Rush Limbaugh said it on his show yesterday (October 16, 2012):
If Obama shows up tonight and successfully breathes, he's going to be declared the winner tomorrow.
Rush was correct. Obama showed up and didn't flounder. He at least managed his talking points. He even had a few good rhetorical decisions. (The one that made me say "SONOFA!" was waiting to bring up the 47% non-story until Romney couldn't respond, using his final statement in the debate.)
What Obama didn't do was he didn't successfully present Romney as a a bad candidate or, more importantly, himself as a good one. At all. He told more tales about "increasing oil production," but Governor Romney pointed out (and Obama ducked the question) that it was entirely on private lands, which the government has zero say over. He lied about the Libya crisis and refused to answer the direct question asked by a voter of what happened. He just blamed Romney for giving a statement.
The Drive-By Media is predictably hammering Romney's strength in the
debate. Their spin is "Romney was a bully" or he was "disrespectful."
These are the same people who glossed over Joe Biden being a legitimate
bully a week ago, by the way. If you doubt media bias, pay attention to
the difference between how Biden's legitimate bullying was presented vs.
Romney refusing to let Obama lie. They are telling you what you saw, but let's stop and think about what we ACTUALLY saw, shall we?
What we actually saw was President Obama having to lie to cover his tracks or just ignore questions. For example, why is he telling a college student who has asked about his job prospects after college about increased manufacturing jobs. (Please tell me the President realizes that the goal of a college degree is not to be a knob turner at a factory.) He also refused to answer Governor Romney's point about his "increased drilling" coming not from public lands but private lands.
I also still heard stammering and stuttering from the President in a lot of the debate. He wasn't quite as bad as last time. But he still was searching for the truth throughout the debate. The only thing is he seemed LESS ridiculously incompetent, so he looked better by comparison. Like Rush said, it's all about exceeding expectations.
So what precisely happened, in terms of this debate? Well, I'll tell you. I watched a Frank Lunz focus group from Nevada after the debate. The lion's share of the people in the group were Obama voters in 2008. The lion's share of those same people said they had now decided to vote for Mitt Romney.
Friends, here's what really happened at the debate: Obama couldn't answer legitimate questions. He couldn't answer Governor Romney's legitimate questions. The Drive-By Media is telling us that Obama "won on points." Let's make pretend that it matters if someone "wins on points" in a debate. Debates are not reflected on points. This isn't high school Debate Team. This is a Presidential Election.
Obama did not move the meter. Even if the Drive-By Media brings out skewed polls that claim it did, trust me, it won't matter on Election Day. Mitt Romney is about to win the Presidency in three weeks. And that's what really matters.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
4 comments:
All posts will be reviewed subject to the Rules for Commenting. Any post that does not abide by these rules will not be posted, entirely at the discretion of the blog editor.
Commenters who repeatedly violate these rules will be permanently banned from commenting, and thus none of their comments, regardless of content, will be posted.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Um, pretty much every poll out there shows Obama winning the 2nd debate, by quite a margin.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.gallup.com/poll/158237/obama-judged-winner-second-debate.aspx
Have you paid attention to the news post-debate? It's been all about how Obama lied on Libya and how the moderator protected the lie. The entire post-debate story is how Obama lied. Yep. He totally won. "On points." Which matters for some reason since this is a college debate team right?
ReplyDeleteUh, except Obama didn't lie. He distinctly called it an act of terror. You can read any independent factcheck shows this. Even factcheck.org shows that Romney lied FAR more that Obama did. It's disgusting how much Romney has to lie to get -2 vs. Obama. Every independent factchecker shows this: politifact, factcheck.org; you name it, that all conclude Romney/Ryan lies far more than Obama.
ReplyDeleteMy friend, you seem a decent fellow (or lady, if that's your gender). But you are missing a few very important details:
ReplyDelete1 - Obama did not "distinctly call it an act of terror." He said the word "terrorism." Even Candy Crowley admitted that immediately after the debate.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/16/fact-check-did-obama-really-call-consulate-attack-in-libya-act-terror/
I have assessed a long list of lies recently (I don't recall the day) the lies Biden told, as an example, that were not reported by Fact check and Politifact. These two sites have consistently left out lies from Obama and Biden in their fact checks. Then the list says "Romney/Ryan lied more" (of the "lies" listed, most of which were imperfect statements/misspeaks.)
One final note: Due to some abuse of the Rules for Commenting by certain people, I will no longer be accepting anonymous comments. Commenters will now be required to be signed in to a valid login ID to comment.
For the record, unless you're the person who is commenting on another post much more rudely, I do not mean you. You and I are politely disagreeing. That's desirable to me, in fact, and I hope we can continue this, just not anonymously.