rabble wrote:The only ones who get the substance are the ones who are listening and trying to GET the substance. It's not the unconverted you're talking about - it's the lazy, stupid, and unwilling.
Your thesis is that the post-debate, 5% swing to Romney consisted of the lazy, stupid and unwilling.
Obama had won just about 5% in the polls in three months prior to the debate. The same lazy, stupid, and unwilling people?
I would say the common attribute of the persuadable is that they are politically disengaged. They don't have all the facts organized in their heads. They are looking for a presentation
of substance that makes a side of the argument seem to make sense.
This argument about substance we're having is trite. What you substance abusers are really saying, if you are honest with yourselves, is that it was impossible for Mitt Romney to win on substance because the substance of the issues is not on his side. Can you imagine ANY debate between Mitt & Barry where you would concede that Mitt won on substance. Of course not.
Your blind spot is that you think Obama's superiority on substance is a True Fact, when this assertion is a matter of opinion.