You’re reaching. They would have been talking about them anyway (“And Obama kept hitting him on that 47% video”) without the veneer of “What in God’s name was wrong with Obama that he didn’t mention…?”
I’d love to believe that Obama was just crazy like a fox and intentionally out-maneuvered everyone last night. He didn’t though. He just did a shitty job (for whatever reason, it doesn’t matter) and will need to make up the ground he lost for it.
I do think it’s plausible that he deliberately didn’t raise them for two reasons: (1) by bringing it into the point-counterpoint format you reduce it to just another political attack on which there are two sides instead of what it is now, a candid moment coming from the candidate himself, which is much more powerful; and (2) relatedly,
because he knew Mitt would have some canned response ready and didn’t want to give him the opportunity to deliver it.
The vast majority of voters already know about the 47% video (nearing 70% of *adults *in the last poll I saw), so I’m not sure what is gained by raising it in the debate.
I don’t know how anyone can DEBATE someone who does the etich-a-schetch, don’t you have to have to have a position in order to make a stand. (Maybe didn’t express my self clearly) If your debating and every point that was once a position isn’t, then there is nothing to debate, so Romney figures you cant hit a moving target, seen this in boxing, and it works for the most part. Romney really never answered a simple question directly, never stated his position, Obama tired to state Romney’s position for him, and then Romney would say that it wasn’t his position. Romney would let others make that position. Seems he is acting like the shrub, great job Brownie.
Regarding the issue of Obama not bringing up the 47% remark:
I think the Romney team had something prepared (think “zinger”) in response to the 47% issue, and Obama knew this. Had Obama brought it up, it would have opened Romney up to launching his prepared response. Going in to this, if Romney had done an ounce of prep work, he was probably just *waiting *for Obama to mention the 47% so he could pounce with his highly-practiced retort. Then-- boom!-- he’s got a nice little soundbite for the talking heads.
In baseball terms, it’d be like tossing a pitch high and away to a batter who is totally expecting a pitch high and away.
Obama gets his ass handed to him in the debate. The liberals instantly declare that the debates are irrelevant. Quelle surprise!
I think that’s extremely likely, personally. Romney knows that his 47% quote is well-known, so he would’ve come prepared for it… and Obama knew that he would. I’m sure that Romney was just waiting for Obama to toss him that slow ball.
You don’t hit them where they’re prepared to be hit- you hit them where they’re not expecting it.
Funny how it works, ain’t it?
Regards,
Shodan
Liberals on this board at least pretty much swear fealty to 538, which has been skeptical of the power of debates since 2007.
Had Obama actually unloaded on Romney like he could have, the resulting narrative would have been exactly like the Bush debates. The voters saw an aloof egghead bullying an honest, ordinary guy, and sympathized with the underdog. Obama’s only realistic strategy was to restate his own ideas, avoid smirking, and keep from getting totally flattened.
I guess I’m in the minority thinking it was a good debate.
Romney won, but I didn’t think Obama did poorly - Romney just did better. I thought they both made good cases.
Additionally, in a debate the talking-points/talking-across-each-other ratio to substance ratio is usually astronomical.
In this debate, while there were a lot of talking points, and intentionally answering a different point than the other candidate brought up, there was some real substance.
Like they say, debates don’t usually turn voters, but I am not worried about the Republican winning like I was in 2000 and 2004. I think the real Romney would be a reasonable president.
My biggest fear is still the deficit - he says he won’t cut taxes leading to a deficit, but the numbers don’t add up. He has to cut taxes first, claiming it will not increase the deficit, and then wait and see. History has shown clearly that does not work.
What I’m wondering about is with the exception of jtgain, none of you Romney supporters even care that he wildly changed his positions again. Does that not matter to you at all?
That might be Romney’s true genius.
Before tonight, one of the big mysterys was why Romney hadn’t tacked to the center after the primaries. Maybe he realized that he didn’t need to tack to the center until the debates since the persuadables weren’t paying attention yet (and given the lower proportion of undecideds this year). And while flippity-flopping closer to election day carries risks, he might have correctly figured that abandoning his more conservative positions wouldn’t matter at this point because his base would be sufficiently whipped into a frenzy by Hannity et al.
It’s ballsy, but it might be the correct read of the political and media environment.
That’s why you have a counter-response ready. It’s not as though Romney hasn’t been defending his remarks for weeks and Camp Obama couldn’t have guessed at likely “zingers” regarding it.
Really, almost any “zinger” could be countered with some variant of “You say that, but when you’re in private with your friends and donors you say 47% of Americans can’t be taught to take personal responsibility; why should anyone think the real you is the one on this stage tonight?”
I’m as liberal as they come. I think Obama got his ass handed to him. And I DON’T think the debates are irrelevant. I thought it was an embarrassing disaster.
It was an incredibly piss poor showing. It stank of lack of preparation, and there is no excuse for that. Is it going to make me vote for Romney? Of course not. But there are those who wouldn’t previously have voted for Romney because he’s looked like an idiot the whole campaign. This puts him in a new light for their consideration.
Do I think it’s sunk Obama’s chances? No, of course not. He’s still the hands down favorite based on the odds. But he has to bring it in the next 2 debates. If he is a piss poor in those, then I think Romney has a chance to turn it around.
I can’t be the only one here who thought Obama was distracted by something, and I don’t mean his anniversary. Maybe someday we’ll find out what. Or it could be he was overcoached into trying too hard to appear presidential instead of partisan, but then that’s been his biggest problem ever since his inauguration.
Claiming “Obamacare” for his own is a good move, considering its popularity and the strong negative reaction people have to “repeal and (not) replace”.
Too bad these things are more about style and soundbites than substance. Obama had and has reality on his side, but for some reason didn’t press it. But I would not expect the same results in the following debates, and no doubt the campaign will keep the same focus it has always had on the factual deficit Romney has to own.
Thank god we have people like you voting.. unless Sons of Anarchy is on, then you may not be able to get off your ass
Wow, people are human and try to see the (to them) positive side of a situation. What an amazingly insightful and original observation!
That is a stunningly short-sighted and closed-minded statement.
And, cite?
Yeah, but Obama didn’t need to do that. Romney is in need of a home run right now. Why set him up? You don’t throw a meatball in the hopes that you’ll pop the batter up. If Obama throws a soft pitch out there like “47%,” it could’ve been a four-bagger for Romney. Sure, a good defensive play could’ve robbed Romney at the wall, but why take that risk? It’s the top of the ninth and Obama only let Romney get on base last night, but he definitely didn’t let him cross home. And considering how many runs Romney’s behind at this stage in the game, a base hit isn’t a game-breaker for Obama. Especially with the Hall-of-Fame double-play duo at short-- ok the metaphor’s out of control now. 