Romney will have some zingers stored up for sure, but I wonder if Obama will be chill and let Romney walk himself into a trap. It looks bad when someone scores points on you but you look really terrible when you try to attack and get crushed with a retort. I think Mitt will hold his own (and therefore win) the first debate, but I'd be lying if I didn't say I was a little excited because there is the potential for the kill screen.
posted by cashman at 6:25 PM on September 19, 2012

A 12 year old's reaction to Romney's policies in general
posted by chela at 6:26 PM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Hitler's reaction to the secret video
posted by Bokmakierie at 6:30 PM on September 19, 2012 [10 favorites]

The debate topics are out: PBS - First Debate To Feature Three Sections on Economy

The Commission on Presidential Debates announced Wednesday that moderator Jim Lehrer has selected the topics for the first meeting between President Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney.

This domestic policy debate will feature six, 15-minute segments: three about the economy, a discussion on health care, the role of government and governing. Lehrer noted the topics could change based on news developments, and will not necessarily be in that order.

The Oct. 3 forum at the University of Denver will begin at 9 p.m. ET and last 90 minutes.

posted by cashman at 6:36 PM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Awesome, there's a Failing Agenda Rally tomorrow. I might have to check that out.

Really? You are actually sending out press releases calling your rally "Failing Agenda" ?
posted by stagewhisper at 6:38 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

oh. I see it's a Koch Bros. thing. You'd think they'd have better branding.
posted by stagewhisper at 6:43 PM on September 19, 2012

elizardbits: Wasn't there something in another thread about that the other day? Where one of the so-called "voters" was proven to be some random Repub's aide/campaign staffer? Did I dream that?

You might also be thinking of this pranking of Fox & Friends.
posted by hydrophonic at 6:50 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

W/r/t the basketball thing, it was really striking that the guys he plays with are like top college b-ball players, but they don't get invited back if they defer to the Prez in any way -- by passing him the ball when there's a better player available, for example. Obama wears a mouth guard 'cause sometimes people's teeth get knocked out, including possibly his.

Wasn't there a throwaway bit/cold open of a West Wing episode that was basically this?

Barack Obama = Jeb Bartlett?
posted by Sara C. at 7:24 PM on September 19, 2012

This movie — set to start airing on Tuesday and run through Nov. 6 on six cable and six broadcast networks

We had a fairly long and funny discussion about this upthread and the general consensus was that an hourlong documentary airing on networks like RuralTV was probably not going to make a major impact. I agreed, and that was before I learned that it's by the same guy who made that Palin movie, The Undefeated, which was apparently execrable.
posted by Miko at 7:37 PM on September 19, 2012

Orange Pamplemousse: Dissilusioned Obama Supporter in Romney Ad is actually GOP Staffer

Oh my goodness! Spending time with celebrities? Playing golf? What, are you going to criticize his vacation time next? SHE'S TALKING TO A CARDBOARD OBAMA AS IF THEY'RE DATING! He's a married man with two little girls! I'm not sure if it's better or worse than Invisible Obama.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:42 PM on September 19, 2012

Speaking of Invisible Obama: racist idiot in Austin is being a racist idiot.
posted by maudlin at 7:46 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

There's also the anti-Obama movie that is actually in theaters, and making good money in the process. Of course, it's riddled with inaccuracies, wild speculation, and a broad glossing over of GWB's impacts on the country. In other words, prime fodder for those who wish to reinforce their inaccurate, negative views of Obama. It has 5.1/10 stars on IMDb, and Rotten Tomatoes lists a 77% viewer approval, compared to 30% critic approval.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:52 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Cashman: "This domestic policy debate will feature six, 15-minute segments: three about the economy, a discussion on health care, the role of government and governing. Lehrer noted the topics could change based on news developments, and will not necessarily be in that order."

I wonder whether having fully half the debate centered on the economy will work for or against Romney, in light of recent events. On the one hand, you have the stark fact of our currently less-than-rosy reality, which I'm sure will be used against Obama. There are signs of recovery, but sluggishness doesn't play well in Peoria, and Romney will definitely work that point hard, even if some encouraging reports come out in the next couple of weeks.

On the other hand, you have clear evidence of Romney's elitism, missing tax returns, unwillingness to talk specifics about how to fill the revenue gap Romney/Ryan plan to create by slashing taxes, and what appears to be a long-term diabolical plan by the Obama campaign to force Romney to buy into Ryan's budget philosophy, so presumably with a clear strategy for tearing it apart (based on Brandon Blatcher's fascinating link above).

It doesn't look great for Romney, based on that list, but three rounds of debate are a lot, and it's really going to come down to how well both candidates are able to articulate their points right out of the gate.
posted by Superplin at 7:53 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

Single-poll numbers, but Obama is +14% in Wisconsin and +7% in Ohio. Remains to be seen if these are outliers, or if there's a trend in either state.
posted by the cydonian at 7:57 PM on September 19, 2012

Regarding the "Poll Shows Biggest Obama Lead Yet." which is a Pew poll. While Pew is generally good, they definitely have had Obama leading by wider margins then any other outfit for at least 3 months. I hope they are correct because their number don't have him far off a 10% lead, and a 10% lead nationally would be entering into landslide territory. I am somewhat skeptical though
posted by edgeways at 8:07 PM on September 19, 2012

(and I'll say it quietly, the polls from the last few days have just the barest dare-not-say-it-out-loud faint hint we may, just almost possible, god don't get my hopes up, see a wave election in regards to the House) The difference between now and a month ago is a month ago I wouldn't have bet two cents on the possibility, now, yeah ok two cents sounds about right.
posted by edgeways at 8:19 PM on September 19, 2012

Another poll on the moocher saga.
posted by the cydonian at 8:42 PM on September 19, 2012

nice little quote pulled from Roll Call

"I just don't think that any of our Members are tied to Romney at all," said a top House GOP aide who requested anonymity to speak freely. "They just don't connect the person to Romney, and that's good for us."

posted by edgeways at 8:59 PM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

The Man Who Tried to Kill the Fribble
posted by homunculus at 9:10 PM on September 19, 2012

Corb: This is not going to happen, because parties shift. If a party thinks that they're in danger of slipping below 45% of the population, they will shift their policies until they are back up to that magical half of the voting population again.

Look back - ideas have historically shifted over the last forty years, but the Republicans and Democrats have existed all the same. They are monolithic parties, and they have no intentions of letting go.

LBJ famously said in 1967 when he signed the Civil Rights Act "Democrats are going to lose power for a generation because of this..."

That was profound shift, with Dixiecrats changing over to the Republican party and the democratic party losing what had formerly been a dependable voting bloc of Southern states. Eisenhower Republicans and other center-moderate and liberal Republicans became an ever greater rarity.

The GOP played that polarization to great effect continually using the race card to win white voters for Nixon, Reagan's 2 terms, HW Bush, and the younger Bush, not to mention a monopoly in the Congress that peaked in 1994 with Newt Gingrich as speaker of the House, and GOP economic policies dominating really, even throughout Clinton.

This is all to say that the party's do indeed undergo cyclical shifts in demographics and the GOP is very obviously on the precipice of either a huge shift in it's ideology that downgrades social issues or it's looking at a steep and massive decline.

I just don't see how they uncouple the party at this point from the social issues, that the Tea Party cares about, and the evangelicals care about and the older people.

That's not even with taking into account that the Right has easily lost immigrants and Hispanics for a generation at least ( I think longer to tell you the truth....the damage they've done there is profound), and Hispanics are the fastest growing minority group soon to be the dominant players in Texas, California, NM, Illinois and lots of other parts of the country and they are a very YOUNG demographic, light years more sophisticated than their religious parents (Catholic or born again). And they're not the only group, women, LGBT etc...

Even many young folks who might be friendly to "free market" ideas aren't really that hot on the idea on harshness the GOP shows towards these demographics or the denial of gay marriage.

So, make no mistake here, the GOP is looking very much at a serious slide into irrelevancy and obsolescence and it is because the country is changing in profound ways they no longer seem able to understand or truly see, or that they have any sympathy towards.

As Miko said, they're out of control and not able to self-correct as a truly effective organization can...they've grown sclerotic and bitter and unwilling to really accept the reality of the country and the way it's changing.

In some ways their Right-wing media, Fox and the other Murdoch news channels, and the WSJ, NY Post, Washington Examiner, Red State, Pajamas Media, Rush Limbaugh, Drudge etc..has almost been spectacularly effective at not only gaining viewers, but also at building an echo chamber that's completely sheltered the GOP from the real issues or any sense that they've gone seriously off the rails in being a responsive party with a plurality of different strata's.

It's one dimensionality and monomania has been HUGELY self-sabotaging.

Mitt's the perfect example of this, he's so inured himself and steeped himself in that echo chamber that he's lost sight of the fact of how off the wall BONKERS it is.

Someone once on the blue suggested that what needed to happen in this country was that the GOP party should disband, and the Democratic party should split in two, with one side being the traditional Democratic party and the other side being the new party of fiscal responsibility.

But the GOtP as it is now is on a one way crash course with reality and progress that's not going to be pretty to watch if they don't have some sort of huge and real renaissance and they jettison the horseshit seeking to moralize how one should or shouldn't live a life and their phony aggressive homophobic, anti-woman uncompassionate idea of Jesus.
posted by Skygazer at 9:50 PM on September 19, 2012 [12 favorites]

So yeah. Things are looking good for the good guys. But please check your registration and remind your sane friends to do the same.

I'm gonna step out on a limb here and say that the debates are going to be disastrous for Romney. Just so much ammunition for Obama, and there's really nothing new Romney can say beyond "giving Paris Hilton a tax-cut will create more jobs."

This isn't about winning in November, this is about crushing the GOP forever. Yeah, they'll have Rubio in 2016, but this is a generational shift in general.
posted by bardic at 10:09 PM on September 19, 2012 [1 favorite]

My fear is that if Republicans are unable to take the Senate in 2014, and lose the House, they will start getting violent. The Republicans have a history of being sore losers. Whether it be from their leadership (Clinton impeachment) or the crazy fringes (Gabrielle Giffords shooter), they don't take being out of power too kindly.

If/when the Republicans go out of power and the crazy racist fringe in their party lose any sort of representation or veto power in government, I fear things will get nasty real fast. And unlike imaginary Islamic Hollywood Plot terrorism, there's a lot more potential domestic terrorists and it seems a lot harder to stop.
posted by amuseDetachment at 10:10 PM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

A piece in the Italian national newspaper La Repubblica describes a Romney interview that... well, "backpedals" is kind of a soft term for the complete reversal in position he seems to have made. (A bit of a roundabout reference, but I haven't looked up the Univision interview, so this is all as reported by the Italians and translated by me.)

According to this article, Romney says his plan is to "help everyone in need, those in difficulty, the nation's poorest who need a helping hand to do better, the middle class who need support because their salaries have declined drastically over the last four years." The Italian journalist dryly notes that this is quite a departure from the "moochers" stance in the video.

But the most interesting part is how he reportedly addressed the issue of immigration, and particularly the DREAM Act. Not only does he support it, he thinks the promise of two-year amnesty doesn't go quite far enough: "These young people deserve better than a temporary permit, there should be something permanent. When I'm President, I promise that I'll lay the foundations for an immigration reform that will solve this problem." (He also says that the U.S. government has better things to do than run around hunting down illegal immigrants to deport them; I wish he could convince my finger-wagging governor and local power-mad sheriff of that. But I digress.)

I wonder if his Republican buddies are aware of this immigration plan? Or anyone else who doesn't happen to be a Univision viewer or reading the international press coverage? Because I have a hard time thinking this would fly with many of his constituents.
posted by Superplin at 10:29 PM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

Reactions of Mitt Romney’s 47 percent write-off, in GIFS
posted by homunculus at 10:36 PM on September 19, 2012 [2 favorites]

The Republicans always come back. LBJ crushed them in 64, but Nixon won in 68. Then Watergate blew them apart in 74 and 76, leading to them taking the Senate and Presidency in 1980. Clinton and Obama both had supermajorities in the senate for a time, but watched Teir legislative majorities collapse 2 years later.
posted by humanfont at 10:46 PM on September 19, 2012

Yeah, but the demographic shift in a big deal. The GOP strategy since the 1960's was to scare working class white voters to vote against their own economic interests.

Those working class white voters are now dying off.

So yeah, not saying we can stop fighting, but even the handful of non-braindead Republicans realize they're headed off of a cliff.
posted by bardic at 10:51 PM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

Here's a Wall Street Journal blog post about the same Univision interview I mentioned earlier. The interview took place in the context of a presidential forum sponsored by Univision and Facebook, and held at the University of Miami. Obama will have his turn tomorrow night.

Some have noticed that Romney went a little, er, heavy on the bronzer for this event. Probably a coincidence. Or the lighting.
posted by Superplin at 11:13 PM on September 19, 2012 [5 favorites]

Humanfront.

The Civil Rights Act decimated the Democratic blocs in the south. LBJ did the right thing in signing it, but as a savvy politician he knew the price that would be paid for it (We [the Democrats] have just lost the South for a generation.)

Of course the GOP just kept coming back. They had the Southern Strategy was the perfect wedge peel off white voters in the south and eventually all over the country, as it took on the ominous the fearmongering it used to publicize "Welfare Queens" and "Willie Horton" and they've used that divisive strategy very effectively. They continue to as well, as that strategy has morphed into one of "patriots" vs. "Socialists," "Liberals" & ""Gays." etc...

From Wikipedia's entry for Lee Atwater.

Atwater: As to the whole Southern strategy that Harry S. Dent, Sr. and others put together in 1968, opposition to the Voting Rights Act would have been a central part of keeping the South. Now [the new Southern Strategy of Ronald Reagan] doesn't have to do that. All you have to do to keep the South is for Reagan to run in place on the issues he's campaigned on since 1964 and that's fiscal conservatism, balancing the budget, cut taxes, you know, the whole cluster.

Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?

Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."[6][7]

The times they are a seriously a 'changin'.
posted by Skygazer at 11:19 PM on September 19, 2012 [5 favorites]

They've been giving Romney better and better odds the last few days.

Yeah, dropped from 80% to 75% odds of victory. If you read the blog posts, though it has to do with how the model works, and the fact that Nate Silver doesn't want to change it during an election. Obama actually does much better when you only include polls that call cellphones or do in-person polling, while polls that only call landlines do worse. However, Silver doesn't want to drop land-line only polls from the model, instead wanting to see how they do in the actual election before making changes.

In any event, the statistical model shows Obama winning either way. But the thing you really want to look at is the "Now Cast". The regular model takes the possibility of unforeseen events into consideration, but the now-cast shows the probability of Obama winning, if the election were held today, at 94%.

The 75% figure is based on the assumption that random, unexpected events might happen between now and the election. And they could. But if they don't, Romney's campaign is over, and so far everything unexpected has only been bad for him.

It isn't bunk, but it also isn't necessary to do all that analysis to predict elections. Nate got 49 states out of 50 correct last election. But the thing is, as Nate himself will say, anybody paying attention in the least knew who was going to win 46 states. That left 4 actual toss-ups. You could randomly guess the winner of the last 4 states and expect to be correct on 48 out or 50. A quarter of people would expect to equal Nate's 49 out of 50. And one in eight would have gotten all 50, bettering Nate's performance with the highly scientific "wild ass guess" method.

The way it works isn't' guessing states. It's probabilistically analyzing the likelihood of various state outcomes. So he doesn't look at a poll in say, Iowa being 55 45 Obama/Romney, but rather that there is an independent random variable with 55% odds of Obama winning Iowa. Then he combines all those random variables and does a monty-carlo simulation to see what the probability density is for various electoral college outcomes is.
Is methodology for predicting the outcome of the national election is not dependent on guessing each state right, but in fact assumes that he doesn't know exactly how each state will vote.

Rule of thumb - politicians craft message to audience. Doesn't mean they believe what they say, and sure as hell doesn't mean they're going to act on what they say.

True, but unless they're idiots they want to make sure that message won't piss off half the country if it's surreptitiously recorded.

the last two weeks have shown nothing but a decline in Obama's chances and a rise in Romney's.

Again, from zilch to slightly more zilch. Look at the "now-cast" which shows Romney with a 5.6% chance of winning if the election were held today.

while Romney's losing, he is still strongly supported in some states.

The way the electoral college works, anything over 50.1% support in a state is actually irrelevant. Getting 50.0001% in California and Maryland is better than getting 99% in Texas. Of course, if a state is close to 50%, you won't know who will win in advance. But the problem is that Obama appears to have a strong lead in enough states that he only has to win one or two of the swing states in order to win re-election. Romney needs to win, like, all of them.

Yeah, in a first past the post two-party system like we have in the United States you don't generally get 60/40 splits long term. What happens is that the parties fracture and re-align slightly further towards the 60% side of the equation and it reverts back to a near 50/50 split.

Right. If there is a long-term progressive shift, what will happen is that the republican party would try to pry off some sub-group of democrats by becoming more liberal on one issue or another. But I wonder if the republican base is so inside its own bubble that it won't be able to agree to give up on any issue. Karl Rove wanted republicans to go after Latinos in 2000, but the party became crazy xenophobic due to guys like Lou Dobbs and Tom Tancredo, so they may be alienated for a while. Perhaps the party will disintegrate entirely, and the democratic party will split in two or something.

I would like to see the US move to a multi-party parliamentary system like you see in many European countries, where the number of votes a party gets is proportional to the number of votes it gets, rather than who wins the most votes in some random district.
posted by delmoi at 11:24 PM on September 19, 2012 [6 favorites]

I'm not sure if this has been posted, but it looks like the Romney campaign might be in financial problems after all. The NYT: Romney Campaign Cautious With Ad Budget, Even in Key States.
posted by feloniousmonk at 11:28 PM on September 19, 2012 [5 favorites]

Just showed up to post that, feloniousmonk. On a day with great polling, that news is the best thing I've seen so far.

And how beautifully ironic that this rich guy, this Dickens-esque Burns-esque cartoon villain, this "I'm a brilliant businessman!" is going broke and can't afford even a basic amount of advertising to counter his hated rival.

Romeny has somehow built the finest recursive trainwreck in modern political history. It's really a work of mind-boggling awesomeness.
posted by honestcoyote at 11:53 PM on September 19, 2012 [3 favorites]

I've heard people say that you couldn't write a script this crazy and get away with it, but it would be absolutely pure Hollywood style comeuppance for Mr. Captain of Industry's campaign to lurch over the finish line in a shamble of debt.
posted by feloniousmonk at 12:03 AM on September 20, 2012

I wish reporting about campaign ad spending discuss it in terms of units of time rather than cost, or at least, include both. It's hard to get a sense for how substantial a difference $300k or whatever amount makes here or there.
posted by feloniousmonk at 12:08 AM on September 20, 2012

Excerpt from NYT: Romney Campaign Cautious With Ad Budget, Even in Key States.

In Colorado, Mr. Romney is being outspent $2.2 million to $1.5 million during that same period. In New Hampshire, Mr. Obama is spending $1.2 million, compared with $380,000 to benefit Mr. Romney. The vast majority of that is coming not from the Romney campaign but from American Crossroads, the conservative super PAC.

Asked about the campaign’s budget on Wednesday, Spencer Zwick, Mr. Romney’s finance chairman, said simply, “We have spent our money smartly and efficiently.”

So what happened to the half a billion promised by Adelson and what was made to sound like an equivalent amount from the Kochs. IS that money being held back until after the debates so that those septuagenarian and octogenarian billionaires aren't made an issue in this election and made Prima Facie examples of why Citizens United is an egregious and despicable perversion of the free speech clause or are they waiting until the final couple of weeks when they can rule the airwaves...or...or..maybe they dont' want to spend all that money too quickly and inadvertently give an economic bounce, especially to those swing state areas. I mean what manner of grotesquery is that about.

One last thing is that I've said from the start, I think Karl Roves Amercian Crossroads superpac is using this presidential election to cement it's money raising network and therefore using Romney for that purpose, so that he's in place to run Jeb Bush in 2016 and man, what a horror it will be to even hear that name mentioned in relation to a possible presidency, no bushes...ever ever again for me...ever....
posted by Skygazer at 12:16 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm wondering if the Adelson + Kochs money is just being shoveled into the House and Senate races instead. Romney is completely hopeless at this point and you can buy few dozen congressmonsters for the price of one failed presidential campaign.

And that would be an interesting long game approach by Rove. I know Americans, at least the white ones, have very short political memories and no real sense of history, but even for them, the name "Bush" should still be a negative brand in 2016.

But, I suppose I'm giving the electorate too much credit. Bush probably will make a go of it.
posted by honestcoyote at 12:22 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Per Pew (which is Dem-leaning yada yada), Obama now has one of the largest leads among likely voters in the last generation, including his own from 2008 at this stage in the game.

That's the story from Real Clear Politics as well.
posted by the cydonian at 12:36 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Jon Stewart Blasts Fox News Over Romney Video: ‘Chaos On Bullshit Mountain’
posted by homunculus at 12:46 AM on September 20, 2012 [32 favorites]

The first thing I think about when I think Romney TV ad are those Crossroads ones. The only official ads that I have actually remembered have been weak, bizarre, and/or full of dog whistles - one was about Obama personally lowering your property value! - which is particularly strange for VA. I don't know the numbers cold but there are not a lot of paths to victory without VA, so this is particularly strange. Even if it's just isolated to NoVA, it's not like you can ignore it.
posted by feloniousmonk at 12:58 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Well, I for one am going to struggle horribly to not use the phrase "chaos on bullshit mountain" in a work email for the next week or so. Thanks for nothing, homunculus.
posted by ominous_paws at 1:07 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

homonculus, that Jon Stewart clip is fantastic, he is just on fire there.
posted by hap_hazard at 1:07 AM on September 20, 2012

Great great Stewart clip, wow...
posted by Skygazer at 2:27 AM on September 20, 2012

Stewart was effective, but he was also angry. You don't usually see that from him. I wonder what is up?
posted by caddis at 3:43 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Loving that Pew poll, where they point out that the President's strongest supporters are positive about their candidate, whereas Romney's are negative against Obama, not for him.

On the other hand a humiliating 10 point crushing of Richie Rich will be "good news for John McCain," as they say in the lefty blogosphere, whose own humiliation set a pretty good standard.

McCain has to be looking at this and saying "see, it wasnt my fault I sucked."

Obama is a fearsome politician. Clinton, McCain, and now Romney underestimated him, just like all those people who hate him so much and think he's stupid or incompetent. Make TelePrompTer jokes all you want. You're fooling yourself and you will lose if you do that.

First rule of war is do not underestimate your enemy. The ability to be underestimated is Obama's secret weapon. That and the ability to look like a nice fellow while he sticks a shiv in his opponent's gut.

I said it before. Barack Hussein Obama does not lose elections.

You heard me... HUSSEIN. Eat it, righties.
posted by spitbull at 4:05 AM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

The candidate emphasized that he would expand legal immigration and said that he wouldn't aggressively pursue undocumented immigrants living in the United States.

"I am not going to be going around the country and rounding them up," he said.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:19 AM on September 20, 2012

whereas Romney's are negative against Obama, not for him.

But isn't that the usual MO in re-election years?

Though I have to say, it really seems like the Republicans are resting on both that and the old "It's the economy, stupid" cliche. Just because re-elections are referendums on the current president and bad economic performance can be a good reason for people to stray over to the opposition doesn't mean they can run a potted plant in a recession.
posted by Sara C. at 4:20 AM on September 20, 2012

John Kerry certainly thought so.
posted by spitbull at 4:26 AM on September 20, 2012

But isn't that the usual MO in re-election years?

Per the Pew report:

With the exception of Bill Clinton in 1992, candidates lacking mostly positive backing have lost in November.

(Now, I'm usually of the opinion that anything can happen in elections, and you shouldn't see too much into such things, but just to answer the point)
posted by the cydonian at 4:29 AM on September 20, 2012

roomthreeseventeen: The candidate emphasized that he would expand legal immigration and said that he wouldn't aggressively pursue undocumented immigrants living in the United States.

That's a fairly tremendous flippity flop. During the GOP primaries he made it very clear that he'd be an undocumented alien's worst nightmare and that such people would have no rights, no benefits, no jobs, no healthcare, no education and he'd make them feel so horrible and demoralized and beat down that they'd spontaneously "self-deport" themselves.

Mitt Romney is an absolutely duplicitous lying sack of shit.
posted by Skygazer at 4:32 AM on September 20, 2012 [11 favorites]

I'm sure it's been said upthread but Romney's campaign has had a central flaw from the beginning, which has been to run against an imaginary (socialiast, America-hating) Obama, rather than the real one. This has two serious problems -- first, most independents are smart enough to know that the caricature of Obama isn't true. Second, as a consequence, it makes Romney seem like a liar, and unwilling or afraid to run against the real man.
posted by unSane at 4:36 AM on September 20, 2012 [11 favorites]

So voting for Romney means four more years of Stewart back on top of his game kicking out 2 or 3 Bullshit Mountains a week? I am so sold. Romney 2012! Bush 2020!
posted by These Premises Are Alarmed at 4:37 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

Anti-incumbent campaigns depend on negative energy against the incumbent, but that's often not enough. The challenging candidate has to successfully convert that into enthusiasm for the challenger, even if that is motivated by a desire to see the incumbent replaced. This is the so called "choice election" conundrum; Romney's crucial stupid mistake (which is of a piece with underestimating President Obama) was believing this could be a "referendum" election past the summer. Maybe if unemployment had spiked to 9 percent or something, yeah. But not in an improving economy under a President with very high likability numbers and against a challenger who at his best appears as the second coming of a cross between Bob Dole and Steve Forbes with a dash of H. Ross Perot.

There could still be a major foreign policy shock, although at this point I think Romney has lost all credibility on foreign policy and can't get that back, which is already a threshold failure for any presidential candidate (and one McCain never had to worry about until he picked Caribou Barbie as VP). Indeed, I think Romney's need to shore up the base with the Paul Ryan pick instead of going for an experienced foreign policy hand as VP was in itself a fatal error, driven by tactics rather than strategy just like McCain's Palin pick, except McCain had a much higher mountain to fall from in terms of impressions of his knowledge of foreign affairs and gravitas on the world stage ("Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" didn't help, however; but it was "I can see Russia from my house!" that sank him on this front.)

And now they're losing Wisconsin by 10 points. Please pretty please let that hold so Paul Ryan is finished as a national candidate.
posted by spitbull at 4:55 AM on September 20, 2012 [8 favorites]

Re the Jon Stewart anger. I obviously don't want to project, but I'll say this.

Before the last week or so, I was basically of the opinion that, while I'm a Democrat and obviously voting for Obama in November, we live in a democracy. Somebody's got to run in opposition. Romney's not completely batshit, he did a reasonably non-horrible job as governor of Massachusetts, and well, if the majority rules and Romney wins fair and square, who am I to cry about it?

Now, though? After Romney makes two (or is it three? or four?) inexcusable mistakes? Mistakes the prove his utter contempt for the American people and everything we stand for?

Those assholes can die in a fire. It's on, now.
posted by Sara C. at 4:56 AM on September 20, 2012 [34 favorites]

And sorry, I just need to light a cigar and savor the continuing and expanding humiliation of a venture capitalist multimillionaire white guy with perfect hair and a blonde wife and the backing of the entire investor class by a skinny black kid from Hawai'i named Hussein whose mother was a single radical anthropologist. Fuck, this is a great country when you scratch below the Fox-News surface.

I came of age under Reagan (speaking of challengers who converted anti-incumbent sentiment to personal popularity in the home stretch, by the way, and proof you can be brain dead and still win an election if people are mad at the incumbent and find you a likable presence, although I always found RR to be a dead-eyed zombie too, I guess some people liked his schtick.)
posted by spitbull at 4:58 AM on September 20, 2012 [45 favorites]

Yes, yes, yes, Sara C. That's what is happening. I've been angry all along, but Stewart's rage speaks for me. Enough of this shit. It was amusing until August, and now it's time to stomp these idiots into electoral dust.
posted by spitbull at 5:00 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Regarding the "redistribution" video:

In rest of '98 clip, Obama speaks of 'competition' and 'the marketplace'
posted by Bokmakierie at 5:01 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

roomthreeseventeen: The candidate emphasized that he would expand legal immigration and said that he wouldn't aggressively pursue undocumented immigrants living in the United States.

I love how he never actually announces his views. He doesn't hold press conferences where he comes out as being pro-immigration, or whatever the strategy of the ~~week day~~ hour is, he just sorta slips it into conversation.

'Why, that's a lovely tie. And have I mentioned to your fine Latino viewers that I love salsa, ponchos and am for immediate immigration amnesty?'
posted by Orange Pamplemousse at 5:16 AM on September 20, 2012 [9 favorites]

"I wonder if people hear how paternalistic and dismissive they're being"

Concern troll is concerned.

Meanwhile.
posted by bardic at 5:33 AM on September 20, 2012 [19 favorites]

It is really frustrating to hear people talk about the Republicans losing the latino voting bloc because of their stance on illegal immigration

It would be, but I'm not sure anyone in this thread has actually done that.

People do know that not all immigrants are illegal, right? And that a lot of legal immigrants actually don't like illegal ones?

Yes. They are also able to recognise, along with lots of Latino voters, I suspect, the dog-whistle that "getting tough on illegal immigration" always is. It's talk predicated largely on appealing to the notion that there are too many people with non-white skins and foreign ways. "illegal immigrants" always means, to the audience the term is aimed at, simply, "immigrants", or at least that subset of them they've got an excuse for kicking out.

Between that and so many people talking about how the Republicans only have white voters, I wonder if people hear how paternalistic and dismissive they're being.

The massive underperformance of the Republicans among non-white voters is a matter of fact. Who here is actually claiming that no non-white will vote Republican?
posted by howfar at 5:35 AM on September 20, 2012 [17 favorites]

And.

But I love your logic there corb. Let's extend it a bit, shall we? Those latinos and blacks must be too ignorant to truly understand their own self interest, yes?

But yeah, it's us Dems who are the paternalistic ones. Uh-huh.
posted by bardic at 5:36 AM on September 20, 2012 [11 favorites]

Between that and so many people talking about how the Republicans only have white voters, I wonder if people hear how paternalistic and dismissive they're being.

The Republican party is overwhelming white. You know this. I know this. Everyone knows this. Sure, there a few Hispanic or Latino or Black members. but overwhelming the party is composed of white Americans. There is no question of this, none.

So I'm not sure what your point is here. Is it that people seem to be ignoring Hispanic or Black Republicans? If so, it's because they compose only a small part of the GOP.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:37 AM on September 20, 2012 [10 favorites]

Corb, the general Republican rhetoric about Teh Illegals is racist. While legal immigrants may resent those who came illegally, intelligent immigrants know that all the talk about "illegals" plays into racist narratives.

Not to mention that the Illegal Immigration debate is a lot like the abortion debate -- while there are some moderate voters who are not super psyched about people coming into the country illegally, it's really on the table as a stand-in for general anti-immigrant sentiment on the far right. I compare it to the abortion debate because, likewise, we all use the term "abortion" as a proxy for contraception in general. It's sort of the opposite of the Overton Window, sneaking extremist positions into mainstream debate by calling it something more palatable than what it really is.

As for the idea that the Republican party is super diverse? Oh, come on. Doesn't the Democratic party pretty much own The Minority Vote, such as it is? There are individual outliers (just as there are plenty of white male Democrats), but when polled as a group, sorry, bro, but it's true, Democrats tend to get the vote of women, gay people, non-white people, and non-Christians.
posted by Sara C. at 5:42 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

I haven't seen anyone claiming that all immigrants are illegal, nor that Latinos are somehow obliged to reject the Republicans, nor that absolutely no Latinos support Romney. There has also been some discussion in this thread of how the Republicans will probably do better with Latinos (and Asians) in the future, and the antipathy between some Latinos who have been here a long time, or who have been born here, versus recent immigrants (legal or illegal), has also been discussed.

But even the most recent, hopeful single poll from Fox shows that Romney is doing horribly among Latinos, with support of about 30% to Obama's 60%. This is framed as an improvement over previously repeated gaps of 40 points. A group that includes many socially and fiscally conservative people is rejecting Romney and the Republicans by huge amounts (with the gap even larger among Latinas). This is not an illusion or a liberal myth; poll after poll after poll has shown large gaps.

Even though legal immigrants, or Latinos who are natural-born citizens, may still feel antipathy towards illegal immigrants, the Republicans have really fucked things up and made many people angry and distrustful. The policies pushed by Republican lawmakers, like the AZ papers law, and the free-floating prejudice and dog whistles from many other Republicans, appear to have been enough to turn off a lot of people who would be otherwise interested in other aspects of Republican policy.
posted by maudlin at 5:44 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

Illegal Immigrants, and better yet, Undocumented Workers, never refers to Irish college kids working under the table at "Irish Pubs" throughout our nation. It never refers to Russians or Ukrainians snuck in through tourist or student visas and given jobs by family members over here.

When people talk about "dog whistles", Illegal Immigrant/Undocumented Worker is probably the biggest one. They mean Latinos and spanish-speaking culture in general. You could be born in East LA or Puerto Rico and never be seen as a Real American, because "Illegal Immigrant" always means someone sneaking in from Mexico. You're Latino, so, you don't belong here. (Exceptions made for suitably anglicized Cubans, because communism.)
posted by Slap*Happy at 5:45 AM on September 20, 2012 [38 favorites]

Anti-immigrant prejudice, a thing the republicans have been at great pains to stoke, does not solely impact undocumented immigrants.
posted by winna at 5:48 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

If you watched the conventions you probably noticed this:

The front row at the DNC was more diverse than the entire room at the RNC.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 5:49 AM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

Or what Slap*Happy said more eloquently.
posted by winna at 5:51 AM on September 20, 2012

BREAKING: Tim Pawlenty to step down as national co-chair of Romney's Presidential campaign. #Decision2012

This is great news for the Romney campaign!
posted by zombieflanders at 5:55 AM on September 20, 2012 [8 favorites]

"BREAKING: Tim Pawlenty to step down as national co-chair of Romney's Presidential campaign."

What's the German word for taking delight in another person's suffering?

I think it's LOLBONER!!!
posted by bardic at 5:58 AM on September 20, 2012 [13 favorites]

Democrats tend to get the vote of women, gay people, non-white people, and non-Christians.

Well, and no secret why: of the two parties, it's the only one that takes the proposition of their equal rights seriously, if imperfectly.

. Yeah, they'll have Rubio in 2016

I'm convinced they won't. Given his positive chatter over the last few years, he should have been the VP choice this time around. I think the skeletons in his closet make it too difficult for him to get by opposition research, and I don't think he's going on to a Presidential campaign.
posted by Miko at 5:58 AM on September 20, 2012

I agree with Miko on Rubio. I also think that, even if he runs, Rubio is not the inclusive hispanic offering the Republicans think he is. His appeal is largely to the conservative Cuban community, which is already solidly Republican.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 6:06 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

It is really frustrating to hear people talk about the Republicans losing the latino voting bloc because of their stance on illegal immigration.

It is, isn't it. Maybe the Republicans should do something about that. Their hardline, kick-everybody-out-no-matter-what rhetoric cannot win them enough voters from the Latino community. All those Republican-sponsored state bills that tried to make it impossible for anyone to get so much as a dog license without showing proof of citizenship or legal residency don't do them any favors either. And apparently Romney couldn't even bring himself to not use the term "illegal aliens" when talking to Univision about the DREAM act - you know, those terrible illegal aliens who came to steal our jobs when they were two years old.
posted by rtha at 6:10 AM on September 20, 2012 [14 favorites]

Rubio is a lightweight. He'll be forgotten in 2016 when the Republican party will either need to change its ideological stripes (and not just the color of its ideologists' skins) or be consigned to a trash heap of tea bags. This election is the swan song for the far right for a generation. Watch and learn.

I'll see your Rubio and raise you a Julian Castro. He was everything Rubio was not in their two convention speeches. His immigrant experience is shared by millions. Rubio's charmed life as a privileged son of the one group of Latinos Republicans (claim to) like will not carry him beyond Florida.

And corb, turn off Fox News. You continute to argue on the basis of woefully wrong "facts."
posted by spitbull at 6:11 AM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

And to many Republicans, merely having brown skin makes you "illegal," so that word is a code word for "Latino," legal or not. You can thank Jan Brewer, Tom Tancredo, Kris Kobach, and the rest of the racists for that. Latino voters of all stripes know what "illegal" means. And it means all of them. Kind of like how "Muslim" means "terrorist" to these idiots.
posted by spitbull at 6:13 AM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

Slap*Happy

I was going to post something ill-advisedly ambivalent about the problem of illegal immigration, but you made me reconsider whether I was just uncomfortable with Latino culture and the increasing prevalence of the Spanish language.

Thank you.
posted by The Confessor at 6:13 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

America does change culturally. Thankfully. I think I can really get behind a more Latin America.
posted by Miko at 6:18 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ha ha. T-Paw jumps ship. The HMS Mitt Romney is listing hard to starboard, aaaaaaar!
posted by spitbull at 6:19 AM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

It is really frustrating to hear people talk about the Republicans losing the latino voting bloc because of their stance on illegal immigration. People do know that not all immigrants are illegal, right?

Yes, as its been mentioned in this thread.

And that a lot of legal immigrants actually don't like illegal ones?

Also mentioned in this thread. Although some immigrants have an extremely easy time of it when they want to immigrate, which likely contributes.

Between that and so many people talking about how the Republicans only have white voters, I wonder if people hear how paternalistic and dismissive they're being.

If anyone's being dismissive, it's the mainstream GOP. They're the ones passing "papers, please" laws, restrictive voter ID laws aimed at suppressing the vote of legal immigrants, and redistricting laws aimed at neutralizing the votes of Latino citizens. They're the ones that are 82% white and getting whiter, and packed the front of their convention with people from non-voting territories like Guam, Puerto Rico, and American Samoa to look good at diversity for the cameras.

And we haven't even started on how the GOP treats black citizens, from needing to kick out conventiongoers for calling black people "monkeys," to even more voter ID laws that GOP officials admit exist to suppress the black vote, and to calling people on welfare "Obama's base" in ways that pretty much every news source calls racist. No one at the GOP seems to wonder why Cubans have been able to get essentially instant citizenship while Haitians don't.

So when you accuse people here of being "paternalistic and dismissive," perhaps you should be looking at your favored major party.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:20 AM on September 20, 2012 [18 favorites]

I think I can really get behind a more Latin America.

For the coffee alone, man! Those of us who already live in Latin(o) America (hello, NYC) know this already. It's a nice place to live. I do not really understand why the GOP would right off a conservative, religious, family-centered, ferociously hard-working constituency wholesale, but their loss is America's gain. Racism is a disease. And Republicans are dying of it.
posted by spitbull at 6:21 AM on September 20, 2012 [8 favorites]

*write* off
posted by spitbull at 6:22 AM on September 20, 2012

I think 'right off' was particularly appropriate there, spitbull...
posted by syzygy at 6:24 AM on September 20, 2012

Yeah, as soon as I typed the correction I realized it was a good pun!

I love the smell of schadenfreude in the morning. And melting plastic Republicans.
posted by spitbull at 6:25 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Romney Tape Leaves Senate GOP Leaders Speechless

Senate Republican leaders fled their weekly press conference after delivering prepared remarks Wednesday without taking a single question from reporters eagerly seeking their thoughts on their presidential nominee’s newly unearthed remarks dismissing nearly half of American voters.

Although some of the leadership members addressed journalists in separate huddles as they walked away, the unusual display is symptomatic of the party’s nervousness over Mitt Romney’s comments from a private fundraiser deriding the 47 percent of Americans who pay no federal income taxes.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) excused himself in the middle of the availability. The rest — Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and Sens. John Thune (R-SD), Roy Blunt (R-MO) and John Barrasso (R-WY) — made no mention of Romney or the race in their comments and instead lamented Senate dysfunctionality and attacked Democratic policies.

When reporters ran after them to ask about Romney’s comments, they dodged.

“First of all I’m not going to get critical — your question implies there’s some really big flaw in the way he’s running the campaign,” Kyl said, when asked whether the GOP nominee has harmed his and Republicans’ hopes in November.

Asked whether Senate Republicans voiced concerns with the Romney snafu during lunch, Blunt did his best to downplay the episode and echo his party nominee’s message.

“Well, you know, whether there was discussion at lunch or not, I wouldn’t want to say,” he demurred. “Not because — I just don’t think we ought to talk about what was said at lunch.

“I really don’t think this is of great concern to the Senate — to members of the Senate,” Blunt said. “It could have been better said, as Governor Romney himself said. But trying to get more people into the active economy should be the fundamental debate of this election. And I’m not sure it’s not good for Governor Romney to go right ahead and pursue that discussion.”

posted by zombieflanders at 6:26 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Marc Rubio is the prototypical white-skinned Latino the Republicans are trying to normalize and "enwhiten" under anglo standards. It doesn't matter if he come from a family were all indentured servants living under worse conditions than slaves back in the day. He is the "Great White Hope" of the dying colonial European white supremacist bulk of people who made American Imperialism possible --and for that matter a transparently cynical choice for "winning" the Latino vote.

They are in for a rude awakening if they think black & brown Latinos are going to jump on that guys' bandwagon. I mean, FFS, his last name even means "Blonde" in Spanish. For us Blatinos, who have to deal with the double whammy of US & Latin American racism, to see Republicans plating their hopes on a guy like him is so blatantly a continuum of anglo-racism it's just a joke.
posted by liza at 6:27 AM on September 20, 2012 [13 favorites]

Not sure if this gem has been posted to the blue before: Arizona Republican Congressional candidate Gabriela Saucedo Mercer - We don't want Middle Easterners in the US

“That includes Chinese, Middle Easterners,” she said. “If you know Middle Easterners, a lot of them, they look Mexican or they look, you know, like a lot of people in South America, dark skin, dark hair, brown eyes. And they mix. They mix in.

“And those people, their only goal in life is to, to cause harm to the United States. So why do we want them here, either legally or illegally? When they come across the border, besides the trash that they leave behind, the drug smuggling, the killings, the beheadings. I mean, you are seeing stuff. It’s a war out there.”
posted by raztaj at 6:32 AM on September 20, 2012 [7 favorites]

People do know that not all immigrants are illegal, right? And that a lot of legal immigrants actually don't like illegal ones?

You're correct, of course, corb, in that not all immigrants are illegal and that a lot of legal immigrants aren't huge fans of the illegal ones. However, as somebody who isn't a white dude, I don't think that a lot of the things many Republicans say about immigration are particularly nuanced. The widespread support of Arizona's show me your papers law, for example, which requires police officers to check the citizenship of anybody they 'reasonably suspect' of being an illegal immigrant is one example -- I have had people literally holding federal identification with my citizenship printed on it and still seem puzzled that I'm an American. How much do you think I trust the 'reasonable suspicion' of some dude?

For me, personally, this is one of the reasons I'm no longer a Republican, and I know a lot of other people who feel the same way.
posted by Comrade_robot at 6:34 AM on September 20, 2012 [18 favorites]

It is really frustrating to hear people talk about the Republicans losing the latino voting bloc because of their stance on illegal immigration. People do know that not all immigrants are illegal, right? And that a lot of legal immigrants actually don't like illegal ones?

Yes -- people know that. The problem is that over the past hundred plus years, "Illegal Immigration" has been a proxy battle for lots of other racism-tinged issues. That's not a Republican problem, it's an American problem. Unfortunately, in recent years, the issue has largely been championed by conservatives who treat it as a nativist rallying point.

In many areas attempting to "crack down," Latinos in particular suffer some pretty serious indignities because they're treated as suspects by virtue of their birth. In Arizona, for example, the Latino 80-something former Governor of the state has been stopped and questioned by police while doing yard work. They refused to believe that he was the owner of his own house (as opposed to a migrant worker) until he could find a friend to vouch for him. Other American citizens have been deported to Mexico in rushed INS operations because they "looked the part" of illegal immigrants.

In that sense (and others), the "Anti-illegal-immigration" cries often represent more than simply a debate about immigration policy for the Latino community. Even if they have no friends or relatives who are in the group being demonized, it's very easy for them to get caught in the crossfire because of racism and racist assumptions. For that and other reasons, whether you think it makes sense or not, positions on illegal immigration seem to have a big influence on the Latino voting community.

It is by no means a monolithic voting bloc, and past Republican candidates have managed -- through consistent outreach and careful courting of the community -- to make a real dent. On the other hand, many conservative leaders have also drummed up anti-immigration rage by appealing to flat out racist fear. Pat Buchanan is an excellent example. In addition, there's been an open and public acknowledgement by older Republican politicians and political operators that they have and continue to use race-baiting tactics to motivate older, whiter core demographics.

Between that and so many people talking about how the Republicans only have white voters, I wonder if people hear how paternalistic and dismissive they're being.

Numbers don't lie; literally the only demographic Republicans can consistently deliver is old and middle-aged white people. "We have a black guy now!" and "But our economic policies would help Latinos!" doesn't really get around the real state of things, or the racial aspects of the policies they have supported.

Lots of people can be condescending and paternalistic, but noting that Republicans have policies that negatively affect minorities and women, and that they consistently (as a party) shelter and excuse behavior that is offensive to many women and minorities, is not really a stretch.
posted by verb at 6:34 AM on September 20, 2012 [12 favorites]

Mitt Romney's Incredible Shrinking Coattails

GOP campaigns cannot count on a strong Romney performance to put them over the top. Republicans seeking re-election increasingly view their races in a vacuum, or at least they hope that's the case.

"I just don't think that any of our Members are tied to Romney at all," said a top House GOP aide who requested anonymity to speak freely. "They just don't connect the person to Romney, and that's good for us."

posted by zombieflanders at 6:35 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

how the Republicans only have white voters,

have you actually seen the crowds at Romney's events or the RNC convention? Really? Cause that is some serious blinding whiteness right there.

It is an actual campaign strategy of the Romney campaign to try and capture ~61% of white votes, because that is one of the few, very difficult, paths open to him to win the election.

"If you stop a Mexican, don't write a citation, arrest him"

corb, who writes and tries to enact racial profiling laws? Is there any wonder the GOP is as white as it is?
posted by edgeways at 6:36 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

I think I can really get behind a more Latin America.

Not the way it really works, tho. Once they get a solid and secure spot in the middle class, immigrant cultures integrate and usually become anglophone. I had a great-great-great grandfather run out of the Republic of Texas for publishing a German-language newspaper for other immigrants. Now, Texas-German is all but extinct. When I was a kid, there were a ton of Italian and Portuguese language radio stations and even a few cable stations here in RI. Now it's Chinese and Spanish as being Italian or Portuguese is no longer a hurdle to being a member of the middle class.

In 30 years, anglophone reactionaries will be panicking about Swahili or Telugu or Caribbean Dutch or something taking over.
posted by Slap*Happy at 6:41 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

Hmong and Somali
posted by edgeways at 6:42 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

"BREAKING: Tim Pawlenty to step down as national co-chair of Romney's Presidential campaign."

The twats desert the sinking ship.
posted by howfar at 6:43 AM on September 20, 2012

Romney is congratulating Pawlenty on taking a job at a banking lobby firm. Hell, given Pawlenty's sterling ability to campaign I'm sure Romney's chances probably up-ticked just a little. This may actually be part of a quiet reboot, get rid of the deadwood, find them a nice job with some high paying firm somewhere.
Either that, or his campaign is starting to look around for better jobs before the stink of defeat disqualifies them.
posted by edgeways at 6:48 AM on September 20, 2012

Run Away!!!
posted by edgeways at 6:51 AM on September 20, 2012

In Arizona

You don't really need to go any further than that. Arizona is less a state and more a theme park for Tea Party insanity.
posted by Artw at 6:51 AM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

May 9: “My view is the same as it’s been from the beginning,” Mr. Romney told a CBS affiliate in Denver. “I don’t favor civil unions if it’s identical to marriage, and I don’t favor marriage between people of the same gender.” Asked why he opposed civil unions, in particular, he explained that in many cases they represent marriage by a different name for gay couples.

September 19: . "My view is this, that individuals should be able to pursue a relationship of love and respect and raise a family as they would choose. I would like to have the term 'marriage' continue to be associated with a relationship between one man and one woman and that certainly ... doesn't prevent two people of the same gender living in a loving relationship together having a gay domestic partnership, if you will"
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:51 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

In 30 years, anglophone reactionaries will be panicking about Swahili or Telugu or Caribbean Dutch or something taking over.

I think that is a prediction based on an incorrect assumption about the long term balance of economic and political power between North and South America. When the US is no longer the sole regional power, and as it drifts away from dominance, it is inevitable that culture will begin to shift. When learning Spanish or Portuguese is a vital economic skill for those chasing jobs in flourishing South American industries, the character of American discourse about race will change. That's not to say that the reactionaries will disappear, but I don't think they'll be anywhere near as Anglocentric as one might expect.
posted by howfar at 6:52 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Let's assume Pawlenty has remaining presidential ambitions. He has to jump now, no?
posted by jaduncan at 6:52 AM on September 20, 2012

If Pawlenty couldn't get through the primaries this year with that jackass lot there is hell no chance he'll last against, Bush, Christie, Rubio.

Running for senate in 2 years
posted by edgeways at 6:55 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm wondering if Pawlenty will try a run against Al Franken for the senate seat in Minnesota in 2014.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:55 AM on September 20, 2012

Too late. You can't erase your bigotry.
posted by spitbull at 6:56 AM on September 20, 2012

You can't erase your bigotry.

Why would you need to? Just wait for the October 5th statement for it to be the official position again.
posted by jaduncan at 6:58 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Sara C.:
"Those assholes can die in a fire. It's on, now."

I used to consider myself independent, that I would vote for the best candidate no matter the party. I'd vote for Republicans when they seemed to be responsible people who would do a good job. But in the past four to eight years, I've begun just voting straight Democrat with the occasional Green or independent. I don't want to enable them - even if you get a reasonably moderate Republican they'll be forced to go along with their bat shit brethren. So fuck 'em. The Republican party is dead to me.
posted by charred husk at 7:00 AM on September 20, 2012 [20 favorites]

Indeed.

Watching this hapless moron being drawn and quartered by his own cynical need to be all things to all people is hilarious.
posted by spitbull at 7:00 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh and forget Chris Christie. He was flavor of the summer, but he's toast politically and this is the last we will hear of him. Promise. NJ hates his ass.
posted by spitbull at 7:03 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

In Arizona, for example,

So we're leaving in a few days for vacation, which will be a grand driving tour of the desert Southwest in order to Look at Rocks, So Many Rocks! We fly into Vegas, pick up a car, and then head for Utah. We'll do a bunch of rock-looking there, and then head to Colorado to see Mesa Verde, then down into New Mexico to see Chaco.

We're skipping Arizona (except, I think, for one teeny portion of our route that cuts through a bit of it, but we're not stopping). Yeah, we're skipping the Big Ditch, because as a brown-skinned, dark-haired, dark-eyed person who gets spoken to in Spanish all the time in my heavily Latino neighborhood (I don't speak any but the most basic Spanish), I don't feel like spending time or money in a state where they really *are* out to get (people who look like) me, and I refuse on principle to carry my passport when I'm traveling in my own country.
posted by rtha at 7:03 AM on September 20, 2012 [39 favorites]

I keep coming back around to Mitt's remark that his "47 percent comments" were "not elegantly stated."

What's an "elegant" (I think you mean "eloquent," by the way) way to say hateful, bigoted things writing off half the people you hope to govern, Mitt? "Let them eat empanadas?"

I also fixate on "it's my job not to care about those people." Not "it's not my job to care about those people," mind you. He is saying it is his active duty not to care about the poor, the elderly, veterans, the unemployed, etc. Spoken to a room full of millionaires eating canapes, that rings so ugly.
posted by spitbull at 7:09 AM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

My theory about T-Paw dropping out of his race was that he was splitting the Romney vote, so Romney offered him the opportunity for a sweet cabinet position if he dropped out.
posted by drezdn at 7:10 AM on September 20, 2012

I think it's either an extremely misguided attempt to say "oh look we ditched the person responsible for all the fuck-ups lately" (misguided in the sense that I would bet most people had no idea T-Paw had an official position on the campaign and most people would not believe T-Paw was the bonehead responsibly for Mitt's gaffes)--or T-Paw just didn't want to go down with the sinking ship.
posted by sallybrown at 7:14 AM on September 20, 2012

The only person they could fire who could credibly take the fall for this campaign is the man at the top. He likes firing people, so maybe he could try it on himself?
posted by spitbull at 7:18 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

I could have read it as an inelegant attempt to say that it was his job to forget about the 47% during the election campaign, since Romney's platform of lowering taxes really doesn't have anything to offer them.

But then he had to throw in the lines about how he could 'never convince them that they should take personal responsibility,' and the one about them seeing food, healthcare and housing as entitlements.

It made an impolitic remark, then kept digging the hole deeper - something he seems to really excel at.
posted by syzygy at 7:19 AM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

What's an "elegant" (I think you mean "eloquent," by the way) way to say hateful, bigoted things writing off half the people you hope to govern, Mitt?

Stephen Colbert had an idea on how it could be done.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:21 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

Not the way it really works, tho. Once they get a solid and secure spot in the middle class, immigrant cultures integrate and usually become anglophone

But not without leaving lasting effects on the culture. The land we had prior to mass Irish immigration, Italian immigration, black emancipation, and, actually if you broaden the lens beyond just our nation to colonialism, Anglo immigration, was demonstrably a different one culturally. Even though I don't expect immigrant communities to culturally dominate, but I do expect them to continue to flavor the mixture, which is the most awesome thing about this nation. Immigrant assimilation isn't a complete absorption into existing American culture - it shifts the culture in sometimes incremental but real ways. There were Spanish-language shows on my TV growing up; a Spanish-language channel. That wasn't the case for my parents. Though in their day there were Yiddish-language shows on the radio. Those shows are gone, but think of all the Yiddishisms and tropes from that cultural infusion that have been absorbed into the culture.

Not I think my point can only be illustrated in small ways like that, but looking across American cultural history in all its changes from the 1600s to today, yes, immigration patterns have dramatically influenced the culture in ways that remained long after any particular group began using English exclusively.

Despite all that, I do think the American orientation to languages other than English (in a nutshell, "who needs 'em!?") is going to change in the near term. In my field alone it's already become a huge advantage in hiring and promotion to have more than one useful language. As we do more transnational work enabled by technology and all that, it's going to become more and more helpful.
posted by Miko at 7:24 AM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

For any who watched the Romney interview with Univision in Florida yesterday - Romney kept mentioning that he would implement a "final solution" to immigration problems (without giving details, even when repeatedly pressed by the interviewers).

Every time he said "final solution," I couldn't help but be eerily reminded of Hitler's use of the same term. Who writes this guy's lines?
posted by syzygy at 7:26 AM on September 20, 2012 [22 favorites]

Some have noticed that Romney went a little, er, heavy on the bronzer for this event. Probably a coincidence. Or the lighting.

"And had [George Romney] been born of Mexican parents I'd have a better shot at winning this, but he was [audience laughs] unfortunately born of Americans living in Mexico. They'd lived there for a number of years, and, uh, I mean I say that jokingly, but it'd be helpful if they'd been Latino…"
posted by kirkaracha at 7:30 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

I always thought Romney's insistence that immigrants will self-deport to be a brilliant bit of political orienteering - it definitely left him open to this 'retooling', where he can defend against attacks of flip-flopping by pointing out that he's always opposed deportation (hand-waving away the fact that his previous positions were worse than deportation).
posted by muddgirl at 7:30 AM on September 20, 2012

"Brazil has a lot of potential, and always will."

Brazil is the sixth largest economy in the world, and growing. I think you're going to need more than pithy one-liners from a man whose been dead for more than 40 years if you seriously want to suggest that nothing has changed. USans are the only people who currently believe in the end of history. During the decline of the British empire, it was us. That's just how it goes.
posted by howfar at 7:31 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

syzygy, that is so gross. I feel about that the same way I felt about his secret comments to the $50,000/plate donors: it is such a stupid thing to say, true/not true/honest/dishonest -- regardless of how it relates to reality or his base -- that I think he should not be elected just for being dumb enough to make such mistakes.
posted by theredpen at 7:33 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama in negotiations to solve Global Warming.

Seriously, that is the very definition of a charm offensive - he can just sit back and do photo-ops like this while Romney is busy doing damage control.
posted by Slap*Happy at 7:36 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm sorry folks - Romney said "permanent solution," which reminded me very much of "final solution." I apologize for the inadvertent mistake.
posted by syzygy at 7:37 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

Slap*Happy, that's a picture from the 2009 White House Press Correspondent's Dinner that was artfully redeployed for "Talk Like A Pirate" Day. So while it is charming, he's not just filling time with weird photo ops-- he just happens to have a creative and fun team behind him.
posted by Flamingo at 7:43 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

I just want to point out that while we're all putting down each others political parties and the schadenfreude word is flying about the web, neither party is actually addressing jobs, poverty, income equality or prosecuting bankers.

And don't talk to me about GOP obstructionism via the mythical filibuster because if Dems really wanted to do something about any of the above they could keep the Senate in session each and every time until the filibuster went away so in my opinion the Democrats are equally culpable since they actually have a Senate majority vote.
posted by Podkayne of Pasadena at 7:45 AM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

"permanent solution": still bad.
posted by theredpen at 7:51 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

How do they get things past the House?
posted by drezdn at 7:53 AM on September 20, 2012

I started to get upset about the once again, assumption that latino = brown, latino = anti-Republican, latino = whatever people choose, or complaints about Rubio looking too white, but figured I'd post a positive and awesome response from someone way more eloquent than I am to that.

Corb, the general Republican rhetoric about Teh Illegals is racist. While legal immigrants may resent those who came illegally, intelligent immigrants know that all the talk about "illegals" plays into racist narratives.

I understand how racists can be against illegal immigration, just like they're against legal immigration, but don't think that means that arguments about illegals are racist. I also think arguments about how "intelligent" immigrants will eventually see are a little not-cool, unless of course you are from an immigrant community yourself. It implies that all those of us who are making choices based on our life experiences are just not smart enough to vote the way you, outside the community, think we should. (And you are by no means the only one who's been talking with that kind of language, so sorry for singling you out but I figured one quote was enough.)
posted by corb at 7:54 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

President Obama's election prospects have shot up to 70.3% from 68% and are still rising (on intrade.com) in the past hour or so - related to Pawlenty's exit?
posted by syzygy at 7:55 AM on September 20, 2012

corb, what?

The word "illegal" as a noun is racist and you just used it. People are not "illegals.". The term is a dog whistle and you ate making less and less sense as you retreat into a purely emotion-based defense of ignorant racists while throwing out handfuls of falsehoods.
posted by spitbull at 7:59 AM on September 20, 2012 [10 favorites]

assumption that latino = brown

So... you are upset with the Republican anti-immigrant political strategy, then? Because no one here is arguing that latino = brown.
posted by muddgirl at 8:00 AM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

In the FiveThirtyEight “now-cast”, which does not adjust for the effects of the party conventions as our Nov. 6 forecast does, and which considers the possibility that a candidate would win a “snap” election held today, Mr. Obama’s chances rose to 94.4 percent on Wednesday, his highest position to date.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:01 AM on September 20, 2012

In other words, talking like a Fox News host. Or a republican. This is why y'all are losing and are already bound for anachronism.
posted by spitbull at 8:01 AM on September 20, 2012

It is too late in this thread to turn it into "Let's talk to corb about her politics until we are satisfied" Take that stuff to MeMail, keep this thread on the topic OF THE THREAD, please.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:04 AM on September 20, 2012 [13 favorites]

neither party is actually addressing jobs, poverty, income equality or prosecuting bankers

That isn't particularly true these days.

they could keep the Senate in session each and every time until the filibuster went away

This isn't really the way the filibuster works in the current Congress, Mr Smith Goes to Washington and Strom Thurmond images notwithstanding. A lot of the time, there aren't even enough votes to allow discussion to continue, let alone put a bill up for a vote.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:05 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

I mean, I don't want to be mean or pick on you, and I salute your courage in coming into this den of progressive voices and trying to stick up for people you think are mostly scared into holding illogical, bigoted, and dangerous views (can you also explain climate change denial, while you're at it? or opposition to teaching the facts of biological science? Because while I get how one could be scared into a racist view of "illegals," I don't understand the defense mechanisms necessary to deny what is plainly obvious to any human who can see.)

We have plenty of emotion on our side (we meaning progressives) but it pales in comparison to the purely id-driven politics you are excusing. If your fearful position is based on untrue "facts," it isn't valid just because you're scared of ghosts.
posted by spitbull at 8:05 AM on September 20, 2012

Podkayne of Pasadena, er you did hear about the Republicans refusing to allow the Veterans Job Bill to advance eh? Just this week.

here is the pull quote

Eager to shoot down President Obama’s legislative agenda just weeks before the election, Senate Republicans on Wednesday blocked a measure that would have provided $1 billion over five years to help veterans find work in their communities.

So keep up with the false equivalencies. I don't think there are many here who would disagree that Democrats have some glaring faults, but, my god at least they are trying to solve some of the problems.
posted by edgeways at 8:05 AM on September 20, 2012 [13 favorites]

(that last to corb, whom I would sincerely like to convince to rethink her positions -- I can't bear how reasonable people manage the denial necessary to remain loyal to the GOP. It hurts my faith in humanity)
posted by spitbull at 8:06 AM on September 20, 2012

Pawlenty flees? Well, that is the T-Paw way. Talk it, don't walk it but run from it. I guess that leaves T-Paw and his evangelical, judge wife to fostering the next round of conservative operatives at the Univ. of Minnesota law school.
posted by jadepearl at 8:08 AM on September 20, 2012

Well, you know, veterans are mostly in the 47% of moochers the GOP doesn't care about.

Defense contractors, on the other hand (like GE, which pays little to no corporate income tax, the moochers!) are in need of our charitable best intentions.
posted by spitbull at 8:08 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

And that was a bipartisan bill too, right?
posted by gaspode at 8:09 AM on September 20, 2012

And that was a bipartisan bill too, right?

From Steve Benen at NBC (emphasis mine):

As proposals go, this should have been a no-brainer. The Veterans Job Corps Act of 2012, sponsored by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), sought to lower unemployment among military veterans, giving grants to federal, state, and local agencies, which in turn would hire veterans -- giving priority to those who served on or after 9/11 -- to work as first-responders and in conservation jobs at national parks.

The bill was fully paid for, and entirely bipartisan -- Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) had his own set of ideas for the bill, and Murray incorporated all of them into her legislation.

And yet, all but five Senate Republicans voted to kill it anyway, 48 days before a national election. Even Burr sided with his party to defeat the bill, and it was filled with his provisions.

posted by zombieflanders at 8:13 AM on September 20, 2012 [12 favorites]

Well it garnered 57 votes to advance it past filibuster, so yeah there where some line crossers, and I suspect if it came to an actual vote it'd pass by a wider margin. The official reason for objection was the cost, which Democrats have said are offset by fees on Medicare providers and suppliers who are delinquent on their tax bills.

It it pretty hard to see this as anything but a political play... what happened to jobs jobs jobs?
posted by edgeways at 8:15 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

oh gods we are so fucked up.
posted by gaspode at 8:16 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Romney Ad Features Coal Miners Allegedly Required To Attend Campaign Event

A new television ad from the Romney campaign touting coal as a reliable source of energy features a group of miners from Beallsville, Ohio, who were allegedly required to attend the candidate’s rally there last month.

The miners standing behind Romney at the event also lost pay for the day when the mine shut down on Aug. 14 for security and safety reasons, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reports, and some workers feared they would lose their job if they didn’t attend.

Rob Moore, the chief financial officer for Murray Energy, the mine’s owner, told WWVA radio that “attendance at the Romney event was mandatory, but no one was forced to attend.” The company told the Plain Dealer in a follow-up statement that “participation was, and always has been, completely voluntary.”

posted by zombieflanders at 8:16 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

The word "illegal" as a noun is racist and you just used it.

I do not view the word as racist, given that illegal immigrants (sometimes shortened for laziness to "illegals") come in all colors and ethnicities. Also, for what it's worth, I come from a (legal) immigrant family. And illegal immigrants aren't fear-based - they are real and exist. I don't think they're a Giant Threat, or even impact my life overly, but I do oppose federal services (or even paying taxes) for illegal immigrants. I don't think we should take their money or give them money.

Well, you know, veterans are mostly in the 47% of moochers the GOP doesn't care about

It it pretty hard to see this as anything but a political play... what happened to jobs jobs jobs?

On the jobs bill - it's not quite as simple as it seems. The cost thing was raised, but I think was more just a way to use a procedural process rather than a straight up-or-down vote. But just because it was backed by IAVA doesn't mean that process wasn't flawed. In particular, the jobs it would have created are mostly outside of the areas where veterans who need and are unable to find jobs actually live. (Rural unskilled jobs rather than skilled jobs, which are what veterans actually have trouble getting) Also, the VA is pretty terrible at delivering programs to veterans - see the GI bill, which they're /still/ unable to get right.

Fire departments and police departments already love to hire vets like it's going out of style. They don't really need incentives to do so. What are needed are white-collar jobs that actually pay decently.
posted by corb at 8:20 AM on September 20, 2012

State Rep Daryl Metcalfe (R-PA)

I don’t believe any legitimate voter that actually wants to exercise that right and takes on the according responsiblity that goes with that right to secure their photo ID will be disenfranchised. As Mitt Romney said, 47% of the people that are living off the public dole, living off their neighbors’ hard work, and we have a lot of people out there that are too lazy to get up and get out there and get the ID they need. If individuals are too lazy, the state can’t fix that.

posted by edgeways at 8:20 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Someone should show Metcalfe's quote to Jim Cramer's dad.
posted by drezdn at 8:24 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

. What are needed are white-collar jobs that actually pay decently.

If veterans were worth giving good white collar jobs the free market and private charity would have done so already. If all that is available is a rural unskilled laboring position then that must be where they belong.
posted by jacalata at 8:28 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

So are you saying republicans are being nuanced in their procedural filibuster and not just a bunch of election year hacks?

that is so funny i forgot to laugh. Even the Republican

What are needed are white-collar jobs that actually pay decently.

Tell you what, talk to all those corporations that are sitting on massive amounts of money (as evidenced by how well the DOW has been doing), I'm sure they will get right on that.

And finally, fine, show me what the counter proposal has been by the Republicans, anything? can you point to anything specifically jobs related?
posted by edgeways at 8:34 AM on September 20, 2012

I will buy that Republicans advance non-racist arguments and policies against illegal immigration when they actually do that, and when my so-pale-she-could-totally-be-Canadian! partner is as likely to get stopped and paper-checked as I am.
posted by rtha at 8:38 AM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

ahem ... Princeton Election Consortium:

The probability of a Democratic takeover [in the House] is currently 74% with a median majority of 16 seats. This is a knife-edge situation, and the picture may well change again over the coming six weeks.

posted by edgeways at 8:39 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

I just realized what happened. For years, the Republican electoral strategy has been convincing poor and working class people to vote against their own interests by scaring them with fear of the "other," as well as pushing wedge issues like gay marriage and abortion for their evangelical block. It's been the three pillars of their platform for a while now.

Mitt Romney broke the division rule: he drew the line at all poor people, regardless of their ethnicity. He got caught talking about the "other" without coding it properly. Instead of saying that "Lazy people are out to get you!" and letting people fill in their preferred scapegoat, he accidentally changed the message to "Poor people are out to get us!"

Once people realized that "us" doesn't mean the middle class, or the elderly, or the working poor, or people struggling on disability, or people struggling in general, the Republican establishment pretty much lost the independents. This may be the event that splits the GOP into rational moderates and right-wing hawks, or sinks the party altogether. I would say they could moderate their platform, but if anything, it's been showing less and less coherence as time moves on.
posted by deanklear at 8:41 AM on September 20, 2012 [16 favorites]

(Obligatory accompaniment to the story noted above, The Obama trap: Romney discovers what Hillary and McCain already know.)
posted by octobersurprise at 8:42 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

538: The Democrats’ chances of controlling the Senate have increased to 79 percent in the forecast, up from 70 percent on Tuesday. Had we run the model a month ago, based on polls through Aug. 19, the Democrats’ chances of maintaining Senate control would have been listed at just 39 percent.
.
.
.
Republicans could also have some reason to be concerned about Nevada, which has not been polled recently but where their candidate, the appointed Senator Dean Heller, maintains a slight advantage over the Democratic Representative Shelley Berkeley. Mr. Heller is a fairly strong candidate, but if there is some sort of national tide against Republicans, he could become the underdog in that race as well.
posted by edgeways at 8:53 AM on September 20, 2012

More on Pawlenty jumping ship at The Atlantic:
I asked a seasoned insider closely following the day to day operations of Team Romney:
Are people surprised by Pawlenty's move 48 days before the election?

Answer:
Well, let me put it this way - it's a great job for T-Paw, but not a better job than a cabinet secretary. If Romney were running five points ahead in the polls I doubt Pawlenty would've jumped ship.
posted by syzygy at 8:55 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

that is so funny i forgot to laugh.

Whoa there P.W. Need to let the X1 cool down.
posted by shakespeherian at 8:57 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Just a small comment on Autostraddle, noted via the lesbian photo history thread:

If you don’t have anything nice to say, maybe don’t run for President?
posted by Anything at 8:57 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Club for Growth ditches Romney

(also CFG is considering targeting Lindsey Graham in 2014)
posted by edgeways at 9:03 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

The Disappearance Of Mitt Romney: Campaign's Push To Humanize Him Evaporates.
posted by ericb at 9:05 AM on September 20, 2012

What are needed are white-collar jobs that actually pay decently.

No, what we need is blue collar jobs and for them to pay decently. Actually, firefighters and police officers generally do get pretty decent pay, by the way, and if there were enough jobs in these fields to absorb the thousands of returning veterans from wars started for no good reason by the last Republican president, no worries, except the Republican governors and legislatures of so many American states are busy decimating both the raw numbers of public service positions and the middle-class incomes associated with them, including for police and fire people. You've heard of Scott Walker and John Kasich, right?

Of course those moochers are just making their nut by scamming the taxpayer so they get ridiculous luxuries like pensions, health care, or job security, right? They didn't build anything.

Of course if that thing you built is under seige from robbers or on fire, and you've fired all the cops and firemen or made those jobs so unattractive that you can't fill them with talented veterans with the right skills, you're SOL, aren't you? Right?
posted by spitbull at 9:17 AM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

Club for Growth ~~ditches Romney~~ Shrinks Election Engagement.
posted by jaduncan at 9:18 AM on September 20, 2012

(Because you also know that the unemployment rate in America is falling for private sector workers but rising steadily for public sector workers, as their benefits and wages fall precipitously for those who do still have jobs, right?)

You'd almost suspect a plot by GOP governors and legistlatures to keep that unemployment rate high during an economic upturn that is lifting the private sector (which is, in fact, "doing fine" in this sense) on purpose. But they wouldn't be that devious about getting their banker elected president, right?
posted by spitbull at 9:19 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

That Univision insta-tan (is it real, is it lighting?) Reminds me of Boehner's excursions into colorhood.

Someone should photoshop a Dr. Bronner's bottle into a "Dr. Boehner's Man-tan lotion"
posted by edgeways at 9:21 AM on September 20, 2012

And yes, I'm sorry, the word "illegal" as a category of person is racist and it is NOT routinely applied to refer to white undocumented immigrants, that's just a fact. You can call it "laziness" all you like, but racism is precisely mental laziness.
posted by spitbull at 9:23 AM on September 20, 2012 [21 favorites]

you're SOL, aren't you? Right?

No! The same organising principles that make American health care the envy of the world can also be applied to firefighting!

Welcome to Blackwater Firefighters Inc, the only slightly suspiciously petrol-scented paid-by-the-fire innovative firefighting solution that's coming to YOUR area. Call now, and with every third fire you'll get a free keyring. Plans start at only $79.99/month!
posted by jaduncan at 9:31 AM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

jaduncan, it's already happened in Arkansas.

That's the America Romney and his supporters dream of. You pay directly for private fire protection and the rich get good service and the poor get to watch their houses burn.

No doubt the firemen in such a scenario are not Blackwater-style veteran merecenaries, but "illegals," since it's a dirty and dangerous job and a whole lot of the cost of the public provision of first responder series goes toward ridiculous things like safety equipment for those moocher guys in the funny hats.
posted by spitbull at 9:41 AM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

the VA is pretty terrible at delivering programs to veterans - see the GI bill, which they're /still/ unable to get right.

You're complaining that the free government benefits aren't good enough? *boggles*.
posted by Miko at 9:48 AM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

The VA is actually a model of cost/benefit efficiency in American healthcare, the single best evidence we have for how much cheaper a single-payer system would be. It's inadequate to its mission mostly because George W. Bush sent thousands of American young people to be maimed in pointless wars based on lies (and in that I personally include Afghanistan). Our erstwhile GOP candidate witht The Hair casually talks about waltzing into another era of warmongering like it's changing a suit. And by the way the underfunding of the VA can be squarely chalked up to Tea Party Republicans in the House.

So yeah, boggles. It's this GOP habit of pointing to their own failures as if someone else had caused them and offering to solve the problem by doubling down on failure. Same for supply side bullshit economics. Same for energy policy. Same for every damn thing.

Meanwhile the latest Arctic sea ice level numbers are nothing short of terrifying. We don't have time for this backwards, nostalgic, lazy-minded ideological bullshit anymore.

The moment President Obama won me completely back to 2008 levels of Fuck Yeah was when he said "Climate change is not a joke" in his convention speech. Damn right. And yet it isn't even being discussed in this election, and the GOP candidate is perfectly willing to ignore the whole subject, since his base consists of ignorant people who think the facts are whatever they prefer them to be.
posted by spitbull at 9:56 AM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

And, also--since when were veterans benefits "free?" You have to be a veteran to earn them.
posted by MoonOrb

QFT.
posted by spitbull at 9:58 AM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

I'm a big fan of the VA. They take care of my dad, a Vietnam combat veteran. I think you guys are misreading where I'm coming from.

What I'm boggling at is not that there's a fair amount of system negotiation to do, but that the use of the benefits is inconsistent with the entire philosophy espoused.

There's no reason that people who elect voluntarily to work in the military should expect the rest of us to pick up the tab for their healthcare (in this philosophy. Not my opinion).
posted by Miko at 10:01 AM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

the VA is pretty terrible at delivering programs to veterans

Yeah, the private sector is so much better.
posted by unSane at 10:02 AM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

I may just pass out soon, Romney just can't seem to get a break. So, his big War On Coal (everything is a war isn't it?) ad features a bunch of coal miners who where required to attend Romney's rally (with no pay), and THAT little tidbit is getting a fair bit of attention, especially in OH.

Of note in both ads is the use of footage from the Beallsville rally.

A top official with Murray Energy Corp., the Pepper Pike company that owns the mine, confirmed to a local radio station last month that miners were told that attendance at the event was mandatory. They lost pay, as the mine was shut down to accommodate Romney's visit. Workers feared they would be fired if they did not participate. - Cleveland Plain Dealer

posted by edgeways at 10:02 AM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

(and yeah, when elected officials force a system to fail by underfunding, overburdening, and badly managing it, and then foist those failures off not on their own bad policy decisions and ill intent, but on the fundamental inadequacy of guvmint, they''re being seriously disingenuous and hoping the rest of us aren't dumb enough to notice).
posted by Miko at 10:04 AM on September 20, 2012 [7 favorites]

No doubt the firemen in such a scenario are not Blackwater-style veteran merecenaries

Heh. Having dealt with BW/Xe stuff, I should tell you that at least for Iraq they required two weeks of security experience (not military, you'll note) for people signing up. People could and did ship out after working on doors at nightclubs, and were about as good as one would expect from that when out in the field. It lead to a lot of incidents where Fly-Over-State Joe shot up a bunch of random civilians after gunshots came from that general area/block. That's what happens when the untrained crap themselves...so, you know, let's not make the mistake of thinking that BW supplied high quality grunts.

TL;DR: They are largely over-aggressive amateurs, not professional mercenaries. You'd want a more specialised agency for quality.
posted by jaduncan at 10:07 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

The VA is actually a model of cost/benefit efficiency in American healthcare, the single best evidence we have for how much cheaper a single-payer system would be.

If the VA is a model of efficiency and the best evidence for how a single-payer system would work, you have given me reason to vote against single-payer for the next thousand years.

Have you ever experienced VA care? It is awful. It requires years of waiting for approvals for things to go through, and months of waiting for appointments. It frequently refuses to give people the medications or treatment they need because there are cheaper, if less efficient, ways of doing things. It routinely overcrowds such that people don't get payments or treatments on time because they are choked up in bureaucracy. It is such a source of frustration for veterans that you have veterans killing themselves in front of VA hospitals to make points about the terrible care.

And these are people who have earned their benefits by fighting in defense of their country, giving their bodies and their sanity so people safe at home can stay so comfortably. A tiny percentage - less than 1% of the nation.
posted by corb at 10:08 AM on September 20, 2012

Do you have anything other than anecdata? Because it seems like studies show that it actually is more efficient and has a higher quality of care.

And, for that matter, so are the other single-payer systems. In almost every single objective comparison, they have shown to be more efficient than most or all of the private alternatives, often by wide margins. Medicare, for instance, pretty much demolishes most private insurers (PDF), despite being much larger. What's more, it does it consistently from year to year. And Medicaid has better cost constraints compared to private insurers (and, for that matter, Medicare and FEHP) because "no payer has been as motivated to undertake cost containment as state governments."
posted by zombieflanders at 10:19 AM on September 20, 2012 [13 favorites]

Have you ever experienced VA care? It is awful. It requires years of waiting for approvals for things to go through, and months of waiting for appointments. It frequently refuses to give people the medications or treatment they need because there are cheaper, if less efficient, ways of doing things.

I get that the VA has systemic problems, some of which are due to the inordinate increase of injuries coming back from the last ten years of warefare, but I am curious as to whether you think this is different from the outside world of American medical care. In my experience, those issues are the same if not worse, even for those with health insurance.
posted by jetlagaddict at 10:21 AM on September 20, 2012 [8 favorites]

What I'm boggling at is not that there's a fair amount of system negotiation to do, but that the use of the benefits is inconsistent with the entire philosophy espoused.

And you're right to boggle, but the boggling itself is a symptom of the real problem — you're finding a deep internal contradiction in the "philosophy" because it's run through with them, top to bottom. And it's riddled with contradictions because it's not actually a philosophy, it's an ideology: a smokescreen of "rational" (i.e. rationalized) beliefs laid over, and obscuring, a very different substrate. When a glibertarian lauds the idea of VA healthcare (but, invariably, at the same time decries its "bureaucracy" as though it weren't a thousand times better than the private insurance bureaucracy) the important content is the jingoistic militarism, not the apparent endorsement of public healthcare. Because the Soldier is the True Citizen, he's entitled to public benefits that the rest of society isn't, because civilians are parasites looking for handouts. It's not a rational doctrine about public spending and private rights, it's a pseudo-rational smokescreen laid over the usual rightist sentiments.
posted by RogerB at 10:22 AM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

re: Nevada

As far as the presidential ticket, I expect that the RNC has written NV off. The numbers have been in favor of Obama since August and the local Republican candidates are losing strong leads that they held a few months back. And of course, we have a very passionate Ron Paul cohort among voters. Our libertarians, even within the party leadership, have been very unenthusiastic about falling in line with Romney. If Ron Paul was the Lib candidate I expect things would be pretty interesting. (I kind of miss the numerous Revolution posters that were around last cycle.)

Nevada statewide politics are getting heated. Shelley Berkeley and Dean Heller have been at this epic grassroots* vs. Crossroads battle for months now. There were some very predictable out-of-context ads that attacked Berkley early on, but Heller's side doubled down with a series of TV spots that were completely fabricated.

To my surprise, the ads were considered bad form (at least in the southern part of the state) and turned a lot of people off Heller. Berkley hit back with ads to refute the lies and they have been close ever since. She has really worked hard to distance herself from some of the more unlikable aspects of her past work, but -personally- I wish she would lose the damn accent. (There should be a law that any NV elected official must say "Ne-vad-a" and never "Ne-vaw-da")

Rep. Joe Heck also is having to run in my traditionally Dem district this term (yay for very equitable redistricting for our new seat!). The mailer picturing him, his blonde wife and their prized thoroughbred stayed on the fridge for a week. His hard-line "family values" rhetoric hadn't changed from when he was courting the low-income voters in his previous district, but apparently his horse is supposed to impress the new middle and upper class voters.

Voting has suddenly gotten exciting. I have never felt so strongly that my vote will matter now and in the next few years.

*I say grassroots because there have been some very successful Obama-esque campaigning for donations, as well as publicizing the fact, but she most certainly has her own large, corporate donors.
posted by Vysharra at 10:22 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Could people please avoid using terms like "Flyover State Joe?"
posted by drezdn at 10:25 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

you have given me reason to vote against single-payer for the next thousand years

You're advocating for a libertarian society, and you're planning to live for the next thousand years? Good luck with your freedom from health care and all that self-sufficiency stuff when you're 90 years of age, let alone when you're 900.
posted by oulipian at 10:26 AM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

"Brazil has a lot of potential, and always will."

Lately Brazil has been the sixth or seventh largest economy in the world.
posted by Mental Wimp at 10:27 AM on September 20, 2012

The U.S. health system is the most expensive in the world, but comparative analyses consistently show the United States underperforms relative to other countries on most dimensions of performance...

Among the six nations studied—Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States—the U.S. ranks last, as it did in the 2006 and 2004 editions of Mirror, Mirror. Most troubling, the U.S. fails to achieve better health outcomes than the other countries, and as shown in the earlier editions, the U.S. is last on dimensions of access, patient safety, efficiency, and equity.

posted by unSane at 10:27 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

So, a couple things to know about Latinos as a political bloc (specifically in California):

Latinos in California used to be Republicans. In fact, Cinco de Mayo is a Californian holiday that celebrates both the Latino contribution to the Union in the Civil War as well as their fight for the Mexican Republic.

But that was also a time when immigration was far less regulated — people used to drive across the border with trucks to pick up Mexican workers and bring them back. Even the depression of the 1880s didn't have a huge effect on California Mexicans, because their world was (ironically) more globalized.

This didn't change in a big way until the Great Depression. Even through the '40s, the Republicans were much more friendly to Latinos than Democrats were. Organized labor was notoriously racist (which is something that prevented a broader base that would have helped them against the Open Shop movement of the '20s).

But during the Great Depression, Herbert Hoover — whose "Do Nothing" policies the Republicans are still endorsing for our Great Recession — thought that "repatriating" Mexicans would help with employment. So he rounded up a couple million people who looked Mexican (whether or not they were citizens of the US or not) and kicked them back over the border.

The next big thing was the Zoot Suit Riots in LA, with similar echos around the country. The LA Times — then a virulently partisan Republican organ — ginned up a crazy amount of racism against Mexicans who wore zoot suits in defiance of war rationing guidelines, leading to violence from servicemembers. The Republican Mayor Fletcher Bowrun (himself wildly corrupt and in the pocket of the Combine as well as the Republicans that ran the city) did nothing to prevent it, and it radicalized a lot of people — not just Latinos like Cesar Chavez, but also people like Richard Wright and James Baldwin. When Roosevelt spoke out against the racism, the LA Times called him a communist. (Sound familiar?)

So, there was a radicalized Latino left that didn't really fit in with the Democrats, but that the Republicans loathed. There was a socialist revolution (briefly — then Mexico reverted to a weird one-party state) in Mexico that spooked Republicans even more. But for most of the '50s, Latinos were excluded from both major parties.

Which meant that when they started to organize, they were largely on their own. Cesar Chavez's experience there is kind of hard to overstate — he used the social organizing pattern of Saul Alinsky to make a moral boycott in favor of the United Farm Workers. In doing so, he did two things: He earned the undying enmity of Republicans in California (home of the nativist John Birch Society, which animates much of the Republican ideology today) and he created a reliable bloc that the Democrats were able to organize with, especially as the Civil Rights struggles meant they lost the South.

Chavez wasn't just concerned with labor rights — he also was a big believer in LGBT equality (he organized one of the first AIDS marches, and was one of Harvey Milk's early backers) — and he fought for economic justice, something that the disproportionately poor Latinos desperately needed.

So within Latino politics, there are two strong strands (at least to this non-Latino): There's the church, but tempered with a Liberation Theology message that remained popular in America even after its leaders in Latin America were assassinated and JPII denounced it, and there's the political machine that's built out of labor organizing.

As is often the case, the luxury of voting against class interests in favor of moral concerns has started to come to the Latino middle class, and the right wing has been fairly effective in using wedge issues to dilute the strength of the Latino bloc (the so-called National Organization for Marriage explicitly used a race-based strategy and was effective in passing Prop. 8 in part because of it).

But that history is something that's really well-known amongst Latinos, not least because American schools are really poor at teaching Latino history, so a lot of it has been a tradition held in the community of activism and organizing. That Latinos still disproportionately live in areas that are subject to environmental attacks has made them easier for Dems to mobilize, as well as working disproportionately in industries that need more labor protection.

So Latinos have an almost 100 year affinity for the Dems as a bloc, in large part due to the crazy racism that has animated Republican strategy, even moreso since the Civil Rights Act.

The most notable exceptions are Cuban Americans, who often were wealthy, right-wing reactionaries who were displaced by Castro, and evangelical Latinos, where the message of social justice (one of the historical reasons why Dems and Catholics used to work together — now intentionally minimized by the Catholic church) has been largely replaced by morals campaigns.

The other thing to notice is how immigration rhetoric sounds to Latinos — when you have a long, long history of being addressed explicitly through racist terms, that things like "illegals" don't necessarily seem racist to a white audience isn't as important as putting them in context of the Latino experience in America. Even things like Latino versus "Hispanic" are markers of intent, and Latinos are pretty canny at realizing that policies explicitly targeted at "illegals" have traditionally been executed on the basis of things like skin color.

There's also the fact that the large value placed of family connections in Latino culture means that a lot of Latinos — even ones who are third or fourth generation immigrants — still have a lot of family in Latin America and have connections there, so they recognize that the person being called an "illegal" is Cousin Albert or whomever, and attempts to denigrate that person (which animate a lot of the rhetoric around "illegals") goes beyond a simple appeal to fairness and process, and connect with attacks on Latino identity as a whole.

I mean, it's not a coincidence that some school districts in Arizona have basically banned teaching Latino history — that's pretty out and out racist, and it's the same people who are all Minuteman about the border.

So sure, it can seem baffling and paternalistic to assume that Latinos are a solid Dem bloc, but that's because you're ignorant of how a lot of Latinos see themselves and their relation to larger American society, and while you'll always find individuals who buck this trend (certainly, Herman Caine doesn't speak for black people as a bloc), cherry picking those to flatter a white narrative is pretty transparent to Latino voters.
posted by klangklangston at 10:29 AM on September 20, 2012 [103 favorites]

If the VA is a model of efficiency and the best evidence for how a single-payer system would work, you have given me reason to vote against single-payer for the next thousand years.

Sincere, I'm not baiting you. Compared to what? Do you think the private health care system we have is sustainable with its current inequities except at the cost of cutting off virtually all care for the poor or the "previously conditioned?" (That would be, eventually, everyone, by the way.) Because if you believe that, you're just wrong on the facts. You can't close your ears for 1000 years to an alternative idea that right now is working better than what we have. I presume you also despise Medicare? You must either be very wealthy, or unconcerned with your own future.

Have you ever experienced VA care? It is awful.

Not as a patient, but I've seen it up close and personal, yes. Remember, I work professionally in rural, working-class communities and have for 22 years. First, your anecdotal claims aside, you're wrong again about the general claims of inefficiency or you have never experienced the private health care system in the context of a serious medical situation, which I doubt. Your CT scan will cost $8000 that we all help pay (all of us who are taxpayers or have private health insurance through our jobs or individually). Of that, a huge amount is administrative overhead. The VA can't raise prices like that. It has to turn to Congress as its only customer, as it were. And Congress won't pay for the level of administrative infrastructure the VA needs and if it had would *still* be far more efficient than the private sector (it has a differen patient demographic, of course, but even adjusting for that). And in recent years, satisfaction with VA administrative services has gone up statistically (I believe, I need to check sources on that one) but it has certainly gotten more efficient by objective measures. And that is because our current President has made the VA a priority even over the obstructionism of congress. Again, just the facts. The VA runs far better now than it did under President Bush, and that includes an array of patient services. Maybe it's been a while since you've dealt with it.

Your qualification of your comments with a well spoken encomium to veterans is appreciated here. But if you would do away with the VA and the model that we the people through our government are responsible for the care of those who are prepared to give their lives (in so many ways) for this country, *with what would you say we should replace it?* Because if you don't have an answer to that but "the private sector," you're telling veterans and their families to go to hell, sentiments aside. There is no example of a better way on display here. The private sector healthcare system is a priori not working unless you can tolerate its gross inequities.

Do you know what it is like to deal with a serious illness when you don't have health insurance? If not, think about the terror of not being able to afford to prolong or save your own life, or your child's. While around you other people can get that care. Because you're poor, or you have the wrong job, or you had diabetes as a kid. Now you need $100,000 for an operation (that's no exaggeration at all for all kinds of very common medical crises). You can't even make the rent this month. And you'll die without it. Or your kid will.

You're willing to accept that as a widespread experience -- affecting *millions* of your fellow citizens -- if you are willing to accept that the US private healthcare system is worth preserving or extending into new domains. And it will affect more and more of your friends and neighbors unless you are filthy rich, because health care costs under this system are growing out of all proportion to GDP because of the inefficiencies in this system. No other civilized country of the USA's wealth does it this way, and the citizens of almost all of them are, in the aggregate, much happier with their medical systems than Americans are. (In fact, and I have to look this up, I believe that is also true of VA patients and Medicare patients, or it was in the recent past.) These are facts. Meet them, and get to know them.

Complaining gets us nowhere. Nyah nyah I'll never support anything like the VA! What are your proposed solutions? What's the choice? Even your presidential candidate thought this was all pretty much the case when he was the governor of Massachusetts, and now he's forgotten what he clearly once studied in a business-like way, which is a shame because this is one of few serious issues he actually commands intellectually, but of course his party will not let him reveal that.

I have dealth with the VA. Numerous times, as an advocate for several veteran friends over 2 decades. You are exaggerating the bad and ignoring the enormous good. That's looking through the wrong end of the telescope. All the VA needs is a proper level of support adequate to its mission, one we both supposedly believe is pretty damn sacred.
posted by spitbull at 10:30 AM on September 20, 2012 [29 favorites]

spitbull

Dude, the South Fulton Fire Department is a department of the city of South Fulton.

The house in question was outside of the city limits, in a rural area that did not pay for fire service though income tax, but where the residents could on an individual basis pay a monthly fee for firefighting services from the city of South Fulton. This arrangement was very well-understood in the area, and the monthly fee was covered by many homeowner's insurance policies.

The so-called "victims" here did not pay the monthly fee. When their home caught on fire, they tried to negotiate a per-incident service instead, but no legal or financial infrastructure existed for them to do so, and given that no human life was at stake, the department declined.

The SFPD wisely understood that offering to pay and actually doing so are two very different things, and opted not to become the offending family's creditors.

They perhaps also understood that setting a precedent for per-incident service under such circumstances was poor public policy, and if it were done hastily and without proper monetary balance could cause other rural residents to forgo their monthly fees, thus throwing the department budget into chaos.

More recently, however, the city of South Fulton has been working to allow for per-incident fire service.

(Sorry for the derail, but spitbull's comment was egregiously misinformed, and he or she does not have MeFiMail enabled.)
posted by The Confessor at 10:31 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Well it garnered 57 votes to advance it past filibuster...

Wait, I thought it took 60 votes for cloture.
posted by Mental Wimp at 10:33 AM on September 20, 2012

OK, The Confessor, mea culpa. That guy deserved for his house to burn down, for sure.
posted by spitbull at 10:35 AM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

Have you ever experienced VA care?

RAND: How the VA Outpaces Other Systems in Delivering Patient Care:

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the country’s largest health care provider, has been recognized as a leader in improving the quality of health care. Beginning in the early 1990s, the VA established system-wide quality improvement initiatives, many of which model the changes the Institute of Medicine would later recommend.

How does the VA measure up against other U.S. health care providers? To address this question, RAND researchers compared the medical records of VA patients with a national sample and evaluated how effectively health care is delivered to each group. Their findings:

VA patients received about two-thirds of the care recommended by national standards, compared with about half in the national sample.
Among chronic care patients, VA patients received about 70 percent of recommended care, compared with about 60 percent in the national sample.
For preventive care, the difference was greater: VA patients received about 65 percent of recommended care, while patients in the national sample received 20 percent less.
VA patients received consistently better care across the board, including screening, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up.

posted by deanc at 10:35 AM on September 20, 2012 [11 favorites]

The U.S. health system is the most expensive in the world, but comparative analyses consistently show the United States underperforms relative to other countries on most dimensions of performance...

Judging by all the references to a lack of universal health care, that seems to be evaluating the private health care sector in the US, no?

Also:

With the inclusion of physician survey data in the analysis, it is also apparent that the U.S. is lagging in adoption of information technology and national policies that promote quality improvement.

This gets hardly any attention, but health IT was one of Obama's pet projects in the stimulus bill(s), something that even conservatives begrudgingly agree was a big deal.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:36 AM on September 20, 2012

You're advocating for a libertarian society, and you're planning to live for the next thousand years?

In space or as part of a computer, probably.
posted by Artw at 10:37 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

Well it garnered 57 votes to advance it past filibuster...

Wait, I thought it took 60 votes for cloture.

It does, that is why even with some bipartisan support (57 votes) it did not advance. John McCain voted against it btw.
posted by edgeways at 10:40 AM on September 20, 2012

klangklangston:

Absolutely fascinating synopsis above. Thanks.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 10:43 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

Judging by all the references to a lack of universal health care, that seems to be evaluating the private health care sector in the US, no?

Yeah, I was trying to make the point that private healthcare as practised in the US is more expensive and has poorer outcomes than socialized healthcare.

This WHO ranking from 2000 is out of date and the methodology is suspect, but it's not meaningless.

The US ranks #1 in cost and 37th on performance. In fact there's no clear relationship between cost and performance at all.
posted by unSane at 10:52 AM on September 20, 2012

spitbull

Not what I was inferring, but I suspect you already know that.

Stay classy.
posted by The Confessor at 10:53 AM on September 20, 2012

corb: "Have you ever experienced VA care? It is awful. "

Christ, you should just try living like any other life except your own. You know, maybe like all the people without any access to health care at all.
posted by danny the boy at 10:56 AM on September 20, 2012 [14 favorites]

poor public policy

The 'poor public policy' in question was not having a fucking fire department.
posted by unSane at 10:58 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

I deploy sarcasm in order to stay classy, The Confessor. Without respect to your implication, that's how I see your counteragument. The essence of the story is the same, complexities aside, as the one I implied in my invocation of the event. It's a bit apocraphyl to be sure (and if you know Greek that's a great pun, btw) but like all great stories it contains a kernal of truth, and that is that it is "poor public policy" indeed to set up a system where someone's house is allowed to burn down.
posted by spitbull at 11:01 AM on September 20, 2012

And in fact we agree, since what we are talking about here is poor public policy, not a failure of the fire department in the City of Fulton or the guy whose house burned down. Neither is relevant to a debate about what our public policy ought to be toward the provision of essential services like healthcare and fire protection and mail delivery. Highest bidder or everyone chips in so everyone gets the same system?
posted by spitbull at 11:07 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

The VA is actually a model of cost/benefit efficiency in American healthcare, the single best evidence we have for how much cheaper a single-payer system would be.

If the VA is a model of efficiency and the best evidence for how a single-payer system would work, you have given me reason to vote against single-payer for the next thousand years.

Both of you should understand that the VA is not a "single payer" system in the model of the Canadian or Australian health care systems, but more like a single provider system (doctors are employees of the government) in the model of the British NHS.
posted by deanc at 11:08 AM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

"Absolutely fascinating synopsis above. Thanks."

Thank you. Again, if we have any people who grew up in Latino culture, they can probably give a more fine-grained and comprehensive summary — I don't wanna whitesplain somebody else's history — but from the folks I've talked to, that's a broad strokes accurate retelling.
posted by klangklangston at 11:10 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

"Have you ever experienced VA care? It is awful. "

And even if it were, which it objectively isn't, it's yet so, so much better than the no care at all that so many Americans are being asked to happily settle for.
posted by Miko at 11:11 AM on September 20, 2012 [18 favorites]

How come no one complains about massive inefficiency and layer cake bureaucracy in the defense industry? The F35 fighter project is mired in hundreds of billions of dollars in projected cost overruns, dwarfing welfare or the VA. But not a whisper from Republicans about maybe possibly controlling defense industry costs.

Wonder why that is? Look at the contributor records.
posted by spitbull at 11:23 AM on September 20, 2012 [8 favorites]

spitbull

Oh, absolutely; I believe that the better policy by far would be for the county to field its own department, or to negotiate with the city so that every property would be covered through a tax or mandatory fee on residents.

It just appeared that you might be blaming the fire department for what happened, and I don't think they or the city are at fault for following a transparent policy when no human lives were at risk. I'd be more likely to blame the county, in fact, for its seeming refusal to pursue fire protection as a community, except that I'm not familiar enough with Tennessee's state or local law to know if it was Libertarian nuttery on the part of its people or some limitation of their charter or state law.

Barring that apparent misinterpretation of your comment, we have no disagreement.

Apologies for the derail.
posted by The Confessor at 11:24 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Linda Lingle Joins Other GOP Senate Candidates In Distancing Themselves From Mitt Romney.
posted by ericb at 11:27 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

All the VA needs is a proper level of support adequate to its mission, one we both supposedly believe is pretty damn sacred.

Create jobs and support our veterans? Senate Republicans Kill Veterans’ Jobs Bill
posted by Golden Eternity at 11:27 AM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

We're cool, Confessor. Glad we agree. I never meant in the slightest to fault the actual emergency responders in that situation. The story is shocking because so far most of us live in places where fire protection is provisioned as a public good we never even really think about and to whose personnel we pay a lot of hero-worshipping lip service that lately is not very well backed up by public commitment to good pay, good benefits, good workplace safety, etc. for first responders. Because after all they're just living off the public dole, to put it in Walker-esque terms, with their fancy "pensions" and "breathing masks." Oh, and their fancy "unions" too. How dare they collectively bargain for respectful treatment? They didn't build that!
posted by spitbull at 11:29 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney: Most Undocumented Immigrants Lack 'Skill Or Experience'.
posted by ericb at 11:29 AM on September 20, 2012

Podkayne of Pasadena: That is not how the filibuster works. Keeping the Senate in session won't accomplish anything. Reid's only option is the nuclear one, which he absolutely should (but almost certainly won't) pursue next session.
posted by Eyebeams at 11:31 AM on September 20, 2012

Romney: Most Undocumented Immigrants Lack 'Skill Or Experience'.

Romney isn't getting a plate without spit in it at a restaurant for the rest of his life.
posted by murphy slaw at 11:33 AM on September 20, 2012 [17 favorites]

[I hit "Post" too soon.)

Podkayne: And that was one of the weakest "both sides are to blame" takes ever. Sorry, but the Repugs are to blame for Congress' failure to take steps to help the economy. 100%.
posted by Eyebeams at 11:33 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney Embraces ‘Grandfather Of Obamacare’ Title: ‘I’ll Take It’.
posted by ericb at 11:33 AM on September 20, 2012

Even Romney's Top Bundlers Think He's Going To Lose.
posted by ericb at 11:35 AM on September 20, 2012

Republicans will buck Tea Party if Obama wins.
posted by Bookhouse at 11:41 AM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

Republicans will buck Tea Party if Obama wins.

Really, Schumer? Really?

Here, let me hold this football, and you can run up and kick it, OK?
posted by maudlin at 11:46 AM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

Soonergrunt at Balloon Juice: "I don’t want the President to win. I want him to utterly destroy the Republican candidate and his Eddie Munster in a cheap suit-looking incubus as viable political candidates forever. To paraphrase Anne-Laurie from earlier today, throw the bastard an anvil. I want to see six more seats in the US Senate (but I’ll settle for three in this tough year) and I want to see Nancy Pelosi wield the Speaker’s gavel again, but I’d call it a win if we send 15 freshman teabaggers home with their balls in their hands. I want to run up the motherfucking score."

Sums up my feelings exactly.
posted by Eyebeams at 11:46 AM on September 20, 2012 [22 favorites]

Linda Lingle Joins Other GOP Senate Candidates In Distancing Themselves From Mitt Romney.

"I am not a rubber stamp for the national party and I am not responsible for the statements of Mitt Romney," Lingle said in an email. "With that said, I do not agree with his characterization of all individuals who are receiving government assistance, as I know many of them are driven, hard-working individuals who are actively working to better the situation of their ‘ohana. It is not fair to place these individuals into any one category.

Man, Mitt is screwing up royally. The 47% thing is really starting to eat away his chances. And he just seems to not know how to apologize or concede that was a bad thing to think, and say. Thank you to whoever recorded the video. I think in the coming weeks as the pressure builds and as Mitt has to simultaneously extremely disciplined while trying to wait for the perfect time to swing his haymaker with the billions in money the Republicans have, he's going to crack. He just doesn't seem built for this. Him and Ann just want to rush through it, and the day to day toll these last days are going to take on him might just make him wilt.
posted by cashman at 11:48 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Brad Delong - Mitt's dad, in 1964, explaining why he could not support the modern Republican party

You were just about to take a position on the 1964 Civil Rights Act contrary to that of most elected Republicans… there were disturbing indications that your strategists proposed to make an all-out push for the Southern white segregationist vote and to attempt to exploit the so-called "white backlash" in the North….
[...]
My testimony specifically urged… that the platform pledge Federal, state, local, and individual action to promote the civil rights of all Americans… the repudiation of extremists who might attach themselves to the party….
[...]
The real challenge for us lies in the expansion of vote support for the Republican party in all parts of the country, urban or rural, North or South, colored or white. Without common dedication to this fundamental, our rehash of 1964 positions may become of interest only to historians of defunct political institutions…

Tactically maybe wrong but morally (and I'd say strategically) right? It's intensely sad that this exact thing is still relevant. It'd be nice to see Mitt address this, but at this point, letting down the old man's legacy is probably pretty far down the list of his worries.
posted by hap_hazard at 11:50 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Again, if we have any people who grew up in Latino culture, they can probably give a more fine-grained and comprehensive summary — I don't wanna whitesplain somebody else's history — but from the folks I've talked to, that's a broad strokes accurate retelling.

If you were directing that at me, yes, yes you are. But I guess I don't count at being accurately aware of history, since, you know, my family has voted Republican consistently since we got here, with the exception of me.

VA patients received about two-thirds of the care recommended by national standards, compared with about half in the national sample.

Deanc - I would be curious to see what that national sample is. I suspect that it is lower than some plans, given that it appears to be made up of randomly selected individuals in the same age group rather than a side-by-side comparison with some of the better plans. And that's the problem, right? Veterans, who were contractually promised that in exchange for them fighting everyone's wars for them, all of their health care needs would be taken care of, are not getting adequate care. 70% of the care recommended is not adequate care, regardless of whether it is better than a random sampling of individuals.
posted by corb at 11:51 AM on September 20, 2012

Really, Schumer? Really?

To be fair, TPM's headline on the blog post pointing to this article is "Yeah, Right."
posted by spitbull at 11:54 AM on September 20, 2012

ericb

Romney Embraces ‘Grandfather Of Obamacare’ Title: ‘I’ll Take It’.

I'll be interested to gauge the conservative reaction to that.

There was a minor conservative blow-up over a lesser overture by a surrogate less than a month ago, if I remember correctly, but I'm guessing that Romney's foreign policy and messaging failures have put him so thoroughly on the ropes now that the Republican talking skulls will give him a pass.
posted by The Confessor at 11:54 AM on September 20, 2012

70% of recommended care would make my day, seeing as how I'm young poor and uninsured with a heart condition. But whatevs. I will stick with my 0% until someone decides to make this country admirable again.
posted by lazaruslong at 11:55 AM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

Whoosh.
posted by Eyebeams at 11:57 AM on September 20, 2012

Considering that a majority of VA patients are still men, the fact that the VA sharply exceeds the private health insurance market (which, remember, includes those without it driving up costs) at providing preventative health care is nothing short of miraculous, actually.
posted by spitbull at 11:58 AM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

corb: "Deanc - I would be curious to see what that national sample is. I suspect that it is lower than some plans, given that it appears to be made up of randomly selected individuals in the same age group rather than a side-by-side comparison with some of the better plans. "

Why should we be comparing the VA to "the better plans" to find out if the VHA is good or bad? You said the VHA sucks based primarily on some high-profile suicides. Given that all but the most expensive private plans offer terrible mental health coverage, comparing the VA to just the better private plans is stacking the deck in favor of your desired outcome. This is precisely why you do random sampling.

Better plans cost more, while the VHA gets by on a shoestring budget. Your sources for how bad the VA is are based on anecdotes. Studies show that the VHA provides some of the best care in America, and that it consistently ranks higher than private plans and even Medicare for patient satisfaction. If we were adequately funding the VHA, they would have money to provide proper mental health care, but we're not, yet it still provides better care than the average person gets with private plans.
posted by tonycpsu at 12:03 PM on September 20, 2012 [13 favorites]

For reasons we can also chalk up to 8 years of Republican malfeasance, unfortunately the VA population is incredibly highly prone to suicide and mental illness.

Gee, I wonder why that is?
posted by spitbull at 12:05 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

The correct comparsion between the VA and private healthcare would be dollar for dollar, in terms of the cost of the coverage.
posted by unSane at 12:08 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Some have noticed that Romney went a little, er, heavy on the bronzer for this event. Probably a coincidence. Or the lighting.

Romney's the least convincing faux Latino since Charlton Heston in Touch of Evil.
posted by kirkaracha at 12:08 PM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

And I repeat, to no answer, as opposed to what? I'm ok with putting every veteran on a cadillac version of a private health plan, and I mean the very best -- let's say what members of congress get, along with special provisions for the particular health risks of being a member of the armed forces.

You realize that would cost orders of magnitude more than the VA does, right? Even than a properly funded VA.
posted by spitbull at 12:10 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh, AND that they would get worse health care overall in an overburdened private system?
posted by spitbull at 12:13 PM on September 20, 2012

Let's go review the "contract" you signed. Section 9.5b states

b. Laws and regulations that govern military personnel may change without notice to me. Such changes may affect my status, pay, allowances, benefits, and responsibilities as a member of the Armed Forces REGARDLESS of the provisions of this enlistment/ reenlistment document.

If the contract is the thing that binds us to an obligation, then we have none. You were paid for your service and time for a job you did and everything else we have done for you is an act of charity.
posted by humanfont at 12:15 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

"If you were directing that at me, yes, yes you are. But I guess I don't count at being accurately aware of history, since, you know, my family has voted Republican consistently since we got here, with the exception of me. "

What are you on about? I mean, I don't generally think of you as accurately aware of history because you demonstrate no real grasp of it, but if there are things in my longer comment that you'd like to correct, feel free.
posted by klangklangston at 12:17 PM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

Studies show that the VHA provides some of the best care in America, and that it consistently ranks higher than private plans and even Medicare for patient satisfaction.

Again, these studies do not show that the VHA provides the best care - the study cited here is versus Medicare, which also doesn't give very good healthcare. Which is why most of the best doctors won't take Medicare or even the active duty healthcare, Tricare.

I'm ok with putting every veteran on a cadillac version of a private health plan, and I mean the very best -- let's say what members of congress get, along with special provisions for the particular health risks of being a member of the armed forces.
You realize that would cost orders of magnitude more than the VA does, right? Even than a properly funded VA

So maybe let's stop getting involved in unnecessary wars, and only handle things that actually matter for defense of the nation? I'd be willing to bet that would bring down VA costs quite a good bit.

If the contract is the thing that binds us to an obligation, then we have none.

Sure - the laws may change. That's fine. But the laws haven't changed. Nor have the promises. In fact, Obama has gone on consistently about how committed he is to providing the best possible care to veterans. (So, for that matter, has everyone else.) But that care is not being provided.
posted by corb at 12:19 PM on September 20, 2012

So maybe let's stop getting involved in unnecessary wars

I believe that goes directly against the Romney campaign's goals, no?
posted by palomar at 12:21 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

GOP Senate candidate cites Romney for bad poll numbers

A new poll out of Wisconsin this week shows Republican Senate candidate Tommy Thompson suddenly falling behind in his race against Democrat Tammy Baldwin.

Thompson is blaming the slip, in part, on the rocky campaign of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney.

Delicious.
posted by syzygy at 12:26 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Again, these studies do not show that the VHA provides the best care

Again, where's your proof?

the study cited here is versus Medicare, which also doesn't give very good healthcare

Same question. Evidence of the level of care in Medicare and Medicaid has been provided. You've done nothing to refute this except post anecdata and a few stories about suicides of veterans (without, I might add, noting the large numbers of people who commit suicide due to poor or no care from the free market).

Which is why most of the best doctors won't take Medicare or even the active duty healthcare, Tricare.

No, a lot of the "best" doctors don't take those because they don't get enormous levels of compensation like they're used to with private insurers.

So maybe let's stop getting involved in unnecessary wars, and only handle things that actually matter for defense of the nation? I'd be willing to bet that would bring down VA costs quite a good bit.

Agreed. But this is not on Romney or most GOP politicians-not-named-Ron-Paul's list of things to do (or not do, as the case may be).

Sure - the laws may change. That's fine. But the laws haven't changed. Nor have the promises. In fact, Obama has gone on consistently about how committed he is to providing the best possible care to veterans. (So, for that matter, has everyone else.) But that care is not being provided.

He can't do anything about it when the GOP kills funding for said care.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:27 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

http://gawker.com/5944931/mitt-romney-dyed-his-face-brown-to-appeal-to-latino-voters
posted by ninjew at 12:30 PM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

The "Mitt dyed is face" stuff is kinda silly, and 99% not true.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:31 PM on September 20, 2012

Republicans will buck Tea Party if Obama wins.

Really, Schumer? Really?

Here, let me hold this football, and you can run up and kick it, OK?

Ha, I read Schumer's statement as sly ... sowing seeds of dissension and suspicion in a group that is already starting to claw and bite at each other. This may well further the fish eye they are all giving each other right now. Any dem who trusts anyone in this current crop of characters is just nuts, anyone decent left the field or was booted out. The republican incumbents? They've salted the earth they walk on.
posted by madamjujujive at 12:33 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

A comment in that gawker article has a closeup of the makeup line.
posted by annsunny at 12:35 PM on September 20, 2012

Deanc - I would be curious to see what that national sample is. I suspect that it is lower than some plans, given that it appears to be made up of randomly selected individuals in the same age group rather than a side-by-side comparison with some of the better plans.

There was a large outcry when Congress attempted to change the laws so that veterans eligible for VA care would have to first resort to using their own private insurance before using the VA. My reaction was, "that makes sense. What's the big deal?" And then I realized that, unlike for me, most people's health coverage plans suck, and the VA was preferable for them.
posted by deanc at 12:35 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

I don't get it, why don't veterans avoid the VA and just turn to the free market if the VA is so horrible?
posted by leopard at 12:35 PM on September 20, 2012 [7 favorites]

Wow, Dave Eggers has balls.

For reference, that would be 90 Days, 90 Reasons entry #43 "by Mitt Romney."
posted by psoas at 12:36 PM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

A comment in that gawker article has a closeup of the makeup line.

Sorry, that doesn't look like anything to me.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:37 PM on September 20, 2012

Wow, Dave Eggers has balls.

How is that ballsy? Everyone has been piling on Mitt for that, including some Republicans.
posted by deanc at 12:38 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Look at his neck. There is skin toward the back that is lighter, and a fairly non-blended line of darker skin. It could be photoshopped, but that is not a lighting trick.
posted by annsunny at 12:39 PM on September 20, 2012

Romney Still in Hot Water After reading GOP Platform Verbatim

God bless the Onion.
posted by codacorolla at 12:39 PM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

Click on the image, and it turns into a headshot where you can see the color differential.
posted by joyceanmachine at 12:40 PM on September 20, 2012

annsunny beat me to it, but yeah -- I see a pretty clear line of demarcation. Reminds me of a lady I worked with who liked to wear her foundation about three shades too dark, to achieve a more tan look. Not cute.
posted by palomar at 12:40 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

image in question
posted by palomar at 12:41 PM on September 20, 2012

I clicked the image. It looks like he’s wearing makeup for TV.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:42 PM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

I'll give Romney the benefit of the doubt on Brownfacegate, but this isn't a trick of the light. There's something there. Either he overdid the bronzer or his makeup artist did a really crappy job.
posted by Faint of Butt at 12:43 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

So maybe let's stop getting involved in unnecessary wars, and only handle things that actually matter for defense of the nation?

What things only matter for the defense of our nation? Just protect our borders and not project any power or influence around the world? This seems to betray an incredible naivete. I wonder what the world would be like if the US really only handled the defense of itself. No involvement in WWI or WWII. No nuclear navy. Let Russia and China do whatever they want around the world; it's not our business to be the world's policeman. I suspect it wouldn't be very long before we were in a very poor position to protect our nation at all. Not that Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan seem to have been very good ideas. Perhaps North Korea and the cold war have not worked out as badly so far.

(William F) Buckley consistently maintained that conservatism was the “politics of reality.” Needless to say, it is not a keen grasp of reality that distinguishes the politics of the Tea Party.
posted by Golden Eternity at 12:44 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

How is that ballsy?

Oh, now I get it. Went over my head for a moment.
posted by deanc at 12:44 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

early voting is nearly upon us. Tomorrow ID and SD (ho hum), next week IA (9/27), and OH starts on Oct 5th.
Absentee ballots already coming in NC (and HI).. in 2008 56% of NC ballots where cast either by absentee or in early voting. By Oct 1st 30 states will have begun either in-person or absentee voting. Early voting accounted for 30% of the national vote in 2008. FL, more than half of the votes were cast before Election Day.

So, when I said up-thread that the air war is nearly reached the peak of effectiveness and now is the time for the ground game, yeah that applies. Kind of a bad time to suffer poor news cycles.
posted by edgeways at 12:46 PM on September 20, 2012

corb: " Again, these studies do not show that the VHA provides the best care - the study cited here is versus Medicare, which also doesn't give very good healthcare.

I guess you read down to the fifth paragraph, but didn't quite get to the sixth and seventh?

Here's another curious fact. The Annals of Internal Medicine recently published a study that compared veterans health facilities with commercial managed-care systems in their treatment of diabetes patients. In seven out of seven measures of quality, the VA provided better care.

It gets stranger. Pushed by large employers who are eager to know what they are buying when they purchase health care for their employees, an outfit called the National Committee for Quality Assurance today ranks health-care plans on 17 different performance measures. These include how well the plans manage high blood pressure or how precisely they adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine such as prescribing beta blockers for patients recovering from a heart attack. Winning NCQA's seal of approval is the gold standard in the health-care industry. And who do you suppose this year's winner is: Johns Hopkins? Mayo Clinic? Massachusetts General? Nope. In every single category, the VHA system outperforms the highest rated non-VHA hospitals.

Which is why most of the best doctors won't take Medicare or even the active duty healthcare, Tricare. "

Can I get a cite for that? There are certainly some doctors who avoid government-funded health plans because the payout rates are lower, but I've seen no evidence that this is widespread, or has had a measurable effect on the care provided.
posted by tonycpsu at 12:48 PM on September 20, 2012 [13 favorites]

> So maybe let's stop getting involved in unnecessary wars, and only handle things that actually matter for defense of the nation?

What things only matter for the defense of our nation? Just protect our borders and not project any power or influence around the world? This seems to betray an incredible naivete.

I think there's a BIT more nuance you could read into the "unnecessary wars" statement to be more charitable. Questioning the legitimacy of the Iraq War does not mean that one is into Wilson-era Isolationism.

How is that ballsy? Oh, now I get it. Went over my head for a moment.

.....It's still going over mine, a bit of help?...
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 12:48 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

.....It's still going over mine, a bit of help?...

Read the other entries. They're essays from individuals explaining their reasons for supporting Obama. #43 is Romney's reasons for supporting Obama.
posted by deanc at 12:51 PM on September 20, 2012

The funniest part of the trouble Romney is having with this whole 47% thing is that the best political course of action for him to take at this point is to follow the example of his opponent.

This is Romney's "Jeremiah Wright" moment, and he should be handling it the way Obama handled that. I'm guessing though, that when Obama gave that speech, folks on the right just plugged their ears and were all "lalalala can't hear you, terrorism, USA! USA!" and missed one of the most effective acts of political Judo in recent history.

The past few weeks have been this wide open opportunity for Mitt Romney to take all the attention focused on him, and use it in his favor. While I'm happy to watch him slowly implode, the politics junkie in me really wanted to see him come out this week with an appeal directly to the American people as to his vision for a less dependent America.

At this point I'm kind of pissed at Romney for not running a better campaign. I wanted to see Obama have to run a really tough race. Obama's a counter-puncher. He's so much better when there's a real fight in front of him, and I think that's the Obama the Dems need this election cycle.
posted by billyfleetwood at 12:51 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

sidequestion: didn't someone link a website where you can update your address information for your voter registration online? i moved within my county in North Carolina recently and want to change my address.
posted by lazaruslong at 12:55 PM on September 20, 2012

No involvement in WWI or WWII.

The US didn't exactly leap with both feet into either of those, you know.
posted by unSane at 12:55 PM on September 20, 2012

Dear God,

If you are listening, please, please convince Romney to go blackface for the debates.

I will never ask you for anything else.

Love,
Secret
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:57 PM on September 20, 2012 [30 favorites]

How is that ballsy? Oh, now I get it. Went over my head for a moment.

Read the other entries. They're essays from individuals explaining their reasons for supporting Obama. #43 is Romney's reasons for supporting Obama.

Hmm, I'm still gonna say less "ballsy" and more "wickedly clever." There's no risk to Eggers from his mostly-lefty readership, but it is an excellent argumentative tactic.
posted by Strange Interlude at 1:00 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

roomthreeseventeen: The "Mitt dyed is face" stuff is kinda silly, and 99% not true.

You sure about that? I watched the interview, and something was CLEARLY going on there. Either he got a seriously weird tan, complete with white circles around his eyes (like from wearing ski goggles or sunglasses), or someone did a horrible job of putting makeup on him.
posted by syzygy at 1:03 PM on September 20, 2012

Obama's anger translator Luther clears everything up.
posted by billyfleetwood at 1:03 PM on September 20, 2012 [7 favorites]

syzygy, I guess I mean it just looks like a bad makeup job.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:05 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

For people interested in improving veterans' benefits, check out the Congressional Report Card from IAVA (Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America).
posted by LobsterMitten at 1:05 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Hmm, I'm still gonna say less "ballsy" and more "wickedly clever."

Ballsy may have been the wrong word choice (although I'm mildly curious whether there's any sort of retaliation possible, or if another essayist was bumped for that stunt), but it grabbed my attention.
posted by psoas at 1:08 PM on September 20, 2012

For people interested in improving veterans' benefits, check out the Congressional Report Card from IAVA (Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America).

Note that it only goes through the 2010 session, although its still informative, since a lot of those folks are still in Congress. For instance, in the Senate, everyone who got an "A" grade was a Democrat, and all but one of the "D" or "F" grades went to Republicans, including known veterans like John McCain and most if not all of the GOP leadership. I haven't cross-checked everyone on the House side, but I'm decently familiar with the names, and it looks to be majority (possibly overwhelmingly) Democrats getting "A" grades and vice-versa for the failing grades, which again include most of the GOP leadership.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:15 PM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

the "Juan Percent" image/comment in that gawker article.. that should be a meme, Internet. make it happen
posted by ninjew at 1:16 PM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

someone did a horrible job of putting makeup on him.

Maybe his makeup artist jumped ship. Or maybe it's a homage to Snooki. I don't think Mitt is quite cynical enough or dumb enough to think that he can pass as a Latino in front of a Latino audience (though given the past week's events I'm not prepared to bet on that).

I gotta say it's remarkable to watch someone who consistently stakes out political positions just this side of anarchy take the government to task for not delivering enough health care.
posted by octobersurprise at 1:17 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Did anyone see The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell last night? There was an amazing sequence where O'Donnell contrasted Bush with Romney. He played a section of Bush's "Compassionate Conservatism" speech of April 30, 2002. (Speech starts at 1:59).

In America, we’ve not always lived up to our ideals, yet we always reached for them. We believe that everyone deserves a chance, that everyone has value, that no insigniﬁ cant person was ever born. We believe that all are diminished when any are hopeless. We are one people, committed to building a single nation of justice and opportunity.
America rejects bigotry. We reject every act of hatred against people of Arab background or Muslim faith. We reject the ancient evil of anti-Semitism, whether it is practiced by the killers of Daniel Pearl, or by those who burn synagogues in France.
America values and welcomes peaceful people of all faiths — Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu and many others. Every faith is practiced and protected here, because we are one country. Every immigrant can be fully and equally American because we’re one country. Race and color should not divide us, because America is one country.
These American ideals of opportunity and equality come to us across the generations. And they have attracted millions from across the world. Yet there are young Americans growing up here, under this ﬂag, who doubt the promise and justice of our country. They
live in neighborhoods occupied by gangs and ruled by fear. They are entitled by law to an education, yet do not receive an education. They hear talk of opportunity and see little evidence of opportunity around them.

Contrast that with what Romney said other night on tape. It is just night and day and that comes from George W. Bush, a complete ass. Romney isn't even up to his level.
posted by Ironmouth at 1:25 PM on September 20, 2012 [16 favorites]

I don't think Mitt is quite cynical enough or dumb enough to think that he can pass as a Latino in front of a Latino audience

At this point I don't want to rule it out. Maybe he thinks if he drops a few hints (My dad came here from Mexico) his audience will be so befuddled that they will pass out and when they wake up in time to vote the only thing they will remember is a brown man whose family from Mexico. Look, I'm not claiming it is a good strategy, just a desperate one.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 1:25 PM on September 20, 2012

Maybe his makeup artist jumped ship.

I like to think that Mitt's handlers at this point know he's a long shot to win at best, and have decided to one up each other in seeing what the craziest thing they can get him to do or say is.
posted by drezdn at 1:32 PM on September 20, 2012 [23 favorites]

Romney said at a Univision forum, adding, “this was during my primary we thought it might not be helpful.”

At this point I'm kind of pissed at Romney for not running a better campaign.

This is another thing I've been thinking about since I first watched the videos. The videos are largely him talking about strategy, strategy, strategy. Things like (paraphrasing) "We're not going to win with this sector or that sector...it'd be easier if I were Latino....We're not using Ann too much....We've tested this message and that message...." This is the language of marketing; he's relating the history and decisions behind his own self-presentation, not articulating his policy positions. He is clearly listening to a lot of campaign advisers - image advisers, profile advisers. He's been heavily handled by his team. "During my primary we thought it might not be helpful" but now you're happy to change the messaging again, because now it might become helpful?

Not only is this all gross in itself, it undermines his central character argument - that he's a strong, savvy business leader. Strong and savvy business leaders, those of them who are really good, don't become tools of their own advisers to this extent. At some point over the last six months, a strong, savvy business leader would take a look or two at a few morning papers, pick up the phone, and fire his whole team for the disservice they've done him. They haven't been effective, and it sounds like he's been happy to just let them mold and shape him - like he's actually been intimidated by his own polling, and super-eager to do and say whatever it is that'll get him the nomination or the office. That's not the mark of a true leader. Only someone in an outcomes-free industry like private equity could possibly succumb to that much groupthink with that many poor underpinnings, and still have as much business success as he's had. And frankly, it's exactly the same thing that brought down John McCain - ultimately, he lacked the courage of his own convictions, and traded his integrity for a chance at the Show. And McCain was made of much better stuff, at heart, than Romney is - but when it came to run for office as if you had a spine of your own, of which you were in control, they both failed.

As for all the other Republicans jumping ship, though I enjoy the spectacle, I have no respect. The things Romney articulated so baldly are the exact principles the party has been pushing and pushing for a decade. They're not some horrifying aberration from the party line - they HAVE been the party line. Only when it seems there is a large and vocal backlash when it's presented plainly, for all to hear, are they pedaling back from this rhetoric. As someone above said, they salted this earth. This mess is theirs to inherit. Romney was not off script for one moment - he just forgot to dress it up as Mom driving a flag-bedecked NASCAR full of apple pie, and without the props, it suddenly became a lot clearer just who Republican policy plans are designed to work for.
posted by Miko at 1:35 PM on September 20, 2012 [42 favorites]

It is just night and day and that comes from George W. Bush, a complete ass. Romney isn't even up to his level.

George W. Bush was in ass in many, many ways, too many to even list, but the one thing I always liked about him was that he seemed to actually, sincerely like individual people of all ages, classes, religions, races, abilities, etc. While I know that the policies he pushed were actively harmful to a lot of people (both on a categorical and an individual level) you never got the sense that he viewed anyone as below him in the sneering way Romney does. Bush may have been a douche but he wasn't a snob.
posted by sallybrown at 1:43 PM on September 20, 2012 [19 favorites]

Just received in my email from Senator Mark Udall:

Dear Fellow Coloradan,

In Colorado, it doesn't have to be Hispanic Heritage Month to notice the positive contributions that Colorado's Hispanic community has made to our great state. This month of recognition provides us with a chance to reflect on how the contributions of Latinos in Colorado have benefited our overall quality of life and how we can collectively celebrate the Hispanic community as a vibrant part of our Colorado family throughout the year.

So, uh, good timing there, I guess, Mitt.
posted by boo_radley at 1:45 PM on September 20, 2012

lazaruslong, I believe the link you're thinking of is CanIVote.com. From there you can follow links to your local voting website to change your address or register. I'm also in NC and I don't believe you can complete the address change on line. There's a online form to fill out, then you print it and drop it in the mail. Still pretty easy!
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 1:47 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

I agree with sallybrown. I save my actual anger and hatred for idea men like Rove and Cheney. W himself was a well-meaning doofus who got in over his head.
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:47 PM on September 20, 2012

W himself was a well-meaning doofus who got in over his head.

Without people willing to play the figurehead, the Cheneys and Roves can't enact their agenda.
posted by Miko at 1:49 PM on September 20, 2012 [9 favorites]

There have been a lot of polls and pundits that talk of Romney getting creamed on Election Day. Now there's whispers of the Democrats either taking back the House or reducing the margins to such an extent they could peel off a few Republicans.

Yet the election is still 50 or so days away and it's inconceivable that Mitt won't learn from many mistakes and do a bit better. I still expect Obama to win and for that to settled on Election night. But Mitt and the GOP are bound to get their act together somehow and close the gap a bit.

I can't literally can not imagine that Mitt will continue bumbling around to this extent. It's impossible. But it would be interesting to be proven wrong
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:50 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

edgewise says: So keep up with the false equivalencies.

This may come as a surprise to you but not everyone who has a different opinion than you is trying to use some logical fallacy to improperly win some sort of battle with you. We simply disagree in how we view things. Here is how I view things:

Podkayne of Pasadena, er you did hear about the Republicans refusing to allow the Veterans Job Bill to advance eh?

Yes I did. What I also heard is that the Democrats have a majority in the Senate which is all that is necessary to pass a bill in the Senate. What the Republicans did was to say - oh we are filing notice that if you try to pass that bill then we wlil filibuster (they did not filibuster they just put out a notice that they would) and the Democrats said "Oh my we can't have that so we'll have to withdraw the bull because what other choice do we have?" And the Democrats now get to say to everyone that the mean old Republicans killed the Veterans jobs Bill ....

But what they could have done instead was to say "Fine! Go ahead and actually filibuster - Play that tune. and we'll all sit in session untill this bill gets passed. No one gets to go home for the weekend. No one gets to go home for Columbus day. No one gets to to do a damn thing until this bill passes or you give up because we thing that our Bets are just that important"

But that's not what they said - or did. Because the truth is that weekends are more important than jobs for Vets and so is campaigning for re-election. What actually happened was a dog and pony show to score political points - and the same thing happened two years ago during Christmas regarding unemployment benefits (because congressional holidays are more important than the unemployed feeding their families) and the same thing happened for dozens of other important bills.

Read my bytes: The Democrats have a simple majority and they can pass any bill that they want to - if they really just put in the time and effort. In the past 4 years not a single filibuster actually happened. The GOP files a notice and the Democrats cave. Dog and pony show. No one - neither party - is actually trying to solve anything in reality

As I said - we simply disagree .
posted by Podkayne of Pasadena at 1:52 PM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

You would think that, but past performance is pretty much the best indicator of future results and the dude's been campaigning since 2007.
posted by TwoWordReview at 1:53 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Miko: when elected officials force a system to fail by underfunding, overburdening, and badly managing it, and then foist those failures off not on their own bad policy decisions and ill intent, but on the fundamental inadequacy of guvmint, they''re being seriously disingenuous and hoping the rest of us aren't dumb enough to notice

And that's no accident. It's the not-so-unspoken Republican strategy since 1980.
posted by Rykey at 1:53 PM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

lazaruslong, I believe the link you're thinking of is CanIVote.com. From there you can follow links to your local voting website to change your address or register. I'm also in NC and I don't believe you can complete the address change on line.

CanIVote.com is a great quick way of seeing whether you are registered (and the details) -- and it's where I direct people when I'm canvassing here in CO. For registration however we direct people to gottaregister.com.
posted by NailsTheCat at 1:59 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Yes I did. What I also heard is that the Democrats have a majority in the Senate which is all that is necessary to pass a bill in the Senate. What the Republicans did was to say - oh we are filing notice that if you try to pass that bill then we wlil filibuster (they did not filibuster they just put out a notice that they would) and the Democrats said "Oh my we can't have that so we'll have to withdraw the bull because what other choice do we have?" And the Democrats now get to say to everyone that the mean old Republicans killed the Veterans jobs Bill ....

That's not actually what happened. The republicans raised a procedural objection that required 60 votes to overrule. They took it to a vote and didn't have the 60 votes. No matter where you stand on the merits of the bill, or the motivation behind it, the Republicans did actually torpedo this one.
posted by billyfleetwood at 2:02 PM on September 20, 2012 [14 favorites]

Sweet, thanks y'all. I just moved within the same city and county in NC and ofc was registered, but I think the address change means my polling station is different and stuff.

Oh goddamn it. Now that I think about it, I still haven't changed my drivers license to reflect the new address, it still has my old one from across town. Sigh.
posted by lazaruslong at 2:03 PM on September 20, 2012

Mitt Romney out of context
posted by madamjujujive at 2:06 PM on September 20, 2012 [15 favorites]

The republicans raised a procedural objection that required 60 votes to overrule.

Thanks - you are (of course) right in this case - just looked it up. IN the past they did it with filibuster and that wasn't the case with this particular bill. I would love to know what this procedural objection was actually about and how valid it really was.
posted by Podkayne of Pasadena at 2:08 PM on September 20, 2012

Obama's anger translator Luther clears everything up.

Giggling at first, then about half way through I started laughing, coughing, choking on my cookies, snorting, clawing at the paper towel to rip off a piece so I wouldn't spit on the keyboard, other people in the room can't hear what they are doing, and I stopped short of crying. SNL is a heartbeat from dead, but long live Key & Peele in this moment. The editing could have been better, but Whoo! 47% is kicking Mitt in the ass.
posted by cashman at 2:10 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

madamjujujive: "Mitt Romney out of context "

omg that's so good
posted by lazaruslong at 2:10 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Once they get a solid and secure spot in the middle class, immigrant cultures integrate and usually become anglophone.

Yes and no. On the one hand, yes, it's true over the course of American history that immigrant ethnic groups are gradually accepted as "white" as the generations pass and they become not immigrants anymore. On the other hand, the US is not nearly as assimilationist as it once was.

I mean, even if you want to stick to talking about Latin-American immigrant culture's effect on mainstream US culture, take a look around. Here in New York -- where Mexican immigrants are not even the dominant Latin culture -- there's a taco stand on every block.
posted by Sara C. at 2:12 PM on September 20, 2012

Just as a quick correction, the URL for checking whether you are registered to vote is CanIVote.org, not .com.
posted by Superplin at 2:12 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

madamjujujive: "Mitt Romney out of context "

Came here to post this. Obama's campaign team seems like they'd be a fun bunch to work with.
posted by Phire at 2:12 PM on September 20, 2012

omg that's so good

And you just know this is laying the groundwork for a potential beatdown at the debates. Mitt may do well, but he may also get got.
posted by cashman at 2:14 PM on September 20, 2012

I also think arguments about how "intelligent" immigrants will eventually see are a little not-cool

Any intelligent person can tell that Republicans use the illegal immigrant issue as a racist dog whistle.
posted by Sara C. at 2:17 PM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

Obama's anger translator Luther clears everything up.

I love how HuffPo makes the word asshole safe for work by spelling it assh*ole. I like Key and Peele quite a bit.
posted by jessamyn at 2:19 PM on September 20, 2012

omg that's so good

Holy crap, that should be on TV.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 2:21 PM on September 20, 2012

And you just know this is laying the groundwork for a potential beatdown at the debates. Mitt may do well, but he may also get got.

Slugfest: This year’s presidential debates could have as decisive an effect on the election outcome as any since 1980, if not 1960. Mitt Romney brings formidable advantages to the contests—but he has one big weakness that President Obama can exploit.
posted by homunculus at 2:21 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

it's true over the course of American history that immigrant ethnic groups are gradually accepted as "white" as the generations pass and they become not immigrants anymore.

Yes, see Italians. As someone said on an AV Club Sopranos thread in response to someone else, "If you consider Italians white, you're not a very good racist."
posted by sweetkid at 2:22 PM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

Bit of a sideline, but here in MA, Elizabeth Warren is debating Scott Brown tonight at 7 pm est. It will be live on C-SPAN or online at cbsboston.com.
posted by madamjujujive at 2:22 PM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

Harry Reid suspended Senatorial business for the day so Brown would not have an excuse to not show up.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid interrupted proceedings on the Senate floor to announce there would be no more votes Thursday afternoon because he thinks Republicans were fixing the schedule to allow Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) to use evening votes as an excuse to get out of a debate with Elizabeth Warren.

posted by edgeways at 2:26 PM on September 20, 2012 [13 favorites]

Scott Brown, vote for me. I'm handsome and alive

I have no idea what the context of that is, but it is hilarious.
posted by madamjujujive at 2:27 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Harry Reid suspended Senatorial business for the day so Brown would not have an excuse to not show up.

Good ol' Harry! I get the feeling he's enjoying this election.
posted by TwoWordReview at 2:29 PM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

The New Price of American Politics: Not since the Gilded Age has our politics been opened so wide to corporate contributions and donations from secret sources. And the new era of big money has just begun. Jim Bopp, its intellectual architect, believes this is a good thing—the more money, the better, he says. Reformers (and most voters) disagree. Their battle is over the most-basic ideas of our democracy; at stake—according to both sides—is either the revitalization of politics, or its final capture by the powerful.
posted by homunculus at 2:35 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

mmmBopp Bopp Bopp.
posted by futz at 2:41 PM on September 20, 2012

In the past 4 years not a single filibuster actually happened. The GOP files a notice and the Democrats cave. Dog and pony show. No one - neither party - is actually trying to solve anything in reality

Please read the Senate rules before making statements that are not reality-based. The process is the reverse. Every bill has a cloture vote. The notice is filed by the Majority leader, not the Republicans. Then there is a cloture vote. Yesterday, every Republican voted against cloture. The bill can't be brought to the floor.
posted by Ironmouth at 2:42 PM on September 20, 2012 [15 favorites]

Key and Peele are not available in Canada. That HuffPo "exclusive" video is actually coming from Comedy Central, and the Comedy Network has only a handful of K&P online. Fuck you, CTV.
posted by maudlin at 2:43 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Yes I did. What I also heard is that the Democrats have a majority in the Senate which is all that is necessary to pass a bill in the Senate...Read my bytes: The Democrats have a simple majority and they can pass any bill that they want to - if they really just put in the time and effort.

This is false.

In the past 4 years not a single filibuster actually happened. The GOP files a notice and the Democrats cave. Dog and pony show. No one - neither party - is actually trying to solve anything in reality

This is not what has actually been happening in the last 4 years.

What the Republicans did was to say - oh we are filing notice that if you try to pass that bill then we wlil filibuster (they did not filibuster they just put out a notice that they would) and the Democrats said "Oh my we can't have that so we'll have to withdraw the bull because what other choice do we have?" And the Democrats now get to say to everyone that the mean old Republicans killed the Veterans jobs Bill

This is not the actual series of events.

But what they could have done instead was to say "Fine! Go ahead and actually filibuster - Play that tune. and we'll all sit in session untill this bill gets passed. No one gets to go home for the weekend. No one gets to go home for Columbus day. No one gets to to do a damn thing until this bill passes or you give up because we thing that our Bets are just that important"

Again, this is not how it works.
posted by zombieflanders at 2:44 PM on September 20, 2012 [25 favorites]

mmmBopp Bopp Bopp.

JIMINY BOPP!
posted by homunculus at 2:46 PM on September 20, 2012

Again, this is not how it works.

And the Republicans have been counting on American's ignorance about how this system works to make the Democrats and President look ineffectual.
posted by Joey Michaels at 2:47 PM on September 20, 2012 [7 favorites]

Podkayne of Pasadena, after thinking about it, I think I am going to stick by what I said. I'm really not trying to "win" the argument and you are fundamentally right in that we basically disagree. Again... I would not contend that Democrats are innocent as driven snow, or have not done nasty, counter productive things (just look at Kaine's recent comments regarding taxing the 47%), but for the love of dog, if you really think the two parties are exactly equal, that Obama and Romney are twins of thought and intent yes... yes I gotta say it is a false equivalency. We do not live in the Mr. Smith goes to Washington universe, cloture and filibuster is not just some magical things that can be overcome without Senate rule changes, which are typically done at the start of the congressional session.

Now if you want to make the case that Reid should have pushed to change the rules to remove the amount of power cloture has, I'm right there with you 100% but it wasn't done, and there are actually good argument as to why we should think carefully before doing so. I use to not be in favor of the idea, but the sheer abuse over the last four years has changed my mind.

be well
posted by edgeways at 2:57 PM on September 20, 2012

And the Republicans have been counting on American's ignorance about how this system works to make the Democrats and President look ineffectual.

Oh God I'm snarking on my own comment, but I reread it and need to point out that making the Democrats look ineffectual is something they need no help doing. Thank you, here 'til Tuesday.
posted by Joey Michaels at 3:01 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Jscalzi on being poor.
posted by Artw at 3:02 PM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

Good quote pairing

Romney 9/2012:

I can change Washington, I will change Washington. We'll get the job from the inside. Republicans and Democrats will come together.

Romney 2007:

I don't think you change Washington from the inside. I think you change it from the outside.
posted by edgeways at 3:03 PM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

Glad to see some money lining up against the odious Allen West. I'm throwing a few dollars to his opponent, Patrick Murphy. West and Illinois' Joe Walsh - please, please, please voters, kick these creeps out. I beg you.
posted by madamjujujive at 3:03 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

And the Republicans have been counting on American's ignorance about how this system works to make the Democrats and President look ineffectual.

It's a pity that ignorance about how they system works (and fails to work) is pretty much equally widespread on the left and the right. The number of outraged Democrats who seem to think that all it takes to get an Act through Congress is sheer willpower and that consequently the failure to pass certain legislation is proof of nothing but a lack of conviction never ceases to amaze me. You'd think if you cared enough about the issues to feel so outraged you'd care enough to do some cursory research into how Congress actually works.
posted by yoink at 3:03 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

This article is a prime example of the insane levels of cognitive dissonance that runs rampant in the republican party. Yes, this article is about Michele Bachmann but it could be about any of them. You can click if you want but this is the whole thing:

Bachmann Ads Blast Stimulus, Tout Stimulus Projects

Rep. Michele Bachmann is in trouble. Despite the fact that her newly redrawn Minnesota congressional district is even more conservative than it was when she was re-elected by 12 points two years ago, a recent internal poll shows the tea party icon leading Democratic hotel magnate Jim Graves by just two points. With that in mind, she's on the airwaves with her first television and radio ads of the cycle. The television spot is an extended dig at Graves' support for the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. As the narrator puts it, "Big spendin' Jim supported the wasteful, trillion-dollar stimulus!"

The stimulus wasn't $1 trillion as the ad suggests; it was $831 billion. But that's not what's interesting. In a radio ad, Bachmann takes a much different approach. As Dump Bachmann points out, most of the ad's 60 seconds is spent discussing all of the awesome things that have been built in her district because of federal funding Bachmann helped secure. The kicker: Bachmann sought hundreds of millions of dollars in stimulus funding for one of the projects she touts in her ad, and another project was completed thanks to an ARRA grant.

"Congressman Bachmann helped re-open the St. Cloud airport," one narrator says. "Working together with local leaders, Michele helped save the airport and keep our area open for business and commerce." The St. Cloud airport, which had been shuttered for a few years after a major carrier left, did reopen for commercial flights in 2012. But it had some help from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act that Bachmann voted against and knocks Graves for supporting. As the Freedom Foundation of Minnesota, a conservative group, noted, "St. Cloud received $750,000 in federal stimulus funding to assist with a portion of the renovation..." With Bachmann's help, it received another $750,000 through a Small Community Air Service Development Program grant—this despite being panned as wasteful by conservatives in Bachmann's own state.

Bachmann's signature legislative accomplishment, which is likewise touted in the ad, is the congressional authorization of a new bridge connecting her hometown of Stillwater to Houlton, Wisconsin, pop. 386. (Critics have compared the proposed bridge to the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere," noting that Stillwater and Houlton are already connected by a bridge, and there's an interstate bridge 10 minutes south.) As the ad puts it, "Michele worked with both parties to cut Washington's red tape to build the new St. Croix bridge. Once built, Michele will have helped every person using the bridge to get to work and to school and to get home." Bachmann sought $300 million in federal stimulus funding for the the new bridge, which has a $700 million price tag. The project was one of six projects Bachmann wrote to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood to request funding for (her request was denied).

But lest you think Bachmann has undergone some sort of miracle transformation, here's an excerpt from a fundraising email she just blasted out:

In 10 days, we must close our financial books and report our fundraising numbers and, unfortunately, we are still short of our fundraising goals by more than $376,000. This is a deficit that we MUST overcome—in the face of senseless attacks from a ruthless opponent, we can't afford to leave any stone unturned.

This is the shit that they shovel into the willing mouths of americans every minute of the day and it has served them well. I'd despair but I am too angry.
posted by futz at 3:04 PM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

I agree with John Stewart that this classic clip nails the far right conservative mindset.
posted by Joey Michaels at 3:08 PM on September 20, 2012 [7 favorites]

Personally, I think he’s a kind, decent man who says stupid things because he is pretending to be something he is not — some sort of cartoonish government-hater. But it scarcely matters. He’s running a depressingly inept presidential campaign. Mr. Romney, your entitlement reform ideas are essential, but when will the incompetence stop? - David Brooks in tomorrow's NYTimes.

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." - Kurt Vonnegut
posted by krinklyfig at 3:17 PM on September 20, 2012 [21 favorites]

Homer Simpson votes Romney
posted by madamjujujive at 3:20 PM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

Anybody else faintly amused by the TPM ad "You wake up in an empty cell -- what do you fear" inadvertently juxtaposed with photos of Romney?
posted by angrycat at 3:22 PM on September 20, 2012

Artw: "Jscalzi on being poor."

The comments on that article are hilarious in a weep-for-humanity sort of way. "If Obama really cared about the poor, he would resign and let Romney take over and fix the economy!"

So that he can laugh at you some more?
posted by Phire at 3:24 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

corb: "Have you ever experienced VA care? It is awful. "

Miko: And even if it were, which it objectively isn't, it's yet so, so much better than the no care at all that so many Americans are being asked to happily settle for.

"No care at all" is what they've earned, I gather from corb's previous assertions that health care should be earned (eg by serving in the military), and that hospitals should be allowed to turn people away.

Of course, it shouldn't have to be pointed out that that position leads to lots of peoples' unnecessarily premature and painful deaths. But hey, according to "I earned it / You didn't" rationalizations, premature painful deaths are presumably a necessary consequence of priorities. Avoid the possibility of getting mooched off of, at all costs! Too bad about any collateral damage. One must protect one's right to judge which people are deserving beneficiaries of one's time and work, and which aren't.
posted by cybercoitus interruptus at 3:25 PM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

Oh God I'm snarking on my own comment, but I reread it and need to point out that making the Democrats look ineffectual is something they need no help doing. Thank you, here 'til Tuesday.

Exhalations to your chosen deity do not detract from the pathetic lameness of your snark. Even PJ O'Rourke cringed when he read it. Seriously he is sitting next to me on a plane. I showed him...he cringed.
posted by humanfont at 3:25 PM on September 20, 2012

humanfront, In my defense, "Thank you, here 'til Tuesday" is the universal acknowledgement of recognition of lameness of one's own snark. I couldn't stop myself. Its a compulsion.
posted by Joey Michaels at 3:27 PM on September 20, 2012

Even PJ O'Rourke cringed when he read it. Seriously he is sitting next to me on a plane.

tell him to pony up 5 bucks so we can all cringe
posted by pyramid termite at 3:36 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Yeah, call off the dogs, humanfont. This ain't exactly Last Comic Standing.
posted by Atom Eyes at 3:38 PM on September 20, 2012

The comments on that article are hilarious in a weep-for-humanity sort of way. "If Obama really cared about the poor, he would resign and let Romney take over and fix the economy!"

@scalzi I showed Krissy the story and she started scrolling down into the comments. I screamed "NOOOOOOOOOOOO" and leapt for the iPad.
posted by zombieflanders at 3:41 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

The New Price of American Politics: Not since the Gilded Age has our politics been opened so wide to corporate contributions and donations from secret sources.

It's stupid but my first thought looking at that photo of Colbert talking with his lawyer was 'I wonder if he's still in character?'
posted by Anything at 3:43 PM on September 20, 2012

Romney: "47% of Americans have never really looked at their hands."
posted by octobersurprise at 3:50 PM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

Putting Mitt Romney's words into Lucille Bluth's mouth
posted by The Whelk at 3:51 PM on September 20, 2012 [15 favorites]

And the Republicans have been counting on American's ignorance about how this system works to make the Democrats and President look ineffectual.

To be fair, the Democrats have looked ineffectual because they are less effectual. They have not been as able (bold, coordinated, sure of media friendliness) to adopt some of the procedural tactics that the GOP has employed. The dems did not have the 9/11 tail wind, and the GOP has been really skilled at running to the media and crying foul/treason when things don't go their way. And of course, because the GOP enjoys the perception that somehow they are not part of government, when government fails ,even when they deliberately make it fail, that actually fits into their narrative.

The dems have been trying to be the party of "holy shit we're just trying to do reasonable things, but look at these impossible dumbfucks we have to deal with." This hasn't worked well until the Tea Party (+fear of a black preznit) broke the GOP's message discipline and let the crazy stupid evil spill out into the light.
posted by fleacircus at 3:51 PM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

I hate getting sucked into tubes.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 3:53 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

I agree with John Stewart that this classic clip nails the far right conservative mindset.

Zeek Braverman would be highly disappointed, Craig!!!
posted by sallybrown at 3:53 PM on September 20, 2012

Oh man, he really did bronze himself for Univision, thought y'all were having a jest.
posted by angrycat at 4:02 PM on September 20, 2012

angrycat: You should watch the whole interview - toward the end, he donned a sombrero, mounted a burro, stuck a mustache on and had Paul Ryan, dressed as a Mexican wrestler, join him on stage for support: http://i.imgur.com/8Lgzn.jpg
posted by syzygy at 4:06 PM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

The comments on that article are hilarious in a weep-for-humanity sort of way. "If Obama really cared about the poor, he would resign and let Romney take over and fix the economy!"

The very first comment I saw was one calling for the sterilization of a "generation or two" of the poor, which... I just... buh. I don't even, on so many levels.
posted by palomar at 4:08 PM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

@syzygy, good thing i wasnt drinking anything when i saw that XD

Mittinflas y el Ryanico Enmascarado
posted by liza at 4:17 PM on September 20, 2012

Oh sure, you gotta sterilize them for at least 2 generations because those people breed like rabbits. Magical rabbits.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:17 PM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

Not only is this all gross in itself, it undermines his central character argument - that he's a strong, savvy business leader. Strong and savvy business leaders, those of them who are really good, don't become tools of their own advisers to this extent. ... Romney was not off script for one moment - he just forgot to dress it up as Mom driving a flag-bedecked NASCAR full of apple pie, and without the props, it suddenly became a lot clearer just who Republican policy plans are designed to work for.

I think I rather believe he's doing what comes natural to him.

There's a good reason there's a shortage of case studies that show successful business people running the country.

The mission of being a partner at Bain, or any large company, is so radically different from managing a country, so it shouldn't be a surprise that Romney's failing at evening running a presidential campaign. Bain's mission was less about creating jobs, and more about enriching Bain. If jobs came (or went) along the way, so be it. But like any other similar company, the goal was always about maximizing payouts for Bain, period.

The mission at Bain was to make money and lots of it. So a cold-hearted focus on money, not people (something that Romney excels at) was an asset, if not a pre-requisite for the job. Romney didn't need to listen to the little people in order to run Bain successfully, and he didn't have to care about them. In the end, it was all about making money for Bain and himself. He called the shots and there was no need to incorporate other views into his plans.

Running for office is completely different. Romney is now showing how little he understands about working with, and listening to, and caring about everyone, even the little people.

His general outlook on people that proved so successful in business jives with the GOP's attitude about business. But as you said, the party builds an entire mythology of ideas around it. For Mitt, it's just business. It's probably his sole instinct when it comes to achieving and maintaining power.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 4:23 PM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

Homer Simpson votes Romney

From '08: "This doesn't happen in America! Maybe Ohio, but not in America!"
posted by Rhaomi at 4:24 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

NEVER READ THE COMMENTS.
posted by Artw at 4:24 PM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

Exterminate the poor, but not eat them, because we are good God-fearing Americans and He wouldn't be down with that last bit. First part is on, though!
posted by angrycat at 4:32 PM on September 20, 2012

Mitt definitely went for more color in recent days. I just looked through hundreds of Reuters photos. But lots of candidates have bad makeup days. Sometimes the lip coloring in particular makes them look ridiculous. I'm sure looking pasty wouldn't really help his case, so it's a win-win. Looking at pictures from Virginia from a week ago, he definitely didn't have that bronzer caked on back then. Beyonce & Queen Latifah have both gotten criticized for whitening up for magazine covers. Mitt is trying to look darker to appeal to nonwhites?

...

Ahahahahahaha! It's offensive, but at some level, it's awesome that this rich white asshole is on some level, even if it is his handlers, thinking "I can't go there looking super white". Welcome to the world where your skin color is something you have to think about before showing up. Hahahahaha!
posted by cashman at 4:33 PM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

Mitts natural skin color - is it a robots silver or a moneyish green?
posted by Artw at 4:37 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Gold standard yellow
posted by edgeways at 4:38 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Not only is this all gross in itself, it undermines his central character argument - that he's a strong, savvy business leader....

I think I rather believe he's doing what comes natural to him.

Headline in the link: The skills that made Romney a successful CEO would make him a terrible president

The mission of being a partner at Bain, or any large company, is so radically different from managing a country, so it shouldn't be a surprise that Romney's failing at evening running a presidential campaign. Bain's mission was less about creating jobs, and more about enriching Bain. If jobs came (or went) along the way, so be it. But like any other similar company, the goal was always about maximizing payouts for Bain, period.

The mission at Bain was to make money and lots of it. So a cold-hearted focus on money, not people (something that Romney excels at) was an asset, if not a pre-requisite for the job. Romney didn't need to listen to the little people in order to run Bain successfully, and he didn't have to care about them. In the end, it was all about making money for Bain and himself. He called the shots and there was no need to incorporate other views into his plans.

Emphasis theirs.

This kills me about people who talk about successful business people and running the country, or even running a state. The government, by design, provides service in ways that businesses do not. The government is not in the role of making money for and from its improvements, but facilitating civilization. People pay into government to provide goods and services that businesses generally don't cover, or if they cover, they're trying to maximize profits instead of support all providers. Government might not always be the most efficient, but there's much less likely to start ratcheting up costs because it has a monopoly on the service.
posted by filthy light thief at 4:38 PM on September 20, 2012 [19 favorites]

Mitt is part chameleon. He'll turn whatever color he needs to.
posted by perhapses at 4:39 PM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

Exterminate the poor, but not eat them,

Indeed, have you seen what they eat? All my Poors are raised locally on an organic diet of nuts and oats and free to roam around the enclosure.
posted by The Whelk at 4:41 PM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

Requires shaking.
posted by Artw at 4:42 PM on September 20, 2012

This kills me about people who talk about successful business people and running the country, or even running a state. The government, by design, provides service in ways that businesses do not.

This, right here, is what's going to be the undoing of the GOP this year. Their philosophy is not tenable, and it proves more apparent all the time.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 4:42 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Or so I hope it will to more voters at least.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 4:43 PM on September 20, 2012

My favorite line from the ‘Chaos On Bullshit Mountain’: "You're looking and hearing the cynical and condescending plutocratic words he was saying, not the aspirational optimistic message he, in retrospect, should have been meaning. It's like Romney Jazz, it's the words you don't hear!"

Conservative two-steppin' to that crazy Romney Jazz.
posted by filthy light thief at 4:46 PM on September 20, 2012 [7 favorites]

Out today, NBC/Marist Obama +8 IA, +5 in both CO and WI
posted by edgeways at 4:47 PM on September 20, 2012

I'm ignoring polls just yet, for my own sanity. Otherwise, I start feeling like a day trader tracking the peaks and troughs of stock prices. 46 days isn't a lot, but it's enough for more upsets.

OK, I might peak at polls after the debates are done. Maybe.
posted by filthy light thief at 4:52 PM on September 20, 2012

In other news: Wall Street Rolling Back Another Key Piece of Financial Reform
posted by homunculus at 5:03 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Follow-up to bookend my comment above (for future reference), Huffington Post is beginning to top out on this story comments-wise at 170K+ [9/20/2012 8:07PM EST].
posted by Skygazer at 5:06 PM on September 20, 2012

Showoffs.
posted by Orange Pamplemousse at 5:21 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

Two Romney staffers bumped from NM
A big shakeup in Mitt Romney's New Mexico campaign appears to indicate trouble for the Republican presidential candidate in the state.

Romney's campaign is pulling two key staffers from New Mexico and moving them elsewhere in the campaign. The two being moved are Romney's communications director and his Hispanic outreach director.

It's a pretty clear signal that the tires are flat, the engine is knocking, and Romney's hot rod is losing the race in New Mexico. He has been trailing President Barack Obama in all the polls.
posted by syzygy at 5:52 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

They have been doing SUCH A GOOD JOB in NM lets send them somewhere else to do the same!
posted by edgeways at 5:58 PM on September 20, 2012

The two being moved are Romney's communications director and his Hispanic outreach director.

These may be the two worst jobs in America right now.
posted by Superplin at 6:01 PM on September 20, 2012 [13 favorites]

"The Republican Noise Machine and Mitt Romney: The Con Artist Conned":

We know this because of the care with which the 47% talking point was constructed:

Last year 47% of tax units paid no net federal income taxes.

Low-information voters are supposed to hear this and process it as "47% pay no taxes" and conclude "they--not me--are moochers!"

Republican operatives and candidates are supposed to know that almost every word in "last year 47% of tax units paid no net federal income taxes" is necessary for the deception. "Last year" because right now the share of taxpayers is far below normal because of the lesser depression--and that is a good thing. "Tax units" because we are talking not about a share of Americans but rather of pieces of paper flowing through the IRS. "Federal" because lots of people pay state and local taxes. "Income" because lots of people pay payroll taxes. "Net" because for historical reasons we channel our Child and Earned Income Tax Credits--programs loved by, among others, Ronald Reagan--through the IRS rather than through HHS.

Omit any of those words, and the 47% figure becomes a lie.

And in the form that it was intended to be received--as "47% pay no taxes, the moochers!" it is a lie.

Of the 47%, 7% points are there because of the Lesser Depression. Of the remaining 40% points, 6% points are non-elderly with incomes under $20,000/year--people who are not supposed to be paying income taxes. Of the remaining 34% points, 8% are elderly--people who are also simply not supposed to be paying income taxes at all. Of the remaining 26% points, 24% points are workers paying payroll and other taxes who are receiving the CTC and the EITC, and hence not owing "net taxes" to the IRS. That leaves 2% points.

posted by FJT at 6:05 PM on September 20, 2012 [16 favorites]

Superplin: "The two being moved are Romney's communications director and his Hispanic outreach director.

These may be the two worst jobs in America right now."

bwaahahahha YUP

I'm really enjoying this now. Not hubris, just flippin'.....relief. There's some part deep down inside of me that really wants to believe that most of this new beast that is the Republican party is just mesmerized or something. I first got excited when they picked Ryan, because it felt like the morally bankrupt philosophy behind the economic and social policies coming out of these people's mouths was given shape and distinction. There's a real sickness and immorality at the heart of the shit these people want to do, and it just seems like the curtain is getting drawn back on the wizard a bit here. Thanks, camera-phones!
posted by lazaruslong at 6:09 PM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

In other words, if Mitt finally just rips the Vader mask off of these ideas, maybe JUST MAYBE some of the people that have been gettin' lied to and supporting Randian social and economic policies against there own interests with serious cognitive dissonance will shake their heads and see it for the nastiness that it is, and we can start to get back to some semblance of sanity in our politics. Lance the boil or something.
posted by lazaruslong at 6:11 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

There is a training role-play exercise used in political communications courses called "My Dog Has Three Legs". The idea is that you, as a politician, wish to get across to the voters at all times that you have a three-legged dog. So you field questions from a person and try to stay on-message:

Q: What do you plan on doing about environmental issues?
A: The environment may be important to many people, but what voters I've been talking to are really concerned about is that My Dog Has Three Legs.

Q: What is your opinion about the president's plan to withdraw troops from Quebec?
A: I have the deepest concern for the people of Quebec, but what folks in diners and town-halls across this great nation have been asking me about is My Three-Legged Dog.

The goal being that practicing this will allow you to substitute your own talking-point for the unfortunate tripodal canine, in the hopes that if you end up on the news, it will be about your message. And any candidate, from Soil and Water Conservation District Manager to President, should know in this age of smartphones, that anything he or she says anywhere could end up on video available to the public. There is no such thing as a "private" campaign event.

This video is strong evidence of a campaign that has been poorly planned from day 1. Romney's advisers should have drilled message discipline into him from the start.
posted by Cookiebastard at 6:25 PM on September 20, 2012 [20 favorites]

Oh, I completely get that the "government is like a business" analogy fails, and that there are a lot of differences, including the fact that government provides services that could never be provided as efficiently on an earned-revenue model. I was really just remarking that even if you judge Romney's approach to his campaign as if it were a business, on business terms, he's been awful at it because he's made bad choices, listened to bad advice, second-guessed himself and allowed people on his executive team to steer him in the wrong direction.
posted by Miko at 6:54 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm just waiting for this video:

Reporter: Mr. Romney, some have suggested that you've refused to release your prior tax returns because you took part in the 2009 Swiss Bank Account Amnesty Program. Is there any truth to this?

Mitt Romney: The American people are not interested in rumors about my tax returns, what they are asking me about again and again, is how I'm going to create jobs....
posted by Golden Eternity at 7:23 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

They have been doing SUCH A GOOD JOB in NM lets send them somewhere else to do the same!

Indeed, his one campaign stop in the state was about his energy plan, which took Romney to Hobbs, New Mexico, located in oil country, almost in Texas. Seriously, Hobbs is almost on the border of Lea County, which is on the Texas border. And before these recent disasters, a fellow Republican thought Mitt could carry NM, turning Obama's 14 point lead in 2008 around to look more like Bush's slim win over Kerry in 2004, based on support from southern New Mexico alone.

538's assessment of the state is for an 11-point Democratic margin this year, and that might have been before Honestygate. Good luck, Mittens.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:44 PM on September 20, 2012

I'm just waiting for this video:

Reporter: Mr. Romney, some have suggested that you've refused to release your prior tax returns because you took part in the 2009 Swiss Bank Account Amnesty Program. Is there any truth to this?

Mitt Romney: The American people are not interested in rumors about my tax returns, what they are asking me about again and again, is how I'm going to create jobs....

God knows he doesn't want to talk about his Dog, three-legged or otherwise.
posted by tzikeh at 7:44 PM on September 20, 2012 [13 favorites]

Sure, sure, 11-point margin. I want to hear more about the three-legged dog.
posted by box at 7:46 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

The three legged dog is leading Mitt Romney by 12 points...
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 7:47 PM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

And is it a dirty ol' egg-sucking dog?
posted by box at 7:48 PM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

Hell, it's a dog that don't hunt.

It's your ex-girlfriends dog - the one that nipped at your balls while you slept.

Its that dog that barked at shadows, but only when you were a watching TV show you liked.

Its that dog that you always suspected would bite your kid that finally bit your ex-wife, but you still don't trust it.

That dog is beating Romney by 12 points.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 7:55 PM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

And who do you suppose this year's winner is: Johns Hopkins? Mayo Clinic? Massachusetts General? Nope. In every single category, the VHA system outperforms the highest rated non-VHA hospitals.

This is interesting. How many VA doctors only work for the VA? I ask because I know that quite a few of the doctors at the Large Academic Hospital I work at work for the VA in addition to working for us. Part of our training program involves having fellows (that is, MDs who have already completed their residency and are getting further training in their specialty) work at the VA with their staff. Many of our doctors maintain their "WOC" (without compensation) credentialing status at the VA so that they can provide care there if needed. I think, but am not certain, that some of the VA attendings maintain credentialing at our institution too. There's some overlap.

So is part of the reason the VHA system is doing so well, that they are able to use the expertise of the doctors at other top-ranked institutions, as well as their own?

Which is why most of the best doctors won't take Medicare or even the active duty healthcare, Tricare.

I'd also like to see a cite for this. It's not my impression at all. I'm not an expert, of course, but I know Large Academic Hospital takes Medicare patients (presumably Tricare as well), and we employ many of the best doctors in the state.
posted by joannemerriam at 7:58 PM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

Joshua Micah Marshall highlights an Ann Romney appearance in Iowa on Talking Points Memo's editor's blog.
posted by The Confessor at 8:04 PM on September 20, 2012

I read the news report cited by Josh Marshall and it was cringe-inducing.
posted by Miko at 8:12 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

filthy light thief: “And before these recent disasters, a fellow Republican thought Mitt could carry NM, turning Obama's 14 point lead in 2008 around to look more like Bush's slim win over Kerry in 2004, based on support from southern New Mexico alone.”

For all you out of staters, the equivalent of that is basically "he thought they could win New York by forgetting the city and focusing on upstate."
posted by koeselitz at 8:12 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'd also like to see a cite for this. It's not my impression at all.

My dad is a primary care doctor, and I know a lot of other doctors/am exposed to a lot of medical shop-talk through family and friends.

I hear a lot of grousing about the need to accept medicare and other federal programs. That said, A) that's anecdata, not a proper cite, and B) so the fuck what? I grouse about all kind of work-related stuff, and then I suck it up and do it because it's my job. As far as I know, that's what doctors do, too.
posted by Sara C. at 8:13 PM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

Apparently, "Tha Perfesser" Warren completely eviscerated a confused and massively under-prepared "Scottie2Hawtie" Brown. He went full-bore Tea Party, Talk Radio rabid right wing, and so lost both on points and style... she was calm, collected, and had bloodlust in her eyes. The woman can smell the weak.
posted by Slap*Happy at 8:23 PM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

I can't find the citation (I believe it was a Moyers interview), but they were talking about how the government was trying to crack down on medicare fraud by requiring more documentation, and doctors were frustrated with the billing process and all the paperwork that they would threaten to stop accepting medicare patients. Of course it was hard to figure out if some of these doctors were complaining because they were dabbling in a little excess fraud themselves. I'd think fraud is one of the bigger challenges of medicare.
posted by Golden Eternity at 8:23 PM on September 20, 2012

doctors were frustrated with the billing process and all the paperwork that they would threaten to stop accepting medicare patients

This is not how running a medical practice works.

Typically you have bookkeepers and administrative type people who do the bulk of the paperwork. It's still a headache on the business side of running a practice, but it's not like it specifically impacts a doctor's ability to practice medicine.

Insurance companies and malpractice insurance are also total headaches. In general, from talking to my dad (who runs the business side of his practice in addition to being a doctor), everything about running a medical practice is a total headache.

And yet, people still do it. Partially out of altruism, I'm sure. But also because, despite all the red tape, the system largely works to doctors' benefit.
posted by Sara C. at 8:28 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh my God. That Iowa interview with Ann Romney. It starts with this complaint / call for pity / demand for gratitude.

... Mrs. Romney directly addressed her fellow Republicans who’ve criticized her husband. “Stop it. This is hard. You want to try it? Get in the ring,” she said. “This is hard and, you know, it’s an important thing that we’re doing right now and it’s an important election and it is time for all Americans to realize how significant this election is and how lucky we are to have someone with Mitt’s qualifications and experience and know-how to be able to have the opportunity to run this country.”

To this delineation of her role:

Romney said her role is to be supportive rather than to give her husband advice about the campaign.

“We call the rope line now the advice line,” she said, laughing, “…because everyone cares and everyone wants to help and everyone wants to just give their peace — a little piece of advice — so I feel like my best advice is just to bring peace and calm to him and just trust in him and just say, ‘I know you can do it,’ but not to give him any advice because it gets too overwhelming.”

To this evocation of Mitt as Ann's three-legged dog:

“In all the past debates, he would find me in the audience and after each question, he’d look at me ’cause it was like, ‘Did I do O.K. Ann? Was that O.K.?’” she said. “And I love that because he cares so much. I mean, we have such a good relationship and we have such a strong marriage and I know that he measures himself and how he’s doing by my face and how I think he’s doing, so I know in these next debates it’s going to be very important for me to be sitting in that audience.”

posted by maudlin at 8:34 PM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

... Mrs. Romney directly addressed her fellow Republicans who’ve criticized her husband. “Stop it. This is hard. You want to try it? Get in the ring"

Can you just imagine what would happen, if Michelle Obama ever said this?

I tend to hate the sort of "But what if Other Person did This Action?" arguments (especially when they show up on MeTa, ahem), but I can't help but think in those terms here. This is the Romneys showing their privilege, even more than Mitt did in his 47% tape.
posted by meese at 8:38 PM on September 20, 2012 [16 favorites]

This kills me about people who talk about successful business people and running the country, or even running a state. The government, by design, provides service in ways that businesses do not.

This, right here, is what's going to be the undoing of the GOP this year. Their philosophy is not tenable, and it proves more apparent all the time.

Or so I hope it will to more voters at least.

Some people get hung up on Smaller Government, and forget that there are all those services government provides, so we get back to outsourcing services as a solution to Big Bad Government. Until we find ourselves with Big Bad Companies, and wonder why the Government didn't do more to make us safe.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:46 PM on September 20, 2012 [6 favorites]

Stop it. This is hard. You want to try it? Get in the ring

"We use Ann sparingly right now, so that people don't tired of her, or start attacking... But you will see more of her in the September, October timeframe."
posted by kirkaracha at 8:52 PM on September 20, 2012 [8 favorites]

"Her?"
posted by The Whelk at 8:53 PM on September 20, 2012 [11 favorites]

Oh. My. Goodness.

“Stop it. This is hard. You want to try it? Get in the ring”

Really? Oh dear gods, they ARE freaking out, man.

Did Ann forget when Romney had to beat out the other people in the ring? There were EIGHT other people vying for the GOP nomination! And now it's too late, because Romney won the GOP nomination. The ring is closed.

kirkaracha, my thoughts exactly. She's not exactly up to Palin levels of crazy, or Dan Quayle levels of stupid, but she's not helping Mitt. He knew it well enough that he mentioned it in the private fundraiser.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:57 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

I gotta say, the biggest reason I'm against Ann being used more by the campaign is that I'm already tickled by folks calling Mitt "Egg Romney." I don't want her to dilute my snark.
posted by klangklangston at 9:01 PM on September 20, 2012 [4 favorites]

I'm sure somebody figured this out long ago, but it took me until this election cycle (combined with living in another country) to figure out that using your family as props is a very American thing. In Asia you might see a (usually male) candidate with his spouse, but you don't get months upon months of publicity shots and speaking engagements and so on.

I mean, getting someone pregnant isn't exactly rocket surgery. And having kids who aren't in jail shouldn't be some sort of huge achievement in life, especially if you're rich and can afford fancy private schools and so on.

So as much as I think Obama's daughters are adorable and Mitt's sons are whitebread little brats who couldn't be bothered to enlist, I'd love a general moratorium on family members in general (even the wives).

It's just such a weird dynastic hang-over from the colonial era that I wish we could get over.

And then sometimes this happens.
posted by bardic at 9:10 PM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

Nah ... [spoiler alert].

Précis from afar: I've loved this thread, such a squabble fest. Metafilter is noisier than a Romney private fundraiser, even without the utensils. (Did you see the guest at the end of the leaked video getting his 50,000 US$s worth by scoffing unfinished drinks?)

Anyway, I have the bottom line for you: Obama gets another 4 years, and he may (now) even get sufficient democrat numbers in the house to get a few substantial domestic things done. Then it's back to war.

George P. Bush (2016 - 2024), leading nicely into Miko's theory of change.

I didn't know there was a George P. Bush, with a mexican mother. It's obvious. He's perfect. What predigree. And he has a birth right to the presidency.

(For a people who are contemptuous of royalty: think Kennedy, Clinton ... Bush. Now you tell me!)
posted by de at 9:22 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

I mean, getting someone pregnant isn't exactly rocket surgery.

Actually, Mitt had a team of consultants give him a three-step plan.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:23 PM on September 20, 2012 [5 favorites]

Ta-Nehisi Coates was linked to above, but just thought I'd quote him further:

The thing is this: As a black person, there's a sort of Cinderella effect. We were not supposed to be here -- not in this time. We were supposed to inaugurate Starfleet before we inaugurated a black president. And yet here we are. And it has been so much worse in the past.

Not to go all race man, but I cut on the television and I see Barack Obama say, "I'll let the American people be the judge of that" and I get warm in a way that I know my people understand. And none of this was supposed to happen. When I was young I was convinced that I should have been black in another time. (Wouldn't it have been great to be like my Dad, rocking the black beret, and aiming guns at the cops?) Sometimes I fall victim to Civil War fantasy, but in my heart I would not have wanted to see any other time, as a black person, than this one.

Oh boy, I get it, I soooo get it. I mean, being able to sit there and calmly eviscerate your opponent's points while his team increasingly gets antsy isn't merely Zen or 11th dimensional chess or whatever, it's sheer, and raw, power. It's power you have over yourself, your opponents and, essentially, circumstances; you're saying you are angry, but you also have the ability to lead and be the adult in the situation.

I don't watch television or videos much (and certainly, don't watch American television), so really hadn't thought about this until now, but it's an important point: I can totally understand why it is such a powerful moment, even in race-relations: Obama was supposed to be the Angry Man here in the narrative, not the one with power.
posted by the cydonian at 9:24 PM on September 20, 2012 [27 favorites]

"Stop it. This is hard. You want to try it? Get in the ring"

You know what else is hard? And draw a lot of criticism?

Being President.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:26 PM on September 20, 2012 [15 favorites]

Obama gets another 4 years, and he may (now) even get sufficient democrat numbers in the house to get a few substantial domestic things done. Then it's back to war.

The problem with this theory is that it relies somewhat on the GOP regrouping sensibly after the Romney loss. But they won't. They'll learn the opposite lesson: that they shouldn't have nominated the Mormon from Massachusetts. And they will elect the whitest and most Evangelical man they can find.
posted by mek at 9:32 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Nope. At his private fundraiser (even) Romney laments "if only i were mexican". He knows he's disadvantaged. There are too many advantages to not being a Romney-type: 'father knows best, on steroids'. Those days have gone.

(The GOP is in transition ... their desperate overcorrection to the far right is already acknowledged this cycle.)
posted by de at 9:39 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Seems as if Ann is not elegantly stating Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment, "Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican."

I used to describe George H.W. Bush as "Ronald Reagan without the charm," and here's Ann, being all Nancy Reagan without the competence.

This kind of thing needs to come from an elder statesman who doesn't sound like a whiner who can't take the heat for saying it. If they can't manage their surrogates, they're going to have trouble sealing the deal.
posted by Mad_Carew at 9:50 PM on September 20, 2012

Top story on Reddit politics Did Mitt Romney Seriously Just Wear Brownface to Appear on Univision?

It is really frustrating to hear people talk about the Republicans losing the latino voting bloc because of their stance on illegal immigration. People do know that not all immigrants are illegal, right? And that a lot of legal immigrants actually don't like illegal ones?

Between that and so many people talking about how the Republicans only have white voters, I wonder if people hear how paternalistic and dismissive they're being.

No, what's 'parternalistic' is thinking that a "legal" latino wouldn't have a problem being harassed by the police just because of the color of their skin or thrown in jail if the cop decides their birth certificate is "fake" (just like Obama's!).

I don't know the stats on the number who "hate" illegals. Lots of Latinos have undocumented immigrants in their circle of friends and families, why would they want them thrown out of the country? And really, the only reason people want Mexicans kicked out is pure racism anyway, it's pretty obvious.

but don't think that means that arguments about illegals are racist.

Well, you don't have too. But they totally are. Also, as other people mentioned, don't use the word "illegal" as an adjective, and especially not as a noun for a person

The "Mitt dyed is face" stuff is kinda silly, and 99% not true.

Well, he's always been a 1% kind of guy.

I gotta say, the biggest reason I'm against Ann being used more by the campaign is that I'm already tickled by folks calling Mitt "Egg Romney." I don't want her to dilute my snark.

I like calling him Willard Mittens Romnibus the Third. His first name actually is Willard. Mitt is his middle name.

BTW. My guess is that Paul Ryan and Rick Santorum will be the top contenders in '16. Republicans like to nominate people who have already run once or twice, that they're familiar with. Paul Ryan will blame everything on Mittens.
posted by delmoi at 9:56 PM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

> My guess is that Paul Ryan and Rick Santorum will be the top contenders in '16.

An ageing Hilllary would beat them.
posted by de at 10:03 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

klangklangston: "I'm against Ann being used more by the campaign is that I'm already tickled by folks calling Mitt "Egg Romney." I don't want her to dilute my snark."

I thought "Egg Romney" did refer to Ann, as an Arrested Development reference. Was I mistaken?
posted by Riki tiki at 10:05 PM on September 20, 2012 [3 favorites]

They've pretty much veered into Caddyshack Territory at this point...
posted by billyfleetwood at 10:11 PM on September 20, 2012 [2 favorites]

It could happen, but a losing VP has a hell of a time getting back to the front of the pack.

Americans like winners above all else.
posted by bardic at 10:14 PM on September 20, 2012 [1 favorite]

Sarah Palin wasn't even invited the the convention let alone had a ghost of a chance of the ticket this time around. I think Ryan is toast irt going for the brass ring... and one hopes the House seat as well.

I know people keep saying nah it isn't going to happen but I tell ya, Christie, Rudio and Jeb Bush (with possible Santorium as well)
posted by edgeways at 10:19 PM on September 20, 2012

flip that d
posted by edgeways at 10:29 PM on September 20, 2012

Christie's chances on the national stage have always been a winger pipe-dream. Dude is loud and morbidly obese and simply horrible on TV. Not gonna fly.
posted by bardic at 10:46 PM on September 20, 2012

I don't want Chris Christie to run because suddenly every Democrat would discover that fat jokes are hilarious and every Republican would discover the concept of sizeism.
posted by Pope Guilty at 12:28 AM on September 21, 2012 [13 favorites]

And really, the only reason people want Mexicans kicked out is pure racism anyway, it's pretty obvious.

I don't agree. I think it's also things like xenophobia, which is functionally pretty close to racism, but it involves things like fears about job security amidst undocumented workers who do appear to have incentives to work for less than you currently make, fears that the government isn't protecting you from this competition, culture clash issues such as disliking it when people around you speak over your head in languages you can't understand, etc.
I think to call it pure racism is an oversimplification. Attempts to alleviate the symptoms that focus on racism as the disease probably aren't going to be as effective as attempts that also address the non-racial sources of tension.
posted by anonymisc at 1:45 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

It's racism, it doesn't matter if it's due to underlying economic insecurities, the fact of the matter is the Republican Party advocates policies which are racist. You're not going to get much sympathy from minority voters about root causes for racist policies when check ID laws get passed or English-only legislation get proposed. The Republican Party may have very well lost many minority votes for a generation.

Racism is largely the cause of this 47% drama and the primary reason why this is incredibly damaging for Romney and the Republican Party. Before this, non-wealthy Republicans always understood arguments in favor of regressive taxation policies and cutting social services as a Lee Atwater dogwhistle. Namely, lower/middle-class Republicans (falsely) understood that they would not be significantly penalized by the regressive Republican policies and understood it as a way to publicly attack black people. The reason the 47% number is shocking for that demographic is because it is mathematically impossible that the de-facto leader/flag-bearer of the Republican Party thinks cutting social services is a dog whistle. 47% must include many of the Republican base -- therefore, by definition, Romney is talking about lower/middle-class white people as much as he is talking about lower-class black people. This misunderstanding in motivation for cutting social services is laid bare and potentially very damaging for the Republican Party's angry racist voter base.
posted by amuseDetachment at 2:11 AM on September 21, 2012 [6 favorites]

Slap*Happy

I hope that you're right... but I'm going to wait for the one-week-out opinion polls on this one. Scott Brown has a compelling story of triumph against abuse (duly referenced in this debate, I noted) and a massive reservoir of personal popularity, such that even if Elizabeth Warren were generally considered to have "won" this extended bruiser of a debate, her behavior could have a greater downward impact on her own positives than on Scott Brown's negatives one week out.

Add to that the massive amounts of American Crossroads and other SuperPAC money I expect to pour into this race, particularly if (as seems likely) Rove concludes that Romney is toast, but no "wave election" surfaces to put control of the House in play, and you'll see that the election is no sure thing. From the Republican point of view, I expect the Massachusetts Senate seat is probably one of the biggest prizes in play this election cycle excepting the Presidency, not only for the value of Brown's Republican vote, but because Brown will then remain a moderate fig leaf for their dickishness.
posted by The Confessor at 3:28 AM on September 21, 2012

Yes, see Italians. As someone said on an AV Club Sopranos thread in response to someone else, "If you consider Italians white, you're not a very good racist.

Oof. You have just reminded me of one of my personal cringe-inducing memories. In US college (which I was attending after having grown up in Pakistan), I made the mistake of referring to someone of Italian descent as Latino (in my mind, the term was connected to Latin languages, etc.; I had no clue that it was mostly about Latin America). It had never occurred to me that Italian-American=white.

In retrospect, I'm not sure who should be more embarrassed, me or the professor who was so horrified at my assumption.
posted by bardophile at 3:37 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

Why Does Everybody Hate Mitt Romney?:

At least three Republican Senate nominees—Scott Brown, Linda McMahon, and Dean Heller—quickly distanced themselves from his comments, followed by Ohio Gov. John Kasich and condemnations from a half-dozen high-profile conservative columnists, including Bill Kristol and Peggy Noonan. According to a new Pew Survey, no other presidential candidate’s unfavorable ratings have been as high at this point in a campaign.

His problems are compounded by an open secret in Republican politics—no one who has ever run against Mitt Romney walks away liking the guy. [...]“Four years ago, the other candidates couldn’t stand him,” said a longtime Republican operative affiliated with another competing campaign in 2008. “There was just this aloofness to him and an elitism that set the tone. There wasn’t the comradeship that you normally have with candidates—you know, when you get to know each other in the course of the campaign and you kind of like each other and respect each other, no matter how badly you beat the daylights out of each other. Romney hammered every single candidate with negative advertising above and beyond what was needed—and his attitude seemed to be ‘I didn’t say it.’ It was this mysterious ad agency off somewhere.’ His aloofness is just what sort of puts people off.”

posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:39 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

Clearly, Mitt Romney Doesn't Understand The Federal Budget, The Tax System, Or American Politics

Mitt Romney's unguarded thoughts about the half of America that pays no income taxes -- "who are dependent on government, who believe they are victims" -- show a notable lack of empathy as well as political savvy.

Maybe that's a surprise. But the big surprise is how little he seems to comprehend about the federal budget or the tax system or American politics.

posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:56 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

(For a people who are contemptuous of royalty: think Kennedy, Clinton ... Bush. Now you tell me!)

