Obama and Biden deserve to lose but will they? They are certainly doing all they can to make it happen, but there are some people just so stubborn they refuse to take the hint and will vote for them regardless. But O&B are making every effort to lose, that’s for sure.
A few examples. First from Biden’s Contempt at The Weekly Standard:
Biden showed that Democrats not only disagree with the Romney-Ryan views of the role of government in domestic and foreign affairs: They have utter contempt for such views, cannot even conceive of the possibility that the other side has a credible point of view, one that warrants thoughtful consideration and response rather than derision. That’s one reason President Obama did so poorly in the Denver debate: Certainty of his own virtue and wisdom relieves him of the necessity of considering the merit in the arguments of political opponents, and the structure of the White House shields him from criticism.
And at National Review Online, a commenter points out that there is more to a presidential debate than the 90 minutes spent on stage:
The debate no longer ends when the debaters walk off stage. And now it no longer ends when the TV spinners have, like cuckoos, laid their eggs and flown away. There is now the long, long reverberation in social media, where the basic debate footage serves as raw material for mash-ups and parodies and treatments for the rest of the election cycle and beyond. And Biden’s performance, which won him some tactical advantage in the debate, has set him up as the target for rich satire and a way that Ryan’s conventional performance didn’t and cannot do. His performance is comic gold, and although within hard-core Dem/left circles he will be celebrated as the warrior, everywhere else, and especially for basically apolitical young YouTube viewers, he will be the jackass supreme. I suspect that by Election Day, the various parodic videos will have had a larger viewership than the debate itself. By this criterion, the tactic was a massive miscalculation.
And the lies will now be checked and the claims checked against common sense. Here is Michael Barone commenting on what he sees as a campaign fit for the 1980s:
Fast forward to Joe Biden at the debate. He clearly did what the Obama campaign wanted: lots of lusty attacks on Mitt Romney, repeated mentions of that magic number 47 percent, smirks and groans and derisive laughter.
He interrupted Paul Ryan and moderator Martha Raddatz more than 80 times, which may have been offputting to Independents and Undecideds. But he gave core Democrats like interrupter Chris Matthews something to cheer about.
On substance he was weaker. He denied that the White House knew that Ambassador Christopher Stevens was attacked by terrorists rather than in a spontaneous demonstration prompted by an anti-Islam video. That’s in vivid contrast with sworn testimony Wednesday that the State Department knew it was a terrorist attack all along.
Biden’s statement was either an untruth or a confession of incompetence. If the State Department had the information, why didn’t the White House?
Well, Hillary, was it you alone who knew or did the White House also know and therefore did Biden lie?
After David Axelrod’s repeated assurances this morning on Fox News Sunday that ‘there isn’t anybody on this planet’ who feels a greater sense of responsibility for our diplomats than this President, Chris Wallace asked how soon after the Benghazi attacks the President actually met with his national security team.
Wallace followed up on Axelrod’s non-answer by asking whether the President managed to squeeze in a meeting with the National Security Council before jetting off to Las Vegas for a campaign rally. Given Axelrod’s inability to produce a straightforward answer to the questions, it’s pretty clear the answer is ‘no.’
This is well beyond incompetence and dereliction of duty. We are looking at people whose judgment is so impaired they should not be trusted with anything requiring an ounce of responsibility never mind the management of our economies and the fate of the West.
Funny – I couldn’t see the photo at first and thought you were referring to this pair of clowns…
Rabz
15 Oct 12 at 1:01 pm
Yes but wait for Hollywood to go into over-drive for their man.
The latest episode of 30 Rock has made it clear that they have decided to waste their last season being Dem/Obama shills.
Luke
15 Oct 12 at 1:19 pm
Does it really help your cause to demonise every left-leaning leader as the Worst Ever? I suppose the point of a post like this is not to convince the undecided, but fire up the converted. It gets rather tiresome, nonetheless. Every extremist post like this puts a lie to the “centre-right” claim made at top right of every page.
If this site wasn’t a cesspool of wingnuts it would be interesting to have a thread, in a similar vein to the one posted where leftist commenters were asked to provide solutions for budget restraint, where rightists could be asked to give some credit to the likes of Obama and Gillard for policies which worked. That sort of level-headed, even approach is rather distant from the tone of the Cat, though.
m0nty
15 Oct 12 at 1:37 pm
Okay, here goes:
Infidel Tiger
15 Oct 12 at 1:40 pm
What would they be?
Gab
15 Oct 12 at 1:43 pm
Thanks for proving my point.
m0nty
15 Oct 12 at 1:49 pm
Thanks for being unable to answer the question, muntster. Prove my point.
Gab
15 Oct 12 at 1:51 pm
Hmm, okay, I’ll read your post because you may have a point.
Oh dear. Looks like you fucked it up.
Abu Chowdah
15 Oct 12 at 1:53 pm
Well, that’s just bloody lovely, innit?
Rabz
15 Oct 12 at 1:55 pm
lol how quaint. so very 1990′s.
Gab
15 Oct 12 at 1:55 pm
You on Twitter Gab? Someone has the same avatar.
Woolfe
15 Oct 12 at 1:56 pm
No, I’m not Woolfe. Tried once but then got bored with all the bloody questions asked when setting up the account.
Gab
15 Oct 12 at 1:57 pm
Maybe you could start your own website mOnty? You could call it: A Fair Go For All. Even Fat Chicks.
Infidel Tiger
15 Oct 12 at 2:00 pm
Obama lied about the circumstances surrounding the attack, lied about the repeated warnings of inadequate security, lied about the reasons for the attack, lies which have since led to a visit in the early hours of the morning by the authorities of a man for the most trivial parole violation and since his arrest, lies which themselves contributed to unrest around the world, and all monty complains about is this site’s failure to recognize the ‘achievements’ of Gillard and Obama. Fme.
dover_beach
15 Oct 12 at 2:02 pm
And while gratuitously insulting this site, its contributors and commenters.
An absolutely outrageous outrage.
Whatever happened to the nice, sensible conservative mUttley, who confessed his admiration for capitalism, Gab and JC?
Rabz
15 Oct 12 at 2:08 pm
Interesting to the high level of support by Australians for Obama, even among LNP voters, according to Essential Report
SteveC
15 Oct 12 at 2:18 pm
Memo Monty: Americans don’t give a fuck.
sdog
15 Oct 12 at 2:26 pm
Apols, that was one of the Steves, not Monty :-/
They’re all starting to sound alike to me.
sdog
15 Oct 12 at 2:27 pm
The majority of people on the planet are morons. The LNP is full of them.
Infidel Tiger
15 Oct 12 at 2:30 pm
“Americans don’t give a fuck.”
No, but so what? They don’t give a fuck what a Canadian is writing on an Australian blog either.
Jarrah
15 Oct 12 at 2:31 pm
“Does it really help your cause to demonise every left-leaning leader as the Worst Ever?”
Does it help the “left” to use such emotive language? Asking questions about the ability of the Obama administration isn’t “demonising”.
If you have an issue with the article start arguing the merits – you’re coming across as a bit of a troll by playing the man and not the ball.
“where rightists could be asked to give some credit to the likes of Obama and Gillard for policies which worked.”
To be fair, both of those leaders have had more failed policies than successes.
Gillard’s publishing of school results on the net was a good move, should have been done years ago.
Apart from that – carbon tax, mining tax, asylum seekers, complete lack of fiscal restraint, internet filtering and monitoring – all the bigger ticket items haven’t been good policies, so its hard to be positive about them @Monty.
“That sort of level-headed, even approach is rather distant from the tone of the Cat, though”
If you look at the top of your browser there’s a box which allows you to go to other websites – you may be happier choose one of those next time if the Cat isn’t to your liking.
After all its a (somewhat) free country…
scotty
15 Oct 12 at 2:34 pm
Canadian PM video. “This is how a defender of democracy sounds. Telling it like it is.
Gab
15 Oct 12 at 2:35 pm
It’s indicative of media’s bias over here, nothing more.
dover_beach
15 Oct 12 at 2:35 pm
I’m not sure that is actually interesting. Nothing especially negative about the guy really hits the oz media.
wreckage
15 Oct 12 at 2:40 pm
The Oz’s Brad Norington for example.
Steve of Ferny Hills
15 Oct 12 at 2:44 pm
mOnty, you’re ignoring two policies: that either all Ruddard and/or Obamacrat polices objectively and indisputably fail, or that they all fail on metrics preferred by the right (whereby you could, by checking those metrics, come to an understanding of how one side might consider a policy a “success” while the other considers it a “failure”.)
In fact I’d say most of their policies failed objectively because neither administration has shown the slightest interest in measurable outcomes.
wreckage
15 Oct 12 at 2:46 pm
Not much talk about Romney’s “flagging campaign” these days.
C.L.
15 Oct 12 at 2:58 pm
Very well said. Nearly all threads on this blog are from people on the far right, not the centre right. Also the overwhelming number of comments are on the extreme right. I’m one of the very few with a centre-left orientation.
It doesn’t matter how much Steve Kates tries to boost Romney and Ryan, they are going to lose in a Goldwateresque landslide on November 6. Just have a look at the betting odds (around 2 to 1 on for Obama, 2 to 1 against Romney). I’ve always found these to be an excellent guide to outcomes at this stage of proceedings.
Fortunately the US will have another four years of compassionate guidance from the Democrat White House.
Gareth Hamilton
15 Oct 12 at 3:05 pm
Last week Romney was 3/1 against. Evens by the weekend?
Steve of Ferny Hills
15 Oct 12 at 3:16 pm
LOL
To space cadet leftists like d’Hamster even moderates are far right.
JamesK
15 Oct 12 at 3:22 pm
LOL
If true, they’ve probably been getting their news from the television or any other newspaper other than the op-ed pages of The Oz where an occasionally informed piece is allowed through.
JamesK
15 Oct 12 at 3:25 pm
“Interesting to the high level of support by Australians for Obama”
That’s because we’ve only seen the oratorical Obama, appearing in front of adoring partisan crowds and being feted at international meetings of the UN and such.
Australians haven’t had to deal with the high unemployment, credit downgrades etc – the grass is always greener on the other side of the pond…
scotty
15 Oct 12 at 3:34 pm
Hammster, what’s good for the Goose, etc.
You are a would be mass murdering commie scumbag.
A totalitarian.
An inner party member.
A more equal animal.
Of the nomenklatura.
Rabz
15 Oct 12 at 3:41 pm
If you weren’t such a tribalist, you would be able to recognize that Obama and Gillard are clowns.
Dangph
15 Oct 12 at 3:43 pm
“Just have a look at the betting odds (around 2 to 1 on for Obama, 2 to 1 against Romney). I’ve always found these to be an excellent guide to outcomes at this stage of proceedings. ”
Better than actual polling? I ask as polls released yesterday show Romney up 49-47.
I agree you can’t say Romney is definitely going to win at this point by any means, but he still has a shot. He’s certainly is a long, long way from losing in a “Goldwateresque landslide” @Gareth Hamilton
Or does suggesting that a Republican candidate has a chance against Obama make me just another far-right poster in your eyes?
scotty
15 Oct 12 at 3:44 pm
Yes. There’s no good news for Obama from here on and he is carrying most of the downside risks. He has the gauntlet of another two debates to run, and it’s clear that Romney outclasses him as a debater.
Benghazi is unraveling and his attempts to blaim Clinton for it all could result in severe political blowback from the Clintons. If it becomes a finger-pointing game between Obama and Biden on one side, and the Clintons on the other, I know where my money is.
Romney has cards in his hand that are not yet played, particularly Fast and Furious. Romney is also scandal-free and apart from the 47 percent comment has made no gaffes.
The Obama campaign has miscalculated with the Big Bird campaign, but that’s indicative that they are struggling to find a coherent anti-Romney message. In the town hall debate, if he gets any questions about same sex marriage he’ll lose another couple of percent.
And incidentally, although this is a second order consideration, I think even abortion questions will play worse for Obama than Romney, if Romney ‘goes there’ regarding live birth and partial birth policies, both of which Obama has a controversial voting record on. The Dems look at the face-value life-versus-choice polling data on this issue but underestimate the risk carried by Obama’s controversial and hardline positions on this topic.
dd
15 Oct 12 at 3:51 pm
Gareth, since you have such confidence in your prediction of Obama’s success, make us a wager.
In the highly unlikely event he wins, you get promoted to the Cat’s Primary Resident Fool, or PRF (as compared to the second rate status you now hold). This would grant you the notoriety you so obviously crave.
However, when Obama loses on 6 Nov 2012 you vanish. No more posting or befouling of Cat threads again. Ever.
A win-win. Over to you.
Zatara
15 Oct 12 at 3:53 pm
Gareth, since you have such confidence in your prediction of Obama’s success, make us a wager.
In the highly unlikely event he wins, you get promoted to the Cat’s Primary Resident Fool, or PRF (as compared to the second rate status you now hold). This would grant you the notoriety you so obviously crave.
However, when Obama loses on 6 Nov 2012 you vanish. No more posting or befouling of Cat threads again. Ever.
A win-win. Over to you.
Zatara
15 Oct 12 at 3:53 pm
Last time around for Obama the catch phrase was “Yes We Can”. This time can I suggest the right phrase is “We Thought We Could.”
mondo
15 Oct 12 at 4:44 pm
Well the Washington Post is determined to save Obama to the bitter fucking end….
They added a huge # more Democrats to their latest poll to get a status quo result, and spun it as “Romney got no bounce from the debate”
It’s a kind of tacit admission that Romney’s ahead since any reasonable tunrout model would show Romney up about 1-3% on their numbers.
MDMConnell
15 Oct 12 at 6:05 pm
Monst:
I’m happy to play that game. In fact I once tried this with you when I asked you to name five good things the Howard government had achieved. I recall never receiving a reply, as you obviously ran off to the nearest Krispy Kream store hoping I would forget.
I’m still waiting.
JC
15 Oct 12 at 7:02 pm
Krispy Kreme, if you please.
Another fine NC export
sdog
15 Oct 12 at 9:13 pm
What Did Hillary Tell Obama on 9/11?
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Charlene Lamb testified that on September 11, after the “full-scale assault” in Libya — “unprecedented in its size and intensity” — began about 9:40 p.m. Libyan time (4:40 p.m. Washington time), she was “in our Diplomatic Security Command Center [in Washington] monitoring multiple open lines with our agents [in Libya] for much of the attack.”
On Friday, a CNN reporter asked Hillary Clinton what she was doing as the attack occurred, and Clinton responded with a 400-word answer that avoided the question. …..
Later on Friday, the State Department spokesperson was asked why Clinton hadn’t answered, and provided this response:
As you know, she’s not that interested in focusing on herself. But obviously, she was here very late that night. She was getting regular updates from both the DS Command Center and the senior NEA leadership in the building, she was making phone calls to senior people, and so she was obviously very much involved. But I think she was not interested in sort of giving a personal tick-tock. It’s not the way she operates.
But to believe that her unwillingness to describe her actions reflected a self-effacing modus operandi may require the willing suspension of disbelief. It seems more likely she decided that, in view of Joe Biden’s malarkey on Thursday about an uninformed White House, this was not the time to describe what it seems any secretary of state would have done: inform the White House and keep it informed, in roughly the same real time as the State Department itself received the information, about an attack that was obviously not a demonstration about a video.
JamesK
15 Oct 12 at 10:41 pm
Killer Romney-Ryan Ad: Fiscal Discipline
JamesK
15 Oct 12 at 11:06 pm
Riiiiiiiiiiiight.
wreckage
15 Oct 12 at 11:15 pm
Andrew Klavan,s take on Obama ,spot on
A Fantasy Election, an Imaginary Man
http://www.city-journal.org/2012/eon1005ak.html
blind freddy
15 Oct 12 at 11:20 pm
The UK Daily Telegraph is reporting that the Obama-outsourced mercs ‘guarding’ the embassy in Benghazi were unarmed.
C.L.
15 Oct 12 at 11:57 pm
Protip: when the level of violence in a Muslim country ramps up, send in a squad of Marines to guard the embassy and let it be known that their bullets are hollowpoints whose tips have been filled in with pork fat.
perturbed
16 Oct 12 at 3:36 am