People are agonizing. Obama lost! Or he let Romney get away with too much! Or, here, let me tell you why Romney really lost. It’s all crap, both the hyper-concern on the part of (some) Democrats or the triumphalism by (some) Republicans.
Partisans who watched the debate are not going to change their minds about who is the better candidate and for whom they will cast their vote. Maybe a few people who haven’t paid attention to the election before will waver a little, but one debate does not change an election. Gore wiped the floor with Dubya in 2000 and look how that turned out. Guess who won the first presidential debate in 2004 to move into a tie in the polls with the incumbent? John Kerry. Anyone remember the Kerry administration?
How many people watched the debate last night? Fewer than you think. Maybe 50 million plus or minus a few. Maybe. How many of those already have their minds made up? Most of them. So have fun talking about last night’s super important debate performances if you like. Tell me all about Big Bird getting a pink slip from Romney on twitter or Obama’s body language (yeah, the media now uses body language experts to tell us how a debate is going, and has for some time). But like most people I wasn’t listening to the Barack and Mitt show last night.
And if history is any guide, this debate won’t change the final election results, whether you watched all ninety scintillating minutes of it or not.
Body language? That’s pretty weird. Is voice analysis next?
Seems like it:
http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/03/obama-and-romney-to-face-real-lie-detector-test-during-debate/
scintillating, it was not. Teenagers got bored after about 20 minutes and hit their Facebook for talk about other things.
They didn’t go on the twitters?
I think surveys show that Twitter use is greater among 20s than teens.
Well, I was being sarcastic. The last scintillating moment I saw in a debate was when Lloyd Bentsen told Quayle he was no JFK.
And that scintillating moment by Bentsen had been anticipated and carefully crafted during debate prep, a less known fact which for me makes it not quite as scintillating a moment. Though for a brief moment it was effective, it mattered squat in the final tally. Americans didn’t seem to care who they put a heartbeat away from the presidency.
It put me to sleep, like most overhyped TV events.
I get outraged by liars, so I stayed awake.
My internet was down so I couldn’t live-blog it. All I know is that I was bored the entire time. If I was bored, I can’t imagine your average watcher…
If I wasn’t a junkie, I’d have turned it off after 5-10 minutes.
Unfortunately for us, it was Obama doing most of the boring.
That’s not just me — go to Daily Beast and watch Obama get skewered on video by a major backer Andrew Sullivan.
And viewer boredom — imagine if they had to watch the two opponents competing in the Lincoln-Douglas format, which many online libs seem to prefer. How many viewers would hang around for an opening argument lasting one hour?
Fortunately for us it was Obama doing most of the boring. The media would have gotten excited over Obama not being boring if he had responded on one Romney’s attacks in a non-boring manner.
The reason that the reviews of this kabuki take the tone of drama criticism is because the CPD essentially sets up a paired infomercial and not a debate.
The moderator is not empowered to enforce the agreed upon rules, as Romney demonstrated many times last night.
That’s why it won’t matter to most folks. It is not really another source of information except for seeing the candidate’s performing style. Folks know Obama’s. Mitt tried to put on a winning style. In the midst of losing on policy very badly. To do this he had to lie about his proposed policies or refuse to provide details.
The “arithmetic” argument is going to start cutting as folks examine the details of Romney’s proposals in the follow-up.
Hope you’re right. In my experience when it comes to arithmetic the average man in the street can’t total up his restaurant check, much less his checkbook which is why so many people moan about overdraft fees.
Sorry, not buying that it was good for O to be boring — thus allowing Romney to dominate the evening — nor about how O was somehow hamstrung into only taking that passive approach. There’s plenty of room for himto be assertive and yet not play into ugly ABG stereotypes. O chose instead the prevent defense strategy — usually a sure loser in sports, as it was last night on the debate stage.
We’ll see about polling consequences in the coming days, but at the moment it seems O allowed Romney back in the race. Obama needs to do far better, toughen up, go on the attack and stop being a punching bag for Mitt.
Romney’s Big Bird line might be the “Wanna buy some wood?” of these debates.
Fox News poll has Obama winning. Voting still open:
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/10/03/pat-buchanan-if-this-was-a-15-round-fight-governor-romney-won-1
3-of-the-15-rounds/
I just went over there and voted. Guess what the results are showing right now?
