Patterico's Pontifications

10/3/2008

Debate Post-Mortem

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:25 am



Sarah Palin needed to hit a home run. She hit a double.

She was poised and had none of that deer-in-the-headlights quality we saw in the Couric interview.

But she was too wedded to talking points and consequently missed several opportunities. She let Joe Biden hang the financial crisis around the Republicans’ neck, when there is ample evidence that Democrats enabled a corrupt Fannie and Freddie. She let Biden paint McCain as a deregulator, when he fought to regulate Fannie and Freddie while Obama took money from those entities. She failed to clearly articulate a vision that would persuade independents that McCain/Palin would be different from Bush/Cheney, although she and McCain have a proven record of spending restraint.

She didn’t stumble or freeze, and many found her performance impressive. But she could have done much better, and McCain needed that.

128 Responses to “Debate Post-Mortem”

  1. You’re scoring on points, like a policy wonk, against the standard of what you wish she would have said in a perfect world. Nobody’s ever going to hit that mark, and it ignores the reality seen by the 99% of the voting population who don’t measure points the same way you do.

    There were two questions for this debate: (1) Would she dissipate the doubts raised by the MSM and Obama/Biden partisans to the effect that she’s a clueless ditz a la Tina Fey’s caricature? and (2) Would she connect again with the ordinary public in the same way that she did at the RNC, that is, as a real person with whom they could identify?

    On both of those bases, she hit another grand slam.

    Beldar (584615)

  2. Rick Moran has a similar take about the onus being on McCain with a slightly different emphasis
    about Palin. If he was scoring baseball I think he scores a triple.

    voiceofreason2 (590c85)

  3. (Lest my comment be seen as too critical, I’m a wonk too. It’s when I take my wonk hat off and try to react like a normal person that I think she hit a grand slam.)

    Beldar (584615)

  4. The clean coal ropeline comment showed that Governor Palin was able and all too willing to knock the smug out of Biden when she was given the proper ammo. If only the McCain campaign would have identified so many of the other soft targets she could have had him reeling by the time it was over. Using Biden’s own comments about Obama were good, but pulling his pants down over the $200M to Iran comment would have made him look absolutely foolish. Also – name the damn oversight legislation that McCain signed onto – IT’S CALLED S190 PEOPLE – why the hell are they reticent to name it, showing that it was real, not just some freaking talking point?

    rhodeymark (6231e5)

  5. Patterico – I’m now persuaded by the argument that McCain/Palin are waiting until after the bailout passes to hit the dems with both barrels on responsibility for the financial crisis. They can legitimately say they waited because it wasn’t a time for partisanship but their opponents couldn’t seem to understand that the country was more important than partisanship. There’s so much red meat there for McCain and Palin it should be awesome. It has to be a deliberate strategy.

    I agree with Beldar. Quit yer whining. She wasn’t perfect. Nobody is, but she certainly shut up a lot of the critics.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  6. But yeah – what Beldar said 😉 my wife was a Hillary supporter and she is digusted with what the MSM has done to Governor Palin.

    rhodeymark (6231e5)

  7. Palin is the talented rookie middle reliever. McCain should be able to finish game on his own. For her to defend every bloviation from crazy Joe wasn’t her job… that’s yours and McCain’s.

    Take a look at ignorant mistatment about Constitution and debate (and Palin?) at top of L. A. Times editorial, which I sent to you hours ago.

    Get to work, eh?

    shivas irons (bbf54b)

  8. Of course, we really will not know how the debate is scored until we hear from the usual suspects:
    Peter, jharp, Phil, Oiram, ….. ?????

    AOracle (44565b)

  9. Based on last night’s debate they had to create a new dictionary entry this morning:

    BS = Biden Says

    h/t Ace

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  10. There is discussion elsewhere that the McCain campaign has told her to lay off the Fannie-Freddie story. Maybe it is as daleyrocks says.

    I wish she had gotten more in about energy but that is where Ifill showed her bias. There was no question about energy, abortion, Supreme Court and a number of other topics. Palin did muscle her way into that topic but it was no thanks to Ifill.

    Of course she was scripted ! So was Bill Clinton. She will be terrific in a year or two but that is another election. I think her greatest accomplishment last night was to guarantee her political future. She will not be going back to Wasilla “with her tail between her legs” as the lefty blogs were crowing. Washington Monthly can’t stop writing about her this morning. That shows you how good she was. That and the MSM silence about her after this morning.

    She is a walking, talking victory in Iraq story. Had she flopped, she would have been front page news until November.

    Mike K (155601)

  11. Yep, daleyrocks, the truth about Fannie and Freddie is going to be the October surprise McCain springs at the economic/domestic debate.

    JFH (c87afd)

  12. Good to see you are still wedded to the lame stream media.

    I didn’t notice you were off the air. Really?

    Larry Sheldon (86b2e1)

  13. Maybe you know–where did they hide Palin’s teleprompter? Ear phones?

    Larry Sheldon (86b2e1)

  14. I agree with Mike, the virtual silence from the MSM this morning speaks volumes about her performance – the few negatives are coming from bizarro polling worlds, like the one Yahoo has on their site today.

    McCain has to take the ball now and ram it into The Messiah’s chest every chance he gets between now and the election. Only so much your subordinates can do for you, at some point you have to do the job in front of you in order to win. No more Mr. Nice Guy/Maverick on all the crapola that’s out there – the public will be taking one last look at Obama before they pull the lever for him, time to get that dirty laundry out, even though the MSM is trying desperately to keep it shoved under the rug.

    Dmac (e639cc)

  15. notwithstanding Beldar’s infatuation with Palin, she his both of his objectives but failed to really score… and it wasn’t by attacking on the issues.

    the election is going to be decided by undecided voters, who by definition don’t care about the ‘issues’ (if they did, they would have decided a long time ago). these voters, more than anything, want to be comfortable with the President (and, to an extent, VP). They want a President they could have over for dinner. And they want a President they feel comfortable having handle things in Washington while they handle things at home, like earning a paycheck and taking the kids to soccer practice.

    To make voters comfortable with her and McCain, Palin could have pushed the theme that what voters hear and read about on the news, the paper and on SNL is filtered and distorted by liberals who really really want Obama to win. The negative press will get even worse in the next few weeks and this was Palin’s last chance to ask the voters to be a bit skeptical about what they see and hear.

    She also should have pushed the theme that there are certain things that you just don’t trust to someone whose experience is only from reading books and talking policy with fellow wonks. You don’t let kids get the keys to the car just because they read a book about driving. You don’t let a kid run your family business without a lot of on the job training. You don’t get to try a murder case the first day you show up to work at the DA’s office. You don’t get to command an army the day you enlist. And you don’t let Obama get the keys to the White House. She could have talked about McCain having lived through Washington, he’s seen and dealt with things Obama can only dream about being able to handle. It’s one thing to trust the White House to a novice when things are going well (as was the case with Clinton in 92), it’s another thing altogether to do so when times are tough.

    So, if you judge her by the bigotry of low expectations, give her an A. If you grade by what she could and should have done, a C at best.

    steve sturm (369bc6)

  16. She didn’t completely embarrass herself, I agree.

    She also didn’t answer any of the questions.

    And did you know they call John McCain the maverick?

    A double? I think not. She never swung the bat.

    jharp (2282bb)

  17. After 36 years on the public dime, Biden is still not ready for prime time. Nobody has kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon as he described. So much for his grand grasp of foreign policy.

    Perfect Sense (9d1b08)

  18. I agree (and hope) that McCain is waiting for the bailout to pass before unloading on the Dems for causing the problems in the first place.

