The most important election of big bird's life: US general election 2012 part III

Yipyipyipyipyip

i think andrew sullivan just endorsed romney

PBS already asked the Obama campaign to stop airing the Big Bird commercial from the other thread.

Ouch. I know that title will please a few people, but maybe something a little less harsh?

I don't even get the joke

I think the thread title should stand in for Morbs' interjections.

but maybe something a little less harsh

How about some blown-up child bodies photos?

As long as just the Taliban are killing Brown civilians, Morbs is happy

We don't elect the Taliban.

@DennisThePerrin
Netanyahu ranting about Iran at the UN was measured compared to liberals ranting about the coming Romney apocalypse.

Eh if the Democrats can't win against this guy, this country deserves what it fucking gets.

v reminiscent of Jon Lovitz as Dukakis on '88 SNL saying "I can't believe I'm losing to this guy"

there are further debates.

the title to this thred is a good and relevant title

We don't elect the Taliban.

I thought we elected Hitler MAKE UP YOUR MIND.

the title to this thred is a good and relevant title

― Grimy Little Pimp (Jimmy The Mod Awaits The Return Of His Beloved),

I agree, but I'd like to fix it to say ONE murdered Big Bird. Grammar counts even at the end of the world.

TRU

seconded, approved, implemented

One of my friends who lives in Mass. just posted this on FB:

So...in the mail today, we received a four-page, color, 8 x 10 "brochure" from the Massachusetts Republican party detailing when Elizabeth Warren called herself a Cherokee and when she didn't. You open it up, and there's a big timeline. The thing that struck me is how expensive this must have been to produce. It must be nice to have an endless stream of money. And, of course, they just HAD to call her "Cherokee Liz."

Eh if the Democrats can't win against this guy, this country deserves what it fucking gets.

Things are going to be fine for the Dems this time around; the trick will be next time to see if the Obama for America crew moves on to other pursuits and the Dem fundraising and ground game reverts to the mean.

Sorry for the cynicism. Just, you have this guy who during his 100th 'Introduction to the Voting Public' declared that he would shut down a 40-year-old business, fire the guy interviewing him for the job of President, and act all cavalier about it. That people would trust their future to a guy that often jokes about firing people is just kind of mindboggling.

I felt the same way when Bush was elected the first time, and with his reelection, I sort of lost all of my hope for the voting people and the election process. This was ignited again when Obama won, maybe the first time I've been happy about an election. If Romney actually wins through some voting laws restricting who can vote or just wins, I dunno. I try hard to see outside of my own perspective, but as hard as I try, I can't imagine why anyone who doesn't profit from Romney's election would want him there.

I can't wait to see Scott Brown lose. I anticipate that even more than Romney losing.

Scott Brown's campaign doubling down on the "hey, let's be super racist" strategy is a very interesting choice

first romney lead on realclearpolitics?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

If you wanna think about whether this would actually be of much help:

http://www.salon.com/2012/10/08/democrats_really_do_have_a_shot_at_winning_the_house/

mitt's campaign doesn't seem so bumbling anymore though

bumbling looks increasingly irrelevant when the incumbent is yawning and shrugging his way through the campaign.

yes it does; the big difference is that Obama's campaign now also looks to be bumbling

xp: rare Morbius/DJP mindmeld

Obama's campaign (or a sypathetic super-pac) could do much worse than to buy up a lot of air time and just use it to show a medley of Romney's all-time moments caught on video, without comment, similar to the ad with the 47% remarks as the soundtrack and pics of random americans.

The "corporations are people, my friend" moment. The "I like firing people" moment. The "I'll bet you $10,000" moment. An so on. Almost as good as Dukakis in the tank or Dubya in his flight suit and Mission Accomplished.

you remember that Dubya in his flight suit didn't work, right

Like a greatest hits package?

That people would trust their future to a guy that often jokes about firing people is just kind of mindboggling.

Well we had a TV show that was sort of popular for a bit there where gleefully announcing that contestants were "fired" was the whole schtick. Plus the guy behind it rode that fame to a quasi-serious presidential bid and a newfound relevancy. Lots of Americans are dicks.

Obama would be pleasing a lot more of his alleged base if he had fired a few more ppl, or just not hired Geithner & Co.

geithner knew where all the dead bodies were buried though. lol

on one hand, after watching what happened in 2004 i'm confident that lots of americans are dicks AND terribly misinformed about everything that's not a tv show. facts are largely irrelevant, too. who has time to keep track of facts these days and now i am slowly pulling out my phone and now i am and looking at my phone and now i am just looking at my phone now, i'm done with this paragraph or whatever. whoa, tv on my phone. update on my phone now, look at that

on the other hand, that debate was romney at his absolute best and obama at his absolute worst. the freakout is a little premature, we'll see if obama is actually awake over the next few weeks, that should help, and if the moderator of the next debate can actually ask a question or two that should help obama as well.

I really don't know how not to be cynical/jaded when popular opinion can be swayed so easily one way or the other. Oh, wow, Romney wasn't a total asshat one night on TV? That guy's getting my vote! Oh, wait, Obama brushed it off with humility the next day? I changed my mind, he get my vote! Oh, wait, Romney said something about Libya? Back to him. Huh, Obama turns out to be fired up and ready to go after all? It's Obama.

that's not how it happens tho, v. few people in america are genuinely undecided and switched their vote cause they saw the debate

it's more like some 'maybe I won't vote' romney supporter was more likely to say they were a romney supporter after hearing that he rocked obamas socks off on the tv

Ahahahah 7 percent of Americans think that PBS takes up half of the federal budget.

7 percent of Americans are currently filling up water balloons with piss

here's an interesting visual of global views on Obama vs Romney (may need to right click and view in a new tab):

http://thumbnails.visually.netdna-cdn.com/obama-vs-romney-what-if-the-world-could-vote_50747103b5170_w587.png

you need a microscope to understand that

oh sorry didn't see your second sentence

also speaking of dead brown civilians

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/09/world/asia/pakistan-teen-activist-attack/index.html

The thing is, narrative-wise the whole first debate sets Obama up as the underdog, which people love.

I hope you're right, but I'm not sure if it works that way for the incumbent.

that wd make him Reagan '84

a new mark in lowered expectations?

I.e., I don't think the Yankees will suddenly be underdogs against the Orioles on Wednesday just because they lost the second game.

iirc Kerry whipped up on Dubya in the first debate, and then it was all downhill.

(tho admittedly that was a real Hail Mary for Mondale at that point)

xxp

Reagan was maybe cut some slack because of his age.

all canadians would vote for obama?

Except for our Prime Minister, and this one other guy names Murray who lives in Thunder Bay. He'd get 99.9% of the vote.

"named"

This thread.

In keeping with Matt's "Who the fuck knows what's going on?" from yesterday, Obama's approval on Gallup is up to 53% as all these other you've-lost-us polls roll in.

omg i just read that sullivan thing. he sounds like he has an IQ of 85 and a proof reader.

well...

tee hee

iirc Kerry whipped up on Dubya in the first debate, and then it was all downhill.

― Johnny Fever, Tuesday, 9 October 2012

didn't the commentariat he won all of them?

Admittedly, this is a very hazy memory - I seem to remember that the opinion was that Kerry crushed Bush in the first debate, but Bush managed to hold his own in the other two; still seen as Kerry wins, but not to the same degree.

New CNN poll in OH has Obama up by 4 with Likely voters, 10 with registered :

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/10/09/topgenstate4.pdf

Romney will be on CNN for a live interview sometime after 6:00. It would be nice to imagine the Wolfish One pouncing on the debate makeover, but I don't see that happening--a closer race is of course good for business.

Lisa Lerer ‏@llerer
When asked abt new ohio polls, romney replied: "this is wendy's guys. This is wendy's."

this is the general elections thread so I'm puttin this here:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A4y8kJPCQAEIix0.jpg

Finally saw the Big Bird ad. It reminds me of the scene in The Candidate where the campaign brain-trust sits around preparing responses for a debate, and, when the subject of Communists landing on the beaches of Santa Monica comes up, someone suggests they reply, "With all the pollution, they can't even see the beaches of Santa Monica, much less land of them." Everyone laughs, that's the line they're going to use, next subject--but before they move on, someone else says, "But do we really want to say that?"

What a long, strange election season

This is why one can't take Sully seriously:

I think he needs to reboot by embracing Bowles-Simpson in its entirety (but he's far too timid to do that and he fumbled the moment when he really could have done it)

americans are clamoring for bowles-simpson

i wonder if even 1 in 20 ppl watching the debates knew wtf 'bowles-simpson' was.

I wonder if 1 in 10 American use "reboot" as a verb.

Americans too

Eh if the Democrats can't win against this guy, this country deserves what it fucking gets.

romney is probably the most competent and deserving GOP nominee of my lifetime, not that his competition is particularly strong

I forget you are young.

It's a good question though. Whatever my philosophical differences with them Ford, Reagan, and Bush I were not incompetent.

Third-rate burglary aside, I'd say Nixon's issues (there were a few) were other than incompetence too.

I forget how Al Haig and Peggy Noonan both were creeped out by how the vacuum in the Reagan White House left hapless aides exposed to the worst backbiting and leaking in a generation; the old man simply didn't give a shit.

Although I'm relieved Nixon was a domestic liberal he lacked the temperament for the presidency. It's weird: despite the depths of his crimes he lacked the sociopathic detachment that Reagan, both Bushes, and Obama project.

romney is prob the least competent gop candidate of kevins tragically brief life, except maybe bob dole

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/10/exclusive-tucker-carlson-logic-daily-caller-radical-left-wing-conspirator/57781

romney is prob the least competent gop candidate of kevins tragically brief life, except maybe bob dole

― lag∞n, Tuesday, October 9, 2012 8:51 PM (9 minutes ago)

i didnt mean as a candidate tho, obvs he's sort of a goof

what has he done thats so deserving and capable

created fecund ILE chatter for starters

Showed his softer side.

May win presidency.

so hes gotten to exactly the same point as all the people were comparing him to, sublime datas

When is "reboot" not a verb?

well, he is second most likely human being in the world to become president of the united states

the system is going down for reboot NOW!

