Brent Nyitray
Fairlington Blade
Let the mutherfuker burn!
jnc4p
Kevin S. Willis
Michigoose
lmsinca
markinaustin
Arcanaut
novahockey
quarterback
ScottC
yellojktVital Statistics:
| Last | Change | Percent | |
| S&P Futures | 1463.6 | 7.8 | 0.54% |
| Eurostoxx Index | 2523.8 | 38.1 | 1.53% |
| Oil (WTI) | 91.12 | -0.6 | -0.64% |
| LIBOR | 0.351 | -0.001 | -0.28% |
| US Dollar Index (DXY) | 79.3 | -0.050 | -0.06% |
| 10 Year Govt Bond Yield | 1.73% | 0.06% | |
| RPX Composite Real Estate Index | 194.3 | -0.1 |
Markets are higher this morning after a surprisingly good employment report. Stock index futures initially jumped on the number and now have given back the gains. Bonds are down a point and MBS are down 6 ticks on the number.
The unemployment rate dropped to 7.8% from 8.1% in September and total nonfarm payrolls rose by 114k. The Street was expecting an 8.1% rate. U6 (the underemployment rate) didn’t change at 14.7%. 873k people became employed in September and the participation rate ticked up to 63.6% from a 30 year low of 63.5%. It looks like the job gains were largely part time, as that sector increased 582k. Average weekly hours ticked up to 34.5, and earnings increased .3%. This report does seem at odds with other economic reports showing the economy is slowing. It certainly makes you wonder what the Fed was looking at when it announced QEIII.
In response to the numbers, Jack Welch tweeted: “Unbelievable jobs numbers…these Chicago guys will do anything… can’t debate so changes numbers.” Unsurprisingly the left blogosphere is swarming. That said, Jack (We always beat by a penny) Welch should be the last person throwing stones about massaging the data. Given that BLS magically found half a million jobs in the sofa cushions, which allows Obama to claim that the economy has reclaimed all the jobs it lost since he took office, we are going to see some predictable partisan doubt on the economic numbers coming out of Washington.
The minutes from the 9/13 FOMC meeting didn’t have anything groundbreaking in it. Some of the regional presidents are doubting how much of an effect further QE can really have. Certainly there is nothing in the minutes that suggests that the Fed is seeing more strength in the labor market; if anything they note decreases in hiring plans.
Larry Fink of Blackrock told Maria Bartiromo that “we are about a year away from a full rebound in American housing.” He is worried about the fiscal cliff: “The fiscal cliff is probably the biggest problem facing us. We are already seeing a slowdown in the U.S. economy. I know many CEOs who are sitting with large sums of cash. If the government comes up with a comprehensive plan to handle it, we would see a huge rally.”
FHFA has a new white paper out for comment regarding a new infrastructure for the secondary mortgage market. It envisions a platform that could be used by multiple issuers – which could be laying the groundwork for an MBS exchange where issuers can sell new issues electronically instead of over-the-counter.
Filed under: Morning Report |
All Things in Moderation 
Puzzling report, but it seems if you wanted to cook the books, this would be a very clumsy way to do it. CNBC essetially has the same info as Brent:
“The report presented a slew of contradictory data points, with the total employment level soaring despite the low net number.
The falling jobless rate had been a function as much of the continued shrinking in the labor force as it was an increase in new positions.
But the government said the total number of workers employed surged by 873,000, the highest one-month jump in 29 years. The total of unemployed people tumbled by 456,000.
The total labor force grew by 418,000, possibly accounting for the relatively modest net level of job growth compared to the total employed. The labor force participation rate, which reflects those working as well as looking for work, edged higher to 63.6 percent but remained around 30-year lows.
“You have to be careful, particularly about components of the household numbers that are highly volatile,” said Liz Ann Sonders, chief investment strategist at Charles Schwab in San Francisco. “It’s been our view that we would see a slow but consistent improvement in the jobs picture. I’m not sure this changes that view much at all.”
