GoldenDogs

From day one the mainstream right has made his race an issue -- John McCain, to his credit, did not. But you had the Kansas Secretary of State, an elected Republican thus very much in the mainstream, trying to keep Obama off the ballot in Kansas. You have Joe Arpaio on his racist crusade in Arizona against not only anyone who looks Mexican but against Obama as well. You had the infamous "Obama invites Hip Hop stars to chill at the White House" article on Fox Nation. And also this lol : http://mediamatters....go-for-n/163159 . Michele Bachmann stated that the first black president was running a "Gangster Government." Choice words from her. Not to mention the way the mainstream right constantly refers to him as "Barack Hussein Obama." Why is his middle name important if you are not bringing race into the conversation?

How are all these things proof of racism? You are intepreting the words and actions of others and insinuating race into their motives; complete and utter crap. Has anyone stood up and said, "Don't vote for Barack Obama because he is black"? Who has said that? What has Joe Arpaio said to indicate that he dislikes black people? Bachmann wasn't referring to Obama's skin color in that statement... she was referring to Chicago-style politics - unless a history rewrite indicates Al Capone was black. I haven't seen a reference to Obama's middle name is ages! Who in the mainstream right refers to him as "Barack Huseein Obama"? But, wait, isn't that his middle name? We aren't allowed to say it... EVER?

And I'm tired of hearing about the "two full years" of government control, when really you cannot do anything in the Senate without 60 votes these days and the Republican minority filibustered him every chance they got. I also object to this argument that just because we were in a Recession, he should have abstained from any legislation not relating to the economy. Then they would just be campaigning against him from "breaking his promise" on health care reform. Also, if you are going to state that he spent two years not doing enough for the economy, it is intellectually inconsistent to then state that the "gigantic, wasteful" trillion dollar stimulus was some awful thing. If that was not a massive-scale solution, whether you consider it good/successful or not, then it was just a drop of spit in the ocean. You can't have it both ways where you say he didn't do enough and then consider the stimulus a gigantic behemoth monster.

More crap, Juppiter. Weak arguments. You are telling me that Obama could get a nonsensical health care bill passed... but nothing for the economy? That is a laugh riot. It should be noted that the Democratically-controlled Senate has not passed a budget in THREE YEARS. But they rammed through a health care bill... Your argument here is weak, dude. The stimulus was a spending bill... NOT A BUDGET. The government needed a budget, not a spending bill. As far as the notion that Obama should have abstained from all non-budget related legislation... nobody ever said that. Indeed, the government can multi-task. There are two chambers of Congress and the Presidency... three separate entities that CAN work on three different things, bare minimum. Priorities, however, are important. With the economy in shambles following that warmonger, George W., I would have thought that some facet of the Obama Administration could have found time to hammer out a budget... find a way to control spending rather than figure out additional ways to blow the wad. Budget first, Obamacare second. I don't know how things work in other people's houses... but I pay my bills and cover necessities before doing other things.

It is racist to not vote for Obama because of his skin color. It means you don't believe a black man can lead the country -- that there is something un-American about being black. On the other hand, it is not racist to vote for Obama BECAUSE he is black. That is not discriminating against whites or saying you will never vote for a white president. We have had 43 white presidents already. Of course once a black option was available the vast majority of black people would vote for him to see one of their own in the Oval Office. There is nothing discriminatory or racist about that in the least.

It is racist to vote for a man based on skin color, PERIOD. Ruling out all other options... not considering domestic or foreign policy... ignoring a person's qualities, skills or abilities and selecting that person based solely on skin color IS, indeed, RACIST. In true liberal fashion, you've made the notion of racism a moving target... it IS racism when you need to be, but it isn't racism when you wish it not to be. That, in and of itself, is the worst kind of racism. It is that notion or idea that fuels affirmative action-style policies and that is why well-meaning affirmative action has evolved into an utter failure that has hurt minorities more than helped them.

The problem is that instead of condemning or ignoring the racism that the psychos fling at Obama, the mainstream right embraces it. For example Mitt Romney stating that he's never been asked for his birth certificate. And then elected Republicans trying to bar Obama from the ballot if he does not produce it. Never before we had a black president were birth certificates such an issue.

