Skip to main content

I am really tired of diaries on here acting like we should be defeated over 90 minutes.

There are two sides to every coin. Watching with my 70 y/o father, we could not believe how Romney acted.

The lines I see:

-Romney won because he was Energetic

-The President was passive, listless

-The President was Defensive

-The President didn't call out the lies

-The President should've x, y, z (47% video, Bain, Swiss bank Accounts).

No one won. These polls are stupid. Obama had a plan and executed. I have no doubt. Every time Romney said something ridiculously outrageous, Obama smiled like he was getting a gift.

I think he's got this. And I don't care if the conservatives are happy their guy attacked the president in their eyes, in people like my father's he was a prick. My father stopped watching because he couldn't believe.

To the above. Stop buying the hype. Plouffe didn't seem too worried. I'm sure the Obamas had a nice Anniversary after. And I'm pretty sure he did what he wanted, and actually won votes he might not have.

Obama is never going to "go for the jugular". It is what makes his character appealing.

What do you remember from this debate? Seriously? That is truly positive for a vote for Romney in November? I don't care that ppl said he won after. You can win but completely turn the wrong people off. It isn't a High School Debate Class.

I will remember my father leaving the room because he (who follows politics a bit) couldn't stand to watch and listen to Romney. He stopped watching. I wonder how many others did?

My father could not believe that he had the audacity not to just stare at the President like he was teaching him a lesson.

But that he just rolled over Lehrer, and acted like he was a simple peasant.

Lehrer actually did a great job. He let them debate. Unfortunately he's part of the story as either Romney swung for the fences (sigh) or was an out of touch asshole who told a guy he was gonna fire him and then treated him like he didn't exist.

What could possibly be learned from Romney? I now know he intends to privatize medicare. Of Pollers I doubt that demographic is highly reflected (but was a priority and focus to Obama those elderly, those over 55 or so), but fairly certain he turned them off. Obama? Fairly certain he assured them. We'll see on election day.

"It seemed he talked more" so the f what. When you are blathering and don't say anything but "I'll do yeah the good stuff he did, but I'll make trillions dissappear".

He was supposed to be the "Economy Guy". Did he ever say "Bain"? Did he say any stance that resonates? I honestly cannot remember anything. I remember W's debates better. I do remember Obama.

The lines:

-Romney won because he was Energetic

Romney was so disrespectful some people stopped watching. Red Meat to Pundits "wow he's so aggressive" that's what he needed. They make money. Is Obama walking away with it a good story? No.

To the Liberals mad for not going for the "jugular" - shame on you. Obama is not going to move to the Left in a General. The pundits in saying what the POTUS "shoudlve done" did it for him. Besides its not who he is. He took in every lie and I saw no lack of him noticing. He would smirk a bit or note it. But then get back to selling himself. He had a message he stuck to it. W won because he stuck with a bumper sticker. You really think the plentitude of lies is not going to be ripe so close to the election?

I can see Clinton as part of the theme "if you want _, He's your guy". And other groups refuting what it was impossible to do and appear to be the encumbant. To point out all the lies is not who the President is. Bush also won because he was the guy you'd have a beer with. Did Romney connect with voters? On what? That he is an asshole, and good choice as at least someone acts like that to the President, rah rah?

-The President was passive, listless- The president had a plan. He was continually baited by lies. He took the high road. He spoke directly to people not at Romney. He spoke and made his best points to the most important people to ensure a victory. You think ppl aged 55 are sure about their Medicare now? For once there was candor, that was probably a mistake on romney's part.

Passive implies some kind of effective attack. What exactly did Romney make POTUS be on the defensive about? I see only 2 things 719 Billion on Medicare, and "Bipartisanship". I have no doubt as it is in the Ryan Plan, that may come up from Biden. Clinton already said it best "it takes brass to". . .  I have gone to trials where I met a fiery opponent. "Won" hearings where I didn't say but who I was. As the judge saw through the BS and did my job for me. Would you rather Romney made salient points? Rather Obama called out lies, so the entire debate was "obama questions Romney's plans". I wouldn't. I'd rather Obama made clear the differences. Explained what Romney wouldn't/couldn't.

Let Romney put on record a whole bunch of stuff that is going to get hacked to bits. Obama gets it. He seemed to relish it. I would be shocked if not used pretty soon. Congrats mitt, you made people think you are an angry billionaire. What's your consolation prize? I don't think it's votes he needs.

-The President was Defensive

See above. I don't recall the President ever defending. The president was cool, had a plan and stuck with it. Nomatter what the Media was going to say Romney did what he had to do. They have to or we have 5 weeks of dead air- to do so all he had to do was show up and be angry. Unfortunately there's 5 weeks because the lies are getting to heavy to not call out in effective forums. I woke up today and saw MORE Obama signs in OH.

