Impressions of the Debate

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.
Slick Willy
Forum Addict
Posts: 420
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:54 am
Location: Madison, WI (Allied-Dunn's Marsh Neighborhood)
Contact:

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Slick Willy » Fri Oct 19, 2012 9:22 am

wack wack wrote:
Slick Willy wrote:
Huckleby wrote:If Obama doesn't get a poll bump from second debate, I'm going back into panic mode.

The first debate is by far the most important not only in terms of first (or reintroduced) impressions, but also in terms of timing, and the damage has been done. Obama supporters just need to accept that.


First debate didn't matter. VP debate didn't matter. Second debate didn't matter. Only the third debate will matter.

The third debate won't mean squat. Less and less voters are still making up their minds the closer it gets to the election. The first debate reaches the most undecided voters. Also, the subject material that voters care about most is what affects them most directly, and the third debate is all about foreign policy.

fisticuffs
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7982
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Slightly outside of Madison
Contact:

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby fisticuffs » Fri Oct 19, 2012 9:24 am

The third debate won't mean squat. Less and less voters are still making up their minds the closer it gets to the election. The first debate reaches the most undecided voters.


... and a large majority of this country don't have the attention span to watch even one debate, let alone 3.

Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 9947
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Huckleby » Fri Oct 19, 2012 9:54 am

Slick Willy wrote:
Huckleby wrote:If Obama doesn't get a poll bump from second debate, I'm going back into panic mode.

The first debate is by far the most important not only in terms of first (or reintroduced) impressions, but also in terms of timing, and the damage has been done. Obama supporters just need to accept that. Most voters won't keep changing their minds back and forth within a month of the election. Now a lot more voters feel like they know who Romney is and what he's capable of under pressure, and that's gonna stick. He came out of the first debate appearing more "presidential" to a lot of people who didn't know Romney very well before. The second debate was by no means a blowout win for Obama, so it really was more about reassuring people who were still leaning toward Obama, but weren't totally sure. Obama made a big mistake in both debates of not really giving anyone hope for the future. He may have done too much of that in 2008, but he still needed to bring (as every candidate should) a vision for the future. Many undecideds won't even watch the third debate, especially since it deals with the most boring subject matter for average Americans: foreign policy. Obama seems to be ahead when looking at an average of all polls, but for some reason Gallup has Obama way behind. I think that Obama might win the 270 electoral votes he needs without getting the popular vote.


Very smart analysis there. (My definition of "smart" is anything I agree with.)

I would just add that Mitt's good first performance was amplified by Obama's sleepy presence. It's easy to look decisive and confident when you aren't being thrown off your rhythm.

I still think Obama will pull his chestnuts out of the fire in the end, but if Romney does manage to win, I think it is legitimate to point to a foggy night in Denver as the reason. Happy anniversary, Sweetie.

Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 9947
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Huckleby » Fri Oct 19, 2012 10:18 am

Slick Willy wrote:The third debate won't mean squat. Less and less voters are still making up their minds the closer it gets to the election. The first debate reaches the most undecided voters. Also, the subject material that voters care about most is what affects them most directly, and the third debate is all about foreign policy.


I generally agree, but there always is a real possibility of an important gaffe. Gerald Ford said a bad one, something about eastern Europe not being under Soviet domination if memory serves, and it helped Carter in close race.

Short of any gotcha moments, I expect Obama to win some votes Monday, although modest numbers. Romney has proven himself deeply ignorant of foreign affairs beyond Republican talking points, and Obama has just spent 4 years in foreign affairs graduate school of hard knocks.

Republicans are convinced they are holding an inside straight when it comes to Libya when in fact they got a pair of threes. The conservative media has not covered "Benghazigate" in a balanced fashion, Republicans didn't even know that Obama refered to attack as "act of terror" on both Sept 12 and Sept 13. The administration was ambiguous on Libya, they were inept in their presentation, but they never lied.
Last edited by Huckleby on Fri Oct 19, 2012 10:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3247
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm
Contact:

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby wack wack » Fri Oct 19, 2012 10:24 am

Huckleby wrote:Very smart analysis there. (My definition of "smart" is anything I agree with.)

I would just add that Mitt's good first performance was amplified by Obama's sleepy presence. It's easy to look decisive and confident when you aren't being thrown off your rhythm.

I still think Obama will pull his chestnuts out of the fire in the end, but if Romney does manage to win, I think it is legitimate to point to a foggy night in Denver as the reason. Happy anniversary, Sweetie.


It's hard to find someone who doesn't think Obama's performance in the first debate was a complete aberration. It is only in that small bubble tossed between Rush and FOX that the first debate is even remembered, and only a true partisan rightie can see anything but a clear trouncing by Obama in the second debate. Obama made him look like an ass. What looked "decisive and confident" by Romney in the first debate was completely nullified by his arrogant, petulant, ignorantly sexist demeanor in the second debate.

Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 9947
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Huckleby » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:12 pm

Huckleby wrote:Republicans are convinced they are holding an inside straight when it comes to Libya when in fact they got a pair of threes. The conservative media has not covered "Benghazigate" in a balanced fashion, Republicans didn't even know that Obama refered to attack as "act of terror" on both Sept 12 and Sept 13. The administration was ambiguous on Libya, they were inept in their presentation, but they never lied.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... ory_1.html

I need to amend my poker metaphor, the Republicans got nothing, time to fold. If Romney is smart, he will back-down completely because of the downside of again appearing politically opportunistic.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10 ... slam-film/

Even Fox News is quietly, implicitly acknowledging that the conspiracy that they had been promoting in blaring headlines turns out to be bullshit. They try to salvage something out of this bad news, spinning confirmation of Administration's integrity as "more shifting intelligence."

