DNC Open Thread

Because the RNC had its thread and I am fighting for thread equality...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I watched the last 3 speeches tonight

(#288750)

Deval Patrick, Castro, and Michelle Obama.

 

All three were better than any RNC speech I saw.

 

There's just no competition in the head-to-head matchups -- Castro vs. Christie and Michelle Obama vs. Ann Romney. 

Agree, and Ann did a fine job

(#288760)

Clearing Christie was a lower bar, but Ann's portrayal of Mitt was nice. Michelle did an outstanding job both describing the personal side of Barack, and defending/promoting Dem policy. 

 

Castro had some good moments (his delivery of the "borrow money from your parents" line was right on) and it's good to see Dems have a strong up-and-coming core. I really liked Patrick's speech, and he's been helpful in general in talking about Romney's record in MA. 

 

One thing that stood out to me in general was that the Dems really are all-in on gay marriage, it was brought up repeatedly. I suppose it's somewhat moving with the polls but personally I was very happy to see the party embrace it. 

Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson

Deval Patrick's was very strong

(#288763)

It's the first D one I watched and was surprised that it seemed significantly better than all of the 8 or so GOP speeches I had viewed.

 

Romney had a tougher job than many at the DNC tho. The GOP conventioners didn't want to hear him attempt to ooze sympathy for the formerly $22.50 an hr. worker who was now getting a second $9 an hr job, etc.

 

They cheered much louder when he made fun of global warming and got hawkish with Russia. But I doubt that stuff has much appeal to independents.

 

D conventioners are probably more in synch with the populist appeal that DNC speakers are more likely to make.

 

Also, I wonder if you'll see more of a bounce from the D convention, given that Obama is polling so much better among registered voters than likely voters.

 

Perhaps the Ds have more opportunity for a bump b/c they have a sympathetic pool of RVs who aren't LVs they could re-engage, whereas the GOP had no such pool.

Good point on RV vs LV -nt-

(#288784)

.

Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson

I thought it was a real brainstorm too

(#288821)

.

Meh

(#288752)
stinerman's picture

I was pissed because it was on 4 of the 11 channels I get with my antenna.  I don't care for conventions.

The Constitution does not vest in Congress the authority to protect society from every bad act that might befall it. -- Clarence Thomas

+1.

(#288944)
Bernard Guerrero's picture

Or minus one for conventions, as the case may be.  I didn't like pep rallies in HS, no reason to start now.

??? Did your pep rallies not get you out of class early?

(#288946)
brutusettu's picture

I say they're more like infomercials.

"I’m to believe that North Korea is so dangerously unhinged that they would attack without warning – yet so meek and easily cowed that they will sit quietly and not retaliate when we start bombing them."

Major Kong

Hey now

(#289182)
stinerman's picture

You're talking to the undisputed human bowling champion.  Pep rallies rock, specifically because they were for me and my team.

The Constitution does not vest in Congress the authority to protect society from every bad act that might befall it. -- Clarence Thomas

A dispirited Romney turned to a former Obama opponent

(#288753)

Surprises for me

(#288756)

Was all the defense of the health care bill, which Democrats have typically shied away from.

 

Also, a lot of uncompromising pro-choice support.

 

The parties could've looked blandly the same since Rs also spent a lot of time pretending to worry about unemployment, entitlements, poverty, etc., and Democrats might've re-iterated that and then just attacked their opponents. 

 

Instead they appear to have distinguished themselves. 

So much for moving to the center

(#288768)
Bird Dog's picture

Abortion-palooza (59% want it either illegal or legal under only a few circumstances).

Taking God out of the party platform (92% believe in God).

Gay marriage (only half support it).

 

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

What does it mean to take God out of the platform?

(#288769)

Was He previously identified as the creator of the Universe and now the Ds have declared war on His religious followers? Sounds like some weird right wing nonsense to me. 

 

There was plenty of religion talk at the DNC last night.

 

Moreso, probably than Romney, who I recall had some line trying to downplay his religious belief, by emphasizing how when growing up his religion wasn't so important b/c he was part of a circle that bonded more over sports.

 

In general, it seemed like Ds were going more social liberal, but basically embracing economic centrism. Warren's speech should be interesting in that regard.

i'm guessing that by "taking God out of the platform"

(#288772)
Jay C's picture

(and like you, I'm unsure as to what he means by this, exactly) BD seems to be taking umbrage at the Dems' not making the assumption that the Almighty is a fervent supporter of their partisan agenda.

 

And this is a BAD thing?

 

ETA: a glance at the DNC website notes that their caucuses include a "Faith Group", and each convention day starts with a prayer meeting; presumable open to all. Not to mention that the daily sessions are opened and closed with a "Benediction" or "Invocation" by various clergyfolks: scarcely a Festival Of Atheism.....

It was in prior platforms, now it's out

(#288773)
Bird Dog's picture

Also out is this:

Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.

 

This was at the request of the Obama WH, so this isn't just meaningless platform gobbledygook. So much for moving to the center.

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

You're saying God used to be in several places in the D platform

(#288776)

but now every instance has purposely been removed?

 

In order to what? Not ostracize non-believers?

 

This sounds like some fake right wing BS to me.

 

Do you have a cite or something? 

A cite? PAUL RYAN sez so....!

(#288779)
Jay C's picture

Here ya go: "God 'purged' from Dem platform" cite? Paul Ryan said so on Fox News, cited by Politico.

 

So of course, it must be 129.3% accurate, 'cuz we all KNOW Rep. Ryan has such a vast respect for factuality.....

(/snark)

Atheists are saying Amen! to...

(#288796)
Bird Dog's picture

...God being taken out of the party platform.

"It comes as a pleasant surprise," he added. "It is something that we have been pushing for and is certainly a positive step. But it is only one step and I would like to see action more than words."

But they do give nice lip service to faith-based groups.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

Hezbollah

(#288803)
HankP's picture

means "party of God". I'm willing to concede that title to the GOP.

I blame it all on the Internet

Looks like they took God out of the Constitution too. -nt-

(#288804)

.

M Aurelius was probably right.

Not the Ohio Constitution though

(#288824)
brutusettu's picture

Anyway, not wanting to give exclusive support and a proper name of particular deity (upper case "G" God), that's the same as hating teh Almighty.

"I’m to believe that North Korea is so dangerously unhinged that they would attack without warning – yet so meek and easily cowed that they will sit quietly and not retaliate when we start bombing them."

Major Kong

It is a pleasant surprise

(#288870)
stinerman's picture

The sooner we as a species get rid of the belief in magic, the better.

