The New Republic

I think Raddatz did a good job but certainly the different visual angles offered by the round table format helped her in a way that a remote moderator doesn't have. Ryan looked simply unable to answer the questions as to tax policy -- the GOP wants to pretend that we can have everything and don't have to pay for it. No doubt the Republican meme will be "biased moderator!" as they cannot bear to have questions asked that require an answer.

- ironyroad

October 12, 2012 at 5:48am

It is difficult to know who won the debate. Biden was louder and interrupted Ryan frequently and was more animated. If you believe in his philosophy, you liked him. Ryan was stiff and lacked passion. Ryan tries to be friendly to everyone. He would not be sarcastic and rude. He is easy to like. He needs to mature as a politician. He needs to get tougher. This was one of the problems with George H.W. Bush. He wanted to be liked by his opponents, and George Mitchell stuck a knife in his back. Both men have different personalities, and they displayed them during the debate. If you like sarcasm, Biden wins. I have learned that if you want to get things done, you must have a civil tongue, listen, and compromise. Making fun of people does not lead to compromise. Both men have never had a private sector job. Biden has been in government, since he was 29 years old. He also has admitted to plagiarism. He is a race baiter and proponent of big government. He is intensely parsimonious. Ryan represents a break with LBJ, Carter, and Obama. He knows that Medicare, Social Security, and the federal deficit can not be maintained at their present levels. A point that Ryan made that has been ignored by the left-leaning press is that there will be no Medicare, Social Security, or safety net if reductions in their growth are not made and there is no economic growth. Biden's answer to everything was raising taxes. Meanwhile, Biden had no answer to the Benghazi fiasco. Notwithstanding, if both sides do not learn to give, the country will suffer. On some issues, compromise can not be made. On most, compromise can be achieved.

- john336

October 12, 2012 at 6:18am

Given Biden's solid performance, just imagine if Obama had fought Romney to a draw in their debate. Had that happened, Romney/Ryan most likely would be packing out of Ohio by now because his debate-fueled surge wouldn't have happened. Their Ohio investments would likely be moved to Florida, which would be matched by Obama/Biden not having to expend anymore time and money in Ohio either. We could be sitting here speculating on which congressional and senatorial seats to snatch from the GOP, rather than fretting about the presidential race(me), or just fighting to make sure the White House isn't lost, as Obama is now doing. That's why Obama's lost chance last week in Colorado bums me out.

- scrubby

October 12, 2012 at 6:24am

Biden interrupted Ryan because whenever Biden did, Ryan was spouting unadulterated BS -- oh, sorry, "Malarky". He'd be patient while Ryan said one lie after another, but by lie number 5 or 6 SOMEBODY should have interrupted Ryan. Since the moderator seemed quite content to let Ryan repeat false propaganda points, I was glad Biden was able to step in and interrupt the flow. Apparently the new Republican talking point this morning is that behavior is "bullying". I don't think it's "Bullying" to interrupt a man spewing falsehoods.

- AllanL5

October 12, 2012 at 8:27am

"Paul Ryan are not being honest about their plan" A list of 5 desiderata is not a tax plan. On Romney's website he will cut taxes 20% and eliminate taxes on incomes of interest, dividends and long term capital gains of up to AGI of $200,000.00. That's all of the plan that we have. And when will we see a defense of the ACA during a debate? It has gotten attacked in both debates for causing all sorts of terrible things and it is not being defended.

- Nusholtz

October 12, 2012 at 8:30am

Here, calling Ryan "congressman" against the debate rules: http://www.mediaite.com/online/nobody-puts-baby-in-the-congress-debate-moderator-not-allowed-to-call-paul-ryan-congressman/ Presumably, because Certain Parties don't want Baby Ryan linked to the horrible Republican Congress that has brought us to the edge of disaster; nor, do they want people looking up his record. Imagine, they might discover his anti-woman propositions and (ahem) his budget and also his voting for bigtime expenditures under Bush. PS to people who have Canadian safety nets and a sane government backing R&R Enterprises, fine, you move here and we'll move THERE.

- Sophia

October 12, 2012 at 8:38am

First time I saw Biden become Angry White Man, but when his face turned red, and stayed red, well, no longer mattered what he said. Not the Biden I supported at the beginning of the 2008 primaries. Maybe I have watched too much British drama. An archly raised eyebrow is more effective than the too-big smile suddenly consumed by someone I would avoid. fwiw, Ryan's family owns a construction company, and he did drive the Oscar Mayer Weinermobile in his youth.

