[quote]smh23 wrote:
Al Gore has suggested that Obama may not have had time to acclimate to the altitude. Jesus.
As for me, and this is wild speculation, I can’t help thinking that Obama is subconsciously unsure of whether or not he actually wants another term. I think he went into this job with an unrealistic sense of what it actually entails. He isn’t a natural politician a la Bill Clinton, he is often criticized on the Hill for failing to schmooze, he obviously doesn’t like answering questions about his decisions.
I’m finding it hard to come up with a better explanation for his recent triple-crown of mediocrity: the convention speech, the 60 minutes interview, and now the debate. Most people–even the staunch detractors–have said all along that, love or hate his policies, he’s a charismatic guy, charming, etc. There was charisma last night, but it was all sitting stage right.[/quote]
You might be on to something. It is the hardest job on earth, and I don’t think he realized that along with glory comes hard damn work.
A bunch of people are railing about why he didn’t bring up the 47% issue. My take is that if you don’t think romney has a responce (good or bad) ready and raring to go, you are insane. Why on earth would obama bring it up and give romney a chance to a) solidify his base that already agree with him and b) possibility (small chance but still) turn it into a homerun.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Al Gore has suggested that Obama may not have had time to acclimate to the altitude. Jesus.
As for me, and this is wild speculation, I can’t help thinking that Obama is subconsciously unsure of whether or not he actually wants another term. I think he went into this job with an unrealistic sense of what it actually entails. He isn’t a natural politician a la Bill Clinton, he is often criticized on the Hill for failing to schmooze, he obviously doesn’t like answering questions about his decisions.
I’m finding it hard to come up with a better explanation for his recent triple-crown of mediocrity: the convention speech, the 60 minutes interview, and now the debate. Most people–even the staunch detractors–have said all along that, love or hate his policies, he’s a charismatic guy, charming, etc. There was charisma last night, but it was all sitting stage right.[/quote]
You might be on to something. It is the hardest job on earth, and I don’t think he realized that along with glory comes hard damn work.
A bunch of people are railing about why he didn’t bring up the 47% issue. My take is that if you don’t think romney has a responce (good or bad) ready and raring to go, you are insane. Why on earth would obama bring it up and give romney a chance to a) solidify his base that already agree with him and b) possibility (small chance but still) turn it into a homerun.[/quote]
He looks tired, grumpy and bereft of ideas. Deep inside May want to just go off into the lucrative lecture circuit sunset and cash in…and if I was to be ultra cynical, to still have some traction on the “poison chalice” defense. In another 4 years he won’t have that to fall back on if he can’t turn it all around.
Yes, it could be temporary or it could shift the election in Romney’s favor just as the first Reagan/Carter debates did. Reagan trailed by 6-8 pts. going into the first debate according to Gallup. After the debate he took the lead and held it to election day.
[/quote]
Glad to see that you have changed how you characterize the Carter-Reagan debate. Of course all of the other polls (other than a SINGLE gallup poll) showed Reagan leading in the run up to their debate.
I am also curious why you keep referring to debates (plural)… Care to explain?
jnd[/quote]
You are truly a johnny one note. Makes me wonder what other screen names you operate under.
I used Gallup because they were the most trusted name in polling in 1980. But then I already schooled you on that a week or so ago. [/quote]
I just dislike when people get their facts wrong… Especially when they are so confident. I enjoy learning new things from all sorts of sources.
So - no comment on all of those debates you keep mentioning professor zeb?
jnd
[/quote]
What happened to your boy last night jnd?
I hate it when people get things wrong too and you said this:
[quote]09-12-2012, 08:25 AM
jnd
Level 0
Based on all of the polls, this election is over. Obama gets 4 more years.
jnd [/quote]
Still think the race is over?
Did you enjoy watching your guy take a beating last night jnd? I sure did!
No media darlings were there to pump him up just him standing there hapless trying to duck Romney’s punches and having no luck at all doing it!
Truly a great night for the truth wouldn’t you say?
No…I guess you wouldn’t say that would you?
Did you still kiss your poster of Obama goodnight or are you now mad at him for not being the man you soooo wanted him to be?
I guess this is a race after all isn’t it?
Just as I predicted this debate may have made a difference just like the Reagan/Carter debate in 1980 where Reagan was behind and after that one debate surged ahead and eventually won the race.
Please tell us all about your take on last nights debate. [/quote]
I did not watch the debate- so I cannot comment on it.[/quote]
I bet you would have “watched the debate” had your guy won.
Stop reaching I added an “s” to debate. Are you now going after me for spelling errors? You are sinking that low?
Well, I’ve proven you wrong on everything else that you posted why should this be any different?
Gallup has been the gold standard in Presidential polls since they predicted that Roosevelt would beat Landon in 1936. Anyone who follows Presidential politics DOES NOT have to be told this.
