October 11, 2012

Philadelphia Inquirer Poll: Obama Leads Romney By 8 In Pennsylvania

Source: TPM

President Barack Obama holds an 8-point lead over Republican nominee Mitt Romney in Pennsylvania, according to results of a new poll announced Wednesday evening.


The latest Philadelphia Inquirer poll shows Obama earning the support of 50 percent of likely voters in the state, while Romney trails with 42 percent. That amounts to a small uptick for Romney since the previous Inquirer poll in September, which showed Obama up, 50 percent to 39 percent.

Romney's personal popularity has improved only marginally, even in the wake of a triumphant performance in the first presidential debate. While 65 percent of debate watchers in the state declared Romney the winner of the debate in Denver, only 47 percent of Pennsylvania voters have a favorable view of the former Massachusetts governor — a modest 2-point bump since the September poll.

Read more: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/philadelphia-inquirer-poll-obama-leads-romney-by-8

---

http://www.scribd.com/doc/109665998/October-11-Inquirer-Susquehanna-Bank-Pennsylvania-Public-Opinion-Poll-Presidential-Race-and-First-Debate-Results-Final-Draft
PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER PUBLIC OPINION POLL (PRESENTED BYSUSQUEHANNA BANK) REVEALS OBAMA HAS EIGHT POINT LEAD INPENNSYLVANIA FOLLOWING THE FIRST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE


EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE AFTER 10:00 P.M. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2012

October 11, 2012

Massachusetts Senate debates, round three: Warren over Brown

The third debate between Elizabeth Warren and Scott Brown, candidates for the U.S. Senate in Massachusetts, accomplished something their two previous matches did not: it produced a winner. Professor Warren had her best night in the debate arena thus far, delivering a performance that was focused, confident, and energetic. Although Senator Brown made no particular missteps, throughout most of this debate he found himself playing defense, stranded on his opponent's turf.

Scott Brown is an exceptionally smooth politician, with a gift for packaging his message in the form of personal appeals. He addresses himself directly to crowd, calls the voters "folks," reminds the audience that he's a native son of the Commonwealth, carpet-bombs the debate hall with local names and references. He exudes charisma, to a degree that most politicians would envy. And he looks like Richard Gere, only handsomer.

But Elizabeth Warren seems to have figured out an effective antidote to the potency of Brown's charms. Unable to match her opponent on charisma, she comes at him with intellect--lots and lots of intellect. In the end, her ability to frame and sustain an argument reduces Brown's likability to a lesser asset, a shiny object that's all surface and no depth.

(snip)
Warren's strongest answer of the night came in response to a question about women's issues. Methodically dissecting Brown's voting record in this area, the challenger displayed some of the passion that has too often been absent from her campaign. "The women of Massachusetts need a senator they can count on not some of the time but all of the time," Warren said, in what will probably become the night's most-played sound bite. Referring to equal pay and birth control, she noted with exasperation, "These issues were resolved years ago, until the Republicans brought them back." Lest there be any doubt whom to she was referring, on the word "Republicans" Warren looked straight at Senator Brown.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-schroeder/massachusetts-senate-deba_b_1956534.html

October 11, 2012

Scott Brown takes a hard-right turn in Senate debate

by Joan McCarter
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/10/1142891/-Scott-Brown-takes-a-hard-right-turn-in-Senate-debate

What a refreshing Massachusetts Senate debate. From the beginning, when moderator Jim Madigan (thank you WGBY and public television), announced that the questions would be from and based on what the public had sent in, there was hope. When the first question was not about Elizabeth Warren's heritage, but instead about unemployment and job creation, you knew we were in for a debate of substance.

Without that initial attack on Warren to set Brown up, he came off a little discombobulated. Brown was often scattered, incoherent, and thrown off by the time clock, resorting to mixing all his talking points on "bipartisan" and "job creators" into a mish-mash of word salad when he found himself with extra time. That was regardless of the question asked of him. He also failed in controlling the nasty, taking several cheap shots at "Professor" Warren, including blaming her salary and benefits as a Harvard professor for the spiraling costs of higher education.

This debate featured a far more Republican-sounding Brown that any of the previous debates. He railed about tax hikes, on his fealty to Grover Norquist, on the job-killing Obamacare. It was a bizarre juxtaposition to see the guy the tea party was so excited to get elected in 2010 and the "second-most bipartisan senator" fighting for the same brain. The results were bad for Brown.

That was particularly true when the question of health care reform came up, and Brown turned into Mitt Romney at last week's debate. He went into full Mediscare mode, repeatedly exhorting seniors watching to be terrified of the "three-quarters of a trillion" dollars in cuts to Medicare from Obamacare. He frantically asserted repeatedly that the 18 new taxes included in Obamacare were "going to crush Massachusetts businesses." Warren effectively called him out for using the "same playbook romney used a week ago," which was "wrong then, and is wrong now." Here was where all of Brown's careful efforts to avoid any connection whatsoever to the Republican party utterly failed.

