[Official Thread] OBAMA WINS RE-ELECTION

[Flagg]

What about the part where his family 'self deported' because they hated the US government not letting them have multiple wives?

[Razorgeist]

Apparently conservatives (my brother in law included) are up in arms over this new Obama pin sighted at the DNC.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... re/261934/

I find it cute myself. Though if I had to pick one I'd go with the RUN DNC logo stuff.

[Block]

Clinton is killing it.

[CaptHawkeye]

He's so commanding you'd think he was the one running for the Presidency. Why is it that when the Democrats talk they actually sound they're talking about real political issues and not hollow drummed up bullshit?

Could it be because they are?

[Block]

Yeah, he's basically going point by point over the Republican talking points and crushing each one, with details and facts.

[CaptHawkeye]

Clinton especially is used to dealing with the Republican Hate Machine. He knows exactly how to put down their horseshit.

[Block]

Clinton especially is used to dealing with the Republican Hate Machine. He knows exactly how to put down their horseshit.

One thing that CBS's crew said and I agree with is that Clinton did a better job expressing in 48 minutes exactly why Obama should be re-elected than the administration has done all year.

[Rogue 9]

Clinton is killing it.

All the rest of 'em are just tin-plated hacks. God, that man can give a speech.

[Dalton]

Obama has just been officially nominated.

[Flagg]

Damn Joe. The pitbull is loosed.

[CaptHawkeye]

He's full of bluster and is a real actor. Can't say I cared much for his speech.

[Xisiqomelir]

I'm a little embarrassed that POTUS has to tell people climate change is not a hoax.

[Flagg]

He's full of bluster and is a real actor. Can't say I cared much for his speech.

I liked it better than Obamas.

[SirNitram]

Either Fox's equipment on site was bought from the back of a truck sending RMA'd equipment to the manufacturer, or they did quite impressive methods of altering how to view it. Color shifts, pull back shots, volume so low it's hard to hear the speakers.. But hey, when your one party's propaganda arm, that's what you do.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Don't know anyone who watched it on FOx.
So, was it just crappy quality? You think they were trying to make it hard to watch or understand?

[Dalton]

Either Fox's equipment on site was bought from the back of a truck sending RMA'd equipment to the manufacturer, or they did quite impressive methods of altering how to view it. Color shifts, pull back shots, volume so low it's hard to hear the speakers.. But hey, when your one party's propaganda arm, that's what you do.

Remote trucks aren't the easiest thing to work with; it's not exactly cutting-edge tech. Also you'll find that audio is a bitch when you have huge crowds of people behind your live shots; I know the Stage Manager for Nightly and he was saying there was NOTHING between the control room and the crowd. This is why you saw all the anchors and guests wearing Madonna mics after the first night.

I don't know about the shading issues, but any change in the lighting will play merry hell with the video ops. Also, it's pretty likely they had to rely mostly on the pool feed, which they probably didn't have control over; if it was during actual Fox programming, they probably had shitty PL (intercom) between New York and Charlotte.

[Flagg]

Considering they were apparently playing REM's 'Losing My Religion' when Obama came out, I kinda don't give them the benefit of the doubt. At all.

[Eframepilot]

Sept. 8: Conventions May Put Obama in Front-Runner’s Position

On Friday, we began to see reasonably clear signs that President Obama would receive some kind of bounce in the polls from the Democratic convention.

Mr. Obama had another strong day in the polls on Saturday, making further gains in each of four national tracking polls. The question now is not whether Mr. Obama will get a bounce in the polls, but how substantial it will be.

Some of the data, in fact, suggests that the conventions may have changed the composition of the race, making Mr. Obama a reasonably clear favorite as we enter the stretch run of the campaign.

On Saturday, Mr. Obama extended his advantage to three points from two points in the Gallup national tracking poll, and to four points from two in an online survey conducted by Ipsos. He pulled ahead of Mitt Romney by two points in the Rasmussen Reports tracking poll, reversing a one-point deficit in the edition of the poll published on Friday.

A fourth tracking poll, conducted online by the RAND Corporation’s American Life Panel, had Mr. Obama three percentage points ahead of Mr. Romney in the survey it published early Saturday morning; the candidates had been virtually tied in the poll on Friday. (The RAND survey has an interesting methodology — we’ll explore it more in a separate post.)

The gains that Mr. Obama has made in these tracking polls over the past 48 hours already appear to match or exceed the ones that Mr. Romney made after his convention. The odds, however, are that Mr. Obama has some further room to grow.

The reason is that the tracking polls are not turned around instantaneously. The Gallup poll, for instance, now consists of interviews conducted between Saturday, Sept. 1, and Friday, Sept. 7. That means that many of the interviews in the poll still predate the effective start of the Democratic convention on Tuesday night.

That Mr. Obama has made these gains in polls that only partially reflect the Democratic convention suggests that his bounce could be more substantial once they fully do so. Mathematically, Mr. Obama has to have been running well ahead of Mr. Romney in the most recent interviews in these surveys to have made up for middling data earlier in the week.
..................

Obama seems to be breaking into a decisive lead in Nate Silver's model, due to the large bump he is experiencing in all of the tracking polls. This change is very different from the static numbers he and Romney have had all summer. The convention may have been a turning point that will lead 2012 to being closer to 2008 than 2004.