When is "reboot" not a verb?

the noun for slipping your foot into a second boot for warmth

what has he done thats so deserving and capable

― lag∞n, Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:06 PM (4 minutes ago)

idk he seemed to govern MA well enough for a republican, is obv much smarter and more technocratic than other GOP doods, i mean again look at his competition

at heart he's sort of a wishy-washy neolib who believes in nothing and has sold his soul in the pursuit of power, not actually traded it for power in the faustian sense but instead for a long, painful taste of something he'll never have, at the mercy of a party he probably deep down despises, it's sad. he's an incredibly tragic figure in a lot of ways

actually that is kind of in the faustian sense

I had no idea E.J. Dionne was capable of aphorisms:

“When you give conservatives bad news in your polls, they want to kill you,” he said. “When you give liberals bad news in your polls, they want to kill themselves.”

well hes always got the $200m to fall back on, literally fall back on it, a huge pile of money

so apparently theres a frontline on obama airing as we speak, wingnuts gonna love this one

Anthony De Rosa ‏@AntDeRosa
Obama told his fifth grade class he was Kenyan royalty - Kristen Caldwell, classmate #Frontline

aw!

it's kind of hard to predict a range of Romney behaviors as prez since he became an invertebrate, but the expectations of these guys' owners seem to increasingly narrow the highway, esp in the Perpetual War / Corporate State sense.

As for this "domestic liberal" Nixon, it's lazy not to include nefarious abuse of domestic political dissent (unprecedented in modern times until the last 11 years of course).

...which is why he was unqualified for the presidency

i really don't think Mittens has the depth or seething inner conflicts to be a tragic figure, not even in the sense a grade-A devil like Nixon did.

i don't think anyone knows, is the thing! maybe the regret will come after he realizes he's never gonna be prez. the catholic in me feels for him

mormons dont have souls kevin its ok

I wasn't saying Nixon wasn't unqualified for the presidency on grounds of temperament--he was dreadfully unqualified in that regard, the most unqualified ever. You were talking about competency earlier.

If Obama actually was a well-intentioned progressive at some point, he is a fucking tragic figure.

oh yeah for sure

Dole was a good moderate politician, but a horrific presidential candidate.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/10/09/article-2215207-15675664000005DC-585_634x862.jpg

the funny thing to me abt her new look is she still cant let go of the up do

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2215207/Im-writing-fitness-book-Sarah-Palin-hits-row-grows-shocking-new-skinny-figure.html

“She was a total charmer, very friendly,” Specter writes. “The few things she said were intelligent.” He doesn’t mention what they were, maybe because he was distracted.

“We were sitting virtually knee to knee in the cramped bus,” he writes. "She radiated sensuality. Her skirt rode above her knees — not exactly short, but close.”

^^ Sarah fullfilling her true destiny as sensual radiator.

What a long, strange election season

Feels like it's been one long election since 1999 or so, tbh.

there is no season, it's what we have instead of a government.

^^ ever more otm each passing year, although it overlooks the shadow government of the corporations

She's a maniac, maniac.

thread title question still needs answer

romney's story is only "tragic" in the prosaic sense that anyone who has unfulfilled ambitions is tragic. that is to say, not tragic.

i mean in the public eye he'll be forever defined as this forgettable guy who ran for president but when he loses he'll go back to his gazillion bucks and his 8,350 children and grandchildren and enjoy the rest of his life. i honestly don't see the same level of hunger with him than i did with even someone like mccain. he seems to be running for president because it's the last thing left to do. (i know there's the whole my-father-tried-and-failed thing, but w/o knowing what's in romney's mind i can't imagine this is something that really tortures him.)

it's not tragic, but it is something. He's really taken political hypocrisy and lack of principles to a new level. The level of irony and mendacity in his lie about pre-existing conditions at the debate is something I'm not sure any other politician can match.

yeah i agree w/ that.

it's more "banality of evil" than "tragedy"

Unsettling idea: that for as long as these good poll numbers keep coming in, Romney can pretty much say whatever he wants without reprisals from the right.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/10/romney_strength.php?ref=fpblg

He's really taken political hypocrisy and lack of principles to a new level.

hyperbole; too much competition, esp once you factor in the unimportance of the office.

romney's story is only "tragic" in the

morbs was talking about obama as the tragic figure, no?

If Obama actually was a well-intentioned progressive at some point, he is a fucking tragic figure.

maybe i'm missing something.

Check back 4 posts further, dude.

ah, thanks!

The only thing tragic about Romney's life is that there is nothing tragic about it.

I really hate the new thread title, is this thread staying open?

― controversial cabaret roommate (Nicole), Wednesday, October 10, 2012 8:38 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Mods...?

― the ones that I'm near most: fellow outcasts and ilxors (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:15 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

It reminds me of an old-school Idiot Thread Repository title.

― borscht and bikinis (how's life), Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:16 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

except not fun.

― borscht and bikinis (how's life), Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:16 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

A point I raised yesterday--don't expect it to change.

― clemenza, Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:29 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Walsh vs. Duckworth: hardcore debate: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-walsh-duckworth-boil-over-in-heated-debate-20121009,0,1141132.story

― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, October 10, 2012 10:18 AM (19 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The Republican congressman also suggested Duckworth was only interested in having a debate about what to wear for her speech at the recent Democratic National Convention. Duckworth, who lost both legs in an Iraq war helicopter crash, replied, “I do sometimes look at the clothes that I wear, but you know, for most of my adult life, I’ve worn one color—it’s called camouflage.”

BAM

― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, October 10, 2012 10:19 AM (17 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

trying really hard to pull off This Facial Expression

― Doctor Casino, Wednesday, October 10, 2012 10:29 AM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Joe Walsh Is "Underwater" In The Polls

― Doctor Casino, Wednesday, October 10, 2012 10:30 AM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Since thread #3 has been started, I'm going to lock this one. If y'all want to have a debate about changing #3's title, go for it, but there's no need to have two simultaneous general election threads going.

― WmC, Wednesday, October 10, 2012 10:31 AM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Final additions to the convo from the old thread.

re: tragic, I can totally imagine Romney going the Lear route in the end.

i would be fine w/changing the thread title is my vote fwiw

i would like to register my disapproval of this thread title.

http://media.egotvonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Mitt-Romney-Crazy-Eyes-110x160.jpg?41ed4f

"This is the excellent foppery of the world, that,
when we are sick in fortune,--often the surfeit
of our own behavior,--we make guilty of our
disasters the sun, the moon, and the stars: as
if we were villains by necessity; fools by
heavenly compulsion; knaves, thieves, and
treachers, by spherical predominance; drunkards,
liars, and adulterers, by an enforced obedience of
planetary influence; and all that we are evil in,
by a divine thrusting on: an admirable evasion
of whoremaster man, to lay his goatish
disposition to the charge of a star!"

(Misattributing Edward speech to Lear for effect)

Don't like the thread title either.

Shit, Edmund.

i also hate the thread title

Let's see some alternative thread titles. I believe if anybody's bookmarked this thread already, the bookmarked title will always be the original one even if a mod changes it.

the tragedy of romney's life is based on the idea that money can buy you the smaller things in life, like happiness and governorships, but it can't buy you the only thing that really matters, which is ruling the entire world

Which is ironic, since those with money rule by default.

I just went to the mod request forum because I didn't want to seem like I was derailing/hijacking this thread to complain. I didn't know if it bothered anyone else, I was uncomfortable with it.

I like the thread title f the haters silby

When you give ILXORS bad news in your LOLS, they want to EXCELSIOR themselves

Even that is a better thread title.

The tragedy of Romney is that he does rule the world but doesn't know it.

I'm not sure why Romney wants the White House when he could buy houses ten times nicer than the White House. He could dot Newport with White Houses.

Is there any other topic you'd like me to fucking big bird for you? US general election 2012 part III

conservative meme: politics is a step down for rich big men like romney, whereas democrats are graspers and political office is the best they can do for themselves

xp ohhhhh

the most important election of big bird's life

It reminds me of an old-school Idiot Thread Repository title.

just pick a candidate who isn't a killer next time, guyz

Not possible in the USA. Next!

all those presidents who never indirectly killed anyone

Josh Romney:

"I don't know if you guys saw the debate last week," Josh Romney said, as the crowd cheered and applauded. "I take a lot of pride in that, because — I don't know if you noticed, but I was — me and my brothers were responsible for my dad doing so well. We were the ones, as kids, that kept saying the same thing over and over. And we'd say the same lie over and over. And my dad learned then, not to believe it. While we didn't go to any of the formal debate preparation, we did the real hard stuff.

"So as a father, he learned how to debate an obstinate child. We had a lot of fun, we had a lot of fun watching the debate."

Starting to think scott seward's fear about that being a dogwhistle for "boy" was on target.

ah, the drone strikes are "indirect killing," I see, kinda like the deeds of 9/11 'jackers who weren't actually flying the planes.

shut up

xpost
naaah. that's more romney's kids trying to figure out what the hell they're supposed to say at campaign stops that might be funny and make people chuckle and say "hahaha, i remember that MY child didn't listen sometimes too! i'm going to vote for romney because i don't follow the news!"

no, fucking Stalinist bullshit gets answered, Que.

so, time for a new thread?

no, just time for me to STFU. sorry Morbs!

ah, the drone strikes are "indirect killing," I see, kinda like the deeds of 9/11 'jackers who weren't actually flying the planes.

― cancer, kizz my hairy irish azz (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, October 10, 2012 11:06 AM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

just for purposes of clarity attempting to make the distinction from killing w/yr own hands, pulling the trigger and so on, which is what generally comes to mind when one invokes killing, bloody bill clinton desperately attempting to wipe all traces of whitewater from the record

We are all constantly killing each other just by living. Makes you think.

Caption contest plz:

http://media.cleveland.com/plain-dealer/photo/2012/10/11683847-standard.jpg

i want sandwiches lol burn

Greenwald prays for the end.

It's a bit bizarre, to put that generously, to insist that protecting Social Security is one of the prime reasons to dedicate oneself to Obama's re-election when he not only worked hard to cut that program substantially, but himself said just last week that he and his opponent have a "somewhat similar position" on that issue.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/09/election-cycle-garbage-romney

'one day I hope to get close to bruce springsteen's butt and this is what I would do'

That's probably a coat but Mitt looks like he's wearing some sort of cult robe. xxp

(friend of mine took that pic for the Cleveland Plain Dealer btw, I might just ask him for a large print for framing)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A42uy-_CQAAs0D1.png

jeez, seems like something happened there in early October

600%

I like those odds.

http://media.cleveland.com/plain-dealer/photo/2012/10/11683847-standard.jpg
http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Wackiki-Wabbit.png

http://media.cleveland.com/plain-dealer/photo/2012/10/11683847-standard.jpg

"It has been the same each day. Night takes me always to that place of horror. I have tried not moving, with the coming of nightfall, but I must walk in my slumber, for always I awaken with the thing of dread howling before me in the pale moonlight, and I turn and flee madly.