The mainstream Republican Party flipping on ideas it once embraced and ignoring its own recent deficit spending is politicking. It has nothing to do with his race and they would've done the same [!@#$%^&*] if Hillary had been chosen. But all too often the mainstream right, which could ignore the whole birther thing, promotes and encourages it and does make things racial.

How, Juppiter? Explain to me how the mainstream right has made Obama's presidency all about race. Cite examples... and I'm not talking fringe politics - you said MAINSTREAM right. By mainstream right, you are talking about people like me. So explain to me how guys like me have made this about Obama's skin color.

With regard to the whole birther thing... what IS the guy's background? Look, I have no idea where he's from or what his background is, etc., except that he was supposedly born in Hawaii. Whatever. Some may find the circumstances of his birth and where it took place troubling... and let's face it, even IF he wasn't a natural citizen, it would be the most closely guarded secret EVER because of the constitutional crisis it would create.

Of more concern to me are his policies and where things stand almost four years since he took office. The fact of the matter is that, for as rotten as the economy was he says he inheritated from that awful man, George W. Bush - all created by monster Republicans - why did he waste two full years with a Democratically-controlled Congress ramming through Obamacare rather than fixing the economy HIS WAY? If things were so terrible and dire following Bush's reign of terror, why not fix the economy FIRST, then deal with Health Care? Simple question... should be a simple answer. TWO FULL YEARS of total government control... and that wasn't enough time to tick off the major items on his to-do list?

The problem with Obama isn't a matter of race or where he was born. Black man, green man... It just isn't an issue for the majority of Americans. For the hating fringe, perhaps... but for most of us? Nope. This noise about racism is smoke and mirrors designed to distract from the President's terrible record.

Juppiter, what about this issue in reverse? Is it racist to vote for Obama based solely on the fact he's black? Let's face it, his Presidency is historic and will always be remembered as such... is THAT point racist??

Yeah, the press pays more attention to overt racism during Obama's presidential election. The Virginia GOP had pictures on Facebook of the President and First Lady in "primitive" African outfits. Someone shot at one of the Obama campaign offices in Denver. Hey, the Romney people think the same way. There was that anonymous quote when he visited the UK about the UK/US special relationship had to do with their shared "Anglo-Saxon heritage." Too bad the Democrats don't like to wade in the sewage like Republicans because now is exactly the time to whip out the "Mormonism is a cult and not a Christian denomination" card much like the Republicans constantly play the "Obama is a Muslim" card.

Over the top, Ann. You're so over the top.

You think someone shot at an Obama campaign office because he's black? How do you know that? I've grown suspect of those who imply racism is at the root of everything these days. I swear, people of all races, religions, creeds and sexual orientations got along better years ago than now, for all the "progressive" assistance out there.

Have you ever stopped for one moment - just a single moment - and thought that maybe people differ with Obama because of his POLICIES and not the COLOR OF HIS SKIN? I personally could care less about the man's skin color. What I'm interested in is what he has done - or not done - as President. Do I like his policies?

Oh, sure... there are still racists out there. And I say we condemn ignorance, blow apart stereotypes, enforce laws where civil rights are violated... and stop painting groups of people with the same broad brush - as you like to do when it comes to conservatives. I'm beginning to think you are one of the most intolerant posters I've ever seen here or anywhere online.

Wales... you are awesome. I can't recall a post recently here so open and forthright... by anyone, including myself.

I am very partisan and have almost nothing good to say about republicans and their anti-intellectualism, religious zealotry, their fear of female sexuality (as seen in all orthodox religions) and their disgraceful 80 year quest to destroy social security, their race and gay baiting ways, and the way they have adopted this sickening world view that it is every man for himself and we all just coincidentally live on the same land mass. I don't care for hicks, and I don't like fundies, and I have no use those who want to tell everyone what porn they can watch and who they can have sex with.

That said, I still have to call it like I see it even if I see something that doesn't flatter a non-republican.

Okay, I'm lovin' Q-Fan even more now... LOL!

Great debate. I don;t know if I would say Biden killed, because Ryan wasn't killed. Ryan still has that phony, robotic speaking style which I can't believe he actually talks like that in his own home, but he did come across as someone who at least as some knowledge of the issues, even if it is knowledge enough to lie or not look there like a blank fool. He almost walked into a quagmire when he attempted to compare himself to John Kennedy. We know how that worked out the last time this happened at a debate and Biden was on high alert ready to pounce but Ryan wisely dropped the tactic.