Obama: 58.99%
Romney: 41.01%
I just went over and voted also.
Twice.
For what it’s worth (not much, probably), Obama is still leading, though the margin is now 53.55/46.45. You’d think the typical Foxites would have swarmed the thing by now, eh?
Welcome to Chicago!
Stole that for my FB status.
As per usual, Romney “won” by lying and obfuscating. The country, even the press, is in no mood for that. So, I predict it will catch up with him. I was listeneing to NPR this morning, and they were already pointing out some of Romney biggest prevarications last night. Obama came off smelling like roses in that respect.
I see by the internet that Wolf B says that the President looked bored and irritable. I didn’t watch CNN, but saw Chris Matthews rant that he didn’t get to see an exciting boxing match.
Last night’s “debate” was probably a disappointment to everybody. I certainly expected a brilliant display of the President’s ability in contrast to the gross incompetence of the Mittwit we’ve seen up `till now. Rmoney somehow managed to channel the actor spirit of rReagan and put on a show for those of us who don’t want to read and think.
Wondering why the President wasn’t the brave gladiator I was hoping for, I have to think about how men relate to each other. It occurs to me that maybe he was channeling another actor – Morgan Freeman in “Driving Miss Daisy.” Ummm hmmn, yassir, yass, dat’s right.
Now I know that expression has been on my face, too. There was a time when I would find myself on a date with a fellow that I just couldn’t stand to be with for more than 2 minutes. Or, it happens even now – no need to bring race or sex into it. I certainly cannot put on a show in front of millions for over an hour and am not happy that it has become expected of my president to be a star on demand.
Obama looked tired to me. Maybe the trains kept him awake the night before – just kidding, I love the sound of trains. Plus all the great classics Western and Blues etc about trains
He has a day job. Romney doesn’t.
I know, I was just kidding about the trains. Hoping we get some info on Libya fairly soon – and the Turkey-Syria situation mentioned previously
I seem to remember the last time Obama looked tired and distracted at a relatively important occasion. April 30, 2011.
yes, that’s what I’m thinking
The Press is universally saying Romney won – many are saying it was in a romp. If you dig into the fact checking stories, which few do, you’ll see false balance at play but even then that Romney lied a lot.
Is still almost certain to win but the horse race momentum is now Romney’s. It’s possible Obama will recover for the next two debates. It’s possible that they can put together some convincing ads with key Romney quotes – like his lie about pre-existing conditions that was refused by his spokespeople after the debate. And it’s possible that some more October Surprises are on the way which will dwarf this.
And maybe, just maybe, having a poor first debate performance is part of some grand Plouffe plan to manipulate the press or something so that they get their Romney comeback story out of their system and then after a few days the momentum starts to build again.
But, regardless of all that I still feel that Obama had an opportunity to really hit home the stark differences between the GOP and Democrats on health care, retirement, and the role of government – Democratic policies that are hugely popular – and he completely failed to do so. He has the opportunity to use his campaign to greatly improve the Democratic party brand. Instead he is playing prevent defense and leaving the downticket Democrats to fend for themselves.
actually by letting Romney “win” this debate, the President improves the Democratic brand because all of Romney’s donors have to stick with him a little longer rather than dumping all that campaign cash into down-ticket races, thus improving the chances of the party overall. Romney was going to “win” no matter what happened because the MSM demands a horse-race, might just as well let him maintain enough viability for now to give some cover to down ballot Dems.
I’m constantly amazed at how often people underestimate this President, and particularly his campaign.
Nice comment! very good to keep their $ off the down ticket races. And agree about underestimating this President. On that topic: one of Romney’s problems is that voters think he is lying. Nothing like a giant lie-fest to help dispel that one. not.
I guess we remember events a little differently. Like you, I felt that Gore mopped the floor with Dubya. In fact, there was a moment near the end when Bush was literally stumbling about and it looked like he might actually fall down.
But what happened next? The post-debate pundits got to work skewering Gore for his makeup, his sighs, his encroaching on W’s personal space, the way he said “lockbox,” and then they threw in a few “invented the internets” just for good measure. And these themes hounded Gore all the rest of the way to the election.
If you don’t believe that all this cost Gore huge in the final tally, then we’re just going to have to disagree about that. To me it’s pretty obvious.
