Skip to main content

You can skip past the jump if you don't want my introduction and just would like the 'meat.'

While the last minute concession towards sanity saved U.S. Department of Health and Human Services v. Florida, Chief Justice Roberts did so with a defense that had little precedent - distinguishing the power of Congress to regulate action and inaction. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was saved by reclassifying the individual mandate as a tax. This unusual holding gave Mitt Romney a new talking point: that the President had supported a tax increase on Americans.

Governor Romney didn't care that the effects of the tax were minimal at best; he only cared that he had a new talking point. And he stumped on that all day long whenever he thought he could get away without someone pointing out that he had implemented the same tax in his own state. Despite multiple changes in position as to whether or not Gov. Romney supported the PPACA and Massachusetts' equivalent law, he was firm about attacking Pres. Obama on the tax issue. After all, what is a Republican without tax cuts? (Answer: Someone with comprehensible fiscal sense.)

That changed yesterday; Mitt Romney pivoted into unfamiliar territory: the truth. "I admit this, he has one thing he did not do in his first four years, he's said he's going to do in his next four years, which is to raise taxes," Gov. Romney acquiesced about Pres. Obama, to the backdrop of a wincing Paul Ryan.

The admission, of course, hurts the Romney campaign by essentially admitting that a major prong of his media attack is founded on lies. But why did he say it? Normally, Gov. Romney's tortured relationship with his messaging strategy is the result of trying to say different things to different audiences - bounce back between a moderate and an extremist position in some bizarre political shell game. When he has remained consistent between audiences, it was to make a political point; analyst amazement at his insensitivity to his NAACP audience became a faint, damning praise when it became clear that he intentionally irritated them to score points with his base.

In other words, Gov. Romney's inconsistency and occasional lack thereof has been deliberate. So what gain did he shoot for with this latest bomb?



It's no secret that Gov. Romney's only chance for an October Surprise is the debates. The President leads in every aspect of national confidence except for the economy, and he's not doing too bad there anymore. Unemployment dropped again last month, consumer confidence continues to crawl upwards, and Mitt Romney has been exposed as a crass parody of such moneyed philanthropists as Flintheart Glomgold, Montgomery Burns, and every Dickens villain ever.

A lifetime of being rich and famous has not been enough in his battle against a community organizer who entered the Oval Office in a pair of shoes with a hole in them. He is being made a fool of, and the legacy of one of the most important families of the Church of Latter-Day Saints is in jeopardy. While it is unlikely that any performance there will significantly change the flow of the race for either candidate, the debates are Gov. Romney's only chance - if not to win the Presidential Election, to maintain his dignity as a man. And his prospects at holding his own are better than people are giving him credit for.

Running blooper reels of the Republican Nomination Debates does not do the man justice. Mitt Romney's ability to fire back quickly, a significant liability in both diplomacy and campaign strategy, is a rhetorical asset when it comes to a debate - particularly a timed one. However, he's only able to use this asset when he has a knowledge advantage over his opponent. When he knows what his opponent is going to come back with, Romney is good at firing salvos. When he's in unsteady ground, his debate performance is abysmal. In many ways, his style of combat is not unlike that of the Dread Pirate Roberts. So this is where Gov. Romney may have finally realized what every parent tells a fibbing child: the truth is easier than a lie. If he fights President Obama on truths, rather than the vague ambiguities which he has been using up 'til yesterday, Gov. Romney will have much more control over the flow of the debate than he would in the comedy of errors which would result from trying falsehood and meandering platitudes against the President.

If Gov. Romney decides to go into the debates, prepared to finally unveil the curtains on policy details and actually engages the President head-on, then the result could be rhetorically impressive. Because on the other hand, you have Barack Obama - he is not a natural debater. The skills between oratory and debate are only related to a certain point. Compare Gov. Romney in '94 to then-Sen. Obama in the early stages of the '08 Cycle, and it's clear who is more naturally suited to the debate floor. Yes, even in that Ted Kennedy debate. It's obvious even in the famous video of Pres. Obama at the GOP Congressional Meeting; yes, he pretty much cleans their clocks. But he's not operating on a time limit there, and there are significant, wooden pauses while he assembles his thoughts, throughout the video.

As James Fallows notes, virtually every incumbent goes into the first debate out-of-practice and at a disadvantage. The challenger has less on his plate, has lower expectations, and is still fresh on debating 'in the wild.'

Does this mean that I think Mitt Romney will win the first debate? No! Barack Obama is not just any incumbent; he has an open competitive streak in him unlike any of his recent predecessors, and it was this competitive streak that led him to adapt to and eventually best then-Sen. Clinton on her political home turf as a debater - no mean feat. He's been practicing with Vice-President Biden, who was also considered to be one of the best debaters of that cycle, despite his relatively easy 'crowd-out' against the starpower of Obama, Clinton, and Edwards.

