Outside the Beltway

RNC Night 2: This Is More Like It

James Joyner
20

Comments

I’ll give more coherent thoughts in the morning but I’ll say that tonight’s roster beat last night’s in one rather important regard: It kept me tuned in until the end.

I clicked it on a couple minutes after 8 and John McCain was talking. Some of the speeches were better than others but none were so bad that I turned away. Condi Rice’s speech was outstanding. Paul Ryan’s was, at best, pedestrian. But I made it well past my bedtime and am writing this during the benediction. So, kudos on that much.

Here’s my Twitter stream from the night, “sponsored” by Johnny Walker Black:

Note: Those are supposed to appear as embedded tweets, not raw links. They were momentarily.

Categories

,

Tags

, ,

20 responses to “RNC Night 2: This Is More Like It”

  1. Quinn Avatar
    Quinn

    There were also more lies tonight. Breathtaking dishonesty.

  2. James Joyner Avatar
    James Joyner

    @Quinn: I’ll address that in more detail in the morning. Much of it is just standard boilerplate, though.

  3. An Interested Party Avatar
    An Interested Party

    Much of it is just standard boilerplate, though.

    Really?

    Ryan said, “Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said, ‘I believe that if our government is there to support you … this plant will be here for another hundred years.’ That’s what he said in 2008.”

    “Well, as it turned out, that plant didn’t last another year,” Ryan continued. “It is locked up and empty to this day. And that’s how it is in so many towns today, where the recovery that was promised is nowhere in sight.”

    It’s an attack Ryan has used before, and one that the Detroit News has called inaccurate: “In fact, Obama made no such promise and the plant halted production in December 2008, when President George W. Bush was in office,” Detroit News reporter David Sherpardson wrote earlier this month. “Obama did speak at the plant in February 2008, and suggested that a government partnership with automakers could keep the plant open, but made no promises as Ryan suggested.”

    Uh huh, “standard boilerplate”…

  4. Just 'nutha ig'rant cracker Avatar
    Just ‘nutha ig’rant cracker

    @An Interested Party: You’ve hit on the problem. Joiner has acquired a taste for Kool-ade.

    Joiner, you’re just another shill for what you keep saying you don’t believe in. But it’s ok because “it’s just boilerplate.”

  5. bill Avatar
    bill

    @Quinn: if lies aren’t for you I’d avoid charlotte, any “successes” they may speak of are already invalid, unless they want to brag about increasing the deficit to the point that our grandchildren will be paying for it. otherwise ‘it’s all somebody else fault’.

  6. G.A. Avatar
    G.A.

    Paul Ryan’s was, at best, pedestrian.

    lol, dude, Ryan was awesome, Even better then Palin….

  7. DA Avatar
    DA

    @James Joyner: James, am I kidding myself, or was there once a time that truth was something that conservatives valued? Is there any lie that Romney-Ryan campaign could come up with that you won’t be an apologist for?

  8. An Interested Party Avatar
    An Interested Party

    …if lies aren’t for you I’d avoid charlotte, any “successes” they may speak of are already invalid, unless they want to brag about increasing the deficit to the point that our grandchildren will be paying for it. otherwise ‘it’s all somebody else fault’.

    Successes that certainly aren’t invalid include the death of Osama bin Laden, expanding health care access for more Americans, and trying to lessen the impact of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression…oh, and “our grandchildren” were responsible for paying for the debt while Barack Obama was still in college–the Reagan years? Perhaps you might remember them…

  9. Rafer Janders Avatar
    Rafer Janders

    Condi Rice’s speech was outstanding.

    No one could have predicted that.

  10. Rafer Janders Avatar
    Rafer Janders

    @DA:

    Is there any lie that Romney-Ryan campaign could come up with that you won’t be an apologist for?

    They’re not lies! They’re boilerplate! Boilerplate, I tell you! There’s a big big difference!

  11. Richard Gardner Avatar
    Richard Gardner

    I’m afraid the sports rivalry takeover of politics is showing in the comments here. The other side is aways bad, evil, liars, spawn of the devil. And they don’t understand that they are not the audience, the Republicans on the convention floor and watching on TV are. The undecideds will not care about the convention speeches, so your invectives are wasted.

    I was watching the coverage on CNBC with Dr. Larry Kudlow (PhD, Econ, OMB staffer under Reagan), focused on the economic issues rather than Entertainment Tonight stuff (though their post debates were trivial too). Such a relief from CNN, Fox, MSNBC (all adjacent channels so I did minor channel surfing) though they don’t have full coverage (showing CNBC specials I’ve already seen when not covering the convention). Meanwhile there were 2 Pres Clinton ads/hour for Obama (from the Obama Campaign, I approve this ad), and 4 Chevy Volt ads/hour talking about how stupid they are that they forget how to fuel a car at the gas station (with folks looking like hipsters – no man I know wears a loose scarf with summer clothes). Not sure if the Chevy Volt ad is coordinated with the Obama campaign, but it is stupid.

    Gov Huckabee’s speech was the only one that was evenly delivered from start to end – but he is a talk show host (only talking technicals here, not that I agree with him). Most of them took a few minutes to get their rhythm.

    OMG, I’m not about to look at that tweet list, sorry.

  12. David M Avatar
    David M

    @bill: Do you know what caused those deficits? Do you think the Bush tax cuts and wars were a factor? If only there were a chart around to explain things.

  13. An Interested Party Avatar
    An Interested Party

    I’m afraid the sports rivalry takeover of politics is showing in the comments here. The other side is aways bad, evil, liars, spawn of the devil.

    Bull$hit…calling out lies is hardly part of a “sports rivalry” mentality nor is it attaching all possible negative attributes to those on the other end of the political spectrum…

    And they don’t understand that they are not the audience, the Republicans on the convention floor and watching on TV are. The undecideds will not care about the convention speeches, so your invectives are wasted.

    Ohhhhhh…so telling the truth about Ryan’s lies is of no importance because those calling out his lies aren’t part of the audience he is appealing to…now there’s some sensible reasoning…

  14. jukeboxgrad Avatar
    jukeboxgrad

    james:

    Much of it is just standard boilerplate, though.

    You’re inadvertently highlighting the heart of the problem, which is summarized in the article Interested Party cited:

    It’s an attack Ryan has used before, and one that the Detroit News has called inaccurate

    “Boilerplate” means material that’s used over and over again. And that’s precisely the problem: your people are telling the same lies over and over again, even though the lie has already been pointed out. When you call it “boilerplate” you’re essentially acknowledging that he told the lie before. That makes matters worse, not better. Yes, certain lies have been adopted as “standard boilerplate.” Why are you saying that as if it’s a good thing?

    Krugman asked the key question months ago:

    Won’t Mr. Romney pay a price for running a campaign based entirely on falsehoods? He obviously thinks not, and I’m afraid he may be right.

    Mitt is not the first politician to tell a lie, but he is taking it to a new extreme, with what can be called the first real “Post-Truth Campaign.” The brazenness of it is captured in this statement from “Romney pollster Neil Newhouse:”

    we’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers

    English translation: ‘we’re going to continue lying because we think this is the winning strategy.’ Mitt has made a strategic decision to lie a lot even though the lies will be pointed out. He has undoubtedly calculated, maybe correctly, that his lies will stick and win because he has such a big megaphone.

    What happens when we set a precedent that the best way to win is to be the most brazen and extreme liar, because there is essentially no penalty for lying? Especially when we have a system based on spending astronomical sums provided by hidden sources? Do you see any problems with where this road leads?

  15. black onion Avatar
    black onion

    @G.A.:

    lol, dude, Ryan was awesome, Even better then Palin….

    If by better you mean told more demonstrable lies, then I am in total agreement with you. Then again, it was harder for Palin to lie when her speech contained so very little substance.

  16. Tsar Nicholas Avatar
    Tsar Nicholas

    Condi Rice followed by Susana Martinez probably resulted in liberal heads actually exploding, like in “Scanners.” Two outstanding speeches. Two amazing success stories. For obvious reasons the liberal media and the liberal academe were unavailable for comment.

    Portman was very good. A tad wonkish in some parts, but clear and persuasive. Shoulda’ been veep.

    Ryan was excellent, if a tad verbose. Had he cut 15 minutes and had slightly better organization it would have been a home run. The dissection of the stimulus was very good. The reference to Gen. Y still living at home with their parents, unemployed, with faded Obama posters on their walls, was priceless. The yarn about his mother’s small business was very effective. The case for Romney was very effective.

    Overall a solid B. Had they eliminated a few peripheral speeches (e.g., Pawlenty, Huckabee), shortened some of the other speeches, and timed the deliveries to be more in prime time, EST, and less in prime time, PST, it would have been a tour de force.

  17. G.A. Avatar
    G.A.

    If by better you mean told more demonstrable lies, then I am in total agreement with you. Then again, it was harder for Palin to lie when her speech contained so very little substance.

    Sigh…what lies did he tell?

    And did you drink a shot of kool aid every time he said Obama?

  18. sam Avatar
    sam

    @G.A.:

    Sigh…what lies did he tell?

    How about this one, numbnutz?

    Ryan misleads on GM plant closing in hometown

    In his acceptance speech, GOP Vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan appeared to suggest that President Obama was responsible for the closing of a GM plant in Ryan’s hometown of Janesville, Wisc.

    That’s not true. The plant was closed in December, 2008, before Obama was sworn in. But look how Ryan came close to the line in his speech:

    “Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said: ‘I believe that if our government is there to support you … this plant will be here for another hundred years.’ That’s what he said in 2008. Well, as it turned out, that plant didn’t last another year. It is locked up and empty to this day.”

    Obama gave his speech in February, 2008, and he did say those words. But Ryan’s phrasing, referring to the fact the plant did not last another year, certainly suggests it closed in 2009, when Obama was president.

  19. sam Avatar
    sam

    @Tsar Nicholas:

    Condi Rice followed by Susana Martinez probably resulted in liberal heads actually exploding, like in “Scanners.” Two outstanding speeches. Two amazing success stories.

    Indeed. Of course, Gov. Martinez left out this part: Susana Martinez, N.M. gov., says grandparents came to US illegally

    What was that about heads exploding?

  20. anjin-san Avatar
    anjin-san

    Much of it is just standard boilerplate, though.

    So the default position of the GOP is dishonesty?

Latest Posts