Clinton? Bill Clinton and Hilary Rodham are both from middle class backgrounds of little political influence. I've got plenty of problems with both, but they really don't fit into the Kennedy/Bush model of political royalty. Of course, when Chelsea's political ambitions become manifest, I'll be ready and waiting with the guillotine.
posted by howfar at 5:01 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Yes, I was reminded the other day (when I was feeling sad that Obama's mother was not alive to see her son's presidency) that both Obama and Clinton were sons of single mothers.

A friend of Paul Ryan, radio host and author Charles Sykes, is claiming his book, A Nation of Moochers, is the inspiration for Romney's 47 percent remarks:

Toward the very beginning of Chapter One appears the following passage:

Even as more people become dependent on government, fewer were paying their share of the tab. By tax day in 2010, nearly half of U.S. households paid no federal income taxes. After years of cuts, credits, and outright rebates, 47 percent of households had no net liability at all.

Note how Sykes seamlessly melds two very distinct groups –those who receive some kind of benefit or assistance from government, and those who pay no federal income tax – precisely as Romney did, quite wrongly.

No wonder Sykes thinks Romney is channeling his ideas*

posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:13 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Charlie Sykes himself was a (by his definition) "moocher."
posted by drezdn at 5:18 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney Struggles To Decide: Who Is Barack Obama

Worth it almost entirely for the quote and video at the end.
posted by zombieflanders at 5:36 AM on September 21, 2012

Christie is going nowhere. If you are actually in or around NJ and can follow his daily activities, this becomes abundantly clear. Besides his more obvious deficits, he's simply too volatile. He's impulsive, emotional, unpredictable and not a party-line guy. He's not the kind of person that gets a party nomination. I might expect a short-lived primary run, but it'll end there.
posted by Miko at 5:55 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

The 47 Percent: Seniors
posted by cashman at 6:21 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

But I have a purple heart!
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:38 AM on September 21, 2012 [15 favorites]

That is a really good ad. Total aside, but: I can't identify the accent of the man in the blue jacket, but it's awfully close to the Foghorn Leghorn accent which has become very rare to spot in the wild.
posted by Miko at 6:43 AM on September 21, 2012

Sarah Silverman, you made me laugh about something sad.
posted by Miko at 6:48 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

cashman: "The 47 Percent: Seniors "

The colon there seems like that's the first in a series. Look out for the sequels 'Minimum Wage Workers', 'Serving Military', 'Students', and, of course 'Families benefiting from Republican-inspired tax breaks'. Oughta be a great season.
posted by Happy Dave at 6:50 AM on September 21, 2012 [6 favorites]

Paul Krugman: Disdain for Workers

Needless to say, the G.O.P.’s disdain for workers goes deeper than rhetoric. It’s deeply embedded in the party’s policy priorities. Mr. Romney’s remarks spoke to a widespread belief on the right that taxes on working Americans are, if anything, too low. Indeed, The Wall Street Journal famously described low-income workers whose wages fall below the income-tax threshold as “lucky duckies.”

What really needs cutting, the right believes, are taxes on corporate profits, capital gains, dividends, and very high salaries — that is, taxes that fall on investors and executives, not ordinary workers. This despite the fact that people who derive their income from investments, not wages — people like, say, Willard Mitt Romney — already pay remarkably little in taxes.
posted by Brian B. at 6:51 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

Mitt Romney paid for his grandchildren's surrogate mother to have an abortion clause in her contract.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:58 AM on September 21, 2012

OMG, when your candidate is making TMZ with a headline about abortion you are in new political territory, GOP.
posted by spitbull at 7:10 AM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

There's plenty of examples and reasons that highlight Romney is unfit to be President. No need to drag his family into this.

How about this tax returns Mitt?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:14 AM on September 21, 2012 [7 favorites]

odinsdream, extremely well stated.
posted by theredpen at 7:15 AM on September 21, 2012

Yeehaw, Sarah Silverman rocks. She really says it straight up. Awesome.
posted by spitbull at 7:18 AM on September 21, 2012

At the end of that article, it says it was just a mistake anyway - a contract provision that was previously removed that was mistakenly left in the second time.
posted by cashman at 7:19 AM on September 21, 2012

Romney doesn't want *your* family to have the right to do what it did. Fair game in my book.
posted by spitbull at 7:19 AM on September 21, 2012

Er, what *his* did, but "it" works too.
posted by spitbull at 7:20 AM on September 21, 2012

Except that it wasn't there the first time, cashman.
posted by gaspode at 7:20 AM on September 21, 2012

Oh, duh, reading comprehension fail from me, cashman. Carry on.
posted by gaspode at 7:21 AM on September 21, 2012

Mitt Romney paid for his grandchildren's surrogate mother to have an abortion clause in her contract.

That's a pretty misleading characterization of the situation. Romney's son used a surrogate to have a kid, which Romney helped to pay for. The contract with the surrogate had a standard clause identifying who would make the decision on abortion in certain situations. In prior surrogacy situations Romney's son removed that clause but one time he didn't.

Romney doesn't want *your* family to have the right to do what it did. Fair game in my book.

There's no evidence that ROmney wants his family to have the right to do what it did.

I can't believe I'm standing up for Romney. I hate tabloids that much.
posted by muddgirl at 7:22 AM on September 21, 2012 [11 favorites]

Romney and the Radical Rich

At no time in modern history has the top 1 percent – or the top 0.1 percent, or the top 0.01 percent – owned more of our wealth or paid less in taxes.

But it isn't enough.

The Wall Street executives who broke laws weren't indicted, and those who ruined their own businesses were saved – their wealth and incomes protected – by the very people who are being financially destroyed by their actions.

It isn't enough.

Our government relaxed the regulations, razed the rules, and leveled the laws so they could ruin both the economy and the Gulf of Mexico, and has left us vulnerable to their ongoing predations.

It isn't enough.

What do they want?

They want more – more tax breaks, more protection from the law.

And they want adoration. From the looks of it, nothing short of an Roman Imperial cult – complete with their apotheosis as state deities upon their death – would satisfy them.

posted by cashman at 7:25 AM on September 21, 2012 [13 favorites]

Man modern plutocrats are just straight thin skinned wrecks am I right? I can't imagine a robber baron* getting all bent out of shape cause people said they might not be literally perfect. They'd just hire a few Pinkertons to smash some faces in.

* Okay, Hearst. And Morgan had that werid thing about his nose.
posted by The Whelk at 7:30 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

Seconding muddgirl on the speciousness of that article.

...and it's probably none of my business, but I can't help but wonder whether this surrogacy was medically indicated or completely elective. I'd be at least vaguely repulsed if it were the latter, and the outsourcing of the (manageable) risks and (profound) inconvenience of pregnancy was just another privilege of the family's wealth.
posted by The Confessor at 7:32 AM on September 21, 2012

The Confessor, according to this from NYTimes, "Tagg Romney’s other three children were not born via surrogacy", possibly through IVF?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:38 AM on September 21, 2012

You can birth three children yourself, even three children conceived without technological assistance, and still have the medical need for surrogacy for a fourth. For example, you could have an abruption in the third birth that necessitated a hysterectomy to save Mom's life, or a history of worsening blood pressure problems in pregnancy, or any of a thousand other worries. Of all the things that concern me about Mitt Romney, his children's private reproduction choices are not among them.
posted by KathrynT at 7:42 AM on September 21, 2012 [25 favorites]

Again, he is running on a stated intention of making your personal reproductive choices of the same exact sort illegal.
posted by spitbull at 7:55 AM on September 21, 2012 [8 favorites]

Of all the things that concern me about Mitt Romney, his children's private reproduction choices are not among them.

Right, I'm with ya but isn't it sad and troubling that our kid's private reproduction choices are among his concerns... Oh, the irony.
posted by RolandOfEld at 7:57 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

Again, he is running on a stated intention of making your personal reproductive choices of the same exact sort illegal.

Agreed, but restating myself, there's no evidence that he supports his son's or his son's surrogate's right to have an abortion. There's literally no evidence that he or his lawyer even read the contract.
posted by muddgirl at 7:59 AM on September 21, 2012

have the medical need for surrogacy for a fourth.

I think you and I have different notions of what constitutes a "need". Normal people who find out they can't have a fourth child just have to suck it up, no-one talks about their "need" to reproduce themselves twice over. But it's not a matter of politics for me, and I don't see this story as particularly relevant except for the irony RolandOfEld points out.
posted by howfar at 8:00 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ugh, poorly-stated but I hope my meaning is clear.
posted by muddgirl at 8:00 AM on September 21, 2012

There's literally no evidence that he or his lawyer even read the contract.

I don't want a man who signs contracts without reading them to be President.
posted by Faint of Butt at 8:01 AM on September 21, 2012 [7 favorites]

Yeah, he is. But that doesn't mean that Tagg and Jennifer Romney have to justify their decision to use a gestational surrogate to me, any more than I have to justify my decision to use an IUD to them. Tagg's not running for office, and neither is Jennifer. I find the whole idea that it's OK for us to sniff out someone's private reproductive medical history if they're someone we don't like unseemly. Even assholes have the right to privacy.
posted by KathrynT at 8:01 AM on September 21, 2012 [10 favorites]

Isn't it sort of telling if a captain of industry who probably has a team of lawyers working form doesn't read a contract about something this important before it's signed?

Smacks of serious negligence, if nothing else.

I'm also not one to, for instance, criticize anyone's choice of religion. But I will continue to share quotes from Christian thought-leaders who condemn Mormonism as a cult, because those who think the religion question is an important one are likely to vote for Romney, and I think they need to at least have a lump of doubt in their throat when they pull that lever.

It has nothing to do with my personal views on religion - it has to do with educating those who will be voting, with the hopes that they vote for the 'correct' candidate, or, at least, do not vote for the incorrect one.
posted by syzygy at 8:03 AM on September 21, 2012

KathrynT: I agree with you 100%, but there is a large cadre of people who will be voting for Romney based on the single issue of abortion.

Since that is the case, I think it's perfectly acceptable to spread factual information that will inform those single issue voters about the stance of the candidate they plan to vote for. My hope is that some of them will be less enthusiastic than they already are, and will choose not to vote, since both candidates seem to be nominally pro choice, anyway.

It may seem dirty, but as long as its truthful, my personal feeling is that it's OK, regardless of my personal feelings about the issue.
posted by syzygy at 8:06 AM on September 21, 2012

I think you and I have different notions of what constitutes a "need". Normal people who find out they can't have a fourth child just have to suck it up,

Yeah, see, about this? I am pro-choice. That means that I believe that the only two people who get a voice into how many children someone has are the people intimately involved in the conception and raising of those children. Nobody deserves to judge other people for having no children, or only one child, or four children, or nineteen. Those decisions are personal and private, even when they are made by assholes. If it were the candidate himself who had made those choices, I'd give it a bye because a candidate for office is not truly a private citizen, but this is his SON. Having a parent running for office shouldn't open up your private reproductive life for scrutiny and judgment.
posted by KathrynT at 8:07 AM on September 21, 2012 [19 favorites]

syzygy, I have to say I find that position worrying. Say Romney were Jewish, and reminding people of that would discourage anti-Semites from voting for him. How comfortable would you feel spreading factual information about his ethnicity?
posted by howfar at 8:09 AM on September 21, 2012

I don't want a man who signs contracts without reading them to be President.

Is this in jest? Why would Mitt Romney sign a contract between Tagg Romney/his wife and a surrogate? From TMZ:

TMZ has learned Mitt Romney's son Tagg -- who had twins this year through a surrogate -- signed an agreement that gave the surrogate, as well as Tagg and his wife, the right to abort the fetuses in non-life threatening situations ... and Mitt Romney covered some of the expenses connected with the arrangement ... and it may boil down to an incredibly stupid mistake.

posted by muddgirl at 8:13 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

For example, my in-laws gifted some money to me. That doesn't imply that they signed the title or read a single loan document.
posted by muddgirl at 8:14 AM on September 21, 2012

...gifted some money to me to buy a house, I mean.
posted by muddgirl at 8:14 AM on September 21, 2012

Nobody deserves to judge other people for having no children, or only one child, or four children, or nineteen.

I can't agree with that. The idea that the sole moral consideration in the decision to reproduce is the interest and desire of the parents seems unfounded to me. There are other people involved in your decision to bring children into the world, not least the children themselves. Also, I am affected by the reproductive choices people make, and I deserve to my opinions about whether they are right or wrong. The notion that one can't have an opinion about an act with major social consequences seems pretty bizarre to me.
posted by howfar at 8:15 AM on September 21, 2012

howfar: If I'm speaking to a friend who is a member of a religion or group in which the leaders of the group have repeatedly said, on record, that group members should not vote for any InsertReligion candidate, and I believe that InsertReligion candidate is the wrong one, I will bring up the on-record quotes from the leaders of the friend's group with my friend in order to make cause some doubt in his mind. Especially if these group leaders have changed their tune and are now backing a member of InsertReligion after having called that religion a cult for years.

I will be very careful to make it clear that I am simply bringing up the past quotes made by the leaders of said group, and that, by doing that, I am not purporting to agree with them.

So yes, quoting idiots is, I think, 100% fair game and defensible. Quoting someone does not mean you agree with them.
posted by syzygy at 8:15 AM on September 21, 2012

In this case we're not quoting anyone. Romney gave some money to his son so his son could have a kid. Romney has never said, "I think surrogacy should be illegal", so such an action is not hypocritical.
posted by muddgirl at 8:17 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Of course, when Chelsea's political ambitions become manifest, I'll be ready and waiting with the guillotine.

I think Chelsea is old enough now that we'd already know if that was the case. She works in finance or something, right?

I mean, I could see her running for NYC city council someday, but she clearly doesn't have the political aspirations of her parents or she would already be fast-tracked to a career that tends to lead to elected office.
posted by Sara C. at 8:18 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

I look at the surrogacy issue from the other direction. I have zero problem with Tagg and wife using a surrogate or any other method to have the family they wish to have. I think criticizing them for that is inappropriate and gross.

BUT. Mitt Romney, knowing that his own son and daughter-in-law used this method of conception (and IVF) to produce grandchildren I'm certain he cherishes, STILL says he wants to pursue policies that would make those methods impracticable if not illegal. That says to me that he lacks an empathy or understanding that I would want in a leader. For me, it's not about his kid's choice at all -- it's about his decision to promote policies that he knows well and good would cause a lot of pain to a lot of families, including ones like his own.

muddgirl, Romney's pro-personhood, which would make IVF (and therefore gestational surrogacy) difficult if not impossible because of the issues of extra embryos.
posted by katemonster at 8:19 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

In simplistic terms, Romney paid for his son to have the right to terminate a pregnancy.
In realistic terms no one is going to touch this, except perhaps some buyer-remorsed hard core eighty.
In practicle terms I can't be bothered to give a damn about it
posted by edgeways at 8:20 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney's said on record that he thinks it's okay to destroy the extra embryos that arise from IVF because "that's a personal choice". It's 11-dimensional-fucked-up-chess over in his brain:

I do. I believe, I believe from a, from a, a political perspective that life begins at conception.

I believe that when a couple gets together and decides that they want to bring a child into the Earth, and they go to a fertility clinic to do so, and if they're going to be through that process a leftover embryo or two, that they should be able to decide whether to preserve that embryo for future use or to destroy it.

Source.
posted by Phire at 8:23 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

muddgirl: Let me be clear here, I'm not saying that this particular issue has any relevance in this campaign. I think it's a pretty weak one, at least from the info that's included in the linked article.

I am, however, saying that reminding anti choice single issue voters that Mitt Romney was once and may still be pro choice is acceptable, regardless of my personal stance on the issue.
posted by syzygy at 8:24 AM on September 21, 2012

Mitt Romney is not a party to this contract. He would have no reason to read it.

I stand by my belief, even if it does not apply to Mitt Romney.
posted by Faint of Butt at 8:25 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

BUT. Mitt Romney, knowing that his own son and daughter-in-law used this method of conception (and IVF)

Mitt Romney is not a party to his son and daughter's IVF.

That says to me that he lacks an empathy or understanding that I would want in a leader.

Oh I absolutely agree. But that has nothing to do with whether or not Romney thinks that his son/daughter-in-law can have access to abortions while the rest of us can't.

Look, I agree that Romney is a total fucktard. But I also think Tagg Romney has the right to family reproductive planning, including IVF and abortion. Show me where Mitt payed for one of his kids to have an 'elective' abortion and we can start with the sensationalist headlines.
posted by muddgirl at 8:26 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Phire: " a political perspective that life begins at conception."

That's an amazing phrasing.
posted by boo_radley at 8:27 AM on September 21, 2012 [6 favorites]

that's a very Romney phrasing.
posted by gaspode at 8:27 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Regarding Chelsea, it's one of those odd things, She's worked for a hedge fund manager in the past, which in my little black book is... not honorable work. Whereas the Bush twins have had some pretty interesting, and meaning full jobs, hell I wouldn't be shocked if they voted D on a regular basis. Big disconnect there
posted by edgeways at 8:29 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

"I thought "Egg Romney" did refer to Ann, as an Arrested Development reference. Was I mistaken?"

I started hearing it during the primaries, when his main attribute was blandness and each time he regained the lead, people would say, "Him?"
posted by klangklangston at 8:30 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

I think Chelsea is old enough now that we'd already know if that was the case. She works in finance or something, right?

You're probably right. She seemed to be getting wheeled out a bit a while ago, but she's definitely in the background now. But never turn your back on a rat or Clinton, I say.
posted by howfar at 8:34 AM on September 21, 2012

KathrynT: Nobody deserves to judge other people for having no children, or only one child, or four children, or nineteen.

howfar: I can't agree with that. The idea that the sole moral consideration in the decision to reproduce is the interest and desire of the parents seems unfounded to me. There are other people involved in your decision to bring children into the world, not least the children themselves. Also, I am affected by the reproductive choices people make, and I deserve to my opinions about whether they are right or wrong. The notion that one can't have an opinion about an act with major social consequences seems pretty bizarre to me.

but then your comment can be flipped around to justify poking noses into all reproductive choices, howfar.

The idea that the sole moral consideration in the decision to abort a child is the interest and desire of the parents seems unfounded to me. There are other people involved in your decision to kill a child in utero, not least the children themselves. Also, I am affected by the reproductive choices people make, and I deserve to my opinions about whether they are right or wrong. The notion that one can't have an opinion about an act with major social consequences seems pretty bizarre to me.

(latter two sentences relevant to whether someone wants to live in a society condoning killing children in utero).

I strongly believe that if we want to protect some private reproductive choices, we should protect them all.
posted by gaspode at 8:35 AM on September 21, 2012 [8 favorites]

> Clinton? Bill Clinton and Hilary Rodham are both from middle class backgrounds of little political influence.

I wasn't referring to financial privilege, more political privilege not based on merit. (Hillary was fast-tracked, almost made presidency, too.)

> ... or [Chelsea] would already be fast-tracked

Without a doubt.
posted by de at 8:35 AM on September 21, 2012

I strongly believe that if we want to protect some private reproductive choices, we should protect them all.

I agree. I believe in protecting the right to do all kinds of things I disagree with.
posted by howfar at 8:36 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Mr. Romney's campaign is low on cash.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:46 AM on September 21, 2012

Mr. Romney's campaign is low on cash.

Kind of, but not really. The article says the RNC controls a lot of the money, but they could release almost all of it for him whenever they please. Also the article notes that "At least 32,000 donors have given the maximum of $2,500 to Mr. Romney’s campaign for the primary season running through August, according to an analysis by The New York Times, but have not contributed to the general election. That group that could generate about $81 million with a second round of general election checks". There are a lot of different accounts (it's Mitt Romney, no surprise there) but I think the bottom line is, if Mitt needs cash, he will have cash. He will not be prevented from doing anything (ads, a line of attack, etc) for want of money.

I thought this part was funny:

Another set of expenditures is likely to draw grumbles from Mr. Romney’s allies given his campaign’s current struggles: The day after accepting the Republican nomination, Mr. Romney gave what appeared to be $192,440 in bonuses to senior campaign staff members. At least nine aides received payments on Aug. 31 well in excess of their typical biweekly salaries, including $25,000 each for Matthew Rhoades, the campaign manager; Lanhee Chen, a policy adviser; and Katie Biber, the general counsel. Rich Beeson, the political director, received $37,500.

posted by cashman at 8:57 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

This saga has made me very curious -- what exactly has allowed such a remarkably thick intellectual bubble to form around a substantial portion of the most wealthy Americans? Not everyone above a certain level of wealth and income lives in this echo chamber isolated from any ideologically uncomfortable realities about people below them -- you've got people like Warren Buffett pointing out how taxes rates for people like him are effectively regressive, and advocating a change in that -- but that just makes me wonder how it's possible that so many others do.

Surely there's a book or two written about this? Any recommendations?
posted by Anything at 9:04 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

roomthreeseventeen: But I have a purple heart!

For posterity, the site is Let My People Vote 2012.com, with an embedded YT video titled Sarah Silverman | Election 2012 - Voter Fraud, which discusses the Voter ID laws in 11 states (PA, IN, FL, TN, MI, SD, ID, LA, KS, NH, and GA). Summary: your social security card, veterans ID, and student ID won't work to vote, but a drivers license or a gun license will. The video alludes to the fact you need a photo ID with your address on it.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:04 AM on September 21, 2012

That someone could reasonably feel threatened by a large group of people who are voting to take away their lifestyle or hard-earned savings, particularly with the added bonus that analysis says if they don't get those things, violence may erupt.

Taxes are a small price to pay for being rich, free and alive all at the same time.
posted by spaltavian at 9:18 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

what exactly has allowed such a remarkably thick intellectual bubble to form around a substantial portion of the most wealthy Americans?

There was an AskMe that kind of touched on the lifestyles and mannerisms of the rich that may partially answer your question.
posted by FJT at 9:29 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

It looks like David Corn (who broke the original story) is doing an AmA on Reddit right now.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:30 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

I regret that my poor choice of words caused some people to understand what I was saying. (cartoon from before the emittery)
posted by Rumple at 9:46 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

Herman Cain lines up to rag on Romney: paraphrase - I'd have a huge lead right now because my ideas have merit -

I sorta wish Cain had won the primary just because I miss the sheer ''amazingness'' of his campaign ads. Having those around for a few more months would have been priceless
posted by edgeways at 9:48 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Mormons Want to Excommunicate Romney Critic
posted by zombieflanders at 9:50 AM on September 21, 2012

Paul Ryan Booed At AARP For Attacking Obamacare
posted by zombieflanders at 9:52 AM on September 21, 2012 [14 favorites]

Found this on reddit, just going to leave this here since this is the thread where we all go bananas on Romney and his stupidity every time he opens his mouth.

Yes, it's an imgur link.
posted by daq at 10:05 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

There are a lot of good reasons why one's religion should not be part of a presidential campaign, but I think Romney should be asked to at least comment and take a stance on the excommunication story, at the least it would give him a chance to do the decent, not even controversial, thing. On the face that sounds like some pretty fucked up shit
posted by edgeways at 10:06 AM on September 21, 2012

Man, if Twitter is to be believed, it sounds like Ryan's getting absolutely eviscerated by this AARP meeting:

@shushwalshe: Huge chant of "No!" When Paul Ryan says he wants to repeal Obamacare.

@AlexNBCNews: Loud boos for Ryan at AARP when he says: "The first step to a stronger Medicare is to repeal Obamacare" #decision2012

@stevesingiser: Looks like the best news for Romney-Ryan is this AARP speech is happening on a Friday.

@Rebecca_CBSNJ: This is without a doubt the most unfriendly audience Ryan has spoken to as VP candidate. Audience alterantes between silence and boos.

And apparently there's a Q&A session coming up!

I hope the Obama campaign is getting this on tape to play in Florida for the next six weeks.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:07 AM on September 21, 2012 [18 favorites]

Oh, Ann. You took a $77,731 tax deduction for your HORSE in 2010. I think I'm doing pretty well for myself, but that amount still exceeds my gross annual income. So as one lady to another: don't try to tell me what's hard and what isn't. What kind of sacrifices can you be making, as a millionaire? Because I'm deciding between vet bills for my dog and prescriptions for myself. Get back to me when you've walked in my shoes - and the shoes of those less fortunate than me.

(Spoiler alert: we can't afford designer shoe brands, sorry. Double spoiler alert: dog vet bills win, of course. I'm not the type to strap my dog to the roof and hope for the best.)
posted by the littlest brussels sprout at 10:11 AM on September 21, 2012 [30 favorites]

Really, nobody thought sending Paul Ryan to the AARP conference was a bad idea?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:15 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Well, these are people who thought brown-face for Latino TV was a good idea...
posted by the littlest brussels sprout at 10:18 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Really, nobody thought sending Paul Ryan to the AARP conference was a bad idea?"

The only way it could have been worse is if it were sponsored by the delicious taste of Fancy Feast. Just because you're an irresponsible victim living off of the government's handouts doesn't mean you have to eat store-brand cat food.
posted by klangklangston at 10:22 AM on September 21, 2012 [13 favorites]

If it weren't for the fact that Reince is friends with Paul Ryan, I would start to wonder if some higher ups in the Republican party talked Ryan onto the ticket in an attempt to reduce his long term role in the party.

(And Paul Ryan's ineffective campaigning is what they get for choosing a candidate who has never even ran a state-wide race).
posted by drezdn at 10:22 AM on September 21, 2012

well from the imgur link, I don't think many are going to defend that Obama quote, indeed over-protection of the banking system is one of the biggest criticisms to be leveled at this administration, but the question asked in the link "what's the difference?" is really... sorta... disingenuous in a fashion. It doesn't take a lot to pick apart the differences. (the link is dead now btw)

1. Romney made a statement specifically targeting and identifying 1/2 of Americans as lazy and parasitic, it is specifically negative and dismissive.
2. Obama made a statement that he wants to help members of the banking industry. (which says nothing about anybody other than the banking industry, without serious subjective self interpretation), in that statement Obama does not preclude assistance to other groups as well. I may disagree with the statement but it is narrow in scope and positive in nature.

And look, on a larger scale, yeah to big to fail and the bank bailouts is a pretty contentious issue and I most defiantly lean much further to the let them fail side then not. However, there are/where at least on the surface, reasonable arguments why the bail outs where needed. I don't think there are all that many people who feel the 47% parasite mentality is terribly good long term policy.

So, yeah it's kind of a weak analogy, I'm sure with effort something much stronger could be made.
posted by edgeways at 10:23 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

If the election pans out as looking right now Reince will be out of a job by Dec, yet another republican Chairman down the tubes.
posted by edgeways at 10:26 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

> This saga has made me very curious -- what exactly has allowed such a remarkably thick intellectual bubble to form around a substantial portion of the most wealthy Americans?

Bill Gates -- now there's a presidential candidate! -- dodged the bubble ... maybe those wealthy individuals stuck inside the Republican intellectual bubble still see life through the past successes of competitive primary and secondary industries, (and the War machine).

No, I'm not kidding; and I don't think the US defending its domestic constitutional rights helps. They're not global, and they're past their domestic use-by date. The US can't export them for the want of trying.

Capitalist America can no longer compete globally without regulating (therefore fleecing) the rest of the world, and guess what?
The US is broke.
posted by de at 10:27 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

My guess is that Paul Ryan and Rick Santorum will be the top contenders in '16.

Huckabee's the clear favorite though, right?
posted by fleacircus at 10:28 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mormons Want to Excommunicate Romney Critic

Wow, that's frightening and also rather sad. The way they kept trying to get him to dime everyone else associated with that website...ugh.
posted by lord_wolf at 10:28 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama made a statement that he wants to help members of the banking industry.

I'd like to see the rest of the speech to understand the context too. It strikes me as likely part of a general "right, you guys fall in line / play nice" lecture. I.e. he's playing the good cop role.
posted by NailsTheCat at 10:29 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

I think Chelsea is old enough now that we'd already know if that was the case.

This recent Vogue profile of her implied she'd be interested:

I ask her, Could you ever imagine running for public office? “Before my mom’s campaign I would have said no. Not because it was something I had thought a lot about but because people have been asking me that my whole life. Even during my father’s 1984 gubernatorial campaign, it was, Do you want to grow up and be governor one day? No. I am four. And also because I believe that there are many ways for each of us to play our part. For a very long time that’s what my mom did. And then she went into elected public life. Her life is a testament to the principle that there are many ways to serve.” She pauses. “And now I don’t know. . . . I mean, I have voted in every election that I have been qualified to vote in since I turned eighteen. I believe that engaging in the political process is part of being a good person. And I certainly believe that part of helping to build a better world is ensuring that we have political leaders who are committed to that premise. So if there were to be a point where it was something I felt called to do and I didn’t think there was someone who was sufficiently committed to building a healthier, more just, more equitable, more productive world? Then that would be a question I’d have to ask and answer.”

It also contains this awesome detail:

(“I will tell you,” says Huma Abedin, “the moment in Hillary’s life when she is happiest is when there’s a call from Chelsea. Even if we are in the middle of a horrible, horrible meeting, she’ll answer the phone and say, ‘HIII, CHELSEA!’ It’s just the best sound.”)

posted by sallybrown at 10:29 AM on September 21, 2012 [24 favorites]

If the election pans out as looking right now Reince will be out of a job by Dec, yet another republican Chairman down the tubes.

As big a buffoon as Michael Steele could be, at least he had some humor and personality. Priebus is just a flat-out prick. I certainly wouldn't hire him to promote my product.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 10:32 AM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

Soon Mitt Romney will interrupt a press event, pick up his cell phone and force out "HIII CHELSEA!" and start mugging for the cameras while wondering "does this make me human?"
posted by boo_radley at 10:34 AM on September 21, 2012 [10 favorites]

Michael Steele is kind of weird, he is prone to wandering off the reservation from time to time, may let the 3 legged dog not get mentioned, or even worse may mention the opposition's 6 toed cat.

I get the feeling he may be a fun person to talk with informally, even if there are some fundamental differences in political positions. I.... really can't think of all that many Republican politicians I would say the same thing about.
posted by edgeways at 10:37 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

Paul Ryan has had decent healthcare as a House member, has he not? Does he know the fear of zero coverage? (I also find it troubling that Mr. Ryan -- as a former Social Security beneficiary -- would now denigrate recipients of public funding.)
posted by the littlest brussels sprout at 10:38 AM on September 21, 2012

I always read Reince Priebus as Rebeus Prince. Which makes him sound like a character in a Harry Potter book. Definitely Slytherin, probably a pure-blood.
posted by book 'em dano at 10:38 AM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

Video of Ryan getting booed. Disastrous.
posted by unSane at 10:39 AM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

sallybrown: "(“I will tell you,” says Huma Abedin, “the moment in Hillary’s life when she is happiest is when there’s a call from Chelsea. Even if we are in the middle of a horrible, horrible meeting, she’ll answer the phone and say, ‘HIII, CHELSEA!’ It’s just the best sound.”)"

That is the sweetest thing I will read this week and honestly makes my heart grow bigger. Aw.
posted by Phire at 10:39 AM on September 21, 2012 [11 favorites]

That is not a "mixed reaction" and that tie make shim look like he has a hole in his chest (Ryan's video)
posted by edgeways at 10:42 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

That is the sweetest thing I will read this week and honestly makes my heart grow bigger.

I read that line, put down the magazine, and called my mom just to say hi.
posted by sallybrown at 10:43 AM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

If Romney loses, here's my 2016 thoughts:

Paul Ryan: Might try but doesn't really have a shot. Who is the last person who has won the presidency from the House? He won't be able to become a Senator or Governor in the next four years.

Huckabee: Had a tendency to give clemency to the wrong people.

Santorum: Will still be less likable than Romney.

I'd put the front runner (if he gets re-elected in 2014) as Scott Walker or another Republican governor that didn't run this year.
posted by drezdn at 10:44 AM on September 21, 2012

My question is why doesn't Ryan buy clothes that fit him? He always looks like a kid on his way to prom in his dad's suit.
posted by shakespeherian at 10:45 AM on September 21, 2012 [6 favorites]

When I was a boy . . .
posted by Ironmouth at 10:45 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Walker is not a bad guess and I wouldn't be surprised to see him run. Will be interesting to see how the next few years play out for him though.
posted by edgeways at 10:46 AM on September 21, 2012

Soon the remote control gizmo will fall out of Romney's C3 vertebrae with a fizzle and a schlorp, slowly dangling down a whipcord that reached to his groin, fallitf to the ground, oozing and twitching, and finally become still. And the body will stop moving, the eyes will glaze over, the hair slowly fall flat and go sandy blonde and what remains will be the true Mitt Romney, the re-animated corpse of
posted by seanmpuckett at 10:47 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

grindlewald?
posted by elizardbits at 10:49 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

The suspense is killing me.
posted by Faint of Butt at 10:49 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

sean, please finish that sentence!
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:49 AM on September 21, 2012

Andy Kaufman.
posted by unSane at 10:50 AM on September 21, 2012

Jimmy Hoffa
posted by zombieflanders at 10:51 AM on September 21, 2012

That Paul Ryan video is astounding.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:51 AM on September 21, 2012

Found this on reddit, just going to leave this here since this is the thread where we all go bananas on Romney and his stupidity every time he opens his mouth.

Yes, it's an imgur link.

It's kinda hilarious that that quotation from Obama about standing between the bankers and the pitchforks has been taken up by Republicans recently trying to defend Romney's comment about the 47%. Back when Obama actually said that to the bankers (in the first couple of months of his administration) the Republican response was howling outrage. This was supposed to somehow be proof that Obama was a vicious socialist who didn't understand how capitalism worked. Now, apparently, it's proof that Obama is a crony capitalist who is on the side of the bankers.

Here's another little snippet from that same conversation:

You guys have an acute public relations problem that's turning into a political problem. And I want to help. But you need to show that you get that this is a crisis and that everyone has to make some sacrifices.

I'm not out there to go after you. I'm protecting you. But if I'm going to shield you from public and congressional anger, you have to give me something to work with on these issues of compensation.

Conveniently, you can read this as heavy handed "nice little shop you've got here, be a shame if anything happened to it" coercion or as craven siding with the 1% depending on your political needs of the moment.

It's also worth pointing out that no one, so far as we know, was tape-recording that meeting. All comments about what Obama said in that meeting are hearsay from the memories of the participants: so trying to get too deep into parsing the details of the wording probably isn't too useful.

It is also worth noting that the bankers emerged from the meeting angry with the administration and that they have, by and large, remained angry with the administration. They have also, by and large, thrown in their support behind Romney. If the purpose of quoting this exchange is to prove, somehow, that Obama is their faithful lackey, their reaction to him and to his administration must remain something of a puzzle.
posted by yoink at 10:51 AM on September 21, 2012 [12 favorites]

Ryan: "The first step... To a stronger Medicare... Is to repeal Obamacare...
Public: "BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Ryan: "Because it represents the worst of both worlds...."
Public: "BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!"
Ryan: "I had a feeling there would be mixed reactions, so let me get into it..."

Do I laugh, or do I cry?
posted by the littlest brussels sprout at 10:51 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

Paul Ryan is a muppet
posted by edgeways at 10:53 AM on September 21, 2012

Buzz is that Romney's releasing his tax return for 2011 at 3pm. Because as we all know, that'll put that debate to bed, and no one will ask for it ever again!

I mean, I guess they're thinking whatevs, Friday news dump and all. But after a week that's been all about taxes, that seems like they're looking at a bonfire and thinking "Man, I wonder what would happen if I threw a firecracker on this sumbitch."
posted by zombieflanders at 10:54 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'm laughing so hard, I'm crying!
posted by ericb at 10:54 AM on September 21, 2012

> Buzz is that Romney's releasing his tax return for 2011 at 3pm.

Longform?
posted by de at 10:56 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

Confirmed! Official campaign details on the tax return here.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:56 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh man. I've been checking out 538 every day for the last week, and the change in the State-by-state probability map between yesterday and today is stunning. There's a lot less red all of a sudden....
posted by gofargogo at 10:56 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

It's really starting to look as if both Romney and Ryan are victims of the right's epistemic closure. That's the simplest explanation for their self-immolation that I can think of.
posted by unSane at 10:57 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Summary of tax return release
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:57 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Paul Ryan is a muppet

My good sir, this statement is an insult to Muppet-Americans everywhere.
posted by the littlest brussels sprout at 10:57 AM on September 21, 2012 [17 favorites]

Check out the 538 now-cast. 94.8% chance of reelection.
posted by shakespeherian at 10:58 AM on September 21, 2012

Ryan: "I had a feeling there would be mixed reactions, so let me get into it...""

I guess a mixture of "No!" and "Fuck no!" qualifies as "mixed reactions".
posted by tonycpsu at 10:59 AM on September 21, 2012 [13 favorites]

Ryan video reminded me of the The Office episode where Michael Scott is talking about some ridiculousness and proceeds to double down by asking/answering himself via an affirmation of "What? Yes, I am right."
posted by RolandOfEld at 10:59 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

I guess the long form returns would have shown proof that he's been drinking Dick Cheney's blood in order to assume his powers or something.
posted by elizardbits at 10:59 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Huckabee: Had a tendency to give clemency to the wrong people.

Not sure how that damaging that really is to a Republican, and I think Huckabee can spin it into something that looks good to independents. Also, it's not 1988 anymore.

"Man, I wonder what would happen if I threw a firecracker on this sumbitch."

Could be more like the Obama birth certificate rope a dope.
posted by fleacircus at 11:00 AM on September 21, 2012

Romney deilberately did not claim about $1.75 million in charitable deductions for 2011 in order to avoid dipping below an effective tax rate of 13 percent, a threshold he said earlier in the year he had never crossed in his previous 10 tax returns.

W.
T.
F.

"I made a random statement about my taxes because I don't actually know what I earn and what I pay, and so I'll adjust my return in accordance with random claim that I made."

Also, I completely agree that releasing just the bottom-line tax rate is only fuel in the fire.
posted by muddgirl at 11:02 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

From that TPM link: "After you have reviewed all of the newly-posted documents, you may have further questions. The campaign asks that you direct them to an e-mail account set up for that purpose. That e-mail address is returns @ mittromney.com."

1) I pity the poor intern handling that account.
2) It would be too much to ask Romney any questions in person, of course.
3) Will reporters actually ask about the 2009 long form? Ever?

Could be more like the Obama birth certificate rope a dope.

Doubtful. He's releasing a SUMMARY of several years of taxes. Even assuming that the summary is accurate, the details of his tax returns are what people want to see. Again: 2009. Amnesty. Did he apply?
posted by maudlin at 11:03 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

$13.7M of "mostly investment income"?

As a struggling but above-average American, may I say: Ehrmahgerd.
posted by the littlest brussels sprout at 11:04 AM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

Romney deilberately did not claim about $1.75 million in charitable deductions for 2011 in order to avoid dipping below an effective tax rate of 13 percent, a threshold he said earlier in the year he had never crossed in his previous 10 tax returns.

That is just insane, isn't it? His tax rate would have fallen below what he said, so he paid more to keep it in line with his claims.
posted by unSane at 11:04 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Could be more like the Obama birth certificate rope a dope.

How exactly? Maybe it shuts up Harry Reid (doubtful, considering only the return for 2011 is being released), but that's a poor trade-off for reminding the press corps and the voters that, oh yeah, this guy has only shown us two years of tax returns and those show he's paying lower rates than most of us.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:04 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

@froomkin If Romney had taken all his deductions, he wd have paid closer to 9% tax in 2011. He paid extra VOLUNTARILY just for optics.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:07 AM on September 21, 2012 [8 favorites]

Romney Artificially Inflated 2011 Taxes After Decrying The Idea
posted by zombieflanders at 11:08 AM on September 21, 2012 [7 favorites]

Ryan's bombing with the old folks!!! scramble scramble scramble, tax returns deploy!!!
posted by edgeways at 11:09 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

This last week or so has been so much fun.
posted by RolandOfEld at 11:09 AM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

Doubtful. He's releasing a SUMMARY of several years of taxes. Even assuming that the summary is accurate, the details of his tax returns are what people want to see.

Clever to provide 20-year average, which includes nearly 10 years of higher statutory rates on cap gains/carried interest
posted by gladly at 11:10 AM on September 21, 2012 [8 favorites]

"After you have reviewed all of the newly-posted documents, you may have further questions. The campaign asks that you direct them to an e-mail account set up for that purpose. That e-mail address is returns @ mittromney.com."

Obama does an AMA; Romney sets up an e-mail account for questions on a specific topic. This looks to me like a desperate attempt to keep up with social technology... but never making it out from behind the curve.

Am I missing something? Was that e-mail address supposed to be available only to reporters, or something? Or was it really just put out there, for all of us peasants/voters, to use at our leisure, as if we'll get direct responses individually?
posted by meese at 11:10 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

In an interview with ABC News in July, however, Romney dismissed the idea that he would ever pay more taxes than legally owed, saying if he did so he wouldn't be "qualified" to be president.

Well now, at least he admits it.
posted by edgeways at 11:11 AM on September 21, 2012 [8 favorites]

Soon the remote control gizmo will fall out of Romney's C3 vertebrae with a fizzle and a schlorp

Based on those sound effects, I'm imagining this as a Don Martin cartoon.
posted by Strange Interlude at 11:12 AM on September 21, 2012 [6 favorites]

Based on those sound effects, I'm imagining this as a Don Martin cartoon.

Based on the last couple of weeks, I'm imagining that Don Martin is running the Romney campaign.
posted by yoink at 11:13 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

Dudes got 99 problems and rich is just one
posted by edgeways at 11:13 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

He paid extra VOLUNTARILY just for optics.

It's funny, because house Republicans just rammed through some sort of tax form modification that makes it easier for people pay additional tax voluntarily. I guess it was some sort of jab at the idea of a Buffett Rule where they allow people to pay extra to prove that most people don't want to pay extra.

Now Romney goes and steps on their message with his craven attempt to look like he's not gaming the system.

This guy simply cannot get out of his own way.
posted by tonycpsu at 11:13 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

If Romney is actually STUPID,STUPID,STUPID enough to think that releasing some bullshit synopsis of his tax returns is going to do anything OTHER than fan the flames, then he doesn't deserve to be dogcatcher, let alone president. This is, far and away, the most ignorant move out of an embarrassment of ignorant moves he's made.

Can you imagine how well he'd run foreign policy? We'd all be dead within a year with his instincts.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 11:18 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

@mattyglesias I can't fully deduct my charitable contributions, I'm running for office for Pete's sake.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:19 AM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

“You may have thought you heard me say I wanted to see your tax return, but what I said was: Give me all the tax returns you have.”
posted by drezdn at 11:20 AM on September 21, 2012 [14 favorites]

My question is why doesn't Ryan buy clothes that fit him?

Yeah, what the hell, dude? You're making, what? Low six figures, at least? What's with the Tom Hanks-at-the-end-of-Big look?

Buzz is that Romney's releasing his tax return for 2011 at 3pm.

I'm beginning to think that Mitt Romney could fuck up a wet dream.
posted by octobersurprise at 11:21 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

Why not just not-report the extra charitable giving?
posted by unSane at 11:23 AM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Nice to know it's business as usual in DC, though: Senate Republicans today rejected the Veterans Job Corps Act, which sought to help returning veterans find work.

The Daily Show: Screwing Private Ryan
posted by homunculus at 11:25 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Yesterday I donated $25 to Mother Jones. It's not a huge amount, but I hope it shows at least in part my undying gratitude for the video, which I consider a gift on par with everything you could ever want for Christmas.
posted by jokeefe at 11:30 AM on September 21, 2012 [19 favorites]

It is stunning how one brave person recording and leaking this can have such an impact. It's like a roll-your-own wikileak. I'd love to buy him or her a beer. This is going to go down in history, I think, on par with the Kennedy-Nixon debate in terms of presidential engagement with new media.
posted by Rumple at 11:34 AM on September 21, 2012 [7 favorites]

Unrelated but awesome weekly Biden family awww/hilarity: Jill Biden Inadvertently Makes A Penis Joke (twice!)
posted by zombieflanders at 11:34 AM on September 21, 2012 [8 favorites]

I'm beginning to think that Mitt Romney could fuck up a wet dream.

You're probably right, but just for the record I'd like to request that everyone please avoid speculating on the details as to how. Because eww.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 11:35 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Yesterday I donated $25 to Mother Jones. It's not a huge amount, but I hope it shows at least in part my undying gratitude for the video, which I consider a gift on par with everything you could ever want for Christmas.
posted by jokeefe

Is there a word for something that's eponysterical but for completely different reasons?
posted by zombieflanders at 11:36 AM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

My question is why doesn't Ryan buy clothes that fit him? He always looks like a kid on his way to prom in his dad's suit.

I imagine that the Republican party would take care of things like this, but maybe they're reluctant due to their last VP candidate, who wound up taking advantage of them by going hog wild on purchasing clothes and accessories not just for herself but for her family and friends and pet moose and what not. If I remember correctly - and I'm not kidding - after the campaign, the party wound up sending an eighteen wheeler and a lawyer to Alaska to collect the clothes that she had used their money to purchase.
posted by Flunkie at 11:51 AM on September 21, 2012

homunculus: "Nice to know it's business as usual in DC, though: Senate Republicans today rejected the Veterans Job Corps Act, which sought to help returning veterans find work.

The Daily Show: Screwing Private Ryan"

oh god all I can wonder is what videogame Clinton was hooked on?
posted by rebent at 11:51 AM on September 21, 2012

NBA Jam, probably.
posted by onehalfjunco at 11:54 AM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

My question is why doesn't Ryan buy clothes that fit him? He always looks like a kid on his way to prom in his dad's suit.

Most men make this same mistake-- they think they're a size or two bigger than they are. It's not that he doesn't have enough money: I bet those suits are plenty expensive. It's that for men, a size 44, being bigger, seems "more manly" than a 40 or 42. Combine this with the fact that his early adulthood was spent in the 90s when baggier, looser styles were the norm, and you have a formula for his sartorial disaster.
posted by deanc at 12:08 PM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

Yesterday I donated $25 to Mother Jones....

Ah, bless you Jokeefe.

There's a real pleasure in seeing that venerable ancient lefty progressive periodical nail the Romster like this, lolz...
posted by Skygazer at 12:11 PM on September 21, 2012

Speaking of Scott Walker, here is his advice on the campaign:

“They not only need to use [Ryan] out on the trail more effectively, they need to have more of him rub off on Mitt because I think Mitt thinks that way but he’s gotta be able to articulate that…I think too many people are restraining him from telling [his vision].”

Two things pop to mind:

1. Using Ryan on the trail this morning was definatlly a mark in the loss collum

and

2. You want Mitt to talk more about his vision?
posted by edgeways at 12:15 PM on September 21, 2012

So if there were to be a point where it was something I felt called to do and I didn’t think there was someone who was sufficiently committed to building a healthier, more just, more equitable, more productive world? Then that would be a question I’d have to ask and answer

So, OK, yeah, that's about what I said. Might run for state rep in 10-20 years. Probably doesn't want to be president.
posted by Sara C. at 12:17 PM on September 21, 2012

Paul Ryan is a muppet

As someone who was literally voted "Most Likely To Be A Muppet" in her high school senior class, I would like to stick up for muppets anywhere and say

NO HE IS NOT.
posted by Sara C. at 12:21 PM on September 21, 2012 [7 favorites]

How exactly? ... this guy has only shown us two years of tax returns and those show he's paying lower rates than most of us.

We already knew that. Romney divulged something and there was no knockout punch. Before, the year he released looked like a lonesome point in the void. It left people wondering "omg if this is the year they picked..." Now it looks more like a pretty representative thing.

Again: 2009. Amnesty. Did he apply?

What new attack has this information opened up?

Romney and his supporters can say better/new things to defend El Mittens from any questions about taxes. He has room to dodge. He can point to the sustained high % of charitable giving. He can point out he never paid less than 13.66%. He say things like "over the last 20 years I've paid $52 million [or whatever] in taxes. Eesh! that's a lot of money. I'm just finding this out from my blind trust guy now." He can make himself look like a guy who has paid a lot of total tax money who is getting badgered on some technical matter.

I guess I'm just not seeing it. To me it looks more like the tax return angle has been sealed off.
posted by fleacircus at 12:22 PM on September 21, 2012

There's a real pleasure in seeing that venerable ancient lefty progressive periodical nail the Romster like this, lolz...

If you've got the dough, I'd suggest a subscription to the print magazine. It goes well with the online blogs from Kevin Drum, Adam Serwer, et al. I got one as a gift a couple years ago and renew it as soon as I get my "last issue" notice.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:25 PM on September 21, 2012

As someone who was literally voted "Most Likely To Be A Muppet" in her high school senior class, I would like to stick up for muppets anywhere and say

NO HE IS NOT.

heh

Oh, I'm not saying that his personality is Muppet like.. I'm saying he looks like a Muppet. the baggy clothes and droopy eyes/mouth
posted by edgeways at 12:26 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Combine this with the fact that his early adulthood was spent in the 90s when baggier, looser styles were the norm

Now I'm just imagining him in JNCOs with his hair all gelled up and highlighted tips.
posted by sallybrown at 12:26 PM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

I thought maybe I was just imagining it, or conflating an old Onion article with reality, perhaps due to my frothing-at-the-mouth liberalness, so I went back and checked:

Here is an LA Times article about the Republican party sending a lawyer to Alaska to try to recoup the absurd amount of clothes that she (without permission) bought on their dime.
posted by Flunkie at 12:27 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Scott Walker joins the pile-on.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:29 PM on September 21, 2012

there was no knockout punch.

perhaps not... but 9% and having to pay more taxes so he looks like he paid 13% is certainly good for one more prevacid, frankly it ties into how often he "retroactively" changes things to fit the current situation I don't think it helps him overmuch.
posted by edgeways at 12:29 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

To me it looks more like the tax return angle has been sealed off.

I want to agree, but the response to "that's all I'm going to show, all the rest of the years are just as boring and mundane" will continue to be, well every other candidate has released their returns (which is true), so why don't you? It's clear he is hiding something substantive in there, and that is preventing him from doing what all other candidates in this situation have done in years past, republican and democrat.

This isn't going to make the tax return issue go away because this was still the line of discussion when he noted long ago that he would release 2011. It's still there.
posted by cashman at 12:30 PM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

As someone who was literally voted "Most Likely To Be A Muppet" in her high school senior class,

Wha...that's awesome. Also Muppets are pro gay rights n things right, so no Paul Ryan isn't a muppet.
posted by sweetkid at 12:32 PM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

I guess I'm just not seeing it. To me it looks more like the tax return angle has been sealed off.

The last thing he wants to do is talk about his taxes, even if everything is above board. Now everyone in his organization is learning the 13.66% talking points this week instead of trying to shift the conversation to attacking Obama or advancing their ideas. It seems like a classic Romney bone-head move, tough it out for three months until people forget about it, then half way give in and raise the issue again in everyone's mind.

Yglesias: Shrewd of Romney to distract attention from his stated policy views by shifting discussion to his unlikeable personal qualities
posted by shothotbot at 12:33 PM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

Paul Ryan Booed At AARP For Attacking Obamacare

I hope they're taking their blood pressure medication.
posted by homunculus at 12:36 PM on September 21, 2012 [7 favorites]

Now it looks more like a pretty representative thing.

Well sure. 2011 taxes are this year's taxes. The taxes that we all did back in April. Surely Romney knew he was running for President in 2011 and during the filing period of 2012, and behaved accordingly. (Then again, if this week has taught us anything, it's that Romney has no idea how to behave.)

What people are concerned about are his taxes prior to 2009.
posted by Sara C. at 12:38 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Just to continue with the reboots, I'm assumi g Romney will be be doing a tell-all interview with Katie Couric about his time at Bain in mid-October *crosses fingers*
posted by zombieflanders at 12:39 PM on September 21, 2012

The last thing he wants to do is talk about his taxes, even if everything is above board.

Yeah. It'd be like if, in three weeks, he held a giant press conference to apologize for his comments in the 47% video. Nothing he could say would stand a chance of blunting the effect of the criticism, so all it would do is attract attention again back to the criticism after the media had, on its own, moved on to other stories.
posted by meese at 12:39 PM on September 21, 2012

Paul Ryan Booed At AARP For Attacking Obamacare
I hope they're taking their blood pressure medication.

I was saying boo-lud pressure medication.
posted by Flunkie at 12:39 PM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

Mitt hasn't "been around much," Obama suggests to Unavision.
posted by bardophile at 12:40 PM on September 21, 2012

Unrelated but awesome weekly Biden family awww/hilarity: Jill Biden Inadvertently Makes A Penis Joke (twice!)

In other penis news: Penis Scientist Rush Limbaugh Blames Small Penis Size on Feminazis
posted by homunculus at 12:42 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

He's on fire!

Boom shaka-laka!
posted by box at 12:43 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

over the last 20 years I've paid $52 million [or whatever] in taxes. Eesh! that's a lot of money. I'm just finding this out from my blind trust guy now.

Given half an hour and a calculator, I could tell you the sum total of the taxes I've paid over the last 20 years (well 12, which is as long as I've had to file).

In 2011 I wrote a check for about $500; not sure what my total tax liability was off the top of my head, but I have an idea of the number and it would take a quick search for a pdf on my hard drive to find out.

The idea that Romney might not know how much he pays in taxes from year to year, and that it's a number that could surprise him would make him seem as out of touch as GHW Bush and the apocryphal grocery scanner.
posted by Sara C. at 12:44 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

apocryphal grocery scanner.

That was a real grocery scanner, not a later interpolation by a second editor.
posted by shothotbot at 12:46 PM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

From the "Blood Pressure Link":

A few weeks ago, several of Ryan’s unemployed constituents staged a peaceful sit-in at his Kenosha, Wisconsin office to protest his unpopular decision not to hold any free public town halls during the August recess. These constituents didn’t think they should have to pay to ask their elected representative a question. Instead of meeting with them, Ryan’s staff called the police.

So it should come as no surprise that this week, three people who paid to see Ryan speak were arrested and charged with trespassing for protesting the event

I think it should be illegal not to meet with your constituents; there should be at least a minimum number of open meetings. If your constituents are angry, you have a responsibility to meet with them and hear them out. I hate this idea that once you get elected you can just enact laws or govern however you feel like without needing to listen to those you govern or represent as though they were just rabble.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:47 PM on September 21, 2012 [18 favorites]

The last thing he wants to do is talk about his taxes

I don't know, right now he might remember fondly the days when he was getting attacked on his taxes and sorta looked like he had a shot at winning the election.

Well sure. 2011 taxes are this year's taxes.

I was talking about the 2010 return he'd already released.

The idea that Romney might not know how much he pays in taxes from year to year

Sorry, I forgot to set RomneyBot.joking_tone = TRUE. Note: I am not a professional speechwriter.
posted by fleacircus at 12:48 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Even Republicans agree--releasing the tax summary was a bad move:

Alex Castellanos, the former Mitt Romney strategist from 2008 who has alternately been critical and praising of the current campaign, left no doubt where he stands on the decision to release a summary of the candidate's tax rates over 20 years.

"At first I thought this was an April Fool's Joke," said Castellanos, who tweeted something to that effect at me earlier. "But it isn't April. I can't imagine that David Axelrod will now say, I'm glad Mitt put this issue behind him. This will drag Mitt's taxes back into the debate. And there's not many days left. I just can't imagine why they would do this. There are 40 days left and you have now made more of them about Mitt's taxes....you don't serve a life sentence and then confess afterward. They've taken their beating on this (already) ... I just don't understand how a (being) 'little pregnant' strategy (works)."

posted by overglow at 12:49 PM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

Romney was already in a hole re:taxes. He put his foot down about what he would and wouldn't release, he caught the shitstorm, and everything more or less moved on. Good move or bad, the damage was mostly done.

Now he's brought the whole conversation back up. HE brought it up. Dumb. So, in his flip-floppy way, he capitulated and, to show that he's a "nice guy" he's offered up info from previous returns.

But he's missed the whole point of why people want to see the returns. People don't want the bottom line numbers, they want to see how he got to them. A synopsis of the results does nothing to address that.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 12:50 PM on September 21, 2012

Plus it's the least interesting possible year. Show us what you do when you're not running for president, Mitt.
posted by Artw at 12:53 PM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

Expert: Romney may have paid less in taxes over 20 years than it appears
posted by zombieflanders at 12:56 PM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

Also, why make this news at this point? Romney must surely know that his campaign needs to go on the all out offensive to win votes from here on in. This, which doesn't really settle anything at all, just seems like a waste of precious time. Attacks deferred are attacks avoided, if I may allow myself a horrible accountancy pun.
posted by howfar at 1:00 PM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

46 news cycles left, strike off 2 or 3 for end of race focus, strike about 10 for weekend, taxes issue will now shave off 2 or 3, leaves about 21 cycles for Mittens to get enough good press to find a path to convince a heck of a lot of voters he is sincere, and with even the Romney camp saying this is a choice election rather than an issue campaign things are very very dark for Romney
posted by edgeways at 1:02 PM on September 21, 2012

I think he is trying to be different people again. For Republicans Tax-Haters he is the guy who says, “I pay all the taxes that are legally required and not a dollar more. I don’t think you want someone as the candidate for president who pays more taxes than he owes.” For Democrats he has to prove that he never paid less than 13%. And for the Mormons or the Anti-Rich he has to show how he gave away $4 million. Reconciling all these different requirements is a fool's game and Mitt just screwed up again. Take a stance. Show us who you really are, Mitt. Are you the anti-tax guy? Are you the paid a lot of tax guy? Are you the big-hearted, charitable guy? Unfortunately you are coming across as a robot twisting himself into pretzels in order to get elected.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 1:03 PM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

And things are going to shit with the protests. If he hadn't muddied the waters that would be a plus for him right now.
posted by Artw at 1:08 PM on September 21, 2012

What is going on in Arizona? I'm seeing some ass-crazy polls out there. Carmona by 5 over Flake first piqued my interest. Then today, Obama within the MOE. Then later today YouGov. Obama 51, Romney 41.

Here's my take. Right now Romney is hemorrhaging. He's losing more than gaining. We'll see Obama up 8 or 9 because a lot of Romney voters will move into the undecided. Romney will gain some of those voters back after the debates.

It won't be enough in my estimation.

The other scenario is that we get a wave for the Dems. I am trying so hard to tell myself it won't happen. But if Obama starts really overperforming in the Red states . . . What tells me that this might stick is how the Dem senate candidates are doing. It is pretty damn amazing and across the board.
posted by Ironmouth at 1:11 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Show us who you really are, Mitt.

Problem is, he really is just the rich guy who wants to be President, though he's not sure why, and he doesn't know enough about America to have his own ideas about what it takes to get into the office.
posted by Miko at 1:12 PM on September 21, 2012 [10 favorites]

The day before the embassy attacks, bettors on intrade gave Romney about a 42% chance of winning the election. In the week and a half since, his odds are down to about 28%. It's as if you can see everyone running screaming away from him.

Romney dropped 0.8% in the last 15 minutes alone. at 3:43 I emailed Josh Marshall saying "look! he's down to 29.5%" Now he's at 28.8.

Free fall.

The earth is moving beneath our feet.
posted by Ironmouth at 1:13 PM on September 21, 2012

Landslide, is it? Welcome to a little socialist economics, America. What took you so long?
posted by de at 1:16 PM on September 21, 2012

Problem is, he really is just the rich guy who wants to be President, though he's not sure why, and he doesn't know enough about America to have his own ideas about what it takes to get into the office.

This is exactly my take. I think he thought taking on Obama would be a breeze because he lives in a Republican bubble. Look at Anne's whining-- she obviously was not prepared for a hard campaign.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 1:17 PM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

Romney now down 5.3% for the day on InTrade.
posted by Ironmouth at 1:17 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

at this point he should just promise to give every American who votes for him a check for a thousand dollars, no questions asked.
posted by The Whelk at 1:18 PM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

Then later today YouGov. Obama 51, Romney 41.

This was definitely eyecatching, but you've got it backwards, unfortunately.
posted by Rhaomi at 1:20 PM on September 21, 2012

Heh... he could argue that if he becomes president and lowers taxes for the wealth, he could double that pay out. Everyone wins!
posted by Groundhog Week at 1:21 PM on September 21, 2012

What is going on in Arizona? I'm seeing some ass-crazy polls out there. Carmona by 5 over Flake first piqued my interest. Then today, Obama within the MOE. Then later today YouGov. Obama 51, Romney 41.

They must have messed up the press release, because their website says 51-41 Romney. But it's not your fault, TPM's Polltracker (I'm guessing we both follow a lot of the same Twitter feeds) got it wrong too.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:22 PM on September 21, 2012

Then later today YouGov. Obama 51, Romney 41.

This was definitely eyecatching, but you've got it backwards, unfortunately.

Sorry, read it off a tweet from TPM PollTracker. They got a typo and I didn't check it.
posted by Ironmouth at 1:25 PM on September 21, 2012

Come on everyone don't get too excited or it'll totally be like the time Martin won class president because everyone was too busy partying with Bart at recess to remember to vote.

The similarities are freaky come on - "Bart" = "Barack" "Mittens" = "Martin"

Think on it!! Wake up sheeple!
posted by sweetkid at 1:28 PM on September 21, 2012 [11 favorites]

Great Veep choice there, Willard.

(Everyone hates Paul Ryan.)
posted by Eyebeams at 1:28 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

PollTracker ‏@PollTracker
AZ President '12: Obama (D) 51.0% Romney (R) 41.0% (Sep. 14 - YouGov) http://tpm.ly/Sfw9S3

my evidence
posted by Ironmouth at 1:28 PM on September 21, 2012

funny, all of the TPM pages have that number reversed.
posted by Ironmouth at 1:31 PM on September 21, 2012

Expert: Romney may have paid less in taxes over 20 years than it appears

I.e. the 20% is an average of percentages, not a percentage of totals. But the "no year less than 13%" puts a lower bound on just how big of a pea might be hidden under that shell. The worst case scenario is on most of his fucktons of money, he only paid 13% tax. But, that's what we previously thought of as the best case scenario given what had already been released.

I guess we'll see how much the taxes thing sticks. It made sense to me as a defensive move, not a topic shift. If he really has nothing at all to put on Obama or can't find some way to not look inept, then things are going to get ugly/hilarious.
posted by fleacircus at 1:32 PM on September 21, 2012

But the "no year less than 13%" puts a lower bound on just how big of a pea might be hidden under that shell. The worst case scenario is on most of his fucktons of money, he only paid 13% tax. But, that's what we previously thought of as the best case scenario given what had already been released.

I don't know if this is possible under the current tax regime, but Gawker suggests there may have been some monkey business going on to keep that 13% percentage for each year:

That would tend to contradict Harry Reid's famous claim that Romney paid no taxes in certain years. But the large unanswered question is: Did the Romney's at any point amend or refile any of those old tax returns? I asked the campaign, and—while they did promptly answer some other questions—they didn't answer that one. Which leaves open the possibility that Romney amended some prior years with the same goal he had in mind in 2011—to make the tax rate more politically palatable.

posted by sallybrown at 1:35 PM on September 21, 2012 [6 favorites]

Of course, this being the USA, almost no one will ask the obvious question: Why is investment income (i.e., rich person income) taxed at a substantially lower rate than wages (lower and middle class person's income)?
posted by Eyebeams at 1:35 PM on September 21, 2012 [17 favorites]

Because they are making the jobs with all those tax savings Eyebeams. Making the jobs.
posted by sweetkid at 1:38 PM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

I propose we reverse the rates. Tax dividends and interest and 39.6% and wages at 15% max. EYEBEAMS FOR PRESIDENT.
posted by Eyebeams at 1:42 PM on September 21, 2012 [11 favorites]

"Illegal immigrants just riding around listening to raps, shooting all the jobs"
posted by The Whelk at 1:42 PM on September 21, 2012 [27 favorites]

That would tend to contradict Harry Reid's famous claim that Romney paid no taxes in certain years. But the large unanswered question is: Did the Romney's at any point amend or refile any of those old tax returns? I asked the campaign, and—while they did promptly answer some other questions—they didn't answer that one. Which leaves open the possibility that Romney amended some prior years with the same goal he had in mind in 2011—to make the tax rate more politically palatable.

Amended returns were my first thought as well.
posted by Ironmouth at 1:45 PM on September 21, 2012

Hmm, somebody on twitter pointed out that the wording on this line

"During the 20-year period covered by the PWC letter, Gov. and Mrs. Romney paid 100 percent of the taxes that they owed."

Leaves open the possibility that they did not pay everything they owed each year in the year that they owed it.
posted by TwoWordReview at 1:48 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Combine this with the fact that his early adulthood was spent in the 90s when baggier, looser styles were the norm, and you have a formula for his sartorial disaster.

Now you've got me imagining Paul Ryan in David Byrne's suit from Stop Making Sense.
posted by jonp72 at 1:51 PM on September 21, 2012 [6 favorites]

Now you've got me imagining Paul Ryan in David Byrne's suit from Stop Making Sense.

It would go well with his same as it ever was policies.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 1:54 PM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

Now you've got me imagining Paul Ryan in David Byrne's suit from Stop Making Sense.

"You may ask yourself: Why such a big suit? And you may ask yourself: Could it be taken in a little?"
posted by Strange Interlude at 1:54 PM on September 21, 2012 [25 favorites]

Now you've got me imagining Paul Ryan in David Byrne's suit from Stop Making Sense.

I demand a "Burning Down the House" remix featuring Paul Ryan's head superimposed over David Byrne and Romney's head superimposed on all the full Stop Making Sense dancers.
posted by sallybrown at 1:56 PM on September 21, 2012 [6 favorites]

And of course the results of a Romney/Ryan administration
posted by Flunkie at 1:57 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

"It would go well with his same as it ever was policies."

:-)
posted by Eyebeams at 2:00 PM on September 21, 2012

Now I'm just imagining him in JNCOs with his hair all gelled up and highlighted tips.

I am imagining him in cutoff overall shorts with only one shoulder strap attached and his own portrait airbrushed onto one of the legs.
posted by elizardbits at 2:03 PM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

Who took the money away?
posted by perhapses at 2:03 PM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

I am imagining him in cutoff overall shorts with only one shoulder strap attached and his own portrait airbrushed onto one of the legs.

So basically, the third wheel to this.
posted by sallybrown at 2:08 PM on September 21, 2012

I imagine Romney is beginning to feel like the captain of the Titanic - unless of course he's just some kind of cyborg filled with third tier transistors and kapok.
posted by Pudhoho at 2:12 PM on September 21, 2012

IT'S JUST A LITTLE AIRBORNE IT'S STILL GOOD IT'S STILL GOOD

will you be writing that check now? I'd still prefer not
posted by The Whelk at 2:15 PM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

In an interview with ABC News in July, however, Romney dismissed the idea that he would ever pay more taxes than legally owed, saying if he did so he wouldn't be 'qualified' to be president.

"'I don’t pay more than are legally due and frankly if I had paid more than are legally due I don’t think I’d be qualified to become president. I’d think people would want me to follow the law and pay only what the tax code requires.'

If Romney had taken all of the deductions available to him under the tax code, he would have paid closer to a 9 percent tax rate in 2011. In attempting to match up his tax rate with his prior statement, Romney is paying more in taxes — and by his very own standard — disqualifying himself from the presidency. It’s worth noting that under Romney’s tax plan, he would cut his own rates even further, and would have paid little to no taxes under Paul Ryan’s 2010 budget, which would have eliminated the capital gains tax."*
posted by ericb at 2:22 PM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

fleacircus: I guess I'm just not seeing it. To me it looks more like the tax return angle has been sealed off.

Surely you jest.
1. He lied about the tax rate he pays
2. He admittedly paid extra taxes in order to truthify the lie
3. For all we know, he's already filed an amended return - AFAIK, that's a private matter
4. He said he would be unqualified to be POTUS if he paid more taxes than he had to, which he's just done

Mendacity, manipulation, etch-a-sketch. It's not going to matter to hardcore Republicans, but I think it's a transparent attempt to 'seal off' this issue, and it's just another inept example of Romney the campaigner.
posted by syzygy at 2:23 PM on September 21, 2012

“It is possible, however, that Mr. Rommey could still deduct the unclaimed amount of his charitable donations in future tax years, experts said.”*

I bet he'll do so. Flippy-floppy as he always is and always will be!
posted by ericb at 2:26 PM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

Romney is congratulating Pawlenty on taking a job at a banking lobby firm.

Former Romney Campaign Chairman Turned Bank Lobbyist: Banks Should Regulate Themselves
posted by homunculus at 2:29 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

@zachdcarter: 233 pages of Romney's 379-page tax return are dedicated to listing foreign corporation/partnership holdings
posted by zombieflanders at 2:29 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

"A campaign plane carrying Ann Romney had to make an emergency landing in Colorado after the cabin filled with smoke, the Romney campaign said."*

"Stop it! This is hard. I wanna get off of this motherfuckin' plane!"
posted by ericb at 2:30 PM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

Wow, I was about to joke earlier that he could write off the extra taxes in next years return as a business/campaign expense but I didn't realise that he actually could write it off in future years.
posted by TwoWordReview at 2:30 PM on September 21, 2012

and in other news foxes make natural hen house guards.
posted by The Whelk at 2:30 PM on September 21, 2012

unSane: Video of Ryan getting booed. Disastrous.

Whose Plan Destroys Medicare -- Obama's or Romney-Ryan's? They both plan on "cutting*" $700 billion from Medicare, but in different ways:

The big difference, though, is the Affordable Care Act achieves these savings by reducing Medicare payments to drug companies, hospitals, and other providers rather than cutting payments to Medicare beneficiaries.

The Romney-Ryan plan, by contrast, achieves its savings by turning Medicare into a voucher whose value doesn't keep up with expected increases in healthcare costs -- thereby shifting the burden onto Medicare beneficiaries, who will have to pay an average of $6,500 a year more for their Medicare insurance, according an analysis of the Republican plan by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.

And furthermore:

Ryan’s proposal includes providing citizens with vouchers to pay for competing private health care plans, and it assumes the competition will drive down costs.

You know, like current competition for medical insurance has kept costs so low.

* And Medicare "cuts" are decreases to the amount allocated to the Medicare system over the next 10 years. It is estimated that Medicare spending over the next 10 years will be about $7.5 trillion. This means the Affordable Care Act’s Medicare cuts account for less than 10% of overall Medicare spending less than 10% of overall Medicare spending.
posted by filthy light thief at 2:31 PM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

Mitt Romney Releases The One Tax Return We Don't Care About -- "These are almost certainly the most highly anticipated tax returns in the history of America, and they have been stage-managed down to the last detail."
posted by ericb at 2:32 PM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

Ironmouth: Romney now down 5.3% for the day on InTrade.

Check out the graph for Obama's odds. This has given him a boost on a par with bin Laden's death.
posted by kagredon at 2:42 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

I wonder if an Obama lead will result in more votes for the other Ds on the local and state tickets.
posted by codacorolla at 2:42 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Pawlenty's departure is surely our best proxy measure for Romney's internal polling numbers, which we can thus infer must be pretty disastrous. This helps me trust the public polling numbers which are swinging so favourably to Obama.

I saw the first poll in three months in Georgia gives Romney only a 3 point lead. Could Georgia really be in play? Awesome.
posted by Rumple at 2:59 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

so, what does this mean:

Obama:

B Qty Bid Ask A Qty
150 71.2 71.6 100

Romney:

B Qty Bid Ask A Qty
5000 28.0 28.9 100

there's a massive difference between bidders and askers for Romney relative to Obama. In fact, it looks like the volume for Romney far exceeds Obama's. Does that difference between bid and ask indicate a huge sell-off?
posted by Ironmouth at 3:02 PM on September 21, 2012

Surely you jest.

If he released something that turns out to be easy to poke giant holes in, that would be dumb. I was assuming he wasn't that inept though...

1. He lied about the tax rate he pays
2. He admittedly paid extra taxes in order to truthify the lie
3. For all we know, he's already filed an amended return - AFAIK, that's a private matter
4. He said he would be unqualified to be POTUS if he paid more taxes than he had to, which he's just done

1+2, I think you're talking about not claiming the maximum deduction so that he paid 13% instead of 12%. That's pretty weak for OMG LIE AND COVERUP, but it seems pretty stupid for him to have done. Just eat the slightly lower %, Mitt. 3, True, but I don't know if you can hit him with that though. 4, Pretty funny gotcha quote, yep he shoulda avoided that.
posted by fleacircus at 3:03 PM on September 21, 2012

I wonder if an Obama lead will result in more votes for the other Ds on the local and state tickets.

All the analysis shows him lifting Dem senate candidates significantly. Yesterday, 538 gave the GOP only a 21% chance of taking over the senate.
posted by Ironmouth at 3:09 PM on September 21, 2012

Paul Ryan getting booed is going to be a cherished memory of this campaign for me.
posted by fleacircus at 3:10 PM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

also the bid-ask spread is wildly different. Obama is .4 Romney is 1.9, nearly 5 times as much. Romney has 50-1 bids to asks.
posted by Ironmouth at 3:11 PM on September 21, 2012

fleacircus: Let me amend #4 - he can still (or may already have) recoup the extra taxes he paid, making this transparent move to pay more even more ridiculous.

You said, "it looks more like the tax return angle has been sealed off."

I interpret that to mean you think the tax issue is finished as one that could do any damage to him. If that's what you mean, I think it's wrong, even IF no other smoking guns come out here. The handling of this makes him look like a mendacious fool. They're going to have to spend time answering questions about this issue (on the defensive) that they should have been using to convince more voters that he's the right guy (on the offensive).
posted by syzygy at 3:11 PM on September 21, 2012

fleacircus, I thought it was changing a 9% rate to 14.1% which is a much more significant difference.
posted by TwoWordReview at 3:15 PM on September 21, 2012

Paul Ryan getting booed is going to be a cherished memory of this campaign for me.

Paul Ryan getting booed by a bunch of outraged seniors is what really makes it special, tbh. I picture a sea of canes being waved angrily.
posted by elizardbits at 3:15 PM on September 21, 2012 [7 favorites]

The Adjusted Gross Income for 2011 from what he just revealed is apparently off of the AGI for 2011 from his preliminary numbers that were released months ago by over a third. Seven million dollars plus are missing.

"The most likely explanation is that Romney's accountants transferred income from Romney's personal return to one of the three trusts that also generate considerable income, almost all of it from investments. It will take a detailed examination of the 2010 and 2011 documents to figure out what changed, but here's a clue: Romney's campaign has begun to focus on the "personal" tax rate paid by Romney, rather than the tax rate that might be associated with the trusts and his total income from all sources."

From here.
posted by Flunkie at 3:18 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

The handling of this makes him look like a mendacious fool. They're going to have to spend time answering questions about this issue (on the defensive) that they should have been using to convince more voters that he's the right guy (on the offensive).

Whenever I see a maneuver like this I always ask myself, "What is the simplest interpretation, what is the shortest sound-bite, how is the campaign going to spin this to voters?

"They asked me to release my tax returns and I released them. They are still not satisfied. Nothing will satisfy my opponent."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:20 PM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

Romney's big announcement less than two months before the election is not a real plan to produce jobs, or a clear statement of his foreign policy. No, after months of doing who knows how much finagling, his announcement is, "look, see, I told you I didn't pay NO taxes!" I still think someone needs to ask him directly if he took advantage of the 2009 Swiss Bank Account Amnesty program.
posted by Golden Eternity at 3:22 PM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

Paul Ryan getting booed is going to be a cherished memory of this campaign for me.

You know that scene in Death Becomes Her when Helen watches Madelyn getting strangled in the movie clip over and over....
posted by The Whelk at 3:24 PM on September 21, 2012

Which I guess is appropriate, him being a zombie and all.
posted by Artw at 3:27 PM on September 21, 2012

Personally, I cannot wait for these debates.
posted by codacorolla at 3:28 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

The only scene I remember with any kind of clarity is the one where someone hits someone else really hard with a shovel. I found that very satisfying.
posted by elizardbits at 3:29 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

"They asked me to release my tax returns and I released them. They are still not satisfied. Nothing will satisfy my opponent."

It totally worked on the Birthers in 2008!
posted by howfar at 3:30 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Rumple- when was the GA poll done? I saw one last month pre-convention that had the 3 point difference and really have wanted to see an updated poll, the only one I have seen since was something done by a pretty crappy outfit showing a Romney blowout, and I've been wondering how serious to take it. If you got somethng, share please. I'd love Romney to have to defend GA (only 2 Eve less than OH)
posted by edgeways at 3:33 PM on September 21, 2012

fleacircus, I thought it was changing a 9% rate to 14.1% which is a much more significant difference.

I got 12% this though now it's been updated to 10.5% with some other way Mitt could have done his taxes.

I interpret that to mean you think the tax issue is finished as one that could do any damage to him.

Right, at the time I assumed it was accurate and consistent. If they couldn't even do this much without stepping in it, then no it was a stupid idea. They grabbed the can of worms and held it over their open mouths, shaking it.
posted by fleacircus at 3:36 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Personally, I cannot wait for these debates.

I'm not that excited for the debates, because they aren't the debates I want to see. What I would love, though, are these match ups: Obama vs. Ryan; Biden vs. Romney.

Obama clearly wants to debate Ryan. There is a clear, pointed difference in political outlook, goals, etc. between the two. This entire election, even before the VP announcement, Obama's focus has been on the sort of policies that Ryan pretty much personifies. That would be an electric show-down.

On the other hand, I believe one of Biden's best qualities, when it comes to debates, is his deep and earnest compassion. I see in Biden someone who is decent above all else. He has a folksy attitude that is earned from a lifetime in the middle class. He emotes, and he cares. Just imagine him facing off with Romney -- just imagine what a glorious spectacle that would be.
posted by meese at 3:36 PM on September 21, 2012 [25 favorites]

It's beautiful. It's really beautiful! What a week. GO ROMNEY!

no seriously keep going, this is hilarious.
posted by Big_B at 3:42 PM on September 21, 2012

I don't get it.
I thought the Romney-Ryan argument for lowering taxes is that if rich folks have more money, they will create more jobs, whereas the government is not very good at that.
So, by voluntarily paying MORE taxes, isn't Romney screwing a lot of people out of those jobs that he now cannot create anymore like he's supposed to?
So one possible move for the Obama camp now would be to propose a tax hike for whatever Romney's tax bracket is that would notch Romney up to exactly what he supposedly paid now - because that's obviously the amount that he deems is only fair.

I'm starting to wonder in all seriousness whether the Romney camp is trying to lose this on purpose. Perhaps they have some inside information along the lines that China will soon start to sell off US bonds bigtime so that the economy will crater for good (not like this Lehman sissy stuff, but real torches and pitchforks) and they don't want to be in office when that happens. I mean, what would you do if you tried to lose on purpose but wanted to make it subtle enough to look like you actually tried? I think the result would be something not unlike the current Romney campaign. I guess all that's lacking is an overtly racist jab at Obama during the debates or perhaps something dirty like Romney's campaign wire-tapping the Obama re-election HQ or so.
posted by sour cream at 3:43 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm starting to wonder in all seriousness whether the Romney camp is trying to lose this on purpose.

I'm honestly wondering if Romney's website was hacked but no one has noticed yet because they took off early. Because this tactic is seriously puzzling to me if we're talking about the narrative of a campaign. Which, yes, Romney has been struggling with his narrative. But still...
posted by muddgirl at 3:46 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

My prediction for next week, at a hastily-called press conference:

Romney: There is no truth to my opponent's allegation that I have killed several hobos. Now I'd like to open the floor to questions.

Reporter: I haven't heard any allegations that you have killed several hobos.

Romney: Blinks

Romney: Pauses

Romney: Blinks

Romney: Pauses

Romney: No more questions.
posted by Flunkie at 3:48 PM on September 21, 2012 [19 favorites]

I wish Steele and Cain would form a ticket and run... OMG that would be the pennicle of political theater, the country might implode but it would be a blaze of sublime performance art unrivaled throughout the ages
posted by edgeways at 3:49 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

''Romney's campaign is so dead the Mormon church is baptizing it''
posted by edgeways at 3:59 PM on September 21, 2012 [20 favorites]

From CBS News, My campaign doesn't need a turnaround.

I had to go back and listen to this part again (emphasis mine):

Scott Pelley: Well-- as you know, a lot of people were concerned about the video of the fundraiser in which you talked about the 47 percent of the American people who don't pay taxes. Peggy Noonan, a very well-known conservative columnist, said that it was an example of this campaign being incompetent. And I wonder if any of that criticism gets through to you and whether you're concerned about it at all, whether--

Mitt Romney: Well, that's not--

Scott Pelley: --the concerns of Republicans--

Mitt Romney: That's not...that's not the campaign. That was me, right? I-- that's not a campaign.

Um, did he just say his campaign wasn't incompetent, he was?
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 4:01 PM on September 21, 2012 [16 favorites]

there's a massive difference between bidders and askers for Romney relative to Obama. In fact, it looks like the volume for Romney far exceeds Obama's. Does that difference between bid and ask indicate a huge sell-off?

It can, but not necessarily. It can also mean that there were a lot of people ready to hedge a lot of shares Romney dropped super low. The actual volume that's being traded (not just offered) is about 19.2K shares for Romney and about 15.6K shares for Obama, which is a substantial difference, but not as huge as the buy-bid numbers on Romney make it look.
posted by kagredon at 4:03 PM on September 21, 2012

The campaign relaunches on Monday as Romney 2012.b: "Don't call it a comeback"
posted by shothotbot at 4:10 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

That's not...that's not the campaign. That was me, right?

yeah, that was you - at a campaign fund raiser

he seems completely confused
posted by pyramid termite at 4:13 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

...I've been here before...
posted by syzygy at 4:13 PM on September 21, 2012

"Don't call it a comeback"

Something tells me we won't.
posted by Bookhouse at 4:13 PM on September 21, 2012 [7 favorites]

At this point it wouldn't surprise me if Ryan was tarred, feathered and run out of town at his next campaign stop.
posted by unSane at 4:18 PM on September 21, 2012

"Don't call it a comeback"

Well, he has been here for years.
posted by COBRA! at 4:21 PM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

As Ryan smirks while the seniors at the AARP convention boo him, I can't help but imagine that he's playing a movie in his head in which all of the booing seniors are on a train that's rushing its passengers to their imminent and horrible deaths, a la Atlas Shrugged.

And he's smirking because the movie in his mind makes him happy.
posted by syzygy at 4:25 PM on September 21, 2012 [6 favorites]

I don't agree. I think it's also things like xenophobia, which is functionally pretty close to racism but it involves things like fears about job security amidst...

I don't think you really understand the concept of xenophobia, which literally just means fear of the other, or fear of outsiders. It's simply a more generalized form of racism, and basically equivalent. Calling xenophobia racism is perfectly fine. The only difference is that you could, in theory, be xenophobic against someone of the same 'race', but in this case it's obviously racial anyway, and thus racist. British people complaining about polish immigrants, for example might be xenophobic but not 'racist', but white people complaining about ethnic Latinos definitely is.

I am, however, saying that reminding anti choice single issue voters that Mitt Romney was once and may still be pro choice is acceptable, regardless of my personal stance on the issue.

Anti-choice people aren't idiots. They're not going to vote for a pro-choice president because the son of the challenger had a child through a surrogate with which he (the son) had a contract that included a clause about abortion. I mean, no abortion even happened here, no destruction of embryos that we know of.

Also, no one on intrade knows anything we don't. It's basically a barameter of conventional wisdom, it's not an accurate representation of reality.

If you look at Nate Silver's "now cast" on 538, Romney has like a 5.2% shot. That's probably the realistic number. The nov 6 forecast includes the possibility of 'something' happening before now and the election, which it should. But the "now cast" is what you want to look at if you want to know who's winning the presidency based on the currently available information, rather then including the possibility of future information.
posted by delmoi at 5:16 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

The Politics of Entitlement
posted by homunculus at 5:20 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm not that excited for the debates, because they aren't the debates I want to see. What I would love, though, are these match ups: Obama vs. Ryan; Biden vs. Romney.

Those would be great match ups, but given her increasing role as a surrogate for Romney, what I'd like to see is a debate between Ann Romney and Michelle Obama. Scary as it sounds, I really think Michelle is actually the smart one in the family.

But her meltdown notwithstanding, Ann Romney seems like she would be able to more than hold her own.

As someone mentioned above, American politics is unique in its level of spousal involvement in election campaigns. I can see a day when potential first lady (man) debates become a part of the process.
posted by Bokmakierie at 5:25 PM on September 21, 2012

As noted elsewhere:

Romney: "I'm convinced that the path [Obama's] put us on is the path to Europe," he said. "Or, I jokingly say....to California."

1 - Romney is traveling to San Diego on Saturday.
2 - Wait, just where is that big shinny new house with the car elevator he bought? Oh... that's right California.

Christ, what an asshole
posted by edgeways at 5:34 PM on September 21, 2012 [16 favorites]

. . . I can see a day when potential first lady (man) debates become a part of the process.

Very much so; in fact, I'd like to see that. As it's the chief social position of the United States, and comes with the expectation of quasi-governmental leadership on an apolitical issue of some kind, I don't see why informal sit-down arguments shouldn't be on.

A few days ago, as all this Schadenfreude was breaking hard and I was all F5'ing this thread, an elderly Republican FB friend of mine shared a pretty headshot of Ann Romney that was posted by the Tea Party page, with the following caption:

Mother of 5 loving sons and grandmother to many. Married to the same man for over 40 years. A Cancer and Multiple Sclerosis survivor and still fighting. Loves God, family and her country.

LIKE and SHARE if Ann Romney is a GREAT AMERICAN!

I almost wrote, "So, this is some of that 'sparing use' her husband was talking about?" But I refrained.
posted by Countess Elena at 5:34 PM on September 21, 2012

10 days ago who would have thought that the comments on the embassy attacks would not be the stupidest thing Romney did this month?

Not even top 3.
posted by fullerine at 5:36 PM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

Personally I would put it in the top three for the month, and it might swing around and bite him again in the debates, but it certainly is not what people are talking about right now. Hell Obama might as well be phoning it in and getting some real work done, Romney at this point is running one hell of a fucked up campaign so many unforced and amateurish mistakes I really and truly think I (and just about anyone in this thread) could run a national campaign then what he is doing (first step, hire a proof reader for me). Indeed I was driving home today thinking about how I would handle Romney's campaign (if I was an absolute bastard) in fact.
posted by edgeways at 5:43 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

There are still 10 days to go in September, let's not get hasty here.
posted by elizardbits at 5:45 PM on September 21, 2012 [3 favorites]

Well, what I would think is the most vital info missing on the percent tax paid is this: percent of what?
For example, I paid 20% on 100,000 dollars net income (adjusted from gross after 100 million was considered untaxable because it is in my IRA account).
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 5:47 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Well, it's blindingly obvious that Mitt's hiding SOMETHING in them thar tax returns. He just did everyone a favour by narrowing down what it must be.

It will come out eventually.
posted by unSane at 6:01 PM on September 21, 2012

There's a blog post that claims the poll to watch is the party affiliation poll that Rasumussen does. They claim that since Democratic party registration is lower than Republican registration, this is going to lead to a Republican victory. He also points out that most polls done by news organizations are weighted towards democrats (meaning more D responders than R), even though it shows more affiliation with Republicans, and this skews the results in Obama's favor.

I'm not sure what to make of it, other than the Rasmussen poll only goes back to 2004, and that it seems kind of odd (not to mention illogical) for news organizations to intentionally skew results. The only indication of why would be a Fox News story that says Axelrod leaned on Gallup by questioning their methodology for a poll.
posted by FJT at 6:04 PM on September 21, 2012

Doing some more googling, the "MSM skewed polls towards Democrats" seems to be a trend among a lot of Righty blogs. And most seem to refer to Rush Limbaugh claiming that Obama's post convention bounce is manufactured.
posted by FJT at 6:14 PM on September 21, 2012

I would be suspicious of someone telling me that I should look at Rasmussen as an example of an unbiased poll.
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:17 PM on September 21, 2012 [11 favorites]

There's a blog post that claims the poll to watch is the party affiliation poll that Rasumussen does.

I've seen no evidence from the ballot box to indicate that Rasmussen does a better job of predicting outcomes than more traditional polls. Rather the indications I've seen are somewhat to the contrary. The right certainly like the fact that Rasmussen polls make them feel good, but beyond that, I'm not sure they're particularly anything to worry about.
posted by howfar at 6:18 PM on September 21, 2012

Maddow and other orgs reported a few weeks ago about how in states like florida, democratic registration is way way down due to suppression efforts. Shit will hit the fan if polling is completely opposite of the result.
posted by cashman at 6:18 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

Yeah, nothing short of an actual Ibama victory will burst their bubble. Probably not even that. It's going to be like those islands of lost WWII soldiers that don't know the war is over.
posted by Artw at 6:19 PM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

I can see a day when potential first lady (man) debates become a part of the process

There's already a Presidential Cookie Bake-off.
posted by muddgirl at 6:20 PM on September 21, 2012

Is iBama the new idea we've all be look for from Apple?
posted by howfar at 6:21 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

The right certainly like the fact that Rasmussen polls make them feel good, but beyond that, I'm not sure they're particularly anything to worry about.

The point is to reframe the message from "Romney's toast" to "Liberal Media wants you to think Romney's toast, but it's only a flesh wound".

There will be more of this as they coalesce around a message.

The past few days have been fun, though. I love when the right wing noise machine gets caught flat flooted and spits up all over the place. It seems to be happening more often lately.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 6:28 PM on September 21, 2012

I was actually thinking I'd actually made him sound kinda muslimy.
posted by Artw at 6:29 PM on September 21, 2012

Yeah, nothing short of an actual Ibama victory will burst their bubble.

That guy already believes "the election of Barack Obama was the biggest con ever perpetuated on the US Public" so I think that bubble will never burst.
posted by fleacircus at 6:34 PM on September 21, 2012

Is iBama the new idea we've all be look for from Apple?

"Sneak previews suggest that the new iBama's term limit may be extended to twice as long! This would give users more screen real estate on which to project their hopes and expectations, but the developers are optimistic that at least some of those will be fulfilled thanks to the new, more streamlined legislative branch, with a projected 20% reduction in Republicans. This improved support means that some productivity, efficiency, and social apps may actually manage to be installed into law before the next iPresident hits the Oval Office. Official launch specifics will be announced on November 6."
posted by Superplin at 6:38 PM on September 21, 2012 [14 favorites]

$7,000,000 of Mitt Romney's 2011 income went missing
posted by shothotbot at 6:40 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

I bet it fell down into the sofa cushions.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:42 PM on September 21, 2012 [8 favorites]

47% of the people who work for him are moochers, according to statistics - he's lucky it was only 7 million
posted by pyramid termite at 6:47 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

I bet it fell down into the sofa cushions.

Don't be silly. You can spend that much money on Show Sheen and little pony braid holders for your stable of real life ponies!
posted by winna at 6:51 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

You can spend that much money on Show Sheen and little pony braid holders for your stable of real life ponies!

no, you can't - but a real life little pony princess wedding castle is going to cost some serious bucks
posted by pyramid termite at 7:00 PM on September 21, 2012

Paul Krugman's Playlist For The Republican Party
posted by homunculus at 7:15 PM on September 21, 2012

It's probably in the pocket of a jacket he hasn't worn for a while. When he finds it, he'll treat himself to a no-caff, tax-free archipelago.
posted by dogrose at 7:19 PM on September 21, 2012 [6 favorites]

If he made money only from his investments, he didn't pay any income tax, just capital gains... and that means he's part of the 47%. So, naturally, he'll be voting for Obama.
posted by Slap*Happy at 7:27 PM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

Ericb: I bet he'll do so. Flippy-floppy as he always is and always will be!

Mitt's got a great big body and a great big head..

Making Flippy Floppy

We kill the beast. Kill it!
posted by Skygazer at 7:43 PM on September 21, 2012

Just consulted my 2011 taxes, and looks like I paid 20% averaged over the year, considering the set of brackets I fall in. I pay more taxes, based on my income, than Mitt. And I sure don't have a car elevator.
posted by Miko at 8:16 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

edgeways - my mistake -- I read the month 8 (August) as (September) so the poll must be the same one you saw. Even so, I wonder what the current Georgia spread has been.
posted by Rumple at 8:17 PM on September 21, 2012

I'm pretty sure I'll be paying a higher percent than Romney (school for half the year, and other deductible expenses, so maybe not), and I have neither a car nor an elevator.
posted by Lemurrhea at 8:19 PM on September 21, 2012

If you'd just read my Facebook page, you'd know that Romney's gonna win this in a landslide. There's no way that commie Obama's gonna win.

I know too many crazy people, apparently.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 8:19 PM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

If you just grab your own tax schedule from last year and look at the numbers in the 15% bracket you will see numbers that look way out of whack with Romney's income.Purely based on the schedules, he's paying less than half of the highest bracket. Even conceding that this is the consequence of legal tax reduction strategy, it can't be helping in terms of making him seem like something other than an out of touch millionaire.

I guess it's good for him that we don't do taxes in the fall, so people are less likely to have the schedule on hand to look at.
posted by feloniousmonk at 8:31 PM on September 21, 2012

he's paying less than half of the highest bracket

Well, remember that you only pay the taxes in each bracket that are on the income you earned at that level. Your whole income isn't taxed at the highest bracket level, only the amount of income that put you over into that bracket. That's why you have to add up all the taxes you paid at the rate for each bracket your income covers, and then compare that total to your total income to get a flat percentage.

Even so, a 14% total is way too low for someone of his wealth and shows how very many dodges, shelters and loopholes there are in this tax system that would have someone like me or you paying at such a higher rate than someone like him.
posted by Miko at 8:35 PM on September 21, 2012

To clarify, I am trying to represent the reaction of an average person who just fills out an 1040EZ without learning much about how the system works beyond that. You can get by without having to know what a progressive tax system is or how it works, and I suspect the majority does. It may be totally legit (maybe there are some shady tax avoidance strategies at work, so I don't want to say that it is for sure) but as they say, the optics are terrible.
posted by feloniousmonk at 8:42 PM on September 21, 2012

It's not Mitt's fault if you didn't have the financial foresight to buy a horse.
posted by Flunkie at 8:43 PM on September 21, 2012 [5 favorites]

Oh my God. That Iowa interview with Ann Romney. It starts with this complaint / call for pity / demand for gratitude.

I hear it in the same tone as Cris Crocker's Leave Britney Spears Alone monolog (YT)

How fucking dare anyone out there make fun of Romney after all he has been through!

He's not Latino, and he's not Obama. He had five fuckin sons. Well, I did, but he's their father. We have hired a lot of nannies over the years. Sorry, what was I saying? Oh right.

He turned out to be a liar, a cheater, and now he's going through hell with this video leak. All you people care about is... readers and making money off of him.

HE’S A HUMAN! (ah! ooh!) What you don’t realize is that Mittens is making you all this money and all you do is write a bunch of crap about him.

He hasn't paid attention to real people in years. He spends all day talking to successful business men like himself, and all they want is MORE! MORE! MORE! MORE! MORE!

LEAVE HIM ALONE! You are lucky he even wants to be president of you BASTARDS!
LEAVE ROMNEY ALONE! ... Please.

The Mainstream Media talked about professionalism and said if Romney was a professional he would’ve pulled it off no matter what.

Speaking of professionalism, when is it professional to publicly bash someone who is going through a hard time.

Leave Romney Alone Please... !
Leave my Mitt Romney alone! ... Right now! ... I mean it.!

Anyone that has a problem with him you deal with me, because I have a lot of time to talk to people.

LEAVE HIM ALONE!

And, scene.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:10 PM on September 21, 2012 [9 favorites]

Reasons why Mitt Romney's tax returns matter: 1) if this country can't effectively tax its wealthiest individuals, then the burden of society is passed to everyone else; 2) [Romney and Ryan] want to regulate OUR taxes while hiding their own; 3) we don't know if our would-be president paid his fair share, which is especially critical when he's harping on how terrible the economy is, and how heavy the tax burdens are on "regular people"; and 4) what could he be hiding that makes him resist so damned hard?

Reasons why it's significant if he paid 10% or 14%: last year, he made 14 MILLION while "unemployed". The difference in 10% and 14% at this scale is $1,400,000 versus $1,960,000. Compared to someone who makes $200,000 per year, where the difference is between $20,000 and $28,000, if they were actually able to pay only 10% or 14%.

The rich have more to lose by paying taxes like the idiots who file their own 1040EZ, but it's the country that loses the most by letting the rich do so.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:40 PM on September 21, 2012 [6 favorites]

For what it's worth, Romney is only $10 million richer (in net worth) than John Kerry, but dwarfed by Ross Perot's estimated $3.58 BILLION net worth.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:06 PM on September 21, 2012

I'm starting to wonder in all seriousness whether the Romney camp is trying to lose this on purpose.

My current favorite crazy theory is that Mitt has found a way to divert campaign donations to his personal benefit and has no need of actually winning the presidency to make this all pay off. Like a character in a Richard Condon novel. Or that character's handler...
posted by bigbigdog at 10:07 PM on September 21, 2012

Lemurrhea: "I'm pretty sure ~~I'll~~ all wage earners will be paying a higher percent than Romney ~~(school for half the year, and other deductible expenses, so maybe not), and I have neither a car nor an elevator.~~" for the rest of our lives, unless something changes. Something drastic. And it might just happen if his club keeps this shit up.

You know you've gone for the throat when even zombie Reagan is spinning in his grave.
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 10:12 PM on September 21, 2012

STEP ONE: we find the worst presidential candidate ever
posted by The Whelk at 10:13 PM on September 21, 2012 [2 favorites]

"Reasons why Mitt Romney's tax returns matter: "

5) Since he's been setting up a run for president since 2002, and actually ran-ran in 2008, why did he not get his taxes squeaky clean sometimes before 2010???? Has he just not been paying attention to politics since OH WAIT HIS DAD decided to start the tax return thing? It speaks of a Donald Trump level of half-assery about his campaign, which is a little concerning.

(Also, I'm pretty convinced he's hiding taking the amnesty in 2009, but I could also believe that it's that he filed taxes in California and voted in MA. I don't believe for a second it's just catastrophically low tax rates.)

He's like a Shakespearian tragedy all on his own there; I would LOVE to know what's going on in his head. His reality seems slightly orthogonal to everyone else's, so his complex and unusual motivations have to be laid bare for us to understand and sympathize with on his tragic but inevitable march to catastrophe in the fifth act.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 10:15 PM on September 21, 2012 [11 favorites]

someone forgets to change his batteries and he slowly winds down during the debates like HAL.
posted by The Whelk at 10:17 PM on September 21, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh Willard, just when I think there are no more chickens to be fucked you find one and fuck it hard.
posted by bardic at 10:19 PM on September 21, 2012 [6 favorites]

bardic: "Oh Willard, just when I think there are no more chickens to be fucked you find one and fuck it hard."

I thought he was screwing pooches. How's that sweet revenge taste, Seamus?
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 10:21 PM on September 21, 2012

Gov. George Rhodes of Ohio memorably described Mittens' dad's failed presidential run as 'like a duck trying to fuck a football.' I guess the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
posted by unSane at 10:38 PM on September 21, 2012 [16 favorites]

My current favorite crazy theory is that Mitt has found a way to divert campaign donations to his personal benefit and has no need of actually winning the presidency to make this all pay off. Like a character in a Richard Condon novel.

As near as I can tell, that is Newt's entire business model.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 10:44 PM on September 21, 2012 [4 favorites]

Pogo_Fuzzybutt: "As near as I can tell, that is Newt's entire business model."

OMFG that is hilarious and oh so true.
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 10:57 PM on September 21, 2012

why did he not get his taxes squeaky clean sometimes before 2010????

People with Swiss bank accounts had every expectation that their accounts would never be discovered because Swiss law prohibits banks sharing any information about their accounts with anyone (including governments and tax authorties), for the most part. Whistleblower Brad Birkenfeld changed this, and in an unprecedented move, Swiss bank UBS - with the cooperation of both the US and Swiss governments - turned over the names of 5000 US citizens that had accounts at the bank to the IRS.

So Romney, who did have at least one Swiss bank account, quite reasonably expected that no one would ever find out about it due to the famously secretive Swiss banks. Until the whistleblower case happened.
posted by triggerfinger at 11:09 PM on September 21, 2012 [13 favorites]

Bigdogdog: My current favorite crazy theory is that Mitt has found a way to divert campaign donations to his personal benefit and has no need of actually winning the presidency to make this all pay off.

That's not a crazy theory at all. Does anyone truly believe that giving $4 million dollars to the Mormon Church isn't going to come back to Romney exponentially in terms of campaign donations, business opportunities, connections, deals, development of land, inside access to business deals over years and years.

I would bet money Romney and family (He's only got 5 sons to spread his business accounts between..) will get a better return on that $ 4 Million invested in the Mormon church, than he gets investing it through Bain Vulture Capital. That' what my instincts say here.

Romney may love his church, but I'm pretty sure some of that is a "transactional" sorta love, L-U-V.
posted by Skygazer at 11:13 PM on September 21, 2012

Skygazer: "Bain Vulture Capital"

Very well said!
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 11:16 PM on September 21, 2012

You really do have to wonder what a senior family man is doing vying for a glorified public service position that pays only $400,000 per annum and involves approving the occasional after-hours assassination (at least), when he's capable of bringing in an easily adjusted $400,000 per week simply by waking each morning -- I assume he sleeps nights. He's obviously prepared to kill for the position.

There must be something else in the job description that appeals to Romney because it certainly isn't the remuneration. (Julia Gillard gets better pay and conditions.)

If I've heard it once, I've heard it a thousand times. "The world needs American leadership", he keeps preaching.

No. No, it doesn't. That's a fallacy. Not only does Romney not have to worry his pretty little head over 47% of the American population who will not vote for him under any circumstances, he also need not worry about 80% of the world's non-American population, who - just like the Americans - believe that they (too) "are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it" ... it's not for the taking.
posted by de at 11:24 PM on September 21, 2012 [9 favorites]

"My current favorite crazy theory is that Mitt has found a way to divert campaign donations to his personal benefit and has no need of actually winning the presidency to make this all pay off. Like a character in a Richard Condon novel. Or that character's handler..."

"I've got a platform — it's called The Producers."
posted by klangklangston at 11:42 PM on September 21, 2012

Does Romney pay Chinese tax?
posted by de at 12:00 AM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

But I thought Russia resisted Libya as well? Or is it they would fight for Syria more?

Syria are a major regional ally, and provide the Russian Navy with their only base in the Med. On a similar note, Bahrain gets staunch backing from the US note and coincidentally provide the major Middle East US Navy base.

Coincidental in both cases, I'm sure. Now watch this drive.
posted by jaduncan at 12:03 AM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

Mitt's got a great big body and a great big head..

Making Flippy Floppy

They say compassion is a virtue, but Mitt don't have the time.

So many people have their problems, he's not interested in their problems.

NO COMPASSION

(One could probably craft a pretty great rock-opera about the Romney campaign using only Talking Heads songs. COINCIDENCE? Or David Byrne? Read the book!)
posted by Strange Interlude at 1:24 AM on September 22, 2012 [8 favorites]

I've seen no evidence from the ballot box to indicate that Rasmussen does a better job of predicting outcomes than more traditional polls. Rather the indications I've seen are somewhat to the contrary. The right certainly like the fact that Rasmussen polls make them feel good, but beyond that, I'm not sure they're particularly anything to worry about.

The most damning thing about Ras polls is that they have a tendency to be very inaccurate in a R-favoured way when needed, then tighten up at the very moment of the election and point to that final prediction as justification for their claim that they don't have a pronounced house effect. People have to make up their own minds as to Ras' motivation, I guess.
posted by jaduncan at 1:26 AM on September 22, 2012 [5 favorites]

The most damning thing about Ras polls is that they have a tendency to be very inaccurate in a R-favoured way when needed, then tighten up at the very moment of the election and point to that final prediction as justification for their claim that they don't have a pronounced house effect.

This is exactly correct and what I've noticed. I think Rasmussen misread just how badly Romney was going to screw the pooch, repeatedly this way in such significant ways, and all week they've been trying to adjust how out to left field and outlier like they've seemd compared to almost all the other polls.

Which is pretty fun to watch them get nailed as biased because even they obviously misread how much Romney was capable of effing up.

My theory is that they're the unofficial, official go to poll for FoxNews horseshit, and I wouldn't be surprised it they're not in some way getting recompensed by some Murdoch group or other...
posted by Skygazer at 1:56 AM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

delmoi: Anti-choice people aren't idiots.

Some of them certainly are. I know a few, personally. They're the types who cheer when Santorum says, "we'll never have the elite, smart people on our side."

They're not going to vote for a pro-choice president

That's exactly what I'm hoping (i.e., that they don't vote at all, or find a 3rd party candidate to vote for on November 6, rather than voting for Romney. It's simply a discouragement tactic - neither candidate is a strong supporter of your #1 issue, so maybe the best choice is to stay home on Nov. 6). Furthermore, I've said already in this thread that this particular IVF topic is probably not a strong one to base any arguments on, at least from what we know, so far.

Miko: Well, remember that you only pay the taxes in each bracket that are on the income you earned at that level. Your whole income isn't taxed at the highest bracket level, only the amount of income that put you over into that bracket. That's why you have to add up all the taxes you paid at the rate for each bracket your income covers, and then compare that total to your total income to get a flat percentage.

If you're pulling in $20 million annually (or even a paltry $14 million), the vast majority of your income falls into the top tax bracket, meaning that including the lower rate for the first $350K or so in your calculations isn't going to have much of an effect on the adjusted rate. Of course, Mitt's probably paying close to zero income tax, since he's set things up so that most of his income will be taxed at the long term capital gains rate, 15% from 2003-2012.

Not arguing, simply pointing out that with this kind of off-the-charts income, factoring in the lower rates on the first $350K or so earned has a negligible effect on the adjusted rate of tax that would have been charged had he paid income taxes rather than long term capital gains taxes.

To put it in numbers, the income tax rate on the highest bracket is 35%.
The effective income tax rate on an annual taxable income of $14M is 34.81% (filing as head of household)
The effective income tax rate on an annual taxable income of $21M is 34.87% (filing as head of household)
posted by syzygy at 2:52 AM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

Someone upthread asked why capital gains are taxed at a lower rate.

This is because they've already been subject to corporate tax and the idea is to make it a wash whether income is dividended out of a company or received as payment for services.

If I have a corporation with $250,000 in the bank, I can get that out of the company in one of two ways -- either by paying me $250,000 in salary, or by dividending it out of the company.

If it's paid as salary, it's regarded as an expense and the company books $0 as profit and pays no tax. I however pay tax on it at the appropriate rate (X) as income.

If it's paid as a dividend, it's regarded as profit and taxed at the appropriate rate (Y). I then pay tax on it again at the approriate rate (Z) for capital gains (since it's a return on my investment in the company).

So the basic idea is that the total amount of tax paid in either case, X, or Y+Z, should be roughly the same.
posted by unSane at 4:04 AM on September 22, 2012

unSane: If I have a corporation with $250,000 in the bank, I can get that out of the company in one of two ways -- either by paying me $250,000 in salary, or by dividending it out of the company.

This 100% false. I don't want to be fighty here, but your explanation couldn't be further from incorrect. There is a capital gains tax, and there is a separate dividends tax. The capital gains tax does not apply to dividends, so it makes no sense to use the avoidance of double taxation on dividend income as a justification for capital gains taxes.
posted by syzygy at 4:19 AM on September 22, 2012 [5 favorites]

Allow me to clarify - the part of unSane's comment that I quoted is not false. The part that is 100% false is the following statement:

Someone upthread asked why capital gains are taxed at a lower rate.

This is because they've already been subject to corporate tax and the idea is to make it a wash whether income is dividended out of a company or received as payment for services.

The capital gains tax has nothing to do with making sure dividend income is not double taxed.
posted by syzygy at 4:21 AM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

Capital gains tax is the tax paid on the disposal of an asset, not on receipt of investment income.
posted by howfar at 4:24 AM on September 22, 2012 [3 favorites]

via Sullivan: US is one of the most unequal countries in the world, even more skewed than India or Russia (which was quite surprising, to me)

And oh: US was more unequal in 2010 than it was in 1774 or 1860.
posted by the cydonian at 4:28 AM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

OK - sorry - that's why I have an accountant!

Anyway, my point is that a large part of Romney's investment income is probably dividend not capital gains, so the headline rate of 14% or whatever may not represent the full tax take on that money.
posted by unSane at 4:36 AM on September 22, 2012

What "double taxation" really means
posted by Faint of Butt at 4:37 AM on September 22, 2012 [9 favorites]

unSane: Anyway, my point is that a large part of Romney's investment income is probably dividend not capital gains

Do you have any evidence to back this claim up? Are you familiar with the 'Carried Interest' rule, which allows private equity fund managers to classify what many consider wage income as capital gains income for taxation purposes?

Are you aware that a number of private equity firms are under investigation for making aggressive use of this 'loophole,' and that Bain Capital is said to use a particularly aggressive set of tactics that sets it apart from many of the other firms under investigation?
posted by syzygy at 4:46 AM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm not defending it. If your view is corporations-are-people then I don't see any reason why corporate tax and dividend/capital gains tax should be concatenated in this way.

On the other hand, in my case where I and my wife own a loan-out corporation for my services, there's something weird about the idea that if pay myself income, it's an expense and taxed at rate A, but if I give myself the same money as a dividend, it's not an expense and taxed at rate A+B.

It's certainly the case that if dividend taxes were higher then there'd be more incentive for companies to retain earnings and grow the market cap of the company (and share price). So then you also have to raise capital gains tax, and that's a whole 'nother argument about risk premiums and whatnot.
posted by unSane at 4:51 AM on September 22, 2012

Do you have any evidence to back this claim up?

Dude has $100m in the bank. If you don't think he's getting a bunch of dividends from that I have no idea what to tell you.
posted by unSane at 4:52 AM on September 22, 2012

Tax perks for wealthy Americans aren't really that important. That simply won't change.
It won't be equitable redistribution of wealth across Americans that saves the US from financial ruin.

Capitalists don't do equitable redistribution of wealth across people or nation states.

What the Obama vs Romney 2012 election is about is China.
America is broke. China isn't. Nothing more. Nothing less. And no-one's mentioning it.

To borrow from Skygazer: "American Vulture Capital"
Obama/Clinton are bad enough; but in the hands of Mitt-Wit it'd be WWIII.

[PS I find the above Clinton link nothing but US propaganda.]
posted by de at 4:55 AM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

The normal justification for a lower tax rate on capital gains is that investing your own money carries risks. Taxing capital gains income at a lower rate is a sort of carrot that's used to entice people to take risks by investing their money - it's sold as a type of reward that helps offset the downside of risk that comes from investing your own money in a venture.

And this is where Carried Interest is interesting - fund managers are able to claim the capital gains tax rate on income that is not derived from investments they have made with their own money. That is, they are receiving the carrot for taking on extra risk that is taken by those who invest their own money, when most of the money invested in private equity schemes comes from outside sources. This is the primary reason why many decry the carried interest loophole as an unfair one.

As to the aggressive tactics used by many private equity firms. The scheme that they've figured out here is the following: Used to a private equity firm would charge the takeover candidate a 'management fee'. This fee was taxed as revenue for the firm, and whatever part of it was paid out to employees was taxed as wage income.

Not wanting to pay wage income on any of these fees, a few PE firms realized that they could forego the management fee and convert it into carried interest income, dropping the tax rates on the moneys made significantly. It's not certain whether the IRS considers this abuse of the tax code - they have not ruled on it yet, but there is currently an ongoing investigation of PE firms by the state of New York for exactly these aggressive tax tactics.

Now, Bain took it one step further, as evidenced by the recent data dump of their tax and business records that were published by Gawker, I believe. The problem with the previously-mentioned tactic is that there is some risk involved. That is, if the takeover target goes out of business, the 'management fee' that was converted into 'carried interest' might never be paid out. So what Bain did was decide on a per-deal basis, what the risk of the takeover target going into bankruptcy was.

For takeover targets that had a high risk of going bankrupt, Bain charged the management fee, up-front, and paid the higher tax on it. The idea is that a higher tax on something is better than a lower tax on nothing. For deals where Bain felt like the company would probably not go bankrupt, they converted the management fee into 'carried interest' income. This selective use of the conversion of management fees is the way in which Bain manipulated the tax code, above and beyond how other PE firms did it - they got a payout, either way, and paid the lowest taxes possible.

What this means is that they were getting the lower capital gains tax on ventures they figured were not risky, and they were getting their guaranteed payout, albeit at a higher tax rate, on more risky ventures - a total subversion of the reason we have a lower capital gains tax.

Dude has $100m in the bank. If you don't think he's getting a bunch of dividends from that I have no idea what to tell you.

Anyone who's paid close attention to the tax debate surrounding Bain would be surprised to learn that Bain and Mitt were so unsophisticated that they structure any significant parts of their payouts in such a way that Bain would have had to pay taxes on the revenue.

I'm sure Mitt earns some dividends, but the point of the whole Bain organization was to minimize taxes at every turn, and this extends to trying to pay as little out as taxable dividends as humanly possible, since Bain would have to pay taxes on those moneys as corporate revenue.
posted by syzygy at 5:10 AM on September 22, 2012 [18 favorites]

For further reading on the topics of Bain Capital, Romney and carried interest, I suggest the following two articles:

Greed and Debt: The True Story of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital *by Matt Taibbi

Inquiry on Tax Strategy Adds to Scrutiny of Finance Firms
posted by syzygy at 5:28 AM on September 22, 2012 [6 favorites]

One more comment on Bain Capital.

Between 2007 and 2011, Bain Capital spent more than $3M on political lobbying
In 2011-2012, Bain Capital has made almost $4.7M in campaign contributions
- this is second only to Goldman Sachs in the Securities and Investment industry
- this does not include the purported hundreds of millions of dollars of campaign contributions from Bain Capital alumni

With this in mind, as well as the current investigation by the New York State AG office, I've often wondered whether one of Mitt's primary reasons for wanting to become president is so that he can dole out clemency to his fellow cohorts at Bain Capital, and elsewhere.

Imagine the scenario: There may be some illegal things that happened at Bain that could be pinned on Mitt. Mitt offers clemency to his Bain Capital cohorts, who then take full responsibility for any illegal activities, absolving Mitt of any legal culpability. Call it clemency by proxy, where the president offers himself clemency by offering clemency to a few friends who can then take the consequence-less 'fall', so to speak.

Sounds like the stuff of conspiracies, but the fact of the matter is that Bain Capital is under investigation along with a number of other PE firms, and Bain's tax-avoidance tactics are characterized as among the most aggressive of said firms, with real questions as to their legality.
posted by syzygy at 5:52 AM on September 22, 2012 [5 favorites]

America is broke. China isn't. Nothing more. Nothing less. And no-one's mentioning it.

Uh, the US is not "broke." We have had larger deficits during our other wars. And right now, our Treasury bonds have a negative yield. That means people think they are so safe they are willing to pay the government to hold their money. Interest rates are incredibly low.

And China as this super-great economic paradise ignores the facts. For the last year or more, Chinese stocks have been heavily shorted and lost a lot of value. Why? Because China is a risky bet--not as a country--but it has next to no accounting standards and is rife with corruption. Investors cannot tell the good companies from the bad ones. Furthermore, the huge currency manipulations of the Chinese government that have fueled their exports have a huge price--supression of their internal market. China is not doing well now and some are sying the stats could show a recession soon.

I think race often causes us to hype these threats. Remember when Japan was going to overtake all of America and rule the world? In the Eighties, it is all they talked about. Japan's been in a 10-year slump. They call it the Lost Decade.

India, now there's a long term economic threat--a free society, lots of English speakers and a heavy emphasis on education.
posted by Ironmouth at 6:05 AM on September 22, 2012 [14 favorites]

Also that whole crap about how taxing dividend earning is such crap. These people act like the money is a person and it is wrong to tax it twice.

Taxation in this country results when an entity or person realizes income. It does not follow the money around.
posted by Ironmouth at 6:11 AM on September 22, 2012 [7 favorites]

> We have had larger deficits during our other wars.

Exactly! Your debt is deepening.

China has a right to grow without interference and regulation.

Obama reads Australia the Riot Act
Suddenly Darwin is a barrack for US troops;
China, a major trade partner and neighbour to Australia, is not pleased.
posted by de at 6:13 AM on September 22, 2012

India, now there's a long term economic threat--a free society, lots of English speakers and a heavy emphasis on education.

I really just have been puzzling as to why the U.S. hasn't made more of an effort to forge a stronger alliance with India (I know, Non-Aligned Movement, etc., still) since it would at the very least be a good counterweight to China's ascendance.
posted by psoas at 6:16 AM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm sorry and this is a little off topic, but I think I just found the apex, the summit, the outer limit of wit.

Apparently a Benghazi, Libya-based Twitizen named Rida (@libyanproud), commenting favorably on the success of the pro-democracy (it's complicated) mob that successfully routed Ansar al-Sharia out of its headquarters in Benghazi yesterday, needs to be working as a speechwriter for President Obama:

"Who needs predator drones!"

Now to bring it on topic, I see a bit of an analogy in the stampede for the exits of what must include some former firm Romney supporters along with leaners if the current numbers are to be believed (Obama is moving into near parity among MEN in some swing states, which seemed out of reach). There is a palpable sense of the mob turning on Romney, a suddent yawning space in which he is free-falling and cannot right himself. Rats don't just desert sinking ships in politics. They tear it to pieces in the process.

With an opponent like Romney and a mob like the Republicans suddenly starting to mutiny and turn on each other and grab shit on their way out and cover their traces, who needs a negative campaign strategy?

I think Obama should turn on a sharp dime and start pumping out optimistic morning in America ads and speeches. Do the full fucking Reagan on this phony vulture capitalist's ass now. Pivot off the dark, foreboding, mean-spiritedness of the whole damn GOP in its agony, and vault.

I've been fascinated by Barack Obama's political skills, which I think reflect an emergent generational style (as well as, as a Hawai'ian friend pointed out to me, an utterly Native Hawai'ian sensibility that has rubbed off on the general population of the place, and it ain't just Aloha, friends), since I first became aware of him around 2003 or so. The reightwingers tend to chalk his success up to some cinematic "Chicago-style" fantasy. And yeah, there's that there, and Axelrod, Plouffe, Emmanuel, Jarrett, and the rest are not fucking around about serious business. But the man at the top is the very opposite of the rigid, authoritarian, patriarchal, brylcreemed 1950s nostalgic bullshit that Romney exudes with his Cadillacs and his very demeanor. He's a meanie. I think he was sunk by the story of his schooldays as a bully, actually, and long ago. Mostly because it revealed -- or should have -- that he doesn't have the *character* to be president of the United States, and certainly not in time of crisis (hello, Arctic sea ice almost gone folks!). He also doesn't have the political skill to lead under new models of authority, consensus, and hierarchy, and new styles of leadership, negotiation, or argument. He and his rump party of older white wealthy men are anachronistic and they know it, but the fear of what that implies (which is really a fear of Death as such disguised by ideology as Love of Nation and adjoined to a Love of Killing as such) drives them to paroxysms of righteous indignation and explains Rush Limbaugh and all the rest of them. We're down to the lizard brain level now when it's really reduced to "makers and takes" talk.

Fuck you people. Fuck you, really. Here's how modern politics is going to work. You are going to be outnumbered. You are going to be a minority. The USA will not be able to bomb its way to world domination any time it wants to do so.

And a black guy from Hawai'i who was born of an aspiring Kenyan father and a radical white PhD-toting activist mother has the codes to the fucking suitcase, not to mention the Predator Drones. Which apparently the Libyans don't need because, in this first foreign policy crisis entirely under Obama's own watch and management (not to discount the long history of coddling Gadafi by Republican administrations going back to Reagan), a solution may be emergent in the example of Benghazi that finally, fucking finally, moves us away from the substitution of assasination for indiscriminate bombardment, which is really not an improvement.

Let people figure their own shit out. It works. It's how it's done (for likely long before Captain Cook) in Hawai'i, not Chicago. Stay above the fray. Don't be cynical. It is not weakness to take the bigger picture into account before you go off half fucking cocked.

In other words, Chill the Fuck Out Everybody, He's Got This. Again. Time to go sunny, and I bet he will. This is surfing, not chess.
posted by spitbull at 6:26 AM on September 22, 2012 [36 favorites]

Why does China's ascendance need counterbalancing?
Why shouldn't China find its way to the ~~American~~ Chinese dream without the Romneys wanting a giant slab of the takings?
posted by de at 6:26 AM on September 22, 2012

And a black guy from Hawai'i who was born of an aspiring Kenyan father and a radical white PhD-toting activist mother has the codes to the fucking suitcase, not to mention the Predator Drones, IS PRESIDENT.

Sorry, incomplete sentence. My students would be amused.
posted by spitbull at 6:28 AM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

What, now I just made it ungrammatical, never mind. Please don't tell my students. The original sentence was fine. Must. Have. Coffee. Before. Commenting.
posted by spitbull at 6:29 AM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

Coffee? Odd way to spell "Valium".

:)
posted by howfar at 6:35 AM on September 22, 2012

"Father knows best" is dead and buried?
posted by de at 6:35 AM on September 22, 2012

I really just have been puzzling as to why the U.S. hasn't made more of an effort to forge a stronger alliance with India (I know, Non-Aligned Movement, etc., still) since it would at the very least be a good counterweight to China's ascendance.

India or Pakistan. Pick one. The US has, and although it's a poor long term bet I suspect that will last roughly as long as the US cares about Afghanistan. The ISI knows this, which is why it has intense reasons to try and keep Afghanistan unstable.

India is clearly the best long-term bet though, even setting aside the amusement of the fact that an effective entry of India into the UK/USA/Canada/Aus/NZ alliance would largely recreate the alliances of the British Empire.
posted by jaduncan at 6:37 AM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

This beautiful essay on Eddie Aikau by Nicole Pasulka in the Believer was an FPP here a while back. Indirectly it explains why Obama's political style is rooted in the sport of surfing and not in more conventional strategic metaphors, and in what the sport of surfing exemplifies about the values and interpersonal style of Native Hawai'ian culture. The essence of surfing is patience and rising to intense performance when necessary. A broad and careful view of risk (as well as the guts to take necessary risks) is essential to survival in the Native tradition from which modern surfing derives. (I loved this article, so if you missed it I recommend reading it for its own sake.)

Interestingly, there are some real parallels with hunting to be had here too, which is not surprising given that surfing was a sport of a subsistence culture dependent on exceptionally skilled and risk-aware seamanship.
posted by spitbull at 6:39 AM on September 22, 2012 [17 favorites]

Why does China's ascendance need counterbalancing?

I've wondered this myself, but not just about China. The rhetoric around any other country having just the potential to become an actual competitor to the US economically is riddled with ominous tones; that if there's a new country added to the High Rollas Club, someone will have to leave, because seats are limited or something.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:41 AM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

Coffee? Odd way to spell "Valium".

LOL, you ought to see me on coffee. I only take valium so I can have another espresso without taking off like a rocket.
posted by spitbull at 6:42 AM on September 22, 2012

> India is clearly the best long-term bet though

China is no threat, for heaven sake. Australia has an amazingly old and large Chinese community ... students, tourists, colleagues, friends, neighbours.

Be friends.
posted by de at 6:44 AM on September 22, 2012

Aloha, motherfuckers.
posted by spitbull at 6:47 AM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

You can't have American "exceptionalism" without having "others". It's primarily a bullying philosophy with no real rhyme or reason. We can't really team up with India because they're big enough and smart enough to be an actual peaceful threat.

It can be used as a reason to be all up in arms about Iran, though. Never mind that is was the excuse used to decimate Iraq, who was, quite literally, the biggest check on Iran's ambitions toward power.

Sorry for the derail. I'm all for healthy patriotism; it's just when I hear "America is the best" or "exceptional", I usually translate that as "we're going to take the most convenient route at the moment, fuck the methods and the consequences".
posted by Benny Andajetz at 7:10 AM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

China is no threat, for heaven sake.

Sure. But given that the question was why India isn't closer and the answer is the need to stay friendly with Pakistan due to Afghanistan, combined with the fact that it's really pretty hard to be good friends with India and Pakistan at the same time...well, Pakistan is clearly not the one to pick on a military, trade or diplomatic basis.

That's not saying that relationships shouldn't be friendly with China at all.
posted by jaduncan at 7:13 AM on September 22, 2012

"So Romney, who did have at least one Swiss bank account, quite reasonably expected that no one would ever find out about it due to the famously secretive Swiss banks. Until the whistleblower case happened."

He reasonably expected that the Swiss would never reveal it, but I don't think, when you're preparing to run for president, that you can reasonably expect that any of your secrets that aren't completely within your own head are safe; your trusted cohorts are willing to sell you out for all kinds of reasons in all kinds of situations, and a lot of your private information that until now was between you and your banker and your lawyer is going to be between you and your banker and your lawyer and an entire set of political party functionaries, including interns both idealistic and cynical.

I dunno. He seems continually surprised that people want to know things about him.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 7:28 AM on September 22, 2012 [11 favorites]

Got it, jaduncan. I read too fast (defending China). Figured the old British Empire were going to regroup the battalions and enter China on foot. Sorry.
posted by de at 7:34 AM on September 22, 2012

"Why does China's ascendance need counterbalancing?"

Well, for a couple of reasons:

1) China's actually pretty unstable. Without a counterbalance, if China's economic problems catch up with it, it could really hurt the world economy. Think of it as hedging your bets. (What keeps China stable is largely an authoritarian ruling party.)

2) China's foreign policy interests include some pretty aggressive, destabilizing stuff, like retaking Taiwan. That, and a lot of China's neighbors really don't like it — Vietnam, for one. Korea for another.

3) China's human rights record is pretty loathsome. For all America's warts, China really takes authoritarian statism to a new level.

4) For China to develop to the level of the West, it's going to either need a massive shit-ton of limited resources, or some pretty amazing science to get around that. It is a little hypocritical for the West to get all agitated over China's coal power plants, but hey, global warming is global.

As for how to counterbalance it, well, obviously that's complicated, but I tend to think it should be less of a military/economic antagonism view and more of a development assistance. One of the ways that China is ascendent and creating more influence is by being aggressive in helping other countries develop (which is largely a good thing). The US acting to balance that out with aggressive development aid — especially in Africa — can go a long way toward both securing long-term good will and helping increase the global market for products, which will benefit the US. That it will help countries historically disadvantaged by colonialism is even better.

(The phrase "A rising tide lifts all boats" is almost always misapplied — it refers to raising the floor for everyone, when it's often used to justify tax breaks for the rich. But if the US wants to continue with the standard of living we enjoy, the best way to ensure that is actually decreasing the global inequality in wealth and making more consumers out of people in developing nations. China realizes this, and it'd be in the American interest to both encourage, say, India's development to the point where it can be as aggressive in giving aid as China is, as well as doing direct assistance on our own.

But then, in IR, I'd be a structuralist internationalist, so that's my bias.)
posted by klangklangston at 8:43 AM on September 22, 2012 [6 favorites]

Note: This is a derail.

Figured the old British Empire were going to regroup the battalions and enter China on foot. Sorry.

Heh. That will never, ever happen. 210,000 people couldn't effectively police Iraq without local assistance, and that was 32 million people and comparatively short supply lines. Even setting aside the fact that disruption of Chinese trade links would now very quickly kill the world economy, it's hard to see how you'd police a country with extensive living experience in asymmetrical warfare where close on 5 million people have small arms just for the army, the police and paramilitaries have more, and the factory base to turn out an insane amount of armaments if required is present. It would be a meat grinder unlike any other land war the world has ever known, and nobody but nobody is going to be sending the tens of millions of troops that would be required...and we haven't even considered the nuke question from a nation that is quite competent at orbital launches and has enough long range ICBMs to make a rather nasty set of nuclear waste dumps out of major US/Australian cities and the medium range nukes to make sure India and China would both take the view that they didn't want hundreds of millions of dead just as the ante chip for an invasion that starts the aforementioned meat-grinder of an occupation.

The same is true of India, which is why both Pakistan and China just sabre rattle over the border rather than ever think they could win.

As klangklangston says, it's a soft power game of spheres of influence. If anyone ever comes close to suggesting an invasion of the PRC could work you can safely assume that they are completely and utterly divorced from reality.

Just no. I shall now set my beret down and return to US politics.
posted by jaduncan at 9:05 AM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

PS: 210,000 people couldn't effectively police Iraq without local assistance

It should also be considered that the effect of all that blood and money was to hand Iran a major ally. It wasn't even effective neocolonialism.
posted by jaduncan at 9:07 AM on September 22, 2012 [3 favorites]

He reasonably expected that the Swiss would never reveal it, but I don't think, when you're preparing to run for president, that you can reasonably expect that any of your secrets that aren't completely within your own head are safe; your trusted cohorts are willing to sell you out for all kinds of reasons in all kinds of situations, and a lot of your private information that until now was between you and your banker and your lawyer is going to be between you and your banker and your lawyer and an entire set of political party functionaries, including interns both idealistic and cynical.

I hear ya. I'd have made sure there was zero chance of anything like this happening if it were me. But I guess when we look at the incredibly stupid mistakes that he's made, we can probably assume that Romney doesn't have the best judgement. I would have thought that he'd surround himself with the best possible advisors to cover any blind spots that he may have, but....no. I don't understand it myself.

Someone at work the other day said that he is obviously a very intelligent man in the very narrow field of what he did at Bain. Get him outside his comfort zone and he just has no clue how to conduct himself or how the rest of the world works. He absolutely flounders.
posted by triggerfinger at 9:08 AM on September 22, 2012

After a week that was already the worst of his campaign, it's as if the man said, "Oh, yeah? Watch this," and pulled back the hyperdumb levers of his magical farting machine, the Mittlennium Fuckup.

I just needed to share that sentence. That's all.
posted by Countess Elena at 10:13 AM on September 22, 2012 [7 favorites]

Stephen Colbert on Mitt Romney’s spray-tanned Hispanic outreach
posted by homunculus at 10:21 AM on September 22, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'm trying to imagine the conversation that lead to the Oompah Loompahing and it just keeps turning into an Arrested Development scene
posted by The Whelk at 10:29 AM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

Greed and Debt: The True Story of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital *by Matt Taibbi

Bain and Mitt Romney: What’s Fact and What’s Opinion
posted by homunculus at 10:32 AM on September 22, 2012 [3 favorites]

Ann went on the airwaves to assure the masses that her husband "doesn't disdain the poor." Phew! I'm so relieved.

I'm beginning to suspect that Ann attended Barbara Bush's School For Hoity-Toity First Ladies where the curriculum includes: Fake Empathy 101, Disguising Your Disgust, Dressing So As Not To Alarm the Masses, and Pretending You Raised Your Own Children. Barbara started her school after the terrible Nancy Reagan years.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 10:35 AM on September 22, 2012 [15 favorites]

I don't think it was that bad of a time to release his return, because even though the issue isn't going to just go away (rightfully so), I think he is hoping to have it all lumped together with the AARP booing and the 47 percentining and just hope for or cause a major event next week before the first debate, to shift attention. He's gearing up to make a run for it and just go guns blazing. It's his best chance at this point.

He's reeled in spending in a few states like PA and MI, and to me this seems like the moment before he tries to go ham.
posted by cashman at 10:36 AM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mitt is down; out looms next

But as I have been saying for a while now, Mitt Romney is a deeply flawed candidate who got the Republican nomination by beating a ludicrously weak field. Don’t believe me? You know who came in second? Rick Santorum. Newt Gingrich was third, and Ron Paul was fourth. That’s not a field; that’s a therapy group.

posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 10:37 AM on September 22, 2012 [11 favorites]

It occurred to me yesterday that the past couple of weeks may have actually just been an attempt by the Romney camp to reach out to NASA voters by doing their impression of the Columbia's final reentry.
posted by COBRA! at 10:42 AM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Romney's will pack up and move to China. America's 47% were never going to produce enough macadamia nuts to supply China's growing middle class, anyway.
posted by de at 10:46 AM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA I missed this delicious bit of "Hispandering"

Romney wasted no time in mentioning his father’s birthplace, and that his son Craig is fluent in Spanish, as though these facts should magically ingratiate him with the crowd.

Well, well. His son speaks Spanish. Do I dare hope that Romney has eaten tacos at some point? Perhaps they have a maid named Conchita? Maybe Ann has a little crush on Julio Iglesias?

I can totally imagine clueless Mitt Rombot, "My best gardener is Latino."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 10:49 AM on September 22, 2012 [7 favorites]

"Some of my best friends have dozens of Latino gardeners!"
posted by rainy at 10:52 AM on September 22, 2012 [9 favorites]

For Pete's sake, I'm running for gardener.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:54 AM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Some of my best friends have dozens of Latino gardeners!"

Yes! Because they are minimum wage, no benefits JOB creators.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 10:56 AM on September 22, 2012

Chauncey Gardner for President!
posted by ericb at 10:57 AM on September 22, 2012 [9 favorites]

Spin, Baby, spin: Sen. John McCain issued a statement heralding Romney for "giving voters an incredibly detailed look at his finances."

"Now that the most recent tax return has been released, it’s time to get back to discussing the issues that voters care about," McCain said. "While President Obama and Democrats will try to distract voters, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are focused on fixing the economy, getting Americans back to work and ensuring a better future for our children and grandchildren.”

Has McCain lost his mind or does he think that this will really work? I would love to ask McCain, "What happened to you? What are you getting out of this attempt to prop up Romney's failing bid for the presidency?"
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 11:06 AM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ann went on the airwaves to assure the masses that her husband "doesn't disdain the poor."

I just watched her interview. Ann seemed decently boring there for much of it, but at a couple of places she just made the campaign look worse and worse.

She tried to rewrite history about 40 seconds in, trying to imply that if you watch the whole 47% portion, that he's saying he's worried about women and poverty, and is concerned. And that is just a complete lie on Ann's part. Sorry. I don't even remember him touching on women in that portion, except to later bring up the "sharp tongued" women on The View.

Then further in around 4 minutes, she tries to make the point that Mitt must be running for president because he cares because he Obviously doesn't need the money. And it just comes off really bad. Really - has anyone ever, ever said they were running for president because they needed the money? And it comes off like she's once again saying "We are upper crust! Do you think we'd bother with the piddly amount of money here for no reason? We are rolling in dough - why would we waste our time with this low-wage position unless we were going to get something out of it?"

Her whole demeanor is just flat. If it's health related, which she says sometimes happens, I feel bad for her, but then they shouldn't have these interviews where there is a defense of Mitt required, even a poor one like this. When she says something like "Mitt is running, because he cares", it is so emotionless and without any kind of feeling of what that means behind it. I wish Mitt did care, but he doesn't. He doesn't have to. He doesn't need to. And that's pretty clear from Ann's interview.
posted by cashman at 11:06 AM on September 22, 2012 [3 favorites]

The LDS may have charitable operations, but it spends a much of its tithed/"donated" money to facilitate the political agenda of its leadership.

Donating — making the bulk of donations — to a non-profit which is aligned with your political mission and which lowers your tax exposure may be win-win, but it is not actually the same as donating to a real charity, in order to further personal ideals of selflessness.

digby: Let's take a look at what Mitt's charitable giving goes to, shall we?
posted by homunculus at 11:09 AM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

as i keep saying over and over again, churches like the LDS & Scientology are just money laundering operations for the filthy rich. sure, they're legal NOW but it's money laundering nonetheless.

that's why we need to abolish charity laws and make churches pay like the rest.
posted by liza at 11:26 AM on September 22, 2012 [5 favorites]

Barbara Bush's School For Hoity-Toity First Ladies

Bahaha. I would love to see Barbara Bush and Ann Romney in the same room; you think the cold war was cold? (Barbara on Sarah Palin: "I sat next to her once, thought she was beautiful, and I think she's very happy in Alaska, and I hope she'll stay there.") Barbara suffered by comparison with Hillary Clinton, but she was publicly critical of the Republican party turning abortion and homosexuality into political wedge issues. (Fun fact: the H.W. Bush family were longtime supporters of Planned Parenthood, dating all the way back to H.W.'s father's position as Planned Parenthood's treasurer.) Barbara would never have pleaded with her husband's--or son's--detractors to "stop it," she would have just broken out the shiv she keeps up her sleeve where other grandmas keep kleenex.

(Barbara Bush served the Romney campaign some haterade back in the spring; it looks like this was her punishment.)
posted by sallybrown at 11:36 AM on September 22, 2012 [17 favorites]

Probably not a big surprise, but Romney's audience for the Univision interview was filled with bussed-in supporters, in violation of the original conditions of the interview.
posted by dirigibleman at 11:39 AM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

Look why don;t we just TELL Romney he won the election, it's not like he'll notice.
posted by The Whelk at 11:43 AM on September 22, 2012 [16 favorites]

I would just send your acquaintance a link to Fivethirtyeight on Monday or Tuesday after the polls have had time to digest this stupid release, and let them draw their own conclusions*.

*which, I'm sure, would be that the media are biased and in the tank for Obama. In which case, send them the link to any news source on Nov. 7
posted by COBRA! at 12:05 PM on September 22, 2012

Wat's this about Obama's academic records, then. Is there some theory floating around that his major was Socialist Takeover of the World or summat?
posted by angrycat at 12:10 PM on September 22, 2012

cdalight, please don't repost entire articles as comments. If you want to post just the link, that's fine.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 12:12 PM on September 22, 2012 [3 favorites]

Wat's this about Obama's academic records, then. Is there some theory floating aro

They want to argue that Obama only got where he did through Affirmative Action. Nevermind that he graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law School.

Pretty much every president has had their grades leaked by third parties. If there was something there, his grades would have leaked by now.
posted by dirigibleman at 12:19 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

But remember, Mitt Romney is callously dismissive and uncaring toward poor peopleOh Please. None of his charitable giving has anything to do with helping the poor. It is all self-serving rich man stuff. Donations that will elevate his status or make him look good. Harvard? The Mormon Church? Brigham Young University? George Bush Library? Yeah I hear they are giving out soup to the poor at the George Bush Library.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:35 PM on September 22, 2012 [11 favorites]

Obama Video Hits Mitt Romney On Tax Returns, Asks 'What Else Is He Hiding?'
posted by ericb at 12:56 PM on September 22, 2012

The fact that the elder Bushes have always gotten along with Clinton and have the most unlikely of relationships makes me warm to them a fair bit, as well:

The former First Lady lavished praise on the man who defeated George H.W. Bush in 1992, lovingly saying that Clinton is “a good fellow” who is “very thoughtful about calling.”

She even revealed that her sons - including, of course, George W. Bush, who followed Clinton into the Oval Office - call him “My brother by another mother.”

“He’s very nice,” Barbara Bush continued. “I think she thinks of George [Sr.] as the father he never had.”

Source.
posted by Phire at 12:58 PM on September 22, 2012

cdalight posted (for comment; without endorsement) this blog post by a conservative touting Romney's release of his tax returns earlier in the thread, but it was deleted for reproducing the entire content, as well as linking to it. The following is my response, with data and speculation culled from various sources.

cdalight

First, I urge you not to consider all Democrats on board with what Harry Reid has done; Speculation is one thing, but I found his citation of a supposed off-the-record source for a specific claim ill-advised and disquieting.

With that said, excepting the release of the 2011 return (which is, of course, sanitized because by that time he was actively running for President, for Pete's sake), the only material that he released yesterday was a (notarized) summary from his accountants, who admitted to obfuscating the data in at least one key way, by using a non-weighted average annual effective tax rate of 20.20%

In other words, they summed-and-divided the tax rate percentage from each individual year, rather than dividing the sum of taxes paid by the sum of gross income. Thus, years in which most of his income was through capital gains and he paid only a small percentage of a possibly huge sum would be offset by years in which most of his income was through traditional salary, and he would pay a much larger percentage of relatively smaller sums (but still substantial enough to qualify for the higher marginal tax rate).

Notably, when asked whether the Romneys had filed revised returns for any other of those twenty years, the campaign refused to answer. This could mean that he has recently refiled or amended other recent tax returns specifically to reflect the 13~% floor that he set for himself; it could mean that returns were amended to comply with the Swiss Bank Account amnesty/repatriation program started in 2009. Other possibilities come to mind as well, but I will not state them because it would be irresponsible given my lack of knowledge of tax law.

Or, it could mean nothing.

Others have stated that before forgoing certain charitable deductions for this year, Romney's effective tax rate would have been 10%, or perhaps even lower. Beyond wholesale amending and refiling of past returns, I know of no way to discredit the 13.66% minimum effective tax rate figure quoted, if it is indeed accurate. I am personally skeptical, however, that the Romneys would choose to make this momentous year the first in which they would pursue tax minimalisation to such an extent.
posted by The Confessor at 1:02 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

I don't understand, what are the odds that in 20 years it's never been below 13.66, and this year it would suddenly be under 10% if he didn't artificially push it up?

At this point they're not even trying to convince anyone, but just to add a talking point for those who are already in the bag for them.
posted by rainy at 1:17 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mea Culpa on the post - I did acknowledge that I may have erred in posting the whole thing (although I have seen that done here before which is the reason I tippy toed into the territory. Lesson learned & will not do again) If there's a way for a moderator to clip it down to just the link - please do?
posted by cdalight at 1:19 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

Palin Advises Romney: ‘Go Rogue’

lol
posted by Flunkie at 1:31 PM on September 22, 2012 [5 favorites]

Just in case you need a cite for how bad the congress has been during Obama's term: Your Do-Nothing Congress (in One Graph). Hint: much, much worse than the “Do Nothing” 80th Congress of 1947-48.
posted by madamjujujive at 1:32 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

Democrats, Media Get Punked - Romney Releases Tax Returns

Sorry guys & gals - the newbie will go back under the rock now and read the manual :o)
posted by cdalight at 1:33 PM on September 22, 2012

How Romney Packed The Univision Forum

"Salinas told BuzzFeed that tickets for each forum were divided between the network, the respective campaigns, and the University of Miami (which hosted the events) — and she said both campaigns initially agreed to keep the audience comprised mostly of students, in keeping with the events' education theme.

But after exhausting the few conservative groups on campus, the Romney camp realized there weren't enough sympathetic students to fill the stands on their night — so they told the network and university that if they weren't given an exemption to the students-only rule, they might have to "reschedule."

... In any case, Romney's team was allowed to bus in rowdy activists from around southern Florida in order to fill the extra seats at their town hall."
posted by madamjujujive at 1:39 PM on September 22, 2012 [6 favorites]

While introducing Romney at the top of the broadcast, Salinas's co-anchor, Jorge Ramos, noted that the Republican candidate had agreed to give the network 35 minutes, and that Obama had agreed to a full hour the next night. Ramos then invited the audience to welcome Romney to the stage — but the candidate didn't materialize.

"It was a very awkward moment, believe me," Salinas said.

Apparently, Romney took issue with the anchors beginning the broadcast that way, said Salinas, and he refused to go on stage until they re-taped the introduction. (One Republican present at the taping said Romney "threw a tantrum.")

"Our president of news was talking to the Romney campaign and negotiating it," Salinas said. "But at that point, you can't really argue with that. The candidate is there, everyone is in their seats, the show must go on. There's a limit to how much we can object to it."

There's only a limit if you're gutless.
posted by grouse at 1:46 PM on September 22, 2012 [9 favorites]

Lucille and Mitt.
posted by drezdn at 1:54 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

Teacher describes meeting Mitt. I can't do anything but look and keep moving, because there is no video/audio of the event, apparently, unless the campaign is saving that. If video of that interaction comes out, and it is as described, it will be a huge blow. You can't just talk to people- your constituents & voters, like they are trash.

Dan Rather talked about how when he heard about the 47% remarks, he figured there had to be some kind of mistake, but there wasn't. I figure there has to be more to Cheryl's story, but if video comes out and it happens like she describes it, whoa nelly.
posted by cashman at 2:15 PM on September 22, 2012 [19 favorites]

Heh - this item cropped up today: Tom DeLay still waiting to learn legal fate

Former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay — still waiting to learn his legal fate since being convicted nearly two years ago for his role in a scheme to influence Texas elections — is praying for vindication but also preparing for the possibility of imprisonment.

DeLay in jail - that would be a nice pre-election present.
posted by madamjujujive at 2:20 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

oh my God how had I never heard of Cookiegate
posted by Countess Elena at 2:34 PM on September 22, 2012 [3 favorites]

"We wanted him to be welcomed with the best in the 'burgh, and he had no idea," bakery owner John Walsh told the local ABC affiliate WTAE. "This guy has no idea how beloved this institution is that provided these cookies."

I think I can gave Romney a pass on this one. Unless it sets off a chain reaction of future candidates making sure to know beforehand where the best cookies in every city are made.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 2:41 PM on September 22, 2012

It's not the fact that Romney didn't recognize the source of the cookies. It's that he was so utterly, smugly, smirkingly condescending about the fact that they weren't 'handmade' and probably came from a low-quality store like 7-11.
posted by muddgirl at 2:42 PM on September 22, 2012 [10 favorites]

Yeah, honestly, don't bitch about the cookies. You're a freakin' presidential candidate -- they're gonna roll out what they think is the best for you, you ungracious turd.
posted by unSane at 2:44 PM on September 22, 2012 [10 favorites]

Cookiegate reminds me of OlympicsGate. How socially inept do you have to be to go to an event hosted in your honor at which your aim is convince people to like you and basically say "hey these cookies look kind of shitty, hahaha." He needs remedial tutoring in basic social interaction.
posted by sallybrown at 2:45 PM on September 22, 2012 [17 favorites]

I think I can gave Romney a pass on this one. Unless it sets off a chain reaction of future candidates making sure to know beforehand where the best cookies in every city are made.

Once again, I'm with muddgirl. I don't think this is forgivable. I mean, obviously it's not as big a deal as flat-out insulting nearly half the people in the entire country, but it should be proof that this man has absolutely no idea how to campaign. Here's what he actually said:

“I’m not sure about these cookies,” Romney said, and continued to tease one of the women at the table: “Did you make those cookies? You didn’t, did you? No. No. They came from the local 7-Eleven bakery or wherever.”

You just don't say something like that. Look, I've got a Charisma stat of approximately 4, and even I know that if you're a public figure confronted with cookies-- even if they're god-awful-- you say, "Mm! These are delicious! Did you make these? No? Well, they're every bit as good as homemade! Where did they come from? That's wonderful! I'll be sure to tell people all about it!"

Romney just has no clue.
posted by Faint of Butt at 2:47 PM on September 22, 2012 [20 favorites]

Yeah, the joke he made about them was pretty David Brent Dance. I really believe he feels a great disassociation from anyone outside his silver bubble, and his crass remarks underline this.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 2:48 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

The problem is Romney dumped all his skill points into Jawline and Whiteness..
posted by The Whelk at 2:49 PM on September 22, 2012 [31 favorites]

Secret Life Of Gravy: Has McCain lost his mind or does he think that this will really work? I would love to ask McCain, "What happened to you? What are you getting out of this attempt to prop up Romney's failing bid for the presidency?"

I think every once in a while McCain has someone remind him (Perhaps McConnell sends him an email asking him to be more of a team player) he's got to do a little bit to help out the retarded people in his party and he begrudgingly makes a statement like this that reads like pure poo written for him by one of the interns in his office. He holds his nose and makes the remark so the GOtP-er's etc... don't begin to go all Invasion of the Body Snatchers on him. That's my theory.

That and also, who knows, Mitt might still win this and I'm sure McCain would love that Sec. of Defense or Sec. of State or who knows what other goody might come his way as a longtime purveyor of GOP-crapola.

(I'm starting to think Palin was his ultimate revenge on a party that effed him over for those scumbags Karl Rove and GWB in 2000, who did the super-nasty on him...really really nasty nasty..(They implied that his black adopted daughter was via an illegitmate birth he had with an African-woman)).
posted by Skygazer at 2:49 PM on September 22, 2012 [5 favorites]

In one tiny shred of his defense, I can imagine that some punk activist might think it was funny to serve him tainted food -- didn't some Merry Prankster try to spike Agnew's coffee with LSD? Still -- no excuse for just, you know, not eating the cookies.
posted by Countess Elena at 2:49 PM on September 22, 2012

Here's the video of Cookiegate.

He's trying to neg the American people into a 4-year stand, as opposed to the usual 1-night.
posted by benito.strauss at 2:49 PM on September 22, 2012 [20 favorites]

I wonder if he's on drugs at this point. I know I would be.
posted by angrycat at 2:51 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

I don't want to see Mitt Peacocking.
posted by The Whelk at 2:51 PM on September 22, 2012

He's like Prince Phillip without the tact.
posted by howfar at 2:56 PM on September 22, 2012 [18 favorites]

Here's the video of Cookiegate .

The video makes this about 45987435 billion times worse. Look. at. his. face. when he says "local 7-11." HAHAHAHAHA WTF.
posted by sallybrown at 2:57 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

More from the Colorado teacher, Cheryl Arnett.
posted by bardophile at 2:57 PM on September 22, 2012

didn't some Merry Prankster try to spike Agnew's coffee with LSD?

Grace Slick, like Tricia Nixon, was a graduate of Finch College. She was invited with other alumnae to a tea party at the White House in Tricia's honor. She had a 600 microgram dose of LSD she was considering putting in Richard Nixon's coffee. She never got to the party, because she was on a "subversives" (read rock-and-roll hippie) list and stopped at the door.

Very short video here.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 3:02 PM on September 22, 2012 [3 favorites]

Those cookies looked kinda tasty, actually.
posted by angrycat at 3:03 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

Richard Nixon On 600 micrograms Of LSD, is going to be the name of my next psychedelic project.
posted by Skygazer at 3:05 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

People say Mitt is unemotional. I disagree. He is very good at conveying his e,optional state to the public, it's just that the only emotions he seems to have are irritation, spite, boredom, and malicious glee.
posted by The Whelk at 3:05 PM on September 22, 2012 [12 favorites]

Actually scratch that, Mitt Romney On 600 Micrograms of LSD is an even better name for my next psychedelic quartet.
posted by Skygazer at 3:07 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

I've met lots of people like Mittens. That he can use the word "entitled" to refer to anyone other than himself or his peers just shows how clueless he is. Really, when people say "eat the rich", they are referring to the Romneys of the world, not the Warren Buffets.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 3:10 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

Warren 'all you can eat' Buffet
posted by unSane at 3:14 PM on September 22, 2012 [10 favorites]

Palin Advises Romney: ‘Go Rogue’

As an advocate of the blind leading the fucking blind, I encourage Mitt to take that advice and run with it.
posted by octobersurprise at 3:23 PM on September 22, 2012 [7 favorites]

"Are these poor people cookies?"
posted by frenetic at 3:27 PM on September 22, 2012 [19 favorites]

They're made with real poor people!
posted by The Whelk at 3:31 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

This short film made for Lenore Romney's (Mitt's mom) 1970 Senate campaign is fascinating. A republican candidate addressing poverty this way is unimaginable. ~~EXTREME FLASHBACK~~
posted by readery at 3:33 PM on September 22, 2012 [5 favorites]

This is the cannibaliest thread ever.
posted by howfar at 3:33 PM on September 22, 2012

McCain seems veer wildly between the guy that gave us the tea party and someone who seems like a genuine human being. I really can't see Romney giving as human and likable speech upon losing as McCain did.
posted by Artw at 3:38 PM on September 22, 2012

I'm almost wondering if the 7-11 comment is something he thought was genuine teasing in a way. As in he could show up at a friends party and make a joke about the cookies being from 7-11 and they would all laugh because the thought of any one of them stepping foot in a 7-11 was beyond ludicrous.

This probably isn't the explanation for Romney being a complete asshole but I thought of it because it reminds me of a Halloween party I was at, when I was dating a med-student. One of her friends, a newly minted M.D., showed up at the party in a 7-11 uniform complete with name tag with his name. And that was supposed to be the joke. Ha ha, look at me. I'm a service worker! And these rich to upper middle class, or soon to be upper middle class, group of medical students and medical professionals thought it was quite amusing.
posted by honestcoyote at 3:40 PM on September 22, 2012 [7 favorites]

The video makes this about 45987435 billion times worse.
posted by sallybrown

I know, right? A transcript can't capture the emotional nuance of conversation, so you can't always trust them. But in this video clip there's no mistake.

My best honest explanation is that Romney has spent much of his life hanging out with the big-swinging-dick alpha males, where it's completely accepted that you immediately try to throw the other guy off with aggressive jab disguised in a polite glove. He may actually not realize how kind we proles are to one another in our day-to-day lives.
posted by benito.strauss at 3:40 PM on September 22, 2012 [5 favorites]

Oh man, Artw: I know the whole don't count your chickens dealio....

but I'm going to spend all night wondering exactly what the Romney concession speech would be.
posted by Lemurrhea at 3:41 PM on September 22, 2012

It's easier to visualize the tying-the-dog-to-a-car these days.
posted by angrycat at 3:43 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

One of her friends, a newly minted M.D., showed up at the party in a 7-11 uniform complete with name tag with his name. And that was supposed to be the joke.

On the other hand, this does make a valid Halloween costume, because come on, seriously.
posted by Faint of Butt at 3:44 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

I mean, is the dog entitled to ride in the car? Certainly not.
posted by angrycat at 3:45 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

It's like someone explained to him the conversational pattern of "Person 1: give compliment; Person 2: play down compliment" but he mixed it up. So "These cookies look delicious" "Oh nah, I just picked them up from 7-11" becomes "These cookies, are they from 7-11?" It's like he walked up to Ann and went "Your dress...that old thing?" with a shit-eating grin. Super creepy.
posted by sallybrown at 3:45 PM on September 22, 2012 [5 favorites]

And (over-)thinking the cookie mistake even more, they really did miss a golden opportunity. Once Romney's people discovered his mistake, Mitt could have gone and visited the bakery in question, said how he had made a mistake but now that he's realized it, tell people how much he's come to love them. Make a standing order for 12 dozen every week, and serve them on the campaign plane/bus.
posted by benito.strauss at 3:47 PM on September 22, 2012 [7 favorites]

Thirding the peculiar difficulty of imagining a Romney concession speech. The mere notion being raised of him having to make one, even though it's been a high probability for some time now, really got my brain buzzing as well. Does not compute.
posted by Anything at 3:50 PM on September 22, 2012

Any move that involves Mitt acknowledging he made a mistake seems pretty much entirely off the table. I'm sure you could dig up something but I can't really think of him ever admitting fault for anything, including while he was governor in MA. It's always someone or something else.
posted by feloniousmonk at 3:51 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

it all reveals someone who really doesn't seem to want to be president, doesn't it?

If (when) he looses, he can breathe a sigh of relief and collect his winnings on the "I bet you can't be a viable presidential candidate " double dog dare.

Also, I know this is out of nowhere, but the man seems like someone who responds well to flattery
posted by The Whelk at 3:55 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

I imagine his concession speech would invoke blame and veiled threats disguised as patriotism.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 3:55 PM on September 22, 2012 [8 favorites]

On the night of the election, instead of giving his concession speech, he just stares ahead madly and unblinking and gives his acceptance speech and then stands there gripping the podium, unmoving until they finally get a shot of Hadol in him and drag 'im away.
posted by The Whelk at 3:57 PM on September 22, 2012 [6 favorites]

I predict a "joking" reference along the lines of "You won't have Romney to kick around anymore" or something equally self-pitying.
posted by sallybrown at 3:58 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

Well, he's had practice at losing elections before though, right? For the Senate?
posted by bardophile at 3:59 PM on September 22, 2012

I couldn't actually watch the cookie video because SQUEE. I had to bail.
posted by unSane at 3:59 PM on September 22, 2012

He'll probably fire the electorate.
posted by Artw at 3:59 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

Who the hell goes anywhere and disses the food provided by the host? Was he raised by wolves? Jesus. I've never cast my vote on whom I would most like to have a beer with, but come on--I do expect my President to be able to converse with a wide range of people. He would be Head of State after all and be forced into lots of social positions where he would have to make small talk with people he doesn't know. Brown people, even. Can you imagine him at an Embassy cocktail party? His handlers would be driven insane trying to prevent WWIII
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:04 PM on September 22, 2012 [13 favorites]

At this point, I would hardly be surprised if during a Romney concession some TP type grabbed the mic and demanded justice for the stolen election via an armed insurrection. It's not like his campaign is too competent for something like that to seem plausible. I'm sure whatever happens we can count on supreme competence from the GOP.
posted by feloniousmonk at 4:06 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm still trying to figure out how he was elected to anything. I guess people running for Governor don't have to rub shoulders with the hoi-paloi.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:07 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

He was elected under very weird circumstances in MA. I think it had more to do with Jane Swift than anything he did.
posted by feloniousmonk at 4:10 PM on September 22, 2012

I'm still trying to figure out how he was elected to anything.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy

Asked and answered.
posted by benito.strauss at 4:17 PM on September 22, 2012 [5 favorites]

Huh - I remember when Cookiegate happened, but didn't see the video until now. I didn't think he was going for "playful little tease about cookies that are (for the purposes of the tease) supposedly crappy". I thought he was going for "playful little tease about cookies that are (for the purposes of the tease) so great that the people who brought them could not (for the purposes of the tease) actually have baked them".

So they must have got them from someplace really good. The proles obviously aren't familiar with the best boulangerie-pâtisseries of Paris, so Romney has to think of someplace that the proles think is good. He's hear of this "7-11 bakery". It must be a prole favorite.

The video makes me believe I'm wrong, as he looks more disturbed than playful while he's saying it, but I'm still not 100% sure. The disturbed look might just be because his InteractJocularly() subroutine hadn't been sufficiently unit tested.
posted by Flunkie at 4:17 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

A transcript can't capture the emotional nuance of conversation, so you can't always trust them. But in this video clip there's no mistake.

I was especially taken with the moment where he starts casting aspersions on the cookies' provenance, and someone sitting next to him (who I assume is one of the locals invited to participate in the roundtable?) blurts the word "bakery" to sort of help him dodge the hole he's in the process of digging for himself, and he fails to even take the hint. He just keeps going, yet throws the word "bakery" into the sentence in a way that makes it seem like he has no idea what 7-11 even is.

Also, yes, I'd assume that it's part of security protocol that these events never have homemade food, and probably that the source of the refreshments is vetted beforehand. Which makes this even worse. Is there ever homemade food at your campaign stops, Mitt? No? Because it might be a breach of security? THEN WHY GO THERE???? And why accuse the locals of bringing you convenience store snacks? Hasn't he done this exact song and dance about a million times over the last 4-6 years? He's been campaigning pretty much continuously since at least 2007. Does he insult local small businesses at every campaign stop?
posted by Sara C. at 4:23 PM on September 22, 2012 [3 favorites]

Asked and answered.
posted by benito.strauss at 7:17 PM on September 22

Really worth reading, thank you. And thanks to oneirodynia who originally posed the question.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:23 PM on September 22, 2012

Can you imagine him at an Embassy cocktail party? His handlers would be driven insane trying to prevent WWIII

"That man is not the porter. He is the President of Ghana."

"But I tipped him well."
posted by The Whelk at 4:25 PM on September 22, 2012 [16 favorites]

You think Mitt Romney tips?
posted by Faint of Butt at 4:29 PM on September 22, 2012 [18 favorites]

The damn cookies thing. If he is this socially inept with white-bread middle America and England, for God's sake, can you imagine him having to deal with world leaders at the APEC costume parties or participating ceremonial or cultural dances?

*boggles*
posted by madamjujujive at 4:34 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

Yeah, I just sort of picture him fingering someone's clothing and asking in his sneery way, "Where did you get this costume? Har Har. No one told me it was Halloween."

Can you imagine what a nightmare it must be to be his daughter-in-law? I see him "joking" about the china, the food, the wine, her dress, "You look like you're ready to drop twins." and all the while Ann has a strained look on her face knowing she is going to have to be in charge of damage control.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:34 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

After Libya, and even more after the 47% speech, I've been pondering the title of that book he wrote: No Apologies.

And that really sums it up, doesn't it? No apology for maligning the Administration and diplomatic corps, no apology to the 47% of America he glibly accused of being irredeemably lazy and irresponsible. Hell, on Libya he initially seemed unwilling to even retreat from his criticism, even when it became clear that only the most shameless partisans were going to back him up on it.

No apologies for America, I can get; it's arguably bad international policy, but definitely good politics.

No apologies for oneself? That's just idiotic!

Consider this (possible) debate response.

"The governor mentioned a gaffe I made while running in the Democratic primary in 2008. It was a statement I regretted, and one I swiftly apologized for. Whereas the governor has made no apology for his dismissal of nearly half of the people of America as shiftless and irresponsible. And that is another difference between me and my opponent.

When I spoke those words, it was to say that the government they may distrust can help them: give them more opportunity, more safety at their jobs, [beat] affordable health insurance, regardless of preexisting condition. When my opponent spoke of his forty-seven percent, it was to write them off, to say he had no plan, and no intention to help them."
posted by The Confessor at 4:35 PM on September 22, 2012 [7 favorites]

The disturbed look might just be because his InteractJocularly() subroutine hadn't been sufficiently unit tested.

I think it certainly contributes to it. There's probably a potpourri of aloofness in general and discomfort around the not-wealthy in particular.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 4:36 PM on September 22, 2012

Those of you who get the Obama campaign emails know that there have been a series of fundraiser dinners with the POTUS and George Clooney, one with the POTUS and Sarah Jessica Parker, last week there was one with Beyonce and Jay-Z and Obama. They give away a couple of tickets to the "regular folks" in a drawing from people that have contributed. Now whether or not you think this is an appropriate fundraising technique is beside the point.

My point being, can you IMAGINE Mitt and Ann sitting down with any "regular folks" for a dinner. I can't imagine that they would know how to behave with just plain folks eating at the same table as them.

I'm not a particularly smart political person, I don't follow the polls excessively or have a lot of high-brown theories about how the process works. I've seen a lot of folks saying that the 47% gaffe, or cookiegate, or the tax issue, etc in themselves aren't bad enough to keep Mitt from winning and that may be true. My theory is though that it will be sum of all these things that keeps Mitt from the White House because he's looking like as much a fuck-up as Bush was and even a lot of Republicans were tired of being a laughingstock because of the buffoon that was our president.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 4:39 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

If he is this socially inept with white-bread middle America and England, for God's sake, can you imagine him having to deal with world leaders at the APEC costume parties or participating ceremonial or cultural dances?

This might have been my favorite moment of W's presidency. I grow fonder of him with every Romney gaffe (now that's he's prohibited from ever ever ever being President again).
posted by sallybrown at 4:42 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

it all reveals someone who really doesn't seem to want to be president, doesn't it?

I think he absolutely wants to be President--but only of His Kind of People. President of the United Mitt Romneys of America. It's like Prom King of the Planet.
posted by tzikeh at 4:42 PM on September 22, 2012 [10 favorites]

I keep coming back to this thread, even after saying I'd be surprised if this did him any harm, and I'm too superstitious to even dare hope he's toast yet, but he's just such a dick. I seriously can't think of a more unlikeable, graceless, entitled, total fucking dick than Mitt Romney, ever, in my lifetime, being a nominee for president. Even G.W. Bush seemed to have the ability to at least fake being pleasant and affable. Romney is just so charm-free it blows my mind.
posted by skybluepink at 4:46 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

President of the United Mitt Romneys of America.

Band name.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:47 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

Dinner with Obama and George Clooney - if we could throw in Johnny Depp, that would be my idea of a fun date night.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:48 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

This might have been my favorite moment of W's presidency.

It really does highlight the difference between the two. Bush was, and is, a fucking idiot, but he had sufficient personal charisma to play the role he needed to play. He could pass, despite being as aristocratic as anyone born with five digits on each hand, for an ordinary person. Romney, by contrast, has all the folksy charm of a diseased, jewel encrusted scrotum.
posted by howfar at 4:48 PM on September 22, 2012 [14 favorites]

President of the United Mitt Romneys of America.

Band name.

Don't tell MeFi's Own caspar babypants.
posted by Faint of Butt at 4:50 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

Metafilter: has all the folksy charm of a diseased, jewel encrusted scrotum
posted by liza at 4:53 PM on September 22, 2012 [5 favorites]

Bwa ha! Mitt Romney Calls USA a "Foreign Country" in His Tax Returns
posted by Faint of Butt at 4:54 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

Someone needs to edit Romney into the ST:TNG were Data learns about humor.
posted by drezdn at 4:56 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

But I bet he does the best robot dance.. should of run in the late eighties!

About the cookies, I suspect his idea was that if they were home-baked, you have to comment on how yummy; if not and they don't look especially fancy, it's ok to needle a bit. I'm sure there was some failure to calibrate what would be considered fancy-enough in small local areas, by people who don't jet-set around the country and to Europe, Japan.
posted by rainy at 4:59 PM on September 22, 2012

Voting Wrongs: The Republicans’ plan is that if they can’t buy the 2012 election they will steal it.
posted by homunculus at 5:06 PM on September 22, 2012 [3 favorites]

In my own personal schadenfreude fantasy, I picture Mittens at an early stage of his campaign where he's trying to pick someone to run the campaign and he's being pitched ideas by a series of hopefuls, like some kind of perverse Republican Idol audition. It's been a long day and they've seen a lot of political operatives. In walks this absolute lizard of a person, wearing a sweat stained ill-fitting suit, reeking of pomade and scotch. His political outlook is archaic, and his pitch is a message that consists of not much more than "I'm not black." There's not a lot of trying to hide it with dog whistles, just "not black", drop the mic, walk off. "Uh, thanks, we'll let you know."

These several years later I picture that odious stain of a person following the Romney campaign in his crusty underwear in a cheap apartment somewhere. A beer in one hand, he mutters to himself, "shit, even I could have done better than this." And he's not completely wrong.
posted by Rhomboid at 5:07 PM on September 22, 2012

Metafilter: So charm-free it blows my mind.
posted by Skygazer at 5:19 PM on September 22, 2012

I suspect his idea was that if they were home-baked, you have to comment on how yummy; if not and they don't look especially fancy, it's ok to needle a bit. I'm sure there was some failure to calibrate what would be considered fancy-enough in small local areas, by people who don't jet-set around the country and to Europe, Japan.

I also suspect that his attempt at needling, in general, fell on absolutely deaf ears. The man has no idea how to needle.

His handlers could have hired him a special consultant to teach him word for word scripts ("These cookies couldn't possibly be homemade, they just look so beautiful..."), and he would have botched the delivery ("These cookies don't look homemade, you probably got them from 7-11...").

I don't think this is going to cost him any votes, let alone the election. This really is a gaffe, in the original sense of the word. It was probably an accident, and, hell, it might be a one in a million foot in mouth situation. In the same boat, I'd probably misspeak and come off like a jerk sometimes, too. It's entirely possible Obama has done the same.

But it's so much fun to mock, I don't care. Pure partisan glee.
posted by Sara C. at 5:23 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

I just sort of picture him fingering someone's clothing and asking in his sneery way, "Where did you get this costume? Har Har. No one told me it was Halloween."

He did this already; remember that rainy day in Florida when he insulted everyone's cheap ponchos?
posted by octobersurprise at 5:33 PM on September 22, 2012 [3 favorites]

I think people are being too hard on the guy. Everything makes a whole lot more sense about the Mittzer, if you realize that, excepting family and LDS congregants, he's usually only in the habit of speaking to employees or domestic servants.
posted by Skygazer at 5:37 PM on September 22, 2012

Voting Wrongs: The Republicans’ plan is that if they can’t buy the 2012 election they will steal it.

Thank you for reminding me it is far too early to relax. That shit scares the bejesus out of me.
Republicans have control of the Governership and both houses in 6 major swing states: Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. They have the mechanisms in place to wreak some serious havoc and I don't put it past them. Expect busloads of True the Vote in every swing state to be intimidating and generally just slowing down the voting process with bogus challenges.
posted by madamjujujive at 5:42 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

Everyone who's not a fellow douchebag is either a sucker, or a spoilsport.
posted by Anything at 5:44 PM on September 22, 2012

"You think Mitt Romney tips?"

Probably hands out whatever the Mormon equivalent of the Watchtower is.
posted by klangklangston at 5:47 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

A pink slip?
posted by unSane at 6:06 PM on September 22, 2012 [6 favorites]

He did this already; remember that rainy day in Florida when he insulted everyone's cheap ponchos?

No I missed this!

I totally agree that G. W. Bush is coming off a hell of lot better in comparison. I hated the smirk, I hated the posturing, but George did have charm-- he did know how to relate to inferiors and you could imagine yourself having a beer with him. He was a tiny bit humble.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:07 PM on September 22, 2012

Well, if we're piling on stupid shit Romney's done on video a while back that probably isn't going to drastically alter the campaign, I was very surprised that he thought it would be a good idea for him to play Jenga on TV. How could he possibly think that would look good?

It's so ridiculous, I had to go and check whether it was a photoshop. Nope.

I think it's a nice visual representation of the past week and a half for his campaign.
posted by amuseDetachment at 6:16 PM on September 22, 2012 [6 favorites]

I'm almost wondering if the 7-11 comment is something he thought was genuine teasing in a way.

what was revealing to me was the way he hesitated and had to think a little before he came up with "7-11" - the man's so unfamiliar with convenience stores he actually had to think hard before he came up with the name of one
posted by pyramid termite at 6:27 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

omg, amuseDetachment - those "candid" photos of the Romneys at home are too much. Mitt should do himself a favor and stick to business suits he needs to stay away from casual wear.
posted by madamjujujive at 6:53 PM on September 22, 2012

Dinner with Obama and George Clooney - if we could throw in Johnny Depp, that would be my idea of a fun date night.

I like this idea of madamjujujive sitting with Obama and Clooney looking bored as shit. "How's your wine," Clooney starts to ask, but she cuts him off. "When's Depp get here?"
posted by fleacircus at 6:56 PM on September 22, 2012 [21 favorites]

That Jenga gif is mesmerizing.
posted by drezdn at 7:01 PM on September 22, 2012 [2 favorites]

Bwa ha! Mitt Romney Calls USA a "Foreign Country" in His Tax Returns

And he wants to be President of The United States of America and he can't even fill in his tax return correctly? Lordy, lordy.
posted by vac2003 at 7:03 PM on September 22, 2012

I totally agree that G. W. Bush is coming off a hell of lot better in comparison. I hated the smirk, I hated the posturing, but George did have charm-- he did know how to relate to inferiors and you could imagine yourself having a beer with him. He was a tiny bit humble.

I disagree. I simply think that Bush knew how to channel his meanness. Like with the ponchos or the cookies, Bush would have singled one person out to mock ("whoah! It looks like you got the crappy poncho of the group!") implying that the rest in the group were on Bush's "side." Romney doesn't know how to play one part of his audience against the other and ends up making enemies of everyone.
posted by deanc at 7:09 PM on September 22, 2012 [9 favorites]

It's just the difference between a frat bro and a prep school twit.
posted by unSane at 7:17 PM on September 22, 2012 [12 favorites]

...it's amusing to ponder the idea that Romney can't fill out his tax forms correctly, but Romney doesn't do his own taxes. Heck, I would be surprised if he even reviewed his taxes, rather than having, like, an independent tax attorney advices him on whether or not to sign it.
posted by muddgirl at 7:17 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

Someone else pointed out that the recent $200,000 paid out to senior staffers seems to be at an odd time. You'd think that would come at the end of the campaign (win or lose). Coming now, it sorta seems like a "please don't ditch me now!!!" payout. I guess they didn't offer enough for Pawlenty to stick around though.
posted by edgeways at 7:19 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

I would hope Romney would think my cookies are at least up to Wawa quality. I mean, I buy real butter, don't use shortening, and dish them out nice and even with a scooper. I even sometimes buy brown eggs from a local farmstand.

My vote is Romney is confused and thinks poor people like convenience stores. Or maybe it was a panic shift. He tried to think of a national bakery. "Entenmann's? No, too fakey and common. Walmart? No, too divisive. What's that one cookie company where they say the place remembers. Fuck it, just say the first place that comes to mind."

Or he could be a huge jerk who thinks 47% of us are layabouts and really is only interested in loving the other half of America who pay his superpacs.
posted by mccarty.tim at 7:21 PM on September 22, 2012

And oh, please let Romney start taking advice from Sarah.. oh please... "Former vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin advised Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan to “go rogue” "
posted by edgeways at 7:21 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think they've gone well past Sarah. They're taking advice from Thelma and Louise and riding this weinermobile of a campaign off a cliff.

I should really get a job as a submediocre political cartoonist. Seems like a stable position.
posted by mccarty.tim at 7:25 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

Actually Pawlenty leaving made me nervous since every political choice the man makes is sub-optimal. I was trying to figure out whether Pawlenty leaving was actually a sign that Romney was going to win.
posted by jadepearl at 7:26 PM on September 22, 2012

frenetic: ""Are these poor people cookies?" "

Well they were afterward. The Bethel Bakery, who's cookies Romney dissed, decided that the best response to CookieGate was to donate trays of cookies to the local food bank.

Oh and insulting cookies in Pittsburgh is a big deal, we take our baked goods seriously here; you can't get married here without a cookie table. It's not quite as bad as if Mitt had come here and insulted the Steeler's defense or made a hunky joke but it wasn't good. Compare it to Obama's liking Pamala's pancakes so much that he invited the owners of the diner to come and cook breakfast at the Whitehouse.
posted by octothorpe at 7:39 PM on September 22, 2012 [11 favorites]

W himself was a well-meaning doofus who got in over his head.

Well-meaning my ass. He is a craven, draft-dodging, gleefully ignorant piece of shit. He giggled and cut brush while plunging us into the bloody wars his buddies wanted then acted annoyed when people called him on it. Having to deal with real crises made him piss his pants. In a just universe, he'd be working at the tire store and getting repeatedly passed over for that Assistant Manager promotion he wanted.
posted by emjaybee at 7:43 PM on September 22, 2012 [32 favorites]

First, I urge you not to consider all Democrats on board with what Harry Reid has done; Speculation is one thing, but I found his citation of a supposed off-the-record source for a specific claim ill-advised and disquieting.

Harry Reid is the second-most important Democrat in power, ahead of even Biden and Sec. Clinton. He is in charge of the most important chamber of congress, and has been in his office as Senator a long, long time... he has done this by knowing how the game is played.

If Harry Reid says Romney is a tax cheat, Harry Reid has the proof and the lawyers to prove it in court. Bank. On. It.

Harry has.
posted by Slap*Happy at 8:25 PM on September 22, 2012 [9 favorites]

Just catching up on my Daily Show from the week. The Moment of Zen clip from Thursday's show is apropos.
posted by Miko at 8:40 PM on September 22, 2012 [10 favorites]

Miko, I literally burst out laughing. That was excellent.
posted by Phire at 8:59 PM on September 22, 2012

W was just a good old boy. Never meanin no harm.
posted by Golden Eternity at 9:03 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

They're doing Ann Romney on SNL's news feature.
posted by cashman at 9:18 PM on September 22, 2012

I assure you, Mitt doesn't even look at his taxes.

Agreed. But you think he could afford tax attorneys/accountants who avoid this sort of sloppiness. I guess they are too busy finding all the loopholes, etc.
posted by vac2003 at 9:20 PM on September 22, 2012

unSane: Yeah, honestly, don't bitch about the cookies. You're a freakin' presidential candidate -- they're gonna roll out what they think is the best for you, you ungracious turd.

benito.strauss: He's trying to neg the American people into a 4-year stand, as opposed to the usual 1-night.

This was my same flash of brilliance. "Romney totally fell for that Pick Up Artist shit, and he thinks it is a real way to connect with people when you aren't naturally charismatic like Obama is. Oh shit." But sadly, I agree with benito.strauss:

benito.strauss: My best honest explanation is that Romney has spent much of his life hanging out with the big-swinging-dick alpha males, where it's completely accepted that you immediately try to throw the other guy off with aggressive jab disguised in a polite glove.

Remember the $10,000 dollar bet with Gov. Rick Perry? Alpha dog dig-wagging all the way. There was no polite glove, it was I'm so rich I'll bet you $10k on national television that my book didn't say that.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:26 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

Flunkie: Palin Advises Romney: ‘Go Rogue’

"Like someone else wrote in my best-selling book, which was mostly purchased by my own Super PAC, um, I don't remember. Any way, don't let the liberal media get in the way of your message that almost half of this country are a bunch of ungrateful moochers, and remind everyone that you praise Jesus, even if it is some kooky Mormon version. Don't let the facts stand in your way, and read anything people hand to you.

And if that doesn't work, see if TLC will give you a show so no one forgets that you exist. They need show about Massachusetts, or New Hampshire, or California, or Mexico, or the Bahamas, or Switzerland, wherever it is you live. Tell 'em Mama Grizzly sent you!"
posted by filthy light thief at 9:36 PM on September 22, 2012 [4 favorites]

spitbull: " It's how it's done (for likely long before Captain Cook) in Hawai'i ..."
spitbull has MeMail disabled, so apologies for this slight derail. But, as a archaeologist who studies Polynesian prehistory, I just want to say that, regarding everything we know about Hawai'ian politics in the pre-contact monarchy, this is unequivocally untrue!

And while I'm here, fuck Romney. Between the dog and the cookies and everything else this evil jerk does and wants to do: fuck him.

posted by barnacles at 10:26 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

excepting family and LDS congregants, he's usually only in the habit of speaking to employees or domestic servants.

As the current poster boy of conservative patriarchal culture, most family members and all but a select few LDS congregants also fall into the employee/servant category.
posted by Sara C. at 10:48 PM on September 22, 2012 [1 favorite]

Wow. The cookie video. Mitt Romney seems to believe that he is a victim... that he's entitled to Thin Mints, Famous Amos, Snickerdoodles, you name it.
posted by taz at 2:25 AM on September 23, 2012 [7 favorites]

As the current poster boy of conservative patriarchal culture, most family members and all but a select few LDS congregants also fall into the employee/servant category.

<aside>
By now presumably you'll all know this having followed Ironmouth's suggestion to read The Making of the English Working Class (and if you read one history book this lifetime...). But, if not, the term 'servant' used to cover most waged labour [E P Thompson (1968). The Making of the English Working Class. 2nd ed. London: Gollancz. 599.].

IMHO the word 'employee' is just Poltycal Corectneff gonne madd. There'll be none of that when Romney is elected King.

</aside>
posted by titus-g at 4:03 AM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

barnacles, I wasn't talking about politics directly. I'm talking about interpersonal relations more generally, attitude toward risk, and the like. pre-contact Polynesia was far from conflict averse. But what I really mean is the way Native culture has rubbed off on contemporary Hawaiian life, so that a kid who grows up there is immersed in a particular style of conflict avoidance/resolution.

You may be an archaeologist, but I first heard this idea from a Native Hawai'ian anthropologist.
posted by spitbull at 4:20 AM on September 23, 2012

What is sorta funny to me is that the maybe dozen or so Mormons I have worked with, gone to school with, or just chatted with in the street were all super super nice. It's sorta like an angel needs to say: "Hey Mitt!/ Your charisma is shit!/ Take these fucking gold plates and go learn how to be fucking polite to everybody!" (paraphrasing Book of Mormon, apologies)
posted by angrycat at 4:51 AM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

Tomasky has an interesting post here, basically saying that Romney's weakness as a candidate will allow the GOP to avoid self-scrutiiny -- they can just blame Mitt instead of looking in the mirror.

Yes, there is something really off about the guy personally. But as conservatives like Noonan start in on Romney vilification, I feel the need to stand up and reiterate: Romney’s problems aren’t all Romney’s fault. They’re not even half his fault. They’re chiefly the fault of a movement and political party that has gone off the deep end. Almost every idiotic thing Romney has done, after all, can be traced to the need he feels to placate groups of people who are way out there in their own ideological solar system, with no purchase at all on how normal Americans feel and think about things.

posted by unSane at 5:45 AM on September 23, 2012 [10 favorites]

The pick-up comments made me realize Mitt Romney's pick-up line: America you're ugly and you're lucky to have me.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 5:51 AM on September 23, 2012 [8 favorites]

If he did study Pick Up Artist crap, he stopped reading too early. negging a [less attractive lady/person/country] may have the counter effect of ruining your game.

But now I expect him to get all touchy-feely, in an attempt to build trust and seduce the now-hesitant voter. Next thing we know, he's joined by Mystery. Then we know his campaign is completely and totally fucked.
posted by filthy light thief at 6:23 AM on September 23, 2012

The pick-up comments made me realize Mitt Romney's pick-up line: America you're ugly and you're lucky to have me.

I'm not sure that the Insulting Librarian move is appropriate here.
posted by jaduncan at 6:25 AM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

And now I have read and watched "seduction game" rubbish (ick), and all in the name of making fun of Romney (double ick).
posted by filthy light thief at 6:25 AM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

Several ads that should be running summed up.
posted by jaduncan at 6:28 AM on September 23, 2012 [11 favorites]

Wow. The cookie video. Mitt Romney seems to believe that he is a victim... that he's entitled to Thin Mints, Famous Amos, Snickerdoodles, you name it.
posted by taz 4 ¼ hours ago

My take on his sneering attitude towards the baked goods on offer is that he is used to being served homemade cookies--the efforts of either a live-in cook or a dutiful Mormon homemaker.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:44 AM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney should move beyond negging and go straight to "The Campaign Bus."

