The Debates

[Corkey]

Mitt was talking so fast I couldn't follow a train of thought. He talks a good lie but it's still a lie.

[Allison W]

Be as disappointed as you please with the President's performance in the debate, but he did keep the pressure on Romney. I rather appreciate that he kept bringing up Romney's clusterfuck of a deficit plan and the extreme vagueness of his policies--a running theme was that Obama was willing to reveal his policies and admit to their costs, whereas Romney kept playing a sad and bizarre shell game, presumably on the assumption that if he just pretends the costs of his un-policies aren't there, voters will imagine him to shit sunshine and rainbows.

That said, Romney was very well-prepared and well-spoken for a night of arguing. It's just that he's such a vapid excuse for a candidate that his performance was just that--a slick song-and-dance routine, and nothing more. His lying may or may not have won him the debate, but it is doubtful that it will win him the election--Romney simply wasn't thinking about the long-term consequences as opposed to the short-term ones. Obama, on the other hand, now has a whole mess of Romney lies that he can throw back in his face with poison added, in addition to the light shined on the magical faerie dust hole in his deficit policy.

Sure, if taken entirely in a vacuum, Romney did very well. The thing is... this isn't a vacuum. For all the unpleasant shit that can be said about the American voting public, they have been paying an unusual amount of attention this election cycle, and Romney was thus setting himself up for a long-term failure.

So when I was watching the debates, I was worried. But in retrospect, I think Obama was allowing Romney to tie the noose around his own neck. And I don't have any particular doubt as to whether Obama will hang him by it.

[Corkey]

Yea but we're not the voters he needed to convince. I got his back, but there are too many independent and frankly ignorant folks who bought Robme's lies. He missed some prime opportunities, and it showed.

[Allison W]

And it's we libs who are complaining about Obama's performance not having been good enough. Outside of MSNBC he's been getting a more favourable review, or so I heard.

[Corkey]

Where? 'Cause FB is not so forgiving.

[Allison W]

Originally Posted by Corkey

Where? 'Cause FB is not so forgiving.

I was actually speaking of a local channel, but after checking CNN (which might be a better indicator), well, shit.

It's not like Obama to just let himself get walked on for no reason, though. So I'm going to hold onto the hypothesis that Obama was letting Romney walk into a trap--Obama plays a long-term game, and if he somehow calculated that letting Romney run his mouth tonight would give him a prime opportunity to deal a killing blow later, it wouldn't surprise me if he chose to do exactly that. The debate may yet turn out to be a pyrrhic victory for Romney.

...Orrrrr perhaps it's just Obama's overconfidence getting ahead of him and he wasn't expecting Romney to be that on the ball. If that's the case, we can expect Obama to be far better-prepared in round two.

[Corkey]

Salon.com has the debate debunk if anyone is interested.

[princessbelle]

Originally Posted by Corkey

Yea but we're not the voters he needed to convince. I got his back, but there are too many independent and frankly ignorant folks who bought Robme's lies. He missed some prime opportunities, and it showed.

I agree.

And those that are independents do not watch MSNBC, they watch Fox or mainstream and they don't hear the lies.

They only hear them if they are called out in a nonpartisan situation as in the debates.

The debates are the only realistic way to call out the ridiculous hypothetical, hypocritical, no real plan, ass-kissing, political mumbo jumbo that Romney spews.

We can only hope/pray/believe that this will be done in the next debates.