Economists were expecting 113,000 more jobs and the rate to rise to 8.2 percent. Last month saw 142,000 new jobs as the rate dropped from 8.3 percent in July.
However, those numbers were revised higher, with the Labor Department putting July’s number at 181,000 from the previously reported 141,000 and August up from an originally reported 96,000.”
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49299718
Rick Santelli was less than surprised shall we say, and the execrable Joe Kernen was worse.
All things considered, I don’t this gained any votes for Obama any more than the debate lost them.
LikeLike
“execrable” Joe Kernen? I never watch CNBC – has he changed? He seemed to be reasonably normal. I liked Faber, because he always had the call with the arbs. Liz Klaman used to crack me up when she would obviously hit on Buffet when she interviewed him.
LikeLike
brent:
I never watch CNBC – has he changed?
No. Kernen is fine. I think he bugs Dems because he challenges and even sometimes mocks their party lines. Seems some of them can dish it out but can’t take it.
LikeLike
brent
yes those were the good days but they are light years gone
For some reason he isn’t the funny guy in the crew anymore, but channels Hannity every day. He rarely even talks business just attacks Obama. I guess this was the real hm all along, but maybe they changed director or producer and he was given the green to become the Fox guy so as not to lose viewers to that network’s business channel.
I can’t watch Squawk Box anymore, but still enjoy the rest of the day.
LikeLike
brent
btw, agree that it does make the Fed’s action even more inexplicable
LikeLike
No incumbent since FDR has been elected with unemployment in November over 7.4%. If Obama isn’t to break that streak, that would mean some incredible numbers in a month.
LikeLike
As a stark reminder that Mitt begins every day a newborn with no history that he will acknowledge, Mitt yesterday on Fox:
“Well, clearly in a campaign, with hundreds if not thousands of speeches and question-and-answer sessions, now and then you’re going to say something that doesn’t come out right,” Romney said. “In this case, I said something that’s just completely wrong.”He added: “And I absolutely believe, however, that my life has shown that I care about 100 percent and that’s been demonstrated throughout my life. And this whole campaign is about the 100 percent.”
On the other hand, here’s Mitt the day after the video came out, also on Fox:
“It’s not elegantly stated, let me put it that way. I was speaking off the cuff in response to a question, but it’s a message which I am going to carry and continue to carry, which is that the president’s approach is attractive to people who are not paying taxes because frankly my discussion about lowering taxes isn’t as attractive to them. Therefore I’m not likely to draw them into my campaign as effectively as those in the middle.”
How dumb would anybody have to be to believe ANTHING that Romney says ever?
LikeLike
How dumb would anybody have to be to believe ANTHING that Romney says ever?
Mitt changed a lot of positions between when he was governor and when he ran in the 2008 primary. He changed more positions between 2008 and 2012. And now he is disavowing things he said in March and re-affirmed just a month ago.
The MTBFF (mean time between flip-flops) is decreasing exponentially. He really thinks people forget this stuff or that the internet does not record these things forever.
LikeLike
The NYT points out that debate Romney, bears no resemblance to pre or post debate Romney on policy issues:
“Entering Stage Right, Romney Moved to Center”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/05/us/politics/ente…
LikeLike
MTBFF
Somewhere, certainly, there has to be a mathematician who has devised the equation for this. . .
LikeLike
Regarding Jack Welch, it’s a glass house situation:
“During the heart of the Jack Welch era,” writes Martin, “GE met or beat analysts’ forecasts in forty-six of forty-eight quarters between December 31, 1989, and September 30, 2001—a 96 percent hit rate. Even more impressively, in forty-one of those forty-six quarters, GE hit the analyst forecast to the exact penny—89 percent perfection. And in the remaining seven imperfect quarters, the tolerance was startlingly narrow: four times GE beat the projection by 2 cents, once it beat it by 1 cent, once it missed by 1 cent, and once by 2 cents. Looking at these twelve years of unnatural precision, Jensen asks rhetorically: ‘What is the chance that could happen if earnings were not being “managed’?”’ Martin replies: infinitesimal.