Meanwhile Romney is in huge trouble, with internal polls in both campaigns showing him behind in Ohio by high single digits. It is virtually impossible for Romney to win without Ohio, and if he loses it by a large margin, he is certainly not going to run the table with the other swing states.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Despite all the bad news about the Economy, Obama has consistently always been ahead of Romney... Not by very much at times, but Consistently. For me it is a rehash of the 2004, when the Dems shouted "Anybody but Bush!" there was HUGE Energy to get Dubya out, huge energy to vote against him... But the candidate we fielded was as likable as damp mold...
Now we have the same thing in reverse... The GOP is energized as never before, they are on fire with determination to get rid of Obama... And yet everyone else in American looks at Mittens and says "Give me a reason to vote FOR Him, and not AGAINST Obama"

In other news, the GOP circular firing squad continues when Mittens says that everyone who voted for the debt limit increase made a "HUGE MISTAKE" including, oyu know... Paul Ryan..

Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., as chair of the House Budget Committee, was part of the team that signed off on the budget deal with the White House, mandating immediate spending cuts, creating a "Super-committee" tasked to finding $1.5 trillion in further deficit rediction, and raising a self-imposed sword of Damocles - $1.2 trillion in cuts to the Pentagon and domestic spending that few in Congress wanted - if the Super-committee failed.

Writing at the National Review Online at the time, Ryan said the bill was a "reasonable, responsible effort to cut government spending, avoid a default, and help create a better environment for job creation."

But today Mitt Romney said Ryan, the man he picked as his running mate on the Republican presidential ticket, and other House GOP leaders made a "big mistake" in agreeing to that deal, which was part of the summer 2011 negotiations over raising the debt ceiling.
Romney said the $1.2 in mandated cuts was "an extraordinary miscalculation in the wrong direction."
"Republican leaders agreed to that deal to the extend the debt ceiling," NBC's David Gregory reminded Romney.
"And that's a big mistake," Romney said. "I thought it was a mistake on the part of the White House to propose it. I think it was a mistake for Republicans to go along with it."
- Jake Tapper

This is a note worthy statement, largely in showing that either Mittens has no understanding of how Fcked America would have been if we DIDN'T raise the debt, or (and more likely) he is simply saying this just to toss more Redmeat to the party base.

[Dominus Atheos]

Maybe don't get your news from Yahoo?

MITT ROMNEY: Well, I want to maintain defense spending at the current level of the GDP. I don't want to keep bringing it down as the president's doing. This sequestration idea of the White House, which is cutting our defense, I think is an extraordinary miscalculation in the wrong direction.

DAVID GREGORY: Republican leaders agreed to that deal to the extend the debt ceiling.

MITT ROMNEY: And that's a big mistake. I thought it was a mistake on the part of the White House to propose it. I think it was a mistake for Republicans to go along with it. The president was responsible for coming out with specific changes they'd make to the defense budget. It was supposed to have come out this last week. He has violated the law that he in fact signed. The American people need to understand how it is that our defense is going to be so badly cut.

He was only talking about the defense cuts.

[Flagg]

Lyin' Ryan is at it again (Think Progress)

Ryan: I Didn’t Vote For The Defense Cuts I Voted For

By Zack Beauchamp on Sep 9, 2012 at 12:13 pm

Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan has gotten in hot water before for criticizing President Obama for the very same defense cuts that he voted for in 2011. When confronted with this incongruity today on Face The Nation, Ryan simply denied that he ever voted for the cuts, telling an incredulous Norah O’Donnell that he didn’t actually vote for the cuts he’s on record as voting for:


O’DONNELL: Now you’re criticizing the President for those same defense cuts you’re voting for and called a victory.

RYAN: No, no — I have to correct on you this, Norah. I voted for a mechanism that says the sequester will occur if we don’t cut $1.2 trillion in government. … We can get into this nomenclature; I voted for the Budget Control Act. But the Obama Administration proposed $478 billion in defense cuts. We don’t agree with that, our budget rejected that, and then on top of that is another $500 billion in defense cuts in the sequester.

O’DONNELL: Right. A trillion dollars in defense spending, and you voted for it!

RYAN: No, Norah. I voted for the Budget Control Act.

O’DONNELL: That included defense spending!

RYAN: Norah, you’re mistaken.

O’Donnell is, in fact, not mistaken. The Budget Control Act, as passed, included both the roughly $600 billion in “sequestration” cuts that will happen if there’s no compromise on the budget by December as well as the $487 billion of military-supported cuts that will take place regardless. The fact that Ryan may have wished that the bill didn’t contain said defense cuts does not absolve him of the fact that he and 201 other Republicans voted for the bill as-passed.

Moreover, Ryan’s statement after voting for the bill contained not a single word of criticism about the defense cuts. As O’Donnell correctly noted, Ryan said the bill “represents a victory for those committed to controlling government spending and growing our economy” and that “The agreement – while far from perfect – underscores the extent to which the new House majority has successfully changed Washington’s culture of spending.” It’s at best misleading, and at worst an outright lie, for Ryan to assert that voting for the Budget Control Act did not mean voting for defense cuts.

Palin 2.0!

[SirNitram]

Again, their campaign is not going to be governed by fact checkers. Fiction is more useful for them.

[Dalton]

Oh man, the next two months are going to be bananas over here.

[D.Turtle]

Even more so than the last three and a half years?

[Dalton]

Even more so than the last three and a half years?

Actually, yes. We have more gizmos.