Obama/Biden vs Romney/Ryan--America's Choose Your Own Adventure Moment

[oxcoug]

I'm not sure why you need the specifics pointed out (I'm guessing you already know the lies), but here are a few:

1. Medicare- Ryan actually has the gall to say Obama raided Medicare with the $700 billion reduction, and never bothers to note that multiple of his budgets did the exact same thing.

2. Debt commission- Ryan says the debt commission "came back with an urgent report," and that Obama "thanked them, sent them on their way, and then did exactly nothing." Ryan somehow forgot that the commission came back with exactly zero recommendations- because Ryan spearheaded efforts to vote against the commission's plan and no consensus was ever reached.

3. He actually blamed the credit downgrade on Obama- even though it was Republicans (again with Ryan as a leader) who played chicken with the credit rating.

It was an embarrassment to himself and his party.

Where is Cali and who is this talking points hack you've replaced him with? Your indignation is amusing. Can't tell if it's real (because you REALLY feel wronged by Ryan) or acted. Either way, fun stuff.

1. Your Medicare point is specious and the so-called "fact-checkers" who feigned outrage on this point shld all be locked in a closet together until they admit to just writing editorials rather than "checking facts." So as a test of your literacy in this conv let me ask - do you actually know why Ryan's cuts are not the same as Obama's? I'm curious to know whether you know and disingenuously hope no one will notice or whether you have been stuck in the echo chamber where no one points out how bad of a claim this is.

2. The notion that the commission came back w/ "zero recommendations" is bull - the commissioners voted against the deal, but the co-chairs came back with a draft proposal including a set of urgent recommendations which the Obama admin still could have pursued as policy - they instead chose to do exactly what Ryan said - ignore the debt problem and stop talking about it and fail to provide any serious map of their own for addressing the country's impending debt catastrophe.

3. There are MANY factors that produced the credit downgrade - the claim that the downgrade was produced merely by the failure to pass a timely debt ceiling extension is wrong. The S&P report warning of the potential downgrade said that it would happen “unless substantial and credible agreement is achieved on a budget that includes long-term deficit reduction" - in other words, increasing the debt ceiling (the only thing the Dems were serious about) w/o substantial deficit reduction plans wld have been part of the trigger for a downgrade, not the solution for preventing it.

In its eventual report explaining the downgrade S&P wrote that the debt ceiling deal was insufficient “the plan envisions only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements, the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal sustainability.”

At no point in the debate did Obama or the White House offer a plan that made any significant changes to entitlements - i.e. they were never serious abt doing what was necessary to avert the downgrade - i.e. Paul Ryan is right.

[UtahDan]

I'm not sure why you need the specifics pointed out (I'm guessing you already know the lies), but here are a few:

1. Medicare- Ryan actually has the gall to say Obama raided Medicare with the $700 billion reduction, and never bothers to note that multiple of his budgets did the exact same thing.

2. Debt commission- Ryan says the debt commission "came back with an urgent report," and that Obama "thanked them, sent them on their way, and then did exactly nothing." Ryan somehow forgot that the commission came back with exactly zero recommendations- because Ryan spearheaded efforts to vote against the commission's plan and no consensus was ever reached.

3. He actually blamed the credit downgrade on Obama- even though it was Republicans (again with Ryan as a leader) who played chicken with the credit rating.

It was an embarrassment to himself and his party.

I think that attacking Obama's record is a very sound strategy. I think we will see a lot more of it now. I believe their best line is to simply say things are wrong in this country, and the incumbent is to blame. My perception is that outside of Mormons very few Republicans are excited about Mitt beyond him being not Obama. He just needs to remain a reasonable alternative and hope the economic indicators don't improve. That is my perception anyway.

[il Padrino Ute]

Where is Cali and who is this talking points hack you've replaced him with? Your indignation is amusing. Can't tell if it's real (because you REALLY feel wronged by Ryan) or acted. Either way, fun stuff.

1. Your Medicare point is specious and the so-called "fact-checkers" who feigned outrage on this point shld all be locked in a closet together until they admit to just writing editorials rather than "checking facts." So as a test of your literacy in this conv let me ask - do you actually know why Ryan's cuts are not the same as Obama's? I'm curious to know whether you know and disingenuously hope no one will notice or whether you have been stuck in the echo chamber where no one points out how bad of a claim this is.

2. The notion that the commission came back w/ "zero recommendations" is bull - the commissioners voted against the deal, but the co-chairs came back with a draft proposal including a set of urgent recommendations which the Obama admin still could have pursued as policy - they instead chose to do exactly what Ryan said - ignore the debt problem and stop talking about it and fail to provide any serious map of their own for addressing the country's impending debt catastrophe.

3. There are MANY factors that produced the credit downgrade - the claim that the downgrade was produced merely by the failure to pass a timely debt ceiling extension is wrong. The S&P report warning of the potential downgrade said that it would happen “unless substantial and credible agreement is achieved on a budget that includes long-term deficit reduction" - in other words, increasing the debt ceiling (the only thing the Dems were serious about) wld have been part of the trigger for a downgrade, not the solution for preventing it.