Biden was as I thought he would be: combative, giving no inch, and willing to call a liar a liar. I think though Ryan has a bit of armor in his smiling demeanor that remains perpetually serene, and Biden was not really able to make Ryan crack. I think both guys did a good job but both had stumbles. Biden has no answer for why Obama's promises didn't bear fruit, and Ryan still has no specifics and no answers for his pie in the sky claims of budget balancing magic. I wish they could have another debate because this undercard is better and more entertaining than the title bout.

Q-Fan, I know I don't often agree with you on politics/policy... but I definitely recognize that you are one of the most fair-minded, least partisan people in the forum. I know where you stand but your honest assessments are appreciated.

I believe Biden scored more points... I think his demeanor was a little weird, though, and it may have turned some off. While I won't go so far as to say it was rude or disrespectful, I do think it was strange. I found myself tuning out the dialogue and just watching him.

Ryan finally found his voice late in the debate, but it was too late to score a win. He knew who he was going up against and he should have grown a pair before walking out on stage. He also needed to counter the moderator... she was ridiculous and, at one point, seemed to be actually debating Ryan. Biden, himself, seemed to square off against her at the end for some reason... then the silly 15 second versus 40 second thing... ummm, okay.

Based on Biden's strange demeanor, I'm going to say I really think it was a toss-up. I don't think Biden did what he needed to do, which was score a knock-out. The main event is next week, anyway. This debate won't change anybody's mind. It might slow the current Romney surge... but it won't stop it.

Biden is KILLING Ryan here. Ryan is completely falling apart on live TV tripping over his words and not answering the questions asked

I can't hear Ryan, actually. Biden doesn't stop talking... and the moderator is debating Ryan, herself... weird...

Wow, Biden is overplaying his hand tonight. Dude is making a fool of himself, grinning like the Joker on Batman and chuckling, interrupting...

Just... wow.

I just realized that the words to the Sesame Street theme basically sum up Obama's foreign policy...

Sunny Day

Sweepin' the clouds away

On my way to where the air is sweet

Can you tell me how to get,

How to get to Benghazi

Come and play

Everything's A-OK

Friendly neighbors there

That's where we meet

Can you tell me how to get

How to get to Benghazi

Sure. You talk, I'll read and make faces you'll never see and you can feel good about whatever you said and never know or care if I questioned your sanity. That sounds perfect right?????

You KNOW I'm insane. Of course I care. I rarely feel good. I know you're making faces at me! I'm just THAT kid in the classroom...

Anybody want to talk about a possible cover-up by the Obama Administration regarding Libya?

Wow. I can't believe Romney is actually saying this. He must be very confident. I guess he knows the social conservatives will see this as a shell game and he's going to still go all out for them if he's elected.

http://www.cbsnews.c...t-on-my-agenda/

I absolutely believe he's saying it. Why? Because, unlike Obama, the man has bigger fish to fry. As a voter who leans right, I could care LESS about this statement or his stance on abortion. Things aren't going well in the country these days and abortion really ranks rather low on the list.

Seizing upon this statement is a clear act of desparation on the part of liberals. Let's face it... you guys spend more time talking about Romney's statements or positions than selling Obama's. This is precisesly why Obama is getting hammered right now.

But keep it up... Let's keep discussing Romney's more moderate positions... it plays really well...

CarlD2, I cannot believe you of all people who can be so cynical at times, are not acknowledging the shear ignorance and shallowness of the American people to be sucked in by Romney's bluster and lies resulting in these more positive polls for him. Obama's poor performance in the debate cannot be dismissed. He did himself no favors. Biden will have step up in his debate and Romney do better in the next debate.

I never doubted the "well done" polls before the debate and I do not doubt them now. I fully believe that there are people who are uninformed and easily influenced are now leaning towards voting for Romney. However, like Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight, I look at trends over time as well as the historical view of both the national and state polls and see that the President remains on track for reelection. http://fivethirtyeig...164E70D30C43879

I love how the Republicans are crowing over the polls that show Romney gaining ground. I guess, the Democratic conspiracy is over until the polls settle down and go back in the other directions. RME.