- K2K

October 12, 2012 at 8:46am

There are some truly delusional people on this thread.

- cspencef

October 12, 2012 at 8:47am

Oh man with the scare tactics on our safety nets: if well-to-do and upper middle class people paid their taxes and funded hugely expensive wars we wouldn't be in this fix. Ditto, the reckless behavior that brought about the housing crisis and caused a near-Depression. If Republicans supported jobs initiatives, education and ran their businesses better, instead of losing whole industries like steel and making bad gas guzzling cars instead of competing for global business with eco-friendly cars, and also inventing games like Bain, offshoring jobs, outsourcing others and making them part-time, we'd be adding money to our coffers (jobs create wealth + revenues) and we wouldn't be in this fix. Instead what happens: a few people get filthy rich, pay very low tax rates, slash taxes some more, concentrating more and more wealth among a few people, who then offshore their wealth, we wouldn't be in this fix. Complaining that Ryan "notices" our revenue problems is rich, he helped create them. And, Biden correctly pointed out it's been a Republican goal since Social Security was enacted to get rid of it; ditto, all the Great Society programs, including Medicare, implemented under Johnson. Basically, you guys prefer Dog Eat Dog, no unions, control over women, control by religion, and cannot stand racial equality. Otherwise explain the Southern Strategy. Note: there is no other explanation. No way would an entire region go Republican, the old Civil War South, since the Civil Rights and Great Society days unless class and racial animus and also, progress for women were involved. And class warfare suits Republicans fine: it keeps workers down, they don't have to be paid well, or kept safe, and the boss class doesn't have to pay taxes or abide by environmental regulations, aka, Job Killing EPA; now it's the Job Killing ACA or the Job Killing Dodd Frank or Job Killing Taxes on Rich People. As for Benghazi, people shouldn't jump to conclusions. Let the investigation proceed. It's interesting that the intelligence community gave bad intelligence, Ryan and Romney both think our embassy (with marines) is in Benghazi (that's a consulate) and the Republicans voted to cut embassy security by hundreds of millions of dollars, and even more interesting that they were trying to make political hay out of it BEFORE we knew Ambassador Stephens was dead and Romney was using a dead Navy SEAL for political fodder until his mother - his MOTHER - complained about it. So please. And PS while we're on the subject, please explain 9/11, where 3,000 Americans on American soil were killed, if you want to get all huffy about Benghazi. Hypocrites; Clinton and his intelligence experts begged Bush to pay attention to al Qaeda, to no avail, they were dismissed because Everybody Knew Saddam Was The Problem. Sheese. After 9/11 2000, Americans pulled together and supported Bush, despite the obvious failure to keep us safe here in America. That isn't the case with Benghazi, Republicans are NOT being supportive, they are being divisive and trying to make out that this tragedy was another Iran and Obama is Jimmy Carter. It's beyond unseemly, it's unpatriotic and also it fits their narrative of the last 4 years: get rid of Obama and regain power no matter what. No matter what.

- Sophia

October 12, 2012 at 8:57am

Dang. If Biden is being called Angry White Man and being accused of having a red face, imagine if Obama had had the temerity to call Romney on his bull****.

- Sophia

October 12, 2012 at 9:01am

And yes Certain People have been watching too much British drama. Try watching British Parliament instead.

- Sophia

October 12, 2012 at 9:02am

cspencef - Laughter. Here is my question. Will Romney borrow from China to finance his tax cuts?

- Nusholtz

October 12, 2012 at 9:03am

I was disappointed with Biden's performance. The office of vice president should carry some dignity. Biden was rude, insulting, he grimmaced and laughed. He looked like a typical urban ward healing politician who had been promoted above his level of ability. Ryan actually came across as the more serious, thoughtful, and rational. He stood up to Biden's baiting. Moreover, Biden will surely be caught out on his outrageous lie, when he said that the US embassy in Benghazi had not asked for additional security. Indeed, they had. The more the public learns about what really happened in Libya, the more likely they are to lose confidence in the current administration. All Biden did in the debate was to throw red meat to the Democratic base. In effect, he acted as their Rush Limbaugh. Ryan was the more presidential and more deserving of election.

