Skip to main content

View Diary: Richard Wolfe-Romney Doesn't Think Voters are Stupid. Romney KNOWS the Press is Stupid (149 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I agree Joan! (30+ / 0-)

    I'm probably going to be flamed for my next comment, but...

    If Obama loses this election, I will, I will, I will blame Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews and Ed Schultz for giving power to Romney and causing our President to lose.  Why? Because of their ranting, their very public outcry to millions of people watching, with their hair on fire like three juvies over that first debate ONLY because Obama didn't perform for them, while Romney stood there lying all the way through it!  He didn't perform.  SHOW TIME for Chris didn't happen.  You can't walk that back.  Too little too late!

    IMAGINE if they had responded to the intelligence on the issues that Obama offered that night, even as Romney was the controlling con-artist and lying his ass off! IMAGINE if they had sat there, like the Rev. Al Sharpton did, and pointed out all the lies offered by Romney as they have with the last debate!  NO! They decided! "Romney won!"  So then the polls immediately fall for Obama and the rest is history!  I just hope Obama's Presidency is not history!  

    I still believe Obama will win, but if he loses, I believe it will boil down to that first debate response by Rachel, Ed, and Chris!  Had they reacted like adults that night, because a debate is supposed to be about facts, then perhaps the rest of the media would have followed their lead.  We will never know now, but I will blame them!

    I would rather spend my life searching for truth than live a single day within the comfort of a lie. ~ John Victor Ramses

    by KayCeSF on Tue Oct 23, 2012 at 08:52:22 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I agree with you, KayCeSF. No flaming from me. (23+ / 0-)

      I went to bed with a headache that night not because of the president's performance but rather because of the response of the MSNBC liberals.
      I just knew that their response would provide cover for the the rest of the media to blast away at the president.
      Bear in mind that David Gergen, right after the debate that night, said that "Romney may have won on style be was lying."
      We don't the conservatives go after Romney after his poor showing last night. They are busy spinning away his loss.

    •  Kay - not enough people watch MSNBC (7+ / 0-)

      to matter. The MSNBC audience is small and heavily weighted towards Democrats so the ranting by Rachel, Ed and Chris after the first debate had no impact on this election whatsoever.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Tue Oct 23, 2012 at 11:23:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's not about who watched MSNBC. (21+ / 0-)

        It's about setting the tone and the story.  It's about not being the guy on your team who whines, cries, and yells when the star player has an off-nite.  It about not being the guy who says "I can't believe we're losing to these guys."  That's what Rachel, Ed, and especially Mathews did.

        And that set-up the meme of "liberal panic."  Why? Because that's clearly what they did—panic.  Mathews was in despair for crying out loud.  Ed was pissed.  Rachel was nowhere.

        Did Lawrence panic?  Did Sharpton panic?  No, they kept their cool, tried to point out that Romney was lying and it had no impact because you just couldn't stop Mathews from freaking out.

        That pretty much ended the debate of style vs. substance and the story then became about Obama losing and dems panicking.   Obama would still have lost and while I certainly understand that it is the sad nature of our country to back the guy who "appears" to be in command (by being a bully with a smile) over the guy with that facts (as the polls proved), the damage did not need to be as severe as it was.  

        An adult response that ignored style and focused on the substance that: Romney lied his ass off, threw out almost every position he held that morning with a more moderate one, that he was not leading but bullying, would have at worst left a lot of democrats a lot less "panicked" and at best, able to talk about Romney lying.  It didn't stop until Clinton, far too late, came out with Moderate Mitt which wasn't even that good.

        No. It's really simple.  If you want to win the game, you don't shit on your team, your coach, and definitely not your captain when he has a bad day.  You take your lumps all the while making sure your opponent takes some, too.

        "Wall Street expertise, an industry in which anything not explicitly illegal is fair game, and the illegal things are fair game too if you think you won't get caught." — Hunter

        by Back In Blue on Wed Oct 24, 2012 at 12:03:02 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Are you kidding. They were being quoted (7+ / 0-)

        all over.  They were being laughed at for the way they foamed at the mouth.  

    •  I don't think Rachael climbed on that bankwagon (8+ / 0-)

      like Chris Matthews and Ed Schultz did.   And,  NoOne paid any attention to Lawrence O'Donnell when he dialed it back.  They just ignored him and Al Sharpton.

      Republicans shout out how great Romney was and find ways even if stupid ways to defend him.  While "our guys" vilified President Obama.

      So, I agree with you 100%.  The way Matthews and Schultz behaved was beyond horrible.  And, that includes people like Andrew Sullivan.  I used to read Sullivan's  site all the time.  I haven't been there since his disgraceful exhibition and will not ever read his site again.  I haven't even gone there for the "view from your window contest."  (sigh)

      Those that threw President Obama under the bus should be called out on it.  We need to let them know how we feel about what they did.  Maybe they will learn to keep their mouths shut until they have tried to use their brains.

      It was not just those on MSNBC.  It happened across the board including MANY, MANY PEOPLE HERE!

      I thought the President believed that the Media and the
      American people would see what a liar Romney was and not believe a thing he was saying.  I don't think he thought that Americans were so superficial that they would think Romney won just because he behaved like a lying, vicious bully.

      Okay, I am done with the rant.   Thank you for writing what I have been thinking ever since the first debate.
      And, I would like to see the people here who were so busy throwing the President under the bus apologize.
      I know, I know I am dreaming!

