The reaction shots are bad for Biden. He looks very old.
47% 1 time; Bin laden 1 time
Ryan pushing the “don’t worry about Social Security and Medicare” if you’re 55 or older. That’s gonna be a problem.
Wow Bidens simle and laugh are a big turn off IMHO.
Did Ed Schultz do Biden’s debate prep?
It’s a base draw..both sides will be happy. Too much time on foreign policy because of Raddatz’ background.
IMO, a draw is a win for Romney/Ryan.
After his strong debate performance in round one, team Romney doesn’t need to win this one. He needs a victory in one more presidential debate (not a knock down win, a win by decision works too), to win the debate “game.” But a tie tonight helps Romney, and keeps the pressure one Obama to turn momentum around.
Chris Matthews: “PAUL RYAN WANTS TO RAISE TAXES ON YOUR LADYPARTS!!!”
twitterverse is concerned about biden’s laughing/smirking in the first half of the debate
The fallout is going to be a replay of the first Gore/Bush debate: The MSM declare the Democrat the winner on points only to be surprised 5 days later that the polls swung to the GOP challenger over Gore/Biden’s bad behavior.
Chris Wallace says in all the years he has covered debates he has never seen such disrepect from one person to another.
Will be interesting to see what others have to say.
Looks like Biden was coached to take control, to be a little pushy and a little condescending as an offset to Ryan’s almost natural commanding presence and mastery of detail. May have come off as smirks but I think the VP pulled that off fairly well.
Al, I agree I think the pundits will say Biden won but for people who don’t watch politics all the time their may be some concern about joe’s smirking. Only time will tell.
Maddow: “Compare Chris Van Hollen’s reaction to the one last week by David Plouffe trying to defend the President in a debate he so clearly lost.”
Uh Rachel: at the time, you said “I don’t know who won the debate”. It was clear to everyone … but you.
Twitter tells me the Fox push is that Biden was a big meanie. Against a marathon-running, weight-lifting tough young guy. That seems like a really bad idea. Romney ran all over Lehrer and Obama last week. There was NO WAY Biden was going to repeat that, and to whine about the old guy bringing it is just silly.
So if the person you’re talking to works out, that gives you the right to be a boorish jacka%%?
joe the fox statements were about joe’s smirking,laughing at what somemight consider inappropriate times. they said he also took control with some things so it isnot all negative on joe baby from fox.
^ I saw the same from CNN & others, too. So it’s not just Fox
So if the person you’re talking to works out, that gives you the right to be a boorish jacka%%?
Being that Romney was a lying, boorish jackwagon last week who was allowed to get away with it, I’m going with yes.
When liberals disagree with someone’s policy positions they lie and are boorish jackwagons.
Meanwhile, POTUS, VPOTUS, and SecState offering mutually exclusive statements on what Intel told them about Benghazi.
Talking about boorish jackwagons in relation to politicians is redundant.
As with every other VP debate, this one won’t influence the election.
MSNBC cannot contain its glee. They think Biden was spectacular and he only smiled and smirked and interrupted because he couldn’t believe what a “clown” Ryan was. MSNBC also had the results of a CBS poll that showed viewers thought Biden won 50% to Ryan’s 31%. I find that really hard to believe.
CNN Poll: Ryan 48%, Biden 44%
biden threw the intelligence community under the bus tonight. we all know obama doesn’t really like patreus so my guess he was/is a good fall guy. obama gave him the cia job so he wouldn’t speak out about iraq/afghanistan/etc. so…as long as patreus keeps his mouth shut and my guess he will because he is that kind of guy, obama will keep the meme that the intelligence failed him and he will hope that no more crap comes out about libya.
Yes… last week Romney monopolized the debate… even if he technically had less talking time than the President, it felt like he had more because… uh… because… um… Jim Leher sucks! Obaaamaaaaaa!
I enjoyed the debate and particularly the work of Raddatz as moderator. My only qualm was no mention of the immigration issue.
In the end the left will say Biden won, the right will say Ryan won and those in the middle will cal it a tie. Like the first debate, I can’t tell who won so I’ll wait a few days for the polls to decide.
In the end there were no knock outs and it’s a two or three news cycle story. By Monday nothing will be remembered of tonight as we get ready for the next debate on Tuesday.
“Talking time” bears no relation to how many words were used, and in what manner. Obama got his a$$ kicked..Biden wasn’t going to let the same thing happen. And as I’ve said, and Larry concurred, it doesn’t matter. This debate will be forgotten before the next one starts.
On that, we agree Joe.
But that’s also a problem for the Obama Admin. A tie goes to whomever has the current momentum, and that’s Team Romney.
This debate (apparently) will do nothing to stop the bleeding, and that’s what needed to have happened.
The debate was alright. No one screwed up and no one said anything spectacular or ground breaking. I wasn’t really a fan of Raddatz as moderator, she seemed to interject herself at unneeded and unnecessary moments and she also seemed to change the topic when one of them was trying to make a point. I don’t know in my opinion it just seemed a little too intrusive on her part.
