Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Coaxial

SNL Is Getting A New
Obama This Season!!

I am – Hercules!!

Fred Armisen will still get to play Prince and Manuel Ortiz and Nicholas Fehn and the “What’s Up With That” sax player on “Saturday Night Live.” But he’s surrendering the role of Barack Obama to newer cast member Jay Pharoah, according to SNL mastermind Lorne Michaels.

Pharoah has long done a much better Obama than Armisen, so the only question is why this took so long.

Michaels also hinted that Bill Hader would dust off his Clint Eastwood impression and Taran Killam would likely play GOP VP candidate Paul Ryan.

SNL has a long tradition of passing presidents along to various cast members.

Ronald Reagan was played on the show by Harry Shearer, Joe Piscopo, Randy Quaid and Phil Hartman.

Bill Clinton was played by Phil Hartman, Michael McKean and Darrell Hammond.

George W. Bush was played by Darrell Hammond, Will Ferrell, Chris Parnell, Will Forte and Jason Sudeikis.

SNL launches its 38th season Saturday, with its first 2012 political special following one week from today.

Find the New York Times’ story on the matter here.

Follow Herc on Twitter!!

Follow Evil Herc on Twitter!!

 

 


Blu At Last In Five Days!!

 


Hundreds of Blu-rays Under $10!!

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Sept. 13, 2012, 9:38 a.m. CST

    Armisen's Obama sucks

    by Cobb05

    He needed to do the voice deeper. His Obama impression sounded a little like a bad Jewish guy impression.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 9:40 a.m. CST

    re: "so the only question is why this took so long."

    by jim

    Maybe they felt making the switch at the end of Obama's first term would be a good transition point. More likely, Lorne bumped into Jay in the hallway the other day and asked "are you new?"

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 9:45 a.m. CST

    The good thing about this is:

    by vettebro

    They will only get to use it for one season or less. Obama isn't going to be president soon after this election. : )

  • Fred Armisen didn't even try to be funny...

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:02 a.m. CST

    At the very least, Fred was funny BECAUSE he was bad.

    by cookepuss

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:04 a.m. CST

    Oh yea, like SNL will actually make fun of Obama! HA!

    by the_rising

    SNL has been so afraid to poke fun at the big O that it's nothing short of ludicrous. it's shameful.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:14 a.m. CST

    Fred Armisen will still ridicule Arabs though right?

    by Darr Furr

    Ghadafi, Ahmadineejad, etc.... Maybe he could try Netinyahoo this year? That would be antisemitism though ;)

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:33 a.m. CST

    I've detested SNL for a LOOONG time now . . .

    by Nice Marmot

    . . . buy there was a skit where Armisen played a parrot that had my wife and I rolling on the floor once . . . Yes, in laughter . . .

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:36 a.m. CST

    Political Talkback

    by SergeantStedenko

    Yay!

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:38 a.m. CST

    His Obama impression sounded a little like a bad Jewish guy impression

    by SergeantStedenko

    You mean like every character he does? I like his New York Jewish talk show producer who has to sit in for the host. Always good for a laugh.

  • You are going to be SO disappointed on November 7. As disappointed as I was in 2004.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:50 a.m. CST

    Hopefully...

    by 5minutes

    ...he'll only be needed for a few weeks. PS: Is SNL still on? Seriously?

  • Granted I never really watch SNL, but honestly from that, it seems no better than Armisen's.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:13 a.m. CST

    Obama is NOT getting a second term.

    by Chris Moody

    Period. Americans are somewhat smarter than Liberals give us credit.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:13 a.m. CST

    This will be a SHORT TERM job.

    by Chris Moody

    ...since Obama will be back in Chicago getting paid big $$$ to "organize" the corrupt neighborhoods in that city.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:15 a.m. CST

    Perhaps Herc should take the role...

    by Chris Moody

    ...since he has so much of Obama in him (well, between 5 and 8 inches). Then again, he is a "registered Republican." LMAO!

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:16 a.m. CST

    SEE!!!!! how utterly mindlessly predictable- yawn

    by Michael Lunney

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:17 a.m. CST

    do the hokey pokey!!!!!!!!!!!

    by Michael Lunney

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:17 a.m. CST

    HOPE and CHANGE didn't work so well in Libya or Egypt either...

    by Chris Moody

    ...but I am sure that Obama will blame the violence on the previous regimes.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:19 a.m. CST

    For true film fans/historians- here's something that is really cool!!!!

    by Michael Lunney

    http://io9.com/5942667/curator-finds-the-worlds-first-ever-color-movie-hidden-inside-museum-vault

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Oh yeah,

    by Michael Lunney

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:20 a.m. CST

    McGootoo...

    by Chris Moody

    Herc loves to set us up with political debates in order to encourage repeat visits. However, you have now taken the high road after a long period hiking the low. It is fine to "evolve," but don't knock those who are where you were a year or two ago.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:21 a.m. CST

    chrism, the pools say otherwise

    by SergeantStedenko

    4 More Years! Get used to it.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:21 a.m. CST

    That IS cool, McGoo.

    by Chris Moody

    It is difficult to believe that there were color films in the 19th Century.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:21 a.m. CST

    Polls

    by SergeantStedenko

  • musr insult Obama, must insult Obama, musrt insult Obama must defend Obama, must defend Obama, must defend Obama..... pre-programmmed, for your talkbacker delight- - what a waste of time and energy- now kiddies, have loads of fun, wasting your time and energy... over an Obama impersonsator on SNL- because it is so important to the future of our nation. gliddy glop gloopy.......the Earth says hello

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:26 a.m. CST

    @ sergeantstedenko: Obama's post-convention bounce is GONE.

    by Chris Moody

    Rasmussen has Romney up by 1...and EVERY major poll has a statistical tie within the margin of error. However, independents are leaning Romney (or not voting at all) ESPECIALLY among "likely voters." This is significant because most polls are weighed heavily with Democrats (typically +7). In 1980, Carter was up by 4% over Reagan in the polls. Reagan defeated Carter by 9% (a 13% swing).

  • ccchhhrr - I knew we could find something in common- I LOVE film history and early color & other film techniques- please share those 113 year old color films with your friends!!!

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:31 a.m. CST

    I loved his Denzel from last season.

    by ckone

    I think he could be even better then Eddie Murphy. I hope he gets more air time this season. GO JAY PHAROAH!!

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:31 a.m. CST

    chrism, you better hope those voter ID laws disenfranchise a lot of people

    by SergeantStedenko

    Romney already lost my swing state, Pennsylvania. You are correct, Americans aren't as dumb as the Republicans think they are. Working class folks are waking up to the reality that they can't vote for an out of touch multimillionaire who doesn't know the first thing about the plight of the Middle Class. "Go borrow money from your parents and start a business." Exactly. As I heard a janitor in Nevada say today on the radio, "Romney never spent a 7 hour day working on his feet in his entire life."

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:32 a.m. CST

    @ mcgootoo:

    by Chris Moody

    I get it. There is no need to speak "gliddy glop gloopy." However, I do feel strongly enough that Obama is a major error perpetrated by an adoring media that I am going out of my way to voice it! I have never been as energized to VOTE OUT a man from a political office before. And, of course, the guys who tend to be the loudest and "first strikers" are on the Left. For years, they attempted to dominate the TBs. I was even the recipient of quite a bit of racially-inspired insults. At this point, I don't care how loud the Left shouts. They are only making themselves look bad. A study at Northwestern earlier this year on the comments sections at Yahoo and Huffington showed that concerted efforts to parrot talking points propaganda by the Left (often from paid operatives or volunteers at local centers using multiple usernames) actually HURTS their cause. The nation is in a mess. No amount of talking point attacks can distract from the obvious.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:33 a.m. CST

    I already tweeted the link, Mcgootoo...

    by Chris Moody

    Very...very cool!