LikeLike
scott
Funny, he never mocked Bush, even at his most absurd. I’ve been watching him for 12 years, since the days David Faber used to have the mechanical penguins marching off the desk to represent analysts views.
LikeLike
Ezra weighs in on the “controversial” jobs report.
LikeLike
“yellojkt, on October 5, 2012 at 9:02 am said:
…
He really thinks people forget this stuff or that the internet does not record these things forever.”
Or he assumes that the electorate is cynical and believes that all politicians lie anyway about everything to get elected, therefore it has no cost. In this, he is not completely wrong.
I assume that the entire campaign from both sides is complete BS. The most likely guide to a Romney presidency is what he did as Governor and the composition of Congress. The most likely guide to a second Obama term is the last four years and the composition of Congress.
The people most likely to be disappointed at the end of a Romney term will be conservatives and the Republican base. Among other things, the ACA/Obamacare isn’t going anywhere unless Harry Reid is actually foolish enough to get rid of the filibuster.
LikeLike
jnc:
Or he assumes that the electorate is cynical and believes that all politicians lie anyway about everything to get elected, therefore it has no cost. In this, he is not completely wrong.
Agreed.
I think that what has the Obama contingent’s panties all in a post-debate twist is that Romney is actually trying to win the election. Doesn’t he know that he’s supposed to have already been written off as stupid, a loser, the worst candidate in the history of the Republic? How dare he actually try to win this thing.
LikeLike
Jesus took five loaves and two fish and fed 5,000 people
Obama took 114,000 jobs and employed 873,000 people
Its a miracle!
LikeLike
All candidates pander to the base during the primaries and then pivot to the center.
LikeLike
Brent:
All candidates pander to the base during the primaries and then pivot to the center.
Yes.
All this shock and consternation over Romney’s “shifting” positions has a distinct Captain Louis Renault feel to it.
LikeLike
I expected Romney to pivot to the center a long time ago and thought he would have been doing better in the polls if he had. What I didn’t expect was for him to lie about pre-existing coverage. People in this category of health care consumers need the ACA and for Romney to pretend he has a plan for them and then watch his campaign walk it back immediately after the debate is reprehensible. He knowingly lied in trying to convince these voters that there was no daylight between him and Obama.
The rest of his pivoting was typical political gobblydigook, and they all do it. He won the debate though, I’ll give him that.
LikeLike
And what does it say about conservative ideology, and how it’s viewed by the majority, that their candidate has to speak as a moderate to be elected?
LikeLike
Had Romney never pivoted, simply stayed roughly the same politician he was in 2006, he would have a 5 point lead now
LikeLike
Had Romney never pivoted, simply stayed roughly the same politician he was in 2006, he would have a 5 point lead now
No, he would be watching Perry from the sidelines.
LikeLike
Brent
you think so? hmmm, well i guess your point is no less provable than mine was
LikeLike
McCain asked on CNBC about Welch’s comments, he says he “wouldn’t put anything past this administration.”
LikeLike
“wouldn’t put anything past this administration.”
McCain jumped the shark right about the time he lost to Obama and went back to the Senate.
LikeLike
“ScottC, on October 5, 2012 at 9:56 am said:
Agreed.
I think that what has the Obama contingent’s panties all in a post-debate twist is that Romney is actually trying to win the election. “
That’s secondary to their issue over Jim Leher allowing Romney to address Obama directly without interjecting himself to declare that everything that Romney was saying was objectively false. Clearly President Obama shouldn’t even be expected to have to respond to Romney’s obviously false talking points. The fact that Romney got a way with it just shows the right wing bias of the entire media.
If only Will McAvoy had been the debate moderator, then everything would have worked out as it was supposed to.
LikeLike
“Michigoose, on October 5, 2012 at 12:19 pm said:
“wouldn’t put anything past this administration.”