-The President didn't call out in lies

See above. He doesn't have to. Look at all the discussion. The most important demographics he did and made distinctions clear. in 90 minutes that was not his goal. As he got 36 minutes on tape to use for 5 weeks.

Obama cans stay above the fray, so long as he doesn't get swift-boated, I am pretty sure he knows what to do with the 36 mins of yeah, I'll do x, y, z even though not possible and yeah kind of already being done.

-The President should've x, y, z (47% video, Bain, Swiss bank Accounts).

He doesn't have to. It is everywhere. The 47% Video. Everywhere. Obama doesn't need to remind us. He needs to convince those not disgusted or caring about those remarks. He brings up Romney can explain. I can guarantee you he had a meme to get around.

Bain? That was Romney's strong point. I do not remember Romney mentioning his greatest accomplishment. People get it, people get the swiss bank accounts.

Obama is doing what he needs. Not getting his hands dirty, not turning anyone off, not making a big flub. I see no headline "Obama says ____".

Chill. So maybe some right leaning people are happy that Romney will do anything to make Obama look good. But he's not convincing anyone in the groups Obama was targeting.

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

  •  Agree. And the other thing people aren't talking (12+ / 0-)

    about is that the odds of Obama 'winning' that debate were slim to begin with. If he did well it would have been a 'draw' or '50/50 between substance and style'.  Like with Dubya, the Romney expectations were so low that jus speaking English would have netted him praise. You'd think people would know the ropes by now, but I guess it's just easier to freak out.

    If I knew it was going to be that kind of party, I'd have stuck my ---- in the mashed potatoes! - Paul's Boutique

    by DoctorWho on Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 10:50:20 AM PDT

    •  Really Disagree (0+ / 0-)

      Almost every one of Romney's misstatement of fact went unchallenged by either Lehrer or the Pres.  In fact, at times it looked like Obama was nodding in agreement.

      Silence is assent. And if you are one of those undecided, haven't-been-paying-attention voters, you weren't given any reason to doubt Romney's word.

      Denying that reality doesn't help. Obama needs to learn from this, fast.

      “The legitimate object of Government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done but cannot do at all or cannot do so well for themselves”- Lincoln

      by commonscribe on Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 06:10:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks (15+ / 0-)

    for this.  I am so tired of everyone who knows more than the campaign.  Remember all the bashing over Obama's acceptance speech?  Every single line in that speech had been tested with independents.  And look where the polls went after he gave it.  While I think Bill gave a good speech as well, everyone who bashed the president's speech had no idea what his game plan was with the independent voters.  I still hear it bashed today.  Does that mean I'm happy about last night?  Hell no.  I honestly do not think even the president's prep crew thought Romney would throw the tax plan he's campaigned on for 18 months under the bus and I think it threw Obama somewhat.  But for the most part I believe he had a plan and stuck to it.  For those who were looking for a candidate out for blood they never should have voted for him in 2008.  It is not now and never has been the way he plays the game. Seems to me he's been pretty successful in the end over the years.

    Gandhi: "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. "

    by FoxfireTX on Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 10:55:51 AM PDT

  •  I don't know... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    commonscribe, phrogge prince

    ...if I was an undecided voter who knew only what was said on the nightly news, and the vote was today, I'd vote for Romney.  I'm not, it isn't, and I won't, but the debate isn't about people like you and me.

  •  The sky is falling! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    steamed rice

    Literally. Obama had the worst performance ever and Romney is probably up by 20-30 points among Democrats right now.

    Obama was listless. He needed to get coked up and bring a sack of bricks on stage with him. Which he would then throw at Romney every time he started to attack the president.

    The fact that you fail to see the truth in this, just makes me wonder why you don't take beltway pundits more seriously.

    Mitt Romney actually is what Republicans pretended John Kerry was. - Jed Lewison

    by MasterKey on Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 11:02:40 AM PDT

  •  Romney gave a pathetic performance. (5+ / 0-)

    If people are impressed by that, they need to get their eyes checked. The President did well. He let Rmoney hang himself last night, and seemed intelligent and focussed, not "passive."

    And no, I don't mind having an unpopular opinion on this. The Academy Awards, the Hugo Awards, all the awards shows are frequently wrong. Why wouldn't the people being surveyed today about the debates be wrong, too?

  •  It's starting to really come together, actually. (6+ / 0-)

    Think about it. You're Mitt Romney. You need to bring people to your side. He had nothing but generic answers and flimsy cheap shots. Pyrrhic victory. All bark and no bite. Obama was biding. Obama took notes. I'm not sure how well that will play in the short term, but I'm starting to get skeptical that Obama was simply being careless. It's true that he didn't make the simple gesture to contradict Mitt's lies. For that, I was very frustrated. But he deliberates and is introspective. It fits his character. He knows that people know about Bain and the 47%, though. Ad after ad after ad has saturated our eyes and ears with that. Can't deny that. I guess what I'm starting to see is: Obama knows there's little else to be said. So he listened. He let Romney be Romney, and walk into his own trap. That's my most positive take on what Obama was doing by not engaging.