  • Oh, right, because the sky is falling......

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:37 a.m. CST

    @ ccchhhrrriiisssmredux

    by JamesT

    A study at Northwestern earlier this year on the comments sections at Yahoo and Huffington showed that concerted efforts to parrot talking points propaganda by the Left (often from paid operatives or volunteers at local centers using multiple usernames) actually HURTS their cause. I think they may have some operatives on this site as well. :)

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:44 a.m. CST

    ALL YOU FUCKS PUTTING POLITICAL TALK IN HERE

    by Rob

    FUCK YOU YOU FUCKING FUCKS. SUCK MY BIG HAIRY BALLSACK

  • but hey, have fun and try to be civil and if you are attacked ignore it. simple... thanks for the Tweet- sharing cool stuff is much more fun than confrontational political posturing to no good effect but self -aggrandizement.... I'll come back in a few hours to see if anyone has said anything that is actually different of interesting from the usual back and forth bumping and grinding and poll-dancing ... Be cool......

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:45 a.m. CST

    the_rising

    by smackfu

    Honestly though, what's to make fun of? From a comedy standpoint, Obama is attractive, cool headed, well-spoken. He rarely ever makes flubs or says dumb things. There's not much to mine there. The only thing Pharoah could even find to 'make fun' of Obama for is his slickness. It's like if Clinton wasn't a poon hound, there's nothing really left to make fun of. Bush was a comedy goldmine, that guy said and did so many ridiculous things there are gag reels of it put it Benny Hill music. He made up words, he walked into doors, he dropped his dog headfirst on the pavement, he gave a creepy backrub to the German Chancellor that made her visibly cringe, there's a picture in existence of him standing there making an Alfred E Neuman face while a turkey chews on his crotch. He once said the following quote: "Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country". <br><br>God I miss GW Bush...

  • ccchhhrrriiisssmredux Have you ever been to Chicago? Because it sounds like you totally know everything about it.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:51 a.m. CST

    mcgoo, I'm not really insulting anyone, just stating the facts as I see it

    by SergeantStedenko

    I really believe that Obama will be re-elected. Romney is a dud just like Kerry was. And thank God, because the Republicans' Right Wing Extremist agenda would be a disaster for this country.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:53 a.m. CST

    Republicans

    by TheSplinter

    I was shocked to see so many talkbackers on here parroting Faux News talking points supporting a party that has declared war on women in the US. But then most of those same talkbackers have never been with a woman, so it kind of makes sense now. Enjoy your 2 months in the sun, hoping your candidate wins. Watch him, as he systematically opens his mouth and says the dumbest shit any presidential candidate ever has muttered. Sure, defend him and criticize Obama. But Romney never gave one half of one shit about any of you. Ever.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:59 a.m. CST

    ccchhhrrriiisssmredux

    by smackfu

    Obama will snag the second term, easily. Even the Republican base has been wishy-washy about Romney right up until the 11th hour. If the disciples have a hard time getting excited about a leader, imagine how he looks to the moderates. You may assume that the rest of America is as dumb and gullible as the average card carrying Republican, but I can assure you, the moderates have noticed that Romney's platform is 'elect me first, then you'll find out what my plans are'. And you'd have to be an absolute fool to elect someone who's saying that. Or at least, be someone who has inexplicably tied his personal ego to a non-existent avatar, ie 'the party is always right no matter what, simply because it's the party I have chosen'.

  • And yeah, Kerry was a dud. If you can convince eveyone you know in your personal life of your beliefs about the dfifferences of the cvandidates and what it would mean to the future of our nation, then more power to you!! here is just a sideshow for all us rubbernecking rubes, me included.... Civility equals power. Anonymous insulting to express a strongly held belief equals ignoble, ignorable immaturity..... Silly human, we are....... ugly bags of mostly water, as one alien species liked to see us....

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 12:07 p.m. CST

    ccchhhrrriiisssmredux you crack me up

    by MurderMostFowl

    Obama aint no saint, that's for sure, but Republicans are going to lose so bad, it will shake the party to its core. And they deserve it. They have moved far to the extremes and only manage to hang onto the people who can be easily manipulated by FUD. You know it's true when this entire last presidency, the republican minority spent their entire time trying to block everything sent their way rather than try to fix what they didn't like about it. We're not an nation of extremes. People can come to a consensus. I have always voted republican and I still consider myself one... but I voted democrat for the first time ever with Obama, and I'll do it again this year.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 12:27 p.m. CST

    Republicans really needed a populist candidate this time

    by SergeantStedenko

    And Romney is about as far as you can get from being a Man of the People. Th problem is that the Republican party is no longer a populist party. It is a party that only represents the elitist wealthy neo-aristocrats. Please name me ONE SINGLE policy of Romney's that is not: lowering taxes for the wealthy.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 12:27 p.m. CST

    Americans are somewhat smarter than Liberals give us credit.

    by professorjack

    Thats a really interesting sentence. So much going on in there

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 12:29 p.m. CST

    It's pretty pathetic

    by Ray Tchoulakian

    ...that SNL relies almost exclusively now on impersonating celebrities and politicians for laughs. Impersonations have always been the absolute cheapest form of comedy, which is why Frank Caliendo has never struck me as particularly funny. I don't really care about who impersonates any politician anymore since it's not clever or funny.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 12:43 p.m. CST

    Just a reminder, Romney is a Mormon

    by Domi'sInnerChild

    Doesn't make him a bad guy, but... See the South Park episode about Mormons if you think it's a good idea for him to be a decision maker.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 12:45 p.m. CST

    Frank Caliendo isn't funny because he doesn't do good impressions

    by Domi'sInnerChild

    I'm shocked he had a career.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 1:02 p.m. CST

    Always funny when GOPers cite Rasmussen as THE POLL for ALL polls ...

    by Judge Briggs

    The House of Ras is widely known for it's GOP-leanings. Check out Nate Silver's five thirty eight blog: (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/author/nate-silver/) ... he compiles ALL of the polls and runs an analysis ... ya know, science and math to predict what'll happen in Nov. The dude is sharp and unbiased But he does work for the evil, liberal New York Times and right now, GOPers won't like what they see, that Obama is gonna win ... so I am sure people like Chrismmm will outright dismiss him as a liberal shrill working for the librul media ... That's the GOP motos operandi- if the fact isn't something they like, dismiss it as liberally biased .... see the media and academia as proof.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 1:06 p.m. CST

    @sergeantstedenko

    by Judge Briggs

    Agreed. If it were Mike Hucklebee running- I think it would be a different race. Oh wellz! I am glad it wasn't and Obama is about to get another 4 years! Hope he gets to nominate 2 more supreme court justices too ... We need to move our country further into the 21st century.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 1:27 p.m. CST

    Hey Mcgootoo - I got a nasty computer virus last night

    by Paul

    It told me that the FBI as freezing my computer for looking at bad stuff (Im an artist so I figure draw, but dont go anywhere near the yucky stuff), I was suspisious so I looked on-line at the library this morning and theres article after article about it being and virus scam (they asked for $200 as a warning to not be prosecuted!). So luckly I was able to follow so instructions on how to get rid of it. So its clean again, but man was that scary!

