Ok, last debate bad - let's put that away in the closet and think forward. How does Joe Biden redirect the narrative of a #RomneyResurgent in his upcoming debate with Congressman Paul Ryan?
It's not going to be easy. Ryan's fiesty, he's charming, he's wonky, he has those deep blue eyes. And then there's the other problem, is he going to be debating with Zombie-Eyed Granny Starver Ryan or will it be the latest patch of the #MiniMittOS v1.3 build #248483?
Which Ryan is going to show up?
What's former Six Term Senator/Vice President to do?
Well, I think I have a couple suggestions on that.
Ryan has already sort of telegraphed that he think "They're going to call us Liars"
Paul Ryan said that Democrats's strategy through the election is "to call us liars for a month" in an interview with Michigan radio host Frank Beckmann Monday. The day after Wednesday's presidential debate, the Obama campaign released an ad saying Romney had not told the truth during the debate.Well, if the shoe fits buddy.
“It seems pretty clear that their new strategy is basically just call us liars, to descend down into a mud pit and hopefully with enough mudslinging back and forth and distortion, people will get demoralized and then they can win by default; sort of a choice of the lesser or two evils,” Ryan said.
But I don't think they have to really do that, all they have to do is quote them and the Lies become apparent.
The trick, I think, is to use their own words and false attacks on the President against them. Polical Jui-jitsu. Implement an Offensive-Defense Strategy that is always accomplishing two goals at once. 1) Bolstering and Correcting the Administrations True Record and 2) Pointing out how You Can't Trust Anything the Romney Campaign Says, because they will simply say something different every couple of seconds.
You don't have to attack Romney's policies or his lack of specifics, you simply have to say - They don't Have Any Actual Policies, just shifting talking points.
Biden can say that the "Obama Stole $716 Billion from Medicare" argument is a perfect example of this. Congressmen Ryan's position was that this reduction was perfectly fine because he kept it in his own budget. VP Nominee Ryan now says it's not fine and that in the Romney Administration that would be restored, even though doing so wouldn't bring back a single benefit to seniors that was lost, Because NO BENEFITS WERE LOST. That $716 Billion was a Savings that extended the life of the trust fund by another 8 Years to 2024, without it the fund runs out of money In 2016!.
So if the plan is "Repeal ObamaCare" just what would Romney/Ryan do about that imminent shortfall? Anything? Beuller?
But wait, it gets worse.
The Romney/Ryan Campaign have claimed that Obama wanted to "Cut the Work Requirements" on Welfare, but the actual fact is that the Waiver proposals were to Increase Work Requirements by 25% - and that as Governor Romney asked for the exactly the same kinds of requirements. So what's his Real Position on Welfare Waivers, that they should be granted or they shouldn't?
And then you have the Romney Campaigns claim that Obama was trying to Block Our Soldiers from Voting In Ohio.
Well that case is now resolved to the favor of the Obama Administration and the result is the Early Voting has been Restored For Everyone, including Soldiers. So do they still stand by that characterization?
You could point out that Romney has claimed just yesterday that Obama has "signed no Trade Deals" when in fact he Signed Three of Them And no, it doesn't matter that these were Trade Negotiations based on deals original put in place by George W. Bush. This is not the meaning of "Is, Is". Romney said "None", this is not None, it's Three. They're New Deals that are different from the Old Deals and they're Signed.
If he meant to say "New Deals with NEW Counties we didn't have deals with before" - he should have said that, but he didn't. Yet again, you can't trust what they say.
Biden could say, "I'd like to criticize the Romney Tax Plan but I Can't because I don't know what it is and neither does Romney!" He's said repeatedly that he would "Lower Tax Rates by 20%" and then he's said "He's not going to lower taxes for the Rich". He's said that his plan is going to "Jump Start" the economy, but then if he's not lowering taxes on the so-called Job Creators how's that supposed to work? They say their plan is "Revenue Neutral" but even the latest review from the Tax Policy Center and Brookings Institute says today...
...Romney's recent support of placing a cap on taxapayers' itemized deductions has the potential to finance some of the tax cuts, and so is a step in the right direction. It remains to be seen, though, whether Romney can develop enough "pay-fors" to cover his tax cuts and not burden the middle class.There's that word again. "Arithmetic".
Or as one example of what might happen, Alan Viard, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute noted in the New York Times, suggested that Romney is "going to need to cut rates significantly less than 20 percent if he wants to honor his other goals." Exactly: something would have to give.
More generally, the basic power of arithmetic is overwhelming in showing that Governor Romney has so far overpromised on the tax side.
The problem is - is that still the Romney/Ryan plan or has it changed? Does Romney/Ryan still plan to Block Grant Medicaid cutting it by as much as 20% which would severly impact seniors in long-term care Today, not just in ten years? Does Romney/Ryan still plan to implement "Premium Support" or Medicare which the CBO says could cost seniors as much as $6,000 in out of pockets costs that they can't afford or is it something else now?
Is he in support of banning Pre-Existing Conditions or has that position shifted since the debate began?
Ryan might, he just might, point out that the Obama Administration actually has a similar revenue neutral plan to cut Corporate Tax Rates and remove loopholes. To which Biden could simply say it doesn't cut nearly as deeply and oh-by-the-way at leat 30 of the Forbes 500 U.S. Corporations already have so many tax breaks they don't pay anything in taxes.
In contrast [to Romney's taxes], there are those U.S.-based multinationals that Citizens for Tax Justice dubbed the “Dirty 30”: behemoths that collectively earned tens of billions in profits between 2008 and 2010 but paid no taxes during that three-year period. These companies “so deftly exploited carve outs and loopholes in the tax code that all but one of them enjoyed a negative tax rate”—that is, they received money back from the U.S. Treasury.I mean, since Romney has said "Corporations are people, my friend" aren't these "People" the real Moochers of Society? Are they Makers or Takers?
The point being that everything the Romney camps has said about President Obama - is Wrong. So how can anyone trust what they have to say about themselves? The question isn't "Are they Lying?", it's "What Aren't they Lying about?"