    Patricia (ee5c9d)

  19. Patricia – It was a trap and Obama and the dems fell for it hook, line and sinker.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  20. It ain’t what is said that matters it’s what we think is said. Our political debates as such mean absolutely nothing. What counts is the impression left. TV is a “hot” medium, meaning that it places people right in our living rooms. In our faces. This means if we don’t like you we kick you out. It would be just as dangerous for Palin to have picked a fight or been nasty to Biden as would the reverse. She had perfect balance. And the “wink?” She did that directly in our faces and in our living rooms, that the liberals are going nuts about it testifies to its effectiveness and the closeness she achieved. I give her at least a triple to the wall in center.

    howard432 (cc8b85)

  21. I thought she did fine, with the exception of actually articulating reasons to vote for McCain.

    There were missed opportunities that someone with a better understanding (interest) in economics and finance could have taken, especially regarding health care and the current financial crisis. Republicans are letting the democrats get away with claiming that the economic crisis is simply a result of underregulation of the greedy. Palin is worthless at helping debunk that myth.

    Biden’s characterization of McCain’s health plan made me want to smack him in the mouth. I would have loved to have someone up there who could have made Biden seriously address things like education and health care.

    Instead, Biden gets away with acting like the nice grandparent who is going to give you all the toys and candy that the mean grandparent says will spoil you.

    McCain was always the most attractive serious Republican candidate for me (Paul excepted), and I was incredibly relieved when he was selected over the rest of that freakshow.

    Seeing Palin and Biden up there together definitely didn’t make me feel any more enthused about Obama than I’ve been in the past. So she didn’t do any more damage than she’s already done.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  22. Beldar’s right, and I think that she scored in a quiet way, too — she stepped out of Biden’s way after that fantasy tale of the US/French military invasion of Lebanon that kicked out Hezbollah, and let it pass. (I think she caught it; Ifill couldn’t have missed it.) For now. Biden threw the McCain/Palin team a hanger, with the bases loaded, and McCain’s coming back up to bat.

    That’s not just a typical Biden flub, and it’s something that McCain can, if he’s willing to play hardball, hit Obama with at the next debate or the last one.

    Do I need to point out to this crowd how damning it is that the guy who Obama brought in because he supposedly knows stuff about foreign policy invents victories — and a failure to capitalize on a victory — out of whole cloth?

    Joel Rosenberg (5ec843)

  23. I think that Joe Biden’s botoxed forehead is iconic of the current corruption and paralysis of Washington DC.

    More on topic, you are right that the charge is wrong and should be rebutted but nevertheless I disagree with your point on her level of success and wrongness of her strategy.

    I think Joe was merely playing defence to shore up the base, with the Bush=McCain memee. Palin response leap-frogs the stale “it’s Bush’s fault” charge, which I doubt has little power to sway undecided voters when they’re looking for a lifeline. Further, Biden could only tie McCain to those policies by dredging up an alleged soundbite, probably Bowderized or Dowdified anyway, when McCain supposedly said he was against regulations (all? some? these? what regulations? goes unanswered). That’s a stretch. Not persuasive.

    In addition, it’s possible Palin was following the political strategy of allowing no space between you and your oppponent on a particular issue. IN last Friday’s debate, look how many times Obama said, “I agree with Senator McCain…” to lead off his response. It makes him seem a safe bet, not so much a risk, etc. In effect Palin was saying, in respose, “Your darn tootin’ we need more regulation and we’re just the team of mavericks to do it!” That’s forward-looking, and I think more appealing to the moderate voter.

    Since McCain and Palin both do have some cred on this issue, and Palin brought up several examples, she did not have to get down in the mud on that issue.

    P, your blog is a daily must for me and I thank you for your insights and hard work. Your co-bloggers are excellent also; I’m glad to catch Karl again who I followed at PW. So my friends, let me conclude by saying that I do agree with you that she hit a double. But the bases were loaded.

    (h/t Russell Martin, LA Dodgers)

    Geo W (b2e4d7)

  24. McCain always want to be a nice guy. Time to take the gloves off and use the Alinsky playbook. Hammer Obama on his taxing and spending plans, his campaign’s threats to radio/TV stations, his position on energy, his willingness to surrender in Iraq, his naiveté that the mullahs/Ahmadinejad will respond to rational talk etc….

    Encourage protesters to follow Obama everywhere between now and the election. In short get in his frakin’ face. Employ the OODA Loop to maximum advantage. Be the fighter pilot.

    Horatio (783c7d)

  25. McCain always want to be a nice guy. Time to take the gloves off and use the Alinsky playbook. Hammer Obama on his taxing and spending plans, his campaign’s threats to radio/TV stations, his position on energy, his willingness to surrender in Iraq, his naiveté that the mullahs/Ahmadinejad will respond to rational talk etc….

    Encourage protesters to follow Obama everywhere between now and the election. In short get in his frakin’ face. Employ the OODA Loop to maximum advantage. Be the fighter pilot.

    Horatio (783c7d)

  26. Patterico,

    I say Palin was effective. The LEFT is already wedded to Obama, the RIGHT to the Republican ticket (if not to McCain himself).

    So the Independents/Undecideds was the target last night and I say that Palin was more effective in being persuasive and in being perceived as one of them than did Biden.

    These people are not policy wonks. Most of them are not Poli-Sci majors, right? They won’t even remember exact details of the policies that were discussed. But they will remember some key ideas — and they will remember their impressions about who was “talking straight” to them vis-a-vis who was trying to fast-talk them by quickly reciting talking points.

    I say Palin was the more effective by quite a bit.

    Calpurnia (ad936f)

  27. Count me impressed. She pretended like the moderator wasn’t there and spat out rehearsed responses every time it was her turn. Way to stick it to the MSM! Now we have planted the subtle hint that Palin may actually have a hearing problem which will get her that liberal, tree-huggin’ sympathy vote.

    Richard (3d65f9)

  28. For an old dog, I’ll be darned if ol’ “Plugs” isn’t pretty good, he’s smooth, he grins or scowls on cue, and he’s a lot more agile than his spotty profile for blunders would have you believe. No, ol’ Joe works his reputation, it gives him plenty of room for manoeuvre. It’s better that way, why ol’ Joe can slip the overalls into Mrs Murphy’s chowder right under the old gal’s nose. Never make a ripple.

    Nope, nobody’s better, and if he happens to get called on it from time to time, well, heck, slippry Joe just grins and starts calling George Bush names. So far, it’s worked every time for the last 5 years or so.

    But, forget Joe’s dog and pony show for now, that’s strickly for suckers, the little people who get stuck with the tab, and the gullible reporters and talking heads who protect him and his fat cat pals on Wall Street.

    You see, Joe’s home and his heart are in Delaware, always has been. Take off the mask, wipe the grin off his face, and there stands Joe Biden: Mr Corporate America in all his naked glory. Senator Joseph Biden represents the great State of Delaware, Corporate Headquarters for over half the Corporations traded on Wall Street. Nearly 60% of the Fortune 500 have their HQs safely ensconced in Delaware, under Joe Biden’s protective wing.

    Delaware’s taxes are remarkably low, very low, third lowest in the country, so Corporations keep their big shots and most important assets in Biden’s bailiwick. Have your Corporate HQs in Delaware and your subsidiaries escape the taxman. Talk about incentives, that’s some powerful stuff. We’re talking some big numbers here.

    Plus, no usury laws in Delaware. Ever wonder why so many credit card operators call Delaware home, well folks, there’s the answer. No cap on interest rates. Try that neat little trick in most other places and you’ll be indicted for loan sharking and quickly find yourself on the lam, or working nights collecting for the boys.

