Post: #1

And there off........

Post: #2

Biden won't allow Ryan to control this so far... he keeps interrupting and is far more emotional/powerful in the conversation.. Ryan may be more intelligent, but Biden controlling things early

Post: #3

Biden is such a pimp, destroying that vampire looking twat.

Post: #4

Its so easy to tell who the vet is and who the rookie is

Post: #5

Biden is much more of a career politician and policy wonk. You can tell he actually *loves* politics and the job of being a politician and doesn't mind going on the attack and getting his hands dirty. Whereas Obama seems to think he's above it all.

Much more exciting than the 1st presidential debate, far more. I like that Biden isn't afraid to call out Ryan on his shit.

Post: #6

Biden wont even let him talk...

Post: #7

Biden is actually being a tad childish, I like it though. Fuck the Republican party, if they win this I'm moving.

Post: #8

oh man this is getting out of hand fast

Post: #9

This debate needs a moderator.

Post: #10

Ha, I never liked Biden, but he seems much more alpha then the other guy. He's like the most interesting man in the world guy.

One thing is for certain, Biden is much more emotionally invested than the other guy. I think people in general are going to resonate with that. He really seems like he cares. The other guy is trying to remember his lines.

Post: #11

(10-11-2012 09:12 PM)Roosh Wrote:  This debate needs a moderator.

Not a woman!

Agh her face is a terrorist threat!

Women's issues = dick, ice cream, shopping, etc.

Post: #12

I bet you could figure out the results of the "who won" polls by watching the debates with the sound off. The guy with better game is almost always going to be perceived as having won the debate, and as we all know game is mostly attitude and body language.

Romney definitely had better game in the first debate. Tonight Biden was the alpha in the room although Ryan didn't do terribly. I think Biden will be perceived as the winner but it won't be as much of a blowout as the first debate was. I don't think there will be a very large effect on the overall race except perhaps to "stop the bleeding" for Obama and stabilize it roughly where it is now.

Post: #13

(10-11-2012 09:12 PM)Roosh Wrote:  This debate needs a moderator.

I thought she did better than the guy last week.

Post: #14

I agree with Obama's foreign policy more: I don't like the sanctions on Iran, they serve only to cause misery mostly to poor and middle class Iranians turning them further against America. But I also disagree with Obama's Kill List. He ordered the execution of at least two American citizens without due process. That is an incredibly egregious violation of the Constitution. Even Bush, that war mongering mongoloid, didn't stoop to doing something this terrible. It gives presidents precedence to deny EVERY American citizen due process and a fair trial.

Ryan convinced me that they are open to going to war with Iran, and not as a last resort. I find this pretty frightening.

On Economic issues, Ryan kicked Biden's ass. All he had to do was remind how Obama has failed to "cut the deficit in half" like he promised he would. He reiterated how more government programs, more spending has stifled economic growth. And he's mostly right.

Biden more alpha? A tiny bit more, yes. But who cares? He's got this plastic Hollywood smile. Heck, would I wanna look and act like him when I'm near 70? Fuck yeah, I would. But he's a bit too fake looking, with his faux pearly whites, to middle America.

To me, Ryan won based on the Economic Issues and Abortion issues (this makes me anticipate that they'll cut bullshit feminist programs).

Post: #15

Biden sowed enough fear in the feministas around abortion and the potential for roe vs. wade to be overturned by the supreme court if there's a Romney/Ryan term. I think if Obama goes after that he can bring out the women vote in a lot of key battle ground states. It deflects from Obama's failings around the economy and get's the populus thinking about moral issues.

They're both intelectual heavy weights and it was a stellar debate on such a broad range of issues. I was taken aback by how prepared they both were and the levels of details they went into from medicare funding too the realities of fighting terrorism in pakistan. impressive.

Post: #16

(10-12-2012 12:24 AM)megatron Wrote:  On Economic issues, Ryan kicked Biden's ass. All he had to do was remind how Obama has failed to "cut the deficit in half" like he promised he would.

That's not Obama's fault. If Bush's tax cuts had been allowed to expire like Obama had planned, that is what would have happened. Remember when the Republicans blackmailed the economy over the debt limit issue and forced the tax cuts to remain? It's ironic that Ryan could blame Obama for this when it was because of Republicans that this happened.

Quote:He reiterated how more government programs, more spending has stifled economic growth. And he's mostly right.

You are buying into Republican talking points. They've repeated the "Obama spends like a drunk sailor" mantra so many times that people just accept it as fact. Do a bit of fact checking before making such claims:

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-05-...ken-sailor



The greatest spending has actually occurred under Republicans despite whatever bullshit they try to say...The numbers don't lie.