God! when will I awaken?"

jesus if this election really ends up turning on one debate performance it will be 100% impossible to read political media for the rest of my life. it's like god designed a campaign precisely for the horserace cokehead set.

(Kudos on the new title.)

lol aero

tell us more Mittens

Can someone with better photoshop skills than I have please cutnpaste Romney to just over Christie's left shoulder so we can post it to the 'Up-the-arse corner' thread?

http://media.cleveland.com/plain-dealer/photo/2012/10/11683847-standard.jpg

"You can do side bends or sit-ups, but please don't lose that butt!"

oh ffs

You can do joeks and quips but please don't post that photo

actually this has been one of the worst campaigns possible for the horserace cokehead types. the numbers have been super flat for months.

xp to goole

that's prob a piece of why the media went crazy for this debate

i don't think we disagree then?

no we don't, I'm just saying they have had it rough, give them their day

also nate silver has prob put like 300 people out of jobs by now

http://i.imgur.com/t8LEm.jpg

lol

from a political perspective, what is the best answer to that question? bald eagle?

Sundried poor people

clean coal

pepperoni imported from China

'I take my pizza drizzled w/ osama bin laden's blood'

reminds me of MumsNet asking david cameron what his favorite biscuit was, which became a story when he stalled for like a week presumably so he could focus-group an answer

i know i predicted back in the mists of time that this campaign would be stupider than average -- the fundamentals are equivocal and point to a close result, magnifying all the 'atmospheric' 'narrative' bullshit that generally doesn't matter much. those last fractions of a percent become more important

What not to do:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/scott-desjarlais-abortion-pro-life_n_1953136.html

the rank hypocrisy is what kills me

hoot-spa

not to mention killing THE BABY xp

(sry, that were a bad joke there)

Best pizza topping would obviously be gold flakes, right?

- this is completely tangential so feel free to ignore -

is the story of the king/ruler/emperor/whatever that eats gold flakes mythical? and if so, what's origin of the myth or legend? a year ago or so i was just around with someone and made a reference to the king that eats gold (this is why i have no friends btw). the friend had no idea what i was talking about. confidently, i did a google search to show him what was up, expecting it to be in the first page of results. it wasn't. and i couldn't find anything about it using different keywords, either. where does it come from? are we all insane?

have never heard of this story

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2398/2240337741_b40482180e.jpg

unless you're thinking of King Midas

xp

Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire.

not thinking of king midas. i'm talking about a ruler that was so flamboyantly wealthy that he has his servants sprinkle gold powder/flakes on his food.

maybe deserves it's own thread but yeah I have no idea what yr talking about

are you sure you aren't thinking of a Vanderbilt

Gold flakes are definitely a thing now, not sure about any historic or legendary source. For instance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Opulence_Sundae

lol saw this in the supermarket on sunday

http://www.marmiteshop.co.uk/marmite/Food/Marmite-Gold-Jar-250g-Limited-Edition/11KQH022T000

Note to Marmite marketing department: 'yeasty spread' is just a horrible phrases.

Er, 'phrase' rather.

BUSTED

welcome to ILX, Gollum

The stars align and the phrases 'Big Muff' and 'yeasty spread' find themselves uncomfortably close together.

FISCAL CONSERVATIVISM

Voters in Columbus, Ohio, saw 30-second television ads for both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney while watching “Wheel of Fortune” on their CBS affiliate over three days in September. For Obama’s team, the order per spot cost $500. For Romney’s, the price tag on the order was more than five times steeper at $2,800 per ad.

That gap – found in data filed with the Federal Communications Commission — is an outgrowth of an unusual TV-buying strategy by the Romney campaign. Media strategists on both sides of the political aisle, along with station managers who handle ad placement, expressed puzzlement to POLITICO about the way Romney’s TV operation does business.

Unlike other presidential campaigns, which typically outsource their ad reservations and placement to specialized firms with large teams that know how to make the most of the complicated FCC payment procedures, Romney does all his TV buying in-house through a lean operation headed by a single chief buyer.

The campaign rarely buys cable ad time, focusing overwhelmingly on broadcast television. Romney places his commercials on a week-to-week basis, rather than booking time well in advance, and typically pays more so that his ads don’t get preempted and to spare his campaign the hassle of haggling over time as prices rise.
For those “Wheel of Fortune” ads in Columbus, for example, Obama bought the airtime on Aug. 29, according to the FCC data. Romney bought the time on Sept. 11, the day before his ads aired.

The Romney media operation is organized under the umbrella of a firm called American Rambler, which includes top Romney advisers Stuart Stevens and Russ Schriefer, the campaign’s chief media consultants, as well as Stephanie Kincaid, the campaign’s top buyer and a longtime employee of the Stevens and Schriefer Group. Press accounts have also named senior Romney campaign aide Eric Fehrnstrom as a Rambler partner, and Romney aides said other top officials’ work is handled through the firm.

The most recent Federal Election Commission data showed that the Romney campaign paid $85,258,006 to Rambler this cycle through August 2012, much of which represents ad buys with primary-election dollars.

Also, "focusing overwhelmingly on broadcast television" = "plz vote for me, elderlies"

Romney places his commercials on a week-to-week basis, rather than booking time well in advance, and typically pays more so that his ads don’t get preempted and to spare his campaign the hassle of haggling over time as prices rise.

baller

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVMcAO5TYzk

Obama emails are getting plain rude:

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/545738_10100613449389527_711744724_n.jpg

My friend Kim got called the fuck out in black and white. For the record, she can't contribute because she's a registered lobbyist.

i also donated $0 to obama this year. i'm not ashamed.

that is not a rude email

I know Clinton's being deified all out of proportion right now, but I agree with crazy Sullivan guy here--is this so hard?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7EyYhbLn98

Incredulity is not unseemly for an incumbent; no one's going to think "angry black man" if you throw out your arms and say "Huh?" with a smile.

that is not a rude email

If I got an email titled "Listen Up" and then it called me out for not giving you any money, I'd consider it rude.

no one's going to think "angry black man" if you throw out your arms and say "Huh?" with a smile.

you're right, they probably will think "uppity"

What's polite – taking you to the Lincoln Bedrom and sucking your dick?

Clinton thought so

Cindy Sheehan 2.0:

The mother of a former Navy SEAL who was killed in the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya last month has asked Mitt Romney to stop recounting a story about meeting the former SEAL, Glen Doherty, at a holiday party a few years ago.

Romney first relayed the story yesterday during a stump speech in Iowa. “[I] learned about him. He talked about his life. He skied a lot. He had skied in a lot of the places I had and we had a lot of things in common,” Romney said, continuing:

"You could imagine how I felt when I found out that he was one of the two former Navy SEALS killed in Benghazi on September the 11. And it touched me, obviously as I realized that this young man that I thought was so impressive had lost his life in the service of his fellow men and women."

Boston’s local NBC affiliate WHDH reported this morning that Doherty’s mother objected to Romney using the story in a campaign speech. “I don’t trust Romney. He shouldn’t make my son’s death part of his political agenda. It’s wrong to use these brave young men, who wanted freedom for all, to degrade Obama,” said Barbara Doherty. WHDH even suggested that it reached out to Romney’s campaign for comment, reporting that “there was no response from the Romney camp.”

But Romney’s not only telling the story against the wishes of Doherty’s family, he’s also mischaracterizing his encounter with the former SEAL. According to Glen Doherty’s longtime friend, Doherty said Romney had introduced himself four times in the span of less than 30 minutes, saying it was”pathetic” that Romney didn’t know the two had just met:

“He said it was very comical,” [Doherty friend Elf] Ellefsen said, “Mitt Romney approached him ultimately four times, using this private gathering as a political venture to further his image. He kept introducing himself as Mitt Romney, a political figure. The same introduction, the same opening line. Glen believed it to be very insincere and stale.” [...]

“He said it was pathetic and comical to have the same person come up to you within only a half hour, have this person reintroduce himself to you, having absolutely no idea whatsoever that he just did this 20 minutes ago, and did not even recognize Glen’s face.”

Ellefsen said it makes him “sick” that Romney is using the story out on the stump. “Glen would definitely not approve of it,” he said, adding, “He probably wouldn’t do much about it. He probably wouldn’t say a whole lot about it. I think Glen would feel, more than anything, almost embarrassed for Romney. I think he would feel pity for him.”

http://www.shoppingblog.com/2012pics/2012_election_cabbage_patch_dolls.jpg

How come Ann and Rafalca don't get cabbage patch dolls?

Paul Ryan's jacket isn't oversized enough.

reverse racism iirc

Cabbage Patch Romney looks a lot like Jason Sudeikis, too.

Romney had introduced himself four times in the span of less than 30 minutes

hahahaha

i really wanna hear mitt take on the 'encounter with voter' form but w/just a total disregard for specifics. "I met a man only last week, in Delaware, maybe, somewhere like Delaware, who worked as an engineer, or a baker, who said that under President Obama his taxes had doubled. this man - maybe he had a family, who knows - this man stands as an example of everything wrong with this administration. imagine his wife - what she's like isn't important, she's whatever, but just imagine her disappointment in this regime."

man it's so embarrassing when you realise you've become a person who writes in-character political madlibs on the internet

MoveOn:

"Scarlett Johansson, Eva Longoria, and Kerry Washington have teamed up with director Rob Reiner to make an absolutely knock-your-socks-off TV ad reminding American women of the terrible consequences of a Romney presidency."

skepticism just can't be denied sometimes

sometimes I wonder if we would be better off if we just told everyone in hollywood to pretend to be republicans

I mean I don't really wonder

If only Hollywood was pro-military, pro-consumerism, pro-big business. Oh wait...

If I got an email titled "Listen Up" and then it called me out for not giving you any money, I'd consider it rude.

The "Listen Up:" email went out to everyone, regardless of whether they've donated or not. The only thing different is the personal info (btw kudos to your friend for putting that out there, now someone can take her id number and make contributions to the campaign with it, making it look like a registered lobbyist is donating to a candidate) and the sales pitch after the donation links (I got "we need $$$ to fight misleading ad campaigns").

