News Presidential Debate #3: Fireworks or Stale Bread?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The final presidential debate between Barack Obama and John McCain sparked intense discussion, particularly regarding McCain's aggressive tactics and the effectiveness of negative campaigning. Observers noted that McCain appeared increasingly desperate, while Obama maintained composure, which many interpreted as a reflection of their respective leadership qualities. There was speculation on whether McCain would resort to personal attacks, with some arguing that such a strategy could backfire, especially given public fatigue with negativity and a desire for substantive discussions on issues like the economy.The debate featured the controversial figure "Joe the Plumber," whose concerns about Obama's tax plan became a focal point. However, it was revealed that Joe lacked a plumber's license and had financial issues, raising questions about his credibility. McCain's reliance on Joe's narrative was criticized, with some suggesting it highlighted a disconnect with voters' realities. Overall, the debate was characterized by a perception that Obama outperformed McCain, leading to predictions of a widening gap in support for Obama as the election approached.
  • #91
LightbulbSun said:
... because Wall Street has been full of crooks for 40 years.

Just 40 years? Not since they met under the buttonwood tree where the old stockade fence used to be?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
LowlyPion said:
Just 40 years? Not since they met under the buttonwood tree where the old stockade fence used to be?

These aren't my thoughts. These are the thoughts of Mike Francesa. Read the whole post, it only gets better. :smile:
 
  • #93
I can't open jimmy's link.

McCain did Joe the Plumber no favors

You knew it would happen. Joe the Plumber's 15 minutes of fame in last night's debate have turned into a round of public humiliation for the wannabe business owner. The Toledo Blade is reporting that Joe has no plumber's license.

To make matters worse, the Blade also found that the Ohio Department of Taxation placed a lien against Joe because $1,183 in personal property taxes had not been paid. To pile on, the paper disclosed, based on divorce records, Joe's 2006 income — $40,000, hardly enough to qualify for the tax hike he's so concerned about.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcb_election2008/20081016/wl_mcb_election2008/mccaindidjoetheplumbernofavors
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #94
jimmysnyder said:
It gets funnier.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aWDHvDjnDnTs&refer=home"
:smile::smile:

Egads. Republican dirty tricks? Hoisted on their own petards?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #95
Evo said:
I can't open jimmy's link.

It opened for me. Here is the first paragraph.
`Joe the Plumber,' Who Dislikes Obama Tax Plan, Owes Back Taxes

By Ryan J. Donmoyer

Oct. 16 (Bloomberg) -- ``Joe the plumber,'' the Toledo, Ohio, man whose complaints about Barack Obama's tax plan were featured in the final presidential debate, owes the state of Ohio almost $1,200 in back income taxes.
 
  • #96
I won't post the link, because Evo would delete it, but Robert J. Elisberg is reporting that Joe "the plumber" Wurzelbacher is the son of Robert Wurzelbacher, an executive of American Continental Corporation, the parent company of Charles Keating's Lincoln Savings. If this is true, the mainstream press should pick it up, though they seem to have lost the talent for investigative reporting in the last 10-20 years. McCain's still pallin' around with the Keating crowd. :smile:

Edit: Possible correction. Joe is said to be closely related to Robert Wurzelbacher Jr, who is Charles Keating's son-in-law and vice-president of Keating's bank's parent company. Robert is going to be going to prison for arranging loans from Lincoln Savings to a company in which he and Keating held interests, and which he knew were unlikely to be repaid.

Edit: (again) that NYT story was an old one, with a very recent date on the web-page header. Sorry for the confusion. Joe could actually be the son of Robert, as Elisberg asserted.

Thanks, Art!

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CE7DE123CF930A25751C1A965958260
 
Last edited:
  • #98
Whoops, CNN reports that now Joe admits that he didn't understand the tax plan - that he wouldn't have been affected by Obama's plan as he suggested, even in his hypothetical example. It seems that he thought purchasing a $250,000 business is the same as making 250K profit. So Joe now understands the difference between gross, and taxable income.

Thanks Joe. Have a beer.
 
  • #99
Ivan Seeking said:
Whoops, CNN reports that now Joe admits that he didn't understand the tax plan - that he wouldn't have been affected by Obama's plan as he suggested, even in his hypothetical example. It seems that he thought purchasing a $250,000 business is the same as making 250K profit. So Joe now understands the difference between gross, and taxable income.

