Jump to content

Debates


MichaelWeston

Recommended Posts

I think Obama was playing prevent defense.. Or like a boxer who has a comfortable lead on the cards dancing around for the final couple rounds. Obama has a fairly large lead in key battleground states. Romney needs these debates more than Obama and likely will not win this election without some sort of big moment to push the polls.. Did he get that in the first debate? I'm not sure. Obama definitely acquiesced to some false attacks, and did not capitalize on some attack openings.

I know liberals wanted to see him swinging, but I think he was opting to try and stay out of Romney's wheelhouse and prevent stepping into a counter-punch which could have sent him reeling (to continue the boxing analogy). I believe the overall strategy was to stay above the fray and see if Romney stuck his own foot in his mouth through the course of the debate. I also think Romney surprised a lot of people including Obama with how adept he was at managing the format.

Who "won" will be determined by any swing in the polls in the days following. If there is no swing, I would count that as an Obama victory since his strategy of preventing a poll pushing haymaker from landing would have succeeded. If Romney gets even a small swing in his favor it would be a victory for him, and then we will likely see a more aggressive Obama in the next debate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1349447079' post='1166410']
I think Obama was playing prevent defense.. Or like a boxer who has a comfortable lead on the cards dancing around for the final couple rounds. Obama has a fairly large lead in key battleground states. Romney needs these debates more than Obama and likely will not win this election without some sort of big moment to push the polls.. Did he get that in the first debate? I'm not sure. Obama definitely acquiesced to some false attacks, and did not capitalize on some attack openings.

I know liberals wanted to see him swinging, but I think he was opting to try and stay out of Romney's wheelhouse and prevent stepping into a counter-punch which could have sent him reeling (to continue the boxing analogy). I believe the overall strategy was to stay above the fray and see if Romney stuck his own foot in his mouth through the course of the debate. I also think Romney surprised a lot of people including Obama with how adept he was at managing the format.

Who "won" will be determined by any swing in the polls in the days following. If there is no swing, I would count that as an Obama victory since his strategy of preventing a poll pushing haymaker from landing would have succeeded. If Romney gets even a small swing in his favor it would be a victory for him, and then we will likely see a more aggressive Obama in the next debate.
[/quote]

Great synopsis... If Obama 'wins' the debate on that night, the race is over... Another 2008 and McCain all over again.

But if there is no bump in the next few days, then that is just as good of news for Obama. If Obama wins, I wish that he would have not been playing defense because he literally didn't look like he wanted to be there. Not how I want my potential president from 2012 - 2016 to act...

We have some tough rapids coming regardless of who is president.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1349447079' post='1166410']
I think Obama was playing prevent defense.. Or like a boxer who has a comfortable lead on the cards dancing around for the final couple rounds. Obama has a fairly large lead in key battleground states. Romney needs these debates more than Obama and likely will not win this election without some sort of big moment to push the polls.. Did he get that in the first debate? I'm not sure. Obama definitely acquiesced to some false attacks, and did not capitalize on some attack openings.

I know liberals wanted to see him swinging, but I think he was opting to try and stay out of Romney's wheelhouse and prevent stepping into a counter-punch which could have sent him reeling (to continue the boxing analogy). I believe the overall strategy was to stay above the fray and see if Romney stuck his own foot in his mouth through the course of the debate. I also think Romney surprised a lot of people including Obama with how adept he was at managing the format.

Who "won" will be determined by any swing in the polls in the days following. If there is no swing, I would count that as an Obama victory since his strategy of preventing a poll pushing haymaker from landing would have succeeded. If Romney gets even a small swing in his favor it would be a victory for him, and then we will likely see a more aggressive Obama in the next debate.
[/quote]

I dont necessarily have a problem with him not coming out swinging, my issue is exactly the notion that he let Romney get away with [b]alot[/b] of falsehoods, I mean 27 lies in 38 min and you cant call him out on at least a few of them, or if not call him out explain the truth of the matter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1349451631' post='1166425']
I dont necessarily have a problem with him not coming out swinging, my issue is exactly the notion that he let Romney get away with [b]alot[/b] of falsehoods, I mean 27 lies in 38 min and you cant call him out on at least a few of them, or if not call him out explain the truth of the matter.
[/quote]

For the record.. I am not defending him, or agreeing with the strategy.. Just remarking on what it appeared to be to me.. I think the idea is that he didn't need to "win" the debate, just keep Romney from having an election defining moment. He may have played it too conservatively. The poll numbers the next few days will be very interesting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1349451631' post='1166425']
I dont necessarily have a problem with him not coming out swinging, my issue is exactly the notion that he let Romney get away with [b]alot[/b] of falsehoods, I mean 27 lies in 38 min and you cant call him out on at least a few of them, or if not call him out explain the truth of the matter.
[/quote]

Wouldn't it be better if the Moderator called out lies? How awesome would that shit be if there were fact checkers like down in the Orchestra seating that were fact checking in real time and if one of the candidates lied the moderator hit a big button and a loud buzzer would go off interrupting them while they talked and a giant "I just lied" sign lit up in bold red letters behind them!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1349452086' post='1166428']
Wouldn't it be better if the Moderator called out lies? How awesome would that shit be if there were fact checkers like down in the Orchestra seating that were fact checking in real time and if one of the candidates lied the moderator hit a big button and a loud buzzer would go off interrupting them while they talked and a giant "I just lied" sign lit up in bold red letters behind them!
[/quote]

Yep. i might actually watch it then.