I forget where it was where I heard that Obama's campaign emails made him sound like a slightly stalker-y ex, but that comparison was otm.

Nate Silver conceding Mitt's post-debate boom both incontrovertible and big. Biden better not bungle it. Something needs to staunch Mitt's inertia.

jesus if this election really ends up turning on one debate performance it will be 100% impossible to read political media for the rest of my life.

Cosign x 10000000000

silver's model gives mitt-mentum a 28% chance of winning in light of the surge. feel it.

really, this is not a unique linchpin, guys. It's the way poli-discourse has been dumbed down at this level since at least Reagan. xp

That's for sure. But if Mitt can maintain this, his odds of at least winning the popular vote go up, no? I imagine Silver's model hinges on Obama's electoral college lead, regardless of Mitt's movement on other fronts. But that lead also hinges on swing states (fittingly).

his chances of winning the popular vote but losing the election do go up, but that's what everyone should be rooting for anyway

a 28% chance of winning!?! OMG WE'RE DOOMED

have you been following the Oakland A's this fall, Shakey? 28% is a cakewalk by comparison.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmLIrQFnZEo&feature=youtu.be

I don't watch the sportsball

nate silver has turned into a hack i'm sorry but it's sad + true

i understand that he needs to sell papers if he wants to keep getting paid but it's ridiculous when his model says one thing and he's doomsaying the next column over

yes, when he left Baseball Prospectus! xp

He knows his audience, Mittpocalyptic Republicrats.

trying to avoid Taking Sides.

Obama only needs to "win" the last debate to make a difference. The first one was "expectation control" -- the President can hardly not exceed expectations of him at this point, which will energize his base and inspire zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

wait hes doomsaying??? where?!?!?

Mittpocalyptic Republicrats

this is some of your best work yet

entirely derivative

It really makes you think.

@fivethirtyeight I just fixed my model oops and mitt romney has a 93% chance of winning now

The forecast model is not quite ready to jump on board with the notion that the race has become a literal toss-up;

I don't read him as doomsaying. He's simply acknowledging, based on the numbers, what people have been saying for days, based on far fewer numbers: that the debate performance hurt Obama immensely. He may still win. He can still win. But what Silver did was admit how much closer Mitt made it, with momentum in his favor. Sure, I can imagine Obama easily gaining that back. But given that things were relatively close to begin with, regardless of lead, it makes me a little uneasy. If one debate can do that, who knows what else is possible, let alone probable.

He is still the significantly more likely candidate to win. Any analysis that doesn't acknowledge that is trying to sell newspapers afaic.

i feel like nate silver is acknolwedging that, by writing that romneys chances are now 30%, and also by having a big 30% in the sidebar

The forecast model is not quite ready to jump on board with the notion that the race has become a literal toss-up;

― Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, October 10, 2012 4:57 PM (2 minutes ago)

Predicting the likely landfall of hurricanes >>>>> Nate Silver's polls at this point

i read that as fairly dry

I feel like people have a fundamental problem w/ the idea of '30%' and either want to believe romney will win 100% or obama will win 100%. cause its very hard to visualize romney 30% winning. but you just gotta think about 100 million parallel universes, sci-fi style, romney wins 30% of those.

max actually becomes president in 34 of the 100,000,000 sci-fi universes according to my model

*clenches fist* yesssss

in 3 of those 34 you get assassinated

That's cuz our brains ain't wired to think in probabilities, and we do so very poorly. The greater we fear some shit happening can affect how likely we think some shit is bound to happen, fer example.

but there's only a 30 percent of that happening

Which PKD story was it had a doomed rocket ship trying to buy repair parts from some moon gypsy else they were going to remain stuck, and she starts sorting thru possible timelines after she gets rich off them to find alt versions to sell more stuff to?

every PKD story?

That's cuz our brains ain't wired to think in probabilities, and we do so very poorly.

there was a 1% chance Sadaam had nukes but we HAD TO KNOW FOR SURE

we couldn't wait for a smoking mushroom cloud over max's apartment

Nah, only a handful of PKD stories had timeline fuckery; I think more were about post-apoc and droids and tv fixitmen

the max in the high castle

i don't have an awesome analysis for this all but there is so much of this thing that just depends on like ... time ... elapsing ... & the second third & fourth debates being more recent than this one, so it's hard to get super horrified or dismissive or whatever. it'll be fine. mitt's not gonna win. obama will have some snappiness in the next debate. there will be more time for mitt to talk & probably more of a concerted emphasis on "but that isn't true"-ing his shit.

I like how the media has basically given obama free reign to be a total asshole in the next debate

the max in the high castle

Haha, stealin' dis

Predicting the likely landfall of hurricanes >>>>> Nate Silver's polls at this point
--the ones that I'm near most: fellow outcasts and ilxors (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn)

Ha. Per Nate Silver's book, the likely landfall of hurricanes is actually one of the things we're best at predicting.

I like how the media has basically given obama free reign to be a total asshole in the next debate

― iatee, Wednesday, October 10, 2012 6:17 PM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

it is kinda weird though. all of the conversations from the debate thread are about whether or not mitt will be judged as the winner, w/probably a slight slant towards yes just on account of him overperforming against expectations. the crazy feedback loop of his slight viability triggering a huge upswing in popularity is a whole other thing. the next debate changes from them talking about shit & hammering some talking points to some virility contest, in which obama's manhood is at stake & he has to prove he won't be outtalked, &c. it's a different sport.

Obama's doomed if that's truly the case

dude has bought so deeply into the "must not be the angry black man" narrative that I believe it is virtually impossible for him to go on the attack on anything, and it's been shown by at least one scientific study that fact-based arguing causes people who disagree with you to become more entrenched in their already-formed opinions

otm

The forecast model is not quite ready to jump on board with the notion that the race has become a literal toss-up;

― Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, October 10, 2012 4:57 PM (2 minutes ago)

― Mordy, Wednesday, October 10, 2012 10:00 PM (22 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Hah, dude this was actually in answer to you - he's pointing out what other people itt are saying, that the model is based on the polls to hand - obviously if we believe that the polls to hand are going to continue to swing towards Mitt, then we believe the model will come around with them. But there's still merit in having a number that indicates that this hasn't happened yet (but also that the jobs report seems to have had 0 effect).

the thing is I think enough people have bought his narrative 'not an angry black man' that he has some room for angry black man, but there's also the fact that he fundamentally is not an angry black man

xp

More Klingon-style, less Vulcan-style, as mentioned earlier.

he needs a zinger coach

Saying that the model is not quite ready to jump on board w/ it being a literal toss-up suggests that it is almost ready to do so - just not quite yet. That's a sentence I'd expect to see if the model was currently predicted 60/40 or 55/45, with a literal toss-up being more like 50/50. When the model shows 70/30 and there are reasons to believe it'll regress you say something like: Romney has made up a lot of ground but Obama is still a clear favorite to win.

it was 70/30 before the conventions

he can't say that though because he's internalized the angry white pollster meme

so your whole reason for calling him a click-grubbing hack now is the three droll words "not quite ready"? blinding analysis

yes, my whole reason. you got me.

the thing is I think enough people have bought his narrative 'not an angry black man' that he has some room for angry black man, but there's also the fact that he fundamentally is not an angry black man

I believe nothing of the sort; people who dislike him appear to think he is either a socialist Satan-proxy who wants to deliver American sovereignty to the United Nations or a sociopathic murderer of foreigners bent on killing civilians in the name of corporate supremacy, and people who like him seem to think he's biding his time for just the right moment for when he's going to UNLEASH HELL on Mitt Romney and all Republicans, leaving them reeling in the face of the righteous onslaught.

What will really happen is that he will semi-genially stutter over some reasonable-sounding soundbites and be too polite to say much more than "Mitt Romney is misleading you; if you did the math you would see why" and ppl on the left are going to wail that the election is over and ppl on the right are going to call him unsure and a bad leader and undecided ppl are going to bristle and feel condescended towards because he pointed out that they can't do basic math.

He will then win the election 54% - 44% because Mitt Romney sucks that hard.

I think it's also worth remembering that the first debate was only a day or two after the "Grr Obama is a slang-slingin' accent-affectin' angry black man" tape was put on Drudge - obviously in retrospect it imploded almost immediately, but it's hard to imagine it wasn't on his mind in the prep for the debate. Which means he was played, sure, but I imagine that Tone Arguments are pretty high on his list of stuff to worry about as a black president getting re-elected on a patchy record.

no, also i've been reading him for months and i've noticed that he's been trying to dramatize the race more and more as its gone on. i don't think it's his fault - "nothing new happened today" will probably get him fired.

so did people believe Obama's fact-based point that he and Mitt essentially agree on Social Security's future?

i don't think he or anyone in his campaign staff gives one shit about that stupid Drudge tape

What will really happen is that he will semi-genially stutter over some reasonable-sounding soundbites and be too polite to say much more than "Mitt Romney is misleading you; if you did the math you would see why" and ppl on the left are going to wail that the election is over and ppl on the right are going to call him unsure and a bad leader and undecided ppl are going to bristle and feel condescended towards because he pointed out that they can't do basic math.

He will then win the election 54% - 44% because Mitt Romney sucks that hard.

yep

I mean, remember when the last black president - nope!

has the current state of the race invalidated any of the very reasonable points nate made here?
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/03/first-debate-often-helps-challenger-in-polls/

I'm surprised a Weekly Standard reporter admitted this:

“I think what campaign journalists, conservative or liberal, always crave more than actual fairness, are twists. Then, each side gets its turn to whine about something. Which is fairness once removed, I suppose.

As for polls, these kinds of swings give journos an important opportunity to entertain themselves by analyzing what undecideds, who can’t seem to make up their minds after two solid years of campaigning by both sides think at the precise moment of a fleeting news cycle that will likely become obsolete seconds after the clueless swing voter hangs up the phone with their pollster.

Then of course, once swing voters read about how they’ve changed their minds, they will only be further confused, thus providing a perfect and endless feedback loop of uncertainty and drama which will need to be further interpreted by the media, thus making us feel relevant, even as our industry is dying.”

