October 2012

By Wink

These were a few of my favorite tweets during debate # 2 between Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama……

Samantha Bee — When Obama is talking, Romney makes the same face my Catholic grandmother would make at a Wiccan wedding. #debate

Bilge Ebiri — Obama: “I passed a law allowing women to get equal pay.” Romney: “I hired women once.” #debate

David Weinberger — Well, there goes the gangbanger vote! Nice job, Mr. President! #debate

Feministing — Guns don’t kill people. Single mothers kill people.

Read more

By Wink

My bad. I previously presented Barack Obama as a good debater. He is quite good, in the classical sense of ‘debate.’ You know – the high school or college variety, where they keep score based on the logic, accuracy and completeness of your arguments. No cheering audience to pander to.

Real debates and political debates are two different animals though. Political debates are closer to pep rallies. No one keeps score in a logical sense and, if you ‘zing’ your opponent, people will think you ‘won.’

Mitt Romney won debate number one. He won it by pushing around the 78-year old moderator. He won it by flinging out accusation after accusation about Obama. He threw out a multitude of meaningless and inaccurate (but scary-sounding) statistics.

He says to pay for his $5 trillion tax cut he will, among other things, get rid of funding for PBS (which is like saying ‘if I drop this bag of marshmallows in the water we can dry up the ocean.’).

And he did it all with an authoritative voice and that stare-you-in-the-eye manor that all great B.S.-ers have. (I would certainly include President Clinton in this category.)

Looks matter A LOT in a political debate, and Mitt looks great.

Obama looked and sounded like a boring college professor. Yeah, all of his facts were right, but he didn’t say them in an interesting way.

Worse, he wasn’t nearly aggressive enough in his attacks on Romney. There is a delicate line to walk for a standing president. The ‘outsider’ has freedom to attack, but presidents must look ‘presidential,’ which is to say, unflappable. This is a distinct visual disadvantage.

George W Bush provided a different way to ‘zing’ Al Gore. Bush proved to be a bumbling idiot in the debates. The result? People hated Al Gore because he kept rolling his eyes at Bush’s moronic and incoherent answers.

Everybody knew Gore was a superior intellect to Bush, and had more experience than Bush, both domestically and internationally.

They voted for Bush anyway because Gore was too smug, and Bush seemed like the kind of aw-shucks guy you could have a beer with, without him talking over your head.

We just hate the idea of a president who is ‘too smart.‘

And that is where we are with Barack Obama. He reads his point-by-point answers in a tedious, spiritless fashion.

What America wants is anger, and bad guys to vilify, and solid pronouncements of who and what is good and bad.

Accuracy doesn’t matter. We are not looking for thought-provoking discussions.

As Stephen Colbert says, we like to think with our gut, not with our heads.

————
Final Debate observation…….

What Mitt wants you to hear: “Jobs” (He said it about 30 times)

What Mitt doesn’t want you to hear: “Minimum wage, no benefits” (This is what Romney always means by ‘jobs,’ including the ones he sends overseas)

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Read more

By Wink

It’s funny how, in advance of the presidential debates, conservatives are saying Obama will use the debates to launch a ‘90 minute attack ad’ against Mitt Romney. This is spin at its purest. Try to portray Obama as an attacking monster.

This is ridiculous. Obama doesn’t attack. It is not his nature, but he won’t back down from a fight either. When Romney hits, he will get hit back.

If Obama wins the debate it will not be because of his attacks on Romney. Obama didn’t win all his previous debates by tearing down his opponents. He is very relatable and people sense he is a straight shooter – people like that.

Because he doesn’t have command of facts Romney is forced to talk in generalities. Granted, generalities can rile up crowds. Here are a few nuggets you can count on if you go to a Romney rally…

“America is the greatest!”
“I will never cater to China.”
“I will create 12 million jobs.”
“Oh beautiful for spacious skies…etc.” (sung)
“I have business experience.”
“I will balance the budget.”
“I will make America Great again.”

Some of these sound like actual ideas, but none of these statements actually mean anything. They are all applause lines. This is what Mitt does.

Listen carefully to the debates. Toss out the applause lines and wait for Mitt to give specifics on any topic (but don’t hold your breath).

No, Obama will not win because he attacks. He will win because he has a command of the facts, and the ability to deliver the information in a way most people understand.

In one way, Romney and Ronald Reagan are similar. Reagan too, was not very strong on facts and figures, but he overcame that by being very likable, and being able to connect with middle class voters.

Romney (1) has no great grasp of facts, (2) is too robotic to be likable and (3) has no earthly concept of how to identify with the average voter.

Knowing his own debate weakness, you can count on Mr. Romney to use some cutesy and/or cutting (and meaningless) buzz-phrase to ‘get’ Obama, and steal the next day’s headlines.

Count on it.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Read more