McCain jumped the shark right about the time he lost to Obama and went back to the Senate.”
The administration has gotten worse on it’s dissembling as well over the past four years. Having said that, I don’t believe the BLS data was fabricated.
LikeLike
“lmsinca, on October 5, 2012 at 10:31 am said:
And what does it say about conservative ideology, and how it’s viewed by the majority, that their candidate has to speak as a moderate to be elected?”
Romney is not the conservative candidate. He’s the Republican Party candidate. You have nothing to worry about from a Romney presidency when it comes to repealing the ACA or for that matter cutting spending. You aren’t the one Romney is lying to. It’s the conservative base.
LikeLike
If only Will McAvoy had been the debate moderator, then everything would have worked out as it was supposed to.
Lehrer was the anti-McAvoy. His part could have been played by a potted plant. Part of the advantage of being anti-Big Bird is that Republicans have cowed PBS correspondents into the worst of the false equivocators. Lehrer let Romney use him as a boot-scrape.
LikeLike
“ScottC, on October 5, 2012 at 10:08 am said:
Brent:
All candidates pander to the base during the primaries and then pivot to the center.
Yes.
All this shock and consternation over Romney’s “shifting” positions has a distinct Captain Louis Renault feel to it.”
It’s worse than that. It’s the “we may have picked the wrong general election strategy” second guessing starting early since the Obama campaign’s messaging has been based on Romney as an unacceptably conservative candidate rather than an untrustworthy flip-flopper.
The problem with this strategy is it depends on Romney playing along with the caricture, which to be fair he’s been more than happy to do up until this point. Once he starts talking about his governing experience in Massachusetts, it’s a lot harder to make it stick.
Cue press stories about the Romney campaign team playing Nth dimensional chess if they win.
LikeLike
“yellojkt, on October 5, 2012 at 12:27 pm said:
If only Will McAvoy had been the debate moderator, then everything would have worked out as it was supposed to.
Lehrer was the anti-McAvoy. His part could have been played by a potted plant. Part of the advantage of being anti-Big Bird is that Republicans have cowed PBS correspondents into the worst of the false equivocators. Lehrer let Romney use him as a boot-scrape.”
No, Lehrer decided his job was to get out of the way. His actions were intentional. He had actually said as much in previous interviews.
LikeLike
“. His part could have been played by a potted plant. ”
then he was ideal. the less said by the moderator the better. let the 2 candidates duke it out. if once can’t take a punch, so much the better.
LikeLike
jnc:
Clearly President Obama shouldn’t even be expected to have to respond to Romney’s obviously false talking points.
I’m sure you’ve read comments somewhere that would suggest all manner of excuses for Obama’s bad performance, but not here I don’t think. Myself and a lot of others, not just here, have been highly critical of Obama’s performance. He looked like he wasn’t paying attention to me. I think he was told to not make any waves……….just to hold his own and Romney’s aggressive winning style surprised him. Who knows, but I give Romney credit for having the best performance.
and
You have nothing to worry about from a Romney presidency when it comes to repealing the ACA or for that matter cutting spending. You aren’t the one Romney is lying to. It’s the conservative base.
I don’t believe that………….sorry. I do agree the BLS numbers weren’t cooked though.
And Scott:
Personally, my panties weren’t twisted but my intestines were in a knot watching Obama make a fool of himself and letting Romney spin his tale.
LikeLike
“novahockey, on October 5, 2012 at 12:32 pm said:
“. His part could have been played by a potted plant. ”
then he was ideal. the less said by the moderator the better. let the 2 candidates duke it out. if once can’t take a punch, so much the better.”
It was in contrast to the common “joint press conference” criticism of most of the past general election debates. This is the alternative, not Lincoln-Douglas.
Updated: Lehrer himself on this:
LikeLike
It will be interesting to see in the VP debate if Biden is smart enough (yeah I can’t believe I wrote that either) to take Romney’s debate positions against Ryan.
