WorldTraveller

Yes, on a micro level it plays perfectly.On a macro level, not so much.Remember, the press coverage he's receiving is negative, and it just feeds in to the narrative of "Ol bumblin stumblin crazy uncle joe" Not to mention it takes them off message for a day or two.

So you are quoting a NYT article to base their opinion on how biased rasmussen is? Nice

Is BFFB really defending this? Context matters, here is what we have to take into consideration, after Biden made his first Wall street comment, there was no applause, so thats when he made the off-the-cuff statement. But what we have to take into consideration is that he was in the state of "North Carolina" (Virginia) to a crowd that was largely comprised of African Americans and thats when he said "There going to put Y'all back in chains" Now if you don't believe he was speaking to his "audience" then I don't know what to tell ya. In any case, that's just old uncle crazy joe. But since we are speaking about Uncle crazy joe, here's yet another gaffe today: 'Folks, where's it written we cannot lead the world in the 20th century in making automobiles?," said Biden. Only problem with that statement is that we are in the 21st century http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-folks-wheres-it-written-we-cant-lead-world-20th-century_650017.html

LA we were talking about this yesterday, how some of the GOP "pros" were fretting over the RYAN decision, and yesterday Bill Kristol took issue , in today's WSJ, the editorial board hammers the "pros" for being wusses, and basically had the same message I did, which was to "buck up" The WSJ editorial page derides the Republicans we quoted, almost all anonymously, in our story yesterday about fears within the party of what Paul Ryan on the ticket means, denouncing the "Bedwetter Caucus": Republicans who believe in something can console themselves in knowing that these "pros" are reflecting the Washington conventional wisdom. 'Nearly everyone in the Beltway thinks it's impossible to reform entitlements like Medicare, and or even to restrain the size of government, so why would a candidate be foolish enough to try? This crowd is good at forecasting the political future as a repetition of the past and present, but as Irving Kristol used to say, they aren't very good at predicting the turns. We'll see if this year is one of those turns. Meantime, the "pros" willing to shoot their candidate in the back are one more reason that voters have contempt for the political class, and why most Republicans who don't live in Washington are delighted with the choice of Mr. Ryan.' The edit-heads took particular issue with the one person quoted voicing anything but glowing praise on the record, Mark McKinnon. McKinnon was not calling Ryan a bad pick, but he stated plainly what everyone else said privately - that the country may not be ready to hear about tough choices, and it gives the Obama campaign a target. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444184704577589262998551978.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop The "Bedwetter caucus"

It's a moot point anyway, that's Ryan's plan, and last I checked Romney is at the top of the ticket. Obamas plan: Obama is using those cuts/rate of growth reduction from Medicare to help fund Obamacare. Ryans plan: Ryan is using the same cuts/rate of growth reduction from Medicare to preserve the solvency of Medicare. Romneys plan: Romney has no cuts/rate of growth reduction in Medicare and promises to restore those "cuts" back into Medicare It's important for anyone who is reading PPP and trying to learn the facts about the plans and where they differ. This obviously pertains to the "cuts" in medicare that is in question. Also it is important to note that in Romneys plan: 1) Anyone 55 and over doesn't get affected by the law whatsoever. 2) Anyone below the age of 55 has the CHOICE to either remain in traditional Medicare or go to the voucher/premium support program. So if you are scared shitless, then you can always decide to stay with the existing traditional medicare program. BOOOOOGAAAAA WOOOOOOOGAAAAA WOOOOOOOOGAAAAAA Scary!!!

I wasn't talking about you nitwit

Actually you are factually wrong, as usual, Rasmussen was rated the most accurate pollster for the 2008 elections. But thanks for playing

Ryan politicking in Colorado: Having won over the crowd with pleasantries, Ryan imperceptibly worked his speech to a crescendo. The famous wonk wisely didn't stump on intricacies of, say, the Wyden-Ryan Medicare reform proposals. He made a series of moral arguments: "Guess what? Government doesn't regulate happiness, government doesn't define your happiness—you define it for yourself. That's how we do it in America. What we are offering is a very clear contrast, a very clear choice. What kind of country do you want to have? What kind of people do you want to be? We want that American idea, that opportunity society with a safety net that's there to help people can't help themselves, that's there to help people get back on their feet who are struggling. But it's the opportunity society, the American ideal, where you can meet your potential, nothing is stopping you from meeting your destiny. Our job is to get the barriers out of your way, it's not to look at people who are working hard, who are succeeding, with resentment. It's to say, 'here's how to get things done, we want more people to be successful, because if more people are successful, America grows and we create jobs." At that point, the crowd in the Lakewood High School gymnasium cut him off, pounded the bleachers, and offered a full 22 seconds of applause. But they weren't done yet—an older man in the crowd stood up, pointed at Ryan and screamed "Hey look, no teleprompter!" The crowd roared in approval, not because it was gratuitous swipe at the president, but because they were so grateful that Ryan was providing not just competing policy vision to Obama, but a substantive rhetorical alternative. And they clearly liked what they were hearing. Ryan finally continued: "When we know what we believe, we know what we need to do, and what we need is leadership. Here is our commitment to you—we're not going to duck the tough issues, we are going to lead. We're not going to blame others for our mistakes, we're going to to take responsibility." http://www.weeklysta...49987.htmlThats That's a great message.