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 1:42 p.m. CST

    SNL has always been making fun of Obama...

    by TopHat

    ...they kissed Hilary Clinton's ass during the whole 2008 primaries and still continued to make little jabs at Obama during the Presidential race. SNL is just a bunch of well paid hipsters now, who are too afraid to have accountability for what they say or do so the skits and jokes are the very definition of the word "safe". Watch them stretch truths and reality just to shit on the Obama Administration because they're too scared to acknowledge the genuine bat-shit craziness of the Romney campaign. There's no Palin this time for them to fall back on.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 1:56 p.m. CST

    www.270towin.com

    by Mr. Anderson

    Go to that site and run the 2012 election simulation to see how likely it is* Obama will lose in November. Best thing is to run it several times, around 10 or so, to get a sense of the pattern that's forming. *(hint, not very)

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 2:10 p.m. CST

    professorjack

    by The Llama

    Ha! That was my first thought as well.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 2:14 p.m. CST

    tophat, Romney's just boring, there's not much there for them to work with

    by SergeantStedenko

    Compared to the gold mines of Palin, Bush and Clinton.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 2:20 p.m. CST

    Romney won't win the big swing states

    by SlyWalker

    Mitt is toast

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 2:22 p.m. CST

    Bush and Clinton were just easier to make fun of...period

    by SlyWalker

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 3:17 p.m. CST

    So Pharoah sounds like a white guy and its called an Obama impression?

    by openthepodbaydoorshal

  • Show Romney as a smoking, drinking, dancing, whoring sumbitch behind the stage....

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 3:31 p.m. CST

    SNL hasn't been funny since...

    by SifoDyasJr

    ...at least the middle of May. Congrats to Jay. Fred should have relinquished Obama a long time ago. He's awesome with other characters, but his President Obama never quite jelled. And wise move by Sudekis to finish out the election season. It's not like they'll need a Romney after November anyway.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 3:39 p.m. CST

    All this "Pharoah will only get a few months as Obama" shit is HILARIOUS.

    by HelveticaBOLD

    Honestly, you people are so divorced from reality it's stunning. Romney has stepped in shit over and over in this campaign, most recently TWO DAYS AGO when he shocked the political world by using the tragedy at the American Embassy in Cairo to take a shitty little swipe at Obama (practically immediately after the event, and with a smirk on his face no less), yet you nimrods insist that Mittens is going to walk all over Obama? Romney/Ryan are literally polling at 0% of the black vote. ZERO PERCENT. And you think the swing votes are going to go to them? You're fucking delusional. I'm not even particularly pro-Obama (even the best politicians are slimy fucks), but COME ON. Settle in, girls. It's going to be a long four years.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 3:56 p.m. CST

    Anyone remember when

    by Michael Lunney

  • The bed is on my foot, the bed is on my foot..... your mother sews socks that smell Richard Pryor Exorcist skit from SNL.... Anyone as old as me out there who remembers when SNL was considered *counterculture*? Is counterculture even a valid term in this day and age?

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 4:22 p.m. CST

    Lysol spray cleaner is just the thing for that counter culture.

    by openthepodbaydoorshal

    Hardy har har

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 4:30 p.m. CST

    Armison's Obama seems appropriate...

    by Mystery Roach

    ...when you consider that Chevy Chase started the trend of doing Presidential impressions that are nothing like the actual President. Carvey's G.H.W. Bush wasn't very accurate either but it was totally memorable, and at the time everybody's Bush impression became an impression of Carvey's impression. Although I can't say for sure whether the same could be said of Armison's Obama if SNL still had any of the cultural relevance it did then.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 4:31 p.m. CST

    Why do those who WANT Romney to win also BELIEVE he will win?

    by Dapper Swindler

    Let me try to explain this as succinctly as possible. You are the problem. You who cannot distinguish between the reality you desire and the reality that exists. This lack of objectivity is dangerous. You are incapable of grasping reality, much less solving any of our problems. I can't believe this has to be pointed out but I believe it's the worst characteristic of our modern American culture.

  • dapper swindler - if you can get the distinction- more people want Obama to lose than Romney to win......

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 4:52 p.m. CST

    OPBDPH- good punning!!!!!!!! sneaks up on ya...

    by Michael Lunney

  • He can't get over 50% in the polls. He can't get our of a tie with Romney. He enjoyed a tiny lead for a couple days after the DNC and the lead is completely gone, now. Anyone who thinks that Obama is a slam dunk for re-election is living in Fantasy Land. I'm not willing to bet for sure that Obama will lose or that Romney will win, but anyone who thinks they know for sure who will win at this point with the Debates left and a billion dollars of advertising yet to be spent on both sides is an idiot. Hardly any of the polls have been outside the margin of error...

  • Plus, it is relevant to look at the partisan split in polls. If a poll samples twice as many Democrats as it does Republicans, and Romney leads by 10 points among Independents, and Obama beat McCain among Independents by 12 points (a 20 point swing), it's impossible to believe that Obama is leading by 6. It doesn't make sense...

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 5:25 p.m. CST

    @coughlins laws

    by Judge Briggs

    So ... only the House of Ras is relevant? All other polls are useless? Just like Fox 'News' ... all other news stations have a clear liberal bias, therefore shouldn't be taken seriously? GOPers are increasingly living in their own reality in which they believe what they want even when reality states otherwise... sigh ... On wellz, on Nov 7th, it should be interesting to hear what coughlins laws, Jay and Chrissm have to say when Obama is elected. Let me predict what they'll say: Dems STOLE the election because Black Panthers showed up and voted using dead people!

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 5:28 p.m. CST

    I am beating myself in the face with a giant stick.

    by adeceasedfan

    Please tell me when it's December.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 5:33 p.m. CST

    coughlins law - I don't think you understand my point

    by Dapper Swindler

    It's not about whether Obama will win or not. I'm concerned with peoples' inability to distinguish between desired reality and actual reality. This is just one example of this occurring. But if you're sure the polls are actually very close, then I can find other examples. But you see what I mean about so many people who want Romney to win also believing he will win - when there is no rational connection between these two things? Reality is being clouded by bias and I'm a big opponent of this, wherever it occurs. So much so that I posted my thoughts in a political discussion on AintItCool news.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 5:47 p.m. CST

    He can't get over 50% in the polls

    by HelveticaBOLD

    Again with the hilariousness. Republicans spent Bush's last term swearing that Bush's slide from a HIGH of 50% in '04 to a low of roughly *25%* in '08 wasn't evidence of his disastrously unpopular standings, and that it was all a Liberal Media Conspiracy (TM). Now Obama's popularity (and yes, the guy *is* a popular president) hangs out at approximately 50% for his ENTIRE FIRST TERM, and it's something he "can't get over"? Give me a break.

  • If you look closely, you'll discover the Democracy Corps, Fox News, Reuters/Ipsos, ABC/Washington Post and CNN/Opinion Research polls all poll LIKELY voters. All also put Obama ahead: Democracy Corps Obama +5 Fox News Obama +5 Reuters/Ipsos Obama +3 ABC /Wash Post Obama +1 CNN/Opinion Res. Obama +6 Jutst for fun, here's the REGISTERED voters polls (which I'm sure are radically different from the "likely voters" polling): Gallup (Thursday) Obama +6 IBD/CSM/TIPP Obama +2 Here are all the polls, as aggregated by the conservative site RealClearPolitics: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/president_obama_vs_republican_candidates.html So, yes, it does seem likely that Pharoah will remain quite busy the next four and a half years.

