in Uncategorized

Your Guy Won Again. (And Romney Will Win the Election.)

A rather uneventful exchange, methinks. This debate was like the last debate, only more so. That is to say, nobody changed any minds. If you liked your guy at the beginning, you liked him even more at the end. It was ultimately pointless.

Which means, in the only way that matters, Romney won.

I grow weary of people who try to say one guy or the other won “on points.” What points? Who keeps score? What are the rules? The only thing that matters is how people vote. After three debates, it’s crystal clear that Romney changed millions of votes with his masterful appearance in the first contest. Those who point to flash polls that claim Obama won Debate #2 are forced to ignore the fact that Obama’s actual poll numbers have gotten worse since last week’s encounter. Those same people insist that Romney “lost” tonight, and I hope their scorecards provide them with some consolation as the momentum Romney has been gathering these past three weeks continues unabated.

The debate itself was more than a little silly. A foreign policy debate that wasted time on Massachusetts education reform really doesn’t matter much. The only thing that has mattered in these debates is whether or not Romney looks like an acceptable alternative. He does. He did again tonight. None of Obama’s barbs managed to change that, and he has no real chances to legitimately alter the dynamic of this race. He can try bombing something, and perhaps he will, but that will look so extraordinarily desperate that I can’t see it working.

Bob Schieffer moderated intelligently and fairly. I’m kinda bugged that Romney let Obama skate on Benghazi, but that was probably wise. He doesn’t need to damage Obama any further than Obama has damaged himself. He just needs to look like he’s up for the job.

He does. He will win handily. And I’m pretty both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama know it.

Your Guy Won
The Myth of Voter Suppression

Leave a Reply

19 Comments

  1. This article, you didn’t build it. You wrote it with the help of untold thousands — highway maintenance workers, cubicle employees, solid waste treatment plant workers, and hair salon stylists. How dare you take credit for this article!

  2. I guess the only real big game changer left is the potential slew of October Surprises we have before us.

    Allred plans to have a woman tell the press that Romney advised her not to have an abortion. That should inflame liberals, and no one else.

    Trump plans to release documents purportedly detailing a planned Obama divorce that never happened. No one will care.

    Known lunatic Andrew Sullivan is frothing at the mouth over Romney attending a white supremacist church. If Pfleger and Wright didn’t matter, neither will this.

    Am I missing anything?

    • > Am I missing anything?

      Nope, that about covers it. Except perhaps Sharmeka’s failed October Tawana Surprise.

      But…it looks like The Donald’s Surprise may be an actual surprise, or so he says. The Donald and P.T. Barnum have a lot in common, so it’s anyone’s guess…

      To Be Revealed at Noon, supposedly: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump

  3. What is most telling about the Republican platform right now is how chameleon like it is. Mitt Romney put forth incredibly hawkish statements in the first year of his campaign to play to the core-elements of the Republican Constituency then for the last four weeks Romney has turned into a amoeba concerning his policies. So, while I will agree that the general tone of the debate was lack-luster on both sides of the isle. With each candidate attempting to squeeze as many key-talking points as they could into just about any question; that at times it seemed absolutely absurd to hear that a strong economy in the US was some how going to affect the progress of Islamic extremism in Yemen. That is absurd. It would be hard to say just how exactly our strong economy will prevent or accelerate the growth of Islamic extremism in the middle east without first hearing concrete plans by either party as to what to do given potential threats in the region.

    We heard far too much from the Romeny-bot that he was different while at the same time embracing the very policies he concluded a few months were negative features to the weak Obama Foreign Policy. For example what exactly is Romney’s position on the 2014 withdrawl? When Joe Biden and Paul Ryan talked about this critical issue his running mate stated that the very notion of mentioning the potential withdrawal in 2014 was wrong, but some how right as well. It was unclear exactly what Ryan thought was right about it– but it was clear that he at least felt that the time of the debate this was the stance of the Romney-Ryan ticket. Well, it probably was. However, as of last night Romney’s position and by association Ryan’s position at least publicly is I agree with Obama’s 2014 pull-out of Afghanistan.. Thus, denying this position: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dqpwin8SPVw

    So, if I were a Republican or an Independent I would extremely confused by Romney’s positions and reversals this debate. Who is Romney is the question? Where is the Conservative Romney of the last 10 months? Where did middle of the road Romney come from? Is this the real Romney? Or is the real Romney to be announced in the future?