[quote]I only post under 1 name and the data continue to show Obama up by 3.1 (as of today). So yes, I still think he wins (at least that is what my Obama poster told me to say).
jnd[/quote]
Sorry you don’t get to play that game. The debate results will not show up in the daily tracking poll until later today or on Friday depending on which pollster you read.
However, early flash polls (look it up the definition) showed Romney to be the clear winner.
CNN poll who is the stronger leader:
Romney 58%
Obama 37%
CBS poll of uncommitted voters:
56% say their opinion of Romney changed for the better.
13% say their opinion of Obama changed for the better.
But enough of this let’s see what Gallup has to say on the issue in a few hours. They have been more accurate in their predictions over the past 76 years than any other polling company. And they’ve been around longer than just about everyone!
Now go put that poster of Obama back over your bed. Don’t take it out on him that he can’t live up to the liberal media’s expectations. [/quote]
So it was a spelling error? Wow, that is a petty way out. What about when you called it the first debate? Were you not implying that there was a second?
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Al Gore has suggested that Obama may not have had time to acclimate to the altitude. Jesus.
As for me, and this is wild speculation, I can’t help thinking that Obama is subconsciously unsure of whether or not he actually wants another term. I think he went into this job with an unrealistic sense of what it actually entails. He isn’t a natural politician a la Bill Clinton, he is often criticized on the Hill for failing to schmooze, he obviously doesn’t like answering questions about his decisions.
I’m finding it hard to come up with a better explanation for his recent triple-crown of mediocrity: the convention speech, the 60 minutes interview, and now the debate. Most people–even the staunch detractors–have said all along that, love or hate his policies, he’s a charismatic guy, charming, etc. There was charisma last night, but it was all sitting stage right.[/quote]
You might be on to something. It is the hardest job on earth, and I don’t think he realized that along with glory comes hard damn work.
A bunch of people are railing about why he didn’t bring up the 47% issue. My take is that if you don’t think romney has a responce (good or bad) ready and raring to go, you are insane. Why on earth would obama bring it up and give romney a chance to a) solidify his base that already agree with him and b) possibility (small chance but still) turn it into a homerun.[/quote]
While I’m sure Romney had a retort ready, I’m still pretty surprised Obama didn’t bring it up. It didn’t play well with voters, and I’d think that makes it a no-brainer for a politician. But it looks like there wasn’t much brain involved in Obama’s prep anyway.
So it was a spelling error? Wow, that is a petty way out. What about when you called it the first debate? Were you not implying that there was a second?
Just say it already- “I was wrong”
jnd[/quote]
If you want to see petty look in the mirror.
I stated that Gallup was the finest polling service of its time (and still is). AND you could not refute it.
I stated that Gallup had Reagan behind before he debated Carter. AND you couldn’t refute it.
I stated that Reagan gained the lead after that debate. AND you couldn’t refute it.
I stated that Reagan held the lead and never once dipped lower than Carter after that debate. AND you couldn’t refute it.
And I just checked what I posted and yes I called it the first debate not thinking that it was the only debate. But I remember that it was the only debate it is a matter of record. So it was the first and last debate.
But if you want to claim victory on that tiny oversight I’m good with that. (applause)
If that’s all you have after being proven wrong so many times…well I hope you feel better now.
Getting back to the point as to why I brought up Reagan/Carter was because I predicted (perhaps accurately) that Romney could do the same thing in his first debate as Reagan did in his come from behind win in his first (and last) debate with Carter.
That is the issue that you need to address. Your hero got a royal butt kicking last night.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Al Gore has suggested that Obama may not have had time to acclimate to the altitude. Jesus.
As for me, and this is wild speculation, I can’t help thinking that Obama is subconsciously unsure of whether or not he actually wants another term. I think he went into this job with an unrealistic sense of what it actually entails. He isn’t a natural politician a la Bill Clinton, he is often criticized on the Hill for failing to schmooze, he obviously doesn’t like answering questions about his decisions.
I’m finding it hard to come up with a better explanation for his recent triple-crown of mediocrity: the convention speech, the 60 minutes interview, and now the debate. Most people–even the staunch detractors–have said all along that, love or hate his policies, he’s a charismatic guy, charming, etc. There was charisma last night, but it was all sitting stage right.[/quote]
You might be on to something. It is the hardest job on earth, and I don’t think he realized that along with glory comes hard damn work.
A bunch of people are railing about why he didn’t bring up the 47% issue. My take is that if you don’t think romney has a responce (good or bad) ready and raring to go, you are insane. Why on earth would obama bring it up and give romney a chance to a) solidify his base that already agree with him and b) possibility (small chance but still) turn it into a homerun.[/quote]
While I’m sure Romney had a retort ready, I’m still pretty surprised Obama didn’t bring it up. It didn’t play well with voters, and I’d think that makes it a no-brainer for a politician. But it looks like there wasn’t much brain involved in Obama’s prep anyway.[/quote]
As I said last week Obama thinks of himself as already being perfect. Hence, whey would anyone who is already perfect actually need to practice.
