Symmetry required it: 2012 american general election thread #2

etc

should I change title to "general election thread #2"?

yeah there will be a lot of #2 in here

yeah you don't have to convince me. i always want new threads when old ones get too long and people say dude, bookmark it. but i'm thinking of the children...

sure!

cuz to READ the whole long thing you have to open it and it can be a hassle. but in the future people will have crazy computers probably.

love this title

Did anyone post this in the last thread? Because wau

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/558262_10151061627637572_1155492852_n.jpg

haha

Haaaa

that's awesome

dudes, locking old threads/starting new threads best practices tip #69: link to the new thread just before you lock the old thread

what a waste of a #69

the most important election of your lifetime: 2012 american general election thread

dunno how you guys feel, but watching this thing I see a crowd whipping itself into feeling excited for its running mate. I heard more enthusiasm for Palin than for Ryan last night. Apart from the fact that no one's watching, I don't see Romney-Ryan getting much of a "bounce" from this thing.

would've preferred a We Can Change Mitt/We Can't Change It in the thread title personally

the hurricane/lack of media coverage will def cut into the "bounce" is my guess

We Can Change If You Want -- You Can Leave That Debt Behind!

a bounce really depends on whether romney can actually pull off earnest bluster even to the level christie and ryan can

I am looking forward to Romney angrily jabbing his finger in the air about something, and then smiling awkwardly/nervously at any received applause

the "charismatic" "fiscal conservative" got the media talking about what a lying liar he is, and now we get a guy who's like quimby, lionel hutz and mr burns put together.

nah 2 of those three guys are drunks

Romney only drinks the finest breastmilks

clint eastwood can come out dressed like ronald reagan and throw dollar bills at the audience, he still won't get to pitch hit for obama in the debates

shit at this point I'll settle for Clint Eastwood doing his John Huston impersonation again

against obama, i mean xpost

I assume you also meant pinch hit

gah yes

Pareene:

It was an attempt to break the mainstream political press. CNN is constitutionally unable to say “that was a load of tendentious bullshit.” Wolf Blitzer, who isn’t paying attention to the speeches and wouldn’t understand them even if he was, sort of figured out (probably because a producer in his ear told him) that the speech had some whoppers but more important to him was that the man on the stage said things that the people in the crowd seemed to enjoy so it was a Good Speech. “His mom is up there,” Wolf Blitzer said. He noticed that part. Paul Ryan has a mom.

I have never understood why Wolf Blitzer has a job

He wears glasses and can talk into a TelePrompTer.

his name! his name is wolf blitzer! of COURSE he has a job

he's a white american guy named wolf blitzer. he couldn't have been dealt a better hand. being a somewhat famous cable news guy is really a let down, he should be captain of the galaxy by now

WOLFBLITZER should've been a metal band of some kind. Maybe it still can be. I can dream.

This conversation between Blitzer and Erin Burnett is so bad:

Blitzer: So there he is, the republican vice presidential nominee and his beautiful family there. His mom is up there. This is exactly what this crowd of republicans here certainly republicans all across the country were hoping for. He delivered a powerful speech. Erin, a powerful speech. Although I marked at least seven or eight points I’m sure the fact checkers will have some opportunities to dispute if they want to go forward, I’m sure they will. As far as mitt romney’s campaign is concerned, paul ryan on this night delivered.

Burnett: That’s right. Certainly so. We were jotting down points. There will be issues with some of the facts. But it motivated people. He’s a man who says I care deeply about every single word. I want to do a good job. And he delivered on that. Precise, clear, and passionate.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/08/great_moments_in_cnn_euphemisms.php?ref=fpblg

"The demographics race we’re losing badly,” said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.). “We’re not generating enough angry white guys to stay in business for the long term.”

did he mean to say this out loud or ?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/30/1125916/-Angry-white-guy-bemoans-lack-of-angry-white-guys-in-Republican-Party

He’s a man who says I care deeply about every single word.

what does this even mean

Although I marked at least seven or eight points I’m sure the fact checkers will have some opportunities to dispute if they want to go forward, I’m sure they will

translation: "Do I really need to get my tongue out of Ryan's asshole?"

The other big problem with TV coverage is that they allow guests to come on and unleash torrents of talking points when they're asked a specific question. It seems to me that reporters can take a bigger stand on this - that not allowing it is actually a simple standard they're not adhering to.

isn't that why Chris Matthews got so much abuse last weekend – he actually called some fool out?

but so many politicians are used to skipping the question and getting straight to the talking points. to force them to actually answer a question would unleash chaos, similar to that classic SNL bit where the teleprompter goes down during a local newscast and they panic and eventually resort to cannibalism.

We need Will McAvoy now more than ever.

He’s a man who says I care deeply about every single word.

It means he was targeting an audience that far more values a narrative of apparent certainty/directness/assuredness/earnestness than it does anything even approaching factual accuracy.

The standard they should stick up for is not allowing someone to use airtime for what are actual propaganda tactics.

uh but that's what airtime is for

there are only so many Frasier and Who's the Boss? reruns that can be used, though! you gotta fill up the airtime with something..

I don't remember if it was an attempt at talking point obfuscation in the Matthews interview. I think it was more unusual for the persistence in the follow-up questions and for his emotion.

Bobby Jindal is the worst I've seen with this recently. He is absolutely relentless.