    Which brings us to now, or rather to the last time ol’ Joe proved his worth to the Corporate elite he serves so well. Joe got legislation approved to make it much more difficult for regular folks to declare bankruptcy.

    That’s right. Borrow so much you can’t pay it back, think you’re going to get off the hook by goin’ belly up, think again pal. Joe and the juice boys are way ahead of the game. They saw the financial crisis coming and got their ducks lined up early. That’s the way it’s done, you snooze you lose. Early birds stay solvent, and the devil takes the hindmost.

    Ol’ Joe is slick as they come, he hides in plain sight, protected by the fancy feathers of a false persona, paid for by the patronage of America’s Corporate elite. Joe calls himself a champion of the people while he stabs John and Jane Doe in the back. He’s got MSM running interference for his tricky legislation, and looking the other way on the things that really matter.

    Yeah, that Joe Biden’s gaffe machine alright, but it’s OK, he’s a good guy, just a little bit nutty that’s all. Don’t be fooled, Joe’s crazy alright, crazy like a fox. That’s all folks!

    Ropelight (1be620)

  29. Well, since the Bailout just passed the House, now would be the time to take the gloves off, right?
    Let’s see what shows up on the Evening News.
    Of course, there are always replays of O’Reilly sticking it to Barney Frank!

    AOracle (d1198d)

  30. I think Palin hit it out of the park and so did all my family members over 45. Those under 45 grade it as a double like Patterico. The reason I think she did so well is that we need to grade her in the context of the McCain campaign’s overall strategy.

    I think elections have innings and it’s a mistake to use all your pitches in one inning. It’s better to save something for the end. I think this is especially true when it comes to economic issues because the domestic policy debate has not been held yet.

    McCain has many flaws but he and his advisers have done a masterful job getting into Obama’s head and throwing him off balance. At this point, Obama has a general idea but he doesn’t know how McCain will handle the economy in the domestic policy debate. This is Obama’s signature issue and the number one item on most voters’ minds. If McCain can handle that issue at the next debate and possibly even throw Obama off-balance, McCain can once again shake this election up.

    DRJ (c953ab)

  31. The more she ignored the camera and talked to the American people the more effective she was. She’s obviously a quick study, articulate and charming. No appearance of gravitas (appearance that is) yet but she’s so naturally girlish that it’ll be hard to counter it.

    Biden seemed smitten with her and at times unsure of himself (those would be the times he BS’d most). That was my favorite part of the entire debate.

    Now let’s hope she and Todd go campaign in Michigan!

    Dana (b4a26c)

  32. Your analogy is wrong. Palin did just fine. Whether she hit a double, triple, or home run last night is not the point. The problem was a couple of errors by Palin and McCain the inning before the debate. Obama-Biden did not make errors last week (and economic events gave them naturally a boost), hence the reason McCain is seven points behind now. I suspect some post debate bounce (not a lot but some from Sarah and definitely a halt on the bleeding). Now it is up to McCain to score big on the next two debates.

    It is an uphill struggle but a couple of pluses:

    The bailout plan passed. Good or bad, that issue is probably off the table since it is bipartisan and is what it is. Now if what Ace suggests is true (and I believe it is) McCain can start attacking Obama for his ties to Fannie, Freddie, Barney Franks, Chris Dodd, etc.

    Palin should be used extensively in battlegrounds the next couple of weeks along with talk radio appearances all the time (especially local talk radio in battleground states).

    And give a coherent economic plan. Is Romney willing to help? Get him out in Michigan, Ohio, and elsewhere to pitch why McCain Palin makes sense.

    Joe (dcebbd)

  33. I think McCain needs to use the web in his next debate. He has to clearly explain the blame that Democrats and Obama share in the financial crisis.

    McCain’s campaign should create a website that clearly, yet simply, explains the whole mess, including the CRA, Obama’s large contributions from Fannie, attempts at reform by McCain and congressional Republicans.

    This is difficult to do during a debate, but if McCain spends some money with 3-5 creative groups and have them separatly tackle the creation of the website and then go with the best solution, I think it’s the only way to effectively get the information across.

    At his last debate, he needs to do the same thing and point out all the Obama lies, sleazy connections, “present” votes, etc.

    The campaign should register two, easy-to-remember websites, one for each debate. McCain then refers the millions of views to the site.

    Of course, Obama, at the last debate, will have his “I have a bracelet, too” moment and probably shout out his website. So, perhaps McCain just does this at the last debate.

    He could also run the website referral in his swing-state ads. Those short, 30 second spots don’t accomplish much on this complicated subject.

    The key is the creation of the site. It has to be an award-winning presentation, entertaing, simple and very on message.

    PC14 (ec0516)

  34. With respect to your baseball analogy if Palin hit a double than Biden got on first base with a walk. Biden didn’t strike out but he wasn’t too impressive either considering he is the guy with decades of experience and is supposed to overshadow Palin’s inexperience.

    Brett (fded77)

  35. I found 5-6 comments from this thread in the filter. You may want to check if there are any comments you missed.

    DRJ (c953ab)

  36. With all due respect to our host, what Beldar said. She did not need to be perfect.* Just good enough. And she was.

    *Actually, being “perfect* may have hurt her. It’s hard to walk the line between a competent, tough woman and a “bitch”.

    She did fine. Just fine.

    nk (77debb)

  37. Going with the baseball analogy, Palin is like a young pitcher, who no one has ever seen, but she only has one pitch. It might work the first few times but after awhile people catch up to it and she get will get crushed.

    Palin didn’t get crushed last night but she certainly didn’t blow anyone out of the water. Listen to the comments that she actually made. Did you hear anything of substance? I sure didn’t. It was like cotton candy, nice to look at, somewhat tasty, but in the end no substance.

    mj (53b86c)

  38. Ropelight–low taxes and less regulation is usually a conservative ideal. So why are you complaining about Delaware?

    And speaking of less regulation–if McCain (and Palin) are real conservatives, they do want less regulation; they want deregulation.

    And Freddie and Fannie got the way they got with some help from the Republicans and the Bush Administration and the Fed. It wasn’t just congressional sins that allowed this; it was also failure of other entities, most of them under or linked to Republican control, to take appropriate steps that allowed this mess to happen.

    kishnevi (b49ea3)

  39. She didn’t completely embarass Joe Biden, I agree.

    She also didn’t fall into any of Ifill’s verbal traps.

    And did you know that John McCain is not George Bush?

    A double? I think not. I can only dream of first base with My Barry.

    Comment by jharp — 10/3/2008 @ 9:37 am

    not jharp (77debb)

  40. Everybody

    Nothing works like a wet blanket of defeatism.

    This election is about the price of gas and the foreclosures –

    The MSM has influenced everyone that its some party’s fault.

    What she did in the debate is over and over again – highlight the differences without the tuned out snow of driviling factiods of senate nuances and stupid global warming, clean coal and plastic vs paper distractions(questions) from “neutral” interrogators (I mean moderators)

    Do you want to pay 50% income tax if you have a job

    Then keep on being pessimistic

    EricPWJohnson (ca64bf)

  41. A double, but with runners in scoring position, based on the numbers for the TV ratings for the debate. The big media will lay off the “Palin is in over her head and/or an idiot” talking points for a couple of days, and play down the debate itself as no big deal in order to resume calling her a yokel next week, but the high ratings for the debate will make that staregery much tougher to pull off, since viewers saw the debate for themselves and aren’t just having to take the media’s word for it.

    John (4a5dc5)

  42. #38, cut the crap. If you actually took a minute or 2 to read my comment, you would see it wasn’t “complaining about Delaware?” That’s not it, that’s not it at all.

    Try again, only this time read the comment first, then make an honest effort to ask a question which isn’t a deliberate misrepresentation.

    Ropelight (1be620)

  43. And did you know that John McCain is not George Bush?

    Comment by jharp — 10/3/2008 @ 9:37 am

    Comment by not jharp — 10/3/2008 @ 11:09 am

    No. You are wrong. He is George Bush albeit only 90% of the time.

    jharp (2282bb)

  44. Whilst you George Palin bootlickers fawn over her regurgitation of GOP talking points last night there are some updates polls to ponder.

    Ouch! Ain’t looking too good for the snake handlers.

    10/3: Gallup Pres-Tracker: Obama 49%, McCain 42%

    10/3: Hotline/Diageo Pres-Tracker: Obama 48%, McCain 42%

    10/3: Rasmussen: Obama 51%, McCain 44%

    10/3: Hotline/FD Tracking: Obama 48%, McCain 42%

    10/3: Survey USA MN: Obama 46%, McCain 47%

    10/3: Rasmussen NH: Obama 53%, McCain 43%

    jharp (2282bb)

  45. 41–your point was that it’s bad that Biden protects those old greedy corporations. And your prime evidence is that he’s senator from a state that applies conservative ideals (lower taxes, less regulation) a little more than most states in this area (mostly because Delaware wants the economic benefits, not because of an ideological basis)
    So your argument amounts to the fact that his state follows conservative doctrine.

    kishnevi (b49ea3)

  46. She didn’t completely embarrass herself, I agree.
    – The meds from the shelter must be working.

    She also didn’t answer any of the questions.
    – On the other hand, the meds still need adjustment.

    And did you know they call John McCain the maverick?
    – Did everyone here know that jharp has an imaginary disabled daughter that he uses to take cheap obscene potshots at Trig Palin?

    A double? I think not. She never swung the bat.
    – And you’ve never touched a girl without having to pay big bucks for it.

    qdpsteve (64c4ed)

  47. Biden seemed smitten with her and at times unsure of himself (those would be the times he BS’d most). That was my favorite part of the entire debate.

    I noticed that! He would grin at her when she was talking, like “wow, you’re adorable!”

    Patricia (ee5c9d)

  48. kishnevi – The point is that he talks the Obama talk but Delaware walks a completely different walk. It’s typical liberal hypocrisy. That’s the point. Like expecting Obama to completely change his stripes once he gets into the White House – ain’t gonna happen.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  49. harpo – Why don’t you make fun of Trig Palin again? That went over big last time.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  50. #44, your words give proof that liberalism causes ignorance. I’ll give you one more chance to get it right, otherwise you’re consigned to the dustbin of outworn creeds.

    Ropelight (1be620)

  51. I must have watched a different debate. In our house, a very middle class household, we scored it a Grand Slam for Palin. Joe Biden not only looked, but sounded shell-shocked with so many factually wrong statements, even the non-political junkies caught a number of them.

    Sara (Pal2Pal) (3337ed)

  52. Great point on Ifill’s bias made by John McCormack over at TWS Blog:

    No questions on energy, guns, or abortion.

    If there are three topics which are more identified with Palin and the conservative base, I don’t know what they are.

    wls (26b1e5)

  53. harpo – Why don’t you make fun of Trig Palin again? That went over big last time.

    Comment by daleyrocks — 10/3/2008 @ 12:00 pm

    Governor Palin’s newborn could respond to Couric’s questions more intelligently that the Governor herself. No doubt about it. By saying nothing.

    How’s that?

    jharp (2282bb)

  54. jharp — all your polls are pre-VP debate, and pre-House vote.

    Those may or may not change the atmospherics of the race.

    That change may or may not start to be reflected in polling today.

    But the race today is different than it was 24 hours ago, in the same way that McCain’s small lead over Obama became ancient history as soon as Lehman Brothers went under and Pres. Bush had to go on national TV and become the face of a potential economic crisis.

    Here’s what we’ve been through over the last 60 days:

    Russian invades Georgia — McCain gains in the polls.

    McCain runs celebrity ads — McCain gains in the polls.

    Dems have a solid convention — Obama gains in the polls.

    McCain names Palin VP, and convention is great — McCain gains in the polls.

    Lehman Brothers fails and financial crisis looms — Obama gains in the polls.

    Palin stumbles in media interviews with network anchors — Obama gains in the polls.

    Palin out performs expectations by wide margin in debate, and Congress passes fiscal assistance measure — ????????

    Obama has had 8 point leads twice before, and each time they have evaporated.

    This one may be more sustaining because a larger share of the electorate is paying attention.

    Then again, it may not.

    wls (26b1e5)

  55. Yeah, there’s no question that this race is neck-and-neck, no matter who’s neck is out front at the moment. Anything can happen.

    As a swing voter myself I really do find myself wanting both of these guys to lose, but I’m not sure who I want to lose MORE yet.

    While neither of them will be able to lock up my vote, either one of them could convince me to vote for the other pretty easily.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  56. wls,

    You are mostly correct about the polls being pre debate. Though not 100%.

    Just checked the intrade.com post debate bounce and it ain’t pretty for the Bible crowd.

    Barack Obama to win 2008 US Presidential Election 69.3 69.8 70.0 +5.0

    John McCain to win 2008 US Presidential Election 30.4 30.5 30.5 -3.9

    Pretty shocking to me that McCain abandoned Michigan but I’m sure this is somehow good news for the republicans.

    You are correct that anything can happen but if I were you I wouldn’t hold my breath.

    And be honest. After the debacle called George Bush the GOP very well deserves to lose.

    jharp (2282bb)

  57. Wow. Just looked at the intrade numbers again.

    A 40 point lead! Holy Moley!

    jharp (2282bb)

  58. I prefer the middle reliever metaphor. The McCain team was getting shelled and need someone to come in and stop the bleeding. Palin absolutely shut them down. So, Obama leads 5-2 in the 7th.

    Pat – I think part of your discomfiture is that Palin used the personality tack that is endemic to Democratic politics, and Biden argued policies, the way a Republican might. It certainly was odd for me.

    Having said that, she accused Biden of waving the “white flag of surrender” and he did not respond with a single word of rebuttal! Game, set, match. She destroyed him.

    I will acknowledge that alleged independents thought Biden won 40-20.

    Ed (385e88)

  59. Is Romney still sulking? Get him out to Michigan and stump for McCain-Palin. Listen, the chances of Mac-Pali winning are certainly less than 50% right now. If Mac wins, he may only serve one term. Win or lose, Romney would do himself an enormous service by stumping actively. Not only that, Romney would do the country a lot of good explaining the economic mess we are in and why the McCain-Palin approach is far better than Obama-Biden.

    Romney could help a lot in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Nevada. And Mac should strongly consider him as Secretary of Treasury (heck he will get 700 billion to play with, which is a heck of a lot of power if they win).

    Joe (dcebbd)

  60. “Governor Palin’s newborn could respond to Couric’s questions more intelligently that the Governor herself. No doubt about it.”

    jharp – Fixed that for you to make it closer to what you said two days ago. That you actually decided to make another comment about Trig just reinforces your loathsomness.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  61. “it was also failure of other entities, most of them under or linked to Republican control…”

    Wrong – and Bill Clinton will only be too happy to help you out on that misunderstanding, he’s been trying to explain the beginnings of the fiasco for the past two weeks. After all, it started on his watch, and was helped immeasurably by a Democratically – controlled Congress.