In its eventual report explaining the downgrade S&P wrote that the debt ceiling deal was insufficient “the plan envisions only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements, the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal sustainability.”

At no point in the debate did Obama or the White House offer a plan that made any significant changes to entitlements - i.e. they were never serious abt doing what was necessary to avert the downgrade - i.e. Paul Ryan is right.

ox for the win!

[calicoug]

Where is Cali and who is this talking points hack you've replaced him with? Your indignation is amusing. Can't tell if it's real (because you REALLY feel wronged by Ryan) or acted. Either way, fun stuff.

1. Your Medicare point is specious and the so-called "fact-checkers" who feigned outrage on this point shld all be locked in a closet together until they admit to just writing editorials rather than "checking facts." So as a test of your literacy in this conv let me ask - do you actually know why Ryan's cuts are not the same as Obama's? I'm curious to know whether you know and disingenuously hope no one will notice or whether you have been stuck in the echo chamber where no one points out how bad of a claim this is.

Specious? Really? There is no difference in the cuts proposed by Obama and Ryan. They are literally the exact same cuts. Even Ryan doesn't dispute that.

I assume you are being sloppy and referring to the use of the savings (where there is a difference between the two).

So if you want to get into the weeds on this, here we go.

Obama cut funds from Medicare.

What are those funds? Much of it was reductions in payments to hospitals and providers that the hospitals and providers had already agreed to cut (remember when Obama was accused of entering into a "sweetheart" deal with providers during the health care negotiations? Now he's being accused of robbing those same providers that people two years ago were complaining got too good of a deal from the government). Other funds were subsidies to Medicare Advantage which were only supposed to last until 2012 anyways (that was part of the original legislation when Medicare Part D was enacted- something Ryan supported then too, including the 10 year termination of subsidies). Other funds were cut where fraud was most rampant.

The actual amount that this totals varies from year to year, but currently is projected to be about $700 billion.

Obama didn't "allocate" these funds to anything (money is fungible), but the savings of these funds was used in the accounting to offset costs of subsidies under the ACA.

What did Ryan do?

He proposed the EXACT same cuts to Medicare. No difference at all (not surprising- he supported cuts to subsidies for over a decade).

His budget also does absolutely nothing to "allocate" these funds to anything. They are used in the accounting to offset costs in his budget. What Ryan won't tell you is that most of the costs of his budget go to tax cuts for the wealthy. So, you could say Ryan "raided" Medicare to pay for tax cuts to the wealthy, if you were going to use his logic.

Ryan wants to say the savings go to "debt reduction." His plan doesn't actually reduce the debt at all- unless you assume revenue as a percent of GDP that no serious person believes will ever materialize under his plan and "savings" that are hugely overstated, most of which couldn't have any material impact for decades even if revenue assumptions did occur. But set all that aside- Ryan then takes the leap that if we lower debt, Medicare is automatically protected (obviously not true), and that therefore his savings actually are being taken out of Medicare and going right back into... Medicare. It's gobbldy-gook nonsense.

And, of course, if Ryan actually believes the garbage above about his savings preserving Medicare, then why did both he and Romney just announce they will reverse these cuts and keep that money in Medicare in the first place? Oh yeah- because he knows he's full of crap.

Summary: Ryan is lying. On multiple levels.

2. The notion that the commission came back w/ "zero recommendations" is bull - the commissioners voted against the deal, but the co-chairs came back with a draft proposal including a set of urgent recommendations which the Obama admin still could have pursued as policy - they instead chose to do exactly what Ryan said - ignore the debt problem and stop talking about it and fail to provide any serious map of their own for addressing the country's impending debt catastrophe.

Two questions. 1) Was Ryan on the debt commission? 2) Did Ryan vote for it?

Answer key: 1) Yes. 2) No.

Pretty fantastic to complain about someone disregarding a report when the complainer-in-chief voted against the report.

3. There are MANY factors that produced the credit downgrade - the claim that the downgrade was produced merely by the failure to pass a timely debt ceiling extension is wrong. The S&P report warning of the potential downgrade said that it would happen “unless substantial and credible agreement is achieved on a budget that includes long-term deficit reduction" - in other words, increasing the debt ceiling (the only thing the Dems were serious about) w/o substantial deficit reduction plans wld have been part of the trigger for a downgrade, not the solution for preventing it.

In its eventual report explaining the downgrade S&P wrote that the debt ceiling deal was insufficient “the plan envisions only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements, the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal sustainability.”

At no point in the debate did Obama or the White House offer a plan that made any significant changes to entitlements - i.e. they were never serious abt doing what was necessary to avert the downgrade - i.e. Paul Ryan is right.

From the S&P report in the very first sentence under "Rationale":

We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the
growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government debt burden by the middle of the decade.