  • Third of all, The CNN Poll is the only poll that has him over 50%. Fourth of all, half those polls you mentioned were taken over last weekend. Fifth of all, you have to wait until polls done this week, after Obama's Convention Bounce to see where they're settled. One's taken immediately after the DNC are worthless, just like Romney's slight bounce after the RNC were worthless. Sixth of all, you have to look at the partisan breakdown of a poll. Are they oversampling either party? Are they not sampling enough Independents? Is the partisan breakdown similar to 2008 or 2010? Does it make sense that the Democrats will vote in even larger numbers than they did in the 2008 election when Obama got historic support? Do you honestly believe that Obama is more popular now than he was when he go elected? Republicans proved to years ago that they are more motivated to vote than Democrats. It will probably be somewhere between what happened in 2008 and 2010. But every poll has Romney ahead among Independents. Explain to me how you think Obama is ahead by 6 when the same poll has him down by 10 among Independents. Also, the Democracy Corps Poll has 41% Democrats and only 30% Republicans. That is not realistic at all...

  • Do you honestly think any polls right now is proof either side will win? Anything can happen in 2 months. Either side could still win in a landslide. Do you really want to trust any polls to predict who will win, right now, 2 months before the election, when the Middle East could blow up, there's 4 debates, and there is almost a billion dollars going to be spent on both sides combined yet to go? Really?

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 6:53 p.m. CST

    Thanks Herc...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...thought I was going to have to do that. Wouldn't have messed around with this because anyone who wants to know the current state of polling only needs to look...well...anywhere (even real clear, the conservative aggregate site), but that Rasmussen lie was just a little too big to swallow. By the way, the brand new Marist poll echoes what other recent polls have been suggesting, which is that Ohio is now out of reach. Romney's big money backers have already given up completely on Michigan and Pennsylvania. Look for the ad buys in Ohio to end soon. Electorally that means Willard is on a tightrope now. The new Marist poll also shows him down by five in Florida, and at this point there is no scenario by which Willard loses Florida and wins the Presidency. But here's the kicker. Willard is down to Obama in Virginia as well, but the key here is that the Republican Senate candidate, Macaca George Allen, is polling better in his senate race against Kane than Willard is against Obama, and the difference comes from the independent vote. And all of this comes from polling that does not yet reflect Willard's last Very Bad Day.

  • Anyway, your post proves nothing. Lets see where the trend is next week from polls not conducted on a weekend, after a Convention. Also, Romney is an assassin in debates. It's not going to be a repeat of McCain who was afraid to say anything mean about Obama. Romney will take it to him. Obama still might win, and might be the favorite, but for anyone to be so confident that he will makes you kind of an idiot. There's ZERO chance he will match what he did 4 years ago. If he wins, it will be closer to how Bush won re-election in 2004...

  • Do you really believe what happened in Cairo is Romney's fault/problem? Seriously?

  • But it was Romney's bad day...

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 7:09 p.m. CST

    coughlin...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...no, I believe that it is Willard's problem that he used a national tragedy to try in the most boorish, amateurish way possible to score cheap political points. I believe that it is Willard's problem that he walked off the stage smirking after speaking on attacks that put Americans serving in dangerous conditions in peril. I believe it is Willard's problem that he misrepresented the facts of what happened, that while Americans in service to their nation were dying and in danger he chose, with apparently cool deliberation, to not only immediately attempt, in the most blundering manner, to exploit the tragedy for his political advantage, but to do so while the situation was still developing. I believe it is Willard's problem that he couldn't act like every major Democratic politician on 9-11. You know, by showing leadership worthy of a statesman. Why do you ask? Were you unaware of all these things?

  • But he's a lock, isn't he?

  • You can't have it both ways. Either it's acceptable to debate foreign policy when Americans die, or it's not. I can link you to Obama specifically using troop deaths to attack Bush in 2007 and 2008. You're being a hypocrite. I can link you to Hillary Clinton screaming about how it's everybody's right to attack the policies of any administration, no matter if we are at war or not. Plus, if you're going down the road of comparing this to 9/11 which you are blaming on Bush, then are you conceding that this is Obama's fault? Seems like you are, using your logic...

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 7:17 p.m. CST

    coughlin...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...actually, Obama skipped his intelligence meeting on 9-12 to go to the State Department to comfort those who lost friends and colleagues. He had attended a principals meeting of the NSC on September 10 and, unlike Bush (but like Clinton) he reads his PDB daily. Bush liked to be briefed, and this is by the admission of his own administration, because he 'didn't like to read'. And really, Coughlin? This is the dishonest road you choose? Osama Bin Laden determined to attack America?

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 7:19 p.m. CST

    Coughlin...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...show me just one example of a national Democratic figure doing it on 9-11. Or 9-12. Or 9-13. Show me one of a national Democratic figure who did it while we were still counting our dead. While the towers were still smoldering. That would be the appropriate comparison to what Willard just did.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 7:21 p.m. CST

    Coughlin...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...nope, I was just pointing out your hypocrisy. You know, because it's fun.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 7:22 p.m. CST

    I know how Coughlin feels like ...

    by Judge Briggs

    I was there with you, man ... 2004 was tough on us Dems. Obama is gonna win this ...

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 7:22 p.m. CST

    coughlins laws - you convinced me - I'm voting for Romney

    by Michael Lunney

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 7:25 p.m. CST

    red ned, I'm going to refute your last post point by point...

    by Coughlins Laws

    Your first point is a stupid opinion, there were no facts in what you said at all. It's your opinion he was boorish... So, now you think he was "smirking"? Really? Are you saying he was smiling? That's what the guy's face looks like. Show the end of that Press Conference to 100 random people and I doubt anyone besides you would say he was smirking... Name one single "fact" "he" "misrepresented". He didn't say one thing that wasn't true. He doesn't want America apologizing to al-Qaeda animals... If you really believe this was like 9/11, you're an idiot. But if you do, isn't it worse that Obama skipped his Intelligence Briefings the day after a US Ambassador was killed and went off to a fundraiser in Vegas, cracking jokes than Bush not jumping up in the middle of a classroom and scaring kids? Nothing you said was accurate. Nothing was based on facts. Everything you said was opinion, a very narrow opinion that comes mostly from liberals and the inside the beltway political class...

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 7:38 p.m. CST

    Actually, the Smirk...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...has been commented on extensively. Shoot, it's even crossed the pond. Here's a link to prove it's gone global: http://tinyurl.com/9godthd Here's another: http://tinyurl.com/8wyvbhl Second, apparently Obama is doing something all right, since several of the extremists who attacked in Benghazi have already been taken into custody: http://tinyurl.com/95t4h8h And third...what the hell? Romney said that Obama's first response to Americans being attacked was to sympathize with the attackers. Prince Repulsive even tweeted the same message. I was being nicer than they deserved by saying they misrepresented. They lied. Fourth, thank you for deciding what terrorist attacks on Americans warrant showing a united front to our enemies and which ones don't. You're a real patriot, you are.

  • And are you really just going to take Obama's word that he read every single PDB just because that's what the White House said he did? He could only be bothered to go to 43% of his briefings. If you really think that people will be more mad at Obama than Romney over all this when the dust settles, you really aren't that bright. This White House condemned Romney before they condemned the animals that attacked the embassy, for Pete's Sake...