I believe nothing of the sort; people who dislike him appear to think he is either a socialist Satan-proxy who wants to deliver American sovereignty to the United Nations or a sociopathic murderer of foreigners bent on killing civilians in the name of corporate supremacy, and people who like him seem to think he's biding his time for just the right moment for when he's going to UNLEASH HELL on Mitt Romney and all Republicans, leaving them reeling in the face of the righteous onslaught.

welllll these people are not undecided voters. his likeability numbers are always higher than his approval rating. I don't think there are very many people in america who think that obama is 1 angry dude but also can't decide whether to vote for him or romney.

The point is that, despite a mountain of evidence the size of Mount Everest to the contrary, both the right and the left paint him as different caricatures of "the angry black man" so it's totally ludicrous to even suggest that a sizable, likely majority segment of the population doesn't see him that way.

has the current state of the race invalidated any of the very reasonable points nate made here?
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/03/first-debate-often-helps-challenger-in-polls/

― Mordy, Wednesday, October 10, 2012 5:39 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

no but where do his new blog posts indicate that he no longer believes that?

I mostly agree but the numbers are like (morbs left 10%) +(crazy right 45%) and both sides are doing it for their own reasons and are in pretty fixed positions. but the people who generally like the dude but might not vote for him - ie the people who decide this election - def aren't looking at the world w/ greenwald or hannity glasses. and I don't think one or two angry zingers in a debate will redefine obama in their eyes cause he's been a very public figure for 5 years at this point.

the Left paints him as a caricature of "the angry black man"? First, what Left? I don't think he's remotely angry, but a manager who knows what his job is. That's why Cheney congratulated him for his "evolution" on terrorism last year.

I don't think Obama needs to act angrier in order to neutralize Romney in the debate. He does need to drop his above-the-fray equanimity though and show some passion.

I think the beware, angry black man! thing is pretty silly. It's been pretty well established that there are things Obama simply doesn't like to do, like schmooze, campaign and debate idiots. Probably picked the wrong profession. Constitutional scholar at stiff grad school seems more his speed.

good thing there ain't much more politics to be done after this job, then

Can we start a new thread please? This bookmark is really NSFW.

?

Bookmarks retain the original titles of threads.

Is it possible to remove the bookmark and then rebookmark?

i just tried it, so guess i'll find out whenever someone posts again

It keeps the title.

yeah, I just tried it.

shoot.

I honestly feel bad that titling the thread after a morbs zinger is causing people distress

yeah it's like for once he got to people with his schtick

"dead civilians" is really nsfw?

original title was "dead brown civilians"

I guess it means Morbs basically succeeds, if thrusting the issue of Obama's global death initiative onto my screen daily has made me disgusted enough to consider giving up on horse-race ILX politics. Hell, I've been considering not voting anyway, the whole situation has me pretty bummed out.

everyone should vote just because it's fun. Why would you want to not vote?

skip the top line and vote for school board or w/e if you have to

simple solution guys: Bookmarkable US Politics Thread v3.1: blah blah Big Bird etc

yeah it's like for once he got to people with his schtick

― j., Wednesday, October 10, 2012 6:36 PM (42 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

be srs morbs is incredibly successful at getting to people w/his schtick

yeah but as a continual but ineffectual conversational irritant, not as like waking up sheeple and making them reject the bankrupt faux-democracy or wahteva

im sure the latter would be deeply satisfying but the former has its charms too

not as like waking up sheeple and making them reject the bankrupt faux-democracy or wahteva

gave up in '84, dude. I'm strictly an End Is Nigh guy.

http://gettingsmart.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Bill-Nye.jpeg

don't you need a sandwich board for that

Meanwhile on the Sesame Street front:

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/181rs0ihg1r71jpg/original.jpg

Nothing to do with the election...maybe.

I endorse this cosplay

everyone should vote just because it's fun. Why would you want to not vote?

― www.toilet-guru.com (silby), Wednesday, October 10, 2012 10:45 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

more likely to be called for jury duty

jury duty is like the last place u can actually participate in citizen life in meaningful way

uh, excuse me, have you not seen city council meetings on public access?

skip the top line and vote for school board or w/e if you have to

Word. There's more to vote for than just the president. I guess people really don't care about local elections or their communities?

pfft im not interested in these horse race politics!

I am interested in who wins. Not that I have much to say about that.

It doesn't matter who I vote for locally, man. They're all the same, just going to spend money on parks and libraries and fixing potholes and block parties and shit. It's enough to turn a person cynical.

Actually, this year the public schools are even closed on Election Day! No excuse.

I'm registered where my parents grew up, which is an hour away, and I don't have a car, so it's more or less impossible for me to get to that county. Those are pretty good excuses, right?

Unless it doesn't matter which county I vote....?

it's pretty easy to change your registration address iirc

i've never missed an election, tho once or twice i've had to fill out one of those provisional ballot things bc i hadn't registered in time at my new address

(i don't know if they exist in all states but worth checking if your deadline has passed?)

i'm asked if i'm registered at my current address (and offered a clipboard to rectify if not) like twice a day now that it's october

I got my (four-page) absentee ballot on Saturday despite being well enough to walk or crawl to my polling station. Jill Stein made it!

I'm registered where my parents grew up, which is an hour away, and I don't have a car, so it's more or less impossible for me to get to that county. Those are pretty good excuses, right?

Unless it doesn't matter which county I vote....?

― Emperor Cos Dashit (Adam Bruneau), Wednesday, October 10, 2012 9:48 PM (22 minutes ago)

absentee ballot dude

Where do i get those?

i forget but i did it in 08. gotta be online somewhere, can't be that hard

google "absentee ballot application [your state here]"

My wife has lived here for almost 20 years, and they still send her her Virginia voter registration card. She joked that this year she was tempted to vote twice, especially given that her vote would actually matter in VA.

heheh, that is funny *tips off drudge report*

what makes an absentee ballot fraudulent or not? Like if you haven't lived somewhere x amount of years does it become not kosher?

In response to multiple douchebag AR state legislators:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2012/10/09/mark-twain-shreds-republican-loy-mauch/

The texts remain: it is the practice that has changed. Why? Because the world has corrected the Bible. The Church never corrects it; and also never fails to drop in at the tail of the procession – and take the credit of the correction. As she will presently do in this instance.

Christian England supported slavery and encouraged it for two hundred and fifty years, and her church’s consecrated ministers looked on, sometimes taking an active hand, the rest of the time indifferent. England’s interest in the business may be called a Christian interest, a Christian industry. She had her full share in its revival after a long period of inactivity, and [this] revival was a Christian monopoly; that is to say, it was in the hands of Christian countries exclusively. English parliaments aided the slave traffic and protected it; two English kings held stock in slave-catching companies. The first regular English slave hunter — John Hawkins, of still revered memory — made such successful havoc, on his second voyage, in the matter of surprising and burning villages, and maiming, slaughtering, capturing, and selling their unoffending inhabitants, that his delighted queen conferred the chivalric honor of knighthood on him — a rank which had acquired its chief esteem and distinction in other and earlier fields of Christian effort. The new knight, with characteristic English frankness and brusque simplicity, chose as his device the figure of a negro slave, kneeling and in chains. Sir John’s work was the invention of Christians, was to remain a bloody and awful monopoly in the hands of Christians for a quarter of a millennium, was to destroy homes, separate families, enslave friendless men and women, and break a myriad of human hearts, to the end that Christian nations might be prosperous and comfortable, Christian churches be built, and the gospel of the meek and merciful Redeemer be spread abroad in the earth; and so in the name of his ship, unsuspected but eloquent and clear, lay hidden prophecy. She was called The Jesus.

But at last in England, an illegitimate Christian rose against slavery. It is curious that when a Christian rises against a rooted wrong at all, he is usually an illegitimate Christian, member of some despised and bastard sect. There was a bitter struggle, but in the end the slave trade had to go — and went. The Biblical authorization remained, but the practice changed.

love this article, sums up the feelings I have about it nicely

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/10/obama-s-debate-performance-how-twitter-has-done-us-wrong.html

I feel like Romney won a boxing match 115-113 on all three scorecards and somehow that became the most devastating knockout in history.

I thought about linking to the same piece yesterday.

Even though I've expressed frustration with Obama's passivity in the first debate, I'm baffled too. Baffled as to the specific trigger for what's happening, though not that it's happened. Here's something I wrote elsewhere on August 14 (I realize quoting yourself is Jerry Lewis territory):

I still say it’s way too early. Nate Silver has Obama pegged at about 70% to win; I’m more like 60/40 at this point. (Entirely based on intuition of course, not understanding the intricacies of regression mean analysis--in fact, not even knowing if I just made that term up.) I’ll repeat an analogy I used on the message board: I continue to see Obama’s prospects as a house of cards, impressive right now in the way it keeps getting higher and higher, ready to fall to the ground if one of the cards at the bottom gets dislodged. I will grant that the number of cards that might do that are down to a handful: a disastrous jobs report, some international calamity (economic more than military), an unexpectedly poor debate performance (one that produces an iconic moment, like Bush checking his watch), or I don’t know what else at this point.

For the longest time, I thought Obama's chances were precarious. I did, for a couple of weeks, finally start to think everything was pretty solid after that 47% tape came out. Now the debate fallout--which really makes no sense--has brought back that uncertainty. Things can easily change again, though, as Romney's comback is sitting on a house of cards too--a lot of people have apparently been momentarily distracted from how much they really dislike him.

Yeah, everything is really precarious, which underscores how much a lot of people must hate Obama yet really dislike Romney. Obama's biggest mistake since being in office is that he's been in office. Romney's biggest attribute is that he is not Obama (literally, regardless of policy). The country is teetering between those two irrational tipping points.

mark twain blisteringly otm. no public figure of similar contemporary renown would think to say the kind of shit he said.

not in america at least.

Let us no praise jaded insiders, etc.

"now," obviously

again I think the whole thing has to be framed by the fact that romney has had basically zero fantastic days until this and soft-supporters were looking for a reason to like him / media was waiting for a moment to pat him on the back. he also benefited from the long-term-expectations-lowering that came from mccain-dubya-dubya - ie he gave the best performance in 20 years for the gop, by virtue of being a fairly intelligent liar rather than a dumb liar. but anyone thinking obama did horribly is buying into the post-debate narrative more than anything else - this was a very technical debate and he never came close to stumbling. there were few moments when he actually came across poorly, he just coulda used a little more oomph.

xp

Well, I guess one issue is that the single Obama gift that almost everyone praises is his public speaking - even his haters admire it so much they need to credit a teleprompter - so to see him do so poorly, relatively speaking, was a disproportional failure. It was a bit like watching a free throw king brick it at the end of a tied game.