Arrogance has a price!
Will he learn from this performance? I’m sure that those around him will push him harder next time in preparations. But, if the next debate is on foreign policy he is still going to have his hands full as the world around him is exploding and he just doesn’t seem to know what to do.
Thank you everyone for your feedback, I missed the debates last night, so I am glad to see the opinions here.
I just want to add something my old coach used to say, because I think it applies…
“You’re never quite as good (or as bad) as you look.”
John Robinson.
It sounds like Romney killed it, and Obama choked, but can it happen again ? Can Romney continue this wave of appearing presidential ? And will Obama pick himself up, dust himself off, and go at it again ?
Romney made progress, because people can now see him as a potential president, while the boy-God Obama bled, showing why people may cease to believe in him.
I have said this time and time again, Obama’s weakness is his temper and his ego. Get him pissed, and he falters. Question his awesomeness, and he stumbles. Obama is weak when he is not being oiled up and lubricated by the MSM, so these debates are where Romney can gain ground. It will be up to Mitty to do that.
How many gaffs do you think Joe Biden will have next week ? Anyone ?
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Al Gore has suggested that Obama may not have had time to acclimate to the altitude…
[/quote]
I had to look this up to believe it.
This guy, Gore, is truly whacked out. This climate thing defines him, I’m thinking.
Good thing (bad thing for him, I reckon) that he decided to harass that massage therapist at sea level. If he’d gone after her at 5,280 ft I bet the fat fuck wouldn’t have had the energy to hit on her.
“Killer Joe” is a different Political animal all-together.
He’s the type that could easily grab his package and tell everyone “Gaff THIS, motherf@#kers!”
What is going to make this different is Joe HAS to know that something is wrong with the Chief…and he’ll have to step up for the Team.
I just think that the VICE Pres debate will be a “wash” because of the glaring differences between the two men.
Mufasa[/quote]
I would love to see Biden step up to the debate podium grab his package and say “gaffe this.”
Very funny image that you gave me Mufasa.
But I do agree with you I think they’ll be a wash. Quale went down to defeat in 1988 and Bush still defeated Dukakis.
The only potentially good part about this is that Ryan can introduce himself to the country as a fresh face and someone who has a command of the facts. In other words someone who won’t hurt Romney.
VP debates are usually not a game changer.
In fact, I’d have to check but I think they are a fairly recent phenomenon. I’m guessing but I think 1984 was the first one. When then VP Bush took on Geraldine Ferraro. I don’t recall a Bush/Mondale debate in 1980. Or any VP debates before 84’.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Al Gore has suggested that Obama may not have had time to acclimate to the altitude…
[/quote]
I had to look this up to believe it.
This guy, Gore, is truly whacked out. This climate thing defines him, I’m thinking.
Good thing (bad thing for him, I reckon) that he decided to harass that massage therapist at sea level. If he’d gone after her at 5,280 ft I bet the fat fuck wouldn’t have had the energy to hit on her.
As Colbert might say, altitude has a well-known conservative bias.[/quote]
Then Al Gore had the moral obligation to blow some of his very hot air Obama’s way.
Seriously, I could see this effecting an athlete but all the guy had to do was step up to the podium and talk for about half of the 90 minute debate. And…he couldn’t do it!
He’s not an old guy (for a President) at 50 or so and he does play lots B Ball. I’m sure not buying the oxygen excuse.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Al Gore has suggested that Obama may not have had time to acclimate to the altitude. Jesus.
As for me, and this is wild speculation, I can’t help thinking that Obama is subconsciously unsure of whether or not he actually wants another term. I think he went into this job with an unrealistic sense of what it actually entails. He isn’t a natural politician a la Bill Clinton, he is often criticized on the Hill for failing to schmooze, he obviously doesn’t like answering questions about his decisions.
I’m finding it hard to come up with a better explanation for his recent triple-crown of mediocrity: the convention speech, the 60 minutes interview, and now the debate. Most people–even the staunch detractors–have said all along that, love or hate his policies, he’s a charismatic guy, charming, etc. There was charisma last night, but it was all sitting stage right.[/quote]
You might be on to something. It is the hardest job on earth, and I don’t think he realized that along with glory comes hard damn work.