- Spengler47

October 12, 2012 at 9:32am

"A list of 5 desiderata is not a tax plan" Outstanding, Nush. I'm amazed this hasn't been broadcast more openly... Romney's "plan" isn't even a plan in any sense of the word. Forget that his logic (tax cuts = job growth) has been proven false time and time again, most of the points in his plan aren't even plans. They're wishes. Saying things like "better schools, more choice", "better trade agreements", and "energy independence" without any detail as to what you would do, how you would do it, and what evidence you have as to what your changes would accomplish based on historical data is absurd.

- Tristan

October 12, 2012 at 9:39am

Aaron w consider the absurdity of your comment. First, you grant the spectral, inappropriate, continual leering, grinning, laughing, interrupting, IE that it went on. Then you justify it by saying, "it's called a debate." So ad hominem becomes an acceptable debate technique. This implies the impossibility or civil discourse. You'll note that when Romney wiped the floor with Obama, so much so it changed the terms of the race, he never engaged in ad hominem. There was no issue of his demeanour, save that it was excellently appropriate. That's exactly how Biden impaired himself last night. Second, let's stipulate for the sake of argument that I don't like Obama. Therefore, what I say about Biden last night is to be taken with a grain of salt. So on your logic, because you don't like either Romney or Ryan, any comment by you is to be taken with an equal grain of salt, or a bigger grain if your vehemence exceeds mine. So what binds and underlies the absurdity of both these points is the hobbling of rational civil discourse: first by vaunting ad hominem; second by partiality necessarily bending judgment.

- basman

October 12, 2012 at 9:43am

You like watching his veneer while he giggles? Show but no substance. When Iran takes occupancy of Obamacity they will cancel your magazine. Me - I am lapsing my subscription.

- dmking316b

October 12, 2012 at 9:58am

I don't think we can assign a debate winner to this one easily, mainly because Biden's mannerisms were incredibly grating, at least at first. Otherwise, he dominated the debate and got in a lot of effective jabs that will be re-played quite a lot. The effect of media repetition of small clips is often as important as the flow the debate itself. However, Biden's punches will get lost because of the short turnaround to the next Presidential debate. However, even though Biden's not a clear winner, Ryan was the clear loser. Ryan came off as milquetoast and unprepared to be a heartbeat from the presidency, especially on foreign policy issues. He also came off as completely untrustworthy on taxes (not being specific about deductions), Medicare and Social Security, and the stimulus. By the end, he wasn't even trying to parry Biden's charges. So far my predictions are coming true: Romney wins first debate, Biden wins (indirectly) second debate, and I expect Obama will do very well in the next debate while Romney struggles to connect to actual human beings in a town hall (if I recall, Romney didn't participate in any Republican debates that will be set up like this town hall. His debate experience won't play as big a role). But Obama's turkey performance in the first debate gives him a lot of ground to make up--something I definitely didn't expect.

- polcereal

October 12, 2012 at 9:59am

basman: Wasn't it ad hominem when Romney, using his bizarre rich-man metaphors brayed that Obama "could have his own house, his own car, but not your own facts." You idealized memory of Romney as grand statesman is simply a fantasy. Oddly, I sat next to a liberal woman watching the debate and she was drawn to his blue eyes and thought he sounded impressive, which left me aghast since I see him as a simpering fake who talks down like a patronizing saccharine kindergarten teacher---and maybe this is how he talks to constituents and high school students who visit his office. You can keep the fraudulent tilt of the head, the smile, the little laugh to encourage you to adore his little bean story, and all the other tricks that seduced voters in his home district---and people watching him on TV. He is quite creepy. And of course, a liar. I am glad that when asked his best personal qualities he blurted "Honest," which was a response so incredible he even caught himself and quickly moved to his memorized closing statemnt to cover up his major gaffe.

- atlasqq

October 12, 2012 at 10:18am

Compared to Gore's "deep sighs", I found Romney's incredulous smiles and good-natured "that's wrong", or "that's malarky", or "no, no, no" to be quite refreshing. The problem the Democrats have is that they must counter the lies and mis-characterizations of Romney/Ryan, without sounding peevish about it. I'm sorry if Republicans want to characterize this as "leering" -- but I don't think that word means what they think it means. Frankly, I found it very effective at preventing Ryan from layering lie upon lie upon lie. The one thing that doesn't come off as "peevish" is an astonished smile and good humor that Romney/Ryan would continue to repeat such transparent lies.

- AllanL5

October 12, 2012 at 10:24am

(I was of course referring to Ryan in the second part of my comments above about Ryan being a uber-patronizing suburban teacher who likes to adopt a cutey-poo voice like he is talking to thick children.)