Actually, Ann, if you really dig into the polling, you'll find that they have been consistently oversampling Democrats this entire election cycle. Sometimes they oversample by as much as 10%, and that's not counting those who call themselves independents who often swing Democrat.

The significance of these polls showing Romney in the lead is that they are STILL oversampling DEMOCRATS. In other words, even fudging the polls to oversample Dems, they are still showing Romney pulling ahead.

I still don't believe the polls are accurate because they are still oversampling Dems! The truth is that Romney may actually have a wider lead than the polls reflect. This is why Liberals are in freak-out mode right now. The Obama Machine's internal polling is revealing this, too, and it's scaring the crap out of them. But don't take my word for it... go to Gallup or Pew or any of them and look at the polling data - the breakdown of those called. There is also a difference in accuracy of results when considering likely voters versus registered voters. I generally throw out a "registered voter" poll because those people may not even show up on Election Day... LIKELY VOTERS is a more accurate sampling of what might happen on Election Day...

He was better than Obama, but he also told a ton of lies which would have been picked apart if someone like Al Gore had been in his place. You only get away with a debate performance if the media lets you get away with it.

Carl, I'm sure he didn't tell any more lies than the President did during that debate. Romney certainly didn't misrepresent what Obama has done and continues to do to Medicare or private insurance in the name of Obamacare. Romney certainly didn't misrepresent the massive failure the stimulus was, or Obama's boner for failing green energy policies. But what Romney did that Obama didn't do was offer more specifics, to explain the differences between himself and President Obama.

I seem to remember George W. Bush getting TRASHED after his debates... Remember the "hunchback" deal... thinking he had a device for cheating under his jacket? The mainstream press floated that BS for a week or two... And they tried it again with Romney's handkerchief. Good grief.

If Romney is getting any favorable coverage at all right now, it's because he won the debate... NOT because the media LOVES Romney. They hate him and you know it.

What are you referring to? The media never went this wild over Obama in any debate. McCain sunk himself in the debates but that was never seen as being about Obama's great abilities. If you mean gushing media coverage for Obama in 2008, there was still plenty of garbage (Rev. Wright, lipstick on a pig, Michelle Obama hating America).

How can you honestly deny that the mainstream media has been in the tank for Obama since he challenged Hillary for the nomination? It's absolutely ridiculous to suggest that the media in any way has been pro-Romney. Do you watch MSNBC? Do you read the New York Times? CBS News? Unless you are suggesting FOX News alone is controlling the airwaves... but with people like Shepherd Smith leading two newscasts a day there and conservatives like Bill Crystal and Charles Krauthammer frequently slamming ROMNEY, I'm not sure the argument FOX is bias washes these days. Even blowhard Bill O'Reilly is frequently critical of Obama and Republicans - to the point where I've often wondered if he's bending over backwards to be overly fair.

Have you noticed some of the slightly relieved, quasi-gushing tones lately to stories about Mitt going "back to the center" and "being a moderate"?

No, I haven't. I've seen stories about how Obama lost the debate for reasons all his own. I've seen forthright liberals like Lanny Davis say Obama is blowing it big time because the media HASN'T called him out on policy and asked him tough questions... so when it came time to account for the past four years, he stumbled horribly! Univision broke it open when they asked him tough questions about Libya he couldn't answer... Real journalism... FINALLY. You think UNIVISION is in the tank for ROMNEY? Puh-lease, Carl...

The Romney debate bump was to be expected no matter what but isn't stronger than good economic news and the fact is that the unemployment rate is below 8% and more people are feeling good about the economy. Well except for the people who are more concerned with seeing Obama fail than the country succeed. Those people are losing their [!@#$%^&*].

Obama has to explain the state of the economy and the country after four years... And he's having difficulty doing so.

Shocking that nonstop gushing media coverage would affect poll results.

I know... and it worked so well the first time for Obama - wonder why it's not working out so well this time...

Ohhh, you mean the media has a boner for Mitt!

Riiiigght...

PRINCETON, NJ -- Registered voters' preferences for president are evenly split in the first three days of Gallup tracking since last Wednesday's presidential debate. In the three days prior to the debate, Barack Obama had a five-percentage-point edge among registered voters.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/157907/romney-narrows-vote-gap-historic-debate-win.aspx

The one positive thing I can say about G. W. Bush is that when it was clear what a liability he was to the Republican Party he receded into obscurity. Kerry and Gore just. won't. die.