    As for the President– well it was a good outing in the sense that he was forceful and presented some arguments for his policies. That is not to say that the President wasn’t without his faults. Obama continued to repeat his critical talking points: The Bailout for The Auto Industry, Increased Funding for Education, The State-Sanctioned Killing of Bin Ladin, Outsourcing of Jobs, Flip-Flopping Romney-Bot, and my favorite DRONE WARFARE… all of which is true but like Romney-bot’s filp-flopping about on stage it was woefully misplaced at certain times. For example when Romney-Bot refused to answer Schaffer’s hypothetical attack on Iran for Obama to just go off on a tangent that was a) totally unrelated to the issue and b) just not informative. What Obama should have done is simple state that Israel would not be calling us up about a surprise attack on Iran– America would already be part of the plan that would only use force as the ultimate last resort to a potential Iranian Nuclear threat. So while Romney is denying that Obama is strong on the issue of Iran and avoiding the question Obama should have outlined just what would really happen in that scenario.

    And Obama and Romney-bot both fell all over the American Flag, Apple Pie, Mom and Veterans– to such a point I thought I was watching Stanley Kubrick’s “Full Metal Jacket” during the war correspondent interview scenes outside of Hue City. Especially, when they talked about the pull out of Americans from Afghanistan– I thought wow that sounds just like LBJ about Vietnam. And what I think people really wanted to his not just that we were getting out of Afghanistan but that we have achieved some of the goals we supposedly wanted to achieve.

    But further more what was so disappointing and while I find mostly that Steve Schmidt is objective and a valuable commentator on MSNBC– his remarks about Romney looking Presidential were absurd. Romney looked like a person who didn’t want to talk about his policy because after all it is the policy of people who got us into this mess in Afghanistan and Iraq in the first place. So if you cannot own your own policies then why should I believe that you the ability create a plan if you a) won’t admit you have one now and b) won’t stick to any specific point you’ve stated 10 months ago? That too me is not the sign of a person that is willing to create an effective Foreign Policy… What is Romney going to do alter his policy based on Gallup Polls? That could be disastrous for the nation. However, at this point that is exactly what Romeny-bot seems to be doing.

    Now, if Obama had been really out to get Romney– he would have pushed Romney to counter him by outlining a specific plan. As Romney is unwilling to push his own plan the more Obama could challenge him on where he differs from the current plan the President has would have outlined Romney’s weakness. Another thing Obama should have pushed was how the sequestering scheme is really going to play out. And how this is in affect a result of the Republican Party not being able to compromise on anything at all. I would also push Romney on his 800 veto record in Mass. I would push him on his plans for adding more to the government spending in military while destroying programs that support our internal security? I would also have outlined that in todays Geo-political reality that America needs to embrace coalition building and embrace sharing the burden of protecting human rights and the sovereignty of nations as a member of a larger group. I also would have hit Romney on the absurd statement to indite Iranian President Ahmadinejad on genocide as being a sign of Romney’s immature nature as a global leader.

    Then I would have confronted him on his contradictory position on China where at moment he claims he is able to place tariffs on China without creating a trade war because China will not want a trade war that China is already engaged in with us? I mean that was just nonsensical gibberish. What Obama should have done is outline a real plan for equalizing trade between China and America. The best way to do that was outline a plan for creating new regulations that demand x number of items be produced solely in America by American based corporations. So that Americans would benefit from the corporate economic growth in the post downturn. I would have contrasted this against Romney-bot’s Territorial Taxation scheme which actually makes it more effective to outsource labor to nations like China, Nepal, Singapore and so on. This is a critical aspect of our foreign policy debate how to stem the flow of jobs to the developing world.

    Obama should have outlined a comprehensive model for energy reform that heavily emphasized the development of such natural resources as: solar energy, wind energy, Geo-thermal, and tidal energy as a means to create true self-sufficiency from the global energy commodities market. Because after all it is not where the oil is produced that drives the price but what happens in the total oil market. So for example if we start to produce billions of barrels of oil drive the price down to $20 a barrel the corresponding response from OPAC will be to create an artificial shortage and bring the price back up to $100 per barrel. This is the merry-go-round that we are on. Now, if the US were to have a local market with fixed prices on certain energy sources say the energy that provides homes and businesses with power we could see a great reduction in operating costs of businesses and homes in America. That would send the Romney-Bot into a tizzy… After all what would Romney-bot do say that doesn’t want to see ultra-cheap and ultra-clean energy powering American businesses, homes, and cities? Obviously, not, because it would be counter to his “Free Market Mantra” of only Free Markets do anything at all. And I would tie this into the idea that buy embracing clean energy that is renewable we reduce our ability to be pressured into conflicts over non-renewable natural resources.