For instance will he say,
“Your running mate castigated us for the 716 billion in Medicare cuts. Since you also included them in your House budget, would you like me to cede my time so you can defend them?”
LikeLike
“Brent Nyitray, on October 5, 2012 at 11:36 am said:
Had Romney never pivoted, simply stayed roughly the same politician he was in 2006, he would have a 5 point lead now
No, he would be watching Perry from the sidelines.”
My guess is it would have been Gingrich. Perry self destructed.
LikeLike
It should be amusing to see the talk time numbers for Biden. If I was Ryan, I’d just let Biden ramble on and on for as long as he wants to.
LikeLike
It should be amusing to see the talk time numbers for Biden. If I was Ryan, I’d just let Biden ramble on and on for as long as he wants to.
Biden is a wily political veteran. I wouldn’t underestimate him – the old dog could very well take the young whippersnapper to school…
LikeLike
I don’t, but I believe Ryan’s approach to the debate should be “Do no Harm”.
LikeLike
JNC – what DJ and you describe, taken together, would be role reversal from this first debate, with one candidate playing a balanced pass/run attack with an occasional trick play in a hurry-up offense against the other playing a prevent D on every snap.
Ah – back to baseball.
PS – now do not think Gary J. would have made a lot of difference in the first debate. Do you?
LikeLike
Can’t the Obama campaign pivot to the flip-flopper critque, sort of like banned suggests of Biden?
For instance: “Some people say the President was ill prepared for his debate with Presidential Candidate Romney. That is not true. He was very well prepared to debate him. He was ill-prepared to debate Massachusettes Governor Romney and that is who showed up at the debate.”
LikeLike
Ash – I think your ? reeks of bad leading on X.
RYAN: “Gov. Romney’s entire previous political experience was as the successful chief executive of Massachusetts. I don’t know how the President missed that.”
LikeLike
I’ll give Joe the help he needs:
BIDEN:
“Your running mate opposes the 716 billion in Medicare cuts. Since you also included them in your House budget, would you like me to cede my time so you can defend them?”
BIDEN
“Your running mate also took us to task for the defense sequestration cuts. Since you voted for them, would you like to explain to him why he is wrong?”
BIDEN:
“You have voted several times recently to increase sanctions on Iran. Now that they are causing rioting in the streets of Tehran, would you like to explain to your running mate why that approach was the correct one?”
BIDEN:
You favor tax simplification. Could you please explain to us which of your running mate’s tax avoidance strategies you would eliminate?”
LikeLike
BIDEN: “Your running mate opposes the 716 billion in Medicare cuts. Since you also included them in your House budget, would you like me to cede my time so you can defend them?”
RYAN: Sure. You said “the 716 billion in Medicare cuts”. It is nice that you are finally admitting here, at last, that President Obama has been deceiving the people over this. Of course President Obama has been playing semantic games over this issue for a long time, denying that any such cuts exist. I am glad that you have finally decided to come clean about it. What’s that? No, I am sorry you graciously ceded your time to me, and so I intend to use it to explain to the people what your campaign has been so reluctant to explain…
LikeLike
BIDEN: “You have voted several times recently to increase sanctions on Iran. Now that they are causing rioting in the streets of Tehran, would you like to explain to your running mate why that approach was the correct one?”
Ryan: “They” are causing? This is unfortunately typical of this administration. First you blame a US filmmaker for the assassination of one of our ambassadors, and now you are going to blame rioting in Iran on our trading policies. Sorry, Mr. Vice President, but the riots in the streets of Tehran are being caused by Iranian policies, not the United States, and I think it is a real shame that we have a White House that is constantly seeking to blame the US for the actions of people in other countries. I think the American people both want and deserve a president and administration that is going to stand up for rather than apologize for American principles and the actions we take in their defense and in defense of our allies, and that is the kind of change that Mitt Romney and I plan on giving them.
LikeLike
BIDEN: “You favor tax simplification. Could you please explain to us which of your running mate’s tax avoidance strategies you would eliminate?”