It may be meant for long term relationships where the douchebag wants to reinforce the relationship by basically saying "I could drive away and never come back! Wouldn't you miss me?" but it's what this campaign needs now.

Handicap: Romney has to make people actually like him, even a little, first.

Yes, this is based on an actual PUA article called "the door."
posted by mccarty.tim at 6:49 AM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

We're discussing the potential election of a man so devoid of any element of humanity that base racial hatred is the only thing which will win him the Election. His victory will begin the march to a quasi-Feudal economy where the obscenely wealthy will rule with impunity and Far Right religious extremism will return us to the dark ages.

So please, enough with the PUA shit, it's depressing.
posted by fullerine at 7:08 AM on September 23, 2012 [6 favorites]

A letter from Ann Romney
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:13 AM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Lord knows this campaign has all the money it needs, especially since Mitt went to Vegas and promised Sheldon Adelson he’d bomb Tehran on Day One."

Good satire is meant to be hard to distinguish from a horrific possible real life, right roomthreeseventeen?
posted by jaduncan at 7:17 AM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

My take on his sneering attitude towards the baked goods on offer is that he is used to being served homemade cookies--the efforts of either a live-in cook or a dutiful Mormon homemaker.

But, again, the guy has been campaigning For Fucking Ever.

I'm not 100% sure, but based on my experience organizing meetings and catering food for people day in and day out, over months and months, event planning campaign staff has this down to a script. The food is likely all the same, with a few regional variations. Their ground team likely has excel spreadsheets of locally reputable small businesses to use for things like this, possibly cross-referenced with Romney and upper level staff preferences, dietary needs, political considerations, etc.

The likelihood that Romney has never seen the standard tray of cookies from the local bakery is pretty much zero.
posted by Sara C. at 7:19 AM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

jaduncan, yeah, it was a little weak, but I thought some parts of it were funny.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:21 AM on September 23, 2012

I've been as incredulous about these as anyone else here, but frankly, I'm already starting to get Romney-character-deficiency fatigue. Anyone keeping up on news about further critical analysis of his policies?
posted by Anything at 7:37 AM on September 23, 2012

spitbull: "barnacles, I wasn't talking about politics directly. I'm talking about interpersonal relations more generally, attitude toward risk, and the like. pre-contact Polynesia was far from conflict averse. But what I really mean is the way Native culture has rubbed off on contemporary Hawaiian life, so that a kid who grows up there is immersed in a particular style of conflict avoidance/resolution.

You may be an archaeologist, but I first heard this idea from a Native Hawai'ian anthropologist"

Gotcha. That's an interesting idea, and I think your friend is probably very much correct in that appraisal! I imagine there are some great books along that line, too, though I don't know of any offhand.

Also, before I end the derail, thanks to the North American four-field approach, anthropology and archaeology are very related. In fact I often write that I'm really more of a historical anthropologist that privileges the material record.
posted by barnacles at 8:00 AM on September 23, 2012

I wish I could be watching the Sunday news shows right now. It usually bothers me a lot to watch people not answer the questions that are posed, but I bet today it's pretty fiery.
posted by cashman at 8:10 AM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

jaduncan, yeah, it was a little weak, but I thought some parts of it were funny.

Yeah. Obviously the one to do that was actually Newt.
posted by jaduncan at 8:21 AM on September 23, 2012

Anyone keeping up on news about further critical analysis of his policies?

He'd have to state them, no?
posted by jaduncan at 8:22 AM on September 23, 2012 [9 favorites]

I wish I could be watching the Sunday news shows right now. It usually bothers me a lot to watch people not answer the questions that are posed, but I bet today it's pretty fiery.

Up with Chris Hayes - Romney adviser "triples down" on 47% comment
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:26 AM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

Anyone keeping up on news about further critical analysis of his policies?

Well... That's the thing. His policies are so vague and ill defined, there's very little to analyze. His strategy was to blast Obama on his record, particularly with the economy, and to wriggle away from anything that would nail him down to one position or another. That strategy is no longer viable, but they're sticking with it. As a result, the Dems are having a field day defining his policies for him.
posted by Slap*Happy at 8:27 AM on September 23, 2012 [6 favorites]

What is sorta funny to me is that the maybe dozen or so Mormons I have worked with, gone to school with, or just chatted with in the street were all super super nice.

This confuses me too. The few Mormons I know personally work really, really hard to live their positive, happy, "serve others" values and, if they disagree with you (which they certainly do with me about many many things), are super gentle and respectful about it. I understand they're also (in their minds) playing the long, long game and so don't really feel they have to concede to you now because the Heavenly Father will straighten it all out when we all go into space, but still, Romney doesn't seem to have gotten the same memo about how to relate to those not in the gang.

Anyone keeping up on news about further critical analysis of his policies?

If he comes up with any policies, we'll get back to you.

the North American four-field approach, anthropology and archaeology are very related. In fact I often write that I'm really more of a historical anthropologist that privileges the material record.

Curious, what do you mean about the North American four-field approach? I'm aware of a little about that in terms of how archaeology/anthropology are more united fields elsewhere but in the US anthropology is becoming a red-headed stepchild, but can you give me a clearer description? Thanks.
posted by Miko at 8:31 AM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

As a result, the Dems are having a field day defining his policies for him.

Nature and politics both abhor a vacuum. And Romney is the very definition of a political vacuum (cue "he sucks" jokes). This is the worst possible strategy, because your opponents then have an open playing field in which to frame your positions for you.

Honestly, I'm disappointed. I never would've voted for him, anyway, but this level of ineptitude in his campaign's communication strategy is appalling. I'd love to see someone who poses a real political challenge to Obama, because there are important debates to be had that could truly advance the public discourse. Instead, all we get is Symbolic Rich White Dude who acts as a lightning rod for voters' pre-existing biases, and who won't say a damned thing of substance.

Feh, I say. This isn't how the whole process is supposed to work, and it's making me pouty.
posted by Superplin at 8:34 AM on September 23, 2012 [9 favorites]

This confuses me too. The few Mormons I know personally work really, really hard to live their positive, happy, "serve others" values and, if they disagree with you (which they certainly do with me about many many things), are super gentle and respectful about it.

It makes sense if you perceive the LDS as a for-profit cult, like Scientology. The people that we meet, the ordinary folks, are the True Believers. They're also the suckers. It's only when you climb the ranks that you start finding the profiteers: men like Mitt Romney.
posted by Faint of Butt at 8:36 AM on September 23, 2012 [15 favorites]

This is probably true, FoB.
posted by Miko at 8:41 AM on September 23, 2012

I think politics does this to people, whatever their beliefs - don't forget, Nixon was a Quaker, and the fundamental point of Quakerism is Not Being Richard M Nixon. Running for president could probably make an evil asshole out of a Jain.
posted by Grangousier at 8:42 AM on September 23, 2012 [6 favorites]

I think politics does this to people, whatever their beliefs - don't forget, Nixon was a Quaker, and the fundamental point of Quakerism is Not Being Richard M Nixon. Running for president could probably make an evil asshole out of a Jain.

Are they transformed by politics or is it the case that only such people are going to even have the ability to be successful in it?
posted by grouse at 8:44 AM on September 23, 2012

This isn't how the whole process is supposed to work, and it's making me pouty.

I'm wondering how the debates are going to go for that reason; there's literally very little idea about what some of the policies are. I'd think that more details will be mentioned by Romney, but perhaps it will literally be wrapping himself in the flag and loving ponies. I find it a bit depressing that a good 48% of people will vote based on that degree of specificity, but there we are. The man has explicitly stated that he wishes to cut entire federal agencies without detailing what; it's hard to know how to evaluate that without knowing which.

Of course, I'm mean. In the debates I'd mention that quote and ask which and why.
posted by jaduncan at 8:46 AM on September 23, 2012

Er, the first part of my last comment should have been italicizes, since I was quoting Slap*Happy.

I should not be permitted to post while undercaffeinated.
posted by Superplin at 8:46 AM on September 23, 2012

ItalicizeD. Man. Time for coffee.
posted by Superplin at 8:47 AM on September 23, 2012

Bill Clinton also made the rounds this morning
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:47 AM on September 23, 2012

Anyone keeping up on news about further critical analysis of his policies?

The debates are next Wednesday, so I am really looking forward to what Mitt says about policies then. I hope the Obama team is coming up with a snappy but sticky line to attach to Romney when he inevitably continues to offer nothing but air in the way of critiquable policy. Again the Romney Campaign tries to attack the President, but the end of the article notes that the Romney Campaign had no specific policy to offer to counter what is a blatant contradiction between their talk and their actions, a la Ryan's continuing to say "failed stimulus" while accepting and even begging for stimulus funds and taking credit for growth and success from the stimulus.

So as others have said, since Mitt has yet, with the election little over a month away, to put forth anything specific on a number of issues (because then he'd be able to be critiqued and Ann doesn't feel like we've earned the right to criticize Mitt's ideas, maybe after the election) - all that is left is his statements to people. And you can see from the videos and stories, that he is pretty shitty to people.

...unless you're very wealthy.

I'd think that more details will be mentioned by Romney, but perhaps it will literally be wrapping himself in the flag and loving ponies.

Wrapping himself in money and loving dressage. Mitt isn't patriotic, he loves money, not country. He made it clear he can't stand half the country and does not care about them. He cares for the wealthy, and indirectly, for the people just below, who help the wealthy, but are rich.
posted by cashman at 8:51 AM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

How Paul Ryan Convinced Washington of His Genius
posted by the man of twists and turns at 8:52 AM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

Wrapping himself in money and loving dressage.

Not entirely sure that's what the advisors will be saying will break the framing. But yes, there was a subtle joke there.
posted by jaduncan at 8:52 AM on September 23, 2012

4 years ago Obama's big food gaffe was asking for an arugula salad.
posted by humanfont at 9:24 AM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

4 years ago Obama's big food gaffe was asking for an arugula salad.

Oh, man, I remember Arugulagate. Obama mentioned arugula in a speech and Fox News went nuts. "Arugula? That's fancy and foreign! Americans don't eat arugula! Obama is an elitist!"

He mentioned arugula because he was talking to arugula farmers, you assholes.
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:30 AM on September 23, 2012 [11 favorites]

I think you mean "47%ers".
posted by Artw at 9:34 AM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney, Obama surrogates clash over '47 percent' comments.
posted by ericb at 9:41 AM on September 23, 2012

An anti-Obama movie claiming — without evidence — that President Barack Obama's real father is an obscure African-American communist has been mailed to 1.5 million voters across the country, its creator told BuzzFeed Friday.
A reader in Ohio emailed this photo of his free copy of the film Dreams From My Real Father, which claims that the Chicago activist Frank Marshall Davis is actually President Obama's father. He received it in the mail this week.
The film's director and producer, Joel Gilbert, said that the film was sent out to more one million voters in Ohio; 200,000 after a mid-summer conference, and a million after that. He said that 50,000 copies had been sent to voters in Nevada and 100,000 to voters in New Hampshire.
posted by futz at 10:27 AM on September 23, 2012

"What did he say?" "He said the president is near!"
posted by jokeefe at 10:48 AM on September 23, 2012 [5 favorites]

Ryan's a pretty good con man, I give you that. In that video where seniors were ready to tear him into bloody chunks, his persona of, "I know you don't like to hear this unsettling truth, but" is tight tight tight. I mean he could be a damn fine card player, if he's not one already. Then again, Norquist amazes me in this way as well, so shrug, maybe it's common, or at least catching,.
posted by angrycat at 11:00 AM on September 23, 2012

Talking about paternity and DNA testing, Paul Austerity Ryan needs one, too. He'd be Greek. Someone peel the manchild a grape.
posted by de at 11:02 AM on September 23, 2012

Weren't there a few other "direct-to-voter" movies sent out in the last few elections? I'm not finding anything on a quick internet search, as the top hits are all for good political movies, not propaganda movies.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:06 AM on September 23, 2012

RNC chairman Reince Priebus: ‘We’ve got specifics coming out our eyeballs’
posted by futz at 11:09 AM on September 23, 2012

They're taking advice from Thelma and Louise and riding this weinermobile of a campaign off a cliff.

Close
posted by achrise at 11:25 AM on September 23, 2012

RNC chairman Reince Priebus: ‘We’ve got specifics coming out our eyeballs’

Entertainingly, he then fails to mention specifics.
posted by jaduncan at 11:26 AM on September 23, 2012 [11 favorites]

Weren't there a few other "direct-to-voter" movies sent out in the last few elections?

I recall some stuff about a Karl Rove/W 2000 project of sending anti-gay-marriage videos to evangelical churches, but don't have a link at hand.
posted by Miko at 11:34 AM on September 23, 2012

Entertainingly, he then fails to mention specifics.

He talks about Ryan's specifics. Which, I'm afraid, are not a big selling point for the swing voter.

And there is something funny about "Vote for our candidate! He is a vague and fuzzy enigma, but his sidekick has some ideas!"
posted by Miko at 11:35 AM on September 23, 2012 [4 favorites]

He is a vague and fuzzy enigma, but his sidekick has some ideas!

worst superhero team ever.
posted by The Whelk at 11:41 AM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

At a Safeway in Colorado, a woman claiming to work for the county clerk's office is registering voters to vote for Mitt Romney
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:41 AM on September 23, 2012 [5 favorites]

He talks about Ryan's specifics. Which, I'm afraid, are not a big selling point for the swing voter.

The problem with that is that Romney has explicitly stated that the Ryan plan isn't adopted wholesale. It's therefore hard to know if it is or isn't policy for the Romney administration, and certainly isn't specifics of the Romney policies. How handy.
posted by jaduncan at 11:44 AM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

roomthreeseventeen: what county is that from?
posted by Miko at 11:45 AM on September 23, 2012

El Paso county, CO.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:46 AM on September 23, 2012

Easy to contact:

El Paso County Office of Elections

Colorado League of Women Voters
posted by Miko at 11:55 AM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

An anti-Obama movie claiming — without evidence — that President Barack Obama's real father is an obscure African-American communist has been mailed to 1.5 million voters across the country, its creator told BuzzFeed Friday.

First of all, who cares who Obama's father is.
The guy has been president of the US of A for almost four friggin' years now. To figure out what his political leanings are, you don't need to look at his father. All you need to do is look at his track record.

But the ad really is comedy gold.
"The Kenyan goat herder father was only a sham marriage to hide an illicit affair."

Right. Because we all know that Kenyan goat herders are so much more accepted in the US than having an illicit affair.
posted by sour cream at 11:57 AM on September 23, 2012 [12 favorites]

Right. Because we all know that Kenyan goat herders are so much more accepted in the US than having an illicit affair.

"Mom, I'm pregnant...of course he can take care of me, he's not that useless academic theorist. This one herds goats!"

Also, I don't think Communism is genetic.
One of you guys needs to tell me if I'm wrong, we could totally test Congress for that.
It's a lot of babies Marx and Engles must have fathered though. I guess it's the beard. 19th century women apparently loved the beards.
posted by jaduncan at 12:04 PM on September 23, 2012 [6 favorites]

Also, I don't think Communism is genetic.

"Oh you always took after the Anarchist side of the family."
posted by The Whelk at 12:05 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

> First of all, who cares who Obama's father is.

Have you not seen Jerry Springer? Probably 2 out of 3 of the 1.5 million video recipients will care. Besides, why else would a Kenyan goat herder marry? Money, of course.
posted by de at 12:06 PM on September 23, 2012

this is the thread that just keeps on giving. thanks metafilter!
posted by liza at 12:08 PM on September 23, 2012

Oh you always took after the Anarchist side of the family.

"Every time he gets in trouble at kindergarten he talks about the propaganda of the deed!"
posted by jaduncan at 12:10 PM on September 23, 2012 [7 favorites]

Also, I don't think Communism is genetic.

Clearly you've never seen this documentary.
posted by Faint of Butt at 12:16 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

David Brooks: Mitt Romney Is 'The Least Popular Candidate In History' (VIDEO).
posted by ericb at 12:22 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

First of all, who cares who Obama's father is.

Prolly the same ignorant racists that are already going to vote against him anyway.
posted by elizardbits at 12:22 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

Tax Cuts Don't Lead to Economic Growth, a New 65-Year Study Finds

Regarding Mitt's tax returns - they've made a claim that they don't want to release the returns due to privacy considerations surrounding their charitable giving. I've been wondering whether the returns might highlight donations to Planned Parenthood or some other charitable organizations that would hurt his conservative bona fides.
posted by syzygy at 12:39 PM on September 23, 2012 [5 favorites]

Tax Cuts Don't Lead to Economic Growth, a New 65-Year Study Finds

This is what we need to be talking more about. There's an emotional appeal to this rhetoric, somehow, but in terms of evidence, it really doesn't seem to work, and that's becoming more and more obvious. We've been cutting and cutting for ages - we ought to be rich as Croesus by now, if the theory bore any fruit.
posted by Miko at 12:44 PM on September 23, 2012 [7 favorites]

The solution is for Mitt to show his returns to a couple of selected Obama campaign people. They can then say "the worst things in the returns are x, y and z". And they could pinky-swear they won't disclose anything that would hurt Mitt on the hard-right.
posted by rainy at 12:52 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama and Romney both on 60 minutes tonight.
posted by cashman at 12:53 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

I've been wondering whether the returns might highlight donations to Planned Parenthood or some other charitable organizations that would hurt his conservative bona fides.

More likely they'd kill the chances of any independent voters having anything to do with them, like massive donations to Prop 8.
posted by winna at 12:55 PM on September 23, 2012

unSane: Dude has $100m in the bank. If you don't think he's getting a bunch of dividends from that I have no idea what to tell you.

According to the Atlantic, "Romney manages such a low rate because most of his income comes from capital gains -- which is taxed at 15 percent, instead of the 35 percent Romney would otherwise pay."

Which is exactly what I was saying above. Bain and Mitt are too savvy to bother with dividends - the real way to lower everyone's tax burden to the absolute minimum is to characterize every possible penny as capital gains.
posted by syzygy at 12:56 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

The favorable tax treatment for carried interest has no justification - zero. Its defenders can barely make a coherent case for it. It's outrageous that this flaw in the tax code was not fixed years ago. To benefit (on a massive scale) from this loophole and then complain that low income persons, the elderly, etc., don't pay enough tax should (sorry for repeating myself) disqualify a person from running for President.
posted by Eyebeams at 2:46 PM on September 23, 2012 [12 favorites]

The Asshole Monologues
posted by Rumple at 3:11 PM on September 23, 2012

Man, I can't wait until all the kids who grew up with social networking start running for public office. People are going to dig up so much stuff from people with vaguely similar usernames.

And plus, the internet just enables people to leave a trail of freak flags they may not want to fly at a later date.

"Mr. Senator, in July 2008, you clearly posted to tumblr that you are an OtherKin of the dragon variety, but in 2011, you later posted your Fursona to DeviantArt. I did not see any scales or wings, and if you were a dragon, you were a very tiny one." - A person in the crowd yells, "GO BACK TO MALATORA!" - "If you can't even give a straight answer on what your true form is, how can we trust you when you say you are not a double socialist who is for clone marriage?"
posted by mccarty.tim at 3:30 PM on September 23, 2012 [22 favorites]

LRB: The primary word that the right is using to characterise the 47 per cent, and the left is using to characterise the characterisation, is ‘parasite’. As Mary Matalin, an omnipresent Republican talking head, put it on CNN: ‘There are makers and takers, there are producers and there are parasites.’ Tens of millions will vote for Romney and many of them will be believers in this myth. Perhaps it’s worth remembering the last time a large segment of a population was vilified as parasites: Der Jude als Weltparasit (‘The Jew as World Parasite’). These things tend to stick.
posted by Rumple at 3:38 PM on September 23, 2012 [7 favorites]

In an amended return also released Friday, Representative Paul D. Ryan, Mr. Romney’s running mate, disclosed that he and his wife had initially failed to report $61,122 in income from 2011. He said the failure was inadvertent. The change raised their total income to $323,416 and increased their taxes by $19,917 to $64,674, or 20 percent of adjusted gross income.

They owed a penalty of $59 for the original underpayment. The Ryans explained that they had overlooked their income from the Prudence Little Living Trust. Mrs. Little, who died in 2010, was Mrs. Ryan’s mother.

Once again, under scrutiny it is revealed that rich people suck at this whole tax thing. They forgot about income from a trust? Who forgets $61,000?

And I just found out that Romeny has 3 years to amend his 2011 taxes, so if he loses (or even if he wins) the presidency he can go back and take those charitable deductions that he did not claim so that his taxes will fall from 14% to 10%.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:56 PM on September 23, 2012 [5 favorites]

Yep, that hasn't been pointed out enough. Romney isn't overpaying his taxes for better optics. It's worse than that. He's time shifting his taxes; he can just take the deduction later after the election.
posted by Justinian at 4:01 PM on September 23, 2012 [7 favorites]

Meet the Press was amusing today. Things ate so skewed that even David Gregory was actively calling bs on the Romney surrogates. In other campaign news most of the top Romney surrogate pols who were also rans or decline to rans this time are now "campaigning" for Romney in Iowa.
posted by humanfont at 4:10 PM on September 23, 2012

They forgot about income from a trust? Who forgets $61,000?

He "inadvertently" left it off his congressional financial disclosure reports. Amusingly enough, it appears to have been the Romney campaign's vetting of Ryan -- including "several years" of tax returns -- that caught it.
posted by We had a deal, Kyle at 4:13 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

Heck I have dozens of friends on the left who are furious at him about drone strikes and Guantanamo and no torture prosecutions,

Speaking of which: Chronicle of a death foretold: Guantanamo Bay prisoner Adnan Farhan Abdul Latif died without having ever been charged with a crime.
posted by homunculus at 4:15 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

If you live in Iowa, be sure to get your $1.84/gal gas next week courtesy of the Koch brothers as part of the "Obama's Failing Agenda Tour." Not a bribe you understand, just a fun, little give away!

Between the cheap gas and the free DVD, Iowans must think they are living in Hog Heaven.

Humor aside, though, I am confused about how this movie is supposed to get votes for Romney. My husband thinks that they will lose as many votes from people turned off by the sheer craziness of the Republican effort to turn the Muslim Kenyan into a Marxist American as they will gain votes from DVD watchers who are afraid that Obama is a Russian sleeper agent. Has there ever been such a concerted effort to smear an American President with Otherness? I'm waiting for the "Obama is an alien zombie who wants to suck your baby's soul" ads.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:15 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

futz: An anti-Obama movie claiming — without evidence — that President Barack Obama's real father is an obscure African-American communist has been mailed to 1.5 million voters across the country...

If they're gonna pull that crap, I'm reviving the rumor that Barbara Bush is the secret love-child of Aleister Crowley.

Take that, Jeb!
posted by Mad_Carew at 4:27 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

Secret Life of Gravy: " your $1.84/gal gas next week courtesy of the Koch brothers "

Just like inauguration day 2008!
posted by boo_radley at 4:30 PM on September 23, 2012

Hmmm I'm beginning to think that Joel Gilbert (writer/director of Dreams From My Real Father) is taking someone in the Far Right for a ride; his previous work include a couple of recent mockumentaries: Elvis is Alive and Paul McCartney Really is Dead. In other words he likes to poke fun at cultural myths.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:32 PM on September 23, 2012

Joshua Micah Marshall belatedly recognized Joel Gilbert as director of some marginal-quality Dylan documentaries he's purchased.
posted by The Confessor at 4:41 PM on September 23, 2012

[H]ow [Romney] presents his taxes ... reflects the character of the man.
posted by ericb at 5:01 PM on September 23, 2012

In other campaign news most of the top Romney surrogate pols who were also rans or decline to rans this time are now "campaigning" for Romney in Iowa.

They must really want those 7 electoral votes.
posted by drezdn at 5:03 PM on September 23, 2012

60 Minutes just started.
posted by cashman at 5:08 PM on September 23, 2012

Just based on the teasers of Romney's interview it doesn't look like it goes too well for him. This should be interesting.
posted by feloniousmonk at 5:13 PM on September 23, 2012

Moyers & Company: Trevor Potter on Fighting Big Money in the 2012 Election
posted by homunculus at 5:13 PM on September 23, 2012

This is a rough interview. I don't think this is going well at all. Maybe I'm wrong, but his answers for specifics about loopholes are pretty terrible. Not to mention the bit about it being fair for him to pay less than someone making $50k.
posted by feloniousmonk at 5:19 PM on September 23, 2012

Wow "I'm the guy running for president, not him" in reference to Ryan's budget.
posted by feloniousmonk at 5:21 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

"Egypt needs to know what the rules are" kind of sums it up for me.
posted by feloniousmonk at 5:29 PM on September 23, 2012

Earlier: RNC chairman Reince Priebus: ‘We’ve got specifics coming out our eyeballs’

Fucking called it on the bullshit of pointing to the Ryan budget as specifics when the Ronmney campaign don't agree. They literally haven't clearly defined a single policy area, and Priebus was full of (uncalled) bullshit.

It genuinely annoys me that this kind of stuff doesn't get called; Paxman would kick them up and down the street and then laugh at the corpse.
posted by jaduncan at 5:32 PM on September 23, 2012 [7 favorites]

A lot of his answers were more along the lines of what I expect in the debate - fairly calm and steady. But man he just looks and acts like a smarmy hustler.

"Egypt needs to know what the rules are" kind of sums it up for me.

Yeah, this is more of the "position of strength" thing from the videos linked in this thread, that Mitt has latched onto. He called it speaking softly and carrying a big stick, but he doesn't know at all how to relate to people (speak softly), and he just seems to want to be president so he can cut social programs and swing his dick around.

He is still running from the 47% comments and has zero answer besides saying it was not "elegant". He has no clue. None. Boo this man.
posted by cashman at 5:33 PM on September 23, 2012

"Egypt needs to know what the rules are"

That rustling sound was diplomats across the world sitting up in their chairs, as they prepared to say "wait.. WHAT?"
posted by Devils Rancher at 5:35 PM on September 23, 2012

"position of strength" thing

"Carry a big stick then insult another country repeatedly whilst waving a big stick. Then they'll understand that you're strong and are sure to like the fact that you've attempted to cut off their balls in front of their hope population."

It's always a good idea to back people into a corner with only the option to resist or very publicly lose a battle of wills. It's virtually what diplomacy is, I should imagine.
posted by jaduncan at 5:43 PM on September 23, 2012 [7 favorites]

*home
posted by jaduncan at 5:43 PM on September 23, 2012

North American four field approach refers to Franz Boas' vision for a unified science of humankind, incorporating what was then called "physical" anthropology (now biocultural and physical), archaeology, linguistics, and cultural anthropology/folklore. In recent decades, the more scientistic (they would say scientific) fields of biocultural and physical anthro, along with some archaeologists (those who do evolutionary work, primarily) and some social anthropologists broke away from the more humanistic/literary (and critical of rhetorics of scientism in matters human based on the the long history of anthropology's intimate relationship to scientific racism, Boas notwithstanding). But archaeologists divide along these lines, with some essentially doing interpretive cultural history (usually of the more recent past), and others doing more biocultural work, often with more distant historical examples. The physicals are basically now primatologists.

barnacles, i'm an anthropologist trained in one of the few four-field programs to survive the 1990s

posted by spitbull at 5:45 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

Oh my, they went there on abortion.
posted by jaduncan at 5:47 PM on September 23, 2012

sorry,

" . . . broke away from the more humanistic/literary *cultural anthropologists* (or sociocultural, in some venues)."

To make up for my error here's a wonderful piece by Claudia Roth Pierpoint from the New Yorker on Boas' influence on American social thought, from 2004.
posted by spitbull at 5:47 PM on September 23, 2012

Oh my, they went there on abortion.

Can you sum it up for those who can't bear to watch?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:03 PM on September 23, 2012 [5 favorites]

Thanks spitbull.
posted by Miko at 6:05 PM on September 23, 2012

The bribe/cheap gas from Koch is "to highlight Obama’s 'failing green energy policies,' and point out that the price of a gallon of gas was $1.84 a gallon four years ago." Which is pretty interesting cherry-picking.

A Little Truth About Energy: U.S. energy production is up significantly under Obama, and oil imports are down, and as fracking increased, natural gas supplies skyrocketed, making coal less important.

In other words, screw the bastards when they complain about "failed energy policies." And screw 'em again when they don't talk about the future of the global environment and just harp on "high gas prices."
posted by filthy light thief at 6:07 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

jaduncan: “Oh my, they went there on abortion.”

That offensive lapel pin he was wearing, though – holy cow. Who pulled that off? One of his stylists must be on the other team. I'd be surprised if the embarrassment from that didn't cost him the election.
posted by koeselitz at 6:09 PM on September 23, 2012

Paraphrased: "So you used to be in favour of abortion choice when you were talking to MA people. Now you don't believe it should be allowed outside of incest and rape. [snipped out other policies referenced] Lots of people say that in general you randomly change your mind on various subjects."

"I changed my mind, but my principles never changed."

No real explaination, but the whole lack of an answer for the flipflopper thing made me wince when combined with an issue so central to the base.
posted by jaduncan at 6:09 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

Isn't that illegal?
posted by bq at 6:11 PM on September 23, 2012

FACT CHECK: More US drilling didn't drop gas price.

U.S. oil production is back to the same level it was in March 2003, when gas cost $2.10 per gallon when adjusted for inflation. But that's not what prices are now.

That's because oil is a global commodity and U.S. production has only a tiny influence on supply. Factors far beyond the control of a nation or a president dictate the price of gasoline.

...
Energy Department figures show that gas prices in the U.S. seem to rise and fall similarly to gas prices in Europe, showing that it has little to do with American drilling.

And that's the key. It's a world market, economists say.

Unlike natural gas or electricity, the United States alone does not have the power to change the supply-and-demand equation in the world oil market, said Christopher Knittel, a professor of energy economics at MIT. American oil production is about 11 percent of the world's output, so even if the U.S. were to increase its oil production by 50 percent -- that is more than drilling in the Arctic, increased public-lands and offshore drilling, and the Canadian pipeline would provide -- it would at most cut gas prices by 10 percent.
That's from Business Week, not Mother Jones or some other "leftie blog."

posted by filthy light thief at 6:12 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

Live Blog: Romney, Ryan on 60 Minutes -- Wall Street Journal, with some counter-commentary in the feed (good on you, WSJ!)
posted by filthy light thief at 6:17 PM on September 23, 2012

That offensive lapel pin he was wearing

What?
posted by grouse at 6:20 PM on September 23, 2012

There is some limited viewing of the live blog, unless you're a WSJ member. Bother.
posted by filthy light thief at 6:20 PM on September 23, 2012

Probably best for my blood pressure anyway.
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:21 PM on September 23, 2012

I'd say you could make it a drinking game, but it's Sunday night, and your place of work (and your head) might not appreciate it tomorrow.
posted by filthy light thief at 6:23 PM on September 23, 2012

Can someone explain this lapel pin thing?
posted by werkzeuger at 6:23 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

A WSJ/Romney interview drinking game? I think we're gonna need a bigger bar.
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:26 PM on September 23, 2012

The lapel pin thing was a random, unexplained non-sequitor to go with jaduncan's random, unexplained "Oh my, they went there on abortion."

Of course, in the very next comment, jaduncan actually explained what he meant, so the effect was rather ruined. Heh.
posted by koeselitz at 6:27 PM on September 23, 2012

(In other words: there is no lapel pin thing. It was a bad joke.)
posted by koeselitz at 6:27 PM on September 23, 2012

OMG! Jimmy Kimmel and Obama still shot in an Emmy clip thing for Kimmel! HOLLYWOOD ELITE!

I'm sort of watching the Emmys on ABC and The Fog on SyFy
posted by filthy light thief at 6:28 PM on September 23, 2012

Dang, I was seriously hoping they were wearing a "We own America" pin in tribute to Eastwood or something.
posted by Phire at 6:29 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

Oh, and 20% off federal income tax for everyone.

"But what would you cut to pay for that?"

"I learned from being governor you don't just hand over a policy document to the other party."

"But you're asking the American people to hire you"

"Well fuck you, no more details."

(I paraphrase the last).
posted by jaduncan at 6:30 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

I was wondering if he would punctuate his interview with random "No, I can't do that to myself, Mr. President", in tribute to Eastwood.
posted by rainy at 6:31 PM on September 23, 2012

Like the "tax rebate checks" Bush gave out in 2008? Yeah, that really boosted the economy.

And I didn't see this in the thread before: Obama outraises Romney in August, barely.
posted by filthy light thief at 6:34 PM on September 23, 2012

The proper version of that abortion thing:

Scott Pelley: Ten years ago, when you were running for governor of Massachusetts, you were solidly pro-choice on abortion. Now you're against abortion, except in cases of rape, incest, or the health of the mother. When you were running for governor, you ridiculed the idea of signing a "no new taxes" pledge, and yet now you've signed one. Some people, Governor, have an uneasy feeling that you're not constant, that you say whatever you have to say in a particular moment.

Romney: Well they can look at my record. I understand that my opposition will do its very best to try and change, anyway they can, the narrative to fit their objectives. The president has certainly changed his view on a whole host of things. He was going to close Guantanamo. It's open. Military tribunals were going to be ended, now military tribunals continue. The president was opposed to same sex marriage, now he's in favor of same sex marriage. So I--

Pelley: But what about you?

Romney: So I--

Pelley: People wonder, "Does Romney believe the things that he says?" You say what to those people?

Romney: The principles I have are the principles I've had from the beginning of my political life. But have I learned? Have I found that some things I thought would be effective turned out not to be effective? Absolutely. If you don't learn from experience, you don't learn from your mistakes. Why, you know, you ought to be fired.
posted by jaduncan at 6:37 PM on September 23, 2012 [7 favorites]

The fuck you, no details:

[snipped bit asking about tax cuts and what to cut]

Romney: Well, that's something Congress and I will have to work out together. My experience with the government--

Pelley: You're asking the American people to hire you as president of the United States. They'd like to hear some specifics.

Romney: Well, I can tell them specifically what my policy looks like. I will not raise taxes on middle income folks. I will not lower the share of taxes paid by high income individuals. And I will make sure that we bring down rates, we limit deductions and exemptions so we can keep the progressivity in the code, and we encourage growth in jobs.

Pelley: And the devil's in the details, though. What are we talking about, the mortgage deduction, the charitable deduction?

Romney: The devil's in the details. The angel is in the policy, which is creating more jobs.

Pelley: You have heard the criticism, I'm sure, that your campaign can be vague about some things. And I wonder if this isn't precisely one of those things?

Romney: It's very much consistent with my experience as a governor which is, if you want to work together with people across the aisle, you lay out your principles and your policy, you work together with them, but you don't hand them a complete document and say, "Here, take this or leave it." Look, leadership is not a take it or leave it thing. We've seen too much of that in Washington.
posted by jaduncan at 6:40 PM on September 23, 2012 [8 favorites]

The principles I have are the principles I've had from the beginning of my political life.

That makes it sound even more calculated! "Well as soon as I decided to get into politics, these are the principles I decided to say I believed in."
posted by sallybrown at 6:41 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm unsure how or whether the videos may be region locked, but for what it's worth the relevant part of tonight's 60 Minutes conversations with the candidates, including transcripts, are online:

Hint: I only had to allow Javascript for www.cbsnews.com, bwp.cbsnews.com and cnettv.cnet.com (2) to see the videos. I did not have to disable AdBlockPlus.
posted by ob1quixote at 6:41 PM on September 23, 2012 [5 favorites]

I was impressed with Pelley in that interview.
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:42 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

jaduncan: “The principles I have are the principles I've had from the beginning of my political life. But have I learned? Have I found that some things I thought would be effective turned out not to be effective? Absolutely. If you don't learn from experience, you don't learn from your mistakes. Why, you know, you ought to be fired.”

Ha – I wonder how much they had to coach him before he memorized every word of that silly, throw-it-back-in-your-face line? 'The fact that I've changed my position makes me better than Obama, who... I just said had changed his position, but... not on... the right things. Never mind! Snappy finish! Ought to be fired!'
posted by koeselitz at 6:44 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

Yeah, he did well. More screw you, no details:

Pelley: Balancing the budget will require sacrifice. And I wonder, what is it, specifically, that you're asking the American people to sacrifice?

Romney: I'm going to look at every federal program and I'll ask this question, "Is this so-- program so critical it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it?" And if it doesn't pass that test, I'm going to eliminate the program because we just can't afford to keep spending more money than we take in. This is, this is something which is not just bad economics. I think it's immoral.

I'm seriously wondering if he's going to try and stick to this little detail all the way though the debates. It would be interesting as a strategy, I guess.
posted by jaduncan at 6:45 PM on September 23, 2012

Have I found that some things I thought would be effective turned out not to be effective? Absolutely.

And this sounds absolutely calculating. How can you change your mind on abortion being "effective" unless you mean "effective as a campaigning tool"? Jesus wept.
posted by howfar at 6:45 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

Really, borrowing from China is the only way to keep the NEA?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:46 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

I hope enough voters see Romney's unwillingness to divulge specific detail for the cowardly dodge it is, instead of just nodding their heads along and parroting the immorality of borrowing from China to fund government excess.

(Xenophobia and anti-government rhetoric for the price of one! Buy now!)
posted by Phire at 6:49 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

This is, this is something which is not just bad economics. I think it's immoral.

On a side note, if I was a Dem researcher I'd be looking up what Romney said when Cheney said that deficits don't matter. That or writing an ad for the South that pointed out that Romney described pro-choice/pro-life as a matter of policy effectiveness and deficit spending as immoral.
posted by jaduncan at 6:50 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

Romney: It's very much consistent with my experience as a governor which is, if you want to work together with people across the aisle, you lay out your principles and your policy, you work together with them, but you don't hand them a complete document and say, "Here, take this or leave it." Look, leadership is not a take it or leave it thing. We've seen too much of that in Washington.

"So in other words, no, I really have no idea. Never do you ever attempt to draw up workable solutions that you can actually bring to the table. It is far better to bloviate about principles and policy until someone comes up with something and we run with it."

Isn't this pretty much what he said about the Middle East too? That he has no idea, but it'll sort itself out somehow? Isn't that pretty much the opposite of "leadership"?
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:51 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

And yeah, saying that being pro-choice is not effective is just chilling.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:52 PM on September 23, 2012

That's why you'd have to stress that it's too serious an issue to describe the two positions as a matter of effectiveness; the one ad works rather well for people who care about the issue from either side.
posted by jaduncan at 6:54 PM on September 23, 2012

Oh, and one last. Romney on healthcare and loving the ER as a primary point of care:

Pelley: There is a lot of rhetoric about Medicare. What do you intend to do?

Romney: Well, I don't want any change to Medicare for current seniors or for those that are nearing retirement. So the plan stays exactly the same. The president's cutting $716 billion from current Medicare. I disagree with that. I'd put those dollars back into Medicare.

Pelley: Mr. Ryan has proposed something similar, almost precisely the same number, 716.

Romney: Yeah. He was going to use that money to reduce the budget deficit. I'm putting it back into Medicare and I'm the guy running for president, not him. So what I do in my Medicare plan for younger people coming along is say this, "We're going to have higher benefits for low income people and lower benefits for high income people. We're going to make it more means tested." I think if we do that, we'll make sure to preserve Medicare into the indefinite future.

Pelley: The idea under your plan for future seniors would be that the federal government would write that senior a check, essentially, and say, "Now, you can go buy a private insurance plan or you can buy Medicare from the federal government." Is that essentially it?

Romney: Yeah. That's essentially it. People would have a choice of either traditional, government-run, fee-for-service Medicare; or a private plan, which has to offer the same benefits.

Pelley: Does the government have a responsibility to provide health care to the 50 million Americans who don't have it today?

Romney: Well, we do provide care for people who don't have insurance, people-- we-- if someone has a heart attack, they don't sit in their apartment and die. We pick them up in an ambulance, and take them to the hospital, and give them care. And different states have different ways of providing for that care.

Pelley: That's the most expensive way to do it.

Romney: Well the--

Pelley: In an emergency room.

Romney: Different, again, different states have different ways of doing that. Some provide that care through clinics. Some provide the care through emergency rooms. In my state, we found a solution that worked for my state. But I wouldn't take what we did in Massachusetts and say to Texas, "You've got to take the Massachusetts model."
posted by jaduncan at 6:55 PM on September 23, 2012 [12 favorites]

That answer seems to be a good characterization of the reality of the GOP's philosophy of state's rights. They each have the right to devise their own unique factory of despair.
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:57 PM on September 23, 2012 [14 favorites]

Romney: Yeah. He was going to use that money to reduce the budget deficit. I'm putting it back into Medicare and I'm the guy running for president, not him.

Pelley: So why the fuck did you pick him?
Note: may not be an accurate transcription.
posted by kirkaracha at 7:01 PM on September 23, 2012 [8 favorites]

Ha! "You can always get healthcare at the ER." Wow. Hope the make-up covered the scales.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 7:05 PM on September 23, 2012 [9 favorites]

I have to say that from here the interview looked like a clusterfuck from a bad used car salesman. I'm unsure how much that's confirmation bias, but imagine the above highlights with the usual Romney level of empathy, charisma and sheer damn human warmth but inexplicably combined with an apparent slight irritation at the sheer chutzpah of the interviewer at asking such inconvenient questions. Like that.

YMMV, and I'd be genuinely curious to hear other opinions.
posted by jaduncan at 7:05 PM on September 23, 2012

This is bullshit. The man has been running for President for 6 years and the reporter lets him answer with when I'm elected I'll take a look at the budget to figure out what we can cut. What kind of bullshit answer is that? Govenor you've had six years, get a copy of the budget, make a list and get to us by tomorrow night.
posted by humanfont at 7:06 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

I really, really hope this Ann Romney quote is true: Ann Romney's Horse Is Classier Than You, Dems:

My horse has more style and more class in its hoof than they [Democrats] do in their whole deal.

(My favorite Rafalca-related headline is still: Ann Romney's horse fails to win dressage but avoids offending British)
posted by sallybrown at 7:09 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

the reporter lets him answer with when I'm elected I'll take a look at the budget to figure out what we can cut.

"You have heard the criticism, I'm sure, that your campaign can be vague about some things. And I wonder if this isn't precisely one of those things?"

This is one step above turning to the camera and saying "This man is saying nothing. Nothing."
posted by jaduncan at 7:17 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

Best politics talk of the day was when David Gregory laid the smack down on Bay Buchanan. She tried to make the argument that Obama was playing class warfar and dividing the nation and he was all please your guy just said half of Americans were poor because they were too lazy to get a job.
posted by humanfont at 7:26 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

I've been thinking about this all weekend. The personality characteristic missing from Romney is humility. GWB had precious little of it but Romney has none, zero, nada.
posted by unSane at 7:39 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

My horse has more style and more class in its hoof than they [Democrats] do in their whole deal.

I am totally hearing that in Rarity voice.
posted by Artw at 7:42 PM on September 23, 2012 [5 favorites]

Quick 538 update:

Obama is 77.6% to win in the November 6th forecast.
Obama is 95.6% [!] to win in the nowcast.

I still have a $100 evens bet with RedShrek on Obama to win.
posted by jaduncan at 7:44 PM on September 23, 2012

Is this so-- program so critical it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it?"

How about some examples of programs that do and don't pass that test? What's a program that's 'worth borrowing money from China'?

I'm putting it back into Medicare and I'm the guy running for president, not him

Oooh, deeeeefensive. Thanks for clarifying! Because honestly, it is hard to tell.
posted by Miko at 7:47 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

man certain parts of the internet are going to be like ...ragequit the planet in the vent of another Obama win.
posted by The Whelk at 7:55 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

I've been thinking about this all weekend. The personality characteristic missing from Romney is humility

Yep. I noted it twice upthread. Only the penitent man shall pass. And it's up to us to be the spinning blade that chops down Mitt's campaign. I think Mitt is not humble before the office and the responsibility that comes with it of caring for the nation, because he honestly does not care about the nation. He is worried about and focused on the rich, and figures if they do well, somehow magically everyone will do well.

It would be fantastic if, since Mitt kind of tried to allude to his business experience, a reporter did what the Daily Show did, and showed Mitt the lowest performing states (label free) and asked him if he would cut programs in those states. The states that are costing the most in government resources. And then after he agrees to slash their social programs and safety net, you pull off the tab and reveal that it is Alabama, or North Carolina. Oh if only.

I can only hope for the interaction between Lehrer, Mitt and the President to catch Romney like this 47% comment did.
posted by cashman at 7:56 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

Oh god. From this L.A. Times story on a Romney fundraiser, here's Mitt Romney mentioning a small fire on a plane carrying Ann Romney this week (emphasis mine):

“I appreciate the fact that she is on the ground, safe and sound. And I don’t think she knows just how worried some of us were,” Romney said. “When you have a fire in an aircraft, there’s no place to go, exactly, there’s no — and you can’t find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows don’t open. I don’t know why they don’t do that. It’s a real problem. So it’s very dangerous. And she was choking and rubbing her eyes. Fortunately, there was enough oxygen for the pilot and copilot to make a safe landing in Denver. But she’s safe and sound.”
posted by palomar at 7:59 PM on September 23, 2012 [10 favorites]

Pelley: The idea under your plan for future seniors would be that the federal government would write that senior a check, essentially, and say, "Now, you can go buy a private insurance plan or you can buy Medicare from the federal government." Is that essentially it?

Romney: Yeah. That's essentially it. People would have a choice of either traditional, government-run, fee-for-service Medicare; or a private plan, which has to offer the same benefits.

So we'll have Medicare, and private plans, which have to offer the same benefits. WHY THE HELL WOULD WE DO THAT? "Oh, you know, the private sector."
posted by filthy light thief at 8:00 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

Quick! Somebody get Mitt Romney a copy of Miracle Landing!
posted by The Confessor at 8:01 PM on September 23, 2012

I know, right?! Whenever I fly I'm all "why...won't ...this darn thing...OPEN?!" and then my seatmate gets agitated, and the flight attendants are all over me, and the handcuffs and sedatives and everything. It's a real problem.
posted by Miko at 8:01 PM on September 23, 2012 [19 favorites]

That's maybe something Bain Capital can invest into, passenger jets with open windows. See, engineers don't understand common-sense things like that. That's why airlines are always losing money.
posted by rainy at 8:01 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

He's still freaked out about that time he looked out the window and there was something on the wing, but no one would believe him.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 8:03 PM on September 23, 2012 [17 favorites]

Maybe Mitt is very worried at there might be some ....thing on the wing.
posted by The Whelk at 8:03 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

(damn your eyes)
posted by The Whelk at 8:04 PM on September 23, 2012 [5 favorites]

Mitt should instruct Ann: "next time don't bother with the window, go back to the door and pull on that big handle. Just common sense."
posted by telstar at 8:04 PM on September 23, 2012

I don’t know why they don’t do that. It’s a real problem.

RomneyBot is engaging is HumorModule here. I know it's hard to tell.
posted by muddgirl at 8:08 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

I hope whoever designed his interaction routines is fired. I mean it's not responding to feedback, positive or negative it just avoids the question like ELIZA or repeats back what other people have said like Chatbot or something. Shoddy work.
posted by The Whelk at 8:11 PM on September 23, 2012

Ah. His sense of humor doesn't really make itself clear in print, I can't count the eye-blinks and see the bared teeth if it's not on video.
posted by palomar at 8:11 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

and you can’t find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows don’t open. I don’t know why they don’t do that. It’s a real problem. So it’s very dangerous. And she was choking and rubbing her eyes. Fortunately, there was enough oxygen for the pilot and copilot to make a safe landing in Denver.

If only she and the pilots were in an environment protected by intense regulation that considered this and required the provision of gas masks!
posted by jaduncan at 8:12 PM on September 23, 2012 [13 favorites]

I think that quote inadvertently reveals that Romney has not flown privately at least since the introduction of the mandatory security briefing, which dates back to at least 1999. In first class you can't miss it, they're right there.
posted by feloniousmonk at 8:18 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

I mean it's not responding to feedback, positive or negative it just avoids the question like ELIZA or repeats back what other people have said like Chatbot or something. Shoddy work.

Heh. For those keeping score, how Cleverbot responds:

Pelley: You have heard the criticism, I'm sure, that your campaign can be vague about some things. And I wonder if this isn't precisely one of those things?

Cleverbot: I think you think that you're sure but you cannot, with certainty, be sure.

---

Pelley: There is a lot of rhetoric about Medicare. What do you intend to do?

Cleverbot: I think it is a very great thing. People should get credit for it, and others should not be able to claim it as their own.

---

Pelley: Does the government have a responsibility to provide health care to the 50 million Americans who don't have it today?

Cleverbot: No.

---

Pelley: You're asking the American people to hire you as president of the United States. They'd like to hear some specifics.

Cleverbot: You're crazy.

Pelley: And the devil's in the details, though. What are we talking about, the mortgage deduction, the charitable deduction?

Cleverbot: We are talking about candy.

---

Would vote Cleverbot over Romney for clear support of Medicare, but am made suspicious by possible candy taxes and roughly equivalent levels of evasion to the critique for lack of policy details. More straight answers though.
posted by jaduncan at 8:29 PM on September 23, 2012 [30 favorites]

A simple question. Does it not feel like the GOP is the oldest tiredest, most worn-out brand right now? I mean, the whole Wurlitzer, Drudge, Limbaugh, O'Reilly and Hannity? They haven't changed in years. They are as stale as can be.

What? It isn't just a feeling? Since April, Pollster.com's average of polls asking for party ID shows GOP party I.D. down 4.8%? Well, well, well.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/party-identification
posted by Ironmouth at 8:29 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

Pelley: And the devil's in the details, though. What are we talking about, the mortgage deduction, the charitable deduction?

Cleverbot: We are talking about candy.

that's it, I'm voting for Cleverbot.
posted by The Whelk at 8:33 PM on September 23, 2012 [4 favorites]

"So in other words, no, I really have no idea. Never do you ever attempt to draw up workable solutions that you can actually bring to the table. It is far better to bloviate about principles and policy until someone comes up with something and we run with it."

Isn't this pretty much what he said about the Middle East too? That he has no idea, but it'll sort itself out somehow? Isn't that pretty much the opposite of "leadership"?

Leadership is a tricky thing. A definition of leadership that would be widely accepted by the majority of theorists and researchers might say that "leadership is a process of social influence in which one person is able to enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task."

If that's the case, he's totally displaying leadership, but future leadership. If elected president, he'll have people help figure out how to balance the economy without raising taxes, and how to bring peace to the Middle East. And bring down the price of gas! Leadership ... of the fuuuutuuuuure! (the last part is said with wavy fingers, for emphasis).
posted by filthy light thief at 8:35 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

Pelley: You have heard the criticism, I'm sure, that your campaign can be vague about some things. And I wonder if this isn't precisely one of those things?

Cleverbot: I think you think that you're sure but you cannot, with certainty, be sure.

for like four seconds I thought this was his actual response BTW
posted by The Whelk at 8:38 PM on September 23, 2012 [4 favorites]

Yeah, the ability to enlist the informed opinions of others is one of the things I like about Obama, but it doesn't preclude having a plan you can offer the American people for future amending. Any previous comparison to Monty Burns seems more apt now - "It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times?! Stupid monkey!"
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 8:40 PM on September 23, 2012

The GOP version of Cleverbot would throw some jabs in at Obama.

Pelley: There is a lot of rhetoric about Medicare. What do you intend to do?

GOP Cleverbot: I think it is a very great thing. People should get credit for it, and others should not be able to claim it as their own. And Obamacare is ruining this once great nation.

Rock'em Sock'em Political Robots! Making the presidential campaigns more interesting since 1964! (Both Rock Em Sock Em Robots, made by Marx, and the International Socialists founded in 1964. Coincidence? I think not.)
posted by filthy light thief at 8:41 PM on September 23, 2012

They really should've nominated the water cooler
posted by The Whelk at 8:41 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

Pelley: There is a lot of rhetoric about Medicare. What do you intend to do?

Water Cooler: glug glug
posted by filthy light thief at 8:42 PM on September 23, 2012 [9 favorites]

Cleverbot: I think you think that you're sure but you cannot, with certainty, be sure.

for like four seconds I thought this was his actual response BTW

It made me suspect that cleverbot got a second hand chipset from Rumsfeld.
posted by jaduncan at 8:42 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

They really should've nominated the water cooler

No! The water cooler is weak on national defense, and refuses to take a hard line on installing interceptor missiles in Poland. Now that fax machine, he could show those Russians we still mean business.
posted by benito.strauss at 8:45 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

Must see: U Didn't Build That by MC 'Bama
posted by madamjujujive at 8:46 PM on September 23, 2012 [17 favorites]

So, in 2008 Obama won an EV in NE (they award proportiatly) so NE republicans redrew the district to avoid it happening again... latest poll out of NE has Obama tied in the distict. All that jiggeryjoo may be for aught.
posted by edgeways at 8:49 PM on September 23, 2012

That was, in fact, a must see.
posted by Miko at 8:52 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh you guys and your wacky robot candy humor.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 8:52 PM on September 23, 2012 [1 favorite]

Notorious GOP!
posted by Miko at 8:54 PM on September 23, 2012 [2 favorites]

Am I crazy or would that make a great T-Shirt: Picture of the Mitt, underneath "Wacky Robot Candy Humor."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 8:54 PM on September 23, 2012 [7 favorites]

Now that fax machine, he could show those Russians we still mean business.

America has enemies. Do we need yet another Democratic president who won't stand up for us? Don't let Obama's weakness, indecisiveness and apologies leave America threatened by foreign terrorists and governments.

Fax Machine is always ready to recieve that 2am phone call, and won't let itself be talked over during it either.

For strong leadership. For the technologies you understand. For America's children. Vote Fax Machine.

Message paid for by the Fax Machine campaign. Well, we say paid for. Please stop just sending images of one dollar bills then disconnecting half way through.
posted by jaduncan at 8:57 PM on September 23, 2012 [7 favorites]

RNC chairman Reince Priebus: ‘We’ve got specifics coming out our eyeballs’

There's a cream for that.
posted by Rhaomi at 8:58 PM on September 23, 2012 [8 favorites]

Must see: U Didn't Build That by MC 'Bama

After watching that: How come I didn't know that Tilda Swinton had become the Prime Minister of Australia?
posted by benito.strauss at 9:34 PM on September 23, 2012 [4 favorites]

‘We’ve got specifics coming out our eyeballs’

Good lord that is straight out of a Cthulhuian nightmare
posted by edgeways at 10:02 PM on September 23, 2012 [3 favorites]

At first I thought it was a little overoptimistic, but after the last couple of weeks this clip has come to represent the tone of the remaining election cycle for me:

Obama Parody - 99 Problems and Mitt Ain't One
posted by Vysharra at 10:22 PM on September 23, 2012 [4 favorites]

spitbull: "barnacles, i'm an anthropologist trained in one of the few four-field programs to survive the 1990s."
spitbull, turn on MeMail and write me! I think we could have an interesting chat! :)

posted by barnacles at 12:09 AM on September 24, 2012

Right. Who the fuck is advising Mittens. Lord knows I'd probably flee the country if he won, but the incompetence is just whoah. Like, I want him to lose but preferably not because he is so embarrassing.
posted by angrycat at 2:46 AM on September 24, 2012

Maybe Mitt is very worried at there might be some ....thing on the wing.

Joe Biden!
posted by spitbull at 5:35 AM on September 24, 2012 [4 favorites]

And am I wrong or is "It's a real problem" for things that are obviously complete misconstruals of reality not a great potential meme.

Like, "For some reason, people don't want to raise taxes on poor people to pay for cutting them for rich guys like me. I don't know why they don't want to do that. It's a REAL PROBLEM!"
posted by spitbull at 5:39 AM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

This is an argument that, if I live to be 200, I will never fucking understand:

I want to lower the corporate tax rate to encourage investment and jobs, but I want to close loopholes because I don't want to lower revenue to the government.

WTF?
posted by Benny Andajetz at 5:41 AM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama pulls ahead in the Nascar vote. Maybe because Nascar fans don't like being sneered at:

The New York Times reported Romney’s Daytona experience in the most classic of ways, “But the crowd initially booed Mr. Romney, who occasionally struck a discordant note, as when he approached a group of fans wearing plastic ponchos. ‘I like those fancy raincoats you bought,’ he said. ‘Really sprung for the big bucks.’ And when asked if he was a fan of the sport, he mentioned that ‘I have some great friends who are Nascar team owners.’”

Anybody keeping a list at the categories of people/objects that Romney has sneered at?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:42 AM on September 24, 2012 [4 favorites]

WTF?

There's an argument from equity, and another from simplifiying the tax code, for 'closing loopholes', but the idea that (a) it's going to generate the revenue needed for ~~Walter Mitt~~y to balance the budget, or (b) that he will ever do it in a meaningful way, is laughable on its face.~~~~
posted by unSane at 5:45 AM on September 24, 2012

Heh. Consider this a study in honest, plain speaking (highlights below):

Romney 2007 on the ER-based care thing:

"When they show up at the hospital, they get care. They get free care paid for by you and me. If that's not a form of socialism, I don't know what is," he said at the time. "So my plan did something quite different. It said, you know what? If people can afford to buy insurance ... or if they can pay their own way, then they either buy that insurance or pay their own way, but they no longer look to government to hand out free care. And that, in my opinion, is ultimate conservativism."

Romney 2010:

"Look, it doesn't make a lot of sense for us to have millions and millions of people who have no health insurance and yet who can go to the emergency room and get entirely free care for which they have no responsibility, particularly if they are people who have sufficient means to pay their own way"

Romney 2012:

"Well, we do provide care for people who don't have insurance, people-- we-- if someone has a heart attack, they don't sit in their apartment and die. We pick them up in an ambulance, and take them to the hospital, and give them care. And different states have different ways of providing for that care."

I can only conclude that Romney 2010 and Romney 2012 don't like each other, and wouldn't talk at dinner parties without considerable tension.
posted by jaduncan at 5:47 AM on September 24, 2012 [11 favorites]

cookies, ponchos, clouds, trees, half the U.S., Europe, Palestine.
posted by angrycat at 5:48 AM on September 24, 2012 [4 favorites]

Vote Fax Machine.

And now back to Fax News.

Glenn Beck: Now I'm not saying that Obama is associated with terrorist organizations, I'm just stating the straight facts... in 2005, he attended a dinner party at the home of one Charles Anderton (who some say is a secret Jihadist, I don't know if that's true but I wonder what they know that we don't?)

Mr. Anderton uses a cable modem. And now the Obama cabal wants to implement "mo' dem" liberal policies. You see what I mean? "Mo' dem"? "Cabal"? "Cable modem?" It's all connected! The facts are right there, (*sob*) and I just think we shouldn't give up on the traditional technologies that were good enough for businesses during the Reagan boom and made America into the moral and economic beacon it is today.
posted by Riki tiki at 5:50 AM on September 24, 2012 [4 favorites]

There's an argument from equity, and another from simplifiying the tax code, for 'closing loopholes', but the idea that (a) it's going to generate the revenue needed for Walter Mitty to balance the budget, or (b) that he will ever do it in a meaningful way, is laughable on its face.

In my defence that looked great on preview.
posted by unSane at 5:52 AM on September 24, 2012

Anybody keeping a list at the categories of people/objects that Romney has sneered at?

"Mitt Romney spotted in a casual moment, unwinding from the tour with a basket of kittens by a the hotel pool. he idly selected one and snaps it's neck before throwing it into the pool "it's like popping bubble wrap" he says, his face fixed and unmoving. A nearby hotel staffer holds the basket aloft. "
posted by The Whelk at 5:56 AM on September 24, 2012 [6 favorites]

"Mitt Romney spotted in a casual moment, unwinding from the tour with a basket of kittens by a the hotel pool. he idly selected one and snaps it's neck before throwing it into the pool "it's like popping bubble wrap" he says, his face fixed and unmoving. A nearby hotel staffer holds the basket aloft. "

"Governor Romney later stated that saying that the kittens, basket and help all look like cheap foreign imports was also not elegant, and that critics are taking the statement out of context."
posted by jaduncan at 5:59 AM on September 24, 2012

Yes but Rmoney isn't courting popularity.
posted by Eyebeams at 6:03 AM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Well, we do provide care for people who don't have insurance," he said in an interview with Scott Pelley of CBS's "60 Minutes" that aired Sunday night. "If someone has a heart attack, they don't sit in their apartment and die. We pick them up in an ambulance, and take them to the hospital, and give them care. And different states have different ways of providing for that care."

Well stated, Mr. Romney. Except that's the PROBLEM, not the solution.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 6:05 AM on September 24, 2012 [3 favorites]

You guys, you guys, Mittens is losing because of that sneaky Obama (the old meanie.)

Speaking to reporters as his private charter plane flew from Los Angeles to Denver, Mr. Romney blamed his relatively languid campaign schedule — five public events in the past seven days, compared with 11 fund-raisers — on the president’s decision to opt out of the federal campaign finance system four years ago, and criticized Mr. Obama for, he said, “trying to fool people into thinking that I think things I don’t.”

Asked why he was behind in the polls in most swing states, Mr. Romney accused the Obama campaign of distorting his record.

Oh poor old Mittens. It's tragic that he is so misunderstood.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:13 AM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

(You're laughing because Mitt is trying to employ sarcasm, but is very bad at it, right? It's very strange to see this going around with the assumption that Romney doesn't know how airplanes work.)
posted by muddgirl at 6:14 AM on September 24, 2012

yeah, he's hitting that LIAR LIAR button pretty hard these days, and it feels like a kind of hysteria. It's like when you're arguing with somebody and they suddenly freak out, and you're like, okay, you're crazy then. Even if they had something of a valid point going in.
posted by angrycat at 6:17 AM on September 24, 2012

He was at a fundraising event, not giving a statement to the press. RomneyBot tries to be funny at fundraising events.
posted by muddgirl at 6:18 AM on September 24, 2012

Really enjoying the Alphacat videos - it's a great comic impression - and just for fun here's Sh*t Obama Says.

It's very strange to see this going around with the assumption that Romney doesn't know how airplanes work.)

But - but - It's taken out of context!

More spoofing on Romney's common touch: "Any one can fire someone - but I try vary it up."
posted by Miko at 6:19 AM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney is pretty terrible at hiding his emotions and thoughts. It's fairly obvious his whining about Obama being a liar is due to his practice for the debates. His game plan for the debates appears to be calling Obama a liar for every single fucking thing. Sounds like fun.......
posted by amuseDetachment at 6:25 AM on September 24, 2012

yeah, he's hitting that LIAR LIAR button pretty hard these days

I think it is stranger that he is complaining about fundraising. From the same NYTimes article:

“I’d far rather be spending my time out in the key swing states campaigning, door-to-door if necessary, but in rallies and various meetings, but fund-raising is a part of politics when your opponent decides not to live by the federal spending limits,” he said.

I thought he was awash in money? I thought his campaign had half a billion dollars to spend and was blanketing the airwaves with ads (not to mention the one hour ad running on cable.) Now he is complaining that Obama is forcing him to spend too much time raising money?

Can you imagine him going door-to-door? Oh my god. The opportunities to sneer would be endless.

"Really nice bathrobe you got there. Too tired to put actual clothes on?"

"Pretty impressive display of crabgrass. Did your gardener not show up to work?"

"Who chose the hallway carpet? Have they been checked for colorblindness?"
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:28 AM on September 24, 2012 [11 favorites]

Oh, I forgot to say that after I wrote El Paso County CO about that voter reg. video - I got this back in less than two hours - on Sunday.

Thanks for contacting us. Please see our recently posted comments to the video:

Both parties can and do prescreen, but all completed voter registrations must be delivered to the Clerk & Recorder, which likely is why she said she was working for the office. Wayne W. Williams, El Paso County Clerk & Recorder

Just to set the record straight, neither this young lady nor any of the individuals involved in the Obama and Romney voter registration drives work for the Clerk & Recorder.

posted by Miko at 6:32 AM on September 24, 2012 [3 favorites]

Can you imagine him going door-to-door? Oh my god. The opportunities to sneer would be endless.

They would be, but I think we're talking at crosspurposes in that I assume you're imagining he'd be sneering at me. Not that I wouldn't like to see Romney take on MeFites in snark, of course...I just don't think he has what it takes to come out on top.
posted by jaduncan at 6:34 AM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

Secret Life of Gravy I thought he was awash in money?

Two points here:
1. Much of the fundraising they've been crowing loudly about has gone to Super PACs and the Republican party, and not directly to Mitt's campaign. The 'problem' here for Mitt is that he doesn't control these dollars, and the Republican party and the Super PACs may decide that their money is better spent defending Senate and House seats if Romney's campaign continues to exude incompetence. A much higher percentage of Obama donations are actually going straight to Obama's campaigns, meaning he controls how they're used.
2. It seems that Mitt's fund-raising has been drying up, of late, which probably explains the amount of time he's devoting to fund-raisers when he'd probably prefer to be out campaigning. To me, it smells like the stench of death. People who've already bet thousands (or millions) on the guy don't want to throw good money after bad.
posted by syzygy at 6:35 AM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

...he approached a group of fans wearing plastic ponchos. ‘I like those fancy raincoats you bought,’ he said. ‘Really sprung for the big bucks.

So that's what the poncho thing was about. I was really hoping he asked "Are those real ponchos or are they Sears ponchos?"
It still wouldn't get me to vote for him, but at least there would be one thing about him I liked.
posted by TedW at 6:37 AM on September 24, 2012 [6 favorites]

Mittens Romney and Frank Zappa aren't even from the same universe, let alone the same planet.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 6:41 AM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

For more on the fund-raising situation:
Low on Cash, Romney Tries to Rally Donors for Final Phase
Mitt and the threat of abandonment
Why Obama’s Money Is Worth More Than Romney’s
posted by syzygy at 6:44 AM on September 24, 2012 [3 favorites]

Well, we do provide care for people who don't have insurance, people-- we-- if someone has a heart attack, they don't sit in their apartment and die.

Did this stand out to anyone else? Like, people without insurance = apartment dwellers = poor people. As if the only people who can't afford insurance are us poverty-striken apartment dwellers. Lol.

But in Romney's world, it seems as though emergency care being your only form of healthcare is sufficicient for poor people/apartment dwellers. Because it goes without saying that the "emergency room only" solution would most definitely not fly for the Romney family.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:46 AM on September 24, 2012 [14 favorites]

Obama Campaign Hits Romney With 47 Percent Ad In Ohio
posted by zombieflanders at 7:35 AM on September 24, 2012

triggerfinger: "Did this stand out to anyone else? Like, people without insurance = apartment dwellers = poor people. As if the only people who can't afford insurance are us poverty-striken apartment dwellers."

I think you're maybe projecting a bit much into that. Plenty of wealthy people, in general, live in apartments. The most valuable real estate in the country is probably mostly apartments.

Aside from that, I think it's much more common than you think for the elderly to downsize their living into an apartment. Or a condo, which is probably a more volatile word to throw around these days.
posted by mkultra at 7:36 AM on September 24, 2012

Yeah, an apartment on Park Avenue is pretty sweet.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:40 AM on September 24, 2012

If you live in Iowa, be sure to get your $1.84/gal gas next week courtesy of the Koch brothers as part of the "Obama's Failing Agenda Tour." Not a bribe you understand, just a fun, little give away!

It seems they are choosing to overlook the climate study they helped to fund, which confirmed that global climate change is real, and humans are the primary culprits. Still betting on both sides, it seems.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:49 AM on September 24, 2012

Mr. Romney blamed his relatively languid campaign schedule — five public events in the past seven days, compared with 11 fund-raisers — on the president’s decision to opt out of the federal campaign finance system four years ago, and criticized Mr. Obama for, he said, “trying to fool people into thinking that I think things I don’t.”

Asked why he was behind in the polls in most swing states, Mr. Romney accused the Obama campaign of distorting his record.

CRAAAAWWWLING IN MY SKIIIINNNNNN
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 8:00 AM on September 24, 2012 [5 favorites]

Mitt Romney Rebukes the Premise Behind Romneycare

As Maddowblog's Steve Benen points out though the "emergency room care" line is a go-to talking point for conservatives, this kind of last-resort care raises costs for everyone else and simply doesn't provide the kind of treatment that really sick people need. Romney knows this—at least he did.

As Sam Stein and Amanda Terkel at the Huffington Post note, Romney recognized this as recently as 2010, when he said on MSNBC's Morning Joe: "It doesn't make a lot of sense for us to have millions and millions of people who have no health insurance and yet who can go to the emergency room and get entirely free care for which they have no responsibility."

This isn't just a minor point: It's one of the major reasons both the Massachusetts health insurance law and the Affordable Care Act include an individual mandate. In Romney's memoir, No Apology, he calls the realization that emergency room care substantially raises costs an "epiphany." From page 171 (italics original, bolded mine):
After about a year of looking at data—and not making much progress—we had a collective epiphany of sorts, an obvious one, as important observations often are: the people in Massachusetts who didn't have health insurance were, in fact, already receiving health care. Under federal law, hospitals had to stabilize and treat people who arrived at their emergency rooms with acute conditions. And our state's hospitals were offering even more assistance than the federal government required. That meant that someone was already paying for the cost of treating people who didn't have health insurance. If we could get our hands on that money, and therefore redirect it to help the uninsured buy insurance instead and obtain treatment in the way that the vast majority of individuals did—before acute conditions developed—the cost of insuring everyone in the state might not be as expensive as I had feared.
That was then. Now Romney seems fine with notion of people waiting until they need to go to the emergency room to get care. Perhaps the sequel to No Apology should be titled "I'm Sorry for all the Stuff I did That Conservatives Don't Like."

posted by zombieflanders at 8:02 AM on September 24, 2012 [9 favorites]

New Obama ad hits Romney on "47%", taxes.
posted by Eyebeams at 8:17 AM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

What's an "eloquent" way to say hateful, bigoted things writing off half the people you hope to govern, Mitt?

I believe John Hodgman, as the deranged millionaire has an answer to that..
posted by obscurator at 8:35 AM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

Did this stand out to anyone else? Like, people without insurance = apartment dwellers = poor people. As if the only people who can't afford insurance are us poverty-striken apartment dwellers. Lol.

I'm sure that some of his best friends ~~live in apartments~~ own apartment buildings.
posted by octothorpe at 8:48 AM on September 24, 2012 [4 favorites]

538's write up today is worth glancing through.

From 1938 to 2008 there has only been one candidate who was leading at this point who lost the popular vote (and two candidates who lost the election).

It'd take a serious game changer event for Obama to lose at this point. By the end of the week we'll have a more precise picture of how close it will be.
posted by edgeways at 8:58 AM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

Some of his best friends are apartments.
posted by klangklangston at 8:59 AM on September 24, 2012 [4 favorites]

It'd take a serious game changer event for Obama to lose at this point

Do you consider widespread "voter fraud" to be a game changer?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:04 AM on September 24, 2012 [3 favorites]

From the LA Times article mentioned above, I thought this part worth mentioning.

[Romney] noting that he had lunch with “a very famous actor — very famous. Very liberal. I won’t tell you his name or he’d shoot me… He pulled me aside, he said, ‘In this town, you really can’t get work unless you’re known as a liberal,’ and he said, ‘But no one knows how I really vote.’ And there are a lot of people that feel that way.”

This claim of a liberal conspiracy and conservatives in liberal clothing smacks of a damnable lie to pander to the audience.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 9:07 AM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

The voters support him in email.
posted by Artw at 9:11 AM on September 24, 2012 [10 favorites]

‘In this town, you really can’t get work unless you’re known as a liberal,’

Yea, cause Bruce Willis, Tom Sellick, Arnold, Clint Eastwood, Kelsey Grammer, Gary Sinise, etc have all struggled to find work in movies and TV.
posted by octothorpe at 9:14 AM on September 24, 2012 [8 favorites]

Perhaps he's not heard of Clint Eastwood?
posted by Artw at 9:17 AM on September 24, 2012 [5 favorites]

Some of Mitt's best friends are corporations that provide full-service apartment management, among other useful products and services.
posted by The Confessor at 9:33 AM on September 24, 2012

Some of Mitt's best friends are Roombas.
posted by klangklangston at 9:36 AM on September 24, 2012 [7 favorites]

In all seriousness, what exactly is the supposed benefit of changing the tax code if in the end everyone is supposedly paying the same amount of taxes? Everytime I hear that tax plan trotted out, I feel like I'm being tricked in some way that I can't wrap my head around.
posted by billyfleetwood at 9:38 AM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

An anti-Obama movie claiming — without evidence — that President Barack Obama's real father is an obscure African-American communist...

So, he is a citizen?
posted by Mental Wimp at 9:39 AM on September 24, 2012 [8 favorites]

To play Devil's advocate here, and taking as the example Bruce Willis, who, among those names, probably has the biggest prospects of a big continuing Hollywood career still ahead of him:

First of all, had Willis voiced any public political opinion before alredy having established himself as a major, safe, box office draw? I might argue that prospects might not be as good for someone who hasn't built a name for himself for the audience but who the Hollywood community knows to be a conservative.

Second, Willis might be known to be a conservative, but has he done high-profile campaigning to a similar extent that many other Hollywood names have done for Democrats? Would you expect his career to not take a hit if he decided to become the conservative equivalent of George Clooney?
posted by Anything at 9:44 AM on September 24, 2012

Do you consider widespread "voter fraud" to be a game changer?

I am of the opinion that voter fraud is something that influences outcomes in marginal ways. It well may decide a race in a state that is incredibly close but the larger the election the harder it is to affect the outcome, especially where there are also concurrent efforts to spot it.

2008 may be a prime example of this with OH. But, it's looking more and more likely that the Republicans would have to flip not one state, but several for Romney to stand a chance. And the larger a conspiracy is they more likely it is to fail.

So... if the race was a lot tighter it could be a game changer, but right now? No, as odious as it is, and as much as we need to root it out and chop it up, I don't think voter fraud is going to decide this election.
posted by edgeways at 9:44 AM on September 24, 2012

In all seriousness, what exactly is the supposed benefit of changing the tax code if in the end everyone is supposedly paying the same amount of taxes?

Well, giving full trust in the Romney campaign's assertion that people would pay the same amount of taxes by lowering the various basic taxes and reducing loopholes:

it would work to even the playing field, and get rid of some transaction costs of preparing taxes. So, I will have the same effective tax rate, except that I won't need to know about the thousands of little loopholes that I should be taking advantage of. Tax prep is easier, and more of my money can go to productive things. Tax advisors/preparers would take a hit, mind you.

In general, simplifying the tax code is beneficial, because complicated taxes favour those who can afford to get them professionally done. That's only true up to a point, of course, some minimum complexity is needed in order to have the tax code modify behaviour as we want (EITC, being able to deduct medical-assistive devices, etc etc).

Whether or not you believe the campaign's assertion is another matter.
posted by Lemurrhea at 9:48 AM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

In all seriousness, what exactly is the supposed benefit of changing the tax code if in the end everyone is supposedly paying the same amount of taxes?

I don't get it either, but it's not a new idea; my area did it with property taxes 3 or 4 years ago. The local government lowered property taxes to show what good guys they were. But to stave off the appearance they were being dumb revenue-wise in the slowing economy, they increased the property values to make the change "revenue-neutral" (their words).

I still don't get it, but I'm still waiting for some unforeseen way for it to bite me in the ass.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 9:57 AM on September 24, 2012

In all seriousness, what exactly is the supposed benefit of changing the tax code if in the end everyone is supposedly paying the same amount of taxes?

It's impossible to change the tax code in the way Romney describes such that everyone will pay the same amount of taxes. Some people will pay more, others will pay less. The idea is that the average amount of tax will be the same. Since Romney refuses to give any substantive details, you can be sure this means that richer people will pay less and the middle class will pay more.
posted by grouse at 10:00 AM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

#SomeOfRomney'sBestFriendsAre:

Tax codes

Dancing Horses

Tax payers in Burberry Raincoats eating homemade cookies
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 10:03 AM on September 24, 2012 [7 favorites]

Tax payers in Burberry Raincoats eating homemade cookies while hanging their heads outside airplane windows at 30,000 feet with their dog strapped to the top on the way to the ER for some sweet sweet free health care
posted by edgeways at 10:08 AM on September 24, 2012 [15 favorites]

The local government lowered property taxes to show what good guys they were. But to stave off the appearance they were being dumb revenue-wise in the slowing economy, they increased the property values to make the change "revenue-neutral" (their words).

It makes sense to reappraise and adjust millage periodically in order to capture fluctuations in the value of individual properties while not changing the total money coming in from this source. Your home lost some value due to general market changes but that empty lot down the street has been developed into occupied single-family homes? A revenue-neutral reappraisement is in your best interest because your taxes should decline. Even if your property doesn't decline in (appraised) value it's still better for you.
posted by achrise at 10:16 AM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

Looking like NC is pretty much an official swing state data trickling in indicates Obama may have as much as a 4 point lead.
posted by edgeways at 10:19 AM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

Willis might be known to be a conservative, but has he done high-profile campaigning to a similar extent that many other Hollywood names have done for Democrats?

One example: "Willis was an invited speaker at the 2000 Republican National Convention, and openly supported George W. Bush that year."
posted by ericb at 10:31 AM on September 24, 2012

40 Celebrities Who Are Republicans.
posted by ericb at 10:32 AM on September 24, 2012

Man, they really found the goofiest possible photos of those 40 celebrities.
posted by KathrynT at 10:41 AM on September 24, 2012

I was about to mourn the loss of Sarah Michelle Gellar to the dark side, but then I realized that Buffy was always a bit of an annoying prude and totally cramped Willow's style anyway.

LL Cool J, though, is kind of upsetting.
posted by Phire at 10:47 AM on September 24, 2012 [3 favorites]

Some celebrities like tax breaks. News at 11.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:48 AM on September 24, 2012

Forgot Neil Young.. although I have no idea what his current political stances are.
posted by edgeways at 10:51 AM on September 24, 2012

KathrynT: "Man, they really found the goofiest possible photos of those 40 celebrities."

The Rock looks like Rob Schneider.
posted by zarq at 10:52 AM on September 24, 2012

Mitt Romney is richer than you think
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:52 AM on September 24, 2012

Meat Loaf, no!

Some of the celebrities on this list are known right-wing nuts (Clint Eastwood, Mel Gibson, Kelsey Grammer, Ben Stein), others are known for not being very smart to begin with (Jessica Simpson), and others I'm sure had very good reasons for registering Republican at the time (James Earl Jones).
posted by Faint of Butt at 10:53 AM on September 24, 2012

40 Celebrities Who Are Republicans.

And, of course, Ah-node!
posted by Mental Wimp at 10:56 AM on September 24, 2012

Wait, Neil Young? I'm confused.
posted by shakespeherian at 10:57 AM on September 24, 2012

In general, simplifying the tax code is beneficial, because complicated taxes favour those who can afford to get them professionally done.

You could probably argue that a simpler tax code would benefit the country by reducing the amount of time and effort currently wasted on tax evasion and fighting tax evasion; but it wouldn't help with unemployment any, at least not for tax accountants, tax lawyers, and IRS employees.
posted by Golden Eternity at 10:57 AM on September 24, 2012

LL Cool J has said he's an independent, and has worked with folks from both parties. The list is a little weak (and I hope that James Earl Jones has come around to the Dems — he's a national treasure).

I was surprised to see that Adam Sandler's a Republican, but I suppose he's on the path toward crazy irrelevancy that seems to define the GOP.
posted by klangklangston at 10:58 AM on September 24, 2012

Faint of Butt: "Some of the celebrities on this list are known right-wing nuts (Clint Eastwood, Mel Gibson, Kelsey Grammer, Ben Stein), others are known for not being very smart to begin with (Jessica Simpson)

Patricia Heaton is strongly anti-choice and works with like-minded groups.
posted by zarq at 11:00 AM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

Back in the day Young was a Regan supporter. Like I said though, I don't know specifically what party 9if any) he supports nowadays)
posted by edgeways at 11:00 AM on September 24, 2012

I was surprised to see that Adam Sandler's a Republican

He was really on board the Giuliani train in 2004, although I did get the impression that he hadn't spent more than 5 milliseconds thinking about it.
posted by COBRA! at 11:00 AM on September 24, 2012

The average annual income for the top 1% is $1,530,773. (2011) (A bit different number is the breakpoint for entry into the 1%, $532,613, or the median income of the 1%. In this case the average is the correct number for calculations.)

The highest bracket of federal tax comes on incomes is 35%, starting at $388,000.

There are 114,236,000 households in the United States.

So, by definition, 1.14 million are in the 1%.

If all of the 1% paid 35% in taxes the money would total $612 billion dollars.
If all of the 1% paid 14% in taxes, the money would total $245 billion dollars.

The tax rate exemplified by Romney, by itself, adds $367 billion dollars per year to the deficit when only considering the 1%. Because Washington likes to talk about 10 year deficit reductions, that's $3.67 trillion.

Romney is contributing a hyena's share to the deficit.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 11:01 AM on September 24, 2012 [8 favorites]

I think the list shows how hard you have to scrape the bottom of the barrel to find some celebrity Republicans (Bo Derek? Scott Baio?), but even then, just being registered Republican isn't, in fact, a certain sign that you always support the GOP. I have at least a few friends who are registered just so they can get their creepy mailings for watchdog purposes, have arguments on the phone, and vote in early primaries (yes, I have odd friends, and I lived in New Hampshire, where people like to game it up). It doesn't mean they vote that way. It's not that I suspect all these people have that approach, but it's just not entirely conclusive that a registration you may have chosen just to be able to vote in a particular primary, or that you went ahead and signed up for when you were 18 and didn't know that much about yourself, is predictive of your current candidate support. I think donations are a far better barometer.
posted by Miko at 11:04 AM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

People in Hollywood will hire an actor knowing he's a crazed drug addict who will throw chairs on the set and cost the production millions in overtime by refusing to come out of their trailer. (As long as the insurance companies will still cover them, it's all good). The idea that they won't hire them based on how they vote is ridiculous.
posted by Bookhouse at 11:06 AM on September 24, 2012 [8 favorites]

Aside from that, I think it's much more common than you think for the elderly to downsize their living into an apartment. Or a condo, which is probably a more volatile word to throw around these days.

Okay, I may have read too much into it, but I don't think he was referring to rich people living in swanky apartments when he said that. He was referring to his own stereotype of poor people who are too poor to afford healthcare, which of course ignores all of the middle class people who are driven into bankruptcy every year from medical costs. I highly doubt that it makes a difference to Mitt, who thinks everyone is lazy, but what stood out to me from that comment (apart from what seems like a classist dogwhistle) is the total ignorance that it's not only poor people who can't afford healthcare.
posted by triggerfinger at 11:09 AM on September 24, 2012

Wait, Neil Young? I'm confused.

Shakey went through a Ronald Reagan period to some extent but appears to have emerged out of the dark side fairly unscathed, at least in terms of wanting to impeach President Bush and supporting Bo Obama.

(It's pretty much impossible for anyone to state definitively what Neil Young thinks about a particular issue.)
posted by sallybrown at 11:16 AM on September 24, 2012 [3 favorites]

Surprisingly unmentioned endorsement:

"I'm very looking forward to a Republican being back in office," [Porn Star Jenna] Jameson said while sipping champagne in a VIP room at Gold Club in the city's South of Market neighborhood. "When you're rich, you want a Republican in office."
posted by mkultra at 11:18 AM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

dogwhistle... that has been said a lot lately. I'm a little unclear about what it is. Is it a coded phrase that only certain people will pick up?
posted by rebent at 11:18 AM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

Dog whistle politics
posted by edgeways at 11:19 AM on September 24, 2012

rebent: dogwhistle... that has been said a lot lately. I'm a little unclear about what it is. Is it a coded phrase that only certain people will pick up?

Yes - Dog Whistle Politics
posted by syzygy at 11:20 AM on September 24, 2012

rebent: That's exactly what it is. See also MetaFilter's favorite example, The Southern Strategy.
posted by absalom at 11:20 AM on September 24, 2012

Dogwhistle politics. It's been in use for some time now.
posted by Miko at 11:22 AM on September 24, 2012

(It's pretty much impossible for anyone to state definitively what Neil Young thinks about a particular issue.)

Well I do know, pretty definitively, that he believes a natural beauty should be preserved like a monument to nature.
posted by shakespeherian at 11:23 AM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

Obama up in all swing states, will have to remove MI (and WI) from Swing state category soon

CO +6 (PPP)
FL +5 (from ARG!)
IA +7 (ARG)
MI +12 (Ras)
NC +4 (Civ)
NV +7 (ARG)
WI +12 (Ask Amer)

ARG, RAS and CIV are right leaning outfits so numbers might be better then even that. PPP is left leaning so CO might be tighter then that. No idea about We Ask America
posted by edgeways at 11:26 AM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

.....

that is an awesome character sheet.
posted by The Whelk at 11:41 AM on September 24, 2012 [31 favorites]

"I'm very looking forward to a Republican being back in office," [Porn Star Jenna] Jameson said while sipping champagne in a VIP room at Gold Club in the city's South of Market neighborhood. "When you're rich, you want a Republican in office."

Pfft. It seems like Obama's got the porn star demographic all tied up.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:47 AM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

The Whelk: "that is an awesome character sheet."

You know it's hardcore because it has a comeliness stat...
posted by boo_radley at 11:48 AM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

Scott Baio, Don King, Bo Derek, Ben Stein, Dean Cain, Heather Locklear, Ricky Schroeder, Karl Malone, Pat Sajak, Shannon Doherty, Susan Lucci, Tony Danza...

Card-carrying Republican celebrities, or the cast of next season's Dancing With the Stars?
posted by Atom Eyes at 12:02 PM on September 24, 2012 [9 favorites]

538's write up today is worth glancing through.

I second that. Of interest are comparisons of undecided voters in different years, final margins, and just the overall picture represented in the table. Good stuff. Repeating what I heard a 13-year-old's say back during the 2008 election, "538 is a beast!"
posted by cashman at 12:02 PM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

I have to say that I'm pleasantly surprised by how articulate those porn stars were. Now, granted, there's some self-selection in there, but I expected a lot less.
posted by klangklangston at 12:05 PM on September 24, 2012

Romney will stand up to China, day one.
Autism?
posted by de at 12:13 PM on September 24, 2012

Meanwhile at Fox News, they have spent a week with headlines trying to suggest a disaster in the whitehouse over their approach to the embassy attacks and/or a coverup.
Failing to generate a news story there, the main headline all day today has been that Obama "Admits, Defends Romney Ad 'Mistakes'".
How can anyone take Fox News seriously if the ONLY lead story of the entire nation, for weeks, has been a fine-tooth comb parsing of anything the President says and trying to spin it off as somehow negative?

Murdoch's Hail Mary here is weak weak weak.
posted by Theta States at 12:18 PM on September 24, 2012

You know it's hardcore because it has a comeliness stat...

That's obviously constitution.

Dunno about the others except that IA clearly affects your ability to summon Old Ones.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 12:20 PM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

Paul Ryan On Conservative Criticism Of Mitt Romney: It's In Their Nature To Complain.
posted by ericb at 12:29 PM on September 24, 2012

Been hearing in different places, Conservatives really really wanting Ryan to become the main voice of the campaign (only it couched in slightly different terms). You know given the reception he had at AARP, the fact that Romney keeps dodging the Ryan budget, and doesn't really know how much of Ryan's contraception stance to swallow (sorry!), I have to really wonder at the wisdom of the desire. I suspect it is just the "ah man... we have Romney?" kicking in.
posted by edgeways at 12:33 PM on September 24, 2012

CO: Comeliness
FL: Flatulence
IA: Iägermeister
MI: Mixology
NC: Mature Content
NV: Nervousness
WI: Winging It

We see the picture of a man who is very hansome, but comes with some surprises below the waste, proabaly due to his high tolerance to hard liquour. That tolerance is part of what grew his incredible skill at mixing just about any drink or non-drink you can think of. Somewhat risque in the past, he is more nervous about revealing his true nature. Thankfully, he can make it up as he goes along with no fear of ever screwing up.

(n.b. I would hate hate hate to DM for someone with a +12 to "winging it")
posted by rebent at 12:34 PM on September 24, 2012 [8 favorites]

Hrm.

Kayden Kross
Kimberly Kane
Sarah Shevon
Dana DeArmond
Penny Pax
and Jenna Jameson

Out of curiosity, do porn stars often take stage first and last names that start with the same letter, or is it just these politically-minded ones?
posted by zarq at 12:36 PM on September 24, 2012

CO, Constitution
FL, Foreign logistics
IA, Invoke Aged
MI, Mental/Intellect
NC, New College (voters)
NV, Necessitate Votes
WI, Wish (fulfillment)
posted by edgeways at 12:38 PM on September 24, 2012 [4 favorites]

Murdoch's Hail Mary here is weak weak weak.

I don't have a cite for it, but I seem to recall that in the last weeks of the 2008 election Murdoch and Fox started to play nice with Obama to a certain extent - apparently they recognized he would win and thought there might be some advantage in putting a toe on the bandwagon. Am I remembering that right?

(obviously it was short lived!)
posted by Rumple at 12:44 PM on September 24, 2012

CO, Constitution
FL, Foreign logistics
IA, Invoke Aged
MI, Mental/Intellect
NC, New College (voters)
NV, Necessitate Votes
WI, Wish (fulfillment)

...West Wing D&D module anyone?
posted by The Whelk at 12:48 PM on September 24, 2012 [4 favorites]

it's going to generate the revenue needed for Walter Mitty to balance the budget, or (b) that he will ever do it in a meaningful way, is laughable on its face.

Oh delicious.

"Mitty, you're on in five!" Mitty closed his eyes and tried to relax into the chair while the makeup artist sprayed his face with another coating of Insta-tan. .....He stood on the stairs of the Capitol, raised above the screaming mob, his brow beaded with sweat, the sting of tear gas in his eyes. He heard the shouts below him, the rabble, the stinking 47% with their off-brand cookies and their crappy rain ponchos, their ignorance of dressage, their ability to know how to properly exit a plane. Shouts to all sides of him. "Mr. President, sir, you must evacuate!" gasped Ryan, clutching at his elbow. "The helicopter is waiting!" "Never!" snarled Mitty, shoving Ryan away, who stumbled and then took off at a speed which nearly matched his purported marathon time. "I'll stand here forever! I have principles! I have a plan!" Someone put a tattered American flag in his hand; he turned to see the kind, steady gaze of his loyal servant, Clint. "Whatever happens, sir, I'm with you!" he croaked, turning his head to the onlookers. Mitty waved the flag, above the chants of the unwashed and unmortgaged, as the sound of levers being pulled in voting machines clattered ta-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa....
posted by jokeefe at 12:49 PM on September 24, 2012 [8 favorites]

West Wing D&D module anyone?

LARPing this would be awesome.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:50 PM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

What worries me a little is what might happen post-Obama win. Where do the angry angry people go/do?
Shouldn't have watched all of the first season of Homeland at one sitting this weekend, I guess (it's much better than 24 and I had a migraine, whaddayagonnado).
posted by angrycat at 12:53 PM on September 24, 2012

WI

I read this as WIsdom. That or a measure of one's fondness for cheese.
posted by octobersurprise at 12:53 PM on September 24, 2012

LARPing this would be awesome.

I took it too seriously and now I'm an alderman.
posted by The Whelk at 12:54 PM on September 24, 2012 [9 favorites]

...West Wing D&D module anyone?

Listen, Cleric: The deity you get your spells from is too busy being indicted for tax fraud!
posted by Freon at 12:54 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

Theta States: How can anyone take Fox News seriously if the ONLY lead story of the entire nation, for weeks, has been a fine-tooth comb parsing of anything the President says and trying to spin it off as somehow negative?

It's election season and it's hard to find a fault with Obama. How else are you going to keep the Obama Rage broiling? The conservative viewers demand nothing less! What, would you like them to start peeling off their "Another Family for Romney" stickers now, admitting defeat with more than a month before the election?
posted by filthy light thief at 12:58 PM on September 24, 2012

Coolness (CO) 22 (+6)
Flavor (FL) 21 (+5)
Initiative (IA) 24 (+7)
Mind (MI) 34 (+12)
Necromancy (NC) 18 (+4)
Nerve (NV) 25 (+7)
Wisdom (WI) 35 (+12)

(Necromancy is normally taken as a dump stat by Democratic characters.)
posted by kyrademon at 12:58 PM on September 24, 2012 [3 favorites]

I took it too seriously and now I'm an alderman.

There is only Elfstar now!
posted by WinnipegDragon at 1:01 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

What worries me a little is what might happen post-Obama win. Where do the angry angry people go/do?

Same thing they did last time: protest, wave misspelled signs, watch FOX news, elect some total fucking idiot in the midterms.
posted by Artw at 1:07 PM on September 24, 2012 [18 favorites]

What worries me a little is what might happen post-Obama win. Where do the angry angry people go?

Facebook and online comment sections?
posted by mikepop at 1:10 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

It's election season and it's hard to find a fault with Obama. How else are you going to keep the Obama Rage broiling? The conservative viewers demand nothing less! What, would you like them to start peeling off their "Another Family for Romney" stickers now, admitting defeat with more than a month before the election?

I just want news organizations (especially the most watched one in the MSM) to actually report news!
posted by Theta States at 1:16 PM on September 24, 2012

What worries me a little is what might happen post-Obama win. Where do the angry angry people go/do?

They settle down. Once the economy gets moving again (she said hopefully) people will be a whole lot calmer.
posted by Miko at 1:33 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

What worries me a little is what might happen post-Obama win. Where do the angry angry people go/do?

The same place the rest of us went in November 2004.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:36 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

The same place the rest of us went in November 2004.

Quickly, to the bowels of the Internet!
posted by kaspen at 1:39 PM on September 24, 2012 [4 favorites]

West Wing D&D module anyone?

LARPing this would be awesome.

Now I'm imagining collegiate gaming-club types, doing their best readings of rapid-fire Aaron Sorkin dialogue, all while walking briskly through the steam tunnels beneath the quads...
posted by Strange Interlude at 1:40 PM on September 24, 2012 [12 favorites]

I just want news organizations (especially the most watched one in the MSM) to actually report news!

Fox News is not the most-watched television news. It's the most-watched cable news channel. The news broadcasts on ABC, NBC, and CBS still get many, many times more viewers than Fox News ever gets. About 2 million people are watching Fox News at peak hours. This compares to about 20 million (combined) for the broadcast network evening news shows.
posted by mr_roboto at 1:47 PM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

Out of curiosity, do porn stars often take stage first and last names that start with the same letter

Just the ones created by Stan Lee.
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 1:55 PM on September 24, 2012 [9 favorites]

I like your idea that Stan Lee is running some kind of porn star mill where he cranks out alliteratively named starlets for the adult film industry.
posted by chrchr at 2:12 PM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

Excelsior!
posted by chrchr at 2:13 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

40 Celebrities Who Are Republicans: Bruce Willis claims he is an Indepedent

He doesn't think he has feet?
posted by Grangousier at 2:13 PM on September 24, 2012 [7 favorites]

Fox News is not the most-watched television news. It's the most-watched cable news channel.

Fox News is not a news channel. It is the media/PR outlet of the GOP. Roger Ailes, chairman of Fox news, ran media relations for the Nixon White House and has been a media consultant for many other republican politicians.

Fox News does have a Sunday morning political program that runs on local Fox broadcast channels.
posted by Golden Eternity at 2:17 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

He doesn't think he has feet?

What a non-mainstream way to point out a typographical error - are you an indie-pedant?

Here 'til Thursday etc...
posted by TwoWordReview at 2:29 PM on September 24, 2012 [6 favorites]

What worries me a little is what might happen post-Obama win. Where do the angry angry people go/do?

IIRC people where actually angrier on 2008. I specifically recall some quoted text from ... I dunno LGF?.... of people saying that if the Democrats won they hoped the entire east coast would be nuked.

haven't quite run into that level of ugliness quite yet, and I think the blatant racism is perhaps just a notch lower, no carved "O"s in foreheads quite yet.
posted by edgeways at 2:43 PM on September 24, 2012

NPR had a kind of interesting piece on ad comparison on today: essentially Obama campaign is specifically tailoring and targeting populations, women, Latinos, elderly ... whereas Romney's is just blanket advertising the same message to everyone.

pausing a moment, you would think target advertising would be the norm in this day and age, it makes sense, different populations will have different concerns yes?. But man... the fellow they had on from the Romney campaign seriously had his rage on about it "class and culture war", he certainly was not a particularly smooth campaign spokesperson. Then again I don't think they have had a good spokesperson yet.
posted by edgeways at 2:48 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

you know LGF's Chuck did a complete turnaround and has not only denounced the islamophobia & racism of the GOP but is now an Obama supporter.
posted by liza at 2:59 PM on September 24, 2012

Yeah I recall hearing that a few years back, people change.

Best tweet I've seen today:

"Mitt Romney's first act as president: Air Force One turned into a convertible."
posted by edgeways at 3:05 PM on September 24, 2012 [5 favorites]

You Built That: How Mitt Romney Shook Down Taxpayers for his Welfare Olympics
posted by box at 3:08 PM on September 24, 2012 [5 favorites]

Some brilliant comments in that Deadspin article:

This is so biased. For a counterpoint, they should have interviewed some of the Olympians who achieved glory thanks to Romney's efforts, like 50K cross-country skiing gold medalist, Paul Ryan.

******
The Utah Olympics provide yet another window into what a Romney presidency might mean.

A confused Mitt Romney wonders why this window won't open at such high altitude.

posted by maudlin at 3:17 PM on September 24, 2012 [4 favorites]

#RomneyPlaneFeatures
posted by liza at 3:23 PM on September 24, 2012 [3 favorites]

cookies, ponchos, clouds, trees, half the U.S., Europe, Palestine.

Jet planes with windows that open etc. /Eyeroll

It occurs to me that it's particularly when Romney tries to "go with his gut-feeling" be folksy that he makes these idiotic statements. He's trying to be everyman folksy like and he ends up sounding like an arrogant patronizing dick.

Someone (and they should consider it an act of mercy towards the nation) needs to sit him down, look him in the eye and say...

"Governor, you should never, ever, ever, absolutely never do folksy, EVER..."

And maybe try and establish the equivalence/connection/subroutine that every time he's being "folksy," he's throwing $1 million dollars out the window of his jetplane in campaign funds.

But no one will, because no one really can, there's no mechanism for any real honest critique. he's the Bossman CEO, and he's got final say.

Maybe that works fine at Bain where he can surround himself with Excel charts and data forecasts, and low interest government loans to supplant the vulture capital schemes/cons, and announce them to a timid echo chamber board room, but it is absolutely killing him in this situation.

And it's difficult not to enjoy the fact that that very strength is an egregious flaw, and this is key: In the real world.

In the free market of real world situations, Romney is a massive loser propped up only by his huge wealth, his family name, his political, church, business connections, his superficial bearing/appearance etc..

And all that is failing miserably up against a disciplined real world, professional team that is the Obama campaign.

Ultimately he's got intuitive feel for this stuff (he's flying blind in a plane with windows that won't open...) and he doesn't trust anyone else enough to be the rudder or stabilizing influence.

It's bad leadership skills when you won't let someone take over a certain role, without micro-managing or second-guessing, especially when from all reports he has a classy (cf: Howard Fineman in HuffPo) and competent bunch working for him and the "best team money can buy."

And so, it's an ever tightening downward retrograde orbit of failure.*

(*paraphrase of Louie CK Season 3, Ep 11. The "Late Show offer.")
posted by Skygazer at 3:23 PM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

That above should be "he's got NO intuitive feel..."
posted by Skygazer at 3:40 PM on September 24, 2012

Well the airplane window "problem" comments are blowing up on my Facebook and Twitter right now, so I consult the hivemind -- did we determine he was in joke mode on that one or not? I am awaiting the backlash against we 'humorless liberals' since this is probably getting more play than it should (granted it is funny). He must have been joking, right?
posted by kaspen at 3:41 PM on September 24, 2012

The only first-hand account I've read is from the LA Times, and they present it without any commentary at all. The fact that it was said at a campaign fundraiser makes me think he was definitely trying to tell a joke.
posted by muddgirl at 3:43 PM on September 24, 2012

That would be my take.

If not for the awful things he's previously done and said I might feel a smidgen of sympathy for him on this one.
posted by Artw at 3:44 PM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

Comedy Rule #1: If you have to explain a joke,or worse, if you have to explain that it was a joke, it didn't work.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 3:47 PM on September 24, 2012 [7 favorites]

Well, he could try to tell a joke that doesn't portray a contemptuous irony for anyone that's not himself.
posted by muddgirl at 3:47 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

(I probably mean sarcasm there, not irony. Who knows anymore.)
posted by muddgirl at 3:48 PM on September 24, 2012

Could New Voter ID Laws Really Disenfranchise 10 Million Latinos?
posted by Golden Eternity at 3:49 PM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

you know LGF's Chuck did a complete turnaround and has not only denounced the islamophobia & racism of the GOP but is now an Obama supporter.

Yeah, this happened a while back, maybe even in 2008. He was appalled at the racism/birtherism, rampant sexism, and just general crazypants of the modern GOP. LGF isn't DailyKos by any stretch of the imagination, but it's much closer to it than it is to say, Hot Air or Instapundit.
posted by zombieflanders at 3:53 PM on September 24, 2012

But no one will, because no one really can, there's no mechanism for any real honest critique. he's the Bossman CEO, and he's got final say.

Also, even if that isn't the case, keep in mind that popular perception is that both Al Gore and John Kerry lost their respective elections due to not being likeable enough and seeming elitist, aloof, etc.
posted by Sara C. at 4:01 PM on September 24, 2012

Comedy Rule #1: If you have to explain a joke,or worse, if you have to explain that it was a joke, it didn't work.

When I was growing up, I had a couple of friends who did this every time: they'd tell a joke and then, without pausing even for a split second, they'd continue, ".. you know why it was funny? He was asleep the whole time!"
posted by rainy at 4:18 PM on September 24, 2012

Sara C.: Also, even if that isn't the case, keep in mind that popular perception is that both Al Gore and John Kerry lost their respective elections due to not being likeable enough and seeming elitist, aloof, etc.

I don't think either Gore or Kerry displayed the tone-deafness and contempt for the electorate that Romney has, who's relentlessly stuck his foot in his mouth in a way that belies a sorta pathology or crippling emotional handicap.

They all share certainly share the trait of being stiff, but that quality didn't extend for Gore or Kerry to being like the tail-spinning rudderless Romney campaign.

And that's not even without going into the fact that Gore WON the popular vote and Kerry was unable to recover or properly neutralize the devastating Swift-Boat campaign Rove, John O'Neill and the Swift-boat Veterans for Truth.. laid on him.
posted by Skygazer at 4:19 PM on September 24, 2012

The same place the rest of us went in November 2004.

...Metafilter? Man the firewalls!
posted by jaduncan at 4:22 PM on September 24, 2012 [6 favorites]

Back in the day Young was a Regan supporter.

I think at one point he expressed support of a couple of ideas Reagan had (communities pulling together to do what the government hasn't) while criticizing most of his policies, so I would hardly call him a Reagan supporter. There is no evidence he campaigned for him or even voted for him.
posted by Mental Wimp at 4:47 PM on September 24, 2012

I don't think either Gore or Kerry displayed the tone-deafness and contempt for the electorate that Romney has, who's relentlessly stuck his foot in his mouth in a way that belies a sorta pathology or crippling emotional handicap.

Oh, of course. But I do think that this is why the GOP campaign staff are content for Romney to keep trying for humor and aww-shucks and just-folks, and why they keep sending him to small-town sit downs with locals where he will inevitably put his foot in his mouth. Because they can't not do it. They can't rope him off and have him talk only about policy (not to mention, err, what policy?). In a lot of ways campaigns like this are seen by the MSM/the public as referenda on one's personal charm.

(Also, yes, of course lack of down-to-earth likeability wasn't the reason those candidates lost. But it's often seen that way, especially by more conservative pundits.)
posted by Sara C. at 4:51 PM on September 24, 2012

The whole clusterfuck has just coalesced in my mind to one simple plan. One very, very, very bad plan.

The apparent instructions: "Romney, it's time to avoid detailed policy discussion and get by till November on personal charm."
posted by jaduncan at 5:00 PM on September 24, 2012 [4 favorites]

Hrm.

Kayden Kross
Kimberly Kane
Sarah Shevon
Dana DeArmond
Penny Pax
and Jenna Jameson

Out of curiosity, do porn stars often take stage first and last names that start with the same letter, or is it just these politically-minded ones?

For science (really!), I just poked around the web until I found a website that lists a large number of porn stars, and ran some scripts against them to check this. Net result: Out of 4,231 total people listed, 661 fit this pattern. That's about 16 percent, and I suspect far higher than the rate of the general population.

Disclaimer #1: The list is not all porn stars; rather, it's apparently porn stars plus other people who a significant number of people have a prurient interest in. For example, I happened to notice that Winona Ryder (not matching the pattern) and Farrah Fawcett (matching the pattern) are listed. I strongly suspect that this has a minor effect at most on the results.

Disclaimer #2: My scripts might have detected some false positives of the form "X... X... Y..." rather than just "X... X...", such as (making this up) "Beautiful Busty Irene". I gave the results a quick once over, and I am convinced that this also has a minor effect at most on the results.

Disclaimer #3: OK, maybe not all for science.
posted by Flunkie at 5:07 PM on September 24, 2012 [10 favorites]

One of my big regrets about the shitty, shitty porn job I had is that I didn't copy and export the giant database that linked performer names to real names. Not because I want to expose or injure any of those folks, but because it's a huge fucking corpus* that could answer a lot of interesting questions.

*Pun intended a little.
posted by klangklangston at 5:19 PM on September 24, 2012 [8 favorites]

about the shitty, shitty porn job I had

/raises eyebrow
posted by angrycat at 5:28 PM on September 24, 2012 [9 favorites]

Silly Mitt. Of course you can't open the windows on a plane. Do you know what that would do to the gas mileage?
posted by dirigibleman at 5:54 PM on September 24, 2012

Romney needs for his people to give him a safe word whenever it appears that he's going to speak.
posted by SillyShepherd at 6:29 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

"stop it"
posted by de at 6:30 PM on September 24, 2012 [3 favorites]

What worries me a little is what might happen post-Obama win. Where do the angry angry people go/do?

I was gonna suggest Afghanistan.
posted by spitbull at 6:42 PM on September 24, 2012

I don't think either Gore or Kerry displayed the tone-deafness and contempt for the electorate that Romney has, who's relentlessly stuck his foot in his mouth in a way that belies a sorta pathology or crippling emotional handicap.

The relentless urge to pathologise normal human behaviour is one of the more ridiculous aspects of the modern age. If it acts like a fuck and talks like a fuck, the chances are it is a fuck. Mitt Romney, shut up you fuck!
posted by howfar at 6:43 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney needs for his people to give him a safe word whenever it appears that he's going to speak.

:/ Romney
:( Wat R U Sayin
:o Romney
:0 Stahp!
posted by jaduncan at 6:44 PM on September 24, 2012 [5 favorites]

One for the scratch my head column: so Romney is using Rob Portman as the Obama stand-in for practice debates.

IIRC Portman was also McCain's stand-in... and McCain did pretty damn poorly in the debates, so why the eff use the same fellow?
posted by edgeways at 6:56 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

Because what are the odds it fails two times in a row? Statistics! It's like flipping a coin, if it's heads now, the next time the coin knows that for the sake of symmetry it should try to show tails.
posted by rainy at 7:03 PM on September 24, 2012 [2 favorites]

Gary Johnson Sues To Get Into Presidential Debates
posted by homunculus at 7:09 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

IIRC Portman was also McCain's stand-in... and McCain did pretty damn poorly in the debates, so why the eff use the same fellow?

Romney's got that covered. He'll probably going to ask Portman to do it in blackface this time.
posted by Skygazer at 7:11 PM on September 24, 2012 [3 favorites]

Oh noes!! I'm starting to think like Romney, HALP~!!
posted by Skygazer at 7:13 PM on September 24, 2012

What worries me a little is what might happen post-Obama win. Where do the angry angry people go/do?

They will go to Facebook to post crying bald eagles with an Old Glory backdrop and capslock statuses about being covered by Smith & Wesson until I am forced to block my cousin once and for all.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 7:15 PM on September 24, 2012 [44 favorites]

The non-existent voter fraud that is being used to support the passage of voter ID laws will also be used to explain Romney's loss.
posted by rdr at 7:36 PM on September 24, 2012 [7 favorites]

a way that belies a sorta pathology or crippling emotional handicap.

a way that 'fails to justify the impression of' a sorta pathology or crippling emotional handicap?
posted by jacalata at 7:39 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

Question: If Obama wins does the thousand years of darkness start the day after Election Day, or on Inauguration Day?
posted by ob1quixote at 9:53 PM on September 24, 2012

Mitt Romney is the replacement ref of politics.
posted by dirigibleman at 9:53 PM on September 24, 2012 [10 favorites]

I can't wait for the next hail mary...
posted by schyler523 at 10:46 PM on September 24, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama will launch the thousand years of demonic darkness immediately after Mitt's concession call. Meanwhile, the Tea Party will follow the call of their deranged totem spirits, the weeping eagles, and immediately begin the Second American Revolution by shooting every perceived liberal in sight. Meanwhile, the Koch Brothers will enter their lair and immediately activate the Doomsday Device. Israel will immediately bomb Iran. Iran will immediately burn all the oil. Europe will immediately collapse into an austerity fueled singularity. China will immediately sell off all US bonds and then nuke Tokyo over a few rocks in the Pacific. Godzilla will level Beijing and Shanghai in response. Mecha-Putin will dig through the Antarctic ice to awaken the Elder Gods, who will look at the rubble of the world, and realize they have nothing left to do. No one will live to see an iPhone 6 nor will Maps ever get updated.

So, vote Mitt 2012. Now more than ever.
Save the world. Save the economy. Power windows in First Class.

i need sleep. lots of it.
posted by honestcoyote at 11:36 PM on September 24, 2012 [28 favorites]

Obama will launch the thousand years of demonic darkness immediately after Mitt's concession call.

And he will do it while riding a fucking lion.
posted by homunculus at 12:00 AM on September 25, 2012 [6 favorites]

Gary Johnson Sues To Get Into Presidential Debates

I wish the Green Party would join in, make it a class action suit. We can make fun of Romney, I guess, but if Obama runs functionally unopposed, that's no good for democracy. It's not like the Democrats are short of their own special interests. We need someone to at least be able to challenge the less savory parts of the incumbent's record.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:50 AM on September 25, 2012 [8 favorites]

Rachel Maddow: Chinese oil company's Romney connection fouls new campaign message
posted by homunculus at 1:19 AM on September 25, 2012

Paul Ryan is going rogue.

Someone at Politico is pulling our legs, right?
posted by rdr at 2:05 AM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

jaduncan: "The same place the rest of us went in November 2004.

...Metafilter? Man the firewalls!"

One blast of the horn for Mefites. Two is for teabaggers. Three - three is for freepers. But they haven't been seen south of the Wall in a thousand years.
posted by Happy Dave at 2:24 AM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

rdr: "Paul Ryan is going rogue.

Someone at Politico is pulling our legs, right?"

Quotes from the article:

“I hate to say this, but if Ryan wants to run for national office again, he’ll probably have to wash the stench of Romney off of him,” Craig Robinson, a former political director of the Republican Party of Iowa, told The New York Times on Sunday...

Reportedly, he has been marching around his campaign bus, saying things like, “If Stench calls, take a message” and “Tell Stench I’m having finger sandwiches with Peggy Noonan and will text him later.”

lolwhut
posted by Happy Dave at 2:47 AM on September 25, 2012 [5 favorites]

rdr: Someone at Politico is pulling our legs, right?

Politico is doing some major leg pulling to keep the race interesting... While other parts of the GOtP echo chamber has gone into full on self-congratulatory-fantasistic-head-up-ass-shaking-hands-with-it's-loony-self recursion warp 9-to the nth-power-bonkersville-mode.
posted by Skygazer at 2:59 AM on September 25, 2012

From the Politico article:

A word about PowerPoint. PowerPoint was released by Microsoft in 1990 as a way to euthanize cattle using a method less cruel than hitting them over the head with iron mallets. After PETA successfully argued in court that PowerPoint actually was more cruel than iron mallets, the program was adopted by corporations for slide show presentations.

:)
posted by the cydonian at 3:02 AM on September 25, 2012 [12 favorites]

Power corrupts. Powerpoint absolutely corrupts - Edward Tufte
posted by Skygazer at 3:11 AM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

We need someone to at least be able to challenge the less savory parts of the incumbent's record.

The thing I don't get about third parties in the US is: why the Presidency? Say you've got a political party with no national power whatsoever and only the tiniest sliver of state/municipal power: a councilman here, a school board member there. What about that situation suggests, "Oh, the fitting way to further our agenda is to set our sights on the office of chief executive"?

If you want to drag the Democrats to the left on certain issues, that's fine, but is a third-party challenger in the general election really the best way to do that?

The fantasies of a third party president seem pretty naive and lazy to me, honestly. I wish the Tea Party's big plan to exert their will was to do nothing for years then run an outsider dark horse candidate for president, all the while whining and pouting about how the political system was broken and didn't work for them the way it should in an ideal world.
posted by fleacircus at 3:35 AM on September 25, 2012 [20 favorites]

One issue is that keeping third-party candidates out of debates arguably contributes much to crippling democracy, given that the lockout reinforces the current winner-takes-all process, along the corruption that goes along with maintaining it. So whatever one thinks about Romney or Obama, it seems worth asking in a courtroom why the media collude in marginalizing views outside those two brands.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:11 AM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

Yes, fleacircus. This has been my exact feeling about third parties for ages.

I love the Greens, but I don't understand why they spend all their resources running presidential candidates rather than state reps, mayors, governors, and the like. We really shouldn't be seeing third party candidates for president until we have a few senators from the party in question.

That said, the Greens are running a candidate for the House in my district this year, and I'm thinking about voting for him.
posted by Sara C. at 4:30 AM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

fleacircus:
"The thing I don't get about third parties in the US is: why the Presidency?"

I think the presidential runs tend to be more in service of bolstering the national organization than actually trying to win the presidency. Ross Perot kind of set the recent standard for that - even though he didn't win, his Reform Party was nationwide for a while and was running candidates all over the place. They just mostly didn't win. While a Ralph Nader didn't win he did bring a lot more attention to the Green party on a national level. I've actually seen more Green candidates here in Toledo for local elections in the past few years than I ever have before.

I'm not saying this is a good strategy. The Tea Party has shown the other way of doing things - challenge in the primaries within the party instead of in the general election outside the party - but the demographics of lefties within the Democrats as compared to righties within the Republican party may be a deciding factor in which way to go.
posted by charred husk at 5:49 AM on September 25, 2012

Ummm OK everyone, this might come as a surprise, but according to the new non-partisan, stats-heavy site UnSkewed Polls, Romney is a favourite to with by almost 8 points!

WAKE UP SHEEPLE: Romney wins by a landslide!
posted by Theta States at 6:15 AM on September 25, 2012 [5 favorites]

The thing I don't get about third parties in the US is: why the Presidency?

Free press, and a semblance of a bully pulpit.
posted by jaduncan at 6:21 AM on September 25, 2012

Out of curiosity, do porn stars often take stage first and last names that start with the same letter, or is it just these politically-minded ones?
posted by zarq at 12:36 PM on September 24 [+] [!]

As I have heard it told, you 'porn star' name is the name of your first pet for first name, and the name of the street you grew up on for the second name.

Silver Rushton.
posted by Hello, I'm David McGahan at 6:22 AM on September 25, 2012

Gary Johnson Sues To Get Into Presidential Debates

I wish the Green Party would join in, make it a class action suit.

If Gary Johnson or any similar person were to get into the debates, then we would NEED to have a green party candidate or Rocky Anderson or somesuch to keep it balanced. Can you imagine the Democratic party being the most liberal party on stage? Sweet jesus. A debate between a Libertarian candidate, a GOP/Tea Party candidate and a Democrat would be such total bullshit. Talk about an unbalnced panel. It's no wonder our country is sliding to the right.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:25 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Reportedly, he has been marching around his campaign bus, saying things like, 'If Stench calls, take a message' and 'Tell Stench I’m having finger sandwiches with Peggy Noonan and will text him later.'"

Stench Romney gets no respect. No respect at all.

Gary Johnson Sues To Get Into Presidential Debates

Re: the debates; voting for third party candidates, especially in Presidential elections, is pointless and/or foolish, but admitting minor candidates into the debates isn't necessarily a bad idea, IMO. But I'd like to know on what grounds minor candidates should be admitted and why the major candidates would ever consent to share a stage with more than one or two.

I mean, a debate between candidates of the Democratic, Republican, Green, and Libertarian parties would make good television and it might even produce a healthier national political conversation in the long run, but why stop at four? And at point, why should the major candidates ever agree to participate in what would be, for them, basically a distraction, at exactly the most competitive moment of their campaigns.
posted by octobersurprise at 6:32 AM on September 25, 2012

We need someone to at least be able to challenge the less savory parts of the incumbent's record.

This is a function the opponent fills pretty well.

If we want third parties in debates, the time isn't a month before the election. They should organize issues forums in between Pres campaigns, and before primaries, when it might actually do some good in shaping agenda. The ship has sailed by now.
posted by Miko at 6:34 AM on September 25, 2012 [4 favorites]

I love the Greens, but I don't understand why they spend all their resources running presidential candidates rather than state reps, mayors, governors, and the like.

They do! In New York, at least, they've been doing that for years. I voted for the Green Party candidate for New York's 2006 gubenetorial election, and in 1997 I voted for Al Lewis.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:47 AM on September 25, 2012

NYT: These moments, though, were not fumbles or gaffes. They were entirely consistent with the dismissive attitude Mr. Romney has routinely shown toward non-Americans or the nonrich. Now even long-undecided voters are starting to catch on and dismiss him.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:49 AM on September 25, 2012

Stench Romney. Oh god. I am laughing so hard I can barely type. Is there anyway to google bomb this? Make it happen!
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:50 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

I definitely think that more parties in the debates would serve as a check on the current parties and help to keep the national conversation more honest but I also think more visibility and more votes for these candidates would only cause problems unless we reform the FPTP voting system. So I'm torn. But I definitely think that it would be helpful if we had a national voice to counteract the current Democratic party and say - no, torture is not a traditional liberal value and we shouldn't accept it as such. We don't really have anyone with a major voice saying that right now. Most people have never heard of Jill Stein.

Also, I just found this webpage which has all the major party platforms back to the mid-1800s and seems really interesting so I just thought I'd put it here.

A sample from the GOP, 1944:

The Republican Party is the historical champion of free labor. Under Republican administrations American manufacturing developed, and American workers attained the most progressive standards of living of any workers in the world. Now the Nation owes those workers a debt of gratitude for their magnificent productive effort in support of the war
posted by triggerfinger at 6:51 AM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

OK, right now "Stench Romney" brings up about 515,000 results. We can do better.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:54 AM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

Another new ad, with the 47% comments and including Romney's 60 Minutes appearance.

You know Mitt is pissed because the one thing they were trying to do in this campaign was be blank, anonymous, a shadow. If Mitt could have changed his name to Generic Politician he would have. And now, all the focus is on his comments, his taxes, and him. And he just comes off as awful.
posted by cashman at 6:54 AM on September 25, 2012 [5 favorites]

Paul Ryan is going rogue.

Someone at Politico is pulling our legs, right?

Paul Ryan: Would-be Prince of the Land of Stench.

Oh god, I just imagined Romney wearing Bowie's wig and codpiece, NOOOOOoooooo...
posted by Strange Interlude at 6:56 AM on September 25, 2012

I see Stench Romney as:

An action figure

A comic strip

A band name
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:57 AM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

Anybody else think that when your negative is coming across as super wealthy uncaring businessman, it might not be the best idea to do 60 minutes in flight on your private jet?

Obama did a lot of his interview standing there, looking like a teacher outside of a school, smiling in the sunlight. Romney looked like he was up in the air on his way to fire someone.
posted by cashman at 6:59 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

"I love the Greens, but I don't understand why they spend all their resources running presidential candidates rather than state reps, mayors, governors, and the like. "

They do in Illinois, too! In 2006 I got to vote for Rich Whitney, instead of Judy Barr Topinka or Rod Blagojevich. Whitney garnered 10% of the vote as disgusted democrats abandoned Blago in large numbers, knowing he'd win anyway because the state GOP was in massive disarray. That meant that the Greens surpassed the 5% threshhold necessary to be designated an "established [major] political party" in Illinois, which meant:

"This status provided the party with several new advantages, such as lower signature requirements for ballot access, primary elections, free access to additional voter data, the ability to elect precinct committeemen, run a partial slate of candidates at any jurisdictional level, and slate candidates without petitioning. "

It also meant when Blago was getting all indicted I was all, "Don't blame me, I voted for Whitney!"

They lost major party status in 2010, when a more competitive election (and a more palatable democratic candidate) meant that democrats weren't voting Green.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 6:59 AM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

With regards to the debates, I started to say that it comes down to an independent election commission. But then I remembered that up here in Canada the debates are through a media consortium and not EC either, and we have similar problems (the Greens launched a suit this year to get included, because their one MP wasn't elected; they lost).

Instead: the networks/debate media people need to have a clear statement, prior to the debates, about the criteria. Unfortunately, the probable fair one is something like "received x% popular vote in the last election [approx 2-5%?] and/or has elected representatives in the Congress/Senate", because weeding out the fringe is valid."

But at least that'd be something to work towards.
posted by Lemurrhea at 6:59 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

I see Stench Romney as:

An action figure

A comic strip

A band name

An actual name of a Romney grandchild?
posted by Strange Interlude at 7:05 AM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

Anybody else think that when your negative is coming across as super wealthy uncaring businessman, it might not be the best idea to do 60 minutes in flight on your private jet?

You mean: Anybody else think that when your negative is coming across as super wealthy uncaring businessman, it might not be the best idea to do 60 minutes in flight on your private jet whilst saying that your 15% tax rate is fair?
posted by jaduncan at 7:10 AM on September 25, 2012 [4 favorites]

Stench being short for Stenchton, in reference to the pet name for the Chinese town where Romney's most successful fenced factory resides. (Don't worry, the fence keeps the would-be workers out, it's just that successful.)
posted by filthy light thief at 7:11 AM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

Jareth: And Hoggle, if she ever kisses you, I'll turn you into a prince.
Hoggle: Y-you will?
Jareth: Prince of the Land of Stench!
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 7:12 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

Good grief - Romney's IRA is worth $82 million. IRA contributions are limited to $30K per year. It would take 2,733 years of $30K/year contributions to reach $82 million. Of course, this math is simplified, but the absurdity of the $82 million in that account (as well as the $100 million in the trust he set up for his sons) is ENORMOUS.

And I'm not complaining about the amount of money he has - I'm complaining about the obvious tax-avoidance that the trust and IRA values are evidence of.
posted by syzygy at 7:20 AM on September 25, 2012 [7 favorites]

But I definitely think that it would be helpful if we had a national voice to counteract the current Democratic party and say - no, torture is not a traditional liberal value and we shouldn't accept it as such.

The US hasn't tortured anyone during Obama's tenure. Hell, Bush only did it in his first term.
posted by Ironmouth at 7:24 AM on September 25, 2012

From the Rachel Maddow segment on Romney's blind trust investment in a Chinese off-shore oil company, she talks about the 5 "reboots" in the Romney campaign since August 31st: Mitt Romney 2.0 succeeds at the RNC, but is overshadowed by Clint Eastwood (Aug 31); Romney tries a retool with NASCAR race fans, but talks about "some friends who are NASCAR team owners" (Sept 8); Romney Campaign Starts Reboot when the campaign was now ready to "meet the demands" for "more specifics about the Romney plan for a strong middle class" but instead glossed over most of the details (Sept 17); Newly aggressive Romney tries another reset for campaign (again with the boarding of jets!), with Romney attacking Obama's comment on "changing Washington from outside" as "[throwing] in the white flag of surrender again" (Sept 20); but that didn't take, either, so Romney Plans Full Slate in Latest Reboot, in which he talks about specifics (again, maybe), and attacks Obama on the economy, as if that actually stopped (Sept 24); and Romney campaign to change message, painting a terrible picture of four more years under Obama (Sept 24).

The Onion: Romney Campaign Reboots For 72nd Consecutive Week.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:27 AM on September 25, 2012 [8 favorites]

homunculus: "Rachel Maddow: Chinese oil company's Romney connection fouls new campaign message"

I expect this Cnooc thing to be a much bigger deal as the story gets more public air. “Large deep-water drilling rigs are our mobile national territory and strategic weapon for promoting the development of the country’s offshore oil industry,” said Wang Yilin, Cnooc’s chairman, according to Xinhua.

This Nexen deal would give China the right to put deep sea drills in the Gulf of Mexico, and as they view international law, gives them Chinese territory in the middle of US national waters. Not only that, but they are major players in the Keystone pipeline...a project, by the way, which Romney has vociferously argued for. (Gee, I wonder why?)

Cnooc is the same company that, when the US sold weapons to Taiwan, responded by going to Iran and building up their oil/gas infrastructure, despite the UN ban on providing support to Iran.

Where it intersects with the Presidential race is that Romney bought shares of Cnooc AFTER the Iran deal. Then he bought more. Then he bought even more. He didn't sell the shares until the day before the Iowa debates.

How much national sovereignty and resource treasure is Romney willing to sell to the Chinese, if it means that he and his make a profit? Fuck the Gulf, fuck the nation, we're making money here! For Romney to "reboot" (again) with his "tough on China" message at the same time that he's profited from their work in Iran is so beyond anything that makes any logical sense...I just don't even know where to begin. (But I swear, his advisers should be horsewhipped for incompetence.)

This story is just starting to filter through the Teahadist communities, and from what I can tell; they are pissed. Most of what I've seen is FB and G+, where it's not really linkable, but I'm keeping my eye on the right-wing press, because this is the sort of thing that could turn the tables, if enough of the base gets riled up about it.
posted by dejah420 at 7:31 AM on September 25, 2012 [31 favorites]

I don't know why I link to these things
posted by The Whelk at 7:41 AM on September 25, 2012 [13 favorites]

Because you're the Tumblr linker Metafilter deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So we'll flag your posts. Because you can take it.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:46 AM on September 25, 2012 [4 favorites]

she talks about the 5 "reboots" in the Romney campaign since August 31s

Maybe he should try zapping the PRAM.
posted by burnmp3s at 7:46 AM on September 25, 2012 [10 favorites]

There may be a legal/technical definition of torture that somehow doesn't include imprisoning someone without charge until they die

Yes, there actually is.

This is something I really wonder about. A lot. Obama was pretty set on closing down Guantanamo and pursuing a more just path of due process for the detainees. And it's pretty clear that sometime around his inauguration, he found out some level of information that made him change his mind. I can only speculate what that information is. But since the reason they are detained without formal charge doesn't seem to be only "because the Bush administration are assholes with no regard for the law," I think there must be some significant rationale that we aren't privy to. Because, given his own legal skills and moral predilections, I don't believe that Obama and his Pentagon advisers would allow it to continue if he didn't have sufficient reason.
posted by Miko at 8:02 AM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

There is no doubt that Guantanamo is an evil situation, but when you have people freaking out over the idea of affording them a trial in the mainland U.S. and possible imprisonment there, as well as few countries willing to take the inmates back, not sure what you could do.

If Obama had turned the ME into a parking lot, then maybe he'd have the warrior creds to make the situation right. But he didn't, thank God, so here we are.

I find drone strikes a lot more troubling.
posted by angrycat at 8:03 AM on September 25, 2012

IIRC, Obama tried to bring the Gitmo prisoners here for prosecution. Even bought a prison in Illinois to house them. Congress had a giant fucking cow and blocked it.

I ain't saying O has tried hard enough, but what are the options?
posted by Benny Andajetz at 8:19 AM on September 25, 2012 [8 favorites]

And in Massachusetts:

Racial Politics: Scott Brown Staffers Mock Warren With ‘Tomahawk Chop’ And ‘War Whoop’
posted by zombieflanders at 8:23 AM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

Folks, at 2700+ comments in could you not turn this into an Obama/torture debate? thank you.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:25 AM on September 25, 2012

Racial Politics: Scott Brown Staffers Mock Warren With ‘Tomahawk Chop’ And ‘War Whoop’

I haven't been following this race closely, but it has become sooo weird for the conservatives. When I heard that there was a controversy regarding Warren's heritage, I shrugged and thought, "ok. Sounds like a one-week-long kerfluffle. Whatever." And now it's dragged on for a couple of months. Really, is this the best they can do... getting obsessed and parsing over discussion of the candidates ethnic background? What's wrong with these people?
posted by deanc at 8:27 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

Racial Politics: Scott Brown Staffers Mock Warren With ‘Tomahawk Chop’ And ‘War Whoop’

Between this and the Romney 'China bad' ad, why don't they just change their slogan to: "Romney/Ryan 2012 - White as all hell"
posted by WinnipegDragon at 8:29 AM on September 25, 2012 [5 favorites]

Racial Politics: Scott Brown Staffers Mock Warren With ‘Tomahawk Chop’ And ‘War Whoop’

1. I love living in the age of YouTube
2. Are you freaking KIDDING me? Are these people fired yet?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:34 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Romney/Ryan 2012 - "Cartoonish Villains in 80s-style Snobs-vs-Slobs movie"
posted by The Whelk at 8:35 AM on September 25, 2012 [6 favorites]

Miko: "I don't believe that Obama and his Pentagon advisers would allow it to continue if he didn't have sufficient reason.
"

Didn't every Republican Congressperson (and some Democratic ones) have complete meltdowns about this? I thought closing Guantanamo required an act of Congress.
posted by boo_radley at 8:35 AM on September 25, 2012

Politico just posted some video of the LA 'plane windows don't open' fundraiser, and... I'm actually less sure that it was a joke than before.

I mean, I still think "it was a very poorly-told joke" is a valid argument, but I also think, "He's a doofus" is a more valid reading than before. Because no one laughs.
posted by muddgirl at 8:38 AM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

I just watched that link, muddgirl, and I'm not sure he was joking either. I watched Ann's face as he said those lines and she had no reaction beyond just the smile plastered on her face. Usually your spouse can tell if you mean something to be a joke and gives you a mercy laugh if no one else does.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 8:42 AM on September 25, 2012 [6 favorites]

"Cartoonish Villains in 80s-style Snobs-vs-Slobs movie"

Stench is totally the Smails kid all grown up. Fifty bucks he still picks his nose.
posted by octobersurprise at 8:44 AM on September 25, 2012

Who vomited a paint store on Anne?
posted by bardic at 8:44 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

That war whoop thing is HORRIFYINGLY racist. My god. They're not even pretending any more.
posted by KathrynT at 8:46 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

rdr: "Paul Ryan is going rogue.

Someone at Politico is pulling our legs, right"

This is rich. Paul Ryan isn't getting booed for saying Romney talking points! These are things he actually believes. Hell, for Ryan, getting rid of Obamacare is step one towards dismantling Medicare entirely.

THE STENCH IS COMING FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE.
posted by graventy at 8:47 AM on September 25, 2012 [12 favorites]

Wow, that Warren video. Someone has told them they're campaigning in "liberal" Massachusetts rather than the 1930s Deep South, right?
posted by jaduncan at 8:48 AM on September 25, 2012

Wait, can we be reasonably sure Romney is from our time period and not like, recently unfrozen from 1922?

It would explain SO MUCH.
posted by The Whelk at 8:50 AM on September 25, 2012 [8 favorites]

Wait, can we be reasonably sure Romney is from our time period and not like, recently unfrozen from 1922?

"My platform is simple: stop the German Zeppelins before they stop is."

Actually, given Romney it'd be: "We have specifics to stopping Zeppelin attacks coming out of our eyeballs."
posted by gc at 9:09 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

Come on, Romney was obviously joking when he said that. It's a terrible joke, but you know, not bad for a robot.
posted by ob at 9:10 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney is clearly joking. His campaign has been incompetently managed, he's perpetually confused because his positions on almost everything have changed, and he has trouble relating to average people. But he's not a moron.
posted by L. Ron McKenzie at 9:10 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

In 1980 the Republicans ran a candidate they called The Great Communicator. In 2012 they run a guy who we can't even tell whether he's telling a joke or actually stupid.
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:12 AM on September 25, 2012 [9 favorites]

"We have uncovered evidence of mass Zeppelin-related program activities. We know where the Zeppelins are. They're somewhere to the north south, east or west of Berlin."
posted by Devils Rancher at 9:13 AM on September 25, 2012

I can see "humorless or moron" becoming a real topic of conversation should Romney win.
posted by octobersurprise at 9:14 AM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

Who vomited a paint store on Anne?

I hadn't watched the video when I read that and thought she had perhaps gone Tammy Faye in the makeup dept... but no it was the dress. And while I wouldn't bat an eye at that dress on the street, because common who cares eh? It certainly is an odd dress to wear at such a function, it seriously should not draw as much attention to the ... er... chest area as it does with those dark splotches so strategically, er, placed. Really, personally I don't particularly give a good goddam, but it certainly looks like a 60's throwback outfit.

.
.
.

On a more serious and substantial note: Democracy now was talking about Bain investors today, seems a large amount of the $ came from Central America 'Death Squad' supporters/participants. And Romney most definably knew about it.

(and christ almighty why the hell do they still invite Ann Coulter on talk shows anyways? Is it really just to rile people up. I honestly can't think of any other reason)
posted by edgeways at 9:15 AM on September 25, 2012

Bain investors today, seems a large amount of the $ came from Central America 'Death Squad' supporters/participants.

Wait, what?
posted by angrycat at 9:16 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

In low information voter news, my mother won't vote for Obama because he is from Jamaica.
posted by winna at 9:17 AM on September 25, 2012 [19 favorites]

Wait, what?

Yeah
posted by edgeways at 9:19 AM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

Seriously, never vote for someone from Queens.
posted by The Whelk at 9:20 AM on September 25, 2012 [6 favorites]

edgeways talking about Anne's dress: "...it seriously should not draw as much attention to the ... er... chest area as it does with those dark splotches so strategically, er, placed."

That's SOOT! From the plane fire! She almost DIED because she couldn't get the window open!
Sheesh, people.
posted by Floydd at 9:21 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ah... I see the problem right there. Use your HANDS when trying to open things next time Ms Romney.
posted by edgeways at 9:26 AM on September 25, 2012 [4 favorites]

Scott Brown Staffers Mock Warren With ‘Tomahawk Chop’ And ‘War Whoop’
Really, is this the best they can do... getting obsessed and parsing over discussion of the candidates ethnic background? What's wrong with these people?

This is the best the Brown campaign can do. It's literally the only thing they can ding Warren for - otherwise she's kind of golden, and going right for his base. Even so -- if your complaint is that it was cynical and racially offensive to claim a Native ancestry that you can't prove you have, then it's utterly crazy to use racially offensive stereotypes to combat it. Earlier, people from the Cherokee nation were sort of weighing in with videos about how often white people claim Native ancestry with nothing to support the claim, etc. This is a pretty fantastic way to shut that potentially helpful (and usually Dem) alignment right down, because few Native people are going to be cool with this.
posted by Miko at 9:27 AM on September 25, 2012 [4 favorites]

This is something I really wonder about. A lot. Obama was pretty set on closing down Guantanamo and pursuing a more just path of due process for the detainees. And it's pretty clear that sometime around his inauguration, he found out some level of information that made him change his mind. I can only speculate what that information is.

"Any questions?"
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 9:27 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

I wasn't going to comment on the dress thing, but when I first saw it I thought she had some kind of Wonderwoman army in the chesticular area.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 9:27 AM on September 25, 2012

umm, arMOR not arMY (I can't even blame that on autocorrect).
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 9:29 AM on September 25, 2012

No, no, imagining a bunch of tiny Wonder Women flying out of Ann Romney's bra is fine.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:34 AM on September 25, 2012 [4 favorites]

GYWO on The Romney Tape
posted by drezdn at 9:36 AM on September 25, 2012 [4 favorites]

I've watched that plane story five times and for tge life of me I can't tell if it's a joke or not.

I think it's a joke up until the aside about 'I don't know why they don't do that' and then all bets are off. Also, it vaguely bugs me that he starts with how Ann didn't know how worried people were about her, rather than talking about how worried she was, or how frightened Mitt was. It's a weird piece of distancing and remoteness that makes the rest if the joke, if it was a joke, more callous.
posted by winna at 9:44 AM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

""Romney/Ryan 2012 - "Cartoonish Villains in 80s-style Snobs-vs-Slobs movie""

If they win the election, they're going to close Ski Mountain and Camp Skinnydip!
posted by klangklangston at 9:59 AM on September 25, 2012 [7 favorites]

It's a joke, and it can be explained by something that humans do often. After moments of great stress, people often make light of it. Jeez, people do it often enough here. He was trying, in his weird robotic dad-humour way, to defuse the tension of the situation. After the last week, this doesn't even register on the Romney gaffe-ometer.
posted by ob at 10:03 AM on September 25, 2012

Maybe it was his very own inside joke. All for himself and his friends who own private jets...

And he only allows 14.1% of the joke to be for the public, and he has to murk up the joke and make nebulous so those ungrateful lazy 47%-er "parasites" don't gobble up all that glorious Romney funny, he so generously puts out in the world on a regular basis.
posted by Skygazer at 10:07 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

Could Romney take Ryan down with him? -- "What seemed like the biggest break of Paul Ryan's political life might end up being a curse."
posted by ericb at 10:09 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

"I don't know why they don't do that" is the joke.

I agree with this guy: Romney has been on enough planes to know how they work. The media needs to give him a break

He's made a ton of terrible mistakes which are directly related to policy and his ability to lead the country. This is a distraction.
posted by L. Ron McKenzie at 10:11 AM on September 25, 2012 [6 favorites]

Of course, he knows why airplane windows don't roll down. It would totally mess up his hair.
posted by perhapses at 10:14 AM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

Could Romney take Ryan down with him?

Yes, of course. The policies that define Ryan's life are getting an utter kicking without Romney delivering any effective counters to the Democratic framing of them. He and Romney are being made the faces of those policies, and Ryan can't really run from them given that they are at least nominally based on his budget.
posted by jaduncan at 10:14 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

This is the best the Brown campaign can do. It's literally the only thing they can ding Warren for ...

During their first debate last week, Brown repeatedly referred to Warren as 'Professor Warren," in his mind being dismissive of her credentials and 'elitism.' As a commentor on one of the Sunday talk shows said: "That's not really a working, or good strategy for a debate being held in Massachussets. It's likely that a great number of folks watching have a professor as a neighbor."
posted by ericb at 10:16 AM on September 25, 2012 [4 favorites]

"The things you talk about like traditional marriage and family and entrepreneurship. These aren’t values that are indicative to any one person or creed or color. These are American values, these are universal human values." - Paul Ryan today in Ohio
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:19 AM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

It's so hard to remember that it's too early to celebrate.

[Stench Romney] had a worse favorability rating than Michael Dukakis—and that was before the 47% gaffe.

Mitt also earns the dubious honor of being the only presidential candidate in modern history to have his unfavorable ratings higher than his favorable ratings at this point in the campaign.
posted by syzygy at 10:43 AM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

Pollster Peter Hart regularily does focus groups with undecided voters, which are aired on C-SPAN. This one is from last week, after the Lybia remarks but before the 47% video leak, with more or less undecided voters from Virginia and runs about 2 hours, with some discussion with journalists afterwards. I find these focus groups always really illuminating, as while many of the participants do not have a firm grasp of the policy differences the broad themes put out by the campaigns ("Obama apologizes", "Romney does not have a plan") nevertheless reach them. Interestingly, one of the participants stated that she was unable to forgive Obama for his two weeks of inaction during hurricane Katrina...
posted by ltl at 10:44 AM on September 25, 2012 [8 favorites]

re: the racist pro-Brown/anti-Warren video

They've already confirmed Brown's Deputy Chief of Staff, Constituent Service Counsel, State Director and a special assistant as well as a "GOP operative." In other words, these aren't privately-funded campaign staff, these are his DC/MA Senate staffers that are doing this on the taxpayer dime.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:46 AM on September 25, 2012

Oh, and Scott Brown will not apologize
posted by zombieflanders at 10:47 AM on September 25, 2012

"I don't know why they don't do that" is the joke.

People need to play to their strengths. Being a class clown/sarcastic joker/"just one of the guys" isn't Romney's. You never saw FDR affecting a Brooklyn working class accent and talking about how much he loved going to Coney Island. He was who he was and worked within those parameters. It's a bit too late, now, but Romney really needed to figure that out. His shtick of "telling the audience what he thinks they want to hear" probably works well when dealing with Bain clients and investors but fails wildly when dealing with voters.
posted by deanc at 10:47 AM on September 25, 2012 [6 favorites]

Interestingly, one of the participants stated that she was unable to forgive Obama for his two weeks of inaction during hurricane Katrina...

I think it's awfully suspicious that our "Hawaaiian" president hasn't divulged his whereabouts on that infamous day the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.
posted by Atom Eyes at 11:21 AM on September 25, 2012 [7 favorites]

Don't you mean the Germans?
posted by zombieflanders at 11:27 AM on September 25, 2012 [6 favorites]

It's hard for me to not imagine what is in Romney's head right now. What would it be like to be golden boy for all of your life and then, wham, you're being mocked by millions? Put that together with little moments like his tantrum before the Univision thing and I wonder -- is he full of hate and seething resentment? Does he believe he's on God's plan and gives as many fucks as a honey badger? Is he yelling at his incompetent aides? Are they yelling at him? If Ryan's nickname for him is actually Stench, is Romney like, fuck you I can use $100 bills for toilet paper for the rest of my life?

Or does he, maybe once a day, a few times a week, hunker in a corner, beat his chest, and wail?

At any rate, I assume the Woodward or whoever the hell's book about the campaign is going to be fascinating.
posted by angrycat at 11:35 AM on September 25, 2012 [15 favorites]

You forgot Poland!
posted by ericb at 11:39 AM on September 25, 2012

Alternate history: Allies forgot Poland!
posted by jaduncan at 11:42 AM on September 25, 2012

Snopes is ON the Romney-airplane-window story, you guys.

“Basically he was retelling the story and when he said ‘I don’t know why they don’t have roll down windows on airplanes,’ he looked at the audience and everyone laughed,” Everitt [said]. “It was a clearly delivered joke … There were 1,000 people there that will tell you the same thing.”

(I don't know if I'd believe all one thousand people there agreeing that it was a joke, mind you.)
posted by Phire at 11:48 AM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

ericb: Could Romney take Ryan down with him? -- "What seemed like the biggest break of Paul Ryan's political life might end up being a curse."

“I like Romney’s message,” [Rick Brumby, 52, a Republican voter] said, “but I just think Ryan is the sharper of the two, and I think Ryan is more acclimated toward and relates better to the working class.”

Uf. The understuffed shirt relates to the working class better than the business grade mannequin. I get that Obama is a filthy liberal and all, but for all his coldness and professional distances, he's a hell of a lot more personable than these two goons.

I'd like to see a breakdown of the reasons people vote for a particular president. How much of a role does "I can relate to/drink with that person" play into the vote? And has that changed in recent times? I remember hearing that a lot with Gore and Kerry vs Bush II, who lacked polish, but gosh durn was he a likeable fellow (except for his policies and actions, dontcha know).
posted by filthy light thief at 11:52 AM on September 25, 2012

Well, if it comes down to a Regular Joe beer-off, I think Obama's VP can drink that Objectivist twit under the table any day.
posted by Atom Eyes at 12:02 PM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

First of all about Ann's dress....I think it is startling to most people because political wives have been dressing down since Pat Nixon's Cloth Coat. It is pretty rare to flaunt your wealth in front of the voters (although Nancy Reagan sure didn't mind) and cutting-edge Fashion (Capitol F) is rarely worn by your average 50 something. But make no mistake that particular dress is High Fashion. I can't find the exact dress but here are a few examples.

About Paul Ryan running concurrent campaigns. How does that work for you as a voter exactly? Do you vote for him twice and hope one "takes"? It seems a bit wrong to me because you are voting to be represented and if both your choices win then you will actually get someone else representing you in Congress, presumably someone chosen by the governor. Do all states allow this? Has this ever happened before?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:08 PM on September 25, 2012

TLo shout-out! Bitteer kittens represent.
posted by Phire at 12:14 PM on September 25, 2012 [6 favorites]

Bitter Kittens and Unborn Fawns, Wheeeeeee!

Interestingly, one of the participants stated that she was unable to forgive Obama for his two weeks of inaction during hurricane Katrina...

In the Sane America that lives in my head someone this disinterested in current events would not bother to vote.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:29 PM on September 25, 2012 [7 favorites]

I don't know if I'd believe all one thousand people there agreeing that it was a joke, mind you.

Listening to the tape (again), I hear a little bit of laughter. Not as loud as the laughter and hand-claps on the last line.

I also disagree with Snopes that

his posture and his tone clearly indicated that he intended the line to be taken as a tongue-in-cheek aside

RomneyBot is not very good at modulating his posture and tone to convey a message, so I don't think that's convincing either way. Did he really tell this story in a different tone than he, say, expresses contempt for the 47% of people who don't pay income tax?
posted by muddgirl at 12:30 PM on September 25, 2012

(Ugh, I need to drop this - I just want to note that I completely understand why so many people didn't 'get' that this was a joke based on a straight transcription. Because it's not funny and it's condescending as usual. And the video is even more confusing, because the joke is delivered in the same jokesy tone as everything else Romney says.)
posted by muddgirl at 12:35 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

Regarding Ryan running for both VP and Congress, Wisconsin would have a special election triggered if Ryan ended up winning VP. I assume different states vary a bit on how this is handled, but special elections seem pretty comon. It's definitely been done before, most recently by Biden, who Wikipedia helpfully points out defeated a "non-witch".
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 12:36 PM on September 25, 2012

Has anyone shared Mitt and Annie’s new twitter nicks – MoneyBooBoo and MoneyBooHoo?

I’ve lived most of my adult life in the Detroit area. I long ago began referring to the “Birmingham/ Bloomfield” attitude. I’ve had the misfortune of having B/B types for bosses, and many a times have witnessed or been partly the object of a B/B Prince or Princess Acting Out in a store or restaurant.

I am/ we are as a little dust mote to such people. (Oh gawd, do I have a flashback when I hear the sharp little voice commanding, “Stop it.” Or when I imagine Mitt walking the blind teacher into a closed door because after all he’s just a lowly paid worker bee and what ya gonna do about it, my dad’s head of a car company/governor?)

IMO We are simply seeing the true BloomfieldHills-type behavior from both Romneys. (And then toss in the also IMHO Mormon nuttiness on top of it.) As others have noted, they are not used to the riffraff talking back, mocking, questioning THEM or their qualifications or actions or lifestyle. That’s what they do to other people – the servants of all stripes (AKA everyone who doesn’t belong to their country club).

I get that Obama is a filthy liberal and all, but for all his coldness and professional distances, he's a hell of a lot more personable than these two goons.
It is so difficult to understand what’s really behind some people’s perceptions. My tea-party niece from TX thinks Obama’s “stupid.” Now, again, I can understand, based on Fox-fueled misinformation, thinking his policies are bad. Or hating him ‘cos he’s not her idea of Xian/patriot/whatev.

But really, stupid? When your party’s paragons the past 10 years have been Mooselini, Todd Akin and a bunch of creepy frat boys riding on daddy’s coattails? It’s like Teapublicans are permanently living Opposite Day.

one of the participants stated that she was unable to forgive Obama for his two weeks of inaction during hurricane Katrina...

OTOH I might hate even more how every election comes down to these Undecided maroons. (SNL did a mild-mannered parody of such folks last weekend, which ended with them not knowing the basics of how anything in life works.)
posted by NorthernLite at 12:37 PM on September 25, 2012 [6 favorites]

Romney thinks Teachers' Unions should not be allowed to donate to political campaigns because....wait for it...it would be a conflict of interest. I am confident that all of the campaign funds received by Romney are conflict-free and not a penny came from any group trying to push their own interests. Right? Right? (He does know how politics works, doesn't he?)
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:40 PM on September 25, 2012 [10 favorites]

Or hating him ‘cos he’s not her idea of Xian/patriot/whatev.

For a brief moment, I wondered why your niece was so jingoistic for a province in China...
posted by FJT at 12:43 PM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

Also, The Nuns on A Bus Tour spokesnun thinks Romney is out of touch and “has no idea how hard it is at the margins of our society.”

CAMPBELL: I mean, it was shocking to me that a person who says he wants to be the leader of our nation believes that 47 percent of our country is basically lazy or dependent or indolent. That was shocking to me. But then, it broke my heart that he would be so out of touch, that he would so not know the truth of folks at the margins of our society who work so hard. And he obviously doesn’t know that if you work a minimum wage job, if you’re a child care, if you’re providing janitorial services, or if you’re a day laborer, if you work for minimum wage, you’re still in poverty. He has no idea how hard it is at the margins of our society.

Sing it, Sister!
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:46 PM on September 25, 2012 [9 favorites]

Secret Life of Gravy: "Romney thinks Teachers' Unions should not be allowed to donate to political campaigns because....wait for it...it would be a conflict of interest."

Holy cow, that's something else indeed.

On the other hand, if this opens up a wider discussion about banning campaign donations from all organizations and corporations and only allowing individual citizens to contribute (LOL), I would be okay with teachers' unions being caught in the fallout.
posted by Phire at 12:47 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

Secret Life of Gravy: "Romney thinks Teachers' Unions should not be allowed to donate to political campaigns because....wait for it...it would be a conflict of interest."

Phire: Holy cow, that's something else indeed.

On the other hand, if this opens up a wider discussion about banning campaign donations from all organizations and corporations and only allowing individual citizens to contribute (LOL), I would be okay with teachers' unions being caught in the fallout.

Yeah, seriously. I want Obama to fire back with "I agree that too many partisan groups contribute too much money to elections. Will you join me in pledging to minimize and roll back Citizen's United, including a constitutional amendment if needed?"

Up here in Canada we've had some recent problems with union contributions, but they're minor minor points compared to the overall system of campaign financing that happens.
posted by Lemurrhea at 12:53 PM on September 25, 2012 [5 favorites]

Romney thinks Teachers' Unions should not be allowed to donate to political campaigns

You'd think he'd know that federal law already prohibits unions and corporations from donating to campaigns.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 12:55 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

if this opens up a wider discussion about banning campaign donations from all organizations and corporations and only allowing individual citizens to contribute

Arguably that's already the law. All money going to campaigns is either direct individual donations or indirect donations filtered through PACs.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 12:58 PM on September 25, 2012

"The things you talk about like traditional marriage and family and entrepreneurship. These aren’t values that are indicative to any one person or creed or color. These are American values, these are universal human values." - Paul Ryan today in Ohio

Well sure, I can see how...huh? This is the intellectual light of the GOP?
posted by Strange Interlude at 12:58 PM on September 25, 2012

(PACs or parties, rather)
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 12:59 PM on September 25, 2012

Rou_Xenophobe, that article says that Obama has received a fair amount of funding specifically from teacher's unions. Is that all filtered through PACs as well and voluntarily disclosed? Because it would seem weird for individual teachers' donations to be classified as "teacher's unions donations".

Anyway, that article that SLoG linked also has this gem:

Williams pressed Romney on whether he would consider keeping Duncan as part of his own cabinet.

“I’m not putting anybody on my cabinet right now, Brian,” Romney said, prompting laughter. “It’s a little presumptuous of me, but just a little.”

Colour me impressed that he's heard of the concept of presumptuousness, but I have to laugh that he didn't think it would be all that presumptuous of him, really.
posted by Phire at 1:04 PM on September 25, 2012

Is that all filtered through PACs as well and voluntarily disclosed?

Has to be to be legal.

Because it would seem weird for individual teachers' donations to be classified as "teacher's unions donations".

...but that happens all the time. Drives me nuts.

For donations over a small limit, the FEC requires you to disclose your employer. So it's very common for people reporting on campaign finance to treat individual donations as if they were directly from their employers. This is how you can get weird things like the donations of the State Department.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 1:12 PM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

Phire: that article says that Obama has received a fair amount of funding specifically from teacher's unions. Is that all filtered through PACs as well and voluntarily disclosed?

ROU_Xenophobe: Has to be to be legal.

As I understand it, union members can choose to have a portion of their paychecks automatically go to a specific candidate and/or party, at least in some states. I believe there's a referendum in California that's trying to put a stop to this practice. I'm not sure whether money donated in this manner counts as 'union donations.'
posted by syzygy at 1:21 PM on September 25, 2012

Corportations are people except when they are unions.
posted by humanfont at 1:24 PM on September 25, 2012 [9 favorites]

I can't have unions. I'm running for office, for Pete's sake.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:25 PM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

Romney Says Obama Did Not Raise Taxes ‘In His First Four Years’

Hi-larious, if just for the WTF look on Ryan's face right after he says it.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:30 PM on September 25, 2012 [10 favorites]

Unions are not people or marriages, and should be banned.
posted by Artw at 1:34 PM on September 25, 2012

Ryan has that look that I bet I get when a student says something that is just sky-blue wa-wa. I mean, I can feel my nose get closer to my chin as I twist my initial grimace into something resembling a smile. He looks like that.
posted by angrycat at 1:41 PM on September 25, 2012

CNN elitist media pundit Erick Erickson throws a tantrum:

"Keep that in mind as I make a very simple point. There are a lot of elitist Republicans who have spent several years telling us Mitt Romney was the only electable Republican. Because the opinion makers and news media these elitists hang out with have concluded Romney will not win, the elitists are in full on panic mode. They conspired to shut out others, tear down others, and prop up Romney with the electability argument. He is now not winning against the second coming of Jimmy Carter. They know there will be many conservatives, should Mitt Romney lose, who will not be satisfied until every bridge is burned with these jerks, hopefully with the elitist jerks tied to the bridge as it burns."

If you're so tough, Erick, how'd you let Romney beat your guy?
If Romney's so great and Obama's "the second coming of Jimmy Carter," why is Mitt doing so poorly?
If Carter was so forgettable, why are you so obsessed with him?
I remember the last time you threatened to make a list of your enemies. How'd that work out for you?

What's remarkable about this besides the chest-puffing is what it suggests about a Romney win. Imagine a President Romney, victorious by a state or two, hobbled by his opposition and half his own party. Who's Jimmy Carter now?

WTF look on Ryan's face

He looks like he wants to pinch the Stench.
posted by octobersurprise at 1:57 PM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

Maybe Erick Erickson has it a bit twisted and Obama is more like the second coming of Ronald Reagan...
posted by codacorolla at 2:04 PM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

If Carter was so forgettable, why are you so obsessed with him?

Clinton polls far too highly to be a stick to hit Obama with.
posted by jaduncan at 2:09 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney needs for his people to give him a safe word whenever it appears that he's going to speak.

I imagine he needs Cesar Millan to stand by him, poke him and go "tsst!"
posted by Joey Michaels at 2:10 PM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

Christopher Tucker | Daily Kos: Dark Secret in Romney's Missing Tax Files: "Amnesty" from Prison for Top-1% Tax Cheats?
posted by ericb at 2:15 PM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

ericb

As a matter of principle, I haven't visited Daily Kos since he decided to pick a fight with John McCain's teeth back in 2008. Did Kos ever apologize for that egregious bit of stupidity? A Google search sheds no light.
posted by The Confessor at 2:25 PM on September 25, 2012

octobersurprise: "If Carter was so forgettable, why are you so obsessed with him?"

Singling out the weak for abuse is classic bullying technique.
posted by mkultra at 2:28 PM on September 25, 2012

Erick Erickson: The staggering irony is that those of us who did not want Romney are now the ones defending him to the hilt while the elitist jerks are distancing themselves from Romney as quickly as possible

Delicious.
posted by Theta States at 2:31 PM on September 25, 2012

Delicious.

Also really one hair away from saying 'now I have to lie all day about liking him'.
posted by jaduncan at 2:33 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

Did Kos ever apologize for that egregious bit of stupidity? A Google search sheds no light.

I don't know. I rarely visit the website myself. A friend forwarded Tucker's article to me.
posted by ericb at 2:36 PM on September 25, 2012

Romney Campaign Dismisses Recent Wave Of Tough Polls.
posted by ericb at 2:38 PM on September 25, 2012

Paul Ryan VP Selection Has Done Little To Win Voters For Mitt Romney: Poll.
posted by ericb at 2:39 PM on September 25, 2012

Oh, snap!

Harry Reid: Mitt Romney 'Sullied' Mormonism, Isn't The Face Of The Religion.
posted by ericb at 2:41 PM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ryan: NFL Refs Like Obama’s Aides.
posted by ericb at 2:43 PM on September 25, 2012

I gotta say, having now watched the Romney airplane video, that is a joke (though it doesn't transcribe as one). He's doing his best Johnny Carson with the delivery.

I kinda hope that in losing the presidency, dude gets drunk for the first time and joins, like, a sketch comedy group. He could be a wicked straight man if he had decent writers.

More likely: "Well, fuck it, I'm still rich. Here comes 2016."
posted by klangklangston at 2:46 PM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

Romney Unwittingly Explains Why Citizens United Was Wrong
posted by homunculus at 2:50 PM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ryan Ryan Ryan Ryan!

Mitt tries to correct them to "Romney---Ryan" with limited success.
posted by Joey Michaels at 2:51 PM on September 25, 2012 [4 favorites]

Warren Responds To Brown's Attack On Her Indian Heritage
posted by homunculus at 2:54 PM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

How the Thought Leaders Created Mitt in the First Place
posted by homunculus at 3:18 PM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

From the homunculus TP link:

But, of course, Romney has made it very clear that he is not concerned by the impact of corporate or wealthy individuals’ donations on politicians. Romney promised to appoint more justices in the mold of the four most conservative justices on the Supreme Court — all of whom were in the majority in Citizens United. Similarly, Romney endorsed eliminating all limits on campaign donations so that Wall Street billionaires can write million-dollar checks directly to his campaign and not just to super PACs and other outside groups.

Boy he is just twisting himself into a pretzel with this logic. Union money, bad. Billionaire or Corporation money, good. "The people who donate money to elect Me are civic-minded and should be allowed to give me as much as they want. The people who donate money to re-elect Obama must want something in return and therefore should be barred from giving anything."

Sure sounds like a fair and balanced position and not at all the self-serving decision of a Stench Weasel
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:24 PM on September 25, 2012 [4 favorites]

uh, could you all please knock it off with the "Stench" nickname? Sure it was funny that someone said that, but silly nicknames for opponents are what gave us all that racist shit we had to slog through four years ago. Metafilter is better than that. I simply can't respect anyone who uses degrading nicknames on their opponents, and I'm surprised to see so much of it here. There's enough to criticize Romney on without having to resort to partisan, dogmatic, mud-slinging, gaff-repeating simplifications.
posted by rebent at 3:32 PM on September 25, 2012 [14 favorites]

Lengthy Nate Silver post up today. He has Obama's chance at winning at 95.7% - I like that number. Seems like the only thing Romney could do to improve his chances is to keep his mouth SHUT - and that seems more than a little unlikely.

I do think Romney was joking about the airplane windows - he just has an epically terrible delivery. Kevin Drum comments that it's apparently a thing that Romney personally is a white knuckled flyer. Ironic for a guy who spends so much time in private planes. Doesn't make me like him any better.

I got into an argument with a right wing relative on Facebook and her friends - never a good idea along the truism about never wrestling with a pig. The irony to me was that her friends felt I was ignorant because I stated that 2016 was a hatchet job with no redeeming information and declined to go see it. None of them could cite any actual new information they had learned although they were all sure that it was "informative and enlightening". More low-information voters. sigh.
posted by leslies at 3:34 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

I simply can't respect anyone who uses degrading nicknames on their opponents ...

Well, apparently the nickname was not coined by an opponent, but by 'Stench Romney's' running mate, Paul Ryan! So, I think it's okay for MeFites to repeat it, as often as we like.
posted by ericb at 3:42 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

Lengthy Nate Silver post up today. He has Obama's chance at winning at 95.7%

if the election were held today. His chance for Nov 6 is 77.7%.
posted by dfan at 3:42 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

So, I think it's okay for MeFites to repeat it, as often as we like.

Just as we were/are free to use Karl Rove's nickname which President George W. Bush gave him: 'Turd Blossom!'
posted by ericb at 3:44 PM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

Tagg Romney blocks hospice from being built

It gets worse the further along in the article you read. Alternately, TL;DR: Christ, what a family of assholes.
posted by zombieflanders at 3:45 PM on September 25, 2012 [7 favorites]

Right - thanks dfan.
posted by leslies at 3:47 PM on September 25, 2012

TL;DR: Christ, what a family of assholes.

Parsed that as The Latter-Day Romneys.
posted by tzikeh at 3:49 PM on September 25, 2012 [4 favorites]

"Well, apparently the nickname was not coined by an opponent, but by 'Stench Romney's' running mate, Paul Ryan! So, I think it's okay for MeFites to repeat it, as often as we like."

Uh, I'm 90 percent certain that article was satire.
posted by klangklangston at 3:55 PM on September 25, 2012

Normally I would not bother defending myself, because I honestly don't give a crap what some random person on a web site thinks, but if you want to know why I am so gleeful at using such a childish moniker it is because I am angry; boiling, seething, white-hot molten metal angry. The idea that the Republicans have nominated Richie Rich with a total contempt for anyone in his income bracket makes me angry. This is their idea of a leader, a guy who will say anything you want to hear in order to get elected. A guy who is ready to make political hay of any disaster--foreign or domestic-- in order to get ahead in the polls. A frat boy bully who held down a classmate and cut-off his hair all the while laughing. Well fuck him and fuck the Party he rode in on. To me he IS a Stench Weasel, no doubt about it, and I am so relieved that he is trailing in the polls that I am nearly delirious. No doubt our country could survive a Romney Presidency but it looks like we won't have to find out.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:09 PM on September 25, 2012 [7 favorites]

No doubt our country could survive a Romney Presidency but

None? Whatsoever? Are we talking within the strict bounds of his Presidency, or simply inevitably eventually? Because climate change will absolutely destroy America, and Mitt sure loves him some coal...
posted by kaspen at 4:18 PM on September 25, 2012

There are plenty of blogs I can visit where people are dancing up and down on their opponents' mistakes. I hope to get better things from political threads on MeFi.

I'd also like less of the name calling so that, should someone come in here and start talking about "Barrack Osama and his democrat party", we can that we don't do that kind of stuff here.

People will do what they want, obvs, but that's what I'd like to see.
posted by benito.strauss at 4:35 PM on September 25, 2012 [9 favorites]

Gravy, I hear ya. But the people on the other side are saying the same thing, about our side. They are just as angry. They are just as disgusted. We all like to think that we are the good guys and they are the bad guys, but the truth is that we are all the same and people in power use these divisions to stay in power and make money off of us.

Now, I think that objectively, our guy is amazing and wonderful and his opponent is a scum bag who wouldn't think twice about turning our hard work into rubbish and laughing while he did so.

But when it comes to voting for something, in the perfect country the voting populace would say "Hm, which of these two candidates would be best for the country?"

Instead, voters see one candidate as amazing and wonderful, and the other as a total scum bag. And who would vote for a scum bag? Only other scum bags.

We've got a nation full of people who think that a whole swath of people are scum. This is not a good place to be. And it's all because elections are polarizing, forcing people into love and hate, instead of a choice.

No conservative who views obama as a demon is going to say to herself, "Well, he is a demon, but he's got better international policy, so I'm voting for him."

And no liberal who thinks romny's scum is going to say "Well, he is scum, but I like what he did in Massachusetts, so I'm going to vote for him"

How are we ever going to win the vote if the population is polarized? We are literally fighting over the uninformed, ignorant, "swing" voters - who are frequently treated worse than the scum on the other side. Is that really the way to win?

Everything is tied up into these two parties, and part of that is because we focus so much on gaffes wile overlooking the real issues. And we don't look at the real issues, because we don't trust anyone who says stuff that doesn't support our guy. And we don't trust them because we are so polarized.

tl;dr - everyone has a pretty dang good reason for hating those people, but in the end it helps a system that hurts all of us.
posted by rebent at 4:38 PM on September 25, 2012 [5 favorites]

benito.strauss: "I'd also like less of the name calling so that, should someone come in here and start talking about "Barrack Osama and his democrat party", we can say that we don't do that kind of stuff here. "

rebent: "tl;dr - everyone has a pretty dang good reason for hating those people, but in the end it helps a system that hurts all of us."

Damn you two and your appeals to logic, reason, and what's best for the country. I can't deny it, though, I agree with you both. You two convinced me.
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 4:51 PM on September 25, 2012 [6 favorites]

I am, by nature, a take the high road kind of guy. But it's fucking exhausting to keep taking the high road when the other side does nothing but mock you for your restraint, which they see as weakness. The most important thing to remember about the fair-and-balanced, both-sides-do-it narrative is that it is a godammned lie. There is only one side that consistently makes up whatever fabrications suit its prejudices and pocketbooks, there is only one side that grounds its appeals in racism, fear, and hatred, and I am not going to pretend differently.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 5:15 PM on September 25, 2012 [22 favorites]

As long as we don't have to give up he Romney-as-robtot I'm good
posted by edgeways at 5:19 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

InsertNiftyNameHere: Damn you two and your appeals to logic, reason, and what's best for the country. I can't deny it, though, I agree with you both. You two convinced me.

Me too. Which is why I've decided to refer to the man as: Mitty Mitty Bang Bang, instead.
posted by Skygazer at 5:27 PM on September 25, 2012 [7 favorites]

Horace, false equivalency pisses me off to no end. The use of deception, lies, and general dickishness is much higher on the behalf of Republican candidates this election (Scott Brown, I'm looking at you!).

I want to see them get hit and get hit hard for lying and deceiving. But calling people names, or going on and on and on and on about whether or not Romney was telling a joke gets tedious. (Watch the video — there's no freakin' way he wasn't trying to tell a joke. He's not great at it, but compare it against Mitt when he's genuinely complaining about something. You'll easily see the differences.)

See, it's looking like Obama's going to be re-elected (knock wood). But even after that there will be many people, not all insane, who oppose him. I think we make it harder on ourselves if we go too deep on dehumanizing them.
posted by benito.strauss at 5:31 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think it's possible and indeed fun to mock a candidate and their policies through zingers whilst not hating their supporters (I wouldn't want to curse the 53%*), but yeah, the cutting nickname thing is a little too much for me.

*this was an example
posted by jaduncan at 5:42 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

I really do agree with you, Benito, it's just so exhausting and frustrating. I feel like there used to be an agreement in our politics (and maybe I'm just nostalgizing here--certainly there have been times in our history where this wasn't at all the case) that there were at least a few things that were above petty political point scoring, that we could all pull together when circumstances demanded it, that there was a common interest in what was good for the country as a whole. I feel like that social contract has been wholly abrogated, and that (and obviously there's some personal psychology framing this) the bullies never learn a lesson from you being the bigger person. They learn from you fighting back, from you sinking to their level if need be.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 5:42 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

I have to say that the personal focus of this election is also because there hasn't been much policy detail, and it's actually rare that you see a candidate implode so much as Romney has recently. It's hard not to make jokes about it, especially since there isn't really any policy discussion to have.
posted by jaduncan at 5:46 PM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

Warren Responds To Brown's Attack On Her Indian Heritage
posted by homunculus at 4:54 PM on September 25

Thanks for posting this. I really liked Warren's response. It hits all the right notes.
posted by marsha56 at 5:46 PM on September 25, 2012

We all like to think that we are the good guys and they are the bad guys, but the truth is that we are all the same

Although only one party is currently engaging in race-baiting, vote suppression and climate change denial.

Again, some are-we-the-baddies moments required there.
posted by jaduncan at 5:51 PM on September 25, 2012

"Well, apparently the nickname was not coined by an opponent, but by 'Stench Romney's' running mate, Paul Ryan! So, I think it's okay for MeFites to repeat it, as often as we like."

Uh, I'm 90 percent certain that article was satire.
posted by klangklangston at 6:55 PM on September 25

This is interesting because checking around no one seems to know for sure whether Roger Simon, POLITICO’s chief political columnist, is making things up when he writes "Though Ryan had already decided to distance himself from the floundering Romney campaign, he now feels totally uninhibited. Reportedly, he has been marching around his campaign bus, saying things like, “If Stench calls, take a message.”" Now that does seem far fetched but we know for sure that Craig Robinson said, "“I hate to say this, but if Ryan wants to run for national office again, he’ll probably have to wash the stench of Romney off of him."

I see some Political blogs taking it as gospel truth and I see some (like free republic) taking it as a hit piece.

But calling people names, or going on and on and on and on about whether or not Romney was telling a joke gets tedious

For some reason that airplane bit really caught the country's imagination and has gone viral in a way other Romney moments have not. Some folks here have tried hard to find evidence support or discredit the idea that he is telling a joke. I don't really care one way or the other. What I find fascinating is that Romney is so difficult to decipher that people genuinely can't tell if he is telling a joke or is clueless.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:56 PM on September 25, 2012

What I find fascinating is that Romney is so difficult to decipher that people genuinely can't tell if he is telling a joke or is clueless.

Fundementally, the problem is that it is possible to believe he was serious. Everybody makes bad jokes or jokes that fail, but Romney seems to do it as an artisan.

I believe he was joking, or rather, trying to. But I also believe that my walking stick has more personality than he apparently does.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 6:04 PM on September 25, 2012

47% of people don't realize when I'm telling a joke, but I don't care about them. I'm never going to reach them.
posted by Flashman at 6:06 PM on September 25, 2012 [14 favorites]

"I don't always tell jokes, but when I do... they're indistinguishable from regular statements." -- The Least Interesting Man in the World
posted by GrammarMoses at 6:09 PM on September 25, 2012 [6 favorites]

Look, I think we all realize it was joke, okay, but the reason this windows on airplanes thing has such resonance and amusement built into it, is because imagining Romney said it in seriousness, makes that statement so so amusing and fun.

And...that leads me to my next point, which is that, once you're an established figure of amusement and fun, with a certain expected persona in the public's eye, that is a parody of oneself, politics is pretty much over as a career choice.

BUT the good news is that, Romney will go on to be that wacky Mormon multi-millionaire/billionaire who everyone loves to make fun of, and who makes fun of himself and hams it up because he loves the attention, so basically I guess what I'm saying is that Romney is probably going to go on to be a sort of Mormon version of Donald Trump, and probably have his own reality TV show at some point in the future.
posted by Skygazer at 6:12 PM on September 25, 2012 [5 favorites]

Romney: Teacher Contributions to Politicians Should Be Limited
posted by box at 6:24 PM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

maybe I'm just nostalgizing here

Some of that. Historians generally offer the view that during the mid-20th century, there was a coalescing toward a nice, civic American middle around non-crazy, generally liberal/moderate (taking the broad view) political values. Even the Republican values - you know, Planned Parenthood and that sort of thing - were not particularly evangelically nor racially influenced just yet; if anything, Republicans were much friendlier to liberalizing racial policies than Democrats. Not coincidentally, that's also the heyday of objective journalism. People had seen enough extremity during WWII to last them a lifetime.

But if you look a little earlier than that, and throughout the 19th century, today's polarization doesn't look all that extreme. It's probably more the American norm than not the norm, but it's sad that people from, like, 1946 through the early 70s, maybe, plus a few holdouts, thought they had left all that behind. When you add in the fact that we've never had as diverse an electorate as we do today, it's understandable that it's more heated - there really are more, different people with different perspectives in the mix than there used to be.

Still, I think there's something really worthy of concern in the polarization - and that's the quiet death of the idea of "civic values." The eager willingness with which people on the right have thrown some of what I thought were our most cherished, widely shared values - like, a service ethic; freedom of speech; etc - into the Dumpster in the name of economic ideologies is extremely strange. What are we all doing here together if all we are is a market economy? We don't need this flag, these values, this Congressional Medal of Honor, these National Parks, and on and on, if we're just an incubator for an idividualistic market economy. The threat to the most elemental aspects of what I thought was "American culture" - about which we used to agree, and just disagree how to foster it - is deeply disturbing to me.
posted by Miko at 6:28 PM on September 25, 2012 [31 favorites]

Mitt Romney heard Americans like Obama because they don't think he can be bought. So Mitt Romney attacked the emancipation proclamation as a needless government regulaton standing in the way of job creators like himself.
posted by humanfont at 6:29 PM on September 25, 2012

In fairness, people's skepticism that Mitt Romney understands how air pressure works? That's totally comparable to speculation that Obama is part of a fifty-year plot to put a Kenyan Muslim in the White House.

And referring to Romney by a name that implies he smells bad? Well that's just the other side of the coin of nicknames conflating Obama with the leader of the terrorist group that killed three thousand people.

Why can't we see how divisive we're being with these hurtful slurs? Don't we realize that there is zero substance to our discussion unless every statement is 100% accurate, constructive, and politely phrased? In the end, aren't we the real stenches?
posted by Riki tiki at 6:30 PM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

Why can't we see how divisive we're being with these hurtful slurs?

Honestly, my feeling is that I'm not going to reach the crazy assholes and so I'm mostly going to avoid them, but I'd rather not present myself as an asshole or a jackass to the rest of the people who I disagree with on a more civil level.

I get sick of e.g. "Micro$haft" and "Amerikkka" for the same reasons.

I may think Romney is an avaricious palimpsest of a candidate, but hurr hurring over The Stench feels like doing myself a disservice by playing pretty dumb ball, etc.
posted by cortex at 6:35 PM on September 25, 2012 [12 favorites]

Riki tiki: "Why can't we see how divisive we're being with these hurtful slurs? Don't we realize that there is zero substance to our discussion unless every statement is 100% accurate, constructive, and politely phrased? In the end, aren't we the real stenches?"

Counterpoint.
posted by boo_radley at 6:37 PM on September 25, 2012 [6 favorites]

joke is delivered in the same jokesy tone as everything else Romney says

Yeah, that thing. I don't find it jokey, but it rubs my fur the wrong direction while simultaneously scraping nails along the blackboard and squishing styrofoam peanuts. It's this clipped, frantic rush of words, like he just remembered what to say and goshdarnit he's going to get it all out before he forgets how to say this thing he memorized or vaguely recalls (47 percent). Often accompanied by an utterly humorless and dry nervous chuckle that makes you laugh not because it's funny but because you want to break the awkwardness hanging in the air up with something. He seems anxious all the time to me, out of his depth and psychologically sort of stunted and (armchair) frankly a little antisocial, like he'd never be a relaxed guest at any party even with his friends, like he'd always be trying to help out and making a mess of it, like he's got to talk his way in to this job with his daddy's friend's firm because he knows his transcript doesn't cut it quite, like he knows he's not as bright as he pretends to be, and lacks any emotional intelligence. A kinder but more audacious question to me is frankly whether he is actually somewhere on the autism spectrum, which seems crazy given his success in business, where social intuition is often paramount, but I'm speculating out of my own depth here. I honestly sometimes feel sorry for him, he cuts such a nervously attention-seeking figure who nonetheless is unable to reveal an inner humanity. He seems like he would be good given a very narrow and single-minded task to focus on to perfection, but he has no spontaneity, no feel for improvisation, no ability to read his interlocutors. How can someone succeed at his level if he's that anxiously disengaged all the time? Maybe it's because he is hiding his normal self -- I've long wondered if he is a passionate person but is simply unable to discuss his passion, which I suspect if it exists is for his church. But now I even doubt that to be the case. I think he is going through the motions and trying to be all things to all people because he doesn't know himself at all. He has no apparent signs of having an inner life. It's why the robot jokes stick, and it's why it doesn't matter if he meant something as a joke or not, because everything he says is now funny because it lacks authority or sincerity. His duplicity is so pervasive, everything he says is a fucking joke. Republicans are good at entertaining contradictory ideas in different halves of their brains ("Keep your government hands off my medicare") -- also known as hypocisy. But no one could be this unprincipled, this craven, this disconnected from other people's experiences and feelings, and be convincing even to a fairly stalwart believer in the ideology he parrots (this time) as if he meant a word of it. You cannot lie constantly and not be taken for a comedian.
posted by spitbull at 6:40 PM on September 25, 2012 [4 favorites]

Skygazer: Look, I think we all realize it was joke, okay, but the reason this windows on airplanes thing has such resonance and amusement built into it, is because imagining Romney said it in seriousness, makes that statement so so amusing and fun.

I wonder if it's more along the lines of Bush I's grocery store disasters of 1992, when he wasn't able to even guess what a gallon of milk cost and when he was (possibly erroneously) accused of being awestruck at the idea of grocery store scanners.

We have his own words telling us how much his life isn't like a normal voters and how he doesn't have any frame of reference for their problems, but it's hard to say what (if anything) will be the one that sticks.
posted by Mad_Carew at 6:43 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

Be careful not to accidentally the paragraph breaks, man!
posted by Anything at 6:44 PM on September 25, 2012

"Historians generally offer the view that during the mid-20th century, there was a coalescing toward a nice, civic American middle around non-crazy, generally liberal/moderate (taking the broad view) political values. Even the Republican values - you know, Planned Parenthood and that sort of thing - were not particularly evangelically nor racially influenced just yet; if anything, Republicans were much friendlier to liberalizing racial policies than Democrats. Not coincidentally, that's also the heyday of objective journalism. People had seen enough extremity during WWII to last them a lifetime. "

That time never existed, even during the post-war boom, and most historians (at least the ones that I've read) wouldn't offer that view at all. It may have seemed that way to suburban white people, but that view has really been deprecated — except by suburban (and now exurban) white people.

During the '50s, there was the Red Scare, big mob hearings, an epidemic of juvenile delinquency and the rumblings of the Civil Rights movement. Unions were still fighting brutal struggles and people had a legitimate fear of nuclear death.

This just reminds me to go back and find this awesome couple of books that I can't remember the titles or author of — it was basically just a description of every presidential election from the beginning of the Republic (it went through '92, the edition I had from the library), and one of the constant themes was that while the partisan divide waxes and wanes, the mythical comity of our ancestors is a myth. Hell, in the "good ol' days," Democrats would roll a giant barrel of cider into town, get fucked up, and run around beating Whigs with hickory sticks. Can you imagine the furor if Obama's inauguration had involved a massive cheese wheel smashing through the White House and drunken revelers spilling onto the lawn?

Likewise, pretty much every history of journalism concludes the same thing — while the post-war period had the most of the Objectives, that wasn't necessarily a good thing, and the idea that things like Fox News are new or dangerous is pretty ahistorical.

Sorry, one of the reasons I get cranky about this is that I do generally believe that things are better now, and while Bush may have been the second or third worst president in history, at least he didn't spark a Civil War.
posted by klangklangston at 6:48 PM on September 25, 2012 [6 favorites]

Also, not to imply that spectrum disorders are in any way conducive to antisocial or confabulist tendencies -- my point is that *some* of Romney's personal quirks and gaffes seem to be genuinely motivated by a failure to read social cues (these are terrible cookies, dude. It is a separate issue whether he is the douchebag he also seems to be.)
posted by spitbull at 6:49 PM on September 25, 2012

The qualities that helped Romney as an industry executive worked against him as a presidential candidate;[35] he had difficulty being articulate, often speaking at length and too forthrightly on a topic and then later correcting himself while maintaining he was not (cite)

That's Wikipedia talking about Mitt's father, and I've heard that the lesson Mitt drew from that is that being spontaneous is deadly in politics. That, combined with his advocating beliefs that, while not exactly antagonistic to his core, are really just driven by what he thinks he needs to say to when and not his bedrock principles, have produced what you've noted, spitbull.

I think Obama was lucky here. A true-believer like Ryan in the top spot would get out a lot more of the Republican base.
posted by benito.strauss at 6:50 PM on September 25, 2012

I never thought he was being serious about the plane thing, but I can understand the confusion. This is a man who campaigns with the guy who thinks women's bodies shut down when they are raped, the man who makes fun of climate change, the man who thinks going to the ER is a good idea if you're sick. The media loves the "out of touch" story, and he gave them good fodder for it. Bonus points for his complete inability to tell a joke.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:51 PM on September 25, 2012 [2 favorites]

I can't speak for anyone else, but the reason I initially thought that Romney meant it seriously is because he was talking about a cabin fire in the plane carrying his wife. The outcome could have been so much worse than it was -- hell, that was exactly what Mitt was saying right before he made the "joke." It was a dangerous, scary situation, one that could have ended in the death of his wife. This is the moment when he decides to crack a joke about why she couldn't just open a window? About how he doesn't know why the windows don't open, and it's dangerous, and maybe someone should look into that? If I were Ann, I would have thrown a drink in his face.
posted by bakerina at 6:54 PM on September 25, 2012 [3 favorites]

This is a man who campaigns with the guy who thinks women's bodies shut down when they are raped,

First two items returned on a Google search for "romney akin":

Romney: Akin's rape comments are 'inexcusable'

Romney: Akin should 'exit the Senate race'
posted by benito.strauss at 6:55 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

bakerina: Yeah, when I first read about it I thought Romney was serious about the window too. Then I went and looked at the tape, and could see he was trying to tell a joke. Done.
posted by benito.strauss at 6:59 PM on September 25, 2012

most historians (at least the ones that I've read) wouldn't offer that view at all.