Brown was evasive. When asked specifically about budget priorities—which two programs he would cut and which two were sacrosanct—Brown went into word salad mode again, reiterating his support for no cuts to defense and launching back into Obamacare lies about how much it would contribute to the deficit. Warren, on the other hand, was quick with a precise answer: she'd cut agricultural subsidies and find defense cuts made possible with the ending of two wars. She unequivocally said that she would not "go to Washington to cut Medicare or Social Security benefits.

As that answer went, so went most of the hour-long debate. Brown careered strangely between tea party talking points and insisting that he was the "last of a dying breed" of moderates, regardless of the question, and Warren providing coherent, thoughtful answers. She missed one big softball opportunity in not homing in on Brown's endorsement of Antonin Scalia as his model Supreme Court Justice when the question of women's rights came up. But she stayed focused on Brown's record and articulating the key element to this election, locally and nationally: the competing visions for the future; tax cuts for the wealthy versus everyone paying their fair share.

There will be a lot of fact-checking to do on this one, because when Brown wasn't uttering nonsense, he was talking about his instrumental role in the Senate for accomplishing everything from keeping low student loan interest rates to the existence of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to serving in Afghanistan.

This was a solid performance for an unflappable and articulate Warren, particularly in contrast to the rattled and often incoherent Brown. But one of the key questions for the next debate, and for the remainder of this campaign, is whether the hard-right turn Brown took in this debate is going to be the Brown that we see for the next month, or if the stress of the campaign and this debate forced him to slip up and show his true colors.

If you missed the debate and would like to watch it, C-SPAN has it up already, in its entirety
http://www.c-span.org/Events/Massachusetts-Senate-Candidates-Hold-Third-Debate/10737434840-2/

Site content may be used for any purpose without explicit permission unless otherwise specified





Elizabeth Warren: All of our daughters

October 11, 2012

Warren Ties Brown to National GOP Throughout Debate

In the third Massachusetts Senate debate, on issue after issue, Democrat Elizabeth Warren was much more aggressive about tying Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., to Mitt Romney and the national GOP agenda.

On health care: Warren said Brown "made it clear" that his first job if reelected will be to help repeal President Obama's health care bill

She also tied his stance on health care to Romney's during last week's presidential debate, saying they were out of "the same playbook."

"It was wrong then, it's wrong tonight," she said, getting the first round of cheers in a debate in which audience members were instructed not to applaud.

http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2012/10/warren-constant.php

October 7, 2012

President Obama's traveling press secretary Runs Through $5 Trillion Tax Math With Reporters

Jen Psaki, traveling press secretary for the Obama campaign, started the press gaggle aboard Air Force One Sunday by running through the math of Mitt Romney's tax plan, according to a readout of the gaggle. "I just wanted to go through some simple 'back of the notecard' math on how we get to the $5 trillion [number]," Psaki said.

So lowering the rates, as Mitt Romney has said he would do, to 20 percent -- $2.7 trillion over 10 years; eliminating the AMT -- $700 billion; repealing high-income payroll tax -- $300 billion; ending estate tax -- $150 billion; lowering the corporate rate from 35 to 25 -- $1.1 trillion. That adds up to $4.8 trillion. If you factor in interest for additional borrowing, you get to $5 trillion.

Obama Spox Runs Through $5 Trillion Tax Math With Reporters
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/obama-spox-runs-through-5-trillion-tax-math

October 7, 2012

Joan Walsh: Sunday best: Chuck Todd loses it

He blasts Jack Welch for "corroding trust in our government" while Paul Krugman drives Mary Matalin insane
http://www.salon.com/2012/10/07/sunday_best_chuck_todd_loses_it/

(snip)
To keep from drowning in despair and nihilism over what the Sunday shows tell us about the bankruptcy of American politics, Salon is bringing you Sunday Best: Our choice of the best moment of all on the top Sunday shows. (We may occasionally have to turn to MSNBC’s “Up With Chris” or “Melissa Harris-Perry,” but if we put them in the mix every week, it wouldn’t be a fair fight. We’ll mainly focus on the productions of the big networks.)

(snip)
Predictably, Democrats fought back better than Obama did, with Robert Gibbs calling Romney’s performance “fundamentally dishonest” and his budget math “absolutely crazy” on ABC’s “This Week.” On Fox, Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley told Chris Wallace, “The fact of the matter is in this debate we saw Big Bird meet the big lie.” Also on “This Week,” Paul Krugman told the panel, “The press just doesn’t know how to handle flat-out untruths,” which led Mary Matalin to absolutely lose her shit and call Krugman himself a liar.

You have mischaracterized and you have lied about every position and every particular of the Ryan plan on Medicare, from the efficiency of Medicare administration, to calling it a voucher plan, so you’re hardly credible on calling somebody else a liar.