I haven't seen anyone mention this but I think the relatively huge debate bounce has to be put in perspective of the v. tiny convention bounce - the gop convention was terrible enough that they failed at doing the thing that usually happens at that point w/ soft-supporters, but they were still there, waiting for a moment to say 'ya actually I might vote for that dude'

Could any of it actually be Obama simply losing support? He got a lot of people to vote for him in '08 who might otherwise have not voted. Doesn't losing some of those fence-sitters in some way magnify Romney's numbers? If the number of potential voters go down, but come out almost exclusively from Obama's side? (Caveat: I have no idea how numbers work)

first response hall of fame on that daily beast thing

part of it is obama losing weak-supporters maybe turning undecided / less likely to vote, part of it is romney gaining weak-supporters w/ the reverse happening. a v. v. small % are crazy people who see one debate and immediately decide to switch their vote. it's difficult to pull those kindsa trends out of the numbers unless you're tracking a fixed group of people over time, but I think this was a case of romney picking up the low hanging fruit that he shoulda already had. if that's true then another bounce of this size would be much harder to pull off.

a v. v. small % are crazy people who see one debate and immediately decide to switch their vote.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/08/buzz-bissinger-why-i-m-voting-for-mitt-romney.html

The percentage of voters who literally changed their minds as a result of last week's debates is really small though. Obama will still likely win. We're just caught in this hypercycle whereby political reporters try to make the race exciting by feeding the belief that things have really changed since last Wednesday.

http://plainblogaboutpolitics.blogspot.com/2012/10/all-i-do-sometime-is-write-little.html

They need to have a Presidential election every year, seems to be a good way to encourage spending, create jobs, sustain careers.

I'm not so cavalier about dismissing the whims of some undefined "really small" number of voters. There's a statistically tiny number of votes separating the two candidates in the first place, especially once you factor in the margin of error. It really doesn't take much to tilt the scale one way or the other. It makes me uneasy when elections are decided on the basis of hundreds, or thousands, or even a few hundred thousand votes in a country of 300 million. It really does magnify the impact of those aforementioned crazy people.

yeah but i thought you had no idea how numbers work

xpost Like the political equivalent of perpetual war. Perpetual campaign! A billion raised and spent on either side, every year: we'll have the best pyramid scheme economy ever!

xpost I know how numbers don't work in my favor!

Like, I don't know how big my piece of pie is, I just know how big your piece of pie is and that it is bigger than mine and that is not fair (aka toddler logic)

The answer: don't watch cable news or read angry white pollsters.

you're a two year old who doesn't understand numbers? you should check out this show, it's called Sesame Street

josh, those numbers are 'really small' when compared to the other voters I was talking about, so they are less important w/r/t winning election

Sesame Street is for commies. That's what mommy says.

basically in the short-term it makes more sense to think of a spectrum of voters w/ fairly fixed ideological positions and maybe a good obama day earns some more support from on the left-leaning centrist side of that spectrum and makes the solid-left part of the spectrum more likely to actually show up and vote. but a good obama day doesn't mean that millions of true-undecided voters suddenly decide to vote for him because 'true-undecided' in the 'has no political leanings in any sense' is kinda a make believe concept.

Does this country need another Civil War? POLL closes: October 16 (in 4 days)

I've just been struck by how many man on the street sort of sources I hear on the radio or read in articles say they voted for Obama last time and are either leaning or decided against it this time. I know they're a weird minority, and outliers when it comes to statistics, but I haven't heard many (any?) of the converse: I voted for McCain but am voting for Obama. I'd like to put my finger on just what has changed with these people, because Obama didn't just become black and angry or whatever. I'm honestly curious what people were expecting from Obama in his first term that they not only did not get but would make them vote for Romney, who would impose the near complete opposite of even Obama's promised but undelivered policies.

we should probably finish the first civil war before we start another xp

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_wSoONVcq6tg/SsNwljZYjFI/AAAAAAAACJk/UgPMWNoNa1g/s320/digging-a-hole.jpg

GOP lawmaker compares Ark. gov, AG to Nazis

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) - A Republican legislator under fire for writing that slavery may have been a "blessing in disguise" is comparing Arkansas' top Democrats to Nazis for criticizing him and two other GOP candidates for similarly controversial comments.

State Rep. Jon Hubbard wrote a letter published by The Jonesboro Sun Thursday accusing Gov. Mike Beebe and Attorney General Dustin McDaniel of tactics that he compared to "Nazi-style political intimidation." Democrats and Republicans have criticized the writings by Hubbard, state Rep. Loy Mauch and House candidate Charlie Fuqua.

Hubbard did not immediately return a call Thursday morning.

Beebe told reporters Thursday that he thought Hubbard's letter was inappropriate, and said the lawmaker is trying to blame others for problems he created with his own writings.

I'll feel bad if Obama loses. I will enjoy compiling all of iatee's reassurances into one gigantic "Oops" post.

I've just been struck by how many man on the street sort of sources I hear on the radio or read in articles say they voted for Obama last time and are either leaning or decided against it this time. I know they're a weird minority, and outliers when it comes to statistics, but I haven't heard many (any?) of the converse: I voted for McCain but am voting for Obama. I'd like to put my finger on just what has changed with these people, because Obama didn't just become black and angry or whatever. I'm honestly curious what people were expecting from Obama in his first term that they not only did not get but would make them vote for Romney, who would impose the near complete opposite of even Obama's promised but undelivered policies.

well if you think about it w/ a spectrum in mind, the set of people who voted for mccain in 2008 was already more right-wing than the set of people who voted for bush in 2004 (and/or racist) which means they were the people w/ the most entrenched views already. and even if you have soured on right-wing politics over the last 4 years, that doesn't mean you've suddenly switched positions on everything you previously believed. it's more likely you'd slowly become some disillusioned independent who doesn't vote than you'd shift from being the type of person who voted for sarah palin to the type of person who believes that obama's done a good job.

maybe they just bought into 'change' but didn't see any

Maybe they should have to write out in a logical sentence what 'change' they are actually looking for.

Yo guys JetBlue has us all covered btw: http://www.jetblueelectionprotection.com/

ON NOVEMBER 6TH, AMERICA WILL ELECT THE NEXT U.S. PRESIDENT. IF THINGS DON'T GO YOUR WAY, DON'T WORRY. HERE'S YOUR CHANCE TO GET A FREE FLIGHT OUT OF THE COUNTRY WITH JETBLUE. PARTICIPATE IN OUR POLL AND LOGIN TO FACEBOOK TO ENTER. IF YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND YOU CAN ALWAYS COME BACK. OR NOT. IT'S A FREE COUNTRY.

idk adam, they voted for big capital letters saying 'CHANGE' iirc, not sure how that translates into individual disappointments

There are a lot of capital letters in that JetBlue post though - might as well pin our hopes on "PARTICIPATE," "FACEBOOK," or "DON'T."

http://obamiconme.pastemagazine.com/entries/images/a0/d1/2259901/original_image.png?1349972214

Mitt Romney Claims No American Dies Because They Don’t Have Health Insurance

It actively offends me that someone with his head shoved that far up his moneyed ass is running for president, let alone that he has any chance at all of winning.

Keep talkin Mittens!

this is just more of that "we have emergency rooms! everyone is fine!" rightwing take on hc

Right, but for him to come right out and say that no one becomes sick or dies from lack of health insurance is just beyond the pale. I'll be extremely disappointed if the Dems don't jump all over that.

blatant lying has given him a poll bounce, of course he's running with it

CHANGE is the vaguest election slogan possible. Plus it's been used forever, the earliest election I'm aware of was Clinton/Bush/Perot and I know CHANGE was a big them then too. It's so vague that when people report they are disappointed it wasn't the CHANGE they were hoping for, I'd like to know exactly what CHANGE they were hoping for. Otherwise, "Not the CHANGE I was hoping for" is just as meaningless as "CHANGE".

Ugh, it's all meaningless anyways...

The slogans are meaningless. The power of office and how it is used affects us all.

I think the CHANGE everyone seems to be forgetting is Obama wasnt George Mother Fucking W Bush

Any kind of good news is welcome, and this seems promising:

Obama is winning Ohioans who have already cast their ballot by a 63-37 margin, and they make up 1 in 5 of the poll’s respondents.

That'd be based on an exit poll, right?

Never mind--that's clarified right in the sentence.

that's the underemphasized story of the election - the number of states that will be decided before election day even starts

Someone's worried about that:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/329135/vote-late-editors

I like the big-upping of shit they don't otherwise care about in order to avoid saying anything about waiting because Mitt's numbers might get better.

mayor jingleberries otm

jesus christ that romney statement about health care. this is the moment when i just wish he were impaled by a mic stand or something. what a useless human being.

very weird to live in a country when a significant minority, including many of the political elite, is so profoundly reality-challenged. and i by weird i mean "it drives me to despair."

That particular statement doesn't seem reality-challenged in that obstinate, finger in the ears, "LA LA LA NOT LISTENING TO THE FACTS" way that a lot of Repub bullshit is. I honestly think he thinks that's the truth. And it probably effectively is, from his limited exposure to the poors. Which is just one reason why he's completely unfit to be president.

"Before we talk about how many people die without health care, we should focus on the real problem: the number of people who die every day in hospitals."

He thinks it's the truth until the truth needs a tune up amirite

"truth"

I honestly think he thinks that's the truth.

that's exactly what i mean by "reality-challenged." he's not just being cynical, he's being honestly ignorant.

It isn't so much resistant to reality (which is indeed part of it) but an aversion to deductive reasoning when the results conflict with ideology. For example, The Corner's gone berzerk over the Benghazi raid – evidence, they say, of Obama's tendency to coddle terrorists and hence Not Being Tough On Terrorism. It's awful what's happened but it looks like "routine incompetence" or "that's what fucking happens when the CIA gives the orders instead of the State Department."

yup

Epistemic closure, ideological adherence over everything, a deep investment in confirmation/disconfirmation bias, and a total inability to error-correct or admit error-correction, as that would show weakness and an inability to persevere to everyone you fear and resent.