- atlasqq

October 12, 2012 at 10:25am

AllanL5--do you want to clarify the apparent typo in your comment when you wrote ROMNEY when I am certain you meant BIDEN there?

- atlasqq

October 12, 2012 at 10:28am

Right at the end of the debate Ryan told another lie of Hitler proportions. When the candidates were asked by Raddatz what they thought about all the negative ads in the campaign, Biden finally fessed up and admitted he found them "unappealing." But Ryan didn't comment on the ads; he just left us with another GOP whopper of a negative ad (okay, a lie), saying that if Obamacare goes through, 20 million Americans will lose their health care and over 6 million seniors will lose their health care. Lies like that SHOULD be challenged immediately in a debate. And, yes, Biden did right to interrupt Ryan's lies continually. When the survival of America is at stake, Roberts Rules of Order go out the window. Americans don't debate that way and never have. I listen to the content of an argument, not the way it's delivered. Biden charged up the Democratic base Thursday. And now that Obama realizes that Weaselly Willard will be changing his position 2 or 3 times on the same topic right during a debate, he'll be much more prepared for the next one. He'd better be. Our economy is recovering, and the last thing we need now is Republicans getting hold of it and crashing it to the ground again. You think the Biden/Ryan debate wasn't "proper" enough? Wait till the Republicans give us another Great Depression and Americans are in the streets "debating" with automatic weapons and grenades. There won't be anybody selling apples this time.

- magboy47.

October 12, 2012 at 10:39am

Good point, atlasqq. I laughed out loud when Ryan said "Honest" in response to that question, and then quickly changed the subject.

- JEFF FREY

October 12, 2012 at 10:44am

...You idealized memory of Romney as grand statesman is simply a fantasy.... Oh please. No one said anything about Romney as a "grand statesman." Anyone can find things they didn't like about Romney's style in that debate. But there is simply no issue about his style or his demeanour other than the general understanding that he was entirely appropriate. The very D spin is that, in fact, Romney won on style but was in substance a liar. Here it cannot be controverted that there's a big issue over Biden's demeanour. The public question is whether it cost him the debate. Its very existence cuts against the claim he won it. It may be the "fantasy" is yours. Voters clearly, for the very recent past and ongoing present, have shifted perceptibly to Romney. That shift may or may not last. But for our purposes--who's fantasizing?-that shift dispels any notion of any Romney inappropriateness.

- basman

October 12, 2012 at 10:47am

To the extent it was Biden's purpose to get the base up, he did that, no question.

- basman

October 12, 2012 at 10:49am

I find it interesting that so many people are so uninterested and/or bored in issues and arguments that they have nothing better to do that study the mannerisms of the debaters. Joe acted like Joe and Paul acted like Paul; neither one has presented a new face since last we saw them. I actually thought they both did a great job of putting forward their arguments and counter-arguments. Joe seemed like he knew his stuff and was able to adapt it to fit the conversation taking place. Paul seemed like he knew his prepared talking points and zingers, and did passably well in delivering them with timing. Of course, I am already familiar with most of the arguments, so I already agree with Biden. I'm just happy to see him make the case so well. My big take-away is that it sounds suspiciously like Romney/Ryan want to stay in Afghanistan indefinitely, and was to expand America's presence in the ME by getting directly involved in a physical way in Syria. Ryan was trying to take the current administration to task for drawing down troop levels; and when Biden argued we were replacing our troop levels with Afghani troops, and Ryan dismissed that as not being an acceptable milestone, he left open the question of when will they draw down troops if not when we're done training their troops, a question he refused to answer. Maybe when they're a territory of the US, like Puerto Rico?

- GSpinks

October 12, 2012 at 10:49am

Malahat, I'm with you in thinking that Biden made telling points. Plus, I think, as I noted, Ryan was unimpressive.

- basman

October 12, 2012 at 10:51am

Basman: Since you said "please" I will respond. (Channeling Ryan here in his baby talk-big word mode). The fundamental point I made was the nasty ad hominem attack ("car/plane/facts" Romney did in fact make. And you, like Romney and Ryan ignore the salient issue and ramble off into some tertiary territory. If you will insist, I will withdraw the charge that you thought Romney was a "grand statesman" in the first debate, but your apparent belief that he was honest and a gentleman---certainly THAT is a fantasy.

- atlasqq

October 12, 2012 at 10:56am

Basman---I would like think our hopes for the country are not that far apart, despite this little dust-up between us on some interpretive points.