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 7:43 p.m. CST

    Of course Peggy Noonan...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...a rock-ribbed conservative of impeccable credentials, chose to say Willard came off looking like Nixon. Here's one of the thousand links to that: http://tinyurl.com/98dfpvk I can link to the video, too, if you'd like.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 7:46 p.m. CST

    coughlin...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...here's a tiimeline... http://tinyurl.com/9l8m8ky ...wow, Coughlin. But I know...eventually...eventually...people will understand. Just give them enough time to forget what happened.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 7:49 p.m. CST

    And no, Coughlin...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...the very first thing Obama did was speak to the nation, as a President, not a candidate. The second thing he did was go to the State Department to comfort those who had lost friends and colleagues in the attack.

  • As far as Democrats attacking Bush after every single combat death and terrorist attack in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Haditha Marines and Abu Graib, are you freaking serious? Bush was attacked and blamed for every single death, every single day. By prominent Democrats. You're right, after 9/11, even Democrats didn't attack Bush for awhile. But every single day from 2002 on Bush was blamed for deaths by Democrats. This isn't even debatable. I will link you to hundreds of examples. They made movies blaming him for deaths in Iraq and even blamed a hurricane on him. I will give you multiple examples, including of your hero Barack in 2007 and 2008 and, talking about deaths that just happened and blaming them on Bush. Again, explain to me why this is comparable to 9/11, but every single time Democrats in the 8 years of Bush disagreeing with Bush policy after Americans died isn't? I'm really not understanding your point and how you can't see how hypocritical you're being...

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 7:55 p.m. CST

    Coughlin...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...I asked for just one link to any national Democratic figure being so craven as to do what Willard just did, on the day of an attack on sovereign American soil. Before the dead were even identified. While the fires still burned. You can't. Cool. Also, I thought it was just me who thought it was a smirk. Now it's another one of those crazy conspiracies. It's the Bilderbergs, isn't it, Coughlin? Maybe the Templars?

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 7:58 p.m. CST

    Oh and Coughlin...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...I'm not including all these links for you. I'm including them for anyone who may be wondering which one of us is telling the truth.

  • That timeline doesn't show any contradiction to what Romney said and Obama didn't release any statement until the next day. You can make the case that the Cairo Embassy doesn't speak for the White House, but that timeline doesn't show Romney saying anything factually incorrect. The next statement coming after the attack started says they stood by the original statement. If you are making the case that the buck doesn't stop with Obama, then make that case. He didn't have any security for that embassy even though they knew attacks were probably coming. You do understand that disagreeing and having a different opinion isn't the same as lying, right?

  • I'll be more than happy to supply you a link...

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 8:16 p.m. CST

    One more link for you, how there was ample warning for the attack...

    by Coughlins Laws

    www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/revealed-inside-story-of-us-envoys-assassination-8135797.html It's from the Independent in Britain. It says how the US had warnings

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 8:22 p.m. CST

    Hey Coughlin...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...I'm really happy with anyone in doubt reading the timeline and drawing their own conclusions. Anyone who cares who's reading this? Just don't trust Coughlin's 'paraphrasing' of the sequence of events. Read the timeline. See Coughlin, it's easy when you don't have to try to rewrite what happened.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 8:25 p.m. CST

    And hey...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...if they agree with your 'interpretation' that's fine with me. The funniest part is, they finally pinned down Willard on what his feelings were about the video the embassy was referring to SIX HOURS before they were attacked... ...and he condemned it in the very same language they used. A lie no heart, that's our Willard.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 8:34 p.m. CST

    Coughlin...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...that's one heck of a link. Not one named source. Not one claimed American source. 'Senior diplomatic sources'. Doesn't mean it might not be true, of course, but one heck of a lot less compelling than the information available before 9-11. Great thing is, I've been here long enough, under the same name, for folks to see what I said about that. That's a pretty slender reed there, Coughlin...but hey, it's a step up from everything else you've presented.

  • Your biggest problem is with what Romney said. Love your priorities. ..

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 8:46 p.m. CST

    Coughlin...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...not my biggest problem at all. My biggest problem is that it appears Al Qaeda inspired militants are trying to set up a stronghold in Derna. You know Derna was the hub through which jihadists traveled in the greatest numbers during the worst days of the Iraq war. I just mentioned that Willard had another very bad day, in the context of a conversation about polls. You took it from there. I just came along, offering corrections. But please, continue to argue with the me you create in your own head. It has become a trademark of conservative thought. Anyone else who's interested can just read back through the thread.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 8:53 p.m. CST

    He's better than Armisen, but he's too black.

    by Queefer Sutherland

    Heh heh. Just wanted to say that, hoping I'd piss somebody off. Now for the political part: I'm no fan of Obama OR Romney. Both of them are servants of the their corporate donors and will do their bidding, and neither of them gives a corn-ridden shit for any of us. BOTH of them will do exactly the same thing once in office, no matter WHAT they say right now. So I'll vote for Obama because he's a lot more interesting than that fucking boring idiot Romney. But anybody who is fiercely partisan about this has NO IDEA how our political system truly works. The "democracy" has been purchased folks, and the corporations/über wealthy own it. Our only hope for a true representative republic these days is to clean house of EVERYBODY and start over again. If we can't do it through voting (and most likely we can't) then we have to do it through armed revolution. And that will never happen, so we're fucked. Welcome to the Corporate States of America. New Rome will fall soon, bide my words, and we'll all be eating each other to survive. Ahoy!

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 8:59 p.m. CST

    And by the way, folks...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    There was nothing wrong with what we did! And besides, you just did it!

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 9:01 p.m. CST

    That's the conservative waltz, by the way...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...a time honored dance sanctified by the right wing since the days of Lee Atwater. But you rarely get to see it done as obviously as Coughlin just did it.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 9:05 p.m. CST

    coughlins laws

    by smackfu

    It IS a clinch for Obama, barring a miracle in Romney's favor. Obama could eat a dog on live TV and when the chips are down, the American people would still vote for him over the slimy car salesman vibe Romney gives off. The most telling thing is the fact that so much of the Republican party were incapable of expressing excitement over Romney for the longest time. In the last election the party was entirely gung-ho for the candidate and he wasn't able to beat the black muslim socialist with a name that rhymes with the most infamous criminal in the world. This time around a large portion of the party is wishy-washy about electing wishy-washy Romney. He doesn't stand a chance. Start planning for 2016 imo.

  • Then he did his normal stump speech attacking Republicans and making jokes. While Cairo was burning and the situation was still unfolding. But Romney had the tough day. You still haven't explained it to me how Romney's day was bad. Wouldn't that imply that the President had a good day? It looks like this sickening display might spread to other Middle East countries. But Obama isn't changing his campaign schedule at all. But Romney had a "bad day". I think the Americans that got killed, including the Ambassador, had much worse days than any politician. Good job making it political. And good job name dropping Lee Atwater...

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 9:13 p.m. CST

    That's right...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...I made it political. And we dance the Conservative Waltz. Read the timeline, folks. Willard couldn't even wait until 9-11 was over before he released his political broadside.

  • The last national election was 2 years ago and almost 55% of the electorate voted for Republicans. More people voted for Republicans nationwide than any time in the last 60 years. It was in direct response to Obama's policies his first 2 years. But all of a sudden you think that Obama's a lock? I feel bad for you. You have too much locked into this guy...