    Dmac (e639cc)

  62. “That you actually decided to make another comment about Trig just reinforces your loathsomness.”

    So let’s predict what the expected response will be, should be easy after all the other ones we’ve been subjected to:

    HarpTard:

    “You’re a liar, Daley Rocks! Prove what you said I said! Prove it! Prove it! Prove it!”

    (the original comment is then summarily posted numerous times)

    “I happen to have twenty disabled children that I take care of 24/7, and I’ve been fighting the health care system for two centuries all for their benefit! I also know 3,000 other disabled children via my international travels to Terre Haute and the stream out back by my trailer park, and also have authored three books on child care that have been nominated for the Nobel Prize on medicine! I also have a gross net worth equal to Latvia’s! You’re all scum and liars, LIARS, I TELL YOU!”

    Dmac (e639cc)

  63. Dmac, great stuff.

    Don’t forget that jharp also worked as Andrew Sullivan’s personal wet nurse for over 10 years, and has the genital scarring to prove it! 😉

    qdpsteve (64c4ed)

  64. “That you actually decided to make another comment about Trig just reinforces your loathsomness.”

    Calling Governor Palin out as an imbecile is an act of patriotism.

    Why do you post my original comment so all can see for themselves what a liar you are.

    jharp (2282bb)

  65. “That you actually decided to make another comment about Trig just reinforces your loathsomness.”

    Calling Governor Palin out as an imbecile is an act of patriotism.

    Why don’t you post my original comment so all can see for themselves what a liar you are.

    jharp (2282bb)

  66. harpo – If Sarah Palin can run for VP with only a college degree there might be hope for you after all. Finish up that GED and get your college applications in. 2012 will be here before you know it!

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  67. The worst health care system in the history of mankind has been my nemesis ever since I adopted and purchased an entire Ethiopian orphanage with my windfall profits and fortune from selling those squirting flowers that clowns use. Now, off to the goofy golf course where I someday hope to be able to come close to par. All of you snake handling Bible thumpers should just quit and submit to Teh One.

    jharp's doppelganger (f7900a)

  68. Daleyrocks, I just have one thing to say to you:

    LIAR!

    Dmac (e639cc)

  69. jharpy – We posted your comment last night, and you denied the words that were there. Why should we expect anything different today?

    JD (f7900a)

  70. On further reflection, I’d add this to my original comment (#1 above): Even if Palin scored a four-bagger (as I think she did), I’d agree that the McCain-Palin ticket was well more than four runs behind. I think Obama will lead in the pre-election public opinion polling up until election day, but under-perform those polls by an average of 3-6%, depending on the state. But there’s ground still to be made up; Palin will continue to help, but won’t have as big an at-bat as the one she’s just finished, regardless of how well she does; so McCain’s got to contribute quite a bit toward making up the remaining deficit by himself.

    I loved Gov. Palin’s comments today on Fox News, however, in reaction to the announcement that the campaign is pulling its ads from Michigan. (She said she and Todd wanted to go campaign there. That’s not a bad idea at all.)

    Beldar (7f8870)

  71. (Should have said “still want to go campaign” in Michigan, notwithstanding the pulling of ad buys.)

    Beldar (7f8870)

  72. I think she did alright, but it’s not a game changing performance. Ultimately people are going to vote for the person at the top of the ticket. I still don’t see her having proved that she’s capable of being VP if required.

    Her rudeness towards Ifill was a cheap shot to score points, even though Ifill treated both her and Biden with kid gloves. No deep questions really, no probing. Basic basic questions and a few right out of the Obama/Mccain debate from Firday.

    She proved herself likeable and cute, but she lays it on SO THICK, it becomes off putting and embarrassing. The constant winks and the over done folksiness, which never sounds genuine, but rather like she’s deigning to speak in the “joe-six pack language.”

    I can let all of these things go by the wayside. The truly troubling thing about her is that I have yet to see her show even a shred of empathy or kindness or compassion. Any good politician needs to be able to do that, Obama, McCAin, Biden, Hillary are all capable of showing something human. SOmething that says “Hey, I’m human and I’m not perfect and I know what it’s like to be hurt or disappointed, sad etc…”

    Nothing like that from Palin, ,ever. And all this Right wing hubris (Morris, Hannity etc..) about her she’s the second coming of Reagan is a joke. If I remember correctly, that guy knew how to show he was a feeling person. I think the real comparison should be to GWB. There’s a very similar faux folksy and essentially hidden or non-existent emotional life there and it just too echoing of these last eight years. People need someone to know they’re hurting right now and Palin seems almost pathologically incapable of it.

    Anyhow, there’s still plenty of time for her to hove more of those deer in the headlights moments almost sure to re-occur with reporters who actually know how to get at the heart of what a politician knows and feels and doesn’t give a damn about this MSM is so mean to Palin nonsense the McCain campaaign and Palin herself, need to push so as to lower the bar and pre-cover any poor performance.

    Anyhow, onward to the next Presidential debate. I have a feeling it’s going to be..intense. McCain is on the ropes and his window of opportunity is quickly closing.

    peter (e70d1c)

  73. daleyrocks–you made the sensible point which, actually, is nothing like ropelight’s plaint. Ropelight was complaining the Biden was protecting and beholden to big corporations. And that being from Delaware was evidence of his guilt.
    He thinks he meant something else. I therefore suggest he needs to retake freshman composition.

    As for the role of others beyond Congress, go to qando.net and read some of the posts there. Q & O is, in general, just as conserative as this blog, and sometimes libertarian, and wouldn’t be ever mistaken for anything liberal.

    I’ll post the exact URLs in another comment, and hope the spam filter lets it through.

    kishnevi (b40a74)

  74. “Her rudeness towards Ifill was a cheap shot to score points, even though Ifill treated both her and Biden with kid gloves.”

    Let’s see if Ifill asked Palin any questions that played to her strengths:

    – gun ownership/rights – no;
    – examples of running against the entrenched interests of your own party – no;
    – energy policy for the next ten years – no.

    Yeah, Ifill was a veritable cream – puff to Palin, not that asking about twenty policy questions regarding foreign policy is biased, or anything. Put away your blinders, please.

    harpy's mouth sores (e639cc)

  75. That last post was me, btw.

    Dmac (e639cc)

  76. “Ropelight was complaining the Biden was protecting and beholden to big corporations.”

    kishnevi – I agree with Ropelight on that, particularly the credit card companies and banks.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  77. I think she homered, but even if it was a double, it was more than enough to wipe out the Gibson and Couric interviews. Once you get even a single, strikes 1 and 2 don’t matter anymore.

    Xrlq (62cad4)

  78. Her rudeness towards Ifill was a cheap shot to score points,

    How is it being rude to call someone out on a dishonest question?

    JD (f7900a)

  79. Comment by JD — 10/3/2008 @ 4:36 pm

    Especially when they’re already in the tank for the Dems.

    AOracle (90addc)

  80. Consider yourself denounced.

    Racists.

    JD (f7900a)

  81. There could be a number of reasons for Palin to be cautious about making the argument that Fannie and Freddie caused the subprime meltdown and credit crunch. First, there’s the Rick Davis connection to Freddie. Second, the basic facts don’t seem to be very helpful.

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  82. The whole Rick Davis’ company once lobbied for Freddie/Fannie is one of the Left’s meme du jour. It is racist and sexist to point out Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick, and Jim Johnson.

    Any article that claims Freddie and Fannie were victims is laughable. Note that your link ignores the role of the CRA in this process. We cannot point out the actual underlying causes of this, because that is well, you know, racist.