"severely kidding"

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/obama-romney-now-severely-kidding

pretty good. they're gonna hammer the flip-flopper/etch-a-sketch angle from here to election day.

where was that last wednesday night, when it mattered?

it'll be there at the next debate for sure

I know what the TPM headline that's been up all day ("New Polls Suggest The Dem Freakout May Be Premature") actually means, but if you look at it sideways you might think, "Wait a week or two, and you'll really have something to freak out over."

http://mansplainingryan.tumblr.com

DYING

After tonight they need to switch to another beguiling candid shot of Ryan tho

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E87gciwebw

Study it out, just study it out.

chris matthews can sometimes be quite good at giving people enough rope.

biden should debate romney next tuesday. has anyone said that?

Yeah, over on the debate thread.

Pareene tears apart a Daniel Henninger WSJ op-ed that says politicians (i.e., Democrats) calling people "liars" is JUST LIKE HITLER.

Senate slipping away fast from possible GOP control.

Because god knows, Republican control of the House alone wasn't enough to stifle things.

yeah that's looked likely for awhile but probably irrelevant if romney wins - dem margin will be narrow enough and dem senators up for reelection in red/purple states in 14 will be easy to pick off for 'bipartisan' support. if obama reelected it will make getting another supreme court nominee thru easier and put off any impeachment schemes for a couple of years.

has anyone pitched in?
http://www.indiegogo.com/BidensTransAm

Nate Silver came out of '08 with a NY Times column and quasi-celebrity status within the world of punditry. God, if Romney wins, will Mr. Unskewed be viewed as a sage?

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51TDYYSWypL._SL500_AA300_.jpg

Joe the Plumber came out of '08 with a book and quasi-celebrity status within the world of plumbertry.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlM5mvV4ATc

that guy looks like jabba the hut. should i watch it?

"You're an American, just like me - almost totally ignorant of history, and constantly whipsawing between smug bellicosity and paranoid self-pity."

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/10/shots-fired-at-denver-campaign-office-138361.html

Don't even know how to respond to this

...other to say I'm shocked, like with stuff like workplace shootings, that these things don't happen more often

it happened a bunch of times in '08, right? iirc

Anyone know any good Willard Mitt Romney anagrams? His last name is one letter from Money so it seems like it should be easy.

Ok, i cheated with a generator. My favorite was "Maimed Wintry Troll" which almost sounds like a Tyrannosaurus Rex lyric.

Good call!

The best one for just Mitt Romney might be 'Me Mr. Tin Toy'.

"President Romney" = "Enormity Spender"

IS THAT MY MAN ENORMITY??

A liberal, moderate, and conservative go into a bar
=
Cool bartender, as above arrived: "Alone again, Mitt?"

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TtfeDls2wuM/TwHbuVzgODI/AAAAAAAAAbE/ANGKz8NHsLA/s1600/rimshot.jpeg

David Stockman on Rom's Bain experience.

sexy big bird supposedly THE costume this halloween season.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_wGr8njEWjtI/TMtqli61zrI/AAAAAAAAOAk/moAnuZpURO8/s640/Sexy+big_bird.jpg

http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/kxkx.com/files/2012/10/Sexy-Big-Bird.jpg

I'd like to cut HER subsidy.

would review her reliance on government funding

it seems like the town hall format is kind of dangerous for both candidates - Mitt is absolutely horrible at dealing with actual real-live people, for ex. And Obama knows he has to be "aggressive" but taking questions from the audience doesn't give a lot of leeway for that kind of thing; the candidates won't be addressing each other.

I liked Pareene's thing on fixing the debates today. Good points and a good deconstruction.

The two parties do not want to repair thecurrent hugely flawed debate format, bcz as far as they are concerned "the fix is in" just fine.

the debates are basically run on behalf of the two campaigns through a private corporation owned by the two parties, there's nothing remotely 'objective' about them and they will never be fixed.

http://www.salon.com/2012/10/15/whats_wrong_with_the_debates_and_how_to_fix_them/

http://mlkshk.com/r/K9QL

Bill Clinton and Bruce Springsteen campaign event in Parma, OH on Thursday.

special guest appearance by The Miz

I sorta disagree w/ the piece. I think it's great that the candidates are making viewers sit through hours of technical arguments about the budget and taxes, because a lot of people watching are going to be hearing those arguments / details for the first time.

I think most people who care enough to watch the debates have opinions on abortion, immigration, gay marriage and hearing one more person spout out the right-wing/left-wing talking points on the issue isn't really gonna change anything. nobody's gonna suddenly win the debate on abortion in a presidential debate and convince millions of people to change their views on the subject. I don't think that's the reason why these subjects don't come up recently - it's more that we're in a transition period where neither party is gonna gain any new support by pressing the issue. eventually dems will have room to press gay marriage and immigration, abortion, who knows.

anyway this is good: http://plainblogaboutpolitics.blogspot.com/2012/10/was-it-debate.html

People might not have their opinion changed by watching a debate on an issue like that, but they will at least be reminded of the issue and of the candidates' stances and that can certainly motivate people to vote or move an undecided voter one way or the other.

And don’t forget that the act of asking a question on a topic usually suggests that the questioner has some sort of position on the topic. It’s “safe” for nonpartisan representatives of the “objective” press to ask about the deficit and the urgent need to reform Social Security, because the urgent need to reform Social Security isn’t considered a partisan position in D.C., it’s just considered an objective fact. But to ask about the right of gay people to serve in the military is to invite the criticism that you care suspiciously much about them. To ask about civil liberties or the drug war is basically to suddenly admit that you are Ron Paul in disguise.

this is so OTM it hurts.

pareene doesn't really tackle the underlying root of the debate problem, which gets a good overview here: http://www.publicintegrity.org/2008/09/18/3057/two-party-debates

fwiw, the Lincoln-Douglas debates worked because they were focussed on a single issue, slavery, with a long, complex history, that involved many fundamental questions about government, including the moral, the philosophical and the practical. It was an issue of such depth and complexity that there were many powerful levers for moving voters toward new appreciations of what could be done and should be done. By moving beyond simple sloganeering to genuinely arguing over the complexities, Lincoln-Douglas even then was very remarkable, and remains unexampled in later times.

The modern version of candidate debates are not similar at all, mainly because there are no similarly fundamental issues on the table. There are some really huge issues out there, such as climate change, but the established political parties have clearly decided to avoid that public debate. If you look at the past 150 years, you see that sticking to slogans and avoiding both depth and details has been the undeviating norm among politicians. The real debates go on, piecemeal, down in the local communities, and they rarely get pushed up into the national campaigns.

Also, Abe and the Judge at least agreed on fundamentals: middle-aged men in the last century wrote a Constitution. Our modern candidates don't even believe that.

revealed constitution is the wildest unenumerated amendment

Jill Stein NYC rally tnite

http://www.jillstein.org/rally_to_occupythecpd_in_nyc_with_jill_stein_cheri_honkala_lee_camp_and_george_martinez?utm_campaign=nyc_rally2

Green candidates arrested at debate site

http://www.jillstein.org/mockumentary_debate?utm_campaign=cpd_arrest1&recruiter_id=198315

Loving this

might have gone with "no black man" but no, Missouri....

what polls should i be looking at?

Former Massachusetts lieutenant governor Kerry Healey, told TPM Tuesday night after the debate that she didn’t want to get into detail on Romney’s position because he’s “not going to have his campaign defined by what the Obama campaign wants to talk about.”

“Saying ‘will you sign this, would you support that,’ this is just a campaign tactic,” she said.

Can't believe Obama made him make that 47% comment...

it's so mean of him

what polls should i be looking at?

― (♥___♥) (roxymuzak), Wednesday, October 17, 2012 5:41 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com

always and forever

are we worried about romney

you probably shouldn't even look at other poll sites. but sometimes it's good to do so just to get a memory of what a cruel and brutish world poll analysis was before nate silver.

we are exactly 35% worried

just tried to donate to the Jill Stein campaign, the page went blooey when I hit Submit. :/

I blame obama

OK, it went through. Suck it, Hempstead PD.

538 + http://election.princeton.edu/ and you're set for

life

oops that was suppsed to be life somebody strike ME out

set for

life

makes me laugh

http://m.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/10/romney-told-employers-tell-employees-whom-vote/58076/

surely this guy is the most cynical gop-candidate since nixon

oh shit

and therefore their job and their future
and therefore their job and their future
and therefore their job and their future

get that shit loopin on blogs

Apparently our buddy Joe Walsh did the same thing. It's officially A THING among the tea party cranks.

I don't know which is more astounding: Romney's complete tone-deafness wrt the non-riches or the fact that said tone-deafness hasn't already effectively lost him the election.

The latter is more astounding than the former.

Like, I'm not at all surprised that he's out of touch with and doesn't really care about anyone who isn't a fellow oligarch. I'm just surprised that he's so inept at disguising it that it's like he doesn't even realize that he should be trying to disguise it. We should be thanking god that he doesn't have a Rove running his shit.

or he realizes that it doesn't matter if he disguises it. anything short of brazenly breaking the law and 50% of the country will still vote for him

47%

right, i meant ~50%

the boss endorsed obama on fb and there are like 500 comments mostly from republican fans rending garments that he betrayed them

OK, Stein meets all my requirements now, I will vote for her barring a sea change.

― cancer, kizz my hairy irish azz (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, October 17, 2012 3:06 PM (7 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

same

― down w/ obana...he is the reson were in dept (Z S), Wednesday, October 17, 2012 3:08 PM (7 hours ago)

can't decide whether to waste my vote on stein or rocky anderson - stein's enviro pedigree is impressive but she was scaring me with some of her anti-QE stuff in the debate today

Nate Silver on the daily show tonight

Woah woah woah. That conference call tape. If this doesn't get to be as huge as the 47% tape someone is really fucking up. Wow. "There's nothing illegal about..." is a really bad look. And how perfectly it lines up with everything else that seems sleazy and corporate and Mr. Boss about the guy. Unbelievable.

Can you provide specifics, I hadn't heard about this?

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/10/romney-told-employers-tell-employees-whom-vote/58076/

Lame and yet not at all shocking

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvR5qTUOTuY

the very last white democrat from the deep south in the house iirc

i wonder what the stopped lynching story is

balls, that's your turf, got any details on that offhand?

("turf" as in john barrow's stomping grounds, not lynching!)

I think Mitt's strategy has been to just let his asshole flag fly high and it's done him pretty well. There's been a number of moments in his campaign where i was astounded that a public figure would get away with saying what he said. Each time it's less and less shocking. He's successfully diluted the impact of these mini-scandals, regardless of how outrageous they may seem to Dem stans. Anything can be spun into a positive for his base. He's like liquid bullshit. It just flows through him.

(Incidentally, I note that 538's map really does have Colorado and Virginia in swing-land - pretty sure both were blue before the first debate, went pink afterwards, were light blue again a couple days ago, then pink again.... tonight Colorado's light blue and Virginia's pink....)

Don't worry guys I vote in Virginia so I'll take care of it

There's been a number of moments in his campaign where i was astounded that a public figure would get away with saying what he said. Each time it's less and less shocking. He's successfully diluted the impact of these mini-scandals, regardless of how outrageous they may seem to Dem stans.

Isn't it great? Now that candidates know they can get away with brazen lies and clown-like incompetency in the campaign, 2016 will be the biggest circus in US history.

*cue witty Morbs retort

Mike Elk of the labor magazine In These Times broke the conference call story and numerous others. In These Times just lost a grant and needs donations, so if you have $ to spare, please think about donating.

This fucking guy.

http://imageshack.us/a/img23/9682/57635951490814520554186.jpg

will do, thanks. (re. in these times.)

reaaaaally hope the Dems jump on Mitt's conference call.

to me it seems more scandal-worthy than the 47% comment even, but there's just so much energy being put into bindergate

that's because Bindergate is funny

conference call doesnt seem to be getting any burn yet

agreed that its 47% like in its potential tho

Warren up by nine in Mass.

Quantum of solace.

http://www.romneytaxplan.com/

conference call?

"I hope you make it very clear to your employees what you believe is in the best interest of your enterprise and therefore their job and their future in the upcoming elections."

one of the advantages that the right has is that they naturally mobilize when things like this happen

Whooo boy

[i]PHOENIX, AZ - The Maricopa County Elections Department mistakenly listed the wrong date of the upcoming general election on an official government document.

The error appears on a document containing a voter ID card.

In addition to the ID card, the piece of paper it comes in lists other information such as important election dates.

In the corner of the document, it says November 6th in English but in Spanish it reads 8 de Noviembre, the 8th of November.
Election day is November 6th, not November 8th.

Read more: http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_phoenix_metro/central_phoenix/Maricopa-County-Elections-Department-admits-error-on-date-of-general-election-on-voter-ID-cards#ixzz29fDnL1gX[/q]

lol formatting but anyway

"mistakenly" obv

one weird mistake

This County Elections Department shows you how to disenfranchise voters using this one weird mistake!

Stupid... But election fraud in arizona won't have a serious impact on the election results.

No, but it might on local and state elections.

Which might be really important to Spanish-speaking people living in Arizona.

Elsewhere via Twitter:

Tagg has "slugged me a couple of times. I assure you President Obama has nothing to worry about." Josh Romney

So basically Josh just called his brother a wimpy milquetoast while also reminding people he himself is a zombie who cannot be harmed by such things anyway.

haha burn

Romney seems like he's raised a family of Patrick Batemans.

that snl sketch where obamas all '...i say that to remind you that i have two adorable young daughters not five creepy adult sons' was lol

Yeah, there's just something unsettling about all of them.

Well cloning vats will do that.

weird combination of pampered and predatory

http://politix.topix.com/img/K7PK8S31NOUIR6SV-rszw514

"Look at those douchebags!"

http://media.northjersey.com/images/090412-obama-daughters-dngso.jpg

http://politix.topix.com/img/K7PK8S31NOUIR6SV-rszw514

― --bob marley (lag∞n), Thursday, October 18, 2012 3:59 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this is like all time

he can play Tom Cruise

If someone told me he was manufactured by the Weyland Corporation I would completely believe them.

theyre like some really expensive well bred hunting dogs

holy shit that picture, lolololol

that one + this one is like

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/assets_c/2012/10/romney-close-afp-debate-cropped-proto-custom_28.jpg

they will kill u

You don't wanna fuck with Romney
cuz Mittens will fuckin kill you

Anyone see the "New Girl" episode this season where Schmidt pretends to be "Tugg Romney?"

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc0rl6azqv1qzigjno1_500.gif

tagg romney aint nothin to f w

what kind of monster would vote for a man that names his child tugg

http://image.retrojunk.com/3d1_9447c4d758.jpg

Tug Mug is a merciless and formidable adversary, he can use his tripod "legs" to leap great distances, and his strength is so impressive that he once snapped the blade of the Sword of Omens with his bare hands.

palin has a tagg too doesnt she

frankly i figure that this whole idea of him wanting to go up and punch someone on that stage is some misplaced "boy named sue" shit

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_GEbDqFCMbIk/Sw2LbVyC3NI/AAAAAAAAA40/DqK--_9JplI/s1600/balok_2.jpg

Let's threaten to detonate the corbomite! That'll show him!

Isn't Sarah Palin's son named Tagg too? Is there an obscure conservative hero named Tagg? I don't get it.

Tagg: the man who thinks he's It.

Palin boys are Track and Trig.

tagg youre it (a socialist)

o man trig is so much worse than tagg

trig tagg bro

Track, Trig, Tagg, Craig
Oh what a relief it is

trig tagg track lax bro

track is way worse than trig or tagg

maybe at your high school

i was in a school play called 'trig trog and the pirates' iirc

Suave:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/10/47-percent-host-leder-romney-fundraiser-milin

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc275i9ogi1r1vk6do1_500.jpg

so palin named her son after a math class she no doubt flunked?

while Mitt named his after a game he'd mastered but spelling he hadn't

jengo?

I've been posting a lot of negative thoughts on here lately, but one thing that continues to bode well for Obama is the relative strength of his approval rating on Gallup. It's still a 50-44 net positive (I think it had gone as high as 53% during Romney's bad run). Maybe it'll follow the polls and go down. If it stays there, though, that would be a bit of a disconnect between the approval rating and the polls.

http://i.minus.com/iOkTKlW3Zu3xC.gif

looooool

and if he defeats you, you have to go ALL the way back to the beginning of 6-1

FUCK

What does the scouter say his tax cuts will do to the deficit?
IT'S OVER NIIIINE TRILLIOOOOOOOOOOONNNN

actually that would probably make a pretty good meme gif, overlaid on some kinda infographic about the tax cut, maybe an excel/powerpoint bar chart kinda thing

Wow this sounds like a crazy debate:

http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2012/10/keith_ellison_repeatedly_calls_chris_fields_a_lowlife_scumbag_during_debate.php

haaa, crazy. i had no idea!

the heat generated is exactly inverse to the republican challenger's chance of winning, btw

Fifth District is DFL4LYFE

"Things got so heated that at one point it seemed as though KFAI cut away from their coverage in fears the two might come to blows. When they came back from a commercial break about 30 seconds later, Ellison could be heard still yelling at Fields, then the audio quickly cut away again."

quality journalism

Headline: "Keith Ellison calls Chris Fields "a lowlife scumbag" during heated debate."

two inches later

UPDATE: "Keith Ellison apologizes for calling Chris Fields a scumbag."

That wacky max:

http://gawker.com/5953005/which-romney-son-is-creepiest

Josh has the creepiest pic there. Very American Psycho.

craig's cute-ish

O's on the Daily Show tonight, btw

Al Smith Dinner always weird.

Lol at Romney's Obama-as-Christ joke

Father in law is watching the roast, I'm in the other room watching Criminal Minds

Wow this sounds like a crazy debate:

http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2012/10/keith_ellison_repeatedly_calls_chris_fields_a_lowlife_scumbag_during_debate.php

― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Thursday, October 18, 2012 4:49 PM (4 hours ago)

this is how debates should be!

obama was great at the al smith dinner i thought

alright everybody have a seat or clint eastwood will start yelling at your chairs

better as entertainer than anything else, thats why ya love him

and feeling good is the most important thing.

wont argue with either of those. lol

Could do worse!

I guess maybe this makes me feel a little better about the SEVEN-POINT SPREAD in the Gallup tracking poll...

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/gallup-vs-the-world/

The USA has done worse than Obama approximately 80% of the past 100 years. This is a low bar to get over in many ways.

smile and the world lets you fuck em

you say that like its a bad thing

well I meant "fuck" as in "blow your 2-year-old child apart"

that should be a facebook image macro

2 year old ilxor kids runnin' around Waziristan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=554kF8pN1q4

Greenwald went so bone-dry on this "what if there were diff rules for the rich" post it didn't register in lazy lefty heads.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/18/obama-romney-debate

yes, that was definitely too subtle for the average addled liberal to understand

aw Morbs: don't be so hard on yourself!

Through the first half of Tuesday's debate, I was distracted by the pure enactment of how "people at the top are entitled to play by different rules." The audience may as well hoot and interrupt and throw things, if this is America.

(If the audience enpowered themselves to break the rules as often as Romney and O did.)

Would watch more debates if people threw things.

That wacky max:

http://gawker.com/5953005/which-romney-son-is-creepiest

― Ned Raggett, Thursday, October 18, 2012 7:02 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

dope post

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=554kF8pN1q4&feature=player_embedded#!

this guy is playing a douchebag, why would anyone want to hear what he says?

poor poor ben romney

I know he's a very famous American right now, but there seems to be something very Mormon about dressing up like your dad on Halloween.

269-269 still possible, want it bad! Bam losing the pop vote wd be cool too.

http://www.salon.com/2012/10/19/obama_is_still_winning/

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m7f1yu5G3n1qeablwo1_250.jpg

No, douche in the video, your boss whacked you because you're completely intolerable to work with and refuse to ever change out of that stupid flannel.

haha omg that sarcastic douche super pac ad, is that suposed be appealing or are they trying to just make you vote against whoever that guys for

its funny because his theory of the economy is completely oligarchic, the powers that be can just fuck w/you so you better not piss them off

He looked like a redditor.

269-269 and romney wins. def rooting for bam losing the pop vote but winning the electoral college tho.

xp

im not rooting for that, even tho maybe it could lead to electoral college reform, cause i just dont want to hear abt it for four years, can you imagine how insufferable my god

269-269 still possible, want it bad! Bam losing the pop vote wd be cool too.

http://www.salon.com/2012/10/19/obama_is_still_winning/

― cancer, kizz my hairy irish azz (Dr Morbius), Friday, October 19, 2012 9:51 AM (9 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah, well i hope you lose your insurance and die of cancer in six months. ::hugs::