Thanks Joe. Have a beer.
Told you he was too stupid to run a business :smile:
 
  • #100
Ivan Seeking said:
Whoops, CNN reports that now Joe admits that he didn't understand the tax plan - that he wouldn't have been affected by Obama's plan as he suggested, even in his hypothetical example. It seems that he thought purchasing a $250,000 business is the same as making 250K profit. So Joe now understands the difference between gross, and taxable income.

Thanks Joe. Have a beer.
I'm disturbed by the fact that Obama did not point that out. I hope Obama learns the basics before he takes office.

I'm disappointed that McCain misrepresented this issue.
 
  • #101
Astronuc said:
I'm disturbed by the fact that Obama did not point that out. I hope Obama learns the basics before he takes office.
It was the wrong place for Obama to be doing a lot of fact finding and interrogating and embarrassing the guy. This was a question thrown at Obama at a rally. Why would you be disturbed or think Obama doesn't understand? He was going by the lies that this guy said, he didn't have the information that was dug up today.

I'm disappointed that McCain misrepresented this issue.
McCain is stupid for deciding to make it half of his debate without getting the facts first. If you plan to make a campaign issue out of something, then you *do* need to make sure the person isn't a fake and you've got the facts.
 
  • #102
Astronuc said:
I'm disturbed by the fact that Obama did not point that out. I hope Obama learns the basics before he takes office.

Joe misrepresented the situation. I don't see how that's any fault of Obama's.

I'm disappointed that McCain misrepresented this issue

He was shooting from the hip again. All political bias aside, if there is one thing that I have learned about McCain, it is that he is reckless.

Well, two things. McCain is very dishonest! Even Rove [of all people!] said McCain was over the line with his untruthful ads and statements. Even in his twisted mind, Rove believed that his own campaign tactics "passed the truth test", but not McCain's.
 
  • #103
Astronuc said:
I'm disturbed by the fact that Obama did not point that out. I hope Obama learns the basics before he takes office.

I'm disappointed that McCain misrepresented this issue.

Why would you expect Obama to have researched this guy's situation before McCain tried to blindside him with the issue in the debate? He was just engaging the guy along a rope line that sprung out of the weeds.

If there is any criticism to be leveled it's at McCain's sorry campaign for fabricating an issue without even vetting the guy's situation. It's for misrepresenting that this Joe had $250,000 to begin with, much less that he would be making that much to be taxed.

Obama for his part looked to me to be merely responding by describing his plan and reiterating that it didn't affect those making less than $250,000.

I'm puzzled at what you would have expected Obama to do? Anticipate that McCain would come with another fraudulent issue and make comment before he had any knowledge of specifically how the Republicans would have stretched and smeared the facts?
 
  • #104
Mo' Jo' -> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27221645/
While Wurzelbacher told Obama that he would be taxed at a higher rate because the company grossed more than $250,000 a year, Ohio business records show the company’s estimated total annual revenue as only $100,000. Actual taxable income would be even less than that.

In any event, Obama’s tax plan specifies that the higher rate would apply only to income above the $250,000 threshold. Assuming Wurzelbacher’s income as owner somehow hit $280,000 — the top end of his supposition of the company’s revenue — only the extra $30,000 would be taxed at a higher rate.

Analysts calculated that the extra tax would amount to $900, which would likely be more than offset by separate provisions of Obama’s plan: a 50 percent tax credit for health care and elimination of the capital gains tax for small businesses.

“I’d have to look at your particular business, but you might end up paying lower taxes under my plan and my approach than under John McCain’s,” Obama told Wurzelbacher during their exchange last weekend.
And Obama was right.

Incidentally, who are these fancy "analysts" that have to tell you that 3% of $30,000 is $900? I'd like to be an analyst, please!
 
  • #105
Astronuc said:
I'm disturbed by the fact that Obama did not point that out. I hope Obama learns the basics before he takes office.
I, for one, am happy that Obama did not try to give the guy detailed tax advice. Obama is not a tax consultant or an accountant. He was right in dealing not with the specifics of Joe the plumber's specifics, but pointing out how his tax plans would effect people in certain tax brackets.