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 9:17 p.m. CST

    Obama made a presidential statement...

    by Red Ned Lynch

    ...flanked by his secretary of state. And then he went to comfort folks working at the State Department. Huh...who is it again who can't quit lying...ummm...talking about the political implications of this? I'll tell you who can, Coughlin. Anyone who's interested? Read the timeline. Read this thread. Simple as that. Or you can trust whatever Coughlin says next. Your choice.

  • ....cause thats how the idiot red ned rolls.

  • They were just trying to score a cheap news cycle hit based on the embassy statement and now it’s just completely blown up," said a very senior Republican foreign policy hand, who called the statement an "utter disaster" and a "Lehman moment

  • ...cause u know, the preezy HAS prior obligations! and Roomney's having a *bad day* lol? red neds (and AICN progressives) idiocy continues...

  • 1) Gays, and their ability to openly serve in the military 2) Gay Marriage: Easy fix when you come to grips w/ the fact that if we're all going to be equal on paper, we should all be equal in practice. Panicky Jesus Freaks notwithstanding, this is an issue that too shall pass within our lifetimes 3) Blacks: Trending @ 0% for Romney 4) Latinos: (Because those damned Mexicans keep stealing all the glamorous lawncare & kitchen jobs from Exceptional Americans) Women: Take your pick - Whether it's the hypocrite males barking about "The Fetus, The Fetus, THE JESUS FETUS!!!", or denying Planned Parenthood for poor / minority females, there is NOTHING the Republicans are selling that ANY self-respecting woman in the 21st century should have an interest in buying 5) Religious minorities (Idiots who can't tell the difference between Muslims & Sikhs) And that's just off the top of my head...

  • someone get oblameya a teleprompter STAT!!!

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 9:59 p.m. CST

    dana carvey's obama is better,,

    by MST3KPIMP

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:12 p.m. CST

    Oh for fuck's sake, AICN...You're in Austin, right?

    by obijuanmartinez

    Can't get some cheap / free net-savvy, hipster interns to bring your forums into the 21st century? Probably could've taken the cash you used to whore yourselves out to Sugartits the Drunken Anti-Semite (AKA Mel Gibson) on the abortive "Get the Gringo" launch and used it to fix this steaming shit-pile of a website. Hurumph and good day, bitches!

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:16 p.m. CST

    Obama facts...

    by vettebro

    National debt before Obama... 10.2 Trillion dollars (That's the debt from EVERY president until Obama National debt today... 16 Trillion dollars! National unemployment rate before Obama... 7.2 % National unemployment rate today... 8.1 % Average US gas prices 2008 $2.45 Average US gas prices today $3.88 These are just the highlights of his 1st term. Let's not forget the "Fast n Furious", "Solyndra" and "Obamacare" debacles just to name the big one. There are plenty more...Go ahead and toe the party line Democrats. I can't believe some of you buy the "saved or created millions of jobs" bullshit. The facts are there, look them up yourselves. We are NOT better off than we were 4 years ago. I need someone to provide factual specifics concerning Romney's "war on women" issue too please. Democrat or Republican, a bad president is a bad president and needs to go. Obama qualifies as a bad president. End of line...

  • wait, what? can you point to where I said it was a lock? didn't think so! having said that, if someone said I had to bet $1,000 right now on who will win in November, I know where I'd put my money. Look at those polls and tell me where you'd put your $1,000. (I might just TAKE YOUR BET.)

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:29 p.m. CST

    Obama, Romney - different rhetoric, same masters.

    by Queefer Sutherland

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:37 p.m. CST

    George Will: For Romney 'conservatism is a second language’

    by obijuanmartinez

    http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/03/george-will-for-romney-conservatism-is-a-second-language/

  • http://www.buzzfeed.com/bensmith/foreign-policy-hands-voice-disbelief-at-romney-cai

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:44 p.m. CST

    Ron Fouier - Conservative writer, National Journal...

    by obijuanmartinez

    A ham-handed and inaccurate response from Romney ... There is a reason why politix stops at water's edge

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:44 p.m. CST

    Herc...

    by vettebro

    Someone already said it here in this talkback. Those polls are skewed. The sampling isn't equal in most of them. Rasmussen gets the closest with something looking like this: 33% Dems 33% Repub 33% Indep. CNN, ABC and NBC (the worst offender) skew these poll ratios for a "favorable" outcome. Example: 54% Dems 24% Repub 22% Indep If I knew you well, I would take your $1000 bet as long as I get Romney. We won't have long to wait for the outcome. Personally, I can't wait for the upcoming debates. Peace.

  • don't feel that Mr. Romney has been doing himself any favors in the past few hours. Sometimes when really bad things happen, when hot things happen, cool words or no words is the way to go

  • im surprised oblameya didnt think Egypt actually meant *roads and bridges*. but, i guess it depends what ur definition of *is* is...

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 10:48 p.m. CST

    Rush Limbaugh says the GOP presidential nominee might as well be Elmer Fudd...

    by obijuanmartinez

    http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/limbaughs_ringing_endorsement_another_bad_gop_rape_analogy_and_more_2012091/

  • Wow, so maybe some of you Flat-Earth fucktards from Dumbfuckistan, USA will eventually wake up to the fact that Romneybot 3000 is NOTHING like you poor, stupid people, and truly cares only for the uber-wealthy: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-j-samuelson-romneys-tax-plan-makes-no-sense/2012/08/08/8a5d2096-e16a-11e1-a25e-15067bb31849_story.html

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:04 p.m. CST

    Great... the AICN political debate thread 2000

    by Wolfman Nards

  • Kind of sort of a legitimate question.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:10 p.m. CST

    And honestly, is there anyone that's undecided at this point?

    by Wolfman Nards

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:28 p.m. CST

    Herc you forgot something when referring to the polls

    by ShakaLaka Lambo

    You forgot how paranoid people here can be. After all if some pollster calls my house after dinner and starts asking me about my political views (considering they know my name and phone number theres no way in hell I'm telling em what I really think about our commu err I mean commander in chief. Oh, and taken a look at the Carter Reagan polls leading up to the election. How did that work out for you guys ? All politicians are scumbag liars but a lawyer/politician from Chicago ?! But seriously even Comrade Barry said if Its not fixed by 3 years I'll be a one term President. I don't think he was referring to the economy being fixed either, I think he was referring to the election itself cause hear me now and believe me in November , if this thing ain't rigged he's got NO chance beating Romney. None.

  • Sept. 13, 2012, 11:57 p.m. CST

    I like how ObiJuan is using disappointed Neocon quotes to attack Romney...

    by Darth_Inedible

    So uh 'conservatives' who side with Hilary Clinton and Zagnut "commiefuck" Brezinski were disappointed with what Romney said. Why should this be a problem for the average non-neocon Rep voter again?

  • Sept. 14, 2012, 12:08 a.m. CST

    vettebro, kindly link to where you're getting those poll stats

    by Hercules

    Without the link they look as fake as the statement "Herc says Obama is a lock."

  • *When asked to further clarify President Obama’s comments about Egypt’s relationship with the United States, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland first tried to direct the reporter’s questions to the White House. The persistent reporter, however, did not accept that answer and pressed further. “So forget about the president’s words, you’re saying that the administration, the State Department still regards Egypt as a non-Nato ally and is still a recipient of all the privileges that that entails,” the reporter asked. “Yes,” Nuland replied.* u were saying, dash??? u idiot AICN progressives are INSANE.