      •  Rachel is totally guilty -- she turned (10+ / 0-)

        First to Steve Schmidt, knowing full well he would loudly and aggressively declare Romney the winner. She did not turn to Al Sharpton until last (after everyone else had roundly condemned Obama). It seemed very orchestrated with Rachel the director of the sorry spectacle.

        •  Well, I will give a little on Rachael. If only (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          caul, wishingwell, michaeloberg

          because she let Schmidt mouth off and Matthews and Schultz just go on and on and on.  She did have control and could have stopped it.

          Maybe give a lot!    I think she was out of her depth in that situation.  I mean, look how far she has come in such a short time.  Except for Schultz, the others there had been around for a long time in television media.  Previous to Olbermann finding her and bringing her on board she was just a Radio personality as was Schultz.   And Schultz is overbearing at the best of times.  She will have to learn to be more confrontational if she is going to be the lead during these round tables.  

          I noticed last night that she stated at one point that "I am in control here" (paraphrase.)   So, I think she knows that she let the first debate discussion get completely out of hand by deferring to the others, Matthews and Schultz especially.

      •  yep (6+ / 0-)

        I've said that over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over HERE. DKos contributed heavily to the shameful meltdown.

        Quit watching MSNBC after that first debate because of the shameful behavior of ALL those pundits except Sharpton and O'Donnell. The rest were just awful, including the saintly Maddow.

        Wolfe is so right about the U.S. press. I left mainstream daily journalism because too many outlets are creating false narratives. Most of it is ingrained in the Beltway press, but it's seeping into the rest of the coverage. That is not why I got into the business years ago. Disgusting.

      •  Not to mention the Handwringers (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        IndyReader, Aquarius40

        who descended on Daily Kos like a pack of teabaggers fighting over the last box of Walmart wine.

        "Oh my Gawd! We're gonna lose! Everyone give up NOW!!!"

        And God said, "Let there be light"; and with a Big Bang, there was light. And God said "Ow! Ow My eyes!" and in a flash God separated light from darkness. "Whew! Now that's better. Now where was I. Oh yea . . ."

        by Pale Jenova on Wed Oct 24, 2012 at 06:59:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I somewhat Agree (0+ / 0-)

      But you can't blame MSNBC and their pundits. Blame the rightwing media for not bringing it up at all and covering it up.

    •  I agree Kay , no flaming here, I absolutely agree (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jds1978, KayCeSF

      I have turned off the TV. I refuse to watch even MSNBC after the way they set their hair on fire after the first debate.  I was appalled, still am.

      Follow PA Keystone Liberals on Twitter: @KeystoneLibs

      by wishingwell on Wed Oct 24, 2012 at 05:31:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Good! (0+ / 0-)

        Now, keep it that way.

        My TV is for entertainment only....old movies on TCM, Tigers baseball, The Walking Dead etc.

        We could really elevate the discussion in this nation if we minimize the TV yappers

        The Romney campaign is a extra-tough Tie Fighter following the Millennium Falcon into an asteroid belt, bouncing from impact to impact in a random manner. - blue aardvark

        by jds1978 on Wed Oct 24, 2012 at 06:19:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Huh, like they're THAT significant? (0+ / 0-)

      Reminds me of those who admonish DailyKosser to watch what they say, so as to on give the likes of Mr. Limbaugh fodder . . ..

    •  That's idiotic. (0+ / 0-)

      I suppose that they and their miniscule audience were responsible for the results of the flash polls that declared Romney the overwhelming winner.

      We like it when they report the facts. We insist that the facts have a liberal bias. Well, sometimes, the facts are simply against us. Were they supposed to stop being who they were and give up their credibility just to make people here feel better? That's pretty fox-like.

      Just maybe, your anger should be directed at the president for phoning in his debate performance that night.

      •  First of all, it was not a minuscule audience. (0+ / 0-)

        Not on the night of the first debate it wasn't.  Around 60 million people were watching, and you can bet they were listening in to see what the panelists had to say in response.

        Second, it is their responsibility to report facts most especially after a debate.  They didn't lend a hand to our President to inform their viewers about all the Romney lies throughout the debate, highlight that he was controlling the conversations, not actually answering questions, and controlling the moderator (I believe Lehrer was a lousy moderator and Romney took full advantage).

        Third, the facts were NOT against us in that debate.  I watched it three times.  Our President stood there, unlike Romney, and gave fact after fact.  

        The crew on MSNBC didn't show they had any credibility.  Not in my book they didn't.  They sat there screaming and whining as though they were watching a talent show and their guy didn't put on a show.

        No.  I'm ticked about this.  Had they been responsible and pointed out the facts vs. Romney's lies, I am convinced the response by others on MSNBC and on other networks who DO listen to this particular crew on that MSNBC panel, would have taken note.  As it was, only Reverend Sharpton had the whole picture about what actually happened, and said so immediately.

        Watch the debate again, and then tell me which candidate was credible in the debate, and who actually won.  The winner was our President, even if he was "looking down."  He was looking down because the man he expected to turn up was a totally different guy, with one lie after another.  

        Even Senator John Kerry said that had our President called him on every lie it would have taken a 3 hour debate... and that's only if the moderator had told Romney to STFU, stay on topic.  

        I would rather spend my life searching for truth than live a single day within the comfort of a lie. ~ John Victor Ramses

        by KayCeSF on Wed Oct 24, 2012 at 04:04:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site