Welcome to tonight's debate thread. . .
For those who haven't heard. Thaddeus McCotter has dropped out and is endorsing Mitt Romney. Darrell Issa is also endorsing Mitt Romney. Commentarama is considering endorsing Barry Goldwater.
Please feel free to join along! :)
Thursday, September 22, 2011
T-Rav's Sockpuppet Theater Presents: The Debate
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
280 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 280 of 280Uh, Andrew, I assume you meant "Romney" not "Perry"???
New Page!!!
Newt is 100% right!
ummmm, Andrew, did you mean Romney?
...And Newt brings the house down.
Obama defeat = new day in America
Paul's forever blowing bubbles. Did I get that right.
Dammit kids, you can have milk or juice, coffee's for the adults.
Yes, sorry Romney... not Perry.
Romney is on the ball, he's sharp and he sounds conservative. Perry is taking a nap.
rla, I think he did, he's just afraid I'll bite his head off if he specifically says "Romney is impressing me." Which I won't--until his back is turned.
Ok, that was worth the price of admission. LOL!
y'all are hysterical to read without the "audio" portion!
yay Cain!
I was afraid Perry would wilt... or glad... or ambivalent...
yay Cain!
Yay Sockpuppet Theater!
Okay, I'll give Johnson credit. That was a pretty good line.
T-Rav and rlaWTX, Yeah... I meant Romney. It's a very strange feeling.
So why all the "Reagan" stuff? I like
When your brother in law is unemployed, it's a recession
When you are unemployed, it's a depression
When Jimmy Carter is umemployed it's a recovery!
That's great...
My trash is not a goldmine for identity thieves, but it is a goldmine for pizza boxes.
rla, maybe you should just do the pointed summaries, instead of us having these windy multiple-page threads.
Cain! Because he's awesome.
Johnson/Paul 2012!!!! End the Fed! Bring back Gold! Tenth Amendment! !!!!!!!!
Obama because he's dreamy.
Very diplomatic by Newt.
Pick me! Pick me! Pick me!!!
Santorum/Gingrich? God help us all. One has only one thought, the other has every thought.
And I will be. Because I'm totally awesome and my victory is inevitable.
Perry's best answer.
Rick, if this is a game show, you're the contestant who walks away with the coffee-maker prize.
I pick Bev.
That really was a really stupid question...
Andrew, don't you DARE say Romney is impressing you again.
T-Rav, then I'd miss the "muted" hilarity!
It's kinda like eavesdropping on half of a conference call... but with interesting and amusing people...
So I'm out of the poll, then?
Thank you Herm. Winners answer the question.
Can Cain be our first Black President????
How about Cain/Bev 2012? I'd go for that, so long as I don't get arrested by the new administration.
"I'm not sure how long Romney and Perry are going to be around, since they seem to be about to bludgeon each other to death."
That is possibly the smartest and wittiest thing Huntsman has ever said.
It is a stupid question, but honestly, I think you need to answer these. And the right answer was Cain.
see ya for the summary tomorrow...
So who do people think won/lost tonight?
234 comments, a new Commentarama record!
Okay, so I don't think we have to wait for Andrew's morning recap, I can tell you who the two winners and two losers are right now.
I'm not recapping in the morning...
Tomorrow is Friday -- film day in the afternoon. Plus, I need to see my doctor in the morning.
I nominate Commentarama as my VP running mate.
I don't know how the snap polls will come out, but even with a couple of slips, I think Romney did better than anyone, and Perry not only didn't hit his necessary bases-loaded home run, he fouled out. Nothing changed my opinions about any of the others. Romney is a long way from getting my vote, but if this debate were the sole determining factor, he'd at least be at the top of the list. Fortunately, this debate is only part of a process.
(that means the sockpuppets are recapping, right?)
rlaWTX, I'll see what I can come up with. Maybe I have to do two post. It might kill me, but I'll see if I can do it.
:(
Ah. Well then...
I think Romney and Cain clearly won, and Perry and Bachmann clearly lost. And maybe also Fox News, for putting on such a crappy debate.
Cain/Commentarama 2012!
Hmm. I don't really agree with most of what the Fox panel is saying right now, but I don't care because I'm in love with Mary Katherine Ham. :-)
Okay, so I have a serious question. Given that a Marist poll had her losing to Obama by only five (even if it is an outlier), what are the odds that Palin gets in after this utter fail by the Tea Party leaders?
Andrew, don't do anything painful! I figure finding yourself appreciating Romney pulled something anyway! ;)
The SP Theater version gave me a pretty good idea of the goings-on!
We all love Romney.
I agree, Fox's panel was simply wrong... did they watch the debate?
Lutz's group is exactly right though.
Yeah Andrew, don't kill yourself. I'd enjoy a recap, but people can get a good idea of what happened from the comments.
Oof. That in-state tuition answer absolutely killed Perry. He sounded like a liberal to them.
T-Rav, I'll see what I can do, but it won't be until the afternoon.
Romney/Cain
Cain/Romney
Cain/Gingrich
Romney/Gingrich
Perry/Cain
Perry/Gingrich
Don't see Perry as VP.
Don't see Gingrich as P.
Bachman et al. fading out...
Bev, Cain/Gingrich. :)
Ohhh, I can't wait to see what Perry's poll numbers look like after this debate has sunk in. This focus group is just tearing him apart. Personally, I'm jumping on the Cain wagon.
The Luntz post-debate group is confirming something I'm thinking about Romney and the Massachusetts health plan.