With the cameras rolling, Obama has to make his policy points, not try to educate an obviously clueless questioner about his tax situation. It's pretty silly, really. For a guy to worry about making over $250K a year after buying a business, he would have to be really wealthy to consider buying such a business. It would be tough to buy a going concern that generates that kind of revenue without investing a LOT of money. I don't think Joe's got the scratch - he has no business plan and no accountant/tax adviser.
 
  • #106
turbo-1 said:
I don't think Joe's got the scratch - he has no business plan and no accountant/tax adviser.
Did you miss the part where he's been exposed as a liar?

He isn't a licensed plumber, he makes $40,000 a year, and hasn't paid the taxes on his house, so the county put a lien on his house for unpaid taxes. :smile:
 
  • #107
Evo said:
Did you miss the part where he's been exposed as a liar?

He isn't a licensed plumber, he makes $40,000 a year, and hasn't paid the taxes on his house, so the county put a lien on his house for unpaid taxes. :smile:
I actually feel a little sorry for the guy now. Okay, he was trying to be a smartass by having a poke at Obama with a fictitious story. He may not realize it yet but the price he will now pay in public ridicule will greatly outweigh any enjoyment he may have gotten from his 15 minutes of fame.

McCain really shouldn't have used him in his campaign without his permission. Politicians take flak over what they say in public but are well prepared and well compensated for it whereas this guy is just a normal dumb Joe (sic) caught up in something, I doubt he ever imagined, when he was slyly heckling Obama.
 
  • #108
Art said:
I actually feel a little sorry for the guy now. Okay, he was trying to be a smartass by having a poke at Obama with a fictitious story. He may not realize it yet but the price he will now pay in public ridicule will greatly outweigh any enjoyment he may have gotten from his 15 minutes of fame.

McCain really shouldn't have used him in his campaign without his permission. Politicians take flak over what they say in public but are well prepared and well compensated for it whereas this guy is just a normal dumb Joe (sic) caught up in something, I doubt he ever imagined, when he was slyly heckling Obama.
Not to mention that I read that he's been caught working without a license, he said he thought he didn't need one, but it was confirmed that he does. He and his boss may now be out of a job and facing legal issues.
 
  • #109
Astronuc said:
...Obama explained that small businesses are exempt from penalties on health insurance. Large companies, which can afford insurance should provide insurance.It's interesting that McCain can sit there are proclaim - "I'll (we'll) cut spending" - followed by "I'll give you $5000 for toward your health insurance." With 47 million without health insurance would represent 20 million families or about $100 billion...
A minutes research reveals the basics: McCain plans to eliminate the existing employer based health care tax exemption. Currently the US http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/hlthaff.w4.106v1/DC1" . McCain will replace it with a personal $5k exemption. Obama's ads and mailings on the subject are scurriously, completely misleading, mentioning only the first part and not the second. Most people will keep more in their pockets as a result.
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1903660&postcount=142highlight=health#post1903660

That extra net money in the pockets of individuals will still cost the government revenue, as will the Obama plan. Both parties recognize this and state they will seek savings in Medicare to offset.

Again, the employer tax exemption has got to go - that system is the primary reason for the high cost of US health care. Either it goes, or the US will end up in a nationalized system to stop the cost runaways.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #110
Evo said:
Did you miss the part where he's been exposed as a liar?
I guess I've missed some stuff. I had to take my wife for a medical procedure today and am dealing with some legal issues, so some stuff passed under the bridge.

I've got a feeling that he is a Rove-ian plant, and that his fictional "plight" was custom-made for McCain to use against Obama to "prove" that Obama's tax plans would strangle small businesses. Unfortunately, the media is disinclined to investigate tough stories, and much of the electorate is disinclined to dig any deeper than the claims made by the GOP.

"Obama palls around with terrorists" - Obama will raise taxes on everybody" - "Obama is a Muslim who doesn't love his country"
 
  • #111
What is with talk radio today? Did people watch the same debate as I did last night? The hosts on WRKO 680AM in Boston are calling out Obama for being deceptive by talking about Buffet willing to pay more taxes when Mccain was talking about Joe The Plumber. It's funny how they don't mention that Joe is not actually a plumber.
 
  • #112
I have a gut feeling that there is a lot more about Joe the plumber that we don't know.

My gut feeling is that he was either a plant or is a Libertarian who wanted to get his name in the media. The guy is too well spoken to be the average $40,000 per year plumber.