Well, I'm not making it up, and it's not really my view - I'm just relating it, and noting that to the extent that it did exist, it was an aberration. I do think it's a midlle-class, white-centric view, but it's a fairly common one.

My point was to agree with you that the "mythical comity of our ancestors" is mythical.

But I do think there was a certain understanding that folks had to hew to a set of what I called 'civic values' that made reference to a common understanding of the democratic ideal, and that it's interesting that today, you don't even have to do that.

I also can't agree that everything's "better." A lot of specific things are actually kind of worse, on a female, race, education, job level of policies and access, than they were in, say, the late 70s or mid-1990s. Perhaps if you weigh it against the overall landscape of how much worse it could be, things are better, but not all things are better than they once were.
posted by Miko at 7:00 PM on September 25, 2012

benito, that's my bad, I apologize. Mr. Romney looks forward to being partners in Washington with Steve King, the man who defended Akin.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:02 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

One Coalition Stays True to Todd Akin
posted by homunculus at 7:05 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

This is a man who campaigns with the guy who thinks women's bodies shut down when they are raped,

I don't think Ryan [the man whom Romney campaigns with] necessarily believes in this counter-physiological understanding that Akin trotted forward, but he certainly agrees with Akin that there's no reasonable exclusion from abortion for rape victims, and that not all rapes are "real" rapes, which is what I thought the comment referred to.
posted by Miko at 7:06 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

There are people who are just incompetent at comedy yet believe in their competence.

Mitt hears laughter when he makes jokes in certain circumstances. Maybe it is polite laughter. Maybe it is the toadying laughter of underlings trying to curry favor. Maybe it is people laughing at him. Whatever. He hears that laughter and assumes its genuine laughter about his joke. So he finds himself in another situation where he can make that same joke and crickets chirp. Somewhere in Iowa, a door slams open and shut on an abandoned shack. A million souls shuffle uncomfortably and are then silent.

Romney thinks to himself "Gosh, what a bunch of humorless pricks. This material was killing it with my interns."

Even Jay Leno cringes at Romney's jokes and thinks "wow, that material is beneath me."

I am not claiming to be any comedy expert here, but that's kind of the point. You don't need to be an expert to recognize that Romney is to comedy what a dirge is to a house party.
posted by Joey Michaels at 7:06 PM on September 25, 2012 [7 favorites]

Metafilter: A million souls shuffle uncomfortably and are then silent
posted by Superplin at 7:09 PM on September 25, 2012 [9 favorites]

There is only one side that consistently makes up whatever fabrications suit its prejudices and pocketbooks, there is only one side that grounds its appeals in racism, fear, and hatred, and I am not going to pretend differently.

Also, there is only one party that is actively trying to restrict each woman's right to decide what is best for her body and there is only one party that is actively trying to restrict rights for gay people (and has made anti-woman and anti-gay measures an official part of their platform), so if you're a woman or gay, both parties are most definitely not the same. This holds true for lots of other demographics as well.
posted by triggerfinger at 7:11 PM on September 25, 2012 [8 favorites]

Romney should just come our and say that actually his social conservative positions o abortionis and gays were just a ruse to win the nomination. No one thinks he actually has any convictions on these iaues anyway. It is too late for a replacement candidate. Sheldon Addelson and the Koch brothers don't care about the issue. He has nothing to lose.
posted by humanfont at 7:24 PM on September 25, 2012

no one is going to believe him if he suddenly says... "Psych! I love me the gays and women.. have at it!". And frankly that is a huge part of his problem, people just don't know what to believe. It is sort of an anti-Obama situation. 2008 People projected all manner of hopes and beliefs upon the candidate, sometimes going far in excess of what he said. Obama was a huge measure of wish fulfillment, the antithesis of Bush Jr.a dreamed of catharsis. He was going to be noble and end all wars and put us on the path to a Democratic golden age.. but of course reality intruded, there is no way any person able to be elected to that office would be able to do as much as what was expected of him. (which is not an excuse for some very legitimate criticisms, many of which lay at his feet, but some lay at the feet of many who stopped fighting and expected their work was done, which resulted in the 2010 debacle of an election)

With Romney no one knows what to believe, he has given too much and too much directly contradicts itself. He is the Overexposed man, as opposed to the Underexposed man Obama was in 2008.

If I had $5000 to spare I'd lay it down on Romney losing the election with confidence.
posted by edgeways at 7:36 PM on September 25, 2012 [7 favorites]

Double that and Romney might take that bet.
posted by Joey Michaels at 7:40 PM on September 25, 2012 [7 favorites]

"I also can't agree that everything's "better." A lot of specific things are actually kind of worse, on a female, race, education, job level of policies and access, than they were in, say, the late 70s or mid-1990s. Perhaps if you weigh it against the overall landscape of how much worse it could be, things are better, but not all things are better than they once were."

I started to disagree with that, but what I'd say actually is that I think things are better on balance. I think there are a lot of things that are better about the broad categories you mentioned: Educational access is broader, and kids are smarter today than they were in the '70s; racial prejudice was a lot more overt, race riots were still going on, inner city crime was a disaster; women's pay disparities were bigger, there were fewer women in positions of power, there were still separate sections in papers for women's and men's jobs.

But think that you can make a reasonable point about the '90s, and it's totally legit to recognize that the level of income disparity and relative cost of health care were better than now, and that's a long-term trend. It's legitimate to recognize that women's health rights have been curtailed, and that we have a very conservative Supreme Court compared to most of the '50s through '70s.

I'll also say that I was talking about a pretty broad timeframe, which maybe isn't fair since we only get to live for a chunk of one century at best. But compared to, say, the Gilded Age or even 60 years ago — my mother went to segregated restaurants when she was a girl — I think that we've made a lot of progress and things are better.
posted by klangklangston at 7:57 PM on September 25, 2012

On the whole I tend to agree with that, but only on the whole. That doesn't mean that individual situations have all improved, and I think that's important to acknowledge, because 'it just keeps getting better' is not a narrative that reflects a full reality or all of our concerns.

It is generally true, it's something I spend a lot of time reminding people who think we're already in the handbasket heading for hell, and I wouldn't be eager to return to any time period in the past (other than perhaps the 1990s), but we have to be careful in crafting a progress narrative that excludes important facts. Incarceration rates, particularly among black Americans, are insanely high, higher than ever in history unless you include slavery. Literacy is shameful for a first world country at only 86%, and that includes very low functional levels. Health care and housing costs are proportionately higher than at any time in the 20th century. Job structures/compensation packages and security and protections for workers are generally also much weaker than in the last half century. The decline in the middle class standard of living is real, and the opportunity for those born poor to access the middle class is not especially good either. And access to abortion and contraception - it's very scary to me. Comparing charts of states from the 80s/90s and today, with access to family planning and abortion services and those with webs of restrictive laws, is somewhat harrowing. It's not a good time to be a young woman.

Though, in general, things get better-ish, I don't think we can apply as confident a progress narrative to the past 20 years as we might have been able to do a couple of decades ago. There are threats to the gains so painfully made, and signs of serious slippage, or total neglect, in some areas, that I'm far from blase about.
posted by Miko at 8:17 PM on September 25, 2012 [9 favorites]

“Despite a high unemployment rate, anemic economy, and upside-down right track/wrong track, Obama is being kept afloat by a solid base of support among African-Americans, Hispanics, liberals, single and college-educated women, and union households,” said longtime Christian conservative strategist Ralph Reed.

Ralph Reed's Group Compares Obama Policies to Nazi Germany: In a "voter registration" mailer, the outfit founded by the ex-Christian Coalition leader also refers to Obama's "Communist beliefs."
posted by homunculus at 9:22 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Real Problem With Romney's Offshore Investments: Forget the 47 percent. Foreign tax havens—and investment vehicles like those the GOP candidate established at Bain Capital—are robbing world treasuries of billions.
posted by homunculus at 9:31 PM on September 25, 2012 [8 favorites]

homunculus: "“Obama is being kept afloat by ... liberals,”"

well color me surprised!
posted by rebent at 10:19 PM on September 25, 2012

Chinese firm promoted its low-wage, low-tax liability to investors shortly before Mitt Romney made investment

Romney said the women were packed into dormitories, 12 per room in bunk beds, and only earned a “pittance.”
posted by Golden Eternity at 11:50 PM on September 25, 2012 [1 favorite]

homunculus: "Ralph Reed's Group Compares Obama Policies to Nazi Germany: In a "voter registration" mailer, the outfit founded by the ex-Christian Coalition leader also refers to Obama's "Communist beliefs.""

I would not shed a single tear if these people were beaten with bats on live television.
posted by dunkadunc at 12:32 AM on September 26, 2012 [3 favorites]

Paranoia about "operatives" infiltrates Romney's grassroots support in Ohio

On the one hand - haw haw haw, whadda buncha maroons.

On the other hand, do they have a legitimate reason to be worried about 'operatives'? Are Romney supporters planning secretly to steal the election in Ohio right now?
posted by syzygy at 1:05 AM on September 26, 2012

Ralph Reed's Group Compares Obama Policies to Nazi Germany: In a "voter registration" mailer, the outfit founded by the ex-Christian Coalition leader also refers to Obama's "Communist beliefs."

Gah, make up your minds. It's good that I'm not on the local Dem committee; I'd be really tempted just to say that Reed loses via Godwin.
posted by jaduncan at 3:36 AM on September 26, 2012

As linked to by TPM, the apparently official Facebook page for the Mecklenberg County (VA) GOP is featuring an "Obama as African bone-in-the-nose witch doctor" picture with the caption "OBAMACARE" (with the campaign logo for the "O" and a hammer and sickle for the "C"), subtitled "Coming soon to a clinic near you"

It's still up as of 7:20am EST.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:20 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Unbelievably, the Mecklenberg County chairman doubled down on the bone-in-the-nose picture in the WaPo with a charming 'aren't you the racists for saying it's racist' move:

"R. Wallace “Wally” Hudson, chairman of the committee, was surprised to hear from a reporter that anyone had taken offense.

“If that group is that sensitive, I’m sorry, they’re just not human,” he said, chuckling. “It’s not American. If they’ve got a problem with it, we’re not going to change what we do.”

He didn’t seem any more inclined to take the state party’s feelings into account when told in a subsequent interview what Mullins had said.

“They can do what they want,” he said, chuckling again. “I’m waiting for the phone call.”

The images were still up as of Tuesday night.

Hudson said he posted most of the images himself, after coming across them online. He said critics were playing “the race card.”"

I can only assume that he's not wanting any other job ever.
posted by jaduncan at 4:44 AM on September 26, 2012 [9 favorites]

I can only assume that he's not wanting any other job ever.

No. Realizing they're about to lose the presidency and the Senate, and might actually have the House in play, the GOP is going to ramp up blatant racism wherever it seems it would help the local candidates downticket. Expect to see a lot more of this, and it's going to get pretty nasty and personal before long.
posted by Slap*Happy at 4:48 AM on September 26, 2012 [5 favorites]

Interesting note: Mecklenberg Co is part of the 5th Congressional District, which was won by (liberal by southern VA standards) Tom Perriello in 2008, defeating virulent racist Virgil Goode. In 2010, he was one of the few vulnerable Democrats who talked up his votes for stimulus and Obamacare, and ended up losing; before that, though, the Tea Party published his brother's address on their website and someone cut his propane line. Perriello is seen as a likely candidate for Governor next year, and Goode is running for President (he got on the ballot despite Romney campaign shenanigans to keep him off).
posted by zombieflanders at 5:02 AM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

No. Realizing they're about to lose the presidency and the Senate, and might actually have the House in play, the GOP is going to ramp up blatant racism wherever it seems it would help the local candidates downticket. Expect to see a lot more of this, and it's going to get pretty nasty and personal before long.

You think this actually helps get votes? At the very least it seems like even if it helps the county it causes damage on the state and national level.
posted by jaduncan at 5:02 AM on September 26, 2012

They've readjusted their goals to making your local school board really racist.
posted by Artw at 5:11 AM on September 26, 2012 [7 favorites]

They've already lost at the state and national level. Time to solidify the base, and get ready for 2014.
posted by Slap*Happy at 5:13 AM on September 26, 2012

As a Virginian, I am sad and angry to see the racist horseshit out of Mecklenburg County. If it gets the local Republicans to pull the lever for Goode, though...
posted by Benny Andajetz at 5:31 AM on September 26, 2012

in other news....why on earth would madonna talk about Obama as a Black Muslim in the White House, even ironically?
posted by Wilder at 5:33 AM on September 26, 2012

Because it gets people to pay attention to her.
posted by absalom at 5:41 AM on September 26, 2012 [6 favorites]

Slap*Happy: Expect to see a lot more of this, and it's going to get pretty nasty and personal before long.

But these are old(er) pictures: Hudson said he posted most of the images himself, after coming across them online.

Hudson didn't make them, he found and copied them. This Obama-as-witchdoctor one is from 2009, during the original "Obamacare" scare. It's from the Teaparty circles, and is anything but new. Remember the watermelons at the White House email from early 2009? Same shit, different day. It's been nasty and personal since the beginning.
posted by filthy light thief at 5:47 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

she looked and sounded a bit spaced to me tbh, the only tactic left to the GOP is outright racism and ramping up the Muslim paranoia even more.

These things tend to get bloodier when they know they've lost. I think now is where we really worry about security, campaigning is of neccessity getting as close to the people as possible. I'm more worried about this than at any time in the past.
posted by Wilder at 5:47 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

in other news....why on earth would madonna talk about Obama as a Black Muslim in the White House, even ironically?

Some reason it's done on the internet: it sounds witty and smart to the speaker, while poking fun at rivals.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:47 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Out of curiosity to see what racist stuff they're throwing out there, I'm tempted to refriend my hick relatives that I cut out of my fb and my life (I should have just blocked them but, well, angrycat was angry) in like 2010 after they published a buncha posters featuring Obama as a Rastafarian smoking giant spleefs. (They live in Cali and the idea was that Obama was pushing the legalization of weed so nobody would worry about the commie healthcare being pushed down their throat because they'd be so stoned).

Ah, no, my blood pressure doesn't need that, I guess.
posted by angrycat at 5:48 AM on September 26, 2012

Hudson didn't make them, he found and copied them.

Well, yeah. They've been around for years. Do you think he's just discovered them now? There's a reason why that image is being featured as part of the Republican Party's official communication this week. It has a lot to do with how the national campaign went last week.
posted by Slap*Happy at 5:56 AM on September 26, 2012

“If that group is that sensitive, I’m sorry, they’re just not human,”

If that ain't a dogwhistle. Who, exactly, is "not human?" What group is it now? The ones playing the "race card?"

Jeeeeeez.
posted by Miko at 6:11 AM on September 26, 2012 [10 favorites]

One thing that's been amusing me in the media is the use of Worried Face Romney. All these stories about things not going so well are illustrated with some image taken from some other event somewhere else of Romney looking troubled and concerned. It's an expression I've seem him use when he's trying to do "oh, poor little me" sarcasm, but I love the media implication that it's his immediate reaction upon surveying the detritus of his wrecked campaign empire.
posted by Miko at 6:13 AM on September 26, 2012

Yeah, candidates pursing their lips & looking worried is a news image trope going way back, for sure. It's never good news when those begin to predominate -- it's a sign of blood in the water, for sure.
posted by Devils Rancher at 7:01 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Worried Face Romney?

Try Little Face Mitt (warning: CANNOT BE UNSEEN)
posted by the man of twists and turns at 7:04 AM on September 26, 2012 [9 favorites]

If that ain't a dogwhistle.

Given that the definition is a coded phrase that is not obvious to the majority, I'm not entirely sure it reaches that level of sophistication.
posted by jaduncan at 7:04 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Worried Face Romney

It's funny, this is in general a thing I've noticed particularly with TPM since that's my primary depot for daily politicking/horserace stuff and they just don't field a particularly large collection of images for any given personality. So there's at any given time something like two or three likely photos for an Obama hed or a Romney hed or so on, and they tend to pick the one that fits the narrative mood (something I'm not really particularly fond of, really), and you get real familiar with them.

And, yeah, it's totally like that. Worried Romney. Smug Romney. Chuckling Obama. Consternated Obama.

It's like some sort of looping back around from reddit F7U12 memes via stock photography; it's hard not to feel like there should be actual riffy names for these photos at this point, like it's not an illustration of an article so much as a bit of extra catchphrase punctuation. Instead of the Worried Romney photo they could just write "dontmentionthecaymans.jpg" or something.
posted by cortex at 7:04 AM on September 26, 2012 [5 favorites]

Slap*Happy: There's a reason why that image is being featured as part of the Republican Party's official communication this week. It has a lot to do with how the national campaign went last week.

That seems less like Republican Party official communication, and more like local GOP racism. The political parties try to shape the dialogue nation-wide, but each level down gets more removed from the nation-wide political party efforts. Cynically, this allows local shops to push out racist stuff that might appeal to a broader group of Republicans, without directly tarnishing the national campaign.

“These kinds of images have no place in political discourse — period,” said Pat Mullins, chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia. “They are offensive, tasteless and should never have been posted anywhere, let alone a local unit’s Facebook page. The Republican Party of Virginia condemns this sort of imagery in the strongest possible terms. I am in the process of contacting our Mecklenburg County unit to inform them that this is unacceptable behavior from any local unit associated with our party.”

Romney's campaign doesn't even need to respond to this, the state-level chairman handles it. But once it gets news coverage, racists elsewhere can say "that's still my party."
posted by filthy light thief at 7:11 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Sad Mitt Romney tries unsuccessfully to lead chant of his own name

I'm 90 percent certain that article was satire.

I went back and re-read Simon's piece; it's very arch, but unless I'm missing something, I can't find any evidence that Simon isn't at least reporting something he believes to be true.

One thing that's been amusing me in the media is the use of Worried Face Romney.

There seems to be a greater variety of Worried Face Romneys than Worried Face Ryan's look of long-suffering disgust. "Hey girl, the wheels are coming off this runaway train, but my tracks are still made of Reardon metal."
posted by octobersurprise at 7:15 AM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

“Obama is being kept afloat by a solid base of support among African-Americans, Hispanics, liberals, single and college-educated women, and union households,” said longtime Christian conservative strategist Ralph Reed.

All right ... all right ... but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order ... what have the Romans done for us?

Notice, reed doesn't say what Romney is being kept afloat by?
posted by edgeways at 8:04 AM on September 26, 2012 [11 favorites]

Miko: One thing that's been amusing me in the media is the use of Worried Face Romney.

I was thinking about this picture this morning. In the twilight realm between sleep and wakefulness, I wished I had the Photoshop skills to take it and turn it into the seed photo for mittromneysadclown.tumblr.com.
posted by ob1quixote at 8:06 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Notice, reed doesn't say what Romney is being kept afloat by?

Gasbags.
posted by Devils Rancher at 8:11 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

A TNR blog on Obama's Ohio story:

It’s worth stepping back to consider how remarkable this state of affairs is. Since Barack Obama started running for president, Ohio was supposed to be his Achilles heel. He won it by four points in 2008, well below his national margin. It has lots of those dread white working-class voters – in fact, it’s one of only a few states in the country that demographers say saw its share of whites without a college degree increase since 2008. Part of the state lies in Appalachian coal country, where Obama is roundly blamed for the mining decline. The state has a Republican governor, John Kasich, who should be helping Romney as much as Ted Strickland boosted Obama in 2008. Obama’s emphasis on social issues earlier this year – especially gay marriage – was deemed so unsuited to Ohio that one veteran TNR contributor argued that he was effectively choosing a non-Ohio path to reelection.

In addition to the obvious points about (what I'd like to call as) "Obama Dharma"'s main planks - the auto bailout, union support etc- working particularly well in Ohio, I found this rather fascinating:

It’s worth stepping back to consider how remarkable this state of affairs is. Since Barack Obama started running for president, Ohio was supposed to be his Achilles heel. He won it by four points in 2008, well below his national margin. It has lots of those dread white working-class voters – in fact, it’s one of only a few states in the country that demographers say saw its share of whites without a college degree increase since 2008. Part of the state lies in Appalachian coal country, where Obama is roundly blamed for the mining decline. The state has a Republican governor, John Kasich, who should be helping Romney as much as Ted Strickland boosted Obama in 2008. Obama’s emphasis on social issues earlier this year – especially gay marriage – was deemed so unsuited to Ohio that one veteran TNR contributor argued that he was effectively choosing a non-Ohio path to reelection.

So Team Obama essentially pioneered a/b testing for online campaigning back in 2008, when they got a few smart folk from Google and Facebook to join their effort. I remember reading a few months back that they had invested quite a bit of resources/ effort in bringing a/b testing to television ads as well, somehow making them extremely focused and targeted, as a way to beat the superPAC-led onslaught that everyone had been expecting. Reading between the lines in this piece, seems like they've had at least some success in Ohio so far (and I stress _so far_; this week is when the onslaught is supposed to come to fruition)
posted by the cydonian at 8:13 AM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

Polls and predictions today continue to tick up for Obama. Bloomberg has a six point national gap. 538 Has ticked up to just about 80% chance of a Nov win (96.4% for an election held today). OH seems to be slipping away from Romney.

Right now on the TPM election board Obama can give up ALL the states that merely "lean Obama" and still win the election. which means he can lose IA, VI, FL, CO, NC and NH and still win the election.

Amongst this background early voting is starting, or starting soon in many places. Good time to be ahead, time running out.
posted by edgeways at 8:16 AM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm assuming that was a mispaste on the second quote and you're not just A/B testing subtle differences between the two.
posted by cortex at 8:19 AM on September 26, 2012 [17 favorites]

yes.

no.
posted by boo_radley at 8:20 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

That Mecklenburg County FB page: This content is currently unavailable.

I think I got in one of the last comments, which was a reprise of Wilford Brimley's line from Absence of Malice: "What'd you figure you'd do after government service, Wally?
posted by Eyebeams at 8:21 AM on September 26, 2012 [3 favorites]

One thing that's been amusing me in the media is the use of Worried Face Romney.

BagNews--"a progressive site dedicated to visual politics and the analysis of news images"--is good for this kind of stuff.
posted by kirkaracha at 8:24 AM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

Polls and predictions today continue to tick up for Obama.

Romney's public performance has been pretty disastrous lately, so it's reasonable that people are looking at that and saying "Oh hell no." Which is confusing the hell out of me, because it makes sense, which is not something I expect from US Presidential elections.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:27 AM on September 26, 2012 [9 favorites]

I'm holding my outrage back a bit and just shaking my head at the pathetic nature of the republican party in Virginia. The harder they try to hold on, the more they slip away.
posted by humanfont at 8:33 AM on September 26, 2012

John Kasich, who should be helping Romney as much as Ted Strickland boosted Obama in 2008

I have a feeling Kasich is probably helping Obama quite a bit this time around. He's part of the wave of tea party governors who rapidly made themselves quite unpopular. Within a month or two of taking office, a poll said Strickland would win in a landslide over Kasich if the voters were given a second chance.
posted by honestcoyote at 8:35 AM on September 26, 2012

kirkaracha: BagNews--"a progressive site dedicated to visual politics and the analysis of news images"--is good for this kind of stuff.

Thanks for that. Intrestingly there was an article on the front page entitled "The State of the News Photo" [Caution: Uncensored War Zone Photos] which was about the very subject of the editorial nature of news photo selection.
posted by ob1quixote at 8:36 AM on September 26, 2012

Shit. Heh, yes, meant to copy-paste this instead:

What’s striking, though, is that how much bang for the buck the Obama side achieved with them – Priorities has a famous lack of resources, yet managed to get a lot of eyeballs on its ads without spending all that much to air them. Why? Because the ads were so devastating – Romney would say unfair – that they got a lot of airtime on TV and YouTube.

_{(long thread, was pasting through the phone's browser, TNR had that crazy ad covering half a page, Yada yada)}
posted by the cydonian at 8:41 AM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

Romney To Middle Class Ohioans: Don't Expect Too Much Tax Relief From Me.
posted by ericb at 8:55 AM on September 26, 2012

Mitt Romney 2011 Tax Return Includes Massive Gain From Controversial Bain Deal.
posted by ericb at 8:57 AM on September 26, 2012

As things look better and better for Obama, I find myself starting to think about other races I would dearly love to see won by Dems —

— Warren over Brown in MA
— Kaine over Allen in VA
— Jim Graves over Michelle Bachmann in MN-6 (please, please . . . )
— McCaskill over Todd “legitimate rape” Akin in MO

Etc. etc.
posted by Eyebeams at 9:02 AM on September 26, 2012 [6 favorites]

That BagNews site is fantastic!

Warren is doing really pretty well in MA. Surprisingly well. Scott Brown is not my favorite guy, though as a pro-choice, generally pro-working-class Republican he's not at the top of my shit list, but Warren is exceeding at least my expectations, and I'm looking forward to voting for her.
posted by Miko at 9:03 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Freud was right.
posted by RolandOfEld at 9:04 AM on September 26, 2012

Conan Rages Against Elisabeth Hasselbeck Questioning Obama: 'She Didn't Even Win' Survivor (VIDEO).
posted by ericb at 9:04 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Jon Stewart: Why Obama Is Surging In The Polls (Video).
posted by ericb at 9:09 AM on September 26, 2012 [8 favorites]

James Henry, a former chief economist at McKinsey & Co., describes offshore tax havens like the "bar scene in Star Wars." He explains, "Dictators and kleptocrats used them to conceal stolen loot. Arms dealers and drug dealers use them to launder their deals. Google and Apple and Pfizer use them to park their intellectual property and pay themselves tax-free royalties. Banks use them to park lousy loans and stash the offshore accounts and assets under management of their wealthy individual clients, many of which are paying zero taxes back home…And so on."

...

"The system of offshore tax havens is one of the greatest threats to the global economy: undermining markets, helping shift gargantuan quantities of wealth upwards from poor to rich, then wrapping up much of it in secrecy," says John Christensen, who served for 11 years as the economic adviser for the British tax haven of Jersey and now works for the Tax Justice Network in London. Before becoming a whistleblower, Christensen helped clients in South Africa evade anti-apartheid sanctions and to dodge taxes, among other things.

"The offshore system of secrecy jurisdictions is much bigger and many times badder than almost anyone realizes. To have a US president who is a serial user and abuser of offshore secrecy, and even a defender of secrecy jurisdictions, would pose frightening threats to the US and the global economy," he adds.

It makes the 47% comments even worse. How dare you criticize people who aren't even making enough money that their incomes are taxed, when you have executives and corporations just streaming out of the country with unreal amounts of money.
posted by cashman at 9:11 AM on September 26, 2012 [11 favorites]

On Topic: David Corn, Romney-Slayer?
Is it possible that the conventional wisdom has not quite fully grasped the damage — perhaps irreparable, barring a huge event — that Romney’s “47%” comment did to his campaign? The internals of the latest WaPO/ABC and QPAC/NYT/CBS polls paint a picture that should be dispiriting to the Romney camp, which is already in denial, about how the candidate is now being perceived, even among his strongest group of supporters — the seniors. Could it be that The Comment has finally crystallized in the voters’ minds what they had suspected all along about Romney but simply could not put their finger on?
posted by syzygy at 9:18 AM on September 26, 2012 [5 favorites]

even among his strongest group of supporters — the seniors.

Sep 24, 2012 1:36am EDT - New polling by Reuters/Ipsos indicates that during the past two weeks - since just after the Democratic National Convention - support for Romney among Americans age 60 and older has crumbled, from a 20-point lead over Democratic President Barack Obama to less than 4 points.
posted by cashman at 9:26 AM on September 26, 2012 [5 favorites]

BEST. ROMNEYFACE. EVER.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:28 AM on September 26, 2012 [6 favorites]

And related to homunculus' link, "During the 1973 to 2011 period, labor productivity rose 80.4 percent but real median hourly wage increased 4.0 percent, and the real median hourly compensation (including all wages and benefits) increased just 10.7 percent. " [Economic Policy Institute]

So "the 47%" bust their asses making money for the wealthy. The wealthy keep that money to themselves and in offshore havens, then Mitt Romney turns around and talks bad about those people, while Mitt and those like him continue to hoard money.
posted by cashman at 9:32 AM on September 26, 2012 [19 favorites]

I think the Rombot may have broken some kind of vital suspension of disbelief thing the Republicans had going on.
posted by Artw at 9:37 AM on September 26, 2012 [15 favorites]

There is the idea that Obama is incredibly lucky when it comes to elections... and it's true. I think it is also true that he has some fucking smart people running his campaign, himself included. A few points:

- IMO the reason the 47% clip worked so well is because the Obama campaign had already set the stage for Romney being a rich elitist even prior to the conventions. All the Bain stuff? Yeah all that did was prime the pump to reinforce any and all tax/business/economic inequality flak Romney would run into down the road. You know how Republicans typically attack the strengths? Heh, that is precisely what the Bain setup did. It put the shunt in to the heart of Romney's so called "strength". So all subsequent economic attack son Romney was mainlined. It reversed the Obama weakness.

- Targeting and efficient use of resources. America is not a monoculture and increasingly politicians who run like it is will fail. The sheer amount of money Romney had at his disposal was a huge concern, but they are losing in part because they are running a very straight, white, male campaign as if everyone else is exactly like them. Except for the Mormon aspect I'd peg Romney's campaign as a very 1950's affair.

- Personal affect and sense of self. Look Romney is a Mormon. it is the elephant in the room because no one talks about it for any length of time. Remember Obama's speech on religion after Rev Wright? That is exactly what Romney needs to, but seemingly cannot do. Not just as an aside in some interview, but a full on address about Mormonism and his relation to it and what that means, talk about the evolution of the church in a meaningful manner. Everything you hear from Romney is superficial, delivered in a unconvincing way, there is no emotional connection, thus the Rom-E jokes.

This is why sometimes people say stuff like jujitsu or 11 dimension chess when talking about Obama. As silly (and frankly misguided) those lines are, Obama's campaign staff absolutely nailed it both in 2008 and increasingly looking like 2012. This was suppose to be an election about the economy... it no longer is. These people will never have to look for work again in their lifetimes.
posted by edgeways at 9:39 AM on September 26, 2012 [11 favorites]

The Mitt Romney Latino Outreach Program
posted by liza at 9:47 AM on September 26, 2012 [7 favorites]

Are people really talking about the Mormonism? I'm not hearing it (and I'm in loose touch with some evangelical networks, so I'd expect to be hearing more if they were chattering about it). Personally, I think a Wright-type speech would be disastrous, in drawing attention to Mormonism that Romney really doesn't want. The policy of being silent on it is, to me, pretty smart. Most people don't know a lot about Mormonism, and it's better that way, because it really isn't the same thing as another garden-variety mainline Protestantism, and as people discover that, for some it will be alienating. I think they've been smart to downplay it, gambling that Obama (or any of the other opponents in the primaries) would know it's a bit of a third rail - that they'd have scored some points for attacking on that, but also lost points for attacking someone's religion, and it would have been easy for Romney to take a solid defensive "this is America, we don't mock or criticize each other's religions" response that would have resonated broadly.
posted by Miko at 9:47 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Say what you like about Occupy, I think a tip of the hat is in order for providing the rhetoric that allows America to discuss the subject of a parasitic millionaire class maybe not being that great a thing.
posted by Artw at 9:48 AM on September 26, 2012 [57 favorites]

New polling by Reuters/Ipsos indicates that during the past two weeks - since just after the Democratic National Convention - support for Romney among Americans age 60 and older has crumbled, from a 20-point lead over Democratic President Barack Obama to less than 4 points.

According to The Drudge Report, the Obama and Romney are tied and the Republican candidate pays higher taxes than 97% of Americans.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:52 AM on September 26, 2012

The Mitt Romney Latino Outreach Program

The untouched ears and the pictures on the wall crack me up.
posted by winna at 9:57 AM on September 26, 2012

If this morning's Romney polls got you down, or you just want a quick laugh, uncook the books.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:58 AM on September 26, 2012

And...that leads me to my next point, which is that, once you're an established figure of amusement and fun, with a certain expected persona in the public's eye, that is a parody of oneself, politics is pretty much over as a career choice.

I don't know about that. Bill Clinton was a joke and had some searing imitations done of him, but if he were running right now he'd smoke his opponent...between his ability to speechify and our nostalgia for the precrash/pre Bush era, he'd have it sewn up.

Not that Romney has that kind of ability, but it's not so much that he's a joke. He's an asshole.
posted by emjaybee at 11:04 AM on September 26, 2012

So, what's that UnskewedPolls guy going to tell himself on Nov. 7? Just rock back and forth and mutter "voter fraud?"
posted by COBRA! at 11:06 AM on September 26, 2012

So, what's that UnskewedPolls guy going to tell himself on Nov. 7? Just rock back and forth and mutter "voter fraud?"

Him and the millions of people he'll have convinced, is what I fear.
posted by Bookhouse at 11:08 AM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

Him and the millions of people he'll have convinced, is what I fear.

Eh, let them whine.
posted by Ironmouth at 11:11 AM on September 26, 2012

Eh, let them whine.

The ultimate "white whine".
posted by ob at 11:16 AM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

ufff, ok, regarding the Romney trying to get the chant going? This is almost mesmerizing: The payoff is about 27 seconds into the vid.
posted by edgeways at 11:16 AM on September 26, 2012 [6 favorites]

Oh Sweet Jesus: Joe Scarbourgh and Assorted Loonies react to RomneyRyan Chant Attempt.
posted by dejah420 at 11:21 AM on September 26, 2012 [3 favorites]

Romney's entire campaign could be called "My God, Just Watch This Video"
posted by The Whelk at 11:22 AM on September 26, 2012 [29 favorites]

And...that leads me to my next point, which is that, once you're an established figure of amusement and fun, with a certain expected persona in the public's eye, that is a parody of oneself, politics is pretty much over as a career choice.

Except for Boris Johnson.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:27 AM on September 26, 2012 [5 favorites]

Direct MSNBC link for the "Sweet Jesus" video from Morning Joe for those unwilling or unable to allow Javascript from adap.tv.
posted by ob1quixote at 11:33 AM on September 26, 2012 [4 favorites]

I think humor at a candidate is ok politically, it's the humor+contempt for a candidate that is the death knell.

Lotta jokes about Clinton, but that never translated well into disliking him personally, same with Jesse Ventura when he was Gov, or heck, even Biden currently
posted by edgeways at 11:37 AM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

The Strip from last Sunday's NY Times isn't very funny but it does summarize nicely what Romney's campaign has become.

"Turn on your TV. That Romney guy is saying some out-there stuff again."-- This is how Romney's campaign will be ultimately remembered, if it's remembered at all. Romney does deserve a little credit in making his campaign somewhat more memorable than Dole '96.
posted by honestcoyote at 11:38 AM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm not sure I've seen it discussed much by pundits, but there is undoubtedly a "fair-weather fan" phenomenon in politics, or at least an "everyone loves a winner" effect. When it becomes prevailing wisdom that a particular candidate will win, undecided voters and even those supporting the other candidate lukewarmly will switch their votes to be part of a winning team. I see Obama's polling continuing to rise as this phenomenon takes over.
posted by Mental Wimp at 11:41 AM on September 26, 2012

Lotta jokes about Clinton, but that never translated well into disliking him personally

Clinton was mockable in the ways that most "regular" people are mockable--I always think of the SNL skit where he jogs to McDonalds--so I think those kind of failings, plus his willingness to show emotion, just made people feel closer to him because he reminded them of themselves or their friends and family. (This is apart from the infidelity; I think the Lewinsky situation resulted in a mixture of mockery/contempt closer to what Romney is facing.)
posted by sallybrown at 11:44 AM on September 26, 2012 [4 favorites]

Amiable dunce is actually a great place to be for the politician who can pull it off. Boris Johnson seems to be a master of it. Biden doesn't carry it to the dunce level but settles merely for unfiltered goofball and it works for him too. Dubya, if he had actually been a humane and thoughtful president, would have been considered the gold standard in amiable dunces.

Amiable dunce distracts the low information voters nicely and gets them to pay attention to you without paying too much attention. Doesn't matter if they're laughing at you as long as they still like you.
posted by honestcoyote at 11:48 AM on September 26, 2012 [3 favorites]

It's a shame he has all that money but won't be able to buy any high-quality alcohol with it after the election is over.
posted by perhapses at 11:52 AM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

That chant thing is such a David Brent moment. It's the boss in the office meeting who tells you that you're doing this stupid icebreaker thing wrong.
posted by angrycat at 11:53 AM on September 26, 2012 [16 favorites]

The Obama Samuel L. Jackson ad goes live tomorrow. Here's one verse:

Sorry, my friend, but there’s no time to snore.
And out-of-touch millionaire's just declared war.
On schools, the environment, unions, fair pay.
We’re all on our own if Romney has his way.
And he’s against safety nets, if you fall, tough luck.
So I strongly suggest that you wake the fuck up.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:03 PM on September 26, 2012 [9 favorites]

OMG angrycat, you've done it. Ever since 2008 gave us McCain/Palin as Cotton Hill/Peggy Hill, I've been trying to figure out who Romney/Ryan are. Ryan is is easy — it's Gabe from The Office, bony and overly-sincere and creepy. But Romney's proved harder to crack. He's got the incompetence of Michael Scott, but they've made Scott too lovable for it to fit. But David Brent? There's that latent anger that makes it work. If only Ricky Gervaise were taller...
posted by benito.strauss at 12:06 PM on September 26, 2012 [5 favorites]

Earlier, people from the Cherokee nation were sort of weighing in with videos ...

Cherokee Nation Chief Denounces Scott Brown's 'Racist' Staffers.
posted by ericb at 12:10 PM on September 26, 2012 [6 favorites]

So I strongly suggest that you wake the fuck up

Do not go the fuck to sleep people!
posted by The Whelk at 12:23 PM on September 26, 2012 [3 favorites]

Do not go the fuck to sleep people!

On cue like they are reading the thread - new Obama ad- Vote for Them.
posted by cashman at 1:19 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Obama Samuel L. Jackson ad goes live tomorrow.

This was funded by the same super pac that brought us the (very funny, imo) Sarah Silervman "scissoring" ad.
posted by triggerfinger at 1:31 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm not sure I've seen it discussed much by pundits, but there is undoubtedly a "fair-weather fan" phenomenon in politics, or at least an "everyone loves a winner" effect.

Yeah, I think amongst strategists at least, this is well known. That's why it's so important to exert control over the narrative so you can believably position your guy as winner - and the other as loser.
posted by Miko at 1:33 PM on September 26, 2012

Gallup catches up, Obama +6.... And NYT/CBS/QUINNIPIAC showing him over 50 and up 12, 10, and 8 in Penn., Ohio, and Florida, respectively.

That leaves Rasmussen all alone out there.
posted by spitbull at 1:33 PM on September 26, 2012

How's that 47 percent thing workin out for ya, douchebag?
posted by spitbull at 1:35 PM on September 26, 2012 [8 favorites]

That leaves Rasmussen all alone out there.

IIRC, Rasmussen had 2008 a tie or within the MoE up until the last week or two, when "magically" their numbers started to resemble the other pollsters and the actual result. Finger, scale, etc.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:35 PM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

Also, Romney was wrong. It appears at least 50 percent will never vote for him. Damn victims.
posted by spitbull at 1:36 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

He did not just liken Romney to Fredo.

That video really is painful - and when you add the few seconds at the beginning, it reads even worse. I didn't realize, when seeing the first tiny clip, that what he's trying to do is shift the crowd from their enthusiastic chanting of "Ryan! Ryan!" to chanting "Romney-Ryan." Ouch, ouch, ouch.
posted by Miko at 1:36 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ras will need to show the Obama lead by next week, else how will they set a narrative for the debate bounce Romney will be needing from the house outfit?
posted by spitbull at 1:38 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Romney campaign is like some incredibly uncomfortable Christopher Guest movie at this point.
posted by The Whelk at 1:40 PM on September 26, 2012 [20 favorites]

I think the Gallup is the rolling 7 day average, and what may be happening is the last of the pre-47 comment is rolling off the far end. That could mean a wider margin in the the days to come... we'll see. Rassmussen is like the anti-Nate Silver, I trust that poll like I trust Mitt Romney, that is not at all. It would be one thing if they where just consistent, that way you could at least divine movement in the numbers even if the top line is suspect, but Rass just seems to make shit up depending on what they want. I trust a 12 point D lead to be half of that and a 12 point R lead to be 1/4 of that. God forbid an actual tight race then they probably sit in the back room and flip a coin.
posted by edgeways at 1:43 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

(oh, and working on the 50 state char sheet... perhaps tomorrow
posted by edgeways at 1:45 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Romney campaign is like some incredibly uncomfortable Christopher Guest movie at this point.

Still not as bad as For Your Consideration. Apologies, it being Yom Kippur and all, but...ugh.
posted by psoas at 1:46 PM on September 26, 2012

Here's a random anecdote from the campaign trail which shows Ryan's more sensitive side:

As Ryan starts talking about repealing Obamacare, a woman collapses in audience. "Hope she has good healthcare," Ryan quips.
posted by honestcoyote at 1:58 PM on September 26, 2012

The reason why Rasmussen always has a house effect for Republicans is that they use a different likely voter model.
posted by klangklangston at 2:06 PM on September 26, 2012

Yeah, which they adjust to get the results they want to drive the narrative or soothe the conservative mob, that and they don't call cell phones and rely on mysterious internet interviews (the methodology for which they don't release, or didn't use to) to correct for that.

Scott Rasmussen seems to be more of a Republican operative in charge of polling operations, not an independent pollster. He's the Matt Drudge of pollsters, with I suspect a similar direct line to Boston and to Rove.
posted by spitbull at 2:18 PM on September 26, 2012 [3 favorites]

Romney camp goes all in on ad touting concern for ordinary Americans

The DNC responds
posted by zombieflanders at 2:27 PM on September 26, 2012 [36 favorites]

Holy cats, that "The DNC responds" link is brutal.
posted by Joey Michaels at 2:31 PM on September 26, 2012 [16 favorites]

ow
posted by edgeways at 2:40 PM on September 26, 2012

And it included the "I'll never convince them to take responsibility and care for their lives" part of the quote. Awesome.
posted by Eyebeams at 2:43 PM on September 26, 2012

Signs of dawning awareness of sensible things in the GOP.
posted by Miko at 2:44 PM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

It's like whoever is coordinating between the DNC and Obama campaigns has a set of ready-made ads to pop out t=in response any given situation.
posted by edgeways at 2:45 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Here's a random anecdote from the campaign trail which shows Ryan's more sensitive side:

As Ryan starts talking about repealing Obamacare, a woman collapses in audience. "Hope she has good healthcare," Ryan quips.

That... That's not real is it? I can no longer tell.
posted by Artw at 2:46 PM on September 26, 2012 [6 favorites]

Damn! Right on though. That Romney ad is cynical.

I gotta say, when I look in Romney's eyes these days, I feel like he's in trouble. Like he's saying all the usual things, but his eyes are saying help, help, it's dark in here.

That might just be my manipulated view at this point, but every now and then I actually worry about him, that he's not a fully integrated psyche.
posted by Miko at 2:48 PM on September 26, 2012 [4 favorites]

Judge hints he may block Pennsylvania voter ID.
posted by madamjujujive at 2:53 PM on September 26, 2012 [5 favorites]

Completely off-topic - sorry - but I was looking up past popular vote results in U.S. Presidential elections and . . . in 1968 George Wallace got 13.5% and carried five states.

I . . . did not remember that.
posted by Eyebeams at 3:01 PM on September 26, 2012

I'm a little freaked out that the new Romney ad's title is "Too Many Americans." I'm really afraid of what he might do with the surplus.
posted by MrVisible at 3:01 PM on September 26, 2012 [9 favorites]

I'm really afraid of what he might do with the surplus.

Soylent Green is PEEEPLE!
posted by Mental Wimp at 3:13 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Too Many Ameri' Uckas, 'Uckin Romney's Shi-

(couldn't resist)
posted by kaspen at 3:14 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

I gotta say, when I look in Romney's eyes these days, I feel like he's in trouble. Like he's saying all the usual things, but his eyes are saying help, help, it's dark in here.

What makes me worry for him is the recurring displays of bad treatment he gives people, and the reports of how he has few friends even in the Republican party. If you're well off enough, you can, I suppose, live your life in the company of fellow douchebags who share your disdain for the losers. But what are you going to do if you yourself turn into one of the losers in their eyes?

That might be the question he's blankly staring at in that video.

I hope some of the people he's looked down upon in the GOP and elsewhere in the political circles are forgiving. He might need to rediscover some friends after his campaign finally crashes down.
posted by Anything at 3:24 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

That... That's not real is it? I can no longer tell.

The author of the tweet is a reporter at a Denver station, a Fox affiliate no less. So probably true. But I understand the skepticism. Poe's law and all that.
posted by honestcoyote at 3:27 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mike Rowe Takes on Dirty Job of Making Mitt Romney Look Electable
posted by homunculus at 3:32 PM on September 26, 2012

Stop calling Mitt Romney a cyborg!
posted by homunculus at 3:40 PM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

Stop calling Mitt Romney a cyborg!

...he is now technically a full android who has escaped the last tyranny of the flesh?
posted by jaduncan at 3:49 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Yeah, which they adjust to get the results they want to drive the narrative or soothe the conservative mob, that and they don't call cell phones and rely on mysterious internet interviews (the methodology for which they don't release, or didn't use to) to correct for that.

Scott Rasmussen seems to be more of a Republican operative in charge of polling operations, not an independent pollster. He's the Matt Drudge of pollsters, with I suspect a similar direct line to Boston and to Rove."

Not really — they've remained incredibly consistent in their polling relative to other firms this year, with an average of a 1.3 percent Republican lean. 2010 was a shit show for them, but they seem to have mostly reformed.
posted by klangklangston at 4:02 PM on September 26, 2012

Holy cats, that "The DNC responds" link is brutal.

I think the DNC may be getting their ad writers from Scribble Jam, 'cause their diss tracks are tight.
posted by Bookhouse at 4:04 PM on September 26, 2012 [8 favorites]

Too Many Americans

I CAME AN ASTRONOMY

I CAN ROMNEY AS MOAT

OO, CANNY RASTA MIME

O YEOMAN CRAM STAIN
posted by DaDaDaDave at 4:13 PM on September 26, 2012 [9 favorites]

I wanted to take the pulse of how these polls are being viewed by the freepers. A sampling:

The onslaught has been brutal today. It's been like a non-stop artillery barrage. Every article is either a bogus poll or a fanny pat for Obama.

One problem for Democrats is that a portion of their constituency has to be forced to the polls with cattle prods or free wine. This is the demographic that won't feel any urgency in voting if they see an inflated lead for Obama.

People working during the day, can not answer the phone when someone calls for a poll.

The goal of deliberately skewed polls this time around is not to be accurate, but to make the degree of fraud seem plausible.

The actual spread is around 14% in Romney favor.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:14 PM on September 26, 2012 [3 favorites]

Romney: sexually active teen age boys are depressed and suicidal
posted by humanfont at 4:16 PM on September 26, 2012

Romney: sexually active teen age boys are depressed and suicidal

Curiously, as a sexually inactive teen age boy, I was depressed and suicidal.
posted by Joey Michaels at 4:22 PM on September 26, 2012 [12 favorites]

I don't think I've ever heard anyone refer to Rombot as partially human.
posted by Artw at 4:25 PM on September 26, 2012

One problem for Democrats is that a portion of their constituency has to be forced to the polls with cattle prods or free wine.

I spilled wine on my mail-in ballot a couple years ago, but I paid for the wine. The wine was not a government handout. But if the government did offer free wine, I'd be first in line. Vote early. Vote drunk.
posted by perhapses at 4:25 PM on September 26, 2012 [3 favorites]

DONE BECAUSE WE YOU WERE TOO MENNY, AMERICANS
posted by RogerB at 4:31 PM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

Do Today's Polls Mean It's All Over for Romney? No.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:43 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

My next Jazz album is going to be called Stuck in A David Brent Moment and will consist of one 40 minute piece looping one awkward moment from U2's Stuck in a Moment.
posted by Skygazer at 4:50 PM on September 26, 2012 [6 favorites]

Sorry, But Mitt Romney's Nickname Is Not “The Stench”, Rosie Gray, Buzzfeed Politics, 26 September, 2012
posted by ob1quixote at 5:04 PM on September 26, 2012

Not really — they've remained incredibly consistent in their polling relative to other firms this year, with an average of a 1.3 percent Republican lean. 2010 was a shit show for them, but they seem to have mostly reformed.

Easy when your method is "see what Gallup has and add 1.3 or as much as needed to set the narrative, then preserve credibility by coming back in line wth reality a week before the election."

Plus they are a robocall outfit. Yuck. Ras is widely discounted even by sober analysts.
posted by spitbull at 5:06 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ras is widely discounted even by sober analysts.

...because the drunken analysts have always discounted them.
posted by Joey Michaels at 5:08 PM on September 26, 2012 [6 favorites]

madamjujujive: [Unidentified Freeper:] The goal of deliberately skewed polls this time around is not to be accurate, but to make the degree of fraud seem plausible.

This is the one that baffles me. Admittedly, I don't watch Fox, but it seems to me there's only one party systematically, and with malice aforethought, working to disenfranchise voters in a very partisan manner specifically to combat the specter of "voter fraud." Are they then going to going to also claim that if Obama wins it must have been due to fraud? If the laws as designed can't prevent that, then what was the purpose in enacting them? It's mind-boggling.
posted by ob1quixote at 5:19 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

spitbull: “Ras is widely discounted even by sober analysts.”

That's bullshit. Even the League of Assassins alone is recognized by all nonbiased observers as a monumental achievement for worldwide villainy, and that's before we even start talking about the scientific advances presented by certain research done with Lazarus pits.
posted by koeselitz at 5:24 PM on September 26, 2012 [9 favorites]

To show that these laws didn't work and the next set need to be tougher.
posted by absalom at 5:24 PM on September 26, 2012

Why don't we have Free Public Wine I thought we had progressed as a civilization
posted by The Whelk at 5:30 PM on September 26, 2012 [4 favorites]

I think wine, or some other alcohol, was a part of the grain dole in the Roman Empire (source: the History of Rome Podcast by Mike Duncan).
posted by Groundhog Week at 5:38 PM on September 26, 2012 [2 favorites]

I think it's pretty easy for them to cast what we see as efforts at disenfranchisement and obstruction of the ballot box as a failed (if Romney loses) attempt at defending the integrity of the election.
posted by feloniousmonk at 5:44 PM on September 26, 2012

An august tradition this fine republic could learn from hic.
posted by The Whelk at 5:45 PM on September 26, 2012 [3 favorites]

"[Unidentified Freeper:] The goal of deliberately skewed polls this time around is not to be accurate, but to make the degree of fraud seem plausible."

If the laws as designed can't prevent that, then what was the purpose in enacting them?

My best guess: If Romney were to win despite a wide margin in the polls for Obama - or just beat the polls by a wide margin - the Dems might actually ask for an investigation of voter fraud. Conservatives could claim only the Ras poll is legit and all of the other polls are part of a liberal conspiracy to claim "the degree of fraud plausible" to skew the results by a large enough amount to ask for an investigation and/or use the Ras poll as a defense???
posted by Golden Eternity at 5:50 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Easy: losing is the evidence that anti-fraud measures weren't enough. Otherwise it might just be that people don't want to vote for very conservative candidates, and that is unpossible.
posted by jaduncan at 5:56 PM on September 26, 2012 [4 favorites]

It was telling how in the run up to Nov 2008 they were drumming up Acorn story, fraud rumours, quite obviously in the preparation for a very close loss, but when it was a landslide that narrative completely disappeared from Fox &c, almost as if it was cut off! I bet some naive conservatives inquired about it quietly afterwards and were told something like "oh no, that angle's useless to us right now".
posted by rainy at 6:01 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

It was telling how in the run up to Nov 2008 they were drumming up Acorn story, fraud rumours, quite obviously in the preparation for a very close loss, but when it was a landslide that narrative completely disappeared from Fox &c, almost as if it was cut off!

Was this in the alternate reality where ACORN never shut down and a ton of states never passed anti-voter fraud laws?
posted by zombieflanders at 6:06 PM on September 26, 2012 [4 favorites]

fivethirtyeight now says that if the election was held tomorrow, Romney has a 2.2% chance of winning.

I have never seen a campaign collapse so thoroughly in the two decades i have been eligible to vote.
posted by murphy slaw at 6:11 PM on September 26, 2012

This was already linked to, but sorry, this so beyond the beyond as to be almost disconcerting, as in, WTF are these people smoking and what if they're somehow right?? Has anyone made any sense of this? Is there anything to be made sense of?

http://www.unskewedpolls.com/

Utterly batshit "unskewed" polls.

Obviously a property of examiner.com

....

LOLZ...?!
posted by Skygazer at 6:13 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

murphy slaw, I'm actually starting to feel somewhat embarrassed for Romney. It has to be hard to lose in the 2008 primaries, feel energised by the lack of competition in the primaries and then crash and burn so much that even your own party like the VP candidate far more than the candidate. Then to have to beg your donors for money as the death spiral gets more intense and people stop wanting to give so much, and to be unable to get out to events because of that...and to stand there on TV knowing not just that you're going to lose, but that it looks like it might turn into a humiliating smackdown. I can't even imagine how that feels.

Then I remember that he wants to cut entire federal agencies and social programs but won't detail which, deny people the right to marry who they love, and has a problem with the entire concept of the common good and don't feel so bad.
posted by jaduncan at 6:21 PM on September 26, 2012 [7 favorites]

zombieflanders: it was "shut down" in 2009.
posted by rainy at 6:23 PM on September 26, 2012

This was already linked to, but sorry, this so beyond the beyond as to be almost disconcerting, as in, WTF are these people smoking and what if they're somehow right?? Has anyone made any sense of this? Is there anything to be made sense of?

http://www.unskewedpolls.com/

Utterly batshit "unskewed" polls.

Ever you heard of the Nate Silver - Gene Ray Institute of Political Analysis? This is probably one of their alumni.
posted by Anything at 6:46 PM on September 26, 2012

Romney does not get my pity though he gets my sympathy. The Republican Party chose their policy and path. Romney chose to adhere to that policy and path. I agree with his wife that running for President "is hard" and that people who are oh so good at the backseat driving and the every morning quarterbacking should STFU. But seriously, you are part of a party that gave up a long time ago on 1) considering their fellow Americans as people of good will; 2) that being an American requires the right Shibboleth of beliefs, cruelties and bravado; 3) that the people who really matter and should be at the decision table are those with unconscionably soft hands; 4) A vision of America that is small minded, cold and frankly, small souled. What vision of America is the party providing beyond the Utopia of you alone, you against the world, you struggling for some small thing, you and just you?

Romney deserves dignity and respect; everyone does. He has done much good but is he and the Republican Party going to be good for the country? That is the question. I do not believe that he is stupid nor a buffoon. He is a man who is being ground down to pulp in the most difficult job interview process in the world.

But it is not over, not by a long shot. Do not think that a defeated Romney means unicorns and rainbows; a purifying fire needs to be lit to push the Republican Party into a self reflective mode and to implement change. Otherwise, you are rewarding bad behavior.
posted by jadepearl at 6:58 PM on September 26, 2012 [4 favorites]

a purifying fire needs to be lit to push the Republican Party into a self reflective mode and to implement change. Otherwise, you are rewarding bad behavior.

Surely the shift from a white-dominated America is doing that; the mills of demographic change are late to grind, but they grind small. If the Republicans remain a party of the white South they are going to slowly become increasingly irrelevant just based on the growth of the Hispanic, Asian and black vote. That's quite aside from the fact that stances like homophobia and racism are getting less viable as bigots die off (or are happily converted). I'm quite curious to see what happens when the shift to inclusion of those groups happens; it's going to be very hard indeed not to cause the mother of all holy wars with the Christian right over homosexuality in particular.

But yeah, I hope they get crushed very intensely indeed and run to the centre so that Obama can actually get work done. A 538 nowcast of 2.2% likelihood of a Romney win suggests that the behaviour isn't exactly getting rewarded right now, either.
posted by jaduncan at 7:23 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

zombieflanders: it was "shut down" in 2009.

Yes, that was kind of my point.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:44 PM on September 26, 2012

Reminder: A lot can happen in 5-6 weeks.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:46 PM on September 26, 2012 [6 favorites]

Today in #romneyshambles the candidate touted his health care law in Mass as proof that he cares about poor people. The same healthcare law he has run away from all year. Then he backed away from his promise to cut taxes.
posted by humanfont at 7:51 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

A lot like what? I'm not trying to be contrary, I'm actually curious.

At this point in the race, what could happen that would result in Romney winning? Especially with Obama being the incumbent, and Romney's poor numbers at least someone having to do with previously demonstrated ineptness?

For example I don't think a major foreign policy situation would put the ball in Romney's court, because Romney is already weak on foreign policy and doesn't have any rabbits up his sleeve on that particular score.

I guess economic numbers could come in badly, but the Obama campaign has gone on the offensive specifically painting Romney as a fat-cat who doesn't care if half the country starves. It's not clear at this point that wobbly economy = Romney Administration.

What kind of scenario would cause Obama to lose this much ground and also cause Romney to specifically look like a good leader in comparison?
posted by Sara C. at 7:54 PM on September 26, 2012

zombieflanders: oh, I meant that narrative disappeared after the 2008 election. Then there was the Pimp undercover video in '09, which is why Acorn funds were cut off, i.e. not because Acorn was alleged to be involved in voter fraud.
posted by rainy at 7:54 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Reminder: A lot can happen in 5-6 weeks.

Outside of live boy/dead girl/evidence of a major crime/improbable levels of collapse in the debates it's getting quite hard to see it. I'm also curious what you'd imagine the scenario would be?
posted by jaduncan at 8:14 PM on September 26, 2012

I'm going to be in the overfill room for the second debate so we'll see what happens there
posted by The Whelk at 8:16 PM on September 26, 2012 [3 favorites]

I don't like counting chickens either, and I'm just gonna quote H. L. Mencken here. Most of us have short memories and aren't too bright. A good debate could produce a worrisome bounce.
posted by Miko at 8:32 PM on September 26, 2012 [4 favorites]

Fivethirtyeight current forecast: 82% for Obama! Jumped quite a bit from yesterday!
posted by rainy at 8:39 PM on September 26, 2012

Well, sure. I'm not counting any chickens, by any means. And I definitely think Romney could get a bounce.

I just think it's terribly unlikely that he'd win. The worst case scenario I can come up with is that he debates well and rides the news cycles to a bump that puts the race back into close territory, and things could get close enough that voter suppression could bring about a return of the 2000 election. And even that is really unlikely.

I'm also not sure that the outcome would be the same in a contested 2012 election. For one thing, Obama being the incumbent might make recounts stick a lot harder. He's also still the president until they figure out who won, so you don't have that weird situation where Bush basically won by default because a couple of news outlets called it prematurely and framed things to his advantage.

I'm prepared to concede that Obama will win by a hair and lack a clear mandate. It would take something really unprecedented and catastrophic to bring about a complete Romney trounce.
posted by Sara C. at 8:47 PM on September 26, 2012

murphy slaw: fivethirtyeight now says that if the election was held tomorrow, Romney has a 2.2% chance of winning.

I have never seen a campaign collapse so thoroughly in the two decades i have been eligible to vote.

rainy: Fivethirtyeight current forecast: 82% for Obama! Jumped quite a bit from yesterday!

Note that the Chance Of Winning is only the chance that either candidate will get at least 270 electoral votes, either now (now-cast) or on election day (Nov. 6 forecast). The closer we get to Nov 6. and the greater the lead, the higher the percentage chance for a win.

In other words, 2.2% now-cast means Obama would quite likely win if today were November 6, even if he would "only" win by a thin margin. But it's looking more likely that there'll be a significant win for Obama in the electoral vote, barring any major shift in the trends.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:55 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney camp goes all in on ad touting concern for ordinary Americans

The DNC responds

That's a great response and all, but will that ad get anything more than internet play? If it's not being broadcast counter to Romney's ad, there's only so far an internet video can go.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:57 PM on September 26, 2012

SCOTUS as in ...
posted by liza at 8:57 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Almost spit up my metaphorical Pepsi, the closest non Rass poll has Obama up 4 points (everyone else is at 6). Rassmussen? Oh, Romney is winning by 2. There is just a little bit of disconnect going on there.
posted by edgeways at 8:58 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Also, I am still so very sad that The Daily Show seems like the only place that keeps track of politicians' prior public comments and places those old comments (even from four days prior) to the current talking points. Scott Pelley did a good job on needling Mitt, but that has been the only other decent example of such a memory for past comments I've seen.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:00 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

Rassmussen has been consider for a long time an under-the-table GOP operative. Nate Silver eviscerated them in his old blog showing how statistically they always skewed GOP :D

but, just wanted to point out that i saw upthread someone say Rass could be working on the set-up: showing Romney winning so when Obama does win, there's "evidence" of fraud. knowing how Rass has operated in the past, i find this strategy completely plausible.
posted by liza at 9:03 PM on September 26, 2012 [1 favorite]

I wanted to take the pulse of how these polls are being viewed by the freepers

When you can disregard something as large and well-documented as climate change, current-day political polls are easy to overlook and reframe as biased, even when the very funding for the polling companies rides on how accurate they are, Rasmussen excluded (or included, as a strategically biased polling company).
posted by filthy light thief at 9:03 PM on September 26, 2012

What kind of scenario would cause Obama to lose this much ground and also cause Romney to specifically look like a good leader in comparison?
posted by Sara C. at 10:54 PM on September 26

Black Box Voting
Voter ID Laws
Supreme Court of the United States

also those crappy replacement refs in the NFL might be involved somehow.
posted by sweetkid at 9:10 PM on September 26, 2012 [5 favorites]

but, just wanted to point out that i saw upthread someone say Rass could be working on the set-up: showing Romney winning so when Obama does win, there's "evidence" of fraud.

I think it's probably much simpler: nearly all other polls sow doom and gloom over the conservative base and if one poll bucks the trend, they have something to lift the spirits a bit and try to make the case that Rass is the better, more important poll. Although today I saw Fox running with the idea that polls are not important after all. But they can easily run with many contradicting ideas, too -- no sweat.
posted by rainy at 9:12 PM on September 26, 2012

What kind of scenario would cause Obama to lose this much ground and also cause Romney to specifically look like a good leader in comparison?
posted by Sara C. at 10:54 PM on September 26

I think the key to this is Romney's character. His poor showing in the campaign is primarily down to his character traits (lack of empathy, a lack of a principled core set of values, disdain for the 47%, etc.) These aren't going to change in the next 6 weeks.
posted by vac2003 at 9:14 PM on September 26, 2012

Even considering how badly Romney screwed up his response to the consulate attack, I think potential bad events in the Arab Spring countries could still also be politically dangerous for Obama. But I don't even want to go there with what specifically I fear could happen.
posted by Anything at 9:15 PM on September 26, 2012

Even considering how badly Romney screwed up his response to the consulate attack

Romney screwed up his response even though he said during his hidden-camera speech that he'd "work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity." So he saw it coming and still fucked it up.
posted by kirkaracha at 9:56 PM on September 26, 2012 [4 favorites]

Medicare fraudster Rick Scott has re-started the FL voter purge. The "good" news is that only 198 or so people will be purged, down from the original 180,000 (later dropped to 2600 "for sure" non-citizens).
posted by dirigibleman at 10:26 PM on September 26, 2012

homunculus: "Mike Rowe"

Mike Rowe is a douche. I notice that no matter how much he praises the folks who "clean the toilets" he still spends most of his air time speaking for (and being handsomely compensated by) Ford, Romney, or some (usually for-profit) "educational" facility.

I'll get my statistics from a truly reliable source like Hu Jintao.

Mister Rowe LIAR! Mister HU, GENIOUS!

(I suspect they're both on the same payroll, however.)
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 10:51 PM on September 26, 2012

? If it's not being broadcast counter to Romney's ad, there's only so far an internet video can go.

Yeah, Romney wishes that were true. Then this thread would not exist.
posted by spitbull at 2:25 AM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Building on what liza and others have said, there's a number of procedural issues that could go down on election day, to which I'd add voter suppression groups like True the Vote and just plain old assholes. And yes, Obama could be utterly destroyed at debates and/or make a ton of gaffes between now and the election. Neither is highly likely at this point, and the debates have little effect if neither candidate screws up (notable exceptions are 1980 and 2004).

There's also the possibility that the EU's financial organization could collapse. It's less likely now than it was a couple months ago, but if you haven't noticed there's a bunch of rioting going on in Greece and Spain over austerity measures, and it's only getting worse. The EU financial markets have dipped, and in response so have ours. It's not big, but there's a distinct possibility for it.

Then there's the Middle East. The embassy attacks have kind of faded from the news, but if something big comes out, like the State Department knew it was coming and didn't say anything, then that could upend foreign policy opinion. And then there's Iran and Israel. Netanyahu (who has been less than subtle in trying to influence the election towards former business partner Romney) has been more belligerent, and Ahmajinedad seems happy to oblige in providing reasons for him to be that way. A shooting war causes all kinds of problems (a lot of them around oil) that could impact several economies, and would undoubtedly have a ripple effect on ours, to say nothing of the effect of having to fight another war, this time as a proxy.

And of course, there's plain old homegrown problems. The jobs report predictions don't look particularly hot and one or more really bad ones, including the one the week of the election, could be bad news. Same thing goes for the final GDP report, which is predicted to be fairly meh, but could surprise us. That last one could be good news--some have speculated the iPhone 5 may provided a couple tenths of a point, and consumer confidence indices are looking good--or bad news, we just don't know.

So, those are the "known unknowns," in the parlance of our times. There's also any of a number of other things that could go wrong that we have little to no idea of. Each day that passes means that the likelihood of something happening is lessened, and therefore the impact it would have is possibly lessened as well. As Nate Silver pointed out in one of his recent postings, if things remain relatively stable, Obama looks really good. That's what his models are showing, and the closer we get to Election Day, the more that great prediction looks like the awesome now-cast. So there's reason to be enthusiastic, just not to call anything done or over and pop the corks just yet. Not trying to be a downer, just making sure people don't get carried away.
posted by zombieflanders at 5:01 AM on September 27, 2012 [13 favorites]

So, now that I've posted a wall of text that might get you a little down, how about a little pick-me-up? Because David Corn and Mother Jones are on it again:

NEW ROMNEY VIDEO: In 1985, He Said Bain Would "Harvest" Companies for Profits

Mother Jones has obtained a video from 1985 in which Romney, describing Bain's formation, showed how he viewed the firm's mission. He explained that its goal was to identify potential and hidden value in companies, buy significant stakes in these businesses, and then "harvest them at a significant profit" within five to eight years.

The video was included in a CD-ROM created in 1998 to mark the 25th anniversary of Bain & Company, the consulting firm that gave birth to Bain Capital.

posted by zombieflanders at 5:06 AM on September 27, 2012 [8 favorites]

"Harvest" like the Grim Reaper? Harvest as in organ gathering? Man, the first celebrity death maybe Romney's campaign while Andy Williams would be the second. What will the third be?
posted by jadepearl at 5:31 AM on September 27, 2012

So, remember the GDP numbers I was just talking about? Well apparently the first set of them were just released, and depending on your level of pessimism, it's could be either "not good" or "quite bad":

Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States -- increased at an annual rate of 1.3 percent in the second quarter of 2012 (that is, from the first quarter to the second quarter), according to the "third" estimate released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the first quarter, real GDP increased 2.0 percent.

The GDP estimate released today is based on more complete source data than were available for the "second" estimate issued last month. In the second estimate, the increase in real GDP was 1.7 percent (see "Revisions" on page 3).

This isn't the Q3 GDP, which I believe we're still waiting on, but that's a headline waiting to happen no matter what.
posted by zombieflanders at 5:44 AM on September 27, 2012

Sluggish growth slightly more sluggish than previously thought is not, in itself, a game changer. If the Romney campaign had been able to stay on message and keep the election about the economy, or if they can pull a rabbit out of the hat and somehow start effectively hitting that message now, this would be the sort of thing they could use. As things currently stand, it seems to me that they'll need much more negative news, and more strongly negative news, if it's to make a difference. Could definitely happen, but they do need to get lucky (in oldspeak "many awful things need to happen").
posted by howfar at 5:59 AM on September 27, 2012

Why Mitt Romney Isn’t Going to Get Blown Out, Chris Cillizza and Aaron Blake, The Washington Post, 27 September, 2012
posted by ob1quixote at 6:13 AM on September 27, 2012

My best guess: If Romney were to win despite a wide margin in the polls for Obama - or just beat the polls by a wide margin - the Dems might actually ask for an investigation of voter fraud. Conservatives could claim only the Ras poll is legit and all of the other polls are part of a liberal conspiracy to claim "the degree of fraud plausible" to skew the results by a large enough amount to ask for an investigation and/or use the Ras poll as a defense???

Maddow referenced the unskewed nonsense poll the other night and said something about the argument being that republicans could claim fraud when Obama wins. I said aloud exactly what you said - no, this is so they have an excuse, some kind of explanation (clearly a lie) to justify them stealing the election through the ways we have all seen that are being put in place - voter id, bullying at the polls, fewer voting days, and then Maddow noted there are even substantially longer voting forms in places like Florida, which will result in longer times, longer lines, and fewer votes able to be cast.
posted by cashman at 6:25 AM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

Meh. While I don't think Obama is going to win in some kind of unprecedented landslide, that article is not super convincing.

For one thing, I think the idea that Obama galvanized some kind of unprecedented national movement is a bit hindsight 20/20 revisionist. It's certainly not the sense I had at the time, living in a blue state as a member of that supposed "national movement".

Secondly, the numbers they hold out as a "blow out" (60% of the popular vote, 500 electoral votes) are pretty much unprecedented by anyone. Except maybe Reagan in '84. They are setting the bar pretty high for what a landslide election would look like. Not to mention that Obama doesn't need 60% of the popular vote to win. He needs 50% and 270 electoral votes. And the consensus seems to be that he's going to be able to do that.

That consensus could change, of course. But the way the article frames all this is really disingenuous.

I also find it sort of hilarious that, "guys, Obama is probably not going to win 100% of all the votes" is apparently a thing you have to warn people about right now. If Romney was actually ahead, or things were really a complete toss-up, you would not be seeing headlines like this.

Again, not counting chickens, but I would like to actually enjoy the lack of total existential dread that I'm forced to assume most of the time as a Democrat in the USA.
posted by Sara C. at 6:26 AM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Why Mitt Romney Isn’t Going to Get Blown Out"

That's a timely reminder of why it's important to remember the underlying political and economic landscape. Also, it's precisely the worst kind of article from the perspective of the Romney campaign. Nervous but cheerful Democratic campaigners and supporters are more likely to work and turn-out.

I think what the article rather neglects, however, is just how terribly the Romney-Ryan campaign is going, even compared to McCain-Palin. Four years ago, the focus on Palin gaffes was significant, but probably not particularly damaging. Those who liked Palin carried on liking her, those who disliked her saw her as an irrelevance, or at least not an immediate threat. When the person attracting ridicule is your presidential candidate, and that ridicule isn't even balanced out by being liked by the base, the narrative is a very different one.

Despite the underlying landscape, this is, in overwhelming likelihood, an election the Republicans have to win, rather than hope to fluke. If they show any sign of knowing how to do that, it might not be necessary to inject a somewhat forced tension into the campaign.
posted by howfar at 6:38 AM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

If it's not being broadcast counter to Romney's ad, there's only so far an internet video can go.

Yeah, Romney wishes that were true. Then this thread would not exist.

Except the leaked fundraiser video features the "private" thoughts of Romney in full, unedited and apparently unfiltered, whereas the well-done little response DNC ad is just that - an ad from the other party.

I get that there is power in sharing videos on the internet, things going viral and whatnot, but when a made-for-TV ad has gotten over 100,000 views online, vs the response ad which may only run online has just over 66,000 views, we're not talking about something that will significantly harm the Romney campaign. It'll likely be viewed by Obama supporters as a well-done response ad, and by Romney supporters as well-done editing to take Romney's words out of context. Will it sway any independent voters? If so, that's a powerful 36 seconds.
posted by filthy light thief at 6:42 AM on September 27, 2012

Nervous but cheerful Democratic campaigners and supporters are more likely to work and turn-out.

Quite true; it's the best headspace to be in, especially for voluntarism. If discouragement sets in, a lot of volunteers who feel it's a maybe a losing battle and a desperate grab just stay home. Only the true believers show up, in that case. But as the feeling that "it's within reach" takes hold, voluntarism and donation swells. I was a 2008 Obama volunteer from midsummer through the election, and it was really interesting and amazing to watch this snowball effect take hold. That's what delivered the victory, IMO. And it's all fairly psychological.
posted by Miko at 6:43 AM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Samuel L. Jackson: Wake the Fuck Up
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:46 AM on September 27, 2012 [8 favorites]

howfar: Despite the underlying landscape, this is, in overwhelming likelihood, an election the Republicans have to win, rather than hope to fluke. If they show any sign of knowing how to do that, it might not be necessary to inject a somewhat forced tension into the campaign.

I agree. In 2008, Obama took 365 electoral votes to 173 for McCain. FiveThirtyEight is forecasting 316 to 222, and now-casting 337 to 201. Either way, it's a win for Obama*, but not the same 2008 blowout.

* A win, if the trends don't shift in the next few weeks, which they still could. I'll be optimistic, but realistic.
posted by filthy light thief at 6:48 AM on September 27, 2012

Sorry, I agree with the non-landslide article but I can't read the article because the only thing I can see is the picture of Mitt they used.

Mitt does not care about 47% of America and would skew things even further toward the rich? Oh You!

Mitt says if you're sick, go to the emergency room! Who needs a healthcare plan? Oh you!

Mitt is in favor of taking away a woman's right to choose, and is against contraception. Oh You!
posted by cashman at 6:48 AM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

Samuel L. Jackson: Wake the Fuck Up

'He cried out twice, a cry that was no more than a breath—"The metre! The metre!"'
posted by howfar at 6:57 AM on September 27, 2012

That's a great response and all, but will that ad get anything more than internet play? If it's not being broadcast counter to Romney's ad, there's only so far an internet video can go.

IIRC there's been a couple of articles that say that viewer statistics (including location) are available for several of the internet-only ads that have been getting wide play, and that most of the views have come from the major swing states.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:57 AM on September 27, 2012

roomthreeseventeen: Samuel L. Jackson: Wake the Fuck Up

Paid for by the Council for Education and Research, www.jcer.info, not authorized by any candidate or candidates committee.

If JCER is run by someone who promoted 'shareholder activism' to combat imaginary 'global warming', I think I can get behind them (link to a conservative blog with a critical view of JCER).
posted by filthy light thief at 6:59 AM on September 27, 2012

Another 47% ad, this one from the Obama campaign, and already running in Ohio.

Also:

Mitt Romney's 'Them' Problem (emphasis in original)

It's not the most polished video in the world. But you can see the thinking behind it. The candidate will directly address the voters, making a spare, authentic, heart-to-heart appeal that he cares about how "too many Americans" are suffering.

And then he says it.

"President Obama and I both care about poor and middle-class families. The difference is my policies will make things better for them."

Them.

Mitt Romney keeps talking about the people whose votes he needs as "them."

In the 47 percent video, it was "those people."

"I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives," Romney said.

But presidential elections are always about the grand national us. They are about we, the people. And when it come to a candidate, they are about me and you.

As Bill Clinton famously said, "For too long we've been told about 'us' and 'them.' Each and every election we see a new slate of arguments and ads telling us that 'they' are the problem, not 'us.' But there can be no 'them' in America. There's only us."

posted by zombieflanders at 7:06 AM on September 27, 2012 [21 favorites]

From the Why Mitt Romney Isn’t Going to Get Blown Out article:

No one — not even the most loyal Obama allies — would argue that the political environment in 40 days will be anywhere close to as favorable as it was in November 2008.

That misses the fact that Obama is an incumbent which gives him a significant advantage over his campaign in 2008. GW's approval ratings declined throughout his first term (except for the big spike after 9/11) and by the time the election rolled around the Iraq war was getting thoroughly unpopular (the Abu Ghraib story broke right around the time Kerry was getting Swift Boat-ed). And yet during all of that he went from losing the popular vote in 2000 to winning by a decent margin in 2004. Obama may not win by as much as he did in 2008, but mostly because he set the bar pretty high already and elections in general tend to be closer than that, not because of any of the reasons the article brings up.
posted by burnmp3s at 7:16 AM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm surprised that not much attention seems to be paid to the following two points:

Romney Presidency Will Boost Economy 'Without Actually Doing Anything,' Mitt Romney Says
Romney: But my own view is that if we-- if-- if-- if we win on November 6th [...] we'll see-- without-- without actually doing anything, we'll actually get a boost in the economy.

Factchecker: Romney’s ’12 million jobs’ promise
Moody’s Analytics, in an August forecast, predicts 12 million jobs will be created by 2016, no matter who is president. (See page 51.) And Macroeconomic Advisors in April also predicted a gain of 12.3 million jobs.
posted by syzygy at 7:23 AM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

I think for the most part Obama can handle himself. Romney can continue to handle himself (in the negative way he's been managing). The problem is at your local polling place on voting days.

I'm surprised that not much attention seems to be paid to the following two points:

I'm sure Obama will get him on that in the debate on Wednesday. Someone noted that in this thread. In Romney's latest ad, Mitt crows about how his plan will result in 12 million jobs. But obviously if the economy is going to have 12 million jobs anyway, his argument is moot.

But anyway, the problem is going to be at the polling places - lines, issues, weirdness - all that. I think anybody who can, should take time off work on election day in places like Ohio and Florida, to help with problems that will arise.
posted by cashman at 7:30 AM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

By now, I'm thinking it's a good idea to follow Jimmy Carter's grandson on Twitter, because he's doing great work uncovering stuff like the original 47% video and this interesting tidbit:

James Carter uncovered this gem, as reported overnight by Rosie Gray.
Former President George W. Bush is set to deliver the keynote address at the Cayman Alternative Investment Summit on Grand Cayman just a few days before the election.

The conference will feature Bush as the keynote speaker on the first night.... The timing of the conference could land awkwardly during an election season that's been marked by speculation about Mitt Romney's finances, particularly his offshore investments in tax havens like the Cayman Islands.
Ya think?

We just saw Mitt Romney's 2011 tax returns and learned that the Republican still stashes cash in the Cayman Islands. We also learned the campaign is playing fast and loose with the facts, hoping the public won't realize that Romney is using the Caymans as a tax-avoidance scheme.

And it's against this backdrop that George W. Bush -- the Republican whose failed policies Romney is accused of wanting to emulate -- is headed to the Caymans, just days before the election, to speak at an "Alternative Investment Summit"? Seriously?

posted by zombieflanders at 8:13 AM on September 27, 2012 [5 favorites]

Nate Silver: Could 2012 Be Like 2008?

Right now, the Nov. 6 forecast projects that Mr. Obama will win the popular vote by 3.6 percentage points. As I mentioned, that does account for about a two-point decline from where Mr. Obama seems to be in the polls right now. Otherwise, however, the model assumes that the uncertainty in the forecast is symmetric: Mr. Obama is as likely to overperform it as underperform it.

If Mr. Obama misses to the downside by 3.7 percentage points, then Mr. Romney would win, at least in the popular vote. However, if Mr. Obama missed to the upside by 3.7 percentage point instead, he’d win the popular vote by 7.3 percentage points, exactly replicating his margin from 2008.

In other words, there looks to be about a 20 percent chance that Mr. Romney will win, but also about a 20 percent chance that Mr. Obama will actually beat his 2008 margin in the popular vote. The smart money is on an outcome somewhere in the middle – as it has been all year. But if you can conceive of a Romney comeback – and you should account for that possibility – you should also allow for the chance that things could get really out of hand, and that Mr. Obama could win in a borderline landslide.

posted by cashman at 8:29 AM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

FWIW, the Obama campaign is confirming that the 47% ad that I mentioned a couple posts up is running in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio and Virginia.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:31 AM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Could 2012 be like 2008? (Nate Silver)
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:31 AM on September 27, 2012

I hate that I can't look away from every. single. little. detail. Every video, every statistic, every new piece of information, every opinion blog....

Can it just be over please? Can't we just vote and have it be over? This is excruciating. It's like this terrible reality competition program that's on EVERY CHANNEL and set up fansites for their favorite competitors and talk smack and throw shade and wind up hating people because OH GOD ROADBLOCK! NOOOOO, JUST GET TO THE AIRPORT, YOU ASSHOLES... OH, FUCK, PLEASE VOTE HIM OFF THE ISLAND, YOU CAN'T USE TRUFFLE OIL AND DON'T FORGET THAT AMANDA FREITAG LIKES CHOCOLATE AND HOW CAN YOU NOT BE SMARTER THAN A FIFTH GRADER?!
posted by tzikeh at 8:42 AM on September 27, 2012 [19 favorites]

6 Conservatives Who Think The Media Is Fixing The Polls For Obama.
posted by madamjujujive at 8:43 AM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

No one — not even the most loyal Obama allies — would argue that the political environment in 40 days will be anywhere close to as favorable as it was in November 2008.

[eyeroll] The environment is different to be sure, but the only State that Obama won in 2008 that it definitely will not in 2012 is Indiana, however at the same time there is some talk [after a moderately positive internal poll] about them making a play for AZ... which coincidentally is the same number of EVs as IN. I think if people are going to postulate that it is not unreasonable for Romney to win the election, in the same breath it is not unreasonable for there to be an Obama blowout. I think it will, most likely, be somewhere in between, a winning Pop voter margin of 4-5%, somewhere in the 290-310 EV range
posted by edgeways at 8:53 AM on September 27, 2012

Only 6?

heh, this is something that both "sides" tend to do when they are down in the polls, I seem to recall similar sounds from left of center in 2008. It kind of is a saving-face, we-can't-really-be-losing maneuver to try and convince people to still vote.

It is delusional, but I think it is also understandable.
posted by edgeways at 9:02 AM on September 27, 2012

It would take something really unprecedented and catastrophic to bring about a complete Romney trounce.

He doesn't have to trounce, he'd just have to win. You can win by the slimmest of unexpected margins.

I could see that happening if the vote in key states has been suppressed by the spectre of Voter ID laws - who's to say that the folks who are the indended targets of that disenfranchising movement aren't already planning to stay home just to "be safe"?

Who's to say that the left isn't already SO confident about an Obama win that they don't bother voting where and when they're needed?

Who's to say there aren't enough of the "47%" who are righteously horrified by "their" candidate to vote for Obama?

This is totally NOT over, and I get cringe-y every time I hear someone trying to write a concession speech for Romney. I've told everyone I've come in contact with for weeks and weeks to make SURE they're on the rolls and to make SURE and vote. Just because all this sounds good for the Dems doesn't mean it will auto-magically BE good. Shit still needs to get done, and we shouldn't rest until it is.
posted by ersatzkat at 9:14 AM on September 27, 2012 [4 favorites]

So what is with Fox News trotting endlessly about how the administration did not tell Fox News everything immediately about Libya?
It's been the main headline there for days.
They are obviously trying to hash SOME kind of scandal together.

The other article I noticed on there was a report on how every other news organization in the world is liberal biased, and that a conservative think-tank wrote a letter saying people should watch more Fox News to get the news properly.

Fox News: creating the news, just for you.
posted by Theta States at 9:18 AM on September 27, 2012

Obama is in Virginia Live - he just hit Romney again, saying "you can't write off half the country". These 47% remarks are just proving to be crushing for Romney, and lets the President go around waving the American flag.

Contrast this with a Romney rally in OH:
‏
@ZekeJMiller
Pool: "Look at this little girl here! Look at this tiny Republican," Romney said, taking the child and cradling her in his arms.

@ZekeJMiller
Pool: "The girl - named Caydence - immediately started balling [sic] - her tiny face gave a look of what might be best described as pure fear."
posted by zombieflanders at 10:24 AM on September 27, 2012 [5 favorites]

Fox are also trotting out these 'Bias Alerts' and featuring them on their front page. The latest is claiming the mainstream media is biased for not giving equal time to the (obviously dug up in desperation to distract from the 47% remarks) 14 year old tape where Obama says he believes in redistribution to a certain extent (obviously ignoring the bit about free markets and capitalism in the very next sentence).

This was following on the heels of the 'fact check' on whether Romney really pays a lower tax rate than the rest of the country (which basically ignored the payroll tax).
posted by TwoWordReview at 10:28 AM on September 27, 2012

What I find funny about the POLLS-ARE-RIGGED! bruhaha... even FOXs polls have Obama up about 5 pts nationally and ahead in the Swing States, So I guess Rasmussen is the only true Scotsman after all
posted by edgeways at 10:28 AM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

Pool: "The girl - named Caydence - immediately started balling [sic] - her tiny face gave a look of what might be best described as pure fear."

Man, Urban Dictionary has so many different definitions for balling...
posted by Mad_Carew at 10:35 AM on September 27, 2012

Latest from FOX: FOX is part of liberal conspiracy!
posted by rainy at 10:39 AM on September 27, 2012

6 Conservatives Who Think The Media Is Fixing The Polls For Obama.
posted by madamjujujive at 11:43 AM on September 27 [1 favorite +] [!]

And every single one of those 6 conservatives has a financial stake in making this election much closer than it is. That's without getting into any analysis of their more egregious aspects.

It's the Right wing echo chamber, and it's hasting the demise of the GOtP and that's something I fully support so more power to their greed and mendacity is what I say, although sadly I also believe the country needs a real conservative party that isn't absolutely bonkers, and doesn't deny reality and tell people how to live.

I think the thing to do is for anyone wishing Obama wins this to simply realize that until election day and everyone getting out as early as possible voting, and car pooling and helping everyone get to the polls and sparing some time and/or bucks if you got'em this election should be assumed a toss-up.

That's job #1.

Everything else has to take a back seat to that in regards to what Obama needs to hear after he wins. And act upon and correct and have his feet held to the fire etc...
posted by Skygazer at 10:41 AM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

@ZekeJMiller
Pool: "The girl - named Caydence - immediately started balling [sic] - her tiny face gave a look of what might be best described as pure fear."

That cracked me up ha ha ha. I couldn't help seeing Romney in my mind caught in, yet another, David Brent Moment..

(And then I saw David Brent actually trying to explain it with that sad pathetic frozen smile on his face when what he thinks he's just said or done is a brilliant thing but falls flat on it's face...)

Damn you, Ricky Gervaise, stop harassing Mitt Romney with your comedic genius!!
posted by Skygazer at 10:49 AM on September 27, 2012

David Brent would find a way to blame the baby.
posted by cortex at 10:54 AM on September 27, 2012 [8 favorites]

Well the baby clearly thinks she's a victim.
posted by Anything at 11:01 AM on September 27, 2012 [4 favorites]

He'd "sympathize" with the mother for having a mentally handicapped baby or somesuch...and then make that stupid laugh to show the crowd he was "just having a laugh", but he'd be digging himself in further...
posted by Skygazer at 11:01 AM on September 27, 2012

Being cradled by Romney? Hell she IS a victim.
posted by edgeways at 11:04 AM on September 27, 2012

Romney's advisers tell him he should bring state sanctioned torture back.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:07 AM on September 27, 2012

MJ is on a tear this cycle, hopefully it culminates with a bunch of new subscribers
posted by edgeways at 11:15 AM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

MJ has hit a new golden age of plutocratic ass-kicking in the name of Progressivism.
posted by Skygazer at 11:22 AM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

Apropo of my mention of Israel up above, Netanyahu is speaking at the UN right now, and as a demonstration of Iran's nuclear abilities brought out--and I swear I am not making this up--a cartoon of an ACME-style bomb. The man who will very likely be responsible for starting a new war within the next few months is treating the debate over nuclear weapons like an episode of Looney Tunes.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:26 AM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

The good thing about these now-casts from Nate Silver is that early voting has begun in something like 30 states.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:28 AM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Via Andrew Sullivan (has links):
Obama: More Efficient Than Romney

Obama is out-advertising Romney in Ohio and Florida despite the overall Republican fund-raising advantage. Jon Chait explains how this is possible:

Obama seems to be getting way more bang for his buck. Republicans are paying their staff twice the rate Democrats are paying theirs, allowing Obama to have twice as many people working for him for the same amount Romney is spending. And the Washington Post today reports the little-known fact that campaigns, by federal law, can command lower advertising rates than Superpacs, giving Obama consistent, and occasionally huge, savings.

posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:28 AM on September 27, 2012

Damn...if the Internet can raise $703,000 for the bullied bus monitor, Kerry Klein, surely it can raise a ton of 'thank you' cash for the person who filmed the devastating Romney 47% video. Please come forward. I'm in it for $100. Who is with me?
posted by ericb at 11:39 AM on September 27, 2012 [15 favorites]

Time for some right-wing handwringing:
Fox News: What the polls aren't telling us about the 2012 election

In this election, with the focus on approval ratings, swing states, and sample design, we've lost sight of the fact that the real issues in the election, the real issues that the electorate cares about, are simply not being focused on.

What are these issues? First and foremost, the American people believe that the country is adrift, lacks leadership, and lacks the policies necessary to address the trenchant problems facing the nation.
...
But it would be a profound mistake to believe that because the race has been so engaged, and because we have so many surveys, so many attack ads and so many speeches, that somehow the concerns of the American electorate are being addressed.

Oh me oh my, won't someone thing of the good governance and even-handed political rhetoric that brings all sides together???

Oh Fox, you've got a smidge of Rove on your face.
posted by Theta States at 11:48 AM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

What I find funny about the POLLS-ARE-RIGGED! bruhaha...

What I find funny is that it reflects just how determined many Republicans are to see themselves as victims. Backed by the forces of capitalism and with a news media that any other right-wing party in the developed world would sell its soul for, they still believe that they're the victims because else they'd automatically be in charge of everything forever.

It ain't 47% of the country, and it likely ain't even 47% of Republican voters, but there's a sizeable chunk of people out there to whom the victim mentality can be very fairly ascribed.
posted by howfar at 11:48 AM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

I love the accusations that the polls are rigged. The polls come from private companies, and are just reported on by the media.
For the right-wing to come out against a wide range of businesses and claim that their methodology is fraudulent is so balls crazy, I hope it finds more traction.
posted by Theta States at 11:57 AM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Republicans are paying their staff twice the rate Democrats are paying theirs, allowing Obama to have twice as many people working for him for the same amount Romney is spending.

So the democrats are underpaying their staff?
posted by winna at 12:05 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

I just remembered the guilty half-hope many expressed for a Santorum or Cain victory in the Republican primaries, based on the bags of crazy they'd bring to the party, or Gingrich, due to his immense unpleasantness. Anyone who secretly prayed for that, well it seems like the universe kinda likes you, but also knows what's best far better than you do.
posted by howfar at 12:06 PM on September 27, 2012 [5 favorites]

Republicans are paying their staff twice the rate Democrats are paying theirs, allowing Obama to have twice as many people working for him for the same amount Romney is spending.

So the democrats are underpaying their staff?

Or cushy jobs for other well-heeled pompous assholes with connections? I certainly doubt that they are paying their entry-level staff a cent more than absolutely necessary.
posted by Vysharra at 12:20 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

I made an attempt to do a bigger part in this election, and I just got confirmation that I will be a poll officer on November 6th. I guess I'm officially an old person now. But there won't be any bullshit shenanigans at my polling place, if I have any say in it.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 12:25 PM on September 27, 2012 [15 favorites]

Akin: McCaskill was more ladylike last time.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:30 PM on September 27, 2012

So; speaking of voter fraud; RNC-Backed Company Accused Of Voter Registration Fraud. Note that they were recommended by the National GOP, and they "collected" voter registration in Florida, Colorado and North Carolina.
posted by dejah420 at 12:34 PM on September 27, 2012 [4 favorites]

I just remembered the guilty half-hope many expressed for a Santorum...

for myself it was neither guilty or a half hope. here is my reasoning. the Republicans should have nominated Santorum. Flat out I believe this. for A number of reasons.
1 - for all the numerous (and they are legendary) flaws Rick has, he at least was/is honest about his credentials. he played it just about as straight as a politician can, unlike Romney.
2- Santorum actually honestly reflected the values of the Republican base. Romney did not win the nomination because people thought he was the best candidate, he won because they thought he had the best chance of winning. Romney, when he loses, will be another in the line of "he lost because he wasn't conservative enough" A la McCain.
3 - Like or not we will have to face the Christian Taliban at the polls, sooner or later, and until we do and until we defeat it at the national level it will keep coming up and will keep pushing the political discourse rightward. Santorum represented a chance to do that. We have a President and campaign staff right now who are strong on electioneering. They could have defeated Santorum and NO ONE would then be able to say "But he wasn't conservative enough", they would have to say "he was too conservative". And THAT. we need that, we need some bright demarcation not just for "America" but the Republican party needs that most of all, to show that the Religious Right is defeatable and can be marginalized. Now, we have 2016 to look forward to with no incumbent, and historically/cyclically a difficult time for the ruling party to maintain control. what if... what if Santorum wins the Nomination in 2016? The chances of defeating him are significantly less then they would be this year.

No half hope from me. Despite the expressed worry of many I was all for Ricky winning the Nomination and getting beat at the Big Dance.
posted by edgeways at 12:35 PM on September 27, 2012 [7 favorites]

Akin: McCaskill was more ladylike last time.

response should be: Just like last time Akin is still no Gentleman
posted by edgeways at 12:40 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

But what if Romney was out front with his reactionary bullshit and won fair and square?

I mean, that's basically a recipe for Hitler 2.0. I'll take another fifty years of moderate namby-pamby democrats and gutless republicans who won't put their money where their mouth is before I'll live in a fascist theocracy.
posted by Sara C. at 12:41 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

So the democrats are underpaying their staff?

Nope.

Romney is compensating his staff well in addition to recently using campaign funds to dole out bonuses.

Romney Campaign Paid Bonuses To Top Staff In August.

Mitt Romney Campaign Gave Bonuses To Top Staffers, Disclosure Records Show.

Richie-Rich, fer sure!
posted by ericb at 12:48 PM on September 27, 2012

Slate | Feb. 7, 2008: How Much Do Campaign Staffers Make?
posted by ericb at 12:49 PM on September 27, 2012

I'll take another fifty years of moderate namby-pamby democrats and gutless republicans who won't put their money where their mouth is before I'll live in a fascist theocracy.

And I think I'd argue that those fifty years will kill the far-right in the US just as effectively as beating them in the polls. The reason that these reactionary fundie-fascists are fighting so hard is the same reason fundamentalism is flaring up the world over. They know, in their heart of hearts, that they're losing the demographic war.

Of course, the heartless bastards like Romney who harness and stoke this unrighteous fervour have plenty of other tools for fucking us. This one, however, is on the road to obsolescence.
posted by howfar at 12:50 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think Romney would be a pretty poor president, I don't think he would be worse thank GWB was though. And we survived that without Nazisim. Hell, Romney would be locked up at least half the term without a Senate(most likely here) and if his rhetoric was that bad then he'd lose the house in 2014 and still be gridlocked.

Fundamental problem with Romney is, no one knows how he'd govern. My Opinion? He'd be on the far side of mediocrity. things just wouldn't happen. We'd survive that.

the Supreme Court would be the big problem.

Richie-Rich, fer sure!

Desperate to keep people from jumping ship for sure, bonuses not big enough for T-Paw though. (and oh, now the scuttle but is he is definitely NOT running against Franken in 2014, which leave the MN GOP without a top tier candidate for the race)
posted by edgeways at 12:50 PM on September 27, 2012

things just wouldn't happen. We'd survive that.

It seems that this is the one point in history when exactly what the US can't survive is inaction. The world is changing, and the US needs to find a place in it, if it's not to become a disastrous and dismal irrelevance.
posted by howfar at 12:53 PM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

... the Supreme Court would be the big problem.

In related news: Conservatives Warily Ponder Prospect Of An 'Obama Court'.
posted by ericb at 12:53 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Sorry, edgeways, I meant to type Santorum. I was talking about the possibility of one of the far-right loons winning the Republican nomination, and then beating the Democrats.

Romney is bad, but he's no Hitler.
posted by Sara C. at 12:57 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Suddenly a whole bunch of mystery money gets thrown into healthcare research for the elderly..
posted by Artw at 12:58 PM on September 27, 2012

From the RNC-Backed Company Accused Of Voter Registration Fraud article on TPM:

The Republican Party of Florida has cut ties with a company it paid $1.2 million to register voters after the elections supervisor in Palm Beach County asked the state’s attorney’s office to review 106 “questionable” applications.

Palm Beach County Elections Supervisor Susan Bucher said she turned the applications over to law enforcement officials because of similar-looking signatures, missing information and wrong addresses on the forms. The questionable applications were part of a batch of 304 voter registration forms turned in by the firm using the Republican Party of Florida’s identification number, according to the Palm Beach Post.

If over a third of the applications in a particular batch of 304 were questionable, perhaps other batches from the Strategic Allied Consultants should be reviewed, too, or the whole lot of 304 voter applications should be reviewed. And maybe the North Carolina and Colorado voter applications from SAC should be reviewed, too, in case it is a company-wide attempt at voter fraud.
posted by filthy light thief at 12:58 PM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

SCOTUS tangent: I like how Ginsburg is drastically leaning away from Kennedy in this photo of the 2010 Supreme Court, and he is leaning away from her a bit. Everyone else seems to be sitting or standing pretty well straight in their chairs.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:05 PM on September 27, 2012

Sorry, edgeways, I meant to type Santorum. I was talking about the possibility of one of the far-right loons winning the Republican nomination, and then beating the Democrats.

Right-o gotcha. And I hear what you are saying, and it most certainly is a valid concern. I think though we are likely to face it at some point 2016? 2020? and I'd much rather face it on ground favorable towards defeating them then on unknown ground, as mixed as the economic data is right now I think this would have been the year to kick it in the metaphorical balls, as it stands we still have the sword of Damocles above our heads waiting to fall.
posted by edgeways at 1:06 PM on September 27, 2012

How can Fox claim poll bias in one article, and then have their own polling page basically agree with every single other one out there, showing Romney's in dire trouble?
UNSKEW THE RESULTS!
posted by Theta States at 1:08 PM on September 27, 2012

In related news...

THE STENCH OF DESPERATION: Scott Brown's "macaca moment"
posted by liza at 1:13 PM on September 27, 2012 [7 favorites]

My kind of random thought about FOX. there are two or three factions at play.

The blatant, not a question, ideologues who just don't give a shit what they say as long as longs as - it gets ratings and riles up the left of center / right of center (in different ways).

And the folks just doing their job with no particular political bent. I've heard on more than one occasion reporters or other news folks from different outfits defending the everyday reporters from FOX. For whatever reason whoever actually runs most of the polls seems to do an ok job at it.

The tension between the two factions must make it an .... amusing ... place to work.
posted by edgeways at 1:16 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

update from the source. y'all may want to delete that comment and this one if it's a derail.
posted by liza at 1:18 PM on September 27, 2012

Scott Brown's "macaca moment"

Wow...
posted by TwoWordReview at 1:18 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

The tension between the two factions must make it an .... amusing ... place to work.

Aww man, if only Sorkin wrote THAT show, instead of The Newsroom.
posted by Theta States at 1:19 PM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

SCOTUS tangent: I like how Ginsburg is drastically leaning away from Kennedy in this photo of the 2010 Supreme Court, and he is leaning away from her a bit. Everyone else seems to be sitting or standing pretty well straight in their chairs.

Kennedy just farted. A real stinker. Ginsburg scooched her chair away.
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:21 PM on September 27, 2012

update from the source. y'all may want to delete that comment and this one if it's a derail.

.................. what
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:21 PM on September 27, 2012

New Obama Campaign Video in what looks like a series - The Road to November 6th. There is a 47% sign shown near the end. Shows his appearances in Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Virginia. Cute baby alert in the beginning. Look at the faces in the crowd. That is what I see america as. Diverse, engaged, excited and working together. The message the President is delivering is the American message. The graphics look fantastic, and back on par with how it was before. Just incredibly appealing for all the right reasons. Still special.

If the 47% video leaker ever does come forward, I will absolutely give money, because at the moment, those horrible comments by Mitt writing off half the country - remarks that he has again and again verified and stood by instead of apologizing for - those are galvanizing those who want to see a great future for all. It's making people who were unsure, realize who Mitt (again, by his own words and defense of those words) really is. There is still lots of time, and Mitt surely has twists and tricks, distortions and lies for next Wednesdays debate, but when we look back, if the President is re-elected, this video might be the thing that was a substantial turning point.
posted by cashman at 1:32 PM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

Ok.... The not official Running for President Char Sheet, with all 50 States + DC:

I apologize.

AK – Actual Knowledge
AL – Attendant Loyalty
AR - Aristocracy
AZ – Activate Zinger
CA – Campaign
CO - Constitution
CT – Circumlocution Test
DE – Debate
FL – Favorablity Ladder
GA – Gaffe
HI – Human Index
IA – Inaccuracy
ID – Immune to Disease
IL – Illegal Immigration
IN – Intelligence
KS – Kissing Seniors (ass)
KY – Kissing Youth
LA – Latinos
MA – Mobilize Aged
MD – Maximize Donations
ME – Military Experience
MI – Mic Interaction
MN – Mesmerization
MO – Media Opposition
MS – Medicare Solution
MT – Mention Terrorism
NC – National Convention
ND – Novelty Distraction
NE – Name-check Environment
NH – iNspirational History
NJ – palestiNe / Jerusalem
NM – New Media
NY – National Yawn
NV – New Voters
OH – Offense Handling
OK – Obstructive Kin
OR – Oration
PA – Polling acumen
RI – Religion Index
SC – Spouse/Children
SD – Sexual Discretion
TN – Tradition
TX – Taxation Plan
UT – Union Trust
VA – Voting African Americans
VT – Vote Turnout
WV – Women Voting
WA – Wide Appeal
WI - Wisdom
WY – White Youth

- DC – Delegate Count
posted by edgeways at 1:42 PM on September 27, 2012 [5 favorites]

THE STENCH OF DESPERATION: Scott Brown's "macaca moment"

That makes me want to hit things.
posted by Devils Rancher at 1:45 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

To be clear, that sign was homemade by this asshole, right? Scott Brown has nothing to do with it.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:45 PM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

It says a mouthful about his supporters, though.
posted by Devils Rancher at 1:47 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama's lead over Romney with the Catholic vote increasing.
posted by Groundhog Week at 1:47 PM on September 27, 2012

Guess that is someone else "propping him up".
posted by edgeways at 1:48 PM on September 27, 2012

That is what I see america as. Diverse, engaged, excited and working together.

Me too. If we're not that, we're not anything worth having. Whenever I shut off the videos and news reports and go walking out into the world, buying some food, passing people on the street, asking my co-workers for stuff - that's the America I see. Different people, all with hopes and goals, all of whom deserve to be thought about and represented in their democracy. That's when I feel angriest at the narrow, nasty, ideological identity politics being played by so many on the right - the homogenous, dull, scared America they are playing to is a long way from real day-to-day life for many of us, and it's not a place I want to live.
posted by Miko at 1:48 PM on September 27, 2012 [10 favorites]

CNN Tells Of Harrowing Dangers Mitt Romney Faced In 1968 France (While Avoiding The Vietnam War)
posted by homunculus at 1:57 PM on September 27, 2012

AK – Actual Knowledge

i think you meant

ARITHMETIC KNOWLEDGE

(i'll see myself out)
posted by liza at 1:59 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

CNN Tells Of Harrowing Dangers Mitt Romney Faced In 1968 France (While Avoiding The Vietnam War)

"This is wine country!"
posted by Artw at 1:59 PM on September 27, 2012 [4 favorites]

To be clear, that sign was homemade by this asshole, right? Scott Brown has nothing to do with it.
posted by roomthreeseventeen

That sign was surely homemade by that asshole. But I wouldn't say Scott Brown has nothing to do with it.

Story.
Tape.
posted by benito.strauss at 2:01 PM on September 27, 2012

this thread is a relationship where i'm constantly 2 days behind
posted by twist my arm at 2:01 PM on September 27, 2012 [10 favorites]

Romney ‘I Dig It’ Trust Gives Heirs Triple Benefit

In January 1999, a trust set up by Mitt Romney for his children and grandchildren reaped a 1,000 percent return on the sale of shares in Internet advertising firm DoubleClick Inc.

If Romney had given the cash directly, he could have owed a gift tax at a rate as high as 55 percent. He avoided gift and estate taxes by using a type of generation-skipping trust known to tax planners by the nickname: “I Dig It.”

The sale of DoubleClick shares received before the company went public, detailed in previously unreported securities filings reviewed by Bloomberg News, sheds new light on Romney’s estate planning -- the art of leaving assets for heirs while avoiding taxes. The Republican presidential candidate used a trust considered one of the most effective techniques for the wealthy to bypass estate and gift taxes. The Obama administration proposed cracking down on the tax benefits in February.

While Romney’s tax avoidance is both legal and common among high-net-worth individuals, it has become increasingly awkward for his candidacy since the disclosure of his remarks at a May fundraiser. He said that the nearly one-half of Americans who pay no income taxes are “dependent upon government” and “believe that they are victims.”

Romney’s effective income tax rate in 2011 was about 14 percent. He has also enhanced his family’s wealth by moving assets worth $100 million into a trust while taking steps to avoid paying any gift taxes. The trust’s value isn’t counted in the $250 million that his campaign cites as Romney’s net worth.

The bulk of the trust’s income comes from Romney’s interests in Bain Capital funds, hedge funds and other investments, according to his 2011 tax return. The return doesn’t show how much Romney paid for these holdings, nor the value assigned to them when he gave them to the trust, so it’s unclear how much in total the trust has saved in gift and estate taxes.

“People like Mitt Romney make a lot of money, but they pay very little income tax,” said Victor Fleischer, a tax law professor at the University of Colorado who has written extensively about private equity and taxes. “Then by dodging the estate and gift tax, they are able to build dynastic wealth. These DoubleClick documents really show that tax planning in action.”

The Obama administration estimates that closing the loophole Romney used would bring the federal government almost $1 billion in the coming decade.

posted by zombieflanders at 2:06 PM on September 27, 2012 [6 favorites]

Holy fuck, that sign.
posted by Artw at 2:07 PM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

TwistMyArm: When I caught up (momentarily) the other day, I excitedly told my spouse, "I finally did it!" She didn't share my excitement.

Hey, I caught up again! ;)
posted by schyler523 at 2:17 PM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

I don't think he would be worse thank GWB was though. And we survived that without Nazisim.

There are lots of non-survivors in Iraq and Afghanistan who would take issue with that if they weren't, you know, dead.
posted by emjaybee at 2:28 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama: "First thing is, I want to see us export more jobs... uh... export more *products*... Excuse me. I was channeling my opponent there for a second."
posted by futz at 2:29 PM on September 27, 2012 [6 favorites]

Ha, good comeback there.
posted by TwoWordReview at 2:36 PM on September 27, 2012

Er.... ''without nazisim'' there emjaybee
posted by edgeways at 2:41 PM on September 27, 2012

I see what you're saying edgeways, but the "survived" thing didn't work for me...but never mind. This thread has enough rabbit trails already.
posted by emjaybee at 2:45 PM on September 27, 2012

FINALLY. I CAN COMMENT.

had to read through every damn comment, didn't I?

Now. Finally. FINALLY. I can say what I want to.

If I could remember it.

Shit.
posted by grubi at 2:45 PM on September 27, 2012 [21 favorites]

Aww man, if only Sorkin wrote THAT show, instead of The Newsroom.

HEY! I like 'The Newsroom!'

Your favorite band sucks!
posted by ericb at 2:49 PM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

...if the President is re-elected, this video might be the thing that was a substantial turning point.

Oh, how much I agree, In looking back at modern American politics that video will likely be referenced more than Nixon's sweating during his television debate with JFK, more than "Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy, I knew Jack Kennedy, Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy," "There you go again." ETC ...
posted by ericb at 2:56 PM on September 27, 2012

Romney fundraiser planned Thursday in Hong Kong

Romney accuses China's government of trade, currency and intellectual property abuses, and says Obama has failed to confront Chinese officials. The Obama campaign said the administration has stood up to China and accused Romney's former firm, Bain Capital, of aiding the shift of American jobs to China. Both China and the U.S. filed World Trade Organization complaints against each other last week for alleged trade violations.
...
Romney has also been sensitive to the China issue in his personal finances. Over the past two years, as the presidential race approached, a lawyer overseeing his family's trusts sold off numerous shares of stock in Chinese state-owned firms, including the 2011 sale of shares in a Chinese oil company. Romney had pledged in 2007 to eliminate any investments that conflicted with his political beliefs, but his trusts kept many of the Chinese investments and other politically-sensitive holdings until 2010 and 2011.
posted by futz at 3:03 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Debate Will Be Romney's Chance To Alter Trajectory Of The Race.
posted by ericb at 3:13 PM on September 27, 2012

Romney Slipping As Early Voting Begins In First Swing State.
posted by ericb at 3:20 PM on September 27, 2012

Debate Will Be Romney's Chance To Alter Trajectory Of The Race.

Well, one of the contestants is a master of controlling and masking his emotions, whereas the other has lived his whole life without having to.
posted by Mental Wimp at 3:20 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

This article points out that early voting this year in Ohio will probably surpass 2008.
posted by annsunny at 3:30 PM on September 27, 2012

From ericb's "Romney Slipping..." link:

A few minutes past 8 a.m. on Thursday, Mark Cooper, 57, walked into the Polk County auditor's office with a plastic travel mug in his hand and cast one of the first in-person ballots in the 2012 presidential election.

Cooper's long brown hair, beard, and leather jacket made him look more like a member of Hells Angels than what he is: a state chapter leader for the AFL-CIO and a member of the Polk County Central Committee.

He was the first to arrive, around 7:15 a.m., but soon a long line of around 200 people formed behind him, almost all of them wearing stickers distributed by President Obama's reelection campaign with the message: "Be the First!"

There's some great pictures if you do a Google image search, including the Dude-esque Mr. Cooper (more pics from NBC here) and the line of excited Obama voters. The Iowa Democratic Chair mentioned on TV earlier that despite the fears of an "inevitable" Romney blowout, the poll trends have actually increased voter morale and volunteer participation/motivation.
posted by zombieflanders at 3:51 PM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

Romney supporters: "Go get food stamps!"
posted by zombieflanders at 3:56 PM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

Romney and Ryan still like each other.*

*warning: cannot be unseen.
posted by annsunny at 4:02 PM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

Mitt Romney plans to turn himself into a one-man truth squad during the first debate next week, President Obama as someone who can’t be trusted to stick to the facts or keep his promises.

Romney himself was the first to signal the strategy.

“I think he’s going to say a lot of things that aren’t accurate,” Romney said on ABC’s “Good Morning America” earlier this month, adding he would have to choose between correcting Obama and delivering his own message.

“I’d be tempted to go back to that wonderful line by Ronald Reagan, ‘There you go again,’” Romney said.

Pretending you are someone else (without your own ideas and sayings) is maybe not the best route to the Whitehouse, although I would love it if Romney showed up wearing a Reagan mask. However the part that is most interesting to me is "adding he would have to choose between correcting Obama and delivering his own message." Since Romney doesn't really have a message-- he doesn't seem to have a policy that he wants to reveal-- then I guess attacking Obama is his only strategy.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:03 PM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'm all for early voting and everything... But isn't it kind of weird to allow people to vote before even the first scheduled debate?

I know it likely won't make too much of a difference in practice, given how polarized the country is. It still seems kinda weird to me, though.
posted by meese at 4:04 PM on September 27, 2012

I don't think Romney has the charisma to pull off making the debates into a discussion about inaccuracy/changing ideas/etc. without it turning into a train wreck. He's changed his positions on so many things that the whole subject is such a comically large minefield for him I can hardly imagine he'd do it. Although that probably serves equally as an argument in favor of it.
posted by feloniousmonk at 4:07 PM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

Meese, I don't care what Romney says during the debate, I am not voting for him. I've already learned enough to know that he will not be representing my interests. If NC had early voting today, I would have voted.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:08 PM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'd feel weirder about it if our electoral process wasn't so protracted as is; voting four weeks early if the entire campaign were only six or eight weeks long would seem like jumping the gun pretty significantly, say.

But with a general election that's in practice months long at least and on the tails of a far longer yet primary season, there's a lot of time for voters to get familiar with the candidates and platforms such that a month out they're going to have a pretty solid idea of where they stand on their votes. Certainly there are exceptions, but that's why early voting is a choice, not a requirement.
posted by cortex at 4:10 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Personally, I'm glad you can vote early. I'm going to be moving across the country at the end of October and if I couldn't take care of it now when things are still calm, odds are I'd find myself in the middle of nowhere with no way to vote.

Unless Romney turns into Q and reveals that the real Obama was replaced with a Borg sleeper agent, the debates aren't going to matter much to me beyond the spectacle anyway.
posted by feloniousmonk at 4:11 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think the debates have historically been much later (Carter-Reagan was less than 2 weeks before the election), so it's not that weird. But Obama's certainly been taking advantage of incorporating early voting in campaign speeches:

“Six days from now, you can start voting,” the president instructed a raucous crowd of approximately 6,600 students and locals at Kent State University. He implored them to visit the website gottavote.com, which redirects to the campaign’s Ohio page and allows visitors to register to vote. “That’s no ‘got to,’ it’s ‘gotta,’ ” he said.

He wrapped up the rally with this: “If you still believe in me, I want you to register to vote by October 9th.”

Supplementing that message was a series of student speakers who took the stage ahead of Obama. One directed the large crowd to take out their cell phones and text the Obama network’s number, which enters each supporter into a database (meaning they’ll get lots of text messages in coming days prodding them to register and to vote). And Congressman Tim Ryan reminded the crowd that Democrat Ted Strickland lost the 2010 governor’s race by just 70,000 votes, stressing, “That comes down to about two or three votes per precinct in Ohio. . . . We want to make sure that Barack Obama wins. So I want you to tell me you’re going to stand with President Obama over the next 47 days.”

An Obama ad playing on area radio stations made the same point: That early voting starts on Tuesday, and that the registration deadline is the Tuesday after that.

By contrast, when Romney bolted up to the microphone in the gymnasium of South Westerville High School earlier Wednesday morning, he was addressing a quieter crowd of about 2,000 in the Columbus suburb
[...]
[Romney]’s not making the same forceful voting push that the president is -- at least not in a public way. In fact, it was only Ohio Sen. Rob Portman who urged voters to get moving.

Portman, the most fiery speaker at Romney’s first rally of the day and the only one sporting an Ohio State shirt, scolded the crowd after asking who had already requested an absentee ballot.

“That’s not enough hands,” he shouted, adding, “Help people vote. We’ve got to bank those votes, don’t we?”

Volunteers were waiting with clipboards outside the event as people exited, but the campaign didn’t exhort them to do their civic duty with the same urgency that Obama’s did.

posted by zombieflanders at 4:12 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

My ballot arrived in the mail today, and I have no qualms about not waiting for the debates. Except for the Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisor debates, which will be crucial.
posted by COBRA! at 4:17 PM on September 27, 2012 [8 favorites]

I would love to vote early and avoid the crowds, but this is my son's first presidential election and he wants to go ON THE DAY and pull the lever for the first time.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 4:20 PM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

Obama: "First thing is, I want to see us export more jobs... uh... export more *products*... Excuse me. I was channeling my opponent there for a second."

Awesome. That's a great answer to this question.
posted by dfan at 4:32 PM on September 27, 2012

I'm all for early voting and everything... But isn't it kind of weird to allow people to vote before even the first scheduled debate?

I think it's a refreshing admission that the debates are bullshit.
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 4:42 PM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

From that NBC News article:“We can’t afford another four years like the last four years,” Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney tells viewers in his new TV ad. And Wednesday’s debate may be Romney’s best opportunity to get Americans to agree with that claim.

The reason hammering on the Economy isn't working the way Romney (and genera conventional wisdom) thinks it should, is because the country didn't gradually fall into a recession (at least not as far as appearances go). When the economy went ka-blooey in fall of '08 it was a big enough event that everyone remembers it. There's just no way to mention Obama's handling of the economy without indirectly referencing the circumstances of the economic meltdown at the end of the Bush administration. The Romney campaign seemingly hasn't figured this out yet.

I think it would almost be smarter for him to address it directly. Take Obama out of the equation and run against the Bush record. "This is where Bush went wrong, and a Real Republican wouldn't have made those mistakes..." It has the added benefit of appealing the the Tea Party Base because it absolves them of their glaring weak spot, which is that they didn't seem to care about Deficits and spending when Bush had the National credit card in his wallet.

But mostly I think Mitt's biggest failing is his complete inability to talk to the American people. That new ad fails because he says Americans are struggling and he's going to make things better "for them" No Mitt, it's "YOU'RE struggling and I'm going to make things better FOR YOU". That's politics 101.
posted by billyfleetwood at 4:43 PM on September 27, 2012 [5 favorites]

It doesn't look like anyone has posted this yet, LA TImes: Tea Party Group Works to Remove Names From Ohio Voter Rolls

“We really aren’t trying to challenge people’s right to vote,” [Mary Siegel, one of the leaders of the Ohio tea party effort] said.

But Siegel signed 422 “Challenge of Right of Person to Vote” forms and submitted them to Hamilton County’s elections board in July. She sought to remove the names from the voter rolls based on a Postal Service change-of-address registry. Siegel withdrew the challenges when the state declared the postal registry to be insufficient grounds to challenge voting rights.

Maybe Mary thinks "right of person to vote" is different than "people's right to vote." And in fact Siegal made
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:44 PM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

Romney and Ryan still like each other.*

I like this one better.
posted by the duck by the oboe at 4:48 PM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

Now I'm just anticipating the Oh Snap moment in the debate when Romney tries to do a lame Reagan "there you go again" impression and Obama drills him.
posted by humanfont at 4:52 PM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

He is a muslim.....Really do pay attention to Fox news...the newspapers and Fox news will help you a lot.

GOP phone bank caller recorded in Florida.
posted by stagewhisper at 4:55 PM on September 27, 2012 [8 favorites]

From a Daily Kos post, a summary of some recent studies of the candidates social media presence:

Facebook:
Barack Obama
27,106,608 likes · 882,784 talking about this
Mitt Romney
2,043,062 likes · 450,019 talking about this

Twitter
Barack Obama
16,877,045 Followers

Mitt Romney
576,840 Followers

YouTube
Barack Obama
201,066 subscribers
195,170,858 video views

Mitt Romney
9,459 subscribers
9,267,525 video views

Now in fairness, Obama has had a four year bully pulpit so those can't just be assigned to the campaign. Still, I found it interesting.
posted by madamjujujive at 5:02 PM on September 27, 2012 [5 favorites]

He is a muslim.....Really do pay attention to Fox news...the newspapers and Fox news will help you a lot.

Jesus suffering fuck. It's not just the lies that demonstrate contempt for the electorate, it's also using someone so profoundly inarticulate to convey them. Presuming that's a real recording, of course.
posted by howfar at 5:05 PM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

It is real.
posted by stagewhisper at 5:20 PM on September 27, 2012 [4 favorites]

I'm all for early voting and everything... But isn't it kind of weird to allow people to vote before even the first scheduled debate?

SNL had a funny "undecided voter" sketch this past weekend.
posted by King Bee at 5:20 PM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

He is a muslim.....Really do pay attention to Fox news...the newspapers and Fox news will help you a lot.

This is the world we live in now. Onion headlines are indistinguishable from genuine reporting, fact-checkers dismissed, foxnews polls being arbitrarily re-weighted by foxnews to be more "accurate", and trolltastic lies are spoken completely seriously even after 4 years.

There is a reason why most lefties in my age group get their news from comedians. This shit is too absurd to be serious.
posted by Vysharra at 5:20 PM on September 27, 2012 [4 favorites]

are you fucking kidding me
posted by bq at 5:24 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

BaracksDubs clip - Obama/Romney Sing Party in the USA

Call Me Maybe is still my favorite, but this'll do.
posted by Vysharra at 5:28 PM on September 27, 2012

No splice beats "The Real Mitt Romney," political or otherwise.
posted by Orange Pamplemousse at 5:30 PM on September 27, 2012 [10 favorites]

Ya’ll sound like ya’ll are seniors citizens, right?” the volunteer said. “You really don’t want Obama because he will get rid of your Medicare … say goodbye to it.”

Dougher said the volunteer was counseled about that call but she wasn’t sure if the woman was still making calls. Dougher also questioned the legality of playing audio after the volunteer was unaware they were being recorded.

“Can you air a recording like that?” she asked. “If not, I would question a station playing something like that illegally.”

Lorei said the decision to play the audio was an easy one to make.

“This listener tells me that he frequently gets calls from the GOP,” he said. “His answering machine did what answering machines do when a person is not there to pick up the phone, it recorded the phone call.”

OK, so let me get this straight. Far from apologizing for this volunteer going rogue and spreading misinformation. the head of the Clay GOP says a) I don't know if this volunteer is still making calls, and b) I question the right of the radio station to air this campaign call from the GOP. Jesus. No apologies, no remorse. <----GOP motto
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:34 PM on September 27, 2012 [10 favorites]

Woah, I skimmed over the comment and assumed it was a member of the public phoning into talk radio or something. That's just crazy!
posted by TwoWordReview at 5:43 PM on September 27, 2012

There He Goes Again Dept, Romney lies about Obama's cuts to the military

In a speech to the American Legion today, Mitt Romney [accused the] administration of cutting the benefits of veterans [...]
Romney charged that the defense budget cuts would affect services for veterans, including the men and women returning from conflict overseas who need psychological counseling. Romney invoked the rising number of suicides – “This is a crisis,” he declared – as he sharpened his attack on the Obama administration’s proposed spending cuts.
[...]the White House announced that virtually all of the Veterans Affairs Department budget will be exempt from mandatory cuts [..] That means health care, vocational, and education services will remain fully funded while cuts are made elsewhere within the Department of Defense, despite Mitt Romney’s claims to the contrary.

Vets don't have to worry about the Democrats, not with the Republicans willing to throw them to the wolves.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:47 PM on September 27, 2012

Confirming that the person was a volunteer for the campaign, not saying the person is no longer working the phones, challenging the legality of the recording. It is like let's figure out a way to maximize the news coverage on this in the most damning light. It demonstrates a major weakness of the Romney campaign, the field staffers suck.
posted by humanfont at 5:53 PM on September 27, 2012 [2 favorites]

Golly gee whiz, those nice ladies over at Fox News are so disappointed that Romney won't be using "character assassination."

“There is always a margin of error within polls,” [Gretchen] Carlson said, by way of dismissing an Ohio poll showing President Obama “up by 10.” Therefore, she suggested, maybe the candidates should just ignore the polls and “figure out how to win.” Carlson didn't hide the disapproval in her voice as she added, “Yesterday, Mitt Romney said he’s not gonna get necessarily more aggressive when it comes to character assassination of President Obama. Does that sound like John McCain four years ago?”

“It sounds like a huge, huge mistake on his part,” Andrea Tantaros said [...] “When we see (President Obama’s) record so dour and so pathetic, knowing that the media is not covering ANY of this… The only person that can take to task the president is Mitt Romney… He really has to bring it because the media’s not gonna do that job.

Oh I think the media is going to bring it-- I think I might know a couple of women with their own show who might just let us viewers at home in on the startling news that President Obama is dour and pathetic. I, for one, did not know that.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:59 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mitt Romney plans to turn himself into a one-man truth squad during the first debate next week, President Obama as someone who can’t be trusted to stick to the facts or keep his promises.

As far as I can tell, this says "Mitt Romney has decided that he is the most beatable candidate in this election and that his path to victory involves mostly attacking himself."
posted by Mad_Carew at 6:05 PM on September 27, 2012 [9 favorites]

Have to say I love following these discussions. That said, things seem to be leaning in Obama's favor, and people appear to be rubbing their hands and smiling widely over this like it was the greatest plan ever. Meaning...

I deliver again the reminder that the election is November 6, and it is not over until it is over. I will be pretty much convinced that Romney's follies actually were effective against him iff Obama pulls away with a 15% or better win over him in the general election.

It is, currently, the night of September 27. You know what that means? IT'S NOT EVEN OCTOBER YET!!! The month notoriously known for surprises and not those in your child's (or even your's if you're just cleverly disguised as an adult) trick-or-treating sack.

So if you haven't yet, check to make sure you and your's are registered to vote. If any of them have moved recently, be sure they re-register and get their change of address acknowledgements (I got a sticker for my ID) along with their voter registration cards.

Do what you can to get out the vote for the mostly good guy. I surely hoped for more from Obama 4 years ago, but capital U Unicorns weren't in that list. He's a patently smart guy, I trust that he's doing the right thing where he can and the best where he cannot.

Now go, and get to it! Cheers!
posted by JoeXIII007 at 6:52 PM on September 27, 2012 [5 favorites]

I will be pretty much convinced that Romney's follies actually were effective against him iff Obama pulls away with a 15% or better win over him in the general election.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Obama will probably not win by the biggest margin since Reagan/Mondale in 1984.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 7:22 PM on September 27, 2012

I will be pretty much convinced that Romney's follies actually were effective against him iff Obama pulls away with a 15% or better win over him in the general election.

Winning by 15% would be a Reagan '84-style 450+ electoral vote landslide. Obama won 365 EV and a 7-point margin in 2008 in what was seen as a decisive victory, and no one really expects him to exceed that at this point. Barring Romney actually consuming living human children on live TV carried by every network, it will be the 150-200 EVs already "baked in" for each side in most states plus another 100 or so to the winner.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:24 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Barring Romney actually consuming living human children on live TV

Fox News would run a piece on how the children were terrorist anchor baby welfare cheats, who totally had it coming.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 7:28 PM on September 27, 2012 [5 favorites]

Wow, that Samuel L Jackson ad is really great. Thanks for posting it.
posted by marsha56 at 8:17 PM on September 27, 2012

Letterman just played the clip of Morning Joe reacting to Romney's failed "Romney! Ryan!" chant. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha.
posted by sallybrown at 8:43 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

A lot can happen in a month. At this point four years ago electoral-vote.com only had Obama over McCain at 286 to 252. It wasn't until mid-October that Obama broke 350 according to the polls, and eventually ended at 365. Right now Obama is at 328, and the debates haven't happened. If the Romneyfail starts a snowball down the mountain effect, could Obama possibly get 400 EVs? Seems unlikely, but Romney still has a lot of time to screw up more.

I should have put money on Obama at InTrade a month ago, when he was clearly undervalued at $6.00.
posted by Llama-Lime at 8:53 PM on September 27, 2012

Wow, that Samuel L Jackson ad is really great. Thanks for posting it.

I heard about it all day and then watched it and thought it was a bit meh. Why did the girls need to bake cookies and cakes for Obama?
posted by sweetkid at 8:56 PM on September 27, 2012

I think getting to 400 would be an extreme long shot. Not only would he have to carry all the states from '08 (Including IN, which does not look likely) but then the most likely states to reach 400 would be some combination of AZ (11), MO(10), TN(11), SC (9), GA (16), MT (3). I suppose a AZ, MO, TN and MT combo is ... possible? But If that happened I'd call in work for the rest of the week and stay drunk in disbelief.

I honestly think there is a great chance of Romney winning rather than Obama hitting 400. But who knows.. perhaps I should stock up on expensive Tequila just in case.
posted by edgeways at 9:46 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

A bit of random trivia: If this thread was printed at an average of ~250 words per page we would be at about page 1,080. By comparison the complete LOTR, including all the bits at the end was ~1137 pages.

1.2 million characters
posted by edgeways at 10:08 PM on September 27, 2012 [7 favorites]

in that case can i be gandalf?
posted by The Whelk at 10:09 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

Only if you got the beard
posted by edgeways at 10:11 PM on September 27, 2012

o no i just shaved it off this is like dramatic irony
posted by The Whelk at 10:11 PM on September 27, 2012 [6 favorites]

Maybe you can be Radagast the Brown. What color is your nose?
posted by Mad_Carew at 10:27 PM on September 27, 2012

i can make it red with the liberal application of grape juice
posted by The Whelk at 10:29 PM on September 27, 2012

Magic! You're in...
posted by Mad_Carew at 10:31 PM on September 27, 2012

Just think how much worse this thread would be with constant musical interludes by Tom Bombadil.
posted by cortex at 10:31 PM on September 27, 2012 [8 favorites]

Just think how much ~~worse~~ BETTER this thread would be with constant musical interludes by Tom Bombadil.

(oh I kinda hate myself now, for engaging in FTFY behavior - goodnight goodnight)
posted by edgeways at 10:35 PM on September 27, 2012 [3 favorites]

I have the beard but I'm tall.. so I guess I'm the tallest and drunkest dwarf. Bring me a case of whatever the White House is brewing and a stack of the latest polls showing how Sauron is underperforming with the middle aged orc male demo.

Tom will be by shortly to sing about the wonders of bathing. And then it'll be a party.
posted by honestcoyote at 10:39 PM on September 27, 2012 [4 favorites]

There's a Reason for Civil Libertarians to Vote for Obama
posted by homunculus at 10:39 PM on September 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

"A bit of random trivia: If this thread was printed at an average of ~250 words per page we would be at about page 1,080. By comparison the complete LOTR, including all the bits at the end was ~1137 pages.

1.2 million characters"

There are way more than 250 words per page on anything except those cheap-ass Stephen King paperbacks where Needful Things is guaranteed to fall apart before you finish it.
posted by klangklangston at 11:46 PM on September 27, 2012

i can make it red with the liberal application of grape juice

Yeah, 'grape juice'....applied to the inside of your stomach!
posted by howfar at 1:17 AM on September 28, 2012

It wasn't until mid-October that Obama broke 350 according to the polls, and eventually ended at 365.

I think it's fair to say that 347 is the upper limit of what Obama can achieve this election season. As Sam Wang notes in his blog, all states beyond that number lean Romney by 5% or more; while I don't doubt the race could (not will, could) tighten in Indiana, Missouri, Tennessee or Arizona, it's difficult to see it going beyond 5% in any of the states here.

In fact, regardless of Romney's actual performance at the debates (ie, whether he was internally consistent/ rational/ logical), I'm thinking he would gain _some_ points among GOP-leaning partisans just by people seeing him stand next to Obama. (Not necessarily for racist reasons, just an empathy thing)
posted by the cydonian at 1:42 AM on September 28, 2012

Not necessarily for racist reasons, just an empathy thing

What does Romney have in common with the vast majority of them beyond skin colour?
posted by howfar at 2:03 AM on September 28, 2012

What does Romney have in common with the vast majority of them beyond skin colour?

Tribalism. Romney is "their" guy for a variety of reasons (race included); just putting a face to the notion of an Obama competitor will get a few votes for him.
posted by the cydonian at 2:25 AM on September 28, 2012

The only point at which his cunning plan may break down is if he opens his mouth and stars talking,
posted by howfar at 3:44 AM on September 28, 2012

Transaction Man, The New Yorker's bio of Romney this week. Haven't finished it, but it is sort of like: Stanford -Golden Boy; B.Y.U. -- Golden Boy; Harvard -- Golden Boy; Bain Capital -- Golden Boy; and then the writer is like, for all that, Romney is the worst political speaker in the world. Good reading.
posted by angrycat at 4:39 AM on September 28, 2012

Hey dol! merry dol! derry dol! my hearties!
Debates won't mean much, especially for Romney!

Old Barry Obama is a merry fellow,
Bright blue his base states are, and his swings are yellow.
None has ever caught him yet, for Barry is the master:
His songs are stronger songs, and his feet are faster.

I'll get me coat…
posted by ob1quixote at 4:46 AM on September 28, 2012 [12 favorites]

I honestly think there is a great chance of Romney winning rather than Obama hitting 400. But who knows.. perhaps I should stock up on expensive Tequila just in case.

FWIW, Nate Silver's article from yesterday morning posited that there is now an equal chance (~20%) of Romney winning or Obama outperforming his 2008 numbers. Maybe not an actual landslide, but close.

In fact, regardless of Romney's actual performance at the debates (ie, whether he was internally consistent/ rational/ logical), I'm thinking he would gain _some_ points among GOP-leaning partisans just by people seeing him stand next to Obama.

Yeah, both sides have said that just standing on the same stage for an hour or two elevates the challenger. Assuming nothing crazy happens, then between the debates, the superPAC money, and the return to the fold of leaners, the race will undoubtedly tighten before the big day. It might be a little, it might be a lot, but it will be a closer race then it is now.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:53 AM on September 28, 2012

Wow, 538's "Now-cast" is giving Romney a 2.2% chance of winning!
posted by octothorpe at 5:34 AM on September 28, 2012

Can I just put a word in about how awesome it is that Mother Jones seems to be the one scooping everyone here? That's kind of cool.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:02 AM on September 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

MoJo has been nailing it recently. I've always *enjoyed* being a subscriber, but now I'm *proud* to be a subscriber.
posted by absalom at 6:09 AM on September 28, 2012

Paul Ryan to a woman on welfare this week:

“Teach a man to fish, he can feed himself for a life. Don’t feed fish.”

You know, I tried this once as a kid and it turns out that if you don't feed fish you end up with dead fish.
posted by angrycat at 6:37 AM on September 28, 2012 [10 favorites]

So the poor in this country are like fish in a tank, kept as pets by the rich, with their mouths up to the surface, just gasping for food to rain down from above.

Got it.
posted by Devils Rancher at 6:43 AM on September 28, 2012 [15 favorites]

“Teach a man to fish, he can feed himself for a life. Don’t feed fish.”

...and he'll come back to your food business because, as angrycat points out, all the fish will be dead and his skill in fishing will be useless.
posted by jaduncan at 6:47 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

Bah! If you feed the fish they will multiply and then you will just have more fish on your hands, and nobody wants that! Instead starve the fish and wait for them to learn how to find their own food. This may be tough in a fishbowl, but they will just have to pull themselves up with their bootstraps.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:47 AM on September 28, 2012 [7 favorites]

This may be tough in a fishbowl

No belief in eventual sprinkledown economics?
posted by jaduncan at 6:51 AM on September 28, 2012 [10 favorites]

So the poor in this country are like fish in a tank, kept as pets by the rich...

... like shooting fish in a barrel.
posted by Groundhog Week at 6:51 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Devils Rancher: "So the poor in this country are like fish in a tank, kept as pets by the rich, with their mouths up to the surface, just gasping for food to rain down from above.

Got it."

It's called sprinkle-down economics.
posted by Happy Dave at 6:54 AM on September 28, 2012 [6 favorites]

“Teach a man to fish, he can feed himself for a life. Don’t feed fish.”

That's nothing. Build a man a fire and keep him warm for an hour.

But if you set him on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Vote Pogo 2016!
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 6:55 AM on September 28, 2012 [25 favorites]

Give a man a fish, and he can eat for a day.

Don't give a man a fish, and he'll die, and another American has moved off welfare.

Win-win.
posted by Groundhog Week at 6:59 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

“Teach a man to fish, he can feed himself for a life. Don’t feed fish.”

I guess that means the GOP platform will include a huge increase in funding for public universities so that the government will teach everyone the skills they need to be successful in the modern job climate.
posted by burnmp3s at 7:08 AM on September 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

Teach a man to fish, then abscond with all the rods & tackle.
posted by Devils Rancher at 7:08 AM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

Sort of a tangential question -- What's the etiquette of keeping these long threads going? Will different one be started at some point? This one is getting sort of unwieldy to me and might be intimidating to someone who is wanting to jump in. Will this be THE THREAD through election day?
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 7:31 AM on September 28, 2012

Vote Pogo 2016!
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt
posted by COBRA! at 7:33 AM on September 28, 2012

What's the etiquette of keeping these long threads going?

It's totally up to the membership at large to come up with a post-worthy link, though the mods have said the bar will be high for political season posts. There won't be a new post simply for the sake of continuing this particular conversation.
posted by Devils Rancher at 7:33 AM on September 28, 2012

I guess that means the GOP platform will include a huge increase in funding for public universities so that the government will teach everyone the skills they need to be successful in the modern job climate.

Of course, this means nothing in terms of actual jobs or being paid a living wage, but one can read poetry in forn tongues while trapped in underemployment despite the aforementioned skills!

nope not bitter at all
posted by winna at 7:34 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Sort of a tangential question -- What's the etiquette of keeping these long threads going?

IMHO jessamyn et al are praising $DEITY_OR_FATES that most of the election stuff is here rather than exploding enough to make MeFi ElectionFilter 2012.
posted by jaduncan at 7:34 AM on September 28, 2012

Will this be THE THREAD through election day?

Don't jinx it!
posted by grubi at 7:37 AM on September 28, 2012

This thread is the honeypot, evidently, just as the epic (and I don't use that word lightly) Palin thread was four years ago. At this rate, we're probably going to beat it, too. I'm okay with that.
posted by Faint of Butt at 7:37 AM on September 28, 2012

I'm betting a new thread with the first debate.
posted by angrycat at 7:39 AM on September 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

Yeah, basically, the thread goes as long as it goes, and the process of conversation wandering elsewhere is a more or less organic one. Usually what happens is there's A Big Thing now and then that tends to spawn a new post with a lot of stickiness and stuff naturally transitions.

If we see someone starting at thread literally as "HEY THE OTHER THREAD IS TOO LONG LET'S TALK HERE", we'll shut that shit down. It's happened a couple times in previous years. But chances are someone will just make a post with some actual topical substance at some point that will be a natural magnet for some of the chatter that has otherwise organized here.

And then everyone will feel sort of weird the way you do at the end of summer, because, sure, the thread has gotten long and unwieldy and takes forever to load especially on a data plan and even Live Preview is sort of weird and laggy at this point and it's for the best, but, man, the thread, the thread, it's the end of an era, man...

In any case, my money is on a post about the kick-off of the debates being the one that ends up rebooting things, presuming nothing earth-shaking happens in the interim.
posted by cortex at 7:41 AM on September 28, 2012 [9 favorites]

Next Weds at the latest
posted by edgeways at 7:41 AM on September 28, 2012

Will this be THE THREAD through election day?

It closes after thirty days, so the answer is necessarily no unless people get to Oct. 17 and collectively decide they've discussed politics enough for the year. I don't dare to dream it.
posted by cortex at 7:44 AM on September 28, 2012 [4 favorites]

cortex: "It closes after thirty days, so the answer is necessarily no unless people get to Oct. 17 and collectively decide they've discussed politics enough for the year."

Hi cortex, have you met MetaFilter?
posted by Phire at 7:45 AM on September 28, 2012 [4 favorites]

Romney Slipping As Early Voting Begins In First Swing State.

Many are marveling that Romney is falling behind in this state. If Obama wins Iowa when all the votes are counted, it will be a symbolic and significant loss for Romney. He will have missed a chance to not only take back a state that went overwhelmingly for Obama four years ago, but also an opportunity to deal a psychic blow to the president.

Obama: I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voters suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:47 AM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

The thread is at the point where the tinted filters start to come on and The Boys Of Summer begins to play.....
posted by The Whelk at 7:48 AM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

Oh shit, my screen's gone sepia...
posted by grubi at 7:50 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

It closes after thirty days, so the answer is necessarily no unless people get to Oct. 17 and collectively decide they've discussed politics enough for the year. I don't dare to dream it.

Tonight at 11: Enthusiasm gap?
posted by jaduncan at 7:50 AM on September 28, 2012

What this thread needs is a montage set to a Smashmouth song.
posted by shakespeherian at 7:51 AM on September 28, 2012 [6 favorites]

From a Daily Kos post, a summary of some recent studies of the candidates social media presence...

Obama has millions of fake Twitter followers, and Romney probably does, too, but we haven't looked into it.

And I forgot where I read it, but Romney was twice to three times as talked-about on Twitter or Tumblr, or some other major social media thing. Of course, not all discussions were positive, and there's no easy way to filter positive vs negative comments.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:55 AM on September 28, 2012

Notice which state is missing in this list?

Ohio.

Interesting.
posted by grubi at 7:56 AM on September 28, 2012

“Teach a man to fish, he can feed himself for a life. Don’t feed fish.”

Feed me twice, won't get fed again.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 7:58 AM on September 28, 2012 [11 favorites]

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a night. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
posted by shakespeherian at 7:59 AM on September 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

And, yeah, I don't subscribe to any print magazines at all because they tend to go the way of New Yorker syndrome for me, but this thread has prompted me to spring for a print sub to Mother Jones.

(Although I'd probably subscribe to the New Yorker and the Economist again if they promised to only send me six issues a year...)
posted by Phire at 8:01 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

What are you, some shill for Pogo?
posted by filthy light thief at 8:01 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

A bird in the hand is worth two in the pants
bath a skunk in tomato juice and he'll smell like a dog
posted by edgeways at 8:02 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

If that statement is accurate, that Romney isn't spending in Ohio, then this 538 post about how Romney can win without Ohio is a good read.
posted by Groundhog Week at 8:02 AM on September 28, 2012

Teach a man to fish once, shame on... shame on you. Teach him to fish again... you can't get fish again.
posted by diogenes at 8:04 AM on September 28, 2012 [8 favorites]

Mitt Romney is campaigning in Virgina about Lyme Disease.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:04 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and he can fish all day and night for you at poverty wages AHAHAHAHAHAHAH ALL THE FISH ARE MINE
posted by The Whelk at 8:07 AM on September 28, 2012 [12 favorites]

Lyme disease? For goodness sake. Throw in thyroid insufficiency and he'll be in for two terms.
posted by de at 8:09 AM on September 28, 2012

1.Teach a man to fish.
2. Buy all the waterfront property.
3. Charge the man 4/5th's of his catch for access.
4. Profit!
posted by Devils Rancher at 8:10 AM on September 28, 2012 [7 favorites]

From the Lyme Disease campaign article:

Here's the problem, though. That Lyme disease epidemic Romney is so concerned about? The spread of the disease is aided and abetted by climate change. Lyme Disease already costs the US $2.5 billion annually, is expected to double in geographic scope over the next 70 years. But Romney has said government should do nothing to stop man-made climate change—if it's even happening at all. "My view is that we don't know what's causing climate change on this planet," he said at a debate last October. "And the idea of spending trillions and trillions of dollars to try to reduce CO2 emissions is not the right course for us."

Romney: I'm interested in your problems, as long as we can address them without making a real change in how we do things.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:10 AM on September 28, 2012 [6 favorites]

Teach a fish to be a man, fool!

(You have to say it with a Mr. T voice.)
posted by diogenes at 8:10 AM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

Notice which state is missing in this list?

Ohio.

Interesting.

They are probably just confident that they can steal Ohio the way they did in 2004. Bastards.
posted by madamjujujive at 8:16 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

Mitt Romney is campaigning in Virgina about Lyme Disease.

That is funny. I had Lyme's earlier this year. Spent a week camping with the dog in WI and MN.

What was strange though - how many ticks there were. Every day, I pulled 6-10 ticks off the dog and me. I grew up there, and I don't think I've seen as many ticks in my life as I saw on that one trip.

It was like some sort of tick plague.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 8:17 AM on September 28, 2012

Deer hunting! Cheaper than addressing climate control.
posted by de at 8:19 AM on September 28, 2012

I wonder what would happen to Romney if someone set him down in a nice mellow room and gave him a hit of acid and let him explore his own navel for a while. Would he come out as some kind of Iron Duke or instead be reborn as the new Buddha?
posted by seanmpuckett at 8:20 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

His solution to climate change is the same as his solution to economic woes: do nothing, wait it out, and continue to be rich.
posted by grubi at 8:22 AM on September 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

On Wednesday, the Romney campaign reserved $3.4 million worth of advertising time in eight swing states. Nearly half of that — more than $1.5 million — was for Virginia. The rest was spread across Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Wisconsin. His total ad spending for the week is more than $10 million.

It's not odd to me that Ohio is out, it's interesting to me that Wisconsin is in. Even the right-leaning Electionprojection.com has Wisconsin, with 10 EVs as Obama +8.1 That's a high hurdle, unless you can pin the replacement refs on Obama.

So, those 8 states are, according to the electoral-vote.com presidential tipping point analysis, the path to a Romney 283 EV victory.Wisconsin is in there as the buffer, perhaps. Or in case Virginia can't be turned.

If the electoral-vote.com poll averages stick or only move relative to each other, then the president's minimum path to victory is "only states where he has a 5% lead at the moment."

So, it's the right strategy, but there's a lot of movement needed in 7 of those 8 states to craft a path to 270.
posted by Mad_Carew at 8:22 AM on September 28, 2012

Paul Ryan to a woman on welfare this week:

“Teach a man to fish, he can feed himself for a life. Don’t feed fish.”

AngryCat: You know, I tried this once as a kid and it turns out that if you don't feed fish you end up with dead fish.

Oh yarrgh, Master Metafilter, but yee makes me giggle..
posted by Skygazer at 8:25 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

Buy some fish on Friday. Won't get fish again, until next Friday.
posted by Skygazer at 8:27 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

I live in Duluth MN, and up until - oh say 3-4 years ago the lime of demarcation for ticks that carries Lymes was about 30 miles south of us. I don't even know what it is now, but it certainly have moved It's about 20 miles north of us now
posted by edgeways at 8:28 AM on September 28, 2012

Arrive at lake to fish. Must present photo ID.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:28 AM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

Throw a fish a Romney, while chanting "Ryan! Ryan!"

Go fishing. Come home. Eat a burrito.
posted by Skygazer at 8:29 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Why give a man a fish when you can just make fish tacos?
posted by Groundhog Week at 8:31 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

Fish for burritos. Present ID. Give ID to burritos.
posted by grubi at 8:31 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Don't feed burritos to the fish. They may be undocumented fish.
posted by Skygazer at 8:34 AM on September 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

> So, it's the right strategy, but there's a lot of movement needed in 7 of those 8 states to craft a path to 270.

Once a venture capitalist, always a venture capitalist.
Wonder if Ryan's been banned from praying.
posted by de at 8:37 AM on September 28, 2012

Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you can charge him hundreds of dollars in fishing gear and fishing license renewal fees.
posted by Groundhog Week at 8:37 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

I would expect them to leave in Wisconsin because it's Paul Ryan's home state. Sure, Romney might be a businessman and understand the concept of a sunk cost, but it would simply look bad to write off WI. I'm sure a large factor for picking Paul Ryan as his VP candidate is the expected bounce from representing WI.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:40 AM on September 28, 2012

Romney's job is not to worry about 47% of the fish. Those fish will never learn to feel responsible or care for their fishy lives...
posted by Skygazer at 8:44 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Politico's advice for Romney is to....tell more jokes.

To which I say: Yes please!
posted by Phire at 8:46 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

Set a fish on fire, he'll be Cajun-style for the rest of his life.
posted by grubi at 8:46 AM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

This is where the fish live

Well, where they used to

They got foreclosed on
posted by The Whelk at 8:50 AM on September 28, 2012

Mitt Romney is a dying fish.

flopflopflipflop

*attempted glub*

flopflopflipflop
posted by Groundhog Week at 8:51 AM on September 28, 2012 [4 favorites]

God dammit, who spiked the punch?
posted by cortex at 8:52 AM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'm not going to make a whole post for this, but here's Nathan J Barnatt's dance video supporting obama: Obama Works... It
posted by rebent at 8:52 AM on September 28, 2012 [4 favorites]

It's like the end of Faith No More's music video for the song Epic. All he's missing is an exploding piano.
posted by Groundhog Week at 8:53 AM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

it's interesting to me that Wisconsin is in. Even the right-leaning Electionprojection.com has Wisconsin, with 10 EVs as Obama +8.1 That's a high hurdle, unless you can pin the replacement refs on Obama

Given that Ryan is doubling down on the 47% vibe by running ads in a union district Wisconsin ads that look like this, maybe they also need help in the Congressional race.

Questioner: "Can American afford the path we are on?"
Paul Ryan: "Our country has a critical decision to make. Will we leave something better or worse for our children? Politicians from both parties have made empty promises, which will soon become broken promises if we fail to act now. We must take action to prevent the most predictable economic crisis in our country's history. Washington promotes a culture of dependency; we need a culture of accountability and personal responsibility. I'm Paul Ryan and I approve this message."

posted by jaduncan at 8:53 AM on September 28, 2012

Throws fishsticks in Paul Ryan's general direction...
posted by Skygazer at 8:55 AM on September 28, 2012

“47%” Was Bad for Romney; Ryan Has Been Deadly.
posted by madamjujujive at 9:04 AM on September 28, 2012 [8 favorites]

Who fished the spike?
posted by grubi at 9:06 AM on September 28, 2012

It's like the end of Faith No More's music video for the song Epic. All he's missing is an exploding piano.

Wow. Actually, that song is perfect for Obama's campaign. "You [Romney] want it all, but you can't have it."
posted by grubi at 9:08 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

If that statement is accurate, that Romney isn't spending in Ohio, then this 538 post about how Romney can win without Ohio is a good read.

Either way, I found the mentioning of "No Republican has ever won the White House without winning Ohio" on the Today Show telling.
posted by Big_B at 9:17 AM on September 28, 2012

Given that Ryan is doubling down on the 47% vibe by running ads in a union district Wisconsin ads that look like this , maybe they also need help in the Congressional race.

Wait, is he also running to keep his congressional seat? Yes, but he's not the first VP nominee to do so. Biden did in 2008, as have others, and when they did, they won their seats. It seems that a replacement is appointed, and in the case of Biden, the Governor appointed the replacement.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:25 AM on September 28, 2012

Fish fool me once, shame on me for a day. Fish fool me twice, set fish on fire, won't be fooled by that fish again.
posted by Anything at 9:29 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

Two kids are in a swimming pool...

Kid 1: "Mittens..."

Kid 2: "Romney"

Kid 1: "Mittens..."

Kid 2: "Romney"

Kid 1: "Mittens..."

Kid 2: "Romney"

Kid 1: "Fish outta water!"

Kid 2: "Dang it! You got me."
posted by Groundhog Week at 9:37 AM on September 28, 2012

Onion headlines are indistinguishable from genuine reporting,...

My nephew hooked me with this one today. Damn kid...
posted by Mental Wimp at 9:42 AM on September 28, 2012

To be fair, sometimes The Onion does report true stories.
posted by Groundhog Week at 9:49 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mitt Romney is campaigning in Virgina about Lyme Disease.

Wow, he is focused like a laser beam.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:00 AM on September 28, 2012 [6 favorites]

Jonathan Chait asks Whose Idea Was It to Nominate Romney, Anyway?

"In what you might regard as an unhealthy sign for Mitt Romney’s campaign prospects, conservatives have turned to debating the question of who is to blame for nominating this man in the first place. Arch-conservatives Erick Erickson and Ben Domenech blame the moderate establishment for foisting Romney upon the base; relative moderates Ross Douthat and Daniel Larison blame the conservatives. Oddly, nobody seems interested in claiming credit for Romney’s nomination."

posted by octobersurprise at 10:04 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

One way to avoid steep medical bills for ailing constituents is to eradicate what ails them.
posted by de at 10:04 AM on September 28, 2012

The Problem with Romney Is the Problem with Empathy
posted by homunculus at 10:05 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think Jonathan Chait is asking the wrong question. Mitt Romney was not nominated by the RNC. In fact, many of the other “frontrunners” including Santorum and Gingrich, did their gosh darn best to label him a liar and unfit for the presidency.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:07 AM on September 28, 2012

In fact, many of the other “frontrunners” including Santorum and Gingrich, did their gosh darn best to label him a liar and unfit for the presidency.

Even a stopped clock, etc.
posted by Faint of Butt at 10:09 AM on September 28, 2012

In what you might regard as an unhealthy sign for Mitt Romney’s campaign prospects, conservatives have turned to debating the question of who is to blame for nominating this man in the first place.

I shouted out, "Who picked the nominee?", when after all, it was you and me
posted by Anything at 10:11 AM on September 28, 2012 [13 favorites]

Random trivia - the last time a Republican became president without a Bush or Nixon on the ticket was 1928. That'd be Herbert Hoover who did that.

Neat, huh?
posted by tzikeh at 10:13 AM on September 28, 2012 [11 favorites]

Those Ron Paul delegates from Maine have been silenced all their lives.
posted by box at 10:14 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

tzikeh, I'm not sure what you're getting at, other than that there was a Republican dry spell from 1928 to 1968.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:16 AM on September 28, 2012

roomthreeseventeen - I'm not getting at anything other than that it's an interesting bit of Presidential trivia.
posted by tzikeh at 10:17 AM on September 28, 2012

That reminds me how I almost spat my drink out in laughter when the Jon Stewart RNC coverage started with the title "Road to Jeb Bush 2016".
posted by Theta States at 10:25 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mitt Romney Favorability Lower Than George W. Bush, Poll Finds.
posted by ericb at 10:30 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

It seems that a replacement is appointed, and in the case of Biden, the Governor appointed the replacement.

That's for Senators. There is only one way on God's green earth to become a member of the US House, and that is to win an election. If -- ojala que no -- Romney won, Ryan's seat would just be vacant until filled by special election.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:30 AM on September 28, 2012

Mitt Romney Ohio Ground Game: A Frantic Race To Catch Obama.
posted by ericb at 10:32 AM on September 28, 2012

This is about that moment in the blowout where you're hot dogging it, dribbling between your legs consecutively and taking "heat check" shots from darn near half court. Then your opponent steals the ball, hits back-to-back three pointers and you remember that they are professionals also.

The game will tighten up the next few weeks. Count on it.
posted by cashman at 10:36 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

Do The Romneys Suffer From A Siege Mentality? -- "Their recent comments reveal a real resentment of the social changes that have helped former outsiders gain a toehold in society."
posted by ericb at 10:39 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

If -- ojala que no -- Romney won, Ryan's seat would just be vacant until filled by special election.

I suspect if Ryan's challenger for the House seat won that election and R&R won the WH, the challenger would keep the seat.
posted by edgeways at 10:41 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ah, thanks ROU_Xenophobe.

Has anyone seen polling for Paul Ryan's congressional seat? The only thing I've seen is a limited poll (of 405 likely voters) from December 2011, showed that Ryan's rating was slipping, from "well over 60%" down to a "job rating [of] 55%" re-election rating of 54%. "When voters hear positive information about Rob Zerban and Paul Ryan, Ryan’s support weakens further to 52%," which makes it sound like a (slightly) biased poll.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:43 AM on September 28, 2012

Personal e-mail urging Mormons to fast and pray for Romney goes national.
posted by ericb at 10:43 AM on September 28, 2012

I'm afraid to say that their fasting and praying on Sunday, Sept. 30 will be cancelled out by my gluttony and sloth. It's that epic.
posted by perhapses at 10:50 AM on September 28, 2012 [11 favorites]

I need to find this on my home link- someone linked me to a pic of an actual Jack-Chick-style tract being passed around where readers are urged to decide whether they will "accept Jesus Christ as their Lord andS Savior" or "reject Jesus Christ and choose Obama for President".
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:50 AM on September 28, 2012

an actual Jack-Chick-style tract being passed around where readers are urged to decide whether they will "accept Jesus Christ as their Lord andS Savior" or "reject Jesus Christ and choose Obama for President"

I'm an atheist, so... done and done.
posted by grubi at 10:53 AM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

Someone needs to inform Harry Reid about all this Mormon fasting and praying for Romney cos I think he might have something to say about it...
posted by Skygazer at 10:53 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm going to fast and pray that Romney releases his tax returns.
posted by Skygazer at 10:54 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

I think if they fast from now until the election, we'll see some results.
posted by perhapses at 10:55 AM on September 28, 2012

He's already passed and frayed.
posted by grubi at 10:56 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm going to fast and pray that after Romney loses, the GOP distances itself from Ralph Reid, Grover Norquist, Karl Rove, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, etc, and establishes a respectable conservative party.
posted by Golden Eternity at 11:00 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

BTW --in the current issue of Time magazine which came out today there is an interesting cover story by Jon Meacham, The Mormon in Mitt. Unfortunately, it's behind a paywall.

Another article from last week written by a fellow Mormon, Mormons and Mitt: Mormons and Mitt: The Myth About Separation of Church and State, is worth reading.
posted by ericb at 11:03 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

How did Mitt "fast and pray" Romnay, NOT get ex-communicated for dismissing the neediest as not worthy of his time or attention or concern?

I'm not much of a Goddamned Catholic, I've got to admit, but what kind of a two-bit crackerjack religion is the Mormon/LDS church if one of it's so-called "Bishops" is such a heartless bastard??

I seriously want to know that.
posted by Skygazer at 11:11 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'd rather they fast and pray than organize and donate. But that's because I'm not much into magic as a political tool.
posted by klangklangston at 11:19 AM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

are you saying my Lieberman Voodoo Doll is for nothing?
posted by The Whelk at 11:22 AM on September 28, 2012 [7 favorites]

With ‘Dreams From My Real Father,’ Have Obama Haters Hit Rock Bottom?
posted by zombieflanders at 11:23 AM on September 28, 2012

Who the heck do they think they are fooling? Conservs (like Matt Barber) trying to pass off Obama '08 rally as a Romney '12 event

That'll be the day...
posted by madamjujujive at 11:24 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

"are you saying my Lieberman Voodoo Doll is for nothing?"

I imagine that looks like this.
posted by klangklangston at 11:27 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

What Republicans REALLY Think Of Mitt Romney In One Clip
posted by Golden Eternity at 11:27 AM on September 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

Lieberman Voodoo Doll
posted by The Whelk at 11:29 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm not much of a Goddamned Catholic, I've got to admit, but what kind of a two-bit crackerjack religion is the Mormon/LDS church if one of it's so-called "Bishops" is such a heartless bastard??

I kinda like the LDS overall, mainly because of the influence of my really awesome Mormon friends, but that church has a big problem with prosperity gospel. They tend to promote economically successful people to leadership positions, starting with bishops and moving on up. The church itself is run as a business and a rather profitable one.

The church does take care of its neediest members and probably does a better job of it than any of the other denominations in the US. In some cases, they'll even pay the member's mortgage for a short time. Their membership certainly won't be allowed to go hungry, at least in Utah. I've seen directly the work my friends did with people in their wards who suffered greatly in the 2000 recession and in the 2008 collapse. But, the suffering individual is expected to get back on their feet ASAP and if they don't, there's probably something wrong with them and maybe they're being punished by God.

If Mitt is like the other members and bishops I've known, he did a lot to help the downtrodden and doesn't like to talk about it, which is to his credit. But that doesn't stop him, like it didn't stop some of the people in my circle, from thinking less of the people he helped if those people didn't recover quickly.

Of course, Mitt has his own problems independent of Mormon culture but, generally speaking, he's not too far out of line for the typical Mormon behavior: quietly kind to the downtrodden, openly vocal about what's wrong with them and why won't they just grab their bootstraps like the good Heavenly Father intended.
posted by honestcoyote at 11:31 AM on September 28, 2012 [4 favorites]

I mentioned this briefly on Twitter, but I wanted to make sure it got in this thread.

Every election, at least a couple of candidates who didn't win the nomination will, for the sake of the party, campaign on the nominee's behalf. But I can't think of one person Mitt ran against in 2011-12 who's stumping for him. Anyone?
posted by grubi at 11:34 AM on September 28, 2012

I mentioned this briefly on Twitter

That just struck me as funny because it's not like you can mention anything at length on Twitter.
posted by sweetkid at 11:36 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

You got me there.
posted by grubi at 11:37 AM on September 28, 2012

I should add: my views of the LDS, good and bad, are skewed because of the many years I spent in Utah. Non-Utah Mormons tend to be very different and the majority of them that I've met tend to be either left-leaning independents or Democrats and they probably despise Romney as an example of the worst elements of mainline LDS culture.

It's really an interesting situation with the non-Utah LDS. Kinda like American Catholics who despise Rome but can't stop going to mass.
posted by honestcoyote at 11:38 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Every election, at least a couple of candidates who didn't win the nomination will, for the sake of the party, campaign on the nominee's behalf. But I can't think of one person Mitt ran against in 2011-12 who's stumping for him. Anyone?

Pawlenty was for a while. Didn't Gingrich do something as well? But you're right. Ain't no love there.
posted by honestcoyote at 11:40 AM on September 28, 2012

But I can't think of one person Mitt ran against in 2011-12 who's stumping for him. Anyone?

That's probably because all of those people would be political poison for Romney right now. What good are Gingrich or Cain or Bachman or Santorum gonna do for Romney? They'll rile up the base, sure, but they won't help him look like a reasonable presidential nominee, except by contrast.
posted by chrchr at 11:41 AM on September 28, 2012

What Republicans REALLY Think Of Mitt Romney In One Clip

a) those clips are truly devastating

b) the default iMovie guitar track needs to die in a fire
posted by unSane at 11:46 AM on September 28, 2012 [4 favorites]

^ What Republicans REALLY Think Of Mitt Romney In One Clip

How damning is that? Seems the Republicans don't want to govern if Romney is captain.

Aside: Apparently, over the last 15 elections, no-one down in the polls 40 days out has gone on to win the election. If Romney does then, maybe there is a god after all.
posted by de at 11:49 AM on September 28, 2012

I wonder what a similar video with talking points from Obama's primary opponents would look like.

Note: this isn't a "both sides are equally bad" argument by any means; the DNC was ample proof of how Obama is on much better terms with other democrats than his opponent is with his party. I'm just curious how the dynamics of primary fights translate to the presidential race.
posted by Phire at 11:59 AM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Just a small bit of anecdotal trivia, but my husband, who handles non-addressed mail, has told me that for every 1 Obama campaign flyer that comes through the mail without an address, he gets 20 Romney flyers without any address. In other words, their quality control sucks. That also means they are throwing their money away, but who cares since they hhave bucketloads, right?

Sometimes in my fantasy life I imagine how nice it would be if the Presidential hopefuls spent hundreds of millions not on TV ads and campaign flyers and telephone banks but on libraries and arboretums and museums. sigh
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:04 PM on September 28, 2012 [11 favorites]

Skygazer: I'm not much of a Goddamned Catholic, I've got to admit, but what kind of a two-bit crackerjack religion is the Mormon/LDS church if one of it's so-called "Bishops" is such a heartless bastard??

With a tip o' the hat to Podkayne of Pasadena, there's at least one Catholic bishop who's a real gem of a human being too.
posted by ob1quixote at 12:10 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

New Theory: Mitt Romney has some sort of Brewster's Millions scheme going.
posted by Twain Device at 12:11 PM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm not much of a Goddamned Catholic, I've got to admit, but what kind of a two-bit crackerjack religion is the Mormon/LDS church if one of it's so-called "Bishops" is such a heartless bastard??

I thought you folks invented the whole mote/beam thing?
posted by benito.strauss at 12:15 PM on September 28, 2012

I live in NC and am a registered in Democrat. In the last week I've received 2 very expensive-looking three page fold-out brochures urging me to register and vote Republican. They even contained postcards pre-addressed to the NC Board of Elections. I've also seen what seems like a big increase in Romney ads on TV in the last week or so, too. Seems like they have decided to put some money toward hoping NC will go republican this time, although I believe its leaning Obama at the moment.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 12:17 PM on September 28, 2012

what kind of a two-bit crackerjack religion is the Mormon/LDS church if one of it's so-called "Bishops" is such a heartless bastard?

Mormon bishop != catholic/orthodox/anglican/lutheran bishop. IIRC, a Mormon bishop is a sort of lay minister for a single "parish."
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 12:20 PM on September 28, 2012

SweetTeaAndABiscuit, Nate Silver has Romney having about a 60% chance of winning NC as of today.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:20 PM on September 28, 2012

North Carolina, according to fivethirtyeight, is 55% likely Obama, 45% likely Romney, and within MOE.

Ain't countin' no chickens at all.

(And yeah, re: a comment about the Romney campaign abandoning Ohio above--I believe they know they can just steal it again. Fuckety fuck.)
posted by tzikeh at 12:20 PM on September 28, 2012

Romney's Intrade odds have hit a new low with 21.1%
posted by Theta States at 12:29 PM on September 28, 2012

Oh shit I can't stop laughing --

The Onion: Gallup Poll: Rural Whites Prefer Ahmadinejad To Obama

Later:

Iran's state media has fallen for a made-up poll from a satirical US website claiming that a majority of rural white Americans would vote for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over Barack Obama.
posted by Anything at 12:29 PM on September 28, 2012 [15 favorites]

The Department of Homeland Security intends to spell out in written guidance that immigration officers should consider “long-term, same-sex partners” as families when considering whether to exercise prosecutorial discretion in the potential deportation of an undocumented immigrant.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:32 PM on September 28, 2012 [14 favorites]

I'm going on a hunger strike until the rich get more tax cuts.
posted by telstar at 12:36 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

I was only joking before about deer hunting. Poor Liza.
posted by de at 12:39 PM on September 28, 2012

I live in NC and am a registered in Democrat. In the last week I've received 2 very expensive-looking three page fold-out brochures

Weird. I just realized that neither my husband nor myself have gotten anything in the mail even though we live in NC and are registered independents. The only thing we have gotten in the mail this last week is our sample ballots. Although if the phone doesn't stop ringing pretty soon I'm going to shoot it.

We have also been watching the Obama/Romney chances in NC with baited breath. Obama eked out a win here in 2008, but since then our state has gone Republican big time with both the state House and Senate having a Republican majority for the first time in decades, both of the National Senators Republican and it looks like our Democratic Governor (who is not running again) will be replaced with a Republican. Even my U.S. Representative, Bob Etheridge, who was returned 7 times to DC, lost his seat to a Republican in 2010. Still our chances for giving our EVs to Obama are looking good.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:43 PM on September 28, 2012

Although if the phone doesn't stop ringing pretty soon I'm going to shoot it.

Come move to Manhattan. We have not gotten one campaign call this year.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:44 PM on September 28, 2012

Secret Life of Gravy: We have also been watching the Obama/Romney chances in NC with baited breath... our chances for giving our EVs to Obama are looking good.

How do you figure?
posted by tzikeh at 12:46 PM on September 28, 2012

The only poll that shows Romney up in NC is Rasmussen, all other polls show Obama up by 1 to 4 points. Now obviously that is undecided territory and the state could go either way, but this is exactly the way it looked in 2008 as well. I like to think positive.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:52 PM on September 28, 2012

Romney is an almost perfect amalgam of all the great out-of-touch douchebags of our national cinema: he's Gregg Marmalaard from Animal House mixed with Billy Zane's sneering, tux-wearing Cal character in Titanic to pussy-ass Prince Humperdinck to Roy Stalin to Gordon Gekko (he's literally Gordon Gekko). He's everything we've been trained to despise, the guy who had everything handed to him, doesn't fight his own battles and insists there's only room in the lifeboat for himself – and yet the Democrats, for some reason, have had terrible trouble beating him in a popularity contest.

The fact that Barack Obama needed a Himalayan mountain range of cash and some rather extreme last-minute incompetence on Romney's part to pull safely ahead in this race is what really speaks to the brokenness of this system.
This Presidential Race Should Never Have Been This Close
posted by madamjujujive at 12:57 PM on September 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

The Republicans will massacre each other after Mitt Romney loses:

Anyone who doubts the reaction of the GOP stalwarts to Romney’s impending defeat should bear in mind this single, if chilling, fact. Most of them still think he’s going to win. They genuinely believe the polls are fixed. They seriously think the surge in support for Obama is nothing more than an "MSM" conspiracy. Some of them clearly even believe the good Lord himself will appear in the spin room at the University of Denver next Wednesday.

And when non of these things turn out to be true, the reaction will be truly terrible to behold. It will be like what happens inside one of those doomsday cults the morning after they all wake up and realise the world hasn’t ended after all. First the shock, then the denial, then finally the anger and retribution.

posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 1:11 PM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

I dunno, I think as the time gets closer there will be resignation, and certain acceptance. Right now it's desperation and... well in a sense they are right in a lopsided way, he does stand a chance of winning, a pretty small chance but it is there. I honestly don't think there will be any such massacre. Perhaps the Tea Party will be galvanized again, but Romney will be effectively marginalized as not really representing the GOP, not being conservative enough. McCain, a man most people see as a WAR HERO, was so marginalized... Romney, a man of such hollow convictions will be painted such so swiftly and so thoroughly. He will not be talked about in polite society for quite awhile and the GOP will continue on it's merry way. The massacre won't happen until the extreme social conservatives are defeated.
posted by edgeways at 1:20 PM on September 28, 2012

Once someone with a sufficiently loud voice asks "so whose bright idea was it to nominate Romney, anyway?" the knives will come out.
posted by feloniousmonk at 1:23 PM on September 28, 2012

Do you know what "nemesis" means?
posted by grubi at 1:29 PM on September 28, 2012

47% of Americans don't know what nemesis means.
posted by perhapses at 1:32 PM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

Goddess who meted out divine revenge eh?
posted by edgeways at 1:33 PM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

Perhaps Joseph Smith will come down in drag and chastise Romney during the Third Debate
posted by edgeways at 1:34 PM on September 28, 2012 [4 favorites]

Ryan boasts having never lost an election.
Ryan knows what nemesis means and he's close to joining the 47%.
posted by de at 1:35 PM on September 28, 2012

A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent.

The reason I threw out that quote is I think Obama will do to Romney in the debates what brick Top's pigs do to those who piss off Brick Top.
posted by grubi at 1:35 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

caintv is claiming that MSNBC doctored the Romney/Ryan chant.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:36 PM on September 28, 2012

Yeah, if I had an idea that people were on average sensible, I wouldn't be worried too much about fallout from an Obama win. But I think people on average are not sensible, and the 80% of the GOP are just absent from reality in a very large, scary way.
posted by angrycat at 1:37 PM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ob1Quixote: With a tip o' the hat to Podkayne of Pasadena, there's at least one Catholic bishop who's a real gem of a human being too.

That is a carefully composed and extraordinarily hypocritical bit of politicizing by a Catholic Bishop.

To excuse the RNC's death penalty, as allowable under certain circumstances as proscribed by Catholic Catechism, yet to call the DNC's support of abortion rights and gay marriage unequivocally "intrinsically evil" seems problematic to me and is absolutely, no matter what shit he says about "failing the flock if he did not speak out these things" total political endorsement.

He sounds very Opus Dei.

This sorta convenient equivocating and hypocrisy has chased me very far away.

WWCHD?
posted by Skygazer at 1:39 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

I was pretty disappointed Caintv wasn't Herman Cain TV... otherwise meh, some pretty lame "They Where really chanting Romney... really!!!"
posted by edgeways at 1:40 PM on September 28, 2012

Fox News is currently working overtime, hunting multiple angles to try and turn things around for their team:
TOTAL FAILURE in Libya because something something bad with terrorists.
'Obama Phone' Video Puts Spotlight on Fed Program because hey I'm sure Obama's just bribing the lazy freeloaders.
Senator Calls for Clarity About Prostitution Scandal because maybe we can somehow tie this to Obama???
Fraud concerns swirl around Florida's unregulated absentee ballot brokers ahead of election because if we lose Florida, let's blame fraud!
Household income down 8.2 percent since Obama took office, study shows because every angle needs its front page headline.

And finally...
Conservative leaders claim unprecedented media bias this election cycle because not enough pepole watch Fox News. Or, as they say it:
"We the undersigned -- representing millions of Americans from our respective organizations -- are now publicly urging our members to seek out alternative sources of political news in order to make an intelligent, well-informed decision on November 6,"
posted by Theta States at 1:43 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Based on my ultra-sophisticated audio-enhancing equipment, I've been able to analyze that chant. The results are:
77% of the crowd are chanting Ryan.
18% are chanting Romney
2% are chanting Arby's.
2% are chanting Palin.
1% are barking Chihuahuas.
posted by perhapses at 1:49 PM on September 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

In The End, It’s Mitt

"It isn’t the chair or the ho-hum convention. Or the leaked video. Or Stuart Stevens. Or the improving economy. Or media bias. Or distorted polls. Or the message. Or Mormonism.

With Republicans everywhere wondering what has happened to the Mitt Romney campaign, people who know the candidate personally and professionally offer a simple explanation: It’s the candidate himself.

Slowly and reluctantly, Republicans who love and work for Romney are concluding that for all his gifts as a leader, businessman and role model, he’s just not a good political candidate in this era."

posted by ericb at 1:49 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

77% of the crowd are chanting Ryan.
18% are chanting Romney
2% are chanting Arby's.
2% are chanting Palin.
1% are barking Chihuahuas.

I was saying Boo-urns.
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:54 PM on September 28, 2012 [7 favorites]

"Five Guys Took A Boy Band Anthem And Created One Of The Best Romney Parodies, Hands Down"*
posted by ericb at 1:57 PM on September 28, 2012 [8 favorites]

^^ video is NSFW
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:59 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

3rd page of the Politico In The End, It's Mitt story:

The latest he’s-just-not-like-you moment came at a fundraiser in Washington on Thursday night. Romney was introduced by Bill Marriott, chairman of Marriott International, who tried to humanize his friend by telling a story of seeing Romney a few years ago while both were visiting their summer places on Lake Winnipesaukee in New Hampshire. Marriott told of taking his children and grandchildren to town on his boat for ice cream when he needed someone to help tie up the boat at the dock.

“They all jumped off and ran up the dock,” Marriott said, according to the pool report. “And I realized there was nobody in the boat to help me dock the boat. … I said, ‘Who’s going to grab the rope?’ And I looked up and there was Mitt Romney. So he pulled me in, he tied up the boat for me. He rescued me — just as he’s going to rescue this great country.”

posted by We had a deal, Kyle at 2:08 PM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

"Five Guys Took A Boy Band Anthem And Created One Of The Best Romney Parodies, Hands Down"*
posted by ericb at 4:57 PM on September 28

^^ video is NSFW
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:59 PM on September 28

But so adorable!
posted by winna at 2:10 PM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

He rescued me — just as he’s going to rescue this great country... for those of us who can afford boats (canoes, kayaks, and anything inflatable not included).
posted by perhapses at 2:12 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

"With a tip o' the hat to Podkayne of Pasadena, there's at least one Catholic bishop [of Springfield, IL] who's a real gem of a human being too."

He's not even the only Catholic bishop doing this in central Illinois; Jenky of Peoria has gone all in on electioneering from the pulpit (direct quote):

Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services, and health care.

In clear violation of our First Amendment rights, President Obama – with his radical, pro-abortion and extreme secularist agenda, now seems intent on following a similar path. Link

That's right, kids, a Catholic bishop said, from the pulpit, during Mass, during election season, that Obama was pretty much the same as Hitler and Stalin. HITLER AND STALIN.

It's interesting, because I'm in my 30s with little kids, which is, historically, when lapsed Catholics start returning to the Church because they want their kids raised in the faith. But so many of my Catholic friends, locally and nationally, are saying they just can't do it. Lots of them have long said, "I don't agree with some of the Church leaders but my diocese is all right" or "my parish is all right." Between the suppression of the nuns, the child abuse scandals that are still ongoing, the lack of support for marriage equality, the railing against Obamacare, and the electioneering shenanigans, a lot of my friends have been saying, "I want my children raised Catholic, but not in this Church." I know a lot of people who are stopping donations to affiliated institutions (Catholic colleges or parish schools, say) and who are reluctantly deciding it's better to raise their children without the faith than risk exposing them to bigotry at Sunday school. I also know some parents who are staying Catholic but are "homeschooling" their kids for CCD/sacrament preparation (which is apparently a thing you can do, with priest approval) because they won't expose their children to the institution's leaders. Rather than re-engaging with the Church in their 30s now that they have children, a lot of pretty devout Catholics I know are withdrawing because it's not an influence they want on their child. Anecdata, I know, but I'd be interested to see the Cushwa Center for the Study of American Catholicism's survey data in 10 years on Catholics my age and their engagement with the Church. It's surprisingly widespread, and contrary to past sociological patterns.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 2:14 PM on September 28, 2012 [6 favorites]

Nemesis Rising*

* -- Friends of mine.
posted by ericb at 2:17 PM on September 28, 2012

ericb: ""Five Guys Took A Boy Band Anthem And Created One Of The Best Romney Parodies, Hands Down "*"

That made me smile so big. Thank you.

I will not apologize for liking that song.
posted by Phire at 2:18 PM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

That's an interesting perspective on the Catholics in these days and times, Eyebrows McGee. FWIW I'm seeing a lot of Catholics in my general age group (late twenties-mid thirties) going Episcopalian. As an atheist, I don't really know what the differences are, but as far as I can tell, it's because it's all of the trappings with none of the crazy. They love them some gays, the parishes(?) seem to be almost uniformly left-of-center if not liberal, social good is freely discussed as no strings attached, nonbelievers and other faiths are welcome, the Bible is less of a rules book and more of a guideline, and they even like to play cool music in church every once in a while. If I had to do mainstream Christianity for whatever reason, they would probably be my first choice.
posted by zombieflanders at 2:22 PM on September 28, 2012

I will not apologize for liking that song.

I didn't even know the original song existed before the parody, so after 3+ minutes at the link, I had to appease the instant earworm by cuing up the original. Musical hooks, how the fuck do they work?
posted by maudlin at 2:23 PM on September 28, 2012

"Five Guys Took A Boy Band Anthem And Created One Of The Best Romney Parodies, Hands Down"

And having seen the video, I now know exactly what their hands were down.
posted by howfar at 2:34 PM on September 28, 2012

^^ video is NSFW

What?

It's just 'hot guys' in board shorts/swimsuits.

No nudity. Nice pecs. Great abs.

But, hey ... I can understand why you might not want your office mates seeing you watch hotties at work.

Heck, they might think you caught 'the gay!'
posted by ericb at 2:38 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

caintv is claiming that MSNBC doctored the Romney/Ryan chant.

Dan Calabrese: "They already were chanting for him and he was asking them to remember Ryan as well."

So they were chanting his (Romney's) name after being prompted by Romney to acknowledge Ryan's greatness? Hmm, maybe they think Ryan isn't so great after all...
posted by vewystwange at 2:40 PM on September 28, 2012

Yeah, banana hammocks aren't exactly the same as just some nice abs.
posted by lazaruslong at 2:41 PM on September 28, 2012

Eyebrows McGee: That's right, kids, a Catholic bishop said, from the pulpit, during Mass, during election season, that Obama was pretty much the same as Hitler and Stalin. HITLER AND STALIN.

That right there is so beyond the pale and belies a such a level of arrogance and pig ignorance that it's too grotesque to think I was ever even one who partook of any aspect of it.

That guy had best get an earful or fuck it, I'm going to just become a Catholic again, just to punch one of these racist, ungodly, Opus Dei fucks...
posted by Skygazer at 2:41 PM on September 28, 2012

"Heck, they might think you caught 'the gay!'"

I had the lollipop in my mouth before I started it, but Mike (one of our development staff) saw me and said, "I knew it was just a matter of time."

Disclosure, I work at a gay rights non-profit
posted by klangklangston at 2:59 PM on September 28, 2012 [16 favorites]

Iran's state media has fallen for a made-up poll from a satirical US website claiming that a majority of rural white Americans would vote for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over Barack Obama.

Iran's Finest News Source, FARS (@fna_iran), is a subsidiary of The Onion. Thus, we freely share any and all content.

I'm kinda relieved they didn't see this one first.
posted by homunculus at 3:00 PM on September 28, 2012

caintv is claiming that MSNBC doctored the Romney/Ryan chant.

Dan Calabrese

Another name for my "knowingly untruthful propagandist" list.
posted by jaduncan at 3:04 PM on September 28, 2012

Anyone who doubts the reaction of the GOP stalwarts to Romney’s impending defeat should bear in mind this single, if chilling, fact. Most of them still think he’s going to win. They genuinely believe the polls are fixed. They seriously think the surge in support for Obama is nothing more than an "MSM" conspiracy. Some of them clearly even believe the good Lord himself will appear in the spin room at the University of Denver next Wednesday.

And when non of these things turn out to be true, the reaction will be truly terrible to behold. It will be like what happens inside one of those doomsday cults the morning after they all wake up and realise the world hasn’t ended after all. First the shock, then the denial, then finally the anger and retribution.

Actually I think doomsday cults (or at least large portions of typical doomsday cults) tend to double down after reality slams into their beliefs. They start rationalizing reality away; they really were right, just on a deeper level than was previously known.

That's certainly how Republicans reacted after the 2008 election. I bet they (or at least a large and significant portion of them) will just double down on the crazy. The already-doubled-down-several-times-over crazy.
posted by Flunkie at 3:22 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Martingale republicans.
posted by ipe at 3:26 PM on September 28, 2012

Let's see...here's what I've got so far.

Obama is a very complicated guy:

Son of a Kenyan goat herder
Son of an American Jazz musician
A Muslim
A Kenyan
A Socialist
A Communist
A Marxist
A KGB sleeper agent
A Nazi
A Fascist
An affirmative action token black Harvard Grad
A terrorist Pal
Gay
A murderer
A tick lover

Have I forgotten anything?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:35 PM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

Senator Jim Webb of Virginia hammers Romney. Video here.