RYAN: Well it’s interesting that you accuse Mitt of avoiding taxes. In fact the biggest tax deduction that Mitt has taken over the years has been for his annual charitable donations. For example, in 2011, Mitt donated about $4 million to charity, which was nearly 30% of his income. But on his tax return that year, although he was legally entitled to deduct all of it, he only deducted half that amount, because he didn’t think it was right to reduce his tax bill so dramatically. So, far from tax avoidance, he actually over paid his taxes. Eliminating or limiting this deduction for charitable contributions is one of the things we have discussed, and if we were to implement it, it might well impact Mitt’s tax bill in the future given how much he gives to charity every year. But certainly that is something you don’t have to worry about, Mr. Vice-president. No one would ever accuse you of trying to avoid taxes through charitable contributions, since you’d actually have to make some in order to reduce your tax bill. According to my numbers you have donated on average just .2% of your income over the last 10 years, summing up to a grand total of $3,690. Definitely not a lot of tax avoidance opportunities there, so you are at least one person who doesn’t have to worry about the elimination of the charitable deduction.
LikeLike
Probably not, given the format.
LikeLike
“ashot, on October 5, 2012 at 12:55 pm said:
Can’t the Obama campaign pivot to the flip-flopper critique, sort of like banned suggests of Biden?
For instance: “Some people say the President was ill prepared for his debate with Presidential Candidate Romney. That is not true. He was very well prepared to debate him. He was ill-prepared to debate Massachusetts Governor Romney and that is who showed up at the debate.””
The framing itself is still excuse making for Obama. It leads one to ask what else was Obama ill-prepared for, such as the economy.
LikeLike
“He was ill-prepared to debate Massachusettes Governor Romney and that is who showed up at the debate”
PR flak response — Gov. Romney constantly evaluates the latest information and re-examines his policies based on the best available data. Using this and his years of experience, he’s able to develop the best policies. President Obama, apparently, sticks to the same failed ideology despite overwhelming evidence it’s a loser that’s failed America and hurts puppies.
LikeLike
http://reason.com/blog/2012/10/05/long-simmering-dispute-over-alanis-moris
LikeLike
“How dumb would anybody have to be to believe ANTHING that Romney says ever?”
Hard for me to deterimine just how dumb I am. I will leave that up to others…
I believed him when he said he was laying out his principles and would work out the details when he got elected with the people in congress. All I have to believe is that his ideals are better than Obama’s. I believe that with every ounce of my being.
LikeLike
Thanks…for beating down my suggestion. It was sort of an off the cuff comment. I wasn’t really thinking of Biden saying that in the debate, more as a spin by the campaign. Biden would not want to bring up the debate much at all given the beating Obama took.
LikeLike
BIDEN:
“You defended your running mate’s statement about the 47% saying:
he was “obviously inarticulate” “The point we’re trying to make here is, under the Obama economy, government dependency is up and economic stagnation is up.”
now that he says that he was actually wrong, which statement of his would you like to defend tonight?”
LikeLike
Ryan:
What Mitt was wrong about is that we’ll never reach those voters. We know what we have a plan and ability to turn this economy around so that we’ll all benefit. Dependency has increased — and it’s Obama’s fault. We started to internalize some of the President’s class warfare rhetoric. we fell into the “us vs. them” trap — and that was wrong. but we can admit a mistake and not cast blame elsewhere, which this administration seems incapable of doing. In any casse, we think “us” includes those left behind in the Obama economy. And I think our message will appeal to them.
LikeLike
BIDEN
Your running mate said for the first time in the last debate that his plan would keep pre-existing condtions protection, and coverage for children into adulthood. After the debate your campaign spokesman said this was not the case. Could you explain to your running mate why he isn’t correct?