Edit: He is a registered republican who owes nearly $1200 to the state of Ohio in back taxes. Neither he or his (boss ) are licensed plumbers. As a general rule usually only the owner of a company or a designated employee need to hold a commercial license.
 
Last edited:
  • #113
LowlyPion said:
I'm puzzled at what you would have expected Obama to do? Anticipate that McCain would come with another fraudulent issue and make comment before he had any knowledge of specifically how the Republicans would have stretched and smeared the facts?
With respect this post and the previous 2, I would have expected Obama to McCain that his position was nonsense. Obama should have asked McCain if he was taking about gross or net income, and then pointed out if Plumber Joe hired/employed someone, those wages would be deducted from revenue. I expect Obama to think on his feet about something so basic as gross and net income, or taxable income.

When one gets a trick question or a bogus proposition such as McCain through at him, someone like Obama needs to have it clarified.

As for the rest - about Wurzelbacher and his status with respect to license or his back taxes - it will be interesting to see how that plays out. :rolleyes:
 
  • #114
Well, at least the media narrative will move on from negative tone to comedic Joe the plumber during the upcoming news cycle. I think McCain won't be too happy with the unexpected popularity of Joe, and the media attention he will receive. Joe's not doing much good for McCain, other than wasting air time that could be used to man a comeback.

Thanks Joe. You are the anti-Robin Hood. You fight for the rich so you can pay a bigger share of tax. Keep talking and don't listen to the haters.

People love you, for different reasons.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #115
Astronuc said:
With respect this post and the previous 2, I would have expected Obama to McCain that his position was nonsense. Obama should have asked McCain if he was taking about gross or net income, and then pointed out if Plumber Joe hired/employed someone, those wages would be deducted from revenue. I expect Obama to think on his feet about something so basic as gross and net income, or taxable income.

When one gets a trick question or a bogus proposition such as McCain through at him, someone like Obama needs to have it clarified.

As for the rest - about Wurzelbacher and his status with respect to license or his back taxes - it will be interesting to see how that plays out. :rolleyes:

I don't know that Obama didn't take the guy at face value when he spoke with him without thinking he wouldn't have known the difference between asking price and income. In hindsight knowing that the guy was much less than he represented himself to be, I suspect he really could have pole-axed McCain by asking any number of specifics about Joe's situation and made a fool of McCain for his sandbag effort. But that's really a bit of a reach for me to fault Obama for not knowing. I thought his comeback on Columbia and then expanding his explanation to include the US-Peru agreement, was really an unreported moment that undercut McCain's whole snide attack, and made Obama enviously in charge of more facts than McCain.
 
  • #116
Tsu was saying that I missed a good slip. When McCain was talking about Palin, she thought he referred to his VP as "a breast of...breath of fresh air".

I haven't gone back to look yet. Did anyone else catch this?
 
  • #117
Ivan Seeking said:
Tsu was saying that I missed a good slip. When McCain was talking about Palin, she thought he referred to his VP as "a breast of...breath of fresh air".

I haven't gone back to look yet. Did anyone else catch this?
Yes I heard that slip too. Given his reputation I thought it was very amusing.
 
  • #118
I was wondering if we'd hear anything like this out of Obama. As if Palin isn't bad enough.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3A5bP4pxOdU
 
  • #119
The difference being the tape of Palin wasn't doctored :rolleyes:
 
  • #120
Art said:
The difference being the tape of Palin wasn't doctored :rolleyes:

What's doctored about it? I watched the original clip on the news after it happened.
 

Similar threads

News Election campaigning tactic, strategy, manuever
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
News Can Romney regain credibility after his Cairo/Libya Embassy blunder?
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
7K
News Palin pick an insult to our intelligence
  • · Replies 1K ·
34
Replies
1K
Views
95K
News Do other countries look at us and laugh?
  • · Replies 129 ·
5
Replies
129
Views
21K
News Criticize your choice for president
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
News Did the 2008 Financial Crisis Mark the End of Free-Market Economics?
  • · Replies 222 ·
8
Replies
222
Views
35K
News Should the US intervene in world problems?
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
10K
News What Was the Hitchens Galloway Debate About?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
News New Hampshire voters worried about U.S. image
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
News Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of Energy Independence
  • · Replies 133 ·
5
Replies
133
Views
27K