I don't know enough about Virginia to know how important this is, but it's a pretty strong speech. Five Thirty-Eight has Obama with a 77.6% probability of winning Va. If Obama wins Ohio and Virginia, he would already be at 268 EV's.

On a different topic, can anyone comment on how good Romney is at Town Hall style debates? I only caught a few of debates during the Republican primary and they were the podium-style ones.
posted by Bokmakierie at 3:35 PM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

> Have I forgotten anything?

Democratically elected President
Gift of the gab
posted by de at 3:39 PM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

I don't know enough about Virginia to know how important this is, but it's a pretty strong speech.

There's a lot of military and veterans, mainly Navy, and a ton of defense contractors with ex-military employees. So it could be a big deal, or at least eat into the usual GOP advantage in those demographics.
posted by zombieflanders at 3:41 PM on September 28, 2012

So, the thing I notice in the Politico "In the End, It's Mitt" post that We Had a Deal, Kyle posted, is that the answer to "what went wrong?" doesn't include the possibility that the Repbulican party's message does not appeal to a majority of voters.

"It isn’t the chair or the ho-hum convention. Or the leaked video. Or Stuart Stevens. Or the improving economy. Or media bias. Or distorted polls. Or the message. Or Mormonism.

With Republicans everywhere wondering what has happened to the Mitt Romney campaign, people who know the candidate personally and professionally offer a simple explanation: It’s the candidate himself.

What I'd like to see is some consideration that it might be the message, not the messenger. Not convinced that that's going to happen.
posted by Mad_Carew at 3:41 PM on September 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

Here's the Wikipedia article on a classic book about the counterintuitive way in which cults seem to react after reality slams into them: When Prophecy Fails. There was a cult that believed the world was going to end in a great flood before dawn on December 21, 1954 (spoiler: it didn't). So some psychologists entered the cult, posing as members, to see how they would react when the world was still around. And (quoting Wikipedia):

Prior to December 20. The group shuns publicity. Interviews are given only grudgingly. Access to Keech's house is only provided to those who can convince the group that they are true believers. The group evolves a belief system—provided by the automatic writing from the planet Clarion—to explain the details of the cataclysm, the reason for its occurrence, and the manner in which the group would be saved from the disaster.
December 20. The group expects a visitor from outer space to call upon them at midnight and to escort them to a waiting spacecraft. As instructed, the group goes to great lengths to remove all metallic items from their persons. As midnight approaches, zippers, bra straps, and other objects are discarded. The group waits.
12:05 A.M., December 21. No visitor. Someone in the group notices that another clock in the room shows 11:55. The group agrees that it is not yet midnight.
12:10 A.M. The second clock strikes midnight. Still no visitor. The group sits in stunned silence. The cataclysm itself is no more than seven hours away.
4:00 A.M. The group has been sitting in stunned silence. A few attempts at finding explanations have failed. Keech begins to cry.
4:45 A.M. Another message by automatic writing is sent to Keech. It states, in effect, that the God of Earth has decided to spare the planet from destruction. The cataclysm has been called off: "The little group, sitting all night long, had spread so much light that God had saved the world from destruction."
Afternoon, December 21. Newspapers are called; interviews are sought. In a reversal of its previous distaste for publicity, the group begins an urgent campaign to spread its message to as broad an audience as possible.

Something like this happened during the recent Harold Camping doomsday prediction. When they didn't find themselves raptured away on the predicted date, oh, wait a minute, really the predicted date was when God decided who would be raptured away, six months from the predicted date. And hey, six months from the predicted date was really the predicted date all along, you see.
posted by Flunkie at 3:44 PM on September 28, 2012 [8 favorites]

What I'd like to see is some consideration that it might be the message, not the messenger. Not convinced that that's going to happen.

Actually, Greg Sargent is already ahead of you on that one.
posted by zombieflanders at 3:44 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Tick lover"?
posted by Flunkie at 3:45 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

> Have I forgotten anything?

Democratically elected President
Gift of the gab
posted by de at 6:39 PM

de, you completely misunderstood the exercise. If I was to list all the things that actually describe Barack Obama we would be here all night. The list would start with Handsome, intelligent, charismatic, happily married, physically fit, Christian, moderate, etc.... No I was just listing all the absurd allegations that have been used by the right to portray their Commander-in-Chief in a very unfavorable light.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:46 PM on September 28, 2012

I didn't the exercise at all.
posted by de at 3:50 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

oops, 'miss' the exercise ...

Matter of fact I was pondering Romney and media bias.
posted by de at 3:53 PM on September 28, 2012

Hah. I was just going to explain that Tick Lover was a bit of a joke on my part. It refers to Romney's Virginia campaign in which he pledges to battle Lyme Disease. We discussed it in this thread earlier.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:55 PM on September 28, 2012

Ouch! This has got to hurt-- Romney's 47% Video Has Been Viewed 3 Times As Often As His Convention Speech. Also:

Barack Obama's convention speech has been viewed 5 times as many times as Mitt Romney's convention speech.

Michelle Obama's convention speech has been viewed 3-times as many times as Romney's convention speech--and 6-times as often as Ann Romney's

See the chart for more data.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:10 PM on September 28, 2012 [6 favorites]

Secret Life of Gravy: The Republicans will massacre each other after Mitt Romney loses.

I know such hyperbolic terminology like "massacre" gets tossed around, and makes a great headline, but reading that after watching about the Syrian civil war, it seems so crass to equate "inner-party disputes and unrest" with "unnecessary, indiscriminate killing of a large number of human beings."
posted by filthy light thief at 4:25 PM on September 28, 2012

Holy cow, Webb sticks Romney so deep. So eloquently. That needs to go viral. This could end Romney. Webb has incredible gravitas on this issue.
posted by spitbull at 4:27 PM on September 28, 2012

Have I forgotten anything?

It will be like what happens inside one of those doomsday cults the morning after they all wake up

When Obama was elected, I wanted to see how this was being taken by the freeper crowd. I expected anger, but I was totally gobsmacked by the racism, the intensity of the hatred and the violent rhetoric. A little nutty, I guess, but I kept a list of all the names that Obama was called. (And this list is tame compared to what they did with Michelle.) So yes, you forgot a few things, Secret Life of Gravy. And yes, I do worry about these people twice defeated.

BaCrack, Badcrack, Bambam, Bambi, bammie, Barama, Barky, Barry B. Hussein, Barry Soetoro, big-earred baffoon, BOMO, Bozo, Brack O’Bomba, Brother Buraq, Caligula, Chairman Obeyme, chumpy obamalini, closet Luciferian, COMMIE PIG BASTARD, Comrade 0bama, Da One is in Da House, dear Leader, DUH-bama, Duh One, emperor bammy, empty suit puppet, evil anti-christ, FauxBama, Fuhrer, gay crack whore marxist quisling, Glorious Leader, His Vacuousness, HolyO, Hypocrite-in-Chief, illegal alien Marxist, Islamabama, Jim Jones, Jug Ears, Kenyan Usurper, King Baraq, King Barry, King Liar, Kunte Kinte, Liar-in-Chief, li’l bHo, Long Legged Mack Daddy, Lord Obama the Commie, Messiah in Chief, MAObama, Millhouse, Mombasa, Moogly, nobama, Oba Mao, Obama Sotero, Obamaloon. Obamessiah, Obamachev, Obambi, Obammy, Obamessiah, obarry, Obastard, Obie, 0blahblah, Oblahma, Obomber, OBOZO, O’Bumbler, Obummer, Obungle, Odopey, Odumbo, Ohaha, Oh Balmy!, Omoslem, OneBadAssMistakeAmerica, oBOWma, OWEbama, ozero, pathetic sociopath, Ponzi Scheme President, Premier Hussein, Precedent Hussein, President Naive, President Wee Wee’d, President Zero, Pretty boy, PUNK, Section 8 trash, Soetero, The America-hater, the appeaser in chief, The Bamma, The Bamster, the big Zero, The Comrade-In-Chief, The Dimwit, The error of Obama, THE FRUIT CAKE CHAMP OF CHICAGO, theHalfrican, the Invertebrate in Chief, the Kenyan of Pennsylvania Avenue, the Messiah, the Obamaloon, the Sepia Savior, TheOne, the walking devil, thugbama, turd-in-chief, Ubama, Wonder Boy, Zer0, Zerobama, zerobamrhoid
posted by madamjujujive at 4:29 PM on September 28, 2012 [8 favorites]

roomthreeseventeen: caintv is claiming that MSNBC doctored the Romney/Ryan chant.

There were other reporters and attendees there, and this sole person comes forward, talking about how Romney is such a kind soul. The truth is out there, man. I want to believe.
posted by filthy light thief at 4:29 PM on September 28, 2012

I've always like Jim Webb going all the way back to HS and reading his books about the Vietnam War.
posted by Skygazer at 4:30 PM on September 28, 2012

I mean, "I was a Marine, my brother was a Marine, my SON was a Marine." Fuck.
posted by spitbull at 4:30 PM on September 28, 2012

This might be an indication of what will happen when some people realize that Obama (is going to win) wins.
posted by schyler523 at 4:33 PM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

Specifically I'm referring to Webb's Fields of Fire.
posted by Skygazer at 4:35 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mitt Romney is incredible. Entire industries will be birthed on how this many got be the Presidential GOP candidate and made so many elementary mistakes.

Hell, I'm thinking of hiring myself out as consulate about this.

"Look, do you want to win or do you want to pull a Romney?"
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:40 PM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

This might be an indication of what will happen when some people realize that Obama (is going to win) wins.

That was a rough read, but I think it's a unique case.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:46 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Webb's speech was absolutely fantastic. Wow.
posted by Phire at 4:55 PM on September 28, 2012

Also, there's probably a bit of truth to the GOP talking point that the press is against Romney. It's correct, but not because he's Republican, but because they don't like him. Bush Jr. was a bumbling idiot at times, but he could at least connect with people, including reporters. So while the press may not have agreed with him, they liked him on a personal level and were willing to cut him slack with his verbal gaffes.

Romney? No on likes that man. No one likes anyone who makes 10k bets during a primary debate, in the midst of recession. There's nothing wrong with being rich, but Romney is so out of touch, it's tragic.

Obama is far from perfect, but at least he's likable, you don't get the impression that he's willing to say "screw you" to half the country, even as they're literally screaming for his head. Obama stays calm and moves on, which tends to diffuse the immediate situation.

Romney is the CEO you see in the hallway and know, just be looking at him, that's he looking down at you and every other peon in the company who isn't upper management. Few people want to vote for such a person.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:59 PM on September 28, 2012 [8 favorites]

This might be an indication of what will happen when some people realize that Obama (is going to win) wins.

You mean mentally ill people will carry on sometimes doing tragic things because of their illness? Seriously, bullshit speculation from the Daily Mail about an awful thing that happened has no relevance or relation to the outcome of the election.
posted by howfar at 5:02 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

This might be an indication of what will happen when some people realize that Obama (is going to win) wins.

That story fills me with rage. My brother is paranoid schizophrenic, and he picked up on that black helicopter/U.N. conspiracy whatever bullshit and it played into his paranoia. I mean, that man may have gone and done all that killing regardless, just as my brother is paranoid about things other than black helicopters, but these people, people who are willing to exploit human weaknesses for gain -- I don't know. I'd like to beat them all up, I guess.
posted by angrycat at 5:03 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

"THE FRUIT CAKE CHAMP OF CHICAGO" could be an awesome sockpuppet name.
posted by kagredon at 5:05 PM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

Trouble in Bachman land:

Sad Face: Wonkette Bread and Butter Michelle Bachman May Be in Trouble

Amongst other things, something I'm not sure has been referenced here: AP revealed that they had to impose a fact-check quota on stories about her, because Christ there is only so much bullshit a news organization can refute, day in, day out.
posted by angrycat at 5:19 PM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

Dierct link to the Daily Mail story on the mentally ill father who feared the re-election of Obama and killed his family then himself. Their speculation is based on quotes from people who said they knew the guy, so it's not completely fabricated. And can we blame the ghost of Reagan for some of this? Supposedly mental health care has gotten better, so maybe his ghost can finally rest.
posted by filthy light thief at 5:21 PM on September 28, 2012

Romney is the CEO you see in the hallway and know, just be looking at him, that's he looking down at you and every other peon in the company who isn't upper management.

Suspect. Then he says it at the Christmas party.
posted by jaduncan at 5:28 PM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

"Pull a Romney" is too unwieldy. "Mitted up" work better i.e. "Jesus you really mitted up these reports, what the hell? All you had to do was copy the number from this old punch cards and put it in the database, how could you botch that?!"

The phrase is no a replacement for 'fuck' as in you can't say "I am going to mitt his shit up if keeps talking on that cellphone in the bathroom." To 'mitt' something isn't to purposely do harm, but rather to cause harm by screwing up basic steps. One flubs the simple, not the complex, when 'mitting up'. For example, I probably mitted up the use of quote marks in this comment.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:28 PM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

"Mitted up"

Peep Show

DAN CORRIGAN
[spills a bit of his drink] Oh, for fudge's sake!
MARK CORRIGAN
It's OK, Dad, the carpet's seen worse.
SARAH
You Jezzed the carpet just like you Jezzed the directions, Dad! [she and Pam giggle. Mark looks uncomfortable]
JEREMY USBORNE
Erm, Jezzed?
PAM CORRIGAN
We got it from Mark, didn't we, Mark?
JEREMY USBORNE
Oh, right. So, uh... it's when you...
PAM CORRIGAN
When you get something wrong - he Jezzed it.
DAN CORRIGAN
Total balls-up, a real Jezzing.
JEREMY USBORNE
Right. Yeah. Yeah, that is funny. Sort of a bit like being famous. [the doorbell rings] I'll go and see who that is. Let's hope I don't Jez it, or do a big Mark in my pants.
posted by jaduncan at 5:37 PM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

AP revealed that they had to impose a fact-check quota on stories about her, because Christ there is only so much bullshit a news organization can refute, day in, day out.

"You see, fact-checkers have a preset fact-check limit. Knowing their weakness, I sent wave after wave of my own bullshit at them, until they reached their limit and shutdown."
posted by Rhaomi at 5:43 PM on September 28, 2012 [10 favorites]

It would be "you Mitt the bed on this one", surely.
posted by cortex at 5:52 PM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

On another discussion board I frequent, someone just complained that the media is being unfair to Romney by unrelentingly criticizing everything about him, including "methods of transporting pets", and anyway Obama's administration lied about the Libyan attacks and pretended it was about some video when it was really Al Qaeda and you don't hear the lamestream media reporting on that.

...hm.
posted by Phire at 5:56 PM on September 28, 2012

If media were truly fair, it would not report stuff Mitt says, because this gives unfair advantage to Obama.
posted by rainy at 7:11 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

How about Anne Romney? Should the media report on what she says? Too late, she is already a top story tonight. She told CBS in an interview that if he is elected she would be concerned for Mitt's Mental Well-being:

Ann Romney's biggest concern if her husband becomes president would be his ability to maintain his "mental well-being," she said in an interview Thursday with KTVN in Reno, Nev.

Asked what her primary worry would be should her husband succeed in defeating President Obama on Nov. 6, Mrs. Romney replied, "You know, I think my biggest concern, obviously, would just be for his mental well-being."

Do you think she really wants him to be President? Because she isn't helping the cause.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:18 PM on September 28, 2012 [11 favorites]

I think Romneyed is so much more satisfying to say as a euphemism for failing miserably at something. Ex:

Goddamn, I completely romneyed that math test.

or

I completely romneyed that half-pipe and my skateboard hit me on the head..

or

I tried to make a souffle, but I romneyed that sucker something fierce.

or

How'd that FPP you put up Metafilter go?

I romneyed it like a motherfucker because Cortex said it was too early to start a new Romney thread.

Or damn, I so romneyed this project I think I'm going to be sick.

or

Dang, I romneyed my tax returns really badly and now the IRS is auditing me.
posted by Skygazer at 7:30 PM on September 28, 2012 [3 favorites]

Mitt two years from now: yeah, I kind of romneyed that campaign.. wait, what's so funny?
posted by rainy at 7:34 PM on September 28, 2012 [7 favorites]

Hey, remember the story about the young woman who was standing outside of Safeway and was caught on video registering voters only after they said they planned on voting for Romney, and when asked she claimed to be working for the county clerk's office? Well it turns out she was working for Strategic Allied Consulting. Which is interesting because Strategic Allied Consulting was paid $3 million by the RNC to register voters. Unfortunately, Strategic Allied Consulting is being investigated by the state of Florida for fraudulent registration forms.

But wait! There's more! Strategic Allied Consulting was founded by Nathan Sproul who has quite a history with the RNC and fraudulent voter registration.

So why should we care about fraudulent forms? As the LA Times reports, this could make things difficult for actual voters because the people filling out the forms are using an actual voter database and changing the addresses.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 8:00 PM on September 28, 2012 [19 favorites]

The Republican Governor of Iowa and his Secretary of State have begun their campaign of voter intimidation by gun-carrying thugs, in the guise of cracking down on voter fraud.
posted by charlie don't surf at 8:10 PM on September 28, 2012 [1 favorite]

Hmm. Is it me, or are they trying to Fox News the voting process? They purposefully ruined journalism to make it hard for people to get information. They purposefully ruined government, making it not work to "prove" it doesn't work, and to have an excuse to try and cripple it further or remove it. Are they doing the same thing to the American voting process?

It seemed too good to be true that the only voting fraud stories that I have heard about - two this week - have come from the republican party. And I thought, they'll probably still just say "see, there is fraud", and conveniently leave off that they are the ones who orchestrated it.

Maybe they are just trying to make things chaotic at voting places on election day so that any weird outcomes or irregularities can be attributed to it. But at some level, I wonder if this is what the game is. To do the same thing they have done to journalism, and to American government. To ruin the voting process.
posted by cashman at 8:13 PM on September 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

Senator Jim Webb of Virginia hammers Romney.

James Fallows: Jim Webb on 'Givers' and 'Takers'
posted by homunculus at 8:19 PM on September 28, 2012

But at some level, I wonder if this is what the game is. To do the same thing they have done to journalism, and to American government. To ruin the voting process.

I think you're right. But I am disappointed with the amount of infiltration that has been performed to uncover such practices. I would have hoped a young wannabe journalist would have signed up and tried to work their way up the campaign in the hope of an expose'.
posted by NailsTheCat at 8:19 PM on September 28, 2012

Sounds like in four more years it might be time for Jim Webb to get drafted again..
posted by goHermGO at 8:21 PM on September 28, 2012 [5 favorites]

Webb is also one of the few voices for prison reform.
posted by feloniousmonk at 9:35 PM on September 28, 2012 [2 favorites]

charlie don't surf: "The Republican Governor of Iowa and his Secretary of State have begun their campaign of voter intimidation by gun-carrying thugs, in the guise of cracking down on voter fraud."

uh, hang on. A non-citizen who illegally voted four years ago - a crime that can result in deportation if convicted - is told in a rather heavy-handed manner that they should not vote.

So, who exactly is being intimidated? People who can't vote anyway? Or do you have another article somewhere that shows they are doing this to citizens as well?
posted by rebent at 10:16 PM on September 28, 2012

I think Romneyed is so much more satisfying to say as a euphemism for failing miserably at something. Ex:

Goddamn, I completely romneyed that math test.

It's much more specific than that. If you romney your math test that means you didn't give answers to any questions, but you assure the teacher that, once you get an 'A', you'll give your answers, and they'll be the best answers they've ever seen, and besides, aren't they tired of the other answers they've been getting for the last few years?
posted by benito.strauss at 11:01 PM on September 28, 2012 [21 favorites]

TPM has a piece on "unskewed polls" site:

“The reality is that (Republicans are) losing, they can’t accept it, and they’re going to find some reason to dismiss every poll that makes them unhappy no matter what its composition is,” [Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling’s] Tom Jensen added. “This isn’t really about Party ID, it’s about hardcore denial.”

posted by Skygazer at 11:35 PM on September 28, 2012

Besides, 47% of the questions on the math test are not my job to worry about.
posted by telstar at 1:01 AM on September 29, 2012 [7 favorites]

You're getting close benito.strauss. Americans can't see the forest for the trees.

Where I come from we're a lot less exceptional, and a little more given to egalitarianism, and want to know - in advance - what we're voting for. Ryan's perpetually present won't-somebody-please-please-read-this 'Path to Prosperity' booklet would have been scrutinised word for word, graph by graph, and we'd be wanting the accompanying 'Implementing the Path to Prosperity' Guidelines. After all, the devil is always in the detail. (On my reading Ryan represents higher unemployment, and hardship, surely, but you know: "only for a few years more while we pay-down the impossible.")

"Someone has to make the hard decisions". Right? Mandated austerity on legs, and Romney talks of victims. Ha!

Romney! What does he stand for? He's astute enough not to hammer home his America-made religion. What else isn't he hammering home. Romney's (personal) ~~earning~~ venture potential has ceiling'd out. He needs to ~~exploit~~ harvest international economies. China's ripe for the picking.

Has anyone questioned him on China and beyond; and the taxes Americans (currently) have to pay on (their) foreign earnings?

Romney knows all about sweat shops and large fences to keep workers out. He spoke with such fluidity at his private fundraiser. That's the man you'd elect: a cut-throat capitalist. (It really isn't smart to focus on the stupidity of wind-down aircraft windows.)

What's America produce at home? In the main: war, debt, insurance, guns and big cars. Can't live on that, and the victimised 47% all want modern blue and white collar opportunities. Hmmm.

Obama really is our best bet for the leadership the World* (supposedly) wants: It's said the world wants strong American leadership. We don't really - we're forever left suffering the Middle East ~~oil~~ mess. The World wants someone with proper leadership skills for considerate co-operation and consensus.

Both contenders to the presidency are thinking locally with full intentions of acting globally, because America is no longer self-sufficient. Good luck getting that back. Foreign investment and trade is here to stay, and we're in the Asian-Pacific era.

Why isn't Obama campaigning on all the preparation and progress made by the Obama/Clinton focus on the Asia-Pacific for future growth, trade and prosperity? That's entirely what Obama's next term in office will be about.

Americans needs details. How can a nation give uninformed consent?

* I happen to think Gillard is the strong leader the World (and Obama) needs, even though her oration sucks, if you'll pardon the expression. Americans need to follow her every move and negotiation. Putin is already putty. Come to know her. Consensus is her game; she thinks locally and acts globally, gets things done, and potentially gets more than two terms in office. She's tenacious.

Viva Australasia!
Vote 1 Obama (I'll show myself out.)

Oh!
posted by de at 1:39 AM on September 29, 2012 [3 favorites]

de: "Oh! "

So, uh... please pardon this US citizen's ignorance, but is that video truly implying that Julia Gillard is, or once was, a member of the communist party?
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 1:56 AM on September 29, 2012

Oh look, we can add Metrosexual to the list of Obama descriptors. Actually the phrase used is "Metrosexual Black Abraham Lincoln." I'm not sure why being Abraham Lincoln is such a bad thing to Republicans these days but I find it funny that Obama has been compared to both Hitler and Lincoln. I guess he is a weird sort of Rorschach test; you can look at him and pretend to see your worst nightmares.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:20 AM on September 29, 2012 [2 favorites]

3500!
posted by Horace Rumpole at 5:28 AM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

InsertNiftyNameHere:
One of her detractors was implying that (2010). Like Obama, Gillard has all sorts of accusations levelled at her from the Right. She makes no secret of her socialist-left stance, though. Of Labor Party Prime Ministers, she's the only one chosen by Caucus to be from the socialist-left faction of the Party. As a rule Labor Caucus only chose PMs from its moderates. (Then again, she's pretty much negotiated her own Prime Ministership, twice.)

She is Australia's 27th and (theoretically) by far the most far-left PM to date ...

... Gillard influences Obama, and vice versa ... peas in a pod, except Obama was printing money on the back of fresh air. No-No! Gillard (I understand, but can't find the gov-cite) negotiated permanent seats for America and Russia on the (6th) East Asia Summit, November 2011, and demoted APEC's regional significance. Australia is bringing the US along, is my point. (And Russia.)

The 2012 US Presidential election (for Obama) is about the US becoming a part of the growing Asia-Pacific, by invitation, in co-operation, not dominance, (says me).

I can't see Romney/Ryan fitting in, frankly. They'll make life more difficult than it need be, for all concerned.
posted by de at 5:44 AM on September 29, 2012 [2 favorites]

Boy just when I think my estimation of Mitt Romney can't sink any lower, Poof! here is a video of him telling a couple of old-fashioned anti-wife jokes. Now granted this is pretty low-key stuff, but it makes him seem so out-of-touch, like someone from a generation older. He and I are about the same age and I can't imagine any of my contemporaries telling these jokes. I can, however, imagine Bob Hope telling them.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:45 AM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Goodbye, Columbus: Why top Ohio Republicans think Romney has lost the state

Presidential candidates have rebounded from downbeat polls before, especially when we are still five weeks from Election Day. So Romney’s problem is not just the recent Ohio surveys that show him losing to Barack Obama by as many as 10 percentage points. Instead, what is striking is the funereal interpretation that downcast Ohio Republicans derive from these numbers. Maybe Romney isn’t down by 10 points, they argue, but the GOP presidential nominee seems destined to lose by a solid 5 points – and in closely divided Ohio that represents a loss of nearly landslide proportions. (That would mean that Obama would slightly improve his 2008 victory margin against John McCain.)

Many of the well-known Ohio Republicans I interviewed offered their blunt assessments only after they were guaranteed complete anonymity. That is often the Faustian bargain of political journalism in 2012: robotic talking points on the record or something resembling honesty with no names attached. The reason, though, that I am emphasizing the don’t-quote-me part of the equation is that I was stunned by the vehemence of the thumbs-down-on-Mitt verdict. All but conceding the state to Obama, these Republicans were offering what may be the biggest rejection of Ohio since Philip Roth wrote “Goodbye Columbus.”

posted by zombieflanders at 6:09 AM on September 29, 2012 [3 favorites]

I was talking it over with my husband and I realized that what really made that first joke weird is that Romney told it with himself as the subject. So he is at a fund raiser for his Presidential campaign and tells a joke to warm up the crowd. But the punchline is...he is dying and Anne can't be bothered to save him. Am I reading too much into this, or is that not a strange joke to tell when you want to get elected to the White House?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:19 AM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

So, who exactly is being intimidated? People who can't vote anyway? Or do you have another article somewhere that shows they are doing this to citizens as well?

The probability that this investigation campaign is not sweeping up any citizens who happen to have the same name and birthdate as noncitizens, or whose naturalization records are effectively fubared for some reason (ie name changes), or for other reasons would be very, very low even if this whole voter fraud thing were an authentic, genuine attempt to prevent vote fraud.

...and the probability that these "vote fraud" measures and voter ID measures are genuine and authentic attempts to prevent vote fraud is zero. Taking such a heavy-handed approach to a nearly nonexistent problem is like saying that you're instituting these heavy-handed program that purely coincidentally are universally acknowledged to suppress Democratic turnout because doing so will reduce the risk of sasquatch attack.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:00 AM on September 29, 2012 [2 favorites]

I think you're right. But I am disappointed with the amount of infiltration that has been performed to uncover such practices. I would have hoped a young wannabe journalist would have signed up and tried to work their way up the campaign in the hope of an expose'.

There's a reason they fucked up the media first.
posted by fullerine at 7:01 AM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

it makes him seem so out-of-touch, like someone from a generation older

Sounds like your nerves are getting to you! Calm down with a nice Chesterfield. Smooth, rich flavor and helps fight off colds, too.
posted by Miko at 7:04 AM on September 29, 2012 [9 favorites]

Ctrl-F: Waitergate. Phrase not found...

Really people? You're slipping.
posted by milarepa at 7:27 AM on September 29, 2012

milarepa: "Ctrl-F: Waitergate. Phrase not found... Really people? You're slipping."

I just did a search for "waitergate" and didn't see anything past 2010. What are you on about?
posted by barnacles at 8:10 AM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

as per the New Yorker article I mentioned upthread, Romney apparently worshipped his dad in a way that seems sort of over-the-top -- e.g. at a meeting the two of them were at Romney's eyes never left his dad's face when the latter spoke.

So the whole thing with his dad dropping out -- Rockefeller apparently promised G. Romney his financial backing, then withdrew it more or less. It's described as this great family trauma (which, I dunno, cry me a river?) So there's this depiction of M. Romney as wanting to be THE guy with ALL the money, and sort of compensating for big bad thing that happened to the man whom he worshipped.

So NOW you have panic amongst the GOP. X percent are making the decision to distance themselves from Romney and concentrate on congressional races and are looking forward to 2016. That's got to be a kick in the gut, if The New Yorker has it right.
posted by angrycat at 8:14 AM on September 29, 2012 [2 favorites]

> What are you on about?

Clue: It was a waiter, at the fundraiser, with an audio video cam.
posted by de at 8:20 AM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

I believe the nature of the complaint, jocular as it was, is that, despite the existence of a political scandal involving in part the actions of a waiter, we have collectively failed to riff on "Watergate" by inserting a coy vowel.

THIS HAS BEEN YOUR JOKE EXPLANATION OF THE DAY. YOU MAY NOW LAUGH.
posted by cortex at 8:24 AM on September 29, 2012 [16 favorites]

From The National Memo:

Nate Silver has found that voter ID laws can reduce turnout by two to three percent among registered voters, which is certainly more than enough to swing a close election. He projects that Pennsylvania’s voter ID law, for example, will reduce voter turnout by 2.4 percent and provide a net 1.2 swing to a Republican candidate. That may not be enough to shift the presidential election, given Obama’s 8-point lead in the state, but it could influence the outcome in other races, particularly down-ballot. The scary thing is that we won’t know the impact of these laws until after the election — at which point it will be too late to do anything about it. At the very least, we’re looking at a lot of confusion and possible chaos on Election Day in important battleground states.

posted by tzikeh at 8:26 AM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

cortex: "I believe the nature of the complaint, jocular as it was, is that, despite the existence of a political scandal involving in part the actions of a waiter, we have collectively failed to riff on "Watergate" by inserting a coy vowel.

THIS HAS BEEN YOUR JOKE EXPLANATION OF THE DAY. YOU MAY NOW LAUGH."

Ha ha ha! Ha ha ha!
posted by barnacles at 8:28 AM on September 29, 2012 [15 favorites]

"What's America produce at home? In the main: war, debt, insurance, guns and big cars. Can't live on that"

50% of the world's grain exports, for starters. Pretty sure we COULD live on that.

We're also the world's leading producer of corn, soybeans, beef, strawberries, almonds, cheese, nuclear energy, electricity generally, natural gas, airplanes, lumber, phosphate, and, yes, motor vehicles and guns. We also host 16 of the top 25 universities in the world (according to the Times Higher Education rankings), have the largest agricultural output in the world, and second-largest industrial output in the world.

If you're going to issue prescriptions for the U.S.'s economy and foreign policies related to trade, it'd help to know something about us first.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 8:32 AM on September 29, 2012 [17 favorites]

I seriously wonder if the organizers of VIP fundraisers in the not so distant future are going to start frisking the help for phones or other recording devices.
posted by Rhomboid at 8:34 AM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Hm. Obama seems like a heh-heh man. Clue to the mysteries of the universe perhaps? Perhaps.
posted by angrycat at 8:40 AM on September 29, 2012

I seriously wonder if the organizers of VIP fundraisers in the not so distant future are going to start frisking the help for phones or other recording devices.

It'll go further than that. They'll do background checks, look for suspicious bumperstickers in the parking lot, and require help to sign agreements that say, in effect, if we catch you doing this we have the right to lock you up and take everything you own.

Though hell, they may do that now and this person was just exceptionally brave. The fact that this person has not come forward to cruise the talk shows indicates that they have some idea of the retribution that would await them, not just lawsuit/jail but possibly threats of violence.
posted by emjaybee at 8:45 AM on September 29, 2012 [6 favorites]

In the future, the help at political functions will be an industry, vetted by the political parties of course. Democrats will only hire vetted democratic waiters and chefs and maids. These people will have to pass through body scanners before entering buildings where private talks are given and routinely monitored as they go about their work. Each job will probably evolve into a House or Guild, with certain manners and customs, along with apprenticeships, done in parent and sibling relationships to further ensure loyalty to the party.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:05 AM on September 29, 2012 [4 favorites]

So the whole thing with his dad dropping out -- Rockefeller apparently promised G. Romney his financial backing, then withdrew it more or less. It's described as this great family trauma

That puts the quote about being annoyed that he has to fundraise rather than campaign into perspective.
posted by jaduncan at 9:14 AM on September 29, 2012

Each job will probably evolve into a House or Guild, with certain manners and customs, along with apprenticeships, done in parent and sibling relationships to further ensure loyalty to the party.

It is by will alone I set my host in motion. It is by the powder of cocaine that thoughts acquire speed, the nose acquires drip. The drip becomes a warning. It is by will alone I set my host in motion.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:19 AM on September 29, 2012 [8 favorites]

IN THE GRIM DARKNESS OF THE FAR FUTURE THERE IS ONLY PARTISAN POLITICS
posted by Rhomboid at 9:19 AM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

IN THE GRIM DARKNESS OF THE FAR FUTURE THERE IS ONLY PARTISAN POLITICS

What are you going to do...vote third party?
posted by jaduncan at 9:33 AM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

uh, hang on. A non-citizen who illegally voted four years ago - a crime that can result in deportation if convicted - is told in a rather heavy-handed manner that they should not vote.

So, who exactly is being intimidated? People who can't vote anyway? Or do you have another article somewhere that shows they are doing this to citizens as well?

If you read a bit more about this, it's not clear this is a crime since a felony of this type requires criminal intent.

The intimidation is aimed at every potential voter in the state, since the government is producing a lot of publicity about their new $250k budget devoted to pursuing voter fraud, using private security forces. This intimidation is largely targeted at the usual minority and disadvantaged voters, who may be uncertain about their legal rights. Just think about it: what if armed Blackwater mercenaries knocked on your door, asking to check your legal residency status and voting rights? This is basically what is happening. For every case they might have a reason to pursue, there are a hundred people targeted for no legitimate reason.

I have been working as an Elections Official since 2008. In my entire time working on elections and working the database to register tens of thousands of voters, I have only seen one case of voter fraud ever. A legal citizen from another county tried to register in our county, using his business address. One of the deputies caught his application and refused it, since he knew the address was a business. The office does plat books and zoning when it isn't doing elections.
posted by charlie don't surf at 9:35 AM on September 29, 2012 [8 favorites]

""You see, fact-checkers have a preset fact-check limit. Knowing their weakness, I sent wave after wave of my own bullshit at them, until they reached their limit and shutdown.""

It's the WWI strategy of bullshit.
posted by klangklangston at 9:40 AM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Do we have a war on voter fraud yet?
posted by telstar at 9:47 AM on September 29, 2012

If I worked for Xe/Blackwater (well, first I'd kill myself, but ignoring that) I'd immediately be adding "Secure Catering" to my list of services offered.
posted by benito.strauss at 10:06 AM on September 29, 2012 [6 favorites]

Literacy and the communications revolution have empowered conspirators with new means to conspire, increasing the speed of accuracy of the their interactions and thereby the maximum size a conspiracy may achieve before it breaks down.

Conspirators who have this technology are able to out conspire conspirators without it. For the same costs they are able to achieve a higher total conspiratorial power. That is why they adopt it.

For example, remembering Lord Halifax’s words, let us consider two closely balanced and broadly conspiratorial power groupings, the US Democratic and Republican parties.

Consider what would happen if one of these parties gave up their mobile phones, fax and email correspondence — let alone the computer systems which manage their subscribes, donors, budgets, polling, call centres and direct mail campaigns?

They would immediately fall into an organizational stupor and lose to the other.

Julian Assange, via Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; “To destroy this invisible government”.
posted by liza at 10:14 AM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

IN THE GRIM DARKNESS OF THE FAR FUTURE THERE IS ONLY PARTISAN POLITICS

What are you going to do...vote third party?

The Eldar will NEVER be a significant force in the WH40K universe.
posted by Artw at 10:27 AM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Elcor and Volus are too dependent on larger states and not numerous enough to justify a seat on the Citadel Council
posted by The Whelk at 10:37 AM on September 29, 2012

Barney Frank Blasts Mitt Romney's 'Galling' Attack On 'Disabled Veterans, Elderly'.

Mitt Gets Worse: Rep. Barney Frank
posted by homunculus at 10:38 AM on September 29, 2012 [4 favorites]

Citizens United is Now the Right's Go-To Excuse for Labor Bashing
posted by homunculus at 10:53 AM on September 29, 2012 [4 favorites]

Wall Street Journal accused of concealing writers' Mitt Romney links
posted by homunculus at 11:15 AM on September 29, 2012 [2 favorites]

Electoral Predictions: The Obama-Romney map is turning blue
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 11:46 AM on September 29, 2012

TNR: “47%” Was Bad for Romney; Ryan Has Been Deadly.
posted by ericb at 12:35 PM on September 29, 2012

Romney Campaign Co-Chair: ‘Timid’ Obama Should Have Gotten Bin Laden Faster
posted by homunculus at 12:36 PM on September 29, 2012

Pollster Map Shows Possible Path For Romney Victory.
posted by ericb at 12:36 PM on September 29, 2012

Letterman Instructs Viewers To Not Vote For Romney Unless He Visits The 'Late Show' (VIDEO).
posted by ericb at 12:40 PM on September 29, 2012

'Waiergate' -- I seriously wonder if the organizers of VIP fundraisers in the not so distant future are going to start frisking the help for phones or other recording devices.

Has it been determined that a waiter was responsible for the video?
posted by ericb at 12:43 PM on September 29, 2012

RNC Shocked That Firm Known For Voter Fraud Was Doing Voter Fraud For RNC
posted by homunculus at 12:44 PM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama 99 Problems remix
posted by angrycat at 1:02 PM on September 29, 2012

"The year is 2009/ And the White House is mine/ But the economy’s in full mother-fucking decline/ My choices at the time were to shit on the poor or/ Fellate the banks to get elected once more."

(lyrics from above)
posted by angrycat at 1:05 PM on September 29, 2012

I didn't watch the full video, but wasn't there a part where a member of the waitstaff adjusts the camera for a better view? Someone upthread mentioned that the staff definitely seemed to be aware of the camera as they were milling about, but I can't find the comment now.
posted by Rhomboid at 1:18 PM on September 29, 2012

Clifford Russell, a retired nuclear engineer and volunteer at the Bedford Virginia GOP headquarters has a lot to say.

“No. No more help, enough is enough. People have to pick themselves up, take some responsibility. Why should we be paying for people’s mistakes and bad choices? All these illegitimate families just adding to the population, making all these bad decisions, then asking us to pay for it? It's time to cut them off."

I ask for some clarification: what do you mean, just starve them out? What if people can't find work? Let them starve?

"Look, there's always something you can do. You telling me people can't make a choice for a better life? We have to help all of them? No. I'll tell you what really need to do with these illegitimate families on welfare—give all the kids up for adoption and execute the parents."

I stare at him and blink in a glaze of shock.

Just to be sure I heard him right, I ask him to repeat it, twice.

"Yes, I mean it. Get rid of all of them, give the kids up for adoption, execute the parents, and you get rid of the problem.” (When I call him back to revisit the issue, he elaborates: “put the children up for adoption and execute the parents, and word would get out soon” that poor people shouldn’t have kids.)
posted by futz at 1:19 PM on September 29, 2012 [17 favorites]

Christ on a sidecar, futz. I'm reluctant to believe that that can be a true account, just because it fits so snugly in with my worldview. But I don't find it unbelievable at all.

The only Democratic equivalent to that kind of grass-roots insanity that comes to my mind is a video from the last election, with a sound bite of a black woman in a cheering crowd, claiming Obama was going to give everyone free gasoline.
posted by Countess Elena at 1:28 PM on September 29, 2012

futz, it's already been perfectly analyzed upthread:

Your ideology has driven you mad.
posted by murphy slaw

posted by benito.strauss at 1:38 PM on September 29, 2012

The Victorian approach to poverty worked out so well the first time, let's try it again!
posted by Rhomboid at 1:45 PM on September 29, 2012 [3 favorites]

Clifford Russell has just followed the logic of the "fuck you, I've got mine" world view (almost) to its logical conclusion. At some point, you need to push troubling moral concerns aside and just embrace the core of your ideology.

I say "almost" because, since research suggests that its very unusual for a child born to poor parents to ever rise out of their economic situation, he really should advocate for executing the children, too.

Its a vexing conundrum that some people feel guilt when they see somebody suffering. If you simply kill everyone who is suffering, you no longer need to feel guilty about keeping all your money to yourself. Finally, a solution.
posted by Joey Michaels at 1:50 PM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Top Romney Adviser Criticizes Obama For Not Killing Bin Laden Fast Enough
posted by futz at 1:51 PM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Futz, I've heard similar things so not surprised. I imagine Clifford Russell is also pro-life, just to be completely confusing. "The poor should be forced to carry their pregnancies to term. And then we should execute them!"

I wonder how long it will be until the cranky old white guys start suggesting a return to indentured servitude in order to teach the lazy poor some personal responsibility. "We should do it for their own good!"
posted by honestcoyote at 1:56 PM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

At the moment I'm grading a student response to "A Modest Proposal." Student claims that essay is mocking mothers who are so lazy they have to beg for sustenance. Then student claims that today's society is even more moochy and lazy. I'm trying to limit my comments to, "think you missed the point a bit."
posted by angrycat at 2:00 PM on September 29, 2012 [10 favorites]

"Yes, I mean it. Get rid of all of them, give the kids up for adoption, execute the parents, and you get rid of the problem."

I wonder how that squares with "America is Christian Nation built on Christian Values?".
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 2:05 PM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh, I am not surprised either. Not at all. I had a conversation with my (sane) mom today about the state of politics in general and we agreed to change the subject b/c it was so enraging and we just wanted to have a good time hanging out.

Also, I started a new job in March and was pleased that politics were never discussed. Well, that has changed. They all like me (!) so I guess they started getting comfortable enough to start making comments and playing Limbaugh out loud on their computers instead of using ear buds. "Fuck Obama" bumper stickers are appearing in the parking lot and there is much talk about Obama taking their guns away. Several of them have bought property (not together) with a lot of acreage and talk about it being their insurance policy for what is to come.

On Friday I stopped into the office of a co-worker who had been proud of the fact that he hadn't listened to Limbaugh in 2 months (it got him to "het up" at work) and he was listening once again and I said, "hey, I haven't heard that in awhile" and he said "I can't help it. I turn on fox news as soon as I get home. Not many people know this about me...but I am a news junkie! I am informed."

I smiled, told him to have a nice weekend and left.
posted by futz at 2:27 PM on September 29, 2012 [4 favorites]

Apropo of my mention of Israel up above, Netanyahu is speaking at the UN right now, and as a demonstration of Iran's nuclear abilities brought out--and I swear I am not making this up--a cartoon of an ACME-style bomb.

Netanyahu 2002: Iraq has Centrifuges ‘the size of Washing Machines’ to Produce A-Bomb
posted by homunculus at 3:10 PM on September 29, 2012 [5 favorites]

And here I thought "Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?" was cutting enough. Not for the irretrievably socially broken, I guess.
posted by jokeefe at 3:29 PM on September 29, 2012 [5 favorites]

HOLY SHIT, best headline ever:

BIAS ALERT: Mainstream Media is Threat to Country
posted by Theta States at 5:36 PM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh wow, it's a speech transcript. Super long, for an article.

From the bottom:
Delivered by Patrick Caddell on September 21 at Accuracy in Media's Conference --.

hahahahaha! FRONT PAGE NEWS, PEOPLE!
posted by Theta States at 5:38 PM on September 29, 2012

Ooops, that should be:

Delivered by Patrick Caddell on September 21 at Accuracy in Media's Conference.. Obamanation: A Day of Truth.
posted by Theta States at 5:42 PM on September 29, 2012

Accuracy in Media is a real piece of work. They seem to have real difficulty with metaphor:

Rep. Keith Ellison, the Muslim Congressman from Minnesota who shed tears in protest over the congressional hearings on the growing radicalization of Muslims in the U.S., wrote the foreword to a book entitled Green Deen: What Islam Teaches about Protecting the Planet. In Arabic, “deen” means religious creed. The author of Green Deen is Ibrahim Abdul Matin. He wrote his book to demonstrate that there is a close relationship between Islam and modern environmentalism. [...]

Matin prefaces his entire book with the idea that “the earth is a mosque.” This means that the environmental holism being espoused by Matin must necessarily be subject to Allah’s totalitarian authority over the earth. [...] If the entire earth is a mosque, as Matin maintains, then Allah’s boundaries are boundless, and this means that simultaneously Americans must live under the theocratic dictates of Allah, and environmentalism can easily be used alongside Sharia law to help bring America to its knees under Islamic jihadist control.

And I think that's enough crazy for me, for one day. This stuff was linked directly to the Fox News website. Fair and balanced indeed.
posted by jokeefe at 6:42 PM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Pogo_Fuzzybutt: ""Yes, I mean it. Get rid of all of them, give the kids up for adoption, execute the parents, and you get rid of the problem."

I wonder how that squares with "America is Christian Nation built on Christian Values?"."

Logic has nothing to do with it, just like logic has nothing to do with "America is a Christian Nation". The people cheering on this "useless eaters" horseshit are just like the twits who cheered on similar talk back in the '30s.
posted by dunkadunc at 7:47 PM on September 29, 2012

The world needs ditch-diggers too.
posted by charlie don't surf at 7:56 PM on September 29, 2012

de: "InsertNiftyNameHere:
One of her detractors was implying that (2010) .
... Gillard influences Obama, and vice versa ... peas in a pod... Gillard (I understand, but can't find the gov-cite) negotiated permanent seats for America and Russia on the (6th) East Asia Summit, November 2011, and demoted APEC's regional significance. Australia is bringing the US along, is my point. (And Russia.)

Ah, OK, thanks for that. Obviously I don't know much about Australian politics, but everything I've heard from or about Gillard has seemed totally reasonable to me. People trying to characterize her as a communist seems laughable from my vantage point. (But it sounds like that was your point, as well as that people in the US try to do that exact thing to Obama as well.)

The 2012 US Presidential election (for Obama) is about the US becoming a part of the growing Asia-Pacific, by invitation, in co-operation, not dominance, (says me).

Who could argue that the above is a bad thing?!?!?!?!

I can't see Romney/Ryan fitting in, frankly. They'll make life more difficult than it need be, for all concerned."

And potentially get a whole lot of people killed as well.

Thanks again! (Please mefi-mail me if I'm still missing something.)
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 8:07 PM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Clifford Russell: "Yes, I mean it. Get rid of all of them, give the kids up for adoption, execute the parents, and you get rid of the problem."

This remind me of something...hmm.

Oh that's right: genocide.

Always a reasonable response to fixing a nation's problems...

So the biggest problem in this country are the people on Welfare and Food Stamps and the best thing to do with those people is to sanction the state, I guess under a Romney Ryan regime to liquidate them wholesale and give away their kids to strangers.

Fuck.
posted by Skygazer at 8:19 PM on September 29, 2012

Homunculous: Wall Street Journal accused of concealing writers' Mitt Romney links

A review by Media Matters on September 19 named the 10 WSJ writers with strong Romney links as John Bolton; Max Boot; Lee Casey; Paula Dobriansky; Mary Ann Glendon; Glenn Hubbard; Paul Peterson; David Rivkin Jr; Martin West; and Michael Mukasey.

The Wall Street Journal is owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation. Murdoch has made it abundantly clear in his many tweets that he supports Romney.

I feel like the whole Right-wing shit-show apparatus is beginning to unravel...

Shit's getting a bit scary.
posted by Skygazer at 8:27 PM on September 29, 2012

Murdoch has made it abundantly clear in his many tweets that he supports Romney.

I don't have enough sighs.
posted by Riki tiki at 8:37 PM on September 29, 2012

The Dangerous Conspiracy Theory Behind Mitt Romney’s Lyme Disease Mailers
posted by homunculus at 8:58 PM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

GOP: A Cult Looking for a Personality
posted by homunculus at 9:00 PM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

This thread is now the third longest one, comment wise, on Metafilter.

Keep rowing everyone!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:23 PM on September 29, 2012

Poll Averages Have No History of Consistent Partisan Bias

Don't hurt 'em Nate! Can the undercard of the debate this week be between Nate Silver and the person who runs unskewedpolls?
posted by cashman at 9:23 PM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ill Doctrine: What is the polite way to tell Mitt Romney’s family that we think he’s a weirdo?
posted by cashman at 9:30 PM on September 29, 2012 [6 favorites]

Brandon Blatcher: ok
posted by rainy at 9:32 PM on September 29, 2012

The Dangerous Conspiracy Theory Behind Mitt Romney’s Lyme Disease Mailers

This article is so obtusely written I can't figure out if it's just poor writing or a fear of a libel lawsuit.

If I understand it correctly, some social conservative who thinks that his family has something called chronic Lyme disease wants to protect doctors from lawsuits for treatments that are proven to be very dangerous met Mitt Romney on a bus (picture included) and hence the origin of that stupid Lyme disease mailer?

Where does the 'dangerous conspiracy theory' come into play?
posted by winna at 9:32 PM on September 29, 2012

Change can't happen if you write off half the nation before you even take office.

I'm one to turn things into basketball metaphors which I suppose works here since the President is a hoops fan. The 47% thing was Mitt trying to go for what he thought was an easy layup in luxury and safety, to his base. And the video got it blocked out to half court. If you've ever had it happen to you, you think you're free to score, and just as you extend your arm, you see the defender and realize you screwed up. Mitt had to watch his chances get swatted back out to half court.

And Nate has the numbers to back that up. All along all Mitt has been trying to do is fade into the wall, be inconspicuous. Get the eyes and focus on the President. Instead, it's all on Mitt. The "sweet jesus" moment, the hastily called press conferences, and Ryan getting heartily booed in Florida. Mitt has got to go for broke in the debates to have a chance. But he has nothing to lose. Hopefully the president is ready for anything. I can't see the outcome being neutral. I think either Mitt will be notably back in the game or down for the count.
posted by cashman at 9:50 PM on September 29, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ill Doctrine: What is the polite way to tell Mitt Romney’s family that we think he’s a weirdo?

The most important thing that you've got to do is remember the difference between the "what he did was weird" conversation and the "he is weird" conversation.

When you say "I think he's a weirdo", that's not a bad move because you might be wrong, that's a bad move because you might be right. Because if that dude really is a weirdo, you want to make sure you hold him accountable and don't let him off easy. And even though intuitively it feels like the hardest way to hit him is to run up on him and say "I think your ass is weird", when you handle it that way you're actually letting him off easy, because you're setting up a conversation that's way too simple for him to derail and duck out of.
posted by Riki tiki at 10:39 PM on September 29, 2012 [5 favorites]

Keep rowing everyone!

U-S-A!
posted by homunculus at 10:50 PM on September 29, 2012

C'mon man, don't be a mitt.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:59 PM on September 29, 2012

You take that back.
posted by homunculus at 11:25 PM on September 29, 2012

Mitt Romney's Real Agenda: If you want to understand Romney's game plan, just look at what Republicans have been doing in Congress
posted by homunculus at 11:30 PM on September 29, 2012 [4 favorites]

heh.

@matcro: Get your Mitt Romney name by taking your favourite item of winter clothing, computer abbreviation and body part. I'm Gilet Ramtit.

I'm Slicker Led Bottom
posted by taz at 11:50 PM on September 29, 2012 [2 favorites]

@matcro: Get your Mitt Romney name by taking your favourite item of winter clothing, computer abbreviation and body part. I'm Gilet Ramtit.

I'm Slicker LedBottom

Slicker LedBottom? I hardly know her!

I'm Scarf MacBellybutton.
posted by Superplin at 1:38 AM on September 30, 2012

Boots MacBellybutton?
posted by spitbull at 2:06 AM on September 30, 2012

Muff RawPinna?

I think I'm doing this wrong.
posted by Vysharra at 2:17 AM on September 30, 2012

Gloves Laptoptoe.
posted by Skygazer at 3:24 AM on September 30, 2012

Ushanka Servchest

I'm in full Obama HUSSEIN mode...and I think I can see Alaska from my house.
posted by jaduncan at 3:41 AM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

Longjohn Elfnose.
posted by knapah at 3:44 AM on September 30, 2012

Jacket Dat Ass
posted by toadliquor at 5:05 AM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

Long John Pramhands.
posted by unSane at 5:21 AM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

Nice to meet you. I'm Galoshes Usbelbow.
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:04 AM on September 30, 2012

Balaclava Wysiwyg PinkyToe
posted by marsha56 at 6:24 AM on September 30, 2012

Gaiter Scsiwart (now responsible for 0.084% of the thread)
posted by achrise at 6:27 AM on September 30, 2012

Balaclava Wysiwyg PinkyToe

Who knew there were quite so many Russian Mormons?
posted by jaduncan at 6:29 AM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

Toque Giffinger
posted by vewystwange at 6:32 AM on September 30, 2012 [2 favorites]

Henley "Raid" Radius.
posted by tzikeh at 6:45 AM on September 30, 2012

Clifford Russell: "Yes, I mean it. Get rid of all of them, give the kids up for adoption, execute the parents, and you get rid of the problem."

Oh gosh...who was that guy that said, "The poor will be with you always"? Oh yeah. Jesus.

The Dangerous Conspiracy Theory Behind Mitt Romney’s Lyme Disease Mailers

This article is so obtusely written I can't figure out if it's just poor writing or a fear of a libel lawsuit.

My take on the "dangerous conspiracy" is that Mitt meets a guy, listens to his story, and suddenly wants to change the law so that doctors won't lose their licenses for pursuing unorthodox and harmful treatments for Lyme disease. It isn't much of a conspiracy but it sure is dangerous if Romney is going to be swayed by everybody with a pet theory.

Also, how did a woman and all 7 of her children contact chronic Lyme disease? Do they not know what ticks look like? This seems more than a bit unlikely.

Get your Mitt Romney name by taking your favourite item of winter clothing, computer abbreviation and body part

Silk Underwear Comeyelash
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:52 AM on September 30, 2012 [2 favorites]

Cummerbund Portnose from the posher, English side of the family.
posted by longbaugh at 6:55 AM on September 30, 2012

My take on the "dangerous conspiracy" is that Mitt meets a guy, listens to his story, and suddenly wants to change the law so that doctors won't lose their licenses for pursuing unorthodox and harmful treatments for Lyme disease. It isn't much of a conspiracy but it sure is dangerous if Romney is going to be swayed by everybody with a pet theory.

Not just a state operative who says it's a good idea because either/or/both

a) they are an idiot;
b) they believe it will solidify the base?
posted by jaduncan at 7:02 AM on September 30, 2012

Being an L.A. girl I don't have much winter clothing so I'll go with obvious: Flip-flop Pramnipple.

(Yearbook quote: "Zap me!")
posted by Room 641-A at 7:07 AM on September 30, 2012 [2 favorites]

DogsAgainstRomney

MormonsForObama
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:21 AM on September 30, 2012

We have rarely encountered tales like Litton’s and Ryan’s. For true distance runners, to lie about time or distance is to lie to ourselves, to diminish the importance of the many sacrifices we make to reach the starting line.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:24 AM on September 30, 2012 [4 favorites]

Romney thinks zingers are going to win the debate. NY Times:

Mr. Romney’s team has concluded that debates are about creating moments and has equipped him with a series of zingers that he has memorized and has been practicing on aides since August. His strategy includes luring the president into appearing smug or evasive about his responsibility for the economy.

posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:25 AM on September 30, 2012

Why isn't Christie distancing himself from Romney? It's a bit curious. For all of my many disagreements with him, I thought he was a smart man. But no, he's harrumphing about how well Mitt is going to do in the debates.

Well, aside from the fact that saying that people have misunderestimated Mitt isn't the same as saying Christie is like him...well, loyal party soldier isn't a bad rep to have before the 2016 primaries.
posted by jaduncan at 7:29 AM on September 30, 2012

Also, how did a woman and all 7 of her children contact chronic Lyme disease? Do they not know what ticks look like? This seems more than a bit unlikely.

Just FYI:

Lyme disease = bacterial infection from tick bite
Chronic Lyme disease = nebulous constellation of symptoms that kinda sorta resembles those of Lyme disease but for which there is no convincing medical evidence that it has anything to do with the bacteria carried by ticks, and which might be another of those diseases that desperate patients suffering from some kind of psychosomatic condition insist that they have despite the entire medical establishment telling them that what they're saying doesn't match the evidence.
posted by Rhomboid at 7:30 AM on September 30, 2012 [4 favorites]

You could shorten that.

Lyme disease : actual disease :: chronic Lyme disease : wifi "allergies"
posted by jaduncan at 7:39 AM on September 30, 2012 [2 favorites]

Why isn't Christie distancing himself from Romney? It's a bit curious. For all of my many disagreements with him, I thought he was a smart man. But no, he's harrumphing about how well Mitt is going to do in the debates.

Maybe he read How Romney botched it and Obama played it perfectly?

Indeed, from the article in Secret Life of Gravy's link, we have this:

As the candidates prepare, the first trick for Mr. Obama is finding time.

and then this:

Mr. Romney has practiced for months, starting in June in Utah, through three days this month in Vermont.

Aside from the expectations game, the one thing that seems to be missing from Romney's strategy, though the reports may just be a ruse, is that he will turn the debates into speeches directed at Ohio, Florida, and Virginia, etc. Because I would bet that's what Obama is doing. Not memorizing random zingers about the 47%, but making sure every attack on Romney is understood as a defense of the battleground states against Romney's policies.
posted by Bokmakierie at 7:43 AM on September 30, 2012

Romney thinks zingers are going to win the debate.

He's not totally wrong. People love a good zing as long as its directed at someone they dislike. They'll love it if it feeds into their personal narrative.

The problem is that Romney has to get in zings that appeal to his base and independents. If they just appeal to his base, that'll turn off independents. Considering Romney has proven tone deaf of how he comes off, I'm not betting ten cents, let alone 10k on his ability to do that.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:48 AM on September 30, 2012 [4 favorites]

“You haven’t given me the math,” Wallace said in one exchange.

“I don’t have the ... It would take me too long to go through all of the math,” Ryan responded.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:56 AM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

Mr. Romney’s team has concluded that debates are about creating moments and has equipped him with a series of zingers that he has memorized and has been practicing on aides since August.

Given his robotic delivery and that weird little smirk he does when he thinks he's been clever, this is going to be quite comical.
posted by winna at 8:16 AM on September 30, 2012 [7 favorites]

oh my God Romney in zing mode is the best time ever.
posted by angrycat at 8:19 AM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

Oh this is nice:

"I shudder as a gun owner ... what would (Obama) do if he never has to face the voters ever again?"

As said by Paul Ryan this Saturday. Dude, I so would not even piss on you if you were on fire.
posted by angrycat at 8:25 AM on September 30, 2012 [9 favorites]

I would like nothing better than a botched debate by Romney, but I'm not sure it's a done deal yet. Obama has his own foibles to battle (from the same article):

In a conference room at the Democratic headquarters, President Obama has been preparing for the debate next week, but the reviews of his staff are already in. Too long, they tell him. Cut that answer. Give crisper explanations. No one wants a professor; they want a president.

Although professorial is not such a bad thing if the other choice is robotic.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 8:27 AM on September 30, 2012

That Lyme disease thing is indeed strange. It's definitely a little crypto-paranoiac. What's going on there?

I ask because of an incident over the summer where I got into it with the spouse of a Facebook friend. He posted some raving-loony website about the conspiracy to cover up chronic Lyme ("this shit is everywhere, man! They don't want you to know!") and I responded with something skeptical. He assured me I didn't know what I was talking about, that one incidence of Lyme was going to condemn any sufferer to a lifetime of mysterious, wide-ranging ailments that can only be cured by massively unsafe-seeming megadoses of antibiotics over the very long term (years,) to which I responded well, I had Lyme 18 years ago, took my meds, and it's been in the rearview mirror since then, no further problems, so I tend to be a little reserved about these claims.

He proceeded to rant and rave and plaster my Facebook walls with a lot of looneyball conspiracy stufff about this doctor that Romney references who lost his license because of this treatment. That included an hour-long movie as well as this ABC news examination of a girl who, to expect horses, is suffering from more pedestrian illnesses. I couldn't believe that any otherwise reasonable American would accept this stuff at face value in the absence of clear evidence from investigation.

Rhomboid's got it nailed.

But the reason the whole incident unsettled me so much was that it was also clear that it was about more than medicine - since I was skeptical, it became obvious that in this whole construction I was the credulous sheeple who couldn't even SEE it when the fascist conspiracy, via the CDC and Obama administration, was hiding the PLAIN FACTS from me, and that we're all on the verge of society succumbing to total Lyme-driven collapse. I wish I were exaggerating. I could see that there was an entire politico-social worldview lodged in this support for this rejected medical theory, and it started to creep me out.

So this is pretty bizarre. I'm not sure how the "Lyme conspiracy" jigsaws into the other paranoid-fantastical obsessions of those whose view of state power is already negative, but it's truly very interesting that Romney's campaign has landed on this as a tactic.

And what's even more interesting, and more disturbing, is that he has such piss-poor judgment about medicine and disease control that he would focus on a couple of crackpot quacks as truth-tellers suppressed by the Obama adminstration instead of focus on the legions of responsible physicians who are approaching the question from an informed framework of research and evidence-based practice and are justifiably concerned about the effects of putting people on probably un-indicated antibiotics for years at a time. Does this bode a Presidency of considered, knowledgeable judgment about science and medicine policy?
posted by Miko at 8:42 AM on September 30, 2012 [8 favorites]

Given his robotic delivery and that weird little smirk he does when he thinks he's been clever, this is going to be quite comical.

All I can think of is the Buffy season six episode one cold open.

But in practice I'm not banking on a particularly entertainingly weird debate. I think the primary debates were about as close to "that'll put marzipan in your pie plate, bingo!" as we're gonna get. And they got pretty close at times.
posted by cortex at 8:42 AM on September 30, 2012 [5 favorites]

He also stressed the importance of appointing people to government agencies who will "respect the rights of hunting and fishing,"

"Gerunds' rights is a matter that's been close to my heart for many years," he continued.
posted by Rhomboid at 8:47 AM on September 30, 2012 [17 favorites]

Elizabeth Warren appears to inch ahead of Scott Brown in new Globe poll, 43 - 38
posted by madamjujujive at 8:51 AM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

As someone who has tested positive for Lyme (full CDC verification) but never had a tick bite or tick to speak of, it is easy to miss the initial infection point. I had it for almost year before the test was done (based on my symptoms and when the period of exposure would have been). Being treated with the same amount of antibiotics for a "just found the tick" infection didn't appear to do the job, so I needed to do a longer and more intensive course of antibiotics.

I agree the area is full of Woo, in part because it is a difficult to diagnose and categorically prove lack of infection. I think this move by Mitt is naked pandering for them on the grounds of not trusting the Government, I'm sure they will court the AntiVaxers next.

But yes, Lyme can be a horrible thing, it is hard to find, diagnos, and in many areas of suburban New England and the mid coastal areas, the milder winters and continued development of wilderness areas have increased the deer tick population. The biggest carrier in most areas are field mice, not deer.

I take Mitts Lyme comments to be as sincere as Newts moon colony.
posted by mrzarquon at 8:53 AM on September 30, 2012 [2 favorites]

Why Obama abandoned audacity

"Watch the video atop this post. It’s an unusual two-minute ad that the Obama campaign is running in battleground states. “During the last weeks of this campaign, there will be debates, speeches and more ads,” Obama says. “But if I could sit down with you, in your living room or around the kitchen table, here’s what I’d say.”

This is, in other words, the fullest argument the Obama campaign is likely to present to swing-state voters. And it’s a strange argument. It’s not just a cautious case for Obama’s reelection. There’s nothing unusual about a timid politician. What’s odd is that it’s a timid argument for a president whose ideas are not timid. It’s an argument meant to obscure the fact that Obama has better, bigger ideas than the ones he’s telling you about."
posted by madamjujujive at 8:59 AM on September 30, 2012 [2 favorites]

Slate on Romney and chronic Lyme.

As someone who has tested positive for Lyme (full CDC verification) but never had a tick bite or tick to speak of, it is easy to miss the initial infection point. I had it for almost year before the test was done (based on my symptoms and when the period of exposure would have been). Being treated with the same amount of antibiotics for a "just found the tick" infection didn't appear to do the job, so I needed to do a longer and more intensive course of antibiotics.

This is, indeed a thing sometimes called "persistent Lyme" and is part of the Lyme treatment protocol:

Approximately 10-20% of patients (particularly those who were diagnosed later), following appropriate antibiotic treatment, may have persistent or recurrent symptoms and are considered to have Post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome (PTLDS). The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has funded several studies on the treatment of Lyme disease which show that most patients recover when treated with a few weeks of antibiotics taken by mouth.

It is a medically supported and totally normal treatment for Lyme which wasn't initially diagnosed. But there's a big difference between that and the treatments and diagnoses of the conspiracy gang, who argue for a "chronic" Lyme disease that doesn't respond to these normal treatments, but don't have the support of evidence. And there are clinical trials going on in government health agencies to investigate, but clinical trials are a lot different from proprietary and off-label and unsupported treatments by a handful of rogue physicians with a gift for self-promotion and a lot of boat payments to make.
posted by Miko at 9:04 AM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

Yes, I understand the difference between Lyme disease and chronic Lyme disease, I first heard about it in the 80's, but what made me question the idea of 8 people in one family all having CLD is how is the father claiming they all got it?

1) CLD is now being touted as communicable to other family members

2) All 8 got bit by infected ticks at the same time

3) All 8 got bit by infected ticks but not at the same time which seems both the most likely from the scientific point of view and the least likely from a practical point of view. If someone in your family got Lyme's disease would you not become more vigilant in inspecting your other family members? And if 2 people got infected would you not become obsessive in your daily inspections?

I'm voting for 4) nobody in that family has CLD, they just eat too many carbs.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 9:15 AM on September 30, 2012 [2 favorites]

So they want Obama to make sure to boil down his debate answers to sound bite phrases. He can maybe just reuse Jed Bartlet's debate line after Romney awkwardly stumbles through a few words in funny mode and then follows it up with a smirk at how clever he just was.

There it is. That's the ten word answer my staff's been looking for for two weeks. There it is. Ten-word answers can kill you in political campaigns. They're the tip of the sword. Here's my question: What are the next ten words of your answer? Your taxes are too high? So are mine. Give me the next ten words. How are we going to do it? Give me ten after that, I'll drop out of the race right now. Every once in a while... every once in a while, there's a day with an absolute right and an absolute wrong, but those days almost always include body counts. Other than that, there aren't very many unnuanced moments in leading a country that's way too big for ten words. I'm the President of the United States, not the President of the people who agree with me.

Having Romney carefully memorizing zingers, if true, is such a remarkable failure to understand why he hasn't connected with anyone, not even the people for whom he is constructing his "beliefs". Uh yeah guys, his abiltity to effortlessly make his speech spontaneous and personal has really been the key to his success so far. Even the people who are voting for him think he's robotic and unlikable. Have his handlers read anything written about their candidate over the last year? They keep doubling down on past failures.

Making the tactical decision to run with his ability to deliver an effective practiced put down, despite a history of conversational awkwardness, brings Seinfeld to mind. His carefully rehearsed, "Well, the Jerk Store called, and they're running out of you," will just hit the floor like a wet paper towel after Obama fails to be rattled and instead fires back with an off the cuff, "What's the difference? You're their all-time best seller."
posted by Babblesort at 9:19 AM on September 30, 2012 [12 favorites]

From the Ezra Klein piece linked above (Why Obama abandoned audacity):

And so the Obama campaign is downsizing its ideas, at least for the remainder of the campaign. Call it the audacity of not telling people to hope for too much. Better to underpromise and, if all goes well, overdeliver, then to overpromise and lose the election.

Or, to put it in a slightly different light: the audacity of cruising to a win without appearing arrogant or unseemly and "spiking the ball." Why would the Obama campaign want to do anything to appear lacking in humility or re-frame the race or rock the boat on a winning campaign and give Romney/Ryan any ammunition whatsoever?

First rule of any competition is to get out of the way when one's adversary is doing a fair job of beating his or herself, and no one can argue that Romney seems inordinately well-disposed to that.

The fact Obama is on the verge of winning a second term against a major national party that has thrown everything it could at him (and then some), is audacious enough.

There's a reason he's sometimes known as "no-drama Obama."
posted by Skygazer at 9:24 AM on September 30, 2012 [4 favorites]

2) All 8 got bit by infected ticks at the same time

Well, if you look at the "Under My Skin" video posted above, there are entire towns and neighborhoods where the incidence is very high, so I think they'd chalk it up to that (though I don't know if they all live in the same area). It's true that there are places where entire families have had it at one time or another. I contracted it while working at an outdoor summer camp in CT, and it was essentially a rite of passage: all the counselors had it one year or another, and many of the kids and their parents, too. It was just a woodsy part of the state and the ticks were in profusion. So I don't think that aspect - that a whole family could have the disease - is farfetched. I just think the whole decades of "chronic Lyme" thing is completely ascientific.
posted by Miko at 9:29 AM on September 30, 2012

In terms of the Lyme Disease curiosity in Virginia, it seems to me a way to keep a hold on the central distrust of the government that fired the GOtP base so strongly against Obamacare, even while Romney can continue to soften his stance against it and attempt to move to the center and show just how much he cares for 100% of the people and what a humane and warm and fuzzy fellow he truly is...

...
posted by Skygazer at 9:32 AM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

keep a hold on the central distrust of the government

Yeah, I agree with you that that's at the heart of it.
posted by Miko at 9:36 AM on September 30, 2012

Is it Mitt Romney's fault, if he loses?
posted by Artw at 9:36 AM on September 30, 2012

I don't know if they all live in the same area

Come to think, they all vacation in the same woodsy area in NH in the summer, so that would account for everyone being where they could contract the infection.
posted by Miko at 9:39 AM on September 30, 2012

It's the fluoride nuts. Now that generations of fluoride use has not caused Communism (unless you count Barry Obummer Sotero, as they say) they have to look for other forms of body-invading jackbooted microbes from the Gummint. Medicine as science is everything they reject in their embrace of an alternative political reality in which they are suspended.

Fear of the other becomes fear of contamination or infection. Old as dirt and the first caveman to call another a dirty fucking Neanderthal.
posted by spitbull at 9:47 AM on September 30, 2012 [6 favorites]

hilarious
posted by de at 10:01 AM on September 30, 2012

O'Reilly Calls Mother Jones 'Possibly One of Fidel Castro's Favorite Publications' For Publishing Romney Tapes
posted by homunculus at 10:09 AM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

Fidel Castro: "I'd never heard of this 'Mother Jones' before, but it sounds like a good magazine. Thank you for the recommendation, Mr. O'Reilly!"
posted by Faint of Butt at 10:15 AM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

O'Reilly: possibly involved in Satanic orgies involving the killing of INNOCENT CHRISTIAN BABIES before he smears their infant blood all over the assembled party? Possibly.
posted by jaduncan at 10:23 AM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

I wonder if some of his gaffes were past 'zingers.' "They take no responsibility for their lives." ZING! "Governor, I'll bet you ten thousand dollars" ZING! "And you know, those airplane windows don't open, it's a real problem." ZING
posted by angrycat at 10:33 AM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

Chris Hayes: The Republican Bubble Trap [ Epistemic Closure]

The increasingly claustrophobic parallel conservative universe isn't just something that lefties like myself have noted. Julian Sanchez, a CATO libertarian who moves in social circles of both liberals and conservative, coined the term "epistemic closure" to describe the alternate reality found in, as he put it, the "multimedia array of interconnected and cross promoting conservative blogs, radio programs, magazines, and of course, Fox News" where "whatever conflicts with that reality can be dismissed out of hand because it comes from the liberal media, and is therefore ipso facto not to be trusted. (How do you know they're liberal? Well, they disagree with the conservative media!) This epistemic closure can be a source of solidarity and energy, but it also renders the conservative media ecosystem fragile."

posted by Skygazer at 10:37 AM on September 30, 2012 [6 favorites]

His carefully rehearsed, "Well, the Jerk Store called, and they're running out of you," will just hit the floor like a wet paper towel after Obama fails to be rattled and instead fires back with an off the cuff, "What's the difference? You're their all-time best seller."

The vision of Romney using George's next line in a debate is just too wonderful for words, however.
posted by howfar at 10:51 AM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

HOLY SHIT, best headline ever:

BIAS ALERT: Mainstream Media is Threat to Country

This morning, just this morning, Gallup released their latest poll on the trust, how much trust [the American people have in the press] —when it comes to reporting the news accurately, fairly, and fully, and [the level of their distrust] it’s the highest in history. For the first time, 60% of the people said they had “Not very much” or “None at all.” Of course there was a partisan break: There were 40% who believed it did, Democrats, 58% believed that it was fair and accurate, Republicans were 26%, independents were 31%.

Ohohohoho! Mind you, this is on Fox News' site. Let's look back at Avenger's comment from 2008, regarding Fox News and their goal: to destroy news itself. In the words of Bush "Miss Me Yet" Jr: Mission Accomplished!

The majority of Republicans asked in the poll don't trust the news! That's your very viewers and readers, Fox News!
posted by filthy light thief at 11:04 AM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

Avenger's comment from 2008, regarding Fox News and their goal: to destroy news itself

Well, mission accomplished. If you've never seen this documentary, it's pretty great.
posted by Miko at 11:09 AM on September 30, 2012 [2 favorites]

From the link that madamjujujive posted upthread:

Watch the video atop this post. It’s an unusual two-minute ad that the Obama campaign is running in battleground states.
...
There’s a reason they’re playing down the audacity of their first term and deemphasizing the policies that they think would do the most to help in a second. The American people, their research shows, are tired of audacity and skeptical of big ideas. They’re willing to believe Obama has done about the best job he could have been expected to do given the collapse of the global economy and the intransigence of the Republicans. But if they’re going to believe that, they’re also not willing to believe that he’s got all the answers now, or that his next big idea is the one that will really turn all this around. If they’re going to lower their expectations, he needs to be more realistic in his promises.

Obama lays out simple plans and contrasts them with Romney's ideas. But he also provides actual numbers for some of his plans (cutting the deficit by $4 trillion, create 1 million new manufacturing jobs, help businesses double exports), where Romney has been vague at best.

I'd be interested to read about the different research methods, goals and strategies from these two campaigns. Maybe I'm biased, but it sounds like the Obama campaign is running on really smart research.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:18 AM on September 30, 2012

A snapping contest with Obama seems like a really bad idea. Also announcing how hard you've been working on your zingers, what kind of strategy is that? That's liked saying let me tell you a joke.
posted by humanfont at 11:21 AM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

Can someone explain to me simply why Indiana seems so much more Republican leaning than what 9from a distance) I think of as it's peer states of Michigan, Ohio and Illinois? I know Obama (barely) won it last time, but I think that was an anomaly, no? Is there a distinctive Indiana culture or demographic?
posted by Rumple at 11:28 AM on September 30, 2012

Can someone explain to me simply why Indiana seems so much more Republican leaning than what 9from a distance) I think of as it's peer states of Michigan, Ohio and Illinois?

Michigan has always been a strong union state (the auto industry) and Illinois has the huge urban Chicago area, which is deep, deep blue. Indiana is mostly rural.
posted by restless_nomad at 11:31 AM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

Huh, cuz I think of Indianapolis, and Gary, and the shores of Lake Michigan, and driving through on that nasty interstate, and it just seemed more like rust-belt. Obviously there is more to it than that - the N-S population balance must be less skewed than Illinois I guess.
posted by Rumple at 11:37 AM on September 30, 2012

If Romney has been preparing these so-called zingers since August, what are the odds that he's managed to keep from using them the entire time? If it turns out that they are just a bunch of applause lines that have been in use throughout the entire summer, they might be far too ugly.

Indiana is definitely different from Illinois. Unlike, IL, IN has a large city down south. IN went for Obama and that was a shock, but while the state is typically republican I don't think it is as enthusiastically behind them as, say, Texas might be. My home town in SW IN is deeply purple and while plenty of GOP politicians have gotten into office there, there is also relatively healthy slate of local level Democratic politicians. Too be honest though, it's such a big state that I don't know much/anything about attitudes north of Indianapolis.
posted by feloniousmonk at 12:04 PM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

I did a few weeks' stint for work in IN a few years ago, and one thing that struck me is that it's not just rural - it's also heavily, heavily dependent on agricultural subsidies and Big Ag. Monsanto corn everywhere. You don't kill your cash cow.
posted by Miko at 12:16 PM on September 30, 2012 [2 favorites]

A snapping contest with Obama seems like a really bad idea. Also announcing how hard you've been working on your zingers, what kind of strategy is that?

"You should know that my humor and 'zingers' have been tested on multiple audiences. If you do not find them funny, the fault lies with you. Now you people must make me your President."
posted by jaduncan at 12:18 PM on September 30, 2012 [12 favorites]

But wait! There's more! Strategic Allied Consulting was founded by Nathan Sproul who has quite a history with the RNC and fraudulent voter registration.

About Mr. Sproul
posted by homunculus at 12:46 PM on September 30, 2012

"Just tap it tap it in that's a zinger...and tell me how to poke it on Tuesday"

Not sure what brain trust made this, but at least it's apropos.
posted by angrycat at 1:04 PM on September 30, 2012

Assuming the "We're gonna zinger him" thing isn't just misinformation, it's sure to go over well with the base, regardless of whether or not they fall flat. Then if the lamestream media calls the debate for Obama, they'll have yet another piece of evidence that they're being oppressed. Claiming that they're oppressed seems to be what they enjoy the most, so hey, win-win.
posted by Flunkie at 1:20 PM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama, Romney are rivals with little personal history; debate will be rare in-person meeting
posted by homunculus at 1:30 PM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm picturing a situation something like this at the debates:

Romney: ...but in case you haven't noticed, gas is really expensive!
Crowd: [Silence]
Obama: [Raises eyebrow]
Romney: [Points both index fingers at Obama] ZING! Ha ha ha!
Crowd: [A solitary, distant cough]
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:31 PM on September 30, 2012 [8 favorites]

Obama Campaign Nearing 10 Million Donations.
posted by ericb at 1:33 PM on September 30, 2012

AP: Obama Would Win If Election Held Today.
posted by ericb at 1:34 PM on September 30, 2012

Christie: Romney Debate Performance Will Change Course Of Presidential Race.
posted by ericb at 1:35 PM on September 30, 2012

AP: Obama Would Win If Election Held Today.

538: 98% Obama on the nowcast.

Brave, AP. Brave.
posted by jaduncan at 1:58 PM on September 30, 2012 [10 favorites]

Conservative radio host Laura Ingraham is warning Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney not to even try to create a “human moment” by attempting to connect with voters during Wednesday’s debate because it would be a “fools’ errand.”
posted by futz at 2:11 PM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

Obama lays out simple plans and contrasts them with Romney's ideas. But he also provides actual numbers for some of his plans (cutting the deficit by $4 trillion, create 1 million new manufacturing jobs, help businesses double exports), where Romney has been vague at best.

You leave future president Romney alone! He promised to create 12 million new jobs in his first term!
(Which are the same number of new jobs predicted by 2016 regardless of who's president.)
posted by kirkaracha at 3:13 PM on September 30, 2012

Remember Mitt, emotions are for ethnic people.
posted by The Whelk at 3:23 PM on September 30, 2012 [8 favorites]

Don't believe him Mitt, we love it when you're being you. That's all America needs to see about you!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:30 PM on September 30, 2012

Judging by the giant procession of motorcycle cops and black SUVs I just saw on my way to Star Market, Mitt Romney just drove past me. Most likely, my attempts to encourage him to post in this thread were unsuccessful.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 4:32 PM on September 30, 2012 [2 favorites]

Maybe the Romney consultants who also consult Netanyahu will advise Romney to use the old cartoon of a bomb zinger.
posted by Bokmakierie at 4:33 PM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

" there is a tortoise lying on its back mitt. You're not helping it. Why aren't you helping?"

" because it can't help itself."
posted by The Whelk at 4:34 PM on September 30, 2012 [25 favorites]

In the interests of pedantrivia: it's a fool's errand, not a a flock of...

[just, y'know, if a published article is going to the trouble of putting it in "scare quotes"]
posted by titus-g at 4:41 PM on September 30, 2012

I think we should build a drinking game around a perfect example of the Ha Ha Ha in the debate.
posted by angrycat at 5:02 PM on September 30, 2012

The right's pop culture problem

And I offer exhibit A: don't vote if you're dum! - but be forewarned, there are no words...
posted by madamjujujive at 5:05 PM on September 30, 2012 [9 favorites]

" there is a tortoise lying on its back mitt. You're not helping it. Why aren't you helping?"

"Wait, it'll pull itself up by the bootstraps"
posted by jaduncan at 6:02 PM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

And I offer exhibit A: don't vote if you're dum! - but be forewarned, there are no words...

The words that come to me, are the words used by the John Birch Society to describe Sgt. Pepper and the Beatles: "Carefully constructed by behavioral scientists in a laboratory or deep within a think tank..."
posted by honestcoyote at 6:16 PM on September 30, 2012

And I offer exhibit A: don't vote if you're dum! yt - but be forewarned, there are no words...

I...what...it doesn't...I don't even... Seriously.

Mitosis?!
posted by nooneyouknow at 6:16 PM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mitt has seen attack ships on fire off of Orion, but only because he was seeing to his "off shore" accounts there.
posted by drezdn at 6:19 PM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

And I offer exhibit A: don't vote if you're dum! yt - but be forewarned, there are no words...

Oh I have plenty of words; I just wouldn't type them all out here. I have to say, though, I love how YouTube has seemed to have replaced public access cable, and yet the same QUALITY of what's broadcast persists.

"Now stand by the drainpipe run-off and dance."

"But I'm freezing!"

"GOD DAMN IT THIS IS FOR MITT NOW DANCE"
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:25 PM on September 30, 2012 [6 favorites]

Is this where the live-blog of the debate will happen? Because I know I can't bear to watch it any other way. And it may be our best shot at blowing the doors off the Palin thread.
posted by rtha at 6:31 PM on September 30, 2012 [6 favorites]

rtha, I was thinking the exact same thing(s).
posted by tzikeh at 6:34 PM on September 30, 2012

I may or may not have committed to liveblog at least one of the debates for another organization along with a Republican contributor, and if you guys don't keep me company I don't know if I'll survive the evening.

Maybe I'm being unreasonable. Maybe they'll be perfectly rational.
posted by Phire at 6:41 PM on September 30, 2012

Someone tell me if jokingdotcom's "Don't vote if you're dum!" is satire of Democrats' opinions, or satire of Republicans' "satire" of Democrats' opinions, because I don't know which type of sad it makes me.
posted by Riki tiki at 7:10 PM on September 30, 2012 [5 favorites]

futz: Conservative radio host Laura Ingraham is warning Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney not to even try to create a “human moment” by attempting to connect with voters during Wednesday’s debate because it would be a “fools’ errand.”

“If he comes across as too negative, that could be risky,” she continued. “But I think Romney could win this debate with one genuinely good human moment, which is something people have been hungering to see from him throughout this entire campaign. If he could have one moment where he gives voters the sense that he’s throwing the talking points out the window and telling them what he really believes. And it doesn’t even matter what the issue is. I just think if he could connect with voters in some way, that would actually probably get him a win.”

Here's your one chance, Mitt, don't let us down. One good joke, or quality story about how you are not a robot covered in the skin of a hu-man.

Oh, I've got it! Walk up the stairs to the podium, but focus on waving to the people and being happy, not on the stairs. BOOM! You miss the top step, sprawl forward, catching yourself on the podium, but you get a splinter and you draw blood. Pull the splinter out, toss it aside, and suck on your finger for a moment, just a moment. Then put your hand on your notes, leaving a little red mark, showing you bled, that you area a human who can stumble on steps, just like everyone. That can be your "good human moment." Then back to your cold-hearted elitist ways. Next day, news coverage will include video clip of the stumble, and conspiracy websites that have previously claimed you were a robot can have a picture of your blood on paper.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:26 PM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

this thread already makes my browser cry.
posted by The Whelk at 7:32 PM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

ericb: Christie: Romney Debate Performance Will Change Course Of Presidential Race.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie says Romney wasn't wrong with his "47% voters are victims" comments, that was it Romney wants everyone to have "skin in the game." You know, because people who are out of work are just dragging their heels, taking handouts. Thanks, Christie, way to spin Romney's comments further, rephrasing the same message that 47% of Americans aren't doing their part. Obama's ad responded to that sentiment.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:36 PM on September 30, 2012

The Whelk: this thread already makes my browser cry.

And this is only 3677 comments deep, before the debates. If there's a new thread post-debates, we won't match the Palin VP longboat of 5,555 comments, which should make our browsers happy.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:38 PM on September 30, 2012

The Plain thread make my iPad weep one single, solitary tear and cry out softly "why?"
posted by The Whelk at 7:42 PM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

Yeah, this thread kills my phone and my HP Touchpad. Just a blue background. Too much for a memory-limited Webkit!

Huh, my Assange post is MeFi's 16th-longest. Not bad. This thread still needs to beat Bin Ladin and Palin, though.
posted by dunkadunc at 7:45 PM on September 30, 2012

this thread is now threatening to expand and consume all of the metafilter and then, THE WORLD.
posted by The Whelk at 7:47 PM on September 30, 2012

The Palin thread make my iPad weep one single, solitary tear and cry out softly "why?"

We had to put up with Palin. Why should your iPad not share the pain?
posted by jaduncan at 7:51 PM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

Assange has how many more days to tunnel through to Harrods?
posted by de at 7:54 PM on September 30, 2012

We had to put up with Palin. Why should your iPad not share the pain?

HE'S ONLY A CHILD
posted by The Whelk at 7:56 PM on September 30, 2012 [11 favorites]

de: "Assange has how many more days to tunnel through to Harrods?"

My dad said if he were Assange he'd take up the electric bass, and resolve to become a virtuoso before he leaves.
posted by dunkadunc at 7:57 PM on September 30, 2012 [4 favorites]

HE'S ONLY A CHILD

I thought we were clear about this. You're not allowed to abort your order, but once it's out of the factory it's not our problem. 47%er. HAMBURGER.
posted by jaduncan at 8:07 PM on September 30, 2012

The 2008 thread Barack Obama is the next President of the United States made me happy all over again. Recalling the joy, reading through the personal stories, anecdotes, and jokes.

And then there was this:

Here ya go:

When MCain mentioned Obama in his concession, the crowd booed Obama.

When Obama mentioned McCain in his victory speech, the crowd CHEERED for McCain. I didn't hear a single boo.

To me, that says it all.

It still says so much. I wish it was different and I wish I was surprised to read it, but it's not and I'm not. It's easier to cheer for the loser when you're on the winning side, but it's also easy to kick him on the way out, which didn't happen.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:11 PM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

I thought we were clear about this. You're not allowed to abort your order, but once it's out of the factory it's not our problem. 47%er. HAMBURGER.

Welcome to the 74th Annual Romney Games.
posted by The Whelk at 8:44 PM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

Road Kill Cook-Off festival
posted by de at 8:51 PM on September 30, 2012

Pfft...my android phone begins clearing it's throat and vibrating spasmodically everytime I load up Metafilter and I even think of reading this thread in any manner other than the easily manageable "recent activity" view.
posted by Skygazer at 9:12 PM on September 30, 2012

My smartphone is a bit of a geezer and gettin' on in years. Back in it's heyday they called em smartypants-phones back then...
posted by Skygazer at 9:31 PM on September 30, 2012

I got an iPhone 5 so that I could keep up with this thread.
posted by box at 10:17 PM on September 30, 2012 [3 favorites]

Mitt Romney: A New Course for the Middle East

Our challenges are different now, but if the 21st century is to be another American Century, we need leaders who understand that keeping the peace requires American strength in all of its dimensions.

versus:

Obama: The United States and the Asia Pacific Century

The Obama administration and the governments of the eight negotiating partners are charging ahead in crafting this agreement that will greatly impact the United States economy, jobs, and workers for decades to come. It’s time to start paying attention to these negotiations.

It can't be both.
posted by de at 10:28 PM on September 30, 2012 [1 favorite]

Box: I got an iPhone 5 so that I could keep up with this thread.

This thread is so badass it's causing an uptick in the economy.
posted by Skygazer at 11:52 PM on September 30, 2012 [12 favorites]

AP: Obama Would Win If Election Held Today.

It started off as red but that was engulfed by a sea of blue.

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought this was the Ryder Cup thread.
posted by fullerine at 5:25 AM on October 1, 2012

Quote of the Day: Romney Is Ruining Things For All the Other Rich Guys

'It’s going to be harder to do tax planning in the future. He’s bringing attention to things that weren’t getting attention.'
posted by the man of twists and turns at 5:29 AM on October 1, 2012 [8 favorites]

Welcome to the 74th Annual Romney Games.

You may be interested to know that Romney claims to love both the Hunger Games and Twilight, citing them amongst his favourite books...it's like he doesn't even care about the MeFi librarian vote.

At least he doesn't think he's Christian Grey.
posted by jaduncan at 5:33 AM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Pfft...my android phone begins clearing it's throat and vibrating spasmodically everytime I load up Metafilter and I even think of reading this thread in any manner other than the easily manageable "recent activity" view.

Yeah, that was a reason I ducked out for a bit. This thread kept restarting my browser.

Romney's said on record that he thinks it's okay to destroy the extra embryos that arise from IVF because "that's a personal choice". It's 11-dimensional-fucked-up-chess over in his brain:

This doesn't sound like extra-dimensional chess, because the embryos would have no chance of being born anyway. It's not like people routinely give their extra embryos to other people to birth. So if people are done having babies, they either have embryos that they preserve forever and never use until they die and they get destroyed anyway, or they destroy the embryos to just eliminate the middleman in that process.
posted by corb at 5:38 AM on October 1, 2012

the embryos would have no chance of being born anyway.

QED
posted by spitbull at 5:44 AM on October 1, 2012

I am plunging into the Atlantic and striking out for Europe if a man who loves the Twilight books gets into the Oval Office.
posted by angrycat at 5:45 AM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

This doesn't sound like extra-dimensional chess, because the embryos would have no chance of being born anyway.

Sure you could. Might be a hassle, although p'raps as not as much as giving birth to the child of your rapist or if you are too poor to actually raise the child.
posted by angrycat at 5:50 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Please please please let us not return to "thread vs. corb."
posted by tzikeh at 5:55 AM on October 1, 2012 [14 favorites]

Is this where the live-blog of the debate will happen? Because I know I can't bear to watch it any other way.

While I crave watching the debates liveblogged on mefi, I really hope the debate opens a new thread because this one grinds my browser a bit.
posted by Theta States at 5:57 AM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

tzikeh: "Please please please let us not return to "thread vs. corb.""

I'd like to 2nd this motion.
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 5:57 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Are y'all tracking this Florida voter registration fraud business? It looks completely lousy. Such poisoning of the well. Turns out it's all been developed by Nathan Sproul, whose Strategic Allied Consulting was also behind our little friend from the "County Clerk's office" in Colorado.

This shit is just sleazy. This kind of thing is why it's so hard - no, impossible - to credit the GOP with goodwill. As Mr. Miko said this morning, it's quite a tell, too: if they actually had a strong platform and good, viable ideas, they wouldn't need to do this kind of thing.
posted by Miko at 6:03 AM on October 1, 2012 [6 favorites]

....this is their website? Man, when you have a website like this, you obviously get your work some other way.

It was all one rogue individual, of course.
posted by Miko at 6:05 AM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Wow, that's a whole lot of <h2>.
posted by taz at 6:14 AM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

It was all one rogue individual, of course.

In five different counties?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:15 AM on October 1, 2012

As Mr. Miko said this morning

I was all "uh, Miko is a woman, and that's sort of a weirdly stilted way to reference another user in any case, and she hasn't said anything this morning, what in the heck is going on" and then I read the byline. I am super awake!
posted by cortex at 6:22 AM on October 1, 2012 [10 favorites]

that's sort of a weirdly stilted way to reference another user in any case

Even weirder if I were referencing myself in the 3rd person - a rhetorical habit some people have which I always find weirdly dissociative.

As a further aside, that's the first time I used that "Mr." thing as a way of identifying my partner. I have not found a way that I like to do this. He's on MeFi, but that doesn't mean everybody would know who I'm talking about. "My partner" gets old, he's not my "spouse" yet, I'm really too old for "bf." I guess the "mr./ms." thing doesn't really work for me either. Plus it oddly subsumes someone.
posted by Miko at 6:29 AM on October 1, 2012

cortex, I think you are me or maybe vice versa because that was exactly my thought. I just made some terrible hotel room coffee, which is all there is until I'm awake enough to stumble down to the lobby for less-terrible coffee - want some?
posted by rtha at 6:30 AM on October 1, 2012

Guys cortex is modding through a hangover again.

If we talk in small tags he can't hear us.
posted by shakespeherian at 6:32 AM on October 1, 2012 [7 favorites]

Distaff counterpart?
posted by The Whelk at 6:32 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm good, sipping on a cup of Awake tea. I'm not sure the name does anything extra for it, but there's something comfortingly aspirational about it.
posted by cortex at 6:33 AM on October 1, 2012

Distaff counterpart?

Spin doctor?
posted by maudlin at 6:35 AM on October 1, 2012

POOSSLQ?
posted by tzikeh at 6:36 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mr. Mister.
posted by cortex at 6:37 AM on October 1, 2012

"He's the gunner in my Snow Speeder." Or just "Chewbacca".
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:37 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Your Huckleberry.
posted by tzikeh at 6:38 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

And this is my wife, Mrs. Mister.
posted by shakespeherian at 6:40 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Are y'all tracking this Florida voter registration fraud business? It looks completely lousy. Such poisoning of the well. Turns out it's all been developed by Nathan Sproul, whose Strategic Allied Consulting was also behind our little friend from the "County Clerk's office" in Colorado.

I'm a little confused on what exactly makes the Colorado situation so problematic for people. That she was only trying to register Republicans? Why wouldn't it be completely legitimate for the Republican party to pay people to register Republicans, or the Democratic people to pay people to register Democrats? The "County Clerks Office" just sounds more like a confused muddle than anything intentional. She was hired by the Republican county office, not the neutral one, but still a county office, right? Lack of full understanding does not a conspiracy make.
posted by corb at 6:49 AM on October 1, 2012

And this is my wife, Mrs. Mister.

Please, Mister Moster is my father's band's name, call be Bob Mister.( lifted off Greg nog)
posted by The Whelk at 6:52 AM on October 1, 2012

corb: I'm a little confused on what exactly makes the Colorado situation so problematic for people.

I still haven't had my coffee yet, so forgive me. Still, off the top of my head, my problem with it is that registering voters must not become a partisan activity. Even if those doing the registrations are being paid by political parties.

You wouldn't catch the League of Women Voters registering people of both parties and then throwing the Republican registrations away so that when those people went to the polls they'd be refused. That's because, protestations from the Usual Suspects to the contrary, the LWV is non-partisan. Just as they should be.
posted by ob1quixote at 6:59 AM on October 1, 2012 [9 favorites]

I'm a little confused on what exactly makes the Colorado situation so problematic for people. That she was only trying to register Republicans? Why wouldn't it be completely legitimate for the Republican party to pay people to register Republicans, or the Democratic people to pay people to register Democrats?

I don't know about Colorado law, but in Texas, that's actually illegal. Either you register whoever wants to register, or you're breaking the law.
posted by Devils Rancher at 7:03 AM on October 1, 2012 [6 favorites]

You wouldn't catch the League of Women Voters registering people of both parties and then throwing the Republican registrations away so that when those people went to the polls they'd be refused.

Oh yeah, that would and should be totally illegal. Is that what was happening? The article that I saw said she was just doing a survey and then wouldn't offer a registration form if the person being surveyed said they were voting for Obama. So nobody actually would think that they were registered, and then not really be.
posted by corb at 7:04 AM on October 1, 2012

It is illegal in Colorado as well.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:04 AM on October 1, 2012

The issue in Florida was that

(a) someone was claiming to work for the County Clerk's office when they didn't

(b) suspicious forms were turning up, presumably referring to non-existent voters, because the workers were being paid on a pro-rata basis.
posted by unSane at 7:10 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

corb: "You wouldn't catch the League of Women Voters registering people of both parties and then throwing the Republican registrations away so that when those people went to the polls they'd be refused.

Oh yeah, that would and should be totally illegal. Is that what was happening? The article that I saw said she was just doing a survey and then wouldn't offer a registration form if the person being surveyed said they were voting for Obama. So nobody actually would think that they were registered, and then not really be."

I'd watch the video again. The young woman claimed to be working for the County Clerk's Office (i.e. a branch of Local Government). She wasn't.
posted by Happy Dave at 7:13 AM on October 1, 2012 [5 favorites]

I'd also point out that if it was an Obama campaign worker (or contractor) claiming to be working for a Country Clerk's Office, the rightwing blogosphere would be losing it's mind and screaming VOTER FRAUD in bright red flashing letters. But because it's a young Republican woman, it's an 'innocent muddle' and in the Florida case it's a 'single individual' in five separate counties.

I must say for a supposed freethinking libertarian corb, you're awfully keen to cut the Republicans a break.
posted by Happy Dave at 7:16 AM on October 1, 2012 [22 favorites]

More fallout from the voter registration fraud that the woman in Colorado was a part of:

Republicans End Swing-State Voter Sign-Up After Firing Company

The Republican National Committee ended efforts to sign up new voters before the deadline in key states for the presidential race because of questions raised over registration applications tied to the party.

Republican parties in Florida, Colorado, Nevada, North Carolina and Virginia -- all states that both campaigns view as competitive -- fired Glen Allen, Virginia-based Strategic Allied Consulting, the company in charge of registrations, said Kirsten Kukowski, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee. The national committee also canceled its contract with the company, its only vendor signing up new voters, Kukowski said.

The five states have registration deadlines from Oct. 6 to Oct. 15. Stopping efforts before then could hurt Republican nominee Mitt Romney in his bid to unseat Democratic President Barack Obama, said Lance deHaven-Smith, a Florida State University political science professor in Tallahassee.

“In any swing state that’s going to be significant because these elections are so close,” deHaven-Smith said. “This gives an advantage to Obama.”

And the spin and finger-pointing from the GOP:

Firing the company didn’t hurt the party’s registration efforts, Kukowski said.

“It was wrapping up at the same time this happened, so there is no impact,” Kukowski said in an e-mail.

Strategic Allied was fired after Florida’s Palm Beach Post reported Sept. 25 that questions had been raised about applications the company gave to the Palm Beach County elections supervisor’s office, Kukowski said.

That was the first time either the national or state party learned about issues with registration, said Kukowski and Brian Burgess, a Florida Republican Party spokesman.
The company was required to report any instances of applications being questioned by elections officials to the state party, Burgess said.

Nathan Sproul, who owns the company, said that wasn’t true.

“Every morning, a conference call was held to discuss the project using their conference call number,” Sproul said in an e-mail. “It’s impossible for them to claim with credibility that we didn’t communicate clearly.”

Anyone party official that says two or more weeks' worth of voter registration effectively canceled plus a number of fraudulent registrations doesn't hurt their efforts is straight-up lying through their teeth. Which, not coincidentally, they also seem to be doing about how much they knew and when they knew it.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:03 AM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

... and here we go.
posted by RolandOfEld at 8:05 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

corb, there are federal & state laws about voter registration drives - it cannot be an activity just for your party. If you are going to have a voter registration drive, you have to take all registrants regardless of affiliation. Now you could target a neighborhood or a demographic (nursing homes) to try to stack the deck a bit, but you are supposed to be party neutral. (I could be wrong on this point, but I believe when you are doing a GOTV, you are not supposed to try to sway people, just get them to register).

States have their own laws - in some, you can't give out buttons or bumper stickers or anything seen a gift or reward. In some, you have to register by party but in others you don't have to declare a party. You have to get forms and guidance about state laws from local registration authorities.

My understanding is that registrants are just supposed to help get people registered. They are not supposed to have any "oversight" - a big brouhaha in the supposed Acorn voter fraud were ballots submitted by Mickey Mouse, but is not up to a volunteer GOTV campaign worker to adjudicate validity of a form - they are supposed to pass along all completed forms. I think they could flag them but they are not supposed to disqualify on their own. It is up the the registration authority to assess and disqualify questionable registrations. As I understand it, for a GOTV volunteer to throw out a completed form for any reason would be a violation.
posted by madamjujujive at 8:27 AM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

"As Mr. Miko said this morning, it's quite a tell, too: if they actually had a strong platform and good, viable ideas, they wouldn't need to do this kind of thing."

Meh, JFK and LBJ disagree with that. They had a strong platform and good ideas, and there was still some likely shenanigans going on.
posted by klangklangston at 8:37 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Given his robotic delivery and that weird little smirk he does when he thinks he's been clever, this is going to be quite comical.

Everyone tweet Romney and tell him to say "bazinga!" whenever he delivers a zinger.
posted by octobersurprise at 9:01 AM on October 1, 2012 [10 favorites]

As I understand it, for a GOTV volunteer to throw out a completed form for any reason would be a violation.

Quite right. I've been working on GOTV for the past few weekends in Colorado under the umbrella of Organizing for America. Every form has a unique ID. We have to return all unused forms at the end of the day because they all have to be accounted for. If a form is damaged in some way we would have to return it and justify that.

And of course, we register all voters: republicans and democrats alike. I'm not going to chase a republican down the street and beg them to register but I'm obliged (legally and ethically) to register them if I tell them I am registering voters, ask them whether their voter registration is up to date and they say no. I happen to believe in democracy.
posted by NailsTheCat at 9:08 AM on October 1, 2012 [21 favorites]

NailstheCat, thank you for what you're doing.
posted by spitbull at 9:17 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Paul Ryan was interviewed by Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday. Two interesting points:

1) He blames media bias for Romney being behind in the polls:

WALLACE: Do you think mainstream media wants Barack Obama to win?

RYAN: You’ll have to ask mainstream that.

WALLACE: No, what do you think?

RYAN: I think most people in the mainstream media are left of center and therefore, they want a very left of center president than they want a conservative president like Mitt Romney.

which might mean, according to Politicuas USA, that "With more than a month to go before the election, Paul Ryan was building his excuse for defeat. Ryan is getting set to follow in the footsteps of Sarah Palin and blame the media if he loses."

2) He refused to give details about Romney's tax plan because It would take too long:

Ryan reiterated in an interview on "Fox News Sunday" that the plan would drop taxpayers' bills by 20 percent without costing a dime, due to closed tax loopholes, but he was short on specifics when pressed by host Chris Wallace.

“You haven’t given me the math,” Wallace said in one exchange.

“I don’t have the ... It would take me too long to go through all of the math,” Ryan responded.

“But let me say it this way,” he went on. “You can lower tax rates 20 percent across the board by closing loopholes and still have preferences for the middle class for things like charitable deductions, home purchases, for health care. What we’re saying is people are going to get lower tax rates and therefore they will not send as much money to Washington.”

So they have a tax plan, it will work, but it is secret. Or too complicated for your pretty little head. Or magic. Or non-existent. Take your pick.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 9:38 AM on October 1, 2012 [5 favorites]

Are they just waiting down the clock and releasing the tax plan very late so a group like CBO will not have time to analyze the plan bevore the election?

We are internet. We have the time. Gimme.
posted by Theta States at 9:58 AM on October 1, 2012 [5 favorites]

...the plan would drop taxpayers' bills by 20 percent without costing a dime, due to closed tax loopholes,...

I like how the Republican party has become the party of magicians, now.
posted by Mental Wimp at 9:59 AM on October 1, 2012

Paul Ryan on Charlie Sykes' show today: The congressman was also asked about a recent Washington Post-Kaiser Family Foundation poll showing that the Medicare debate has helped Democrats. “We were actually winning this Medicare debate in the beginning,” Ryan told Sykes, before Obama “put up ads literally telling these falsehoods.” Obama’s Medicare ads have, in fact, used out-of-date figures from an old and less generous version of Ryan’s plan.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:59 AM on October 1, 2012

GOP's October Surprise?

According to a highly reliable source, as Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama prepare for the first presidential debate Wednesday night, top Republican operatives are primed to unleash a new two-pronged offensive that will attack Obama as weak on national security, and will be based, in part, on new intelligence information regarding the attacks in Libya that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens on Sept. 11.

The source, who has firsthand knowledge of private, high-level conversations in the Romney camp that took place in Washington, D.C., last week, said that at various times the GOP strategists referred to their new operation as the Jimmy Carter Strategy or the October Surprise.

He added that they planned to release what they hoped would be “a bombshell” that would make Libya and Obama’s foreign policy a major issue in the campaign. “My understanding is that they have come up with evidence that the Obama administration had positive intelligence that there was going to be a terrorist attack on the intelligence.”

The source described the Republicans as chortling with glee that the Obama administration “definitely had intel” about the attack before it happened. “Intelligence can be graded in different ways,” he added, “and sometimes A and B don’t get connected. But [the Romney campaign] will try to paint it to look like Obama had advance knowledge of the attack and is weak on terrorism.”

He said they were jubilant about their new strategy and said they intended to portray Obama as a helpless, Jimmy Carter-like president and to equate the tragedy in Libya with President Carter’s failed attempt to rescue American hostages in Iran in 1980. “They are so excited about it,” he said. “Over and over again they talked about how it would be just like Jimmy Carter’s failed raid. They feel it is going to give them a last-minute landslide in the election.”

posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 10:01 AM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

If they think that they can shift focus with a month left in the election and the middle will follow them, then they are stupider than they look. By now 99% of the electorate already knows who they prefer. 30 days isn't enough time to get a new, never-before-mentioned area to take hold.

And, hell, foreign policy isn't where Obama looks weak. That's just a weird idea altogether.
posted by grubi at 10:06 AM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

They feel it is going to give them a last-minute landslide in the election.”

WTF is a last-minute landslide? Their candidate's been losing all year long, and they're going to turn around into a landslide? If they believe that, then they're nuts.
posted by grubi at 10:08 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

If they think that they can shift focus with a month left in the election and the middle will follow them, then they are stupider than they look.

I'm telling Fox News you are making fun of them!
posted by Theta States at 10:09 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

grubi - never underestimate middle America's hatred of foreigners--especially when they've killed Americans. The GOP are masters at using that to stir up blind "patriotism" and get their way.
posted by tzikeh at 10:09 AM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

And, you know, Obama's brown, just like "those" people. Though they conveniently ignore the fact that Bush had ample warning about bin Laden and did nothing--seriously, they just flat out ignore it--they will as easily believe that Obama not only knew there was an attack planned, but who planned it, where it would be, how it would be executed, etc. etc. etc. He probably had a hand in it, too. They'll say anything, and people will believe them.
posted by tzikeh at 10:13 AM on October 1, 2012

The GOP are masters at using that to stir up blind "patriotism" and get their way.

In 30 days? No, I don't think so. I mean, it took them 18 months to invade Iraq. While in power.
posted by grubi at 10:14 AM on October 1, 2012

Besides, Obama just has to push back with "I killed bin Laden, fuckers". It's a weird idea on the GOP's part.
posted by grubi at 10:15 AM on October 1, 2012

Meh, JFK and LBJ disagree with that. They had a strong platform and good ideas, and there was still some likely shenanigans going on.

Is that right? What did they get up to?
posted by Miko at 10:15 AM on October 1, 2012

The idea of them chortling with glee and being jubilant about the fact there was a sad and tragic event that could be skewed to make Obama look bad is just so repugnant to me. And the concept of a landslide at this point is ridiculous.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 10:16 AM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

I know this is grotesque and wrong (what a great way to start a comment!), but imagine what the debates would look like if Obama came out each time with bin Laden's head on a pike. Every time national security would come up, all he'd have to do is point at it, without saying a word.
posted by Groundhog Week at 10:18 AM on October 1, 2012 [6 favorites]

but imagine what the debates would look like if Obama came out each time with bin Laden's head on a pike. Every time national security would come up, all he'd have to do is point at it, without saying a word.

OK then, Obama Debates Fan Fiction time it is!

I'm picturing a story where he walks out there, fakes shaking hands, and just knees Romney in the groin.
posted by Theta States at 10:21 AM on October 1, 2012 [6 favorites]

I must say for a supposed freethinking libertarian corb, you're awfully keen to cut the Republicans a break.

Oh, I have a lot of issues with Republicans, but I do think I try harder here than elsewhere to be fair to them. Maybe it's because it doesn't seem like anyone else is. My sense of fair play hates what looks like an unjustified pile-on.
posted by corb at 10:22 AM on October 1, 2012

I was thinking pimp slap.
posted by grubi at 10:23 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

If they think that they can shift focus with a month left in the election and the middle will follow them, then they are stupider than they look.

Not saying it's the same, but according to wikipedia, Carter was ahead of Reagan by 8 percentage points about a week before the 1980 election.

I mean, nothing's impossible. Just remember, a lot of the electorate are those people who comment on youtube and watch whatever dumb show you think is dumb etc. The point is, just because it seems impossible to you doesn't mean it's impossible for the rest of the people voting.
posted by mdn at 10:23 AM on October 1, 2012

I suppose there is no easy way to remind people that not only did Bush-Cheney leave their successor with a nightmare economic mess to clean up, they left a foreign affairs landscape that was a complete clusterfuck, especially in the Arab world, even considering whatever a measured response to 9-11 might have looked like and the implications of that measured response for terrorism, etc. Truly Obama was tasked with cleaning up after the drunkenly irresponsible neoliberal party.
posted by Rumple at 10:25 AM on October 1, 2012 [5 favorites]

That "surprise" they are hoping to dish up to Obama? Too bad Romney already made a fool of himself once over Libya, that will make it a lot harder for him to credibly carry any message on that topic.

One of the lines they are trotting out in recent days (which that jerkwad David Gregory bought into) is that Obama said he had defeated al Qaeda. Un-uh, this is what he actually said:

And one year ago, from a base here in Afghanistan, our troops launched the operation that killed Osama bin Laden. The goal that I set — to defeat al Qaeda and deny it a chance to rebuild — is now within our reach.

Still, there will be difficult days ahead. The enormous sacrifices of our men and women are not over.
posted by madamjujujive at 10:26 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

according to wikipedia, Carter was ahead of Reagan by 8 percentage points about a week before the 1980 election.

Not according to the tracking polls.
posted by grubi at 10:26 AM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

It's also very different from the Carter mission in that it's (allegedly) a sin of omission rather than the sin of commission of Carter's raid.

I'd just say this: "It was a tragedy and I wouldn't want to make it a political football, in much the same way that I dealt with the actual man behind 9/11 rather than blaming President Bush."
posted by jaduncan at 10:26 AM on October 1, 2012 [4 favorites]

Not saying it's the same, but according to wikipedia, Carter was ahead of Reagan by 8 percentage points about a week before the 1980 election.

The problem is that the GOP seem to have bet the farm, since before the summer in fact, on this being some sort of replay of 1980. That all the evidence to the contrary does not seem to have dissuaded them from this point of view makes it more difficult to be scared of yet more rumours that Romney is suddenly going to turn into Reagan and reshape the narrative into that of the 1980 election.
posted by howfar at 10:28 AM on October 1, 2012

My sense of fair play hates what looks like an unjustified pile-on.

Except that in almost every situation, the pile-on has been entirely justified.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:29 AM on October 1, 2012 [8 favorites]

Truly Obama was tasked with cleaning up after the drunkenly irresponsible neoliberal party.

There were several jokes in 2008 that of course a black guy would be hired to clean up the mess.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:29 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

He added that they planned to release what they hoped would be “a bombshell” that would make Libya and Obama’s foreign policy a major issue in the campaign. “My understanding is that they have come up with evidence that the Obama administration had positive intelligence that there was going to be a terrorist attack on the intelligence.”

coincidentally, the same has been said over and over again about George W. Bush and intel he got on a possible attack on... oh never mind :P
posted by liza at 10:31 AM on October 1, 2012

Is that right? What did they get up to?

Some IL precincts reported suspiciously late and pro-Kennedy, and it's alleged that the Mafia played a role in making sure that IL went blue..."every dead man in Chicago voted Kennedy", as they say.
posted by jaduncan at 10:31 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

making sure that IL went blue..."every dead man in Chicago voted Kennedy", as they say.

Better dead than red state.
posted by grubi at 10:33 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Carter was ahead of Reagan

But people loved Reagan, he oozed charisma. OK, not to me, but he was much beloved. Nobody loves Mitt. No-one. Well his wife & kids and a few Bain people. Who else?
posted by madamjujujive at 10:37 AM on October 1, 2012 [4 favorites]

I really question the idea that Obama's foreign policy is going to grab the attention American voters as Romney's 47% remarks did. Domestic policy is what is on everyone's mind at the moment-- not what is happening in the Middle East.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 10:37 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Domestic policy is what is on everyone's mind at the moment-- not what is happening in the Middle East.

Unless they can show that Obama did have intel about an upcoming terrorist attack and didn't take steps to prevent it. As I say, *even though the very same people ignore the fact that Bush had lots of intel and did nothing*, they will have no problem turning the tide against Obama with something like that.

I truly hate that this is so, but it is so.
posted by tzikeh at 10:42 AM on October 1, 2012

Plus, Romney's campaign strategy from the very beginning was "it's the Economy Stupid" -- "laser like focus on jobs" etc. So if the campaign is chortling that they've been forced into a strategy they decided at the beginning was not a winner for them, then, yes, this is very good news for John McCain.
posted by Rumple at 10:42 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Rumple: “I suppose there is no easy way to remind people that not only did Bush-Cheney leave their successor with a nightmare economic mess to clean up, they left a foreign affairs landscape that was a complete clusterfuck, especially in the Arab world, even considering whatever a measured response to 9-11 might have looked like and the implications of that measured response for terrorism, etc. Truly Obama was tasked with cleaning up after the drunkenly irresponsible neoliberal party.”

Obama and his team have wisely elected not to mention this at all. I'm not sure if this was before or after the GOP decided this would be one of their favorite talking points, but either way it was a good decision.

Even now, no matter where you turn, you'll find a Republican sneering about how Obama keeps blaming Bush for everything! and How long will it take him to take responsibility for his own actions? They adore this line for a lot of reasons – it paints any explanation as a dodgy excuse, it instantly reframes debates, etc – but I think the biggest reason they love it is because they have fantasies about being the party of responsibility and love to imagine themselves returning responsibility to the national spotlight, particularly in the economy, which is now overrun with freeloading.

Republicans adore this line of argument so much that they'll repeat it even when it doesn't really make sense to do so – that is, even when Obama hasn't even mentioned Bush or blamed anyone for anything at all. He'll start to say something like 'well, given the state of the economy when I took office, I knew it was my job to try to take care of...' and the moaning and hand-wringing will begin: he's blaming Bush again! Take responsibility for your own presidency, Mr Obama!

I haven't heard him mention Bush in public for months and months. Which would probably disappoint them if they weren't adept at finding excuses to imagine he was secretly referring to Bush.
posted by koeselitz at 10:43 AM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

Mitt Romney’s weakness on foreign policy

* Obama holds a 14 point edge over Romney on who is more trusted to handle terrorism, 53-39. Among independents it’s 51-43; among moderates it’s 62-32.

* Obama holds a 10 point edge on which candidate would do a better job handling an unexpected major crisis, 52-42. Among independents, that’s 51-43; among moderates it’s 60-33.

* Obama holds a five point edge on who is trusted to handle international affairs, 49-44. However, this represents some slippage, and Romney leads among independents by this metric, 48-43. But Obama is still ahead overall.

What about Israel? Well, the recent Fox News poll found that only 37 percent of voters think the Obama administration has not been supportive enough of Israel, versus 42 percent who say it’s been about right (and another 10 percent who say it’s been too supportive).

Romney will undoubtedly hit Obama with charges of weakness at the debates. But this gives Obama an opening to respond with some variation of: “Ask Osama Bin Laden if my administration has been too weak.” He has said this before; at a presser in December of 2011, Obama said: “Ask Osama bin Laden and the 22-out-of-30 top al Qaeda leaders who’ve been taken off the field whether I engage in appeasement.”

posted by zombieflanders at 10:44 AM on October 1, 2012 [4 favorites]

Miko, Wikipedia has a decent summation. There were plenty of counties in Texas that had more votes than voters, and Daley's machine was corrupt to the core.

That said, there was similar (if milder) fraud from Republicans in the election, and it would have taken both states having their results thrown out for Nixon to win.
posted by klangklangston at 10:50 AM on October 1, 2012

I really question the idea that Obama's foreign policy is going to grab the attention American voters as Romney's 47% remarks did.

Fox News has been pushing this since the attack occurred. They so want Obama to burn for this. The fact that he isn't says a lot of about power of that network.

Mitt Romney’s weakness on foreign policy

Well, that depends on which poll you dirty liberals choose to believe.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:52 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

DebateFanFic:

Romney and Obama are on stage. Romney extends his hand. Obama looks at hand. Then stares Romney in the eye. Moments pass in silence. Romney laughs: Ha ha ha. Obama stares. Romney begins to giggle. Obama stares. Romney begins to drool, giggling, begins waving his hands frantically.

Credits to Steve King and his creation, Flagg.
posted by angrycat at 10:52 AM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

From National Journal's Ron Brownstein, an interesting analysis of Obama's success with blue collar white women in swing states: Why Obama Is Leading in the Polls

"A National Journal analysis of recent polling results across 11 states considered battlegrounds shows that in most of them, Obama is running considerably better than he is nationally among white women without a college education. Obama’s gains with these so-called “waitress moms” are especially pronounced in heartland battlegrounds like Iowa, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

Combined with his continued support among other elements of his “coalition of the ascendant,” including young people, minorities, and college-educated women, these advances among blue-collar women have been enough to propel Obama to the lead over Republican Mitt Romney in the most recent public surveys in all 11 states (albeit in some cases within the polls’ margins of error).

Democrats say blue-collar women have been the principal, and most receptive, target for their extended ad barrage portraying Romney as a plutocrat who is blind, if not indifferent, to the struggles of average families."
posted by madamjujujive at 10:56 AM on October 1, 2012

Not according to the tracking polls.

Fair enough, but even there you can see that it breaks away at the end. The dots are overlapped until the debates, and then they move to strong opposite angles.

The problem is that the GOP seem to have bet the farm, since before the summer in fact, on this being some sort of replay of 1980.... makes it more difficult to be scared of yet more rumours that Romney is suddenly going to turn into Reagan

Sure, I don't think any situation should be thought of as the same. When the Carter/Reagan thing happened, that hadn't happened before either. All I'm getting at is that anything's possible.

The economy is not getting better, and with the rioting in Europe it's pretty much bound to get worse.

The middle east situation is also pretty hot right now, and though people seem to have taken a few disasters in stride, if there are more or if there's a particularly big one, that could really hit Obama hard.

Even having got Bin Laden could be seen as a negative with al Qaeda active & claiming revenge.

Oh, also voting ID laws could be a big pain for some democratic demographics.

Anyway - I'm a pessimist at heart, so this is more anxiety than insight, but I don't think it's totally irrational anxiety.
posted by mdn at 11:00 AM on October 1, 2012

or maybe it's because, i dont know... these waitress moms* are working for the health insurance denied to their blue collar spouses after their employers got pillaged by Wall Street robber barons like Bain's Mitt Romney.

-----
* "waitress mom"? really!?!??
posted by liza at 11:03 AM on October 1, 2012

DebateFanFic

Shirtless steel cage match that includes the VPs. Something tells me that Biden would have a beer in one hand and be beating the crap out of Ryan with the other.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:03 AM on October 1, 2012 [4 favorites]

Whoa, whoa there on that image of Joe Biden with beer in hand and giving the beat down on Ryan because that is just a little too much dessert for me! I like Biden, and though people think he is goofy he seems to be approachable and have that old time politician feel to him. I hope that his debate with Ryan will be great.
posted by jadepearl at 11:08 AM on October 1, 2012

Fair enough, but even there you can see that it breaks away at the end. The dots are overlapped until the debates, and then they move to strong opposite angles

The 1980 polls are probably a bad example to pick if we're considering the risk of a real comeback by Romney. Most people seem to concur that the polls in that year were, for a number of reasons, largely just inaccurate. That of course leaves open the other Republican claim, that the polls now are just wrong, but I don't think 1980 can be employed to support both arguments. If you're going to pick one narrative for this election based on the 1980 polls, my impression is that this is much easier to do with "wrong polls" than "last minute landslide".
posted by howfar at 11:14 AM on October 1, 2012

The economy is not getting better, and with the rioting in Europe it's pretty much bound to get worse

Well....austerity budgets are seemingly usually precursors to bail-outs, which suggest that there might well be a spell of market confidence just before the election. In any case, nothing that happens now is going to show up in any data released before the election.
posted by howfar at 11:18 AM on October 1, 2012

Fair enough, but even there you can see that it breaks away at the end. The dots are overlapped until the debates, and then they move to strong opposite angles.

The difference being that there was only one debate, held a little over a week before the election, during an ongoing international crisis that was big in the news every night, something that is not the case now. And IIRC the economy was still headed downwards, and unemployment was rising quickly, whereas the economy now is improving slowly, we have looser monetary restrictions (i.e. QE3), and unemployment seems to be neither falling nor rising, and certainly not jumping as it was in 1980.

Sure, I don't think any situation should be thought of as the same. When the Carter/Reagan thing happened, that hadn't happened before either. All I'm getting at is that anything's possible.

Well, yes. But not necessarily the same trends or events.

The economy is not getting better, and with the rioting in Europe it's pretty much bound to get worse.

The first is arguable, but the general trend has been upwards. The second is not visible to anybody but the most information-hungry voters at the moment, and even then is not making much of a dent.

The middle east situation is also pretty hot right now, and though people seem to have taken a few disasters in stride, if there are more or if there's a particularly big one, that could really hit Obama hard.

Even having got Bin Laden could be seen as a negative with al Qaeda active & claiming revenge.

Google the "rally 'round the flag effect" and read the polling data on Obama v Romney on foreign policy I posted.

Oh, also voting ID laws could be a big pain for some democratic demographics.

At the moment, most of the ones in swing states seem to have been at the very least postponed if not overturned in court or by the DOJ. Pure voter suppression (like the polling station intimidation from True the Vote et al) might be a much bigger deal this year.

Anyway - I'm a pessimist at heart, so this is more anxiety than insight, but I don't think it's totally irrational anxiety.

You're right, it's not irrational anxiety. But for now, it's not as bad as you fear.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:24 AM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

He's all "ya fucked up Libya, dude."

So I go, "I got BL, fucker."

Then he's all "shoulda got him sooner."

So I go, "Got him sooner than you, ace."
posted by telstar at 11:27 AM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

NCTE: Voting While Trans
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:36 AM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

madamjujujive: That "surprise" they are hoping to dish up to Obama? Too bad Romney already made a fool of himself once over Libya, that will make it a lot harder for him to credibly carry any message on that topic.

He even failed to smile and be polite to ENGLAND when they were HOSTING THE OLYMPICs.

“It’s hard to know just how well it will turn out,” Romney said after being asked if the United Kingdom was ready for the Olympics. “There are a few things that were disconcerting – the stories about the private security firm not having enough people, supposed strike of the immigration and customs officials. That, obviously, is not something which is encouraging.”

Romney said that there were three key aspects to a successful Olympic games; the security, the volunteers and an enthusiastic public in the host nation. “Do they come together and celebrate the Olympic moment,” asked Romney. “That’s something which we only find out once the Games actually begin.”

If you can't put on a smile for international games held in a non-hostile nation, I have no faith in your ability to negotiate when things actually get hostile.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:38 AM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

From Strategic Allied Consulting:

Since 2004, Strategic Allied Consulting and its affiliates have registered more than 500,000 voters in 40-plus states. These massive operations have involved thousands of contractors working across a geography literally the size of the United States.

Literally the size of the United States, minus a few non-significant states.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:41 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

For crying out loud, Mitt, you aren't running against the Queen of England! Why bring their ability to host the games and "come together" into question on national TV? GAAAH! I cannot fathom what was going on inside his head, except to distance himself from "European influences"

And why the hell is European such a dirty word for Republicans? Why would it be so bad if Obama made the US more 'like Europe'? Is it a convenient bit of short-hand for "debt-ridden Socialists who don't want to spend between $400 and $800 BILLION dollars on 'defense' every year"?

Tangent: How Romney Would Make The United States More Like Europe
posted by filthy light thief at 11:52 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Then he's all "shoulda got him sooner."

Then I'm all "In a raid you said in the primaries that you wouldn't personally undertake."
posted by jaduncan at 11:53 AM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

Fun fact: if this thread is to top the Palin longboat, we'll need to average about 100 comments per day. I'm not so idle that I'll tally comments to see how this compares the the current commenting trend, but I think this thread could break the record.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:56 AM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

“waitress moms”

Because of course there are no women who are not moms. I do love how women without children are disappeared. I'm a unicorn!
posted by winna at 12:00 PM on October 1, 2012 [12 favorites]

we'll need to average about 100 comments per day

ROW

ROW

ROW
posted by The Whelk at 12:04 PM on October 1, 2012 [5 favorites]

Mr. Mister.

Kyrie!
posted by ericb at 12:06 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

He's all "ya fucked up Libya, dude."

So I go, "I got BL, fucker."

Then he's all "shoulda got him sooner."

So I go, "No, your previous president should have. Gettin' tired of cleaning up your messes."
posted by grubi at 12:07 PM on October 1, 2012 [4 favorites]

“Keep in mind we’re talking about a fundraiser that cost $50,000 a plate. Fifty thousand dollars also happens to be the median household income in the U.S. So the kind of wealth you need to have to be in the room with Romney is the kind of wealth that means you can just pony up as much money as many Americans make in a year to listen to Mitt Romney trash talk the very people who make in a year the same amount you just ponied up for dinner.” ~
posted by cashman at 12:12 PM on October 1, 2012 [5 favorites]

Are we now imagining the debates as some Harvard-grads' version of The Dozens?
posted by tzikeh at 12:12 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Because of course there are no women who are not moms."

C'mon, you're already voting for Obama. Like the rest of the spinsters ;)
posted by klangklangston at 12:15 PM on October 1, 2012 [4 favorites]

Something tells me that Biden would have a beer in one hand and be beating the crap out of Ryan with the other.

I find it endlessly fascinating that this is such an ingrained part of The Biden Image since he, just like Romney, is an avowed teetotaler.
posted by psoas at 12:19 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

C'mon, you're already voting for Obama. Like the rest of the spinsters ;)

What a ridiculous stereotype. I'll have you know that some of the women voting for Obama are whores or jealous barren witches who want to force abortions on fertile God-fearing wives.
posted by howfar at 12:20 PM on October 1, 2012 [12 favorites]

Dude, whore is not the preferred nomenclature. Slut-Americans, please.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:25 PM on October 1, 2012 [13 favorites]

City Journal: Romney’s Stock Market Problem -
Why the GOP candidate’s proposal to eliminate taxes on investment income falls on deaf ears

No wonder nobody wants to take Romney up on his offer of tax-free stock-market gains. To many, that sounds like a sure route to losing money. What to do if you’re the candidate?

doing my part
posted by the man of twists and turns at 12:25 PM on October 1, 2012

It's all too true- me and my cat Mister Churchill are much occupied knitting a Slutty Abortifacient Witchy wool hat to wear with pride on election day!

Mr Churchill doesn't knit much of it, though, on account of cats not being able to count well enough to help with the heathen stitch count.
posted by winna at 12:25 PM on October 1, 2012 [6 favorites]

I bet that moocher is one of those Blah Cats.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:28 PM on October 1, 2012

I find it endlessly fascinating that this is such an ingrained part of The Biden Image since he, just like Romney, is an avowed teetotaler.

I don't know why but Biden always seems like he's a version of Saul Tigh, from the updated Battlestar Galatica.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 12:30 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

ROW

I believe the chant is STROKE
posted by telstar at 12:30 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Like the rest of the spinsters ;)

Hey, you, as a nonmom, I resent that characterization. I am definitely "a bachelorette." Cue some yeye girls music.

If I must be a demographic, then I would say Single Living Over Budget.
posted by madamjujujive at 12:32 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

ROW

I believe the chant is STROKE

You're confusing your holography. What The Whelk was saying was "ROW". Rhymes with "cow". Means "to argue". Not something MeFites normally need encouragement to do.
posted by howfar at 12:33 PM on October 1, 2012

To tell the truth Mr Churchill is wholly imaginary, but spinsters all have to have cats so i have given to airy nothing a habitation and a name in cat format. Imaginary cats may not be wonderful fuzzy companions with a charming purr, but they also don't continually wee all over everything like a sprinkler in hell, so what I lose on the swings I gain on the roundabouts.
posted by winna at 12:34 PM on October 1, 2012 [4 favorites]

We can just spend the rest of the thread talking about wholly imaginary cats

Meet Mittens Rom, the cat who falls down stairs!
posted by The Whelk at 12:37 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

Not something MeFites normally need encouragement to do.

They hardly need more encouragement to stroke.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 12:39 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

You're confusing your holography

Um yeah that should be homographs. I fucking hate autocorrect sometimes.
posted by howfar at 12:40 PM on October 1, 2012

YOU'RE A HOMOPHONE!
posted by grubi at 12:42 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

The GameBro song off the Homestuck album is curiously apropos.
posted by winna at 12:43 PM on October 1, 2012

ROW". Rhymes with "cow". Means "to argue".

Wait I'm sorry what? Does row-as-argument differ in sound from row-as-sporting-action? Because they don't in my head. Or on my tongue, I suppose.
posted by Lemurrhea at 12:44 PM on October 1, 2012

I was rather surprised and disappointed to hear on Chris Hayes' MSNBC show yesterday that the candidates have been given a list of topics ahead of time, and that they're not going to release the terms of the debate, negotiated in secret between the two campaigns. I do suppose that this arrangement favors the President, since Romney's the one who really needs an unscripted "gotcha" moment to move the polls in his favor, but even though Obama's my guy, I hate the idea that the two candidates can negotiate this kind of dog and pony show in secret. No good can come of a presidential debate that's as scripted as a WWE title bout.
posted by tonycpsu at 12:45 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

I thought there was some new literary tool and was VERY excited about seeing the Emperor on holograph teach me pronunciation.
posted by Twain Device at 12:46 PM on October 1, 2012

Wait I'm sorry what? Does row-as-argument differ in sound from row-as-sporting-action?

Yes. The word meaning "stroke" is "row" like "blow", but the wrod meaning "argument, fight" is "row" like "cow".
posted by grubi at 12:47 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Watch the debates in your new Halo 4 armor!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 12:47 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Should we establish the rules of the drinking game before the debates begin?
posted by Theta States at 12:48 PM on October 1, 2012

So, Jon Stewart and Bill O'Reilly had a PPV debate this weekend, correct? Nobody has said anything about it. How did it go? Are there any writeups about it? My google-fu has failed me because all I can find are announcements and advertisements.
posted by rebent at 12:50 PM on October 1, 2012

No good can come of a presidential debate that's as scripted as a WWE title bout.

AND BIDEN HAS BROUGHT A FOLDING CHAIR ONTO THE STAGE! WHERE IS LEHRER DURING ALL OF THIS?! IN ALL MY YEARS OF DEBATE ANNOUNCING, I HAVE NEVER SEEN A MORE SHAMEFUL DISPLAY!
posted by Horace Rumpole at 12:52 PM on October 1, 2012 [21 favorites]

Am I correct in understanding that Romney's October surprise strategy seems to be premised on the disclosure of classified intelligence data? Who would possibly declassify it for this use?
posted by feloniousmonk at 12:53 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

rebent, the debate is Oct 6th between O'Reilly and Stewart. Expect a huge thread about it to hit the front page sometime shortly after it starts.
posted by daq at 12:55 PM on October 1, 2012

the candidates have been given a list of topics ahead of time

Noted above in this thread.

This domestic policy debate will feature six, 15-minute segments: three about the economy, a discussion on health care, the role of government and governing. Lehrer noted the topics could change based on news developments, and will not necessarily be in that order.

they're not going to release the terms of the debate, negotiated in secret between the two campaigns.

Now what is that supposed to mean? They agree not to talk about each other's mommas? Nobody gets to say anything that ends in "Bush"? Both people pledge not to Google Ron Paul? No sighing allowed?
posted by cashman at 12:56 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

they're not going to release the terms of the debate, negotiated in secret between the two campaigns.

Now what is that supposed to mean? They agree not to talk about each other's mommas? Nobody gets to say anything that ends in "Bush"? Both people pledge not to Google Ron Paul? No sighing allowed?

I think it stinks that the terms are secret. Even if it's just than Romney can't go BOOYAH after his inevitably devastating zingers.

I do hate to sound like Keith Olberman, but I think the American people have the right to know the terms.
posted by winna at 1:07 PM on October 1, 2012

cashman: " Now what is that supposed to mean? They agree not to talk about each other's mommas? Nobody gets to say anything that ends in "Bush"? Both people pledge not to Google Ron Paul? No sighing allowed?"

You're not too far off.

Every four years, the two major campaigns work out an elaborate contract governing everything from whether pens and pencils can be used to what kind of questions the candidates may ask each other. So far, Open Debates has been able to get its hands on the 1998 and 2004 agreements. All the other agreements have been kept secret.

The 2004 agreement, for instance, featured the following language about the debate moderators: "If any proposed moderator fails to execute a copy of this agreement at least seven (7) days prior to the proposed date of the debate he or she is to moderate, the two campaigns will agree upon and select a different individual to moderate that debate."

At this point, I think a ladder match would be more spontaneous.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:07 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

“They are so excited about it,” he said. “Over and over again they talked about how it would be just like Jimmy Carter’s failed raid. They feel it is going to give them a last-minute landslide in the election.”

The GOP keeps saying that Obama is really Jimmy Carter and I keep feeling like Regina from Mean Girls: "Stop trying to make "fetch" happen! It's not going to happen!"

How many people likely to vote in November even voted in 1980? How many even remember 1980? And of those who did and do how many were already voting for Romney? Politics isn't magic, Mitt. You can't win a race just by pretending you're running against a candidate who lost.

He added that they planned to release what they hoped would be “a bombshell” that would make Libya and Obama’s foreign policy a major issue in the campaign.

This is such transparent bullshit. If the Romney campaign is privy to "secret information" so damning that it could cost Obama the election why are they sitting on it? Any media outlet in the country would beg to have that scoop. And if Romney thinks he can "win" a debate by just "dropping a bombshell," then it only demonstrates how much he's mischaracterized the effects and dynamics of the Presidential debates.

So much of this reminds me of the beliefs by so many during GWB's tenure that the right story or discovery or phrase would convince everyone that the President was a monster if only they could hear it. But, hell, even the abuse at Abu Ghraib wasn't enough, by itself, to persuade enough voters to turn out a guy they were more-or-less satisfied with.
posted by octobersurprise at 1:10 PM on October 1, 2012

How many people likely to vote in November even voted in 1980? How many even remember 1980?

And the crowd in the first debate is University of Denver students. It's a nationwide broadcast, but if the room is dead when Mitt thinks he's zinged, and they reply more to a comeback to the supposed zing, it's a fail for Mitt.
posted by cashman at 1:13 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Ultra-Rich Flip Out At Obama: Compare His Rise To Third Reich's... See His Peers As 'Battered Wives'... 'He Really Loves Us And When He Beats Us, He Doesn’t Mean It; He Just Gets A Little Angry'... 'Oppression' Of Super Rich Compared To Treatment Of Ethnic Minorities.
posted by ericb at 1:19 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

Every four years, the two major campaigns work out an elaborate contract governing everything from whether pens and pencils can be used to what kind of questions the candidates may ask each other. So far, Open Debates has been able to get its hands on the 1998 and 2004 agreements. All the other agreements have been kept secret.

I have it on good authority that the rider for both campaigns also states: "M&M's (WARNING: ABSOLUTELY NO BROWN ONES)."
posted by ericb at 1:25 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Obama's College Voter Trump Card

With young voters less enthusiastic than they were four years ago, some fear that low turnout might hamper Obama’s effort to win reelection. But contrary to popular belief, Obama can actually afford lower youth turnout rates—as long as he still boosts absolute turnout among Obama’s young and disproportionately non-white base.

There’s actually a big catch with the 18-29 year-old age group: 33 percent weren’t even eligible to vote in 2008. The old 18-29 year old cohort is now 22-33 years old, and even mediocre turnout among 2012’s 18-22 year-olds will allow Obama to compensate for decreased turnout among his aging supporters.
[...]
f non-white or young voters turned out at ’08-levels in 2012, demographics would actually ensure that Obama does even better than he did four years ago. These same demographic trends give Democrats a bit of breathing room to withstand modest declines in enthusiasm among young voters without actually falling far behind where they stood four years ago.

With this in mind, it's no surprise that Obama opened his campaign at Ohio State University, or that Michelle Obama is holding rallies on college campuses across the battleground states. Today's college students didn't vote four years ago, and even an underwhelming turnout from America's most diverse age group could help the Obama campaign make up for losses among voters who have abandoned their cause since 2008.

posted by zombieflanders at 1:25 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama Presidential Debate Strategy Avoids 'Zingers,' Speaks 'Directly To The American People'.
posted by ericb at 1:26 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Will Mitt run on torture? -- "His advisers want him to bring waterboarding back. Challenging Obama on torture might be his debate surprise."
posted by ericb at 1:28 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

"What a ridiculous stereotype. I'll have you know that some of the women voting for Obama are whores or jealous barren witches who want to force abortions on fertile God-fearing wives."

Forty-seven percent of 'em, even.
posted by klangklangston at 1:28 PM on October 1, 2012

I think avoiding Zingers is a good strategy. You don't want to be all hyped up on sugar during a debate. Maybe save a pack for when it's over as a reward for a job well done.
posted by perhapses at 1:29 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

The orange flavored cupcakes, however, are nectar of the gods and any candidate who disparages them shall feel my wrath.
posted by cashman at 1:33 PM on October 1, 2012

Ten Races Where Mitt Romney Could Sink GOP Candidates.
posted by ericb at 1:36 PM on October 1, 2012

I think this ancient web animation, Mittens The Cute Kitten, could somehow be a prescient metaphor for Romney's campaign. There's things he knows he shouldn't say, but he can't stop saying them.
posted by Joey Michaels at 1:37 PM on October 1, 2012

The Ultra-Rich Flip Out At Obama

"Come along. We're going to the Trans-Lux to hiss Roosevelt."
posted by octobersurprise at 1:38 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

The Atlantic: Can The Romney Campaign Be Saved?
posted by the man of twists and turns at 1:42 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

The Ultra-Rich Flip Out At Obama

Actually reading the article, it seems less "flip-out" and more "make calm commentary." These guys are concerned about class-war rhetoric, but their own rhetoric seems pretty tame - definitely not approaching being unstable, like that framing implies.

"To frame the debate as one of rich-and-entitled versus poor-and-dispossessed is to both miss the point and further inflame an already incendiary environment."

posted by corb at 2:00 PM on October 1, 2012

The word meaning "stroke" is "row" like "blow", but the wrod meaning "argument, fight" is "row" like "cow".

And if that's not clear enough, another handy way to think about it is that "row" rhymes with "sow" as in a lady pig, while "row" rhymes with "sow" as in what you reap. Which, further, rhyme with "bow" and "bow", respectively. Easy peasy!
posted by cortex at 2:01 PM on October 1, 2012 [7 favorites]

Potato. Potato. Tomato. Tomato.
posted by ericb at 2:02 PM on October 1, 2012

Liza: Dear United States,

You're welcome.

Sincerely,
Occupy Wall Street

The little Occupy engine that could.

Looks like you really can't evict an idea.

I'm looking at you, Mayor Bloomberg.
posted by Skygazer at 2:04 PM on October 1, 2012 [5 favorites]

Uh...AHHHHH!

What's this?? ------> Need to fix a typo? Edit

Have I been made a MOD??
posted by Skygazer at 2:06 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

You say Tomato I say Tomaho

You say potato I say WE'RE NOT EATING CARBS RIGHT NOW
posted by The Whelk at 2:07 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

The distinction between now and know should be carried over to all other three-letter words that end in -ow. Bow, as in curtsy, and kbow (silent k), as in and arrow. Sow and ksow, etc. the added k always makes it the long o sound.

(I didn't have a typo but just wanted to watch the Time Remaining to Edit tick off.)
posted by perhapses at 2:07 PM on October 1, 2012

Oh snap, 5-minute edit window!
posted by cashman at 2:08 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Be here now

Know be here

edit is my friend. it tells me what to do.
posted by honestcoyote at 2:09 PM on October 1, 2012

I have died and gone to Metafilter heaven.
posted by Skygazer at 2:11 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh snap, 5-minute edit windowwwwwwww!

New mods and now this ?

I'm scared.

And there's a timer!!! ZOMG
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 2:11 PM on October 1, 2012

I figured if we need to break a record for comments we'd need to liven things up with a little October surprise. But, yes, there is a Metatalk thread.
posted by cortex at 2:13 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

Metafilter fears change and will do anything to prevent it. To the barricades!

EDIT: I disavow the above comment. It was inelegantly stated.
posted by zombieflanders at 2:13 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm scared.

Me too.

Matt Howie surely does move in mysterious ways.
posted by Skygazer at 2:14 PM on October 1, 2012

why dont i see any edit thingies?!?!?!
*pouts*
posted by liza at 2:16 PM on October 1, 2012

Oh snap, 5-minute edit window!

I can't belive it!
posted by DaDaDaDave at 2:17 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

You must not have a Metafilter Premium account.
posted by perhapses at 2:17 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Metafilter: you did build that. Edit to add: DIDN'T BUILD THAT.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 2:17 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

OH SNAP! I SEE IT!
*squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee*

TAKE THAT MITT ROMNEY! WE ARE THE 47% WITH EDIT POWERS!!!!!!

XD
posted by liza at 2:17 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

I feel so special.

*Preens poises "vogues", acting special*
posted by Skygazer at 2:19 PM on October 1, 2012

Does this work for me? AM I SPECIAL?

...

On edit: I AM! I AM!
posted by grubi at 2:22 PM on October 1, 2012

*Flexes muscles and looks in mirror American Psycho style while in the act.../wink*
posted by Skygazer at 2:23 PM on October 1, 2012

OMG FOR REAL?

ETA: FOR REAL OMG!
posted by tzikeh at 2:27 PM on October 1, 2012

Hey guys, there really is a MetaTalk thread where you can practice edits, give useful feedback and get giggly. I suspect that if you keep things up here, that's a paddlin'.
posted by maudlin at 2:27 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

Let's face it, this thread has become honorary metachat.
posted by jaduncan at 2:30 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

When I saw the "17 new comments" on this thread I was all excited because I thought there was another colossal Romney fuckup that MeFites were eagerly discussing. You have all let me down.
posted by Phire at 2:30 PM on October 1, 2012 [13 favorites]

Great. This feature shows up about an hour and fifteen minutes after this comment I made.

Man.
posted by grubi at 2:31 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Thomas L. Friedman: The World We’re Actually Living In.

"For the first time in a long, long time, a Democrat is running for president and has the clear advantage on national security policy. That is not 'how things are supposed to be,' and Republicans sound apoplectic about it. But there is a reason President Obama is leading on national security, and it was apparent in his U.N. speech last week, which showed a president who understands that we really do live in a more complex world today — and that saying so is not a cop-out. It’s a road map. Mitt Romney, given his international business background, should understand this, but he acts instead as if he learned his foreign policy at the International House of Pancakes, where the menu and architecture rarely changes."

posted by ericb at 2:31 PM on October 1, 2012 [6 favorites]

Need to fix a typo? Edit

Wait. WTF. Our pony has come home? "The mods. They really, really love us!" Thank you so much!
posted by ericb at 2:36 PM on October 1, 2012

Where's Mitt Romney's edit window? This site is so biased!
posted by feloniousmonk at 2:37 PM on October 1, 2012

The Parallel Universe Where Mitt Leads All Polls.
posted by ericb at 2:39 PM on October 1, 2012

His five minutes were up a while ago.

ZING!
posted by filthy light thief at 2:40 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Where's Mitt Romney's edit window? This site is so biased!

He doesn't need one. He's got an Etch-A-Sketch!
posted by ericb at 2:41 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

When I saw the "17 new comments" on this thread I was all excited because I thought there was another colossal Romney fuckup that MeFites were eagerly discussing. You have all let me down.

Just wait 24 hours ... he'll likely shoot himself in the foot once again.
posted by ericb at 2:44 PM on October 1, 2012

Will Mitt run on torture?

The new Mitt 7.0! It's better than the six prior versions, because it runs on torture! Was that another political gaff? Don't worry, his smile might slide for a moment, but it's back and good as new! Another video leak? You can't break Mitt v7.0, pain makes him stronger!

"That which does not kill me will only make me stronger!"

Yeah, we just said that. Anyway, Mitt v7.0, coming to a campaign stop vaguely near you!
posted by filthy light thief at 2:44 PM on October 1, 2012

GOP Focus Group: Undecided Voters Assume Romney’s Attacks Are Dishonest
posted by zombieflanders at 2:54 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

from the Politico article linked by ericb But it’s one thing to advocate for a preferred party and portray the other in the worst possible light. Questioning the integrity of professional pollsters is something different: It’s preposterous.

Consider: For the vast polling conspiracy of 2012 to be legitimate would be to presume that longtime GOP pollster Bill McInturff is on the deal. McInturff co-runs the respected Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll with veteran Democratic pollster Peter Hart.

McInturff is also business partners with Neil Newhouse, Romney’s own pollster. So, by this standard, Romney’s own campaign could also be part of the conspiracy to … hurt the Romney campaign.

that's gotta hurt. and this is written in GOP-leaning Politico.
posted by liza at 2:56 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

liza: "that's gotta hurt. "

Robots don't have emotions, so I doubt it does.

Holy hell! I can edit too! (Sorry all)
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 3:07 PM on October 1, 2012

from zombieflanders' GOP Focus Group: Undecided Voters Assume Romney’s Attacks Are Dishonest

"Whenever we showed direct quotes from President Obama over the last few years, voters consistently say that this is probably taken out of context and they don’t seem to hold that same standard with Governor Romney"

This is brilliant. That's what "crying wolf" will get you. They ran miles with the obviously out of context "You didn't build that" line. Add to that Ryan's pathological exaggerations of his physical accomplishments ("6-8% bodyfat" etc.), his convention speech, Romney's ridiculous assertion that the 47% are all democrats and the result is that voters can't trust a word they say. Thank you, karma.
posted by NailsTheCat at 3:10 PM on October 1, 2012 [9 favorites]

"Ten Races Where Mitt Romney Could Sink GOP Candidates."

Oh, man, my congressional district isn't listed, but I see my (new, I've been redistricted) Tea Party rep is neck and neck -- 47/45 -- with the (unknown until now) Democratic challenger and she's surging, as of a week ago.

Oh please oh please oh please.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 3:13 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Actually reading the article, it seems less "flip-out" and more "make calm commentary." These guys are concerned about class-war rhetoric, but their own rhetoric seems pretty tame - definitely not approaching being unstable, like that framing implies."

They repeatedly compare Obama to Hitler for even insinuating that in some way, the banking industry could be responsible for the banking crash of 2008.

Your special pleading is a bit strained here.
posted by klangklangston at 3:16 PM on October 1, 2012 [12 favorites]

Oh, man, I can only hope the sorta-kinda optimism in that "Ten Races Where Mitt Romney Could Sink GOP Candidates" piece about Carmona winning Kyl's senate seat over Flake here in Arizona isn't delusional. Kyl is a weasel, and Flake is in his image. Carmona is a terrific candidate--former Surgeon General, so among other things someone who actually understands and believes in science, even--and I want to believe this state is capable of electing somebody sane.

When I moved here, Janet Napolitano was governor. It's been all downhill since she abandoned us for Washington, leaving the ridiculous Jan Brewer and her cronies to run the place.

If Carmona wins the senate race and Arpaio is ousted as sheriff, I might actually not have to be apologetic about where I live. It'll be like that amazing moment in 1992 when I was living in Italy, and after Clinton was elected I was able to experience the strange sensation of not being completely embarrassed to be an American abroad.

/derail

Uh, Romney is running the worst campaign I've seen since I first started paying attention to politics in my late teens. It's kind of amazing to watch.
posted by Superplin at 3:24 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

People really just don't understand how Hitler and the Nazis came to power. Americans especially transpose our understanding of our system of government onto the creaking, hydra-headed quasi-Imperial machine that Bismarck left and it just doesn't work.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 3:25 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is "campaigning" for Mitt Romney in New Hampshire (where Obama has a 10 pt. lead). Knowing Walker's M.O. of running for the next office as soon as he's elected, he's so confident in Mitt's chances, he's positioning himself for 2016.
posted by drezdn at 3:26 PM on October 1, 2012

Uh, Romney is running the worst campaign I've seen since I first started paying attention to politics in my late teens. It's kind of amazing to watch.

I keep thinking that there has to be some kind of rope-a-dope. They have to be faking an injury here, only to turn and fight when the kill shot comes. I think Mitt is in a position where he has so much to remember and he is under so much pressure to do something, that it puts him on a tightrope. He can't wait past the first half hour to start trying to win noticeably.
posted by cashman at 3:40 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

My sense of fair play hates what looks like an unjustified pile-on.

I'd like to address this because it is very reminiscent of the failed notion of "equal time" that I've seen trotted out in televised media and in online communities such as this, and I think it's a good idea to think carefully about this. In an ideal world, all voices are equal, everyone is playing nice and following the rules, and so everyone deserves to be heard and you should go out of the way to give your opponent the benefit of the doubt.

This wonderful idea, unfortunately, does not hold up to scrutiny this election season (if it ever did). We have a presidential candidate who's already written off half of Americans as economic parasites, whose running mate touts Ayn Rand without having being a high school sophomore as an excuse, and whose campaign has now been exposed as engaging in unethical at best campaign practices.

There is no "fair play" from these guys. You have to be vigilant, you have to call them out on their shit, and you cannot pull any punches. People screaming about it on the internet in some kind of "pile-on" is far, far less damaging than anything Mitt & Co. have been getting up to lately. Engaging in a dialogue with others about it isn't only justified; it's the least we can do.

This election season, like many others beforehand, we have a cornered rat of a GOP campaign that could - as they've demonstrated they're willing to do in the past - pull any card out of the hat to squeek in a win. I would love to live in a world where we're all just awesome, law-abiding people who happen to believe different things, but that isn't the world we're living in, and I'm very wary of anyone who suggests that the Romney camp is on the same ethical footing as the rest of us, deserving of the type of charity they wouldn't show us in a million years.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 3:40 PM on October 1, 2012 [22 favorites]

Marisa Stole the Precious Thing: "There is no "fair play" from these guys. You have to be vigilant, you have to call them out on their shit, and you cannot pull any punches. People screaming about it on the internet in some kind of "pile-on" is far, far less damaging than anything Mitt & Co. have been getting up to lately. "

Let me s'pose, if you don't mind....

*With righteous indignation*
Surely you aren't trying to claim that the republicans are doing anything that the democrats haven't done already and probably twice as intensely!

Republicans have to rise to the occasion and defend themselves and respond in kind when the entire media-verse is arrayed against us in this sinister takeover of our beloved democracy!

(I can't continue. I have to go try to shower the stench off of me now. I'll probably be in there long after the hot water is gone.) Let's just see how close my prediction was, though. Delusion is a helluva drug I hear.
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 3:55 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

A-Ha! Today on the Charlie Sykes radio show Ryan let a few more details slip on the Romney tax plan. It's the old "Trickle Down Economics" sleight of hand:

Not only does Ryan let the cat out of the bag, and admit that their whole tax cut scheme is predicated on trickle down economics, but he seems to be working off of an entirely different script than Mitt Romney.

Just four days ago, Romney told the Toledo Blade a completely different story about how he would pay for his tax plan, “These are the kinds of things that get worked out in Congress, as you go back and forth between Democrats and Republicans, very much like you go back to the Reagan plan, he talked about bringing taxes down.”

posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:00 PM on October 1, 2012

Wait, Paul Rand preached the word of Ayn Rand? That was 2005! This is 2012, and his past is urban legend! Seven years? That's forever ago! 16% of his life ago! He was an impressionable 35 back then!

Oh, then he said "I think Ayn Rand did the best job of anybody to build a moral case of capitalism, and that morality of capitalism is under assault." in 2009. Oops, that's only 3 years ago, and those were pretty strong words.

Damn. And now the return of the Ghost of Reagan? Double damn. I've tried to play "considerate Democrat" and failed to prop up the slumping corpse of Republican double-speak and flip-floppery.
posted by filthy light thief at 4:03 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

From the Atlantic piece linked above, "Can the Romney Campaign Be Saved?":

All politicians pander, but in order to persuade enough voters that one has the ability to both govern and make policy in a country as diverse as ours, politicians must pander within reasonable limits [...] But unsustainable pandering backfires; candidates with coherent strategies learn that they must often "just say no" to maintain broad credibility. When conservative social activists demanded that Governor George W Bush pledge never to hire gays in his administration, he refused; when Governor Bill Clinton was pushed to rule out the possibility of tax increases, he refused as well.

and

the GOP Tea Party base is pushing for policies that cannot be defended nationally by a presidential candidate.

The Romney campaign wanted the election to be a referendum on Obama's record on jobs. Once the Tea Party tail started wagging the elephant, Romney pandered himself into a corner. Each time the Romney campaign has seemed ready to acknowledge a more centrist idea, the far right yelled and Romney blinked.

Good points made here about why Romney has been leaking credibility like the Titanic over the past few weeks.
posted by Superplin at 4:09 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Someone's changed their tune about the debates.....Even though the Romney camp is now downplaying Romney's upcoming debate performance, only a few months ago things were different:

During the primary race, Newt Gingrich rose to frontrunner status in part due to a belief among Republican voters that Gingrich was a virtuoso behind the podium, just a few Lincoln-Douglas style debates away from handily defeating Obama. It was all of a piece with the base Republican belief that Obama has never been properly vetted and that a rhetorical roundhouse to his glass jaw will reveal the shattering truth.

Romney pushed back on Gingrich’s boasting at the time, promising that he himself was the one with the skills and message to expose Obama on a debate stage. In almost polar opposition to the Romney rhetoric of today, the messaging throughout the primary fight with Gingrich served to continually raise expectations for Romney’s ability to take on Obama in a debate, not lower them.

But --hey!-- months have passed! The voters can't be expected to remember anything that happened during the primaries.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:10 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Is Christ Christie trying to jinx Romney by saying "this whole race is going to be turned upside down" by Romney's amazing debate abilities?

Whether he is or not, I'm glad one of the developments that came from the Conventions is that Christie has pretty much been re-evaluated for a vapid and partisan windbag.
posted by Skygazer at 4:19 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

From the "He Can't Be Serious" Dept: Glen Beck claims God has put Romney behind in the polls so that when he wins it will be seen as a miracle

“I know Mitt Romney wasn’t your first choice, nor was he mine,” Beck recently told controversial “historian” David Barton in a video clip highlighted by Right Wing Watch on Monday. “I am to the point that — A — God is trying to make this so clear to us that if it happens, it’s his finger. Because nothing looks good.”

“And yet, everybody I know who I consider a spiritual giant feels good,” he continued. “And it bothers me that I feel good because, I’m like, there’s no reason that I should feel good on this.”

Beck goes on to proclaim that Romney is just like George Washington.“It shows he knows [God is] in charge. And he obeys. … He’s enough like [Washington] that God can change you.”
which makes zero sense to me. Romney is so much like Washington that God can change me? or change Romney? Why do I get the feeling that Beck is damn near beatifying Geo. Washington?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:23 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Did Beck just imply he is a Spiritual Giant?
posted by Rumple at 4:27 PM on October 1, 2012

No, simply that God's will is something that he can make manifest for his viewers.
posted by Skygazer at 4:29 PM on October 1, 2012

Romney is so much like Washington that God can change me? or change Romney? Why do I get the feeling that Beck is damn near beatifying Geo. Washington?

I don't think we'd really want St. George as president... among other things, even the Muslims like him! Doesn't really uphold that neocon worldview. Not nearly American enough.

Did Beck just imply he is a Spiritual Giant?
Well, he was trying to be modest about it, but yes. Yes he was.
posted by Superplin at 4:30 PM on October 1, 2012

Arguments for the existence of God #473: The Holy Shit He Won! argument.
posted by perhapses at 4:32 PM on October 1, 2012

Hey people, where is your sense of fair play? Stop piling on the poor little Republicans when there is no one here to defend them!

PS Romney has zero, that is zero, foreign policy experience, and Ryan has a trivial amount of it. Don't see how that isn't an easy pushback.
posted by spitbull at 4:32 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Why do I get the feeling that Beck is damn near beatifying Geo. Washington?

We've gone far beyond beatifying him. The inside of the Capitol Dome is crowned by a painting entitled The Apotheosis of George Washington, literally depicting him rising to the heavens to become a god.
posted by Flunkie at 4:34 PM on October 1, 2012

Some fun Poll Results:

81% interested in the upcoming debates

56% believe Obama will win the debates vs. 29% believe Romney will

66% believe that Obama favors the middle class vs. 17% believe he favors the wealthy

57% believe that the gap between the wealthiest and all the rest is bigger than at any time in our history vs. 5% think it is smaller

53% believe Obama would handle terrorism better vs. 39% favor Romney
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:34 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

“I know Mitt Romney wasn’t your first choice, nor was he mine,” Beck recently told controversial “historian” David Barton in a video clip highlighted by Right Wing Watch on Monday. “I am to the point that — A — God is trying to make this so clear to us that if it happens, it’s his finger. Because nothing looks good.”

Never thought I'd agree with Glenn Beck, but I have to admit--if Mitt Romney is elected president, I will definitely interpret that as God's finger.
posted by DaDaDaDave at 4:51 PM on October 1, 2012 [17 favorites]

Glen Beck claims God has put Romney behind in the polls so that when he wins it will be seen as a miracle

And when Romney doesn't win, the message shifts to "Boy, God's work is just beyond our understanding, isn't it? Must be part of a greater plan he has, a testing of our faith he's set up by not allowing our guy to win." It must be fascinating to be a member of the religious right.
posted by Rykey at 4:52 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

“It shows he knows [God is] in charge. And he obeys. … He’s enough like [Washington] that God can change you.”

The "It" that Beck is referring to? Concealing himself from scrutiny:

“Nobody knew Mitt’s private life,” Barton agreed. “In the same way, you have George Washington. When you look at his private life, now you know why he’s a great guy.”

“And a politician to hide that shows even deeper character, I think,” Beck observed. “It shows he knows [God is] in charge. And he obeys. … He’s enough like [Washington] that God can change you.”

Earlier Beck was talking about how his show "exposed things about Romney's private life." I don't know what those things were, but it confuses me that in the same breath he would say that for Mitt to hide it shows "deeper character".

I understand that there's a line of decency under the "private life" heading, but I think what Beck might be referring to is the general spirit of obfuscation that Romney's campaign has been maintaining. It is one of the most common criticisms laid at him, after all. But Beck honestly believes that this secrecy is a sign from God that Romney has been chosen to be president, no matter how badly his campaign looks even to someone like Beck.

There was a time I, like a lot of people, used to be convinced that Beck was actually a Kaufmanesque professional troll. Today I'm undecided about that but if it were true, this construct of Beck's looks like he's running out of material. Whether he is or he's not, though, his attitude is a pretty accurate illustration of the cognitive dissonance going on in Romney's camp - things are looking so abyssmal that it has to mean things are actually looking up.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 4:52 PM on October 1, 2012

-if Mitt Romney is elected president, I will definitely interpret that as God's finger.

I think we all know which finger, too.
posted by emjaybee at 5:00 PM on October 1, 2012 [7 favorites]

If Romney wins, then it's a blessed miracle from God. If he loses, then it's because the forces of Satan thwarted God's will.

Funny how that works. Heads I win. Tails and you're the demonic spawn of a whorish Keynesian, Sharia-loving witch who hates God, mom, apple pie, and America.
posted by honestcoyote at 5:09 PM on October 1, 2012 [11 favorites]

...promising that he himself was the one with the skills and message to expose Obama on a debate stage.

For Republicans, "good debater" = "pompous windbag," apparently.
posted by Mental Wimp at 5:15 PM on October 1, 2012

This thread is so badass, the earth rumbles every time I hit F5 - Reload Page.
posted by Skygazer at 5:52 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

From the "He Can't Be Serious" Dept, part 2: Trump Advises Romney To Ask Birther Question At Debate

"In debate, @mittromney should ask Obama why autobiography states "born in Kenya, raised in Indonesia."
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 1, 2012

WTF? In what book is Obama claiming he was born in Kenya?! Oh, excuse me. "Autobiography" Which autobiography, when, what, why? ...Wait...is this an autobiography written by somebody else, like "Dreams of My Real Father"?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:01 PM on October 1, 2012

In October 2008, Focus on the Family wrote a letter depicting with uncanny accuracy the hellish Maoist dystopia that would inevitably result from an Obama presidency. Letter from October 2012.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 6:01 PM on October 1, 2012 [6 favorites]

There is no "fair play" from these guys. You have to be vigilant, you have to call them out on their shit, and you cannot pull any punches. People screaming about it on the internet in some kind of "pile-on" is far, far less damaging than anything Mitt & Co. have been getting up to lately. Engaging in a dialogue with others about it isn't only justified; it's the least we can do.

Here's the thing, though. There's being vigilant and calling people on their shit and engaging in a dialogue, and then there's just pure meanspiritedness about it. There's a difference between nuanced exposes of policy, and people leaping on someone's bad jokes as evidence of their ignorance about how planes work. Or hoping that terrible fates happen to them or people who vote for them. And that does seem like not fair play. We're not extending the courtesy of understanding to other people and then we're complaining that it's not extended to us.

Interestingly, in Obama/Romney news, I just picked up my VFW magazine today, and it has identical questions prepared for Romney and Obama that they didn't have to agree to in advance. It had some interesting things that I was surprised to see: first, Romney is promising to go after the defense procurement waste, and allow suicidal veterans to see private mental health providers. Secondly, Obama is not taking changes to retiree pensions off the table, which is interesting given the language around union-busting and cutting pensions.
posted by corb at 6:04 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Remember, though, that the Republican big money men are for the most part rational actors who want to win, not lose heroically. If Romney seems like a lost cause they might throw their money at Congressional races or the state level instead.
posted by gerryblog at 12:33 PM on July 14

HuffPo today: Fox Business' Charlie Gasparino reports that some wealthy donors who have made financial commitments to the Romney campaign are reneging, and instead, opting to send their money to Republican House and Senate candidates who they see as having a better chance of winning next month.

If this thread becomes the longest thread, then I'm the new owner of MetaFilter, right? I'm certain that's how it works.
posted by gerryblog at 6:06 PM on October 1, 2012 [4 favorites]

CNN has obtained Romney's Talking Points for the Debates. I won't copy/paste all of them (it's a long list) but here are a few of them:

· Barack Obama doesn't have a record to run on or a plan for the future.

· In a second term, President Obama will keep piling on the taxes, regulations, and debt that have ground our recovery to a halt.

· President Obama continues to push for devastating tax increases that will kill more than 700,000 jobs.

· Mitt Romney will also reform the tax code to create millions of new jobs.

· Mitt Romney will provide the leadership needed to shape world events and protect our interests and our ideals.

· Mitt Romney will reverse the President's defense cuts, and he will never apologize for America.

Blah blah blah tax cut magic plus increase in Defense spending blah blah blah Sounds like he is just going to keep hitting the same old Republican shit even though clearly the American People are beginning to wise up to VooDoo economics. Also, Obama doesn't have a plan for the future? Riiiiight.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:15 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

There's being vigilant and calling people on their shit and engaging in a dialogue, and then there's just pure meanspiritedness about it. There's a difference between nuanced exposes of policy, and people leaping on someone's bad jokes as evidence of their ignorance about how planes work. Or hoping that terrible fates happen to them or people who vote for them. And that does seem like not fair play. We're not extending the courtesy of understanding to other people and then we're complaining that it's not extended to us.

Honestly, this seems like mountains to molehills stuff. I don't really see the equivalence between a presidential contender scoffing at the very idea that people feel entitled to food, and people perhaps deliberately misconstruing a joke about airplane windows. They're not even in the same ballpark.

Where Obama's platform and policy needs tightening up, the bald-faced predatory corporatism, obfuscation and contempt Romney's displaying - and in fact advocating - is again, not even in the same ballpark.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:17 PM on October 1, 2012 [4 favorites]

Those repub talking points are a disaster. Most of them a pure unicorns, but quite a few of them are just straight-up facepalms.

I mean,

o Mitt Romney will champion manufacturing jobs and bring them back to our shores.

Really? You really want to go there?
posted by unSane at 6:30 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh I forgot this talking Point:

Mitt Romney will champion manufacturing jobs and bring them back to our shores.

The fucking gall of this guy. How many jobs did Bain outsource? I know on the 47% video Romney talked about his factory in China where the girls worked for a "pittance" and they had to surround the place with barbed wire and guard towers to "keep people on the outside from coming in."

It's like the bank thief turning around and saying, "Hire me to be the bank guard."

Whoops, should have checked preview, unSane. But, damn that is pretty fucking outrageous. And it wouldn't be too smart to talk about outsourcing during the debates. Obama is kinda bright.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:33 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

CNN has obtained Romney's Talking Points for the Debates

I agree with unSane, those are just not really moving. And they don't seem to be underhanded or dogwhistly, so I doubt they are real. If Mitt actually sticks to those and doesn't say anything underhanded, I'll actually gain an ounce of respect for the guy. Because as it stands, he's just a jackass who wants to be president so he can strut around and bless the rich with even more wealth.

The "didn't build that" nonsense was when Mitt's reputation went way down for me. If he actually stayed above board and fought fair, he might actually gain back a little respect. So of course he won't.

It's going to be an interesting few days.
posted by cashman at 6:36 PM on October 1, 2012

If you haven't read the Rolling Stone article homunculus linked above, do that now.

posted by cashman at 6:40 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Secret Life of Gravy: "· Mitt Romney will reverse the President's defense cuts, and he will never apologize for America."

Reminds me of the "NAM VETS - NO REGRETS" bumper stickers I used to see as a kid. It's this belligerent posturing that can't be swayed by any display of facts. As Bertrand Russell said, "The fundamental cause of trouble in the modern world is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt".
posted by dunkadunc at 6:41 PM on October 1, 2012 [14 favorites]

I get a lot of these from azspot.

"Romney is so inordinately proud of his enormous wealth, which he mentions at every opportunity, that he apparently assumed it would command unquestioned respect from the masses. He’s been actively running for president for six years, but – even to the amazement of Fox News – it never occurred to him that it might not be terribly appealing to American voters that a potential president hoards his millions in the tax shelters of Switzerland and the Cayman Islands. Or that an election year in the midst of an economic recession might not be the moment to spend $12 million renovating his beach house in California, complete with an elevator for his cars. Or that perhaps his wife should have been encouraged to take up another hobby besides $400,000 dressage horses." ~ Eliot Weinberger
posted by cashman at 6:47 PM on October 1, 2012 [7 favorites]

Meanspirited? Compared to what, exactly? Those civic-minded and civil voices screaming bullshit from the right?
posted by spitbull at 6:48 PM on October 1, 2012 [4 favorites]

So, I got a little further into the New Yorker profile, and another thing that's real interesting is the reporter's contrast between Mitt the inept campaigner and Mitt the fluent business-speak guy. Man, he seems so comfortable in the latter role. And there's this ineffable thing about people that really comfortable in business speak -- I don't mean to slag off on people who are in to that, I recognize the merits of capitalism. But at the same time, I would go out of my way to avoid walking past NYU Stern Business School because the students there -- they just scared me. Not in a way I can articulate well.
posted by angrycat at 6:57 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

If you haven't read the Rolling Stone article homunculus linked above, do that now.

This might be old news to you guys, but still:

If you want to understand Romney's game plan, just look at what Republicans have been doing in Congress ...
Republicans in Congress have repeatedly put ideology before creating jobs. For more than a year, they've refused to put President Obama's jobs bill up for a vote, even though projections show it would create nearly 2 million jobs without adding a penny to the deficit. The reason? The $447 billion bill would be entirely paid for through a surtax on millionaires. ...
Last year, the House passed a bill that would broadly prohibit women from purchasing insurance plans that cover abortion. The so-called Protect Life Act would also allow hospitals to refuse a dying woman an abortion that would save her life. Ryan himself co-sponsored legislation that would have made it impossible for impoverished victims of rape and incest to receive abortions unless their assault met a narrow definition of "forcible rape." Under the bill's language, for instance, federal abortion coverage would be denied to a 12-year-old girl impregnated by a 40-year-old man, unless she could prove she fought back.

And cetera. This is like, every Dead Kennedys song ever written, times a hundred. "We've got a bigger problem now" indeed.

But when it comes to the debates themselves, I'm ambivalent. To me, they occupy a zone of almost pure spectacle, and don't seem to really influence the general election all that much. But they're fun to watch, and are good for hindsight examination of why things went one way or another. As predictors they seem unreliable at best.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 7:08 PM on October 1, 2012 [5 favorites]

angrycat: "I would go out of my way to avoid walking past NYU Stern Business School because the students there -- they just scared me. Not in a way I can articulate well."

I recently walked late at night in Boston behind what I could best describe as a couple of broski bankers from hell, about 24 or 25.

They were still dressed in their business clothes, stumbling along drunk and talking in Bro-speak "HAHAHAHA and she said she wanted 5% over 30 years!" and then they both started guffawing "FIVE PERCENT OVER THIRTY YEARS! HAR HAR HAR HAR!".

The sense of loathing and nausea I had was strong, If I could have pushed a magic button and made them vanish from this universe, I would have done so.
posted by dunkadunc at 7:09 PM on October 1, 2012

In October 2008, Focus on the Family wrote a letter depicting with uncanny accuracy the hellish Maoist dystopia that would inevitably result from an Obama presidency. Letter from October 2012.

That letter is just astounding; to be fair though, it's got to be hard to predict the future with such a tenuous grasp on the present day reality.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 7:12 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Those repub talking points are a disaster.

Those are not the real talking points. They can't be, because they're comically insane and won't fly with undecided voters. I'm guessing Team Romney is trying to put out false information in the hopes of surprising and tripping up Obama.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:13 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

Never thought I'd agree with Glenn Beck, but I have to admit--if Mitt Romney is elected president, I will definitely interpret that as God's finger.

Show us on the doll where God touched you.
posted by murphy slaw at 7:25 PM on October 1, 2012 [10 favorites]

Maybe Romney has been playing "bad cop" to Obama's "good cop", to make Obama's abuses look tame.

If Romney takes a fall, Obama gets another four years and the drone strikes, assassinations, domestic spying, war without Congressional approval, et cetera. If Romney wins, well, they just hit the jackpot.

Edit: Why I Refuse To Vote For Barack Obama (responses)
posted by dunkadunc at 7:26 PM on October 1, 2012

I'm with Brandon Blatcher, even as incompetent as the Romney campaign team has seemed to be, I can't believe they would let their debate plans be leaked. It seems more likely that this is their idea of an October Surprise (let's release our FAKE talking points on Monday, but really we'll have DIFFERENT talking points on Wednesday, and they'll NEVER SEE THAT COMING). Uhhh, right.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 7:41 PM on October 1, 2012

Trump Advises Romney To Ask Birther Question At Debate
"In debate, @mittromney should ask Obama why autobiography states "born in Kenya, raised in Indonesia."
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 1, 2012
WTF? In what book is Obama claiming he was born in Kenya?!

The dick has been on the birther topic for a long time. As recently as August 6, Trump claimed "An 'extremely credible source' has called my office and told me that @BarackObama's birth certificate is a fraud." Yes, via Twitter. Totally legit there. But hey, it means more publicity for the real estate mogul and outspoken star of "Celebrity Apprentice". Did someone bring up Obama's birth certificate again? Call up Trump for a bonus sound bite! He's completely sane, versus the "crazy" birthers, right? He's only crazy rich, not actually insane, right? Right?
posted by filthy light thief at 7:42 PM on October 1, 2012

If Romney takes a fall, Obama gets another four years and the drone strikes, assassinations, domestic spying, war without Congressional approval, et cetera...

I've been playing a private drinking game whenever someone brings up this (IMO tired and useless) argument whenever Obama's name is mentioned.

I died of alcohol poisoning 18 months ago.
posted by billyfleetwood at 7:42 PM on October 1, 2012 [8 favorites]

Gosh, Trump's let his comb-over go grey.
posted by de at 7:52 PM on October 1, 2012

He's only ~~crazy rich~~ a shameless publicity person-of-negotiable-virtue, not actually insane, right?
posted by jaduncan at 7:57 PM on October 1, 2012

Fun fact: if this thread is to top the Palin longboat, we'll need to average about 100 comments per day.

Quick tally via rss... you're doing fine, don't give up.

212 Tue Oct 2
127 Mon Oct 1
92 Sun Sep 30
236 Sat Sep 29
167 Fri Sep 28
170 Thu Sep 27
199 Wed Sep 26
169 Tue Sep 25
209 Mon Sep 24
172 Sun Sep 23
355 Sat Sep 22
324 Fri Sep 21
298 Thu Sep 20
567 Wed Sep 19
662 Tue Sep 18
posted by adamt at 8:10 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Damn, you're right. Romney's just a straw man to make Obama look good. After all, what the fuck has Obama really done so far? (Sadly, some of those things are now a bit dated, like the order to close Guantanamo Bay facility, given the subsequent blockages to this order, from the Senate and such).

Just wondering, who was the last president that was 100% made of unicorns and goodness? Running a country that is tangled in two wars, amongst other things, makes it a bit harder to completely halt combat-related activities. And are US actions in Libya really something held against Obama? I've forgotten that. And I'll agree that the sharp rise in warrantless electronic surveillance under Obama's administration is alarming, but the majority of requests seem to be for metadata, the "who" of communications, not the "what." Bad, and it should stop, but not terrible. That HuffPo article likened it to Target's use of shopping habits to figure out if someone is pregnant. Sure, the Government can listen to more communications than Target, but I don't think it's as dire a situation as it sounds in the headlines. Again, I'm not in support of such information tracking without appropriate clearance and tracking of these actions, but the internet isn't being "tapped" like a bugged phone line.

EDIT: thanks for the tallies, adamt
posted by filthy light thief at 8:11 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

There's already a Presidential Cookie Bake-off.

Michelle Obama wins cookie contest!
posted by Bokmakierie at 8:19 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Michelle Obama wins cookie contest!: "Obama’s white and dark chocolate chip cookies won with 51.5 percent."

...sometimes I find it hard to think that the Obama PR people don't just troll racists for their own amusement.
posted by jaduncan at 8:23 PM on October 1, 2012 [24 favorites]

Michelle Obama wins cookie contest!

This made me inordinately happy...much like cookies.
posted by sallybrown at 8:24 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

(Also, countdown to "BUT SHE WON'T LET THE POOR STARVING VEGETABLE-HATING CHILDREN EAT THE COOKIES" in 3...2...)
posted by sallybrown at 8:28 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Michelle Obama wins cookie contest!

Wut? Is this presidential bake-off a Thing now?
posted by the cydonian at 8:30 PM on October 1, 2012

White and dark cookies. How considerate.
posted by de at 8:30 PM on October 1, 2012

the cydonian: Wut? Is this presidential bake-off a Thing now?

They are Family Circle bake-offs, in which there was even some cookie drama in 2008!
posted by filthy light thief at 8:35 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Did anybody see the Simpsons yesterday? I never watch that show, but I did, and in the intro, you could see them running through a day care, past a sign that said DON'T SHARE YOUR CARROTS! and then they got to the front and you could see on the door it said Ayn Rand Day Care Center.
posted by cashman at 8:38 PM on October 1, 2012 [6 favorites]

filthy light thief: "Damn, you're right. Romney's just a straw man to make Obama look good. After all, what the fuck has Obama really done so far? (Sadly, some of those things are now a bit dated, like the order to close Guantanamo Bay facility, given the subsequent blockages to this order, from the Senate and such). "

The persecution of whistleblowers, the drone strikes, assassinations, spying on dissidents, et cetera are dealbreakers for me.

I get a creepy feeling when I hear Obama talk about standing up for justice, working things out peacefully, et cetera and I've figured out why- it's because he's not being sincere. He's lying. How does having a list of people to extrajudicially murder fit in with all of Obama's talk of peace?

Obama's abuses are too evil for me to vote for him.
posted by dunkadunc at 8:39 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Your threshold for "too evil" and mine are different, it seems.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:42 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

Wut? Is this presidential bake-off a Thing now?

A lot of people thought Carter was on his way to slam-dunk the 1980 election when his peanut butter caramel chewies easily trounced Reagan's uninspired and pedestrian oatmeal-prune balls.

Obama's abuses are too evil for me to vote for him.

Fair enough, though I wonder what that's worth if it contributes to enabling a greater evil to take over for him.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 8:45 PM on October 1, 2012 [6 favorites]

I've often wondered, as a politically-interested geek, if it would be possible to lead a large nation while maintaining one's alignment on the 'good' side of the spectrum. I can't think of a single leader in modern history who didn't take some action during their tenure that would have made any DM revoke paladin status.
posted by MrVisible at 8:50 PM on October 1, 2012 [6 favorites]

Generously assuming that Family Circle aren't just sexist, there's an interesting alternate universe where Bill Clinton was unexpectedly required to provide a cookie recipe.
posted by jaduncan at 8:52 PM on October 1, 2012 [4 favorites]

there's an interesting alternate universe where Bill Clinton was unexpectedly required to provide a cookie recipe.

Let's see what happens in 2016!
posted by NailsTheCat at 8:55 PM on October 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Noam Chomsky on How Progressives Should Approach Election 2012
posted by homunculus at 9:00 PM on October 1, 2012 [7 favorites]

"Romney: “There are 47 percent who are with [Obama], who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it.” To Romney, these are things we can do without so the state can give rich people more tax breaks (and build a bigger military).

In 50 years, the Republicans have gone from building the middle class with the aid of government to admonishing the middle class for utilizing government. At the RNC the speakers who mentioned their family’s economic rise actually showcased the government programs they now oppose: Chris Christie’s father took advantage of the GI bill; Paul Ryan went to college using his father’s Social Security; Romney’s family (according to his mother) was on welfare when they came back from Mexico. It goes to the core of the GOP message this year: We’re not going to cut your benefits—just the other guy’s. With the fine print: Also we’re going to have to cut your benefits." ~

(And another republican who showcased.)
posted by cashman at 9:02 PM on October 1, 2012 [7 favorites]

homunculus, I just wanted to say that I really appreciate how you drop in late in threads everyone else has moved on from and add relevant links.
posted by dunkadunc at 9:03 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

Noam Chomsky on How Progressives Should Approach Election 2012

For those who aren't able click through, Chomsky says Vote for Obama if you live in a swing state. "Vote against Romney-Ryan, which means voting for Obama".
posted by cashman at 9:05 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

This thread hasn't been "moved on from," it's just losing some eyeballs to the big Meta thread for the mother of all ponies.

Giddy-up.
posted by Skygazer at 9:09 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Marisa Stole the Precious Thing: "Does this come bundled with the assumption that anyone voting for Obama doesn't care about these things? You don't honestly believe that, do you?"

They think they care. But when asked "Do you approve of drone warfare?" or "do you approve of the extrajudicial killing of American citizens?" many find a way to justify it- meaning that no, they do not care about these things.
posted by dunkadunc at 9:15 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

" If two candidates favored a return to slavery, or wanted to stone adulterers, you wouldn't cast your ballot for the one with the better position on health care."

Sure we would. Did it for centuries, even. Progress never comes in clean.
posted by Miko at 9:24 PM on October 1, 2012 [17 favorites]

But when asked "Do you approve of drone warfare?" or "do you approve of the extrajudicial killing of American citizens?" many find a way to justify it- meaning that no, they do not care about these things.

And the only expression of that opinion is how you vote in a presidential election?

I doubt I'm going to sway you on this, but just to clarify where I'm coming from here - yes, I actually do care about these things. There's a school of progressive thought wherein the best possible outcome of a presidential election is the lesser of two mainstream evils, and the worst outcome is pretty much whatever crap the GOP can come up with. You cast your once-every-four-years ballot for the less shitty candidate as a stop-gap measure for the White House while simultaneously campaigning for third parties to get into offices closer to the grassoots, building a base that can eventually reach the White House. Worked out pretty well for the Republicans.