    Last night, Obama talked to the people. I thought his most definitively positive moment was when he said "And people over 55, you might want to hear this" as he spoke directly into the camera. I was moved by that. People don't want to be lectured. They want to hear what Obama has to say.

    "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." ~Edward Abbey ////\\\\ "To be a poor man is hard, but to be a poor race in a land of dollars is the very bottom of hardships." ~W.E.B. DuBois

    by rovertheoctopus on Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 11:17:38 AM PDT

  •  Romney behaved as expected. Barack maintained. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cedwyn, Broke And Unemployed, a2nite

    Romney has a reputation as a bully in debates and we saw him belittle Rick Perry a couple of times in the primaries.
    Romney has no inhibition preventing from going over the line into inappropriate and unfortunately the public doesn't seem to mind.  I get the feeling that 30 years from now the presidential debates will be like a shouting match from "The Jersey Shore."

    "Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln

    by leftreborn on Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 11:23:30 AM PDT

  •  So I was in a room full of democrats (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cedwyn, ybruti, kevin k, breathe67

    And the entire reaction to the debate was gasps of astonishment over Romney's increasing whoppers.

    I mean, we were all expecting him to lie.  But I guess we were expecting the same old lies, not gigantic new ones.

    I don't think there was a single person in the room who would vote for Romney as a result of the debate.

    Some of them might have rated him the "winner" though.  Until I read the community and pundit meltdown over his performance though, I didn't think either side did anything especially effective.

    Obama didn't say anything that could haunt him.

    Romney said lots of crap that might haunt him, but he has said SO MANY THINGS this election that there probably isn't time to attack all of them.

    So you know...status quo.

    Having looked at the reactions, there are a lot of people who feel he rolled over.  Here's what I saw:

    I thought Obama did a good job at attacking the Romney tax policy and defending his Obamacare Medicare adjustments.  He just stated his case once though, when the question was first asked and let Romney repeat the opposite several times.

    So in a fact-check vacuum, if all you have is what you see in front of you, the "Big Lie" effect of repeating your case loudly wins by sheer repitition, over the other guy stating his case once, and assuming once is enough.

    If facts don't matter, then anybody who will shout a lie more times than the other guy will always "win".

    And if we really vote for the guy who lies the most, we deserve to fail as a country.

  •  What I found interesting about the debate (4+ / 0-)

    Romney had supposedly prepared all of these zingers.  I can guess that they were around the things he expected the President to bring up - tax returns, the 47%, the thinks we all like to hit him on. Romney seemed as frustrated as the people at DKOS that the President was not fighting him hard.  It seemed to almost make him nervous.  Just think - had the President brought up the 47% and gotten a strong "zinger" from Romney, he might have hurt the chances of keeping that theme going - same with Bain, tax returns, etc.  There were so many responses we expected the President to say that seemed obvious to us, but perhaps he could tell that they were set ups and that Romney was goading him to say something that he had a response for.  In the end, I don't think Obama was prepared for Romney's complete reversals on policy, but I also don't think Romney was prepared for Obama to walk away from some of these fights either and I think he was frustrated as hell about it.

  •  Romney didn't win, especially with Ohio voters. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    freerad, a2nite, myboo, kevin k, breathe67

    Rmoney just can't connect with us. He's a bad campaigner, and even worse in Ohio.

    I really thought he won, and my wife and I were really surprised by Ed Shultz freaking out and saying Obama lost. We couldn't take it, and just shut it off.

    Then I get on the Internet and see comments and diaries saying that people who think Obama won aren't "reality based". Sheesh.

    "I read this- Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I read every last word of this garbage, and because of this piece of $#!^ I'm never reading again!"-Officer Barbrady

    by Broke And Unemployed on Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 11:48:57 AM PDT

  •  Thanks nt (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kevin k

    The radical Republican party is the party of oppression, fear, loathing and above all more money and power for the people who robbed us.

    by a2nite on Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 12:44:21 PM PDT

  •  My impression (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    is that the debate validated the narrative that Romney is a bully.

    Romney validated the narrative that the prescription for all the nation's woes is "tax cuts".

    Romney validated that his Medicare proposal IS a voucher system and that he supports it.

    Romney did not present a single idea for creating jobs even though he opened by saying his focus is on creating jobs.

    He thinks he will balance the budget by de-funding PBS?  Good gawd -- gimme a break!

    Romney is all smoke and mirrors.  He is a tiny man behind the curtain.

    Romney's bombast tended to overshadow Obama's quiet command of the facts.

    I believe that Romney's (so-called) victory is a one-night stand.  What looked like confidence the night before looks like smugness in the morning.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site