The first presidential debate is upon us, and the political world has temporarily descended on my city, Denver, and specifically on the university — indeed, the very arena — where I’ve spent so much blogging about basketball these last few years, the University of Denver’s Magness Arena. I don’t have credentials to attend the main event, but I did manage to get inside to check out the debate hall and the preparations on Debate Eve. Photos here, including this ridiculous bit of epic Mid-Majority win:
Yes, that would be DU Bally and Mile High Bally, a.k.a. the Brotherz Ballz, on the very podiums where Obama and Romney will stand during the debate. The story of how they got there is pretty damn hilarious.
Anyway, I’m taking a long-planned day off work Wednesday, and will be tweeting — first from Marco Rubio’s morning rally, then from some portion of DU’s “DebateFest,” then probably from our family “debate watch” at home, and perhaps even from a Green Party rally afterward — and I’ll be using CoverItLive to collect, publish and archive it all. Becky’s tweets, too. Here goes:
No comments? Really? Obama reminded me of Obi-Wan Kenobi up there last night, right before Darth Vader cut him in half with the light saber.Obama got crushed, but the debate was so boring and sort of strange. It was like everything that was said before didn’t exist. Obama said Romney is cutting 5 trillion in taxes, I’ve never heard anyone say that and I have no idea what that means. 5 trillion next year? Over 10 years? Over 20 years? Then Romney said he’s going to eliminate government waste like PBS/”Who needs big bird”? That was crazy. Then nothing more was said that Romney was cutting taxes, but that’s been a pretty big part of what he’s been saying for months now to stimulate the economy, shouldn’t it be discussed at the debate?
Romney has given no specifics and continues to give no specifics about anything. It’s just like a fantasy that he’ll take office and then do a bunch of meetings and magically create 12 million jobs. Why would Obama not just ask him how he’s going to do that, and be specific? And he’s going to put 716 billion dollars of waste BACK into medicare, and add 2 trillion dollars to military spending, doesn’t that make it impossible to balance the budget, cut taxes, and effectively reduce spending? And Romney just said he’s going to fix medicare and Obama hasn’t fixed it. Okay, I’ll fix it too.
The last time *I* saw such a skilled performance by a Democrat candidate, Geraldine Ferraro was asking “What does that little red light mean ?” …
It could well be ironic, if VP Biden turns out to have a better debate than Teh One did …
Normally, I would say it couldn’t be worse than last night, but knowing Biden, it could be a lot worse, and a lot more embarrassing.
SU – from your fingerstrokes to the ocular abilities of the Deity !
Having listened to, then watched last night’s debate, I understand why Brendan didn’t want to live-blog it …
My sympathies, Brendan !
THIS, would have been the debate to live blog. So many things to be said. The previous debate was so boring Obama almost fell asleep at the podium. What I’m amazed at is the simpleton independent voters that Frank Klutz polled on Fox after the debate who said that Paul Ryan gave them more information than Joe Biden. Biden and the moderator were both trying to get Paul Ryan to commit to ONE thing, just ONE, and he wouldn’t do it. Wouldn’t say that the mortgage tax deduction would be safe. Didn’t say that the health care deduction would be safe. Didn’t say a damn thing, again.
I can’t recall any politician saying they will do things and openly refusing to even give ONE specific example of how they expected to accomplish what they wanted to do. Great, they want to work with Congress to come up with a plan, but you don’t show up to a meeting like that with no suggestions or idea of how you want to do it, you go with a plan and then compromise from there, if they don’t have only 1 party in control of everything, in which case they could conceivably do anything they want without any negotiation, which makes it even more important to be open and honest about how they want to do this.
Sandy:
What Ryan laid out was a principle that they would follow when making/proposing cuts. I realize you on the Left don’t understand principles, so i’ll attempt to explain. What Ryan said is that they would cut loopholes for the wealthy, while keeping them for the middle class. So, they would not neccessarily eliminate any loophole at all, merely begin means testing them. Take mortgage deductions, instead of eliminating them completely, maybe they’ll change it so you can only deduct the first $200,000, or say anyone making over $250,000 a year can no longer deduct mortgage.
And as for the debate, we can all agree that SNL needs to do a skit portraying Biden as a grumpy old man telling the kids to get off his lawn…right?
Sandy – “I can’t recall any politician saying they will do things and openly refusing to even give ONE specific example of how they expected to accomplish what they wanted to do. Great, they want to work with Congress to come up with a plan, but you don’t show up to a meeting like that with no suggestions or idea of how you want to do it, you go with a plan and then compromise from there, if they don’t have only 1 party in control of everything, in which case they could conceivably do anything they want without any negotiation, which makes it even more important to be open and honest about how they want to do this.” …
So you don’t remember “Hope & Change !” ? Which of those two was Presidential-Candidate Obama’s (now-Pres’ent Obama’s) “specific example” ?
And you don’t remember “Obamacare” ? An example of Pres’ent Obama’s “compromise from there, if they don’t have only 1 party in control of everything, in which case they could conceivably do anything they want without any negotiation, which makes it even more important to be open and honest about how they want to do this” ?
It is fascinating that you are actually capable of recognising the significance and importance of good concepts and bad concepts except when Democrats do ’em …
(Spock’d eyebrow)
“Hope and Change” was a campaign slogan, not a policy proposal.
Obama proposed to reform the healthcare system and laid out his specific plans and ideas on how he wanted to do it. A single payer system, keep medicare and social security as they were, get rid of insurance companies, have all americans pay into it, etc. When Obama was elected, even though he had a majority in both houses, he opened the debate up to the public and wanted input from all sides, but those townhall meetings were over-run by Republican extremists who were throwing hissy-fits and they finally broke down and Obama compromised his position and agreed to let insurance companies dictate our healthcare, essentially.
Obama laid out everything he wanted to do when elected, with no secrets or surprises. Including increasing military efforts in Afghanistan, which democrats didn’t like, and ending the war with Iraq, ending “Don’t ask don’t tell”, closing gitmo (but Congress would not allow it), diversifying the supreme court, aiding homeowners facing foreclosure, and much much more.
Mitt Romney is like the slimy sales people that call me every day wanting me to change my business credit card processor because they have a “better rate” and when you change you get screwed with a higher rate and you find out you agreed to a 2 year contract. I just hang up on those people literally every day.
As for laying out a “principle”, okay, Romney wants a lower tax rate. That’s fine, but tell me how you can lower income taxes by 20% across the board, raise defense spending by $2 trillion, give $716 billion to insurance companies that was cut out of medicare with the passage of obamacare, and balance the budget. It truly doesn’t make sense, and saying he’s a business man doesn’t make it make mathematical sense. Just tell us what you think would be a good approach to making this new tax system viable, and cutting children’s education programs isn’t the way I want to do it, but that’s the only thing he’s been specific about cutting.
A confirmed supporter of Obama complaining that Romney will be unable to balance the budget is perhaps the most absurd thing I’ve read on this site. Naturally, it was sandy who wrote it.
I’m not complaining that Romney won’t balance the budget, I’m complaining that he won’t be honest and lay out specifics about the tax deductions he won’t eliminate and the tax deductions he would like to eliminate. And I’m complaining that Romney is not being honest in his presentation of his idea that he’s going to cut 20% of people’s income tax when nothing like that has ever been proposed or attempted before in american history.
Really? President Reagan cut taxes 23% across the board. There were also large tax cuts in the 1920’s and under President Kennedy. These cuts were all successful in increasing the size of the American economy and increasing the percentage of taxes paid by the wealthy.
Yeah, I guess so. I know Americans have been asking for the tax system to get honked up and re-arranged ever since Reagan left office, since everybody knows rich people pay too much in taxes. It’s pretty much the most important thing on people’s minds.
Wasn’t the lesson of Reagan and Bush Jr. that when you drastically and minimally cut-taxes you create a huge budget deficits? As when Bush took office and the budget was balanced for the first time in American history, and then blam-o huge deficits after the tax cutting and increased government spending. Today we’ve got huge budget deficits and there’s going to be a huge tax cut, 3 times the size of Bush’s tax cut? And that won’t affect the already immense deficit?
When Romney gets elected, he’ll do the tax cuts that the wealthy benefit the most from, and there will be huge deficits, dwarfing the one we have currently, and then Republicans will all blame Obamacare, and then they’ll get rid of everything that was beneficial about the healthcare bill, and the horrible parts, which are irrevocable, due to the Supreme Courts ruling, will remain, and the country will be down the tubes. And everyone will blame each other, and they’ll both be right.
But that’s the eternal realist in me.
since everybody knows rich people pay too much in taxes. It’s pretty much the most important thing on people’s minds.
Pretty good attempt at humor. you’re getting better.
The basic fact is, the United states has one of the most progressive tax systems around. The top 1% pay 36% of all income taxes. That is pretty dam progressive. The top 5% pay over 55% of all income taxes! The bottom 50% pay less than 3% of all income taxes paid! How much more progressive do you want to get?
Personally, I think everyone should be required to pay a minimum income tax.
Wasn’t the lesson of Reagan and Bush Jr. that when you drastically and minimally cut-taxes you create a huge budget deficits?
Nope. Government revenues went up after both sets of tax cuts. The problem was, spending went up faster.
When Romney gets elected, he’ll do the tax cuts that the wealthy benefit the most from, and there will be huge deficits, dwarfing the one we have currently,
Prediction noted. My prediction is that President Romney with a Republican controlled House and Senate will immediately reverse much of what President Obama has done the last four years, and cut spending; and the economy will come roaring back.
and the country will be down the tubes. And everyone will blame each other, and they’ll both be right.
But that’s the eternal realist in me.
My prediction is that four years from now, the country will be flourishing.
For a more entertaining debate, with a more catholic audience … Enjoy ! …
In four years, the economy may very well be flourishing. If you compare where the economy was 4 years ago with where it is now, it’s turned around incredibly. John McCain quit his campaign 4 years ago to try and prevent the economy from cratering, and he failed at that. The worst is behind us.
When Romney gets elected, he’ll start a war (or two), like the previous Republican presidents. He’ll cut taxes which benefit the wealthy “job creators”. Yes, he’ll get rid of as much of whatever Obama did. He said he would make sure that insurance companies get the 716 billion tax payer dollars that Obama cut out of medicare. He said he will increase military spending, which goes with starting a war or two. He said he wants to get rid of provision in obamacare that prevents insurance companies from dropping people or refusing people health insurance because of pre-existing conditions. I’m sure he’ll get rid of the new rights given to children of illegals who were brought to the US. He said he would get rid of funding for educational programming that reaches children who’s parents can’t afford cable television. He has insinuated that he’ll get rid of programs that benefit the less fortunate in order to fund his tax cuts and “balance the budget”.
The country wasn’t better off under Bush, it’s true that he was able to borrow enough money to create the illusion of prosperity, like using your parents credit cards and money when you’re a teenager, but let’s face it, without artificially inflating home values and making money easy to borrow, we wouldn’t have had the financial crisis we were left with, and that can’t be done today, or at least shouldn’t be done again. Those were the lessons I thought Americans learned under Bush. Until November 7, I’ll still believe Americans did learn that lesson. But then again, America has disappointed me before like when they ignored the lessons of Viet Nam, and that was the same idiots who vote in this election.
If you compare where the economy was 4 years ago with where it is now, it’s turned around incredibly.
Really? How? To me it looks exactly the same. The stock market is a little higher, but that is because the fed has been printing so much money. Everything costs more, especially food and gas, the number of people on food stamps and other government assistance is higher than it has ever been, the deficit is higher than ever, and the debt is higher than ever. The workforce participation rate is millions lower.
When Romney gets elected, he’ll start a war (or two), like the previous Republican presidents
Really? Where? If he does will he lead from behind?
He’ll cut taxes which benefit the wealthy “job creators”.
I certainly hope so.
He said he would make sure that insurance companies get the 716 billion tax payer dollars that Obama cut out of medicare.
No, he actually said doctors and hospitals will get the $716 billion that Obama stole from Medicare to pay for Obamacare.
He said he will increase military spending,
No, he said he wouldn’t cut spending, and keep it at it’s current level. Obama is determined to cut spending further than he already has.
I’m sure he’ll get rid of the new rights given to children of illegals who were brought to the US
I certainly hope so.
He said he would get rid of funding for educational programming that reaches children who’s parents can’t afford cable television.
No, he said he would cut the federal sunsidies for PBS. Since PBS shows make hundreds of millions of dollars a year in profits, I fail to see this as a problem. If it is, simply mandate that broadcast channels have to show educational programming.
He has insinuated that he’ll get rid of programs that benefit the less fortunate in order to fund his tax cuts and “balance the budget”.
No he hasn’t. In fact he has explicitly stated that he would cut programs and deductions for the wealthy.
The country wasn’t better off under Bush, it’s true that he was able to borrow enough money to create the illusion of prosperity
Seriously? This is wrong in too many ways to count.
like when they ignored the lessons of Viet Nam,
You mean the ones about allowing a Democratic Congress to abandon our allies in time of need and directly cause a genocide of millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians by their Communist opressors??
“the stock market is a little higher”.
Yeah, just 100% more than it was when he took office.
“Really? Where [will he start a war]? If he does will he lead from behind?”
Leading from behind kept us out of another war, which the republicans said they would have liked to have led, which would be the war we didn’t have because we didn’t have a Republican president. I’d say there’s a real good war to start in the middle east, and since Republicans take orders from Israel, Romney should have no problem finding just where to start it.
“I certainly hope [Romney cuts taxes for the wealthy]”
Rich people are so smart they get broke shmucks like you (and there are millions) to carry their water and love it.
“No, he actually said doctors and hospitals will get the $716 billion that Obama stole from Medicare to pay for Obamacare.”
Yes, I’m sure Romney said that, but if you actually look at what the $716 billion eliminated in Obamacare, it was waste that was being paid to insurance companies, which Paul Ryan cut out of his plan as well, before becoming Romney’s VP candidate. No benefits were affected by the $716 billion cut, I thought republicans liked cutting waste, not keeping it or reissuing it.
“No, he said he wouldn’t cut spending, and keep it at it’s current level. Obama is determined to cut spending further than he already has.”
Yes he said he wouldn’t cut spending, and if you take the time to read his budget he has non-war military spending at 4% of GDP, where it is currently 3.5% of GDP. So 4 is more than 3.5, and at the same time it’s true that he isn’t cutting spending on military. So we’re all being honest, just some more than others. See how double-talk works?
“No, he said he would cut the federal sunsidies for PBS. Since PBS shows make hundreds of millions of dollars a year in profits, I fail to see this as a problem. If it is, simply mandate that broadcast channels have to show educational programming.”
If PBS shows made 100’s of millions of dollars they wouldn’t get or need government subsidies. Clearly you never watch PBS, but they don’t have commercials, which, if you have kids, you would understand that that’s a great thing. It’s saturday tomorrow, DVR NBC or CBS children’s programming and then DVR a PBS kids show, and just fast forward the whole thing, you’ll see a huge difference. And that’s just the commercial aspect, there’s the education aspect which doesn’t equal big profit when marketed commercially.
“No he hasn’t. In fact he has explicitly stated that he would cut programs and deductions for the wealthy.”
I don’t know many wealthy people in after school lunch programs, or HeadStart, or midnight basketball to keep them out of gangs. But, yeah I guess if that helps wealthy people, they’ll be cut out of it as well.
“You mean the ones about allowing a Democratic Congress to abandon our allies in time of need and directly cause a genocide of millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians by their Communist opressors??”
Okay, so if we hadn’t started a war because we disagreed with the outcome of their democratic election, they wouldn’t have ever been in danger in the first place. The other side is, your mindset (like McCain) would have no problem letting our soldiers die there for the next 1,000 years. There’s no good time to leave a bad situation. The US should have left years before they did, in both instances.