Quote:Biden more alpha? A tiny bit more, yes. But who cares? He's got this plastic Hollywood smile. Heck, would I wanna look and act like him when I'm near 70? Fuck yeah, I would. But he's a bit too fake looking, with his faux pearly whites, to middle America.

Biden's condescending grinning and histrionics did make him come off as a quintessential career politician. But I think he did what he needed to do tonight. There was no knockout blow in this debate. I think he was zealous to call out R&R on their spin and make up for lost ground.

Post: #17

Thanks for sharing that data, Speakeasy.

I agree Bush was a disaster for Republican credibility on fiscal matters (and foreign policy).

I thought the numbers you shared were strange, though. I wonder how they calculated them?

I went out and did my own calculations:
   
Source: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spen...111mcn_F0f
Calculations:
  usgs_2000_2012.xlsx (Size: 16.13 KB / Downloads: 78)

Simple stuff. Anyways, measured in fixed 2000 terms, spending increased 17.3% year-on-year in 2009. Under Obama Federal Spending has increased 26.1% in 2009-2011. I don't quite trust the 2012 figures, because they are the government's own estimates and they have a tendency to underestimate how much they really end up spending. The numbers for 2010-2012 are still estimates according to FY11. I am willing to bet anything the true figure will be higher.

For 2009-2011, according to these figures, average annualized increase in federal spending was 8.0 percent. If we include the 2012 estimates, it will be just 4.7%.

For the whole Bush presidency, it was 3.9%, with the biggest jump in 2008 (6.4% year-on-year).

The numbers point to ever-increasing federal spending that has really taken off under the financial crisis. At the same time, the economy is still sluggish at best, but taking into account all future problems, we're in real trouble, so there is a desperate need to match revenue to spending levels.

Post: #18

(10-12-2012 02:16 AM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 12:24 AM)megatron Wrote:  On Economic issues, Ryan kicked Biden's ass. All he had to do was remind how Obama has failed to "cut the deficit in half" like he promised he would.

That's not Obama's fault. If Bush's tax cuts had been allowed to expire like Obama had planned, that is what would have happened. Remember when the Republicans blackmailed the economy over the debt limit issue and forced the tax cuts to remain? It's ironic that Ryan could blame Obama for this when it was because of Republicans that this happened.

Quote:He reiterated how more government programs, more spending has stifled economic growth. And he's mostly right.

You are buying into Republican talking points. They've repeated the "Obama spends like a drunk sailor" mantra so many times that people just accept it as fact. Do a bit of fact checking before making such claims:

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-05-...ken-sailor



The greatest spending has actually occurred under Republicans despite whatever bullshit they try to say...The numbers don't lie.

Regardless of what skewed/misleading stats you are presenting, when President Barack Obama took the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2009, the total federal debt held by the public stood at 6.3073 trillion, according to the Bureau of the Public Debt, a division of the U.S. Treasury Department. Today, the debt is north of 16 trillion, an increase of 10 trillion dollars in less than four years.

The other point, most of Obama's spending increases (Obamacare) haven't even kicked in yet.

Question, if Obama hasn't increased spending, how did he rack up $10 trillion dollars worth of debt in under four years?

Post: #19

(10-12-2012 03:53 AM)Pacesetter20 Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 02:16 AM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 12:24 AM)megatron Wrote:  On Economic issues, Ryan kicked Biden's ass. All he had to do was remind how Obama has failed to "cut the deficit in half" like he promised he would.

That's not Obama's fault. If Bush's tax cuts had been allowed to expire like Obama had planned, that is what would have happened. Remember when the Republicans blackmailed the economy over the debt limit issue and forced the tax cuts to remain? It's ironic that Ryan could blame Obama for this when it was because of Republicans that this happened.

Quote:He reiterated how more government programs, more spending has stifled economic growth. And he's mostly right.

You are buying into Republican talking points. They've repeated the "Obama spends like a drunk sailor" mantra so many times that people just accept it as fact. Do a bit of fact checking before making such claims:

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-05-...ken-sailor



The greatest spending has actually occurred under Republicans despite whatever bullshit they try to say...The numbers don't lie.

Regardless of what skewed/misleading stats you are presenting, when President Barack Obama took the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2009, the total federal debt held by the public stood at 6.3073 trillion, according to the Bureau of the Public Debt, a division of the U.S. Treasury Department. Today, the debt is north of 16 trillion, an increase of 10 trillion dollars in less than four years.

The other point, most of Obama's spending increases (Obamacare) haven't even kicked in yet.

Question, if Obama hasn't increased spending, how did he rack up $10 trillion dollars worth of debt in under four years?

could you please explain speakeasys chart for me? is it total bs?

Post: #20

Pacesetter20 Wrote:  Question, if Obama hasn't increased spending, how did he rack up $10 trillion dollars worth of debt in under four years?