    JD (f7900a)

  83. Musn’t say anything bad about Maxine’s good friend Frank (who BTW, had to give what – $22M? – to the SEC to settle the acct’ing scandel he was caught up in).

    Nothing to see here;
    Move along now!

    AOracle (90addc)

  84. The facts may be similarly unhelpful with respect to making the case that the CRA was somehow responsible for the crisis.

    JD, I haven’t said anything about racism and I don’t see that Pressman has either. I sure that if you find any errors of logic or fact in Pressman’s columns, you’ll share them with us.

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  85. And, another thing…
    Wouldn’t be easier to list the K-Street firms that weren’t on the pad for Fannie and Freddie?

    AOracle (90addc)

  86. Tim – If the CRA, Freddie, Fannie, Franklin Raines, Jim Johnson, Barney Frank, and Chris Dodd share no blame for the crisis … who does?

    JD (f7900a)

  87. Any good politician needs to be able to do that, Obama, McCAin, Biden, Hillary are all capable of showing something human. SOmething that says “Hey, I’m human and I’m not perfect and I know what it’s like to be hurt or disappointed, sad etc…”

    Nothing like that from Palin, ever.

    Peter, I’m sure you’re a really nice kid but this is just one of the most ridiculous shallow statements ever made.

    The woman is in her mid-40’s, married 20 years, has 5 children, one in Iraq, one expecting, one with Downs Syndrome. There is no one on the face of the earth who has had children, marriage and their particulars on top of that who has not experienced tremendous disappointment and hurt. Its a no-brainer, a given and a fact.

    When someone says that they need to see something human, or that they imperfect or have experienced disappointment or sadness in light of the above it evidences a very shallow, vapid understanding of adult life.

    Dana (973491)

  88. I have had it with conservatives who accept the idiocies that flow from Biden’s and Obama’s mouths and expect Palin to be Einstein. GET REAL. She hit the home run she needed to hit. I’m re-watching it now and she wiped the floor with Biden.

    There might be veep picks that would have debated Biden more effectively. They wouldn’t have energized the base, garnered much viewership or have a chance of helping McCain pull this out, end of story.

    Peg C. (48175e)

  89. Comment by Dana — 10/3/2008 @ 5:18 pm

    Or, a college freshman, who never had to stretch in HS.

    AOracle (90addc)

  90. JD–the SEC, the Fed, the Bush Adminstration….
    Point is, that there is plenty of blame to go around, and a fair portion of it is attachable to Republicans. Some of them may have been Republican trying to earn brownie points with Democrats, but they were Republicans.
    Refer back to the two links I posted earlier in this thread–Q&O has never been none to favor Democrats, to put it mildly.

    Oh, and perhaps we need a new post to explain to flybys and newcomers like Mr. McGarry what some of the injokes are here?

    kishnevi (0a2fa0)

  91. kishnevi – What did the Bush administration do to precipitate this crisis? Specifics.

    How is the answer to the above question any more or less important than the roles of CRA, Freddie, and Fannie?

    JD (f7900a)

  92. kishnevi – I find it hard to believe that the CRA and the accounting fiasco at Freddie/Fannie did not drive this. I am willing to listen to a non-moonbat it is all Bush’s deregulation argument, it is just that I have not heard one. At the inception, forcing banks to make loans that they would not have otherwise made seems foolish, and that is an example of regulation run amok, not deregulation.

    JD (f7900a)

  93. JD, here’s a link to the New York Fed study Pressman referenced in his column, the one that identified several causes for the subprime meltdown — all relating to Wall Street investors, credit rating agencies, private lenders and marketplace fraud.

    The GSEs had accounting, management and capital problems that made them vulnerable to the crisis, but didn’t cause it.

    Whether the New York Fed is “non-moonbat” is a matter I’ll leave to you.

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  94. Look, I get it, Tim. You like Pressman. His views fit with your views. I simply made a point that anyone that absolves the CRA, Freddie, and Fannie of any culpability is not engaged in a good faith discussion of the issue.

    JD (f7900a)

  95. jharpy – We posted your comment last night, and you denied the words that were there. Why should we expect anything different today?

    Comment by JD — 10/3/2008 @ 2:39 pm

    JD. You are a liar.

    Why don’t you post my alleged lie.

    Hint. You won’t because it doesn’t exist.

    jharp (2282bb)

  96. “Why don’t you post my alleged lie.”

    Thar She Blows!

    Harpo – Are you drunk again? It wasn’t a lie it was making fun of a Down Syndrome baby to make a political point and JD was the one who posted it last night once again. No sense in continuing to deny it on your part.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  97. JD, Pressman offers reasons for disagreeing with the view that the Community Reivestment Act and the GSEs caused the subprime meltdown and credit crunch.

    He notes that CRA became law in 1977 and the crisis relates to lending that occurred between 2004 and 2007. He notes that most subprime loans were made by firms not subject to CRA, or by unsupervised affiliates.

    Re the GSEs, he notes that they didn’t back subprime loans (or “liar” loans or low-downpayment loans w/o PMI) and that their loan origination volumes dropped sharply during the period when the seeds of trouble were sown, while the origination numbers of private subprime lenders rose sharply.

    If you don’t regard this way of proceeding as good-faith discussion, I’d be curious to know why.

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  98. Harpo – Are you drunk again? It wasn’t a lie it was making fun of a Down Syndrome baby to make a political point and JD was the one who posted it last night once again. No sense in continuing to deny it on your part.

    Comment by daleyrocks — 10/3/2008 @ 7:24 pm

    You are a liar and continue to lie.

    Have you no shame?

    jharp (2282bb)

  99. JD–if you want specifics, go back to the links I posted as comments 74 and 75.
    CRA, Fannie and Freddie had important roles in this, but they weren’t the only things driving this mess, and Republicans bear the blame for some of them. Some things the SEC and the Fed could have done on their own, without reference to Congress, but didn’t, in terms of applying existing regulation or amending regulations to make things stricter.

    kishnevi (0a2fa0)

  100. #76 Dmac
    – gun ownership/rights – no;
    – examples of running against the entrenched interests of your own party – no;
    – energy policy for the next ten years – no.

    In those famous words of Presidential election strategy that seem to be ever relevant and applicable:

    IT’S THE ECONOMY…D-MAC.

    So you want to talk about gun rights? The country is staring down an economic abyss and you want talk about guns? One of the few things we do know about Palin is that she likes moose hunting and likes her guns. Obama and Biden support the Second Amendment, but not in regards to assault weapons.

    Entrenched interests eh? I’m sure you’ll would’ve been screaming about how unfair that question was if Ifill has dared to ask about McCain’s cozy connections to the money interests that are about to get a great FAT gift from the American Taxpayer for their over-reachin greed and corruption and distrust of the government. Except, of course when it means saving their sorry entitled asses. Also, you forget that Obama went against most of the Washington Dems who let Bush go to war agaiunst Iraq. Oh right, but we’re winning that aren’t we? And Obama wants to “wave a white flag.”

    Energy policy? Palin spoke so much about that, her supposed area of expertise anyway. And I do not, for a second believe that a McPalin administration is seriously going to even know how to approach the idea of truly alternative fuels nor do they have the motivation. Seems the only real thing that might happen is ANWR gets drilled.

    Aren’t you harping I think on another thread about how Palin “won” the debate? SO did she or didn’t she and if she won doesn’t that mean Ifill was fair? Personally, I and independents think she feel short AND Ifill was more than fair, if anything she went too easy on both of them, but other than unfairly becoming right wing Moonbat enemy no. 1 this week, she broke her ankle as well so I’m going to give her a pass.