Unless of course you are someone who agrees with it, but disagrees, but agrees with it on principle but doesn't agree because its unfair, but agrees, but disagrees with it because its not good for your party.

Not to mention that there is widespread support of the Voter ID law.

Two more interesting points of data: - A new report on voter registration trends finds that Democratic voter registration is down by more than 800,000 since 2008 in 8 key battleground states. GOP registration has also declined – but by only 79,000, a tenth of the Democrats’ losses. Meanwhile, registered independents are on the rise, increasing their numbers in those states by nearly half-a-million. http://www.politico.com/blogs/charlie-mahtesian/2012/08/dem-registration-down-in-key-states-132150.html - Considering that polling has been showing a tight race and that the energy is more with conservatives, when you look at the voter registrations, GOP has been making significant gains over the past 4 years. Iowa for instance had 100,000 D advantage for 2008, as of right now its 20,000 advantage R. That's a pretty stark turnaround. Also this is another interesting data point: - For the first time since he began running for president, Republican Mitt Romney has the support of over 40 percent of America's youth vote, a troubling sign for President Obama who built his 2008 victory with the overwhelming support of younger, idealistic voters. Pollster John Zogby of JZ Analytics told Secrets Tuesday that Romney received 41 percent in his weekend poll of 1,117 likely voters, for the first time crossing the 40 percent mark. What's more, he said that Romney is the only Republican of those who competed in the primaries to score so high among 18-29 year olds. "This is the first time I am seeing Romney's numbers this high among 18-29 year olds," said Zogby. "This could be trouble for Obama who needs every young voter he can get." Zogby helped Secrets dig deeper into his weekend poll, which we reported on earlier. The poll had Romney and Obama tied at 46 percent. - http://washingtonexaminer.com/a-romney-first-over-40-of-youth-vote-back-him/article/2504893#.UCuqkKD329s

Sick people are

Rob I would suggest that you read the path to prosperity from Paul Ryan, he has a PDF and you can cut right to the Medicare section. There you will read it for yourself and know what's in it as opposed to hear other people's interpretations

It's certainly possible birdog.. But I will say this again, as a resident of Florida, I watched rubios campaign closely when he ran against meek and crist, and they both tried hammering him over his FULL embrace or Paul Ryan's plan, and Rubio ran on it and as a result he won the senior voters by a landslide. I believe the obamacare argument of IPAB rationing and cost control and the 700 B obamacare "raid" of Medicare to pay for his deeply unpopular law, specially with seniors will serve as an effective offset. We'll see

Fair game

By the way, I recorded the Ryan Brit Hume interview which was being aired on Bret B's show on fox and during their round table discussion, they mentioned the exact same point I did, which was if you are under 55 you have the choice to stay on traditional Medicare. It's also on Ryan's path to prosperity PDF pages 52 -55

Well... I mean you did link Wikipedia .

When I get to work and off this iPad I will. But I did just link you that choice from the CBS website. That wasn't good enough? In any case tomorrow I will.

I don't know how else to tell you, you have a choice to stay with the existing program as is or go to the voucher/premium support plan. By the sounds of it, you weren't aware of that choice. You keep bringing up the voucher as the only choice, that's simply not the case. I would suggest you google up Paul Ryan's path to prosperity site there you can learn a little more about it. I'm glad we are having this discussion, so other people who by chance are reading this can actually learn the facts about the plan. 1) those over 55 not affected at all. 2) those under 55 can stay in the existing Medicare system OR go to the voucher/premium support plan.

"After the plan failed to get a single Democratic vote, Ryan made key changes, working with Oregon Senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat. The revised plan gives seniors a choice between the current system and the voucher program, and it would not affect people who are over 55. The cost to the average Medicare patient are less than his previous plan, an average of $800." http://www.cbsnews.c...as-on-medicare/ "Choice between current system and the voucher program" The only change for those choosing the existing program is the age which goes up to 67. So if you are referring to that, which you weren't then you could make an argument.

Soledad Obrien, you know that chick for CNN : http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/08/13/soledad-obrien-caught-reading-liberal-blog-during-heated-debate-romne - Can CNN's Soledad O'Brien make her sources any more apparent than she did Monday night? While filling in for Anderson Cooper, O'Brien was actually caught on screen looking at an article from the left-wing website Talking Points Memo to assist her in a heated debate with Romney campaign senior adviser Barbara - So what does she use to attack Paul Ryan's plans? Talking Points Memo talking points

Of course not, who said it was? If I remember correctly, I said "coin flip", which infers 50/50

That's your opinion. Well, yes it is the same. You are going based on your assumptions, not based on what is proposed. So let's acknowledge first that.

The most likely route before the Ryan pick was Florida, Ohio, Virginia, N.C, Indiana and one of the following (Iowa, N.H, N.V, COL, WI, MI or PA) Now with the pick of Ryan, he could afford to lose either VA or Ohio and pick up Wisconsin and 2 of the states previously mentioned. CO, NH and Iowa seem to be the most likely

Not the case, as I've explained to NewBills, that with the pick of Paul Ryan, Wisconsin now becomes a coin flip. Which means that Romney could afford to lose either Ohio and Virginia and replace it with 2 out of the following 3; N.H, Iowa or Colorado.