The Constitution does not vest in Congress the authority to protect society from every bad act that might befall it. -- Clarence Thomas

I approve 100%

(#288791)
HankP's picture

it's probably related to this, and I say good on Obama for reminding them who the dog is and who the tail is, unlike the Republicans.

I blame it all on the Internet

The DNC says nothing about the need for Israel to change.

(#289047)

The DNC says nothing whatsoever, about the need for the Israeli Government to change its policies in West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem and pull her troops and rightwing Israeli Jewish settlers out of those territories, and allowing the Palestinians to create their own independent, sovereign nation-state alongside Israel, and not in place of Israel the way lots of people want.  

 

Pulling back from West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, dismantling the settlements or handing them over to the Palestinians to do what they want with, and allowing a Palestinian nation-state to emerge alongside Israel is crucial to Israel's survival.  The DNC refuses to realize that, and to point that out.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Why is why...

(#289092)
Bird Dog's picture

...the taking out of that language is relevant as it reflects a change in policy. It's relevant because the two parties diverged on a policy that had been highly similar. The "Israel to change" business is couched in the aspiration of a "just and lasting Israel-Palestinian accord". This was a debacle, and you know it was a debacle because of the last-minute amendments that were passed in botched, embarrassing fashion.

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

It was base night sorta with prime time moderation...

(#288774)

First off abortion polling varies considerably on how you ask the question.
Second off .... The GOD issues is being pushed by Brietbart ? Glen Reynolds changed his link this moring. Going to drudge who posted this link...
From the CBN

Gives it more context but it seems it splitting hairs and I'm sorry designed to hide it from the lazy... Ignore the man behind the curtain and look over here...
Demographically Gay marriage is the future and its 50% will grow every day for the next thirty plus years..

 

The first ladies speech was amazing... Patrick was a burner to the base.... Castro speech was perfect in its own way to many people in the America. I also heard that but have not seen former Ohio governor Stickland yet, some said it was over the top... but I also heard  that it was seen as much more  positive  from a blue collar fifties male point of view....

 

The other thing was monday was very diverse and representative of most of the Base of the Democratic party.... The speeches hit on many voting groups.... there was someone for almost anyone in the center left coalition. The Eisenhower Republicans point of view is Charlie Crist  along with the conservative dems pov with Clinton.. You are going to get a youth vote push again tonight with single and young women targeted.... 

Ask courageous questions. Do not be satisfied with superficial answers. Be open to wonder and at the same time subject all claims to knowledge, without exception, to intense skeptical scrutiny. Be aware of human fallibility. Cherish your species and yo

Taking God out of the platform? Did you listen to the speeches?

(#288777)

I heard about 20 variations on "God bless America" last night, how about you?

M Aurelius was probably right.

The keynote's central and repeating anecdote

(#288778)

was how his mother said to him every school day, and he now says to his daughter, "May God bless you"

The Platform Includes a Faith Plank

(#288780)

It's on page 48.

 

But the actual name of the Lord Himself?

 

Not included in the document:

The 2008 Democratic Party platform made a single reference to God, referring to the "God-given potential" of working people.

I'd call this gambit a Hail Mary.

Not good enough

(#288781)

"We honor the central place of faith in our lives. Like our Founders, we believe that our nation,our communities, and our lives are made vastly stronger and richer by faith and the countlessacts of justice and mercy it inspires. We believe that change comes not from the top-down, butfrom the bottom-up, and that few are closer to the people than our churches, synagogues,temples, and mosques. To face today’s challenges–from saving our planet to ending poverty—we need all hands on deck. Faith-based groups are not a replacement for government or secular non-profit programs; rather, they are yet another sector working to meet the challengesof the 21st century. We will empower grassroots faith-based and community groups to helpmeet challenges like poverty, ex-offender reentry, and illiteracy. At the same time, we can ensure that these partnerships do not endanger First Amendment protections – because there is no conflict between supporting faith-based institutions and respecting our Constitution."

 

Faith in that wishy washy sense could encompass even religions that don't recognize the Judeo-Christian-Muslim God, like Hindus or Sikhs.

 

That kind of radical tolerance and inclusiveness is uncalled for.

Where does it mention god

(#288782)

in the US constitution?

"Something I think most liberals don't understand is exactly how stupid many conservative leaders are." - Matt Yglesias

Might want to update

(#288783)

your gay marriage link. If your contention is that the Dems are now further away from the center than the Republicans are on social issues, then why are the Dems playing up these issues, while the Republicans are madly trying to downplay them? (Mittzie: "What can lil' ol' Prezdents do bout abortion anyway?") It's not because both sides are incompetent, it's because both sides can read a poll.

"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs

Ha. They took God out of the platform

(#288790)
HankP's picture

just like the Constitution did.

I blame it all on the Internet

God should be out of the platform...

(#288818)

...because God should be out of government.

 

Even the founders got that.

 

They should have stuck to their guns, shame on them for caving. It was a golden opportunity to point out the hypocrisy of the Tea Partiers and their supposed respect for the founders.

I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz: Liar

(#288771)
Bird Dog's picture

First, what she said.

 

"We know, and I’ve heard no less than Ambassador Michael Oren say this, that what the Republicans are doing is dangerous for Israel.”

Oren categorically denies saying this. And then, on FoxNews, DWS lied, accusing Philip Klein of a "deliberately misquote".

"I didn't say he said that."

Part of me wants to say, "keep her on, let her make a fool of herself and her party". Another part wants her out. Her schtick is bad for her party and bad for America. As Mark Twain said: Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. DWS is spinning so hard she can't find a clue let alone a fact. Can somebody please fire her?

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

Nope

(#288833)

In fact, DWS did not say that the ambassador said that Republican policies were a danger to Israel.

 

What she said was that the ambassador has said that Republican politics depicting division are dangerous to Israel.

 

It's crystal clear from both videos.

I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.

What's crystal clear is that...

(#288840)
Bird Dog's picture

...DWS lied. She said what she said on the audio, and then she denied she said it.

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

No

(#288882)

She said nothing on the radio about republican policies.

I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.

Yes

(#288886)
Bird Dog's picture

DWS: "We know, and I’ve heard no less than Ambassador Michael Oren say this, that what the Republicans are doing is dangerous for Israel.

Oren denied ever saying that to DWS.

When confronted about it on Fox News, DWS: "I didn't say he said that."

She lied about what Oren told her, and she lied about using Oren's name in making her assertion.

EDIT: Liar, liar, pants on fire.

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

One DNC bummer announced

(#288786)
Jay C's picture

Proving, maybe, that the weather does not play political favorites when it comes to disrupting mere mortals' plans: the DNC has canceled their stadium rally for Thursday night and is moving it (not-moving-it?) back into the TWC Arena.