An increase in debt is caused by either an increase in spending OR a decrease in revenue. Or both.

Obama's discretionary spending has been low.

So what has caused the deficit/debt to explode? Several factors:

1) The Bush tax cuts slashed revenue. They were to expire a few years ago but the Republicans stonewalled on the debt limit crisis and forced Obama to extend them a few more years.

2) The wars. Bush started them(all on borrowed money of course). Obama had to finish the job. If he'd withdrawn the troops, Romney would be up there saying he cut and ran and is weak on security.

3) The recession. Revenue drops in a recession, this adds to the deficit.

4) The stimulus packages, TARP, Bailouts, etc. Probably the closest thing you can lay at the feet of Obama. Though keep in mind republicans supported TARP as well. There's no concensus as to whether the stimulus was imperative or not.

5) Entitlement programs. The boomers are starting to retire and medical costs are going up. These programs are already promised to people now retiring, so saying that increase is because of Obama is fallacious.

Post: #21

(10-12-2012 03:47 AM)ElJefe Wrote:  Thanks for sharing that data, Speakeasy.

I agree Bush was a disaster for Republican credibility on fiscal matters (and foreign policy).

I thought the numbers you shared were strange, though. I wonder how they calculated them?

I went out and did my own calculations:

Source: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spen...111mcn_F0f
Calculations:

Simple stuff. Anyways, measured in fixed 2000 terms, spending increased 17.3% year-on-year in 2009. Under Obama Federal Spending has increased 26.1% in 2009-2011. I don't quite trust the 2012 figures, because they are the government's own estimates and they have a tendency to underestimate how much they really end up spending. The numbers for 2010-2012 are still estimates according to FY11. I am willing to bet anything the true figure will be higher.

For 2009-2011, according to these figures, average annualized increase in federal spending was 8.0 percent. If we include the 2012 estimates, it will be just 4.7%.

For the whole Bush presidency, it was 3.9%, with the biggest jump in 2008 (6.4% year-on-year).

The numbers point to ever-increasing federal spending that has really taken off under the financial crisis. At the same time, the economy is still sluggish at best, but taking into account all future problems, we're in real trouble, so there is a desperate need to match revenue to spending levels.

I'll take a closer look at your figures tomorrow. Bed time for me now.

Post: #22

1) He could have vetoed the extension. Plus I wish the republicans would have stonewalled and the debt limit, it would have really curbed government spending instead of they phony cuts they made. You might say that would have destroyed the economy, I say good, we need a good creative destruction. The economy as it stands is broken and built on a house of cards and coporate welfare, let the zombies burn and get out of they way of the productive parts of the economy.

2) The wars were/are.....winding down, the vast majority of the spending had already been spent. Obama was elected partly and promises to bring the Troops home. We are still here, surprise, surprise. Besides, ending the war is now largely a bi-partisan issue.

3) Instead of letting the recession do it's job (kill off the zombies), Obama propped it back up, which will only lead to another larger crash down the line, goes into your point #4.

5) This is a mess that has been screwed up by everyone. Entitlement programs like SS need to be privitized, see Chile, they have an excellent, stable private retirement system that has none of the problems of ours.

Look I get it, I'm not a Bush apologist (nor Romney supporter). I think they are/were both terrible and if Romney does win, won't make any sigificant changes to help America, but what I can't stand is how everyone thinks that Obama is somehow not responsible for the mess we are in today and terrible policies that haven't kicked in yet (i.e. Obamacare).

Post: #23

Everyone over here is saying it was an unequivocal win for Biden. He "dominated".

Over at WSJ they are saying Biden did himself more harm than good with his grinning, interruptions, and antics.

What's going to happen? Will people punish Biden for his attitude or will they punish Ryan for ineptness or will it have no effect - people were just confirmed in their beliefes?

Post: #24

(10-12-2012 04:20 AM)megatron Wrote:  could you please explain speakeasys chart for me? is it total bs?

It's not complete B.S. it is just misleading. Look at the dates, it doesn't take into account when they went into office, but allowed a 1 year gap for their policies to take affect, which is debateable, but this is like saying that 9/11 is Clinton's fault because it technically occured during FY2001, whose budget was appoved by Clinton.

Plus it covers FY13 (for Obama), which just started.

Post: #25

Biden stirred up the democrat base but chased away females and independants with his obnoxious performance. Remember the last time they let him speak to reporters was five months ago when he forced Obama to flip flop on gay marriage. He acted like a spoiled brat with zero substance while Ryan stayed calm and stuck to issues instead of personal attacks. Anyone comfortable with Biden a heartbeat away from the presidency should have their head examined.

Call the debate a draw but the result will move the polls a bit in Romney's favor because Biden came off like a raving buffoon.