If you believe Obama and Romney are essentially the same, that's one thing. But at least give some of us a little more credit than "voting for Obama, must not care about universal civil rights".
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 9:26 PM on October 1, 2012 [11 favorites]

That was one of the most illogically, sloppily constructed essays I've ever read. Sophomoric throughout.
posted by Miko at 9:31 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Anyone under the age of 34 has never had a chance to vote for an incumbent Democrat. Does that apply to you, duncadunc?
posted by benito.strauss at 9:34 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Now Nate's just playing with your emotions.
posted by cashman at 9:42 PM on October 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

If two candidates favored a return to slavery, or wanted to stone adulterers, you wouldn't cast your ballot for the one with the better position on health care." In other words, certain things are just dealbreakers."

For you, I guess. Do you honestly think the vast majority of people who vote for Obama want the President of the United States to be responsible for killing humans? Because I sure don't.

I can't find a source for you, but I saw an exchange online that boiled down to "We're fucked either way" / "If you believe that's true, then you vote for the guy who will let you purchase Plan B in the morning."

Not voting=voting for the worse evil. Period. And if you're okay with actively working towards the election of Mitt Romney to the office of President of the United States, then you go right ahead and stay away from the polls. Meantime I'll be casting my vote in the real world, where we have to deal with all the ugliness and try to push back against the worst of it.
posted by tzikeh at 9:47 PM on October 1, 2012 [16 favorites]

The difference between my definition of 'too evil' and many American liberals' definition of 'too evil' is that I value the lives of foreigners just as much as I do those of Americans, and I'm actually serious about civil and human rights being universal things, not just for people who I agree with.

I'm a liberal who is serious about those things too, but I also try to be somewhat realistic about the world I live in and the options it offers. Do I think Drone strikes are terrible? Yes I do, but I'm not going to close my eyes to the fact that at worst drone strikes have killed half as many people in the past 8 years than were killed in the first month of the Iraq war under the last administrations completely insane "Shock and Awe" strategy.

What one person sees as evil, I see as a President prosecuting an inherited war in as pragmatic a way as possible and accepting the responsibility of the bad choices that go along with that job. And there's nothing that he has said or done, or that anyone else has shown me to make me believe that If Obama had taken office in a time of peace that his agenda would have been "drone strikes and war in Afghanistan".

If I'm being naive, please show me any evidence that given the realistic choice between preserving lives and taking them, he chose to take lives. And there's no switch to just turn off a war, especially one that's been going on as long as this one has, so I have trouble believing "do nothing" is a realistic choice.

Has he made some bad choices? Yes he has. But there's no evidence that he relishes those choices, which to me is where the "evil" line is drawn.

I personally think that the 2008 campaign criticism of Obama was pretty spot-on. He lacked the experience that one would want in a President inheriting 2 wars and an economic disaster. As they say, "mistakes were made". I also think you can probably count on one hand the number of people in this country capable of taking on that task and doing even half as well as he's done so far. When you finished counting you'd probably have a couple of fingers left. I think he's shown humility and a willingness to learn and adapt. I honestly believe that he'll be a better president in his second term while still falling short on a lot of things I care about.
posted by billyfleetwood at 10:00 PM on October 1, 2012 [27 favorites]

Question: are there likely to be fewer, equal, or more innocent people killed and or tortured in war under an Obama presidency compared to a Romney presidency? Is 1 life lost is morally equivalent to 1000 or 100,000 lives lost, merely because it's difficult to contemplate numbers when it comes to lives? When faced with a tough choice, refusing to choose at all is cowardly, not admirable. I have absolutely no sympathy or patience for those that think seeing the world in stark black and white, who can only contemplate binary yes/no questions, or think that such simplistic views are ethical. To hell with that addle-mindedness. Sometimes I think that people choose an overly simplistic worldview because it allows them to believe something strongly about difficult and complex situations that would otherwise require balancing conflicting views, and it feels good and right to believe very strongly. But strong beliefs are not inherently better than other beliefs, they're merely more self-indulgent.
posted by Llama-Lime at 10:01 PM on October 1, 2012 [12 favorites]

Sometimes I think that people choose an overly simplistic worldview because it allows them to believe something strongly about difficult and complex situations that would otherwise require balancing conflicting views

Yes. Well said, Llama-Lime.

Isn't that life anyway? Do I take the job with better pay but longer hours and crappy coworkers, or the job with lower pay but better hours and nice but incompetent coworkers? Should I live in this state with no income taxes but a lower paying job I'd have to commute to or this one where I'd have to live in a rough area and sell my car but I have a clearer path at a promotion? Should I marry this man who has a great job but problems with impulse control when it comes to spending? Or marry this guy who has a blue collar job but swears he's going to go back to school?

Unless you're a kid you do not go around demanding the near perfect thing in every situation and then pouting with your vote when you cannot have it. This is real life, and there are essentially 2 choices in about a month from now.

Back to the 47% comments.

Businessweek:

96% of Americans have benefited from government help at some time, including from breaks in the tax code, according to Suzanne Mettler, a professor of government at Cornell University and John Sides, an associate political science professor at George Washington University.

The remaining 4%? Most are young adults who don’t qualify for most government programs, they say.

“You might get to a point in midlife where you think, ‘I’m one of the earners, not one of the takers,’” Mettler said in an interview. “In fact, your life has long been affected by the social policies you were able to use early in life."

posted by cashman at 10:18 PM on October 1, 2012 [9 favorites]

"They think they care. But when asked "Do you approve of drone warfare?" or "do you approve of the extrajudicial killing of American citizens?" many find a way to justify it- meaning that no, they do not care about these things."

The problem with this kinda high toned sanctimony is that the response is too easy: If you care so much, why are you commenting on a website? Obviously, commenting on a website is more important to you than the lives of foreign babies or whatever abstract sympathy bucket we're using today. QED.

Or, if you're not a moron, you realize that sometimes you can care about more than one thing, and that it's rational to try to affect things you have more control over rather than less, especially when the action you're taking is a symbolic gesture in private. It's some deluded form of self-loathing liberal prayer, and just about as effective.
posted by klangklangston at 11:20 PM on October 1, 2012 [5 favorites]

And just to be clear, I have no problem with Chomsky's advice to vote Green for president (watch out on those downticket races though) unless you're in a swing state. I just feel like it's not an effective gesture at all, and hectoring other people about not hewing to your simplistic world view is bullshit.
posted by klangklangston at 11:23 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

> The persecution of whistleblowers, the drone strikes, assassinations, spying on dissidents, et cetera are dealbreakers for me.

I get a creepy feeling when I hear Obama talk about standing up for justice, working things out peacefully, et cetera and I've figured out why- it's because he's not being sincere. He's lying. How does having a list of people to extrajudicially murder fit in with all of Obama's talk of peace?

Obama's abuses are too evil for me to vote for him.

You're correct, of course, duncadunc, but to vote for Obama is necessarily to be an Obama-apologist.

It was rumoured in Australia that Obama was instrumental in Gillard overthrowing Rudd. There were some WikiLeaks cables that supported the theory that the US endorsed Gillard for its own ends.

Gillard and Obama now work closely implementing Rudd's philosophies (to the benefit of the US). I'm not so sure Rudd would have included the US in Australia's Asia Pacific Community - we'll never know.

Rudd was Australia's most popularly elected Prime Minister in decades, in fact - I think - THE most popular person to be elected Prime Minister. Gillard is the most unpopular Prime Minister, ever. (She remains unelected by the Australian people, forced to lead a hung parliament.) She's greatly disliked.

But Gillard is quite an ambitious, and pragmatic person with a stronghold on slim power, and I like to think Obama has bitten off more than he can chew with Gillard. She bows to no-one. Time will tell.

Meanwhile we're all apologists for what little time remains of white male supremacy. ('Power corrupts' is always a given.) Vote Obama. It's the Asia Pacific Century, what could possibly go wrong? :)
posted by de at 11:29 PM on October 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

It's ironic that people who pride themselves on their savvy and financial acumen have so completely bought into the philosophy of trickle-down/supply-side economics. In my experiences (both from public statements and from private conversations), it's not a case of "I have weighed the alternatives and this makes the most sense to me," as would befit their self-proclaimed skepticism. No, it is an absolute economic law from which all other economic behavior is derived.

The obvious conflict of interest — that such policies conveniently serve themselves — is easily waved aside by the Randian notion that their interests are the world's interests. "I am successful, therefore what makes me successful is right."... it's not even a circular argument, as that would imply that it goes somewhere before returning to the start. It goes nowhere. It is intellectual loitering.

Its most prominent proponents seem to be those individuals who would describe themselves as "my own boss." Business owners both large and small, and people in the financial industry (who may technically have a boss, but who operate with far greater autonomy than the average employee and who are primarily rewarded from the spoils of their own deals).

And that, in my view, is the environment in which these ideas can grow. The common theme, I think, is that those are the jobs where there's a good chance that you'll benefit more from shortchanging others than from helping them.* Cutting payroll costs through downsizing or outsourcing. Using cheaper materials or offshoring manufacturing. Corporate raiding.

^* That's not the only influence, obviously. There are certainly companies occupying different niches, such as hiring premium talent, or earning customer loyalty with high-quality products, or being a goddamned talented trader who can recognize and recommend a great investment opportunity. All I'm saying is that there's a threshold at which "running a more profitable business" can diverge from "running a better business."

And I think that's the spore. It takes root the first time you, as "your own boss," make a decision that benefits you at someone else's expense. It can be trivial (savings to you and an insignificant cost to each individual customer) or abstract (you're not hurting a person, just a competing company), because that's not the point. The point is that you are no longer following orders, so you can no longer defer the responsibility to someone else.

The ultimate irony is that, in my opinion, "self-interest as a virtue" mostly develops among people who truly want to be virtuous. As the exception that proves the rule, I've dealt with several people who approach their jobs with an unapologetic kill-or-be-killed mentality, but (therefore?) believe that there should be major checks on selfish behavior. But for those who believe themselves to be fundamentally decent, Randianism offers a coping mechanism. It gives them the ability to reconcile their desire to do good, with the fact that sometimes they don't.

That, incidentally, is why private charity is often proposed as the alternative to governmental safety nets. Indeed, many of those individuals are very charitable (and even more consider themselves very charitable). What they don't notice, or don't acknowledge, is the collective tunnel vision associated with private charity. "Popular" charities will receive far more attention than "ugly" ones:

Causes with good marketing, or that benefit from word-of-mouth because they affect the wealthy, e.g. various cancers.
Causes that subtly reinforce the view of oneself as a philanthropist. I think much of the charity targeted towards Africa falls into this category, perhaps because it assuages subconscious guilt about western nations' abuses, but without the baggage of admitting fault.
Stuff Rich People Like: lots of funding for the Arts, not so much for edgy or controversial art unless it's considered "fun" controversy.
Religious charities, drawing either from genuine devotion, or from cultural pressure, or from the convenience of Helping without having to figure out who actually needs help.

Meanwhile, not so much with the aid for:

Causes you can't brag about in Polite Society or that may be a liability in the future, such as pro-choice advocacy, mental health issues, or (for a long time) AIDS research.
Issues that are beneath rich people's radar, such as prison rape, or needle exchange, or even basic preventative health care.
"Quagmire" problems without an obvious "money → solution" avenue. There's no shortage of examples here, but the essence is captured by "I shouldn't give you money, because you'll probably just spend it on booze."

Note: I apologize if I've offended you with any of these examples. I don't mean to represent myself as a particularly good judge of the merits of particular causes. No one should treat my examples with any more weight than "a guy on the internet said this."

Moving on: in case you've never observed it, people undergoing cognitive dissonance get extremely sensitive when they're called on it. That leads us to our next topic, which is the serious persecution complex epidemic among these folks. It is hilarious to hear bankers, privileged beyond human imagining and eager to boast about their brave deeds on the corporate battlefield, turn right around and say that they'd totes want to help the little guy if stupid meanie Obama didn't hurt their feelings.

But it doesn't stop there, because it didn't start with Obama. You can't be persecuted without a persecutor, and when you feel you're being attacked for your success then you're going to strike back against the unsuccessful. That's where we get the characterization of the poor as lazy freeloaders. Not even just the poor; anyone less successful than you are has a reason to resent your success. You can even go as high as, say, 47% of people who will never get over their irrational jealousy.

All of the above may be informative, but it's all just annotations of the original problem. In 2012, in America, no one is their own boss. You may feel you built a business from the ground up, but your success is not just your own. It is also your customers', and of the societal infrastructure you may not realize you enjoyed. When you started out, you didn't build either of those, but they definitely built you.

Well, now it's time to pay up, and even the most strident taxation advocates aren't asking for an even trade. Everyone wants you to enjoy the fruits of your success because that's what you've earned. The fruits. Not the tree. Or if you'd prefer an alternate metaphor: no one's saying you can't be the at the top of the pyramid; all we're saying is how silly it is to imagine you constructed a pyramid from the top down.

You are not a job creator. You alone did not build that. I'm sorry if this is hard to hear, but even a cursory reflection should reveal the unique opportunities you were afforded that enabled your success in the first place.

...okay, now I'm addressing people who aren't going to read this, so I'll step back. How do we get this message out?

Well, some of these people may actually come to their senses when their blind spots are pointed out to them. So we should keep doing that. However, that will drive others further away. Those individuals will perceive any criticism of their beliefs as a personal attack, and nothing we say will convince them otherwise. They do, however, respect their peers and superiors (a consequence of the success=merit philosophy). So, getting a few allies among the highest echelons can be an umbrella for like-minded individuals, and maybe serve as role models to others.

If those strategies sound familiar, it's because that's basically what's been happening with Occupy flanking from one side and the Buffett Rule from the other. These things are being effective.

It's easy to become discouraged when you see the extremist rhetoric from the right wing. I often am. But I honestly believe that it's a desperate attempt to make up in fringe enthusiasm what they're losing in broad support. That would probably be a losing long-term strategy anyway, but especially so when that fringe's demographics are dwindling so rapidly.

That's not to say we can sit on our asses. Between incumbency advantages, the veto, the filibuster, the bully pulpit and lifetime Supreme Court appointments, it's important to put every effort into resisting extremism in every election.

Make no mistake, Romney is an extremist. He will say or do whatever is necessary to advance his poisonous economic views (fortunately for us, he doesn't seem to be very good at it). He exhibits all the characteristic "litheness" on social issues, whatever's necessary to make him the "electable" one and to provide cover to trickleist policies. He will happily advance or abandon social progress, in exchange for political currency for his real priorities of enriching the already-rich.

I'll let you draw your own conclusions about which party will be more likely to make that trade.

I mean damn, not to dwell on it, but if there was ever an archetype for that world it's him. Born on third and thinks he hit a triple. Devout member of a religious community that not only doesn't judge him harshly for his wealth, it eagerly embraces it. Describes his predatory business practices as "creative destruction." Is it any wonder that he finally seemed easygoing and natural when he was caught speaking to the ultra-rich about how the poor were out to get him?
posted by Riki tiki at 11:51 PM on October 1, 2012 [41 favorites]

96% of Americans have benefited from government help at some time, including from breaks in the tax code, according to Suzanne Mettler, a professor of government at Cornell University and John Sides, an associate political science professor at George Washington University.

These sorts of statistics are quoted a lot, but the thing is, it's only to Democrats that these things are remotely the same. For many others, there is a huge difference between "the government gives you piles of cash for doing nothing but be born" 'government help', and "the government gives you a thing because of something you sacrificed or did". There's also an enormous difference between "the government gives you additional money" and "the government refrains from taking an obscenely large chunk of your money." In other words, a tax break is not the same as a hand-out. Nor is welfare the same thing as the GI bill.

And just to be clear, I have no problem with Chomsky's advice to vote Green for president (watch out on those downticket races though) unless you're in a swing state. I just feel like it's not an effective gesture at all, and hectoring other people about not hewing to your simplistic world view is bullshit.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
posted by corb at 12:18 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

If Romney takes a fall, Obama gets another four years and the drone strikes,

Obama set precedent with Drone Killings for Romney to become Terminator-in-Chief
posted by homunculus at 12:32 AM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

This thread hasn't been "moved on from," it's just losing some eyeballs to the big Meta thread for the mother of all ponies.

Pony!
posted by homunculus at 12:33 AM on October 2, 2012

In other words, a tax break is not the same as a hand-out. Nor is welfare the same thing as the GI bill.

The statistic you're attempting to debunk merely states that 96% have benefited from government help. All of the examples you mentioned do indeed benefit the recipient. The reasons, eligibility, who earned it, and who didn't might differ but they are all still benefits.

In a country where taxes are the law of the land, a government check and a tax subsidy are exactly the same thing. Maybe those distinctions apply out in international waters where pirate law is king, but here in the USA, taxes means it's not all "your" money. You can argue the rates, you can argue the methods, but until this country abolishes taxes altogether, some portion of every dollar that changes hands belongs to the man.

I don't believe that because I'm a Democrat. I believe that because I accept the rule of law as a foundation of our society.
posted by billyfleetwood at 1:05 AM on October 2, 2012 [11 favorites]

unSane: "Those repub talking points are a disaster. Most of them a pure unicorns, but quite a few of them are just straight-up facepalms.

I mean,
o Mitt Romney will champion manufacturing jobs and bring them back to our shores."

You're not suggesting that Mitt might perhaps be exaggerating, are you? Surely only a guy like Obama would do that (what with the god thing and stuff).
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 1:23 AM on October 2, 2012

For many others, there is a huge difference between "the government gives you piles of cash for doing nothing but be born", 'government help', and "the government gives you a thing because of something you sacrificed or did".

Just so we understand each other, could you give examples of where a government gives anyone piles of cash for "doing nothing but be born"? The only example I can think of are the baby bonus schemes various international governments have enacted over the years, but can think of none in an American context.
posted by the cydonian at 1:25 AM on October 2, 2012

the cydonian: "For many others, there is a huge difference between "the government gives you piles of cash for doing nothing but be born", 'government help', and "the government gives you a thing because of something you sacrificed or did".

Just so we understand each other, could you give examples of where a government gives anyone piles of cash for "doing nothing but be born"? The only example I can think of are the baby bonus schemes various international governments have enacted over the years, but can think of none in an American context."

corb is rather gracelessly attempting to describe the children of welfare recipients. The additional coda for 'piles of cash for doing nothing but being born' is 'into a family that, for some reason, is in receipt of benefits'. Said reason can range from lack of available jobs to disability to horrific personal histories and mental ill health. But the kids, you see, they just had to be born.
posted by Happy Dave at 1:32 AM on October 2, 2012 [10 favorites]

The child tax credit benefits people with piles of cash for having children. But a lot of right-wing people eagerly take advantage of that, so it must be all right.
posted by Miko at 2:03 AM on October 2, 2012 [8 favorites]

corb is rather gracelessly attempting to describe the children of welfare recipients. The additional coda for 'piles of cash for doing nothing but being born' is 'into a family that, for some reason, is in receipt of benefits'.

No, that is not what I'm talking about at all. But it does speak to your own prejudices that you leap to those assumptions. I don't blame anyone for their family of birth.

Just so we understand each other, could you give examples of where a government gives anyone piles of cash for "doing nothing but be born"?

Sure. A more accurate statement would maybe be "doing nothing but be born (in America)" Things like SSI (which, unlike SSD, doesn't require anyone to have paid into the system) Pure welfare, which now that Obama has issued his directive, no longer requires anyone to perform any positive action in order to receive. Medicaid, which requires a negative rather than a positive action. (To be clear, I'm not using moral terms here, but just absence/presence of action) Now, it can certainly argued that these things are given for circumstances beyond just "being born," but those circumstances are not activities that require positive action. So someone might receive one of these for being poor or disabled, but that wasn't a positive action they took.

So for example, (whether or not I agree with them personally), unemployment insurance is not "doing nothing," because you had to work to gain them. Same with Social Security and most Medicare. Workman's comp isn't doing nothing, because again, you had to work to gain them.
posted by corb at 2:12 AM on October 2, 2012

So How Did That Whole "Lesser of Two Evils" Thing Work Out For You in 2000?

I'm a little nonplussed that it's suddenly become a thing to write about whether any self-respecting liberal can vote to reelect Barack Obama, given that he's a warmonger who kills innocent Muslims with his drone attacks. The reason I'm nonplussed is that this meme got kicked off by a piece written last week by Conor Friedersdorf in the Atlantic, and Conor isn't a liberal. Of course he's not thrilled about the prospect of voting for Obama. Not only does he dislike Obama's foreign policy, but he doesn't like Obama's domestic policy either

posted by the man of twists and turns at 2:28 AM on October 2, 2012 [6 favorites]

corb: "No, that is not what I'm talking about at all. But it does speak to your own prejudices that you leap to those assumptions. I don't blame anyone for their family of birth.

No, but you sure seem keen to strip benefits from people who you believe haven't made a 'positive action' to earn them.

Sure. A more accurate statement would maybe be "doing nothing but be born (in America)" Things like SSI (which, unlike SSD, doesn't require anyone to have paid into the system) Pure welfare, which now that Obama has issued his directive, no longer requires anyone to perform any positive action in order to receive."

SSI Definition: The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program pays benefits to disabled adults and children who have limited income and resources.

How is that not a family in receipt of benefits? Are you saying if someone is born into a family where the parent or parents can't work or have very low income, they should be... what? Left to fend for themselves?

People are born into circumstances outside their control, by definition. Families fracture for all sorts of reasons, people are unable to work for all sorts of reasons. There are genuine cases of people literally unable to contribute a thing to the societies they are born into. While the vast majority of people have the ability to find work, a humane society cannot make all welfare spending contingent on your 'positive action', simply because a few will not be able to make that action. It is not just or fair to discount those people or use them as an excuse to trim away the safety net below everyone else.

Put it another way. A social safety net should act, for most, as a trampoline - something that catches you and (eventually) springs you back up into wage-earning. But for some it will be the essential support that lets them have any sort of life at all.

I must say I really don't understand what position you are taking, corb. You seem determined to minimise every criticism of or incident involving Republicans in this thread, while making blanket assertions about how worried you are about welfare spending and America's dreadful descent into Big Government Control of Everything. If you're seeking to come off as the fair-minded independent libertarian, you're failing.
posted by Happy Dave at 3:17 AM on October 2, 2012 [21 favorites]

Pure welfare, which now that Obama has issued his directive, no longer requires anyone to perform any positive action in order to receive.

This is just a straight-up lie. It's been debunked by every single nonpartisan fact-checking organization out there.
posted by zombieflanders at 3:50 AM on October 2, 2012 [25 favorites]

This is just a straight-up lie. It's been debunked by every single nonpartisan fact-checking organization out there.

Yes, as well as explained publicly by the administration on multiple occasions. Corb, have you considered that some of the intensity of your world view has been produced by your information sources?
posted by jaduncan at 4:07 AM on October 2, 2012 [8 favorites]

That's setting aside other welfare measures that we accept people are born into but which offer considerable societal benefits such as, oh, primary education and vaccination.
posted by jaduncan at 4:30 AM on October 2, 2012

It's a lot easier to have a hateful worldview when you have no particularly accurate view of the world.
posted by Pope Guilty at 4:40 AM on October 2, 2012 [13 favorites]

I'm not so sure Rudd would have included the US in Australia's Asia Pacific Community - we'll never know.

Is there a particular reason why he wouldn't? The U.S. is, to put it mildly, a major Pacific power and is focusing more attention on the region all the time.
posted by psoas at 4:45 AM on October 2, 2012

Generously assuming that Family Circle aren't just sexist, there's an interesting alternate universe where Bill Clinton was unexpectedly required to provide a cookie recipe.

If it were pre-concerned-with-health Bill Clinton, I imagine it simultaneously being the greatest and the most horrible cookie ever. "All right, I call this the Arkansas Biscotti... first you get yourself a huge heaping of pure lard, some flour, some brown sugar, some sugar sugar, some more sugar, and listen up because this is the important part: A hot dog, a couple slices of pizza..."

Edit: Lasted till my second whole comment until I needed to fix a typo!
posted by Flunkie at 4:47 AM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

Is there a particular reason why he wouldn't? The U.S. is, to put it mildly, a major Pacific power and is focusing more attention on the region all the time.

The only other major Western power is Australia, of course, and it has a soft-influence competition with both China and the US over the Pacific islands and SE Asia. From that perspective it's good to deny the US a seat at the table if possible.
posted by jaduncan at 4:49 AM on October 2, 2012

Ah yes, the dick-waggling theory of diplomacy.
posted by psoas at 5:00 AM on October 2, 2012

Ah yes, the dick-waggling theory of diplomacy.

It isn't just that. I have an economist friend who worked on the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (represents most of the island states) negotiating trade deals with Australia and NZ. By all accounts, before she turned up it was largely the Australians turning up and saying sign here to hand over your mineral rights in return for aid; she measured the success of her work by how much their delegation hated her.

Not having competing offers has been a big advantage for Australia in several areas.
posted by jaduncan at 5:12 AM on October 2, 2012

Naturally, and as usual, I feel compelled to point out that spending estimates for TANF, i.e. what we used to call welfare, in 2012 amounts to $16.5 billion, or less than half of one percent of the U.S. federal budget. In fact, for 2012 the entirety of the top level category labeled "Welfare" on usgovernmentspending.com, which includes TANF, SNAP, SSI, free school lunches, unemployment, Section 8 housing, what's left of TARP, and both the Earned Income and Child tax credits where the payment exceeds tax liability, among other things, comes to $451.9 billion, or approximately 12% of the federal budget, a reduction of $43.7 billion from 2011. For comparison, defense spending for the same period is expected to be $902.2 billion or 24%, i.e. approximately twice what is spent by the federal government on soi-disant welfare.
posted by ob1quixote at 5:50 AM on October 2, 2012 [17 favorites]

Wasn't the child tax credit introduced by a Bush?
posted by rtha at 6:02 AM on October 2, 2012

ob1quixote: "Naturally, and as usual, I feel compelled to point out that spending estimates for TANF, i.e. what we used to call welfare, in 2012 amounts to $16.5 billion, or less than half of one percent of the U.S. federal budget. In fact, for 2012 the entirety of the top level category labeled "Welfare" on usgovernmentspending.com, which includes TANF, SNAP, SSI, free school lunches, unemployment, Section 8 housing, what's left of TARP, and both the Earned Income and Child tax credits where the payment exceeds tax liability, among other things, comes to $451.9 billion, or approximately 12% of the federal budget, a reduction of $43.7 billion from 2011. For comparison, defense spending for the same period is expected to be $902.2 billion or 24%, i.e. approximately twice what is spent by the federal government on soi-disant welfare."

To put this another way, the US military spends more money air-conditioning mobile field headquarters around the world than the entire TANF budget.
posted by Happy Dave at 6:19 AM on October 2, 2012 [24 favorites]

nope. it was under Clinton. 1997.
posted by liza at 6:25 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

after perusing Mitt Romney's tax returns I quipped he'd earned the title of Welfare Queen. you go through those papers and there's forms for just $8 in some tax-credit or another. EIGHT FRIGGIN' DOLLARS. and that's just for 2 years. there's nothing there for years prior to 2010, so we don't know if the guy paid a fine to the IRS in lieu of going to jail for STEALING TAX MONEY by squirreling it in secret bank accounts around the world.

the guy doesn't have a job. he made almost 200K just giving speeches. he earned over $20million just out of his so-called trust fund. and his real tax burden isn't 14%, it's 9%.

Romney doesn't work enough to just have a 9% burden that allows him to build $20 MILLION houses with elevators for his cars while you and i are burdened with 30-40% in taxes & state/local fees (which are taxes by any other name).

Mitt Romney is a parasite that lives off the millions he has stolen from whole communities through his predatory business and the tax money he gets to hide in secret bank accounts around the world. Mitt Romney is a Welfare Queen, not the working class, not the poor or the indigent who have to take one or another form of safety net paid for by We The People.

We The People have paid for, in one way or another, with our blood, sweat & tears for We The People, even if some of them have not been able to contribute at all. Mitt Romney has proven with his tax returns he doesn't give a fuck about We The People. He is a predator, a parasite, a leech.
posted by liza at 6:40 AM on October 2, 2012 [21 favorites]

Breaking:
Pennsylvania Voter ID Law Ruling: Judge Halts Enforcement Of Law For Election

That is a big effing deal.
posted by madamjujujive at 7:11 AM on October 2, 2012 [23 favorites]

More GOP registration issues/fraud allegations: 35,000 people newly registered as Republican in one CA county, including two of the aides of the local Democratic Senate candidate.
posted by jaduncan at 7:12 AM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

That is a big effing deal.

Mother Ucking heck yeah!
posted by zombieflanders at 7:17 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

Rush appeal possible? I'm wondering if the reason for the PA state Supremes requiring the ruling for today is precisely to allow for an appeal directly to them.
posted by jaduncan at 7:20 AM on October 2, 2012

4000!
posted by Horace Rumpole at 7:24 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

So in the end, Tom Corbett ended up handing the state to Obama with this voter supression bullshit? MMMM, THAT'S SOME JUICY IRONY.
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 7:28 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

This is just a straight-up lie. It's been debunked by every single nonpartisan fact-checking organization out there.

Looking at your own 'debunking' link, it appears to be somewhere in the middle - we don't know what could be happening, because we don't know what is being offered to be waived. Your link speculates on what the intent might be, but this is kind of like when the Obama administration tried to fill in Romney's tax plan with what they thought it would be. Requirements are being relaxed - it remains to be seen how that relaxment will be used.

In fact, for 2012 the entirety of the top level category labeled "Welfare" on usgovernmentspending.com, which includes TANF, SNAP, SSI, free school lunches, unemployment, Section 8 housing, what's left of TARP, and both the Earned Income and Child tax credits where the payment exceeds tax liability, among other things, comes to $451.9 billion, or approximately 12% of the federal budget, a reduction of $43.7 billion from 2011.

Yes, but if you add in the spending for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP, you are looking at approximately 54% of the federal budget. Which means, if you believe that such things are not the function of government, that we are spending more than half of our budget on things that are not our business. If you add in the interest from that debt that people seem to think isn't important, it's 60%. That's a pretty bloated beast.
posted by corb at 7:30 AM on October 2, 2012

How on earth do you afford to wage war?
posted by de at 7:33 AM on October 2, 2012

There is always money in the couch cushions for another war, my man. Especially one the public doesn't have to pay attention to.
posted by absalom at 7:47 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

They think they care. But when asked "Do you approve of drone warfare?" or "do you approve of the extrajudicial killing of American citizens?" many find a way to justify it- meaning that no, they do not care about these things.

I would respond to this but klangklangston said everything I might say about it better (and less sarcastically) than I, so I won't. I will endorse these remarks by Erik Loomis on the topic:

" ... In a sense I respect it when people care so much about one issue that they can’t vote for any candidate who disagrees. On the other hand, Friedersdorf doesn’t seem to care one iota about the horrible economic and social policies a Romney administration would enact. He doesn’t seem to care at all about labor, abortion rights, gay rights, environmental policy, etc., etc. It’s all about drones, civil liberties, and such. And Obama has indeed sucked on those issues.

But given that Friedersdorf probably doesn’t have to worry much about his next paycheck or be concerned about having an unwanted fetus in his body, it’s a luxury for him to be a one-issue voter on this particular issue. It’s all too typical of a lot of angry left-wing white men from Glenn Greenwald on down who live privileged enough lives that they can find the one issue where there really aren’t any differences on the two parties and instead suggest alternatives that completely ignore the poor in this country, whether being Paul-curious to not voting to voting for a whacko like Gary Johnson ..."

(Note: I wouldn't call Johnson "a whacko," personally. He seems to have been a more-or-less successful, more-or-less popular governor. But believing that a Presidential vote for him is anything more than a "Honk if you hate drones!" is whacko.)

How on earth do you afford to wage war?

We've been over that.
posted by octobersurprise at 7:55 AM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

corb: I think the issue is whether to look at one point in time or at a wide range. Let's say someone works at a factory all of their life and then gets SS and medicare after retiring. If looking at a single point in time, it may seem like a handout, if looking across 60 or 70 years, it's all worked for and paid for. In the same way, CHIP is only a handout while the person receiving care is a child, if you look across person's entire life, they are almost certain to work and contribute to the society and to pay taxes; something they're much less likely to do if let's say they die of a disease in childhood.

The basic idea that a large proportion of people don't do anything and get by on handouts is just not true when you think long-term. A few percent of people who do get constant handouts are simply unable to support themselves for physical or mental illness reasons, but if you add up all of them, I don't think it's that big of an expense in the grand scheme of things.
posted by rainy at 7:58 AM on October 2, 2012 [9 favorites]

if you believe that such things are not the function of government

Oh, but I do believe they are! It turns out that private enterprise is remarkably inefficient at keeping the unfortunate from starving.
posted by murphy slaw at 8:00 AM on October 2, 2012 [30 favorites]

Ah. Which means, if you believe that such things are not the function of government, that we are spending more than half of our budget on things that are not our business.

But I do believe that such things are a function of our government. I believe that government is the way that large groups of people pool their resources for the benefit of all.

I'm much better off in a civilized society than I would be in a dystopian anarchy; I believe everyone except a handful of musclebound gun nuts is. I make the sacrifices that participating in this society requires freely and gladly.

You don't believe that taking care of those who need it is the business of government. Two questions, then. Whose business is it to take care of those who need help at some point or other in their lives? And what is the government's business?
posted by MrVisible at 8:02 AM on October 2, 2012 [6 favorites]

A great deal of military spending is essentially welfare, much of it corporate, but also conventional in the sense that people are getting paid to do non-productive things - which is not meant to be a blow at military folks, just that the US almost certainly doesn't need quite so many of them, or the hardware they operate.

TARP and its friends and relatives are pure corporate welfare.

Agrigultural subsisdies are rural welfare.

The entire prison system is a dual form of welfare -- for both the folks inside and the folks who guard them.

And yet somehow it's only social welfare that gets targeted. I wonder why that is?
posted by unSane at 8:03 AM on October 2, 2012 [18 favorites]

Looking at your own 'debunking' link, it appears to be somewhere in the middle - we don't know what could be happening, because we don't know what is being offered to be waived.

But we know it doesn't include language that (in your words) "no longer requires anyone to perform any positive action in order to receive":

The actual language is rather strict and rules out a number of potential waiver applications. For example, the memo states, “The Secretary will not use her authority to allow use of TANF funds to provide assistance to individuals or families subject to the TANF prohibitions on assistance.” Translation: people who aren't on TANF because they didn't meet the work requirements aren't going to get bailed out here. Proposed waivers also must include concrete methods of evaluating performance, and set standards that the new programs must meet for the waiver to continue.

Your link speculates on what the intent might be, but this is kind of like when the Obama administration tried to fill in Romney's tax plan with what they thought it would be. Requirements are being relaxed - it remains to be seen how that relaxment will be used.

Your non sequitur about the tax plan aside--those came from the CBO and several non-profits, and the "speculation" is backed up by arithmetic--this is wrong:

One man’s gutting is, of course, another man’s tweaking, but in this case, the Obama administration is not removing the bill’s work requirements at all. He’s changing them to allow states more flexibility. But the principle that welfare programs must require recipients to move toward employment isn’t going anywhere.

Which means, if you believe that such things are not the function of government, that we are spending more than half of our budget on things that are not our business. If you add in the interest from that debt that people seem to think isn't important, it's 60%. That's a pretty bloated beast.

Which, of course, was not your original point, that people were getting something for nothing (or as you called it "no positive action").
posted by zombieflanders at 8:04 AM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

murphy slaw: "if you believe that such things are not the function of government

Oh, but I do believe they are! It turns out that private enterprise is remarkably inefficient at keeping the unfortunate from starving."

Seconded. This is the entire point of civilisation, in my book. It has been from the moment we thought it would be a good idea to stick by that other ape so we could watch each other's backs instead of heading off into the depths of the jungle to be True Objectivist Apes.
posted by Happy Dave at 8:04 AM on October 2, 2012 [14 favorites]

35,000 people newly registered as Republican in one CA county, including two of the aides of the local Democratic Senate candidate.

I fully agree that voter suppression is a thing, but I fail to see how this (registering people as Republicans against their will/without their knowledge) is worthwhile for the Republicans to do.

First of all, people are welcome to vote however they please, regardless of their registration. You can be registered Republican and vote straight ticket Democrat (or, shit, even Green) if you want.

Secondly, this might actually be a good thing for liberal politics and a bad thing for Republicans, because it suddenly makes a lot of potentially liberal people eligible to vote in Republican primaries.

Thirdly, as far as I know it doesn't help them in some inside baseball area like gerrymandering, since that's based on districts and populations, not on party affiliation. I guess it could get them access to a larger proportion of public money that goes to local elections, but that's relatively small potatoes and probably not worth a huge voter registration/fraud/trickery effort that is only going to make them look bad when it's discovered.
posted by Sara C. at 8:05 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

Sara C., see this part lower down in the story:

Maviglio contended that by padding their registration numbers, Republicans could get a fundraising boost because prospective donors would view local races as more winnable.

Re-registering Democrats as Republicans also interferes with Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts, he said, because the party won’t contact a voter who is listed as a Republican.

posted by maudlin at 8:06 AM on October 2, 2012 [8 favorites]

corb: Yes, but if you add in the spending for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP, you are looking at approximately 54% of the federal budget.

Indeed. An argument can be had about the propriety of the people of the United States collectively making some provision for income and medical security for the elderly and infirm, but those things are not "welfare", as you pointed out above.

Please forgive the impudence, but I think I'll just quote myself from another conference on the actual utility of eliminating Social Security, Medicare, etc.

In any case, completely eliminating the entire top-level category labeled Welfare, including nutrition assistance, housing assistance and unemployment insurance, comes to less than $0.5T. Doing so would leave tens of millions of Americans hungry and homeless, and we'd still be $1T short of a balanced budget. If we also completely eliminated Social Security, we'd still need to find another $264B to cut to even break even. So we could also eliminate Medicare, and then we'd finally be in the positive by $233B. At that rate, we'd have the debt paid off in 65 years or so, barring another unfunded war or two. Of course, since everyone currently on Social Security and Medicare would have to go back to work, it would actually be somewhat shorter due to the additional tax revenue brought in from millions of senior citizens returning to work, while they lasted. If they could even find work.

posted by ob1quixote at 8:07 AM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

Corb's ideal of a society with no public safety net has been tried many times. The consequences for an industrialized society are well-documented and lead to the kinds of consequences which corb would probably abhor.
posted by unSane at 8:10 AM on October 2, 2012 [9 favorites]

Which means, if you believe that such things are not the function of government, that we are spending more than half of our budget on things that are not our business.

Nobody with a molecule of sense thinks those things are not the function of government.

You really want to see old people starve in the street and children die for lack of healthcare? Really?

Really?
posted by Sara C. at 8:10 AM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

You don't believe that taking care of those who need it is the business of government. Two questions, then. Whose business is it to take care of those who need help at some point or other in their lives? And what is the government's business?

Where business = "duty", then I believe it is the family's business, assuming that the individual hasn't done anything to forfeit family aid and assistance. Where business = "something someone can reasonably be expected to engage in", then any private charity or individual can make it their business, but is not obligated to.

I believe that it's the federal government's business to coordinate defense of its borders, treaties and such with other nations, provide a common currency, facilitate interactions and disputes between the states, and to protect "life, liberty, and property."

You really want to see old people starve in the street and children die for lack of healthcare? Really?

I want to see a societal shift where the responsibility for such individuals is left to families, not to the state.
posted by corb at 8:13 AM on October 2, 2012

I know I'm going back over material we've already covered here, but calling soc sec and Medicare "bloated" only makes sense if you think that administering a nationwide pension plan and old-age care system is outside of the purview of a democratically elected government. I'm basically repeating corb here, yes, I know that.

But, well, can you think of any organization other than a democratically elected government that's qualified to administer those things? And given the quantifiable and incredibly clear benefits of having pensions and old-age care - the massive reduction of deep poverty among the elderly, the frequently overlooked benefit of getting elderly people out of the workforce, clearing space for younger people, and never mind the humanitarian angle, and ALSO never mind the self-interested angle, at least for anyone who intends to live to retirement age - given the benefits, the citizens of a democracy would have to be either insane or completely befuddled to NOT want their government to maintain a pension program and to provide old-age health care.

This was the consensus among everyone sane from FDR to the 1980s. It's only now that we have lost the generational memory of widespread deep poverty among the elderly that people have started mustering sophistic arguments against this consensus.

So I guess my two responses to critiques of social security as bloated are: 1) are you kidding?, and 2) okay, who else are you going to get to administer pensions? Industry? Hah, right, they'll totally do that.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 8:13 AM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

Thanks, Maudlin.

But then... won't the Republican party hit them up on their GOTV efforts?

Again, the Republicans can't make anyone do anything inside the voting booth. I've never gotten a GOTV call before (maybe because I don't live in a swing state?), but while I assume there's a degree of influence on the voter in question, it's still the voter's decision.
posted by Sara C. at 8:14 AM on October 2, 2012

I want to see a societal shift where the responsibility for such individuals is left to families, not to the state.

OK. And what when the entire family is poor (for example, when the mining industry was shut down in the north of England)?
posted by jaduncan at 8:14 AM on October 2, 2012 [8 favorites]

From my first link above, here's a society without a safety net for you.

The streets are generally unpaved, rough, dirty, filled with vegetable and animal refuse, without sewers or gutters, but supplied with foul, stagnant pools instead. Moreover, ventilation is impeded by the bad, confused method of building of the whole quarter, and since many human beings here live crowded into a small space, the atmosphere that prevails in these working-men’s quarters may readily be imagined. Further, the streets serve as drying grounds in fine weather; lines are stretched across from house to house, and hung with wet clothing.

Let us investigate some of the slums in their order. London comes first, and in London the famous rookery of St. Giles which is now, at last, about to be penetrated by a couple of broad streets. St. Giles is in the midst of the most populous part of the town, surrounded by broad, splendid avenues in which the gay world of London idles about, in the immediate neighbourhood of Oxford Street, Regent Street, of Trafalgar Square and the Strand. It is a disorderly collection of tall, three or four-storied houses, with narrow, crooked, filthy streets, in which there is quite as much life as in the great thoroughfares of the town, except that, here, people of the working-class only are to be seen. A vegetable market is held in the street, baskets with vegetables and fruits, naturally all bad and hardly fit to use, obstruct the sidewalk still further, and from these, as well as from the fish-dealers’ stalls, arises a horrible smell. The houses are occupied from cellar to garret, filthy within and without, and their appearance is such that no human being could possibly wish to live in them. But all this is nothing in comparison with the dwellings in the narrow courts and alleys between the streets, entered by covered passages between the houses, in which the filth and tottering ruin surpass all description. Scarcely a whole window-pane can be found, the walls are crumbling, door-posts and window-frames loose and broken, doors of old boards nailed together, or altogether wanting in this thieves’ quarter, where no doors are needed, there being nothing to steal. Heaps of garbage and ashes lie in all directions, and the foul liquids emptied before the doors gather in stinking pools. Here live the poorest of the poor, the worst paid workers with thieves and the victims of prostitution indiscriminately huddled together, the majority Irish, or of Irish extraction, and those who have not yet sunk in the whirlpool of moral ruin which surrounds them, sinking daily deeper, losing daily more and more of their power to resist the demoralising influence of want, filth, and evil surroundings.

posted by unSane at 8:14 AM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

"Looking at your own 'debunking' link, it appears to be somewhere in the middle - we don't know what could be happening, because we don't know what is being offered to be waived. Your link speculates on what the intent might be, but this is kind of like when the Obama administration tried to fill in Romney's tax plan with what they thought it would be. Requirements are being relaxed - it remains to be seen how that relaxment will be used."

No, that's flat out bullshit. You trotted out a lie and got called a liar for it, and now you're trying to spin this into some alternate world where you really advanced a nuanced position instead parroting a debunked talking point from Fox News.

For all of your whining about not being respected, you've got to realize that trotting out an endless stream of easily-checked bullshit and then dissembling when you're called out is a pretty good reason to not respect your political views as credible, informed or coherent.

Want respect? Don't lie.
posted by klangklangston at 8:16 AM on October 2, 2012 [24 favorites]

Or orphans, or people estranged from their family, or women escaping from abuse, or the handicapped, or or or.
posted by jaduncan at 8:16 AM on October 2, 2012 [13 favorites]

Re-registering Democrats as Republicans also interferes with Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts, he said, because the party won’t contact a voter who is listed as a Republican.

Except that it would also screw with Republican GOTV efforts, because the Republicans would have to either sort through which of these people were "really" Republicans, or run the risk of assisting tons of Democrats to get to the polls. Really, Sara C. is right, this doesn't make any pragmatic sense.
posted by corb at 8:17 AM on October 2, 2012

I think that the whole libertarianism thing is kind of like being anti-immunization programs. I think a big reason that we see an upswing in silly anti-vax sentiment among otherwise sensible, well educated people, is that nowadays new parents just don't have the societal memory of what it was like when kids were dying of measles and getting polio and all that. The arguments against vaccination can sound good, just like the ones for libertarianism. It's not until you see the devastating results that you realise that they are based on untenable premises.

(just an analogy DEFINITELY not looking to derail here)
posted by gaspode at 8:21 AM on October 2, 2012 [7 favorites]

At this point, I'd like to reiterate the point that cashman made upthread, citing Businessweek's article government assistance: 96% of Americans have received government assistance at some point in their life, including breaks in the tax code.

Gravelle estimates that at least 70 percent of tax filers, or 98 million Americans, have either a tax credit or some type of itemized deduction or both.

Twenty-three percent of people who pay taxes benefit from the deduction for charitable contributions alone, and 23 percent gain from either the mortgage interest or property tax deductions, according to the Tax Policy Center. Thirteen percent benefit from the special tax rates for long-term capital gains and qualified dividends.

OK, you say, let's get rid of tax breaks and make taxes lower for all. We'll screw over some who are paying more to take care of their children and their home, but others who lack kids and are renters come out ahead. What about government contractors?

New York University Professor Paul C. Light calculated there were 7.6 million federal contractor employees in 2005, when contract spending was $90 billion lower in inflation- adjusted dollars than in 2011.

“Government funding supports their jobs,” Sides said.

They're all leeches on the American People, they need proper jobs. Next? Everyone should be able to balance their own budgets, take care of their own health, even in the case of catastrophic and unforeseen health problems, and plan for their own futures. Done.

Are we left with public infrastructure, police officers, fire suppression, and civil defense? What do you want government to do? Or are the first three left up to states?

any private charity or individual can make it their business [to take care of the poor and broken-down]

This reminds me of a college professor who asked individuals in my class how much they would pay to save an individual species. Thinking in terms related to personal pay, people gave figures in the tens of thousands. The professor's "gotcha" was that the person would soon run out of money.

Except it shouldn't be up to a well-meaning individual to take care of something for a collective good. For fuck's sake, humanity has progressed so far that we live in a time of plenty. Hoarding over your little pile of gold like Smaug makes no sense, because you will die, and your gold will remain with your bones. Join in the collective humanity, and make the world a better place for everyone, for now and for the future.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:22 AM on October 2, 2012 [8 favorites]

There's an fpp right now about a private group in Greece that's helping needy people whom the government will not help. I think you should read it, corb.
posted by rtha at 8:23 AM on October 2, 2012 [5 favorites]

corb: In fact, you want possibly broken families to take care of their own and to hope they have enough resources to pay for health insurance because the hospitals also shouldn't provide emergency care.

So I have questions for you:

a) breadwinner gets sick/has a non-treatable mental breakdown. What happens then?
b) what do you tell the child/eventual adult who is forced to depend on the same emotionally/physically/sexually abusive family that has rendered them mentally ill?
c) what about herd immunity (it isn't good when people start passing infectious disease around due to lack of treatment)?
d) whilst you are letting these people eat cake, what makes you think that they won't just take your stuff?
posted by jaduncan at 8:24 AM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

Wait, this is the crux. I really really am interested to know the answer to this question, the logical outlay of your political philosophy:

corb: "You really want to see old people starve in the street and children die for lack of healthcare? Really?

I want to see a societal shift where the responsibility for such individuals is left to families, not to the state."

For the poor, the handicapped, abused, sick, and others....what is the answer for them? Those that don't have family support? This is the absolute crux of the problem with Libertarian ideas. The fuck you I got mine mentality. What is your answer there?
posted by lazaruslong at 8:25 AM on October 2, 2012 [9 favorites]

rtha: although I posted it I was attempting hard not to mention it. But yeah, it is probably the right thing to go there.
posted by jaduncan at 8:26 AM on October 2, 2012

And what when the entire family is poor (for example, when the mining industry was shut down in the north of England)?

I guess they will just collectively become wards of some wealthier relatives somewhere? And on and on until whole clans of people are dependent on the wealthiest few? More and more I think libertarians just have a hard-on for feudalism or maybe the ancient Roman system of patronage.

This is not so much a rant against corb in particular, but I always wonder at the one-percenters who claim to want the poor to be kept afloat by "family". Because, seriously, how many of those same one-percenters are willing to materially support distant family members? I think people would be OK helping out their kids or their parents, or maybe a sibling. But what happens when Poor Relation Jim knocks at the door asking you to pay for their kid's chemo?
posted by Sara C. at 8:26 AM on October 2, 2012 [5 favorites]

"I believe that it's the federal government's business to coordinate defense of its borders, treaties and such with other nations, provide a common currency, facilitate interactions and disputes between the states, and to protect "life, liberty, and property." "

I'll give you one hour of high school civics credit if you can write a 200 word essay on why the words in the Declaration of Independence aren't "life, liberty and property."

(You can earn extra credit by talking about how Locke used the phrase initially rendered as "life, liberty and estate" and how he felt "health" was included in the estate.)
posted by klangklangston at 8:26 AM on October 2, 2012 [13 favorites]

(also were this not MeFi I'd be coming close to 'don't feed the troll' territory)
posted by jaduncan at 8:27 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

Re-registering Democrats as Republicans also interferes with Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts, he said, because the party won’t contact a voter who is listed as a Republican.

Except that it would also screw with Republican GOTV efforts, because the Republicans would have to either sort through which of these people were "really" Republicans, or run the risk of assisting tons of Democrats to get to the polls. Really, Sara C. is right, this doesn't make any pragmatic sense.

Registering voters for a party does more than tell people where and when to vote. It tells them who to vote for, and tries to raise funds for candidates and the party. Also, in some states, you can only vote within your selected party for primaries.

Mis-registering people really is a bad thing. If it wasn't, why go to the effort of decieving people in the first place?
posted by filthy light thief at 8:27 AM on October 2, 2012

Honestly, I go for the "$7 per registration" theory more than the "intentional conspiracy" thing.
posted by klangklangston at 8:29 AM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

The fuck you I got mine mentality. What is your answer there?

You're missing the point. "Fuck you, I got mine" is the answer.

Libertarianism is a political philosophy for people who have never had an unexpected illness, were not born in a town with a collapsing industry, and who have never questioned where their next meal was coming from, but who HAVE suffered the indignity of having to settle for a lower level of trim on their sedan.
posted by murphy slaw at 8:29 AM on October 2, 2012 [23 favorites]

There's an fpp right now about a private group in Greece that's helping needy people whom the government will not help.

SPOILER: it's about a right-wing extremist group, described as neo-Nazi and fascist, though the group rejects the labels. If nothing else, the party's leader has openly identified it as nationalist and racist. And there is significant violence related to the party. But hey, they're helping the right kind of people who are down on their luck in that tough Greek economy.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:31 AM on October 2, 2012

And re the Greece fpp: while I would dearly love to believe that Americans are exceptional enough to not go that way, history and experience tell me that we're just not that fucking special.
posted by rtha at 8:31 AM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

rtha: "There's an fpp right now about a private group in Greece that's helping needy people whom the government will not help."

Here's a link.
posted by zarq at 8:31 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

There's an fpp right now about a private group in Greece that's helping needy people whom the government will not help.

After a massive governmental collapse brought on by overgenerous social safety net spending. Yes, I think Greece can be a warning sign to many of us, but I think we're all taking different lessons from it.

For the poor, the handicapped, abused, sick, and others....what is the answer for them? Those that don't have family support?

I think it is inaccurate to say that the poor can't provide family support to each other. In fact, they are the people who can best provide it to each other. If you have a society where it is expected that extended families will live together if they need to, you lose a lot of the problems with the nuclear-family-only model, like the childcare issue. Or why the handicapped or abused wouldn't have family support - because in a large extended family, if your immediate family is shitty to you, it is not the only option.

Because, seriously, how many of those same one-percenters are willing to materially support distant family members?

I think a lot more than you'd think. At least personally, I was raised that when family came knocking and asked for help, you gave it. Currently, my family is engaged in discussions around who takes care of X relative who is unable to help themselves - and it's not because people are fighting to avoid it, but because people are arguing that it is their duty by virtue of age/closeness/blahblahblah. I've given significant sums of money and non-material assistance to family members who were not in my immediate family when they needed something and I was the one who could provide it. In return, when I was younger and needed assistance and wisdom, it was provided for me.
posted by corb at 8:34 AM on October 2, 2012

I like how you duck addressing the ways in which the private group helps only people it considers worthy.

And I cannot wait to get home to my laptop tonight because oh my god is this painful on a phone.
posted by rtha at 8:36 AM on October 2, 2012 [5 favorites]

And re the Greece fpp: while I would dearly love to believe that Americans are exceptional enough to not go that way, history and experience tell me that we're just not that fucking special.

People can say what they like about Anon, but when Golden Dawn set up an NYC branch website it was hacked out of existence very, very quickly and hasn't come back up.
posted by jaduncan at 8:37 AM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

At least personally, I was raised that when family came knocking and asked for help, you gave it.

Are you literally incapable of imagining someone less fortunate than yourself?
posted by murphy slaw at 8:37 AM on October 2, 2012 [29 favorites]

I think it's OK with some posters after you've responded once to just raise your eyebrows at each new post, say to yourself 'huh, still wrong', and move on.
posted by unSane at 8:38 AM on October 2, 2012 [29 favorites]

Or why the handicapped or abused wouldn't have family support - because in a large extended family, if your immediate family is shitty to you, it is not the only option.

Seriously, you think that there aren't plenty of situations where the victims are abused by people precisely because the abuser will be the one believed by their mutual family? Abuse of a powerful position is like the cliche of abuse, and that doesn't stop in cultures that have extended family norms.

I'm stepping away from this bit of debate now because grah/really?
posted by jaduncan at 8:42 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

And once again, it's glaringly apparent that the people who consider themselves hard-nosed pragmatists, realistically fighting against the encroachment of civilization on their precious right to ALL THE STUFF, are living in a fantasyland that makes My Little Pony look positively gritty.
posted by MrVisible at 8:43 AM on October 2, 2012 [12 favorites]

Are you literally incapable of imagining someone less fortunate than yourself?

Are you incapable of reading comprehension? I'm not saying that I had special magical ponies, I'm saying that if you come from a situation (as my family did) where there is no social governmental spending, the cultural shift tends to be that you are more primed to take care of family no matter how much you have. These are not magical ponies no one else can have, these are situations that /everyone/ can have. My family started out as illiterate peasants, that's not exactly a fortunate situation.

I like how you duck addressing the ways in which the private group helps only people it considers worthy.

I think there are a lot of problems with groups which are racist, but I don't think their distribution of aid is one of them. If the choice is between them distributing no aid, and distributing aid to some specific individuals, I think the latter is better - don't you?
posted by corb at 8:44 AM on October 2, 2012

And I cannot wait to get home to my laptop tonight because oh my god is this painful on a phone.

This thread made me buy a new computer.
posted by cashman at 8:44 AM on October 2, 2012 [7 favorites]

Stop with the libertarian derail and stop with the "reading comprehension" nastiness. This is not a thread on how any one MeFite would run the country, nor should it be.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:46 AM on October 2, 2012 [7 favorites]

Romney says he's going grand. I don't buy it.

“And there’s going to be all the scoring of winning and losing, and you know, in my view, it’s not so much winning and losing or even the people themselves — the president and myself — it’s about something bigger than that,” Romney said.

The debates will be a chance for the two politicians to “describe the pathway forward,” laying out a choice for voters, he told the crowd, estimated by campaign staffers at nearly 6,000 people.

...

here tonight, in what was one of the larger crowds of his campaign

This has to be an attempt to have the other side walk into a gunfight with a teddy bear. You know Romney is going to go in there trying to make it look like the president is evil incarnate. I know there will be at least one dogwhistle. Anyway, 6,000 is among his larger crowds? Seriously?
posted by cashman at 8:50 AM on October 2, 2012

This thread is so badass, smartphones and ipads are starting therapy groups.
posted by Skygazer at 8:50 AM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

> If you have a society where it is expected that extended families will live together if they need to

I'd prefer to have my expectations around owning an assault weapon altered, than filling my 2 bedroom home with half a dozen down and out pseudo-relatives.
posted by de at 8:52 AM on October 2, 2012

Anyway, 6,000 is among his larger crowds? Seriously?

No, no. Don't go too far. What the quote said was "estimated by campaign staffers at nearly 6,000 people." Call it 5?
posted by jaduncan at 8:53 AM on October 2, 2012

This thread is so badass, it's got differing weather patterns.
posted by Skygazer at 8:56 AM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

Hay guys/gals, how about that presidential campaign?
posted by jaduncan at 8:56 AM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

Seriously, walk away from this derail, everyone.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:59 AM on October 2, 2012 [5 favorites]

what is very clear with candidates like Mitt Romney & Paul Ryan and sundry internet trolls is that the plutocratic "fuck you, got mine" creed of Libertarianism that was considered fringe just a decade ago, has become normalized. and am not talking about the Ron Paul type of Libertarianism because many Paulites find the Romneys of the world disgusting enough to join Occupy Wall Street.

for all his flaws, George W Bush would have never flaunted his wealth & privilege like Romney has. and as I have said many times in the past, ironically, Dubya's 8 years had one of the most racially & ethnically diverse executive administrations this country has ever had the mis/fortune to have.

a Romney administration, with it's coded white-supremacism & not-so-coded plutonomic anarchocapitalism? that monstrous beast would make all of us pine for the years of republicans like Dubya. and that is a fucking scary thought.
posted by liza at 9:03 AM on October 2, 2012 [5 favorites]

I would prefer that racist and xenophobic groups give no aid to anyone, yes. We used to have that here in the US, within living memory of many mefites. It is corrosive, divisive, and anti democratic. It is immoral.
posted by rtha at 9:04 AM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

More and more I think libertarians just have a hard-on for feudalism or maybe the ancient Roman system of patronage.

There's a strain of thought in libertarianism that valorizes pre-modern social organizations. Hans-Hermann Hoppe's 2001 book Democracy: The God That Failed argues that monarchy, or "privately owned government" is preferable to democracy, or what he calls "publicly owned government." Reading around the Von Mises Society sorts, it becomes pretty hard to conclude that many of them wouldn't prefer some kind of hierarchical, non-democratic, tribalist form of social organization.

If you have a society where it is expected that extended families will live together if they need to, you lose a lot of the problems with the nuclear-family-only model

David Frum came to similar conclusions in his book Dead Right. In his review of '03, John Holbo quotes Frum:

"It is socials that form character, as another conservative hero, Alexis de Tocqueville, demonstrated, and if our characters are now less virtuous than formerly, we must identify in what way our social conditions have changed in order to understand why.

Of course there have been hundreds of such changes – never mind since the Donner party’s day, just since 1945 … But the expansion of government is the only one we can do anything about.

All of these changes have had the same effect: the emancipation of the individual appetite from restrictions imposed on it by limited resources, or religious dread, or community disapproval, or the risk of disease or personal catastrophe.” (p. 202-3)

Holbo writes,

"The thing that makes capitalism good, apparently, is not that it generates wealth more efficiently than other known economic engines. No, the thing that makes capitalism good is that, by forcing people to live precarious lives, it causes them to live in fear of losing everything and therefore to adopt – as fearful people will – a cowed and subservient posture: in a word, they behave ‘conservatively’."

Almost worse than being cruel, this is ridiculous. It is, Holbo says, "risably twee nonsense; faux-rusticated arty-woodcrafty tourist fantasy."
posted by octobersurprise at 9:04 AM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

I think a lot more than you'd think. At least personally, I was raised that when family came knocking and asked for help, you gave it. Currently, my family is engaged in discussions around who takes care of X relative who is unable to help themselves - and it's not because people are fighting to avoid it, but because people are arguing that it is their duty by virtue of age/closeness/blahblahblah.

I come from a family like that, too.

Some of them are one percent folks (or so they claim).

While they are generous with immediate family, and, yes, will fight to the death for the opportunity to pay for Nana's assisted living facility, I know for absolutely 100% SURE that if some third cousin twice removed who was getting evicted from their trailer knocked on said one percenters' doors, they would be, well, not turned away, because of course We Don't Do That.

But there would be conditions. Third Cousin would be held at arm's length. There would be speculations about how closely we were related, really, and why we didn't hear from this guy before his money problems. Why he came to us and not some other family member somewhere else. Any excuse would be searched for to get out of this obligation. Any help would be given grudgingly, and with heavy expectations attached. There would be a lot of rationalizing about whether he really deserved this help, why he was getting evicted, his worth ethic, his past choices, and aspects of his current life which had little to do with his current situation.

There would be strings attached, and there would be a heavy tendency to get as close to "no" as you can get without looking like a bad person.

I'd much rather just go on unemployment or apply for food stamps or whatever rather than put up with that kind of bullshit.

And that's a functional and loving family with material resources. What about all the people who will fall through the cracks due to broken families, abusive situations, or simply not having any family with resources that can be tracked down?
posted by Sara C. at 9:05 AM on October 2, 2012 [11 favorites]

FiveThirtyEight: New Polls Raise Chance of Electoral College Tie

Yeah, this was the first time I've thought of a 538 article as blatant clickbait. It was somewhat disappointing from Nate.
posted by jaduncan at 9:09 AM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

Yeah, this was the first time I've thought of a 538 article as blatant clickbait. It was somewhat disappointing from Nate.

I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and blame it mostly on the NYT editorial staff.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:12 AM on October 2, 2012

Yeah, it seems there's a bit of an effort to throw a bone to the Right with many news outlets having some Right wing sympathetic clickbait of that sort...

It's part of the artistry of journalism I guess to tread water a bit sometimes...
posted by Skygazer at 9:14 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think Nate is just trying to keep it interesting for the next four weeks. I mean right now, the only other headline he could write is: 'Nothing to report, Obama continuing to kick ass in polling'
posted by WinnipegDragon at 9:14 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

The future is here: the quasi-guest columnist has more credibility than the Old Gray Lady editors.
posted by jaduncan at 9:15 AM on October 2, 2012

I made the mistake of checking some Drudge stories and the comments I'm reading from the GOTP folks is headspinning...any entreaty to logic and reason has been fully jettisoned...

Every single godawful comment is basically: Obama is a Commie, socialist, fascist and if he wins the country is FINISHED.

Every. Single. One.

Can they be real? I mean check out the comments for this story (linked from Drudge).
posted by Skygazer at 9:19 AM on October 2, 2012

Right wing sympathetic clickbait of that sort...

CNN had the election as a "statistical dead-heat" on their front page going into the first debate for about a whole day, until just a few hours ago. They need to portray the race as being as close as they can via whatever counting methods in order to keep the excitement & eyeballs up, but it really doesn't help people who want, you know, information.
posted by Devils Rancher at 9:21 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

"as another conservative hero, Alexis de Tocqueville"

Lollerz.

Between this and the abuse of Locke, I wonder if any pundits have actually read these books all the way through, or if they just know them from cherry-picked quotes.

(De Toqueville was a deeply complicated political figure, and reading him as "conservative" or "liberal" under 21st century frameworks is a total folly; similarly, Democracy in America is full of canny observations, ridiculous predictions and a wide variety of possible political interpretations.)
posted by klangklangston at 9:21 AM on October 2, 2012 [7 favorites]

The editors at the New England Journal of Medicine had the President and Romney describe their health care platforms and their visions for the future of American health care.. "Analysis: Romney would send consumers healthcare bill, with benefits"

The former Massachusetts governor's advisers say he would accelerate the use of high-deductible insurance plans that offer lower premiums but require beneficiaries to pay thousands of dollars more in out-of-pocket expenses than they would face under conventional coverage.

Romney's overriding aim is to create a much bigger retail market in healthcare, with transparency on pricing and services, more flexible insurance pools and interstate insurance markets.

There are some good comments at the NEJM too:

"To think that an unregulated free market system will put less emphasis on profit and put patients' interests first is to be stuck in a 1950's mentality: as long as clean cut white men in suits are in charge, we are all in good hands.

The Affordable Care Act, as well as its earlier version, Romneycare, moves us towards providing incentives for quality outcomes and cost-effectiveness rather than for productivity. We the people, in the form of a democratic government, need to continue to work towards this critical goal, keeping special interests at arms length. Private business has very different goals, ones that are often directly at odds with patient's best interests."
posted by cashman at 9:24 AM on October 2, 2012 [5 favorites]

I'm sort of inclined to read the 538 'tie' story as an intentional statistical joke.
posted by Anything at 9:30 AM on October 2, 2012

I mean check out the comments for this story

I don't actually need to go further than the story body text: "Members of the Tea Party suspect intentional skewing by a remarkable 84-5 percent margin."

...wow.
posted by jaduncan at 9:37 AM on October 2, 2012

I mean check out the comments for this story (linked from Drudge).

I find the formatting of the comments high-larious because the indenting results in some of them being squished down to a couple letters wide in the right-hand side of the comment box, like the writers are screaming gibberish from the far right.
posted by achrise at 9:43 AM on October 2, 2012 [5 favorites]

Ralph Reed's Group: An Obama Victory Means He Can Complete America's Destruction, Andy Kroll, Mother Jones, 2 October, 2012

In this letter to potential voters, Reed claims that Obama wants an America where "government bureaucrats micromanage every aspect of your life," the taxman "seizes most of what you earn," and death panels—yes, those fictional death panels—determine whether you live or die. Reed insists that Obama will destroy capitalism and replace it with "Socialistic economic theories."

Here's the most inflammatory line: If Obama wins reelection, "he can complete America's destruction." This warning, naturally, is presented in bold print.

v.s. Horace Rumpole's link.
posted by ob1quixote at 9:43 AM on October 2, 2012

I don't actually need to go further than the story body text: "Members of the Tea Party suspect intentional skewing by a remarkable 84-5 percent margin."

...wow.

Come on, that poll was obviously intentionally skewed to make the Tea Party look irrational, paranoid and scientifically illiterate, so they have less credibility.

Polls about who trusts polls. We're through the rabbit hole, people.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 9:44 AM on October 2, 2012

"he can complete America's destruction."

"I guess what I'm saying is that he's really a conviction candidate."
posted by jaduncan at 9:48 AM on October 2, 2012

Meet the Ohio Voters Who Are Killing Romney's Campaign: In Appalachian coal country, Romney is now viewed with nearly as much suspicion as Obama -- and that may be the story of the 2012 election.
posted by octobersurprise at 9:49 AM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

Polls about who trusts polls. We're through the rabbit hole, people.

Pssh. I predict there will be a late October post from 538 that is an analysis of a poll of polls about who trusts polls.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:49 AM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

New ads against Romney (not from the President) from service workers, related to the comments that resulted in this FPP.

"Meet the people that make America happen. Mitt Romney doesn't care about them"

Meet Joan Raymond [YouTube]
Joan is a City of San Diego sanitation worker whose route included Mitt Romney's $12 million oceanfront villa in La Jolla, Calif. This is her story.

Meet Temo Fuentes [YouTube]
Temo repairs the City of San Diego fire trucks that service Mitt Romney's $12 million oceanfront villa in La Jolla, Calif. This is his story.

Meet Richard Hayes [YouTube]
Richard is a City of San Diego sanitation worker whose route includes Mitt Romney's $12 million oceanfront villa in La Jolla, Calif. This is his story.
posted by cashman at 9:50 AM on October 2, 2012 [8 favorites]

I'm proud to be a Pennsylvania resident today, like, for the first time. I love me my Philly, but the rest of the state save Pittsburgh I've viewed as just ugh ugh ugh. Here's one for justice. I tweeted a marriage proposal to the judge which is mega lame but it just gave me such a big happy.
posted by angrycat at 9:50 AM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

Mitt Romney Loves a Good Gun Conspiracy: The presidential candidate rolls with paranoid NRA talk while ignoring mass shooting victims.
posted by homunculus at 9:51 AM on October 2, 2012 [6 favorites]

Doesn't look like we'll hit the Palin threshold with this thread, but by and large it's been fun.
posted by edgeways at 9:59 AM on October 2, 2012

Doesn't look like we'll hit the Palin threshold with this thread, but by and large it's been fun.

83% blame Obama for that.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:06 AM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

From Ralph Reed's "letter": If Obama wins reelection, "he can complete America's destruction." This warning, naturally, is presented in bold print.

Honestly I wish they would explain how it is Obama in his all encompassing Mordor like ultra-evil hasn't already destroyed the country?

I mean, c'mon already...is Obama super-evil or moderately-evil, and therefore requires another term for his evil to fully bloom or, is there something that went wrong with his evil powers??

WHY DOESN'T RALPH REED ADDRESS THESE IMPORTANT ISSUES?
posted by Skygazer at 10:07 AM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

Doesn't look like we'll hit the Palin threshold with this tread, but by and large it's been fun.

According to UnskewedMetafilter.com, this thread will exceed that threshold in a comment landslide, after you adjust for favorites and flags.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:08 AM on October 2, 2012 [11 favorites]

Doesn't look like we'll hit the Palin threshold with this thread, but by and large it's been fun.

If people come here to talk about the debates, that could breathe new life into it.

Speaking of the debates: Third Party Candidates to Join in Real Time on Democracy Now!’s Live Coverage of First Pres. Debate
posted by homunculus at 10:09 AM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

This thread is so badass it just made a remark concerning that infamous "Palin thread's" mother's habit of wearing combat boots.
posted by Skygazer at 10:17 AM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

Thinking about it a bit more, I beginning to think this Wednesday's debate will be anti-climatic. It won't convince anyone of anything they haven't already been convinced of and Obama will still continue to lead. Though the gap will probably close a bit over the next month.

When Obama wins re-election, and he will, then the story will be about why Obama won, what that means for both parties and how they'll act going forward.

Personally, I'm curious how the GOP will spin this. After all, what happened to their monstrous monetary lead? What does this say about the power of the FoxNews? And most importantly, what does this say about the Citizens United ruling and its supposed affect on US politics?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:21 AM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ralph Reed and Chuck Norris need to join forces. Like the Wonder Twins.
posted by homunculus at 10:21 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

Thinking about it a bit more, I beginning to think this Wednesday's debate will be anti-climatic.

I think wrong. Debate climaticity make Romney mad, say mean thing and whistle like dog.
posted by cashman at 10:25 AM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

Brad DeLong: Felix Salmon vs. Leon Cooperman

The thing about Leon Cooperman is--he didn't built that. He spent two years in the mid-1960s as a Xerox engineer, then went to business school, then went to Goldman Sachs as an analyst. Since then he has been picking stocks, buying them from people who probably would not sell and selling to people who probably would not buy if they really understood who their counterparty was--and, since 1991, persuading investors to pay him 2-and-20 to pick stocks for them.

NYMagazine: The Paul Ryan Legend Dissipates

Paul Ryan’s selection as Mitt Romney’s vice-presidential candidate is subjecting him to all manner of strange new indignities, such as questions about public policy that are different than those that his own press staff would have written. The Washington Post reported this weekend that Ryan has opposed bipartisan compromises to reduce the budget deficit. The facts in the story aren’t new. (If anything, they understate the active, crucial role Ryan has played in killing these deals.) What’s new is that the publicly available facts about Ryan’s opposition to bipartisan deficit reduction is penetrating the media narrative about him, which has always presented him as the very opposite.

Mother Jones: It's October, So It Must Be Time For A Surprise

Really? Well fine. I wasn't going to do this, since the prospect of an October Surprise hasn't really been a topic of conversation this year, but back in 2004 it was, and I wrote a short little history of October Surprises for the Washington Monthly. It never got published, but by God, no research should ever go to waste, should it? So in honor of October 1st, here it is. If you have the stamina to make it all the way to the end, there's even a short little contest. Enjoy.

posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:25 AM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

Brandon Blatcher: "Personally, I'm curious how the GOP will spin this. After all, what happened to their monstrous monetary lead? What does this say about the power of the FoxNews?

Assuming Romney loses the GOP will turn on him and his campaign like wolves. They'll blame his campaign for being incompetent. They'll start with the etch-a-sketch comment and create a timeline that makes him look like he didn't have proper control over his people or his message, and they'll blame him for making repeated mistakes that made him seem out of touch.

And most importantly, what does this say about the Citizens United ruling and its supposed affect on US politics?"

They'll probably say it hasn't been having as much of an effect as expected.
posted by zarq at 10:27 AM on October 2, 2012

Brandon Blatcher: Thinking about it a bit more, I beginning to think this Wednesday's debate will be anti-climatic. It won't convince anyone of anything they haven't already been convinced of and Obama will still continue to lead. Though the gap will probably close a bit over the next month.

I note that the always excellent Frontline "The Choice" episode for 2012 won't air until Oct. 9th.
posted by ob1quixote at 10:28 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

Personally, I'm curious how the GOP will spin this. After all, what happened to their monstrous monetary lead? What does this say about the power of the FoxNews?

They'll probably do something between claiming that Romney wasn't right-wing enough to motivate the GOP and seeing to it that no member of Jimmy Carter's family ever gets a job waiting tables ever again.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 10:36 AM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

I mean, c'mon already...is Obama super-evil or moderately-evil, and therefore requires another term for his evil to fully bloom or, is there something that went wrong with his evil powers??

It's because he knows that once the plan is completed, he'll be left with nothing to do but evilly twiddle his evil thumbs.
posted by diogenes at 10:43 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

I fully agree that voter suppression is a thing, but I fail to see how this (registering people as Republicans against their will/without their knowledge) is worthwhile for the Republicans to do.

In addition to the above explanations, there are a disturbing number of people who think if you're registered Republican, you can't vote for a Democrat. And, of course, don't discount the overwhelming Republican/conservative urge to do something pointless just to piss off a Democrat.
posted by dirigibleman at 10:43 AM on October 2, 2012

What does this say about the power of the FoxNews?

IMHO: that the Republican party is tied to it is not a good thing for Republicans. It's now common knowledge that Fox is full of it, and attacks based on their output are getting smeared with the same perception of dishonesty. Also FN is keeping the primary voters so far right and disconnected from the mainstream that it's hard for the relatively sane (hello Jon Huntsman) to even get the traction to reach the election proper.
posted by jaduncan at 10:43 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

In addition to the above explanations, there are a disturbing number of people who think if you're registered Republican, you can't vote for a Democrat. And, of course, don't discount the overwhelming Republican/conservative urge to do something pointless just to piss off a Democrat.

It also fits with what the right seems to want to do as of late, after trying to destroy journalism by doing it poorly on purpose, and trying to destroy government by doing it poorly on purpose. They seem to be intent on creating havoc with the voting process to destroy that too.
posted by cashman at 10:55 AM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

NYMagazine - The Polls Have Stopped Making Any Sense
posted by the man of twists and turns at 11:19 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

Offshore Tactics Helped Increase Romneys’ Wealth.
posted by ericb at 11:21 AM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Mitt Romney Who Might Have Been.
posted by ericb at 11:24 AM on October 2, 2012

Romney would be such an awesome president of Saudi Arabia or some other nation with a big sovereign wealth fund.
posted by feloniousmonk at 11:24 AM on October 2, 2012

From the article about the Voter ID law in Pennsylvania (which was a very mixed decision, by the way, it's not a complete victory by any means):

"Republican Pennsylvania Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, who sponsored the voter ID bill, lashed out at a 'judicial activist decision' he called 'skewed in favor of the lazy who refuse to exercise the necessary work ethic to meet the commonsense requirements to obtain an acceptable photo ID.' Simpson, he wrote, has chosen 'to openly enable and fully embrace the ever-increasing entitlement mentality of those individuals who have no problem living off the fruits of their neighbors' labor.'"

... Wow. They're not even all pretending it's about voter fraud anymore, huh?
posted by kyrademon at 11:38 AM on October 2, 2012 [22 favorites]

Why should voting be work? Isn't work something you avoid unless you are paid? Should we pay people to vote?
posted by edgeways at 11:43 AM on October 2, 2012

How can Metcalfe, a democratically elected official, be so off his rocker? I mean, psychologically, it's fascinating.
posted by angrycat at 11:46 AM on October 2, 2012

We should at least make sure they are not being unpaid to vote. Make it a federal holiday. The reasons why it isn't are fairly transparent in my view.
posted by feloniousmonk at 11:49 AM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

And, uh, I think debate wise the Vice Presidential debate could be where the firecrackers happen.

Finally:

How the Romney campaign is spinning the debate?

"This is really about introducing him to the country,”

Jesus Christ on a pogo stick, just how many times does this jackass need to be introduced? Not to mention the Convention which was suppose to be all about introducing Mitt, if people weren't tripping over themselves getting ready for 2016, or yelling at furniture, but seriously enough already, 6 years running for president I think people know you already. That's the problem.
posted by edgeways at 11:53 AM on October 2, 2012 [13 favorites]

Re: Citizens United

It's not having as much of an effect on the presidential race, but it is having a huge effect on congress. Why throw good money after bad in trying to buy a president when you can buy ten house seats for the same price?

Re: Fox News

One of the things that's really interesting to me is that the mutual push rightward from both the Republicans and Fox has left them each further right than the median Republican voter. Frankly, I hope that losing this election leads to enough recriminations that we get Republicans closer to the center and more able to work with Democrats, who are already centrist enough. But I tend to think that the extreme insulating powers of wealth will prevent the Republican elites from recognizing that it's their fault they're losing, and that they've been radicalized far more than the general populace.
posted by klangklangston at 11:59 AM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

He ran for president in 2008. He's been introduced. We're asking him kindly to fuck off.
posted by grubi at 11:59 AM on October 2, 2012 [8 favorites]

FiveThirtyEight: New Polls Raise Chance of Electoral College Tie

Yeah, this was the first time I've thought of a 538 article as blatant clickbait. It was somewhat disappointing from Nate.

Headline: Is the Presidential Race Tightening Heading Into the Debates?
Article: Nope.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 12:03 PM on October 2, 2012

cashman: It also fits with what the right seems to want to do as of late, after trying to destroy journalism by doing it poorly on purpose, and trying to destroy government by doing it poorly on purpose. They seem to be intent on creating havoc with the voting process to destroy that too.

That made me think for a minute, and reminded me of something. William S. Lind, in addition to being the author of the Maneuver Warfare Handbook and popularizing the concept of the Boyd Cycle among the American officer corps, is a staunch conservative. So conservative, in fact, that your statement, cashman, made me think of the time Lind wrote in his column, "Of course, like all real conservatives, I am a monarchist. The universe is not a republic."

In some senses, Lind sees World War I as the end of civilization. He writes, "In fact, it was one of two cataclysmic disasters of Western civilization in the Modern period (the other was the French Revolution)." He continues, "Still, had the Central Powers won in the end, the civilization destruction might not have been so complete."

So I'm left wondering just how common such views are on the right, and how that impacts today's soi-disant conservative movement.
posted by ob1quixote at 12:04 PM on October 2, 2012 [8 favorites]

We are brought full circle back to the 47% video because Romney voiced what a lot of people on the Right believe-- that if the poor are allowed to vote, they will only vote for welfare for themselves. There are so many things wrong with this position but two things pop into my head immediately. The first is that this only pays lip service to Democracy. America is The Greatest Country on Earth and Land of the Free but there is this hidden agenda that certain freedoms should not be allowed and certain people should not be allowed to vote.

The second thing that jumps out at me is that of course everybody votes selfishly. Why on earth are these billionaires spending so much money trying to sway the vote if not for the fact that they think a Romney Administration will give them something they won't get with the Obama Administration. I personally will vote very selfishly: an Obama America sounds more like a country I would like to live in than a Romney America.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:04 PM on October 2, 2012 [9 favorites]

Poll from late Sept that includes Johnson pulling about 2% has Obama about 3 points back in MO, which incidentally is a closer margin than FL, OH, IA, CO.

Would need a series of confirmation polls, but I wonder if Akin is eroding some support for the top of the ticket. Consider if MO Republican voters are already ambivalent about Romney and their Senate candidate is also kind a major asshole there could be serious motivation issues in MO.
posted by edgeways at 12:07 PM on October 2, 2012

And on the other end of the voting news spectrum:

[Link] "Nationally, there’s been little to no concern raised over using tablets and smartphones while voting, said Kay Stimson, spokeswoman for the National Association of Secretaries of State. States seem more focused on harnessing new technologies to aid voters, she said.

Some counties in Oregon and Colorado now send election officials with iPads to the homes of disabled voters, Stimson said."

Here, let me save you the trouble of looking it up: Oregon demographics (black persons - 2%). Colorado demographics (black persons - 4.6%).

Versus states where people are freaking out and throwing up voting barriers and saying anybody with a problem is lazy and shouldn't be accommodated - Pennsylvania demographics (black persons - 11.3%). Ohio demographics (black persons - 12.4%). Florida demographics (black persons - 16.5%).
posted by cashman at 12:12 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

Man.. I don't know who is in charge of selecting photos for their candidates in the web advertising, but there are a variety of particularly bad ones. Rob Mckinna (sp?) running for Gov of WA (I believe) has a photo on an ad that frankly makes him look like he is going to bite your throat out while singing show tunes.
posted by edgeways at 12:22 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

Does Mitt Romney stand by the Mormon Church's views of women?

But unlike almost any other high elected American official who’s also a person of faith, Romney has been a leader of his church, not simply a congregant—having stood at the front of his Massachusetts congregation and presided as a stake president for the region. He hasn’t simply absorbed and followed church policy in his own life, but has enforced it in the community of believers.

[snip]

So I’d like to know: does Romney see women as innately subject to the authority of men? Would he dismiss women’s issues like contraception as distracting, shiny objects, as one of his senior campaign advisers did in June?

posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:28 PM on October 2, 2012

Harpers : Unlikely Questions for the First Presidential Debate - Some questions that are highly unlikely to be asked at the first, “domestic” presidential debate on Wednesday—or that will, if they are somehow asked, be strenuously avoided by both candidates.

NYTimes:The Math On The Romney-Ryan Tax Plan

Mr. Ryan and Mitt Romney have proposed a tax plan that would lower everyone’s tax rates by 20 percent. On Sunday, Mr. Ryan was asked to explain how the proposal can be revenue neutral — that is, not reduce the total amount of tax revenues collected — given this condition of substantially lower tax rates. He mentioned ending tax deductions starting with “people at the higher end” and broadening the tax base, and finally declared:
… it would take me too long to go through all of the math, but let me say it this way. You can lower tax rates by 20 percent across the board by closing loopholes and still have preferences for the middle class for things like charitable deductions, for home purchases, for health care.

There’s a reason why it would take too long — infinitely long, you could say — to go through the math that holds this policy proposal together: because math will never hold this particular policy proposal together.

posted by the man of twists and turns at 12:39 PM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

Headline: Is the Presidential Race Tightening Heading Into the Debates?
The answer is always "No".

Separately, if I had a car that needed to be re-started as often as the Romney campaign, I'd figure the battery was dead.
posted by benito.strauss at 12:40 PM on October 2, 2012 [6 favorites]

Skygazer: Can they be real? I mean check out the comments for this story (linked from Drudge).

Poll: Plurality say polls biased for Obama

Some 42 percent of voters surveyed by Daily Kos and SEIU believe pollsters are manipulating their sample sizes to benefit the incumbent president, while 40 percent do not. An additional 18 percent said they were not sure. That's evidence that Republican claims that Democrats and minority voters are being oversampled in national polls could be resonating — and potentially undermining the momentum of the president's early lead.

That's a lot of that there, and it is some pretty weak sauce. "People think so, so that HAS to be proof, right? There are a lot of people saying so, so some of them have to be right!"

And then the comments get even more scattered. One person wrote "the greedy Unions in this country are ready to hand it to the World Communist Order on a silver platter," and follows with the following:

If Barrack Hussein Obama comes out on top in the evening of Nov 6 or the early morning of Nov 7, you will be living in a bankrupt, atheistic, Socialist state by 2016, run by an individual who has no use for our Constitution, no use for freedom and democracy, no use for the truth, no morality, no use for the United States of KKK

And it goes on. In summary, we need to Praise God, fear the World Communist Order, and somehow the KKK are involved.

If nothing else, why can't people embrace the separation of church and state? Don't they remember that this nation was founded by people who were escaping religious persecution? That's back to my first-grade level education, so I'm not claiming any "educated elite" status.
posted by filthy light thief at 12:40 PM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

And they aren't going to have any women presidential moderators in a position to ask about this, which kinda sucks. The one lady they do have, Candy Crowley, for the Prez debates is running the "town hall" format which more or less is someone who is a mobile mic stand for the audience rather than getting to ask your own questions.
Jim Lehrer and Bob Schieffer are pretty ho hum safe choices... don't get me wrong I tend to like Lehrer, but I would be surprised if he asks anything about Voter ID or "Women's issues"
posted by edgeways at 12:41 PM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

Is the Presidential Race Tightening Heading Into the Debates?

Following the headline writer's rule there: want to run an attention grabbing story you wish you had but have no evidence whatsoever? Headline it as a question.
posted by jaduncan at 12:42 PM on October 2, 2012

[Akin talking about abortion providers] And what sort of places do these bottom-of-the-food-chain doctors work in? Places that are really a pit. You find that along with the culture of death go all kinds of other law-breaking: not following good sanitary procedure, giving abortions to women who are not actually pregnant, cheating on taxes, all these kinds of things, misuse of anesthetics so that people die or almost die...

(my bold)

Women are so dumb they pay for abortions when they are not even pregnant.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:47 PM on October 2, 2012 [9 favorites]

I was in a Subway, the lone customer. Some dude comes in, gets his sandwich, then as he goes out the door just as I begin to shove food in my mouth begins to yell, "VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY DON'T LET THAT ASSHOLE BACK IN OFFICE." The only other people in there were me and the sandwich maker. I mean, it seems a very inefficient way to get out the vote. It was also very startling and off-putting, like I'd somehow taken my sandwich into a public restroom and there were all these bodily functions going on while I was eating.
posted by angrycat at 1:05 PM on October 2, 2012 [11 favorites]

FPP (not mine) was deleted but the letter itself was pretty awesome, so maybe no one minds if I repost it here?
posted by RolandOfEld at 1:09 PM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

I was in a Subway, the lone customer. Some dude comes in

Are you sure it wasn't Mitt?
posted by Horace Rumpole at 1:11 PM on October 2, 2012 [6 favorites]

”If Barack Obama becomes the president in November, again, I will be either be dead or in jail by this time next year.”

- Ted Nugent April 2012

Man, 7 more months until we don't have to hear from the Nuge anymore
posted by edgeways at 1:12 PM on October 2, 2012 [17 favorites]

funny photo HR, my bet? the fellow on the right just goosed Romney and Mittens can't respond because he is being photoed.
posted by edgeways at 1:15 PM on October 2, 2012

I'm still trying to figure out what bonuses are given out to get gays into the military, like a giftcard?
posted by The Whelk at 1:17 PM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

November 7, 2012: In the nation's capital, Ted Nugent and eleven of his self-proclaimed Motorcity Militia were killed by federal security officers when they tried to attack the White House this afternoon. Mr. Nugent, formerly known as a rock musician, was armed with a bow and arrow.
posted by perhapses at 1:27 PM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

Coincidentally Chipotle prices dropped 4% today, with a bit of a sharp drop about 11:30am... now what time did Romney visit? (heh)
posted by edgeways at 1:44 PM on October 2, 2012

Here's the Chipotle photo from the side with the guy (who reminds me of DMC) gettin silly with it. And you can see dude cheesing already as Mitt is coming through the line.
posted by cashman at 2:00 PM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

giving abortions to women who are not actually pregnant

I like to call those 'ethical abortions', since they are guaranteed to cause no harm to a fetus.

HAMBURGER
posted by Space_Lady at 2:08 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

Looks like that 3 point gap in MO was replicated in a poll today... so we'll see. MO may just be a swing state this year
posted by edgeways at 2:18 PM on October 2, 2012

Drudge is planning on "dropping" something tonight. That could get us to 5k.
posted by drezdn at 2:33 PM on October 2, 2012

Fingers crossed!
posted by grubi at 2:38 PM on October 2, 2012

Normally, I wouldn't much care what Drudge says but with time counting down it will be interesting as an indicator of the quality of what we can expect in the coordinated talking points during the big debate news cycle. If he "drops" some braindead birtherism revival on us, it's a strong sign that the GOP is for-real out of ideas.
posted by feloniousmonk at 2:43 PM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

Drudge is not a GOP operative, but it would indicate that some who are against Obama being president for a second term are desperate. Anyway, Trump has been tooting the birther horn for long enough that Wolff Blitzer said ‘Donald, you’re beginning to sound a little ridiculous’. I don't expect the return to birther claims to be met with anything more than widespread scorn in the MSM, if it gets picked up at all.
posted by filthy light thief at 2:49 PM on October 2, 2012

BREAKING ON DRUDGE: Video of Obama throwing up on a white woman in 1962.
posted by drezdn at 2:50 PM on October 2, 2012 [6 favorites]

Drudge is not a GOP operative

...just how close do you have to be to qualify here? I mean, full direct paycheque?
posted by jaduncan at 2:53 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

Drudge's headline now reads: "FOXNEWS TONIGHT: OBAMA'S OTHER RACE SPEECH."
posted by zarq at 2:53 PM on October 2, 2012

filthy light thief: "Drudge is not a GOP operative"

In all but name. He's a cog in their attack machine and has been so since his site launched.
posted by zarq at 2:55 PM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

Drudge is not a GOP operative

had no idea today is opposite day.
posted by liza at 2:57 PM on October 2, 2012

Romney's out with an actual specific proposal: cap itemized deductions at $17,000. And damned if I don't think it's an excellent idea. I hope Obama steals it for his second term.
posted by msalt at 2:58 PM on October 2, 2012

I don't really want to get caught up in the issue of who keeps Drudge in funny hats, but I think it is undeniable that he is an influential voice among the contemporary right.
posted by feloniousmonk at 2:58 PM on October 2, 2012

Romney's out with an actual specific proposal: cap itemized deductions at $17,000. And damned if I don't think it's an excellent idea. I hope Obama steals it for his second term.

Tax plan specifics! From Mitt Romney!

This leaves a lot of unanswered questions. For instance, which deductions are covered in the $17,000 cap? Is it only the deductions he mentioned? Is it all itemized deductions? Is the state and local tax deduction in there? Is it really going to include the exclusion for employer-based health care? Is the cap in addition to, or instead of, the standard deduction? Do individual taxpayers have a lower cap than families?

Even if you assume the plan will be maximally stringent, it doesn’t look like this would raise enough money to pay for Romney’s tax cuts. Remember that to make the numbers work, Romney would have to fully eliminate all itemized deductions — and a few deductions beyond that — for wealthy taxpayers. This doesn’t go anywhere near that far. William Gale, of the Tax Policy Center, says the net revenue would likely be in the $1-$2 trillion range, while Romney’s rate cuts are in the $5 trillion range, though he cautions that that’s just a guess based on Romney’s description of the idea.

posted by zombieflanders at 3:05 PM on October 2, 2012

OK, correction: Drudge is not a paid GOP operative. By that, I mean whatever he pulls out is just as much a Message from the GOP as when a local GOP office posts a picture of Obama as a witch doctor with a bone through his nose. Sure, it's a sentiment shared by some members of the party, but it is not a message from the national Grand Old Party as a unified whole.

angrycat: then as he goes out the door just as I begin to shove food in my mouth begins to yell, "VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY DON'T LET THAT ASSHOLE BACK IN OFFICE."

And this is how some discuss politics in the US, because they're afraid the other person might actually reply.
posted by filthy light thief at 3:06 PM on October 2, 2012

I don't know about the deduction cap idea. On the one hand, we have a progressive tax rate that determines how much you pay based on your income, and on the other hand, we have a proposal for a sort of progressive deduction cap, which determines how much you can not pay based on your income.

This seems dubious to me. Beyond the flaws pointed out in the link, it seems like an attempt to surreptitiously raise the standard deduction for people who can afford to figure out how to hit their cap, so basically, another tax cut.
posted by feloniousmonk at 3:10 PM on October 2, 2012

The Republican strategy of trying to keep Obama from being successful is the primary reason they will lose this election. For some people, it's far easier to vote against Obama (the main message) by not voting at all.
posted by perhapses at 3:11 PM on October 2, 2012

If the choice is between them distributing no aid, and distributing aid to some specific individuals, I think the latter is better - don't you?

What!? I thought the libertarian position is that all wealth redistribution is evil? What am I missing?

Currently, my family is engaged in discussions around who takes care of X relative ... I've given significant sums of money and non-material assistance to family members who were not in my immediate family when they needed something and I was the one who could provide it.

What gives your family the right to take your money and spread it around to more "needy" family members? This seems inconsistent with libertarian morality as I understand it.

In return, when I was younger and needed assistance and wisdom, it was provided for me.

In return? Retroactive repayment? Just because your family perpetrated wealth redistribution in your favor when you were young, doesn't mean you should continue that mistake. What if you hadn't received enough wisdom and other benefits when you were younger to justify what would be required of you to take care of needy family members? Maybe the best thing would be for families to keep books on how much value/wealth they have provide to their children, so there is no over or under repayment later on.

I think it is inaccurate to say that the poor can't provide family support to each other.

I agree, but I think it is inaccurate to say there is an either/or choice between a poor family helping themselves and receiving assistance from outside sources. The government (the community) can assist a poor family in helping themselves, IMO. What would happen if a family was really unlucky and and had several handicapped children and a primary care giver with a major health problem or something?

It seems to me if Romney is truly against any wealth redistribution he should make sure most of his money is burned and wealth completely destroyed after he dies. Otherwise, there is no way his wealth will be spread around fairly.
posted by Golden Eternity at 3:15 PM on October 2, 2012

"I'm still trying to figure out what bonuses are given out to get gays into the military, like a giftcard?"

A camo boa and a Magic Mike dvd.
posted by klangklangston at 3:15 PM on October 2, 2012 [5 favorites]

The Republican strategy of trying to keep Obama from being successful is the primary reason they will lose this election.

The election's already over. The Republican strategy should've included two kinds of chocolate chips.
posted by box at 3:19 PM on October 2, 2012

Also, those Unlikely Questions? They are awesome. I wish there were debates where questions like that got asked.
posted by klangklangston at 3:20 PM on October 2, 2012

So, apparently people are saying this speech at Hampton University is the Drudge video (transcript here). These "secret" links have been available since June of 2007, which is sad and hilarious.

I'm watching it now, but I'm not seeing anything incendiary about it, at least not to the average American. There's some talk about the after-effects of the LA riots and Katrina being the results of generations of Blacks and Black communities being treated like shit that might get racists all hot and bothered. Of course, this may not be the video, or I might just not see it, but for now it seems pretty meh.

EDIT: Apparently this was from an open press event, too. Shocker!
posted by zombieflanders at 3:26 PM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

And apparently there's another clip where Obama thanks Rev. Wright for being like a family to him, and Politico had a 2008 story about the top 8 gaffes of the fall that included it.

This is good news for the McCain campaign!
posted by zombieflanders at 3:40 PM on October 2, 2012 [12 favorites]

Huh, it must be old video night. Huffington Post has a video of Ryan speaking in Nov 2011 which would be 6 months before Romney's 47% video but with roughly the same sentiment:

"Today, 70 percent of Americans get more benefits from the federal government in dollar value than they pay back in taxes," Ryan said. "So you could argue that we're already past that [moral] tipping point. The good news is survey after survey, poll after poll, still shows that we are a center-right 70-30 country. Seventy percent of Americans want the American dream. They believe in the American idea. Only 30 percent want their welfare state. What that tells us is at least half of those people who are currently in that category are there not of their wish or their will."

Somebody want to check his math because it seems a bit off.
100% of Americans
70% get back more than they give
70% want the American Dream
30 % want welfare
50% getting welfare don't want to be in that situation.

I would like to see a Venn diagram of this because I am dizzy. But the crux is that he thinks 70% who "get more from the federal government than they pay in taxes" is equal to getting welfare and that 30% of something (all people? those on welfare?) are lazy bums.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:41 PM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

That's all you got, Drudge?

Breitbart wept.
posted by Joey Michaels at 3:42 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

""Today, 70 percent of Americans get more benefits from the federal government in dollar value than they pay back in taxes," Ryan said. "So you could argue that we're already past that [moral] tipping point. The good news is survey after survey, poll after poll, still shows that we are a center-right 70-30 country. Seventy percent of Americans want the American dream. They believe in the American idea. Only 30 percent want their welfare state. What that tells us is at least half of those people who are currently in that category are there not of their wish or their will.""

That 70 percent bit is just remarkably stupid if you think about it for a moment. Pretty much 100 percent of Americans get more than they give based on paying a market rate for things like internet and roads and police; all the 70 percent does is illustrate that by investing in government, most people profit! It's an investment! That's capitalism, you myopic schmuck!
posted by klangklangston at 3:51 PM on October 2, 2012 [5 favorites]

What I keep stumbling over is the phrase "we're already past that [moral] tipping point. What does that even mean? If 50% of Americans were getting back more from the government than they pay in taxes, would that make America more moral? So does that make the 70% "immoral"?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:01 PM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

I used to compete in speech and debate in college. Ryan reminds me of guys that would give speeches and to the audience members not paying attention would come across as whiz kids with their amazing ability to pull statistics out of the air. But to anyone listening closely the logic is fuzzy, the math doesn't add up and in the end you are sitting in your seat thinking "Why the hell are you clapping? That guy just spoke a lot of gobbledegook." I remember walking up to one guy after his speech and asking, "What did you mean by saying XYZ?" and his reply was "Well if you didn't understand it, I can't explain it to you." I get the feeling Ryan is a lot like that.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:08 PM on October 2, 2012 [6 favorites]

There will be a Press Conference to officially announce the establishment of the New Independent Christian Party on October 5, 2012 at 7:00pm at the Kingdom Empowerment Business Center, 3512 Bladensburg RD, Brentwood, MD 20722.

The November election is poised to leave the Christian base with an extremely bitter taste of misrepresentation and miscalculation of our position and priorities concerning many of the issues in the forefront of American lives today.

The misrepresentation of the biblical teachings and principles to which we profess as Christians, prevent us from continuing to support either the Democratic or the Republican Party candidates.

As the Party of No Compromise, the New Independent Christian Party intends to influence the outcome of American elections and uphold the Godly principles by which America was built and by which Christians believe, live and exist.
posted by perhapses at 4:10 PM on October 2, 2012

Ryan reminds me of guys that would give speeches and to the audience members not paying attention would come across as whiz kids with their amazing ability to pull statistics out of the air. But to anyone listening closely the logic is fuzzy, the math doesn't add up and in the end you are sitting in your seat thinking "Why the hell are you clapping?

Ah, so he's going to President one day.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:10 PM on October 2, 2012

So the deluge of almost-specifics will start, so that the race tightens, Romney & Ryan can say they have specifics, and so they are at the sweet spot of having no chance to win because of the constant dodging, and giving analysts and the public too much time to debunk their plans and see through them. It also keeps the focus away from his still unreleased tax returns, and other damaging information. It has been said since early this year, and before. Their only hope is to wait until the end, and then make a run for it. Smear the president, float ideas without real commitments, do the robocalls, and basically cause chaos that prevents the truth from being known, and hope that through the voter suppression efforts and appealing to people's lower selves that they can squeak out a victory. I will be absolutely shocked if Mitt played fair tomorrow night. It just isn't going to happen. The election is far from over, and it looks like they think now is about the time to start shit.
posted by cashman at 4:11 PM on October 2, 2012

"Today, 70 percent of Americans get more benefits from the federal government in dollar value than they pay back in taxes," Ryan said. "So you could argue that we're already past that [moral] tipping point.

The logic is simple. Receiving more than you pay is immoral. Everyone needs to pay the same or more in tax than they receive. The only certain way to achieve this is a 100% tax rate, and all things being ultimately owned by the state. Thus, with only one huge logically dubious jump, I accuse Ryan of communism.

I hope I have embraced his rhetorical methods correctly.
posted by jaduncan at 4:13 PM on October 2, 2012 [8 favorites]

OK, correction: Drudge is not a paid GOP operative.

Neither is Rush. Neither is Fox. But they are operatives none the less.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:14 PM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

Robert Wright's rebuttal to Friedersdorf:

Why I Refuse to Refuse to Vote for Obama
posted by Bokmakierie at 4:15 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

Ralph Reed and Chuck Norris need to join forces. Like the Wonder Twins.

"Shape of... a bigot!"

"Form of... a jackass!"
posted by Flunkie at 4:26 PM on October 2, 2012 [5 favorites]

ericb at 2:21

Same-day Obama Truth Team ad on Mitt Romney's Offshore Tax Havens.
posted by cashman at 4:27 PM on October 2, 2012

Flunkie: "Shape of... a bigot!"

Just to preserve the water-based theme of one half of the Wonder Twins, that should be "Shape of... a really, really sweaty bigot!"
posted by Joey Michaels at 4:29 PM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

I seem to remember that there were a lot of "cheaty" things that were equivalent to "Form of... an ice bigot!"
posted by Flunkie at 4:41 PM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

Jackass Bigotry activate!
posted by futz at 4:43 PM on October 2, 2012

Secret Life of Gravy: What I keep stumbling over is the phrase "we're already past that [moral] tipping point.["] What does that even mean?

That's what I was sort of obliquely getting at above. I think that a sizable portion of self-styled conservatives are distrustful of democracy in general and the their fellow citizens in particular.

The moral tipping point in this case is the fact that too many people are receiving benefits above what their contribution is. The implication being that in itself is immoral because, "if any would not work, neither should he eat." The thinking being that if those people—and I think we're all well aware what the implication of that loaded phrase is—were working as they should, they must perforce wind up paying more in tax than they receive in benefits. The fact the entire premise is misguided and misanthropic at best is lost on people who don't really believe in representative democracy anyway.
posted by ob1quixote at 4:43 PM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm watching it now, but I'm not seeing anything incendiary about it, at least not to the average American. There's some talk about the after-effects of the LA riots and Katrina being the results of generations of Blacks and Black communities being treated like shit that might get racists all hot and bothered.

Exactly. Re-posting this old video is a reminder dog whistle: "Hey, Tea Party! This is why you hated this guy in the first place, remember?" It's meant to stoke the fire of what these people really mean when they talk about "entitlement" - that the African-American poor have the nerve to point out their continued disenfranchisement and the institutional racism that surrounds them even though slavery's abolished and they can drink from the same water fountains as anyone else.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 4:49 PM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

Apparently...

From Drudge: DAILY CALLER: 'For nearly 40 minutes, using an accent he never adopts in public, Obama describes a racist, zero-sum society, in which the white majority profits by exploiting black America'... Developing tonight...

emphasis mine, good grief...
posted by TwoWordReview at 4:53 PM on October 2, 2012

What? They're going to use audio of a Malcolm X speech and say it's Obama?
posted by perhapses at 4:56 PM on October 2, 2012

Black man born during Jim Crow era "sounds blackish," talks about black people's struggles in America throughout the years. News at 11 9!
posted by zombieflanders at 5:18 PM on October 2, 2012

What? They're going to use audio of a Malcolm X speech and say it's Obama?

No, no. This is the GOP. It just sounds like a person with a bone in his nose.
posted by jaduncan at 5:19 PM on October 2, 2012

How can any sentient human believe Mittens when he says, "Not one dollar in taxes was saved by my investing offshore or in Switzerland..."?

Why in the holy fuck would anyone do that if there were no benefit?

It boggles the mind.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 5:29 PM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm still trying to figure out what bonuses are given out to get gays into the military, like a giftcard?

Have you seen those Navy uniforms? HelllLO.
posted by Miko at 5:32 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

ProgressNow set up a cardboard Obama near the entrance to a Romney rally on Monday night. They filmed the Republicans as they passed by.

“Go back to Kenya!” one person says.

“Strangle him!” says another.

Some of the comments were directed at the ProgressNow staffers holding up the cut-out and the video camera.

“Is that your Muslim communist buddy?” one person asks.

“Why are you supporting an Islamist, Marxist idiot?” asks another.

I was trying very hard to imagine this as a Democrat crowd passing by a cardboard cut out of Romney. For the life of me I cannot imagine what I would say/yell. I can't imagine the crowd getting rowdy at all. What's the meanest thing you could imagine labeling Romney? Capitalist?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:33 PM on October 2, 2012

Oh, I already have many choice words coming to mind. I really can't say that my liberal cohort is stainless when it comes to name-calling.
posted by Miko at 5:35 PM on October 2, 2012 [5 favorites]

What's the meanest thing you could imagine labeling Romney?

"Did you get lost on the way to the 'Just For Men' shoot?"
posted by drezdn at 5:36 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

Word--I can definitely go meaner than 'capitalist.' In fact, you go ahead and think of a word that's meaner than 'capitalist,' and then I'll go meaner than that word.

(This would make a good Name-that-Tune-style game.)
posted by box at 5:37 PM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

We already knew that a candidate who wins as a result of nonwhite support didn't *really* win. Now it turns out that a public address given before a nonwhite audience is actually private!
posted by gerryblog at 5:38 PM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

What's the meanest thing you could imagine labelling Romney?

A man who spent his life and sold his soul trying to do what his daddy couldn't, and is about to fail anyway.
posted by jaduncan at 5:39 PM on October 2, 2012 [6 favorites]

What's the meanest thing you could imagine labeling Romney?

Oh, there's probably a lot of unfair shit you could say about Romney, much of it invoking magic underwear and polygamy. But pertaining to his beliefs and practices as a businessman and politician, yeah, there's a boatload of stuff you could justifiably throw at that guy.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 5:40 PM on October 2, 2012

Wah, this was on my G+ feed:

"think 4 more years of a admin that issued denial too CHRIS STEVENS for more security at the consulate in BENGHAZI, yet gave Valerie Jarrett a SECRET SERVICE DETAIL TOO PROTECT HER from what exactly,4 more yrs of the lying,cover-ups where is this TRANSPARENTCY HE TALKED ABOUT 4yrs ago,4 more yrs of him claiming responsibility for Osama really thought NAVY SEALS TOOK HIM OUT,another 4 YRS of waiting for an inept president TOO LEAVE MORE MURDERED AMERICAN'S BEHIND "THOSE BUMPS IN the ROAD HE RAN OVER,just think give him 4 more years in OFFICE, AND MEXICO WILL HAVE AMERICAN FOOD STAMPS PAID FOR BY AMERICAN TAXPAYERS,with all those free phone he is handing out He'll have instituted VOTE BY PHONE AND THE OBAMA FLAG WILL FLY HIGH OVER OUR CAPITAL yes america VOTE 4 MORE YEARS"

I think that I may have bumped into a mixture of partisan and timecube believer.
posted by jaduncan at 5:42 PM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

I wouldn't say anything to a cardboard cutout of Romney. But I couldn't make any promises if it were actually Romney.

I once called Ollie North a prick to his face when I met him in a ski lodge. I'm older now, and mellowed, but...
posted by Benny Andajetz at 5:42 PM on October 2, 2012 [9 favorites]

No the left is not stainless, but all the buzz words applied to Obama: Marxist, communist, Nazi. Muslim, socialist, terrorist, have been applied without rhyme or reason. Just a mish mash of bug-a-boo words.

Seriously what is left? (And I don't mean true qualifiers like Mormon or 1%er)

A man who spent his life and sold his soul trying to do what his daddy couldn't, and is about to fail anyway.

Funny, but kind of hard to yell at at a cardboard cut-out when walking by.

I don't think Fascist has been applied to Obama but I don't think of Romney as a fascist. I don't think of him as stupid or crazy. I guess "Wooden-Boy" or "Robot" is the only thing I can come up with.

AND THE OBAMA FLAG WILL FLY HIGH OVER OUR CAPITAL

Ooo I'm excited. Wonder what the Obama Flag looks like.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:43 PM on October 2, 2012

Heh:

@joelmmathis: Tucker Carlson aired the Obama video on his MSNBC show back in 2007. Which is why it's news: No one saw it until tonight.

posted by zombieflanders at 5:44 PM on October 2, 2012 [12 favorites]

Benny Andajetz: Why in the holy fuck would anyone do that if there were no benefit?

I'm not saying I believe Romney when he says that his offshore accounts were never used to avoid tax liability, but, presuming you have enough money, it is prudent investing to not have all your assets denominated in the same currency.
posted by ob1quixote at 5:45 PM on October 2, 2012

Huh, this version of Romney seems more personable, somehow.
posted by Lemurrhea at 5:46 PM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

I once called Ollie North a prick to his face when I met him in a ski lodge. I'm older now, and mellowed, but...

But I am saluting you through the other side of your monitor.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 5:46 PM on October 2, 2012 [8 favorites]

I have a hard time seeing "robot" as an insult on par with calling a black Christian an "Islamist."
posted by muddgirl at 5:47 PM on October 2, 2012

That Chipotle picture is priceless.
posted by drezdn at 5:49 PM on October 2, 2012

I'd probably yell "Get a real job, ya hippie!"
posted by Faint of Butt at 5:51 PM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ooo I'm excited. Wonder what the Obama Flag looks like.

Almost sure that he means the campaign symbol, but I'll spare the blue the other [maybe 30] postings.
posted by jaduncan at 5:54 PM on October 2, 2012

Huh, this version of Romney seems more personable, somehow.

"Romney 21.0: now no gaffes."
posted by jaduncan at 5:56 PM on October 2, 2012

Ooo I'm excited. Wonder what the Obama Flag looks like.

I thought we already settled what the flag would look like.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 5:57 PM on October 2, 2012 [7 favorites]

all the buzz words applied to Obama: Marxist, communist, Nazi. Muslim, socialist, terrorist, have been applied without rhyme or reason

Racist, sexist, liar, desperate, pathetic, white supremacist, miser, neurotic, certifiably insane, dissociative, coldhearted, phony, bully, tax cheat, jackass, loser, stench...There are some really good ones on here. Didn't get far at all before I snorted at "American Borat."

I agree that there are a lot of accusations against Obama that are the stuff of sheer fantasy. And that you don't see as much of that on the left. But as far as extrapolating from his actual policies to create negative epithets: well, sure. Don't mind if I do.
posted by Miko at 5:58 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'm disappointed by the lack of unicorns in that picture.
posted by TwoWordReview at 5:58 PM on October 2, 2012

This is hilarious! Hannity is trying to dramatize this Obama tape, even though he admits the AP was there and news media was there.

I'd say all this stuff right now, today. Obama could say that tonight and I wouldn't have a single problem.

Also, these fools are COMPLETELY out of touch with black America. Completely. They are going on about the way Barack is talking. Obama is behind a pulpit. That's what black preachers do. They adopt a manner of speaking that draws out words like that. If you've ever been to a black church you've heard it.

This tape is completely nothing. Every single black person I know would cosign the shit out of this tape.

Complete non-story. Complete.

This is Fox news desperate.
posted by cashman at 6:10 PM on October 2, 2012 [7 favorites]

I'm disappointed by the lack of unicorns in general.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:12 PM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

Secret Life of Gravy: Ooo I'm excited. Wonder what the Obama Flag looks like.

Obama team tweets red, white and blue poster, critics see only red, msnNow, 20 September, 2012
posted by ob1quixote at 6:13 PM on October 2, 2012

Tucker Carlson is getting clowned on twitter.
posted by cashman at 6:19 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

Also, these fools are COMPLETELY out of touch with black America. Completely. They are going on about the way Barack is talking. Obama is behind a pulpit. That's what black preachers do. They adopt a manner of speaking that draws out words like that. If you've ever been to a black church you've heard it.

In fairness to them, they don't have to believe that. They just have to believe that their almost-entirely-white audience do.
posted by jaduncan at 6:21 PM on October 2, 2012

@chrislhayes: Wait, Tucker Carlson carved a backwards B into his own cheek?
posted by cashman at 6:22 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'm kind of amused to think that the October Surprise might be that Obama is black.
posted by jaduncan at 6:22 PM on October 2, 2012 [25 favorites]

The October Surprise will be a video of Obama surreptitiously putting ketchup on a Chicago hotdog.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:25 PM on October 2, 2012 [10 favorites]

Also, I was just reminded that Obama talks like that all the time when he gets amped up. And it's true. When he starts talking over crowd noise, that's exactly how he talks. I had to turn it off of Fox News. I think 25 minutes is more than enough crazy for this month.
posted by cashman at 6:26 PM on October 2, 2012

Corrected link to @chrislhayes tweet:

@chrislhayes: Wait, Tucker Carlson carved a backwards B into his own cheek?
posted by ob1quixote at 6:30 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

Thanks ob1quixote.
posted by cashman at 6:34 PM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

The feeling of "Oh, really? Surely not. Really? OK, heh, I guess that really is it." is very nice to have, but makes me think surely there must be more than this to come. This doesn't smell of 'this is what we think will swing 5% of the voters', and frankly wasn't even vaguely worth the watch tonight for something special trail. I feel a bit like a kicked puppy for thinking like that, but frankly even a scandal allegation faked up in a day would have been a bit more impressive than this.

This smells more like 'not even the base really care about this'.
posted by jaduncan at 6:36 PM on October 2, 2012

This smells more like 'not even the base really care about this'.

I am only slightly misquoting Public Enemy when I ask "Base, how low can you go?"
posted by Joey Michaels at 6:54 PM on October 2, 2012 [9 favorites]

Also, I was just reminded that Obama talks like that all the time when he gets amped up. And it's true. When he starts talking over crowd noise, that's exactly how he talks.

"Oh stewardess! I speak jive."
posted by zombieflanders at 6:54 PM on October 2, 2012 [16 favorites]

Republicans must really be desperate. Dragging up Wright and Ayers doesn't really work now that Americans have seen Obama govern for 4 years. It just feeds the narrative that Repbulicans are out of touch, backwards and controlled by the most extreme elements of their base. The Drudge Report even looks like some page created by a crank and dropped on Angelfire.
posted by humanfont at 6:54 PM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

Tucker Carlson getting clowned (epically by Jon Stewart)
posted by msalt at 7:10 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

"I'm not saying I believe Romney when he says that his offshore accounts were never used to avoid tax liability, but, presuming you have enough money, it is prudent investing to not have all your assets denominated in the same currency."

The other quasi-legit reason is that if you do business with folks who don't pay US taxes — like, the rest of the world — it makes sense to have assets and holding companies that aren't subject to US taxes.
posted by klangklangston at 7:35 PM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

Via @maddow, "What Drudge/Fox is hyping as "OBAMA DECLARES... POOR PEOPLE" is actually Obama talking about veterans w/PTSD." Hilariously, the included link is to the entire transcript of then Senator Obama's remarks which were posted on The Daily Dish by Andrew Sullivan on 7 June, 2007. Sullivan's take on it:

Notice the conservative pitch for a liberal policy. Obama focuses on young children and ex-offenders. His big government programs are all geared toward fostering conservative social behavior and opportunity. Who does this remind me of? George W. Bush, of course. The rhetoric at least. Perhaps the true legacy for compassionate conservatism will be in the Democratic Party.

posted by ob1quixote at 7:48 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

ROW

ROW

FIGHT THE POWAH
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 7:52 PM on October 2, 2012

So, come Thursday morning, and no one is giving any oxygen to this recent attempt to portray Obama as an Angry Black Man, how much deeper will Drudge et al sink?

this thread made me finally go upgrade my phone, even though Verizon made me get my husband's permission to do so. What year is this again?
posted by ambrosia at 8:01 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

Tucker Carlson getting clowned (epically by Jon Stewart)

I honestly love this. This was Stewart, off the cuff, by and large. And it's not for the jokes, even though people laugh. That's the problem with being a jester, even a straight-faced jester. People will laugh, and think it's all a joke, even when you're kidding on the square. Then again, it's hard to watch that segment and not laugh out of discomfort. "Oh shit, Stewart is right. He's being serious. And Tucker Carlson is a fucking tool."

Jon Stewart appeared on Crossfire in October 2004. CNN CEO Jonathan Klein indicated that he wanted to change the tone of shows on the network, and in interviews said he sympathised with Jon Stewart's criticisms of Crossfire. The cancellation of Crossfire was announced in January 2005, and the last episode aired on June 3, 2005.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:38 PM on October 2, 2012 [3 favorites]

Well, for whoever makes the debate thread for tomorrow, note that YouTube will be streaming all of the debates.
posted by cashman at 8:51 PM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

humanfont: The Drudge Report even looks like some page created by a crank and dropped on Angelfire.

That's its charm. Someone on MetaFilter mentioned that their friend, who ran an amateur porn site, kept the look of the site basic. Whenever it was spruced up, the site lost subscribers. The presentation is part of the site: if it looked all glossy, then I'm sure readers would assume some Mainstream Media influence, and turn on the site. Now it's a DIY project by a guy who cares about his country, or whatever bs line Drudge runs on.

Here's more on the re-airing of the old Obama clip, including Tucker Carlson telling Sean Hannity that "no, it actually hasn't been reported on, because I reported on it the first time."

So you missed your chance to fully criticize Obama in 2007, and now is a good chance to call him on his anger at the mis-management of the response to Katrina? Good god, give this man a Pulitzer or whatever it is they give partisan TV reporter hacks.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:54 PM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

benito.strauss: "Separately, if I had a car that needed to be re-started as often as the Romney campaign, I'd figure the battery was dead."

Naw, it's the alternator. Hey! A new Romney nickname!
posted by notsnot at 9:03 PM on October 2, 2012 [12 favorites]

CNN is planning to differentiate its programming by making fact-checking a big part of its [2012 presidential] debate coverage.

CBS or NBS is promising a post-debate fact-checking run-down. I'm excited about how big fact-checking is, even though most media coverage glosses over it until something they missed becomes viral, or is at least heavily criticized.

Meanwhile, CBS tells us about Romney's sons' unique debate prep routine:

Eldest son Tagg anticipates ensuring his health-conscious dad has a rare chocolate molten milkshake - his favorite - and while Romney may not be able to sneak out to the cinema, which he liked to do during the primaries, sons Josh and Craig have been tasked with bringing funny YouTube videos to keep their father amused.

It is true, he's just like you and me! I LOVE funny videos! Man, I could really see myself sitting down with a big ol' chocolate milkshake and watching America's Funniest Home Videos with Mitt.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:04 PM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

Damn, just learned that I will miss the debate because of band practice.
posted by unSane at 9:15 PM on October 2, 2012

10/3 NYT debate article. Excerpt:

There will be no rigid time limits, buzzers or cheering that often threatened to turn the Republican primary debates into a recurring political game show. The debate will be divided into six segments of 15 minutes, with ample opportunity for robust exchanges and a level of specificity that both sides have often sought to avoid.

...

A coin toss determines speaking order: Mr. Obama opens and Mr. Romney closes. Their respective campaign representatives have spent days on details as small as how many family members can take the stage after the debate, a sign that almost nothing will be left to chance.

Yet the chemistry between the two candidates cannot be rehearsed and their interactions could be just as important as the answers to the debate questions. Mr. Romney has practiced being “respectfully aggressive,” a senior adviser said, with a goal of pleasing Republicans who believe he has been too passive. At the same time, the objective is to not turn off independent voters, women or others who may be disappointed with Mr. Obama’s policies but still like him.

Mr. Romney’s goal is not focused on tearing down the president, aides said, but rather to use the audience of tens of millions of American to show that he can be trusted to improve their lives.

"built that" liar, "nobody asks to see my birth certificate", "47%" Mitt Romney going respectful and not using dogwhistles and deliberate nonsense? I don't believe that for a second.
posted by cashman at 9:16 PM on October 2, 2012 [2 favorites]

Rigging the Presidential Debates:

The three upcoming so-called presidential debates (actually parallel interviews) between Obama and Romney show the pathetic mainstream campaign press for what it is – a mass of dittoheads desperately awaiting gaffes or some visual irregularity by any of the candidates. The press certainly does not demand elementary material from the candidates such as the secret debate contract negotiated by the Obama and Romney campaigns that controls the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), the campaigns’ corporate offspring.

A similar secret contract between George W. Bush and John Kerry in 2004, obtained by George Farah, executive director of Open Debates (www.opendebates.org) showed just how the two Parties rig the debate process. Both Parties agreed that they would:
(1) not request any additional debates,
(2) not appear at any other debate or adversarial forum with any other presidential or vice presidential candidate, and
(3) not accept any television or radio air time offers that involve a debate format. Were this deal to be between two corporations, they could be prosecuted for criminal violation of the antitrust laws.

This year voters are not allowed to know about the current backroom fix between Obama and Romney.
posted by dunkadunc at 9:41 PM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

chocolate molten milkshake

Chocolate molten milkshake.

Chocolate molten milkshake?

Surely they meant chocolate malted milkshake.

I mean, who mistakes "molten" for "malted?"

Whippersnappers.
posted by Miko at 9:55 PM on October 2, 2012 [7 favorites]

Yeah, those secret debate agreements are really unpalatable. We need top to bottom election reforms, an aspect of which I would hope would mandate transparent debates with public terms and a fair process for conducting them.
posted by feloniousmonk at 9:56 PM on October 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

Both major parties would only stand to lose by it, and would make sure such legislation never got off the ground.
posted by dunkadunc at 10:15 PM on October 2, 2012

Ta-Nehisi Coates: Ralph Reed's Paranoid Style
posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:28 PM on October 2, 2012

"Damn, just learned that I will miss the debate because of band practice."

Yeah, that was Tagg's excuse too.

Now he's trying to figure out how to keep ice cream simultaneously frozen and molten as the Rombot requires for optimal function.
posted by klangklangston at 11:23 PM on October 2, 2012 [4 favorites]

I figured a molten milk shake was the mormon equivalent of getting stoned.
posted by de at 11:35 PM on October 2, 2012

... and I'm feeling sympathy for Romney and his wife, especially if there's any truth in his being a man who spent his life and sold his soul trying to do what his daddy couldn't.. Little wonder Ann came to his aid with "Stop it", and is worried about his mental health.

All that money, all that housing, food on the table, you-name-it, and an unfulfilled sense of entitlement. He's a victim, too.
posted by de at 12:02 AM on October 3, 2012

Raspberry lemonade is the Utah Mormon equivalent of getting stoned. Many a time I'd sit on my deck sipping a Laphroaig and my LDS buddies would be guzzling the raspberry lemonade, and they'd get a buzz faster than I did. Then they'd go for the strong stuff-- Mountain Dew-- and I knew there was gonna be at least one fight.

Speaking of frozen delights, I once caused a very small religious conflict by asking my friends if coffee ice cream was kosher or not. Since it is neither hot nor a beverage, my thought was it should be allowed. This caused quite a bit of theological debate and, for a time, they briefly divided into two sects on the issue. Fortunately, the raspberry lemonade high wore off, they ate a lot of doritos, and sectarian violence was avoided.
posted by honestcoyote at 12:55 AM on October 3, 2012 [6 favorites]

It blows my mind a little bit that Juan Williams is on Fox News. Man must need a paycheck.
posted by angrycat at 1:45 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Here is your gif of Warren trying and failing to not laugh at Scott Brown at last night's debate
posted by angrycat at 1:55 AM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

A great deal of military spending is essentially welfare, much of it corporate
TARP and its friends and relatives are pure corporate welfare.
[...]
And yet somehow it's only social welfare that gets targeted. I wonder why that is?

Yes, too bad corporations aren't peop...d'oh!
posted by Room 641-A at 2:35 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

My liking of my President Warren daydream is not decreasing.
posted by jaduncan at 4:12 AM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

Eldest son Tagg anticipates ensuring his health-conscious dad has a rare chocolate molten milkshake - his favorite - and while Romney may not be able to sneak out to the cinema, which he liked to do during the primaries, sons Josh and Craig have been tasked with bringing funny YouTube videos to keep their father amused.

"Ha ha ha! That human really enjoys lapping water straight out of the faucet!"

"That's a cat, dad."

"Thank you, Josh!"

"I'm Craig."
posted by Flunkie at 4:26 AM on October 3, 2012 [8 favorites]

A foretaste of the treatment Romney can expect from the right of his party if he loses.
posted by unSane at 4:55 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

How the first debate will go down.
posted by drezdn at 5:09 AM on October 3, 2012

The Economist: The Campaign and Gender Gap: Blame Mars, Not Venus

If the gender gap is defined as the difference between men and women’s support for a candidate, most polls currently show it to be about ten percentage points for Mr Romney, who does better with men. (John McCain, by comparison, faced a gap of about five points in 2008.) Women have been consistently more likely than men to give the president higher marks, and there is evidence that more women than men have swung into Mr Obama’s column in the last month, helping to fuel a recent bump in the president's poll numbers.

Esquire blog: Warren/Brown II — Out of the Ring and into the Classroom of National Ideas, Advantage: Professor

Yes, by all means, let's spend the first 20 minutes or so of a one-hour debate talking about what may or may not be on Warren's job applications from 20 years ago, and then 10 minutes discussing who represented whom in court; for what it's worth, Warren was much better prepared for this than she was during the first debate. Let's then spend another 10 or so chatting over Gregory's undying devotion to the Simpson-Bowles "plan." (I think he gets a royalty check every time he mentions the damned thing.) Okay, so now let's talk about the war we're in, but not for long, because there is a very important question to be asked about the future of Red Sox manager Bobby Valentine. No, really, that was the evening's last question. You could look it up.

posted by the man of twists and turns at 5:19 AM on October 3, 2012 [4 favorites]

What's the meanest thing you could imagine labeling Romney?

The boy who couldn't cry.
posted by Room 641-A at 5:34 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Paul Ryan's Other Race is No Guarantee

his opposition to unemployment insurance has dramatically hurt working families here in the district. The bottom line is: voters don’t like Ryan’s plot to voucherize Medicare, gut student loans, and slash popular tax credits that working families rely on.”

For deeply frustrated progressives and labor advocates, Zerban represents a long-awaited serious threat to Ryan. “Zerban is able to relate to what working-class and middle-class people are facing in this district,” observed Ron Thomas, secretary of the Racine AFL-CIO Council. Zerban has been waging a serious campaign, with a busy schedule of public appearances and strong fund-raising efforts. He has raised a reported $1.7 million, well below the $5.4 million Ryan has available but enough to establish a much higher level of visibility and credibility than any of the previous Democratic opponents of Ryan. (From 2000 to 2010, Ryan outraised his opponents by a combined 31 to 1. In 2012, Ryan’s advantage was 325 to 1.)

325 to 1 gah! That is obscene. He is not representing his district but because he spouts the far Right ideology of cutting taxes for the wealthy and abolishing all Federal regulations his millionaire friends are happy to shower him with money. Damn. If only there wasn't so much money floating around.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:01 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

After keeping up with this thread all this time, I haven't seen anyone make this point and wondered if anyone thought the same:
Romney's 47% comment that "his job is not to worry about those people" - I actually didn't hear "job" to mean "as president". Since he's talking to a group of donors, I took "his job" to mean "a candidate for presidency". And I can understand that. Strictly speaking in terms of campaign strategy and tactics, there actually is no point in him focusing on the people who will never vote for him. As a candidate he should be focusing on keeping the people who would vote for him and swinging those undecideds.

He's still a total ass for describing the people who won't vote for him the way he did. But to me, the more disturbing thing is how short-sighted he is.

He's completely and utterly focused on getting elected... but nothing beyond that. This explains his fuzziness on policies. This explains his wishy washiness. Because, those things only matter *after* you are elected and that's not even on his radar. He just wants to win the race, he doesn't want to be president.
posted by like_neon at 6:09 AM on October 3, 2012 [4 favorites]

Paul Ryan: Only Business Owners Work Hard

During a rally in Iowa on Tuesday afternoon, Paul Ryan expressed a similar sentiment, arguing that business owners are the only Americans working hard and taking risks to make “this country grow.” The comments echoed Mitt Romney’s now infamous 47 percent remark and suggested that Ryan too believes that many Americans are too lazy or simply refuse to work long hours:

RYAN: And when he says, if you have a small business you didn’t build that. Look, all we mean is that nobody else gets up at 5:00 AM and opens the doors. Nobody else works 7 days a week. Nobody else takes the risks. Nobody else meets the payroll. Nobody else goes to the bank. These are businesses that are built by the sweat, toil, and hard work of workers in this country of businesses in this country and that’s what makes this country grow.

"Nobody else gets up at 5:00 AM and opens the doors. Nobody else works 7 days a week." So he is either a liar or pig-ignorant. Take your pick. I'm going with pig-ignorant because I think he has this in common with Romney, they both really have no concept of how the bottom 50% live. Somehow they are getting all their ideas of the lower classes from the TV, movies, and Fox News-- i.e. that the struggling blue collar families in America are struggling because they are lazy and if they would only work hard (and pull themselves up by their boot-straps!) they, too, would become millionaires.

He's completely and utterly focused on getting elected..

No that point has been brought up. That's why he never seems to take a stance on anything and why he never gives firm policies. Many of us in this thread have wondered why he is even bothering to run for President as he comes across as being disaffected and half-assed.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:13 AM on October 3, 2012 [4 favorites]

The BBC has a nice interactive where you can make your predictions state by state and see how they stack up.
posted by tardigrade at 6:20 AM on October 3, 2012

Oh, that's fun tardigrade.
posted by gaspode at 6:27 AM on October 3, 2012

BBC, Pennsylvania is not a swing state no more.
posted by angrycat at 6:32 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

The interactive map at 270 to Win isn't quite as pretty as the BBC's, but it starts from a more realistic allocation of swing states.
posted by kirkaracha at 6:36 AM on October 3, 2012

Mother Jones: News coverage of the debates matters more than the debates themselves

Test subjects who just watched the debate itself thought Kerry won in a landslide. Test subjects who watched the debate plus 20 minutes of analysis on NBC thought Bush won in a landslide. And test subjects who watched the debate plus 20 minutes of CNN commentary were more likely to think that neither candidate won. Obviously public perception of a debate can depend pretty heavily on the spin given to it afterward by the news coverage.

I thought that was obvious already but this is just reinforcement. Unless one of the candidates falls down and starts drooling or has a stroke while trying to pull a factoid out of his ass, we won't have a National consensus as to a winner.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:46 AM on October 3, 2012 [10 favorites]

Oh and I think I can put on my psychic turban and predict whom Fox News proclaims the winner.

My psychic turban is pretty fetching but I have to save it for special occasions. Right now it is carefully swathed in gauze and dodo feathers and stuck way up on the tippy-top of my wardrobe in a cardboard box marked "Secret Life's Secret Bonnet of Secrecy. Unauthorized use is forbidden."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:52 AM on October 3, 2012 [5 favorites]

Eh, he'd be better off with Gangnam style.

You rang? (College Humor video, some sweary bits).
posted by maudlin at 7:05 AM on October 3, 2012 [4 favorites]

BBC, Pennsylvania is not a swing state no more.

One of the "expert predictions" has Romney winning Minnesota, which is only plausible if the Republicans have a secret tape of Obama at a fundraiser saying "You know what I fucking hate? Casseroles."
posted by Horace Rumpole at 7:09 AM on October 3, 2012 [20 favorites]

--and Jello with stuff in it.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:11 AM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

Wow, that Obama cutout video reminds me of what the bullies in high school would do to the smart kids.

Hey nerd, where's your pocket protector? He-yuk, He-yuk.
posted by RolandOfEld at 7:13 AM on October 3, 2012

Unless one of the candidates falls down and starts drooling or has a stroke while trying to pull a factoid out of his ass, we won't have a National consensus as to a winner.

It will be mitt. Hands down.

It has to be. The media exists to create a narrative and a good close fight is way better than a two hit KO for ratings.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 7:13 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Actually the people in the Obama cutout video seem to be verging more on the racist kids who would say way out of line shit while surrounded by their maybe-not-exactly-racist friends who, most painfully of all, would just chuckle and play along instead of correcting them or even looking ashamed.

That's about right.

Strangle him!

My God.
posted by RolandOfEld at 7:17 AM on October 3, 2012

325 to 1 gah! That is obscene.

It's also impossible from the numbers in the same paragraph -- 5.4 million is, obviously, not 325 times 1.7 million.

I think they mean 2010, when Ryan's opponent John Heckenlively raised about $12000. At a guess, he only raised $12000 because it was obvious from the start that the only way he could possibly win was if Ryan died after being nominated but too late to be replaced, or if Ryan was caught with the proverbial live boy or dead girl. Savvy donors are unlikely to give their money to an unemployed student-teacher in Wisconsin who's never won any election, ever, when they could give it to a sitting state legislator in some other state or district.

Lots of campaign finance stuff operates in this reverse-causality way. The good news for Democrats is that Zerban easily has enough money to run an entirely credible race.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:22 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

RYAN: And when he says, if you have a small business you didn’t build that. Look, all we mean is that nobody else gets up at 5:00 AM and opens the doors. Nobody else works 7 days a week. Nobody else takes the risks. Nobody else meets the payroll. Nobody else goes to the bank.

THIS attitude right here is what angers me the most. I've worked for large corporations (actually, I worked for Rick Scott's Columbia/HCA outfit when he wanted to fire us all and hire us back as independent contractors without benefits) and I've worked for a small businessman. I can tell you this:

My small businessman employer paid me $8.00 an hour and "couldn't afford" to give me any benefits like sick pay, vacation, health insurance or retirement. He also didn't get up at 5:00 am and opened the door to the office-that was me and the other employee, after we dropped our kids at school. He and his wife rolled in around 10:30 or so. He also didn't work the Saturday mornings we were open. He didn't make the bank deposits, he didn't write our payroll checks (we wrote each other's checks and his wife would check their bank account online that night to make sure we didn't "overpay" ourselves). He basically sat in his office and talked to his other small business owner friends, then went to lunch, then went home.

Spare me. That man didn't work even 30 hours a week-in an insurance agency his father opened in the 60's. But boy, did he feel like he earned all his income and by God, no socialist was going to take what he earned away from him.
posted by hollygoheavy at 7:35 AM on October 3, 2012 [36 favorites]

hollygoheavy: "Spare me. That man didn't work even 30 hours a week-in an insurance agency his father opened in the 60's. But boy, did he feel like he earned all his income and by God, no socialist was going to take what he earned away from him."

At my former workplace, the owner came in at six four days a week, left by eight or nine. He put a "third generation" logo on the the letterhead - which means his grandpa started the company and his dad grew it. The plumbers' pay stubs were had political tracts folded into them; there were Minuteman and "Build the Wall" stickers placed on the work trucks; and for a while in 2010 there was a Gadsen flag flying in front of the other office.

On the day he let me go, I called to say I'd left my spare phone charger and could they mail it to me; oh and what about rolling over my IRA? I was told that after letting me go (on a wednesday) he'd left (to go fishing) and wouldn't be back til the next week.

Bleargh.
posted by notsnot at 7:43 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

I actually didn't hear "job" to mean "as president". Since he's talking to a group of donors, I took "his job" to mean "a candidate for presidency".

I don't know about others, but that was obvious to me. That's how I took it, so I never thought it needed to be brought up.

Strictly speaking in terms of campaign strategy and tactics, there actually is no point in him focusing on the people who will never vote for him.

Why Romney Shouldn't Have Given Up On That 47%

The truth is that some (though certainly not most) of the 47% of Americans who don’t pay income tax have a history of voting for Republicans in presidential elections. They may have even been planning to vote for Mitt Romney.

I agree with that point, though the rest of the essay has issues. When Barack ran 4 years ago, he went after everyone's vote, and I think is doing so again. If you are a republican with sense, you could easily vote for the President. But for a presidential candidate to write off half the country, it's wrong any way you slice it. Black people seem to see right through him, as at one point there was polling out where it was 94% to 0% against Romney. If he came out and said "Black people will never vote for me, my job is not to care about them", that would be just as stupid and problematic.

He also didn't get up at 5:00 am and opened the door to the office-that was me and the other employee, after we dropped our kids at school. He and his wife rolled in around 10:30 or so.

That is so true in so many situations, and I loved your comment.

I do think that Ryan is not saying nobody else works hard. But before I continue, keep in mind Ryan's comments are a response to the fake, nonexistent thing they created that the President never said. Remember that!

Ryan's response to the fake, nonexistent created thing they made up, is not saying nobody else works hard, it's saying the small shop owner is typically the one doing things. The "no one else" isn't referring to other families or other people, it's saying "that floor aint gonna mop itself". I've seen and interacted with lots of small business owners who are indeed the ones opening and closing the store. But I have also been in the situation hollygoheavy refers to, where the owner has gotten to the point where they rake in the money and just stop in to make fear-inducing appearances, and all us lackeys do the hard work, the opening and closing, the double shifts and dirty work.

And now I want casserole. Anybody got a good tuna casserole recipe?
posted by cashman at 7:49 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney wins Minnesota?

Seriously do people get paid for this? Because I want to be in on the gig.. really. I can do it either as a straight man "Obama looks strong to win the election with between 300 and 350 EVs", or as a partisan hack with a slim grasp on reality. "Expect Obama to win in a landslide, Electoral prediction of 402 carrying such states as SC, MT, MO, AZ and IN!!!" Course Obama winning MO is much more likely than Romney winning MN, so perhaps I should just blather on about skewed polls and Obma is really going to also carry GA and AR as well.
.
.
.

I could wear a funny hat as well if it helps?
posted by edgeways at 7:50 AM on October 3, 2012

Anybody got a good tuna casserole recipe?

Some combination of tuna, cream of mushroom soup, noodles and/or bread crumbs and tater tots on top. Salt/pepper. Bake the hell out of it.

throw frozen veggies in the milieu if you want to be fancy, and cheese never hurts.
posted by edgeways at 7:57 AM on October 3, 2012

Drudge, Daily Caller Hype Old Obama Speech, Trolling Entire Political World.

Sean Hannity's Obama 'Bombshell' Draws Yawns; Juan Williams Says He's 'Playing A Race Card'.

Rachel Maddow Rips the New Jeremiah Wright Race Nonsense.
posted by ericb at 8:15 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

So a reasonable best guess, based on the historical precedent and without considering any factors specific to this race, is that Mr. Romney will gain a point or two in the polls by next week, while Mr. Obama’s number will hold steady.

Bake the hell out of it.

350? 450? I'd never thought of the tater tots. In all seriousness, can you be anti-romney and memail me specifics? I'm not one of them there natural cooks.
posted by cashman at 8:16 AM on October 3, 2012

It's not Minnesota hot dish if there are no tater tots.

Here's a recipe - take a cheeseburger. Add tater tots and cream of mushroom soup.

Call it the Minnesota Burger. Wash it down with a Hamm's.

Good times.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 8:20 AM on October 3, 2012

Why the debate is crucial for Obama too
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 8:29 AM on October 3, 2012

Eldest son Tagg anticipates ensuring his health-conscious dad has a rare chocolate molten milkshake - his favorite - and while Romney may not be able to sneak out to the cinema, which he liked to do during the primaries, sons Josh and Craig have been tasked with bringing funny YouTube videos to keep their father amused.

I have it on good authority that these are videos of OWS protesters being pepper-sprayed and dragged into police vans by their hair.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 8:37 AM on October 3, 2012 [5 favorites]

Cashman, think of it like this... make a big mix of the tuna, noodles, cream of mushroom/chicken/celery (whatever cream soup you like), add a little liquid like milk so things are nice and slippery. (think 6-8 oz tuna, 1 can cream soup, 1/2 cup milk, salt and pepper to taste)

now some people will go all, don't have two starchs (pasta and tater tots) in one dish, if that is you skip the noodles, on the other hand if you want noodles cook up 1 cup uncooked pasta, shells, macaroni... whatever.

Mix the whole thing together.

Grease bottom of baking dish (er.. prop a 2 qt dish), then cover bottom with tater tots, pour mix over, cover with 1 1/2 cups grated cheese.

cover in foil bake at 350 for an hour, remove foil and brown top.

- Additions, substitutions: This can really be a "clean the fridge" dish. Throw in frozen veggies, diced or crumbled up meats, rice, onions, stale bread crumbs, anything whose basic taste will not overwhelm the cream of X soup. Some people crumble up chips/corn chips for the top. I have also seen the tater tots on top.

Eat in moderation.... there is a reason Midwest women of yore where, er, stocky.
posted by edgeways at 8:40 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

This latest derail is making me ill.
posted by grubi at 8:42 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

someone please make a good debate FPP, I want to keep talking about this with y'all but DAMN this thread is rough on the phone and browser.
posted by lazaruslong at 8:42 AM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

This latest derail is making me hungry.
posted by dirigibleman at 8:43 AM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

Someone please make a good casserole FPP, I want to keep reading about this with y'all but damn...

You get the idea.
posted by RolandOfEld at 8:51 AM on October 3, 2012

For your own sake, on the casserole -- cook the tater tots separately so they're cripsy, as hot as you can. Don't just thrown them uncooked in a casserole so they come out all soggy. Perhaps that's authentic Minnesota cooking but .... we can make some progress.
posted by msalt at 8:52 AM on October 3, 2012

Their respective campaign representatives have spent days on details as small as how many family members can take the stage after the debate,

And this, this is why we have serious problems. Are you kidding me? The fact that people won't agree to a debate without having every angle carefully nitpicked is offensive. Not to mention they're not even letting all the candidates running for office on the stage. What about Stein or Johnson?
posted by corb at 8:55 AM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

What about Stein or Johnson?

Who?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:00 AM on October 3, 2012

What about Stein or Johnson?

Who?

Sounds made-up.
posted by grubi at 9:02 AM on October 3, 2012

Yeah, I'm saddened by how I can't really read this thread on my phone anymore (and posting to it from a phone is a real adventure, let me tell you). Somewhere on my (actually relatively short) Metafilter wishlist is the option of folding the tops of extremely long threads like this... like, some sort of "once thread has more than 1000 comments, fold all by the last 100" function, or "fold everything posted more than a week ago."
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 9:07 AM on October 3, 2012 [10 favorites]

> Drudge, Daily Caller Hype Old Obama Speech, Trolling Entire Political World.

To be frank, I'm a little worried this might get some traction. Drudge and Hannity might be wrapping this up for McCain.

...

Wait, what?
posted by boo_radley at 9:07 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

It's funny to realize that with Stein and Johnson, Romney would still be the most right-wing candidate on stage. But yeah, the stage managing of the debates should just remind everyone that they're theater. No one will give an answer that's not carefully rehearsed and based on talking points — the three-legged dog will be walked over and over.
posted by klangklangston at 9:09 AM on October 3, 2012

What about Stein or Johnson?

Who?

Sounds made-up.

Or Goode.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 9:10 AM on October 3, 2012

Current Fox News headline count:
Out of 13 major headlines up at Fox News, 9 are anti-Obama/pro-Romney puff pieces, 2 are pro-GOP Senate pieces, 1 is an election-focused-yet-neutral headline, and 1 is about Al Quaeda.

Wow.
posted by Theta States at 9:10 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

> I have it on good authority that these are videos of OWS protesters being pepper-sprayed and dragged into police vans by their hair.

No. Can't have it.
posted by de at 9:12 AM on October 3, 2012

I don't think Green Party candidate Jill Stein would ever swing things more right than either invited party.
posted by boo_radley at 9:12 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh man, Virgil Goode. As much as I don't want to give him any support, a debate that included him would have me popping some popcorn.
posted by ambrosia at 9:12 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Party press, man. Fox doesn't just want gilded age economic policy, it wants gilded age media norms too. They're remarkably consistent in their attempts to return us to the world of 1893.
posted by klangklangston at 9:13 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Who?

Sounds made-up.

But they are running for president they should be on the same stage!

I want a viable multiparty system, but just declaring your candidacy is not an auto invite.. hey perhaps we should also include Rick Rogers, or Star Locke? CLAUS, SANTA filed papers to run on 8/28/12.

and you know, mechanical details to the debate don't really bother me. I understand why there is a limitation to how much family are allowed on stage afterwards, and I think if you take a moment or two to think about it it makes sense. I disagree with any strict limitation of questions, or trying to limit other venues or any thing actually substantive, but the mechanics yeah absolutely.
posted by edgeways at 9:16 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

I want a viable multiparty system

Unless we remove the first-past-the-post system we have in place, there will never be any such thing.
posted by grubi at 9:20 AM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

> I want a viable multiparty system, but just declaring your candidacy is not an auto invite.. hey perhaps we should also include Rick Rogers, or Star Locke? CLAUS, SANTA filed papers to run on 8/28/12.

Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Jonathon The Impaler.
posted by boo_radley at 9:29 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ah absolutely. I am a big supporter of thinking of IRV and other such voting mechanisms to better reflect voters stances. I even think the proportional EV distribution would be a great idea. But there is serious fear, on both political sides, to these ideas. There aren't baked in. Democrats talk about trying to strip out NB's proportional EV distribution, even though Obama won one of those last time and has an outside chance of doing it again despite blatant redistricting to keep it from happening, for fear it might catch on with other states which would mean what we see as electoral mandates now, would really be much closer. We are looking at an election now where the current incumbent is likely to win by something like 3-6%. But the EV count could be as high as 347 to 191 which looks much prettier.

Who do you think carries a bigger political stick? a 3% win or something that looks like a 64% - 36% win?

So you know what? I would vote for a Green candidate for President, absolutely. But, not under the current voting structure.
posted by edgeways at 9:34 AM on October 3, 2012

Mississippi: No voter ID ruling before election
posted by madamjujujive at 9:36 AM on October 3, 2012

someone please make a good debate FPP, I want to keep talking about this with y'all but DAMN this thread is rough on the phone and browser.
posted by lazaruslong

Don't worry. People trading recipes is a pretty reliable sign that a MeFi thread is reaching ripeness and will end soon. If the debates don't finish off this puppy, the casseroles will.
posted by benito.strauss at 9:38 AM on October 3, 2012

Alas, Babylon. There's a debate thread up.
posted by gerryblog at 9:38 AM on October 3, 2012

Doesn't matter, this thread will always have a special place in my heart.
posted by boo_radley at 9:42 AM on October 3, 2012 [4 favorites]

Agreed, this thread brought me more moments of WTF/LOL than anything else in recent memory.
posted by sallybrown at 9:43 AM on October 3, 2012

Godawful poetry moment to let the door hit me on my ass out of here.

O thread I hardly knew ye
na'er a month old old and we abandon thee

Unkind to the tab and the phone
Cast we now you to the winds unknown

Palin has finally won on metafilter
A claim that well reflects her

No idea how we managed in 2008
the machines then we not so great
posted by edgeways at 9:47 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

(p.s. Favorite memory from this thread: the Cookiegate video)
posted by sallybrown at 9:48 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

I hope this ends up at 4444 comments. It seems fitting. Goodbye browser-crushing thread!
posted by cashman at 9:52 AM on October 3, 2012

Since you guys are the only ones I know who would care:

John Hawkins: "A white woman voting for Barack Obama is like a black woman voting for the KKK."

Follow-up: "Conservatives, including Mitt, have similar things said about them every day of week. The dif is Obama actually is a racist."

Who is John Hawkins, you ask? A blogger for Mitt Romney's official website.

So yeah.
posted by Phire at 9:55 AM on October 3, 2012 [10 favorites]

That is some A. Wyatt Mann stuff right there, Phire.
posted by boo_radley at 10:01 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

holy shit, it's still up.

And he's doubling down on his position: "@john_mcguirk I think Barack Obama is an anti-white, racist. I don't have a problem saying it or being quoted on it."

oh my gosh.
posted by boo_radley at 10:04 AM on October 3, 2012 [8 favorites]

That's lucky. I'm quite sure he'll be quoted.
posted by jaduncan at 10:10 AM on October 3, 2012

Paul Ryan talks about his band "Steak Baby" in a new Bad Lip Reading.
posted by drezdn at 10:14 AM on October 3, 2012

Tucker Carlson Wants You To Enlist In Race War Against Jive-Talking President
posted by homunculus at 10:17 AM on October 3, 2012

Alas, Babylon. There's a debate thread up.

Dammit. We were so close to greatness. I will mourn this thread.
posted by homunculus at 10:20 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Nothing is over!
posted by cortex at 10:27 AM on October 3, 2012 [4 favorites]

I'd like to take a moment to remember "The Bain of his existence" the FPP that begat this one. It was an exciting time: speculation on tax returns and off-shore accounts were the order of the day, and Rafalca still had a chance at the gold.

At 1590 comments, it died, as so many young posts of its generation, before its time. In your wisdom, Mathowie, you took it, as you took so many bright flowering young FPPs at Khe Sanh, at Langdok, at Hill 364. Goodnight sweet post.

Seriously, these have been some of my favorite posts ever.
posted by Room 641-A at 10:28 AM on October 3, 2012 [9 favorites]

Re the emergency room thing - I just got a bill for a emergency room visit (infected bursitis - if you rummage around in AskMe you can find the exciting details!) which was $150 post insurance. Pre insurance? TWENTY GRAND. Holy fucking shit. I was in there a few hours at most, and talking to staff a tiny fraction of that.

(forgive me if this is unshocking to Americans. I am not from here and am stunned by this)
posted by Artw at 10:34 AM on October 3, 2012 [6 favorites]

The debate post is a flash-in-the-pan. This thread is a glorious beacon on a hill.
posted by drezdn at 10:34 AM on October 3, 2012 [5 favorites]

Tucker Carlson Wants You To Enlist In Race War Against Jive-Talking President"

He never really recovered from the Jon Stewart smack down, did he?
posted by Room 641-A at 10:34 AM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

Nothing is over! yt

You're right. What has that other thread ever done for me? I'm sorry I doubted.
posted by homunculus at 10:35 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Anybody got a good tuna casserole recipe?

Take a casserole dish. Dump a can of tuna in it. Take out 1/3 for the older cat. Take out 1/3 for the younger cat. Feed the remainder to the dog. Make a nice bit of steamed fish. eat with a fresh salad.

Wait. Where did everybody go?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 10:36 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

At 1590 comments, it died, as so many young posts of its generation, before its time. In your wisdom, Mathowie, you took it, as you took so many bright flowering young FPPs at Khe Sanh, at Langdok, at Hill 364. Goodnight sweet post.

Wait what was all that shit about Vietnam? What the fuck has anything got to do with Vietnam?
posted by shakespeherian at 10:36 AM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

Why the Hell Are We Still Holding First Lady Bake-Offs? Stop It. Stop It Right Now.
posted by homunculus at 10:37 AM on October 3, 2012 [4 favorites]

Nothing is over!

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
posted by Horace Rumpole at 10:40 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Wait what was all that shit about Vietnam? What the fuck has anything got to do with Vietnam

It's from the eulogy in Big Lebowski.
posted by Room 641-A at 10:41 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Artw, I think the part most Americans would find shocking is that you have insurance that covered a whopping 99.25% of your emergency room visit. That's the kind of insurance people stay in bad jobs and unhappy marriages for.
posted by kagredon at 10:42 AM on October 3, 2012 [14 favorites]

Uhm.
posted by shakespeherian at 10:42 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

It's from the eulogy in Big Lebowski.

So was shakespeherian's response, dude.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:44 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

It's from the eulogy in Big Lebowski.

You know what else is from the eulogy in Big Lebowski?
posted by Horace Rumpole at 10:44 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Shut the fuck up, Room 641-A, you're out of your element.

;)
posted by howfar at 10:46 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Vagina.
posted by Room 641-A at 10:50 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

She's like a child who wanders into a movie.
posted by gerryblog at 10:50 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Sorry shakespeherian, that was just me assuming I was over the line with the Vietnam part.
posted by Room 641-A at 10:56 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

This thread is so badass it just looked at that new thread, and did a riff from The Big Lebowski...
posted by Skygazer at 10:56 AM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'll just leave this here.
posted by cortex at 11:03 AM on October 3, 2012 [4 favorites]

Artw, I think the part most Americans would find shocking is that you have insurance that covered a whopping 99.25% of your emergency room visit. That's the kind of insurance people stay in bad jobs and unhappy marriages for.

Different perspectives: I'm from the UK, and thought "$150 to visit the ER/A&E? What an odd thing to live with."
posted by jaduncan at 11:05 AM on October 3, 2012 [4 favorites]

Phire: "Who is John Hawkins, you ask? A blogger for Mitt Romney's official website."

John Hawkins also wrote this story on why he founded NottMittRomney.com (which now redirects to the Mitt Romney site).
posted by mkb at 11:08 AM on October 3, 2012

Alas, poor thread, I knew thee well. Flights of angels sing thee to thy rest, etcetera.
posted by jokeefe at 11:12 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Don't you quit on this thread, it's got a lot of love to give.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:13 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

And so, 47% Post... in accordance with what we think your dying flags and favorites might well have been....we commit your final mortal comments to the bosom of the Pacific Ocean, which you loved so well. Goodnight, sweet thread.
posted by Devils Rancher at 11:19 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Alright Blatcher. I want to take you up on your election bet.

Loser gets to eat my botched tuna casserole.
posted by cashman at 11:22 AM on October 3, 2012

That's the kind of insurance people stay in bad jobs and unhappy marriages for.

Oh dear. Friday is my last day working here.
posted by Artw at 11:28 AM on October 3, 2012

Interesting observation that can be applied to the Drudge tape:

Feeding The Movement-Conservative Marketplace Beast

There's a common wisdom, in high-profile campaigns, that you need to "feed the beast," meaning the media, with things to write about -- or else they will go out looking for things, which might not be things you want them to write about.

As a Hillary Clinton media person said to me in New Hampshire in 2007, "I know [New York Times reporter] Adam Nagourney is going to be eating breakfast down the street tomorrow morning, and if I don't walk in and give him something, the Obama or Biden people will."

That also applies to the movement-conservative marketplace, if not moreso. They have all day to fill up with radio gab and blog posts and twitter banter and so on. It's actually not that easy to keep the audience hooked hour after hour. To keep it fresh and have people tuning in and calling and tweeting back, they constantly need things to be outraged about. And the truth is, campaigns tend to be a lot of the same thing over and over most of the time; fresh new outrages don't always track to the lifespan of the last outrage.

It's vitally important for, say, the Romney campaign to keep the movement-conservative audience engaged, to keep their interest up so they will turn out to vote in big numbers.

But it's also important that the movement-conservative marketplace not go veering off into dangerous looney-land. And that's really, really likely if you're not feeding that beast. If you're not giving them something reasonably safe to be outraged about, they're likely to go looking for outrages in, say, the latest press releases from the Gun Owners' Action League, or the latest book from Regnery, or worse.

posted by zombieflanders at 11:32 AM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

Now it turns out that a public address given before a nonwhite audience is actually private!

It's not public, it's for them!
posted by Mental Wimp at 11:32 AM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

I don't think Fascist has been applied to Obama...

Sorry, but it has. (There are hundreds of these on the innerwebs.)
posted by Mental Wimp at 11:36 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

lazaruslong: someone please make a good debate FPP, I want to keep talking about this with y'all but DAMN this thread is rough on the phone and browser.

This thread has quite literally crashed my computer at least twice now. Still, I'll be sad to see it go. I haven't hit F5 on Recent Activity this much since the Tohoku disaster.

I had resolved to try and write up a final summation, but looking back over what I've written, I'm not sure how to fold both analysis of conservative thinking and a jokey Tom Bombadil song together without coming across like a Romneyesque "Ha. Ha. Ho. Ha."

Rather than a casserole recipe though, I'll leave you with this article I posted as comment in the fall of last year. Looking back, I realize that, along with the William S. Lind column I referenced above, this cemented my opinion that American conservatives are, protestations to the contrary notwithstanding, embarrassed monarchists in right wing authoritarian clothing.

Conservatives Say It Out Loud: They Hate Democracy, Dave Johnson, Truthout, 23 September, 2011

The roots of today's toxic conservative movement lie in Ayn Rand's teaching that wealthy "producers" -- now called "job creators" -- should be left alone by the government, namely the rest of us. The rest of us are "freeloaders," "moochers," "leeches" and "parasites" who feed off these producers and who shouldn't be allowed to make decisions to collect taxes from them or regulate them or interfere in most other ways. The Randians hate democracy, and say so, declaring that "collectivism" sacrifices individual rights to majority wishes.

For decades these selfish, childish, "you can't make me" beliefs stayed largely below the radar, because conservatives understood that voicing them in public risked alienating ... well, anyone with any sense at all. But for various reasons sense has departed the country and conservatives are finally saying it out loud, for everyone to hear: they hate democracy. They want to limit the country's decision-making and the rewards of our society and economy to those they feel "deserve" to be on top, namely the "producers" and "job-creators."

posted by ob1quixote at 11:54 AM on October 3, 2012 [11 favorites]

THIS THREAD is so badass, when I comment in the new thread, I feel like I'm being unfaithful to it...

I'm sorry bigass thread. But I gotta move on...to quicker load times, and greater relevancy to the world and suchlike...you'll always be the thread that introduced me to the edit window.
posted by Skygazer at 11:55 AM on October 3, 2012 [4 favorites]

I've been following this thread since its start and I keep having to dig for it in 'My Favorites'. It's time to comment.
posted by iamkimiam at 11:55 AM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

I don't know about others, but that was obvious to me. That's how I took it, so I never thought it needed to be brought up.

I thought it was obvious too. But it does reveal a major flaw in reasoning which is why it's been so remarkable (many of those 47% who "don't pay taxes" are likely Romney voters). And it's clear he generalized that out to "personal responsibility," framing it so that either you have personal responsibility and you might vote for Romney, or you're in the 47% because you don't have personal responsibility and you never will.

HE's confused psycho-sociographics with economics in the whole presentation, and done so offensively through the implications.
posted by Miko at 12:03 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

ob1quixote: ""Conservatives Say It Out Loud: They Hate Democracy", Dave Johnson, Truthout, 23 September, 2011 "

Wow. I had not seen that article before. That's mind blowing.
posted by dejah420 at 12:04 PM on October 3, 2012

THREADZILLA!

A RomneyComm production.

Produced at OmniRom Studios.
posted by Mister_A at 12:05 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Wow. I had not seen that article before. That's mind blowing.

If one has truly bought into the idea that those who benefit from government are largely parasites who will vote for their own continued featherbedding until they cause the death of the republic...well, it doesn't even seem a big jump.
posted by jaduncan at 12:07 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Produced at OmniRom Studios

OmniRomNomNom.
posted by Miko at 12:10 PM on October 3, 2012

Miko: "OmniRomNomNom."

No. OmniRom has no craft services table.
posted by boo_radley at 12:11 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Not for 47% of us, anyway. (Heyohhhhhhhhh!)
posted by bakerina at 12:22 PM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

There is a certain air of...giddiness to this thread. Have we all started drinking already? Pace yourselves, friends.

What's all this nonsense about giving up old 8595? I, for one, am perfectly capable of dividing my attention between the thrilla and this old gal. I'm not ready to say adios yet.

Exhibit 4001: Ryan speaking to Focus on the Family

President Obama gave up defending the Defense of Marriage Act in the courts, I mean, not only is this decision to abandon this law the wrong decision, it passed in a bipartisan manner, it is very troubling because it undermines not only traditional marriage but it contradicts our system of government. It’s not the president’s job to pick and choose which laws he likes.”

“A Romney administration will protect traditional marriage and the rule of law and we will provide the Defense of Marriage Act the proper defense in the courts that it deserves.”

My bold.

So apparently young Ryan has never heard of the Presidential veto before.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:25 PM on October 3, 2012 [6 favorites]

Headline: Is the Presidential Race Tightening Heading Into the Debates?
Article: Nope.

A lot of these are in response to the buzz of the latest news cycle. So, imagine that Fox News ran a piece talking about how Clint Eastwood's debate with an empty chair really got undecided voters to think about their current situation, both as individuals and a country and really come out in favor of Romney.

The 538 response generally reads something like:
Headline: Chair Debate - Master Stroke?
Article: Cocaine is a hell of a drug.
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 12:27 PM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

I think it is inaccurate to say that the poor can't provide family support to each other. In fact, they are the people who can best provide it to each other. If you have a society where it is expected that extended families will live together if they need to, you lose a lot of the problems with the nuclear-family-only model, like the childcare issue.

6000 years of a social safety net designed around this model failed to alleviate poverty, provide public health infrastructure, or spread literacy to the masses, so you are essentially arguing for failure simply because it fulfills your aesthetic preferences. I have no room for that kind of anti-empirical fanaticism.

Libertarians are no different than the chain-smoking middle aged communist in a black turtleneck and a beret trying to tell me that "real Communism has never been tried!"

The developed world is organized the way it is organized for the simple reason that the non-governmental solutions that you so desperately argue for didn't produce good results. Quite frankly, it is the argument of a ideological parasite to go on to grab all the benefits of the society we created just to argue that the infrastructure should be destroyed to create your own fantasy world that wouldn't have even been possible without policies that ran in direct opposition for what you're arguing for.
posted by deanc at 1:21 PM on October 3, 2012 [13 favorites]

Rumors abound that Paul Krugman is "on the list" to replace Alan Krueger as the Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers.

Mind you people may just be spreading delusional hopeiness, but if against the odds it turns out that way... and Warren lands that Senate seat there will at least be two folks in federal govt with some economic sense.
posted by edgeways at 1:24 PM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Will Mitt run on torture? -- "His advisers want him to bring waterboarding back. Challenging Obama on torture might be his debate surprise."

Torture grows in popularity: Poll finds that extreme counterterrorism tactics have more support than under Bush, possibly because of pop culture
posted by homunculus at 1:38 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

So apparently young Ryan has never heard of the Presidential veto before.

I don't really care to defend Ryan in general but in this case the Presidential veto is irrelevant. If a bill is vetoed it's not a law. So this isn't a good example of a Ryan GOTCHA.
posted by Green With You at 1:48 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

However, every other thing Ryan has ever said is a good GOTCHA.
posted by Mister_A at 1:50 PM on October 3, 2012

Like when he said he did a marathon in 12 minutes. COME ON!
posted by Mister_A at 1:51 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ryan, like lowfat milk, is apparently 1% fat. COME ON!
posted by jaduncan at 2:04 PM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ryan said he can "smell time". COME ON!
posted by grubi at 2:06 PM on October 3, 2012 [5 favorites]

Ryan is like school in the summer time. No Class.
posted by cashman at 2:16 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ryan said he helped Marko Ramius defect in the Красный Октябрь, allowing a major US intelligence haul. COME ON!
posted by jaduncan at 2:18 PM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ryan said he once debated the ghost of Franklin Roosevelt -- and won. COME ON!
posted by grubi at 2:19 PM on October 3, 2012

Will Mitt run on torture? -- "His advisers want him to bring waterboarding back. Challenging Obama on torture might be his debate surprise."

If this happens I will burn things from sheer frustration.

Oh, and I heard Ryan claimed that he's going to make it to VP. Come on.
posted by jaduncan at 2:23 PM on October 3, 2012

I am picturing eight or nine people, most in just their underwear, eyes shut tightly, all thinking the same thing: "Ryan... something something something. COME ON!"
posted by Room 641-A at 2:26 PM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Ryan is as clever as eight or nine underwear-clad internet nerds. COME ON!
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 2:29 PM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

I am picturing eight or nine people, most in just their underwear, eyes shut tightly, all thinking the same thing: "Ryan... something something something. COME ON!"

Yes. Now imagine the fun when we stop doing that and retire to the bedroom together. Tonight we're going to try doing the "molten chocolate shake".
posted by jaduncan at 2:29 PM on October 3, 2012 [6 favorites]

Ryan is as clever as eight or nine underwear-clad internet nerds.

"I would never understand? I'll understand more...than you'll never know."
posted by kagredon at 2:30 PM on October 3, 2012

Alas, Babylon. There's a debate thread up.

No, no. You can't change threads in mid-stream. Also, if you change threads, I have it on reliable authority that the terrorists win.
posted by corb at 2:35 PM on October 3, 2012

I'M WEARING SHORTS AND A SHIRT, OKAY?

gah!
posted by grubi at 2:47 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

There is a certain air of...giddiness to this thread. Have we all started drinking already?

Who stops?
posted by titus-g at 2:54 PM on October 3, 2012 [5 favorites]

I don't really care to defend Ryan in general but in this case the Presidential veto is irrelevant. If a bill is vetoed it's not a law. So this isn't a good example of a Ryan GOTCHA.

You are so RIGHT and I am so WRONG. I will now have to take a drink in order to wash the shame away.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:05 PM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Yes, I know there's a lean and shiny new debate thread - and over here, this poor creaky old thing is getting a little long in the tooth and bloated ... but this place is cozy and comfortable and you are all my peeps here...

There's a bunch of strangers over there and 250+ comments I have to catch up on. I bet all those people aren't as smart and nice and pretty as all my friends here.

I can't quit you, creaky old Romney thread.
posted by madamjujujive at 3:27 PM on October 3, 2012 [8 favorites]

There's a bunch of strangers over there and 250+ comments I have to catch up on. I bet all those people aren't as smart and nice and pretty as all my friends here.

Hey I still have this in Recent Activity, you know! Gawd, at least wait til I'm out of earshot ...
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 3:30 PM on October 3, 2012

I'm in both. I'm such a wench.
posted by jaduncan at 3:31 PM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Heck, what's one more browser tab among friends?
posted by rifflesby at 3:33 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Can we leave "."s for threads after they get cruelly supplanted ...?

.
posted by RedOrGreen at 3:36 PM on October 3, 2012

This is the politics thread for the cool kids...

... you know, the ones sitting in the school parking lot, smoking camels (+ one creepy chick smoking cloves), listening to Iron Maiden, drinking some Bud Light that some old dude (actually it was Biden) bought for us.
posted by honestcoyote at 3:36 PM on October 3, 2012 [7 favorites]

Heck, what's one more browser tab among friends?

$20 dollars, same as in town.
posted by drezdn at 3:38 PM on October 3, 2012 [5 favorites]

drinking some Bud Light that some old dude (actually it was Biden) bought for us.

Mummy said he's my new uncle.
posted by jaduncan at 3:39 PM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Damn it internet, where is my Mitt/Malory Archer mash-up tumblr?
posted by Room 641-A at 3:42 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

We're getting off task in our exuberance.
posted by absalom at 3:54 PM on October 3, 2012

(+ one creepy chick smoking cloves)

dang man the thread is still in recent activity so I can see you being hurtful and all.

:(:(:(
posted by winna at 3:55 PM on October 3, 2012 [7 favorites]

I'm in both. I'm such a wench.

Me too, except I see myself as more of a scarlet hussy.

drinking some Bud Light

Oh God, no!!! Mike's Hard Lemonade maybe? Probably too expensive. In my youth it was Bartles & James-- I don't know what the under-aged non-beer drinkers are drinking now.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:57 PM on October 3, 2012

dang man the thread is still in recent activity so I can see you being hurtful and all.

If it makes you feel any better, I was the not-so-creepy but still in-all-black boy who also smoked cloves constantly. Djarum Internationals. Came in a little red tin. Thick as blunts. Unfiltered. Sugar on the tips. Sweet, sharp, searing all at once.

God, I miss those things even if my lungs don't. stupid lungs
posted by honestcoyote at 4:00 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Aww. Marisa, you're smart and pretty enough.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:02 PM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Shoot all I have is half a bottle of merlot and a partially eaten turkey leg.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:04 PM on October 3, 2012

(4388 comments total)

with this one, 4389
posted by liza at 4:07 PM on October 3, 2012

I have some delicious stinky french cheese. Yay.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:08 PM on October 3, 2012

I have a can of Coca-Cola and a Little Debbie Swiss Roll.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 4:11 PM on October 3, 2012

Merlot? Fuckin' merlot? No one ever wonders, "Hey, is that the kind of person I'd like to have a glass of merlot with?" No. The canonical question is: "Would I like to have a beer with that dude?"

Put down the merlot, get in your big American car, drive out to one of your big American supermarkets and pick up some goddamn beer, Brandon. We have standards here.
posted by maudlin at 4:12 PM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

Heck, what's one more browser tab among friends?

It bogs down the browser enough that I've now gone ahead and isolated this thread in Safari instead. Excelsior!
posted by cortex at 4:15 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Debian Wheezy/Firefox, no lag with both open. This is a 8 core laptop though, so YMMV.
posted by jaduncan at 4:18 PM on October 3, 2012

(4388 comments total)

For the really finicky, note that this doesn't account for the 47 comments that have been deleted.

SO FAR.

DUN DUN DUNNNNNNN
posted by cortex at 4:18 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Yeah, I've started running this as the only tab in Chrome and the whole thread seems to reload reasonably promptly. I feel so disloyal to Firefox, but man, it's kind of frightening to watch it thrash.
posted by maudlin at 4:22 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

What alcohol mixes well with a molten chocolate milkshake?
posted by perhapses at 4:22 PM on October 3, 2012

SLoG, there is a "y" in Bartles & Jaymes. Yes I know this because that's what I drank then too.

No booze for me tonight, I'm flying solo with two little kids, so I guess I am the designated driver. Someone have a glass of wine on my behalf.
posted by ambrosia at 4:23 PM on October 3, 2012

What alcohol mixes well with a molten chocolate milkshake?

Bailey's and/or vodka is always a good mix for that sort of thing. Though, should just skip the shake and go straight for a mudslide. Even better.
posted by honestcoyote at 4:26 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'd like to inform everybody that I have most of a 12-pack ready to go and 2 kitties to watch the debate with. This shit is on.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 4:27 PM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

Put down the merlot, get in your big American car, drive out to one of your big American supermarkets and pick up some goddamn beer, Brandon.

That cat is sitting on my chest and I'm not allowed to move.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:27 PM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

I've started running this as the only tab in Chrome

Good idea, thanks maudlin! Much better ... and I can keep ff for the new thread.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:28 PM on October 3, 2012

For the really finicky, note that this doesn't account for the 47 comments that have been deleted.

SO FAR.

Heh. 47? I would never have guessed.

So we are announcing what we are drinking and eating? I'm having beef curry with a side of kim chee and unsweetened Ice Tea. The Finlandia and nuts comes later.

SLoG, there is a "y" in Bartles & Jaymes. Yes I know this because that's what I drank then too.

Oh God you are right. How could I have forgotten? What I will never forget is the vile taste of it-- like rotted fruit.

What alcohol mixes well with a molten chocolate milkshake?

Whatever goes in a Mudslide. Rum? Brandy? I don't know.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:28 PM on October 3, 2012

That cat is sitting on my chest and I'm not allowed to move.

Do you have another cat, of suitable age, who knows how to drive? This is an emergency, dear.
posted by maudlin at 4:28 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Sesame sticks and Duvel.
posted by Mental Wimp at 4:29 PM on October 3, 2012

I'll be watching with my new puppy. He'll probably poo during the debate. I'll keep it so that I can fling it at the TV at some point.
posted by charred husk at 4:30 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Wife and I are ordering a pizza, I'm gonna go get some beer from the convenience store, and when things really get dour I've got some nice Knob Creek rye that I've been enjoying a lot lately.
posted by cortex at 4:31 PM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

As long as an alphabet thread doesn't break out, chums
posted by gnome de plume at 4:32 PM on October 3, 2012

Oh Knob Creek. Niiiice.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:32 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Bah, that's hardly likely.
posted by cortex at 4:32 PM on October 3, 2012

By the hounds of Jupiter, save us from alphabet threads.
posted by Rumple at 4:32 PM on October 3, 2012

cortex hates alphabet threads
posted by gnome de plume at 4:33 PM on October 3, 2012

I am having roasted red pepper and tomato soup, some root beer, and a bagel to stick in the soup since I have no crackers. I am living high upon the hog!
posted by winna at 4:33 PM on October 3, 2012

I've made panko and pecan encrusted chicken breasts, pesto pasta with the last of the season's basil, sauteed spinach and have cracked a bottle of malbec. Let the debates begin! Godiva martinis for desert, for anyone who makes it here before the martinis are gone...
posted by dejah420 at 4:34 PM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

CNN's live feed from Colorado has crashed 3 times in the last 30 minutes. I bet someone at CNN is sweating bullets.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 4:35 PM on October 3, 2012

*kicks in door* someone said Knob Creek?
posted by The Whelk at 4:36 PM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

Wait, what's an alphabet thread?
posted by dejah420 at 4:36 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Do you have another cat, of suitable age, who knows how to drive?

He's BUSY.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:38 PM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

What on earth is CNN live-feeding two hours before the debate? Just round table time filler?
posted by cortex at 4:39 PM on October 3, 2012

Xpecting an answer to that, dejah420?
posted by Rumple at 4:39 PM on October 3, 2012

I have no cable tv any more, so I'm relying on the YT feed, the Guardian liveblog, and John Cole's drinking game.

On preview: KITTY! God forbid you disturb either overlord. Keep calm and chug Merlot.

On edit: goddamn it, I fixed a bad link. GO ME!
posted by maudlin at 4:40 PM on October 3, 2012

Wait, what's an alphabet thread?

I think it's a 4chan thing, where the author of a post ending in 7 has to share a photograph of human mammary glands, either theirs or someone else's.

But, that's probably not true since there's no img tag. So this is probably the answer.

I had to look it up too. Don't tell anyone.
posted by honestcoyote at 4:40 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Yes, honestcoyote has it
posted by gnome de plume at 4:42 PM on October 3, 2012

Zingers are Romney's best hope
posted by Rumple at 4:44 PM on October 3, 2012

i will be providing my offspring with pulled pork, roasted yams & watercress salad. that pork butt has been in the oven since 1pm today. we're waiting for the "bark" to get extra crunchy.

i will be partaking of the victuals in a keto way, without the yams. libations are kept carb-free to stick to my ketogenic diet regime.

carry on.
posted by liza at 4:45 PM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

y are you so deadset on these so called "zingers"?
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 4:45 PM on October 3, 2012

Zingers are Romney's best hope

Better not be Hostess brand. They nasty.
posted by charred husk at 4:46 PM on October 3, 2012

I love pretending to be one of the cool kids.
posted by angrycat at 4:48 PM on October 3, 2012

We're ordering pizza and I'm hoping that the current clusterfuck at work is done by the time the debate starts.

(Don't they realize I can never get any real work done if it's always fucking new crises every week?)
posted by klangklangston at 4:50 PM on October 3, 2012

For those of you who can divide your attention (like a BOSS!), there's Charles Pierce's Twitter feed, too, although the Twitter machine is looking rickety tonight.
posted by maudlin at 4:50 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Stir fried vegetables in a square wrap with a lot of black pepper and just a little mayo. Om nom nom.

Now ensconsed with that and my dog, who is currently licking my toes in a somewhat adorable manner. What more prep could I need?
posted by jaduncan at 4:52 PM on October 3, 2012

Up until now my camp kitchen was a bunch of pots and pans and a camp stove stuffed into a rubbermaid bin.

Last weekend, I built a chuckbox from some spare wood I had laying around. I'm going to spend all night sanding the thing. By hand.

I think it will do more for my sanity than howling at the idiots on the Tee Vee.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 4:52 PM on October 3, 2012

I've got some unaged whiskey (read: legal moonshine) from Buena Vista, CO and some Chivas from my grandparents' liquor cabinet (just moved them into a home) that's older than I am. Gonna be a good night, one way or another.

"...one forty-five caliber automatic; two boxes of ammunition; four days' concentrated emergency rations; one drug issue containing antibiotics, morphine, vitamin pills, pep pills, sleeping pills, tranquilizer pills; one miniature combination Russian phrase book and Bible; one hundred dollars in rubles; one hundred dollars in gold; nine packs of chewing gum; one issue of prophylactics; three lipsticks; three pair of nylon stockings. Shoot, a fella' could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff."
posted by notsnot at 4:53 PM on October 3, 2012 [6 favorites]

Going to juggle homework (net ionic equations, strong acids, and what it means to you and your family), this thread, the other thread, the debate, and the occasional bored puppy who demands a belly-rub RIGHT NOW.

Think it's going to be a confusing night.
posted by honestcoyote at 5:01 PM on October 3, 2012

And MeFi's own mightygodking has put up odds and will be live blogging tonight.
posted by maudlin at 5:03 PM on October 3, 2012

This the debate I want to see.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:05 PM on October 3, 2012

The debate I want to see involves way more liquor, handguns and screaming bald eagles. Zombies are welcome to attend, of course.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 5:07 PM on October 3, 2012 [3 favorites]

Browser watch: I just started Chrome 22 and Firefox 15 from scratch and loaded this page in each before opening the Task Manager (Windows 7) and checking memory usage.

Chrome: 87,060 Kb
Firefox: 267,884 Kb

That's embarrassing.
posted by maudlin at 5:12 PM on October 3, 2012

FF grows a lot more slowly for me when more tabs are added, and Chrome often shows 250MB+ per tab in the Chrome task manager. I have no idea why it is so nuts on my machine.
posted by jaduncan at 5:15 PM on October 3, 2012

For the really finicky, note that this doesn't account for the 47 comments that have been deleted.

SO FAR.

Including the very first comment in the thread, which was my own stupid link to my friend's stupid but hilarious series of Mitt smirking memes. jessamyn let me off with just a warning and let me drive myself home to sleep it off.
posted by gerryblog at 5:29 PM on October 3, 2012

Including the very first comment in the thread, which was my own stupid link to my friend's stupid but hilarious series of Mitt smirking memes. jessamyn let me off with just a warning and let me drive myself home to sleep it off.

Repost it!
posted by jaduncan at 5:30 PM on October 3, 2012

Safari 5 takes 15 seconds to load this thread, from a cold start.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:30 PM on October 3, 2012

Ha! I got this thread going on the laptop and the other thread on the PC. The only problem I have is when I try to use the PC mouse to load this page.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:31 PM on October 3, 2012

Yeah, chrome takes all of 2 seconds to refresh this page for me on a macbook air.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 5:33 PM on October 3, 2012

(I am, admittedly, a little tipsy already).
posted by jaduncan at 5:35 PM on October 3, 2012

we won't tell
posted by cashman at 5:38 PM on October 3, 2012

Well, this sounds like a situation made for memail...
posted by jaduncan at 5:38 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Molten Chocolate Shake available at CHILI's! Only 1070 calories!
posted by ericb at 5:40 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

"There are 47 comments that will be deleted no matter what. All right, there are 47 comments that are dependent upon moderation, that believe they are victims, that believe the moderators have a responsibility to care for them, that believe they are entitled to flags, to deletion, to you-name-it."

posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 5:41 PM on October 3, 2012 [9 favorites]

... drinking some Bud Light

Fuck that shit. ZIMA's where it's at!
posted by ericb at 5:43 PM on October 3, 2012

There are contractors drywalling my upstairs this week and they are having way too much work ethic tonight because they were supposed to be gone like an hour and a half ago and I feel really weird plopping down on the couch and blasting a debate across eight feet of projector screen while they're still here. Serious first world problems here.
posted by cortex at 5:44 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Pee Break!
posted by ericb at 5:48 PM on October 3, 2012

I've also had to switch over to Chrome, partially because I've left my laptop charger at work and I kind of need this thing to last for at least another three hours. I'll miss my glorious tree-styled tabs and Greasemonkey scripts, though.

Shameless plug: I'll be chitchatting with some other Canadian expats over at Globe and Mail.
posted by Phire at 5:51 PM on October 3, 2012

This thread is so badass, (snif),

this thread is so badass, it just keeps giving and giving and giving, never asking for a darned thing in return, and you takers keep on taking and taking and taking.

I hope you're all as ashamed of yourselves as I'm ashamed of myself!!

Sorry, badass thread, can I, could I be part of you again?
posted by Skygazer at 5:52 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Awww, they were introducing Mrs. Obama and Mrs. Romney and they met in the middle and hugged it out. Nice start!
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 5:52 PM on October 3, 2012

CHICKEN MOLE Burrito and Brita water...

LIVING IT UP TONIGHT!! WOOO!!!
posted by Skygazer at 5:54 PM on October 3, 2012

Brandon is making fanfic threats in the other thread. Daaaad, make him stop!
posted by maudlin at 5:54 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

xbox fired up? CHECK.
cats? CHECK.
new gy!be album? CHECK.
boozes? CHECK.
tylenol for when I wake up bloody from attacking the tv? OH SHIT.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 5:56 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Jim Lehrer is on CSPAN right now and for a minute I thought he'd gone Clint Eastwood talking to empty podiums. However it was just a mic check.
posted by humanfont at 5:57 PM on October 3, 2012

Can't believe Obama iced Romney on the opening handshake. That's a power move.
posted by drezdn at 5:58 PM on October 3, 2012

My YT stream has someone yammering on it right now. The PBS Ustream is less offensive, although it's buffering like mad. Let's see if ABC holds up.

(Yep, they're yammering. But at least there's no buffering. MUTE!)

(So YT is ABC. Oy.)
posted by maudlin at 5:59 PM on October 3, 2012

If any candidate drop the F-bomb take a drink.
posted by humanfont at 6:01 PM on October 3, 2012

Jim Lehrer and two podiums are quietly staring at each other.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:01 PM on October 3, 2012

Bet the podiums blink first.
posted by maudlin at 6:03 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

"No, god dammit, it'll be 'The Lehrer-Podium Newshour or it'll be nothing!"
posted by cortex at 6:06 PM on October 3, 2012

Drinking game entry: "new economic patriotism".
posted by maudlin at 6:06 PM on October 3, 2012

Babies Consider Mitt Romney
posted by homunculus at 6:08 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Can you help us ignore 47% of the country? Romney is trying to hypnotize me, I can feel it.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:08 PM on October 3, 2012

Romney's gestures are robotic - and he's such a liar! - I guess that's his strategy - lie, lie, lie and try to act all warm and fuzzy. rrrrr
posted by leslies at 6:12 PM on October 3, 2012

Romney: I don't want tax cuts. Wait what?
posted by humanfont at 6:12 PM on October 3, 2012

MetaFilter is over capacity at the moment. Please try reloading the page after a few seconds.