We love the Clinton era! Woo hoo!

(#288801)
Bird Dog's picture

Except for his tax rates.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

The mystery to J-Lo's booty? Solved!

(#288805)
Bird Dog's picture

Fix-a-Flat.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

Didn't sound like two-thirds to me

(#288809)
Bird Dog's picture

Re the vote on the two amendments.

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

No It Didn't

(#288810)

WTF, Democrats? Terrific way to lose the initiative and make everyone forget the terrific first night.

 

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Embarrassed by Republicans, Democrats amended their convention platform Wednesday to add a mention of God and declare that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
Many in the audience booed after the convention chairman, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, ruled that the amendments had been approved despite the fact that a large group of delegates objected. He called for a vote three times before ruling.

 

It's been less than 24 hours since Mr Patrick exhorted you to grow some backbone, and now you cave to a silly little GOP God and Israel stunt like this?

 

That collapse deserved more chaos -- and many more NOs than the clear majority of NOs voiced in the clip.

Call it...

(#288812)
Bird Dog's picture

...the No, We Really Do Like God and Israel Amendment. Except that two-thirds really do not.

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

The Two-Thirds

(#288814)

who "really do not" like God and Israel?

 

That's a pretty uncharitable characterization.

 

I'd go with the two-thirds who don't like party elites changing the platform because of some dumb GOP insults.

It's not uncharitable, it's a smear

(#288817)
HankP's picture

but just wait until late October, the screams will be deafening.

I blame it all on the Internet

Take the comment above, in context with (#288768)

(#288822)
brutusettu's picture

Maybe BD thinks all the "God" believers at the DNC don't really like this "God."

"I’m to believe that North Korea is so dangerously unhinged that they would attack without warning – yet so meek and easily cowed that they will sit quietly and not retaliate when we start bombing them."

Major Kong

Maybe uncharitable, maybe not

(#288842)
Bird Dog's picture

You and I don't know. What we do know is that the voice vote did not match the determination by the LA mayor. They basically tried to shove the issue under a rug, and they botched it. Badly. I'm sure this did not escape the attention of Jews in in Israel and elsewhere.

 

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

Not To Mention Certain Big Donors At Home

(#288844)
M Scott Eiland's picture

Anyone who would have otherwise withheld donations who was convinced by that pathetic little display should mail their testicles in along with the checks--they obviously have no use for them.

Surprising to see Mayor V. so incompetent at a display of corruption--did he think that the fraud would be somehow less obvious and despicable if he had two false starts at it first?

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Why should ANY political party

(#288863)

in the USA care what Jews in Israel think about their political platform? It's a foreign country. Would any party care what scientologists in Ireland think? Or rosicrucians in Malta? I have no care for jews in israel than i do for christians in uruguay. Why the hell should any of us care about them specifically, unless you were a blood relation or a personal friend?

 

And the existence or non existence of "god" (whatever the hell you figure that to be) has no place in a political platform, unless you're grandstanding for an audience who have really poor judgment. Wouldn't an almighty creator have little concern about the wording of a politicians' document? And wouldn't he simply smite the nonbelievers who excluded him? I've yet to be smited.

 

And this probably marks the 700th time I've heard the implied notion that US jews might make some move to the GOP. I really don't get what repeating the same nonsense over and over accomplishes, but to each his own.

 

Also and by the way, I haven't watched any of either conventions. I'm continuing my 41 year long streak. Well, I did watch some of clint eastwood admonishing a chair after reading about it online. 

Well, there is that Holocaust thing

(#288868)
Bird Dog's picture

And there were Americans and Jews and such who were serious when they said "never again". And there is a UN partition agreement that allowed the creation of a Jewish state, which we supported, for both Israel and the Arabs. And there is the fact that Israel is a free Democratic nation in the Middle East. And there is the fact that Israel has been a loyal US ally since the country's inception. And there is the fact that we brokered a peace accord with Israel and Egypt, and we financially support both nations to this day. And there is the fact that the territory claimed by Israel is but a fraction of the area taken by the Arab-controlled Middle East. And there is the fact that the US is loyal to its allies, or at least we should be.

 

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

They have challenges

(#288869)
HankP's picture

but they're not our challenges. They're the first to say that they'll do what they think is best for their country no matter what anybody else thinks. The US should have that same attitude.

I blame it all on the Internet

Define loyal ally, please?

(#288907)

What has Israel ever done for the US?

 

Admittedly it's not their fault that having them deploy troops on our behalf in the Middle East would be counterproductive, so we never asked. But the fact remains that their "loyalty" has never been tested.

 

Not that there is any such thing as loyalty between nations. I don't expect Israel to be loyal and I wouldn't punish them for not being loyal. But neither am I willing to credit them for something they have not had a chance to show.

 

The Holocaust has nothing to do with Jerusalem or the Palestinians. It's relevant when dealing with Iran, obviously, but Israel has been devaluing the Holocaust by using it as an excuse to maintain a Palestinian ghetto. It is precisely because the legacy of the Holocaust is so serious that Israel should remind us of it sparingly, rather than milk it for excuses to maintain an unsustainable occupation policy.

I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.

Mexico and Canada are also loyal allies,

(#288917)
Bird Dog's picture

and I haven't seen them have to go through loyalty tests. We do have common interests with Mexico, Canada and Israel, enough so that they're allies with us.

If you're suggesting that Israel has overplayed the Holocaust card, I'm not going to argue.

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

No Maybes About It

(#288885)

When "you and I don't know", we don't know. We can choose to ascribe the worst motives, or the best.

 

We learn more when we opt for the best.

 

 

The Screeching Sound You Heard. . .

(#288811)
M Scott Eiland's picture

. . .was the Hamas enabling "progressives" doing a 180 and scurrying back under their rocks, trailing brown and yellow as they departed.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

At least Villaraigosa

(#288819)

Looks embarassed about it. When the Reps changed the rules to snuff out the grass roots candidates, they didn't even blink at the revolt on the floor.

"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs

Uh oh

(#288823)

Warren is kind of a boring primary school teacher.

 

The good news is that maybe it's not her populist economic message that's the problem, maybe she's just not a very talented/charismatic politician. 

Warren got 'em standing though....

(#288828)
Jay C's picture

She's not the most charismatic, true: but the speech was as hard-hitting as they could want.

 

The Big Dawg seems to have got the house really sparked, though.....

Yeah, her delivery was awfully tentative

(#288831)

given the subject matter...don't know if she wrote the speech or not, but it was written for a firebreather and she isn't one.

