Comments on: New Yorker cover about Obama-Romney debate is funny

By: Pace Ricciardelli

Pace Ricciardelli — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 15:11:00 +0000

That image is a lot more clever than most people will probably give it credit for. Depending on your party affiliation, you could interpret it differently:
1) A dig at Romney’s debate style, which included a number of falsehoods and seemed akin to Clint Eastwood’s attacks on an imaginary Obama.
2) A sendup of Obama, emphasizing that his mind (and body) was elsewhere during the debate – that he wasn’t really present.

By: Kimmo

Kimmo — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 12:25:00 +0000

Obviously we’ll wait until season five of Breaking Bad is done.

By: NynjaSquirrel

NynjaSquirrel — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 12:01:00 +0000

Dear America, I hope you realise that if you elect Mittens as your president, we (the rest of the world) have been stockpiling enough concrete to finally wall you off from spreading the stupid. We appreciate that we may lose plasticky chocolate, plasticky burgers and plasticky TV, but we feel it’s a sacrifice we’re willing to make. PS – we’ll make sure The Hoff is on your side before we add the last piece.

By: chris coreline

chris coreline — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 08:10:00 +0000

pro burn.

By: chris coreline

chris coreline — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 08:09:00 +0000

you get to choose between Oligarchy and Plutocracy. have the funs.

By: catgrin

catgrin — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 07:03:00 +0000

Ask and it might take me a while but if I’m in the mood to play with Photoshop you shall receive. Here’s an edited version of the cover for anyone who wants it. Enjoy!

(Also located at my Flicker photostream - http://www.flickr.com/photos/76260647@N06/8069900675/in/photostream)

By: teapot

teapot — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 02:06:00 +0000

The only known picture of Barack Obama and Karl Marx together…
https://twitter.com/GSElevator/status/248106321658904576/photo/1

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A3FzYpFCAAAEncr.jpg

By: Jello

Jello — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 02:05:00 +0000

It sure helped that he took notes in.

By: teapot

teapot — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 01:59:00 +0000

Isn’t the significance of debate based on the idea that it is just a structured logic game – a game which oftentimes ends with a (very subjectively chosen) winner, but also a game that demonstrates a person’s ability to sound convincing no matter what position they are required to take. Being convincing is a pretty helpful skill to have for effective international engagement.

I, too, was a debating nerd… in primary school we got out of class for it but in high school we had to stay back after school, meaning my high school debating career was very short lived. The whole reason I mention this is that one day everyone was out of control and the teacher with a lazy eye was having trouble getting everyone to behave.. until she lost it and announced in shouty angry teacher voice “That’s it.. I’m giving you all a mass debating detention”. The room did not come to order.

By: ocker3

ocker3 — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 00:50:00 +0000

I agree, they went for the easy joke when they could have made about three overall, just to start with.

By: Boundegar

Boundegar — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 00:38:00 +0000

If by optimism you mean “wishing on America a replay of every Bush debacle.”

By: badgeriffic

badgeriffic — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 22:19:00 +0000

Zing!

By: Selena60

Selena60 — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 21:51:00 +0000

Sorry, I know clever and that isn’t clever. It was low-hanging fruit disguised as clever. It would have been clever if, as a previous commenter said, Romney had a pinocchio nose.

By: Rindan

Rindan — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 21:49:00 +0000

Holy shit. The end times are upon us. A political New Yorker cartoon managed to extract a brief chuckle from me.

By: Gary Flores

Gary Flores — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 21:49:00 +0000

Well, there are no strings because they omitted Obama!

By: badgeriffic

badgeriffic — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 21:40:00 +0000

More importantly, where are the strings?

By: Antinous / Moderator

Antinous / Moderator — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 21:38:00 +0000

Debates are to candidates as eyewitnesses are to criminal justice: not very reliable evidence of factual reality.

By: UncaScrooge

UncaScrooge — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 21:36:00 +0000

Indeed, when I was on the debate team (which I regretted, instantly) I soon learned that it didn’t matter how well or how poorly I presented my arguments. What mattered was how experienced or engaged the judge was in ruling on the outcome.

By: DewiMorgan

DewiMorgan — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 21:30:00 +0000

What *is* the joke in the image, here?
That all the news was about Romney’s talk, and nothing about what Obama said?
And where are Romney’s crib-notes in this pic? :P

By: Antinous / Moderator

Antinous / Moderator — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 21:24:00 +0000

But a formal debate has no bearing on reality. It’s just a structured logic game. They might as well play poker and see who wins.

By: DewiMorgan

DewiMorgan — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 21:17:00 +0000

There’s a second party, other than the Corporate party? Who do I vote for?

By: Navin_Johnson

Navin_Johnson — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 21:04:00 +0000

ditching Netenyahu

If he actually gone further and told him to fuck off too, I’d probably vote for him.

By: Michael Jensen

Michael Jensen — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 20:35:00 +0000

It’s only surprising that they let Mitt run on and on with his Gish-Galloping, and dishonest “debate” tactics. You can’t really call his cheating a “win”.

By: grimc

grimc — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 20:09:00 +0000

Wharrrrrblgrrrrbl!

Now watch this drive.

By: DreamboatSkanky

DreamboatSkanky — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 19:55:00 +0000

It could’ve been you.

By: Daemonworks

Daemonworks — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 19:46:00 +0000

Man, I really hope we never let our system here devolve into a two-party system. It’s a terrible thing to have happen to a democracy.

By: dj1193

dj1193 — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 19:45:00 +0000

Being President, by which we mean attending to the economy, foreign policy and negotiating with Congress, is now supposed to distract from The One’s ability to debate over government? Wouldn’t being President actually mean you have more access to the real workings of government and therefore a more hands on grasp of both its function and figures? Who would you ask to debate on the shoe industry, a guy applying for the job or the person who actually runs the factory? Now you’re saying Obama is too busy running government to actually talk about government? The man who is so intelligent he doesn’t need to attend intelligence briefings? You mean appearing on the View and ditching Netenyahu for Late Night Television has made him too distracted? Is he too distracted from the onerous task of hanging out with Jay-Z and playing golf? Too distracted from spinning the whole Libya debacle?

By: bibulb

bibulb — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 19:43:00 +0000

This many posts in and still no “Christ, what an asshole”?

I am disappoint.

By: franko

franko — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 19:23:00 +0000

“the president”? wow, you’re that sure romney’s going to win? that’s some incredible optimism there.

By: Halloween_Jack

Halloween_Jack — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 18:50:00 +0000

Some thoughts about the debate and the aftermath: 1) As many people suspected, the president was distracted by the job of being the president. 2) Romney supposedly memorized a number of "zingers" to drop into the debate, but the only specific thing that most people seemed to take away from it is the War on Big Bird. 3) Now that Romney's post-debate bounce is settling down, it's clear that, absent some major catastrophe (like the attacks on U.S. embassies in Libya and elsewhere that distracted Obama during his initial debate prep), Romney's only hope is to nail both of the upcoming debates and hope that enough people watch them to make a difference. He's weak on foreign policy, the main subject of the next debate, and Obama is stronger in a town-hall setting, which covers the final debate. And Romney no longer has the flip-to-moderate card to play.