Yes…BOTH campaigns have PUBLICALLY said that they are not pleased with the moderator being able to ask follow-up questions. If that’s NOT true, so be it.
And if you are suggesting that the President’s campaign is “thrilled” about the possibility of “one-or-their-own” taking it too Romney…THEY are the ones that are naive. An important segment of the Electorate was already turned-off by “Killer Joe”. If they smell bias, I think that those same segments will be further turned off.
Mufasa
(P.S. Not that it really matters; but I’m not a “Lefty”…I just don’t hate and despise the President).
And if you are suggesting that the President’s campaign is “thrilled” about the possibility of “one-or-their-own” taking it too Romney…THEY are the ones that are naive. An important segment of the Electorate was already turned-off by “Killer Joe”. If they smell bias, I think that those same segments will be further turned off.
.[/quote]
Also, like I said. This is a woman we are talking about. She wants to maintain her rep and is, by the accounts I’ve seen, not taking too well to the “brow beating” that may or may not be going on.
If she plays this like Univison, it isn’t going to go as well for obama as many hope. And I think she just might, just to shove it up that ass of those that doubt her.
But then again, she might just shill, which is the expectation.
The President certainly has a lot to gain tonight. And the expectations are overwhelmingly in his favor: come out and don’t seem like you’re dead. Smile a little bit. Look the other guy in the eye a couple of times. I wish I could go into the most important night of my career with a laundry list of objectives like that.
More generally: I don’t often like to make such brazen predictions, and it goes against a lot of what I’ve been saying lately, but I suspect that the winner of tonight’s debate will take the election. If Obama can retake even a small amount of the ground he lost to Romney in the first debate, he will probably win the popular vote by about a point and the electoral college more comfortably. If Romney can knock it out of the park again, it’s a walk-off, the momentum is decisively in his favor, and he will be the next President of the United States.
And what if it’s a tie? We forge ahead with the same uncertainty, and if nothing changes between now and November, pundits and vote-counters are going to have a long election night.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
The TV debate game is all about expectations. Each candidate and their backers try to lower the expectation for their particular candidate then when the debate begins and he beats expectations it’s called a win. That is how the game is played. It doesn’t matter how you and I think it’s played that IS how it’s played.
Secondly, Obama did so poorly the first time out the voters have lower expectations of his capabilities. Hence, when he shows up happy upbeat and says a few smart things he has exceeded expectations.
Simple.
[/quote]
I think we disagree because, and correct if I’m wrong, but you believe the media will say Obama won if he shows up and just does better than before thus expectations are very low. I believe most people in the real world have very high expectations for the President because of how poorly he performed and because they truly expect more for the guy they backed.
[/quote]
You have it backwards my friend. When someone performs poorly expectations are always lowered. And yes the MSLM will say Obama won if his performance is even close to Romney’s.
40% of age eligible voters don’t vote even for president - average american thinking about latest iphone, extra-size portions at cheapest buffet, dancing with the stars, and commenting on chat boards (this one included haha)
(P.S. Not that it really matters; but I’m not a “Lefty”…I just don’t hate and despise the President).[/quote]
You’re always going on about people hating and despising the President. I actually have a great deal of respect for the office of President. Obama has disgraced the office. Aside from his character and policies, Obama has committed many impeachable offences. In terms of abuse of executive power he unilaterally enacted legislation pertaining to welfare, immigration and education. He refuses to enforce federal law - immigration, defence of marriage act etc. He obstructs state law - voting laws, immigration etc. He issues executive fiats that have no constitutional basis. He claims the Senate is in recess when it’s not so he can unconstitutionally make appointments. Then there’s the matter of his little war in Libya, void of any Congressional consent or oversight. Together with his character, background, associates and what he’s actually done it becomes difficult to give the office of President the full respect that it deserves.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
(Ah, Zeb…you never fail to disappoint…!)
Yes…BOTH campaigns have PUBLICALLY said that they are not pleased with the moderator being able to ask follow-up questions. If that’s NOT true, so be it.
And if you are suggesting that the President’s campaign is “thrilled” about the possibility of “one-or-their-own” taking it too Romney…THEY are the ones that are naive. An important segment of the Electorate was already turned-off by “Killer Joe”. If they smell bias, I think that those same segments will be further turned off.
Mufasa
(P.S. Not that it really matters; but I’m not a “Lefty”…I just don’t hate and despise the President).[/quote]
I just said that my original assessment of you may have been a tad off. You lean left but your major problem is naivette.
But you still love me right? RIGHT? Come on I can’t go on unles we are friends
As for the general public you are overestimating their intelligence. Most do not recognize bias in the media. Nor will they recognize a softball thrown to Obama and a hardball at Romney. Especially if it’s done with the finesse that only the MSLM can bring to such events. Trust me when I say that the Obama campaign is thrilled with the choice of Candy Crowley as the moderator. And if you watch closely tonight you will see the subtle slights that she gives to Romney. The unfinished sentences, the interruptions etc. And you will also see the gifts given to Obama. How she may bail him out or stop a pounding rigth in its tracks with gems like “we have to get another question in here…bla bla bla…”
Hey if I’m wrong you can remind me of it on Wednesday.
I agree Obama will not be a laughing fool like his running mate. He’ll be poised, upbeat, smiling when appropriate and seemingly very able. We all know what we get with Romney he’s very stable and has been in every debate that I’ve ever seen him in and I watched about a dozen of the republican primary debates.