Damn you Mr. Romney, DAMN YOU!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:16 PM on October 3, 2012

What's the drinking word???
posted by Skygazer at 6:18 PM on October 3, 2012

Romney is doubling down on not raising taxes on the super wealthy. Interesting tactic there.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:19 PM on October 3, 2012

I have been loving the Democrats' emphasis on "its arithmetic" this year.
posted by Lemurrhea at 6:19 PM on October 3, 2012

Flippy floppy...

K' I'm just drinking any ole time.
posted by Skygazer at 6:20 PM on October 3, 2012

Babies Consider Mitt Romney

They're all 47%-ers. "Food is for closers, you greedy lazy babies!"

Also, compare and contrast.
posted by kirkaracha at 6:21 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Babies Consider Mitt Romney

New Tumblr in 3, 2...
posted by kagredon at 6:22 PM on October 3, 2012

Ughhhh my fellow livebloggers are totally obsessing about how Obamacare kills jobs and small businesses and "there are no jobs without small businesses" and the only other democrat liveblogger is not talking at all.
posted by Phire at 6:25 PM on October 3, 2012

The Guardian live blog breaks out the food metaphors: "So far from Mitt Romney there's been more waffle than zinger. But when you have a "no details tax plan" that's what happens I guess."
posted by maudlin at 6:25 PM on October 3, 2012

It would be wrong for me to want to see Romney DIAF for calling Obama a liar, right?
posted by jaduncan at 6:27 PM on October 3, 2012

Romney seems to be getting a bit rattled, though he's been expressing his points well.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:27 PM on October 3, 2012

Killing Big Bird is supposed to appeal to someone outside of the 27%?
posted by honestcoyote at 6:28 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

maudlin, you're an angel.
posted by Phire at 6:30 PM on October 3, 2012

Phire: are your comments on G&M moderated? They seem to be several minutes behind compared to the YouTube feed.
posted by tksh at 6:32 PM on October 3, 2012

Babies Consider Mitt Romney

Compare and contrast
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 6:34 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Guardian live blog breaks out the food metaphors

So did Jill Stein. I want bread.
posted by homunculus at 6:35 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm not sure what the deal is, tksh. I don't think they're moderated, but it's possible that there's a lag in the software.
posted by Phire at 6:40 PM on October 3, 2012

We're Sorry — A Server Error Occurred
MetaFilter is over capacity at the moment. Please try reloading the page after a few seconds.

Dammit PB, we need more power! Send in the red shirts to fix it!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:44 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Compare and contrast

To be fair to Romney, those look like human babies. Awkward.
posted by kirkaracha at 6:46 PM on October 3, 2012

Phire, only one of my comments have been published at G&M so far. I'm being mod-blocked like crazy. Will try harder!
posted by maudlin at 6:48 PM on October 3, 2012

No, no! I thought the thread was closed already! Sad for what I missed but so much hope for the future again.
posted by Room 641-A at 7:02 PM on October 3, 2012

loaded this page in each before opening the Task Manager (Windows 7) and checking memory usage.

You can't use Task Manager to measure Chrome's memory usage, because of the multi-process model.

I just did the same experiment, loading nothing but this thread in both Chrome 24 and Firefox 16, and then I visited chrome://memory which helpfully compares the memory usage of both for you. They both had virtually identical numbers in the "total" column: 210,294k for Fx and 210,020k for Chrome.
posted by Rhomboid at 7:15 PM on October 3, 2012

Sadly a bit late- I should have commented during the exchange itself, but there was a polite warning about not piling on corb that landed in the thread around the same time, so I backed off-- but I have to respond to this:

I think it is inaccurate to say that the poor can't provide family support to each other. In fact, they are the people who can best provide it to each other. If you have a society where it is expected that extended families will live together if they need to, you lose a lot of the problems with the nuclear-family-only model, like the childcare issue.

Just to point out that this model only works, only runs, with an endless supply of women's unpaid labour. Those aged parents who need caring for? The orphan children? The suddenly widowed brother-in-law? It was the women in the family who carried the burden: the unmarried sister, the already overworked mother or grandmother or aunt, or the oldest daughter, pulled from school to help out. When middle-class women moved into the workforce, that social structure came apart, and this was understood as a likely consequence of women's independence early on; it was one of the arguments against the franchise. For poor families, it was much the same, before contraception. The women of the family took on the care of its members, just as described. But when women decline to spend their lives caring for others--when you're faced with "a lot of the problems of the nuclear family only model"-- a large part of those "problems" are caused by the lack of free female labour. To return from that to the extended family mutual aid model requires women to be tethered to the home. The expense involved in maintaining the infrastructure of daycares, nursing homes, retirement homes, and so on, puts a financial value on the uncompensated work done by women, work which most women today are less eager to do. You can't have the supportive extended family without it.
posted by jokeefe at 7:20 PM on October 3, 2012 [43 favorites]

Yeah, Rhomboid, but I checked all the Chrome processes showing in the Task Manager AND I timed loading speed from scratch and on reload on my Windows 7 laptop:

FF: 10 seconds to show the top of the page, 45 seconds to show the whole thing and allow me to scroll to the bottom, and 30 seconds to refresh once loaded.

Chrome: 10, 15, 20.

That's a big difference right there as a human being sitting behind my keyboard.

(Now Chrome seems weird about closing tabs when 3 or more had been opened -- I saw more processes open up in TM -- but the overall load was still less than FF and my timing still showed a difference.)
posted by maudlin at 7:22 PM on October 3, 2012

Fuck you Romney, it's not Obama's house and plane, they belongs to THE PEOPLE. All 100% of them. That's right. Did you think you'd get to keep them if you won?

Edited for typo, woo!
posted by Room 641-A at 7:24 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Somewhere, Bill Clinton is shouting answers to all of Jim Lehrer’s questions at his television
posted by homunculus at 7:26 PM on October 3, 2012 [5 favorites]

It still sounds like you're comparing apples to oranges. For instance, do you have any greasemonkey scripts installed in one and not the other? For me, with both browsers running without extensions, they both take nearly exactly the same time to load the page (3 - 4 seconds) and nearly the exact same amount of memory.
posted by Rhomboid at 7:37 PM on October 3, 2012

That was incredibly frustrating. Obama was (understandably) on the defensive and seemed like the stumbled more than Romney did. Romney had little by way of what we call "accurate facts", but he came off as someone who actually cares, which I didn't think he was capable of doing.
posted by Phire at 7:43 PM on October 3, 2012

Obama also didn't call Romney on several direct lies. THEY ARE OPEN GOALS.
posted by jaduncan at 7:47 PM on October 3, 2012

I felt that Romney had a much better delivery than Obama, even if he was much malleable with the truth and quite insistent on getting the last word. He responded to the barbs thrown at him smoothly and didn't stammer like Obama did. Boo on both candidate's non-answers to the role of government question. Really, education had to fill the entirety of it?

Was Obama avoiding the offensive to not get baited into canned responses Romney had waiting?
posted by tksh at 7:48 PM on October 3, 2012

OK, Rhomboid, you got me: I have a few GM scripts.

But -- COLD! DEAD! HANDS! My FF experience is GM-driven (stuff for MF, plus a few non-GM add-ons like NoScript and Google Talk and -- HOLY FUCK WHAT ARE ALL THESE ADD-ONS?)

There may be a bit of spring cleaning going on tonight.
posted by maudlin at 7:50 PM on October 3, 2012

I tried to watch and listen to this but had to change the channel frequently, just boring and annoying. I like Obama but what happened, you could hear him struggling to not insert the "ummmm" practically every sentence without an 'um'.
posted by sammyo at 8:02 PM on October 3, 2012

I just donated another hundred bucks to the Obama campaign. Maybe Obama won the debate, after all.

I can tell you, however, that the CNN post-debate coverage is practically killing me. I'm so friggin' glad I don't live in the US any more, and am therefore not subjected daily to US media. I feel sorry for the rest of you who are.
posted by syzygy at 8:03 PM on October 3, 2012

That was painful
posted by caddis at 8:13 PM on October 3, 2012

For those in need of cheering up: 27 Of The Most Insane Martial Arts Battles Ever Filmed
posted by homunculus at 8:28 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

I don't have time to watch that now, but thank you homunculus because just imagining random kung-fu flicks is doing a lot for my personal morale.

There's nothing sadder than a cool kid on the tail end of a Bud Light binge. Definitely have a headache.

Anyone up for pancakes? Carb bombs and kung fu are definitely what's needed now.
posted by honestcoyote at 8:36 PM on October 3, 2012

just imagining random kung-fu flicks is doing a lot for my personal morale.

Hell, I missed the whole debate because I was watching this.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 8:39 PM on October 3, 2012

EmpressCallipygos: I think you had the right idea. That definitely sounds much better than what I was watching.
posted by honestcoyote at 8:44 PM on October 3, 2012

Hell, I missed the whole debate because I was watching this. yt

Anyone with a headache might prefer the acoustic version.
posted by homunculus at 8:56 PM on October 3, 2012

Hey, thread, I'm sorry I bailed on you during the debates, but you weren't loading at all on my laptop. You're still my boo.
posted by cortex at 9:46 PM on October 3, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm going to fire this thread.
posted by The Whelk at 9:58 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

Glad to see some money lining up against the odious Allen West yt .

In other news: Allen West orders wife to be his porn star
posted by homunculus at 10:09 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

That Kung Fu list missed Swordsman 2: The Invincible Asia, about a dude who had to castrate himself to get the total Chi. Tsui Hark and like three other directors, straight masterpiece of insane Kung Fu action.
posted by klangklangston at 10:12 PM on October 3, 2012

I've kept this thread open in Chrome for days and days now. But I think it might be time to finally close it. Farewell, sweet thread.
posted by litlnemo at 10:25 PM on October 3, 2012

This thread is so badass I can't even come up with any way to describe it right now other than that it simply is and it is good...
posted by Skygazer at 10:59 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

the Andre the Giant of threads!
posted by mannequito at 11:04 PM on October 3, 2012

The Presidential Debate That Wasn't Very Presidential: How Obama Let the Etch-a-Sketch Take the Controls
posted by homunculus at 11:29 PM on October 3, 2012

it simply is and it is good...

The thread abides.
posted by honestcoyote at 11:47 PM on October 3, 2012 [1 favorite]

I haven't bathed since the previous post took off.
posted by Room 641-A at 12:06 AM on October 4, 2012 [2 favorites]

Took off what?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:09 AM on October 4, 2012 [2 favorites]

i cant let this thread go... it's so hard to leave and say good-bye :'')
posted by liza at 6:04 AM on October 4, 2012

I'm so late to this thread.
posted by josher71 at 6:33 AM on October 4, 2012

It can't be over, no no no no no, i refuse to believe it nooooooo
posted by grubi at 6:55 AM on October 4, 2012

JFC CORTEX & METAFILTER,

don't delete comments after a thread has been going for so long and with so many angles like this one. you've really overextended yourselves in changing this thread with the deletions you've made. it's a rather dishonest move.
posted by liza at 7:32 AM on October 4, 2012

What on earth are you talking about?
posted by grouse at 7:36 AM on October 4, 2012

singin don't delete this grooooove.
posted by cashman at 7:44 AM on October 4, 2012

The probable reason Obama looked so tired.
posted by jaduncan at 7:46 AM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

Why do people still think we're still on Earth 616?!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:50 AM on October 4, 2012 [2 favorites]

I just bought a shiny new MacBook Pro, with extra RAM. This thread? Opens in, like, .5 seconds. Blam! I love you, shiny new laptop.
posted by jokeefe at 7:51 AM on October 4, 2012 [2 favorites]

OMG WE'RE NOT?
posted by grubi at 7:51 AM on October 4, 2012

No grubi, we're not shiny new MacBook Pros, not yet.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:55 AM on October 4, 2012

I aimed that at your comment, Brandon. jokeefe stood in between you and my aim. Collateral damage.
posted by grubi at 8:03 AM on October 4, 2012

don't delete comments after a thread has been going for so long and with so many angles like this one.

This is a unreasonable and unrealistic dictate and I have no idea why you would go there. Comments get deleted from long threads just like they do from short threads. If you need to talk about this further, hit the contact form or Metatalk if it needs to be a public discussion.
posted by cortex at 8:16 AM on October 4, 2012 [3 favorites]

Wah, NYT this morning:

"Virtually every time Mr. Romney spoke, he misrepresented the platform on which he and Paul Ryan are actually running. The most prominent example, taking up the first half-hour of the debate, was on taxes. Mr. Romney claimed, against considerable evidence, that he had no intention of cutting taxes on the rich or enacting a tax cut that would increase the deficit.

That simply isn’t true."
posted by jaduncan at 8:54 AM on October 4, 2012 [10 favorites]

I would like this thread to be spun into yarn, and then knitted .... into a pair of mittens ..... for a lobster!
posted by Rumple at 8:56 AM on October 4, 2012 [4 favorites]

I have no idea why you would go there.
posted by octobersurprise at 9:03 AM on October 4, 2012

I am so jealous of everyone getting shiny new computers in this thread I might go out and order that SSD for my MBP I've been eyeing.
posted by Phire at 9:30 AM on October 4, 2012

Mitt Romney’s Long Fixation On Big Bird And Public Arts Funding
posted by homunculus at 9:44 AM on October 4, 2012 [2 favorites]

At Last Night’s Debate: Romney Told 27 Myths In 38 Minutes
posted by homunculus at 9:46 AM on October 4, 2012 [3 favorites]

AW WE'RE IN THE LIST OF LINKS PORTION OF THE THREAD

That usually means it's about to end... :-(
posted by grubi at 9:48 AM on October 4, 2012

False. The list of links portion of the thread can go on for weeks. In this case, the thread has almost two weeks before it closes.
posted by homunculus at 9:56 AM on October 4, 2012 [2 favorites]

Still. It's usually a sign! A SIGN OF DOOM
posted by grubi at 9:57 AM on October 4, 2012

Mitt Romney Style (Gangnam Style Parody)
posted by homunculus at 10:11 AM on October 4, 2012 [3 favorites]

homunculus: "Mitt Romney Style (Gangnam Style Parody)"

I've been seeing this going around for a few days, and wow, that was so much better than it had any right to be. The lyrics actually fit the beat! That, like, never happens.

Plus, any song that has "savoir faire" in its lyrics is just fine by me.
posted by Phire at 10:22 AM on October 4, 2012

That's a million times better than the Samuel L Jackson video.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:30 AM on October 4, 2012

President Obama answers questions from "Indian Country" media
posted by Rumple at 10:32 AM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

President Obama answers questions from "Indian Country" media

One more item on the already massive list of refutations of "They're both the same!" claims.
posted by grubi at 10:50 AM on October 4, 2012

Dude, that Mitt Romney Style video actually made me smile. And the lyrics were perfect.
posted by daq at 10:51 AM on October 4, 2012

I'm starting to get scared coming back into this thread. Waiting for it to load is like having my toe in this particular ocean of Blue only to be pulled under by a Great White Shark while Safari tries to load.
posted by ericb at 11:44 AM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

I just can't abandon this thread. It's like an old friend that you share a lot of history with, even if you aren't as close as you once were.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 11:48 AM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

Time for a montage video of all the good times we've had with Thread 120016.
posted by grubi at 11:53 AM on October 4, 2012 [2 favorites]

Goddamn fair weather commenters. Sure, run off to your new, quickly loading thread, forget about your first love. $#$% Gingriches!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:55 AM on October 4, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'm just gonna keep it open over here in this dedicated Safari one-tabber until it closes. Every time I actually want to leave a comment I can hit "Post" and then go get a cup of coffee.
posted by cortex at 11:57 AM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

I aimed that at your comment, Brandon. jokeefe stood in between you and my aim. Collateral damage.

Have I mentioned how shiny it is? And how, as yet, uncovered with cat hair?
posted by jokeefe at 11:59 AM on October 4, 2012

You know the cat is currently eyeing that Macbook, waiting for the moment that you turn, ever so slightly, away. The instant your attention is elsewhere, your cat will pounce, and rain fur all over that technological wonder like it's Vegas and they're a feline Mitt Romney after a few too many milkshakes.
posted by MrVisible at 12:01 PM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

cortex: "Every time I actually want to leave a comment I can hit "Post" and then go get a cup of coffee."

Yeah, this thread is slow enough that I can follow it in RA, but posting is definitely a pain. If only there were some way of sending a comment to be posted without actually reloading the page, and just relying on the "x new comments" AJAX-y thing to make sure your comment turned out alright.
posted by Phire at 12:02 PM on October 4, 2012

We only need another 997 comments to beat the Palin thread. I think we can do it.
posted by grouse at 12:03 PM on October 4, 2012

Have I mentioned how shiny it is? And how, as yet, uncovered with cat hair?

Oh, I can imagine. Mine's only a little over a year old. And gorgeous, because I got a clear plastic shell for it (Speck makes 'em). And I can put the stickers I want (geek stuff) on the shell and not actually ruin the aluminum finish!
posted by grubi at 12:04 PM on October 4, 2012

We only need another 997 comments to beat the Palin thread. I think we can do it.

I'll immediately begin one-word comments!
posted by grubi at 12:05 PM on October 4, 2012

You know the cat is currently eyeing that Macbook, waiting for the moment that you turn, ever so slightly, away. The instant your attention is elsewhere, your cat will pounce, and rain fur all over that technological wonder like it's Vegas and they're a feline Mitt Romney after a few too many milkshakes.

There are two of them. They plan to tag-team it.
posted by jokeefe at 12:11 PM on October 4, 2012

This Thinkpad is the anti-shiny. Kinda anemic processor but with a 256GB SSD and it loads this thread well in Chrome. Matte screen and completely black finish so there's no reflection, no indication that it is even here. Cats look right through it because they cannot even perceive it with their tiny, yet twisted, brains.

Hence no cat hair. Plus, the keyboard has a nipple. Every keyboard should have one.

And, on the plus side, I think I'm done freaking out about last night. I'm staying positive. If my guy wins, I'll be thrilled. If Romney pulls the comeback of all comebacks, then I get to indulge in four years of derisive chortling and I'll finally get my new pantry filled with canned goods and boxes of ammo. Win win.
posted by honestcoyote at 12:13 PM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

Matte screen and completely black finish so there's no reflection, no indication that it is even here.

Stealthtop.
posted by grubi at 12:15 PM on October 4, 2012

How To Measure for a President
Entry 1: Suppose the presidential campaign was settled by a job interview. Here’s what we should look for.

What do you say, debate links in one thread, poll and horserace links in another, and political analysis in this one?
posted by the man of twists and turns at 12:17 PM on October 4, 2012

My previous old workhorse of a Powerbook had cat hairs seemingly growing out from the keys themselves, like a weird species of mold filaments had attacked the keyboard.

I'm avoiding the debate thread because this one still feels so warm and reassuring. In this thread, Romney is an airplane which has lost an engine and is still falling earthward in a ball of flame. I'd like to stay here, thanks.
posted by jokeefe at 12:18 PM on October 4, 2012 [2 favorites]

Thank god my boss didn't come in today.
posted by computech_apolloniajames at 12:26 PM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

The other thread got its first admonishment from a mod! I wish I had a picture of it.
posted by grubi at 12:28 PM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

Pfft, those whippersnappers. We remember a time before edit windows.
posted by Phire at 12:33 PM on October 4, 2012 [14 favorites]

Though since the title of that other thread is "Thrilla or Vanilla", every time I see it in my Recent Activity I have to go listen to Konnichiwa Bitches, which is doing wonders for this gray muggy Thursday.
posted by Phire at 12:34 PM on October 4, 2012

I had to comment uphill in the snow! Both ways!
posted by grubi at 12:35 PM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

My husband walked in the door this morning and the first thing he asked me was, "How did it go last night?"

"Romney wants to kill Big Bird."

"Oh man..."

This afternoon we talked about our memories of Sesame Street and our favorite characters (I love Grover, he loves the Count) and I couldn't help but think in the richest country on Earth-- in the country with the most billionaires anyway-- isn't it tragic that we can't afford a Nationally funded TV channel filled with arts and children's learning programs. You know you can always afford the things you really want but they have to be high in your priorities.

I could not help but imagine that all over the USA today people sat around with their friends and family and talked about Sesame Street. I hope some people thought about their priorities as well.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:35 PM on October 4, 2012 [9 favorites]

he loves the Count

He's not the only one.
posted by homunculus at 12:51 PM on October 4, 2012

Romney’s Successful Debate Plan: Lying
posted by homunculus at 1:39 PM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama lost the debate in the first five minutes. The moderator actually stopped the exchange and asked him to comment on Romney's "trickle down" comment. It was a chance to call Romney out on the right wing theory it represented, from tax breaks to the rich, and then question whether Romney knew what it meant or not. He avoided the issue entirely and acted confused instead. I wonder now if Obama knows what it meant.

Another major zinger Obama let slide was the "borrowing money from China test." I could hardly believe it when I heard it, like those idiots who claim they don't want their tax dollars going somewhere they don't like, boo hoo. The point is that any borrowed money is potentially from China, even for the military and tax breaks for the rich.

Then there's the Romney gaffe of referring to the poor as "...your poor..." indicating Obama's poor, as if he alone represents them. He could have slam dunked that one as a 47% sentiment on national television.

Major debates can't let mistakes like that just slide by, or people will wonder.
posted by Brian B. at 3:09 PM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

I honestly never thought that I would be taking a partisan position on this issue, but ...

The other thread really kind of sucks.
posted by kyrademon at 3:11 PM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

Is the ghost of Mitt Romney's ancestor haunting Kendal pub?
posted by homunculus at 5:37 PM on October 4, 2012

Maybe I'll get the last comment on this thread, maybe I won't.
posted by ob at 5:40 PM on October 4, 2012

You won't.
posted by josher71 at 5:42 PM on October 4, 2012

I might though.
posted by ob at 5:44 PM on October 4, 2012

Damn!
posted by josher71 at 5:46 PM on October 4, 2012

See?
posted by ob at 5:50 PM on October 4, 2012

Is it time for ASCII art?

Here's a piece of bamboo
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
posted by drezdn at 5:56 PM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ob, I think we can all agree that drezdn should NOT be getting the last comment in this thread.
posted by josher71 at 5:58 PM on October 4, 2012

Yeah, not on my watch.
posted by ob at 5:59 PM on October 4, 2012

Yeah, hear that drezdn?!
posted by josher71 at 6:02 PM on October 4, 2012

Please quit fucking around?
posted by jessamyn at 6:03 PM on October 4, 2012

Biden is far from a sure thing in the VP debate. Ryan has a knack for lying with a straight face.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:07 PM on October 4, 2012

corb: Have you ever experienced VA care? It is awful. It requires years of waiting for approvals for things to go through, and months of waiting for appointments.

Excuse me but that is complete bollocks. I have used the VA system for 12 years now and have experienced over 6 different VAa in 4 states during that period. You can get a VA card in about an hour (if qualified). The ER is open 24x7 in most places (and it's free). They gave me chemo and saved my life when my new insurance company said "Nuh...uh ... preexisting ... go die somewhere"

Yes it takes a couple months to get an appointment for something like a routine checkup but if you have an emergency (bronchitis, very bad cold, etc) you get seen that day. Did I mention that for most Vets it's free. I have to pay a co-pay of 8 bucks for my scirpts - a freaking good deal.

When I had a funny ECG last summer they scheduled me for a treadmill test and a nuclear scan within the week (turned out to be nothing at all)

So corb your portrayal of the VA in my experience at half a dozen major and some minor VA hospitals is utterly without merit and bogus. frankly I get better care there then I do at the average HMO these days.
posted by Podkayne of Pasadena at 6:28 PM on October 4, 2012 [19 favorites]

Bill Black: Let’s test Romney’s claims about the 47%

We can test the claim that unemployment is high because the unemployed are shiftless. My colleagues at UMKC have detailed how to create a job guarantee program that offers a job to everyone who wishes to work. Our experience is that such jobs prove very attractive to the unemployed.

And the follow up:

Bill Black: Ryan Talks Jobs and Exposes the Lies about the 47%

This insulting question gave Ryan the perfect opportunity to begin to undo the damage done by Romney’s slander about 47% of Americans. Instead, Ryan gave an answer that indicated how faux a wonk and how unserious he is. “I have an idea: Let’s help them get jobs so they can get good paychecks and then they’re good taxpayers.”

Ryan could have explained to the questioner why the question was premised on multiple factual errors. He could have explained that the overwhelming majority of the 47% currently bear the cost of taxes and many have done so for decades. Businesses may nominally pay a tax but economists have shown that they generally pass on the cost of the tax to the customer. The concept is known as “tax incidence.”

Ryan could have explained that bearing the cost of taxes has nothing to do with “hav[ing] ownership of government.” Ryan could have explained that governmental assistance is not a “handout” and that America would not be a better place if single mothers refused to accept food stamps and their children went hungry.

Ryan does not understand how subversive his response was to the questioner. His response exposed the lie at the heart of Romney’s slander of the 47%.

There were really no good excerpts to pull, but they are worth a look.
posted by cashman at 8:04 PM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

Going right along with the points made in those pieces, this:

One of the great wonders of the conservative movement is how effectively they’ve constructed this inverted narrative in which the rich are victims, and the poor are perpetrators. They’ve managed to convince tens of millions of decent Americans—many of them poor—to ignore any evidence that contradicts this worldview. You can jump up and down and scream, ‘Hey, the Americans who don’t pay income tax are dirt poor, or serve in the military, or are aged!’ Or, ‘Listen, the top ten percent of our country controls 75 percent of our wealth, while the bottom half controls 1.1 percent!’ These are factual statements. But they don’t register. The reality conservatives cling to resides in their hearts. The poor wind up poor not because they lack access to opportunity—to good education and good jobs—or because they lose their jobs, or get sick, but because they’re parasites. The rich are rich not because they were born that way, not because they’ve rigged the system in their favor, or because they’re ruthless or unethical, but because they’re braver and more noble than the rest of us.

posted by cashman at 8:07 PM on October 4, 2012 [8 favorites]

Romney : What I said was just completely wrong...

Etch-a-Sketch...
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 8:40 PM on October 4, 2012 [2 favorites]

Are you kidding me? He's trying to take it back now? Oh Obama should rip his ass to shreds now. He said it, meant it, defended it, Ryan defended it, and now he's trying to act like he didn't really mean it? What a joke of a candidate trying to have it both ways.
posted by cashman at 8:54 PM on October 4, 2012 [1 favorite]

LeVar Burton furious over Romney’s attack on PBS
posted by homunculus at 8:55 PM on October 4, 2012 [5 favorites]

I'm furious that this guy is trying to take back his remarks after he so clearly meant them. And now I'm glad that Obama didn't give him the opening to apologize on live television to the nation and try to look heartfelt. Because in print, he just comes across as the complete jerk he is. We all know this guy. The well-to-do guy who will crap on anybody he can to get his way. He scoffs at service people like they are balled up pieces of paper and walks around like everybody is his potential servant.
posted by cashman at 9:08 PM on October 4, 2012 [6 favorites]

I forget who called that strategy of Obama's - don't bring up 47% because you know he has a response planned - but give that point to the President.
posted by msalt at 9:16 PM on October 4, 2012 [3 favorites]

CSMonitor: Top 7 Super-PACs

Mitt Romney Pitches Smaller Government - Is His Target Realistic?
posted by the man of twists and turns at 11:49 PM on October 4, 2012

o hai, thread. I just wanted to hop in to make my ~~totally obvious dumb joke~~ clever scathing commentary that it's small wonder that Obama looked tired during the debate, since he has at least 47% more to worry about than Romney.

unless someone's already made this brilliant observation, in which, case, you know, "NEVER MIND."
posted by taz at 2:43 AM on October 5, 2012 [15 favorites]

The Economist The Swing States: North Carolina: New South, Blue South?
posted by the man of twists and turns at 6:16 AM on October 5, 2012

Huge September Drop In Unemployment, Economy Adds 114,000 Jobs

the unemployment rate plummeted from 8.1 to 7.8 percent, about where it was when President Obama took office, amid the 2008 and 2009 economic collapse
posted by madamjujujive at 6:43 AM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

Paul Ryan: "Let's Make This Country a Tax Shelter"
posted by zombieflanders at 6:55 AM on October 5, 2012 [2 favorites]

zombieflanders: "Paul Ryan: "Let's Make This Country a Tax Shelter""

Holy crap. That...wow.
posted by Phire at 7:37 AM on October 5, 2012

I mean, yeah, the Cayman Islands have such a booming economy and they're one of the world's leaders in innovation and science, we should totally emulate their model.
posted by Phire at 7:38 AM on October 5, 2012

Maybe I'm being dense, but what's in it for us? I mean how on earth would it benefit the USA to become a tax haven?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:49 AM on October 5, 2012

Well, if you're rich, your tax rates will go down. Does bugger all for the rest of us, though.
posted by grouse at 8:01 AM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh, but, you see, when I REALLY DO finally become rich (through, you know, some way), I don't want the gummint touching all MY MONEYS. So we'd better set up a system in which I can take advantage of the middle class once I magically find myself rising above it.
posted by grubi at 8:05 AM on October 5, 2012 [2 favorites]

And if you don't have an American address, parking money in an American bank account will soon attract drones. No thank you.
posted by de at 8:08 AM on October 5, 2012

Romney to give foreign policy speech Monday
posted by the man of twists and turns at 8:40 AM on October 5, 2012

Brandon Blatcher: "Biden is far from a sure thing in the VP debate. Ryan has a knack for lying with a straight face"

I'm hoping it will be the moment Joe Biden has been working and training for his whole life. That, or he says 'fuck it' and goes all honey badger on Ryan's ass.

I made a comment in the other thread and included a reference to a comment here. Let them come over and prove it was link bait!
posted by Room 641-A at 9:17 AM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ryan is an unknown for the debate. He's never even ran for a statewide office. Biden needs to kill him with kindness (and the "everyone's uncle" schtick).
posted by drezdn at 9:23 AM on October 5, 2012

Romney to give foreign policy speech Monday

I hope he doesn't insult a close ally again, or cause an international crisis cos he wants to play-pretend/satisfy the delusion that he's big bad "zombie-Reagan-approved-President-in-waiting."

Fuckin' presumptious creep that he is.

...
posted by Skygazer at 9:28 AM on October 5, 2012

PS: Hello excellent badass thread.
posted by Skygazer at 9:29 AM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

I would love for Biden to use any of the following words when referring to Ryan - "Son", "Whippersnapper", "Young guy", "young fellow", "Kid" etc
posted by TwoWordReview at 9:33 AM on October 5, 2012 [4 favorites]

"Slugger", "Chief", "Kiddo", "Bud", "Chuckles", "Fella", "Chum"
posted by grubi at 9:35 AM on October 5, 2012 [6 favorites]

"fuckhead," "fuckface,"fucknuts"
posted by Skygazer at 9:37 AM on October 5, 2012 [3 favorites]

"Eddie"
posted by drezdn at 9:38 AM on October 5, 2012 [5 favorites]

"listen here, Lad"
posted by de at 9:40 AM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

Even better!
posted by TwoWordReview at 9:42 AM on October 5, 2012

"Sport"
posted by gofargogo at 9:43 AM on October 5, 2012 [2 favorites]

"Al" "Sam" "Arthur"

(In that order...)
posted by Skygazer at 9:43 AM on October 5, 2012

"Usain"
posted by drezdn at 9:44 AM on October 5, 2012

"Li'l Bitch"
posted by grubi at 9:51 AM on October 5, 2012 [2 favorites]

Aw shit. I can't believe I forgot "Skipper".

So here it is. "Skipper".
posted by grubi at 9:58 AM on October 5, 2012

I'm not sure if this burst of comments is a sign of renewed vigour in the old beast, or the last spasms of a dying thread.

Nice to see it hanging on for now though!
posted by knapah at 9:58 AM on October 5, 2012

"Squeaky"

"Mr Lyin' "
posted by Rumple at 9:59 AM on October 5, 2012

Rumple: since he dodged a draft, change it to "The Cowardly Lyin'".
posted by grubi at 10:01 AM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

Excerpt from this LA Times piece yesterday: (emphasis mine)

The debate spotlight now slowly turns toward the running mates—the relatively untested Wisconsin Rep. Paul D. Ryan, whose aides say he may have participated in one debate when he first ran for Congress 14 years ago, and the very experienced Vice President Joe Biden, who has run for president twice and memorably faced former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin in a high-stakes debate in 2008.

Ryan may have a knack for lying with a straight face, but Biden doesn't suffer fools gladly. Obama may have laid back off Romney in order to look more presidential, but I can't imagine Biden doing that. I hope Ryan is pooping his pants at the thought of debating Joe.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 10:08 AM on October 5, 2012 [3 favorites]

Yeah I can't think of any reason for Biden to go easy on him-- his public image being what it is (everyone's sitcom dad) vs. Ryan's public image (supposed whiz kid, definitely eager to prove himself) what would the negative repercussions be of Biden going for a kill?
posted by shakespeherian at 10:12 AM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

I don't know that Uncle Joe will have to do anything except leave enough slack in the rope for Ryan to make his own noose.
posted by rtha at 10:18 AM on October 5, 2012

he may have participated in one debate when he first ran for Congress 14 years ago

Which he did in just a hair under three hours, mind you.
posted by cortex at 10:19 AM on October 5, 2012 [15 favorites]

Never underestimate your opponent, especially a good looking one who can convincingly lie at the drop of a dime. You learn these things when dating in college.

I don't know that Uncle Joe will have to do anything except leave enough slack in the rope for Ryan to make his own noose.

Yep. Have the video staff on standby to create ads for the next day and get Uncle Joe home.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:21 AM on October 5, 2012 [2 favorites]

> what would the negative repercussions be of Biden going for a kill?

After all that Biden's been through in life? None!
What's his email address?
posted by de at 10:21 AM on October 5, 2012

Oh man, someone should do a comic about Obama and Biden working in an office.

Obama: Joe, the Syria situation is heating up again, what the hell?

Biden: Eh, let's go some burgers at the strip bar, come back to this later.

Obama: We can't just leave now, it's the middle of day!

Biden: Isn't it night time over there at this point? Plus, it's not like the country is going anywhere. Everything will look better once you get some onion rings in ya, promise. Where's the limo keys? The driver's on break and we can handle this.

Obama: Joe, seriously...

Biden: Geeze man, grab some of the Secret Service guys, see if they want to join us. Except that Ted guy. He was an ass at the poker game last week, he can go get his own damn burger.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:30 AM on October 5, 2012 [4 favorites]

I hope Biden calls him Sparky.
posted by klangklangston at 10:35 AM on October 5, 2012 [7 favorites]

Which he did in just a hair under three hours, mind you.

Oh God, Biden, so needs to needle Ryan about that and riff on it. Maybe go off on a tangent about his sons and how they never got their marathon times wrong, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT COMPLETE MENDACIOUS ASSWIPES...
posted by Skygazer at 10:41 AM on October 5, 2012 [2 favorites]

especially a good looking one

I don't get this even though I keep hearing it. Is there such a dearth of good looks in politics that it's come to this??? He looks like a cartoon child vampire!!
posted by sallybrown at 10:45 AM on October 5, 2012 [12 favorites]

Hey, don't make fun of Sookie's taste in men!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:50 AM on October 5, 2012 [3 favorites]

I hope Biden calls him Sparky.
posted by klangklangston

That'd be an affront to Charles Schulz, dammit.
posted by COBRA! at 10:52 AM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

He looks like a cartoon child vampire!!

He actually looks specifically like Eddie Munster.
posted by howfar at 10:54 AM on October 5, 2012 [2 favorites]

He looks like a cartoon child vampire!!

All growed up!

But yeah, I'm not seeing it either.
posted by Room 641-A at 10:54 AM on October 5, 2012

Ooh, my first MeFi jinx!

I like the commenter in howfar's link who tries to hurl an insult back by asking if James Carville is an alien. I guess they think that for Democrats he shape-shifts into Johnny Depp?
posted by Room 641-A at 11:01 AM on October 5, 2012

His appearance and demeanor are at the very bottom of the long list of reasons not to like the man, but for me it's his voice. I don't watch video of the news, so I heard him for the first time the other day, and Ryan's reedy, toneless whine is so off-putting I'd rather go the rest of the way deaf than listen to him for four years. He's not an ugly man, though he doesn't rise to being good-looking, but that voice kills any possible appeal. All this is apart from every other thing about his personality and outlook, which trump the mere physical aspects.

In addition, he couldn't hew more closely to my prejudices about personal trainers if he had a checklist on the matter.

Finally I'd like to brag that my iphone's back is strong. The thread is slow, but is still functional. Adding favorites is getting to be tricky, though.
posted by winna at 11:05 AM on October 5, 2012 [4 favorites]

Yeah, it's entirely possible to believe that James Carville is smart and insightful, and still recognize that he's one freaky-looking dude. No blinders here.
posted by Faint of Butt at 11:06 AM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

I hope every time Biden rebuts one of Ryan's points, he follows it up with an avuncular, "But that's okay, Tiger!" or "You'll get me next time, Champ!"
posted by Freon at 11:09 AM on October 5, 2012 [12 favorites]

"PS: Hello excellent badass thread."

Gee, Skygazer, if you like the thread so much, why don't you marry it? Huh? HUH?

(Apologies to all the mods for the next pony request: "Can we spouse threads?")
posted by maudlin at 11:26 AM on October 5, 2012

"PS: Hello excellent badass thread."

Gee, Skygazer, if you like the thread so much, why don't you marry it? Huh? HUH?

FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!
posted by grubi at 11:31 AM on October 5, 2012

why don't you marry it? Huh? HUH?

If ya like it then you shoulda put a ring on it, if ya like it then you shoulda put a ring on it....
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 11:43 AM on October 5, 2012

"But that's okay, Tiger!" or "You'll get me next time, Champ!"

While this did make me laugh I would not want Biden to turn into a patronizing dick. Remember when Cheney said "I go to every breakfast meeting and I've never seen you there" to John Edwards? Yeah, he was acting like a patronizing dick and Biden shouldn't go there.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 11:43 AM on October 5, 2012

I agree, but that's the thing, it's hard to imagine Biden coming across as patronizing - even if he was trying to be!
posted by TwoWordReview at 11:45 AM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

Exactly! It's hard not to see Biden as your cool uncle helping you practice for debate club and taking you out for ice cream after!
posted by Freon at 11:49 AM on October 5, 2012

And he ends the debate tousling Ryan's hair.
posted by grubi at 11:51 AM on October 5, 2012 [3 favorites]

Biden could make Paul sit in his lap. Worked with the biker in that diner. (I know, I know, she was in the next chair.)

On preview: And after he tousles his hair, he can pull a quarter from the tax haven that is Ryan's left ear.
posted by maudlin at 11:52 AM on October 5, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'm seeing a ventriloquist routine, now.
posted by de at 11:54 AM on October 5, 2012

Happy Out-Of-Context Friday!

Marco Rubio:

"Those happen to be the words of our distinguished Vice President, Mr. Joe Biden. [crowd boos and jeers] No, don't boo, he's the best thing we've got going!"

I have to run out for a bit, so take five everyone!
posted by Room 641-A at 11:59 AM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

Gee, Skygazer, if you like the thread so much, why don't you marry it? Huh? HUH?

Guilty as charged. But I feel like a bit of cad two-timin' this fine classy lady with that "other" thread, so I'm putting my best Smoove B. Love foot forward....
posted by Skygazer at 12:15 PM on October 5, 2012

Anyhow Maudlin you sound a little jealous over there... There's plenty of me to go around, I've got lots of L-U-V to give, so rest easy lady, you will get your lovin' from the Sky master of Gaze. /wink

Now Playing: Marvin Gaye
posted by Skygazer at 12:18 PM on October 5, 2012

It's about to get sticky up in hyah
posted by grubi at 12:20 PM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

Better butter your cue finger up.
posted by Flashman at 12:27 PM on October 5, 2012

The Colbert Report: Mitt's Socialist Rhetoric & Body Language

Mitt's "Etch A Sketch" Behavior
posted by homunculus at 12:36 PM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

Paul Ryan: 60 Percent of Americans Are 'Takers,' Not 'Makers
posted by zombieflanders at 1:28 PM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

Meet the Incredible, Incoherent Jobs-Report Truthers
posted by homunculus at 2:18 PM on October 5, 2012 [2 favorites]

I wonder what's next. This cannot end. THIS CANNOT END.
posted by grubi at 2:44 PM on October 5, 2012

Just 38 more to an even 5000, no?
posted by Mental Wimp at 3:12 PM on October 5, 2012

Good news everyone! Paul Ryan let me borrow his calculator, and it turns out this thread already has 6000 comments!
posted by drezdn at 3:14 PM on October 5, 2012 [18 favorites]

I want to see a societal shift where the responsibility for such individuals is left to families, not to the state.

Ho-lee.

Just to point out that this model only works, only runs, with an endless supply of women's unpaid labour. Those aged parents who need caring for? The orphan children? The suddenly widowed brother-in-law? It was the women in the family who carried the burden: the unmarried sister, the already overworked mother or grandmother or aunt, or the oldest daughter, pulled from school to help out.

No lie. Right now my uncle is in the hospital for cancer treatment. The only place that will provide the (advanced) treatment he needs that is also covered by his insurance is 250 miles away from home. Insurance won't cover a nurse to stay with him (he should have someone with him 24/7 to monitor any fevers, &c.), so my mom moved there temporarily to stay with him (they provide the housing for one support person). She was the only one in our extended family who "could" go, and by "could" I mean she works at Wal-Mart so her job was (supposedly) the most expendable. She's been working at Wal-Mart for almost ten years now-- she's been promoted to lead of her department-- but she'll most likely lose her job this month when she's officially been away from work for over three months. She straight up doesn't have a job now. No one else was going to voluntarily lose their job (plus, not everybody has family medical leave) to take care of him. Of course, no one expected my other uncles to go-- just the sister. What the fuck. Women can't devote their time to caring for extended family members and working outside of the home at the same time. (Also, when I think about other situations where family takes care of extended family... I can think of my ex-boyfriend's retired mother taking care of her father-in-law, my overworked grandmother taking care of her grandchild... &c., &c.)
posted by stoneandstar at 3:37 PM on October 5, 2012 [29 favorites]

Let Him Die
posted by Golden Eternity at 3:46 PM on October 5, 2012

Tipping point. Takers. Makers. What a giant brain. Who else would you choose to write your social contracts?

The Mormon and the Moron - only in America.
posted by de at 4:33 PM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

Santorum Suggests 'Eating' Big Bird: 'You Can Kill Things and Still Like Them'
posted by homunculus at 5:27 PM on October 5, 2012

Obama ad - He said it, he meant it.

Mitt is trying the Burke line from Aliens: "It was a bad call".

Mitt, don't you have any idea what you have done here? Well, I'm gonna make sure they nail you right to the wall for this! You're not going to sleaze your way out of this one! Right to the wall.
posted by cashman at 5:30 PM on October 5, 2012 [5 favorites]

The Mormon and the Moron - only in America.

Throwing around someone's religious affiliation like an insult is icky.
posted by benito.strauss at 5:53 PM on October 5, 2012 [4 favorites]

You're right, it should be "Mittens and the Moron."
posted by jadepearl at 6:01 PM on October 5, 2012

It was offensive. I'm sorry. His faith and love of his family are the only aspects worth trusting.
posted by de at 6:33 PM on October 5, 2012 [2 favorites]

Deducing Romney, One Big Budget Bird at a Time
posted by homunculus at 6:39 PM on October 5, 2012

That "He said it, he meant it" ad is good. I mean, flip-flopping is one thing, but to try and reverse your position you've been doubling down on it even when specifically asked if you want to recant.... that can't fly. I think the ad really gets that message across.
posted by adamt at 7:58 PM on October 5, 2012

Foreign-Owned Firm Gives $1 Million to Romney Super-PAC: Foreigners aren't allowed make campaign donations. But post-Citizens United, the rules have gotten hazy.
posted by homunculus at 8:33 PM on October 5, 2012

Paul Ryan: "Let's Make This Country a Tax Shelter" - After calling the Cayman Islands "the place where you hide your money," Ryan said we should make the United States more like that notorious tax haven.
posted by homunculus at 8:44 PM on October 5, 2012

Obama should do a series of ads that start out with an every(wo)man saying "I believe Mitt Romney." They then go out to quote Romney on one or another hard right position from the the primaries. Followed by a primary debate clip where he says it out loud. Back to every(wo)man: "Some people say Romney doesn't really mean all that stuff he said. But I think we should take the man at his word."
posted by msalt at 8:51 PM on October 5, 2012

RoboRomney: Mitt Romney agrees with you.
posted by homunculus at 10:40 PM on October 5, 2012

Million Muppet March
posted by homunculus at 10:42 PM on October 5, 2012 [1 favorite]

Fun distraction: Todd Akin and his nutty misogyny! Some old C-Span footage of Todd has provided us with more of Akin's bizarre world views such as women are climate-controlled, food-providing incubators for embryos, stem cell research will lead to human clones being harvested for organs

Akin has competition: Rep. Paul Broun, High Ranking Member of the House Committee on Science: Evolution, Big Bang Theory ‘Lies Straight from the Pit of Hell’
posted by homunculus at 11:02 PM on October 5, 2012 [2 favorites]

Nothing like getting things in perspective: Romney-Ryan or Broun-Akin ... cinch.
posted by de at 2:58 AM on October 6, 2012

Evolution, Big Bang Theory ‘Lies Straight from the Pit of Hell’

Awfully harsh words for a lousy David Duchovny movie and an overrated sitcom, don't you think?
posted by Faint of Butt at 3:05 AM on October 6, 2012 [2 favorites]

The Economist Campaigns Don't Matter (Much) "The simplistic but roughly accurate rule of thumb I tend to repeat at parties is that, in presidential elections, the incumbent wins as long as he's passably popular and the economy has been growing, and he loses if he isn't and it hasn't. "
posted by the man of twists and turns at 3:54 AM on October 6, 2012 [2 favorites]

This debate also highlights the unequal nature of Presidential race debates. One person has nothing to do but practice debates. The other person has to run the country and squeeze in practice time at some point.

Then there's the idea of having to practice. You can prepare speeches for state dinners and what not, but not for antics of mad men and their countries.

A better idea would be to simply grab both of the nominees out of the blue, on a date unknown to them and toss up on stage for a 2 hour debate. Let's see how they do without preparation.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:22 AM on October 6, 2012 [4 favorites]

This debate also highlights the unequal nature of Presidential race debates. One person has nothing to do but practice debates. The other person has to run the country and squeeze in practice time at some point.

Usually the opponent has a day job at least. In fact, when's the last time one of the presidential nominees was not only not a current politician, but technically unemployed? It's usually a senator, governor, or vice president. But unemployed?

2008: Senator McCain and Senator Obama
2004: President Bush and Senator Kerry
2000: Gov. Bush and Vice President Gore
1996: President Clinton and Senator Dole
1992: President Bush and Gov. Clinton
1988: Vice President Bush and Gov. Dukakis
1984: President Reagan and former Vice President Mondale

So it's been almost 30 years since a presidential nominee had nothing to do but practice debates and he had the bad timing to be running against Reagan. I'm not sure who was considered to have won the debates at that time though.
posted by Green With You at 10:39 AM on October 6, 2012

Mondale won the first debate, Reagan's performance was dismal. He was seen as tired, vague, and confused - a little worrying given his age.

Reagan came good for the second debate making an ageist joke about not wishing to take advantage of Mondale's youth and inexperience.

Associate Professor Mitchell Mckinney, The University Of Missouri:

... it really is the rule that we see in presidential debates that for some reason an incumbent president will take the debate stage against a challenger who has that sense of urgency, who is on the attack and the incumbent president will appear somewhat sluggish or lacklustre and we certainly saw that again [with Obama].

OPINION: How the media are trying to spin the first presidential debate

Barack Obama 2012 = Ronald Reagan 1984?
posted by de at 12:58 PM on October 6, 2012

Mondale won the first debate, Reagan's performance was dismal. He was seen as tired, vague, and confused - a little worrying given his age.

Check out this article from the Washington Post about the first debate in 2004 and compare it with this year's reporting. It works best if you copy it into document program and do a search/replace of "Kerry" with "Romney" and "Bush" with "Obama" or combine the challengers and the incumbents, respectively.

It's uncanny how much is identical to how the media reacted on Weds and Thur. Even the part about the color of the ties reads the same.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:09 PM on October 6, 2012 [1 favorite]

I still don't believe Mitt 'won' the debate in the eyes of the viewers, but rather, that the pundits weighed in quickly with their evaluation and then the viewers changed their opinions to match those of the pundits.
posted by Mental Wimp at 1:27 PM on October 6, 2012

Good news everyone! Paul Ryan let me borrow his calculator, and it turns out this thread already has 6000 comments!

Pfff, Paul Ryan would never do such a thing. Sharing degrades the soul.
posted by kagredon at 1:36 PM on October 6, 2012 [7 favorites]

Mother was an Adventurous Woman
posted by homunculus at 2:07 PM on October 6, 2012

Hannity and Rove Join the Job Report Truther Brigade
posted by homunculus at 2:15 PM on October 6, 2012

Not only that, but they are major players in the Keystone pipeline...a project, by the way, which Romney has vociferously argued for. (Gee, I wonder why?)

Speaking of the pipeline: Texas grandmother arrested for trespassing on her own land to protest Keystone
posted by homunculus at 5:03 PM on October 6, 2012

Hannity and Rove Join the Job Report Truther Brigade

Oh dear god, seriously? The ancient Bureau of Labor Statistics is now becoming biased? "Well, they've been at this for decades, but now they'll fudge the numbers a bit, just this once, for the poor, troubled Obama. Totally realistic."

From the debate thread:

Matthews: well, let me get back to your tweet this morning. it must be embarrassing for to you do a tweet now after the power you used to have. i mean, tweeting, doesn't seem like something i'd hear from jack welch and i mean it. here you put out the word, unbelievable jobs number, fair enough. these chicago guys will do anything so they changed the numbers. what evidence do you have that they got to the bls?

Welch: i have no --

Matthews: that the chicago guys got to the bureau of labor statistics and jimmied these numbers by 0.3%.

Welch: i have no evidence to prove that. i just raise the question.

Matthews: you didn't raise the question. you said these chicago guys will do anything so they changed the number. you were asserting here in your tweet that you put out at 8:35 this morning, five minutes after the report came out,. did you talk to any economists or anybody in the accounting world that understood how the numbers were put together before you accused the chicago guys of changing the numbers.

No evidence, just a question, which spun into a "Job Report Truther" movement.
posted by filthy light thief at 5:53 PM on October 6, 2012

Of course, "just asking a question" itself is one of those gems like "no offense, but..." and "I'm not a racist, I'm just being honest" that is such a great barometer of sincerity.
posted by feloniousmonk at 6:32 PM on October 6, 2012 [4 favorites]

And the great thing here, of course, is that Welch didn't ask a question. He stated it as fact in the tweet and Matthews totally called 'Bullshit!' and didn't let him weasel out of his original statement. And because he did that, by the end he actually gets Welch to admit it could be a coincidence and he had no evidence of maleficence. He and his next guest were joking about how even Nixon tried to get to them and couldn't.

We need people in news media to grow some clit or balls and start ~~making these lying politicians accountable for their bullshit~~ doing their job.

I'm the one who posted the original comment in the other thread, if it matters
posted by Room 641-A at 7:54 PM on October 6, 2012

I feel like adding to my above comment that my mother (who is losing her job) is married to someone (an ex-garbage man) who has been out of a job for six months (a deadbeat but in this case not voluntarily, hasn't been able to find a job), and she lives rent-free with a different brother. That brother has a working class job. He used to own my grandparents' house, which was so dilapidated (holes in the walls and foundations, mold, dust, putrid standing water in a hole underneath the kitchen, boarded off rooms, rodents and vermin freely moving through the walls) that it had to be torn down, and now he lives in a new prefab house on the same property which soaks up much of his income. (We live in a very rural area, where apartments really aren't a thing, unless you're on certain government assistance.) In other words, a great example of families living together in one house, passing down "resources" (an old, rotting house), "supporting" each other, and still getting hit in the teeth when life throws a curveball. None of the "solutions" for the poor that Romney/libertarians/whatever suggest actually change anything in the real world-- the money, the resources still aren't there. Poor people do help each other-- I grew up with the expectation that we would all take care of each other-- but when no one has enough money for their own family, no one can give enough to anyone else. It's simple math.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:34 PM on October 6, 2012 [10 favorites]

Sorry for being all "me me me me me" but man, it's harsh when people propose these perfect solutions that are completely unattainable in the real world. And when examples of why these things fall apart are given it's always "you see, well, but." They should have done this, they should have done that. Always something someone did wrong, when we're talking about the real world, where things for the poor (who in general have to deal with very erratic, chaotic circumstances) are never going to reliably follow a pattern of always being able to do precisely the right thing for themselves and everyone else (because hindsight is 20/20 and not everyone has a therapist/life coach/financial adviser, especially the poor). It's not even about giving poor people the respect and dignity to learn from life, make mistakes, and occasionally want something more than bare bones (which we should), it's about not being in denial about what is possible and how entropy works. Entropy in a low-resource, sometimes low-information environment. (And I really mean low-information, not as a euphemism for stupid. Non-poor people take for granted what they learn by osmosis, just from being around other people who run their lives in resource-rich ways. Ask anyone who's moved from the working class to the middle class how much cultural education they had to cram and bluff to get there.)
posted by stoneandstar at 11:37 PM on October 6, 2012 [9 favorites]

Well, it's still good polling, so I'm still relaxed (and looking forward to my $100 victory cigar).
posted by jaduncan at 4:15 AM on October 7, 2012

The New Republic: Why Won't Conservative Denounce Voter Suppression?

Why won’t some principled conservative commentator like David Brooks or Michael Gerson denounce the Republican party’s voter-suppression efforts? I find this genuinely puzzling.

I don’t expect actual GOP politicians to condemn the voter-suppression movement within their ranks, because they have a partisan interest in, well, suppressing votes. The fewer low-income African-Americans and Latinos show up at the polls, the better off they’ll be.

At heart, a lot of so-called 'conservatives' actually don't like democracy, because the wrong sorts of people get to make decisions.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 4:17 AM on October 7, 2012

At heart, a lot of so-called 'conservatives' actually don't like democracy, because the wrong sorts of people get to make decisions.

I think that applies equally to left and right. No-one likes democracy. That's the point.
posted by howfar at 4:19 AM on October 7, 2012

" I grew up with the expectation that we would all take care of each other--

Growing up rural/farming, the idea that not just families but entire communities worked on a soft version of the 'from each according to their ability, to each according to their need' principle was a part of my education. You help out when they need extra hands, and they do the same. Food and beer may change hands, but money would be an insult...

And this is a great thing. But it's not a thing that is ever going to work in a massively mobile, technological and sub|urban culture. It's like suggesting that the answer to to climate change is for everyone to go back to using horse drawn jalopies instead of cars and trains and trucks and planes.

Wonder what it was caused the breakdown of traditional families and communities in the first place... oh, wait, yeah, this.

"looking forward to my $100 victory cigar"

Really getting tempted by intrade, currently £100 down would give an extra £53 back...
posted by titus-g at 4:21 AM on October 7, 2012 [1 favorite]

Really getting tempted by intrade, currently £100 down would give an extra £53 back...

Yes, I was surprised people thought it was a rhetorical device rather than smart finances when I took an even money bet from RedShrek. I had to remind myself that I can't afford to lose $1k and the pot size might have scared him off.
posted by jaduncan at 5:06 AM on October 7, 2012

I think that applies equally to ~~left~~ Democrats and ~~right~~ Republicans. No-one likes democracy. That's the point.

FTFY.
posted by Rykey at 5:32 AM on October 7, 2012 [2 favorites]

Pastors prepare to take on IRS over political endorsement ban

When Ron Johnson takes take his pulpit on Sunday, he will willfully break the law. After presenting his views on President Barack Obama’s handling of religious issues –- like abortion, gay marriage, and religious freedom - Johnson will ask his congregation a question.

“In light of what I have presented,” Johnson says he will say, “How can you go into that election booth and vote for Barack Obama as president of the United States?”

posted by syzygy at 5:39 AM on October 7, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Pastors do this nearly every year.
posted by drezdn at 5:44 AM on October 7, 2012

This criticism may "apply equally" on the level of our fantasies about what people do and don't think in their heart of hearts, but in terms of who is actually voter-suppressing I don't know of even a single policy Democrats have proposed or enacted to suppress the votes of right-leaning demographics. This is a pox on just one house.
posted by gerryblog at 5:48 AM on October 7, 2012 [3 favorites]

drezdn: The Pastors do this nearly every year.

Perhaps, but did you read the article? This year, there is a concerted effort by an organized group (Alliance Defending Freedom) counting more than 1,400 churches, nationwide, as members.

They're hoping to force the IRS's hand on the Johnson Amendment, which forbids §501(c)(3) organizations from making political endorsements. They're hoping to test the constitutionality of this clause.

Or, you know, you can just slag it off like a know-it-all. Whatevs...
posted by syzygy at 5:51 AM on October 7, 2012

The Pastors do this nearly every year.

"Clearly, the best person to lead this great Christian nation is a Mormon dedicated to the blind support of another nation built around a religion that explicitly denies the deity of Jesus Christ!"

Sometimes being an American is not as fun as it looks.
posted by Rykey at 5:53 AM on October 7, 2012 [5 favorites]

Did anyone watch the Stewart/O'Reilly debate?
posted by futz at 6:22 AM on October 7, 2012

I've seen Stewart and O'Reilly together before, and didn't see the point. Stewart softballs the hell out of O'Reilly, O'Reilly pretends to respect Stewart, it's always been the same so far.
posted by Pope Guilty at 7:13 AM on October 7, 2012

Did anyone watch the Stewart/O'Reilly debate?

I did. There wasn't a lot of softballing since it was a debate rather than an interview. O'Reilly yelled a lot when he got frustrated at the rather good points that Stewart occasionally made. I think it's still possible to pay and watch it, and you'd get a better experience than watching it live because there were some technical problems. But I suppose you could also find the video that someone posted on YouTube and donate directly to the charity instead.
posted by zerbinetta at 11:04 AM on October 7, 2012

I saw it last night. Stayed up way too late to watch a pirated stream on youtube. it was amazing! It was much much better than the presidential debate, that's the truth.
posted by rebent at 11:35 AM on October 7, 2012

I thought O'Reilly was quite surprising and Stewart was hilarious.

This part though, where the two talk about what is wrong with the political discourse in America was just crazy. Stewart is looking at O'Reilly incredulous at the truth of what he is saying and yet stunned by who was saying it.

O'Reilly's response is either purest example of cognitive dissonance ever committed to video, or he is dog-whistling "rescue me" to the reality-based community.
posted by fullerine at 12:02 PM on October 7, 2012 [3 favorites]

Mass Revolt: Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts just six years ago. Today he’s so unpopular here he’s barely bothering to campaign in the state. There are reasons for that—and they could spell doom for his presidential campaign.
posted by homunculus at 12:47 PM on October 7, 2012

O'Reilly's response ....

Wow. I've noticed the Rovian "accuse the other guy of your weakness" before, and how it happens so often with Mitt, but O'Reilly's gone another step beyond.

Am I wrong, or is this kind of thing happening more and more? All the anti-porn crusading pedophiles, and gay-bashing closet cases. Is there a good name for it? It seems to go beyond mere hypocrisy, and becomes some sort of confession-through-accusation.
posted by benito.strauss at 12:53 PM on October 7, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm all for pastors getting to endorse candidates. As soon as they pay their taxes.
posted by Bookhouse at 1:01 PM on October 7, 2012 [8 favorites]

n+1 Politicopsychpathology

Many features of the Republican psychosis are well known: Global warming isn’t caused by humans; Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are responsible for the financial crisis; the President, who may be a foreign-born anticolonialist undermining America at the bidding of his father’s ghost, has eliminated the work requirement for welfare; and so on. There’s never much point in talking to psychotics, though we can speculate about the particular delusions they exhibit. Most of us probably subscribe to an interpretation of the Grand Old Psychosis (GOP) that goes something like this: The trauma of American decline as experienced by white people, older people, and men—and above all older white men—has caused a psychic break producing a classic paranoid delusion, in which that segment of the population which through its race, culture, and creed embodies the American virtues responsible for the country’s former greatness is being attacked by a composite monster (dark-skinned, sexually deviant, non-Christian, and anticapitalist) bent on stigmatizing family as patriarchy, religion as ignorance, and free enterprise as predation. Here as in many cases of persecution delusion we might suspect the displacement onto others of a terrible guilt, in this instance surrounding war, racism, climate destruction, and so on. This interpretation of Republican loss of contact with reality is cartoonish and speculative but, in my considered opinion as a democratic ecosocialist and citizen–clinician, probably true as far as it goes.

Wow.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 1:13 PM on October 7, 2012 [6 favorites]

I'm all for pastors getting to endorse candidates. As soon as they pay their taxes.

The trickery part about getting religion into politics is that politics will get into religion. I doubt the churches pushing for the change fully understand this.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:25 PM on October 7, 2012

Mitt Romney debates himself
posted by homunculus at 1:34 PM on October 7, 2012 [2 favorites]

It seems to go beyond mere hypocrisy, and becomes some sort of confession-through-accusation.

The bit where he pauses and says "a lot of money", I don't know, it seemed really confessional to me.
posted by fullerine at 1:59 PM on October 7, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mitt vs. Mitt : The Story Of Two Men, Trapped In One Body
posted by the man of twists and turns at 2:36 PM on October 7, 2012 [1 favorite]

fullerine: That is an amazing quote, thank you very much. It has to be read as a confession, I think. He could not possibly be so deluded as to not notice that it applied to himself.
posted by msalt at 2:58 PM on October 7, 2012

Mitt Romney Tries to Prove He Is Human by Telling Sad Stories
posted by homunculus at 3:43 PM on October 7, 2012

"I have feelings, just like all of you. I feel love, I laugh, I sometimes cry."

"Albeit a saline lubricant solution..."

/It's Zed! And no, Neil Peart stands alone.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 3:56 PM on October 7, 2012 [3 favorites]

John Kerry’s Elizabeth Warren Dilemma: How a Warren victory could thwart John Kerry's dream of becoming secretary of state.
posted by homunculus at 4:14 PM on October 7, 2012

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus: Gary Johnson is a ‘non-factor’
posted by homunculus at 4:44 PM on October 7, 2012

John Kerry’s Elizabeth Warren Dilemma: How a Warren victory could thwart John Kerry's dream of becoming secretary of state.

Based on Obama's willingness to hand over the far redder states of Kansas and Arizona by tapping Sebelius and Napolitano for the cabinet, it doesn't seem likely that this is as big a concern as the article makes out.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 5:38 PM on October 7, 2012

I hope you're wrong. Maybe he learned his lesson in his first term.
posted by msalt at 6:00 PM on October 7, 2012

Yeah, speaking from an Arizonan perspective, giving us Brewer instead of Napolitano was a terrible move.
posted by MrVisible at 7:48 PM on October 7, 2012 [1 favorite]

I love how everyone and their goddamned brother is telling the Kenyan born socialist who manipulated his way to President of the United States what he's doing wrong. Particularly when he's been leading in the Electoral College since what, May?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:52 PM on October 7, 2012 [1 favorite]

Yeah, speaking from an Arizonan perspective, giving us Brewer instead of Napolitano was a terrible move.

I moved here in 2008, so it really felt like I'd been handed the old bait-and-switch routine. I seem to recall it took a while for Brewer to show her true colors; at first I though she might actually be reasonable. I look fondly on my naive self of just under four years ago. (I still hadn't grasped the full horror of Sheriff Joe by then, either. It was a much happier time in the relationship between myself and my adopted state.)

I watched part of the O'Reilly-Stewart debate, but I couldn't stand how much O'Reilly was talking over Jon Stewart and basically bulldozing his way through.

It actually made me glad I hadn't seen the presidential debate, because I have the impression Romney did much of the same, and that's a tactic I find so abhorrent I can't listen to it for very long. Apparently I'm a delicate snowflake when it comes to civility in conversation. This probably explains why election season is so stressful for me.
posted by Superplin at 8:16 PM on October 7, 2012 [4 favorites]

What I find is funny is how this week "the media" has been all, "NOW it's a horse race!" as if they have been saying anything else for the last upteen bizzilion weeks.

Some things tricking in saying things may be sliding back to pre-debate numbers.
posted by edgeways at 8:55 PM on October 7, 2012 [1 favorite]

Less than a month to go
posted by edgeways at 8:56 PM on October 7, 2012

zarq: If Romney's handlers are smart, they'll have him repeat that "Hope is not a strategy" line until he's hoarse

And if even the slightest flicker of humanity still burned within their dead, dead eyes, they would follow it with: "Hope is the thing with feathers..."
posted by titus-g at 5:50 AM on October 8, 2012

zarq: If Romney's handlers are smart, they'll have him repeat that "Hope is not a strategy" line until he's hoarse

To which Obama's handlers should reply with "The 47% doesn't have time to hope, they're too busy pushing the jobless rate below 8%. IF Governor Romneyy wants to pitch in and help with concrete ideas instead of political rhetoric, they'r eappreciate it."
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:56 AM on October 8, 2012

I was also absolutely *astonished* at O'Reilly there. It must be weird to know that you're an actor heavily pushing beliefs that you don't even have and appear to regard as hate.
posted by jaduncan at 6:10 AM on October 8, 2012 [2 favorites]

Pastors prepare to take on IRS over political endorsement ban

Another Fake Holiday, Another Ceaseless Threat to the Things We Fought for This Country to Become
posted by homunculus at 10:55 AM on October 8, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mitt Romney channels Condi Rice in foreign-policy address
posted by homunculus at 12:05 PM on October 8, 2012

Gallup (7 day average) with decent #s for Obama. +5 over Romney, job approval over 50%.

Gallup has certainly been a bit odd lately. They indicated earlier today the race was tied at 47-47, but then release this.
posted by edgeways at 12:18 PM on October 8, 2012

Four Key Areas Where Romney’s ‘New’ Foreign Policy Is Identical To Obama

Romney’s Major Reversal On Foreign Aid
posted by homunculus at 12:57 PM on October 8, 2012

This Photo of Mitt Romney Bending Over in Front of an Astonished Schoolgirl Is Ripe for the Captioning
posted by homunculus at 2:01 PM on October 8, 2012 [6 favorites]

This Photo of Mitt Romney Bending Over in Front of an Astonished Schoolgirl Is Ripe for the Captioning

Given the frequency with which Mr Romney pulls new policy positions out of his arse, I'm surprised it's taken this long to capture to moment on film.
posted by adamt at 3:47 PM on October 8, 2012 [3 favorites]

Mendacity is a cowards strategy and it always loses
posted by humanfont at 4:16 PM on October 8, 2012

Romney Proudly Explains How He's Turned His Campaign Around
posted by box at 4:43 PM on October 8, 2012 [6 favorites]

The National Interest: The Still-Missing Opposition Foreign Policy

Setting aside whether Pletka's own recommendations ever really get beyond sloganeering and offer any meat, the speech that Romney delivered on Columbus Day at the Virginia Military Institute should have left any meat-eaters hungry. Romney talks about strategy, too, and perhaps the most laudable line in the speech is that the use of drones is “no substitute for a national security strategy in the Middle East.” Quite so. But the most one can extract from the speech about Romney's own strategy is that if one proclaims often enough and loudly enough that America is great, that it is exceptional, that it is a leader, and that others in the world want our leadership, somehow those bedeviling problems in the Middle East and elsewhere will get solved.

posted by the man of twists and turns at 11:58 PM on October 8, 2012

Mitt Romney's Foreign Policy Speech: More of the same, but better, stronger, more expensive.

Mitt Romney's Foreign Policy: Wishful thinking

Neocon vs. Realist: Romney punts at VMI

Romney Attacks Obama's Foreign Policy

Weak Responses to Romney's Foreign Policy Address
posted by the man of twists and turns at 12:16 AM on October 9, 2012

Mitt Romney's Foreign Policy In Three Sentences

I will reaffirm our historic ties to Israel and our abiding commitment to its security—the world must never see any daylight between our two nations.
I will roll back President Obama’s deep and arbitrary cuts to our national defense that would devastate our military.
In Syria, I will work with our partners to identify and organize those members of the opposition who share our values and ensure they obtain the arms they need to defeat Assad’s tanks, helicopters, and fighter jets.

Yay proxy war.

Mitt Romney’s Most Dishonest Speech: 'When it comes to lies and half-truths, Romney saves his best stuff for foreign policy.'

Clear Eyes, Full Hearts, Vote Mitt: ' In the run-up to the 2008 election, the Daily Beast mastered a form of clicky concern-trolling -- the column by a Lifelong Liberal Who Can't Support Obama. The crowning acheivement was some twaddle by a former Democratic speechwriter who saw in Obama some kind of disrespect for women or the working class or lawnscapers, I think. Well, the Beast is back.'
posted by the man of twists and turns at 12:21 AM on October 9, 2012 [1 favorite]

A Slate writer accusing The Daily Beast of 'clicky concern-trolling'? Not to defend The Beast (which is horrible in at least 7 different ways) but that's pretty much Slate's business plan.
posted by octothorpe at 4:43 AM on October 9, 2012

If I wanted to read a Slate article, I'd read Ron 'Explaining Hitler' Rosenbaum's 'Is the Republican Party Racist?'
posted by box at 8:25 AM on October 9, 2012 [2 favorites]

"A Slate writer accusing The Daily Beast of 'clicky concern-trolling'? Not to defend The Beast (which is horrible in at least 7 different ways) but that's pretty much Slate's business plan."

Takes a thief, etc.
posted by klangklangston at 11:34 AM on October 9, 2012

Juan Cole: Romney’s Five Wars
posted by homunculus at 11:44 AM on October 9, 2012 [2 favorites]

Welp, as per NPR, Romney is telling farmers, 'watch out, if Obama wins, he will tackle climate change and that means more regulation and you will lose'

Hate...so much....flames...flames on the side of my face
posted by angrycat at 1:04 PM on October 9, 2012 [3 favorites]

Metafilter: Back to the motherthread!
posted by Skygazer at 2:46 PM on October 9, 2012 [2 favorites]

Metafilter: Back to the motherthread!

We've just gotta get to 5556. "More inane chatter" you say? Why I'm right here, thanks for asking.
posted by howfar at 2:58 PM on October 9, 2012

Romney is giving Wolf Blitzer a live interview as we type on CNN.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 3:08 PM on October 9, 2012

The New New Romney Is a New Kind of Mendacious Liar
posted by homunculus at 3:15 PM on October 9, 2012

ob1xquote: You know what's fun to say? "Maybe baby."

Also quite a good movie (and you wouldn't believe how many sotto-voce references there were to it in the last episode of House. Still, it will still go down in history as one of the many movies with both Rowan Atkinson and Emma Thompson that wasn't nearly as life changingly awesome as "The Tall Guy").

And in defence of words, 'drubbing' is real! most possibly derived from the (Moroccan/Algerian) Arabic "d'rab", meaning to beat soundly (with an optional cudgel). I always associate it [possibly thanks to Enid Blyton] with the public (U.S. => private) school type bully: the one who closes down the ski camp 'caus his dad owns it. It is the word 'beating' with a large hint of supercilious smug superiority involved.

Victory over, not against.

Still, that's not important right now.

So how hard would it be to modularise and open-source the sort of analyses that 538 do?

I really only dabble in machine learning, but it seems these days there's a bit of python will tell you everything you could ever want to know if you feed it the right numbers. This isn't know as viperomancy, but it possibly should be.
posted by titus-g at 3:44 PM on October 9, 2012 [2 favorites]

'drubbing' is real!

Datapoint: If you follow (or have ever followed) football (soccer) in the UK, you are almost guaranteed to have heard or read the word 'drubbing'.
posted by TwoWordReview at 3:51 PM on October 9, 2012 [1 favorite]

Saying "drubbing" more often doesn't make it more real. Rather to the contrary in fact.
posted by howfar at 3:55 PM on October 9, 2012

{{{{{ Welcome back to the motherthread! }}}}}}
posted by Skygazer at 4:11 PM on October 9, 2012 [4 favorites]

Welcome back to the motherthread!

I have a number of mobile devices that may not make it to the election if we stay in this thread. But the poor things will have died in the service of a worthy cause.
posted by howfar at 4:13 PM on October 9, 2012

I've stitched the two together. The MotherThread and the Daughter thread now make up a polythread that weighs in at approx. 7000 comments.
posted by Skygazer at 4:15 PM on October 9, 2012 [1 favorite]

Tagg Romney blocks hospice from being built

Tagg Romney To Be Our New George W. Bush
posted by homunculus at 5:08 PM on October 9, 2012

Romney flipped on abortion today and said he has no plans for new restrictions. I suppose the evangelicals will just ignore this.
posted by humanfont at 7:01 PM on October 9, 2012

Srsly? And it's more than the evangelicals who will have to ignore his newest flip: [T]his year's GOP platform contains no exceptions for rape or incest or to protect the health — or even the life — of a woman. The anti-abortion plank of the Republican platform has never contained an explicit exception for any of these situations.

That article looks back to 1976, three years after Roe vs. Wade. Back in '76, the GOP platform endorsed a "constitutional amendment to restore protection of the right to life for unborn children."
posted by filthy light thief at 7:07 PM on October 9, 2012

And if this new non-news makes you cringe, enjoy Samatha Bee's experience learning that government is meant to protect the individual liberties of everyone lacking a uterus at the GOP convention.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:10 PM on October 9, 2012 [1 favorite]

Rick Santelli goes berserk when asked to defend jobs report conspiracy theory
posted by homunculus at 8:40 PM on October 9, 2012

Skygazer: "{{{{{ Welcome back to the motherthread! }}}}}}"

You're my hero today! And it feels good to be back. Punish my browser, motherthread!!
posted by barnacles at 9:01 PM on October 9, 2012 [2 favorites]

AP Adds Caption Note To ‘Unflattering’ Romney Photo
posted by homunculus at 9:25 PM on October 9, 2012

Romney Tax Plan Would Choke Off Charitable Giving
posted by homunculus at 9:32 PM on October 9, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ta-Nehisi Coates: " I am sorry that the president finds debating before the public to be annoying. And I am very sorry that more Americans don't delve into the footnotes of position papers. And I am very sorry that Mitt Romney was mean to the moderator, and lied to the viewers. And I am especially sorry that Barack Obama was evidently shocked -- shocked! -- to find the party of poll-taxing, evolution-disputing, and climate-change denying engaging in such tactics.

But this is the war we have. And this president has signed up to lead the fight. I think he understands that. Over the past four years Obama has proven to be very slow, but very deadly. I doubt that's changed."
posted by barnacles at 9:53 PM on October 9, 2012 [5 favorites]

The Frontline on the presidential race was quite good. I forgot how bad the bat-shit crazy racist tea partiers were during the healthcare town hall meetings. And it comes out so completely hypocritical since Obama's healthcare plan was modeled after Romney's. It also appears that Romney won the Massachusetts governorship by dominating the debates. Romney is a great debater. I wonder how well Obama's campaign understood that going into the first debate.

This is kind of fascinating. Romney is being hounded by a right-wing religious talk radio nut on his Mormonism and abortion positions: Mitt Romney caught on "hidden camera". If Romney ends up winning the election it's also a bit comforting. Honestly, it doesn't seem to me like he believes any of the literal, historical truth of the church teachings (but I always doubt that anyone actually does).

This is good as well. Christopher Hitchens on Mitt Romney and Mormonism. As a bishop in the Mormon church, Romney should be questioned on what it was like to be part of a racist organization that did not allow black members until 1979! And I totally agree that the Mormon church seems like nothing more than a racket or a mob - that is completely exempt from taxes, which is so bullshit.
posted by Golden Eternity at 12:39 AM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

Golden Eternity: "And I totally agree that the Mormon church seems like nothing more than a racket or a mob - that is completely exempt from taxes, which is so bullshit."

Eponysterical! I never get to do this!
posted by barnacles at 12:55 AM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

NPR's all, this election could very well be decided by Ohio, which, no offense Ohio, but fuck that noise.
posted by angrycat at 4:15 AM on October 10, 2012 [2 favorites]

NPR's all, this election could very well be decided by Ohio.

Just like 2004!
posted by drezdn at 4:42 AM on October 10, 2012

I'm listening to the same NPR program Angrycat, and the thing that's annoying is just how hard Romney is pretending it's okay for him to be as moderate and reasonable as he wants at this point and no one seems to really and properly taking him to task. He said at a rally that he won't seek new restrictions, and then his campaign quickly issues a statement afterwards saying more or less the opposite and that he "will protect the life of the unborn."

It is so slippery, nasty, and duplicitous, it's sick making. People need to realize ultimately that the Supreme court justices he nominates will make this the most regressive Supreme Court since the Gilded Age.

Romney... needs to be pinned down and dissected, disarmed, dismantled, and disposed of...like the two-bit sleazy dissembling used car salesman he is.
posted by Skygazer at 4:47 AM on October 10, 2012 [8 favorites]

Does Jack Welch's wife work for the Romney campaign?
posted by drezdn at 5:29 AM on October 10, 2012

*runs up to hug thread and then spins it 'round and 'round*

If you missed it in that other, totally less awesome thread:

Thin-Skinned CEO Superstar Jack Welch Quits Fortune, Reuters After His Demented BLS Tweet Gets Criticized

Welch apparently ended up at odds with various journalistic institutions that placed a higher premium on providing readers with objectively rational information about the economy, as opposed to flattering an old executive who sows derangement on the Internet. According to Gandel, Welch did not take kindly to a CNN Money piece that criticized Welch's original tweet, and was further angered by a Fortune piece, "detailing Welch's record as a job destroyer."

posted by Room 641-A at 5:33 AM on October 10, 2012

More Jack Welch rage:

And, he says, the way he's been treated the past few days is akin to how someone who questions authority might be handled in "Soviet Russia [or] ... Communist China." [and that] "mobs of administration sympathizers" have said he should be embarrassed and called him a "fool, or worse."
posted by jaduncan at 5:56 AM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'll cop to the "or worse" part, although I'm not really a mob
posted by edgeways at 6:04 AM on October 10, 2012 [4 favorites]

NPR's all, this election could very well be decided by Ohio, which, no offense Ohio, but fuck that noise.

Obama leads in Ohio, so it's fine if Ohio decides this election.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:08 AM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

I like the idea that if you offended, say, Stalin, you'd be called a fool or worse. As opposed to say, starved to death in a labor camp.
posted by angrycat at 6:12 AM on October 10, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'd say it's good to be back in the motherthread, but I NEVER LEFT. This tab's been open since the beginning!

Pour me another, barkeep.
posted by grubi at 6:16 AM on October 10, 2012 [2 favorites]

And, he says, the way he's been treated the past few days is akin to how someone who questions authority might be handled in "Soviet Russia [or] ... Communist China." [and that] "mobs of administration sympathizers" have said he should be embarrassed and called him a "fool, or worse."

An insanely wealthy man who has an entire of career of being sycophanted and worshipped by his peers is CRITICIZED on the INTERNET? Yep, that's real gulag-y.
posted by grubi at 6:19 AM on October 10, 2012 [2 favorites]

The current headline on Drudge is that 20 years ago, Obama was a guest at the wedding of Martha Raddatz, who will be moderating the Vice Presidential debate.

Wake up people, the fix is in!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:36 AM on October 10, 2012

I like the idea that if you offended, say, Stalin, you'd be called a fool or worse. As opposed to say, starved to death in a labor camp.

Being starved to death in a gulag is, clearly, worse than being called a fool.

Welch is technically correct - the best kind of correct!
posted by Lemurrhea at 6:39 AM on October 10, 2012 [4 favorites]

Also, vaguely on topic:

Republican women are prettier than Democrat women. Hard-hitting journalism from the Globe & Mail, Canada's "national newspaper".

goddamn it I hate newspapers.
posted by Lemurrhea at 6:43 AM on October 10, 2012

Hello long thread my old friend
Safari's loading you again
posted by cortex at 6:55 AM on October 10, 2012 [5 favorites]

the faces of Republican women were, on average, twice as sex-typical (i.e. feminine) as those of Democratic women

Oh for crying out loud. As the article finally gets around to hinting vaguely despite its inflammatory head, this has more to do with the fact that a woman who doesn't appear conventionally attractive (and thus more conforming and less threatening) isn't going to get anywhere with the party's base of social conservatives.
posted by Miko at 7:04 AM on October 10, 2012 [2 favorites]

Romney : What I said was just completely wrong...

Is that an apology from Mr. No Apologies?
posted by kirkaracha at 7:04 AM on October 10, 2012

Oh for crying out loud. As the article finally gets around to hinting vaguely despite its inflammatory head, this has more to do with the fact that a woman who doesn't appear conventionally attractive (and thus more conforming and less threatening) isn't going to get anywhere with the party's base of social conservatives.

So, then the study really indicates that Republicans are more shallow and threatened by women? Seems about right.
posted by grubi at 7:06 AM on October 10, 2012 [2 favorites]

Yeah, but that's not the more sensational headline, is it.
posted by Miko at 7:08 AM on October 10, 2012

Truth rarely sells.
posted by grubi at 7:10 AM on October 10, 2012

I got into a pretty big argument with someone about this the other day. The Lindy West article referred in to G&M is actually pretty good and worth at least skimming.
posted by Phire at 7:11 AM on October 10, 2012

Cortex: Hello long thread my old friend

Long Thread welcomes one and all back and sends it's greetings !
posted by Skygazer at 7:11 AM on October 10, 2012 [2 favorites]

In 2008, Metafilter had the longest thread ever, and Obama won the presidency.

There are 7 days left people, we need to do this... for America.
posted by drezdn at 7:23 AM on October 10, 2012 [3 favorites]

this has more to do with the fact that a woman who doesn't appear conventionally attractive (and thus more conforming and less threatening) isn't going to get anywhere with the party's base of social conservatives.

So you're saying the Dems should run known-Democrat, Scarlett Johannson?
posted by drezdn at 7:24 AM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

homunculus: AP Adds Caption Note To ‘Unflattering’ Romney Photo

Fox News' website accused the AP of running a photo that is "unflattering" of the Republican presidential nominee.

The photograph, posted Monday by The Associated Press for all to see, has since surged across the Internet. The candidate riding a wave of confidence from last week's debate performance was suddenly made, pardon, the butt of jokes.

So was it a cheap shot?
...
Stephen Ward, director of the Center for Journalism Ethics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said the photo by itself was not too offensive but noted it could be exploited.
...
The AP may have entered a bit of a gray area with this one. The photo was not altered or manipulated in any apparent way. But the National Press Photographers Association code of ethics offers some guidance.

"Treat all subjects with respect and dignity," it says. The code also says: "Be complete and provide context when photographing or recording subjects."

Apparently, Fox News isn't bound by the NPPA code of ethics.

And you think Mitt is some poor individual, like the elderly bus monitor who was verbally abused and actually prodded by middle schoolers, and not someone who is running for President of the United States. Poor, poor Mittens, at least he doesn't smoke in private, like that jerk Obama. That guy totally deserves everything he gets.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:36 AM on October 10, 2012 [2 favorites]

Just make up whatever you want, Mitt.

I wonder if the Romney campaign is finally going to break the media's determined stance of "our job is stenography only". Surely this...
posted by Pope Guilty at 7:48 AM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

As an erstwhile journalist, that photo is misleading and I wouldn't have run it. As we immediately see, it is all too easy to position Romney as a liberal-media victim because of it, and further derail substantive coverage.
posted by Miko at 7:56 AM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Yeah, but that's not the more sensational headline, is it."

Not on Globe and Mail. If I was writing for Gawker, it would be.
posted by klangklangston at 8:47 AM on October 10, 2012

Poor, poor Mittens, at least he doesn't smoke in private, like that jerk Obama.

Mitt Romney's Bain Made Millions On Big Tobacco In U.S., Russia

Bain Capital & Big Tobacco: Romney’s Firm Profited From U.S.-Russia Cigarette Deals & Privatizations
posted by homunculus at 8:59 AM on October 10, 2012 [4 favorites]

As Romney Repeats Trade Message, Bain Maintains China Ties

As Bain Ships Jobs to China, Bainport Protesters Arrested for Blocking Illinois Factory’s Closure
posted by homunculus at 10:08 AM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think the next two Presidential debates will show a stronger Obama, but he won't deliver the knock up punch that most liberals won't. It's just not in his nature.

I'm not being a downer, just hoping to set expectations about what's to come. Obama will win the Presidential election, but (sadly) he won't be doing it while sitting on a mound of Republican skulls. We're probably just going to have accept that as we hit replay on Bill Clinton's slams and sigh longingly.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:59 AM on October 10, 2012 [3 favorites]

It's also worth noting that the next Presidential debate is in a Town Hall format and not the supposedly tightly structured format of the first. It'll be interesting to see how Romney connects with people.

If you're wondering how Biden will do in the VP debate this Thursday, the 2008 debate against Sarah Palin is a good review. He gave a solid performance and was widely regarded as having won the debate, though Palin scored higher on the likability factor.

The biggest question is how Biden will deal with the stream of lies wrapped in important sounding facts and figures that will no doubt spew from Ryan's mouth.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 12:15 PM on October 10, 2012

I was getting all 2004 feeling, that the US is just fucking hopelessly weight down by its politicized moron contingent, then I remembered that over the last 10 years, gay rights have made amazing progress. I didn't think that would happen in my lifetime.

Oddly I want to say it was 9/11. It broke the spell the media was under in the 80s and 90s, when social issues seemed the most important things in the world, and the attention they gave them seemed to guarantee there would be no progress. The media lost its way and became Geraldo writ large.

Still, I think the GOP actually lost the true battle of ideas during this time, meaning that they could not win over the center by reasonable arguments and appeals to good character, and so they slowly turned into the party we know today of gibberish-spouting figureheads fronting for devious technocrats, backed by a propaganda machine to keep the ignorant center confused and forever casting poxes on both houses, man.

But after 9/11 they couldn't do social issues and sell the GWOT as well, so the awful media spotlight moved away from social issues. And social conservatism lost ground in the collective consciousness because really, it's a lot of work to be THAT much of an ignorant asshole—especially when the public conversation isn't validating your bigotry every other minute. Will and Grace was on the air and the world didn't end. A generation grew up and didn't feel like they had to make some important complicated decision about these social issues.

It's not all roses but we have a black president, some kind of well-meaning health care reform, and DADT is gone. Maybe the righties have been blaming the correct person all this time: it's Osama's fault.
posted by fleacircus at 12:41 PM on October 10, 2012 [2 favorites]

Here's your vaguely reassuring quote of the day:

Towards the end of the interview, Obama sought to assure listeners that he was still confident, alluding to an internet meme that features him: “As some of these emails that go around with my picture on them say, I can’t quote the entire thing, but ‘I got this.’”

posted by honestcoyote at 12:41 PM on October 10, 2012 [15 favorites]

Poor, poor Mittens, at least he doesn't smoke in private, like that jerk Obama.

Obama has quit smoking.

iVillage: How The Obama Girls Got Their Dad To Quit Smoking.

posted by ericb at 1:04 PM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

fleacircus: It's not all roses but we have a black president, some kind of well-meaning health care reform, and DADT is gone. Maybe the righties have been blaming the correct person all this time: it's Osama's fault.

So you're saying... The terrorists have already won?
posted by syzygy at 1:09 PM on October 10, 2012

If Biden drops a rebuttal that includes "Nice try champ, you'll get it next time," he'll win my 2016 vote.
posted by drezdn at 1:23 PM on October 10, 2012 [6 favorites]

It makes me incredibly happy and hopeful that the President of the United States knows about, and quotes, a meme about himself. In a totally appropriate context. And is funny when doing so.

Just the fact that he's not completely out of touch with the internet is reassuring.
posted by MrVisible at 1:34 PM on October 10, 2012 [4 favorites]

He gave a solid performance and was widely regarded as having won the debate, though Palin scored higher on the likability factor.

Is this a fair comparison though? By the time of the debate, we knew that she was a terrible candidate and the expectations for her were extremely low. Ryan is a much better candidate and has some intelligence.
posted by triggerfinger at 1:37 PM on October 10, 2012

Speaking of lowered expectations:

Romney Lowers Expectations For Paul Ryan Ahead Of VP Debate

"I don't know how Paul will deal with this debate. Obviously, the vice president has done, I don't know, 15 or 20 debates during his lifetime. He's an experienced debater," Romney said. "This is, I think, Paul's first debate. He may be wrong. He may have done debating in high school, I don't know. But it will be a new experience for Paul."

posted by Room 641-A at 1:48 PM on October 10, 2012

It makes me incredibly happy and hopeful that the President of the United States knows about, and quotes, a meme about himself. In a totally appropriate context. And is funny when doing so.

I love the idea that a staffer probably brought it to his attention. "Hey, boss! You have GOT to see this!"
posted by grubi at 1:53 PM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

Paul Ryan said something to the effect of "I expect Biden to come out with a fury, to try to make up for a bad first debate (by Obama)".

So there is your hand tip. Ryan is going to come out very aggressive and attack Biden.
posted by cashman at 2:01 PM on October 10, 2012 [4 favorites]

Will he be wearing his big boy clothes?
posted by Artw at 2:14 PM on October 10, 2012 [5 favorites]

Per earlier discussion, there are (finally!) signs of extremism fatigue in Arizona.

I dare to dream.

(Disclaimer: I know the author of that Atlantic piece, and think she's a terrific journalist who is all too familiar with the dark underbelly of our state politics, especially regarding immigration. She wrote an excellent book on the subject. So if she says there's reason to be even a little bit optimistic, I'm gonna believe her.)
posted by Superplin at 3:38 PM on October 10, 2012 [4 favorites]

Biden can also win points by referring to Ryan as "squirt" and tell him to "buck up."
posted by drezdn at 3:53 PM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

I love the idea that a staffer probably brought it to his attention. "Hey, boss! You have GOT to see this!"

Certainly more dignified than Obama googling himself after staying up til 2am doing internet searches on old girlfriends.
posted by shothotbot at 4:47 PM on October 10, 2012 [2 favorites]

Bill Clinton on the Real Mitt Romney: 'Where You Been, Boy? I Missed You!'
posted by homunculus at 5:16 PM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Benghazi situation is not looking good for the Obama administration. Their original denial of a terrorist attack along with throwing Rice out there to emphasize that fact rang false with me. I don't think that this is just a blip on the radar.
posted by futz at 6:04 PM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

Is this the October Surprise?
posted by futz at 6:08 PM on October 10, 2012

That's what some people suspect.
posted by homunculus at 6:11 PM on October 10, 2012

Hmm. I hadn't seen that before. It just occurred to me today. Didn't see any discussion of it in the two big willard threads which I think is interesting. It was huge news today.
posted by futz at 6:24 PM on October 10, 2012

Maddow just showed the CNN interview of the Republican senator that defunded the security, after secretary of state Hillary Clinton warned of the issue.
posted by cashman at 6:56 PM on October 10, 2012

Is this the October Surprise?

No, you can always expect the current GOP to lie its ass for political points.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:00 PM on October 10, 2012 [1 favorite]

so uh according to reddit, Romney's 11th largest campaign donor is HIG, which is run by ex-Bain employees, and which also owns the voting machines in many states.

so, yeah.

> * H.I.G. was founded by Tony Tamer, a former Bain employee and bundler for Mitt Romney’s campaign.

> * Of H.I.G.’s 22 American directors, 21 donated to Mitt Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign. One person made no political donations at all; one person donated to both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama; the remaining 20 directors donated exclusively to Mitt Romney in 2012.

> * Of these 22 American directors, seven of them (nearly one-third) are former Bain employees.

> * Four of H.I.G.’s directors, Tony Tamer, John Bolduc, Douglas Berman, and Brian D. Schwartz, are Romney bundlers along with former Bain and H.I.G. manager Brian Shortsleeve.

> * Two of H.I.G.’s managing directors, Douglas F. Berman and Brian D. Schwartz, were present at the $50,000 per plate fundraiser where Mitt Romney made his notorious ”47%” comments.

> * H.I.G. employees currently make up the majority of the Hart InterCivic’s five-member board of directors. Two of these three directors of the voting machine company, Neil Tuch and Jeff Bohl, have donated directly to Mitt Romney’s campaign.

> * H.I.G. is the 11th largest donor to Mitt Romney’s campaign. H.I.G. employees have given $338,000 to the Romney campaign, outpacing even Bain Capital itself, which gave $268,000.

Shit, I would FPP this link if I didn't think it'd get deleted: Owner Of Electronic Voting Machine Company To Be Used Across the Country Has Close Ties To Bain, Romney
posted by rebent at 7:06 PM on October 10, 2012 [5 favorites]

Mr. Blatcher sir, want to make a cookie bet around how you estimate things will play out on election night? You win, I have to send you the best local business-bought chocolate chip cookies from my area. You lose, you have to send me the best local business-bought chocolate chip cookies from yours.*

*You vacate your win if you get the cookies and proceed to make disparaging comments about them.
posted by cashman at 7:13 PM on October 10, 2012

Sure. Obama wins and it's decided by 11pm est on election night.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:31 PM on October 10, 2012 [7 favorites]

I think there's a long distance between 'business donates money to Romney, and several of his pals work for it' and 'business engages a massive internal conspiracy to de-legitimize the government of the country in which they do business.'
For one, I'd wager that you could find multiple people at most large companies in this country who did time at Bain or a Bain subsidiary. Right now, many of them would like to be able to claim to be Mitt's pal, and a bunch probably donate to his campaign.
I'm not saying it's impossible or anything - I don't know the first thing about, well, anything involved in business - but it's not like the people who own the company know how to program the machines, right? Meaning you need a legitimately pretty large group of folks who aren't going to talk, and the risk/reward is pretty bad. The company is presumably doing fine, they've been in business for almost 100 years, according to wiki, making voting machines (of admittedly questionable quality, the linked article implies). Why risk going to jail forever and ever for Mitt Romney? My impression has been that most people who are Romney's 'friends' aren't the types who'd risk doing hard time for him.
Also, if you're going to engage in voter fraud, why give money to the guy? It puts a microscope on you, and it's not like he needs the cash if what you're doing is going to work.
posted by qnarf at 8:44 PM on October 10, 2012 [2 favorites]

Why risk going to jail forever and ever for Mitt Romney?

I think this might be hyping the risks up a bit and underestimating the reward. The media is fond of pointing out that the last election had Ohio decided by 180,000 votes or so, if I am remember correctly. I think there are 88 counties in Ohio. The race is very close in Ohio. Have the machines take 750 votes per county from one candidate and give them to the other, and that's a 130,000 vote difference.

So of course, the first question that comes to mind is, what's the process for checking the machines for irregularities or otherwise calibrating them, and who oversees that process?

I don't think they'd straight up just give one person the win. I think the thing to do would be what I suppose above, and then the candidate is responsible for making up the rest.

Now, here's the interesting part. This is where all the "the polls can't be trusted!" stuff comes in, as well as the confusion the republicans have created at the polls. Because now there is a narrative where even if the polls showed one person with a solid lead (few undecided, stable polling), the explanation for why the result doesn't match the polls will be the change in voting days will be "well the polls must have been wrong, also with these changes, I guess some weird things happened!" Keep in mind Ohio Secretary of State Husted is appealing having 3 early voting days, and the resolution might not come until just days before the election window, and Husted also is limiting the ways voters can be contacted when there are problems with their absentee ballot. In Florida, Republicans worked to add ridiculous regulations to people trying to register voters. As a result, voter registration is down, bucking a trend of higher and higher voter registration patterns since 2000. In Michigan, republicans tried to add a citizenship check-box on the ballot. That was recently struck down.

From what I have seen, you don't really hear Republicans gnashing their teeth as across the country, many of these things get reverse and removed by the courts. Because while it was obvious they never actually cared about voter fraud, it's clear that the intent is to cause chaos at voting sites, and that will effectively limit participation. Additionally, much like a mistake and retraction, many will not know that a lot of the voter ID measures or restrictions on voting have been removed by the courts. So more of a suppressed turnout thanks to that as well.

Or so this is how I see things working. I get the feeling we will see very low turnout across the nation in terms of actual votes that get counted. And overall it makes you wonder - you know Republicans have billions of dollars for this election. I've seen an attack ad or two, but you don't see the wave of negative ads that you know Republicans would run. Where's the money that they have to spend going?
posted by cashman at 9:17 PM on October 10, 2012 [2 favorites]

> Where's the money that they have to spend going?

It's all for the small judge positions, court seats, governors, state senate and house seats. Things where positions are practically part time, and where the usual amount of funding is in the thousands of dollars, are now getting millions to back the GOP candidate who is most likely to support things like these 'vote fraud' initiatives.
posted by mrzarquon at 9:51 PM on October 10, 2012 [3 favorites]

When House Republicans called a hearing in the middle of their long recess, you knew it would be something big, and indeed it was: They accidentally blew the CIA’s cover.

"Through their outbursts, cryptic language and boneheaded questioning of State Department officials, the committee members left little doubt that one of the two compounds at which the Americans were killed, described by the administration as a “consulate” and a nearby “annex,” was a CIA base. They did this, helpfully, in a televised public hearing."
posted by madamjujujive at 10:10 PM on October 10, 2012 [18 favorites]

Wow, madamjujujive, that's just...I'm speechless. I am without speech.
posted by Room 641-A at 11:48 PM on October 10, 2012

Why risk going to jail forever and ever for Mitt Romney?

If your guy wins, he'll be in charge of the people who would investigate charges of voter fraud.
posted by drezdn at 5:30 AM on October 11, 2012 [1 favorite]

And who would investigate tax shelters, questionable business practices with Chinese firms who deal with Iran, and other things tied back to Romney's own past.

In other words, Romney winning would be great for Romney and his close business associates. He'll do whatever dance and back-flips he can do to win, if it means covering up these shady past dealigns.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:30 AM on October 11, 2012

And don't forget - he'll also be able to grant clemency to whomever he'd like.
posted by syzygy at 8:32 AM on October 11, 2012

madamjujujive: When House Republicans called a hearing in the middle of their long recess, you knew it would be something big

They called a hearing in their long recess, just to "get to the bottom" of this deception? So their October Surprise of turning the deaths in Benghazi into a show of Obama's weakness on terror (or whatever they're calling this) turned into a public leak of information? And a key reason there was limited coverage of the "other government agency" facility was because providing security costs money, and "Ryan, Issa and other House Republicans voted for an amendment in 2009 to cut $1.2 billion from State operations, including funds for 300 more diplomatic security positions." I hate to make deaths political, but since this is already a clusterfuck, can the Dems at least bring this back full circle to cut budgets for oversea protections versus increased defense budgets?
posted by filthy light thief at 8:45 AM on October 11, 2012 [2 favorites]

This is reminds me of the infamous Missile Gap used by Kennedy. The Republicans on this committee knew all the details, but they thought they could score political points by raising questions that couldn't be answered because the real story had to remain classified. Just as Ike couldn't disclose that there wasn't a missile gap because that would reveal too much about what we knew about the Russians missile programs and how we knew it.
posted by humanfont at 8:51 AM on October 11, 2012

Clemency is if he wins, which is partially contingent on pulling it off, which there are no guarantees on. Checking the electoral vote trackers, there's a reasonable path to Obama victory even if he loses CO and OH, which are the two states that the company in question provides to (or at least the states that keep getting mentioned). All he needs is MI, FL, or NC, all of which are very close.
Then there's the issue of the number of people who know. How many programmers would you need to change the programming for that many machines? Say Romney wins. None of those people are going to talk? As to immunity, granting blanket immunity to the persons who fraudulently delivered a presidential election strikes me as a particularly torches and pitchforks move on the part of a president. I can imagine the American people swallowing a lot, but that?
I think, though I'm not sure, that the investigation of any voter fraud would fall to the attorneys generals (or however that's pluralized) in the individual states, at least initially.
I've no doubt that a Romney presidency would be better for his buddies at Bain than an Obama victory. Some of the sociopaths involved might even try to flip an election just to see if they could do it, but there's a limited reward in this to people who are already millionaires. Things can only get so much better with Romney, and they're not particularly bad under Obama. They'd be very bad in jail.
posted by qnarf at 8:53 AM on October 11, 2012

If all that is getting you down, take some comfort in knowing Google images is currently associating searches for completely wrong with photos of Mitt Romney. (as seen on CNN and elsewhere).

A Google spokesman said the gallery of photos is the unintentional result of normal Google analytics, which produce images associated with popular phrases in news headlines and search terms, and not the result of any effort to skew the results.

Slate got word from a Google spokeman who confirmed:

this is not an intentional "Google bomb." The search results for "completely wrong" are the natural result of a flurry of recent news articles associating Romney with the phrase. How long this will persist, then, simply depends on how long the quote stays in the news—and, to a lesser extent, how many bloggers write posts like this one, which have the effect of perpetuating the association. Sorry Mitt.

Gawker pointed out that searches for "completely wrong" were at the top of Google's Hot Trend list for his retraction of the now-infamous "47 percent remarks," Romney told Fox News host Sean Hannity he was "just completely wrong." The search term was the top search on October 9, with 500,000+ searches, more than twice as many as the next closest terms.

Google could end the fun, like they did in 2007 when ‘Miserable Failure’ linked to President Bush. Oddly, clicking on the "completely wrong" link from Google's Hot Trends page, the first result on the focused Google search is The Daily Caller's piece State Dept.: Susan Rice, Obama administration completely wrong on Libya attack details. But the Completely Wrong image search is a top result (for me) today on Google, fwiw.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:01 AM on October 11, 2012 [1 favorite]

Say Romney wins. None of those people are going to talk? As to immunity, granting blanket immunity to the persons who fraudulently delivered a presidential election strikes me as a particularly torches and pitchforks move on the part of a president. I can imagine the American people swallowing a lot, but that?

They've swallowed everything else, why not? I have no faith that even if someone openly admitted stealing the election with documentation anything would happen at all. Well, something might happen. The person might get to go on Dancing with the Stars, which would be far more important as far as our self-styled 'news' media is concerned.
posted by winna at 9:08 AM on October 11, 2012 [3 favorites]

An askme you might find interesting.
posted by cashman at 9:37 AM on October 11, 2012

If I were Biden, I'd needle Ryan early by pointing out that if he's so proud of his "conservative" beliefs, why aren't he and Romney presenting them in debates.
posted by drezdn at 10:05 AM on October 11, 2012 [5 favorites]

From this morning: "Sixth Circuit Decides Provisional Ballot Cases, Finds Constitutional Violation in Not Counting Certain Wrong Precinct Ballots": This is the most important decision in this election cycle, and it represents a major victory for voters’ rights, regardless of party.

In Ohio for the last election, I think something like 14,000 provisional ballots were thrown out for wrong precinct, even though voters had been directed to the wrong precinct by poll workers in a number of cases.
posted by cashman at 10:15 AM on October 11, 2012 [1 favorite]

Paul Ryan's Halloween costume: Kevin Rose circa 2006
posted by homunculus at 10:45 AM on October 11, 2012

Mitt Romney on Taxes: Fudging the Numbers

TUESDAY night on the fading dowager of cable news that is CNN, Wolf Blitzer asked Mitt Romney about his tax proposals. What specific deductions did Mr Romney propose to eliminate in order to finance his promise to cut income-tax rates by 20%, Mr Blitzer asked? Home mortgage interest? Charitable donations? No, Mr Romney said, he'd keep those. So how would he limit deductions? Would he institute an overall deductions cap of $17,000, as he's vaguely mentioned on the campaign trail? Well, Mr Romney said, a cap might be possible; it could be $25,000, it could be $50,000. (He appears to have backed away from the $17,000 figure.) "Would that add up to the $4.8 or $5 trillion it's been estimated your comprehensive tax reductions would cost?" asked Mr Blitzer. Well, Mr Romney replied, that $5 trillion number is wrong, because it doesn't take into account the elimination of deductions. "The president's charge of a $5 trillion tax cut is obviously inaccurate and wrong because what he says is, all right, let's look at all the rates you're lowering, and then he ignores the fact that I also say we're also going to limit deductions and credits and exemptions."

You see what he just did there, right? If the United States were a publicly-traded company and Mitt Romney were its CEO, and if that interview had been a conference call with analysts, shares in USA Inc would have dropped 5% in the subsequent minute.

posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:50 AM on October 11, 2012 [3 favorites]

This isn't an accusation of voter fraud, but I've spent a lot of time over the past year thinking about the issue.

The one thing the Republicans have on the issue is a "moral" reason (in their mind) to create voter fraud. If you're a Republican who sees abortion as an act of murder, then, in your mind, tilting the scales to ensure that anti-choice politicians are elected is perfect acceptable.

Now say someone does win because of voter fraud. What happens if someone eventually proves that fraud led to the election result? Would the courts throw out everything that happened after the election? My guess is, not likely.

Plus, to prove the voter fraud, you would need an airtight case. A reporter or prosecutor would need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the election was rigged, and that the winning candidate would have lost. Otherwise, at least 30% or more would doubt the legitimacy of the candidate who originally lost being made the winner.

This is why everything a party does election-wise should be clear of even the whiff of election fraud. Once you start to fiddle around with it (or accusing the other side of it), it weakens the people's faith in democracy.
posted by drezdn at 10:59 AM on October 11, 2012

You see what he just did there, right?

I do, and I'm sure Blitzer did as well. I don't know why, after years of watching US political interviews, I still want to scream when I see politicians being let off the hook without even being made to put up a fight. Romney entirely avoided the question. HOW FUCKING HARD IS IT TO POINT THAT OUT?

I come from the UK, I know we have the worst print media in the world, but at least I don't have to sit and watch smug cunts like Romney thinking they're being like totes superslick with rhetorical tricks worthy of a 12 year old. I want to see Paxman or John Humphrys go for these people. I want to see them shit themselves, I want to see them cry. Please can we send you some sort of interviewing equivalent of a cell of Mossad Nazi-hunters?
posted by howfar at 11:10 AM on October 11, 2012 [19 favorites]

Interestingly, sometimes US people don't realise when Paxman has done them up, as the US media does a lot less leaving things implied. I saw Coulter on Newsnight (the interview memorably featured Paxman talking about her latest book and starting with "Your publishers gave us chapter one, I've read it. Does it get any better?") and she appeared not to even realise that she was losing by just agreeing with the quotes pulled out of her book for obvious insanity. It was the look on Paxman's face whilst reading back the quotes that stuck the knife in and twisted it; it really wasn't necessary to actually call her an idiot.
posted by jaduncan at 1:26 PM on October 11, 2012 [5 favorites]

Coulter probably didn't care, she's just there to flog her crappy book. She got on air and got them to say the book's title. That's mission accomplished.
posted by octothorpe at 1:55 PM on October 11, 2012

Coulter probably didn't care, she's just there to flog her crappy book. She got on air and got them to say the book's title. That's mission accomplished.

I'm not entirely sure the Venn diagram circles of the Newsnight audience and purchasers of the Coulter oeuvre touch beyond the researcher pulling out the insanity quotes.
posted by jaduncan at 2:25 PM on October 11, 2012 [1 favorite]

That Coulter interview is a classic piece of toe-curling fail. She acts like a sarcastic teenager throughout, and comes across as far too stupid and childishly arrogant to understand how stupid and arrogant she looks. She's also seems totally unable to understand the difference between wanking off people who agree with you and persuading people who doubt you. That crack about "best selling book in America" is pure Ricky Gervais.

Paxman is holding back, of course, and letting her make herself look foolish. The level of open doubt and aggression he is allowed to express is limited by the fact that she's a commentator.
posted by howfar at 3:01 PM on October 11, 2012

Roger Ebert: Who do you believe--Mitt, or your lyin' memory?
posted by homunculus at 3:59 PM on October 11, 2012 [2 favorites]

Vote Hedgehog!
posted by Room 641-A at 5:23 PM on October 11, 2012

A new debate thread? You go to debates with the thread you have---not the thread you might want or wish to have at a later time.
posted by drezdn at 5:44 PM on October 11, 2012 [3 favorites]

The Lying Precedent
posted by homunculus at 10:10 PM on October 11, 2012

A Libertarian Perspective on Romney vs. Obama
posted by the man of twists and turns at 6:29 AM on October 12, 2012

No mention of women's rights or reproductive rights in that entire Libertarian blog post. Gay rights get a "if you're in a big hurry" sideswipe.
posted by Miko at 7:59 AM on October 12, 2012

We're about 700 away from the record. It doesn't seem like it's happening. :-(
posted by grubi at 8:21 AM on October 12, 2012

No mention of women's rights or reproductive rights in that entire Libertarian blog post.

I did a quick skim for that as well. I didn't realize until recently that Ron Paul, Mr. 'government out of people's lives' is also anti-abortion. Since then I check every Libertarian thing I come across and I am beginning to believe a lot of it is macho posturing.
posted by readery at 8:25 AM on October 12, 2012 [5 favorites]

I'm inclined to agree, readery. The whole damn "philosophy" is about "I got mine, I can defend it like a manly man, so fuck off'...plus whatever right-wing nonsense they can tack on (i.e. being anti-choice).
posted by grubi at 8:45 AM on October 12, 2012

TNR: When Conservatives Loved Keynes

Reason: Romney's Middle-Class Problem

Since Romney insists "there'll be no tax cut that adds to the deficit," he needs to make up for the lost revenue by cutting back on tax breaks, and he is committed to doing so without increasing the burden on "middle-income" households, shrinking the share of taxes paid by "high-income" households, or reducing the tax code's incentives for savings and investment. According to a widely cited August report from the Tax Policy Center (TPC), a joint project of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, this task "is not mathematically possible," a point that President Obama emphasized during the debate.

The Romney campaign dismissed the TPC's "biased study," saying it failed to take into account "the positive benefits to economic growth" from his deficit reduction plan and his proposed cut in the corporate income tax. If those changes boost economic output, tax revenue will increase, reducing the amount that needs to be raised by closing loopholes.

As usual, however, Romney did not show his math.

posted by the man of twists and turns at 8:48 AM on October 12, 2012

As usual, however, Romney did not show his math.

Also the TPC study DID take into account the positive benefits of economic growth, using a pretty standard metric. Claiming that tax studies don't do that when they really do is a common tactic to dismiss criticism without getting called out on it by journalists who either didn't read or didn't understand the underlying report

Also,

Sympathetic economists such as Harvey S. Rosen of Princeton and Martin Feldstein of Harvard provided much more substantive responses to the TPC report, arguing that a tax reform plan similar to Romney's could indeed work.... As The Washington Post's Dylan Matthews pointed out, the broader definition of middle-class households is counterintuitive, to say the least, since it applies to 96 percent of Americans. The narrower definition, by contrast, makes sense if the middle class corresponds to the middle fifth of household incomes. The problem for Romney is that he (like Obama) uses the broader definition, which is politically useful but fiscally inconvenient.

Defining "Middle Class" with a cutoff income of $100,000 definitely makes some sense, but Romney would be a fool to adopt it.

Serious reform would start by eliminating the arbitrary, meddlesome, and economically distorting complications that have made the tax code such a headache-inducing mess and only then ask how much rates should be lowered to keep revenue about the same.

...except Republicans shouldn't want to keep revenue the same if they want to keep a bloated military while lowering the national debt. We need to increase revenue to do so.
posted by muddgirl at 9:02 AM on October 12, 2012 [1 favorite]

(Also, wasn't there a report recently which claimed that messing with the balance of income tax rates vs. deductions doesn't really affect economic growth or lack thereof, it just literally redistributes wealth up or down the food chain? I didn't dig into that one very closely, though)
posted by muddgirl at 9:11 AM on October 12, 2012

One out of every 10 political ad spending dollars goes to attacking Wall Street
posted by the man of twists and turns at 9:14 AM on October 12, 2012

I didn't realize until recently that Ron Paul, Mr. 'government out of people's lives' is also anti-abortion.

Don't feel too bad--I've encountered a lot of big fans of Ron Paul who are unaware of that.

(Barely-related: some college kid from Colorado, a political science student, on NPR the other day, was, like, 'I'm voting for a third-party candidate--Ron Paul.')
posted by box at 9:34 AM on October 12, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'm voting for a third-party candidate--Ron Paul.')

Dude, the Republican Party hasn't been a third party since like 1854!
posted by grubi at 9:37 AM on October 12, 2012 [1 favorite]

Confusion Sown in Pennsylvania by Lingering Voter-ID Ads

“We’re talking about the same people we’ve been fighting since March,” Jordan said of state officials. “We still feel that this was targeted toward certain voting groups, the largest voting groups that voted in 2008: women, seniors and students.”

Ivelesse Coroussett, a 30-year-old clerk at Rebeka Envia Centro De Llamadas, a store across the street from the Northeast Philadelphia billboard, said she thought she’d be required to show her driver’s license when she votes next month.

Robert Smallwood, 67, a neighborhood resident who was walking by the billboard, said he knew he wouldn’t have to show identification at the polls. He said the sign is an example of an effort to confuse voters. “A lot of people don’t really know what’s going on.”

...

The state has set aside $5 million to educate the public on the voter-identification law, which includes broadcast time from now until Election Day, Matthew Keeler, a spokesman for the Department of State said. So far, $1.23 million has been spent on TV, $210,000 on radio and $119,296 on ads on buses and billboards, he said

...

Pennsylvania is revamping its voter-education campaign, with new ads set to run this week, said Keeler. He disagreed with those who said the lingering images would produce any confusion.

posted by cashman at 10:21 AM on October 12, 2012

Why we vote for liars
posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:33 AM on October 12, 2012

The Final Word on Mitt Romney's Tax Plan

Mitt Romney's campaign says I'm full of it. I said Romney's tax plan is mathematically impossible: he can't simultaneously keep his pledges to cut tax rates 20 percent and repeal the estate tax and alternative minimum tax; broaden the tax base enough to avoid growing the deficit; and not raise taxes on the middle class. They say they have six independent studies -- six! -- that "have confirmed the soundness of the Governor’s tax plan," and so I should stop whining. Let's take a tour of those studies and see how they measure up.
The Romney campaign sent over a list of the studies, but they are perhaps more accurately described as "analyses," since four of them are blog posts or op-eds. I'm not hating -- I blog for a living -- but I don't generally describe my posts as "studies."

posted by syzygy at 10:36 AM on October 12, 2012 [3 favorites]

The New New Romney Is A New Kind Of Mendacious Liar

Leaving aside for the moment the audacity of Josh, we must leave it to the fanzine reporters from Tiger Beat on the Potomac to explain in-depth how the heroic intervention of the plucky Romney family forced the transition from the previously unsuccessful campaign of sheer mendacity to the campaign of sheer mendacity that seems to be on something of a roll at the moment. The basic Politico analytical technique — buying whatever magic beans are being sold, as long as the beans are sold anonymously — is perfectly suited to the fairy tale of how Ann and the boys convinced the paterfamilias to drop all this Beltway wiseguy nonsense and get back into the comfy, well-worn, three-piece, double-breasted bullshit suit he used to wear when he was governor of whatever that state was he once was governor of.

posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:58 AM on October 12, 2012 [2 favorites]

I am beginning to believe a lot of it is macho posturing

Well, an agenda that discusses women, families, etc. is pretty rare from them. And it seems to be a philosophy disproportionately espoused by men. It may be symptomatic of machismo, but I think it's also sympotomatic of a lack of pragmatism and real-world conditional awareness.
posted by Miko at 11:22 AM on October 12, 2012

Mitt Romney: None Of You Poors Die, I Think?
posted by homunculus at 11:59 AM on October 12, 2012 [2 favorites]

Gary Johnson Officially On The Ballot In Pennsylvania
posted by homunculus at 12:31 PM on October 12, 2012 [1 favorite]

Well isn't THIS just a lovely way to support our troops.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 12:37 PM on October 12, 2012

I didn't realize until recently that Ron Paul, Mr. 'government out of people's lives' is also anti-abortion.

It's much more comprehensive hypocrisy than that. He's basically Mr. "Federal government out of people's lives", and would be glad to have State government firmly inserted in people's lives. Check out item #2 on this page.
posted by benito.strauss at 12:41 PM on October 12, 2012 [2 favorites]

Well isn't THIS just a lovely way to support our troops.

Whenever somebody talks about how great capitalism, I always think of stories like this. Jesus.
posted by grubi at 1:32 PM on October 12, 2012

HEY GUYS INTERESTING FACTOID: David "Eagle Scout" Lynch has just maybe lost it.
posted by psoas at 1:47 PM on October 12, 2012

psoas: "HEY GUYS INTERESTING FACTOID: David "Eagle Scout" Lynch has just maybe lost it."

Oh. my. Who gave David the ether bottle? People. We've talked about this before. You know how he gets. If I find out he's been prank calling Peter Dinklage again , you're all in big trouble.
posted by dejah420 at 2:24 PM on October 12, 2012

JScalzi on Obama's 11 dimensional debate chess
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 2:35 PM on October 12, 2012

Buy Vice President Biden a Trans Am.
posted by Uncle Ira at 3:01 PM on October 12, 2012 [3 favorites]

Lynch was the best part of the Louie three-parter about the Late Show.
posted by klangklangston at 3:41 PM on October 12, 2012 [2 favorites]

JScalzi on Obama's 11 dimensional debate chess

Reminded me of this:

He didn’t lose; he failed to win in the short term. So in the next two presidential debates, he will be the underdog. Romney, going in as the favorite, will have to produce performances that are not only as good as his first, but better (since the excellent “new Romney” is the new old Romney). And if in either debate the President pulls off the gloves and plays to win, he will scored much higher than if he had raised expectations in the first debate. And the closer a debate is to the election, the more of an effect it is apt to have (if in fact debate performance, except of the most extreme kind, ever has any effect at all).

posted by ambrosia at 3:52 PM on October 12, 2012

The Uninsured Die at Home
posted by homunculus at 5:09 PM on October 12, 2012 [4 favorites]

EC, that made my heart hurt. Fuck all these people.
posted by Phire at 5:51 PM on October 12, 2012

Akin: I Don’t See Evolution ‘Even As A Matter Of Science’
posted by homunculus at 11:51 PM on October 12, 2012

Moody’s Chief Economist On Romney’s Tax Plan: ‘The Arithmetic Doesn’t Work’
posted by homunculus at 12:06 AM on October 13, 2012 [2 favorites]

JScalzi on Obama's 11 dimensional debate chess
Reminded me of this:

This thread is such a sporting event.

The glee during Romney's Week of Bumbling was so just like the overreaction of fans whose team is up big early. Everything seems so easy! Ha ha the other team are the biggest chumps ever! They don't even look like they belong on this field. We might put a hundred on these losers... quick, to the record books!

But then your team has a dry spell, the other team gets it together, and is almost tied up at the half. You spend halftime with a weird icy chill of fear. This isn't a special game. Andrew Sullivan passes out in the stands, and they put it up on the jumbotron and it makes your fan base look pathetic. You tell yourself your team will come out strong, you fantasize what kind of pep talk you'd be giving down in the locker room. Your team is naturally better and they're going to win. You can grit your teeth into kind of a confident smile. Your team will come out strong, make some big play and the fans will go nuts, it will re-ignite, re-energize. Then your team will pull away, like they did before. Get back up and put the other team away, grind it out.

Your team doesn't come out strong. The other team ties it up, they have the ball, they're in a position to take the lead. It seems like forever since your team scored. Now you're thinking, "oh shit oh shit" and your big hope is that this is going to come down to the wire. It's a coin flip at best. The other team looks confident now. Their bullshit offense is working, thanks to the stupid refs who aren't calling the game right. (Which makes you sound like a paranoid fan except no, really, so many refs are totally fucking biased and/or bad—it's just that you also scream equally loud at the good calls that don't go your way.)

The horrible feeling sets in that despite having mentally moved into the world where your team won already, you could very well be getting evicted to the world where you lost. Where the other fans will mock you and gloat for years. Where you have to accept your team wasn't that good in the first place. You think you might throw up.

Have a nice weekend everyone!
posted by fleacircus at 3:56 AM on October 13, 2012 [3 favorites]

Nothing quite like a long, satisfying sneer, is there?
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 3:58 AM on October 13, 2012 [3 favorites]

More to the point, it would be like a sporting event, if it weren't for the fact that this isn't about "teams"; this is about real-life decisions each candidate is going to be making that will directly affect our lives. People tend to get emotional about things like that. So there's elation when things look good, abject terror when things look bad. And rather than merely rooting from the stands, a lot of us are working to make sure the person likely to fuck up our lives the least ends up in power.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 4:08 AM on October 13, 2012 [5 favorites]

But at the same time, it is about teams! Those real-world consequences depend totally on which team has the most energized fan-base - it's almost like, watching the game at home actually does improve your team's chances of winning
posted by rebent at 4:32 AM on October 13, 2012

also, this is why bashing the other team is such a terrible thing. If they're so incompetent, what does it mean if our team can't beat them? If we can't even beat "Mittens" the robot? What does that say about us?

The less respect we have, the worse off it is
posted by rebent at 4:36 AM on October 13, 2012

What does that say about us?

I'd worry less about what it says of your "team" and more about what it says of the US electorate. The VP debate, with the supposed Republican policy wonk, exposed clearly the complete absence of any policy at the heart of this Republican campaign. No real tax plan, no coherent foreign policy strategy, no intent to address infrastructure issues, no plan for healthcare except scrapping the one in place. Regardless of how well "the game" is being played, if a majority of US voters (which looks necessary) elect Mitt Romney, it says something profound about how low the US has fallen. To me, if that happens, it looks like game over, and not just electorally.
posted by howfar at 4:46 AM on October 13, 2012 [2 favorites]

I mean a majority of voters looks necessary for Romney to win, given the electoral college advantage Obama seems to be just about maintaining, BTW.
posted by howfar at 4:48 AM on October 13, 2012

JScalzi on Obama's 11 dimensional debate chess

That can also apply to Romney. Imagine he's been purposefully underperforming, to set expectations low, only to suddenly put on this this powerful performance in the last month of the campaign. The Democrats are caught looking weak and the electorate suddenly gets a 'comback kid' story.

Think about it. The GOP's been planning all this from the get go. Come this Tuesday, y'all are gonna witness to one of the greatest political turn arounds in American history as Mitt Romney expertly crushes Obama again and appeals to the heart strings of America.

Just kidding! Obama will do better, the debate will be a draw, polls will strengthen for Barack and he'll win this thing by 11 pm EST on election night.

BUT WHAT IF?!

Nah, just messing with you again.

Mostly.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:36 AM on October 13, 2012 [3 favorites]

NYRB: The Hidden Stakes Of The Election

However fundamental, the debate over the Constitution misses a problem that may well be even more important in American life. Many of the most significant judicial decisions do not involve the Constitution at all. Most people never hear about those decisions. But they determine the fate of countless regulations, issued by federal agencies, that are indispensable to implementing important laws—including those designed to reform the health care system, promote financial stability, protect consumers, ensure clean air and water, protect civil rights, keep the food supply safe, reduce deaths from tobacco, promote energy efficiency, maintain safe workplaces, and much more.

Here as well, Republican judicial appointees differ dramatically from Democratic judicial appointees, and along predictable partisan lines. The outcome of the election will help determine the ultimate fate of these rules in court.

posted by the man of twists and turns at 6:40 AM on October 13, 2012 [1 favorite]

This thread is such a sporting event.

Ish. But it's also like I consider a possible war with Iran, revocation of Roe v Wade, pushback on abortion rights in general, two Supremes (no Diana Ross) and not removing nameless federal agencies and hiking defence spending by $2bn as important or something.
posted by jaduncan at 6:41 AM on October 13, 2012 [6 favorites]

Think about it. The GOP's been planning all this from the get go. Come this Tuesday, y'all are gonna witness to one of the greatest political turn arounds in American history as Mitt Romney expertly crushes Obama again and appeals to the heart strings of America.

MOMMY MAKE THE BAD MANS STOP, HE'S SCARING ME!
posted by winna at 7:22 AM on October 13, 2012

Up with Chris Hayes—"The Beauty of Process", 13 October, 2012
posted by ob1quixote at 8:02 AM on October 13, 2012

Nothing quite like a long, satisfying sneer, is there?

Nothing sneery meant at all; you're mistaking me.
posted by fleacircus at 8:53 AM on October 13, 2012 [1 favorite]

Jon Stewart Slams GOP Candidates: ‘How Do These F**king Crazy People Make It To The National Stage?’
posted by homunculus at 9:20 AM on October 13, 2012

Because most people are crazy, irrational animals who want to feel good. The easiest way to feel good is by bashing or looking down on someone else.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:39 AM on October 13, 2012

This thread is such a sporting event.

Not surprising at all, we knew what was happening well before the debate.
posted by cashman at 9:49 AM on October 13, 2012

Meet Your New Diebold!
posted by homunculus at 10:34 AM on October 13, 2012

Bill Nye: Paul Broun 'Unqualified To Make Decisions About Science, Space, And Technology'
posted by homunculus at 12:28 PM on October 13, 2012

howfar: "What does that say about us?

I'd worry less about what it says of your "team" and more about what it says of the US electorate. The VP debate, with the supposed Republican policy wonk, exposed clearly the complete absence of any policy at the heart of this Republican campaign. No real tax plan, no coherent foreign policy strategy, no intent to address infrastructure issues, no plan for healthcare except scrapping the one in place. Regardless of how well "the game" is being played, if a majority of US voters (which looks necessary) elect Mitt Romney, it says something profound about how low the US has fallen. To me, if that happens, it looks like game over, and not just electorally."

sorry but that argument is hogwash. What you are saying is basically:

If 51% of the voters are democrats, then the US has not fallen profoundly low. But if only 49% of voters are democrats, then the US has fallen profoundly low, and it's GAME OVER TIME.

In my opinion, that is the wrong place to draw the line. Game over if 2% of the electorate, the "swing votes", goes one way or the other? Hedging our bets on such a small group of people, who we don't even trust?

In my opinion, we lost the game when we lost the supermajority, in the same way that having even one asshole at a party can ruin it. I don't wait until the party is 51% asshole to leave.
posted by rebent at 1:41 PM on October 13, 2012 [1 favorite]

The point is more about international politics, rebent. The US is a superpower in decline, this much is obvious. It also lost an enormous amount of international prestige, influence and respect during the Bush fuckup, or "presidency". At the moment, but only for a limited period, the US is still the economically and militarily dominant state. It desperately has to work out its exit strategy from being the sole superpower while it has room to move, or it will find its place defined for it. The US needs a president who can comsolidate soft power, not one who will squander it.

The other ticking clock is climate change. There is good reason to believe that we have very few, or no, years left to deal with this problem. Obama is hardly taking the matter seriously enough, but the obstructionism and inertia that a Romney presidency would bring would doubtless cost time and hence people's lives and prosperity, internationally and in the US.

The world is in crisis, it needs a US president with his eye on something other than the meaningless interests of the super-rich. It needs that.
posted by howfar at 2:07 PM on October 13, 2012 [1 favorite]

I should add that it of course needs strong leadership everywhere, and it won't get it. We're going to make a godawful hash of things as a planet, I fear. I just hope we manage to scrape by.
posted by howfar at 2:13 PM on October 13, 2012

So…uh…this happened.

@ob1quixote Will the revelation of Obama’s Anti-Christ Goddess religion sink his campaign? nostradamus.org/f/index.php?to…— Fox News Alert (@FoxNewsAlert577) October 13, 2012

posted by ob1quixote at 2:52 PM on October 13, 2012

I think Obama should be more concerned about these revelations.
posted by homunculus at 3:10 PM on October 13, 2012 [1 favorite]

Colbert Vs. Colbert: Is Romney A Moderate Or A Severe Conservative?
posted by homunculus at 3:13 PM on October 13, 2012

homunculus: I think Obama should be more concerned about these revelations.

Oh, no doubt. I mean the fact that Obama is going to build landing strips for gay Martians at the White House needs to be on the front page of the paper. I just thought it remarkable that some poor, misguided soul created a fake Fox News Alert account and went through the #uppers stream this morning and replied to only some of the people with a bizarre tweet containing a bizarre link to a bizarre screed.
posted by ob1quixote at 3:52 PM on October 13, 2012

This isn't a thought I"m particularly proud of, but since we're down to wrangling over a few percentage points' worth of fairly ignorant/fuzzyheaded voters who are not a guaranteed base, I was thinking about what events or issues might be left that give people an uncomfortable feeling about Romney, enough to make them stay home or vote the other way, and frankly, it's Mormonism.

I've talked (I think even in this thread, but I ain't about to search!) about how circumspect both the campaigns and the media have been about touching this issue. It's definitely a third rail, because any perceived attack on someone's religion is going to offer the target an opportunity to take the offended victim role. But at the same time, Romney has really been benefiting from the vagueness - in his own campaign and in the public mind - about what Mormonism is, what Mormons believe, and what it entails. According to this piece remarking on how absent the whole question has been, 40% of people planning to vote GOP don't even know he is Mormon - data from this poll. Even Obama's religion (thanks, Rev. Wright!) got a lot more examination than this in 2008.

I've seen some cautious explorations of the issue over the last month or so - Lemman in the New Yorker, lefty media stuff... I wonder if we'll start seeing Obama "surrogates" (this election year's fave new word) start raising eyebrows a bit more. I'm not super in favor of this idea, but also not super opposed, as I think that most people have a very poor understanding of Mormonism and (aided by Romney and the Church's own deflections) tend to think of it as a somewhat more strict version of American evangelical Protestantism ...when it's really something quite different entirely, in theology, structure and aims.

But who knows, it could just be perceived as too below the belt. However, if I'm noticing it and wondering if it's time to open up this discussion, I'm certain campaign staff are, too.
posted by Miko at 4:36 PM on October 13, 2012

Speaking of below the belt: New site uses Ann, Mitt Romney to sell Mormon underwear copies
posted by homunculus at 4:50 PM on October 13, 2012

Miko: However, if I'm noticing it and wondering if it's time to open up this discussion, I'm certain campaign staff are, too.

Not to channel my inner-Bill-Maher too much, but is "God is a living man who resides on the planet Kolob" really that much more ridiculous than a talking snake? My suspicion is that most people wisely think it's un-American to bring up the nonsense portions of other peoples' religions.

If we're going to armchair quarterback the campaign, I'd much rather that the Obama camp go after Romney on his bullshit economic policy positions by simply calling them bullshit. You don't have to drill down or use a bunch of charts and graphs. Just keep repeating it doesn't add up.

I also want them to hit the Sensata story that Secret Life of Gravy commented about today really hard. Chinese flags flying over an American factory because of Bain? That will not fly with Joe Six-pack. I'd run that at every commercial break like a credit card commercial. To quote The Egregious Frum paraphrasing Kissinger, "That ad will draw blood and will—as Henry Kissinger used to say—have the additional merit of being true."
posted by ob1quixote at 5:02 PM on October 13, 2012 [5 favorites]

is "God is a living man who resides on the planet Kolob" really that much more ridiculous than a talking snake? My suspicion is that most people wisely think it's un-American to bring up the nonsense portions of other peoples' religions.

That's a skeptical perpective, though. I understand that you might not think there's a big difference, but mainline Protestants, at least, are willing to give a little on the literal truth of the talking snake in a way that Mormons are not about the reality of Joseph Smith's direct revelation, the appearance of holy texts and tribes of Israel in the New World, and the idea that Christ was a human prophet, not divine/Trinitarian. The reality is that a lot of Christians of different flavors can unite on common points of faith about Christ being savior and being divine, but they can't unite with Mormons on that stuff, and most just reject a lot of the customs and rituals of Mormonism as beyond the pale. I'm not saying this is all rational, but it's real.

I think the Obama campaign will go after policy and certainly economics, if they're smart. But I also think their operatives might be smart to be working on creating a bit of a wedge with this. Is it honorable tactics? No. But has it been practiced by both sides before? Sure. Religious strategies in American politics are standard, and I expect that will be unfortunately true as long as our country remains dominated by religious people.
posted by Miko at 5:48 PM on October 13, 2012

I also want them to hit the Sensata story that Secret Life of Gravy commented about today really hard. Chinese flags flying over an American factory because of Bain? That will not fly with Joe Six-pack.

Romney's Stake in Chinese Stocks: The GOP candidate invested in 10 Chinese companies recently—including ones that embezzled, partnered with Iran, and stole US trade secrets.
posted by homunculus at 6:19 PM on October 13, 2012 [1 favorite]

My preference is always to keep religion out of American politics, but Mitt Romney thinks it is useful to draw distinctions based on it, whether or not they are valid.

Everyone's going to come to their own decision about whether or not this should open the gates to using Romney's religion against him. For me, I'd love for there to be an example of "raise religion, get smacked at the polls for it", but in this case the lesson learned would probably just be "only pick main-line Protestants".
posted by benito.strauss at 6:36 PM on October 13, 2012

From the other thread:

Secret Life of Gravy: "So now that Billy Graham has endorsed Romney, he had to go back and remove the part on his web site where he calls Mormonism a cult"

(I didn't see this posted here yet.)
posted by Room 641-A at 6:59 PM on October 13, 2012 [2 favorites]

South Park should have ended long ago, but I really liked their episode relating the origins of the Book of Mormon with the flashing subtitle "THIS IS WHAT MORMONS ACTUALLY BELIEVE".
posted by dunkadunc at 7:56 PM on October 13, 2012

Of course, by Graham's definition, my religion is also a cult. Oh well.

On one side I can see the "keep religion out of politics" argument. But on the other, I'm feeling like, hell, drag it all in. Let's hear your account of things.

I spend a lot of time with history, and a lot of time trying to puzzle out while the USA remains a country with its collective head up its ass while other Western democracies look on in pity as to why we can't agree that guns are dangerous or that people should all have basic rights. The more I look at it, the more I think it's basically our history of religious crusade, religious tribalism, and milennialism. All fights are religious fights, here. Might as well acknowledge it and drag out the worldviews for examination, since they so profoundly influence the policy and alignments, anyway, despite our pretenses and hopes otherwise.
posted by Miko at 8:33 PM on October 13, 2012 [1 favorite]

South Park should have ended long ago, but I really liked their episode relating the origins of the Book of Mormon with the flashing subtitle "THIS IS WHAT MORMONS ACTUALLY BELIEVE".

That was the Scientology episode.
posted by shakespeherian at 8:44 PM on October 13, 2012 [1 favorite]

That was the Scientology episode.

That was an entirely unfair conflation! Saying that an organisation with: a modern prophet of dubious personal character that got personal fame and fortune; cult-like religious organisation that has secrets only revealed in later stages; cuts people off from their families; openly hates gay people; requires large payments to progress to higher church levels; only recently stopped being openly racist, and; is still extremely sexist was IN ANY WAY like...

OK, OK, the punchline works either way.
posted by jaduncan at 9:03 PM on October 13, 2012 [4 favorites]

If the Obama campaign is going to use religion as a weapon, I'd much rather see them do it by attacking the repulsive Objectivist language that's become vogue among the GOP. Ryan is a clear devotee of Ayn Rand, despite his convenient eleventh-hour change of heart, and Romney's "47%" comment oozes with libertarian contempt for the "takers" and "parasites."

Considering Ayn Rand's theology of selfishness, greed, and altruism-as-sin is diametrically opposed to everything Christianity -- and all religion, really -- claims to value, there's a significant non-evil wedge issue here just waiting to be used. Catholic luminaries have already castigated the Ryan budget and its philosophical underpinning as "morally indefensible" and "antithetical to the Gospel values of compassion and love." Heck, even the Book of Mormon proclaims things like:

"But woe unto the rich, who are rich as to the things of the world. For because they are rich they despise the poor, and they persecute the meek, and their hearts are upon their treasures; wherefore, their treasure is their God. And behold, their treasure shall perish with them also."

"Yea, he saw great inequality among the people, some lifting themselves up with their pride, despising others, turning their backs upon the needy and the naked and those who were hungry, and those who were athirst, and those who were sick and afflicted."

"That ye may walk guiltless before God -- I would that ye should impart of your substance to the poor, every man according to that which he hath, such as feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and administering to their relief, both spiritually and temporally, according to their wants."

It has all the makings of a compelling and honest attack on Romney's religious shortcomings.
posted by Rhaomi at 10:38 PM on October 13, 2012 [6 favorites]

shakespeherian: That was the Scientology episode.

Quite right. However, the chorus of the Joseph Smith song is "Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb."
posted by ob1quixote at 10:47 PM on October 13, 2012

Miko: I'd be pretty distressed to see the campaign descend to driving a wedge based on differences in theology that have no discernible impact on our relationship with other human beings. That is entirely different from an open discussion about the discomfort various groups may have with the dogma of other groups. As you yourself say, the former tactic is not an honorable one. The latter is a big gap in the public discourse that absolutely needs filling.
posted by bardophile at 11:17 PM on October 13, 2012

The Real Reason Romney's Tax Math Doesn't Add up

Conservatives have reacted aggressively against the TPC report. It seems that Mitt’s plan should be viable: If you cut tax rates proportionally across the board, and eliminate tax deductions proportionally, it seems progressivity should be unchanged. In fact, if you eliminate tax breaks starting with the wealthy, as Romney says he would, it seems he should be able to make the tax code even more progressive.

The idea is intuitive, but wrong. And it’s wrong because of something people don’t realize: The tax preferences that exist today overwhelmingly benefit people with lower and middle incomes, not the wealthy. While tax rate cuts reduce income tax burdens proportionally, as TPC notes, there aren't enough tax preferences for wealthy people to offset Romney's cuts at the top.

posted by the man of twists and turns at 2:51 AM on October 14, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Final Word on Mitt Romney's Tax Plan -

Finally, I would note one item that the Romney campaign does not cite in support of its tax plan: Any analysis actually prepared for the campaign in preparation for announcing the plan in February. You would expect that, in advance of announcing a tax plan, the campaign would commission an analysis to make sure that all of its planks can coexist. Releasing that analysis now would be to the campaign's advantage, helping them put down claims like mine that their math doesn't add up.

Why don't they release that analysis? My guess is because the analysis doesn't exist, and the 20 percent rate cut figure was plucked out of thin air for political reasons without regard to whether it was feasible.

posted by the man of twists and turns at 2:56 AM on October 14, 2012 [2 favorites]

The Self-Destruction of the 1 Percent

The story of Venice’s rise and fall is told by the scholars Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson, in their book “Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty,” as an illustration of their thesis that what separates successful states from failed ones is whether their governing institutions are inclusive or extractive. Extractive states are controlled by ruling elites whose objective is to extract as much wealth as they can from the rest of society. Inclusive states give everyone access to economic opportunity; often, greater inclusiveness creates more prosperity, which creates an incentive for ever greater inclusiveness.
posted by madamjujujive at 9:09 AM on October 14, 2012 [5 favorites]

^ The Self-Destruction of the 1 Percent

Now, as then, the inevitable danger is that they will confuse their own self-interest with the common good. The irony of the political rise of the plutocrats is that, like Venice’s oligarchs, they threaten the system that created them.

The editor of Thomson Reuters Digital and the author of “Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else,” from which this essay is adapted.

Global.
posted by de at 11:18 AM on October 14, 2012

The more I look at it, the more I think it's basically our history of religious crusade, religious tribalism, and milennialism. All fights are religious fights, here.

Exactly. Which is why the vehemence of the atheist movement in America startled me at first-- I mean, who cares what you believe, or not? it's nobody's business but your own-- until I realized that in the States, atheism is primarily a political position, not an opinion about religion.
posted by jokeefe at 2:16 PM on October 14, 2012 [3 favorites]

Huh? No. Atheism in the States is a lot of things to a lot of people, beliefs are kinda like that, but to say that it isn't an opinion about religion is...weirdly wrong. Sorry. No.
posted by lazaruslong at 3:20 PM on October 14, 2012 [2 favorites]

Gary Johnson: Mitt is “without one molecule of brain”
posted by homunculus at 3:26 PM on October 14, 2012

I would say that Secularism is the political position, not 'atheism.' Most vocal secularists are atheists, but not all of them. Secularism is a much more contentious position to hold in the US than it is in Europe.
posted by muddgirl at 3:26 PM on October 14, 2012 [1 favorite]

Libyan Ambassador’s Death Not a Political Issue, Says Dad
posted by homunculus at 3:43 PM on October 14, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mother Jones: 2009 Romney aided Glenn Beck in setting up crazy fringe university

In 2009, Mitt Romney, who is now trying to campaign for president as a moderate, lent his star power to an unusual charitable project: celebrating right-wing talk show host Glenn Beck to raise money for an unaccredited Utah-based college, which was founded by acolytes of the late W. Cleon Skousen and promoted the work of this fringe conservative figure. Much-touted by Beck, Skousen was an anti-communist crusader, a purported political philosopher, a historian accused of racist revisionism, and a right-wing conspiracy theorist. He contended that the Founding Fathers were direct descendants of the Lost Tribes of Israel, claimed that a global cabal of bankers controlled the world from behind the scenes, and wrote a book that referred to the "blessings of slavery." Skousen, who died in 2006, taught Romney at Brigham Young University.
posted by angrycat at 5:12 PM on October 14, 2012 [2 favorites]

Got a push poll today. I'm disappointed though because they wouldn't let me pretend to be voting for Gary Johnson.
posted by drezdn at 5:40 PM on October 14, 2012

I got a phone call from a volunteer at the state Democratic party, asking who I was voting for going from local state rep up to the Presidential race.

Caller: "If the election were held today, who would you vote for: Barack Obama or Mitt Romney?".
Me: "Jill Stein."
Caller (flummoxed): "But... there are only two candidates!"
Me: "No, there aren't. She's on the ballot!"
Caller: "Well, she isn't on my form here! What are they, an independent candidate?"

The Dems aren't even mentioning Stein or Johnson in their polls because they don't want voters to even know they exist. They don't want them hearing their names and looking them up.
posted by dunkadunc at 7:43 PM on October 14, 2012 [1 favorite]

That would be kind of stupid of them. I'm guessing Republicans aren't thinking about Gary Johnson or Ron Paul or anybody else but Romney. They're trying to win. They are trying to get control. I'd actually think the Dems were stupid if they wasted money printing up scripts with Jill Stein in them.

It's winning time, not time to play games with 3rd party candidate hypotheticals and say we're going to hold our breath til we turn blue if we don't get our way by having a discussion about any but the only two possible outcomes of this election.

Anyway, the 47% comments that are the subject of this thread indeed seem to have had a major effect on the election. Without them, I think Mitt would have a notable lead at this point, instead of where we are now.

I hope the president has come up with a way of using them to devastating effect. It is clear Mitt is a fraud in that he has his eye on helping the rich, and the poor are just dust for him to step over.

If Obama doesn't go at Mitt with a focused and powerful attack, I'm going to begin to wander down some interesting thought paths. There is so much out there to attack Mitt on, rightfully. The country and the world needs to know what we know and see what we've seen. There are far too many articles, stories and information that haven't been used.

Easy for me to say, because I'm not the guy who has to hold that all in his head and then spout it out perfectly in front of a global audience. Barack is still rusty debate-wise, and I suspect it'll be a tie on Tuesday. But in the final debate, hopefully Obama brings the thunder.

I feel like we're at a crossroads. We can either go to that selfish place that is easy to go to where the poor are fucked completely and systemically things get worse for everybody who isn't wealthy, or we can once again try to be our best selves. I'm sure people don't like to see one side get characterized as good (good, not great, good, not perfect) vs evil, but if you look at the behaviors, it is pretty clear. The good guy always is saddled with the rules and is careful and has to do things the right way. The bad guys lies, cheats, steals and can pretty much do anything and cause mayhem in an attempt to win. It's pretty obvious which is which. This is going to be one interesting week. For anybody in a swing state, I hope you can get out to the polls on election day, drive people who need rides, and provide aid and comfort to voters. It's going to be wild.
posted by cashman at 9:17 PM on October 14, 2012 [2 favorites]

Crooked Timber : Philosophical Conservatism and Operational Liberalism

Romney/Ryan get a bottomless stack of Get Out Of Budget Nonsense Jail Free Cards because the 2 + 2 = 5 stuff resonates with – feeds into – a certain kind of utopian conservative fantasy. It’s aspirational, rugged individualism stuff. Wouldn’t it be nice if we all just stood on our own two feet! Since saying this sort of stuff amounts to signaling to the base ‘I’m one of you!’, it is easily discounted as rhetoric – because that is, in fact, what it is. This produces a kind of feedback loop.

posted by the man of twists and turns at 9:36 PM on October 14, 2012

“What does it say about the Republican Party that despite our being the richest country on the planet, all they can worry about is how expensive it is to take care of our elderly, our sick and our less fortunate? What kind of statement are they making when they focus almost exclusively on how much richer we could all be if we just spend a little less money on the sick and the elderly? There are more billionaires in America than in the next 10 richest countries combined. We are actually millionaires when it comes to the number of millionaires with almost 5 million Americans having that distinction – more than the next 10 countries combined. But the way Ryan describes it you would never know that the tax burden for American workers is one of the lowest on Earth… or that our defense budget is ten times greater than the next closest country.”
posted by cashman at 9:59 PM on October 14, 2012 [8 favorites]

I already know what the realistic outcomes are. That's irrelevant. I don't want either one.

Both the candidates are loathsome. Romney might as well be a robber baron of yore. Obama smiles and makes big talk about peace and justice and then turns around and orders someone murdered without trial. How is that not evil?

Under Obama, they're spying on dissident groups and blowing kids up with drones, calling all men killed 'insurgents' regardless of the truth. How is that 'playing by the rules'?

Romney may be 'worse', but how the hell can anybody vote for Obama in good conscience?

Can't anyone talk regime change? Can't anyone say "This electoral system is completely broken, let's stop pretending otherwise and put our efforts elsewhere"?

They're throwing the book at Bradley Manning because they're scared. Because leaks show them for the monsters they are, and they don't want anyone else doing that again. But leaks also force governments to be honest and obey the the law, which we're having real trouble with right now.

Not everyone is a military intelligence analyst, but if one wanted to bring about political change I would draw a lot more inspiration from Bradley Manning than I would from the Democratic Party.
posted by dunkadunc at 9:59 PM on October 14, 2012

I should also mention that Richard Nixon was a Quaker who founded the EPA and wanted a guaranteed minimum income.
posted by dunkadunc at 10:03 PM on October 14, 2012

"Travels aren't called when they should be. Fouls are routinely missed and then called almost randomly. In some situations, you can almost bank on a clear foul not being called. Stars get the calls and rookies don't, and everybody knows and accepts it. Coaches stand 4 feet on the floor and don't get technical fouls. Lane violations occur and rarely get called. Bigger, stronger players get slapped and don't get fouls called, while smaller players get those same hits and get calls. Some players with "reps" get called for technical fouls for looking at other players, while stars can actively yell at a ref and not get a call. Teams in small markets don't have the chance they should - at winning games, at landing stars, at getting coverage on ESPN, at getting calls. You name it. It's awful!"

"....Thanks coach, that's nice and all, but the game is tied, there are 24 seconds left, there are only two teams playing in this game, and we need to figure out how to win, or the other team wins and rolls back civil rights, slants society toward the wealthy and starts a couple more wars, adding to the deficit. Our team isn't perfect, but we're damn sure better. Can you help us win, or what?"
posted by cashman at 10:10 PM on October 14, 2012 [11 favorites]

Romney may be 'worse', but how the hell can anybody vote for Obama in good conscience?

Obama thinks I have the right to control what happens to my own body. Romney doesn't -- oh, he's given some bullshit about no plan to roll back abortion rights, but that's bullshit. One party respects my ability to control my own body, the other doesn't.

That's just one issue. Maybe this is selfish thinking on my part, but I don't exactly think I need another. And, like I said: that's just one issue.

Replace the whole broken two-party system, and give me a real option of someone who will uphold justice and peace and my rights as a human being, and I'll be happy to participate in such a more perfect society. Find a way to get our country and our world closer to utopia, and I'll be grateful. But, until then, I'm not going to feel too bad voting to protect my rights.

I'm sorry I can't have the same priorities as you. Your priorities for peace and justice are most definitely good ones. But you asked for an explanation, and here it is: I am prioritizing my own well-being in the face of a very terrifying and very real threat to my very rights as a person. That's how I will vote for Obama in good conscience.
posted by meese at 10:28 PM on October 14, 2012 [10 favorites]

To the 16-Year-Old Who Knocked on My Door, Asking That I Vote for Obama. - I'm cynical enough to take these stories with a grain of salt, that it could be made up, but that's some good stuff. References the 47% comments too.
posted by cashman at 10:54 PM on October 14, 2012 [1 favorite]

I already know what the realistic outcomes are. That's irrelevant. I don't want either one.

Well too bad, you're going to get one of them, so you might as well pick the one that'll be better for the country.

Both the candidates are loathsome. Romney might as well be a robber baron of yore. Obama smiles and makes big talk about peace and justice and then turns around and orders someone murdered without trial. How is that not evil?

Which quiet, mind their business, peaceful person are we talking about here?

Under Obama, they're spying on dissident groups and blowing kids up with drones, calling all men killed 'insurgents' regardless of the truth. How is that 'playing by the rules'?

Romney may be 'worse', but how the hell can anybody vote for Obama in good conscience?

Obama enacted a version of universal healthcare, not the best, but a version of universal healthcare. Made decent Supreme Court picks. Isn't interested in setting women back to the '50s. Etc, etc.

Is he perfect? No. Am I happy about Brandy Manning, drone strikes and another two years of war? No. But make no mistake, he's a lot better than Romney will ever be and for the 2012 US Presidential election, the choice is astonishingly simple. Jill Stein and whoever has zero chance of being elected. You make not like that fact or the two candidates you can choose from, but that's the choice there is. Make it and move on.

Can't anyone talk regime change? Can't anyone say "This electoral system is completely broken, let's stop pretending otherwise and put our efforts elsewhere"?

Sure, go ahead and say it if it makes you feel better. Just realize that a lot of people are fine with the current system.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:01 AM on October 15, 2012 [4 favorites]

Romney may be 'worse', but how the hell can anybody vote for Obama in good conscience?

I could list a ton of reasons but it comes down to this: out of the set of 300 Million Americans, only two have a chance of being president for the next four years. That's it; that's our choice. We either get Obama or we get Romney. Romney has promised to make the country much worse than it is now and while I'm not always happy with Obama (for mostly the same reasons that you don't like him), he's done some very significant things to make the country a somewhat better place. So do you want the country to get better or worse? It's really that simple.
posted by octothorpe at 4:53 AM on October 15, 2012 [7 favorites]

To add to octothorpe's comment, one can be unhappy with both the candidates AND work to change the electoral system radically, while still acknowledging the differences between the two candidates and therefore voting for one of them.

I have absolutely no reason to believe that Romney will refrain from doing any of the terrible things that Obama does. And yes, I firmly believe that Obama does some really terrible things. However, it seems pretty clear to me that Romney will do even more terrible things than Obama does.

Thinking Obama is a significantly better candidate than Romney does NOT in any way preclude me or you or anyone else from doing real work to reform the electoral system.

Having lived much of my life in places with only the barest facade of functioning systems, I am extremely reluctant to reject systems as a whole. Have you seen what happens during a revolution? Have you seen what happens in the aftermath of a revolution? I've heard a lot of non-Americans comment, over the years, that one of the reasons the US is so willing to take military action in other parts of the world is that no wars have been fought on the American mainland in living memory. Real war, real revolution, real doing away with the system altogether is far uglier than it is possible to imagine from afar.

I live in the land where drones are dropped by Obama's orders. I teach at schools that have had to set up military style barricades to make sure that the students and teachers are safe. There is no doubt in my mind that I would rather have Obama in the White House than Romney (or indeed, any of the candidates the Republican Party fielded in the primaries).

Naturally, this is a choice that everyone must make for themselves. Vote (or not) your conscience.
posted by bardophile at 5:13 AM on October 15, 2012 [12 favorites]

If Obama doesn't go at Mitt with a focused and powerful attack

Oh he'll go for it. Fox News is already priming its audience to start gasping at the Angry Black Man.

To the 16-Year-Old Who Knocked on My Door, Asking That I Vote for Obama.

One thing I never understood about the democratic campaign: Why not let those that are benefitting from Obamacare go front and center and tell more of their stories?
"Hi, this is me, and for the first time ever I was able to get insurance thanks to Barack Obama's legislation..."
posted by Theta States at 6:28 AM on October 15, 2012

I already know what the realistic outcomes are. That's irrelevant. I don't want either one.

Too bad. That's not a choice you get at this point. Come to terms with voting or not for a presidential candidate - that's what you get right now.

Can't anyone talk regime change? Can't anyone say "This electoral system is completely broken, let's stop pretending otherwise and put our efforts elsewhere"?

People are doing this. Some of them are flat-out nuts, but lots of them aren't. What are you, specifically, doing in your community to create or further this discussion? There is no "anyone": there is you, reaching out and starting the discussion. Are you volunteering for the Stein campaign, or for the local Green candidate in your school/city council/whateverotherlocalrace? Are you having house parties for candidates or parties you support?

If you are, more power to you, and keep it up!
posted by rtha at 8:33 AM on October 15, 2012

It's just occurred to me, rather forcefully I might add, what a perfect-storm this "Town Hall" debate will be for majorly squee inducing Romney-esque David Brent moments™ as he attempts to bring his "empathy" module online and "rub elbows" with "the little people."

You know, the ones who "grab his butt" and serve him their cute little cookies "from the 7-11" and the ones who make up the 47% and "won't ever take responsibility for or care about their lives" in any way a ruthless, greedy vulture capitalist with the spiritual presence of a kitchen appliance could ever approve.

I daresay; what an epic thrilling awkward humongous cornucopia of Fremdschämen this event is destined to produce.

The Romney campaign people have to be freaking the fuck out...over the likelihood of imminent disaster just waiting to happen tomorrow night.

My favorite new word for a while now since I think Madamjujuve introduced it on the blue. Fremdschämen Fremdschämen Fremdschämen Fremdschämen Fremdschämen Fremdschämen Fremdschämen!!
posted by Skygazer at 8:36 AM on October 15, 2012

"I already know what the realistic outcomes are. That's irrelevant. I don't want either one."

That's not irrelevant. That's extremely fucking relevant — what will actually happen in the world. And too fucking bad, man, you're getting one or the other, so which do you want it to be?
posted by klangklangston at 9:02 AM on October 15, 2012 [5 favorites]

I don't want either one.

I want a pony, some Kobe beef and a expensively truffle flaked white pasta sauce; I'll even work for it. That doesn't mean that I starve because I refuse to choose between the things actually available in the cupboard at supper time.
posted by jaduncan at 9:22 AM on October 15, 2012 [5 favorites]

"Yeah, there's not a glob of spit's difference between the two major parties, corporate puppet masters &c &c. Hey, what do you mean I can't get an abortion? Grandma's moving in with us? I don't want my kid to go to a religious school!"
posted by msalt at 9:24 AM on October 15, 2012 [4 favorites]

dunkadunc: Can't anyone talk regime change? Can't anyone say "This electoral system is completely broken, let's stop pretending otherwise and put our efforts elsewhere"?

I think you'll find this is a catch-22. Our rules are set up for a plurality rule system which means, according to Duverger's Law, that politics will inevitably tend towards a two party system. To change to something else, e.g. the proportional representation system popular in much of the rest of the English speaking world, would require the extent two party system to cooperate in changing the statutes, and where necessary adopting the amendments to the Constitution, to allow it. This would, of course, have the effect of lessening the power of the two parties, so it's something they're unlikely to do.

My suggestion, and it's what I've been telling all my Facebook friends who express similar thoughts, is to figure out which of the major parties most closely aligns with your desired policy and get more involved in the affairs of that party. Start going to that party's local meetings. They're free and open to the public.
posted by ob1quixote at 9:41 AM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

My favorite new word for a while now since I think Madamjujuve introduced it on the blue.

Skygazer, you must be confusing me with some other jive-talking lady because that word is a new one to me. And a fun one!
posted by madamjujujive at 9:45 AM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

madamjujujive: ...you must be confusing me with some other jive-talking lady because that word is a new one to me. And a fun one!

Well, one of yous fine Mefite broads on da Blue that talks good learned it to me.

Maybe it was Elizard, Bearwife, DeJardins, Phire, maybe...WhimsicalNymph?

Who knows anymores...I DON'T!
posted by Skygazer at 9:52 AM on October 15, 2012

This comment?

(I tend to think of it as a Costanza Moment. My own personal name for Seinfeld is Dear God, George... No! Stop!, which isn't as snappy, I'll admit.)
posted by Grangousier at 9:59 AM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

Remember this comment upthread about why people would take the risk in order to steal the election for Mitt Romney?

Check out this post at commondreams:

The widespread use of electronic voting machines from ES&S, and of Diebold software maintained by Triad, allowed Blackwell to electronically flip a 4% Kerry lead to a 2% Bush victory in the dead of election night. ES&S, Diebold and Triad were all owned or operated by Republican partisans. The shift of more than 300,000 votes after 12:20 am election night was a virtual statistical impossibility. It was engineered by Michael Connell, an IT specialist long affiliated with the Bush Family. Blackwell gave Connell's Ohio-based GovTech the contract to count Ohio's votes, which was done on servers housed in the Old Pioneer Bank Building in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Thus the Ohio vote tally was done on servers that also carried the e-mail for Karl Rove and the national Republican Party. Connell died in a mysterious plane crash in December, 2008, after being subpoenaed in the King-Lincoln-Bronzeville federal lawsuit focused on how the 2004 election was decided (disclosure: we were attorney and plaintiff in that suit).

Diebold's founder, Walden O'Dell, had vowed to deliver Ohio's electoral votes---and thus the presidency---to his friend George W. Bush. That it was done in part on electronic voting machines and software O'Dell happened to own (Diebold has since changed hands twice) remains a cautionary red flag for those who believe merely winning the popular vote will give Barack Obama a second term.

This November, much of the Ohio electorate will cast its ballots on machines again owned by close cronies of the Republican presidential candidate. In Cincinnati and elsewhere around the state, the e-voting apparati are owned by Hart Intercivic. Hart's machines are infamous for mechanical failures, "glitches," counting errors and other timely problems now thoroughly identified with the way Republicans steal elections. As in 2004, Ohio's governor is now a Republican. This time it's the very right-wing John Kasich, himself a multi-millionaire courtesy of a stint at Lehman Brothers selling state bonds, and the largesse of Rupert Murdoch, on whose Fox Network Kasich served as a late night bloviator. Murdoch wrote Kasich a game-changing $1 million check just prior to his winning the statehouse, an electoral victory shrouded in electronic intrigue. The exit polls in that election indicated that his opponent, incumbent Democrat Ted Strickland, had actually won the popular vote.

Ohio's very Republican Secretary of State is John Husted, currently suing in the US Supreme Court to prevent the public from voting on the weekend prior to election day. As did Blackwell and Governor Robert Taft in 2004, Husted and Kasich will control Ohio's electronic vote count on election night free of meaningful public checks or balances.

posted by cashman at 10:12 AM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

Central Mississippi Tea Party president Janis Lane:
Our country might have been better off if it was still just men voting. There is nothing worse than a bunch of mean, hateful women. They are diabolical in how than can skewer a person. I do not see that in men. The whole time I worked, I'd much rather have a male boss than a female boss. Double-minded, you never can trust them.
posted by madamjujujive at 10:32 AM on October 15, 2012 [2 favorites]

The Cynic and President Obama: In an age of unprecedented obstructionism, there has been more of Machiavelli in the man than the author thought possible. But toughness isn't his failing; it's that he thinks we are a better people than we are.
posted by homunculus at 10:38 AM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

The Curious Case of Mitt and the Apartment

Curiously, it’s when Romney talks about health care that he fixates on apartments. If housing is the topic, he forgets them. Asked by CBS to state his urban agenda, he dodged the question entirely and called for corporate tax cuts to stimulate manufacturing. And his Republican platform veers into open hostility to apartment houses. It denounces the Obama administration for “replacing civil engineering with social engineering as it pursues an exclusively urban vision of dense housing and government transit.”

As I observed here last winter, urban life itself has become a target of right-wing demonology. The Republican National Committee saw fit in January to speak out in defense of “the American way of life of private property ownership, single family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices.”

Mitt Romney's Nonexistent Foreign Policy: 'The Bush foreign policy is a terrible brand."
posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:51 AM on October 15, 2012

Fremdschämen

I, too, have always referred to this as a "George Costanza moment" but Fremdschämen sound much more erudite. Will install into vocabulary update.
posted by ambrosia at 10:57 AM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

madamejujujive: Our country might have been better off if it was still just men voting. There is nothing worse than a bunch of mean, hateful women. They are diabolical in how than can skewer a person. I do not see that in men. The whole time I worked, I'd much rather have a male boss than a female boss. Double-minded, you never can trust them.

Holy fuckin' ~~1912~~ 1839 Batman.

Really?
posted by Skygazer at 10:59 AM on October 15, 2012

... allowed Blackwell to electronically flip a 4% Kerry lead to a 2% Bush victory in the dead of election night. ES&S, Diebold and Triad were all owned or operated by Republican partisans. The shift of more than 300,000 votes after 12:20 am election night was a virtual statistical impossibility. It was engineered by Michael Connell, an IT specialist long affiliated with the Bush Family. Blackwell gave Connell's Ohio-based GovTech the contract to count Ohio's votes, which was done on servers housed in the Old Pioneer Bank Building in Chattanooga, Tennessee.

Yeah, not saying that this couldn't or wouldn't happen, but I'd have to see more evidence than simply assertions of statistical certainties and shenanigans by dead guys before I was anything more than skeptical that it did happen. I think that kind of skepticism is warranted because without strong proof A) very little action can be taken anyway and B) voters, to the extent they believe such theories become ever more dispirited and more polarized over the election process.
posted by octobersurprise at 11:15 AM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

Central Mississippi Tea Party president Janis Lane:
Our country might have been better off if it was still just men voting. There is nothing worse than a bunch of mean, hateful women. They are diabolical in how than can skewer a person. I do not see that in men. The whole time I worked, I'd much rather have a male boss than a female boss. Double-minded, you never can trust them.

That crazy dame.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:16 AM on October 15, 2012

It's Funny Because We're White
posted by homunculus at 11:44 AM on October 15, 2012

The Tea Party Will Win in the End

This is a nation that loathes government and always has. Liberals should not be deluded: The Goldwater revolution will ultimately triumph, regardless of what happens in November.

posted by syzygy at 11:49 AM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

klangklangston: "That's not irrelevant. That's extremely fucking relevant — what will actually happen in the world. And too fucking bad, man, you're getting one or the other, so which do you want it to be?"

It is irrelevant. It's irrelevant to me that the candidate I want isn't going to get in and that it's a Romney-Obama horserace. I already know it's going to be one of the two. Why should I vote for a candidate far, far to the right of what I believe in, just to let the Dems know they can count on my vote and don't have to end the abuses or move left-of-center?

I care about people living in Swat just as much as I do about people living stateside. Would you vote Obama if there were drones flying overhead, shooting missiles at people in your community based on sloppy guesswork? Would you vote Obama if the drones then killed the emergency responders that came to the scene?

Fuck that.

On Wasting Your Vote:

There’s been a lot of angry posturing from Americans who think of themselves as progressive about how the purported political center in this country has been moving inexorably to the right, yet it’s these very people who are directly responsible for the shift. If you vote for a candidate whose farther right than you would prefer, well, then you’re shifting the political “center” to the right. Republicans aren’t responsible for the increasingly conservative face of the democratic party. Democrats are responsible for it. Democrats keep racing to the polls like lemmings being chased by the boogeyman.

“This is not the election to vote for real change” runs the democratic refrain. We’re in a crisis! We must do whatever it takes to ensure that the republicans don’t get in office even if that means voting for a democrat whose policies we don’t really like and which are only marginally distinguishable from those of the republican candidate. That “margin” is important, we’re reminded again and again. That little difference is going to make all the difference.
posted by dunkadunc at 11:54 AM on October 15, 2012

Interesting statistical comparisons of the RAND American Life Panel poll and prices for Obama shares at intrade.

Apparently, the RAND ALP poll has a high correlation with intrade prices, with a 2-day lead.
posted by syzygy at 11:57 AM on October 15, 2012 [2 favorites]

Syzygy: Interesting statistical comparisons of the RAND American Life Panel poll...

The really need to fix that Rand chart so the final day is 10/14. Right now it looks like 10/1.

But, yeah, wow. That's an amazing chart and another one to put on the "to watch" list.
posted by Skygazer at 12:02 PM on October 15, 2012

dunkadunc: I LIVE in Pakistan. Swat is where I spent my honeymoon. My first cousin serves in an army unit that was deployed in Swat. This is a cousin whose diapers I changed. I have been vocal about my opinion on drone attacks. I am willing to accept that you care as deeply as I do about the people of Swat, but I'm damned if I will let you tell me that my willingness to vote means that I don't care enough for the people of Swat, or the people of my community. The Taliban come after MY schools and MY students and MY people in response to the drone attacks that they are impotent to do anything else about. I am voting for Obama. So yes, even though the drones circle over my community, because by all that is holy they ARE my community, I will still vote for Obama in this election.

You, as I said before, must do as your conscience dictates. Don't presume to tell me that I have not consulted mine.
posted by bardophile at 12:03 PM on October 15, 2012 [41 favorites]

Romney's Talking Points on the Uninsured Are Like the Ones I Wrote When I Was an Insurance Industry Flack
posted by homunculus at 12:18 PM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

Not voting for Obama is half a vote for Romney. If you really think Romney is a more likely path to a more progressive government, then I guess it makes sense. You might be right, who knows what will happen? I suspect if the GOP gains more power they will do more gerrymandering, more voter disenfranchisement, bring more of their money into politics, gain greater control of the judicial branch, and make it more and more difficult for progressives to get elected.
posted by Golden Eternity at 12:20 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

homunculus: The Cynic and President Obama: In an age of unprecedented obstructionism, there has been more of Machiavelli in the man than the author thought possible. But toughness isn't his failing; it's that he thinks we are a better people than we are.

This is absolutely, positively, worth the time it will take to read it.
posted by ob1quixote at 12:22 PM on October 15, 2012

If you vote for a candidate whose farther right than you would prefer, well, then you’re shifting the political “center” to the right.

This is a great argument for getting more involved with the Democratic Party, for canvassing more aggressively in the primaries for candidates that are further left, etc. I just don't find it convincing as a reason to sit out the presidential election altogether.

(I have JUST realised that disabling Greasemonkey makes this thread load SO SO SO much faster.)
posted by bardophile at 12:25 PM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

homunculus: The Cynic and President Obama: In an age of unprecedented obstructionism, there has been more of Machiavelli in the man than the author thought possible. But toughness isn't his failing; it's that he thinks we are a better people than we are.

/CharlesPierceFilter

Seconding the call that it be read.
posted by Skygazer at 12:28 PM on October 15, 2012

the Paris Review: What Would Happen If The Three Jonathans Rewrote Mitt Romney? - Romney's RNC speech rewritten in the style of Lethem, Franzen, and Safran Foer.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 12:38 PM on October 15, 2012

... allowed Blackwell to electronically flip a 4% Kerry lead to a 2% Bush victory in the dead of election night.

Yeah, not saying that this couldn't or wouldn't happen, but I'd have to see more evidence than simply assertions of statistical certainties and shenanigans by dead guys before I was anything more than skeptical that it did happen.

I share your need for skepticism, but the larger issue is why the possibility is even allowed. In what other circumstances have we ever left vote-counting to a secret process controlled by private individuals with stated political goals? We, the people, not only cannot examine the code, we are not even privy to results of quality testing of the software and any independent examination of the code for trapdoors and such.

And, by the way, I've examined closely two of the papers that argue the unlikeliness of the 2004 Ohio results and, atlhough it's been a while since I did so, my memory is that they don't necessarily point to intentional election fraud, but they do definitively indicate a problem with the vote-counting software used. It wouldn't be paranoid or disenfranchise anyone to at least ask for open accountability for the e-voting firms.
posted by Mental Wimp at 12:52 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

This is absolutely, positively, worth the time it will take to read it.

Anyone who read the link, why do you consider it a must read?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 12:53 PM on October 15, 2012

Seconding the call that it be read.

Thirding.

Or would it be fourthing if I'm seconding a seconding?
posted by Mental Wimp at 12:54 PM on October 15, 2012

Brandon Blatcher, 1) I always enjoy Charles P. Pierce's writing. 2) It sums up a lot of what I think about the President, and how he's handled things, and how people react to him. The cynic vs. the maneuverist.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 12:57 PM on October 15, 2012

Brandon Blatcher: This is absolutely, positively, worth the time it will take to read it.

Anyone who read the link, why do you consider it a must read?

I found it to be an extremely insightful portrait of the landscape of the early-21st century American electorate and an interesting counterpoint to Pierce's 2008 essay. The most interesting idea to me was that Obama's election offered "absolution without penance" for the worst parts of America's shameful history of racial injustice. There is much more, including an extremely interesting analysis of the reversal of the roles of the parties vis-à-vis states rights, race relations, the proper role of government, and whether or not such a thing as the political commonwealth even exists.
posted by ob1quixote at 1:14 PM on October 15, 2012

Why should I vote for a candidate far, far to the right of what I believe in, just to let the Dems know they can count on my vote and don't have to end the abuses or move left-of-center?

You shouldn't. You also shouldn't confuse choosing not to vote or choosing to vote for a candidate who will do nothing about those drones with actually caring about Swat. How much do you care about Swat? So much you're willing to tell everyone how much you care about Swat! So much you're willing to vote for a candidate who can't possibly have any effect on the actual drones that actually fly over Swat!

It all sounds lovely, but in politics, in the long run, there isn't much difference between moral purity and simple apathy. AFAIK, there's never been a politician or a party in American history who's policies were shaped by the votes they didn't get.

"If we are ever going to see real political change of the sort progressives purport to want, then we are going to have to be brave enough to risk losing an election."

Only a lefty weaned on Søren Kierkegaard would actually argue that progressives need to lose more elections in order to achieve their goals.
posted by octobersurprise at 1:23 PM on October 15, 2012 [5 favorites]

"It is irrelevant. It's irrelevant to me that the candidate I want isn't going to get in and that it's a Romney-Obama horserace. I already know it's going to be one of the two. Why should I vote for a candidate far, far to the right of what I believe in, just to let the Dems know they can count on my vote and don't have to end the abuses or move left-of-center?

I don't think you know what irrelevant means. For the rest, you're asking "Why shouldn't I cut off my nose to spite my face?"

"There’s been a lot of angry posturing from Americans who think of themselves as progressive about how the purported political center in this country has been moving inexorably to the right, yet it’s these very people who are directly responsible for the shift. If you vote for a candidate whose farther right than you would prefer, well, then you’re shifting the political “center” to the right. Republicans aren’t responsible for the increasingly conservative face of the democratic party. Democrats are responsible for it. Democrats keep racing to the polls like lemmings being chased by the boogeyman."

Yeah, actually, that's bullshit. It's idiotic tubthumping from someone whose life won't be materially impacted by a Romney presidency.

By voting for someone more right than you prefer, you are not moving the center further right. This is especially clear when the options are between far right and center right. Not voting for center right moves the center much further right. This is pretty simple stuff: if we go 1 to 10 with 1 being totally left and 10 being totally right, voting for the guy at 6 when you prefer 3 is still better than either not voting or voting for the guy at 8. Math it out. (The absolute difference from the mean and your preferred position will be greater if you vote for the right/don't vote for the left, assuming a normal distribution.)

If you want candidates that are further to the left, go work for them. I have, and sometimes we've won. What never works is withholding a vote from the least-worst option because of some juvenile idealism.
posted by klangklangston at 1:40 PM on October 15, 2012 [11 favorites]

It's idiotic tubthumping

It is idiotic tubthumping, but, also, what's weird and interesting about the piece is the way she seems to conceptualize "progressivism" almost as a religious faith. Progressives, in this telling, are a coterie of faithful beset in a wicked world by temptations to stray from the path of righteousness. You can call yourself a progressive, but if you vote for a Democrat, then your faith is betrayed by your actions. "Progressive political change will never be a fact unless we have faith in its coming," she writes, "unless we have faith that others will back us up when we refuse to be forced to vote yet again for a candidate we do not like."

That's not a recipe for political action, that's a recipe for salvation.
posted by octobersurprise at 2:06 PM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

Paul Krugman: Death by Ideology

So let’s be brutally honest here. The Romney-Ryan position on health care is that many millions of Americans must be denied health insurance, and millions more deprived of the security Medicare now provides, in order to save money. At the same time, of course, Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan are proposing trillions of dollars in tax cuts for the wealthy. So a literal description of their plan is that they want to expose many Americans to financial insecurity, and let some of them die, so that a handful of already wealthy people can have a higher after-tax income.

It’s not a pretty picture — and you can see why Mr. Romney chooses not to see it.

I get that argument from many of my older Republican family members, "We cannot afford health care for everyone." and I always ask why. Why can't we? We have more billionaires and more millionaires than any other country-- obviously there is something about America that allows people to generate wealth. So why can't the millionaires and billionaires give back to the country? I guess I am a dirty rotten commie socialist for thinking that way.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:01 PM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

the Paris Review: What Would Happen If The Three Jonathans Rewrote Mitt Romney? - Romney's RNC speech rewritten in the style of Lethem, Franzen, and Safran Foer.

Swift or GTFO.
posted by psoas at 3:21 PM on October 15, 2012 [2 favorites]

idiotic tubthumping

It also seems to completely ignore any politics that occur below the national level. There are lots of progressive pols running at the local level (school board, city, county, state). If you're going to stay home out of some notion that hating both guys running for president will somehow make a difference, then you're missing your best chance to actually make a difference. Maybe it's because I know a ton of people involved in local politics right now - gingerbeer nearly had us and her visiting parents signed up to go door-to-door for a candidate for the SF board of supes (and not even in our district!) this weekend.

So you hate the frontrunners for POTUS. Fine. Don't vote for either of them. But if you're not working to start making change in your city/county/state, then I think stopping whining about how there are no progressive candidates is a thing you should do.
posted by rtha at 3:21 PM on October 15, 2012 [2 favorites]

According to this article the top 10 richest Americans increased their wealth by $50 Billion in one year. 60% of that was from capital gains-- meaning untaxed.

Didn't the rich people EARN their money through hard work and innovation? No, they didn't. 60 percent of the income for the Forbes 400 came from capital gains. A lot more of it came from other forms of deregulatory subterfuge. CEOs have used carried interest, performance-related pay, stock options, and deferred compensation to make off with extra money that is only available to the beneficiaries of diminishing government.

So I find it difficult to believe that asking more from the richest Americans would be a hardship, and I think they owe it as a patriotic duty. If we were in a World War right now we would expect our young men and women to go out there and sacrifice their lives to ensure that our country stayed safe, yet somehow we cannot ask the richest Americans, sitting on their piles of gold like mythical dragons hoarding their riches, to give up some of their wealth to improve the lives of their countrymen?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:56 PM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

I get that argument from many of my older Republican family members, "We cannot afford health care for everyone."

Funny thing, you almost never hear them say "We can't afford these wars," or "We can't afford these tax cuts," the cost of either of which would have paid for an overhaul of the system to implement a single-payer system.
posted by Rykey at 4:02 PM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

Older Republican family members have definitely told me they can't afford a tax raise.
posted by grouse at 4:06 PM on October 15, 2012

According to this article the top 10 richest Americans increased their wealth by $50 Billion in one year. 60% of that was from capital gains-- meaning untaxed.

Capital gains are taxed, just not nearly as much as regular income (15% vs 35% for the highest income bracket).
posted by dfan at 4:08 PM on October 15, 2012

So I find it difficult to believe that asking more from the richest Americans would be a hardship, and I think they owe it as a patriotic duty.

To put it in terms they might be familiar with: freedom isn't free.
posted by Rykey at 4:08 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

Just 556 more comments in this thread to guarantee another Obama victory!
posted by howfar at 4:11 PM on October 15, 2012

Ooooo, if howfar's right then I'm going to chime in to do my part for another Obama term.
posted by ooga_booga at 4:15 PM on October 15, 2012

Capital gains are taxed,...

Only when they are realized.
posted by Mental Wimp at 4:31 PM on October 15, 2012

Making Mitt: The Myth Of George Romney. The Republican nominee's father didn't walk out of the '64 convention. And George Romney didn't teach Mitt that you lose by being honest — he taught him that you change your positions to win.
posted by homunculus at 4:32 PM on October 15, 2012

~~556~~ 553 more comments and just shy of 48 hours.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:40 PM on October 15, 2012

Just 556 more comments in this thread to guarantee another Obama victory!

I wasn't going to say anything but I'll just note the following additional facts

1) This thread is set to retire at around 4pm PDT on Oct 17th
2) There is another presidential debate at 6pm PDT on Oct 16th
3) Someone in one of the other threads was asking if there would be another new thread for the Oct 16th debate

Make of these facts what you will...
posted by TwoWordReview at 4:41 PM on October 15, 2012

Plus, we may need an extra 10 or so for margin. That scamp cortex could delete some comments just to fuck with us.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:42 PM on October 15, 2012 [2 favorites]

Tell me more about how this thread will never reach 5556. I'm interested to hear lots of opinions on that.
posted by howfar at 4:43 PM on October 15, 2012 [4 favorites]

Someone in one of the other threads was asking if there would be another new thread for the Oct 16th debate

A new thread sounds like a good idea, but it's like voting for Ralph Nader at this point, and will only serve to take away needed comments from this thread.
posted by grouse at 4:47 PM on October 15, 2012 [5 favorites]

We can't just have silly content-less posts to get there tho - this thread has been information rich and we have to keep up our standards. We just need homunculus and ericb to tote that barge and life that bale a little bit harder.

White collar government.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:48 PM on October 15, 2012

Did you ever notice that Romney's logo is toothpaste?
posted by madamjujujive at 4:52 PM on October 15, 2012 [4 favorites]

madamjujujive: heh, that's pretty funny
posted by rebent at 5:00 PM on October 15, 2012

And on that theme: 2012 Design Debate: Romney vs Obama

heh, from the comments:
Within the logo designs, it appears that Romney doesn't care about 47% of the kerning.
posted by madamjujujive at 5:01 PM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

Did you ever notice that Romney's logo is toothpaste?

My girlfriend's daughter pointed out that it looks like a butt and thighs in a three-quarter view. I now cannot un-see this.
posted by Rykey at 5:13 PM on October 15, 2012 [2 favorites]

1) This thread is set to retire at around 4pm PDT on Oct 17th
2) There is another presidential debate at 6pm PDT on Oct 16th
3) Someone in one of the other threads was asking if there would be another new thread for the Oct 16th debate

Well, there's already an open Presidential debate thread, and it will still be open during both upcoming debates. And since it already has over 3000 comments, it might just get the most comments by the time it closes in November.
posted by homunculus at 5:20 PM on October 15, 2012

Worth noting that this thread will have worse load issues than usual during the debate with the extra load from liveblogging, if the last two debates have been any indication. We've actually been turning off a couple of ancillary sight features just to keep the site from falling over during those.

So if you're gonna push, you might want to push early.
posted by cortex at 5:25 PM on October 15, 2012

Or maybe then mods will let this thread stay open forever, like on MonkeyFilter!

Probably not, though.
posted by homunculus at 5:25 PM on October 15, 2012

“It was the phoniest piece of baloney I’ve ever been associated with. In hindsight, I would have never let him in the door.”
Soup kitchen employees react to dish-washingate
posted by madamjujujive at 5:29 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

Well, there's already an open Presidential debate thread, and it will still be open during both upcoming debates. And since it already has over 3000 comments, it might just get the most comments by the time it closes in November.

We need a unified and strategic vision here.

I think once we're all agreed on this, and whether it's this venerable beloved Blue whale of a Prez. thread or the upcomer Sperm Whale Thrilla-or-Vanilla Prez thread doesn't matter.

We can take either one past the Palin thread with mega-commentary during the Romney David Brentian blowout of Fremdschämen via the Town Hall debate tomorrow evening.

LET'S MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

Do we need to meta this?? If we don't eradicate the Palin thread from it's No.1 spot we will live under it's shadow for a long long time...
posted by Skygazer at 5:34 PM on October 15, 2012

"We've actually been turning off a couple of ancillary sight features just to keep the site from falling over during those."

CHOOSE QUIP:

A) "Like the filter that catches 'site' versus 'sight?'
B) "I thought my marquee tags hadn't been displaying. They're integral to my tone, Cortex!"
posted by klangklangston at 5:35 PM on October 15, 2012

If we don't eradicate the Palin thread from it's No.1 spot we will live under it's shadow for a long long time...

I would like to contribute to your anti-Palin cause. Here is my donation.

And also make myself a new placesaver
posted by triggerfinger at 5:39 PM on October 15, 2012 [2 favorites]

Or maybe then mods will let this thread stay open forever

That'd be sending the wrong message. If you want to break a record, you roll up your sleeves and you by-god break it. That Palin thread didn't grab the brass ring through special pleading or deferrals; it nailed that 5555 mark on the strength of collective hard work, determination, and the sheer batshit craziness that was that VP nod.

Romney/Ryan may not be the same sort of easy-to-boggle-at lunacy, but you don't go to the epic thread with the political fodder you want, you go with the fodder you've got.
posted by cortex at 5:40 PM on October 15, 2012 [13 favorites]

Elizabeth Warren Raises $12.1 Million In Third Quarter

The campaign said that it raised over $7 million in September alone. It also said that 80 percent of donations were $50 or less, and more than half were $25 or less.

The numbers represent a staggering amount in the nation's most expensive U.S. Senate race, where Warren has raised more than any Congressional candidate.
posted by madamjujujive at 5:41 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

Do we need to meta this?

At the risk of contrasting with the tone of my own motivational speeches, I will note that we need to not do that, really. This thing is what it is, and it should get put to bed one way or the other on its own terms.
posted by cortex at 5:44 PM on October 15, 2012 [4 favorites]

If we don't eradicate the Palin thread from it's No.1 spot we will live under it's shadow for a long long time...

It may not be that simple. Sarah Palin is a Goddess (in the tantric sense), and deities cast long shadows.
posted by homunculus at 5:46 PM on October 15, 2012

If we don't eradicate the Palin thread from it's No.1 spot we will live under it's shadow for a long long time...

well in a worst case scenario-- romney wins or ties and the election day thread turns eventually into the longest thread by way of gnashing teeth, threats of quitting life, and drunken wailing.

and i specifically say in the event of a loss because i don't think an obama win would break 5555. though maybe i'm not properly factoring in voter ID swing state nailbiting and downticket/local ridiculousness...
posted by twist my arm at 5:47 PM on October 15, 2012

Besides, we don't want all those strangers crashing our party and drinking all the cocktails after we did all the heavy lifting.

There are going to be cocktails, right?
posted by madamjujujive at 5:48 PM on October 15, 2012

COCKTAILS ARE FOR CLOSERS
posted by twist my arm at 5:49 PM on October 15, 2012 [2 favorites]

This thing is what it is, and it should get put to bed one way or the other on its own terms.

That's what... nah, too easy
posted by Devils Rancher at 5:49 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

you don't go to the epic thread with the political fodder you want, you go with the fodder you've got.

This is true.
posted by homunculus at 5:49 PM on October 15, 2012

Did you ever notice that Romney's logo is toothpaste?

Whoa, that's the Romney logo? My first thought was that's the Routledge books logo.
posted by Bokmakierie at 5:53 PM on October 15, 2012

Romney/Ryan should totally steal the Rolls-Royce logo.

(As it turns out, I am not the first person to have this idea.)
posted by box at 5:56 PM on October 15, 2012

553 more comments and just shy of 48 hours.

We can do this people! Goddamnit, there's enough batshtinsanity in all of us to make this final push.

I heard Romeny was an intern at the studio where they filmed the moon landing in Atlantis.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:58 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

And in other political news ... things are getting decidedly ugly.
posted by madamjujujive at 6:01 PM on October 15, 2012

Regarding the soup kitchen: what a bunch of dicks that campaign is, seriously.

At the risk of giving undue credit to Ryan, that ludicrous piece of theatre looks like pure Romney. Wow.
posted by Bokmakierie at 6:05 PM on October 15, 2012

And in other political news ... things are getting decidedly ugly.

Admittedly, I've often wanted to tase local City Council members.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:07 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

fivethirtyeight's ticker shows a decided upward trend for obama/biden over the last three days or so.
posted by qnarf at 6:09 PM on October 15, 2012

qnarf: "fivethirtyeight's ticker shows a decided uptick for obama/biden over the last three days or so."

I don't want to interrupt the strategizing re: topping the Palin thread, but where the hell did this recent Romney surge come from? I think I'm heading back to nightmares and fetal position territory.
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 6:15 PM on October 15, 2012

And in other political news ... things are getting decidedly ugly.

You know, when you can't have a long serious talk with your horse without the police getting in your face and tasing you, it's over. America's done for. The terrorists have won and those Godless socialist death panels are going to be ringing yer doorbell any second now, and it's a good think you've been stocking up on ammo and teaching yer horse to hold a handgun, cos you and your horse ain't going down without a fight!
posted by Skygazer at 6:16 PM on October 15, 2012

And also, Romney/Ryan and their hatred of the little people seems almost quaint after spending the last hour and a half reading through that monster Violentacrez thread. Ugh.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:16 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

Elizabeth Warren Raises $12.1 Million In Third Quarter

Dear Scott Brown,

We hate you thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiis much.

Regards,

People from just about all over
posted by twist my arm at 6:20 PM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

Vulgar birther fraud appearing with Paul Ryan tonight

Donald Trump is hosting a special event for Romney that's closed to the press, for some strange reason.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 6:29 PM on October 15, 2012 [2 favorites]

Mitt Romney & his Campaign Senior Foreign Policy Adviser John Bolton hanging out with hate mongers.

Plus, let me emphasize "John Bolton." Under a Romney Ryan regime, we will have Bolton & Bork. Yowzer.
posted by madamjujujive at 6:59 PM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

closed to the press, for some strange reason

hairdo envy. life can be unfair even to the rich.
posted by twist my arm at 7:02 PM on October 15, 2012

The secret tapes from that would be a gold mine.
posted by Artw at 7:05 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

Toothpaste? A butt and thighs?

No, you're all wrong. It's a roll of toilet paper. Now you can't unsee THAT.
posted by emelenjr at 7:13 PM on October 15, 2012

That scamp cortex could delete some comments just to fuck with us.

Cortex aint a scamp. Them scamps are lovable.

Kidding, mostly, of course. Cortex is hereby entitled to all the beer he cares to drink the next time he's in Madison, WI courtesy of Pogo. Offer void if Pogo has moved somewhere warm by then.

I'm loving this photo-op. What a clusterfuck.

Also, nice clean apron. Dweeb. Real dishpigs represent!
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 7:13 PM on October 15, 2012

Mitt Romney & his Campaign Senior Foreign Policy Adviser John Bolton hanging out with hate mongers.

Speaking of hate mongering: Why is Rand Paul running Muslim-baiting attack ads? The senator's fear-mongering isn't just morally repugnant. It's completely at odds with his libertarian principles
posted by homunculus at 7:16 PM on October 15, 2012

libertarian principles

oxymoron
posted by twist my arm at 7:19 PM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

The secret tapes from that would be a gold mine.

You'd think so, but they're playing the long game on this one. They ban press, they entice secret taping, they say some carefully scripted apparently odious things, the tape "leaks", but then! They release the "un-edited" version of the tape, recorded in an exacting, heavily-rehearsed group pre-staging of the event with modified dialogue, that reveals that those terrible statements were actually innocuous or even laudable.

"We must kill the poor in droves", says Ryan in a shocking clip from the leaked footage, but R/R shoots back with cries of foul, releasing the full statement in context: "We must kill this idea that the poor are entitled whiners; supporting each other is what makes America great, and the clarity of this message will bring voters in droves!"

It's basically a reverse MAD Magazine fold-in. 7th dimensional pong up in this thing.
posted by cortex at 7:20 PM on October 15, 2012 [4 favorites]

romney: people are people too my friends

bazillionaire: why i've created jobs for some of my closest servants who are people

ryan: dishes freedom
posted by twist my arm at 7:25 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

Yeah, my first thought with the "no media allowed" was IT'S A TRAP! My second thought was this would be like that black guy meme.

My third thought, what will it be?! stay tuned.
posted by cashman at 7:32 PM on October 15, 2012

In other news: George W. Bush Whiles Away the Time Painting Pictures of Dogs
posted by homunculus at 7:46 PM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

Ignore them Candy Crowley

Both campaigns want to muzzle Candy Crowley at Tuesday's town hall debate. She should do her job and follow up
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 7:46 PM on October 15, 2012

There's something so incredibly weird about the complete retreat of Bush from public life. I mean, I know the Republicans don't want him around, but damn. Painting dog pictures? Huh. Wish he'd found the interest a couple decades ago.
posted by gaspode at 7:51 PM on October 15, 2012

you know who else liked to paint?*

*just doing my part for the thread's count.
posted by qnarf at 7:54 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

In amusing news, six-term congressman Paul Ryan announced that he supports congressional term limits. He also claimed to have co-sponsored legislation to enforce term limits.

According to the Washington Post, he does not appear as a sponsor or co-sponsor of any known legislation involving term limits.
posted by verb at 8:02 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

In other news: George W. Bush Whiles Away the Time Painting Pictures of Dogs

Holy crap. I thought that was a continuation of the Onion's "George Bush Returns from Four Years in the Himalayas."

What the fuck.
posted by Orange Pamplemousse at 8:04 PM on October 15, 2012 [2 favorites]

Recently, Senate candidate Tommy Thompson posted a picture of him changing a tire on the way to a campaign event. The thing is, in the picture he's wearing a white long sleeve dress shirt. Has he ever changed a tire before? Does he know how dirty he'll get?

That picture reminds me of Dishwatergate.
posted by drezdn at 8:16 PM on October 15, 2012

In amusing news, six-term congressman Paul Ryan announced that he supports congressional term limits. He also claimed to have co-sponsored legislation to enforce term limits.

Training to do sub-3 marathons is hard. He needs another 10-12 terms in congress before he can introduce term limit legislation.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 8:23 PM on October 15, 2012

If he passed term limits, it would literally be only the third thing he has accomplished in the House.
posted by drezdn at 8:28 PM on October 15, 2012

If Mitt Romney wins, there is a decent chance he could be president until 2020.
posted by cashman at 8:30 PM on October 15, 2012

Humunculous: In other news: George W. Bush Whiles Away the Time Painting Pictures of Dogs

He names all his dogs Rosebud.
posted by Skygazer at 8:49 PM on October 15, 2012

The Passion Play and Cold Reality of Gary Johnson
posted by homunculus at 8:53 PM on October 15, 2012

Is washingate the new dukakis in a tank?

Except instead of trying to cover for foreign policy, this is trying to cover for Ryan's lack of human decency?
posted by mrzarquon at 9:12 PM on October 15, 2012

Commenting on Bush's painting, the Monkey Cage blog provides a link to a pdf of some of Eisenhower's paintings along with some art criticism of it.
posted by Bokmakierie at 9:14 PM on October 15, 2012

If Mitt Romney wins, there is a decent chance he could be president until 2020.

There's nothing decent about that.
posted by Bokmakierie at 9:22 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

> If Mitt Romney wins, there is a decent chance he could be president until 2020.

Eight years. Eight l o n g years.

dunkadunc, this is not the election to promote the Greens or push for regime change. Romney will be the unfair death of many more people than Obama. Obama may be all talk and no idea, but he has colleagues pulling the (Western) World more peacefully to co-operation, recovery and growth.

Think locally, but vote globally. Romney is not for this World.
posted by de at 9:27 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

bardophile: "dunkadunc: I LIVE in Pakistan. Swat is where I spent my honeymoon. My first cousin serves in an army unit that was deployed in Swat. This is a cousin whose diapers I changed. I have been vocal about my opinion on drone attacks. ... You, as I said before, must do as your conscience dictates. Don't presume to tell me that I have not consulted mine"

Oh, snap! Wow.
posted by barnacles at 9:34 PM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

dunkadunc: "On Wasting Your Vote:"

Thanks, dunkadunc, that was an interesting read. At a certain level, I agree with it and I understand exactly what it's saying. God knows I wish we had a real progressive party to make the changes I wish the country could make.

But more than that, I think about the many people who are undoubtedly going to be worse off if Romney gets elected. The poor, those who finally got onto health insurance plans, GLBTs, women, and people in the various countries he would undoubtedly invade (basically, everyone who isn't a straight white monied American male).

These are real people who are going to have to live through the next four years with the rest of us, and while I count myself as extremely fortunate to be in a position where I think I could weather that storm without too much problems, I have friends and family who will come out the other end of four years of Romney in a radically terrible position, compared to what I know of Obama. If they make it at all.

Professor M.G. Piety, I'm going to commit what you consider a cowardly act by doing what you call "throwing my vote away". But I'd rather commit an act of cowardice than an act of violence.

From what we know of Romney's party and his policies, I believe that, in very real and violent ways, a vote for Romney is one that will cause many people to suffer a great deal of pain. So, yeah, I'm gonna throw that vote right the fuck away -- straight to Obama/Biden.

It would be nice to be in a position to make a point about progressivism, but people's health and lives are on the line, here. One option really is exponentially worse than the other.
posted by barnacles at 9:47 PM on October 15, 2012 [3 favorites]

you know who else liked to paint?

Winston Churchill?

48 hours! We can do this!*

*or not
posted by jokeefe at 10:07 PM on October 15, 2012

... ancillary sight features ...

How about quip C? "I believe the proper term for that is 'peripheral vision'."
posted by benito.strauss at 10:10 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

Did someone say cocktails? I got a bottle of Laphroaig, a whole lotta worry, and a blue eyed dog with an itchy belly. And... I have no idea what any of that means. If any of you are in rural Kansas on debate night and you're wondering "how the hell did I end up here?", feel free to stop by the place, get smashed, and give the dog a scratch.

Very busy over the next two days so if I'm not here when the jewel in the thread's palm starts flashing red, I just want to say: it was a pleasure serving with you Cap'n.

As long as there is injustice, whenever a Targathian baby cries out, wherever a distress signal sounds among the stars, we'll be there. This fine ship, this fine crew. Never give up... and never surrender.

That's my deep thought for the night and probably my last post for like EVER.. at least in this thread. We won't let Palin beat us: not now, not then, not ever.
posted by honestcoyote at 10:14 PM on October 15, 2012 [2 favorites]

48 hours! We can do this!

HOPE.

Did someone say cocktails? I got a bottle of Laphroaig

That is not a cocktail ingredient.
posted by Artw at 10:18 PM on October 15, 2012 [2 favorites]

de: "Eight years. Eight l o n g years."

Oh hell, I hadn't even thought of the prospect of Romney serving two terms. At this point, I can't see how I could make it through one of his terms!
posted by InsertNiftyNameHere at 10:20 PM on October 15, 2012

I salute you, honestcoyote. May your dog belly scritching days be long, the whisky robust, and the corn in Kansas grow ever higher (is it corn in Kansas? Nevermind). We're all counting on you, etcetera.
posted by jokeefe at 10:26 PM on October 15, 2012

Put Coke in it and I will HUNT YOU DOWN.
posted by Artw at 10:30 PM on October 15, 2012

Artw: "Put Coke in it and I will HUNT YOU DOWN"

Whoa, that was close!!

But no worries, Artw, I'll stick to 50/50 Laphroaig/RC Cola. Ain't nothin' finer in life.
posted by barnacles at 10:40 PM on October 15, 2012

Put Coke in it and I will HUNT YOU DOWN.

I meant for that post to be my goodbye sweet and/or cruel thread note, but I'm being delayed from my bed because of a sudden and insistent need to defend my honor.

Worry not about the Laphroiag. It won't get mixed with anything. Cocktails made me think of getting schnockered and getting schnockered made me think of Laphroaig and how it seems to greatly improve my musical talents. And then I had to offer it, at least vicariously, for those of us still in the greatest political thread of them all.

So be nice to me Artw and I'll let you visit my 1 cm^2 plot on Islay, which I received courtesy of the good folks at Laphroaig. I've heard its lovely if you like cloudy days, cold oceans, and peat. I happen to love all three so, as they say at Passover, next year in Islay! Maybe they'll let me, and all my drunken friends from the thread, live there as refugees if Romney wins. We can work as whisky tasters or stirrers or something.

And thanks jokeefe.
<Returns salute with a solemn mix of gratitude and sadness>
posted by honestcoyote at 11:06 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

I only now comprehended my typo that you guys are riffing on.
posted by cortex at 11:08 PM on October 15, 2012

But anyway, I went to the hardware store the other day to get some paint and they somehow got a very different color than the one I wanted and it was two gallons (they mixed both before checking either) and so they really wanted to try and fix it by nudging the recipe so they didn't have to junk the paint and I wasn't feeling like being an asshole about it, so my wife and I killed some time wandering around the store but then it still wasn't done and we were like ugh and killed some more time and you can really only look at the chainsaws and make zombie jokes so many times before it begins to have a real sort of existentially troubling air of desperateness to it but finally the paint was fixed and so we bought it and a few other things we'd been carrying around for those forty five fucking minutes and went home.
posted by cortex at 11:18 PM on October 15, 2012

And we said no we don't need a bag we'll just carry these things, and we got out the door with our paint and a new toilet seat and a couple of new paint rollers because our old one was shit and we got home and, fuuuuuck, we paid for a one and a quarter inch putty knife as well but left the store without it in our not-bag, so I called the store and made sure it was there and came back and got it and the paint guy who took forever didn't really meet my eyes and the lady who answered the phone was like Wow You Must Live Close By which okay it's about a mile actually but I own a car and you have my putty knife, what am I going to do, really.
posted by cortex at 11:20 PM on October 15, 2012

But I was already a mile from home anyway and a lot less than a mile from the liquor store and so I got a bottle of Maker's 46 while I was out, and I have to say I don't think Maker's is any great shake, like, it's a totally nice bourbon, it's a nice bourbon like Glenfiddich is a nice scotch, I'd never turn it down but I'm not like OH MY GOD GLENFIDDICH HOW DARING or whatever, but Maker's 46 is actually kind of interesting and a little bit spicy and I had some and now I am going to bed.
posted by cortex at 11:22 PM on October 15, 2012

And that is how you row a longboat.
posted by cortex at 11:24 PM on October 15, 2012 [10 favorites]

I'm in oar.
posted by de at 11:29 PM on October 15, 2012 [4 favorites]

"I believe that if America does not lead, others will; others who do not share our interests and our values, and the world will grow darker, for our friends and for us," Romney told the audience of cadets at the Virginia Military Institute.

That's not true. The world has been much lighter since Bush disappeared.
No Romney, please.
posted by de at 11:46 PM on October 15, 2012 [1 favorite]

cortex: "But I was already a mile from home anyway and a lot less than a mile from the liquor store and so I got a bottle of Maker's 46 while I was out, and I have to say I don't think Maker's is any great shake, like, it's a totally nice bourbon, it's a nice bourbon like Glenfiddich is a nice scotch, I'd never turn it down but I'm not like OH MY GOD GLENFIDDICH HOW DARING or whatever, but Maker's 46 is actually kind of interesting and a little bit spicy and I had some and now I am going to bed"

It's not scotch, and it might not be up your alley, but at my house we've recently taken a turn into the Kraken Rum territory, and golly goodness is that a nice one to sip with lime (or mix, if you're a cocktail man like Artw!). We won't turn down a nice scotch when it comes our way, but boy howdy, this is smoothing out our election season something fierce.

(Not Kraken Blue-ing, here)
posted by barnacles at 12:34 AM on October 16, 2012

Believe him.
posted by de at 12:50 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

RELEASE THE KRAKEN RUM
posted by twist my arm at 1:50 AM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

aw that is actually an adorable mythical beast.

And that is how you row a longboat.

post as if we had character limits. gotcha chief.
posted by twist my arm at 2:10 AM on October 16, 2012

aardvark.
posted by twist my arm at 2:32 AM on October 16, 2012

Now we have video of Ryan washing clean pans.
posted by madamjujujive at 2:45 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

THE AUDACITY OF REASONABLENESS: BARACK OBAMA, MITT ROMNEY, US FOREIGN POLICY AND AUSTRALIA

At first glance, the differences between the two candidates for president of the United States in 2012, President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney, are striking. Each candidate is doing his best to emphasise these differences. Most commentators have drawn sharp distinctions between the two candidates on foreign policy. Global perceptions of the two men are also noticeably different: most of the Western world wants Obama to win....

posted by de at 2:48 AM on October 16, 2012

More from R&R's women-friendly party friends: "Some girls rape easy".
posted by madamjujujive at 2:55 AM on October 16, 2012

Rep. Roger Rivard criticized for 'some girls rape easy' remark

Geez Louise, Wisconsinites - my sympathies to you all. You have had to put up with way too much political insanity in the last few years ... more than your fair share.
posted by madamjujujive at 3:02 AM on October 16, 2012

> We have learned to be citizens of the world

YAY!
posted by de at 3:04 AM on October 16, 2012

Home schooling & the effect on critical thinking, exhibit #587,632: The duck doubling down theory.

If homosexuality spreads, it can cause human evolution to come to a standstill. It could threaten the human position on the evolutionary ladder and say, ducks, could take over the world. Ducks always nest in pairs and if we allow same-sex marriage, then the ducks will have evolved further than we have. We will be in danger of all being equal, with ducks more equal than us.
posted by madamjujujive at 3:10 AM on October 16, 2012

double
posted by de at 3:15 AM on October 16, 2012

Great, now I'm imagining Romney as a shape shifting alien.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:20 AM on October 16, 2012

If you are just going to use underhand methods to win then you're no better than the other side and so I'm staying out of this and not comme... FUCK!!

THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN IT'S TIME FOR NESTED COMMENTS AND UPVOTING
posted by fullerine at 4:01 AM on October 16, 2012

Moderator Role Under Scrutiny — Before the Debate
posted by de at 4:13 AM on October 16, 2012

It would be nothing short of great if the moderator pressed both candidates and called them on any bullshit.

That said, she shouldn't overpower the townhall format or the questions of citizens. But please do assist in getting clear, no bullshit answers to those questions.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:29 AM on October 16, 2012

Removed most of jaduncan's soliloquy. Far be it from me to poop in the longboat, but there's a difference between leaving 3 comments in a row and leaving 30. Back to our scheduled programming?
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane (staff) at 4:54 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Yeah, thanks goodnewsfortheinsane. After all, cortex has lost any moral authority to delete irrelevant comments with his blatant efforts to bolster this becalmed longboat (did longboats have sails?).
posted by bardophile at 4:57 AM on October 16, 2012

Removed most of jaduncan's soliloquy

Yeah, it seemed a less good idea even before I sober up.
posted by jaduncan at 5:02 AM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

per wikipedia: Like other ships' boats, the longboat could be rigged for sailing but was primarily a pulling boat.
posted by bardophile at 5:09 AM on October 16, 2012

(doh. completely forgot that goodnewsfortheinsane is now a real mod and was not making a joke. sorry.)
posted by bardophile at 5:12 AM on October 16, 2012 [6 favorites]

Fullerine: If you are just going to use underhand methods to win ...

de: Moderator Role Under Scrutiny — Before the Debate

I thought that would be about the moderator of this thread! Haha.
posted by Bokmakierie at 5:16 AM on October 16, 2012

So are y'all in prediction mode yet i.e. do you think Obama is going to win? If so, then by how much in Electoral College?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:34 AM on October 16, 2012

Ross Perot Endorses Romney
posted by the man of twists and turns at 5:35 AM on October 16, 2012

I don't even....The rural voters responding to the survey overwhelmingly believe Romney will do a better job with the economy, with representing their views on taxes, with sharing their values, with saving Medicare and Social Security, with addressing the needs and concerns of the middle class and with reducing the federal deficit.

On the president's Affordable Care Act, 60 percent said they disapproved.

This is an educated voter group, by and large, with more than 60 percent saying they attended college, earned college degrees or studied in post-graduate school. Close to one-third collect Social Security and/or Medicare benefits. More than half are older than 50.

President Obama rated almost even when it came to addressing the needs and concerns of women. He was close to even on which candidate would do a better job with women's health and which represents the respondents' views on health care, despite the strong disapproval of Obamacare.

So 50% think Romney will better address the needs of women? What the hell are they smoking out there in the boonies?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:35 AM on October 16, 2012

So 50% think Romney will better address the needs of women?

Cannot resist the joke: the other 50%, of course, are women.
posted by jaduncan at 5:43 AM on October 16, 2012 [15 favorites]

5 Things To Watch at the Debate

1. Oh yes, it’s ladies night.

women voters are the key to a second term for the president. Obama’s team dismissed as not credible a USA Today/Gallup swing-state survey released Monday showing Romney and Obama tied with women voterss

Nonetheless, expect Obama to talk about women’s issues whenever the opportunity presents itself at Hofstra, especially the pragmatic kitchen-table kind that helped propel pre-debate Obama to a commanding lead among middle-class voters.

But Obama’s attack will also be more explicitly gender-based: The president will look for an opportunity to talk about social issues, especially Romney’s flip from pro-abortion rights as a gubernatorial candidate to anti-abortion as Massachusetts governor

posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:44 AM on October 16, 2012

Ok, here's my first guess on how the EC tally will go: 297 Obama, 241 Romney. Florida is a tough call, it's the state most hanging in the balance and I can't swear to how it will swing at this point. But I do think there's a slight Republican edge there, so I gave it to Romney.

That said, if it's clear early on election night that Florida has gone for Obama, I think it'll be a clear sign he's going to win.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:50 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

CNN: Do facts matter?

when fact-checking organizations try to point out when politicians are stretching the truth, giving them Pinocchio noses for having made claims that have little bearing in fact, the public just isn't surprised. In fact, these revelations just confirm the general impression that the public has of their leaders. As a result, the fact-checkers fade in the noise of the media frenzy over the campaign.

Good time for a flip-flopper to run.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:53 AM on October 16, 2012

Good time for a flip-flopper to run.

The trick isn't to nail them for all the flip-flops, just the one or three that people will really make people angry. Hit Romney on the pro-life flops.

Ryan? It's like a buffet, that guy lies so much the biggest problem will be trying to settle on only a few. The DNC should just keep a scorecard on their website an in their ads for the number of times he's been full of shit and then question how Romney could have picked such a person.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:00 AM on October 16, 2012

This thread is good news... FOR JOHN MCCAIN!
posted by Theta States at 6:08 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Okay, a moment aside: "Nonetheless, expect Obama to talk about women’s issues whenever the opportunity presents itself at Hofstra, especially the pragmatic kitchen-table kind that helped propel pre-debate Obama to a commanding lead among middle-class voters."

GRAR GRAR GRAR GRAR.

As a Uterus-American, for those handful of issues that concern me more than they might concern my male fellow citizens, immediately reducing those issues of clear and major importance to "kitchen-table" issues (because those little ladies, they're in the kitchen, teehee!) is not the way to make me think anything but pandering is going on. BY THE CANDIDATES OR THE MEDIA.

Also I have been getting fucking swamped by targeted "Moms for Romney" ads, and as far as I can tell, they believe that as soon as I had children, my brains fell out, I stopped following news or politics, and all they have to do is say "economy family" repeatedly in the same sentence to get me to vote for them. Political advertising in general is execrable, but I've never before been the target of such a closely-targeted ad that thinks SO LITTLE OF ME. I'd whack them upside the head with a kitchen table, except I do not have a kitchen table.

Health care for children, education, paid family leave, the environment, unregulated toxic chemicals in consumer products, and fair wages aren't WOMEN'S issues, except insofar as apparently any issue that focuses on creating a safe, healthy, and economically bountiful future is now a "women's issue" so that we can focus entirely on NOW NOW NOW with our mainstream "men's" issues. Or so political advertising has given me to believe.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 6:28 AM on October 16, 2012 [14 favorites]

"Conservative radicals — not moderates — have a different idea of democracy: They define democracy as providing the liberty to seek your own interests without any responsibility for the interests or well being of others, and without others helping you. They consider illegitimate all the things citizens do for the citizens of our country as a whole. And under Romney-Ryan, all of that would be eliminated.

The moral difference is clear: Do we have both personal and social responsibility, or just personal responsibility? Are we in this together, or are we on our own? The conservatives say we are, and should be, on our own. Are we the United States or the Separate States — or millions of isolated individuals who don’t care about anybody else?" ~
posted by cashman at 6:34 AM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'd whack them upside the head with a kitchen table, except I do not have a kitchen table.

I will predict that you're urban and educated; you almost certainly are collateral damage it wasn't worth spending the ad money on.
posted by jaduncan at 6:36 AM on October 16, 2012

I still can't believe I live in a world where women are seen as special-interest voters.
posted by shakespeherian at 7:04 AM on October 16, 2012 [10 favorites]

Separate States

This would result in the utter financial collapse of most of the red states, especially when farm subsidies are included.
posted by jaduncan at 7:14 AM on October 16, 2012

shakespeherian: Well, at least they are acknowledging that we are voters...
posted by bardophile at 7:15 AM on October 16, 2012

Romney's Tax Plan
posted by droomoord at 7:24 AM on October 16, 2012 [11 favorites]

droomord: That is truly awesome. I have been giggling for the past minute.
posted by bardophile at 7:28 AM on October 16, 2012

Should we be individualistic cave-men, living in constant fear and conflict, at war with our neighbors for all of the resources that are MINE MINE MINE, or should we be, you know, civilized human beings, sharing a small portion of our wealth to make a prosperous civilization?

It amazes me that this election has come down to that question, especially seeing as the whole issue was explored in depth by Sigmund Freud back in 1929.

‘The liberty of the individual is no gift of civilization. It was greatest before there was any civilization, though then, it is true, it had for the most part no value, since the individual was scarcely in a position to defend it.’

‘Civilized man has exchanged a portion of his possibilities of happiness for a portion of security. We must not forget, however, that in the primal family only the head of it enjoyed this instinctual freedom; the rest lived in slavish suppression.’

It's pretty far out there every so often, but it's a fascinating read, and directly relevant to this election. Frighteningly enough.
posted by MrVisible at 7:31 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I will predict that you're urban and educated

I, on the other hand, am a suburban, married college dropout with two kids and a cat. I'm white, I go to church most weeks, and my refrigerator is covered with children's artwork. I have a kitchen table; it's old and kind of shitty, but I don't mind breaking it over the heads of the media or any part of the Republican campaigns or candidates. Maybe Ryan can drop in for a nice round of "trespassing with cameras" while I'm trying to cook dinner, that would be a GREAT photo op.
posted by KathrynT at 7:31 AM on October 16, 2012

In other news: George W. Bush Whiles Away the Time Painting Pictures of Dogs

“He’s become increasingly agoraphobic,” this person adds of the former president. “He looked startled by the whole thing. But he doesn’t like people, he never did, he doesn’t now.”

I approve of a future where GWB spends his last years painting dogs and pissing in the bottles around his bed.
posted by octobersurprise at 7:34 AM on October 16, 2012

droomord, that is great. I got a good chuckle out of that.
posted by cashman at 7:42 AM on October 16, 2012

I am thinking about whether I will wake up at 5am to watch the debate. Worth it? Yes/No?
posted by bardophile at 7:44 AM on October 16, 2012

I've had it with Chuck Todd. On his program this morning he made a big deal out of Ross Perot's endorsement of Romney. He opined that older voters will remember Perot better than younger people who might not have been politically aware in 1992 and that could prove significant, even decisive, in the presidential race. How does Todd have any credibility anymore?
posted by ob1quixote at 7:47 AM on October 16, 2012

It's almost impossible to say, bardophile. It could be standard, it could be explosive, it could be nothing.

Who are the audience members of this debate? Anybody know?
posted by cashman at 7:50 AM on October 16, 2012

Maybe my memory is failing me, but I don't recall there being this much fervour and liveblogging over the 2008 elections. I mean, the Palin thread was epic, of course, as was the eventual OBAMARAMA thread, but right now I have this long boat plus a 3,000-comment thread from the first debate and a 2,000-comment from the VP debate in my Recent Activity, and we're probably expecting new threads for the 2nd and third presidential debates.

I mean, that's a lot of boats.

I absolutely want to do my part to push this thread over the Palin-edge, but I'll also be glad tomorrow evening when I only have to keep an eye on three threads again.
posted by Phire at 7:53 AM on October 16, 2012

Who are the audience members of this debate? Anybody know?

Yeah the intrigue for me is the process of how they choose who gets to ask questions, and which questions are they allowed?
Is it done like jury selection?
Can it be rigged for one party's favour? (This crowd is 90% HUMAN!)
posted by Theta States at 7:54 AM on October 16, 2012

Well, the Whelk is going to be in the overfill room, per a comment from him in one of the other longboats.
posted by bardophile at 8:03 AM on October 16, 2012

(This crowd is 90% HUMAN!)

"For the other 10% in the audience, let me just repeat what I said in the primaries: "-.- .. .-.. .-.. / .- .-.. .-.. / --- ..-. / - .... . / .... ..- -- .- -. ... .-.-.- / ... - .- .-. - / .-- .. - .... / - .... . / --- -. . / --- .--. .--. --- ... .. - . / -- . .-.-.-" and to the rest of you, that roughly translates as 'I love kittens.'"
posted by jaduncan at 8:03 AM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

> Yeah the intrigue for me is the process of how they choose who gets to ask questions

From the link above:

[Crowley, the moderator] will cull the questions submitted by the voters who are invited to attend the debate, and then decide which ones will be asked and in what order.

Questions are obviously submitted in advance.
posted by de at 8:16 AM on October 16, 2012

I love this farce that's meant to fool people into thinking that there is any spontaneity at all in the whole campaigning process.
posted by bardophile at 8:21 AM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

the voters who are invited to attend the debate

How do people get invited? - oh it's in that same article - "likely voters selected by the Gallup Organization". I wonder what the selection process is like. Let me see if I can find a press release from Gallup on it.
posted by cashman at 8:24 AM on October 16, 2012

Questions are obviously submitted in advance.

It is still the public saying it, which makes me idly wonder what happens if one just asks a different question at that moment.
posted by jaduncan at 8:31 AM on October 16, 2012

It is still the public saying it, which makes me idly wonder what happens if one just asks a different question at that moment.

I'd love to see this, what are they going to do? If they tried to cut the mic, it's real easy points for whichever candidate goes "Hold on, I'd like to hear what this person has to say..."
posted by jason_steakums at 8:37 AM on October 16, 2012

According to the agreed upon debate guidelines, "the Commission shall take appropriate steps to cut-off the microphone of any such audience member who attempts to pose any question or statement different than that previously posed to the moderator for review."
posted by droomoord at 8:39 AM on October 16, 2012

It is still the public saying it, which makes me idly wonder what happens if one just asks a different question at that moment.

Pepper-spray cannon descends from the ceiling.
posted by Theta States at 8:44 AM on October 16, 2012

I don't recall there being this much fervour and liveblogging over the 2008 elections

Oh, gosh, I think there was. Maybe not as much "liveblogging" as four years ago that was a bit less of a thing, but I certainly spilled a shit-ton of pixels during 2008 - about Palin but particularly about Obama, race, and Jeremiah Wright, and also about Obama v. Clinton in the primaries. I can't find it due to the miseries of search, but the second Obama-McCain debate (which I think was a really key moment in Obama's win) featured the famous "that one" comment occasioned a lot of immediate response here. MeFi's own MrMoonPie set up a little cottage industry selling That One stickers as a result.

So I think there was just as much comment in '08, if not more. Though maybe not as much minute-by-minute liveblogging, as that, I think, is just more of an indication of bandwidth improvement and mobile proliferation across the board over the last 4 years than of anything specific to MeFi's community.
posted by Miko at 8:46 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

to the rest of you that translates to I love kittens...

01001001 00100000 01101100 01101111 01110110 01100101 00100000 01101011 01101001 01110100 01110100 01100101 01101110 01110011 00101100 00100000 01110100 01101111 01101111 00101110

{Binary translator here}
posted by Skygazer at 8:47 AM on October 16, 2012

Well and too I think we had less crackdown on NOT SO MANY THREADS ABOUT THE ELECTION, PLEASE so the commentary was more spread out four years ago, whereas here it's really only in these few threads.
posted by shakespeherian at 8:48 AM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

Pepper-spray cannon descends from the ceiling.

Heh. If this were true I'd start my other-question with

"Are civil liberties being unduly curtailed..."

If it's mike cutting I'd start with

"Some say free speech is limited..."

Either being interrupted would be amusingly satirical.
posted by jaduncan at 8:49 AM on October 16, 2012

***** ATTENTION LIBERALS *****
***** This is Your Hourly Freakout *****
ROMNEY HITS 50 PERCENT,
HOLDS 4-POINT NATIONAL LEAD

posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:50 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

And from the people who provided that poll, a little context:

At a time when other polls are moving back in the president's direction, our own weekly poll by Public Policy Polling saw the opposite—a two-point Romney gain. Per day:
Friday (38%) Obama 47, Romney 49
Saturday (39%) Obama 49, Romney 47
Sunday (24%) Obama 43, Romney 55
That Sunday sample, about a quarter of the total, was entirely responsible for Romney's favorable numbers.

posted by zombieflanders at 8:54 AM on October 16, 2012

Yeah, I'd say there's been a bit more sort of smooth deployment of the happenstance liveblog machine (with I want to say mixed results since it's been realllllly hammering the site and I'm not coming out the other side thinking "wow those threads were amazing" so much as "wow those threads had a lot of comments" and it's left us with a whole shmear of simultaneous active threads on the general election topic) but that aside I continue to feel like this election cycle has been a bit tamer than 2008 in terms of fervor/heat/mess/loudness on the site.
posted by cortex at 8:54 AM on October 16, 2012

***** ATTENTION LIBERALS *****
***** This is Your Hourly Freakout *****
ROMNEY HITS 50 PERCENT,
HOLDS 4-POINT NATIONAL LEAD

Or, you know, go look at the EV numbers on 538.
posted by jason_steakums at 8:54 AM on October 16, 2012

Yeah, 538 nowcast still looks reasonable, and the blog article today is good.

I kind of hate to say this, but it's looking close and very definitely like Obama can't afford to screw the pooch on the other debates. That's a long way away from 'look at our statistical outlier and weep' though.
posted by jaduncan at 8:58 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

this election cycle has been a bit tamer than 2008 in terms of fervor/heat/mess/loudness on the site.

I think that might be because the site does skew left, and there is a lot less for lefties to fight about internally in this election. In 2008 there was a really miserably painful primary, though it's hard to remember now, and the camps were pretty combative, particularly the Clinton/Obama divide which created a fair amount of rancor here (including some that was probably just righties stirring the pot, but still). Also, conversations both on race and on Palin unearthed some "stuff" about entrenched/unconscious bias that people had to hash out a lot - for example, differentiating Palin being awful because she was a completely inappropriate, inexperienced, undisciplined and dramatically poorly informed person to nominate for the role, and Palin being awful because she was things like a "bitch" or "shrill" or other stuff that really emanated from a larger uncritically-examined misogyny. So yeah, shit was ugly at times.
posted by Miko at 8:59 AM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

To me it just reflects ignorance in the population. The president needs to get out all that information that we know. There is a wealth of it I think his "you were wrong" moments with McCain provide a model of where he was forceful and focused, direct and pointed, and it came off well. He needs to son Romney. Or rather, son Romney's policies and positions.

If there are this many openings you've go to run through the holes.
posted by cashman at 9:00 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Well and too I think we had less crackdown on NOT SO MANY THREADS ABOUT THE ELECTION, PLEASE so the commentary was more spread out four years ago, whereas here it's really only in these few threads.

Really, I feel like we haven't had to crack down too badly lately. People haven't been going too nuts, so it's not like we're just being total softies. The primary season this cycle was actually a lot nuttier I think is part of it, what with the ten-legged race the GOP was doing. Whereas last cycle things were certainly bumping throughout and the Hillary/Obama primary was the source of a lot of kinetic energy on the site, but the Palin pick really sort of blew the top off the whole deal and had us probably literally deleting a new "and here's ANOTHER crazy" thing thread every single day. And a lot of the crackdown was very Palin-specific in that sense and sort of high visibility, which is part of why that mega-thread got so mega.

I suppose in the sense that we haven't been like "no, you cannot post a new thread about the debate" in some hardcore no-ifs-ands-or-buts way that's been not so much of a crackdown, but people have been doing a decent job of it and one a week during the final run up vs. one a day is a big difference.
posted by cortex at 9:02 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama deploying information isn't going to help sway people to vote for Obama. People who are not voting for Obama are by and large not comfortable with the use of facts as a primary decisionmaking tool. I'm sure we've had this discussion before? The mindset is different. Conservatives rule by authority, not by argument.

Honestly I think Uncle Joe had a good at-bat, but his "can you believe this bozo" act did not play at all well with the authority-based populace because it didn't treat Ryan as a worthy opponent to be beaten or destroyed through superior firepower but rather a kooky child to be tolerated and then shown the door when the adults need to speak.

That's not how you win conservative voters.

You have to dominate their champions on the battlefield, not mock them and refuse to fight.

It's ugly, but true.
posted by seanmpuckett at 9:08 AM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

To me it just reflects ignorance in the population. The president needs to get out all that information that we know.

Nah, just question Romney about 2 or 3 lies and sit back and let people seem him dance, while pointing out whatObama will do in the next four years. Hit Ryan in the same way, since the boy just can't seem to stop himself from lying.

Frankly, I think Obama should steal the tagline from Halo 3 and say his administration needs another 4 years to "Finish the Fight". Wind down the war, make sure healthcare reform gets started on the right foot, protect women's rights and take care of the economy as it slowly recovers. It doesn't have to be a grand vision, just a more pragmatic one who's message is repeated endlessly.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:09 AM on October 16, 2012 [5 favorites]

"Finish the fight" is totally an excellent slogan. Brandon, go get on their communications team.
posted by Miko at 9:17 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

You have to dominate their champions on the battlefield, not mock them and refuse to fight.

This. Because a section of the electorate think this:

1) America must be strong.
2) America is the President.

therefore

3) If Obama can't even dominate the debates/opposition in general, how can America dominate the world?

and

4) Of course the Republicans resisted him, but if he was enough of a man to be President he'd ram things through.

President as national penis extension: who can say why that appeals disproportionately to threatened white males? This was, IMO, why Bush was so popular with that group at first; you might not know what his view was, but whatever it eventually was it was The Decider's view regardless of opposition or facts.
posted by jaduncan at 9:17 AM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

Also see the random $2tn more that Romney wants to spend on defence spending, aka "we ARE still totally the man, and can pull off driving this sweet new sports car and punch anyone in the face we like. WE ARE THE MAN."
posted by jaduncan at 9:21 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

You have to dominate their champions on the battlefield, not mock them and refuse to fight.

This is what I am saying. You have to tell the American people why Mitt Romney is wrong. How he is wrong for writing off half the country, how he is wrong because he has no specifics in his tax "plan". How he can't hold a consistent position when it ocmes to abortion. How he is scared to release his tax returns like everybody else. Dominate and and destroy him with this information that all of us in this thread know, but a lot of the public does not. I'm not saying Obama should get up there with a white board. I'm saying Mitt has flaws, destroy him with them. Mitt has said ridiculous shit, destroy him with it. Mitt has horrible policies, destroy him with them.

If Mitt's tax plan was an FPP, it would get deleted as too thin. Destroy Mitt in real time, on national television, using these articles and information that we know in this thread. Look at Mitt directly like you did McCain, and go right at him.
posted by cashman at 9:22 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

"For the other 10% in the audience, let me just repeat what I said in the primaries: "-.- .. .-.. .-.. / .- .-.. .-.. / --- ..-. / - .... . / .... ..- -- .- -. ... .-.-.- / ... - .- .-. - / .-- .. - .... / - .... . / --- -. . / --- .--. .--. --- ... .. - . / -- . .-.-.-" and to the rest of you, that roughly translates as 'I love kittens.'"

yea, um, I love kittens too ... /steps away/
posted by achrise at 9:35 AM on October 16, 2012

What Obama should say tonight.
posted by gaspode at 9:41 AM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

Another thing about 2008 is that Palin was a complete unknown, leaving people with a desire to fill in the blanks and vulnerable to believing any crackpot theory (fake pregnancies and all). Say what you will about Ryan but he's no stranger to the national media or political junkies.
posted by msalt at 9:44 AM on October 16, 2012

Seeing the banner headline in the local paper Article calling Mormonism 'cult' disappears from Graham website (possibly paywalled) (previously) drove home the corrupting influence of politics. That "the Graham organization" modified its proselytizing to promote the candidate of the greedy over the candidate of the needy proves that flip-flopping is contagious. Protect yourselves out there!
posted by achrise at 9:50 AM on October 16, 2012

Another thing about 2008 is that Palin was a complete unknown...

That thing about Palin was that the camera loved her and she loved it right back. Some people naturally have a telegenic presence and Palin has it spades. I abhor her as politician, but damn if she didn't have this presence that made you want to watch her, in only to see what crazy thing she would say or do this time.

Sadly, she didn't have much sense, intelligence or experience, so she went down in flames while we all stared, transfixed at the spectacle before us.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:52 AM on October 16, 2012

"you almost certainly are collateral damage it wasn't worth spending the ad money on."

Well, I'm clearly not worth spending the ad money on, but it's been intensively targeted mailings and calls (as well as ads during every prime-time show I like to watch but none of the ones my husband picks, OKAY I WATCH IN MY DEMOGRAPHIC I GUESS); I'm a white married women with two little children in a high-unemployment area, in a pretty competitive house race. My electoral college votes are clearly not up for grabs -- I'm in Illinois -- so I have to guess they're trying to help my terrible, terrible Tea Party rep retain his seat against a surging democratic challenger, as well as run up Romney's popular vote total.

Romney for America or one of its surrogates calls me literally every night. We have unplugged our land line because it just got so ridiculous.

What I actually don't get is my husband has had basically no mailings targeted at him from the GOP, while I have had literally dozens. I was never going to vote GOP but my opinion of my state party (and of my local party) isn't that bad; I think they run credible candidates and have a reasonable state platform, sometimes. But after this ONSLAUGHT of mailings that treat me like an absolute moron, I'm not real happy with the state or local iterations of the GOP either. The whole campaign they're aiming at me is incredibly alienating and belittling.

(And I have no kitchen table because I have a theoretically eat-in peninsula, but the room's oddly-shaped.)
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 9:53 AM on October 16, 2012

(fake pregnancies and all)

Oh Jesus God, the next time anyone goes on about how we're better than the GOP because we're reason-based.
posted by shakespeherian at 9:56 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh boy, longboats! That's where I'm a midshipman.

Another thing about 2008 is that Palin was a complete unknown

Also there was the angle that it was something pretty historic for the GOP and would be historic for America. And the political possibilities were in question because of the whole PUMA nonsense. And as BB says Palin herself was magnetic.

Romney picking Ryan was about as unsurprising and uninteresting a move as it gets.
posted by fleacircus at 9:57 AM on October 16, 2012

Romney picking Ryan was about as unsurprising and uninteresting a move as it gets.

You mean 'old white guy wanting to look vibrant and more conservative picks young very conservative white guy' doesn't do it for you?
posted by jaduncan at 10:09 AM on October 16, 2012

More from R&R's women-friendly party friends: "Some girls rape easy".

Lizz Winstead, co-creator of Daily Show, launches Lady Parts Justice

Lady Parts Justice
posted by homunculus at 10:11 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney Tax Plan, with 30% more details!
posted by liza at 10:13 AM on October 16, 2012

Re: Palin - 30 Rock is doing a great VP-candidate-who-looks-just-like-one-of-the-staff thing right now.
posted by Artw at 10:25 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

A second term presidential campaign is just a whole different animal than the first time around. Last campaign Obama was energetic, bright-eyed, full of vim and vigor and optimism and I was right along with him, voting for change and Yes We Can and excited about a future that did not include a Bush.

After four years as President though Obama looks tired and weathered. It's harder for him to make promises about what he'll do if elected because then people wonder why you didn't do those things in the first term. And while I'm still a staunch Obama supporter, I don't have the sense of optimism and excitement I did four years ago.

Four years ago I was voting for Obama to Do Wonderful Things and this time I'm voting for Obama in order to Keep Bad Things from Happening.

Real (political) life sucks.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 10:45 AM on October 16, 2012 [6 favorites]

Well to be honest dude has been pushing a boulder up a hill for four years.
posted by seanmpuckett at 10:50 AM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

Well, if there's any hope that I'll be up in time to see the debate, I should head to bed now. Keep rowing, all.
posted by bardophile at 10:50 AM on October 16, 2012

For posterity, the site is Let My People Vote 2012.com, with an embedded YT video titled Sarah Silverman | Election 2012 - Voter Fraud yt , which discusses the Voter ID laws in 11 states (PA, IN, FL, TN, MI, SD, ID, LA, KS, NH, and GA). Summary: your social security card, veterans ID, and student ID won't work to vote, but a drivers license or a gun license will. The video alludes to the fact you need a photo ID with your address on it.

Sarah Silverman’s Dad Gets in Commenting War With Dickish Rabbi
posted by homunculus at 11:02 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

A second term presidential campaign is just a whole different animal than the first time around.

This is very true. I'm hoping that, as well, a second term president will be a whole different animal. No need to run for re-election, maybe even emboldened a bit by the approval, I hope Obama can/could be more aggressive and push more left-leaning action.

..but that might just be me getting my hopes up.
posted by Lemurrhea at 11:07 AM on October 16, 2012

"Romney for America or one of its surrogates calls me literally every night. We have unplugged our land line because it just got so ridiculous."

Because I'm a dick, I like to just keep them on the phone as long as possible because I know that they're wasting their time. (This is more for local GOP, who still call me, as opposed to national since I'm in California and everyone knows that it ain't goin' GOP).
posted by klangklangston at 11:12 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

No guarantee of obama rebound in second debate from fivethirtyeight.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 11:22 AM on October 16, 2012

The Big Question: Where is Obama's Positive Message? from The New Yorker.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 11:33 AM on October 16, 2012

The bleeding needs to stop (if it hasn't already), rebound or not. All we need is 270, so I'd be happy with the race staying exactly where it is now, given Nate's current prediction of ~285.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:35 AM on October 16, 2012

Great news - early voting hours assured for Ohio, much to the chagrin of Ohio secretary of state John Husted, who has been doing everything he can to make it hard for people to have their vote count.
posted by cashman at 11:55 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Post pwning, Husted issued a directive for early voting hours in Ohio:

Saturday, November 3, 2012 – 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
Sunday, November 4, 2012 – 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Monday, November 5, 2012 – 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

Get out there and vote, Ohio!
posted by cashman at 11:57 AM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh, Scotusblog.

The Court’s action also cannot be interpreted as a decision to give Democrats a temporary victory in this dispute. Neither side had argued the partisan impact of the planning poll-closing, even though that was obviously in the background of this controversy. Democrats and Republicans, alike, had fought hard in this dispute not only to establish legal principles, but also to help achieve partisan goals, but that aspect was not before the Court.

One side, of course, to decrease the ease of access to the franchise for all. One to intentionally restrict it. But, of course, they are "alike" in this legal fight.

Let me say that in the case of efforts to restrict access to the franchise I support an utterly bipartisan firing squad for the officials concerned; I just suspect that one side would have to pay a lot more for life insurance.
posted by jaduncan at 12:04 PM on October 16, 2012

verb, that is hilariously predictable in light of his marathon claim and general predilection for truth-bending.
posted by GrammarMoses at 12:07 PM on October 16, 2012

I finally figured out who he is: Community Theater Jake Gyllenhaal.
posted by shakespeherian at 12:23 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

A second term presidential campaign is just a whole different animal than the first time around.

Absolutely. Give Obama and his team credit for a keen sense of exactly how far and how fast you can push public change without threatening reelection. Lily Ledbetter? Day 1. Gay marriage? super slow but firm: first publicly "opposed", then drop support for Defense of Marriage act, then end DADT, then full support -- and notice how this is not a political issue whatsoever (compare to 2004, when moving too fast probably cost Democrats the presidency.)

My prediction, if Obama is re-elected? He changes marijuana from a schedule 1 to (schedule 2?) medicine, allowing at least research early in 2013. This is the safe, indisuputable change. 2014- change policy to support "states rights" since by then some states have legalized marijuana and outright disaster has not resulted. Late 2015 - support full legalization of weed. As part of a broader plan to refocus law enforcement, cut prison costs and focus police on crimes against women.
posted by msalt at 12:24 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

i just posted this in the mcsweenie's thread but Debate Remix
posted by rebent at 12:37 PM on October 16, 2012

Obama will be great tonight.
posted by humanfont at 1:28 PM on October 16, 2012

Why Is Failed Iraq Neocon Dan Senor Dictating Romney's Foreign Policy?
posted by homunculus at 1:28 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

So is this going to be tonight's big debate thread? If not, I'd appreciate a pointer to where the discussion is going to be. I can't watch (both in terms of free time and technology), but I love to catch up after the fact.
posted by Shepherd at 1:47 PM on October 16, 2012

Likeliest bet at this point for critical mass of liveblogger types is the debate thread from last week, since it's a mere two thousand comments or so. Though I imagine there'll also be some action in the prior debate thread, and at least a few folks holding the torch in here.

It's possible there'll be a new post at some point in the next few hours that'll be a natural home for it in which case that'll probably suck most of the traffic away from the two other debate threads above.
posted by cortex at 1:53 PM on October 16, 2012

Anti-abortion group (allegedly) sets up faux website offering late term abortions in order to collect confidential medical information.

Quite despicable.

How many more hours until #5555?
posted by Rumple at 1:54 PM on October 16, 2012

It's possible there'll be a new post at some point in the next few hours that'll be a natural home for it in which case that'll probably suck most of the traffic away from the two other debate threads above.

Nooooooooooooooo!!!
posted by grouse at 1:55 PM on October 16, 2012

Hey, I'm not saying it'll draw attention away from this thread. I mean, let's be honest: nobody is wandering in here by accident at this point.
posted by cortex at 1:59 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Why Is Failed Iraq Neocon Dan Senor Dictating Romney's Foreign Policy?

I think it was on the New Yorker Political Podcast (maybe Slate?) where someone that reported from Iraq at the same time Dan Senor was there was aghast that he would be put in any kind of position of power.
posted by readery at 2:01 PM on October 16, 2012

MOTHERTHREAD 4EVA
posted by Theta States at 2:01 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

Invoke the sock puppets! Hand them oars and lay the whips to their shaggy backs.
posted by Rumple at 2:02 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

Can anyone tell me where to watch the debate tonight? I was just surfing the web looking for information and came across this page. Looks like the place to be.
posted by perhapses at 2:06 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

nobody is wandering in here by accident at this point.

Oh hai guys, i just clicked the 'random' button at the top of the homepage and it brought me to this thread and that was 4 days ago cos I was told that I should read the whole thing before I comment and now my question is, are all MeFi threads like this?
posted by TwoWordReview at 2:07 PM on October 16, 2012 [11 favorites]

A bit of trivia, actually: we keep track of how many people have used the "remove from activity" button on the Recent Activity page to nix any given thread from their RA feed, under a handy tool in our admin labs page called Most Regretted Threads.

In the last month, this is the second most regretted thread, with 27 hides; the first debate thread is third with 19, and last week's VP debate thread has 13.

Number one is the comment editing test thread in Metatalk, with a whopping 67 hides; makes sense given that that more than anything had a likely very wide swath of users going in to make a comment so they could try editing it and then wanting to not read the next several hundred jokey non-sequiturs.
posted by cortex at 2:08 PM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

Oh hai guys, i just clicked the 'random' button at the top of the homepage and it brought me to this thread and that was 4 days ago cos I was told that I should read the whole thing before I comment and now my question is, are all MeFi threads like this?

All. It's very time consuming.
posted by jaduncan at 2:09 PM on October 16, 2012

How many more hours until #5555?

I think it closes tomorrow at 7pm EST on the 17th, which means there's about 26 hours left.

Now row, damn you, but do it smartly.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:09 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I mean, let's be honest: nobody is wandering in here by accident at this point.

Dear AskMe: I'm seriously thinking of getting a kitten again, but if I can't find just the right name in advance, I'm gonna have to cut off my right h -- oh. Wow. Way too many open tabs. Sorry.

So: is it safe to go back to 538, or should I just hang with my new BFF Sam Wang for the duration?
posted by maudlin at 2:11 PM on October 16, 2012

Steve Kornacki's 2012 Presidential Debate Drinking Game
posted by ob1quixote at 2:11 PM on October 16, 2012

Can anyone tell me where to watch the debate tonight?

I found C-Span is the best place for me. Least amount of talking heads, best streaming. For some reason PBS "streamed" me a series of stills with video.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 2:12 PM on October 16, 2012

So: is it safe to go back to 538, or should I just hang with my new BFF Sam Wang for the duration?

538 has Obama on 66% again. To be fair, it's never had him below 50-odd.
posted by howfar at 2:15 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Invoke the sock puppets! Hand them oars and lay the whips to their shaggy backs.

Your methods intrigue me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
posted by Hosni Mubarak at 2:19 PM on October 16, 2012

maudlin: So: is it safe to go back to 538, or should I just hang with my new BFF Sam Wang for the duration?

Look. I wanted to make a bunch of Wang jokes. You wanted me to make a bunch of Wang jokes. Either way, Sam Wang's probably heard them all.

In all seriousness, I prefer Sam Wang's approach to analyzing the election.
posted by ob1quixote at 2:20 PM on October 16, 2012

Wang's Swing State Analysis
posted by Rumple at 2:23 PM on October 16, 2012

O motherthread fair ankled, Biden boosting, Obama shielding, be with us this day.
posted by fleacircus at 2:23 PM on October 16, 2012

Do you keep track of which threads get removed from RA and then re-added? 'Cause I've done that a whole bunch (with other threads, never this one) and I always feel vaguely ashamed when I do it.
posted by Phire at 2:23 PM on October 16, 2012

I've been watching them on Xbox Live, though that's obviously not helpful if you don't have a 360 and a Live account. But it's been slightly more stable than youtube or PBS for me for whatever reason, so I've been running with it. No commentary, which is nice, though they run live poll questions throughout that are about as inane and non-segmented as you could ever hope for ("are the candidates telling the truth" without breaking it down by candidate?) which, I dunno. I guess it's cute.
posted by cortex at 2:24 PM on October 16, 2012

I bought a 99 cent Obama coffee mug at the thrift store yesterday, just to show my support.

for this thread of course. I'm not even American!
posted by mannequito at 2:25 PM on October 16, 2012

I've done that a whole bunch (with other threads, never this one)

Prove that you have never done it with this thread or be branded a traitor to the longboat and face the plank! A brief recap of the major themes please.
posted by howfar at 2:25 PM on October 16, 2012

Romney may be 'worse', but how the hell can anybody vote for Obama in good conscience?

Fuck that.

Under Obama, I can get insurance. I can get healthcare.

Under Romney, I can't, not even in the private market (if he follows through with his promise to dismantle the Affordable Care Act).

It has nothing to do with my conscience. It's for purely selfish and pragmatic reasons that I'm voting for Obama. I know other people in my position, and if my conscience comes into play it's in empathy for them.
posted by krinklyfig at 2:28 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Prove that you have never done it with this thread or be branded a traitor to the longboat and face the plank! A brief recap of the major themes please.

Is this the part where we all turn viciously on each other even if we're not registered Democrats?
posted by maudlin at 2:29 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Of course I've really been here since the beginning, and I was surprised to discover just now that I've only ever made 376 comments 'on the blue', 20 of which were made in this thread.

This thread accounts for over 5% of my comments on Metafilter (not including subsites).
posted by TwoWordReview at 2:29 PM on October 16, 2012

So amateur pollsters, breakdown of Obama vs Romney voters in this thread?
posted by Hosni Mubarak at 2:30 PM on October 16, 2012

I've been watching them on Xbox Live

Yeah but then you have to put up with kids dick jokes and them calling out the n00bs.
posted by Theta States at 2:32 PM on October 16, 2012

In the grim future of the 5500th comment, there is only THE POST.
posted by Artw at 2:32 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Yeah but then you have to put up with kids dick jokes and them calling out the n00bs.

I can't take the multiplayer; all those people cheaply camping for the armor.
posted by jaduncan at 2:34 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

OTOH there will be lots of hacks and at least one bot at the debate so maybe it's appropriate.
posted by fleacircus at 2:38 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

howfar: "Prove that you have never done it with this thread or be branded a traitor to the longboat and face the plank! A brief recap of the major themes please."

Romney sucks. Obama is winning, hurray! Obama is losing, everybody freak out. Everybody eventually remembers that polls suck, too. As does Paul Ryan. And Palin has mysterious powers of supreme suckitude that made everyone argue about her a lot, and now it's time to get out of the boat and into the water and push.

Oh, and cortex bought some paint.

Am I close?
posted by Phire at 2:42 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I would seriously turn on alltalk mic chatter if that were possible, if only for a couple minutes. Imagine ten thousand jabbering nitwits threatening to teabag Lehrer. Like listening to the secret CIA radio in God's own teeth.
posted by cortex at 2:43 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

> Why Is Failed Iraq Neocon Dan Senor Dictating Romney's Foreign Policy?

Bad ideology leads to bad policy? My shocked face and all that.
posted by peeedro at 2:44 PM on October 16, 2012

Imagine ten thousand jabbering nitwits threatening to teabag Lehrer.

In fairness, Romney was like a hair away from that.
posted by jaduncan at 2:44 PM on October 16, 2012

Which countries are freaking out most about Romney's surge?
posted by homunculus at 2:46 PM on October 16, 2012

Oh, my damn clients made me work all day, no respect that there was a longboat that needed rowing.

OK, I have to say I am nearly nauseous with anxiety about this thing tonight, you'd think I was the one debating. I guess it's because I have never experienced as much antipathy to the opposing candidate as I do at present, have never felt the stakes were so high. I don't know how I am going to stand 20 more days of this shit. Before the Brooks Brothers Florida riots, I was painfully naive because I did not think a presidential election could be stolen. I was blind but now I see, and it's a Hieronymus Bosch painting.

This is like some crazy freaking limbo. Every election, I keep feeling like the Republicans can't possibly field anyone worse, this, surely this, must be the nadir, we are finally scraping rock bottom. But lo, every four years we sink to greater depths.
posted by madamjujujive at 2:47 PM on October 16, 2012 [8 favorites]

Imagine ten thousand jabbering nitwits threatening to teabag Lehrer.

That certainly gives Lemon Zinger a new image.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:47 PM on October 16, 2012

I think it was on the New Yorker Political Podcast (maybe Slate?) where someone that reported from Iraq at the same time Dan Senor was there was aghast that he would be put in any kind of position of power.

The Daily Show: Actual Democalypse 2012 - Conservatives Rethink Middle Eastern Democracy
posted by homunculus at 2:48 PM on October 16, 2012

I approve of a future where GWB spends his last years painting dogs and pissing in the bottles around his bed.

He should be sent to Iraq and forced to paint portraits of these children.
posted by homunculus at 2:49 PM on October 16, 2012

Marco Rubio Knifes Romney's Tax Reform Plan, Sahil Kapur, Talking Points Memo, 16 October, 2012
posted by ob1quixote at 2:51 PM on October 16, 2012

This is like some crazy freaking limbo. Every election, I keep feeling like the Republicans can't possibly field anyone worse, this, surely this, must be the nadir, we are finally scraping rock bottom. But lo, every four years we sink to greater depths.

Well, you'll be glad to know that Jeb Bush is now close to RINO status. I am awaiting the time where W's belief that immigration reform and talking to Hispanic people might be a good idea makes someone actually point to him as insufficiently conservative for the modern party.
posted by jaduncan at 2:55 PM on October 16, 2012

This essay is kind of amazing and in many ways reassuring, and I apologize for quoting at such length. (Hat tip to frenetic for the blog recommendation.)

I submit that there are three ways to respond to this experience:
1. Accept that Romney’s coked-up jack-o-lantern strategy has altered the course of American history. 2. Reject the validity of public opinion polls. 3. Reject the validity of democracy.
Option (1) is clearly the most reasonable course of action, and I advise you to totally go ahead and do it with your deepest heart of hearts. I’ll wait. Options (2) is easier, even after you read Silver’s long—so long—assessment of why certain polls should be under- or over-weighted and aggregated and otherwise statistically cooked. FiveThirtyEight is a lot more right than other predictive instruments, but it is still only a weather report. The weather report is both useful and pretty much always wrong.

Option (3), on the other hand, is both tempting and something the responsible American spends his time guarding against. Maybe large swaths of the American public have decided that the billionaire investor son of a millionaire governor is a more dynamic and competent human than the black guy who was 75% abandoned by his parents and went on to become a Harvard professor who killed Osama bin Laden. Apparently, they believe this because the billionaire displayed more energy one night on TV.

It’s maddening, and the only refuge is to declare those people stupid. They should not be running the country, and a good politics would prevent them from doing so. Otherwise, we are in a rowboat captained by a mongoloid trying to jump the horizon. In a situation like that, the choice is between mutiny and death.

I submit that such is the attitude many people adopted when Barack Obama was elected president. Probably, they forward you emails. For these people, the idea that America would elect a one-term senator whose middle name is “Hussein” over the war hero Time magazine once called the most trusted man in America cannot be compassed. Obviously, the lunatics had taken over the asylum, and the only course remaining was to decide who was sane and jab everybody else with Thorazine. And that is what brings us to the present day in American politics.

Democracy is infuriating. It comes from the Greek demos, meaning “people,” and cracy, meaning “are stupid assholes.” But you have to roll with it—not because it produces good results, but because to do otherwise is to be swept up in the thing you hate. You cannot beat the people. There are so many of them that they render you and all your opinions negligible. The only consolation is knowing that the same thing is happening to everyone else.

posted by Phire at 2:58 PM on October 16, 2012 [6 favorites]

“Do you really want to hurt charitable giving in a country when you are saying that you want to rely less on government and more on private institutions to deal with these issues? And how are you going to raise taxes on people on their health care premiums when you are saying you want there to be a system in place where folks can have more control over their own money?”

Wah, Rubio really really did. I guess he doesn't think the electoral math works either, because that's not subtle opposition and he's in Florida. One way or the other, he's not exactly in line for a good Romney administration role right now.
posted by jaduncan at 2:59 PM on October 16, 2012

Oh, and let me just laugh and laugh and laugh at this:

Indeed, George W. Bush, now 66, has spent the past few years living as invisibly as possible, working diligently on his golf game at the Brook Hollow Golf Club in Dallas, showing up at a Rangers baseball game, or being spotted eating a steak in one of his favorite restaurants. While the rest of the world judges his years in office, he’s taken up painting, making portraits of dogs and arid Texas landscapes. “I find it stunning that he has the patience to sit and take instruction and paint,” says a former aide.
posted by jaduncan at 3:01 PM on October 16, 2012

His portraits of dogs aren't too bad.
posted by perhapses at 3:07 PM on October 16, 2012

You personally could not pay me enough to watch the debate, as I'm already terrified enough about the prospect of President Romney. I will cling to this thread like a familiar wooly sweater instead.

Also, the new Godspeed album is just ace. I'm listening to it at work on headphones and the world is briefly perfect.
posted by jokeefe at 3:10 PM on October 16, 2012

Also, I need to buy some paint in the near future as well, and am turning to this thread for tips.
posted by jokeefe at 3:11 PM on October 16, 2012

I need to repaint the kitchen pretty soon. I am tempted to take in a corn husk and say "Match this" because that is such a lovely soft, green color that I always marvel at whenever I have to shuck corn.

Thank you for the stroll down memory lane vis a vis the Sarah Palin thread; I remember it vividly. "OMG she ran for city council on a no-abortion platform!" "Holy cow she discussed how to ban books with the librarian!!" "Jiminy Christmas she had laying on of hands to prevent witchcraft!!!" Good times. Of course that is only in hind sight-- at the actual time I was scared that woman was going to be a frail heartbeat away from the Presidency.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:24 PM on October 16, 2012

The Ten Most Dangerous Kinds of Town Hall Debate Participants
posted by Bokmakierie at 3:24 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ah, the Sarah Palin thread. Can I just say I am glad the crazy is a different flavor this time around?

Also, I need to paint my bathroom. It's been this nasty mint/hospital green since we moved in, and it's time for a change, but I can't think of what I want to change it to.
posted by ambrosia at 3:26 PM on October 16, 2012

When Jeb Bush runs in 2016 the Republicans will ignore these objections and reconfigure themselves around him. They consider him part of the tribe.
posted by humanfont at 3:28 PM on October 16, 2012

The Ten Most Dangerous Kinds of Town Hall Debate Participants

So are these largely going to be the not-really-a-question questions? Sadly that favors the not-really-an-answer guy.
posted by Artw at 3:33 PM on October 16, 2012

Oh wow, we're still going to use this thread tonight? Here's to breaking the five digit comment count barrier!
posted by ceribus peribus at 3:34 PM on October 16, 2012

Blue is always good for a bathroom-- evokes water.

I think the Bush name is tainted. Getting the public would to vote in a third Bush would be difficult enough if the prior Bushes were great leaders with unblemished records. These days the name Bush is definitely anathema to many on both the Right and the Left. Might be time for him to make a change: Jeb Bushmill or Jeb Bushinski or Jeb Busho.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:35 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Howard Fineman: Obama-Romney Debate 2012: Can Cool Hand Barack Dismantle Robomitt?

Fineman has been writing some terrific stuff this election cycle, as well as having some very good appearances on Hardball.
posted by Bokmakierie at 3:36 PM on October 16, 2012

I was here for the Palin thread in Aught-Eight but hadn't ponied up the five bucks yet. But this thread has been open in one of my (28, currently!) tabs since the beginning, so I guess it's time to put my back to the oar. Go, Little Big Thread, go!

Prediction: MrMac just asked how many questions from the plebes tonight before Romney insults someone. I say three, and I suspect it'll be an Old.
posted by MsMacbeth at 3:36 PM on October 16, 2012

Romney's Vision for Etch-A-Sketch America Takes Hold
posted by homunculus at 3:37 PM on October 16, 2012

Might be time for him to make a change: Jeb Bushmill or Jeb Bushinski or Jeb Busho.

Jeb Reagan
posted by Golden Eternity at 3:38 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I feel like now is the time for a montage of the thread's greatest moments, set to inspirational power chords.
posted by jokeefe at 3:40 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Income Inequality May Take Toll on Economic Growth

This NYT article's headline states the patently obvious... but makes me weep nonetheless.
posted by NailsTheCat at 3:41 PM on October 16, 2012

Speaking of George Bush, he finally got around to endorsing Mitt today and says he will make a great President.

Well I'm glad we got that settled.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:42 PM on October 16, 2012

No big surprise here, Romney's plan to create 12 million jobs is a complete flim-flam

We asked the Romney campaign and the answer turns out to be: totally different studies … with completely different timelines.

For instance, the claim that 7 million jobs would be created from Romney tax plan is a ten-year number, derived from a study written by John W. Diamond, a professor at Rice University.

This study at least assesses the claimed effect of specific Romney policies. The rest of the numbers are even more squishy.

For instance, the 3-million-job claim for Romney’s energy policies appears largely based on a Citigroup Global Markets study that did not even evaluate Romney’s policies. Instead, the report predicted 2.7 million to 3.6 million jobs would be created over the next eight years, largely because of trends and policies already adopted — including tougher fuel efficiency standards that Romney has criticized and suggested he would reverse.

I should run for President. Apparently you can just make things up and that is good enough for 50% of the electorate as long as you pay lip-service to some of the party platforms.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:56 PM on October 16, 2012 [5 favorites]

There's a Romney ad showing Mitt in the debate saying "the middle class have lost $4k a year in the past four years." And all I could think was "BECAUSE YOUR FUCKING FRIENDS KEEP CUTTING EVERYONE'S PAY!"
posted by drezdn at 3:57 PM on October 16, 2012 [6 favorites]

I should run for President. Apparently you can just make things up and that is good enough for 50% of the electorate as long as you pay lip-service to some of the party platforms.

It's good to remember that some people are thinking "anyone but Obama". No, I don't know why. I keep hoping it's some godawful prank, but that didn't work out too well in 2000 or 2004.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:59 PM on October 16, 2012

This cheered me up I Can't Go For That - most excellent pairing.

OK, back to the sloughs of despair for me now.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:05 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

anybody else in the northeast? I think we just had an earthquake - quonsar is talking to someone in NH that shook when we did here in MA
posted by madamjujujive at 4:18 PM on October 16, 2012

Miko just said she felt it in Salem.
posted by cortex at 4:19 PM on October 16, 2012

5 Facts you should commit to memory before watching tonight's debate:

5. The “six studies” that Romney cites in defense of his tax plan are actually 3 blog posts, 2 right-wing reports and 1 op-ed.

The idea that a Romney administration could give a 20 percent tax cut to everyone, and then pay for it by eliminating loopholes and deductions for the wealthy has been strong refuted by the Tax Policy Center. Romney has cited six other “studies” that confirm his plan could work, but those are dubious: One is a report by the conservative Heritage foundation, one is a paper from a former Bush adviser, one is an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, and three are blog posts.

Ooooo blog posts! If we all wrote blog posts condemning his plan would that be enough to sink it into the Sea of Wishful Thinking?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:20 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Yes on the earthquake here in Somerville.
posted by shortfuse at 4:21 PM on October 16, 2012

Yep ... Earthquake here in Boston. Romney's shaking things up!
posted by ericb at 4:23 PM on October 16, 2012

Earthquake centered in Maine
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:24 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

holy shit - first I thought, yikes, wind is really kicking up. Then I thought, damn, those construction trucks shouldn't be driving by at night, and then the whole place really swayed and it clicked - a freaking earthquake!

OK, all you jaded Californians, it scared me.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:37 PM on October 16, 2012

Why didn't somebody tell me there is a new thread for the debate?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:38 PM on October 16, 2012

madamjujujive, that really did cheer me up, too! I'm going to keep some Hall and Oates cued up on YouTube and this old thread open in another tab when I need some Fripp, Gabriel, Hall et. al.

Earthquake? God's freaking out, too.
posted by maudlin at 4:38 PM on October 16, 2012

And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood...

It's debatin' time.
posted by goHermGO at 4:40 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

Why didn't somebody tell me there is a new thread for the debate?

Burn the witch!
posted by howfar at 4:44 PM on October 16, 2012

I'm going to row this boat home even if it means posting every time it crashes my iPad browser. Like just now.
posted by howfar at 4:46 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Secret Life of Gravy: Why didn't somebody tell me there is a new thread for the debate?

Because row, damn it! Row!

Anyway, for some reason the news today, and especially the tone of the coverage on MSNBC, has me out on the ledge looking for Andrew Sullivan. Like, to the point I was sorely disappointed to see that there are no current, credible risks of a civilization-ending asteroid impact at this time.
posted by ob1quixote at 4:48 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm going to keep some Hall and Oates cued up on YouTube...

I've listening to a lot of music from this AskMe about "strip-hop" recommendations. It's gettin' a bit surreal up in here.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:52 PM on October 16, 2012

Anyway, for some reason the news today, and especially the tone of the coverage on MSNBC, has me out on the ledge looking for Andrew Sullivan.

You'll be delighted to know (as we in DC are) that he's just relocated his vile ass to NYC, so if you need someone to blame for the earthquake look no further.

Spoiler: he's whining about it.
posted by psoas at 4:53 PM on October 16, 2012

maudlin, there are many more great shows at Live from Daryl's House - some great musicians.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:56 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Two people (including you, Brandon) listed the same song by Tricky (which truly is brilliant), but skipped Overcome? Blasphemy!

On preview: thanks, mjjj. I've got that site open in another tab -- IN CHROME. YESSSSS!!!!!

ObThisThread: I'm probably running the C-SPAN stream again. Don't bother with even trying PBS, eh?
posted by maudlin at 4:59 PM on October 16, 2012

PBS worked fine for me in the UK.
posted by howfar at 5:01 PM on October 16, 2012

well there was some damage in the quake
posted by madamjujujive at 5:01 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

PBS worked fine for me in the UK.

Honey, that's what I'm afraid of. Even PBS people have mastered the art of nattering.
posted by maudlin at 5:02 PM on October 16, 2012

I was expecting the content but not the author, well played.
posted by TwoWordReview at 5:03 PM on October 16, 2012

According to CNN, the ambient temperature of the debate hall has been negotiated to be between 62 and 64 degrees. Hope the audience brought their gloves.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 5:05 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

Honey, that's what I'm afraid of. Even PBS people have mastered the art of nattering.

But if you don't watch the debate on PBS, you won't get to take three drinks every time David Brooks mentions "positive growth agenda items"!
posted by dialetheia at 5:07 PM on October 16, 2012

Was sort of hoping for a gloves off occasion.
posted by de at 5:08 PM on October 16, 2012

has been negotiated to be between 62 and 64 degrees

Ooh, maybe they're overclocking the Romneybot this round.
posted by ceribus peribus at 5:08 PM on October 16, 2012 [7 favorites]

Fox Nation Super-Stoked On Romney’s Domination Of Pre-Debate Coin-Toss
posted by homunculus at 5:11 PM on October 16, 2012

But if you don't watch the debate on PBS, you won't get to take three drinks every time David Brooks mentions "positive growth agenda items"!

Now you're just trying to make me keep the Buzzfeed Animals page open in YET ANOTHER MIGHTY CHROME TAB so I can keep myself from curling up into a little ball of despair.

This longboat is not a very nice longboat.
posted by maudlin at 5:12 PM on October 16, 2012

It seems strange that there's a coin test. The President is, you know, THE President, shouldn't it be his choice about who goes first or last?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:16 PM on October 16, 2012

Conservatives Suddenly Decide Ball Busting Harridan Hillary Clinton Is a Wimpy Doormat
posted by homunculus at 5:16 PM on October 16, 2012

Can anyone recommend a good way to livestream the debate through Roku? I've used the Wall Street Journal's livestream for past debates, but I don't like it. They have awful talking heads, and I don't like their camera angles.

In the last month, this is the second most regretted thread, with 27 hides

Hey, hiding a thread doesn't imply regret! I haven't done it, but I might hide this thread. Not because I'm not following it, but because I'm following it so closely I just keep it open in its own window. This thread, Thrilla or Vanilla?, and Biden/Ryan faceoff.

That's right. You folks have driven me to the madness that is three constantly-refreshing longboat political threads.
posted by meese at 5:22 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Don't forget the new thread for tonight's debate. That's four, count 'em FOUR, simultaneous political threads.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 5:26 PM on October 16, 2012

Oh dear God!
posted by meese at 5:29 PM on October 16, 2012

Can anyone recommend a good way to livestream the debate through Roku?

Isn't there a CSPAN channel on Roku?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:29 PM on October 16, 2012

Threadzophrenia. Whoa.
posted by Skygazer at 5:30 PM on October 16, 2012

Michelle Obama is on CNN right now.

Every time I see her, I am a junior high school girl once again, in awe and thinking to myself, "she's so pretty".
posted by triggerfinger at 5:31 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

Quad core, but can we overclock it?
posted by maudlin at 5:31 PM on October 16, 2012

Maudlin: This longboat is not a very nice longboat.

Hey! Be nice to the motherthread longboat!
posted by Skygazer at 5:31 PM on October 16, 2012

How many more comments do we need? We can do this.
posted by triggerfinger at 5:34 PM on October 16, 2012

You are quoting someone named "Muadlin". I have no idea who that person is.

Oooh! Fierce Bengal kitten!
posted by maudlin at 5:34 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Michelle Obama is on CNN right now.

How is she appearing? Before the last debate, they showed her and she looked shook. I didn't want to say it then, but that was kind of an unsettling moment. She'd mentioned before that she is always (as is Ann Romney) nervous before these things, so I figured it was no big deal.
posted by cashman at 5:35 PM on October 16, 2012

By the way, did Romney say anything about facing the President in recent days? Last time he kind of tipped his hand, and then I thought perhaps Ryan was doing the same thing but that turned out to be wrong. I'm just curious if Romney said something about what he expected the President to say/do tonight.
posted by cashman at 5:36 PM on October 16, 2012

Cashman, it's from the same interview as last time, just a repeat. Also a repeat of the interview with Ann Romney.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 5:36 PM on October 16, 2012

You are quoting someone named "Muadlin". I have no idea who that person is.

Ha! HA! Look again, ma soeur! I have you now! on guardez!!

Nice cute Bengal kitty's are cute and nice until they bite yer thumbs off!!
posted by Skygazer at 5:38 PM on October 16, 2012

By the way, did Romney say anything about facing the President in recent days?

But they're not facing each other in this debate, they're taking questions. Obama should concentrate on appealing to people as opposed to attacking Romney. Push that whole "Finish the fight" idea and save any real hammering of Mitt for next week.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:45 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Amen Brandon!! I just posted in the other thread that I'd like to see Obama have a Clinton moment tonight where he really connects in a personal (not phony) way with some of the questioners.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 5:48 PM on October 16, 2012

Clearly a sing-off is in order.
posted by cortex at 5:49 PM on October 16, 2012

Stick the landing everyone, stick the landing!
posted by drezdn at 5:50 PM on October 16, 2012

Michelle was in Chapel Hill today
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:51 PM on October 16, 2012

I'd like to see Obama have a Clinton moment where he plays the saxophone, eats a Big Mac and then tells Romney to blow him.
posted by box at 5:53 PM on October 16, 2012 [8 favorites]

Ha! HA! Look again, Mon soeur! I have you now!!

I looked, and I feel compelled to tell you this: the French version of the possessive pronoun "my" is gendered, but it reflects the gender of the noun it possesses, not the gender of the speaker. Thus, when you're trying to think like a Frenchie, you must remember that:

A woman would call her sister "Ma soeur".
A man would call his sister "Ma soeur".
A neutered robot would call its unaltered sister "Ma soeur".

If any of these beings had a brother, they would call him "Mon frère".

The closest phonetic match to "Mon soeur" is "Mon sieur", and as both God and landowners have forsaken this thread, that's not even wrong.

(OK, I think that took long enough to type. Let me just refresh the page and -- maudit.)
posted by maudlin at 5:53 PM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

I hope that Obama is able to whip the crowd into such a frenzy that they start booing Romney every time he speaks. I dream zingers so potent that Hostess launches a DCMA takedown of the debate for infringing. I feel like we are holding our breath waiting for this moment to pass. Bring on the glory Barack. Take off the gloves and smash him champ. Now let's do this thing.
posted by humanfont at 5:59 PM on October 16, 2012

Zoot alors!!

Ma Soeur! Thanks for that long winded commentary, but what kind of philistine do you take me for...thanks to the edit window I was able to correct that myself!

You must refresh the motherthread more frequently! And remember; ASK NOT WHAT THE MOTHERTHREAD CAN DO FOR YOU, ASK WHAT CAN I DO FOR THE MOTHERTHREAD!

Allonzy to the new thread!~
posted by Skygazer at 6:00 PM on October 16, 2012

My wish list:

Several Real Barack Obama grins
Romney flop-sweat
Audience gasping in horror at lies
Audience laughing at Obama jokes
COMPLETE SILENCE AT ROMNEY "JOKES"
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:02 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

We have not forsaken the thread!

Allons enfants de la Mere Patrie
Le filetage est arrivé!
Contre nous de la tyrannie,
L'étendard renard est levé,
Entendez-vous dans les campagnes
Mugir cet fourbe automate?
Ils viennent jusque dans vos bras
Égorger vos fils, vos compagnes!

Okay, my French is terrible, but I tried.
posted by winna at 6:02 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

Is this where people are debate watching? Or is there another thread for that?
posted by Miko at 6:05 PM on October 16, 2012

You probably want this one, Meeks.
posted by box at 6:07 PM on October 16, 2012

Yes watch the debate here.
posted by humanfont at 6:08 PM on October 16, 2012

Prob'ly the "How to not give a fuck" thread. If it lives up to its title, it will help me a lot.
posted by klangklangston at 6:08 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

Mitt is the usual salesman. Obama is stronger, but sort of eh. But seems to be bouncing back with his answers.

Unsurprising, both of them are using this format to hit each other. Niiiice.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:11 PM on October 16, 2012

Oh thank god. Obama smacks Romeny hard.
posted by humanfont at 6:11 PM on October 16, 2012

This is the debate thread for the 47% (of people who have not collapsed this thread in recent activity).
posted by drezdn at 6:11 PM on October 16, 2012

Meh, Barack you need to answer the "can you get gas prices lower" (paraphrasing) question better and in a shorter way.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:14 PM on October 16, 2012

Nice cute Bengal kitty's are cute and nice until they bite yer thumbs off!!

Some kittehs turn into treat monsters!
posted by homunculus at 6:14 PM on October 16, 2012

This is the Frenchie thread.

Nous parlons francois ici!
posted by Skygazer at 6:15 PM on October 16, 2012

Oui!
posted by drezdn at 6:16 PM on October 16, 2012

Bonjour!
posted by homunculus at 6:17 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Zoot alors!!

Zoot Allures!
posted by TedW at 6:18 PM on October 16, 2012

Crap, he's not connecting on the gas price question.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:18 PM on October 16, 2012

He just got a bit of a gasp from the audience. He's definitely stronger. Romney's being a dick to the moderator now.
posted by Babblesort at 6:23 PM on October 16, 2012

Brandon, je crois que les lignes signifiant l'approbation d'Obama (les lignes sur l'émission CNN) ont été à la hausse au cours de cette question. Il est également rappelé à tous que les prix du gaz très faibles en 2008 ont été causés par une économie terrible. Détendez-vous.
posted by maudlin at 6:24 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

...he's not connecting on the gas price question.

Did you say he'll wind up workin' in a gas station?
posted by TedW at 6:24 PM on October 16, 2012

Brandon, je crois que les lignes signifiant l'approbation d'Obama (les lignes sur l'émission CNN) ont été à la hausse au cours de cette question.

Your...momma?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:26 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

All those struggling middle class people buried in the economy have to be heaving huge sighs of relief now that they'll get a break on all their capital gains. Next up: tax credit for luxury car owners.
posted by cortex at 6:27 PM on October 16, 2012 [5 favorites]

Je pense qu'Obama a l'aise cette fois-ci, et elle était immense, il a complètement fait face au visage de salope qui romney, comme il l'a fait là-bas ... Je veux lui pour détruire ce salaud .... Le Romnay ... Blammo!
posted by Skygazer at 6:29 PM on October 16, 2012

So hai guys, how's the Motherthread doing?

I gather there's also some kind of talking match thing going on. I'm the one in the corner here, all fingers in ears and la la la, trying to pretend that whatever America does makes no difference to the land of maple syrup and moose.
posted by jokeefe at 6:29 PM on October 16, 2012

Je voudrais manger un Croque Monsieur.
posted by box at 6:31 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney est un glos pautonnier, non mais sans blague.
posted by winna at 6:34 PM on October 16, 2012

Viens ici, Brandon. N'ayez pas peur!

(Skygazer a déclaré ce fil doit être appelé «le Frenchie», même si nous devons tous d'accord qu'il s'agit d'une terrible façon de décrire sa mère. Mais il a déclaré qu'il est «le Frenchie», et ce sera «le Frenchie».)
posted by maudlin at 6:34 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Sketchy deal was a pretty good bit.
posted by Babblesort at 6:35 PM on October 16, 2012

I wonder if the people speaking French here appreciate the harrowing dangers Mitt faced in 1968 France.
posted by homunculus at 6:35 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

So hai guys, how's the Motherthread doing?

Bien...tres bien....Maudlin ca va bien??
posted by Skygazer at 6:35 PM on October 16, 2012

It doesn't say anything good for my character, but motherfuck do I enjoy seeing Mitt fail to interrupt someone.
posted by cortex at 6:36 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ah, d'accord!

So, uh, cortex-- how close does the thread have to get to 5555 before the management would consider extending its glorious reign for a day or two in order to shatter the previous record like Felix Baumgartner hurtling through space?
posted by jokeefe at 6:37 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Also, even my fancy new laptop, previous lauded for its unearthly speed and lack of associated cat hair, is choking a bit on this thing. I mean, compared to before.

I guess I could watch the debate like everyone else, huh?
posted by jokeefe at 6:38 PM on October 16, 2012

I refuse to put an asterisk next to a record like that. It ends up how it ends up, praise Kibo.
posted by cortex at 6:39 PM on October 16, 2012 [5 favorites]

Yay Lilly Ledbetter!
posted by homunculus at 6:40 PM on October 16, 2012

Mitt Romney, sitting in the governor's office, looking through binders full of women.
posted by cortex at 6:41 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Okay, I just peeked in long enough to see Romney assert that he'd gone to see a "whole bunch" of women's groups, and my soul tried to leave my body, so I turned the debate off.
posted by jokeefe at 6:41 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

LE ACT DE LILLY LEDBETTER! MAS OUI! YAYY!! EXCELLENTE!
posted by Skygazer at 6:41 PM on October 16, 2012

Mitt Romney, sitting in the governor's office, looking through binders full of women.

C'est une image inquiétante.
posted by winna at 6:44 PM on October 16, 2012

Mitt Romney has a binder.
posted by humanfont at 6:45 PM on October 16, 2012

"These are not just women's issues, these are family issues, these are economic issues." Yes!
posted by bardophile at 6:49 PM on October 16, 2012

Oh, wow. Romney said "every woman in the world should have access to contraceptives."

So if you work on Romney's team, do you just tear your hair out wondering what new policy positions he's going to blunder into during the heat of the debate?

Or do you just say eh, etch-a-sketch, people respond to the emotion and bearing and won't even remember and don't really care what it was he ever said?
posted by Miko at 6:49 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Bueno, bueno!
posted by Artw at 6:49 PM on October 16, 2012

"You're the last person who's going to get tough on China."
posted by bardophile at 6:50 PM on October 16, 2012

this thread is making me feel drunk
posted by poffin boffin at 6:50 PM on October 16, 2012

feel?
posted by cortex at 6:51 PM on October 16, 2012

Barack is doing exactly what I wanted - bringing in the information that we all know - allllll Romney's missteps, failed ideas, messed up policies. YES.
posted by cashman at 6:51 PM on October 16, 2012

I find the only way I can take the debates is to follow them on MetaFilter. Ugh.

In other news, I can't believe I read the whole thing (this thread that is)
posted by Otherwise at 6:51 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

So if you work on Romney's team, do you just tear your hair out wondering what new policy positions he's going to blunder into during the heat of the debate?

Or do you just say eh, etch-a-sketch, people respond to the emotion and bearing and won't even remember and don't really care what it was he ever said?

I think at this point they have embraced saying absolutely anything and expecting no one to care. They're not the reality-based community, after all. They're proud of it.
posted by winna at 6:51 PM on October 16, 2012

God this is making my hands sweat
posted by klangklangston at 6:52 PM on October 16, 2012

I felt a little sick before this started but I'm so relieved now. Obama showed up this time.
posted by Babblesort at 6:54 PM on October 16, 2012

Obama has brought in soooo many of the things we've talked about in these threads. I love it.
posted by cashman at 6:54 PM on October 16, 2012

Ok, this is actually the first time I've looked at Mitt for any length of time. Does he always look so incredibly smug?
posted by bardophile at 6:54 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I've never seen him not look smug. Angry smug, faux-concerned smug, we-all-rich-people-here smug, but never not smug.
posted by winna at 6:55 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

Yes, he does. Always. Even when he's doing "sad puppy eyes."
posted by Miko at 6:56 PM on October 16, 2012

look at his stupid fake smile when he says "the middle class". JUST SAY THE PLEBES EVERYONE KNOWS YOU WANT TO.
posted by poffin boffin at 6:56 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

That's kind of his default face mode, yes. It's a very alpha dog biz sort of look, makes sense when you're trying to exude "I will kill you and eat you if you're not smart enough to work with me on this".
posted by cortex at 6:56 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

the last time someone condescended to me so badly it was a peacocking douchebag in a bar telling me that my favourite band sucked so i should bone him to make it all better.
posted by poffin boffin at 6:57 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm having a hard time how any TV watchers can be voting for him at all... my consumption of politics coverage is mostly online, and most of that in print...
posted by bardophile at 6:58 PM on October 16, 2012

'Governor, I want to move on... don't go away.'

Like she doesn't have to BEG him to stop talking. Ha!
posted by winna at 6:58 PM on October 16, 2012

Ooh! I love me some domestic issues, I sure do.
posted by Miko at 6:58 PM on October 16, 2012

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS SHOULDN'T HAVE TO HIRE LAWYERS

THAT WOULD TAKE AWAY MONEY THAT THEY NEED TO PAY THEIR SERVANTS AND GARDENERS
posted by poffin boffin at 6:59 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney's Binder
posted by homunculus at 7:01 PM on October 16, 2012

I can't believe he just offered military service as the only specific option for a pathway to becoming a citizen.
posted by bardophile at 7:01 PM on October 16, 2012

Yeah, I'm surprised he didn't mention indentured servitude.
posted by poffin boffin at 7:02 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

My president is back!
posted by cashman at 7:04 PM on October 16, 2012

"If my daughter, or yours looks to someone like they're not a citizen..." yes.
posted by bardophile at 7:04 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Do you," asks Xbox Live, "think the candidates have your best interests at heart?"

The answers are Yes, No, and Don't Know. Not sure where "could you please be a little more specific" is.
posted by cortex at 7:04 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I want to know when they're going to get to the important issue of poffin manufacture safety.
posted by winna at 7:04 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

i just want obama to fling the mic right at romney's big stupid smug face
posted by poffin boffin at 7:05 PM on October 16, 2012

EVERYBODY TALK AT ONCE
posted by cortex at 7:06 PM on October 16, 2012

i wanna see the debate moderators armed with tasers in 2016
posted by poffin boffin at 7:08 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Waah. I've FINALLY thought of a respnse on China!
posted by bardophile at 7:08 PM on October 16, 2012

Company plug in guise of question! It's like I'm at a SXSW panel Q&A session.
posted by cortex at 7:09 PM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

"My friends in a brain trust"? What did that guy say?
posted by homunculus at 7:09 PM on October 16, 2012

Suggested question fox Xbox live: "do you think it's an intern writing these questions or a person trapped in an inanity factory?"
posted by jaduncan at 7:09 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I keep hoping to see "Seriously, did you hear that shit?" show up. Possible responses: "Yes", "No", "oh HELL no".
posted by cortex at 7:11 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

oh god he said coffins not poffins

okay i admit it i am drunk
posted by poffin boffin at 7:11 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

SHUT UP MITTENS YOU ARE MAKING SHIT UP
posted by poffin boffin at 7:12 PM on October 16, 2012

VAGUE CARTER REFERENCE
posted by cortex at 7:13 PM on October 16, 2012

I'm SO sick of no one remembering Ambassador Raphel dying in 1988.
posted by bardophile at 7:13 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

I just have milk, but it is from lovely fuzzy Jersey cows.

My feed is stuttering and it looks like the Mittbot is doing the robot.
posted by winna at 7:14 PM on October 16, 2012

Oh wait. We can't talk about that. It was during the Reagan presidency, and Raphel was in the plane with Pakistan's horrific military dictator!
posted by bardophile at 7:14 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Work in the video game industry they said. It'll be glamorous they said. I have to write these questions and don't even get dental coverage. Should I go back home and take a job at the family business? Yes, no, don't know, yes and call your mother more often."
posted by jaduncan at 7:15 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

OH SHIT LIVE FACT CHECK
posted by cortex at 7:16 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

He did in fact sir. Followed by applause. Nice.
posted by Babblesort at 7:16 PM on October 16, 2012

_Romney 3.0 memory instructions_

Carter: still relevant.
Dubya: forgotten.
posted by jaduncan at 7:18 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

man, i don't even wanna hear obama talk like a grownup anymore, i just wanna see romney lose his shit some more
posted by poffin boffin at 7:20 PM on October 16, 2012

See, we said Real Obama would eventually call. He still loves us really.
posted by jaduncan at 7:20 PM on October 16, 2012

"Yeah, we should do a better job in education. First thing, let's fire the teachers."
posted by bardophile at 7:21 PM on October 16, 2012

Hmm, how do we prevent unplanned pregnancies out of wedlock to limit single parenthood? Is there, like, a thing that prevents pregnancies or something?
posted by Phire at 7:21 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

it's GUNS apparently
posted by poffin boffin at 7:22 PM on October 16, 2012

also buttsex technically
posted by poffin boffin at 7:23 PM on October 16, 2012

Shotgun weddings. Bam, everything is solved.
posted by cortex at 7:23 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

That is a painful rictus ol Mittens is sporting right now. It looks like it hurts.
posted by winna at 7:24 PM on October 16, 2012

I'm not seeing much delighted glee in this thread so I assume Romney hasn't stumbled badly enough yet. Obama, quick, ask him for the last digit of pi.
posted by fleacircus at 7:24 PM on October 16, 2012

The truth about the Fast and Furious scandal
posted by homunculus at 7:24 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

...cannot...reconcile...guns pandering then...and new requirement for NRA pandering...and am on TV...
posted by jaduncan at 7:25 PM on October 16, 2012

Man, I can't really believe that just happened.
posted by Skygazer at 7:25 PM on October 16, 2012

there is unholy glee in the other thread

unholy and glorious and CAPSLOCK
posted by poffin boffin at 7:26 PM on October 16, 2012

I'm not seeing much delighted glee in this thread so I assume Romney hasn't stumbled badly enough yet.

Heh, I don't know. I'm enjoying watching it.

Although guns to schools and education? That was a large pivot, Obama.
posted by jaduncan at 7:26 PM on October 16, 2012

oh no, fleacircus, we're all rolling on the floor in the other thread. This is the serious times thread.

We even have binders and tequila in the other one!
posted by winna at 7:27 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I kind of figured Fast and Furious would come up when she said guns, but I wasn't sure how it was going to come out in a digestible way and I don't really feel like it did. It's a super wonky issue that sounds like a shitty car movie, and if you haven't already followed it what the hell are you going to make of a driveby debate reference?
posted by cortex at 7:27 PM on October 16, 2012

Outsourcing! C'mon Obama. Nail him to this.
posted by Babblesort at 7:27 PM on October 16, 2012

"People think it's more attractive." Not me.
posted by bardophile at 7:27 PM on October 16, 2012

I had to come here and collect myself...
posted by Skygazer at 7:27 PM on October 16, 2012

China has been a currency manipulator. I have taken advantage of this. But really, I'm going to crack down on China. Really.
posted by bardophile at 7:28 PM on October 16, 2012

CURRENCY MANIPULATORS GONNA CURRENCY MANIPULATE
posted by cortex at 7:28 PM on October 16, 2012

"A lot of good people have lost jobs" ...on the other hand, Bain made out on the capital gains.
posted by jaduncan at 7:28 PM on October 16, 2012

i just shouted OH MY GOD SHUT THE FUCK UP and like 3 of my neighbors are applauding me
posted by poffin boffin at 7:29 PM on October 16, 2012 [8 favorites]

Somebody tell me how Romney is getting away with trading in generalities?
posted by ooga_booga at 7:33 PM on October 16, 2012

tell me how Romney is getting away with trading in generalities?

WE don't have a culture of accountability. Truthiness is good enough for many.
posted by Miko at 7:34 PM on October 16, 2012

Great question, sir. Many people seem to think that I am not a "human" "person". That does not compute. That just simply does not compute. Error. Error.
posted by cortex at 7:35 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh god what is that German word someone had for being embarrassed for someone because the waves of that emotion are drowning me with this last question and Mitt's awkward attempt to bond with the people.
posted by winna at 7:35 PM on October 16, 2012

Somebody tell me how Romney is getting away with trading in generalities?

Come now, he's very clear that on day one he will piss off the largest US trading partner, and if there's one thing the PRC likes it's public humiliation.
posted by jaduncan at 7:36 PM on October 16, 2012

Fremdschamen
posted by bardophile at 7:36 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

"and my missionary service is why I skipped Vietnam."
posted by jaduncan at 7:37 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

We just might be able to pull this off. I have a binder full of comments saved up.
posted by drezdn at 7:37 PM on October 16, 2012

Fremdscham.
posted by maudlin at 7:37 PM on October 16, 2012

AND OBAMA BROUGHT UP THE 47%
posted by liza at 7:38 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama slamdunks the 47% comment. Last comment, no chance for Mitt to make his time!
posted by winna at 7:38 PM on October 16, 2012

Oh yeah! NOW I'm going to slam him on the 47%! YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
posted by bardophile at 7:38 PM on October 16, 2012

Oh, he will try.
posted by Miko at 7:38 PM on October 16, 2012

Closing on 47% attack. Love it.
posted by Babblesort at 7:38 PM on October 16, 2012

Romney got MA schools to #1? There are a whole set of teaching people up there with high blood pressure right now.
posted by jaduncan at 7:39 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

Closing on 47%, have to think that was a major bullet point on the plan for tonight.
posted by cortex at 7:39 PM on October 16, 2012

Can we have an "Add to Binder" button here?
posted by Room 641-A at 7:39 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh ho ho ho. Nice, nice end Obama.
posted by jaduncan at 7:40 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

i think that 47% Obama comeback is going to break the internet
posted by liza at 7:40 PM on October 16, 2012

Can we have an "Add to Binder" button here?

That's not a pony request, that's a dressage horse request.
posted by drezdn at 7:41 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

David Brooks calls win for Obama.
posted by Babblesort at 7:41 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think the clear winner of the second debate was the brain trust at Global Telecom Supply in Minneola.
posted by homunculus at 7:43 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

the clear loser of the second debate was my liver
posted by poffin boffin at 7:44 PM on October 16, 2012

Intrade liked what they saw from Obama.
posted by drezdn at 7:45 PM on October 16, 2012

I cannot overstate how relieved I am.
posted by Phire at 7:45 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I've always liked the phrase "brain trust". Like you all got together and put your brains in jars in a bank somewhere where they could appreciate interest for twenty years down the line when your brain babies go to college.
posted by cortex at 7:45 PM on October 16, 2012

Obama won this. calling it like it is.
posted by liza at 7:46 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

110 comments until our goal! WE CAN DO THIS.
posted by Phire at 7:46 PM on October 16, 2012

There is a party in my head and all of the long boaters are invited.
posted by jaduncan at 7:47 PM on October 16, 2012

I BELIEVE
posted by Miko at 7:48 PM on October 16, 2012

I'll do my bit!
posted by unSane at 7:48 PM on October 16, 2012

Transcript
posted by Miko at 7:48 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

No one puts baby in a binder.
posted by drezdn at 7:48 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

If I had one adjective for Romney tonight it would be 'petulant'.
posted by unSane at 7:48 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I thought Romney also ran away from the deductions question in a very obvious way.
posted by unSane at 7:49 PM on October 16, 2012

i just want to cuddle tumblr to my bosom and feed it cookies
posted by poffin boffin at 7:49 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I was only able to catch the last 15 minutes of the debate and even then it was audio only. My quick impression is that Obama's speech mannerisms work against him in a debate environment, namely the frequent pauses and occasional stammer. Romney has the advantage in just being able to rattle off whatever it is with conviction, regardless of the veracity of his comments.

That said, I'm glad to hear that most people think Obama took this one. I was a little worried, to be honest.
posted by ooga_booga at 7:49 PM on October 16, 2012

*grins*

That's all I really have to say. Like a nervous one that broke out during the debate and then widened and spread to the eyes before ending the debate with a mental funky chicken dance and a grin I could park a Romney limo in.

That is my analysis.
posted by jaduncan at 7:50 PM on October 16, 2012

Best gif - the Mittsneer loop!
posted by winna at 7:50 PM on October 16, 2012

And Obana's 'you wouldn't buy that as an investor' line was a total killer.
posted by unSane at 7:50 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

If the Yankees lose tonight, my Republican-Yankee loving facebook friend will be having a very rough night.
posted by drezdn at 7:50 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

one does not simply fill binders with women
posted by poffin boffin at 7:50 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

are... some of you commenting in both threads? i can't even
posted by twist my arm at 7:50 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Just switched off my TV after one of the talking heads said that he thinks Romney is much more the kind of guy "people would want in their living room." CNN chief political analyst (a woman) says "Shockingly, I disagree with that."
posted by bardophile at 7:51 PM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

separate browsers for each thread
posted by poffin boffin at 7:52 PM on October 16, 2012

Stolen from drezdn in the other thread LOL'd.
posted by Miko at 7:52 PM on October 16, 2012

We are multifaceted even without being be-bindered!
posted by winna at 7:52 PM on October 16, 2012

You know what I love seeing? Friends on Facebook and some blogs who have been sour on Obama for a looong time jumping up and down and getting giddy. Please let this translate into GOTV, voting, and. more importantly, getting genuinely involved in political action year round that boots those right wing assholes off of every fucking school board, city council, state office and federal office across the entire fucking continent. ENOUGH.
posted by maudlin at 7:53 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney is much more the kind of guy "people would want in their living room."

Oh God no. I really hate these sorts of personality characterizations. I spend as much as my free time as possibly actively avoiding people who resemble Romney. I don't want him or Ann or any of the gang in my living room.
posted by Miko at 7:54 PM on October 16, 2012 [6 favorites]

Romney is much more the kind of guy "people would want in their living room."

in this scenario is the house on fire?
posted by poffin boffin at 7:55 PM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

Hillary weighs in on binders
posted by Otherwise at 7:55 PM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

I'd just like to say that in the spiritual successor to the Palin thread it's nice that Romney so easily fits into what can only be lovingly described the women's group version of the following exchange:

COURIC: And when it comes to establishing your world view, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this — to stay informed and to understand the world?
PALIN: I’ve read most of them again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media —
COURIC: But what ones specifically? I’m curious.
PALIN: Um, all of them, any of them that have been in front of me over all these years.
COURIC: Can you name any of them?
PALIN: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news..
posted by jaduncan at 7:56 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

FROM BINDERS FOR EXAMPLE
posted by poffin boffin at 7:57 PM on October 16, 2012

re: Romney in the living room

I don't think I could stand it. Cultural demands that I be hospitable to a guest and therefore, polite to him, would make my head explode.
posted by bardophile at 7:57 PM on October 16, 2012

Like he would want to be in your prole living room.
posted by Artw at 7:57 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

I bet when he was a missionary, he found a lot of people weren't all that into having him in the living room.
posted by Miko at 7:58 PM on October 16, 2012

no poffins for that fucker then

see him try to reach max sheen now
posted by poffin boffin at 7:58 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

Missionary in the living room - carpet burns on your arse.
posted by howfar at 8:00 PM on October 16, 2012

Missionary in the living room - carpet burns on your arse.

All must praise the modern drive for laminate flooring.
posted by jaduncan at 8:01 PM on October 16, 2012

CBS News poll of uncommitted voters: 37% say Pres Obama won, 30% say it was Romney, remainder called it a tie.

This is GREAT NEWS! For John McCain!
posted by drezdn at 8:02 PM on October 16, 2012

Chris Rock: Mitt Romney is like a Best Buy employee trying to sell you something he cannot fully explain.
posted by drezdn at 8:03 PM on October 16, 2012 [5 favorites]

I've now got to be in work in 5 hours. But there are so few comments needed. Please talk fast...repeat yourselves if necessary. Say "government does not create jobs" a few times maybe.
posted by howfar at 8:07 PM on October 16, 2012

5483, guys! We can do it!
posted by maudlin at 8:07 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I've now got to be in work in 5 hours. But there are so few comments needed. Please talk fast...repeat yourselves if necessary. Say "government does not create jobs" a few times maybe.

I THINK IT'S MY TURN. I THINK IT'S MY... I THINK IT'S MY TURN. I THINK... HE GOT 4.3562 SECONDS MORE TO ANSWER THE FIRST QUESTION, SO I THINK... THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE BEING BURIED bzzt*snicktwirlEEEEdeedledeedledeedle
posted by winna at 8:09 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Do it for me and muadlin!
posted by howfar at 8:09 PM on October 16, 2012

I have a binder full of comments.
posted by humanfont at 8:11 PM on October 16, 2012

So Obama spoke three more minutes than Romney. How did that happen?
posted by bardophile at 8:11 PM on October 16, 2012

And for the Gipper, surely. His ghost has certainly continued to haunt our fair nation. We will persevere!
posted by winna at 8:11 PM on October 16, 2012

I just want to tell you good luck. We're all counting on you.
posted by triggerfinger at 8:12 PM on October 16, 2012

I am not shitting you.
posted by maudlin at 8:12 PM on October 16, 2012

Apropos of nothing, this is the sort of post that you can be pretty sure immediately leads to me and Jessamyn IMing.
posted by cortex at 8:12 PM on October 16, 2012

So Obama spoke three more minutes than Romney. How did that happen?

Does it still count as his time if he's trying to talk while being interrupted, if it's on his time?

That's the only way I can figure it.
posted by winna at 8:12 PM on October 16, 2012

Yes we can.

'Night all - it's been great
posted by Otherwise at 8:12 PM on October 16, 2012

Sullivan is going absolutely over the moon on MSNBC, and I think he invented a couple new glowing adjectives. I still think he's way too excitable, but its good to hear it going the other way after how he's been Eeyore the last 2 weeks.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:13 PM on October 16, 2012

So Obama spoke three more minutes than Romney. How did that happen?

Romney fucked up. He made it look like he was going to try to take over, so Obama was challenged less early when he went over his 2 minutes. The interrupting shit really backfired badly on Mittens tonight.
posted by howfar at 8:14 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

"Soooo from the looks of it all blacks and Mexicans want Obama and all the white people want Romney. #teamromney #smart"

Gah, that's off the Twitter feed of someone the BBC just quoted. :/
posted by jaduncan at 8:14 PM on October 16, 2012

5483, guys! We can do it!

I got 5379. Maybe I'm on daylight savings time.

(Nevermind, I hadn't refreshed)
posted by cashman at 8:14 PM on October 16, 2012

Longest thread in mefi's history should absolutely be retroactively referred to as The Binder.
posted by mannequito at 8:14 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

hey sweet I snagged comment # 5500!
posted by mannequito at 8:15 PM on October 16, 2012

Apropos of nothing, this is the sort of post that you can be pretty sure immediately leads to me and Jessamyn IMing.

Is that when she makes the Kif noise?
posted by Phire at 8:15 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Sullivan is going absolutely over the moon on MSNBC, and I think he invented a couple new glowing adjectives. I still think he's way too excitable, but its good to hear it going the other way after how he's been Eeyore the last 2 weeks.

Because. no. matter. what! Andrew! Sullivan! Says! IT'S! IMPORTANT! AND! BREATHLESS!
posted by jaduncan at 8:15 PM on October 16, 2012

just heard Sullivan call Obama lazy inre: first debate. he's such an asshat.
posted by liza at 8:16 PM on October 16, 2012

muddgirl, so true. And someone (already forgot who) in the other thread pointed out how manipulative as a strategy that even is. It's not as though women are in the decisionmaking seat. They just accept the favors that are handed out.
posted by Miko at 8:16 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

5502! W00t! (5503?) Anyway -- triumph!
posted by maudlin at 8:16 PM on October 16, 2012

My Facebook is blowing up with happy lefties. Yay! Oh and the Facebook page for Binders Full of Women has close to 93,000 likes.
posted by Babblesort at 8:16 PM on October 16, 2012

More from R&R's women-friendly party friends: "Some girls rape easy".

More on that: Politician Who Said ‘Some Girls Rape Easy’ Was Discussing the Actual Rape of a 14-Year-Old Girl
posted by homunculus at 8:17 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

hey sweet I snagged comment # 5500!

Yeah well I got 5000 and I say it's the motherthread
posted by howfar at 8:17 PM on October 16, 2012

@fivethirtyeight: Looks like Obama named winner by CBS, Google and PPP snap polls. No word from CNN poll yet.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:18 PM on October 16, 2012

FREEDOM BEYONCE WANTS YOU TO VOTE FOR OBAMA
posted by poffin boffin at 8:18 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

More on that: Politician Who Said ‘Some Girls Rape Easy’ Was Discussing the Actual Rape of a 14-Year-Old Girl

...I don't even. DIAF.
posted by jaduncan at 8:18 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

how many do we need?
posted by liza at 8:19 PM on October 16, 2012

Whatever else happens, the important thing is that we debunked libertarianism and established a realistic voting/activism ethos for the far Left. I'm glad we finally settled this and can move on to other matters.
posted by fleacircus at 8:19 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

And a little praise here for Candy Crowley. She did a fine job tonight.
posted by maudlin at 8:19 PM on October 16, 2012

how many do we need?

5556
posted by cashman at 8:19 PM on October 16, 2012

I just want to tell you good luck. We're all counting on you.
posted by askmehow at 8:20 PM on October 16, 2012

at LEAST
posted by poffin boffin at 8:20 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

You know, the 'binders full of women' comment is hilariously disturbing on the surface, but even underneath it makes me really sad. It's like, a crystal clear example of what causes a glass ceiling - men in power network with other male but not women. In other words, does Romney need to reach out to mens organizations for binders full of men to fill his cabinet positions?

It is really sad and angry-making. It is all of a piece with the utter cluelessness he displays. He probably has no idea how terrible it sounds, because for his entire life he's been used to people smiling and nodding no matter what hideous things he says.

I once had a vice president of my company come in on a particularly snowy day and I was one of the only people there, because there was literally three inches of ice on the roads. He blustered about how it wasn't that bad, and I looked at him and said levelly that it took me an hour to drive seven miles. So he asked what kind of car I had, and when I told him a compact sedan he told me that I should have an SUV and I wouldn't have a problem! Because of course we can all afford to pay for the gas and insurance and car payment and taxes on a giant boatmobile for the one snow day a year, jackass.

Every time I look at Mitt Romney I think of that jackass and his complete inability to imagine how other people live.
posted by winna at 8:20 PM on October 16, 2012 [9 favorites]

Like a few dozen liza. We're in the vinegar strokes now, as they say.

(don't look up vinegar strokes)
posted by howfar at 8:20 PM on October 16, 2012

Candy needed some time to calibrate to the crazy energy, but she did do a good job in the end, and she had her facts. It ended up being a good job.
posted by Miko at 8:20 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

and ideally the 5556th comment should be a superawesome gif
posted by poffin boffin at 8:21 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

@StevenAgata: Google says that interest in the word "Binder" has increased in search by 425% bit.ly/Qp8ysT
posted by liza at 8:21 PM on October 16, 2012

we're getting there.
posted by bardophile at 8:21 PM on October 16, 2012

And a little praise here for Candy Crowley. She did a fine job tonight.

The live-fact checking moment was awesome. In my dreams it would set precedents for the future. Moderators would be required to fact check candidates so they couldn't just say shit and get away with it.
posted by cashman at 8:21 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

I heard Candy Crowley say somthing, not to either Obama or Romney. Was she wearing an earpiece?
posted by de at 8:22 PM on October 16, 2012

I'm happy that the 47% comments came back to bite Mitt in the ass. He was so specific about them, that you know he means them. He went on and on and said them with passion and meaning. And I hope that Obama wins and these remarks prove to be a big part of why.

I'm glad to be on a site that took these remarks so seriously and thought they were so repugnant that it was the longest thread in the history of the site.
posted by cashman at 8:23 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

@ditzkoff Looking forward to the Mad Men season 6 episode where Peggy has to create a campaign for something called "Binders of Women."
posted by liza at 8:23 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

Obama has clearly been eating his poffins
posted by en forme de poire at 8:23 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

I don't even know what to say about the drum playing thing. My eyeballs burn.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 8:23 PM on October 16, 2012

The live-fact checking moment was awesome. In my dreams it would set precedents for the future. Moderators would be required to fact check candidates so they couldn't just say shit and get away with it.

Was that not absolutely beautiful? And then the crowd clapped. Then Romney doubled down on the comment.

I could watch a loop of that for hours.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:24 PM on October 16, 2012 [6 favorites]

The drum player did not get to the vinegar strokes. (Yes, I looked it up. I blame library school.)
posted by maudlin at 8:24 PM on October 16, 2012

So I'm currently stressed and depressed because I have a loser of a case coming up on Tuesday and I'm scrambling to find the time to at least make a good show of it.

But watching the debate here and in the new thread has been a great relief. Thanks everyone!
posted by Lemurrhea at 8:26 PM on October 16, 2012

MSNBC just replayed the moment where Obama noted that the guy who designed the Arizona law, is on Mitt Romney's campaign. I didn't know that, and it's exactly the kind of thing I hoped Obama would do.

I was honest in the first debate in saying the president was rusty, and that Mitt did well. It would be nice if the pro-Romney folks could be just as honest and admit their man got absolutely destroyed tonight, but of course you'll hear none of that.
posted by cashman at 8:26 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

Obama has clearly been eating his poffins

I do agree that this was a max sheen situation.
posted by winna at 8:26 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

Looks like Obama has added about 20c on Intrade since the debate started. Seems to be holding steadyish there. That's 2%.
posted by howfar at 8:26 PM on October 16, 2012

I agree with cashman (again). The whole 47% thing was so repugnant. It's been a month now and there's a lot going on politics-wise, so I think it's easy to sort of get inured to how horrible it really was. But every time I look at Romney's smug car-dealer, televangelist face, I think about how quick he was to write off almost half of the US because he doesn't consider them important enough to care about.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 8:27 PM on October 16, 2012

Transcript Truthers: Conservatives Deny Obama Called Libya Attack An "Act Of Terror"

Oh please please please be represented by GOP interviewees all over TV tomorrow.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:27 PM on October 16, 2012

I'm so glad I sacrificed those goats to the motherthread.
posted by fleacircus at 8:27 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

Was that not absolutely beautiful? And then the crowd clapped. Then Romney doubled down on the comment.

I could watch a loop of that for hours.

MY favorite part was where Romney tried to justify his self-deportation comment. He was not just digging a hole there, he had some nitro and a backhoe and one of those jackhammer dealies.
posted by winna at 8:28 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

Can someone summarize what happened there?

obama was basically like MAMA SAID KNOCK YOU OUT and crowley was all GO FLEX GO FLEX GO FLEX and romney was whack
posted by poffin boffin at 8:28 PM on October 16, 2012 [7 favorites]

I think that during the first debate Obama may have been a little taken aback by the brazenness of Romney's etch-a-sketch erasing. Biden showed him how to combat it in the previous debate, and Obama executed with vigor. This liveliness of this debate was inspiring, it really makes the debates seem like a positive part of the political process.
posted by Llama-Lime at 8:28 PM on October 16, 2012

Candy Crowley Fact Checks Mitt Romney On Libya
posted by homunculus at 8:28 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Going to get some breakfast. Be right back.
posted by bardophile at 8:28 PM on October 16, 2012

Also the most interesting thing was that Romney was clearly getting flustered. He turned colors and started stumbling over words as he kept trying to harp on points.

Obama should make a note of that and keep hitting him like that at the next debate.

Also, what the hell is up with Romney calling China liars and manipulators. That's no way to start a potential relationship, any successful business man should know that. I wish Obama had pointed out that Romney's success in business doesn't necessarily translate to governing. China is country and major trade parter. There isn't any American President who could strong arm them at this point.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:29 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

MY favorite part was where Romney tried to justify his self-deportation comment.

Heh, that should have been easy: "No, no. After I get through with worker's rights everyone will want to leave."
posted by jaduncan at 8:29 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

That fact check with Candy happened so quickly. Between this thread and the other thread and watching the debate with one eye I missed what the point was that Romney was trying to make there. And how Crowley's correction was a downside for him??

Can someone summarize what happened there?
posted by Skygazer at 11:25 PM on October 16 [+] [!]

Romney thought he had a gotcha on Obama saying the Benghazi attack was an "act of terror," and went all the way out on a limb calling Obama a liar over it. Then Crowley confirmed Obama was right and Romney looked like a huge jerk. And the world wept.
posted by gerryblog at 8:30 PM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

That's no way to start a potential relationship

ALL the foreign policy saber rattling really freaks me out. I can't imagine having this guy in charge of America's foreign relations.
posted by Miko at 8:30 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

I'm not sure what Mitt can do in that last debate. Surely pulling out anything new is going to play to the "flip flop" angle? Any guesses as to his best strategy?
posted by howfar at 8:31 PM on October 16, 2012

The next debate is on foreign policy only. That should be interesting.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 8:31 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think that during the first debate Obama may have been a little taken aback by the brazenness of Romney's etch-a-sketch erasing. Biden showed him how to combat it in the previous debate, and Obama executed with vigor.

I'm still guessing he was up all night over Turkey/Syria. Turkey undertook offensive operations against soldiers inside Syria almost the following day, there's no way that wasn't discussed *heavily* by NATO before they went for the Turkish parliamentary debate in the morning.
posted by jaduncan at 8:32 PM on October 16, 2012

Hey, I know about that binder! And guess what -- Mitt Romney was lying about it.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:32 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

And the world wept.

and the world did the cabbage patch
posted by poffin boffin at 8:32 PM on October 16, 2012

China knows what the American conservative voters know, which is that anything Romney says now is blowing smoke. Behind closed doors he knows his place: in a dog collar with mittens on his extremities.
posted by fleacircus at 8:32 PM on October 16, 2012

Here's video of the live fact check, including audience laughter and clapping.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:33 PM on October 16, 2012 [7 favorites]

I'm not sure what Mitt can do in that last debate. Surely pulling out anything new is going to play to the "flip flop" angle? Any guesses as to his best strategy?

Well it's on foreign policy and with the grandaddy of them all, Bob Schieffer. So he'll be able to interrupt him all he wants, but don't underestimate the old man checking (but not fact checking him) for doing it.
posted by cashman at 8:33 PM on October 16, 2012

Je peux dormir tranquille ce soir.
posted by maudlin at 8:33 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

TAKE THAT PALIN
posted by DaDaDaDave at 8:33 PM on October 16, 2012

Candy Crowley is on CNN, saying that she purposely asked to stand so that she would be on the same level as the candidates and not lower than them like Lehrer was.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 8:33 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

so yeah... this thread is real long now.
posted by Babblesort at 8:33 PM on October 16, 2012

BUTT TOUCH FOR 5555
posted by poffin boffin at 8:33 PM on October 16, 2012

I'm not sure what Mitt can do in that last debate. Surely pulling out anything new is going to play to the "flip flop" angle? Any guesses as to his best strategy?

If behind in the polls, attack attack attack, I won't apologize for America, why do you want to cut defence spending is it because you hate babies!

If not, play defense.
posted by jaduncan at 8:33 PM on October 16, 2012

Nice choice for 5556, Brandon.
posted by maudlin at 8:33 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

gdit browser
posted by poffin boffin at 8:33 PM on October 16, 2012

a list of moments i wish i could slap Mitt Romney (self-links via twitter):

"trickle down government"

the fact @MittRomney can only say ILLEGALLY or LEGALLY in reference to immigrants, is all you need to know #HumansArentIllegal

the words MIDDLE CLASS rolling off @MittRomney's lips are just jarring. it's hypocritical. can't brush off that 1% patina

UNFUCKINGBELIEVABLE @MittRomney is sayin there'll be so many jobs with him that companies will even want to hire women
posted by liza at 8:34 PM on October 16, 2012

> The next debate is on foreign policy only. That should be interesting.

It should be interesting, but Romney will just talk over everyone making it a free for all.
posted by de at 8:34 PM on October 16, 2012

OK guys we need not to talk too much after 5556. No need to set the target too high for 2016.
posted by howfar at 8:34 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

China knows what the American conservative voters know, which is that anything Romney says now is blowing smoke. Behind closed doors he knows his place: in a dog collar with mittens on his extremities.

...strapped to the top of a speeding car.
posted by jaduncan at 8:34 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

bonne nuit, muadlin!
posted by winna at 8:34 PM on October 16, 2012

Candy Crowley is on CNN, saying that she purposely asked to stand so that she would be on the same level as the candidates and not lower than them like Lehrer was.

Smart woman. Additional props are headed her way.
posted by maudlin at 8:34 PM on October 16, 2012 [7 favorites]

CNN/ORC poll 46% thought Obama won, 39% thought Romney won. 76% thought Obama did better than they expected, 37% thought Romney did better than they expected.
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 8:35 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I thought the first debate was foreign policy? Again? There are hardly any people left in the world to threaten to kill.
posted by gerryblog at 8:35 PM on October 16, 2012

My favorite part was right before Candy Crowley's factcheck. Romney was trying to harangue Obama and Obama just goes, "Please proceed, Governor."

Because I heard it as, "Go fuck yourself, Governor."
posted by Bokmakierie at 8:35 PM on October 16, 2012 [17 favorites]

Romney said Obama didn't say it was an act of terror the morning after. Obama said, yes, he did. Romney said, nuh uh. Crowley said, yes, in fact, Obama did say that. Romney went BLARGA ARG FUZZA DOODIE NO

That's what I thought happened, but I just couldn't believe that Candy Crowley actually was that on top of it. I mean, since when does a debate moderator do that, and I guarantee she's going to get 10 types of hell from the Right wing echo chamber for it...really amazing...
posted by Skygazer at 8:36 PM on October 16, 2012

oh god I have hit my favorite limit AGAIN this is maddening.
posted by winna at 8:36 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Yeah, that "please proceed" was good.
posted by Miko at 8:36 PM on October 16, 2012

CNN/ORC poll 46% thought Obama won, 39% thought Romney won. 76% thought Obama did better than they expected, 37% thought Romney did better than they expected.

UNSKEWEDSNAPPOLLS.COM
posted by zombieflanders at 8:36 PM on October 16, 2012

muadlin .... even my name is a killing word.
posted by fleacircus at 8:36 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

Have one of mine, winna.
posted by Skygazer at 8:37 PM on October 16, 2012

oh god I have hit my favorite limit AGAIN this is maddening.

this is what sockpuppets are for
posted by poffin boffin at 8:38 PM on October 16, 2012

Hey, I know about that binder! And guess what -- Mitt Romney was lying about it.

Unreal. This guy is just a liar through and through. It seemed a bit off for someone like him to all of a sudden be so concerned about gender equality, but I accepted it. And of course, another lie. Unbelievable.
posted by cashman at 8:38 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

muadlin .... even my name is a killing word.

I know we've achieved our goal of exalting the Motherthread, but I love the David Lynch Dune movie and I'm not sorry.
posted by winna at 8:38 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

Buzzfeed is saying that the CNN snap poll had a weighting of R+8. Double oof.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:39 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

@jbouie: Video: I imagine that this is what Team Obama did after tonight’s debate. http://tmblr.co/ZpN67yVRx-Rx
posted by zombieflanders at 8:41 PM on October 16, 2012

Romney is promising the world. Little does he know, the world is disapproving.
posted by de at 8:43 PM on October 16, 2012

I know we've achieved our goal of exalting the Motherthread, but I love the David Lynch Dune movie and I'm not sorry.

Me too, but only 'cause Sting gets killed in it.
posted by howfar at 8:43 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

Me too, but only 'cause Sting gets killed in it.

Well, that is definitely a selling point.
posted by winna at 8:45 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

That binder story reality check is excellent info:

the percentage of senior-level appointed positions held by women actually declined throughout the Romney administration, from 30.0% prior to his taking office, to 29.7% in July 2004, to 27.6% near the end of his term
posted by Miko at 8:45 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

UNFUCKINGBELIEVABLE @MittRomney is sayin there'll be so many jobs with him that companies will even want to hire women

I'm so glad someone picked up on that too. I heard that, and it insulted me to my core. Such a hideous, disgusting things to say. "Employers will be so desperate for employees, they'll even be willing to hire the wimminz!" It angered me so much, but I didn't see anyone else pick up on it. Man, that was such a jerk line.
posted by meese at 8:46 PM on October 16, 2012 [6 favorites]

Good night all. We did it. Same place in 4 years?
posted by howfar at 8:46 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

Colorado voters give Obama a 48/44 victory in the debate- more importantly 58/36 among independents. Sample is R+3.
posted by jaduncan at 8:47 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Well Miko, would you want to work with him? I know I wouldn't. He has the deadly combination of being a Mormon Bishop and a high stakes Businessman--both of whom tend to put woman i a lower category.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 8:48 PM on October 16, 2012

So Obama won the debate, he finally said the things we wanted him to say, and the motherthread outran all.

I don't smoke, but I feel like I should be having a post-coital cigarette.
posted by jaduncan at 8:49 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

I have had to work with lots of people who thought I was lower because I'm a woman. Their paychecks spend the same as anyone else's. It's nice to work with people who respect me for my skills and abilities, but it's nicer to have a job.

I know what you mean, SLoG, but a binder gotta eat.
posted by winna at 8:50 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'd love to work with him, just for an afternoon. That should do it.
posted by de at 8:52 PM on October 16, 2012

Motherthread wins!! Yay!!
posted by Skygazer at 8:52 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Mitt Romney's Bain Helped Philip Morris Get U.S. High Schoolers Hooked On Cigarettes
posted by homunculus at 8:52 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

YAYY!
posted by notsnot at 8:52 PM on October 16, 2012

That Libya question was the maddest I've ever seen Obama. Almost like he was Obama, Luther's Anger Translator.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:53 PM on October 16, 2012 [8 favorites]

I'm so proud...

/snif

Good night, good peoples.

*Blows nose*
posted by Skygazer at 8:54 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I think it's interesting to note that Romney's "lead" in the polling was always the result of extremely generous likely voter screening that assumes democratic voter turnout will be pretty mediocre. Even if Obama really didn't sway that many undecided voters (although snap polling even with really skewed samples tends to undermine that thought) his performance tonight should really help with Democrat turnout. Obama still needs a big GOTV push in the final weeks but he's got a beast of a organization and tons of motivated canvassers in swing states so I don't think the likely voter screens that some pollster are using are telling a particularly great story.
posted by vuron at 8:55 PM on October 16, 2012

I feel like tomorrow is going to a pretty weird sort of last-day-of-school haze in here. All signing yearbooks, all starting to seriously confront for the first time that it's over and you're not sure what you really spent the last long while doing.
posted by cortex at 8:56 PM on October 16, 2012 [6 favorites]

I guess I actually should have said that this whole, long two weeks—that took at least two years off my life—was a setup for the "Don't call it a comeback" moment tonight.

Then Chuck Todd came along just like clockwork to say something stupid. "Gee, The President lost voters in the middle because he wasn't nice to Romney during the debate." Honestly. How did this guy wind up being the chief political analyst for anything?
posted by ob1quixote at 8:56 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I feel like tomorrow is going to a pretty weird sort of last-day-of-school haze in here. All signing yearbooks, all starting to seriously confront for the first time that it's over and you're not sure what you really spent the last long while doing.

KIT!!! BFF!!!
posted by winna at 8:57 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

and then we fly off in that convertible and no one ever mentions anything about it like it's totally normal and not really weird
posted by poffin boffin at 8:58 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

If Roe v. Wade Goes
posted by homunculus at 9:01 PM on October 16, 2012

In my mind I'm already gone (to bed.)
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 9:01 PM on October 16, 2012

I'M GONNA MISS YOU ALL AND WE HAVE TO KEEP IN TOUCH OVER THE ~~SUMMER~~ PRESIDENCY OKAY.
posted by Phire at 9:01 PM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

sounds like a chitty ending
posted by fleacircus at 9:03 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm sad that we can't write in hot pink and teal glitter pen. METAPONY REQUEST: COLOR CHOICE FONT BUSINESS.
posted by winna at 9:03 PM on October 16, 2012

Dat guy got us the longest thread!
posted by jaduncan at 9:05 PM on October 16, 2012

Kara Smoke: Pretty sure 'binder full of women' was the first name Mark Zuckerberg thought of for Facebook.
posted by Phire at 9:08 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

So we're officially the longest, right? I'm definitely the greatest MeFite in history?
posted by gerryblog at 9:09 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

good job guys *high fives* good thread good thread good thread
posted by twist my arm at 9:10 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

So we're officially the longest, right? I'm definitely the greatest MeFite in history?

You didn't build that.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:12 PM on October 16, 2012 [30 favorites]

Mr. Romney knows this, or at least he used to. Running for the United States Senate in Massachusetts in 1994 against Edward Kennedy, Mr. Romney spoke of a young woman, a close relative, who died years before as result of complications from an illegal abortion to underscore his now-extinct support for Roe v. Wade. In a report in Salon last year, Justin Elliott, a reporter for ProPublica, found that when the young woman passed away, her parents requested that donations be made in her honor to Planned Parenthood. That’s the same invaluable family-planning group that Mr. Romney has pledged to defund once in the White House.

Gaaaaaaah.
posted by jaduncan at 9:13 PM on October 16, 2012 [6 favorites]

I feel like I just fell 29 miles to get down to the bottm of the thread.
posted by mwhybark at 9:15 PM on October 16, 2012

The smell that surrounds you is MetaFilter history.
posted by fleacircus at 9:19 PM on October 16, 2012

One nice thing about hitting the record on this is that I can completely stop worrying about that whole "will a thread hit the record" issue and just enjoy the rest of election season completely free of any kind of stress.
posted by cortex at 9:22 PM on October 16, 2012 [9 favorites]

One nice thing about hitting the record on this is that I can completely stop worrying about that whole "will a thread hit the record" issue and just enjoy the rest of election season completely free of any kind of stress.

This is the American spirit of optimism of which our people are so rightly proud.
posted by winna at 9:23 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

FREEDOM BEYONCE WANTS YOU TO VOTE FOR OBAMA

Romney shoulda put three rings on it.
posted by fleacircus at 9:24 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

S'pose waiting on another Mother Jones RomneyLeak is taking optimism too far.
posted by de at 9:27 PM on October 16, 2012

Meta
posted by Artw at 9:32 PM on October 16, 2012

The conservatives I know are talking about how stupid debates are and rediscovering their hatred of the sound bite, so I think we can chalk this one up as a solid win.

Hey guys, lets go TP jobs.metafilter.
posted by fleacircus at 9:34 PM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

Is the thread going to close at 12:00 am Oct 17th, 11:59 pm Oct, 17th or exactly 30 days after it was opened, 6pm Oct 17th?
posted by nooneyouknow at 9:35 PM on October 16, 2012

Wow. I feel like a cigarette after reading the debate thread. And I don't even smoke.

BINDERS! Binders FULL of WOMEN!
posted by RedOrGreen at 9:36 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney To Town Hall Audience: 'I Own Horses And Care For Them, And You Are All Like Horses' --

“The horses I own, especially the ones who specialize in dressage, need constant attention because they are unable to care for themselves, much like all of you,” said Romney, adding that to the extent that horses aren’t the smartest animals out there, average Americans “aren’t that bright either.” “See, if I didn’t buy my horses and train them, they would be roaming around a some field somewhere, lacking any sort of direction. They wouldn’t know there is a better, more fulfilling life for them out there in which I am their owner and master. So what I’m saying is, let me buy you, and everything will be better.” To further the analogy, Romney said that when Americans get sick or break a leg, they should be shot.

posted by sallybrown at 9:38 PM on October 16, 2012 [4 favorites]

4pm server time, which is Pacific.
posted by cortex at 9:39 PM on October 16, 2012

Romney said Obama didn't say it was an act of terror the morning after. Obama said, yes, he did. Romney said, nuh uh.

My take on this (apologies if it's obvious) is that the Romney team's talking point is that Obama didn't declare it "terrorism" until 14 days after. Of course, Obama said an "act of terror" the day after instead. If he'd said "terrorism" they would have said he didn't say it was an "act or terror" or something.

Romney must have been coached so hard to make sure he said that "Obama didn't say terrorism" but he lost it and said "act of terror". Ha ha ha. That'll teach him to misrepresent.
posted by NailsTheCat at 9:39 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

> Romney said Obama didn't say it was an act of terror the morning after. Obama said, yes, he did. Romney said, nuh uh.

Romney's wife has the same morning after problems.
posted by de at 9:42 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Thread haiku, for jokeefe:

Romney is honest,
Mother Jones rises again.
Palin is erased.
posted by jaduncan at 9:46 PM on October 16, 2012 [3 favorites]

Great debate performance tonight, Mitt! (heh heh)
posted by Lynsey at 10:04 PM on October 16, 2012

(Sadly, some of those things are now a bit dated, like the order to close Guantanamo Bay facility, given the subsequent blockages to this order, from the Senate and such).

Bush-Appointed Judge Smacks Down Bush and Obama's Military Commissions
posted by homunculus at 10:06 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

The crowd were pretty passive through most of the debate, but it did seem that Obama got all the good crowd reaction moments, including a number of solid laughs (that at least on the PBS stream sounded quite loud).
posted by haveanicesummer at 10:12 PM on October 16, 2012

so long, old thread, and thanks for all the poffins!
posted by hap_hazard at 10:17 PM on October 16, 2012

America Has Now Met the Many Romneys, and America Knows They Can Get Their Asses Kicked
posted by homunculus at 10:37 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

It's not the length of a thread, it's what you do with it.
posted by mazola at 10:43 PM on October 16, 2012 [1 favorite]

Tonight, Romney = Judge Smails.
posted by klangklangston at 11:34 PM on October 16, 2012 [2 favorites]

So long, it's been good to know you,
The heft of this thread is killing my phone.....
And the Palin thread is long gone.
posted by bardophile at 11:36 PM on October 16, 2012

Aww, I missed the moment where we crossed the 5555 barrier, but it's nice to know we made it!

I noticed at the beginning the moderator mentioned that the audience had agreed to the standard respectful, no cheering, applause etc so the audience applauding the fact-check really stood out.
posted by TwoWordReview at 11:38 PM on October 16, 2012

does anyone read the posts down here?
posted by axiom at 1:45 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

does anyone read the posts down here?

No. I, for one, do not.
posted by jaduncan at 1:47 AM on October 17, 2012

Our boyfriend's back and Willard's gonna be in trouble. . . .

Hey-la, heyla!
posted by bardic at 2:18 AM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

I was told there'd be mashed potatoes...?
posted by Joseph Gurl at 2:40 AM on October 17, 2012

Thing that I did not expect to do this morning: google 'binders' + 'women' to work out what the hell twitter was on about
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 2:58 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Hi guys. I'm selling these fine leather binders.
posted by ersatz at 5:03 AM on October 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

We have achieved history!
posted by drezdn at 5:08 AM on October 17, 2012

"I don't look at my pension. It's not as big as yours, so it doesn't take as long."
posted by box at 5:14 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Having two active threads is beyond annoying. Besides, this one makes my iPad browser barf and die.
posted by Slap*Happy at 5:21 AM on October 17, 2012

drezdn writes "We have achieved history!"

Hurray!
posted by Mitheral at 5:31 AM on October 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

The thread is on Deathwatch now I guess. So long old friend, parting is such sweet sorrow.
posted by edgeways at 6:02 AM on October 17, 2012

I am going to depart this thread. It's been fun; I'll miss you.
posted by Miko at 6:06 AM on October 17, 2012

OMG. I am sorry in advance for this.

The hair switcheroo twixt Fightin' Joe and Lyin' Ryan.
posted by Skygazer at 6:08 AM on October 17, 2012

Don't we have until 7pm EST?

TO 6000 AND BEYOND!
posted by zombieflanders at 6:22 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Just a little crumb to add on the way to 6K (and perhaps beyond)!
posted by iamkimiam at 6:38 AM on October 17, 2012

Here in this "battleground state" of Colorado, mail-in ballots just started arriving in mailboxes. Goodbye sweet thread, I'll be voting now!
posted by mkdg at 6:38 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

TO 6000 AND BEYOND!

But then how will we manage in 2016? It's all about managing expectations...
posted by bardophile at 6:39 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Angry Mitt is angry
posted by drezdn at 6:42 AM on October 17, 2012

I am so proud of you all.
posted by grouse at 6:57 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm sorry I'm late to the thread. Can somebody give me a precis?
posted by Jehan at 7:02 AM on October 17, 2012

The thread is on Deathwatch now I guess. So long old friend, parting is such sweet sorrow.
posted by edgeways

Opening this thread now consistently turns on the fan in my laptop. It's kind of awesome.
posted by COBRA! at 7:05 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Romney's Sensible Stance On Israel / Palestine

But perhaps the time has come to face reality and recognize that Romney was right, that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict “is going to remain an unsolved problem” for a long time and that Washington cannot do much more than “moving things along the best you can.” Members of the reality-based community should admit that the U.S.-led “peace process” has accomplished little. And yet, like the Energizer Bunny, it keeps going and going and going.

ROW, DAMN YOU! ROW!
posted by the man of twists and turns at 7:05 AM on October 17, 2012

Romney Speech Raised Red Flags For Military School
posted by the man of twists and turns at 7:08 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Precis:

Romney got videotaped making a speech confirming that he believes what most commenters thought he believed.
All but a handful of commenters agree that Romney is not the person to vote for in this election.
Some of the commenters feel that neither deserves to be voted for.
The first debate was Romney lying and Obama not responding.
The vice-presidential debate was Biden calling Ryan a liar, with evidence, but without actual use of the words "lie", "liar", or "lying".
Last night, Obama mopped the town hall floor with Romney.
The press continues to panic, criticize, sensationalize, and occasionally (but they promise to try better about rectifying those slips) informing.
The rest of the thread was about efforts to surpass the Palin thread.
Now it is a thread adrift.
posted by bardophile at 7:09 AM on October 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

I hereby pronounce this thread AWESOME.
posted by Theta States at 7:11 AM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

homunculus: America Has Now Met the Many Romneys, and America Knows They Can Get Their Asses Kicked

Pierce does it again. That paragraph on, "Jesus Christ, I'd hate to play golf with [Mitt Romney]," is just priceless.
posted by ob1quixote at 7:14 AM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

I keep making the same mistake: I dink around until bedtime, as usual, then I remember "oh hey wasn't there a debate today?" and I click over here and you guys have written goddamn War And Peace The Extended Remix about it and I must read ALL THE THINGS before I can sleep. Grrr.

Is it too early in the day for a nightcap?
posted by ook at 7:15 AM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

it's always time for a nightcap somewhere
posted by twist my arm at 7:17 AM on October 17, 2012

Even if you've got a binder full of women, you didn't compile that! You didn't even ask for it.
posted by anotherpanacea at 7:25 AM on October 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

On binders.
posted by Wordshore at 7:26 AM on October 17, 2012

Only four more till 5678. Do we have the necessary self-control?
posted by gerryblog at 7:27 AM on October 17, 2012

also the thread as a whole surpassed war and peace awhile ago. not the same as doing it all in one debate of course, but still. it would be interesting to see stats in terms of peak commenting rate, longest time between comments, most valuable commenter in terms of commenting total, distribution (1000 people commenting once, 50 people commenting 200 times).
posted by twist my arm at 7:29 AM on October 17, 2012

I'd like to say hello to historians of the future who have unearthed this thread to get context on WTF is goin' down.
posted by Theta States at 7:32 AM on October 17, 2012

I love you all.
posted by jokeefe at 7:34 AM on October 17, 2012

Close it there!
posted by gerryblog at 7:37 AM on October 17, 2012

I love you all.

Too bad we passed 5440 a while ago.
posted by maudlin at 7:39 AM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Our next question is from twist my arm, and it's for cortex: Would you rather moderate 1000 duck-sized comments once, or 50 horse-sized comments 200 times?
posted by zombieflanders at 7:49 AM on October 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

That's a great question. Thank you so much for asking that. I think a lot of us, these—we look at these comments, the comments that are in the threads today, and what we want to know is, how can we trust a moderator who spent 43 months with the horse-to-duck ratio over six to one? Six to one! That's unbelievable, that's—I, I, I think most mefites believe, like I do, that there's a real need for change in the horse-sized comment supply, but more than that even it's the economy, people are hurting because there's a, a, there's—look, I've got a five point plan that will turn this site around. One. More ducks. Two, fewer horses, that will reduce the horse issue in my first month. Three, we've got to stop China from turning horses into ducks, that's horse manipulation. Four, horse-ducks. It's a sort of half-horse, half-duck thing, much less expensive than a pony, this what middle class families need. And five, cut flag rates by 20% across the board.
posted by cortex at 8:01 AM on October 17, 2012 [35 favorites]

In the eternal words of Crow T. Robot, "Good night, sweet ~~Hubble~~ thread, and a flight of angels sing thee to thy rest."
posted by Theta States at 8:03 AM on October 17, 2012

Oh, the moderation!
posted by Danf at 8:08 AM on October 17, 2012

Only four more till 5678. Do we have the necessary self-control?

Naturally no. It's a hedonistic thread with a unique subculture.
posted by jaduncan at 8:08 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

I, I, I...there's a, a, there's—look

you actually do this a lot on the podcast. now i'm suspicious that you do it on purpose as a humanizing trick.
posted by twist my arm at 8:14 AM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Romney should smoke a spliff and rethink the direction his life has taken.

"And I say, I say this to America. America was built by the hands of hard working, good American families. Have you ever - I say have you ever - really looked at your hands? I mean, look at them. Hands. Amazing."
posted by jaduncan at 8:14 AM on October 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

you actually do this a lot on the podcast. now i'm suspicious that you do it on purpose as a humanizing trick.

Oh man, I consistently rush and repeat and stammer over filler words and conjunctions, yeah. Probably a little more than the average speaker even, especially when I'm nerding out on something. But not much more; part of the thing is we rarely (outside of either linguistics or Ha Ha Gotcha contexts) see transcripts of extemporaneous speech that actually dutifully reproduce all those misfires and false starts and redundancies, because there's not actually a lot of semantically interesting content to all that and it's harder to read.

If you look at an actual phonetic transcript of extemporaneous speech (not scripted remarks, that's a whole other ballgame) by even folks considered to be very eloquent speakers, you'll find all kinds of junk in there that we don't even really actively notice when listening for content in real time because it's just speech glue, it's stuff we produce and consume really naturally as a part of two-way verbal communication.

I enjoy trying to render that sort of speech junk for dialogue in writing sometimes because I happen to think it's interesting glue and humanizes a written character a little, but one of the interesting things you'll see is how in more of a journalistic (or faux-journalistic) context the use of cleaned-up vs raw transcript style can be a kind of code-switching where someone may elect to not clean up a transcript not so much because the ums and the I, I, Is are important to understanding the quote but because it just makes the speaker look clumsier or less coherent.
posted by cortex at 8:29 AM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

"And I say, I say this to America. America was built by the hands of hard working, good American families. Have you ever - I say have you ever - really looked at your hands? I mean, look at them. Hands. Amazing."

"Take a look at these hands. Take a look at these hands. The hand speaks. The hand of a government man."

(Hey, Ryan can loan him an appropriate suit, too.)

From the hand of a government man
Came these papers
Came these signs
Came these good things
From this machinery hums come
Oiled and whirling
Fast strong
Tightness meshing
Meshing forever
(pert near)
Steel gear inside gear

Another Theory Shot to Shit.
posted by Ironmouth at 8:38 AM on October 17, 2012

Sorry, U.S. Recoveries Really Aren’t Different

Recently, however, a few op-ed writers have argued that, in fact, the U.S. is “different” and that international comparisons aren’t relevant because of profound institutional differences from one country to another. Some of these authors, including Kevin Hassett, Glenn Hubbard and John Taylor -- who are advisers to the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney -- as well as Michael Bordo, who supports the candidate, have stressed that the U.S. is also “different” in that its recoveries from recessions associated with financial crises have been rapid and strong. Their interpretation is at least partly based on a 2012 study by Bordo and Joseph Haubrich, which examines the issue for the U.S. since 1880.

Gross Misinterpretations
We have not publicly supported or privately advised either campaign. We well appreciate that during elections, academic economists sometimes become advocates. It is entirely reasonable for a scholar, in that role, to try to argue that a candidate has a better economic program that will benefit the country in the future. But when it comes to assessing U.S. financial history, the license for advocacy becomes more limited, and we have to take issue with gross misinterpretations of the facts.

posted by syzygy at 8:55 AM on October 17, 2012

I suspect and fear the media isn't tackling this brazen, unbelievably rude move, can more media-connected mefites shed some light on it?

Charlie Pierce @ Esquire mentioned it (link upthread), but I'm not sure any of the usual vidiots or talking heads are mentioning it. But I repeat myself.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:08 AM on October 17, 2012

I suspect and fear the media isn't tackling this brazen, unbelievably rude move

Not centrally, but it is being mentioned. Here's your Google news search for "You'll get your chance in a moment. I'm still speaking.", but the short version is that there's about 1,530 results.
posted by jaduncan at 9:08 AM on October 17, 2012

CORTEX/DUCK 2016.

I hit my favourites limit again. Dammit.
posted by Phire at 9:15 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

In regards to the whole "I'm not speaking," I think that kind of stuff is generally a calculated gambit to lower the power/prestige of the POTUS and raise the power/prestige of the challenger. Ie essentially saying, "I don't have to accept your power, I will be the power soon" blahblahblah. Which is kind of shitty, but may be why news networks aren't covering it aggressively.

Also, thread, I love you so, but how you break my computing devices!
posted by corb at 9:20 AM on October 17, 2012

I'm a bit afraid to wade into the normal media on one particular aspect of the debate, where Romney fucking said, to the fucking President of the United States of America: ""You'll get your chance in a moment. I'm still speaking."

The President is far more civilized than I am, because if someone spoke to me in that tone of voice I would provide them with a selection of anatomically impossible activity suggestions for my interlocutor and a dead goat. It was breathtaking to see someone behave that way, not just to the President, but anyone.
posted by winna at 9:21 AM on October 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

I kept wanting the moderator to call out the presumptuous rudeness of talking over her. Just saying, "That's rude. You've had your time," would have been a great way to reassert the control of the room, and made it harder to continue talking over her.
posted by klangklangston at 9:27 AM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

If the trade-off was between calling Romney out on his rudeness that most people will see for themselves anyway or catching him in the middle of a blatant lie fed to him by the conservative media bubble, I'd take the latter every time.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:32 AM on October 17, 2012

I'm finally watching the second debate now on youtube and I can't look at the other thread until I finish the debate, but have to say the "You'll get your chance in a moment" pissed me off in the context where it happened. Romney has lived his whole adult life having the last word on everything and gets bent out of shape by little things like that.
posted by peeedro at 9:32 AM on October 17, 2012

Binders full of women you say? I've heard of something like this before.
posted by eyeballkid at 9:48 AM on October 17, 2012

Why Romney Screwed Up the Libya Question
posted by homunculus at 9:55 AM on October 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

homunculus: "Why Romney Screwed Up the Libya Question"

he is bad at politics? now to click dat link
posted by boo_radley at 9:57 AM on October 17, 2012

Naiiiiiled it.
posted by boo_radley at 9:58 AM on October 17, 2012

Longer boats are coming to win us
They're coming to win us, they're coming to win us
Longer boats are coming to win us
Hold on to the shore, they'll be taking the key from the door.
posted by futz at 10:04 AM on October 17, 2012

It's not for everyone, but I am really enjoying the hilarious YouTube creations this cycle. Here are a few that I don't think have been posted yet in the Motherthread(!):

Obama v Romney - Epic Rap Battle
Obama and Romney Duet - Hot and Cold
VP Debate Songified
Romney sings Big Problems

In a perfect world, all political parodies would be musical.
posted by Vysharra at 10:07 AM on October 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

I am not sure when this thread will close so I just had to do a shout out to all my fellow peeps on our journey from hope to despair to hope - y'all are awesome, can't think of anyone I would rather go through an election with.
posted by madamjujujive at 10:07 AM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Vysharra: In a perfect world, all political parodies would be musical.

Caught this one on last night.

Video: I imagine that this is what Team Obama did after tonight’s debate. tmblr.co/ZpN67yVRx-Rx— Jamelle Bouie (@jbouie) October 17, 2012

The linked tumblr post is just an embed of Baracka Flacka Flames - "Head of The State" [NSFW: Explicit Lyrics]
posted by ob1quixote at 10:26 AM on October 17, 2012

7pm est. i daren't hope for 6000 in a last-minute push of reminiscing. but remember every morning when we'd read the tea leaves on 538 and freak out accordingly?

*gets misty*
posted by twist my arm at 10:26 AM on October 17, 2012

We Are Sure Mitt Romney’s Lady-Binders Are Nothing Like Outlaw Mormon Sect ‘Joy Books,’ Because That Would Be Gross
posted by homunculus at 10:27 AM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

^ Mitt Romney admits using Chinese slave labor at Bain

"The Bain Partner I was with turned to me and said, you know, 95% of life is settled if you are born in America. This is uh, this is an amazing land and what we have is unique and fortunately it is so special we are sharing it with the world." -Mitt Romney-

Leslie T. Chang: The voices of China's workers
[15min TED Talk] The cheats.
posted by de at 10:28 AM on October 17, 2012

Hey, if I'm going to stain my brain with the horror of this drawing, so are you.
posted by cashman at 10:28 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

dude i know that's not a pancake with syrup and a pat of butter on her foot, what am i looking at?
posted by twist my arm at 10:32 AM on October 17, 2012

In a perfect world, all political parodies would be musical.

In a perfect world the debate itself would be done as a musical. This would take the edge off of the "alpha male" posturing. Candidates could choose the music ahead of time. All responses must be sung or rapped. Obama would respond to mo-town. Romney to Book of Mormon? Ryan to Rage Against the Machine (who would make an exception in this case - maybe even play live for him).
posted by Golden Eternity at 10:45 AM on October 17, 2012

homunculus: "Why Romney Screwed Up the Libya Question"

For the tl:dr; crowd:

So how did Romney end up getting it so wrong? As the Washington Post's Eric Wemple notes, Romney was simply repeating what's been written ad nauseam in the conservative media. For conservatives, the administration's insistence—chiefly UN Ambassador Susan Rice's remarks shortly after the attack—on pointing to a widely seen anti-Islam video on YouTube as a cause was the same as claiming the attack was not an act of terror. But that's simply not true, because Obama had identified the incident as "an act of terror" even when the administration said it believed the video was the cause. The idea that blaming the video meant not acknowledging the attack as an act of terrorism is a false distinction. They're not mutually exclusive. Republicans had convinced themselves otherwise.

I think this is a very clear distinction between the two parties. I can't find the comment that I'm sure I read here on the blue, but the ideology of authority on the Republican side is really starting to hurt them long term. If watching only Fox News is a requirement for the reality distortion field to continue to have credibility, they're going to lose election after election after election.

That's probably why the fact-checking craze has taken off. Collectively we're tired of the rhetoric, and tired of the hyperbole, so the facts are starting to matter because we've learned to tune out the rest of the noise — at least those of us who prefer evidence over authority.

And, since the political spectrum has moved the Democrats to the middle, I think it's very difficult for the Republican party to carve out any meaningful positions that aren't batshit crazy or indistinguishable from Democratic positions.

In a way, I feel bad for Romney. I know he thinks lying to please whatever crowd he's in front of is the way politicians operate, and that was the case in the past, but when every single campaign appearance is a click away as a video, successfully pretending to hold two opposing viewpoints just isn't possible anymore. If you're going regurgitate some ridiculous nonsense to please a Tea Party in Georgia, and then you claim the opposite three months later on television, people are going to know about it. The internal pandering to extremists inside of both political parties has no place in the future, but unfortunately for moderate Republicans, that leaves them in a small minority when compared to what's left of the Democratic party.

For me, it was all summed up in the moment when Romney took credit for Romneycare extending health insurance to everyone in Massachusetts as a sign of his success. You could see the confusion on his face: he didn't know if he was allowed to say that on television. If most of your party sees taking credit for helping people as a failure of leadership, there is something deeply ignorant and wrong about the principles driving your party.
posted by deanklear at 10:47 AM on October 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

What do folks make of Crowley's semi-backtrack? Seeing it go around with my (few) Republican Facebook friends.
posted by naoko at 10:52 AM on October 17, 2012

I hope this campaign ends the notion that the way to win an election is to promise virtually anything and provide absolutely zero detail on how it would be accomplished. Complete energy dependence in 5 or 8 years? Cut taxes $8T and remain revenue neutral?
posted by Golden Eternity at 10:54 AM on October 17, 2012

Yikes. When I was grabbing links for my last post, I noticed there were dozens of Ellen clips waiting for me. My Fangirl membership has officially lapsed.

I didn't realize how consuming these ElectionFilter mega threads were until now. I've had an open window on at least one active thread since Clinton's Awesome Speech at the DNC. I barely have the time or energy to check Facebook recently, let alone my subscriptions. I'm looking forward to when this is all over and I can get back to what's really important.

/rowrowrow
//Obama needs to go on Tea Time with Sophia Grace and Rosie.
///Please, oh please!
posted by Vysharra at 11:00 AM on October 17, 2012

Not just cut taxes and remain revenue neutral but to also keep that revenue neutral across all income brackets!
posted by Green With You at 11:02 AM on October 17, 2012

energy independence. Oops, missed the edit timeout.
posted by Golden Eternity at 11:06 AM on October 17, 2012

What do folks make of Crowley's semi-backtrack ? Seeing it go around with my (few) Republican Facebook friends.

Candy Crowley: I didn’t backtrack on Libya in debate
posted by zombieflanders at 11:08 AM on October 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

dude i know that's not a pancake with syrup and a pat of butter on her foot, what am i looking at?

The little paper wheels on some binders that you wind the string around to close it.
posted by cashman at 11:08 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Pierce does it again. That paragraph on, "Jesus Christ, I'd hate to play golf with [Mitt Romney]," is just priceless.

He's back at it this morning: Debate Spin Room: Beyond Binders, Etch-A-Sketch 2.0
posted by homunculus at 11:08 AM on October 17, 2012

What do folks make of Crowley's semi-backtrack? Seeing it go around with my (few) Republican Facebook friends.

It's not a backtrack. She just reiterates what she said in order to argue that she wasn't being unfair to Romney. Which she wasn't being.
posted by howfar at 11:13 AM on October 17, 2012

Do Romney and Ryan really think they can just. keep. lying to win?
posted by howfar at 11:14 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Do Romney and Ryan really think they can just. keep. lying to win?

All politicians lie. Some are better at it than others. No political party has a monopoly on the truth.

Lying is a tactic that works. We have only look to Bush/Cheney 2004 to know it.

Despite the efforts of both parties to control their respective messages, elections still tend to hinge on small, unscripted events and revelations, and "game-changing" interactions between candidates.
posted by zarq at 11:22 AM on October 17, 2012

howfar: "Do Romney and Ryan really think they can just. keep. lying to win?"

"Oh, no. We've totally learned that lesson.
posted by boo_radley at 11:38 AM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Lying is a tactic that works. We have only look to Bush/Cheney 2004 to know it.

But it isn't the only tactic that works, and I think failing to vary the tactic after a successful first debate is suggestive of a lack of depth in the R/R campaign.

elections still tend to hinge on small, unscripted events and revelations, and "game-changing" interactions between candidates.

I don't think that this is particularly accurate. There are some moments when some elections turn of course, but there are almost invariably fundamentals that are the most important factors in shaping the outcome. The media would love you to believe that game changers are much more important than they are, because "anything can happen" is a much more exciting message than "but it probably won't".
posted by howfar at 11:38 AM on October 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

~~Hope~~ Binders
posted by homunculus at 12:25 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

IBTL.

Do Romney and Ryan really think they can just. keep. lying to win?

They don't think they are lying. And within the confines of their worldview, they aren't.

You remember that thing someone said a few years back "we create our own reality, and you people in the press just report on that". It's like that.

That being said, I think Mitt is more focused on just winning the thing than on convincing people he should win the thing. Which is to say, he's willing to live in whatever reality gets him elected and is less willing to create it.

As for Ryan - that guy is a smarmy used car salesman. I think he believes his own BS.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 12:27 PM on October 17, 2012

Still working my way through watching the debate, but man those people in the audience look miserable.
posted by peeedro at 12:33 PM on October 17, 2012

zarq: All politicians lie. Some are better at it than others. No political party has a monopoly on the truth.

Sorry, but I have a real problem with this type of false equivalency. It is my opinion that the GOP are, at this time in history, fundamentally more dishonest than the Democrats. I know this is a generalization, but I believe it is one that holds true.

The problem isn't that all politicians lie. The problem is that the GOP relies almost solely on lying, every step of the way. There is no equivalency, at this time in history.
posted by syzygy at 12:37 PM on October 17, 2012 [17 favorites]

homunculus: "Why Romney Screwed Up the Libya Question"

Google "epistemic closure".
posted by benito.strauss at 12:40 PM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

‘It Felt Like [Mitt Romney] Was Staring Into My Soul’: The Post-Debate Musings of Jeremy Epstein

Jeremy is lucky. When Mitt slays an enemy he takes that person's soul and puts it in his magic Binder of Souls. Last night he clearly had his eye on Jeremy's soul.
posted by homunculus at 12:42 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

No political party has a monopoly on the truth.

Q: "Mr. Secretary, on Iraq, how much money do you think the Department of Defense would need to pay for a war with Iraq?"

Rumsfeld: "Well, the Office of Management and Budget, has come up come up with a number that's something under $50 billion for the cost. How much of that would be the U.S. burden, and how much would be other countries, is an open question."
...
Rumsfeld: "Five days or five weeks or five months, but [the Iraq War] certainly isn't going to last any longer than that."

...

CNBC: "You have said in the past that it was quote "pretty well confirmed."

Cheney: "No, I never said that. Never said that. Absolutely not."
...
Meet The Press, December 9, 2001
Cheney: "It's been pretty well confirmed that he [Atta] did go to Prague and he did meet with a Senior Official of the Iraqi Intelligence service."

...

President Bush: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

The Washington Post: "Dozens of interviews with current and former intelligence officials and policymakers in the United States, Britain, France and Italy show that the Bush administration disregarded key information available at the time showing that the Iraq-Niger claim was highly questionable."

No monopolies, sure, but one is at least somewhere in the ballpark of what I call reality and fact.
posted by deanklear at 12:43 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

I agree with pogo that most of what we perceive as lying is actually a radically different world view. Romney likely really believes that his view of tax reform will be a game changer for all kinds of social and economic ills, much in the same way people in the reagan era believed in trickle-down economics. Why worry about women's issues and safety nets when we can all just get wealthier due to our exceptional american-ness, business savvy, and willingness to let the future rot? His answer about adding more jobs so businesses will hire more women comes in the context of that thought-process.
posted by ianhattwick at 12:46 PM on October 17, 2012

I agree with pogo that most of what we perceive as lying is actually a radically different world view.

Yes, a world view where pathological lying should get you whatever you want.
posted by octobersurprise at 12:53 PM on October 17, 2012 [6 favorites]

But it isn't the only tactic that works, and I think failing to vary the tactic after a successful first debate is suggestive of a lack of depth in the R/R campaign.

Part of the problem (as pogo fuzzybutt notes) is they do believe what they are saying. But the fact that they seem to also think they can be elected with a complete lack of policy specifics and by emphasizing their competence without providing any details, represents (I think) a much bigger problem. Thanks to the revelations discussed in this post, we already know Mitt has a great deal of contempt for the American people. Well, 47% of us, anyway. So the lack of details and specifics become part of an overarching false narrative for people who are likely to believe it.

This is the same reason why Bush and Cheney fearmongered non-stop in 2004, and why so much of McCain/Palin's campaign rhetoric was fearmongering of a different sort. They believe they don't need to be accurate to win -- they just need to be convincing.

There are some moments when some elections turn of course, but there are almost invariably fundamentals that are the most important factors in shaping the outcome.

Yes.... and no. I was writing quickly and should have gone into detail. Let me clarify and backtrack a bit?

I think the small moments and large moments are both important and one shouldn't be dismissed in favor of the other. I suspect the reasons people vote for one person / party or another are a lot more complicated than is usually acknowledged.

The media would love you to believe that game changers are much more important than they are, because "anything can happen" is a much more exciting message than "but it probably won't".

I'm not really referring to anything said in the media, because I don't particularly believe they're properly attuned to public opinion. I'm speaking of the role 'gotcha moments,' hypocrisy, expectations and scandal play in humbling the powerful -- some of which may be highlighted by the media, some not. It seems doubtful that mainstream media outlets would have paid much attention to the "Big Bird" or "Binders for Women" moments in the debates if they hadn't trended so strongly on Twitter and Facebook. Small things, but they add to an anti-woman, anti-child, anti-poor narrative that has been a consistent GOP problem, and could well have a larger, negative impact for Romney.

There has been a strong, ongoing undercurrent of public resentment and distrust towards politicians, congress and many state legislatures for decades, which the Tea Party has most recently tried to capitalize on, which Candidate Obama very effectively harnessed to catapult him into the oval office in 2008. I don't think we should be ruling the potential impact of anything, large or small, that could influence the way people vote -- especially their proven tendency to vote against their own self-interest.
posted by zarq at 12:59 PM on October 17, 2012

Paul Ryan mistook Colt McCoy for Brandon Weeden. He then asked Trent Richardson to autograph his copy of Madden NFL 12.
posted by drezdn at 1:04 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

It is my opinion that the GOP are, at this time in history, fundamentally more dishonest than the Democrats. I know this is a generalization, but I believe it is one that holds true.

I agree. I think they've been that way for decades.

But that doesn't mean we should ignore lies told and stories concocted that we happen to agree with. There's nothing wrong with pointing out broken promises, either. We don't improve the status quo by closing our eyes to its problems. Sorry, but as far as I'm concerned, 'They do it less' is simply not good enough.
posted by zarq at 1:12 PM on October 17, 2012

Lets put into context shall we, in terms of popular knowledge?

The biggest lie that the Bush Government is on record of perpetrating involves false pretexts for going to war thereby killing a bunch of people and wasting shitones on money.

The biggest lie the Clinton Government is on record of perpetrating, was about getting a blowjob.

The biggest lie the Obama Government committed isn't even a lie, he actually IS a US citizen.

One was impeached.

No, there is no monopoly, and lying is a bad thing, but good god, on balance I'd much rather people lie about getting illicit nookie then why we should go bomb the shit out of people, I would take 1000 John Edwards (as much of a dick he turned out to be) and Eliot Spitzers to one George W Bush.
posted by edgeways at 1:15 PM on October 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

I agree with pogo that most of what we perceive as lying is actually a radically different world view.

Yes, a world view where pathological lying should get you whatever you want.

It's probably a much more paternalist point of view, of telling what they consider small or "white" lies for the greater good of getting themselves into power so they can fix things. So I think they probably do think they're doing the right thing, even when they know some of the details may not be accurate.

And some portion of their followers basically feel the same way - annoyed at how focused the left can get on specifics when the point is (to them) an overall method or even just attitude of leadership... They want someone strong, with a good smile and a firm handshake, who can be the logo of the country.
posted by mdn at 1:32 PM on October 17, 2012

The present day Repulican party (at least the less cynical members) lies because overall they believe the end justifies the means. They are just 'over selling' because they believe present day America has gone off the rails. Why isn't everything like the America they remember from Andy Griffith and Meet the Beaver? The America that never was. And they instinctually avoid anything that will change their world view so they turn a blind eye to any media that does not reflect this world view back at them.

So it's lying, but with a strange determination that thru shear force of will IT WILL BECOME TRUE. Also because god is on our side.

It is an impossible position to argue with.
posted by readery at 1:38 PM on October 17, 2012

Romney's Bain Capital Is Sending a Bunch of High-Tech Jobs to China on the Day Before the Election: The story of Sensata Technologies is about the hollowing out of America's economy by a rapacious 1 percent.
posted by homunculus at 1:44 PM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Charlie Pierce has the sharpest knives around:

"I know George W. Bush and you, governor, are no George W. Bush," is about the nastiest thing that can be said about any American politician.

posted by benito.strauss at 1:48 PM on October 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

My Pain Is Mitt Romney's Gain: My Story as a Sensata Worker
posted by homunculus at 1:48 PM on October 17, 2012

The Sensata stuff is probably nearing FPP worthy. They are doing videos, they've created a website, and it is getting a decent amount of traction. It's timely, relevant, and interesting.
posted by cashman at 1:50 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

With 2 hours to go, this thread got serious again!
posted by Theta States at 1:53 PM on October 17, 2012

The biggest lie the Obama Government committed isn't even a lie, he actually IS a US citizen.

No, there were a ton of promises made by the President during his campaign and first year in office on domestic and foreign affairs which have not been kept. Not all of them can be chalked up to a recalcitrant Congress. All Presidents find the reality of governing much more restrictive than they probably thought.

Personally, I'm okay with his results considering the mess he was given. The current administration has done wonderfully positive things. No question.

No, there is no monopoly, and lying is a bad thing, but good god, on balance I'd much rather people lie about getting illicit nookie then why we should go bomb the shit out of people,

I agree.

Which administration were you speaking of, then? The Obama administration has quietly authorized bombing the shit out of Pakistan through drone attacks at a rate five times higher than his predecessor, and according to the White House, the campaign does not officially exist.

I'm tweaking you a bit, but I hope you understand my point? The administration has done their damndest to keep that military campaign under wraps.

I know there's a difference between Bush and Obama, and especially betweeen unmanned attacks versus troops on the ground. I also believe wholeheartedly that Obama is better than the alternative. And I'm impressed with his overall track record, which is why I'm voting for him again. I don't even want to contemplate the nightmare that would be a Romney administration.

But I won't sugar-coat reality, either.
posted by zarq at 1:54 PM on October 17, 2012

My Pain Is Mitt Romney's Gain: My Story as a Sensata Worker

Tom Guaulrapp: "I've worked at the same factory in Freeport, Ill. for thirty-three years, making sensors and controls for the auto industry. It's tough work, but it pays a living wage with health benefits that folks can count on, and it fuels our town's economy and tax base.

That's been changing since Bain Capital came to town. Two years ago, our factory was sold to Sensata Technologies, a company created by Bain Capital, and they told us that by December 2012, all 170 of our jobs would be shipped to China. They even made us train our Chinese replacements."

Those are five devastating sentences.
posted by cashman at 1:54 PM on October 17, 2012 [5 favorites]

Sensata Workers for Truth
posted by Golden Eternity at 1:56 PM on October 17, 2012

Filter in the Wind

Goodbye, motherthread
Though we read you through it all
You had the length to bring all our
Web devices to a crawl
Trolls crawled out of the woodwork
And they whispered into our brains
They set us off on tangents
As the goalposts moved again

But it seems to me
You lived your life
Like a massive megathread
Never knowing when the comments
Get deranged again

And I would have liked to read you
But you were just too long
And all I can contribute now
Is a lameass tribute song
posted by MrVisible at 2:10 PM on October 17, 2012 [7 favorites]

With 2 hours to go, this thread got serious again!

MeTa.
posted by maryr at 2:12 PM on October 17, 2012

zarq: No, there were a ton of promises made by the President during his campaign and first year in office on domestic and foreign affairs which have not been kept.

First off, I don't categorize not keeping a promise to do something in the future in the same league as knowingly distorting facts about something that happened in the past.

I also think that some in the GOP know full well that they're lying.

Then there's this GOP dirty trick of the 'manufactured scandal,' like we see with Benghazi or Fast and Furious. Specifically with Benghazi, they're lying off their asses about a number of things, misconstruing things, and they have heated the discussion up so much that they've planted the idea of a coverup in the minds of their followers. Now they've launched their investigation, and whether the investigation turns anything up, they're hoping to catch someone in a false statement that they can hang their hat on as proof of a coverup.

It's the same damned thing as with Fast and Furious - in the end, hardly anything of substance came out of the multiple congressional investigations, but they were able to 'nail' various people in the admin for making false statements or else statements that could be construed and parsed, if done very carefully, as having been false. There was no there, there, but that didn't matter.

Same thing with Monica Lewinsky. Manufactured scandal. The president got a blow job. So fracking what? The GOP appoints a special prosecutor, hoping to catch the president in a lie so they can impeach him. I mean, how far back to we have to go here?

The Vince Foster 'scandal.' The list of 80 people 'connected' with Clinton who died 'mysteriously.'

Can anyone point out an example of a manufactured scandal perpetrated by the Democrats in the last 3 decades?

So yeah, dishonesty is bad, no matter which side it comes from, and I'm willing to admit when 'my' side has been dishonest, but I think the false equivalence does a disservice to the reality.

As Steven Colbert said, "reality has a well-known liberal bias." Let's be honest, he's right.
posted by syzygy at 2:26 PM on October 17, 2012

Frankly, the Dems would be a little better off if they could manufacture scandals around, say, lying about WMD to involve us in a pointless war.
posted by klangklangston at 2:31 PM on October 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

klang: Good point - the Dems have a hard enough time nailing someone to the wall for a REAL scandal, much less successfully manufacturing one out of whole cloth.
posted by syzygy at 2:37 PM on October 17, 2012

the Count tried to count them but he had sort of a breakdown

posted by cortex at 2:43 PM on October 17, 2012 [32 favorites]

Oh, Netscape broken image symbol, it's been so long since I've seen you.
posted by klangklangston at 2:45 PM on October 17, 2012

cortex: ""

First, you're a tease. That's fowl, sir. Just fowl.

Second, that image doesn't show up in Recent Activity. So it looks like you posted a blank comment.
posted by zarq at 2:48 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Obama and Romney, if they switched hair with their wives.
posted by Skygazer at 2:51 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh, Netscape broken image symbol, it's been so long since I've seen you.

Hello Netscape, my old friend
I've come to crash with you again
Because a gif of goatse softly creeping
Dripped its seeds while I was sleeping
And the vision that was jammed into my brain
Still remains
Within the sound of silence
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:51 PM on October 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

Do you think we'll reach 5773?
posted by zarq at 2:52 PM on October 17, 2012

Images never do, since the expectation is that they won't be there in the first place.
posted by cortex at 2:52 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Hey, if I'm going to stain my brain with the horror of this drawing, so are you.

Cashman, twist my arm -- are you unfamiliar with Dan Lacey Painter of Pancakes (NSFW)? You are in for a treat. Politicians are some of his favorite subjects.
posted by madamjujujive at 2:56 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Oh snap, it's a pancake for real! Egads.
posted by cashman at 2:58 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

It would be interesting to see stats on this thread. Who made the most comments? The longest? The shortest? Who posted the most during American business hours? What comment has the most links?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:00 PM on October 17, 2012

"You hit your favorite limit for the day."

Well that's my first time doing that.
posted by cashman at 3:02 PM on October 17, 2012

Same here.

Achievement unlocked!
posted by rewil at 3:04 PM on October 17, 2012

cortex, you are a dork. In a good way.

Bird is the word.
posted by futz at 3:07 PM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

Soon.
posted by homunculus at 3:21 PM on October 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

And now, in its twilight, this thread just stone cold bums me out. When it first popped up, I was on vacation and wasn't sure about spending an hour reading the 300-comment thread I'd just noticed, no matter how enticing it looked. Now here we sit and all I can think is, "man, that trip was a month ago?"
posted by COBRA! at 3:24 PM on October 17, 2012

I hope Josh Romney's robo-glare becomes a meme.
posted by klangklangston at 3:25 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

In Conference Call, Romney Urged Businesses To Tell Their Employees How to Vote
posted by zombieflanders at 3:30 PM on October 17, 2012 [3 favorites]

it's been an honor
posted by twist my arm at 3:35 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

I hope Josh Romney's robo-glare becomes a meme.

Don’t Turn Off The Lights: The Most Frightening Moment Of The Obama-Romney Rumble
posted by homunculus at 3:35 PM on October 17, 2012

Last throws of the thread:

Time gentlemen (and ladies) last orders please.

*Wipes glasses - glares menacingly*
posted by edgeways at 3:36 PM on October 17, 2012

*prints out thread, folds into a triangle. Taps is playing in the distance*
posted by Lemurrhea at 3:37 PM on October 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

The closer we get to 4 p.m. server time, the more I start hearing "30 Seconds Over Tokyo" by Pere Ubu in my head.
posted by bakerina at 3:38 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

In other news: Creative Legal Thinker John Yoo: Not Deporting Children Is More Unconstitutional Than Crushing Their Balls
posted by homunculus at 3:40 PM on October 17, 2012

Dan Lacey Painter of Pancakes (NSFW)

no no no bieber pubes no bieber pubes

however i was right about the pancakes, not just hungry
posted by twist my arm at 3:40 PM on October 17, 2012

COBRA! I hear ya. When I first noticed this thread and opened it, I was sitting on a beach drinking a beer in shorts and flip flops. Now I have to put on two extra layers just to take the dog around the block.

Peace out, juggernaut thread!
posted by mannequito at 3:41 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

The ABC’s of the Presidential Debate: From Awkward Laughter to Binders to Zingers
posted by homunculus at 3:41 PM on October 17, 2012

In Conference Call, Romney Urged Businesses To Tell Their Employees How to Vote

For serious I am not even this kind of geek but I would not be surprised if Mitt's entire biography were not actually the product of some sort of cosmic Markov generator keyed to "unseemly activity" + "semi-public venue" + "flavor of entitled arrogance."
posted by psoas at 3:41 PM on October 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

Well, it's been fun
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:44 PM on October 17, 2012

thread i said thread i will thread
posted by cortex at 3:44 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Wait a minute what if we transfer the thread to a transit router, connected to a load balancer connected to a disk-less server tied in to a cloud provider? In the cloud this thread could last forever.
posted by Flashman at 3:44 PM on October 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

But not that kind of fun, damn it.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:45 PM on October 17, 2012

what will i do now? where will i go?
posted by twist my arm at 3:45 PM on October 17, 2012

You don't have to go home, but you can't stay here.
posted by cortex at 3:46 PM on October 17, 2012 [4 favorites]

Frankly, the Dems would be a little better off if they could manufacture scandals around, say, lying about WMD to involve us in a pointless war.

Besides nurturing those nasty long form scandals, the Republicans are also really good at being SHOCKED, SHOCKED, ginning up instant shitstorms of faux outrage. Like ACORN. This helps them defend against any of those kind of attacks. It's dangerous. One misstep, one overreach, and that becomes the story. Like Rathergate.

The fifth estate's retreat from quality is partially (hugely?) to blame, but still the Democrats are simply outclassed, I think.
posted by fleacircus at 3:47 PM on October 17, 2012

Now, watch this drive.
posted by fleacircus at 3:47 PM on October 17, 2012

I've avidly followed this thread in every minute detail since the very beginning (much to the amusement of Mr. Go Banana, who thinks I'm a politics obsessed junkie....which I guess I am). Such good times. I'm so proud to have been a part of it!
posted by Go Banana at 3:48 PM on October 17, 2012

Goodbye old thread, we hardly knew ye...
posted by SweetTeaAndABiscuit at 3:50 PM on October 17, 2012

Goodnight, sweetheart, well it's time to go,
Goodnight, sweetheart, well it's time to go,
I hate to leave you, but I really must say,
Goodnight, sweetheart, goodnight.
posted by nooneyouknow at 3:52 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

I keep a list of books I read each year, and I can't decide if this thread gets an entry.
posted by COBRA! at 3:52 PM on October 17, 2012 [2 favorites]

.
posted by dialetheia at 3:54 PM on October 17, 2012

sorry about that.. silly work computer.. flagged
posted by edgeways at 3:54 PM on October 17, 2012

Last one out, please shut down the back door vote changer on the machines, thanks.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:54 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Just think, right now people are loading the front page sorted by recent comments and trying to decide if now's the time to take the plunge on this bad boy.
posted by COBRA! at 3:56 PM on October 17, 2012

worth every browser crash
posted by twist my arm at 3:56 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

And Now, a Picture of Mitt With Office Supplies
posted by homunculus at 3:57 PM on October 17, 2012

I just wanted to say that one of the best things about this thread has been having the space to really get to know people though their comments; normally it's all a bit hit-and-run, but I really meant it about this having formed a little subculture.

It's been warm and funny, and I've discovered that I like some people enough to want to get in touch outside of the thread (hey rtha, for example). It's reminded me that Metafilter is, above all else, a community, and I feel happy and proud to be a part of it.

Plus, you know, highly amusing election snark. It's been awesome.

Kisses to you all, and see you in the third debate thread...and let's face it, probably future meetups.
posted by jaduncan at 3:57 PM on October 17, 2012

Great thread. Thanks, everyone!
posted by rtha at 3:57 PM on October 17, 2012

Man.. no way I get the last word, gotta do my station break at the top of the hour
posted by edgeways at 3:58 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Candy, if I could just, I know I'm a bit low on time, but, Candy, Candy, I'd—regarding my, uh, my tax plan, I'd, I'd like to rebut the President, if I—
posted by cortex at 3:59 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

Ceiling Cat is watching you debate.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:59 PM on October 17, 2012 [1 favorite]

what will i do now? where will i go?

Song of Mitt's Self
posted by homunculus at 3:59 PM on October 17, 2012

Fare thee well! See y'all in the next life..er thread I guess...
posted by TwoWordReview at 3:59 PM on October 17, 2012

Oh, and if you're reading this in the post-apocalypic world of the Santorum term that came after 8 Romney years, radioactivity is counteracted by iodine.

You're welcome.
posted by jaduncan at 3:59 PM on October 17, 2012 [8 favorites]

*fade to black*
posted by twist my arm at 3:59 PM on October 17, 2012

Good night, sweet thread, good night...

Darn you, zarq & MrVisible - I almost had it!

;-)
posted by syzygy at 3:59 PM on October 17, 2012

Thanks, everyone!
posted by zarq at 4:00 PM on October 17, 2012

I just want to tell you... good luck. We're all counting on you.
posted by MrVisible at 4:00 PM on October 17, 2012 [68 favorites]

« Older Hop In | Counting Rhos Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments

MetaFilter

my job is is not to worry about those people
September 17, 2012 4:00 PM Subscribe

Tags

Share

my job is is not to worry about those people September 17, 2012 4:00 PM Subscribe

Tags

Share

my job is is not to worry about those people
September 17, 2012 4:00 PM Subscribe