Oh YES! Agreement in the forum again! Love you, Juppiter!

Obama and the Democrats raised $181 million in September. Wow, that is a lot of dough and almost all of it from small individual donors.

http://www.washingto...ry.html?hpid=z1

Obama and the Democrats are blazing a hot trail... Oh, wait...

It's not that "we" can't trust" the judiciary, the Justice Department, the Federal Reserve... or anyone," it's that you choose not to because you don't like what you heard. The only people questioning the data are the neocons. These are the same people who have been screaming at the top of their lungs that "Obama said that if the unemployment rate was still above eight percent he should only get one term!" so apparently the data was just fine until today. It's the same thing we've seen with the reaction to the polls. Two years ago when the polls said that a generic Republican could beat Obama, the neocons practically sprayed their shorts. Now that Obama's ahead, suddenly "oversampling" is the right-wing's new favorite word.

Reasonable Americans should no longer be forced to tolerate the paranoid ramblings of people who ignore math then tell the rest of us the "we" can't trust the numbers. These people are an embarrassment to themselves and this country. Conservatism I can tolerate, proud stupidity, however, I cannot. I'm glad to see that there are Republicans who seem to have gotten their fill of it.

If you think that we can't trust the numbers then make your case as to why not.

Marceline... ya'll are right. Numbers are great and Americans are back to work! I've just come to realize that everything is totally awesome with the economy and all these low-paying part-time jobs the "adjusted" unemployment rate reflects are just what the doctor ordered. Silly me... you've proven me wrong again.

I'm disgusted that they are so desperate to discount Obama that they consider the fellow Americans who have gotten jobs - some after being out of work for more than a year - to be a liability. I'm also disgusted that they are so wedded to ideology that they won't accept basic verifiable data.

Marceline, it isn't just the right questioning the data. Everyone is suspicious of the numbers.

I think it's sad, too, that we can't trust the judiciary, the Justice Department, the Federal Reserve... or anyone.

At the end of the day it matters not at all. I refuse to believe there are actually undecided voters left. There are Obama voters, Romney voters, a lot of people who will not vote, people who think they are undecided when really they are not but just don't want to be grouped with a party, and then maybe .005% of the population that is undecided and will actually vote.

So does it matter that Obama failed miserably to call out Romney's gleeful lies? Not in the least.

I agree 100% with Juppiter here, particularly on the point that the notion there are still undecided voters out there. How could some people NOT know by now who they intend to support?

When asked for polling purposes, I don't believe some people are responding honestly or accurately, particularly in those battleground states. Eerily familiar to 2010. Polls correctly somewhat about a month or so before Election Day and you're starting to see that now... These people are JUST KNOW figuring out who they wish to vote for... they've known for quite some time.

I believe there is manipulation of the polls, but not for the same reasons Carl does... and certainly not in support of Mitt Romney to help him. I'm still floored by that charge...

Being a good orator may not be the best skill in a debate. Joe Biden never gives all that exciting a speech but he is quick and clever and can come up with a seemingly impromptu wisecrack now and then. Quick thinking is important, more important than the ability to dynamically recite a well written speech. There aren't many good speakers in politics these days. Mitt Romney's convention speech about church and sports teams was cringe inducing from the saccharine content alone. Paul Ryan sounds like an automaton. Hillary speaks with a very shrill style that it is just a turn off. None of these people can touch Bill Clinton who can give speeches, news conferences, debates, anything really with equal ease.

I think the teleprompter is a fake complaint. I highly doubt Reagan gave his speeches without a telemprompter. The difference is Reagan was a great speaker who never uttered an "umm" and "uhh" in any speech, and he had the personal touch. MSNBC was saying this morning Obama was never spoken to like that, he is not used to people disagreeing with him and didn't know what to do. That's hogwash. Every president in every debate prior was in the same toady bubble Obama is in and they all managed to remember they were entering the real world.

We shall see if it won't happen again.

Good points... I agree with much of what you're saying.

Are you surprised we're seeing this tight of a race this close to Election Day? I know people like Carl here believe the media, out of some love for Romney or a need to make things exciting, are responsible for all of this... but the media didn't make Obama perform poorly in the debate, nor did they give Romney an edge in public speaking... I'm curious as to your thoughts on this...