:lol: This is starting to get fun.

Meade
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Meade » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:50 pm

But while acknowledging that Ambassador Rice and the intelligence community were wrong in some of their initial assertions about the attack, Clinton blamed that false narrative on the "fog of war [and] the confusion that you get in any kind of combat situation."


Obamfuscation of war.

david cohen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1817
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:48 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby david cohen » Sat Oct 20, 2012 5:18 pm

Fox News bullshit leaking from Meade's orifi. Since you weren't there, you haven't a bloody clue what really went down.

city2countrygal
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 12:43 pm
Location: ???

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby city2countrygal » Sat Oct 20, 2012 5:19 pm

You can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake.

-Jeannette Rankin

Stella_Guru
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1216
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 7:08 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Stella_Guru » Sat Oct 20, 2012 5:39 pm

Huckleby wrote:Republicans are convinced they are holding an inside straight when it comes to Libya when in fact they got a pair of threes. The conservative media has not covered "Benghazigate" in a balanced fashion, Republicans didn't even know that Obama refered to attack as "act of terror" on both Sept 12 and Sept 13. The administration was ambiguous on Libya, they were inept in their presentation, but they never lied.

What passes for debate on Benghazi by these two pussified empty suits is nothing but an attempt to continue masking the nature of the Libyan legions armed by the U.S. as proxies against Gaddafi, many whom are now deployed in Syria, a mission in which both are in full accord.

Oh, and what to do about the jobs crisis? Apply additional corporate "incentives" to boost investment (Obama), or another layer of laissez faire (Romney). And by all means extract more energy (Obama and Romney).

DCB
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3926
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby DCB » Sat Oct 20, 2012 5:47 pm

Missing from the debate was any discussion of climate change. Crowley claims she wanted to ask a question about that, but didn't have time.

Chris Hayes wrote:“Climate change people” is a revealing phrase. It suggests that climate is a boutique issue, like NIMBY opposition to an unsightly development down the block, or advocating for the metric system. But I can’t really blame Crowley for the omission, because the candidates both spent much of the night talking about the related, and entirely inseparable issue of energy, and had every opportunity to at the very least mention or single greatest governing challenge.

Instead, the entire debate about energy, such as it was, was a debate over who can most ruthlessly facilitate the total and utter exploitation of every last ounce of fossilized carbon sitting beneath the continent.

http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/10/20/silence- ... e-debates/

Meade
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Meade » Sat Oct 20, 2012 6:43 pm

Stella_Guru wrote:What passes for debate on Benghazi by these two pussified empty suits is nothing but an attempt to continue masking the nature of the Libyan legions armed by the U.S. as proxies against Gaddafi, many whom are now deployed in Syria, a mission in which both are in full accord.


Obama intervened in Libya despite his awareness that the anti-Gaddafi rebels had pro-al-Qaeda leanings. He intervened to support those rebels because he hoped to prove to Islamists everywhere in the Middle East and North Africa that they had more to gain from co-operating with the United States than from fighting the United States. This is the famous “opening to political Islam” that has been so intensely discussed in Washington.

And the opening continues. It continues in the form of the covert aid now reportedly flowing to the Syrian rebels, and in the soft line being taken with Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood president even after Egyptian police failed to protect the U.S. embassy in Cairo against attack (which also was on 9/11). If the opening failed in Libya, it’s likely to fail even worse in Syria, where the rebel groups are even more saturated with Salafist Islam than the Libyan rebels.

Romney was trying to articulate these ideas on Tuesday night. He slipped and suffered for it. But his slip should not be allowed to shut down this discussion. President Obama’s big risky Mideast gambit is failing badly. Four Americans died because of that failure — and many other US interests have been put at risk. Americans need to hear that truth before they vote in November.http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/201 ... i-matters/

Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 9947
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Huckleby » Sat Oct 20, 2012 7:00 pm



Meade, I just read that David Frum editorial, it is based on "facts" from the right-wing echo chamber that have been definitely discredited in the past 24 hours.

The following is a fairy tale:
Pulitzer-worthy reporting by my Daily Beast colleague Eli Lake has established that U.S. intelligence quickly ascertained that the Benghazi attack had been planned in advance; that it was organized by an al-Qaeda affiliate group operating inside Libya; that the attackers had surveilled the targeted consulate before the assault; that they maintained communications security in a way consistent with a trained force; and that they directed their firepower skillfully not only against the consulate, but also against a nearby CIA annex.

Yet despite this knowledge, and with very rare exceptions, the administration for almost two weeks mischaracterized the incident.


The CIA did not inform the administration of the theory claimed above. There may have been some individual in the CIA who was humping that story to journalists, but the working CIA assumptions were quite different. The CIA has come forth to document exactly what they told the administration, and they describe their theory as of today. Susan Rice repeated exactly what the CIA told her, and today's updated report is little changed from what Susan Rice claimed.

Keep belieiving in your dream scandal. Alternatiely, catch-up on the facts that have emerged since Frum wrote that silly piece.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... ory_1.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10 ... slam-film/

pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7162
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby pjbogart » Mon Oct 22, 2012 9:34 pm

That wasn't even a debate. It was like watching Morgan Freeman give Frasier a swirley.

Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6073
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm
Contact:

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Stebben84 » Mon Oct 22, 2012 9:41 pm

pjbogart wrote:That wasn't even a debate. It was like watching Morgan Freeman give Frasier a swirley.


It was a lot of agreeing. I thought Romney played it safe and didn't attack as much as he could have. The question dodging was quite amusing. It shows that the economy is going to be the selling point in this election.


Return to “National Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests