Skip to main content

View Diary: Romney lost because Obama beat him: Updated (151 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  no (33+ / 0-)

    we got all the votes we could, the first debate was meaningless for us.  For the most part the undecided voters were the crankier then usual Republicans, and they enjoyed watching Mitt seem to dominate Obama, and that got them excited. But the Republicans won the house because they won in '10, they got to gerrymander, those census elections aren't as critical as supreme court elections, but they matter.  The house flip was a wetdream.  

    "oh no, not four more years of hope and change?" Karl Christian Rove

    by anna shane on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 04:51:58 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I know the gerrymander was a hard hill to climb (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blueoasis

      but re-energized Rs showed up to vote, and if they hadn't, we might have come close...

    •  I still have the nagging question....... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dejavu, SpringFever

      Was President Obama's first debate performance a purposeful result that he intended or was it an unintended result ('bad day' problem for someone who has also been called 'no-drama' Obama)???

      I just would like to know what Barack Obama was thinking before and during that first debate.

      •  Read his memoirs? (12+ / 0-)

        Perhaps in 20 or 30 years he'll relate his experience. In the meantime, it doesn't matter.

        I love it that Obama's channeling Harry Truman: "I don't give 'em hell; I just tell the truth and they think it's hell!"

        by sillia on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:11:45 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  At some point we will find out (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SpringFever, murrayewv, elektra

        I am sure the books are being written as we speak. From some of the "fair and balanced" news sources, they are suggesting from their usual "sources", that he just didn't prep for the first debate, his contempt for Romney more than anything else...and was then blind sided when the extreme Romney didn't show up but the more reasonable Romney.

        All theories floating around..but hell, who cares.

        This is our moment...this is our time! President Barack Obama

        by ankae on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 08:33:22 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  There's this FWIW (6+ / 0-)
        Shortly after the debate began, Mr. Obama’s aides realized they had made their own mistakes in advising Mr. Obama to avoid combative exchanges that might sacrifice the good will many Americans felt toward him. In Mr. Obama’s mock debates with Senator John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, Mr. Kerry drew Mr. Obama into a series of intense exchanges, and Mr. Axelrod decided that they were damaging to the president.
        http://www.nytimes.com/...

        United citizens against Citizens United ͭ ͫ

        by LeighAnn on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 09:39:11 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well now that we are safely victorious (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LakeSuperior

          We can learn from that episode and become even stronger. This is what I like about the Democratic party. We know how to self-examine and make corrections as we go. Republicans on the other hand tend to double down on the very things that hurt them.

      •  One of the "Purer Than Thou" Posters Here (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        matrix, Matt Z

        Claimed that "Obama felt it was beneath him to turn in a good first debate performance."

        That poster confirms her cluelessness with every post . . .

        I miss Speaker Pelosi :^(

        by howarddream on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 10:39:31 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  If you listened to what he said going into (6+ / 0-)

        ...the first debate, he basically said that he was goIng to present his vision / plan, and let the voters decide. I honestly don't believe it was anything more than simply that Obama didn't expect to have to call out a fellow statesmen for brazenly lying and flip-flopping on key issues. I really do believe it was nothing more than Obama was "just being polite" ... too polite, and he even stated this in a radio interview severals days later. A diary was even posted with a link to the interview, if you want to listen to it: (President Obama: "I was too polite with Romney in the first debate."
        ) So I think we already have the answer.

        He made a judgment call. Was it the right one or the wrong one? Who knows. 

        Now, you can suggest that if he had done far "better" in that debate, it would have given us a better shot at the House, but you need to also weigh the fact that if Romney had not had that surge, a lot more money might have been funneled to the down-ticket races (away from Romney) ... and thus, who knows the outcome of that? The Senate races might have faired different, not that "more money means victory," because that myth was just blown out of the water. 

        But thrn, on the other side, Obama's choice to not call out Romney in that first debate spurned some down-ticket Democrats to do what Obama had not, which also led to Romney himself feeling boldened to lie with even greater boldness, like with his "Jeep production moving to China", and also him lying about "let GM go bankcrupt" both of which resulted in the CEO's of those companies speaking out against Romney and calling him on his lies. So, we then had free PR from those companies' leasership. The media narrative of "Romney lies" became the theme song that spelled his death knell and whose to say if it had played out differently that a greater good is served or that a more clear distinction would have been made. The apparent "loss" in that first debate caused some serious soul searching, at all levels, within the Democratic, I believe, and maybe that was needed. Obama is human, and he too, maybe had some learning to do, which would help him in his second term, learning that might pointedly help him deal with the GOP Obstructionism. Remember, he had a Democratic House in '08, and this clealry did not solve all problems, though clearly this made some things easier. But then, fillibuster reform would make a difference there. And further, we, as a party, have much to learn, and maybe, not winning back the House in '12, will spurn us to really attack the '14 cycle with a unifying purpose and mission, so that we are not complacent. Again, what's the greater good? At least, that's how I look at it. 

        In any case, it is what it is: Obama made a judgment call, namely, to not call out Romney during that first debate. And now we need to take the House in '14! 

        •  1st debate kept money away from 'R' Senate races (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          shinobi9, elektra

          I suggested this before, but the right's reading of Romney's first debate just might have kept big money behind him a little longer, diverting money that was all set up to go to Senate races.
          I don't suggest that the President contrived for this scenario, I'm just saying that's how it worked out. I'm pretty sure it was Divine Intervention, like Sandy.

      •  It may have been Obama's way to fire (0+ / 0-)

        up the base. As simple as that. It certainly energized them, didn't it? People really buckled down and GOTV, and GOTV is what won us the election.

        That, and the fact that all the ad dollars in the world won't help if you're selling a bad product.

        But we won't really know till PBO writes his memoirs after leaving office--unless he share his thoughts with David Corn.

      •  The first debate... (0+ / 0-)

        We will never know...but...perhaps he wanted to get Romney on the record in front of millions of people and then develop a strategy for the final two debates.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site