No one upside down on favorables/unfavorables in October has won, at least not since 1980. (Gore is an exception — he was upside down on the Supreme Court.)
Romney’s been upside-down for months.
An election which Gore won.
But due to a number of factors, the election results were close enough for it to be stolen. Had any one of a handful of these factors not occurred, the outcome would have been different. The drubbing Gore took in the press following the first debate perhaps is one of those factors. The butterfly ballot definitely was, but it’s harder to quantify how many votes the press debate reaction cost.
No LIEberscum to backstab us for his true masters anymore.
Careful, Steven. If you keep making good common sense like this you are liable to lose your frontpager status.
Remember…you’re part of the media now.You’ve got ads and everything! Just like the big boys. Why…Booman’s going the White House soon!!!
So remember the drill.
Four more years of this and we’ll all be stuck in Wonderland.
Tweedle Red and Tweedle Blue
Go tweedle yer voting booth.
It’s IMPORTANT!!!
Thank you for your sanity, Steven.
Whadda buncha maroons!!!
Over and out…
AG
An unpaid part of the media Arthur. So, losing front pager status isn’t exactly a nightmare scenario for me. But Martin and I have disagreed on a lot of stuff over the years and he hasn’t threatened to go all Trump on may ass yet. Thanks for caring though. 😉
Unpaid?
Well…I guess it’s an audition, then.
Eh?.
But…is Booman paying is own way to “consult” in DC?
Ads aplenty on his site.
PermaGov ads, some of them.
Hmmmm…
Please.
It’s a business.
Bet on it.
One way or another…time and effort invested promises a reward.
I used to think otherwise. As a musician, I gave of my talents on any number of levels. Just for the music. But later on I saw that others were profiting from my efforts and I was not.
Hmmmmmm…
Wake up call!!!
Bet on it.
AG
Guys, chill out. I didn’t watch because these things drive me crazy. But I’ve read a lot of the leftish reaction. Obama had a C-, Romney had a B or B+ night. HE’S STILL ROMNEY. Remember, he’s re-inventing himself again.
Everyone here sounds like a college Junior after an all nighter before a philosophy final. Obama didn’t win. Who cares? Romney didn’t land any knockout punches and there were not any bumper sticker moments.
Puts on pundit hat;
It seems every debate that Obama has, whether McCain or Clinton or now Romney, people freak out about a ‘poor’ performance. He’s not aggressive, he does not call them on their lies, he is not passionate, etc. We go through the same thing EVERY time.
But in my opinion, Obama has different goals, and his idea of a ‘win’ looks different than than other people. First, Obama, being a black male, can NEVER allow himself to come off angry in these types of settings. Or scolding, or frustrated. I honestly think that is also his personality, but that is a ‘chicken or egg’ discussion.
But more importantly than that;
Present day campaigns are now all about sound bites in ads. ‘you did not build that’ ‘i like to fire people’ ‘corporations are people, my friend’. Obama, in my opinion, goes into these events making sure he gives as little of those bites as possible. He says everything very carefully. He makes sure that if the republican machine finds a bite, it is so taken out of context it is easily refutable. Look at the ‘47%’ video. That was brutal to Romney in ads. Also the ‘guns and religion’ comment of Obama’s. The Obama campaign are experts on using these thing, but the converse is true, they are experts on avoiding giving them. The Obama debate motto could be ‘let the other guy get excited and blurt something out’. In the dabates, Obama is willing to risk losing the night, to win the election.
We go through this every darn time, but by now the strategy is pretty obvious. After all, it has not changed since 2007.
nalbar
Good points.
perhaps, but Obama was the clear winner of the insta-polls after all of the McCain debates.
That may be, but while it won’t change the election results by itself, it does put Obama in the position of having to “prove himself” next time around, and relieves Romney of that imperative. It doesn’t matter what viewers think, but the media will pound on this incessantly because they think it’s the hot political story.
I think Obama let himself be thrown off balance by the idiot consultants and their focus groups who insisted he couldn’t show any emotions. And yet it’s precisely that failing that’s been killing Romney. Obama has been president for 4 years. Time to quit with the “angry black man” crap.
The perception I am seeing of the outcome of the debate is that Romney won, and he won by lying.
If this really becomes the settled perception, then it
will turn out that Romney did not win, and will not
gain any lasting advantage, as it is just cementing the
ROMNEY EQUALS LIAR
in peoples mind.
