Skip to main content

View Diary: Reality and the post-debate responses (263 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think Rev Al was right (10+ / 0-)

    when he was the only one on MSNBC to point out the relentless lying.  Debates work on two levels, and the superficial impression given to voters is only one of them.  Romney had a slam-dunk with that aspect, and Obama did poorly.  But substance also matters, and in fact Obama and Biden did make Romney pay on the substance as the campaign continued, with their emphasis on Romney's lying and lack of character -- and the polls slowly rebounded.

    Where I think much post-first-debate analysis fell flat was in ignoring substance entirely, not only to the point of asserting that it didn't matter to voters right then, but also acting like it never would.  In fact it gave Obama an opening with which to recover, and he took advantage of it quite well.  That possibility probably should have blunted some of the panic.  Liberal commentators could have taken the point Troubadour made in his controversial "Obama won" diary and run with it a bit without actually sticking their heads in the sand -- the point that you can't truly win a debate when your entire substance consists of lies.  It's an unstable victory, and subject to being undermined.  And that's what happened.

    •  Sharpton shouldn't have had to point it out (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      slinkerwink, ladybug53, Matt Z

      When you're debating a bullshitter, you better be ready for it and smack him HARD on the first one. They are generally less eager to try it again later.

      Obama let him slide and then it was off to the races for Romney.

      Biden showed him how to administer a proper smack-down and he did much better in debates 2 and 3.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site