M Aurelius was probably right.

It Was Written To Rev The Crowd Up. . .

(#288834)
M Scott Eiland's picture

. . .and to give her exposure to the home folks in MA. For that, they were willing to sacrifice what might have been a more charismatic performance with less cliched material.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Sounds right

(#288838)

.

So, mixed purposes. I'd say it's better to match the speech

(#288846)

to the speaker. When the performer can't rise to the material, neither comes out well. 

 

Then, what's supposed to be a high energy crowd pleaser becomes an abomination...

M Aurelius was probably right.

Wow, I disagree

(#288830)

I think she's a considerable talent. There aren't many pols that project passion and sincerity as well as she does.

"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs

I am a huge fan of Warren's...

(#288852)

...and I think she would be a tremendous and unique presence in the Senate as a legislator.  But you are absolutely correct-- she is not a talented politician, and her opposition Scott Brown is a talented politician, and she therefore may not get the chance.  It would be a shame if the Democrats lost the Senate because we could not take back Ted freaking Kennedy's seat :-[

 

I don't think that it hurts Obama, though, because this night was all about Clinton anyway.

Please, Bill, lose the Fleetwood Mac nt

(#288825)
HankP's picture

.

I blame it all on the Internet

When They Said That Bubba Refused To Be Vetted. . .

(#288826)
M Scott Eiland's picture

. . .I didn't think they meant the introductory video as well.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

He's still got it

(#288829)
HankP's picture

best pure politician of my lifetime. The guy can give a speech like nobody else, and apparently ad-libbed a bunch of it.

I blame it all on the Internet

He's a living rebuttal

(#288832)

To the idea that people don't care about public policy. I remember every State of the Union, the pundits would tut-tut about him being overly long and boring, then the overnight polls would come in with huge spikes in support for him. He manages to both be folksy and substantive.

"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs

The model for liberal speech making.

(#288845)

the heir to FDR as far as speech.  He uses simple words and is easy to understand, but his speeches not only convey information but have a logical progression to them that makes the whole greater than the parts. 

 

He may be a little shaky now, but he has still got it!  Another one knocked out of the park!  Obama has a high bar to clear tomorrow after the precedent set by his wife and his Democratic predecessor. 

 

Exciting time to be a Democrat... I want to see some new polls! 

So much for the rumors

(#288835)
Jay C's picture

that a lot of rightie "pundits" were trying to peddle before tonight - that Bill was going to backstab or left-hand Obama out of some supposed pique/leftover resentment over 2008....

Heh.

 

Long-winded (hey, it's Bill Freakin' Clinton, whaddya expect?), but a real masterstroke, IMO.  Mainly because I'm not sure there's much of a viable rejoinder by R&R.

 

 

Clinton wasn't at his very best

(#288837)

Nevertheless, his speech contained more breadth and depth than all the Republican speeches I saw combined:

 

  • he rebutted every major argument the Republicans leveled against Obama
  • gave a synopsis of the economy during Obama's presidency
  • highlighted the major benefits of the health care law
  • characterized in some detail the central aspects of Romney and Ryan's approaches to medicare and taxes
  • auto industry, etc.

 

Despite covering all this ground, Clinton didn't bore, he drew the audience in close, and he made you feel like there's a plan in place to benefit the majority, some of whose rewards are already being reaped, and whose true potential is right around the corner.

This was Clinton the wonk more than Clinton the orator,

(#288841)

but no matter. It was fairly devastating. "We will not let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers," well now that at least is the truth!

M Aurelius was probably right.

I do not like how the media works...

(#288848)

...but the media works in the Democrats' favor here.  The media way too often reports what "important" people say rather than reporting facts.  When Bill Clinton, "important" person, states these facts that are favorable to Democrats, and the media reports what Bill Clinton said, the favorable facts get reported.  The wonky speech, particularly the way that it countered the Ryan speech, was exactly the way to go here.

 

 

Oh Bubba

(#288839)

Nobody like him. He made the case -- the Medicaid stuff is, as Frum tweeted, the H bomb in it -- and he both highlighted and eviscerated every Republican lie from last week. So two nights in.  Anybody wanna bet that the Obama bounce won't be bigger than Romney's?

“Two clichés make us laugh but a hundred clichés move us, because we sense dimly that the clichés are talking among themselves, celebrating a reunion." - Umberto Eco

I don't think it will show up as a bounce

(#288853)
HankP's picture

I think the real goal is to move registered voters to likely voters.

I blame it all on the Internet

Wouldn't that be a bounce?

(#288855)

One of us doesn't understand how polls work and it may well be me!

It might be

(#288861)
HankP's picture

but polls use all kinds of different methodologies with RV and LV, so it might not be obvious without a bunch of drilling down or filtering. I'm not saying it wouldn't show up at all, but it may not show up as a headline number.

I blame it all on the Internet

It could turn some undecideds into decideds, no?

(#288857)

If Obama lives up to what we have seen the past two nights, I think we will see a bounce in the polls.  There are lots of people who are not overly political but who want to be associated with winners.  The Democrats look like winners after these last two nights.  That's the stuff bounces are made of. 

 

Until proven otherwise, I refuse to accept that something has changed and convention bounces do not happen.  History says that conventions do usually produce poll bounces, and I would expect that a compelling convention would be even more likely to produce a bounce.

 

I agree that it could also show up in November in better Democratic turnout than the polls predict.

I didn't know the medicaid details re; nursing homes

(#288856)

I like, learned stuff during that speech. 

OK, I'm going to say this

(#288843)
Bird Dog's picture

I hardly watched any speeches at Tampa, and the only speech I saw at the DNC was Clinton's (mostly). What can I say, Clinton gave a helluva speech. He is still the best politician the Dems have.

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

Watch Michelle's. -nt-

(#288847)

.

M Aurelius was probably right.

He's probably the best politician the country has, period.

(#288858)

At least I can't think of anyone else who can do what Clinton just did.

Yeah. I don't think anyone else is even close.

(#288867)
aireachail's picture

This one's going to be dissected, analyzed, and envied for years to come.

But first it's going to be captured by cartoons

(#288887)

Re: analysis and dissection

(#288888)

Here's some insight into Clinton's extemporaneous nature. Fascinating and impressive.

You should have seen Rubio's

(#288859)
HankP's picture

he was very good, probably the best of anyone at Tampa.

I blame it all on the Internet

Easily the best GOP speech I saw

(#288860)

and exciting partly b/c you know he's got the future in him.