I'm old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan was taking heat from conservatives for having signed California's first [therapeutic] abortion bill as governor. He repeatedly said it was a state issue, and he saw the result and changed his mind completely about the issue.
Romney is no Reagan, but his disavowal of a national healthcare plan modeled after the Massachusetts plan seems to be having the same effect now as Reagan's disavowal of his signature on the abortion bill. And in addition, it strengthens his public support of state 10th Amendment rights and privileges. We'll soon see if the general public sees it the same way as the Luntz group.
BTW: I missed the Johnson "dog" remark because the grandkids were fighting over who got the last burrito. What did I miss?
LawHawk, I'll defer to your judgment on that. If I were an Obama campaign manager, though, I would make sure he was absolutely hammered on that in debates if he were the nominee: "If it was good enough for your state, what's your objection to having it in the entire country? Why not simplify matters?" I simply do not trust the man on this.
Lawhawk, I agree. That focus group completely bought the idea that he'd learned his lesson.
Oh, there was a question about job creation and Johnson said something to the effect of "my neighbor's two dogs next door have created more jobs than Barack Obama has." I dislike Johnson, but that was a good hit.
Romney/Rubio. It's not my first choice, but we can't seem to get Rubio to run for President (or Bobby Jindal, for that matter).
Lawhawk, He said that "My neighbors two dogs have created more shovel-ready jobs than this administration."
T-Rav: Thanks. And he's right.
Also these combinations:
Cain/Bev
Cain/Commentarama
Bev/{no one because she is just THAT good}
T-Rav/Kittens
Kittens/Sock puppets
Obama/sock puppet (oops that's what we have now....)
No Bev, what we have now is Sock Puppet/Wooden Head. Not to nitpick or anything.
And thank you for putting me at the top of a ticket! I'll have my people call the kittens' people.
Andrew, don't feel under pressure for another post. If you do post something, I have more free time tomorrow than I have had this week, so I'll be sure to add my own two cents in.
T-Rav: I didn't say that I necessarily am comfortable with Romney's explanation. I'm simply interpreting what I think Luntz' group was saying, and that it may very well be the way it affects the general public. We have to remember that not everybody loves politics, and we can't win the Presidency with conservatives alone. I hope his disavowal was as genuine as Reagan's, but I'm not fully convinced. So you're right about him having to be ready to face further questions about it.
Andrew: Thank you as well for letting me in on the Johnson joke.
Hey, it the Supreme Court says corporations are people too, why can't "we" be VP?
T-Rav - I thought it was a little too dangerous to allow the kittens to be President. And since you seem to have them under control with your threats of violence and all, I figured you had a good rapport. And kittens must be a marketable "protected class", right?
Oh and yes - Sock puppet/wooden head...yes, you are right.
Sorry LawHawk, I didn't mean to imply that. I know what you were saying, I just really wasn't paying attention to what I was writing. I hope Romney can convince me he's sincere on this, and if he can put together a winning moderate-conservative coalition that undoes Obama's disasters, I'll be a happy camper. But thanks for reminding me not to go too far with my dislike of him.
Bev, I like that idea. We incorporate and then we become VP! :)
Bev, that's very true. All I'd need to do is run a few commercials of innocent-looking kittens (actually, that's redundant, isn't it?), set them to some Sarah MacLachlan, and I'd sail right into the White House.
If nominated, I will not run. If elected, I will not serve. Politics has aged me enough already.
Oh, not to go OT or anything, but quickly, Drudge is saying that the New York Times will be running a major story tomorrow on Solyndra and the Obama Administration's involvement. This should be interesting.
T-Rav: The question is, will it be a real news piece, or another defense of the crooked, dangerous Obama administration? I tend to think the latter, but they do have to do something to restore that .05% credibility they have left. I guess we'll see.
LawHawk, that's very true. I guess we'll find out in the morning.
Ron Paul was just on Hannity, and he said that Iran was not a threat, and Ahmedinejad's fulminations against Israel are no different than Khrushchev banging his shoe on the table. In other words, Ron Paul just demonstrated once more why he should not be President.
Okay, I've been staring at this computer screen for four hours straight, and I'm giving it a rest. Great commenting, everyone! Good job, sockpuppets!
I don't know who the next debate sponsor is or what the format is, but I WANT TO HEAR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT GUNWALKER/FAST AND FURIOUS, SOLYNDRA and LIGHTSQUARED in the next debate. Yeah, all the candidates want to do better than Obama, but corruption brought Nixon down, and a clear plan from Republicans could be the final nail in Obama's Presidential coffin. No mealy-mouthed "we'll have to wait until all the evidence is in" or "innocent until proven guilty." This is politics. It's not beanbag, a college debate, or a court of law. And besides, this kind of political speech is strongly and fundamentally a protected First Amendment right. So let's see some cojones, kids.
'Night everyone! Sock puppets, get back in your drawer where you belong...
T-Rav: And unlike Khruschev, Ahmadinejad believes that if he gets nuked back by Israel or the US, he will go to paradise and get his seventy-two virgins automatically by virtue of his Islamic martyrdom. Khruschev was an s.o.b. and wanted world domination, but he didn't believe in paradise and preferred to live rather than die in a nuclear oven. Thus, mutually-assured destruction (MAD). Paul is certifiable.
Andrew Price Said
"RINOs have earned that title, both by consistently voting against conservative ideas, AND by being disloyal to the Republican Party."
Andrew Andrew Andrew why do you always have to bring up Mccain
Post a Comment