Pretty clear. The debt was downgraded first and foremost because Congress began acting like children unconcerned with a debt default.

And who was helping lead that discussion? None other than Ryan. Do you not recall when he said it wouldn't be a big deal to default for a few days on government debt and that bondholders would prefer we default then miss a chance at forcing a huge long-term debt reduction deal?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/43060739

Of course, once our debt rating was downgraded (which he had to think would also result if we had defaulted for a few days on bond payments), he now says it is Obama's fault.

Summary: He's a liar.

[calicoug]

I think that attacking Obama's record is a very sound strategy. I think we will see a lot more of it now. I believe their best line is to simply say things are wrong in this country, and the incumbent is to blame. My perception is that outside of Mormons very few Republicans are excited about Mitt beyond him being not Obama. He just needs to remain a reasonable alternative and hope the economic indicators don't improve. That is my perception anyway.

Sound strategy? Perhaps- that remains to be seen. But let's be honest about what it is then. The "strategy" involves making up lies and distorting reality to get elected. A portion of that "strategy" has been involved in most every American campaign ever conducted. It's hard to think of a campaign other than Romney's where it was the centerpiece of the campaign, however.

[creekster]

Sound strategy? Perhaps- that remains to be seen. But let's be honest about what it is then. The "strategy" involves making up lies and distorting reality to get elected. A portion of that "strategy" has been involved in most every American campaign ever conducted. It's hard to think of a campaign other than Romney's where it was the centerpiece of the campaign, however.

seriously? How about "It's the economy, stupid!"?

[calicoug]

seriously? How about "It's the economy, stupid!"?

How was that a lie? The US was coming off a recession. The economy was a huge issue- much like now.

[creekster]

How was that a lie? The US was coming off a recession. The economy was a huge issue- much like now.

and you think Romney's approach is different?

[UtahDan]

seriously? How about "It's the economy, stupid!"?

It's one of the reasons these campaigns have come to bore me to tears.

[calicoug]

and you think Romney's approach is different?

Yes.

I don't have a problem with Romney saying "The economy is bad," or "here's what I would do differently." The economy is in rough shape, and all that's clearly fair game.

I've been quite surprised that for a guy who presumably welcomes a debate on the merits of policy differences (else, why pick Ryan who highlights those differences), the primary way Romney is expressing these views is through pure fabrications, such as, Obama gutted the work requirements in welfare reform, or Obama robbed Medicare.

[SCcoug]

Evidently NBC didn't air this Brian Williams interview with Paul Ryan about the shoddy fact checkers. I wonder why.

[YOUTUBE]dHSPM2SoO0M[/YOUTUBE]

[Uncle Ted]

And, of course, if Ryan actually believes the garbage above about his savings preserving Medicare, then why did both he and Romney just announce they will reverse these cuts and keep that money in Medicare in the first place? Oh yeah- because he knows he's full of crap.

Hasn't Romney announced if he is elected that he "will act to repeal Obamacare" on his first day in office? That would effectively reverse the cuts.

[Uncle Ted]

Two questions. 1) Was Ryan on the debt commission? 2) Did Ryan vote for it?

Answer key: 1) Yes. 2) No.

Pretty fantastic to complain about someone disregarding a report when the complainer-in-chief voted against the report.

It seems that Ryan answers these questions pretty well in the unaired NBC video that SCcoug posted...

Evidently NBC didn't air this Brian Williams interview with Paul Ryan about the shoddy fact checkers. I wonder why.

[YOUTUBE]dHSPM2SoO0M[/YOUTUBE]

[Uncle Ted]

From the S&P report in the very first sentence under "Rationale":



Pretty clear. The debt was downgraded first and foremost because Congress began acting like children unconcerned with a debt default.

And who was helping lead that discussion? None other than Ryan. Do you not recall when he said it wouldn't be a big deal to default for a few days on government debt and that bondholders would prefer we default then miss a chance at forcing a huge long-term debt reduction deal?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/43060739

Of course, once our debt rating was downgraded (which he had to think would also result if we had defaulted for a few days on bond payments), he now says it is Obama's fault.

Summary: He's a liar.

The reason that U.S. lost its AAA credit rating and who is to blame is pretty much summed up in the following chart....

[Tex]

Yes.

I don't have a problem with Romney saying "The economy is bad," or "here's what I would do differently." The economy is in rough shape, and all that's clearly fair game.

I've been quite surprised that for a guy who presumably welcomes a debate on the merits of policy differences (else, why pick Ryan who highlights those differences), the primary way Romney is expressing these views is through pure fabrications, such as, Obama gutted the work requirements in welfare reform, or Obama robbed Medicare.

The sheer volume of words you've had to devote to emphasizing this point belies it. It's what happens when opinions become "facts."

Personally, I'd love to hear an Obama supporter make the case for a 2nd term, without mentioning Romney/Ryan, Bush, or the Republicans.