But no one remembers this past the weekend to be honest. The polls wont change and people’s minds wont change. This was a debate where we basically got we expected. Who won? Doesn’t matter but I’m going with Santa Claus.
No one screwed up and no one said anything spectacular or ground breaking
Can’t tell yet of it was a screw-up, but Biden contradicted the State Department on Benghazi security. That may break something.
In my mind, there are four potential outcomes for a debate:
1- A tie (no clear winner, only partisans declare winners)
2- A soft win/loss (one person slightly better/worse, partisans still declare their side winner)
3- A clear win/loss (one person dramatically better/worse, most partisans agree)
4- A knockout (an unrecoverable blunder for one candidate)
That said, coming into the debates, Romney needed a clear win (or a knockout, but that almost never happens). Anything less would have really hurt his campaign.
But he got one. So going into the VP debate, he can afford a soft win or tie, because he’ll maintain momentum.
In the next debate, he needs at least one more clear win, to have a very good shot at winning. Right now, I think saying he’s 50/50 is good, but still a tough place to be in if you’re trying to win. Scraping by, isn’t a successful strategy.
If he ties the next debate, his momentum will probably slip backwards, and will need to replay his first debate in the last debate (and I doubt he’d be able to) if he hopes to have a shot. If he has a soft win, he’ll be alright… the momentum will stop, but won’t slide backwards.
Conversely, Obama needs a clear win in the next debate to prove he’s the person his fans have always said he was. Without that, he’s human again, and the race becomes competition, instead of a cake walk.
Biden says they weren’t told the ambassador wanted more security. Sally Kohn says Stevens was wary of bringing too much on for diplomatic reasons. I’d love to know if either one of those positions are remotely close to the truth.
Biden says they weren’t told the ambassador wanted more security
Obama/Biden 2012: We’re not Evil, just grossly incompetent.
Pat Buchanan was on Greta’s post-debate show. MSNBC really needs him back, or someone like him. Steve Schmidt usually agrees with his liberal co-panelists. He’s a Repub milquetoast.
Does anyone know what the AP flash poll was after the debate?
State Department staff testified that security was requested and that the request was denied.
That Stevens was wary for diplomatic reasons doesn’t pass the smell test. Anyone who might be put-off because an American ambassador has a security detail isn’t anyone of sufficient status to work with an ambassador from any country.
I just found the AP poll: Ryan – 51% and Biden – 43%.
Steve Schmidt usually agrees with his liberal co-panelists. He’s a Repub milquetoast.
My morse is pretty rusty, but I could swear he’s blinking “My kids are being held hostage.”
^Ha! That’s funny. No wonder he looks scared all the time.
This was the first time I have seen or heard either one at any length. I found that Biden was both rude and disrespectful and his constant smirking made him look like an idiot. If I were to vote for either of based purely on what I saw tonight, it would be an easy choice. Ryan was cool, calm AND respectful.
^ Says a guy with a Facebook page full of criticisms of Obama.
The smirking and laughing really didn’t make him look good, point blank.
Liberals think that ‘obnoxious’ is a good look. They’re wrong. Not to mention lying about Libya and his votes on the Iran and Iraq war. It doesn’t move the needle a bit, thus leaving the momentum on Mitt’s side.
I’m not defending the laughing/smirking schtick, I’m just reacting to the partisan showing up here to pretend he’s giving an objective analysis of the debate. We’re not stupid.
And I don’t appreciate being called ‘liberals’. We’ve been over this a thousand times.
What is it with guys named Joe?
In the final analysis:
Ryan played to the remaining independent/undecideds.
Biden played strictly to the base.
That alone should tell you the overall state of the race.
What was with the CBS poll with Teeth 51% and Ryan 39%? Did they just walk across the street and poll MSNBC?
“Says a guy with a Facebook page full of criticisms of Obama”
Says a guy with a TWITTER page full of criticisms of Romney.
“What was with the CBS poll with Teeth 51% and Ryan 39%? Did they just walk across the street and poll MSNBC?”
I guess CBS didn’t get the Romney memo that Ryan won the debate and their poll was supposed to get in line with that view.
CBS; just another example of the vast left wing media conspiracy to defeat Romney. :-)
I didn’t make any claims to being a non-partisan observer, and anyone actually reading my Twitter feed knows how I felt about the smiling thing.
There is no such thing as a nonpartisan observer… unless one has had a lobotomy.
Nor did I make any claims of being nonpartisan. I just hadn’t seen these two gentlemen (?) before. I’ve followed Obama and Mr Romney throughout the campaign. You left wing liberal loons always want to spin things your way.
Claiming you had hardly seen the two speak before yersterday implies impartiality, which you clearly do not have. You also have little claim to having a clue about politics if you’re this unaware of Joe Biden and Paul Ryan this late in the game.
Whatever fits your agenda, Joe. Let’s just hope that President Romney will be able to dig us out of the financial hole Obama has put us in
While he grows the military, starts a couple wars, and gives everybody a 20% tax cut. Yeah, that’ll work. Maybe he’ll cover the debt by rooting out waste and fraud…
I think we can all agree that we need a new direction and a president that has a clue as to all things financial.