You know, it’s commonly said that these “debates” don’t make much difference. Yet it seems to me that this is a little bit of whistling in the graveyard. Gore demolished Bush in every debate substantively, and he won the election (he just wasn’t seated as a result of our corrupt institutions). Kerry destroyed Bush and Bush barely was re-elected. McCain performed very weakly and was decisively defeated. Clinton was an excellent “debater” in these formats and cleaned up.
Now, what exactly are the standards for “winning”? They can’t be based on evidence and logic because Rmoney (for example) didn’t answer Obama’s “arithmetic” response or his observation that historically low tax rates don’t create jobs—as our current low rates have proven. So Rmoney didn’t “win” by these standards. His “win” must apparently be based on appearances—he “appeared” to be debating and challenging what Obama said.
It’s pretty frustrating to watch the self-proclaimed “severely conservative” hollow man start blabbering how much he really “loves” green energy and gub’mint regulation and not receive a punch in his etch-a-sketch face. It’s pretty frustrating to watch the latest leader of the braindead “conservative” movement get to act as though he has nothing to do with it and its insanity after pandering to “conservatives” for over a year. It’s pretty frustrating to see a massive tax-cutter claim that he doesn’t have the slightest intention of cutting taxes and emerge unscathed. It’s pretty frustrating to watch this plutocrat conservaturd brazenly move to the center and not even have it remarked upon. The Bishop was allowed to clumsily change his vestments last night and not be called on it. Why? How?
As Booman has said, to win the election you have to “win” the debate—meaning the mega debate. When 60+% of Americans claim that they want taxes to increase on the rich, yet think that Rmoney “won” this debate, then something has gone seriously wrong. If Obama thinks not hammering this conservative claptrap more forcefully and completely is “looking presidential” then this election is indeed going to be close, and another Bush-Kerry replay.
And finally, if Rmoney’s tax “plan” is actually revenue neutral (haha), can someone please explain to me how it could possibly have any sort of stimulatory or “job creating” effect on the economy? How can a plan that merely rearranges rates and deductions and supposedly results in the same revenues possibly have a macroeconomic effect? thanks kindly.
see my comment above: one of R$’s problems w. independents is that ppl think he’s lying. So he lied away for an entire debate last night.
I didn’t bother watching it either, and the one snippet I did catch reassured me that was the right decision; I can’t afford to replace a hurled-object-shattered TV right now.
For what it’s worth, P.M. Carpenter has this to say:
Ya know what, after doing some more reading, thinking and watching snippets I’ve come to the conclusion that my comment above was wrong.
There WAS a bumber sticker moment: He’s gonna fire BIG BIRD
Damn. Talk about cold hearted.
Certainly fits in with Romney’s ‘what a dick’ persona.
nalbar
I didn’t watch it either. I watched the San Francisco Giants lose to the Los Angeles Dodgers. So losing was in the air generally for my teams yesterday, but it’s the Giants, not Dodgers, appearing in the playoffs this year, because of the Giants better performance all summer. One game doesn’t get you a trophy.
Mitt’s comment that stuck in my craw was how he used his 5 boys as an example of how if you tell a lie enough times it sounds like the truth. He was using his own children, telling the audience that they lie, while he himself was lying…I thought it captured the real Romney circling back into himself.
Interesting. That somehow didn’t register, but you’re right. He’s calling his own kids serial liars. And, when you think about it, how could they not be? He programmed them.
This is hysterical – Obama: “when I got on the stage, I met this very spirited fellow who claimed to be Mitt Romney”
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/04/1139998/-Obama-When-I-got-on-the-stage-I-met-this-very-spir
ited-fellow-who-claimed-to-be-Mitt-Romney
There is a groundswell on the left now trying to turn the debate result around by pointing out the lies. I’m seeing this show up in top news stories as Obama mentioned it himself today.
Let us recall that Gore creamed Bush in the instapolls after the first debate – as Kerry did after his third – but the “Drudge rules our world” press turned those results around with 3 days of Gore-bashing and 3 days of Kerry-offended-Cheney’s-daughter bullcrap.
So perceptions can be changed. I hope Obama’s team CAN deliver this perception change – if the end result is “Romney looked great but he lied his ass off about health care and taxes” then he will be completely neutered for the next two debates. The perception will be a lying con man.