  • dont need a cast member to do romney, just use a store mannequin with good hair

  • Sept. 14, 2012, 2:07 a.m. CST

    the war on women?

    by jbinminot

    I don't think anyone from the party of Edwards, Clinton or Kennedy (take your pick) should speak of the war on women

  • Sept. 14, 2012, 7:25 a.m. CST

    jbinminot you are funny!

    by Michael Lunney

  • Sept. 14, 2012, 7:41 a.m. CST

    Vegas has the race at 2 to 1 for Obama ~

    by Halibut

  • Sept. 14, 2012, 9:09 a.m. CST

    Wait a minute? So you guys prefer dictatorship in Egypt?

    by onezeroone

    Egyptians chose democratically the sort of government they want and they voted fully against a western friendly government. So, NOW you're saying bringing Democracy and Freedom to them was a mistake? That you'd support a friendly dictator over an hostile democracy? That you're willing to curb a whole nation's freedom to choose just coz they didn't choose what you wanted them to?

  • onezeroone- better queston- why do so many Americans hate each other over political differences- does that seem nomal? this talkback seems filled with such hatred.... I don't mean you...

  • Sept. 14, 2012, 9:52 a.m. CST

    @jbidiot - What a conveniently simplistic world-view to have...

    by obijuanmartinez

    Clinton = Yep, a philandering liar, but who cares? I'd have had a lot more respect for a guy just copping to the Blowinsky bits. The more outrageous element is the +$70 million dollar witch-hunt, led by the likes of Ken Starr & whipped on by noted philanderer (and champion of "Marriage Values") Newt Gingrich: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CDOC-105hdoc311/content-detail.html Beyond this, the idea we could put Clinton on the stand for this, but leave Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld walk scot-free for instigating a war on a sovereign nation with "0" credible intel on WMDs. As to the Kennedy clan - Yup, a bootlegger (Joe Kennedy) built a dynasty and affected JFKs rise to power + presidency, and he got to diddle Marilyn Monroe (apparently). And? (Insert point here - not sure there is one, unless you're attempting to prudishly indict him for being male...) Teddy Kennedy by all rights should have served jail time for vehicular manslaughter (at the very least). It's amazing what you can accomplish with a death on your conscience and the ability to bankroll your redemption in the public eye Edwards is a creep, regardless of his political affiliation. You can't indict the democrats based on 3 people. They are still the clear choice for women who aren't stuck in the Stone Age...it's really very simple: When you have GOP heads nattering on (Akin) about asinine terms like "intentional rape" and arguing about females being able to "reject" a rapist's seed, you're pretty much in the Land of Oz at that point

  • Do you love your mummy?

  • He loves his mummy....

  • How else can you explain how literally EVERY last economic "policy" they have forced on us since Reagun has been the SAME goddamn "trickle-down with MASSIVE tax cuts for the rich" bills that have NEVER even come close to "solving" the very problems they in turn create? I'm not here to praise the Democrats as a model of fiscal responsibility or anything, mostly because they FAR too often capitualte to GOP ideas in the name of "bi-aprtisanship", but history has proven that in the last 60 years, the stock market, jobs numbers, % of GDP, and all around quaility of living are OVER DOUBLE what has been created under Republicans! Bigotry is the FOUNDATION of the GOP, as over half the stuff they do excludes anyone seen as an "other" (like gays who want to marry or serve in the military) and even though they claim to hate government intervention and spending, they have DOUBLE the size of governemnt and contributed more to our national debt by a 4-to-1 margin. THESE ARE ALL HIGHLY PROVEABLE FACTS THAT HAVE BEEN COLLECTED AND ANALYSISED TO DEATH OVER THE LAST FEW DECADES, YET THE RIGHT COMPLETELY IGNORES REALITY SINCE IT DOESN'T FIT INTO THEIR WORLDVIEW IN THE SLIGHTEST WAY!!!

  • Sept. 14, 2012, 10:49 a.m. CST

    and the beety, beety beat goes on says Tweeky....

    by Michael Lunney

  • Sept. 14, 2012, 10:58 a.m. CST

    Neither Obama nor Romney are particularly funny

    by Beezbo

    Tough for comedians to find a hook with either of them. They have to take the route Dana Carvey took with Bush Sr. - don't try to be accurate, just exagerrated and funny. Didn't find Jay Pharaoh's bit above to be accurate OR funny. My problem with Darrell Hammond was that he was always much more accurate than funny. For SNL's purposes, this election could sure use a Ross Perrot-like character. And don't judge Armisen on his bad Obama or on his performance on SNL in general - he really shines on Portlandia.

  • ...*You can't indict the democrats based on 3 people.* then PROCEEDS to indict ALL Republicans by referencing Akin LOL. u cant make this shit up (unless ur an AICN progressive)!!

  • Sept. 14, 2012, 12:03 p.m. CST

    Bookmarking this TB...

    by Mr. Nice Gaius

    ...looking forward to revisiting it and laughing my ass off after the election.

  • Ahhh, Jay: Slow day in the trailer park? Sis out with the kids? For the Republicans, anti-abortion is a consistent party platform, so citing the peccadilloes of one erratic, male GOP hypocrite is a fairly accurate & uniform assessment of their confusing "pro-life" stance In the case of Clinton, Kennedy (take your pick) & Edwards, @jbiminot was attempting (illogically & tenuously) to connect philandering with somehow being "anti-women", in which case you'd have to go after as many Republicans as you do Dems. You may also care to have read my unflattering evaluation of these 3 gentlemen...or not

  • Sept. 14, 2012, 12:34 p.m. CST

    I like the Rock Obama the most.

    by hank_chinaski

  • Sept. 14, 2012, 1:58 p.m. CST

    Why is it so hard to understand

    by Sonny_Williams

    that predicting Obama's re-election does not mean that you are gung-ho pro-Obama? I am no cheerleader for the current administration at all, but I CAN clearly see that the Republicans have blown it once again. For fuck sake, they've spent the whole primary season trying to get traction for someone, ANYONE, other than Romney. But in the end, there he is, the turd that's still afloat. Had the Republicans managed to field a candidate with even a modicum of appeal to the masses, the Obama's would already be lining up the movers for next January. BUT NOOOOOOOO! They nominate a guy that most Republicans were calling "as bad as Obama" just a few months ago, who has no appeal to any thinking person who isn't a millionaire, and will probably set a record for the number of times he says something that makes his campaign manager reach for the Valium. All they need now is for Ron Paul to run as a Libertarian and their slim chance becomes "no fucking way!" So, yes, Obama WILL win, and NO, that doesn't make my day at all!

  • Sept. 14, 2012, 3:05 p.m. CST

    I should know better by now...

    by schadenfreudian

    I don't know why I come into these politically charged talkbacks expecting to see anything other than name calling and, "Duck season!" "Rabbit Season!" type debates. <br> Carry on, AICN think tank.

  • Sept. 14, 2012, 3:21 p.m. CST

    Obama will win easily. Romney = John Kerry

    by fastcars

    1) Mitt Romney is a terrible, unlikeable candidate, who does not even has his own party's enthusiastic support. 2) The Republicans have fallen victim to boy cried wolf syndrome. They declared everything Obama did to be the worst thing ever. Now even if Obama did fuck up, no one would believe them. 3) When your party loses in an election cycle...you come back by moving closer to the middle. You don't come back by running farther to the extreme. It's like every Republican politician in the past four years turned into the Right Wing Michael Moore, on coke. Making bad puns on Obama's name and saying insane things about birth control / Obama's birth certificate / socialism / whatever is not going to make people vote for your side. That said...Armisen's Obama sucked ass. Looking forward to Pharoah's.