Even in Retirement

(#288849)

even on a vegan diet, Bill Clinton is still kicking the GOP up and down the street.

"There wasn't any discord"

(#288850)
Bird Dog's picture

Another DWS lie (link). Please. Can somebody fire her?

 

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

Hey

(#288854)
M Scott Eiland's picture

Don't mess with the source of ten thousand smashmouth YouTube videos. Someone that robotic and clueless is a true gift to her opponents.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Really, at this rate she should switch to the GOP nt

(#288865)
HankP's picture

.

I blame it all on the Internet

A few lies of some substance and we'll have a game.

(#288874)
brutusettu's picture

or

 

Debbie makes contact with the ball.

Ryan knocks a few dingers into the upper deck.

 

 

Give 'em both a ribbon, *both sides* made contact with the ball.

"I’m to believe that North Korea is so dangerously unhinged that they would attack without warning – yet so meek and easily cowed that they will sit quietly and not retaliate when we start bombing them."

Major Kong

/thread -nt-

(#288878)

.

M Aurelius was probably right.

The Big Dog Speaks

(#288880)

On Republicans in Tampa...

They did it well. It looked good, it sounded good. They convinced me they all loved their children, their families… They convinced me they were honorable people who believed what they said and they’re going to keep every commitment they’ve made. We just got to make sure the American people know what those commitments are — (cheers, applause) — because in order to look like an acceptable, reasonable, moderate alternative to President Obama, they just didn’t say very much about the ideas they’ve offered over the last two years.

On Mediscare...

Now, when Congressman Ryan looked into that TV camera and attacked President Obama’s Medicare savings as, quote, the biggest, coldest power play, I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry — (laughter) — because that $716 billion is exactly, to the dollar, the same amount of Medicare savings that he has in his own budget. (Cheers, applause.) You got to get one thing — it takes some brass to attack a guy for doing what you did.

On Obamacare repeal...

So if he’s elected, and if he does what he promised to do, Medicare will now go broke in 2016. (Boos.) Think about that. That means, after all, we won’t have to wait until their voucher program kicks in 2023 — (laughter) — to see the end of Medicare as we know it. (Applause.) They’re going to do it to us sooner than we thought.

On Romney's proposal for Medicaid block grants...

Lot of folks don’t know it, but nearly two-thirds of Medicaid is spent on nursing home care for Medicare seniors — (applause) — who are eligible for Medicaid.

On Workfare...

This is personal to me. We moved millions of people off welfare. It was one of the reasons that in the eight years I was president, we had a hundred times as many people move out of poverty into the middle class than happened under the previous 12 years, a hundred times as many. (Cheers, applause.) It’s a big deal.

 

But I am telling you the claim that President Obama weakened welfare reform’s work requirement is just not true. (Applause.) But they keep on running the ads claiming it. You want to know why? Their campaign pollster said, we are not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers. (Jeers, applause.) Now, finally I can say, that is true. (Laughter, cheers, applause.) I — (chuckles) — I couldn’t have said it better myself. (Laughter.)

On Romney's debt-reduction plan...

Now, I think this plan is way better than Governor Romney’s plan. First, the Romney plan failed the first test of fiscal responsibility. The numbers just don’t add up. (Laughter, applause.)

 

I mean, consider this. What would you do if you had this problem? Somebody says, oh, we’ve got a big debt problem. We’ve got to reduce the debt. So what’s the first thing you say we’re going to do? Well, to reduce the debt, we’re going to have another $5 trillion in tax cuts heavily weighted to upper-income people. So we’ll make the debt hole bigger before we start to get out of it.

 

Now, when you say, what are you going to do about this $5 trillion you just added on? They say, oh, we’ll make it up by eliminating loopholes in the tax code.

 

So then you ask, well, which loopholes, and how much?

 

You know what they say? See me about that after the election. (Laughter.) I’m not making it up. That’s their position. See me about that after the election.

 

Now, people ask me all the time how we got four surplus budgets in a row. What new ideas did we bring to Washington? I always give a one-word answer: Arithmetic. (Sustained cheers, applause.)

M Aurelius was probably right.

Shorter Bill Clinton

(#288894)
HankP's picture

Ha, got ya - there is no such thing as a shorter Bill Clinton.

I blame it all on the Internet

Is it smart for Romney to have bailed on MI and PA

(#288889)

the very next morning after all this press on how Clinton's speech the previous evening was a knockout punch to the GOP?

 

It seems to kind of feed into the narrative that the D convention is nailing their hides to the barn door.

 

MI is Romney's home state.

 

Maybe they could've waited until the weekend?

Michelle Obama and Bill CLinton pre-convention approval ratings

(#288890)

Art Modell Dies

(#288892)
M Scott Eiland's picture

I think we can all be grateful that Twitter didn't exist when Walter O'Malley died--the sheer number of invocations of a flaming afterlife sent into the ether from Brooklyn would have certainly summoned the apocalypse.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Instead of balloons at the convention tonight

(#288893)

Someone suggested dropping thousands of copies of pages of Obama's tax returns from the convention ceiling.

 

Sounds like a good idea to me.

 

 

I can't wait for the first debate

(#288897)
HankP's picture

I blame it all on the Internet

That is one of...

(#288900)
Bird Dog's picture

...the better pictures of Biden.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

I guess you missed the RNC

(#288901)
HankP's picture

which is a good thing.

I blame it all on the Internet

I guess you missed seeing...

(#288902)
Bird Dog's picture

... Biden in action for the last 20 years.

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

He does lie a lot less than Ryan

(#288903)
HankP's picture

which I suppose could be considered a liability from the Republican point of view.

I blame it all on the Internet

I dunno, those hair plugs are an act of deep intellectual

(#288913)

dishonesty. 

Just vanity, nothing deep about it nt

(#288914)
HankP's picture

.

I blame it all on the Internet

I don't know if you're an Onion fan

(#288905)
stinerman's picture

But the lampooning they do of Biden is something anyone can enjoy, regardless of their politics.

 

1

2

3

The Constitution does not vest in Congress the authority to protect society from every bad act that might befall it. -- Clarence Thomas

I liked the Hennessy ad

(#288910)
HankP's picture

too bad that Hennessy is awful, awful stuff.

I blame it all on the Internet

Being Joe Biden

(#288911)

A photo essay.

"Something I think most liberals don't understand is exactly how stupid many conservative leaders are." - Matt Yglesias

What does that remind me of ...

(#288912)
HankP's picture

"It must be very strange to be Vice President Biden. A man of extraordinary vision and brilliance approaching to genius, he can't get anyone to notice. He is like a great painter or musician who is ahead of his time, and who unveils one masterpiece after another to a reception that, when not bored, is hostile."