LikeLike
Ryan: Pre-existing conditions will be covered, albeit differently than under obamacare. we’re going to work very closely with the states b/c this is such an important issue. we’ll make sure they have the resources and assistance needed to develop policies that are the best fit. and that’s key for this population for vulnerable. simple “banning” insurance companies from dropping coverage is not a solution. we want to work with the states to find a way to make sure the sickest get the health Care they need, not just a policy that might not suit their needs.
LikeLike
nova:
“Pre-existing conditions will be covered, albeit differently than under obamacare. we’re going to work very closely with the states”
In other words they aren’t covered under your plan.
LikeLike
“You said “the 716 billion in Medicare cuts”. It is nice that you are finally admitting here, at last, that President Obama has been deceiving the people over this”
In other words, you’re going to lie about supporting them.
LikeLike
BIDEN: In other words, you’re…
I’m sorry Mr. VP, but you specifically ceded your time. Please stop rudely interrupting.
LikeLike
“We started to internalize some of the President’s class warfare rhetoric”
snort, they don’t internalize thing where romney is getting his votes
LikeLike
“They” are causing? This is unfortunately typical of this administration. First you blame a US filmmaker for the assassination of one of our ambassadors, and now you are going to blame rioting in Iran on our trading policies.”
So you have no clue what’s been going on in Tehran then.
LikeLike
“Well it’s interesting that you accuse Mitt of avoiding taxes. In fact the biggest tax deduction that Mitt has taken over the years has been for his annual charitable donations. For example, in 2011, ”
so you’re not going to change any of the tax avoidance strategies currently in place?
Congressman Ryan are you running for Vice Presidnet of the US or the Caymans?
LikeLike
BIDEN: so you’re not going to change any of the tax avoidance strategies currently in place?
Sorry, Mr. VP, but you specifically asked me about my running mate’s tax avoidance schemes, not any tax avoidance strategy at all. Did you already forget what you asked? I can have it read back to you if you like, if your memory is really that feeble. Quite clearly the purpose of your question was to malign Mitt as having avoided taxes, so that is what I addressed. Now that it has backfired, you want to pretend you were asking me something else? Sure, we can talk about real policy if you want, but if that is what you want, don’t couch your questions with snarky and cheap insinuations. Alas, based on recent evidence, it seems you have little more than cheap snark to offer.
LikeLike
The only flaw in this back in forth is assuming a level of competence that Biden just doesn’t have. He’s not disciplined enough.
LikeLike
nova;
You may be right. Personally I thnk VP debates are stupid.
I imagine that Joe will let Ryan bury himself with statistics like he did at AARP, while joe throws his populist suit on.
LikeLike
Please go right ahead, explain your support for those cuts, I’m all ears
LikeLike
“i’m all ears”
i thought that was your running mate
/and i’m off.
LikeLike
BIDEN:
Your running mate has criticzed the withdrawal of troops in Afghanistan. Could you tell us how soon you plan to stop the withdrawal and how any troops you intend to send back please?
LikeLike
nova:
Doing two shows a day?
LikeLike
BIDEN;
It’s interesting that you’d had to change so many of your previous positions to run with Governor Romney. Was there anything that you’ve been able to change his position on? (or did he beat you to it in every case?)
LikeLike
remember, vps are supposed to carry the attack load in campaign so the other two can look “presidential” so this debate should be a lot nastier.
LikeLike
yep. but the late show gets a little blue.
/really off this time
LikeLike
scott;;
you wouldn’t make it as a politician
you work with stilletoes, not sabres
LikeLike
you wouldn’t make it as a politician
Quite right. I find it difficult to pretend. Good luck to you, though.
LikeLike
I mean a politician works with stilletoes not sabres, sorry for the confusion.
LikeLike
BIDEN:
So you want to cut taxes and increase defense spending at the same time. My calendar says 2012, not 2003, has your party rehabilitated President Bush yet?
LikeLike
scott:
I’m not old enough to run for office yet, at least not as a Democrat.
LikeLike
This was a very Sorkinesque dialog. It’s a shame the real candidates aren’t nearly as witty or forthright.
LikeLike