  • Hula Hoops and slip and slides, 6th finger, sixth finger, man alive, how did I ever get along with just five!!!!

  • *Ahhh, Jay: Slow day in the trailer park? Sis out with the kids?* i see the tolerant, progressive bigotry is still with u. a hypocrite in every way. my fact still stands.

  • Yeah me neither. Seth is going to have a much longer and far more interesting career. Matt Stone and Trey Parker will just go back to South Park after they make the movie version of the Book Of Mormon and it bombs.

  • Sept. 15, 2012, 10:58 p.m. CST

    1/2 hour in and it is painfully unfunny.

    by Ingeld

  • watch that clip again - he is bombing all over that stage, so he whips out rule #1 to save himself.

  • Sept. 16, 2012, 9:19 a.m. CST

    Cerebus ...

    by Toe Jam

    South Park" = "Monty Python.

  • Sept. 16, 2012, 9:22 a.m. CST

    Oh, this fucking site!

    by Toe Jam

    Please do something about the talkback form! I had just made several salient points about Cerebus' Parker & Stone/MacFarlane post, and it all disappeared because of this outdated fucking form. Fuck it! Nobody was going to read it, anyway.

  • Fox News Obama +5

  • Sept. 16, 2012, 9:37 p.m. CST

    Herc intellectual curiosity is showing.

    by Philbert

    or lack of. Did you bother to actual look at the internals of these polls or did you just take the numbers at face value? These polls only reflect a lead for Obama due to heavy skewing of the samples toward likely Obama voters. Let’s look at these polls you cited one by one. -If you look closely, you'll discover the Democracy Corps, Fox News, Reuters/Ipsos, ABC/Washington Post and CNN/Opinion Research polls all poll LIKELY voters. All also put Obama ahead: Democracy Corps Obama +5 Fox News Obama +5 Reuters/Ipsos Obama +3 ABC /Wash Post Obama +1 CNN/Opinion Res. Obama +6- Okay Herc, let's look closely. 1. Democracy Corps: This poll announces that Obama leads Romney 50 to 45. However, this poll is also weighted heavily in favor of Democrats. The sample had a +13 Democrat sample pool. When adjusted to reflect a more likely turnout model, the numbers shift to show Romney leading Obama 52-45%. Also bad news for Obama, in this poll, with a +13 Democrat sample, he still couldn’t get to 50% Job Approval. That is pathetic. An incumbent under 50% in September loses, almost always. http://www.examiner.com/article/barack-obama-leads-five-percent-heavily-skewed-democracy-corps-poll 2. Fox News: This poll shows Obama leading Romney 48-43%. This also oversampled Democrats by 8 points. When adjusted for sample bias, Romney leads Obama 48-45, with 7% undecided. Knowing that usually undecided voters break for the challenger 9-1, this sample does not bode well for Obama. http://www.examiner.com/article/mitt-romney-lead-presidential-race-denied-by-skewed-fox-news-poll 3. Reuters/Ipsos: This poll shows Obama leading Romney 48-45. Again, Democrats were oversampled. The difference here is that this poll also heavily under sampled the independents. When adjusted to reflect likely turnout in November, Romney leads Obama in this group, 51-42%. A Landslide. http://www.examiner.com/article/barack-obama-lead-manufactured-by-heavily-skewed-reuters-ipsos-poll 4. ABC/Washington Post: Another skewed sample leads to a reported Obama lead of 49-48%. However, when you actually look at the internal numbers and remove the polling bias, the numbers actually reflect a Romney lead 52-45%. Seems to be a pattern forming. http://www.examiner.com/article/mitt-romney-leads-seven-percent-by-unskewed-data-from-wash-post-abc-news-poll?cid=db_articles 5. CNN/Opinion Research: Another poll heavily weighted to get favorable numbers for the Obama campaign, the dirtiest in modern times. This poll reported Obama leading 52-46%. When adjusted for polling biases, it’s completely the opposite. Romney leading 53-45%. These polls only serve one purpose, and it’s not to find out what is going on. It is to suppress Republican votes and turnout and to feed to media narrative that Obama is going to win. If Herc cared about honesty, he would have actually read beyond the headlines and seen that these polls are all deeply flawed and reach incorrect conclusions. The funniest part is all these were conducted during the tie of the Obama bounce. These numbers could be even more in Romney’s favor right now.

  • Sept. 17, 2012, 1:22 a.m. CST

    Weird Obama impression

    by Bass Ackwards

    Voice is a bit closer then Armisen, who seemed to have given up on trying to do an impression at all (probably jealous of Sudekis, who gets to play Romney as a caricature but doesn't have t worry about impersonating the guy at all). But the I didn't get the personality tics Pharoah was adding in, like falling asleep mid-speech (what?) and the facial expressions (looked like he was mixing Obama and Eddie Murphy).

  • Sept. 17, 2012, 7:47 a.m. CST

    PHILBERT

    by lprothro

    ..national Examiner is a TABLOID and a heavily biased one at that! They manage to publish some outrageously malicious story about the Prez or his wife just about every other week! Thought Pharoah was great btw--cracked me up!

  • Sept. 17, 2012, 7:58 a.m. CST

    Oh wait my mistake..

    by lprothro

    ..looks like there's more than one examiner. Don't know anything about this one Philbert cited. My bad!

  • That's just silly. Obama is leading in the electi

  • That's just silly. Obama is going to win this election. Romney doesn't resonate with the voters. If he did he would be winning by a mile. I think too many of the republican stances are out of step with American voters (stem call research, Abortion, immigration, gay marriage). Romney needs more woman, Hispanics and other minorities and he isn't going to get them with his current platform. The Repubs have allowed a party that really consists of two different entities the fiscal conservatives and religious right. It's essentially a two headed party. In today's America I don't know if that party will win many elections because the entities can be so different. So from simply a common sense perspective I don't see Obama losing. I do see the fiscal conservatives reclaiming their party after this frustrating loss

  • Sept. 17, 2012, 12:50 p.m. CST

    Ok, well I guess astranautjones knows better

    by Philbert

    Thanks for actually commenting on the substance of the post, instead of just parroting the media Romney memes. oh, wait...

  • Sept. 17, 2012, 1:35 p.m. CST

    I understand this is a little hard to understand

    by Philbert

    The polls do not match what turn out is expected to be, and are skewed towards Obummer. These polls do not reflect reality.

  • Sept. 17, 2012, 9:32 p.m. CST

    by Matty G

    When was the last time the polls were as wrong as you suggest? Dewey defeats Truman?

  • Sept. 17, 2012, 10:31 p.m. CST

    Carter-Reagan 1980

    by Philbert

    Carter was up 8 points in October 1980. Reagan won by 9 points and took 44 states. Oh yeah, Dukakis lead Bush by 17 in 1988 coming out of the Dems convention. Obama can't get to %50 in horribly skewed polls. He is gonna get crushed.

  • Sept. 17, 2012, 10:58 p.m. CST

    by Matty G

    Both races were accurately polling but broke toward the winning candidate. Could happen again but in this information age there such a difference between the candidates and so much info is out there people have made their decisi

Top Talkbacks