I blame it all on the Internet

Sheesh, get your combatants straight

(#288906)

The President will be debating the empty suit.

 

Joe Biden gets to debate the zombie eyed granny starver.

"Something I think most liberals don't understand is exactly how stupid many conservative leaders are." - Matt Yglesias

Romney's Convention Dent

(#288898)

No bounce for Romney. But we already knew that.

 

There was, however, a Dent.

In terms of electoral votes, he figures they lost a bit, then gained a bit, and ended up about 10 EV worse than they started:

See the chart.

 

We were told that Romney was keeping a low profile this week to warm up for the upcoming debates. Maybe instead it's a duck and cover strategy to prop up his poll numbers.

You catch John Kerry's barnburner?

(#288918)
Jay C's picture

Bill Clinton took a stiletto to Romney and Ryan last night: Big John seems to have decided that a nail-studded baseball bat was a subtler weapon to wield...

 

"Ask Osama if he's better off..."

"Rocky IV"

"blooper reel"

"had every position on Afghanistan"

"omission of 'the troops' from his acceptance"

 

Rough stuff, but it's nice to see Dems standing up - and proudly - for their foreign policy endeavors.

Good job by Obama tonight

(#288919)
HankP's picture

he was going for the undecideds, and I think he did a good job highlighting the differences between the Dem and GOP approaches, hitting really hard on the tax cuts for the rich angle.

I blame it all on the Internet

Serviceable

(#288921)

Not really good though. He's had four years to write this one. Clinton showed how it's done.

 

But he did what he needed to do, I think, and closed off a generally successful convention.

 

On to the debates...

I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.

And close the convention...

(#288922)
Jay C's picture

on a generally upbeat note.

 

That said, I'll agree that Clinton's was the better speech (a modern classic, IMO) -  though I noticed that the main theme in Obama's address was a sort of relentless (and very American) sense of can-do optimism. Something that I thought was (oddly) missing from the Republican Convention - and their campaign in general this year, AFAICT.

It's easier to attack than defend

(#288923)
HankP's picture

which actually shows the GOP really missed their opportunity.

 

I don't think a President can make the same kind of speech that a challenger can. He has to be more conciliatory towards all Americans and can't be a purely partisan attack machine. That's why Clinton's speech had more impact, he has no such limitations anymore.

I blame it all on the Internet

It's true he is more constrained.

(#288930)

But that's not a good reason for muddling through a number of ideas. You can't say climate change is not a hoax 30 seconds after going with "clean coal". I mean, really? Do they think that line will get him the West Virginia vote?

 

It did have some high points though. The anecdotes were often effective. It was effective when he said he was the president now. It sounded like "I'm the man now, bitches, I know what I am doing, and I've got the scar tissue to prove it!".

 

The "It's not about me" line sounded mildly defensive. I know what they tried to do there, but it didn't really work. It's hard to pull off. Aw-shucks Clinton could pull off a line like that and come off sincere, Obama, not so much.

 

And while I am here, I might as well point out that I was irritated by Biden using "folks" all the time. It's such an astroturfed word now, it's useless.

I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.

I'm pretty sure Biden doesn't listen to pollsters

(#288932)
HankP's picture

I don't think "folks" is a new term for him.

 

I don't think this was Obama'a best speech by any means. But I think if you're trying above all else to persuade the persuadables and get people off the fence he did a good job. He certainly drew a sharp contrast with Romney and the Republicans.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Against a party who explicitly state climate change is a hoax?

(#288933)
mmghosh's picture

A little unfair, no?  Certainly for a major politician (the major politician) to stand up and say clearly "climate change is not a hoax" is a very big statement.

 

In the UK, David Cameron has just appointed a climate change sceptic as Secretary of the Environment.  And this from the US's closest ally? 

 

And lets face it, clean coal is better than dirty coal (although not as good as no coal, I'll agree).  And the US has cut emissions, whether involuntarily by increasing gas use or no.  Building and insulating efficiencies, doubling car mileage are all good steps.  Granted, Mr Romney is also very likely to go down the gas route, and will probably remain committed to auto efficiency and building regulations, so the actual difference in US policy between the two will not affect the final emission values 4 years from now.

 

But I still think explicit endorsement of climate change by a President is a huge deal.  Its a lot more honest than we or our northern neighbours are, that's for sure.

The sad thing

(#288934)
HankP's picture

is that his statement is a political risk here in the US. The propaganda against the validity of AGW is unbelievable over here.

I blame it all on the Internet

That makes it even braver.

(#288935)
mmghosh's picture

It's odd though.  The 2 contestants in 2008 said fairly similar things about climate change.  IIRC, President Bush, in spite of his oil company connections endorsed the IPCC consensus.

 

In the midst of droughts, wildfires and Arctic melt why would you think being realistic about climate change would lose votes?  IIRC, polls show a majority in the US think of climate change as a threat.

"being realistic about climate change"

(#288945)
Jay C's picture

has the potential of losing American politicians votes, because it will make them targets of those interests that are willing to spend comparatively huge sums of money on buying the political influence necessary to make sure that promoting the "climate change is a hoax" viewpoint is a political winner.

 

They do so, IMO, because however much it costs them to bolster pseudoscience or anti-science, it's still seen as a lesser expense than actually having to DO something about AGW (emissions controls, say) by a large margin.

 

Also, Manish, I'm not sure you understand the depths of efforts that have been made in this country to demonize, marginalize and discredit even the most basic notions of environmental responsibility: any mention, say, of the term "ecology" by a political figure here will be enough to get them tarred (by those well-heeled interests) as a dangerous radical freak. However much reality lies behind their views....

Not a good speech

(#288920)
Bird Dog's picture

Pretty lousy, actually. It paled before Clinton's.

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

Yet still far better than anything from the RNC

(#288924)
HankP's picture

how Obama took optimism and a can-do spirit away from the Republicans is truly amazing.

I blame it all on the Internet

"You did that"

(#288926)

was a nice counterpoint to the GOPs sneery strawman, and an upbeat invocation of one of our better myths about ourselves. I wanted more of that and a shift to 'We'll do that" tied to plans for what's ahead.

That would be your opinion

(#288928)
Bird Dog's picture

For me, I prefer to not feel insulted after a speech. The strawmen and the platitudes were stale.

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

You weren't the target

(#288929)
HankP's picture

persuadable people are. And optimism beats pessimism every time.

 

BTW, everything posted here is an opinion. That's kind of the whole point.

 

I blame it all on the Internet

Clinton was persuadable,

(#288942)
Bird Dog's picture

Obama was not, which is kind of the whole point, no?

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

I liked the optimism.

(#288940)

When not slathered in American Exceptionalism it was very well done.

Clinton isn't running

(#288925)

Unfortunately for you, Romney is.

"Something I think most liberals don't understand is exactly how stupid many conservative leaders are." - Matt Yglesias

Ha

(#288927)
HankP's picture

looks like the headline from Fox tomorrow.

I blame it all on the Internet

We agree

(#288943)
Bird Dog's picture

Clinton isn't running. Unfortunately for you, Obama is.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

Hilarious

(#288948)

You finally found a positive use for Bubba.  And channel Jennifer Rubin effortlessly.  Which, you know, is what it is.

“Two clichés make us laugh but a hundred clichés move us, because we sense dimly that the clichés are talking among themselves, celebrating a reunion." - Umberto Eco

What can I say

(#288956)
Bird Dog's picture

Speechwise, the first black president ran circles around the second black president. For all my criticisms of the Big He over the years, Clinton gets it in a way that Obama doesn't or couldn't. It pains me to say this, but I'd pull the lever for Clinton over Romney on the strength of what Clinton said. I think his Third Way, DLC perspective is superior to what Obama and Romney have to offer.

I don't know what Rubin said, but she is the dependable conservative as Sargent is the dependable liberal.

 

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

How To Manufacture A Run

(#288931)
M Scott Eiland's picture

#1. Hustle on a ball hit to the left center power alley and turn what would be a double for 95% of hitters into a triple:

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=24547811&topic_id=&c_id=mlb...

#2. Exercise perfect timing on a ball hit back to the box and dash home with the tying run, scoring easily:

Naturally, this tends to annoy the other team, and tends to make them act like punks:

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Obama's fairly boring speech & final DNC scorecard

(#288947)

It was a mostly dull performance, certainly not as good as Michelle's, Clinton's, Biden's, even John Kerry's (who still sounds insincere with every word he utters, IMO, even when he isn't being insincere). In fact, in terms of substance and delivery, Obama's workaday talk was pretty much upstaged by all the other keynote, prime time speakers.

 

If the aim was to lay out a clear vision and inspire campaign organizers & voters to get to the polls, I don't think it did a very good job. It sounded like a fairly low-key recital of accomplishments.

 

As far as the DNC itself, there are two notes nobody really touched on, and that in my opinion were critically important:

 

1) The economic recovery plan - what exactly are Dems going to do about unemployment and the ongoing mortgage crisis? This morning's jobs report shows just how critical this issue still is, and I wanted to hear more than just "stay the course" from Democrats. I wanted to hear exactly why the President thinks recovery is taking so long, exactly what the problems are, and exactly what he thinks we should do to overcome those problems and bring about real recovery. Which leads me to...

 

2) Congress & downballot votes - Most everyone who isn't part of the right wing propaganda system understands that Republicans in Congress, under pressure from the Tea Party faction in the House, have been deliberately sabotaging recovery efforts using obstructionist tactics that are unprecedented in US history. Truman's "Do Nothing Congress," just by way of example, passed five times the number of public laws as the 112th Congress. Republican bums in the Senate have blown away previous records for filibusters, procedural holds, and so forth, while the Republican House spends its time banging the Repeal! button over and over again like a mental patient in a football helmet, when it isn't holding the Treasury hostage and earning the US an unprecedented credit downgrade.

 

Congressional Republicans in this term are the most destructive, obstructionist, irresponsible crowd of nitwits ever to hold the minority. All they care about is cutting taxes for rich people and beating Democrats...gone is any pretense of duty. They are preventing Congress from carrying out its constitutional function of producing legislation for the general welfare, and doing their best to prevent the executive from carrying out its functions as well. They're a disgrace, and they've got to go.

 

I thought we'd be seeing a lot more "vote downballot! straight ticket D!" or the like. There were some fingers waved at Congressional R's, but it was a distinctly minor theme, and there was nothing, nothing about getting out and campaigning for Congress, for statehouses, etc. The whole "unity" theme could have been used to build up to a mighty denunciation of Republican tactics in Congress and the need to elect people who are willing to help the government actually perform its basic functions. But no.

 

 

Overall grade: A-. Epic performances by Michelle Obama & Bill Clinton will make this a convention to remember & study in the future. Really needed the President to step in and close the deal though, and I feel like Obama was a bit of a disappointment on that score. For all of the passion & clarity of vision expressed by the other speakers, they aren't the ones who have to go back to work at 1600 Pennsylvania. We needed even more passion & even more clarity from the guy himself, and instead we got a fairly uninspired recital of accomplishments. Great stuff he was talking about, but he just didn't explain it all in a way your average low-information voter could understand and "feel." 

M Aurelius was probably right.

This election won't be won or lost by speeches

(#288950)

Republicans have shown their hand and they aren't interested in offering a competing vision. They simply want to win and are fully prepared to win ugly. Obama was correct in not descending to their level. More naked partisanship is not the answer. At least not with those still undecided voters in the battleground states.

"Something I think most liberals don't understand is exactly how stupid many conservative leaders are." - Matt Yglesias

Ok, seriously, why....

(#288952)
Bernard Guerrero's picture

I don't watch them

(#288955)

Whenever I'm in the mood to be bullsh#tted at I just call my in-laws. 

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome. 

Quit linkwhoring

(#289019)
HankP's picture

if you want to discuss it here then crosspost it.

I blame it all on the Internet

I get that the conventions are a lot of noise

(#289044)

But personally, I find some big speeches psychologically interesting. Someone like Bill Clinton's mastery is impressive to witness. I'll watch old speeches of his on youtube, just coz he's that good at drawing an audience in and punching their buttons.

 

E.g., it's fun when Clinton ad-libs lines like "Now — but — he has — he has laid the foundation for a new, modern, successful economy of shared prosperity. Now, why do I believe it? I'm fixing to tell you why."

 

Also, talk isn't nothing. It's much less important than action, but it can change people's minds, which in a democracy can lead to action. E.g., when Romney makes fun of climate change and Obama reiterates its existence, that counts for something at least.

 

Another aspect is to see who the up-and-comers are. Christie blew it, Castro didn't. etc.

 

Finally, I did actually learned something from Clinton's speech. I didn't realize that 2/3rds of medicaid went to helping seniors in nursing homes, or that even non-bailed out car companies supported the bailout b/c they wanted parts manufacturers to stay in business. But for several hrs of watching, that wasn't much info to have picked up. 