But it does mean that I expect these three debates will have Mitt Romney in his best form. It does mean that we should expect him to come out swinging, and not a deer in headlights. He's running for office, for Pete's Sake.

Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 6:11 AM PT: NY Times article that also seems to think Romney will go wonk-lite for the debates.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  What Romney will struggle with most (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ConfusedSkyes, mdmslle, kevinpdx, rbird

    Just my opinion, is his demeanour.

    How to not look condescending, how not to smirk.

    He must be quite shocked at how badly he is doing and in panic mode right about now.

    People in a panic make unforced errors. He must be being coached on how to act...."don't smirk", "don't talk down" etc.

    Makes me think of "Don't mention the War" in the Fawlty Towers UK sitcom.

    p.s. Just seen the Intrade no's - Obama 75.7%, Romney 24.2%

    Ron Reagan: "Sarah Palin's constituency are people who wear red rubber noses and bells on their shoes."

    by AnnetteK on Wed Sep 26, 2012 at 03:53:17 PM PDT

    •  Basically, whenever he's not talking. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AnnetteK, rbird

      His smirk, it seems to me, is worst whenever he's thinking about what he's about to say and I suspect it'd be even moreso during the period where they can't talk.

      For a second I got Fawlty Towers confused with Allo! Allo! and I was trying to figure out why they wouldn't talk about the war... :)

      •  I can't put my finger on (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ConfusedSkyes, Catte Nappe

        the look he has when he has just said something he thinks is clever.

        He tilts his head slightly to the side and has a smirk that is somewhere between "aren't I clever"? and "no, I didn't steal the cookies", he just stops short of batting his eyelashes a la Shirley Temple.

        Ron Reagan: "Sarah Palin's constituency are people who wear red rubber noses and bells on their shoes."

        by AnnetteK on Wed Sep 26, 2012 at 04:28:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  he blinks a lot too. and sadly the "don't talk (4+ / 0-)

      down"thing cannot be taught/corrected because he's largely unaware that he does it. or how he does it. it's a function of who he is. it's not usually until the next day, after twitter blows up, that he and his campaign realize he's pissed off a bunch of folks.

      I think the easiest way for Obama to win the debates is with details. The difference will be stark. People notice that kind of thing. And if Obama gives specifics in his answers, it sort of forces the moderator to pose the same question and ask for the same details - you know, for "balance".

      If Obama can just give specifics in a clear succinct way, knowing Romney can only offer platitudes (unless he wants to completely tank his campaign), Obama wins handily. We seem to have come to a place as populace, where we wants some common sense specifics.

      When Obama says, "We'll use the money we're saving from drawing down two wars, half to pay down the deficit and the other half to create jobs at home; we'll ask those who are earning a little more to pay a little more and use part of that money to reinvest in things like schools and infrastructure and some of it to pay down our deficit; we'll find some wasteful things in government and streamline them and we'll make sure we stop rewarding big companies who hire overseas and instead reward companies who keep jobs in America", when Obama says this stuff, IT MAKES SENSE. It's balanced and people "get it". And it's reasonably specific.

      All Romney has is "We're going to lower taxes for everyone and job will be created as a result." This doesn't make sense to people and they trust him anyway. But that's all he's got.

      For the record, I am not a member of Courtesy Kos. Just so you know. Don't be stupid. It's election season. My patience is short.

      by mdmslle on Wed Sep 26, 2012 at 04:36:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Wall Street Journal headline (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AnnetteK, ConfusedSkyes
    Romney Tempers Tax Plans

    By SARA MURRAY And DAMIAN PALETTA WESTERVILLE, Ohio—Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, seeking to emphasize his deficit-cutting ambitions, is warning Americans that his tax-cut plan might not decrease their tax bills as much as they expect.

    Read my lips: No new significant tax cuts as you might expect.

    I guess he's trying to get his last few Etch-a-Sketches in before the debates, so that he can say 'the President is lying about me and my record, I said so-and-so last week.'

    The choice of our lifetime: Mitt Romney, It Takes A Pillage or President Barack Obama, Forward Together.

    by FiredUpInCA on Wed Sep 26, 2012 at 04:47:01 PM PDT

  •  I am hoping Obama is spending time with the (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coffeeprocessingmachine, rbird

    Big Dog or maybe Hillary.  She really put him through his paces last time.

  •  And now today (0+ / 0-)


    Two days, two almost not lies.  I think he's up to something.

    On November 6 I'm voting for Citizenship and Arithmetic.

    by coffeeprocessingmachine on Wed Sep 26, 2012 at 06:53:48 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site