As for hating Obama…I don’t hate the man I really don’t. I wish him a long life, much happiness and a successful retirement from politics. However, if there is one man who should not be President, or even close to the White House it is Obama! He’s really bad for America in more ways than I have the time to write. He’s been a total disaster over the past four years. And the next four will be absolutely horrific in just about every way imaginable. And my only solace in a possible Romney loss is that I get to rub your nose (and many others) in the fact that I was correct. Not much to hang my hat on but at least in the end I get to be right. Ha ha…
[quote]ZEB wrote:
The TV debate game is all about expectations. Each candidate and their backers try to lower the expectation for their particular candidate then when the debate begins and he beats expectations it’s called a win. That is how the game is played. It doesn’t matter how you and I think it’s played that IS how it’s played.
Secondly, Obama did so poorly the first time out the voters have lower expectations of his capabilities. Hence, when he shows up happy upbeat and says a few smart things he has exceeded expectations.
Simple.
[/quote]
I think we disagree because, and correct if I’m wrong, but you believe the media will say Obama won if he shows up and just does better than before thus expectations are very low. I believe most people in the real world have very high expectations for the President because of how poorly he performed and because they truly expect more for the guy they backed.
[/quote]
You have it backwards my friend. When someone performs poorly expectations are always lowered. And yes the MSLM will say Obama won if his performance is even close to Romney’s.[/quote]
I personally believe for Obama to win the debate he not only has to outperform Romney, but also give a top notch academy award winning performance…so I’m not really wrong I just have a different perspective.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
The TV debate game is all about expectations. Each candidate and their backers try to lower the expectation for their particular candidate then when the debate begins and he beats expectations it’s called a win. That is how the game is played. It doesn’t matter how you and I think it’s played that IS how it’s played.
Secondly, Obama did so poorly the first time out the voters have lower expectations of his capabilities. Hence, when he shows up happy upbeat and says a few smart things he has exceeded expectations.
Simple.
[/quote]
I think we disagree because, and correct if I’m wrong, but you believe the media will say Obama won if he shows up and just does better than before thus expectations are very low. I believe most people in the real world have very high expectations for the President because of how poorly he performed and because they truly expect more for the guy they backed.
[/quote]
You have it backwards my friend. When someone performs poorly expectations are always lowered. And yes the MSLM will say Obama won if his performance is even close to Romney’s.[/quote]
I personally believe for Obama to win the debate he not only has to outperform Romney, but also give a top notch academy award winning performance…so I’m not really wrong I just have a different perspective.[/quote]
So you’re saying that in order for the liberal media to declare Obama the winner he has to give a “top notch academy award winning performance.” Otherwise, you don’t think that the MSLM will declare him a winner.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
The TV debate game is all about expectations. Each candidate and their backers try to lower the expectation for their particular candidate then when the debate begins and he beats expectations it’s called a win. That is how the game is played. It doesn’t matter how you and I think it’s played that IS how it’s played.
Secondly, Obama did so poorly the first time out the voters have lower expectations of his capabilities. Hence, when he shows up happy upbeat and says a few smart things he has exceeded expectations.
Simple.
[/quote]
I think we disagree because, and correct if I’m wrong, but you believe the media will say Obama won if he shows up and just does better than before thus expectations are very low. I believe most people in the real world have very high expectations for the President because of how poorly he performed and because they truly expect more for the guy they backed.
[/quote]
You have it backwards my friend. When someone performs poorly expectations are always lowered. And yes the MSLM will say Obama won if his performance is even close to Romney’s.[/quote]
I personally believe for Obama to win the debate he not only has to outperform Romney, but also give a top notch academy award winning performance…so I’m not really wrong I just have a different perspective.[/quote]
So you’re saying that in order for the liberal media to declare Obama the winner he has to give a “top notch academy award winning performance.” Otherwise, you don’t think that the MSLM will declare him a winner.
Oh…you’re absolutely very, very wrong.[/quote]
No I clear said I believe for the AVERAGE AMERICAN to give Obama the win and lean back toward him he has to give the performance of a life time. The media would undoubtedly give him the win if he farted his answers.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
The TV debate game is all about expectations. Each candidate and their backers try to lower the expectation for their particular candidate then when the debate begins and he beats expectations it’s called a win. That is how the game is played. It doesn’t matter how you and I think it’s played that IS how it’s played.
Secondly, Obama did so poorly the first time out the voters have lower expectations of his capabilities. Hence, when he shows up happy upbeat and says a few smart things he has exceeded expectations.
Simple.
[/quote]
I think we disagree because, and correct if I’m wrong, but you believe the media will say Obama won if he shows up and just does better than before thus expectations are very low. I believe most people in the real world have very high expectations for the President because of how poorly he performed and because they truly expect more for the guy they backed.
[/quote]
You have it backwards my friend. When someone performs poorly expectations are always lowered. And yes the MSLM will say Obama won if his performance is even close to Romney’s.[/quote]
I personally believe for Obama to win the debate he not only has to outperform Romney, but also give a top notch academy award winning performance…so I’m not really wrong I just have a different perspective.[/quote]
So you’re saying that in order for the liberal media to declare Obama the winner he has to give a “top notch academy award winning performance.” