Biden's laughter a sign of 'passion and joy,' Carney says

politico44 ^ | 10/12/12 | DONOVAN SLACK

[sickoflibs]

RE :”I’ve even seen a number of Leftist players saying Biden screwed the pooch. They’re right”

That is completely ridiculous. They are cheering what they are still calling his decisive victory. Over at DU they are are still calling that debate the deciding factor in Obama’s re-election. Every single MSNBC Dem has called it a victory for their side.

Look, they are not whining about the moderator. There is an independent measurement free of biases (those who see that their side winning even when they end up getting slaughtered). After the first debate they were whining about the moderator.

Make believe doesn't change reality. The fact that some Republican women who hate Obama told you that Biden turned them off is no newsflash.

[LtKerst]

passionate

This word is always used By the left to excuse Rude and even Criminal Behavior....

If they Lie...they are “Passionate”
If they Cheat...”Passionate”
If they are Violent...”Passionate”

What a load of Crap.

[a fool in paradise]

[FlingWingFlyer]

So what little JJ is trying to say is that Joey Buffoon was just in the Christmas spirit?

[ridesthemiles]

Sure, Jay-—that fully explains the behavior of millions of people with Alzheimers!!!

[DoughtyOne]

Look, be honest with yourself. You’ve seen the list of journalists that think Biden was an insulting boor the other night. If Tom Brokaw thinks he was an ass, then I’m fairly certain a lot of others think so too. Or do you think Tom Brokaw is on our side now?

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

It’s also possible that Biden’s “performance” makes Obama look weak compared to Biden, by leftist standards... so far, anyway. And with the exception of LBJ, voters don’t seem to vote for VPs.

Wonder if they are prepping Romney for the possibility that Obama will channel Biden in the next debate (talking over Romney, acting like an AH crackhead, etc., since O does need to change something).

Another question is, how do you screen the townhall participants to detect operatives who claim to be “undecided?”

[DoughtyOne]

I don't know how you screen them. That's a good question.

I don't think Obama will get by pulling the Biden crap though.

Besides, I think he's sworn to using Hopenosis, since it worked so well last time.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

I don't think Obama will get by pulling the Biden crap though.

There is a theory that since O's numbers among "independents" is going down, they will bet all their chips on "base turnout." If I were a leftist strategist, I would not give up on the independents, but who knows what an MSNBC believer might try.

Ed Schultz types, rather than Brokaw types, would be working the phones, driving winos to the polls, etc.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”Look, be honest with yourself. You’ve seen the list of journalists that think Biden was an insulting boor the other night. If Tom Brokaw thinks he was an ass, then I’m fairly certain a lot of others think so too. Or do you think Tom Brokaw is on our side now?”

Biden was an ass. I never said different. What I said was that it was his job to attack R+R and he did. He was not going for popularity points. Ryan on the other hand kept smiling and playing nice guy. In fact SNL did a pretty funny skit on it.

I saw Frank Luntz today on a Sunday show say that he did a focus group on the debate and they said that they thought Biden won on points, but they didn't like his behavior. Luntz concludes “They told me that Biden didn't change any of their minds”

Did Tom Brokaw say that he will vote for Romney now? Of course not. That was my point.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”It’s also possible that Biden’s “performance” makes Obama look weak compared to Biden, by leftist standards... so far, anyway. And with the exception of LBJ, voters don’t seem to vote for VPs.
Wonder if they are prepping Romney for the possibility that Obama will channel Biden in the next debate (talking over Romney, acting like an AH crackhead, etc., since O does need to change something).”

It all depends on how the next two debates go. Everyone loves a winner.

Obama cant act like Biden did in that debate. That would be the kiss of death for him. Before that debate I posted about 6 times here that Biden would play the mad dog, That was easy because it made perfect sense for him to do that as VP. Obama cant do that.

Romney needs to be prepared for Obama making the case that he (Romney) is not being honest with his arguments. That is the only place I can see Obama has to go from here and is what his Dem voters are demanding.

These debates are much better show than the 2008 O-M ones were. That was a disaster. The next one should be a doozy.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”Look, be honest with yourself.”

Be careful there.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

I saw Frank Luntz today on a Sunday show say that he did a focus group on the debate and they said that they thought Biden won on points, but they didn't like his behavior.

Bear in mind that the Luntz group was composed overwhelmingly (90%) of Obama 2008 voters. I didn't think either won on substance.

"They told me that Biden didn't change any of their minds" Did Tom Brokaw say that he will vote for Romney now? Of course not. That was my point.

I agree that the VP debate (as expected) does not matter much. If something like that happened during an Obama-Romney debate, that might be a horse of a different color, maybe like Gore appearing to encroach on GWB's territory during one of their debates. But I think even that was not a game changer.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”I saw Frank Luntz today on a Sunday show say that he did a focus group on the debate and they said that they thought Biden won on points, but they didn't like his behavior......
Bear in mind that the Luntz group was composed overwhelmingly (90%) of Obama 2008 voters. I didn't think either won on substance. “

He probably figures that they are the ones Romney needs to either vote R or not vote, considering how 2008 went. Focus grouping those who voted for McCain wouldnt be that useful except as a campaign tool, ref Rush theory on polls .