- atlasqq

October 12, 2012 at 10:57am

What Ryan was trying to do in the arguments about Afghanistan and Syria was criticize whatever Obama is doing, but not get his side tied to any alternative policy. Romney's main foreign policy at this point is to criticize Barack Obama, no matter what Obama is doing. Remember the situation in Libya in the spring? Biden put Ryan on the spot, and of course Ryan floundered because the real alternatives to Obama's approach are all pretty clearly worse (or at least less popular).

- JEFF FREY

October 12, 2012 at 11:20am

dmking: "When Iran takes occupancy of Obamacity" Sorry folks - good points by more or less everyone (basman - what's got into you? Spengler: "dignity of the office" - you KILL me man ... so Biden should be dignified, but when Obama is dignified and does not call Romney out on his lies, this is a show of weakness, fecklessness, whatever - Republicans make Big Brother look like Mr. Rogers) - but dmking has the post of the day, week - election season. I'm still trying to figure out where Obamacity is. And wondering how a country with a rapidly deteriorating economy (the official rate of inflation is 24%), crumbling infrastructure and dysfunctional armed forces 9000 km away from the shores of these blessed states is going to be "occupying" a place called "Obamacity" and cancelling TNR ... Thanks for my laugh of the week.

- icarus-r

October 12, 2012 at 11:28am

As for the debate, here is my prediction: it will not move the dial in Obama's direction, but it puts away the silly idea that Obama somehow wants to lose. And it shores up Democrats' morale - God knows, it needs a lot of shoring up. It's telling that Romney supporters attack Biden for his leering; but Obama's supporters attacked not Romney for his lies, but Obama. No matter. Biden stanched the Democratic bleeding. Romney has already conceded the foreign policy debate in his idiotic speech. Don't expect another "malarkey" from Obama, but do expect him to filet Romney every time he tells a lie. And expect Romney to come across as cloying and unsympathetic the first time he gets a question on the ACA or Obama's Executive Decree on illegals' children.

- icarus-r

October 12, 2012 at 11:33am

Obama should win the foreign policy debate. All he has to do is what Biden did, just say, "I was there [and you weren't]." On foreign policy the Republicans are tripping over themselves in the dark. It's almost beyond belief that they don't know the difference between Iran developing fissionable material and producing a workable, deliverable nuclear weapon (actually, they do--they're just hoping the average voter doesn't).

- magboy47.

October 12, 2012 at 12:09pm

Good to note the reference to Ryan’s statement on middle class taxation. Middle class savers and modest investors are where the big money is and they will be the ones that will, through taxation and inflation, pay down the debt whether Republicans or Democrats rule. Neither candidate or party can tell the truth about the reality that it is those who `played by the rules’ who will be required to pay most dearly. No good deed goes unpunished as they say. As for Biden’s goofy face routine, Ryan did the right thing by completely ignoring it thus coming across as the more serious man.

- rvogel

October 12, 2012 at 12:19pm

Here's my question: My expectation is that Obama will acquit himself in the next debate, the last one being an outlier for him. My expectation too is that Romney will continue to perform well enough but not so well that it's objectively possible to declare him victor again. So, if those expectations hold, and the next and say the last debate are "draws," other things being equal, how do tbose draws, and the arguable draw in the vp debate, affect the race and the momentum Romney now rides?

- basman

October 12, 2012 at 2:05pm

magboy: "...It's almost beyond belief that they don't know the difference between Iran developing fissionable material and producing a workable, deliverable nuclear weapon (actually, they do--they're just hoping the average voter doesn't). ..." There are hundreds of North Koreans working in Iran. Recent speculation is that Iran has outsourced the "put it in a weapon" to a site in North Korea. In other words, this bit of the debate omitted a ton of details that both debaters know. Someone here mentioned Ryan's eyes. One should not underestimate the general appeal of such an eye color. A few models and actors make big money because such eye color is compelling. Probably an evolutionary thing, but it sure helped Daniel Craig in his acting career, and the female model in the cat food romance series. And, Sophia - as a registered democrat (no longer knowing why) who actively supported Biden for President in 2008, seeing his demeanour change to angry white man, and then turn red-faced, was a shock, to me, and the friend who was watching along with me. (I also admit I was wondering if Biden uses Botox because he did not look any older than Ryan. The parallels between the VP debate and Wednesday's debate between Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren DID complicate my assessment of the VP debate. Both Biden and Warren used 'liar, liar' type attacks. Ryan handled them better than Brown, but I thought Warren was going to explode when Brown laid out his personal history of supporting women, because there was nothing she could attack. On Thursday, I saw even more Scott Brown "He's for Us" yard signs in this normally deep blue bit of western Mass. The near absence of yard signs for president is striking. Neighbor v neighbor in what may be the tightest Senate contest in the USA.