2/3rds of Medicaid Doesn't Actually go to Seniors

(#289046)

I was bummed when Suzy Khimm of Ezra Klein's blog told me so.

 

Dual eligibles certainly cost more than other Medicaid enrollees, like children and pregnant women. But there’s no evidence to support that these patients eat up two-thirds of the Medicaid budget. Kaiser Family Foundation looked at this issue in an April 2012 brief. It found that, “Although these ‘dual eligibles’ accounted for only 15 percent of Medicaid enrollment in 2008, 39 percent of all Medicaid expenditures for medical services were made on their behalf.”

Clinton’s prepared remarks on this point, however, were quite different. Here’s how those went: “Almost two-thirds of Medicaid is spent on nursing home care for seniors and on people with disabilities, including kids from middle class families, with special needs like, Downs syndrome or Autism.” That checks out: the Congressional Budget Office estimates that 63.5 percent – or $148 billion – of federal Medicaid spending ($251 billion in total) goes towards the elderly, blind and disabled.

 

 

Thanks for letting me know

(#289049)

That kind of error from ad-libbing is acceptable to me.

 

I don't think Clinton said anything intentionally misleading. 

 

There were many things about which I disagreed with him in his speech, but it was obviously honest.

Yes

(#289053)

"Sincerity is the key. If you can fake that you've got it made."

Quick Question

(#288953)

According to a Jon Alterman tweet, economists figure a 100k margin of error when it comes to job reports.  

 

So.  Maybe it's 96k.  Maybe it's closer to 200.  Or maybe we lost jobs.   

 

Is it really worth all the attention? 

“Two clichés make us laugh but a hundred clichés move us, because we sense dimly that the clichés are talking among themselves, celebrating a reunion." - Umberto Eco

It mostly isn't.

(#288957)
Bernard Guerrero's picture

I can justify interest in three ways, though.

 

A) Level - 0K-200K is a wide band, but most of that band looks weak, so you can draw some conclusions.  i.e. even the high end is below the level required to reduce UI after accounting for population growth

 

B) Trend -  It's a band, but if that band is generally moving in one direction or the other (or remaining stable), it tells you something

 

C) Accumulation of evidence as to Fed - it's one of the things the Fed in practice takes into account when setting policy, so even a vague data point is one more bit of evidence as to what a very concrete actor might intend

On the other hand, I don't remember any jobs revisions

(#289050)

changing the numbers by 100k for any month.

 

This is a lousy # any way you slice it.

 

And it's sad to hear the Big Dog talk about structural unemployment and the urgent need to address the deficit, while Obama mostly talked the same game. 

 

No one is willing to even talk about the idea of further stimulus.

Ok that looks to be false

(#289058)

For example, the famous zero jobs in August 2011 was revised up to 84k. 

 

Another month in the past 3 yrs. was revised up 99k.

 

But according to this story, the average revision is 40k. And even a +40k revision does not turn this into a good report.

 

What's amazing is that Romney hasn't taken the lead with jobs numbers in 4 of the last 5 months that aren't even keeping pace with population growth. 

That's because Romney has no policy proposals

(#289059)

..that will improve jobs #'s. Tax cuts won't do it, neither will the proposed spending cuts and further stimulus is an anathema to the GOP base. Obama has made slow but steady progress, largely stymied by GOP obstructionism. Romney has only empty rhetoric and it shows.

"Something I think most liberals don't understand is exactly how stupid many conservative leaders are." - Matt Yglesias

Republicans in '10 had no good policy proposals either

(#289060)

yet the midterms were a historical success.

 

I think you have to be a pretty lousy candidate on a number of dimensions not to be able to take advantage of an economy with nearly 25 million under and unemployed, and job growth that doesn't keep pace with with population growth.

2008 & 2010

(#289061)

were both anti incumbent, 'throw the bums out' elections. Faced with the Gecko/Galt ticket and the GOP's behavior since 2010, that portion of the electorate open to making an informed decision irrespective of partisan leanings, may just be wising up to the notion that 'throw the bums out' is not the most thoughtfull or productive use of their vote. If undecideds are putting a little more thought into it this time around, that can't be good for Romney. Can it?

"Something I think most liberals don't understand is exactly how stupid many conservative leaders are." - Matt Yglesias

Pundit wisdom of the day

(#288964)
Bird Dog's picture

From none other than Chris Matthews.

Bras aren't a mystery to this guy. He knows a clasp from a hook. He's touched base. He's tagged up. He knows his way around a hooter.

 

And that's how Obama wins Ohio.

Lean Forward!

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

In unrelated news,

(#289005)

after 50 years of not giving a darn about football, I am now a Vikings fan.

"I've been on food stamps and welfare.  Anybody help me out?  No!" Craig T. Nelson (6/2/2009)

There would be millions more jobs

(#289066)

if government employment under Obama had kept pace with government employment under Bush II:

 

I would think this is related

(#289070)

I would think this is related to the wars in a big way.

I don't believe so

(#289071)

The decline in public employment under Obama is concentrated at the state and local levels - think teachers and firefighters, and also to declines in federal infrastructure spending. I don't think much of the decline has anything to do with e.g. wrapping things up in Iraq.

 

The increase in public employment under Bush I believe is mostly the result of a normally expanding # of public sector workers as the population grows. Perhaps some portion is security-related, my recollection is that it's not the bulk.

 

This has just been an era of drastic public cutbacks all over the place for Obama, he's the unfortunate recipient of it, but he's also done very little to push back against it. E.g. I glanced at his recent speech and only saw calls for cutting spending a la Simpson Bowles.  

What do you expect him to do

(#289084)
HankP's picture

call for bigger government? That would be a real political winner.

I blame it all on the Internet

September 8, 2012: PAC-12 Respect Day

(#289083)
M Scott Eiland's picture

UCLA stuns #16 Nebraska 36-30; Oregon State slips past #13 Wisconsin 10-7.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Photo of the day

(#289094)
Bird Dog's picture

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

I'm surprised Obama didn't appeal more to you in his speech

(#289098)

.

What happened to the movie review diaries?

(#289097)

that MaPol posted the other day?

 

I hope they weren't deleted as spam or something ...

Photo of the day

(#289168)
Bird Dog's picture

This is literally an awesome picture!

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particula

A BETTER "Photo of the Day"

(#289170)
Jay C's picture

...would be the full version of this Joe Biden pic...

 

Sorry for my poor (i.e. utter lack of) embedding skills.

 

The look on "President Troll"'s face is worth many thousand words...

Ha

(#289173)
aireachail's picture

Ooh, Mr Vice President! Does this chair have a suicide shifter, or are you just happy to see me?