    And finally, I would attack Romney on his total miss handling of basic foreign relations this summer in England especially but his misunderstand of Poland’s economic system. And his lack of geographical knowledge during the debate since Syria and Iran do not share a border unless he considers Iraq either a part of Iran or Syria? Or that Iran actually has plenty of shore front along the Indian Ocean. I would show that to be the President means you have more then a CIA world book fact sheet memorized.

    Overall, I would say that Obama sounded better, spoke better and basically controlled the flow. I’m not sure that Obama was strong enough making his case that Romney is not able to handle the requirements of being a President. Romney-Bot merely attempted to dodge tough questions by merely accepting the current President’s plans if they seem popular with a key demographic he is not doing well with. I wonder if people will ask themselves why is Romney-bot so easily programed to appease voters no matter what? And what does that mean if Romney-bot is in the office? Will he merely do what ever his handler tell him is popular? That is not the way to lead from the front!

      • “Bwahahahahahah!!!!!” is only true if you actually are as foolish as Romney is then and is now to believe that any equity firm in 2008 would invest in the Car Industry! Romney’s plan while acceptable for maybe one of the major car manufacturers would have been disastrous for two of the major car manufactures to be in managed bankruptcies. When your economy is loosing jobs the answer is not pile on more job loss… Massive job loss is exactly what causes the sort of atrophying in the economy that extends and prolongs a recession if not creating a depression.

        http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=0

        Now, Romney was right the corporate had to change in the auto industry. That is very true. He is right labor and management needed to then and still do need to work on their relationship. However, Romney’s big solution is nothing more then simple solution bankruptcy process: 1) secure the assets that make you money; 2) reduce present costs; 3) reduce future costs; 4) secure external funds to support your rebuilding.

        The problem with this model in 2008 was 1) private equity was attempting to stop its own hemorrhaging from the derivatives market collapse that destroyed many of the very firms: i.e Bears&Sterns, Merril lynch, and Lehman Brothers. All of which were taken over by other firms– so the emphasis in private equity was to consolidate large banks into even larger ones. 2) the private equity firms were using Bush’s bailout to basically make these large deal possible using Government money to secure the debt they were taking on from failing banks int he buy out process. They basically had no other money in the sufficient amounts to achieve the goals that Romney’s plan would require. About 100 billion dollars. Bush put in 17 billion and Obama did the other 82 billion to finish the deal.

        Secondly, the biggest part of Romney’s plan is to lay off workers, reduce pension benefits on future retirees and freeze pension benefits on current retirees, finally his plan is to cut the costs of operations to the bone. The only smart thing Romney talks about in this section of the article is to reduce the corporate perks in the corporate culture. Otherwise Romney’s advice is basically the same as any other classical economy.

        His sole idea of where money from Federal Government is proper is in two places: 1) Investments in R&D and 2) and I quote this now: “The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk”. This means just that he would put guarantees on financing and warranties to the car buyers… That is meaningless.

        What Obama did was more successful– he forced the companies to come up with a business plan just like Romney but instead of guarantee loans and warranties he gave the equity directly to the business.

        However, Obama did force the workers to take one on the chin with reduced pay, reduce benefits and reduced pension plans. Myself, I thought that was unconscionable of Obama. I would have cut out the management benefits and created new Cooperative Corporations for GM and Chrysler. A total restructuring with labor and management as one united force… Not one group pacified with the mere notion of being employed.

  4. So how is Romney going to do when it comes that he supports such people as Senator Mourdock from Indiana– who just claimed that God often leaves a souvenir of rape for women in the form of a pregnancy??? How considerate of God. I would thank him for such a privilege if I were a woman!

    http://news.yahoo.com/mourdock-god-rape-leads-pregnancy-005625738–election.html

    Will Romney disavow these ads???
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVXKYw_r5ZY

    I’m sure the Romney-Bot is being reprogrammed as we speak to disavow this radical Position from Mourdock during this debate… I’m sure he will say that Mourdock paid him some cash and that he only read the lines and didn’t really believe in the words he spoke. After all it is what you do when you’re a candidate you help out another candidate in need. It was neighborly thing to do for his fellow Republican.

    My question is this why is Romney getting such a pass for flip-flopping from voters in America? Why is Romney not brought to task for basically avoiding the positions he holds?

  5. I think you will find that Obama will win the electoral vote and Romney will get the Popular Vote.