- K2K

October 12, 2012 at 2:19pm

I probably liked Biden's laughing and jeering and interrupting. It said to me that enough was enough. No more pretending that their tax plan is not going to put a huge hole in the budget or that, if it doesn't, it's going to create 12 million jobs. No more pretending that if the United States acts like a big bully, it's going to bring peace. We have had the Bush Tax cuts and in 8 years we lost 1.5 million jobs and their still here and it's still bad. We had the Bush policy of "if you're not for us, your agin us" and we're still suffering from that policy. I could watch someone laughing at and deriding that sh*t all day long and never get tired of it.

- Nusholtz

October 12, 2012 at 3:26pm

they're not there.

- Nusholtz

October 12, 2012 at 3:27pm

My take: Bears up 17 heading into the 4th quarter against an outmatched, underwhelming team (let’s say, Carolina). Game should be over (see Obama v. Romney I), but a punt return, fluke pick-six and field goal later, all the sudden things are closer than they should be. Home crowd is nervous. Joe kicks a field goal to stem the tide and go up three midway through the 4th; now it’s up to O to ice the game (Round II). Hopefully…

- OkiSaru

October 12, 2012 at 3:51pm

Ryan was noticeably weak in the FP section of the debate and his talking points boiled down to "Obama is doing x and y so it's bad/wrong/whatever but we'll probably do x and y too if we get in and then it'll be good/right/whatever" -- which is pretty much all they've got. The arguments for keeping troops in Afghanistan longer just don't mean anything to most Americans any more. I was surprised that he even tried the "UN=nasty foreigners" line over Syria but it sounded to me like clutching at straws.

- ironyroad

October 12, 2012 at 3:53pm

Icarus: “Don't expect another ‘malarkey’ from Obama, but do expect him to filet Romney every time he tells a lie.” I would hope O would be more decisive, concerted and focused. Along the lines of “In the real world, one vastly apart from the CEO realm, the president must make decisions – evvverrry sinnngggle daaaay [emphasis] – in which the lives of men and women who serve this country are at risk…” That goes for a 1st MARDIV lance corporal in Afghanistan to the ambassador of Libya. Or whatever hell-hole to which we send our people in representation of our interests. A "No time for Tuesday Morning Quarterbacks" reference wouldn’t be bad, either.

- OkiSaru

October 12, 2012 at 4:08pm

I personally have no problem whatever with Biden laughing at Ryan's "bunch of stuff." It's amazing to me that all of the analysis seems to center not around Romney and Ryan making brazenly inaccurate statements, but how Obama and Biden responded to their brazenly inaccurate statements. The problem with taking the "well, this is just a difference of opinion" approach that Obama seemed to go for in the first debate is that it elevates those lies to something reasonable. Lashing out about said lies makes you seem peevish and defensive, but laughing at them basically conveys the same point in a way that displays a bit more self-confidence. If it comes off as derisive, that's because it's meant to. Absurd claims deserve to be laughed at (and then rebutted).

- AlanSP

October 12, 2012 at 4:28pm

The one thing really missing from Biden's performance (and more importantly, from Obama's) was a genuine defense of the ACA. It's Obama's most important accomplishment as President, and he needs to explain why it's a good thing. That's different from just explaining why all of the crap about it being a government takeover of healthcare or causing 20 million people to lose their insurance (does anybody have any idea where that comes from?) is wrong. He needs to forcefully make the positive case for it. Incidentally, one of my biggest problems with the way the ACA was implemented was that it pushed the meat of it's impact to 2014. This was bad from both from a policy standpoint (delaying reforms that were and are needed in a major way) and a political standpoint. It's very easy to fear-monger about a program that isn't in place yet (go read Reagan's statements about Medicare before it was implemented), but after it's in place and helping people, it's a hell of a lot harder to convince people that it will be a disaster.

- AlanSP

October 12, 2012 at 4:42pm

Curses! The Italics Gremlin has struck again! When will The Bold Italics Gremlin begin his mischief?!

- OkiSaru

October 12, 2012 at 7:33pm