Ryan being forced to say that congress will figure out how to make sure Romney's tax cut plan doesnt increase deficits is a fat juicy target for Dems, which is why they use it so much .
What if R+R were asked if they would sign a tax rate cut bill that the CBO scores as creating deficits? Or if they were asked if they would reverse the automatic defense cuts if it was not paid for with tax increases or other spending cuts? Those would be tough ones.

Alternatively the attacks in Libya and their coverup are a huge target for R+R to use against Obama, it nullifies the benefit they got from killing Bin Laden. It looks like this one could be the gift that keeps on giving if Romney uses it properly.

[DoughtyOne]

Well they may, but I think they’re in much more trouble than we are led to believe.

[DoughtyOne]

RE :”Look, be honest with yourself. You’ve seen the list of journalists that think Biden was an insulting boor the other night. If Tom Brokaw thinks he was an ass, then I’m fairly certain a lot of others think so too. Or do you think Tom Brokaw is on our side now?”

Biden was an ass. I never said different. What I said was that it was his job to attack R+R and he did. He was not going for popularity points. Ryan on the other hand kept smiling and playing nice guy. In fact SNL did a pretty funny skit on it.

Yes he was, and I realize you didn't say different.  I know what his job was, but I don't believe we agree on the impact.  I do agree that die hard Democrats are going to give him slack over it.  I do not think Independents will.  I particularly don't think Independent women will.  If you were a person still trying to make up your mind, Biden offended you.

I saw the Biden/Ryan debate skit on SNL.  Some of it was pointedly against Biden.  There were some ribbing of Ryan in there too.  I came away mostly neutral on it.  There was so much fertile ground there, and I think they missed a number of opportunities. 

I saw Frank Luntz today on a Sunday show say that he did a focus group on the debate and they said that they thought Biden won on points, but they didn't like his behavior. Luntz concludes “They told me that Biden didn't change any of their minds”

No disrespect to you intended on this count, but Luntz is hardly the guy I would use to make an unbiased point concerning a debate.  Remember when Cain won that debate and his focus group was close to unanimous with that mindset?  Luntz was speachless, dismissed them, and cut back to the anchors.  When they came back to him, he had changed the point and never gave Cain his due.  If someone did try to address their view of a Cain win, he wouldn't let them talk.  He interrupted them and put them down because he didn't see any reason why they should think Cain won.

The focus group they had this time was supposed to be unbiased, but there were clear evidences of bias as soon as the focus group members began to explain their views.  A number of staunch Obama supporters spoke up.  These folks were die-hard Obama supporters.  There was no hint of neutrality.  A neutral person says something like, well I didn't care for Biden's actions, but I still think he won the debate overall.  No, their responses went way beyond this.  So I'm having to dismiss this group based on the failure of the premise they were neutral going in.  Luntz needs to be replaced IMO.

Did Tom Brokaw say that he will vote for Romney now? Of course not. That was my point.

And it's a reasoned point to make.  The reality is, that when ten to twenty fairly well known Leftist talking heads describe Biden's actions for what they were candidly, those watching take away the belief that their views leaning in the same direction were not off base.  Brokaw and the others reinforced the opinion a lot of people had.  That's not going to break Obama's way when we're talking about Independents or folks who were already having grave doubts about supporting Obama/Biden.

That's not a win for Biden.  It's not a win for the team.  Independents and women got an eye full.  Too bad for Obama/Biden.

I think there's a real possibility that the Obama/Biden/Press team realized that Biden's actions had cost them.  It's my take that group of talking heads were involved in a mop-up action, seeking to mitigate the damage.  They were tasked with agreeing publicly that Biden really screwed up, but at the same time saying it wouldn't affect their vote.  That's the take-away they wanted.  The take-away for non-diehards, was that Biden was boorish, and the team isn't worthy of support.

Agree or not, that's my take-away.

[DoughtyOne]

I agree with your take here. If I were Romney, I’d mention a number of times how convenient it is to talk about his supposed lies, than gas at 2.5 times the cost, tens of millions of citizens out of work, and four patriots that died because they didn’t have adequate security forces.

“Mr. President, the three o’clock in the morning call came, and you were missing in action. Of course that’s no different than you had been for the previous six months or so. Now do you understand why you don’t skip over half your national security briefings?

The more Romney wraps this guy in his own failings, the better he looks. I’d just about ignore charges to simply recite Obama’s record a to z.

[DoughtyOne]

Or what?

[DoughtyOne]

We’re handing out nearly a trillion dollars per year in welfare payments. We’re handing out more in unemployment benefits. These massive deficit builders accomplish little for the future of our nation.

Tax cuts do spur job creation, and that does a great deal for our future. It reduces welfare and jobless outlays. In Reagan’s day, it doubled government receipts during his presidency. The down side? The Democrats tripled spending. And no, the military buildup after Carter decimated it wasn’t the whole cause.

Dump Obamacare. Transmit the idea to potential employers that you aren’t going to destroy them. Reduce welfare payments with the promise it will be 25% of what it is today, in three years. Then proceed to put that into action.

Welfare was impacted under Clinton. People didn’t go hungry. They went out and got jobs.

We should be very careful about true jobs figures though, because under Clinton you could be working very few hours under welfare to work, and still be counted as being employed.

[DoughtyOne]

Ah, so that was the demographic. No wonder.

Why would Luntz go there? It completely defeated any possible positive feedback for Ryan.

Eee gads, that couldn’t have been focused better for the Democrats.