Kornacki giving an impassioned diatribe about the Romney/Ryan calculation that the media will leave the truth to the fact checkers. He holds up the NYT front page and says it takes 18 paragraphs to mention the possible lies in the speech. SE Cupp responds that the 'line' was crossed a long time ago when Romney was accused of killing a woman.

can i interrupt all this conventioneering crap (which i'm ignoring) to say that i'm not especially optimistic about this election?

people's optimism seems based on the electoral college & nate silver's parsing thereof. it turns out he lowballed 2010. here he is on sept. 15 2010:

"On average, the model predicts a net gain of 45 to 50 seats for Republicans, which if achieved would put the G.O.P in the majority. But there are 90 districts, the model finds, in which either party still has at least a 10 percent chance of prevailing, and it is on a district-by-district basis that each party will learn of their fate on Nov. 2." (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/10/g-o-p-has-2-in-3-chance-of-taking-house-model-forecasts/)

the GOP gain turned out to be 60. and, i think we are living among 2010's electorate, not 2008's. perhaps a direct, rather than proxy defense of Obama will energize his 08 voters, but i think pessimism is on order there too.

my one point of optimism is the sense, attested to in several places, that political professional in both parties assume that obama is running/positioned stronger than the polls suggest. plenty of psychological mis-attribution possible there tho.

Country really begging for Joe Biden to step in and save the day.

http://votamatic.org/the-polls-are-behaving-just-fine/

xp

The thing I'm having a hard time getting my head around is that a single debate could have such an effect--especially one that, no matter how tepid you thought Obama was (no argument here), didn't involve a gaffe, didn't involve some endlessly repeatable soundbite from Romney, didn't involve much of anything except Romney exceeding very low expectations. Do people have their minds changed that easily?

"Who the fuck knows what's going on"--works for me.

lag00ns link upthread addresses that - its not so much millions of people who changed their minds and more that republicans got pumped up

daveweigel ‏@daveweigel
Compare the conservative base reaction to bad Romney news (SKEWED POLLS!) to lib reaction to Obama's trouble (OMG WE'RE DOOMED)

Except for our two house explainers.

There is a republican "documentary" called "Obama's America" showing at the local megaplex... Gotta love that Citizens United ruling.

Yeah, that'd be Dinesh. we've been over him before.

http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/politics/6446/saving_teens_from_obama%3A_when_bible_study_goes_wrong/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0PeBwzvQds

key moment:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8318/8070173487_233ff5e152_o.png

sexy.

omg

that guy is apparently some kind of millenarian internet preacher/conspiracy theorist who has a small following.

he is also missing a sizable chunk of gray matter, as evidence by his videos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0Ik2C8S8Fg&feature=plcp

guy is legitimately insane.

ok whatever more LOLs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zm8msoKME4w&feature=plcp

There is a republican "documentary" called "Obama's America" showing at the local megaplex... Gotta love that Citizens United ruling.

― blank, Tuesday, October 9, 2012 2:06 AM (7 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

so...you think political movies should be banned?

daveweigel ‏@daveweigel
Compare the conservative base reaction to bad Romney news (SKEWED POLLS!) to lib reaction to Obama's trouble (OMG WE'RE DOOMED)

― Mordy, Tuesday, October 9, 2012 12:23 AM (9 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

hah i wonder which one of these is more constructive, or maybe neither are, or maybe it doesnt matter

straw man. i don't know anybody saying that obama is doomed.

did you read that sullivan post

why would i do that?

did u read ilx thread of barely concealing doomsaying?

concealed*

Thanks for the av, stevie.

http://imageshack.us/a/img213/3995/screenshot20121009at916.png

no, point me in that direction, jeeves...

haha xp

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZxs09eV-Vc

lolz

Mitt Romney declines to participate in Nickelodeon’s ‘Kids Pick the President’ special

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/tv-column/post/mitt-romney-declines-to-participate-in-nickelodeons-kids-pick-the-president-special/2012/10/08/534f210c-119a-11e2-ba83-a7a396e6b2a7_blog.html

The only other presidential candidate to do so in the special's run? John Fucking Kerry.

why would i do that?

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Tuesday, October 9, 2012 10:07 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

ha i was actually gonna say, i do not recommend it if you have not, but there are liberals who are in doomsday mode

Typical response to Sully's hysterics (which at least Sullivan posted):

WOULD YOU PLEASE CHILL THE FUCK OUT?!

Nate Silver is on the front page of the Times saying that the trend (job stats up, likability strong) will hold. So for the first time since I can remember - the Bush years maybe? - I closed my Dish tab. I cannot bear the stress of this election. And in particular, now, I cannot bear your wailing about the polls.

does anyone have the How many dead brown civilians equal murdered Big Bird chart, or is MoveOn still working on that?

Can Alfred or someone start General Election #3? This one's getting unwieldly for those of us who don't use bookmarks. Also, we're now into the final jumping-out-of-windows phase.

no, we'll enter that when the EC tie throws it into the House.

Morbs' posts are like the commercial breaks in this program. HEAD ON! APPLY DIRECTLY TO THE FOREHEAD! HEAD ON! APPLY DIRECTLY TO THE FOREHEAD!

How many dead brown civilians equal murdered Big Bird? US general elections 2012 part III

the big bird obama ad is funny but i think they should really leave that kind of snark to the bloggers and youtube whizzes--the message will get out, but they won't appear frivolous by spending people's campaign contributions on LOLsnark ads.

I think it's an interesting strategy, actually, and I'm not sure that it appears frivolous.

lol too frivolous for the sober environment of this elevated dialogue

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

Mods...?

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

except not fun.

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

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

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

http://newspaper.li/static/dd9b4bfee855559e9fe9d264f3f96d99.jpg

trying really hard to pull off This Facial Expression

http://bluestormmusic.com/store/images/joewalsh_butseriously.jpg

Joe Walsh Is "Underwater" In The Polls

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.