A bunch of people are railing about why he didn’t bring up the 47% issue. My take is that if you don’t think romney has a responce (good or bad) ready and raring to go, you are insane. Why on earth would obama bring it up and give romney a chance to a) solidify his base that already agree with him and b) possibility (small chance but still) turn it into a homerun.[/quote]
While I’m sure Romney had a retort ready, I’m still pretty surprised Obama didn’t bring it up. It didn’t play well with voters, and I’d think that makes it a no-brainer for a politician. But it looks like there wasn’t much brain involved in Obama’s prep anyway.[/quote]
As I said last week Obama thinks of himself as already being perfect. Hence, whey would anyone who is already perfect actually need to practice.
Arrogance has a price!
Will he learn from this performance? I’m sure that those around him will push him harder next time in preparations. But, if the next debate is on foreign policy he is still going to have his hands full as the world around him is exploding and he just doesn’t seem to know what to do. [/quote]
I have to say Zeb, you were dead on in predicting this one. I didn’t think Romney would be able to step out of his wooden persona, but he seriously delivered. I’m tempted to believe he might have said to hell with Mormonism and pounded a Red Bull before the debate.
Foreign policy will I think be trickier. Unlike economics, it’s far from his strong suit, and in fact in my view he’s said some unbelievably dumb things.
But of course the playing field has tilted against Obama considerably in the last two weeks. It will certainly be interesting.
While I’m sure Romney had a retort ready, I’m still pretty surprised Obama didn’t bring it up. It didn’t play well with voters, and I’d think that makes it a no-brainer for a politician. But it looks like there wasn’t much brain involved in Obama’s prep anyway.[/quote]
I’ll tell you why. It has to do with never before aired footage that Romney had waiting in his own quiver. Trade the 47% attack for a an extraordinarily divisive racial grievances speech? A speech where the case was made for a big bad racist Bush and Federal government, on nothing but half truths and outright lies?
At best both men lose the exchange. You’re instincts are correct, Obama knows that stone is there for his sling. Problem is, he dare not touch it out of fear of a boulder being hurled back his way. I’ll say it now, Obama isn’t going to use it. You might see it floated here and there by surrogates, but it’s been disarmed as far as Obama is concerned.
But of course the playing field has tilted against Obama considerably in the last two weeks. It will certainly be interesting.[/quote]
See, I honestly think Obama had to win this one. Because I don’t see any chance for him to come out looking good in a debate heavy on foreign policy. The way his administration handled their responses to recent events has even the mainstream media suggesting political ass-covering. It would appear that this administration hoped the turned down requests for security wouldn’t surface. That the actual nature of this attack could be kicked down the road. Like–oh, I don’t know–after the election!
This upcoming debate is the one Obama needed a win, a buffer, before going into. Think he was off, nervous, defensive, and stammering this time? I predict cringe-worthy meltdown over Libya. And with Univision’s recent reporting on Fast and Furious, I can’t imagine that not coming up. Someone might need to arrange a suicide watch over at MSNBC after this next debate…
Edit: Honestly, I mean it…it’ll be cringe-worthy. Ever see someone you vehemently disagree with take such a drubbing you feel pity for them? I was just short of that feeling this time. Seriously, I think it’ll reach that level for the next debate. You almost want to say, “Ok, enough. I get the point, you’re right. Let him go home now to lick his wounds.” Libya and Fast Furious are going to shutdown any game he might find between now and that debate. He needed this win. He was supposed to have this win. There is outright panic in the halls of liberaldom right now, with the nature of the debate coming up. I repeat, Obama needed a point on the scoreboard to get him through the swamp he’s going to walk into during the following debate.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
It sounds like Romney killed it, and Obama choked, but can it happen again ? Can Romney continue this wave of appearing presidential ? And will Obama pick himself up, dust himself off, and go at it again ?
Romney made progress, because people can now see him as a potential president, while the boy-God Obama bled, showing why people may cease to believe in him.
I have said this time and time again, Obama’s weakness is his temper and his ego. Get him pissed, and he falters. Question his awesomeness, and he stumbles. Obama is weak when he is not being oiled up and lubricated by the MSM, so these debates are where Romney can gain ground. It will be up to Mitty to do that.
[/quote]
Sometimes you win a battle and lose a war. Observations of comments on the internet I see democrats supporting Obama more than ever while acknowledging the debate mishap, and republicans raving about Romney’s debate win. They’re not going to change, but the swing voters seem to observe Romney did well. However, they all feel like he won a DEBATE. Debate in essence a mental sport appears as a game. In a time when unemployment is sky rocketing people don’t want to play games. Most of those voters all say it seemed like Romney was just telling them what they wanted to hear. If Obama planned this it was a great tactic. Romney looks like a used car salesman with a gold watch telling you a shiny new mustang with no engine runs great.
Oh, and remember Eastwood’s putting questions to an empty chair? I’ll be damned if it didn’t turn out the be most fitting image for last night’s debate. The media has, until recently, played softball with this administration. In the end, they didn’t do him any favors. When it was time to face the questions head on, you might as well have dragged that same chair up on to the stage.