The opening question and following 2 minutes for each candidate were about how they would create new jobs. Obama spent a good thirty seconds apologizing to Michelle for missing their anniversary night. Obama seems laid back and articulate from the get go. He's considering what he says before he says it, and because of that may seem less than assertive. His points on job creation are congruent with his stance on job creation since his first campaign in 2008, and with the actions he's taken since he was inaugurated. His performance could be better, but he has been performing:
Romney then follows up with a 5 point plan that seems to fly in the face of all of his campaign promises, and reference numbers that I know from previous research into similar claims by other Republicans in the primaries to be based on nothing. On point 1, the MOST jobs that anybody in the industry admits could be created if absolutely everything went their way is 1.4 Million by 2030. Wood Mackenzie's study here. Point No. 2 would not have the desired effect for anybody but the importers and multinational corporations that have already been exporting jobs to Latin American (see: GM, Chrysler, Ford here; Tomato Growers here). On point No. 3, well, he has a few details to flesh out and I'm sure he will. He is right however about the state of our schools currently. Obama has however made long strides towards improving that, which goes against Romney's narrative of this path being the wrong one. On point number 4, well again he has a few details to flesh out and I'm sure he will, but he has a very long uphill battle on that one considering most of his budget promises on the campaign trail run in line with Ryan's plan. Interesting note on No. 5. Go here and watch his body language at 6:20-6:24. I've got quite a bit of experience sussing out lies and dishonesty when tracking people down through their relatives. Notice the "no" head shaking, in the middle of what is supposed to be an affirmative point, as witnessed by the vertical motions made by his hands. To me that's a clear sign that he's either pulling my leg or hiding something. He then goes on to talk about something that definitely has me thinking he's worried about the only kind of small business he actually has exposure to, large firms. Small business growth has been increasing at a rate far outpacing that of large firms, and have been doing pretty well in making up the losses from the recession. SBA study here. The thirty year low claim is something I'll have to research later. The source I've seen so far is making an accurate statement about per capita business startups this year being half of that of the rate in 1977.
Good god, did he just say trickle down goverment?
Retort by Obama, he talks about his Race To The Top program. No lies. Taxes, no lies. He's essentially repeating everything he's been trying to implement and said he would try to implement for almost 5 years now. His claims about Romney's tax plan ring true, at least according to things Romney has said on the campaign trail, and the Tax plan he released on his website, Tax Policy Center details it here.
Romney's retort require alot of details to be fleshed out in order to ring true about his tax plan. All of the points he brings up about the middle class are true. Problem: "When you also account for growth." Numbers needed, never released. The past 30 years have been an example of how that approach works, tax cuts never spur growth, nor do they increase revenue. How anybody could buy that is an example of how under-educated the American people are.
The Keystone XL will not help our energy independence, it will help Canada's energy exports to China and other expanding markets.
Clean Coal? Sorry, the Coal industry's woes have nothing to do with Obama. You can thank cheap natural gas for that. Not only that, Clean Coal is dirtier than any other energy source out there, period. Coal waste is more radioactive than most nuclear reactor waste.
And yet again, Romney has alot of details to flesh out to make his claims ring true.
Obama's retort is spot on. 1
Ok. Now. I'm only 15 minutes into this thing and already I'm about to throw something at the monitor. Romney literally just backed up Obama's point by saying his tax plan will not put into place a cut that adds to the deficit. Exactly, it has to be paid for, how?
"I'm used to people saying something that's not always true but just keep on repeating it and hoping I'll believe it."
Romney describing Obama's assertion as the exact same thing the Republicans have been doing consistently, full blast, all the way up to 11 since 2008. Birth Certificate? Muslim? 16 Trillion? No Jobs Created? Corporate Taxes the Highest in the world? The economy is in the worst shape it's been? "You didn't build that?"
Jesus H tap dancing, titty fucking, balls deep in Mary Magdelene Christ crushing crackers on a pogo stick. That's snifter through monitor material right there.
The small business claim is BS. Most small businesses are S Class corporations, LLC's and Partnerships. Which means profit is passed through to shareholders and taxes paid at the individual level. Lowering the corporate tax rate would do nothing to help most small businesses, because the "corporate tax rate" only applies to C-Class corporations.
Obama's retort is on point.
Lehrer almost completely lost control of the debate, and it's only 20 minutes in.
I'll have to look into Romney's claims about the top 3% of small businesses employing half of the people working for small businesses but I smell BS. The company I work for, rms, employs over 650 people and is considered a small business but by the metrics I've been able to find to define small business doesn't fall into that 3%, the only metric I could find to actually define small business is people employed (Census, SBA). The numbers from that alone drastically swamp Romney's claim. He's in even bigger trouble if he's using a metric based on revenue or profit.
NFIB! Drink!
Little rule, if it has Family, Federation, or Fiscal in the name and is used as a source, it's tied almost directly to the Republican party with little regard for neutrality or intellectual honesty. Focus on the Family, National Federation of Independent Businesses, ANYTHING with "Fiscal Responsibility" in its name. Hell, Focus On the Family is listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group. If you really want an example of encouraging inappropriate behavior on the part of employers, look no further. That's right, encouraging voter tampering and intimidation. That's the NFIB folks.
Obama, saying what he's been saying, yet again, for 5 years.
Lehrer, you are never to moderate a debate again.
Romney, still not fleshing out any details.
End part 1 of the debate. 24:22 in. Over 9 minutes past the deadline, Lehrer, grow a pair.
I'm going to need a drink.
No comments:
Post a Comment