    The debate wasn’t about her. It was about Biden and Palin.

    peter (e70d1c)

  101. #89 Dana

    There is no one on the face of the earth who has had children, marriage and their particulars on top of that who has not experienced tremendous disappointment and hurt. Its a no-brainer, a given and a fact.

    Dana, with all due respect, having kids does not equate being capable of having compassion or empathy toward others. There are parents who’re so narcissistic and self-centered, that their kids lives become an extension of their own desires and needs and ambitions, robbing them of a childhood and/or a healthy adulthood.

    Do you think Bristol and Levi had any choice in the matter of whether to have a kid and get married whether they love each other or not or whether they’re ready to raise a child? I don’t. Adoption? Of course not. Because it’s all about Sarah Palin. Do you think Track had much of a choice about what to do with his drug and booze addles life life short of joining the military? Think he had the option of going to college or learning a trade or was it all about Sarah, being able to brag about her boy in the army for political gain? Do you think Trig is going to ever be anything but a showpiece to “prove” Sarah’s commitment to pro-life. Hauled out every time there’s a massive political event to have to deal with auditoriums and stage lights and missing bedtime? I could never see dragging a baby not even six months out to public events as huge and overwhelming as the RNC or a political debate. So it’s all about Sarah. Sarah’s ambition, Sarah’s political career and Sarah’s ego.

    Put away the condescension and look up the words empathy and compassion. Sarah hardly seems able differentiate her families needs from her own selfish petty desires, and she sure as hell doesn’t care about you or me or Joe and Jane six-pack, any further than what it means in terms of furthering her ambition and ego and thirst for power.

    Like I said, I have yet to hear her say anything that isn’t one great big emotionally manipulative load of crap designed for maximum effect. She really thinks the rest of the country outside of Alaska can’t see through her horsesh*t and she’s a bad joke.

    This is a woman who shamelessly spouts off the now dead Reaganesque dream of Free Market fundamentalism self-correcting and producing endless wealth, while that very philosophy is imploding spectacularly. She has no idea how disingenuous she sounds and the day I hear a real emotion from her, that is glossed over in a wall of fake down home nonsense, is the day I begin to worry that she will make a difference in this election. But I don’t think she’s capable of it and I think she’s going to quickly become a passing phenomenon quickly forgotten until she tries to run for national office again or becomes a pundit on Faux news as someone mentioned.

    But you know other than that, she didn’t make any huge mistakes. It must mean she won the debate.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  102. harpo – neener, neener, neener

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  103. And Gwen Ifill got a visit on the Oprah Show today to…why was she there anyway? Because she’s black, because she’s liberal? Or was it to answer the controversy about her book?

    All of the above!

    Patricia (ee5c9d)

  104. Tim, I agree that the fact that CRA was passed in 1977 and the crunch didn’t happen until 2008 is evidence that the CRA is not solely to blame. It doesn’t follow that CRA is irrelevant to the mess we’re in now, and the fact that most subprime loans are made by non-banks is irrelevant. As long as some lenders were required to make the loans in question, it is unrealistic to expect their competitors not to follow suit.

    Xrlq (62cad4)

  105. Hi, Xrlq. Long time, no talk.

    Nothing in the CRA mandated subprime lending. The only incentive companies not subject to CRA had to enter the market was the perception that the high margins that could be charged borrowers with flawed credit histories would translate into exceptional profitability.

    Subprime took off in 2003 when the refi wave had exhausted itself and mortgage brokers and lenders were looking for ways to keep volume high. Wall Street, hungry for yield, helped with securitization, abetted by the ratings agencies. Underwriting based on teaser rates, interest-only, no doc (liar) loans, interest only and negatively amortizing loans were all private sector innovations.

    Our current trouble was produced by a reach for exceptional yield accompanied by terrible miscalculations of risk. The principal actors were in the private sector.

    My understanding of the facts (at this point, anyway) leads me to believe that the CRA-GSE narrative some folks are working so hard to construct just won’t fly in the end.

    I recommend the NY Fed study I cited above (#95).

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  106. Tim – The NY Fed study does not address what the GSE’s purchase from originators or on the secondary market to park on their own balance sheet so merely points out trends in the marketplace outside of the GSE’s. What people not familiar with the market may loke to not is the large portion of the subprime and Alt-A market accounted for by cash out refi’s and investor property, partially belying the “predatory lending” war cry of the democrats. There has been plenty of speculative borrowing going on predicated on the assumption that real estate values will only continue to climb. Californians in particular seem to forget the lessons of the past.

    A brief look at Fannie Mae’s web site does seem to indicate that they stand willing to purchase Alt-A and subprime loans unless I am interpreting the following links incorrectly. The first one speaks to a program specifically designed to help originators with CRA compliance.

    My Community Mortgage Products

    Current Fannie Mae Pricing Matrix

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  107. You’re right, daleyrocks. If I’m understanding correctly, you’ve pointed to exactly where the self-inflicted wounds are on the GSE corporate bodies. As Aaron Pressman points out in his Business Week commentaries, however, this puts them in the same class as other investors who bought toxic paper. The fact remains that the toxic paper was generated elsewhere.

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  108. Tim – I don’t think anyone has denied toxic paper was generated elsewhere, but until the GSE’s created the market, nobody was going to venture into in any kind of major way. In more recent years it became a best execution, Wall St. game for mortgage brokers, bank originators, etc. If I want to originate and offload toxic paper, whay’s the best way to do it? GSE’s, Wall St. Conduit, securitize it myself, buy credit enhancement and retain it as long as my own capital is protected?

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  109. Again, good points. Can you be a little more specific about the market the GSEs created?

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  110. #104–Go back to Kos, please. I happen to think that Palin is as much a fraud as any other politician, but there’s no reason for the abuse you are flinging at her kids. I’m sure Bristol chose to keep her child, and I’m sure was no more booze and drug addled than most teenagers, and willingly chose chose to enlist. And if Levi isn’t completely willing–well, now he knows what consequences are, and I’m sure there are far worse fates in life than being the son in law of the Governor of Alaska and possibly the Vice President of the United States.
    Aroint thee!

    kishnevi (4fe729)

  111. Another useful examination of the “CRA” explanation for economic failure. This one’s from American Prospect

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  112. Tim – any errors of logic or fact in Pressman’s columns

    From a link in Pressman’s link:
    Federal banking agencies examine banks periodically on their CRA performance and rate the institutions. Regulators consider a bank’s CRA record in determining whether to approve that institution’s application for mergers with, or acquisitions of, other depository institutions. Banks and thrifts must have a satisfactory CRA record if they, or their holding companies, are to engage in newly authorized financial activities, such as certain insurance and securities functions.

    Tim – that’s a hand on the tiller. How you can describe the GSE’s as ‘victims’, when their interaction with the ‘oppressors’ was directly linked to the approval process for business decisons seems disconnected. Again from the same link:

    Changes to CRA regulations issued in 1995 focused evaluations on objective performance measures rather than previously used process-oriented factors.

    This seems to render the ‘1977’ issue moot, as this change in procedure from ‘process’ to ‘objective performance’ (read quotas) is a significant change in the course of action required by the CRA. One of the uses for the link with the original 1977 CRA is to attempt to use the longer time period to deflect the blame, since the affect over such a long span of time is harder to believe, as well as the fact that the period in question passes through more Republican administrations.

    From a comment in your link: Nobody made loans “under the CRA program” CRA is not a loan program. It sets numerical targets for lending by location, race, and ethnicity. CRA often required lending to uncreditworthy persons to get a satisfactory CRA rating, and it did indeed cause Freddie and Fannie to take on huge amounts of dreck.