Who would you pick to be the moderator? Would have to be a loudmouth, obnoxious, asshat.Howard Stern? Joe Rogan?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1349452086' post='1166428']
Wouldn't it be better if the Moderator called out lies? How awesome would that shit be if there were fact checkers like down in the Orchestra seating that were fact checking in real time and if one of the candidates lied the moderator hit a big button and a loud buzzer would go off interrupting them while they talked and a giant "I just lied" sign lit up in bold red letters behind them!
[/quote]


HA! I saw someone who posted that on FB the other day, I'd love that. Of course Romeny isnt concern with the fact checkers either...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1349452049' post='1166427']
For the record.. I am not defending him, or agreeing with the strategy.. Just remarking on what it appeared to be to me.. I think the idea is that he didn't need to "win" the debate, just keep Romney from having an election defining moment. He may have played it too conservatively. The poll numbers the next few days will be very interesting.
[/quote]

Oh I know.

Guess I'm just frustrated with him for the past few years, I wanted this....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjSTQwamo8M
Link to comment
Share on other sites

God I love Jon Stewart....


[url="http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-october-4-2012/democalypse-2012---o-bama--where-art-thou--pt--1?xrs=share_copy"]http://www.thedailys...?xrs=share_copy[/url]

part 2

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-october-4-2012/democalypse-2012---o-bama--where-art-thou--pt--2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1349452086' post='1166428']
Wouldn't it be better if the Moderator called out lies? How awesome would that shit be if there were fact checkers like down in the Orchestra seating that were fact checking in real time and if one of the candidates lied the moderator hit a big button and a loud buzzer would go off interrupting them while they talked and a giant "I just lied" sign lit up in bold red letters behind them!
[/quote]

I think this is brilliant. Make it real time. Have 3 nonpartisan fact checkers right there who ask the candidates questions immediately after they say something. Or make it like a referee challenge flag in the NFL. Obama says something that Romney finds not factual and he can buzz in a fact checker. Why in the world would we not want that. I plan to vote for Obama, with that said if he is lieing to my face I want to know it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1349526319' post='1166553']
[url="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/05/business/medicare-fraud-charged-against-91.html?"]Obama administration cuts [i]another [/i][/url]430 million from Medicare.
[/quote]


and yet the fraud of the bankers....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I question the timing of this 430 million. It was known there was widespread fraud 3 years ago. Why wasn't something done back then before more money went out the door ?

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/FBI-arrests-Riverside-General-Hospital-CEO-son-3918870.php
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like there has definitely been a bounce. Ladies and Gentleman, it is a real race again.


[url="http://www.people-press.org/2012/10/08/romneys-strong-debate-performance-erases-obamas-lead/"]http://www.people-press.org/2012/10/08/romneys-strong-debate-performance-erases-obamas-lead/[/url]

[url="http://www.gallup.com/poll/157907/romney-narrows-vote-gap-historic-debate-win.aspx"]http://www.gallup.com/poll/157907/romney-narrows-vote-gap-historic-debate-win.aspx[/url]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ohio: [url="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/oh/ohio_romney_vs_obama-1860.html"]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/oh/ohio_romney_vs_obama-1860.html[/url]
Florida: [url="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/fl/florida_romney_vs_obama-1883.html"]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/fl/florida_romney_vs_obama-1883.html[/url]
Virginia: [url="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/va/virginia_romney_vs_obama-1774.html"]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/va/virginia_romney_vs_obama-1774.html[/url]
North Carolina: [url="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/nc/north_carolina_romney_vs_obama-1784.html"]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/nc/north_carolina_romney_vs_obama-1784.html[/url]
Iowa: [url="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/ia/iowa_romney_vs_obama-1922.html"]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/ia/iowa_romney_vs_obama-1922.html[/url] (Bump for Obama)
Colorado: [url="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/co/colorado_romney_vs_obama-2023.html"]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/co/colorado_romney_vs_obama-2023.html[/url]

that is 5 out of 6 battle states that are a bump towards Romney... Romney is still behind in 4, up in NC, and tied in Florida

But if you look at the graphs I posted, there is a clear bump in 5 out of 6... Which was Romneys only chance.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='bengalrick' timestamp='1349734142' post='1168091']
Ohio: [url="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/oh/ohio_romney_vs_obama-1860.html"]http://www.realclear...obama-1860.html[/url]
Florida: [url="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/fl/florida_romney_vs_obama-1883.html"]http://www.realclear...obama-1883.html[/url]
Virginia: [url="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/va/virginia_romney_vs_obama-1774.html"]http://www.realclear...obama-1774.html[/url]
North Carolina: [url="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/nc/north_carolina_romney_vs_obama-1784.html"]http://www.realclear...obama-1784.html[/url]
Iowa: [url="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/ia/iowa_romney_vs_obama-1922.html"]http://www.realclear...obama-1922.html[/url] (Bump for Obama)
Colorado: [url="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/co/colorado_romney_vs_obama-2023.html"]http://www.realclear...obama-2023.html[/url]

that is 5 out of 6 battle states that are a bump towards Romney... Romney is still behind in 4, up in NC, and tied in Florida

But if you look at the graphs I posted, there is a clear bump in 5 out of 6... Which was Romneys only chance.
[/quote]

Be careful what you wish for, BR. Lol.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...