Actually, Mary, Romney himself admitted it was a voucher program on Wednesday night. Someone’s lying here, and it’s not Krugman. Digression: Paul Krugman probably deserves the Sunday Best award for simultaneously fighting off Peggy Noonan’s gauzy, shimmery fantasies and untruth, along with Matalin’s sharp and ugly lie-daggers, on the very same show. But Krugman would probably win it every week, which wouldn’t be fair.

video of Chuck Todd
NBC’s Chuck Todd Lashes Out At Conspiracy Theorists ‘Corroding Trust In Our Government’
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/nbcs-chuck-todd-lashes-out-at-conspiracy-theorists-corroding-trust-in-our-government/
1:53 of the video

October 6, 2012

Ohio newspaper: Don't support GOP candidate involved in 'nasty' race

Source: CNN

Ohio's largest newspaper on Saturday endorsed the reelection bid of Sen. Sherrod Brown, a Democrat, calling him a "good listener and a creative lawmaker."

But the Cleveland Plain Dealer's editorial board also based its endorsement on defeat of Brown's opponent.

"Electing his Republican opponent, Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel, would reward one of the nastiest campaigns ever waged in this state," reads the editorial, published on the Plain Dealer's website. "It would reward a candidate who hasn't moved beyond partisan slogans and careful sound bites. It would reward ambition untethered to substance."

The paper credited Brown for his "pragmatic support for an infrastructure bank, for advanced manufacturing research, for balanced environmental policies in a state with huge energy resources and needs" and other bipartisan efforts.

Read more: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/06/ohio-newspaper-dont-support-gop-candidate-involved-in-nasty-race/

---

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251123650
Sherrod Brown has earned a second term in the Senate: editorial

(snip)
There's another powerful reason to vote for Brown -- a negative one: Electing his Republican opponent, Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel, would reward one of the nastiest campaigns ever waged in this state. It would reward a candidate who hasn't moved beyond partisan slogans and careful sound bites. It would reward ambition untethered to substance.

No one runs for the U.S. Senate without a healthy ego or considerable ambition. But raw desire must be balanced by a willingness to study issues and to do the hard work of governing. Mandel shows little interest in either. He's simply not ready for the Senate.

A bit of historical perspective: We preferred the steady if unspectacular incumbent Mike DeWine to Brown in 2006. But we never doubted that Brown would be a "bright, articulate, edgy and energetic" advocate for Ohio. He has been that -- and more.

As anyone might expect who has followed Brown's long career -- Mandel, 35, likes to point out that his opponent first ran for office when Richard Nixon was president -- Brown has been a loyal Democrat in the Senate. When Brown, 59, does go rogue, it is usually because he wants to push the president or his party further left on issues such as health care or taxes. Predictably, Brown has maintained his professed suspicion of trade agreements, opposing even a deal with South Korea that the Obama administration renegotiated and that the United Auto Workers supported.

October 6, 2012

Joseph Stiglitz responds to jobs numbers conspiracy, calls allegations 'literally absurd'

Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz responds to jobs numbers conspiracy, calls allegations 'literally absurd'
http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.com/_news/2012/10/06/14260021-video-nobel-prize-winning-economist-joseph-stiglitz-responds-to-jobs-numbers-conspiracy-calls-allegations-literally-absurd

Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist and former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Bill Clinton, responded Saturday to baseless allegations that the Obama administration may have manipulated the Bureau of Labor Statistics' monthly jobs report to make it look better than it actually was, calling those allegations "literally absurd."

In an interview on Up w/ Chris Hayes Saturday, Stiglitz said the accusations leveled by Republicans and their supporters on Wall Street -- including Rep. Allen West of Florida, former General Electric CEO Jack Welch and former Republican presidential candidate Steve Forbes -- were outlandish and contradicted a broad consensus among economists of all party affiliations that the jobs numbers are not influenced by political calculations.

"No president, maybe except Nixon, would actually try to change what the Bureau of Labor Statistics does," Stiglitz said. "These are really independent statistical agencies, and the idea that they would do that is, I say, literally absurd."

(snip)
"There’s this old debate about, 'we can’t choose our facts, we can choose our interpretation of the facts,'" Stiglitz said. "And what they’re trying to move to is the direction where we get to choose our facts."

video at link

October 6, 2012

Dishonest - Obama for America TV Ad

October 4, 2012

Jim Lehrer blasted for his performance in first presidential debate

PBS Executive Editor Jim Lehrer was criticized in various media circles for his performance during Wednesday’s first presidential debate after losing control of the proceedings and allegedly letting Republican candidate Mitt Romney “push him around.”

Lehrer, who moderated his 13th debate Wednesday, was “head-scratchingly absent,” wrote Buzzfeed’s Rosie Gray, who also pointed out criticism from several of his peers, including Meet The Press host David Gregory, who was himself pilloried for his performance in the Massachusetts senatorial debate Monday between Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA)

Even non-political media members like Today Show meteorologist Al Roker joined in the disparaging of Lehrer; “I hope Jim Lehrer gets the license plate of the truck that drove over him in this debate,” Roker said on Twitter.

On MSNBC, Hardball host Chris Matthews said Romney had a plan to “push (Lehrer) around, which he did effectively,” a criticism echoed by Current TV contributor Tricia Rose.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/03/jim-lehrer-blasted-for-his-performance-in-first-presidential-debate/?utm_source=Raw+Story+Daily+Update&utm_campaign=5f7307cdf5-10_3_1210_3_2012&utm_medium=email