    There is plenty of blame to go around here, but to ignore the fact that the GSE’s are government institutions in competition with the private sector, while simultaneously guaranteeing assets, coupled with unscrupulous behavior by the officers of the GSE’s, and then spin around and claim ‘victim’ is simply not believable. The government is only the victim when it allows itself to be the victim. In other words, never.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  113. A question from an old moss-back….

    Is “Free Market Fundamentalism” the latest Leftist scare talking point?

    Do “FML’s” walk around in burkhas, or other distinguishing dress?

    Just asking.

    AOracle (28e671)

  114. Do “FML’s” walk around in burkhas, or other distinguishing dress?

    Right, now some are walking around in $5000 CEO designer suits and cups asking for hand-out from the government and to understand the irony of that, I guess you could say it’s something like a Jew accepting Jesus as God.

    The rest are on their knees praying to their lord and savior Ronald Reagan and beseeching him to give them a sign that they haven’t been living a lie for near on 30 year and if it would truly be blasphemy to change that R after their names to an I or even a D.

    Free Market Fundamentalism is what we’ve been living under for the last 30 years. It’s also know as Reaganism, Voo doo economics, Trickle down economics, University of Chicago Economics via Milton Friedman and the religion and dogma and single greatest defining characteristic of the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

    Sorry, didn’t mean to shout.

    Read up:

    http://preview.tinyurl.com/48e3gc

    Peter (e70d1c)

  115. Apogee, thanks. You and I both agree there is plenty of blame to go around.

    “Victim” is Pressman’s word. I will acknowledge some discomfort applying it to a corporate entity. I think Pressman’s essential point is that the GSEs’ role was on a par with other investors (banks, hedge funds, etc.), as opposed to the producers of toxic material (brokers, lenders, the investment banks who securitized and sold the stuff).

    Re the 1995 changes to CRA, there was an interesting op-ed piece in the WSJ yesterday that suggested their effect was to accelerate increases in housing values. There are competing explanations, however. Subprime lending by the private sector vastly expanded the buyer universe and that, more than anything else, seems to have created the bubble.

    Finally, my nose tells me that profit rather than compliance drew lenders to subprime. One of the big names in the field (now fallen) was a veritable acquisition machine. It consistently received “Outstanding” in its CRA ratings and never had a deal challenged by activists. It went on to acquire a subprime subsidiary, selling the move to shareholders as a way to increase margin. When things got manic after 2003, it went along with the industry’s debased underwriting in order to defend market share. Management came to regret that, I’m sure, but too late.

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  116. Tim – Finally, my nose tells me that profit rather than compliance drew lenders to subprime.

    Agreed. Perhaps in practice it was more ‘carrot and carrot’ than ‘carrot and stick’, but the fact remains that the entity with a commonality to the GSE’s and not the lenders is the government.

    Government alone had sole power to issue carrots and sticks, and in doing so, highlights the separation of the GSE’s from lenders with respect to accountability.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  117. Tim – You asked about markets and I thinks that’s a critical part of how private conduits got so big. As you are probably aware, Fannie and Freddie bascally required credit enhancement on loans they purchased with LTV’s>80%. The most common form of credit enhancement was private mortgage insurance. As far as I’m aware the MI industry was not writing much subprime MI at the beginning of the 1990s. It had experimented with the product in the past and gotten burned. For the subprime market to expand it require the MI companies to price the risk and it had not been stress tested through a national downturn. HELOCs are not comparable products. Strong arming by the GSEs and the increasing consolidation of customers kind of forced them to act. You want my prime loans, price my subprime loans. Gradually as the MI companies became “comfortable” pricing the risks for the GSEs, they could offer quotes on loans for pools not going to the GSEs. That’s the best execution strategy I was talking about before.

    I suggest you take a look at the old financial statements of MGIC or PMI Group to see when they began talking about their subprime experience separately. The delinquency rate on the product was typically a multiple of the prime loans from the get go.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  118. Thanks, daleyrocks. That could make for some grim reading… Can you suggest any fairly accessible articles that examine the relationship between the GSEs and the MI companies?

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  119. Tim – I’m not aware of any articles. FMWatch was a lobbying group set up by banks, MI companies and other financial institutions to fight the direct competition from the GSEs that came from expansion beyond their original charters. If their website is still active there might be some things there.

    If you want to take a little time, skim a few old annual reports or 10-Ks.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  120. Tom – Or even old earnings releases of the companies I mentioned.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  121. FM Watch — I had forgotten about them. Thanks.

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  122. The basic problem was the disconnect between lender and holder of the loan. All the banks and brokers became dependent on loan origination fees for revenue, not mortgage payments. The loans, themselves got passed around like hot potatoes. The mortgages got sliced up and bundled in derivatives until nobody seemed to recall that these were people making loan payments, not some sort of automatic money spigot. When values got out of control, risks multiplied. Bush’s failure was in not popping the bubble with a raise in interest rates. They all wanted to keep it going. The Democrats got the party going but others could have done more to take the punchbowl away.

    MIke K (155601)

  123. Big article on Fannie in the New York Times:

    “But by the time Mr. Mudd became Fannie’s chief executive in 2004, his company was under siege. Competitors were snatching lucrative parts of its business. Congress was demanding that Mr. Mudd help steer more loans to low-income borrowers. Lenders were threatening to sell directly to Wall Street unless Fannie bought a bigger chunk of their riskiest loans.

    So Mr. Mudd made a fateful choice. Disregarding warnings from his managers that lenders were making too many loans that would never be repaid, he steered Fannie into more treacherous corners of the mortgage market, according to executives.

    For a time, that decision proved profitable. In the end, it nearly destroyed the company and threatened to drag down the housing market and the economy.

    Dozens of interviews, most from people who requested anonymity to avoid legal repercussions, offer an inside account of the critical juncture when Fannie Mae’s new chief executive, under pressure from Wall Street firms, Congress and company shareholders, took additional risks that pushed his company, and, in turn, a large part of the nation’s financial health, to the brink.

    Between 2005 and 2008, Fannie purchased or guaranteed at least $270 billion in loans to risky borrowers — more than three times as much as in all its earlier years combined, according to company filings and industry data.

    “We didn’t really know what we were buying,” said Marc Gott, a former director in Fannie’s loan servicing department. “This system was designed for plain vanilla loans, and we were trying to push chocolate sundaes through the gears.””

    Mike – The derivatives don’t alter the underlying nature of the loans. If they are bad they’re bad, but there was a disconnect on many fronts. People can to rely on rating agencies too heavily instead of asking what type of loans are in the portfolios and what are the profiles of the borrowers. Was the modelling to generate the rating based on actual experience with this type of loan and borrower or just pie in the sky assumptions by a bunch of people right out of grad school with no real world experience who think they are the world’s smartest people (and are not afraid to tell you that).

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  124. Mike and daleyrocks: You’re both correct.

    Daleyrocks comments: The derivatives don’t alter the underlying nature of the loans.

    This is correct. But Mike’s assertion is the reason casinos use chips. It doesn’t change the underlying value, but it does change the perception that the gambler is spending money. The poor ratings served to remove the numbers from the chips.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  125. Breaking News!!!

    I just heard a clip of Gov. Palin referring to Bill Ayers, something about having domestic terrorists as friends is not the kind of change we need.

    The Pit bull growls, the Saracuda strikes.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  126. We’ll know when the libs have decided that they have defeated Sarah Palin when SNL shows her in a sympathetic light.

    nk (77debb)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1257 secs.