Surrendering, tea, and tentacle porn, respectively.
I think he’ll do well, too. One of the reasons Biden is known for making gaffes is because he’s a lively speaker unafraid of making extemporaneous comments. That kind of speech works well in a debate, and I imagine it will allow him to draw the debate to a close tie, even when Ryan comes across as the more articulate of the two.
I disagree, obviously, that the debate will be less a fight than a seminar. I think the Romney campaign can smell the blood in the water, and they’ll be looking to extend their momentum through Ryan’s performance. The Obama campaign, on the other hand, understands that they can’t afford another poor debate. And while it’s true that vice presidential debates haven’t had a tremendous amount of influence on the polls in previous elections, I think this one will be different, and I think both campaigns know it.
Biden will do well. He’s extremely knowledgeable and he has done well in debates before. If he does nothing more than point out the lying and hypocrisy of the $700 billion Medicare lie and the utter impossibility of finding enough deductions among the wealthy to pay for Romney’s tax cut, I’ll be quite pleased.
Obams’s performance was like Apollo Creed’s early rounds in Rocky. Surely someone in the Obama corner has pointed out that his opponent doesn’t think he’s in a show, he thinks he’s in a fight. So let’s stop with the Debbie Downer stuff, Obama will do fine in the next two debates and win the election.
It’s even on their national coats of arms.
Or should be.
Nate actually has a long poston this exact issue of state versus national polls. He suggests a range of possibilities and mentions a number of reasons why state polls may sometimes be better than national polls when the two diverge.
Eh, Silver has Obama up by 1.6, so don’t start counting any chickens just yet.
ETA: Also, why make a statement like that with 27 or whatever days out?
Will he?
In the debates, Obama may be too far behind overall to catch up. This could be similar to Hilary’s loss in the 2008 primary. She fell behind, in a race that was tailor made for her, and couldn’t catch up because Obama continued to press his advantage.
What do you mean by “In the debates” he may be too far behind? Because surely you don’t think he’s too far behind in the current polling to come back, do you? Hell, depending on where you look, he’s not behind at all.
Even if Obama’s slipped to either allow Romney to close the gap or fall behind, I think people’s expectations of Obama-- both on the left and right as well as those in the middle-- have fallen because of the first debate. However, any real net positive in the upcoming debates for Obama will be multiplied because as of now, people have sort of come to expect him not to do well. If he does better than last time, people will remember that he actually *isn’t *a stoned-looking, lazy, rambling pansy. He’s the fucking president. If Obama does better than he did in the first debate, I expect the polls and forecasts to jump back in favor of Obama. Maybe not to pre-Denver levels, but they’ll jump pretty significantly away from Romney again.
With these debates, it’s all about expectations, and how the candidates meet them. No one expected much from Romney in the first debate, and most people expected more from Obama. Combine the fact that Obama disappointed with the fact that Romney didn’t fall on his face, and what you get is one of the biggest post-debate jumps in recent memory. Now that the public’s expectations are reversed, if Obama does better than last time, even moderately, we’ll be back to saying Romney’s toast.
… and we’ll still be wrong.
Probably not.
What would be awesome if there was like one big poll taken on just one day with millions of people and we all agreed that the result of that poll would be the winner. we could do it in some sort of state-weighted way if we so desired.
Romney’s a relatively strong debater, Obama’s a relatively weak one.
Obama tries hard to do better, and does, but is still bested by Romney, who’s riding a surge of confidence. (A confident, sincere liar is tough beat in the short run. It takes time for people to see through him.) Obama loses all three debates by not being able to produce a definitive victory in any of them.
Advantage Romney, and it’s too close to the election to create any other narrative. The first debate ends up being the last word.
The people that think that a Romney presidency would lead to a theocracy haven’t looked at what Romney actually did as governor of Massachusetts. Romney may be lying, but he is probably lying to the conservative base. He would be to the right of Obama, but to the left of George Bush.
People worrying about policy changes, should pay more attention to the Senate and the House. How much do you think Romney can actually change as long as Democrats control the Senate? What is Obama going to do if Republicans take control of the Senate?
Probably fodder for a different thread, but off the top of my head…
Obama presidency:
Liberal judges
Less likely go to war with Iran
No torture
Potentially pass immigration reform
Probably will not extend Bush tax cuts
Will probably keep all discretionary spending stable
Will keep Obamacare
Will implement Dodd-Frank
Will implement CFPB
Will implement CO2 regulations
Romney presidency:
Conservative judges
More likely go to war with Iran
Reinstitute torture
Doesn’t believe in immigration reform
Probably will extend Bush tax cuts
Will probably cut non-defense discretionary spending but increase defense
Will repeal Obamacare through waivers and ending regulatory process
Will make Dodd-Frank toothless through regulatory process
Will not implement CFPB
Will not implement CO2 regulations
You left out, “Won’t have some froo-froo Portuguese First Dog” and “Will repeal imaginary Obama gun control legislation”
I would add:
Obama presidency:
Signed Ledbetter Act
Secured repeal of DADT
Opposes constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage
Supports Roe v. Wade
Rescinded Global Gag Rule
Supports and has funded green energy
Supports and has funded stem cell research
Romney presidency:
Opposes Ledbetter Act
Opposed repeal of DADT
Supports constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage
Opposes Roe v. Wade and supports constitutional amendment to override it
Would reimpose Global Gag Rule
Would cut funding for green energy
Opposes and would cut funding for stem cell research
Give me time, and I’m sure I could think of more.
I mean, if we’re coming up with genuine differences, we could fill pages. My list was just differences for which control of the Senate was largely irrelevant.
I’m not sure how control of the Senate is irrelevant to the appointment of judges.
Not irrelevant. Largely irrelevant. Whether there are 40 or 50 Republicans doesn’t make a great deal of difference in who Obama will appoint.
In other words, the difference between the next judge being more like Scalia and the next judge being more like Kagan is a matter of the Presidency, not the Senate.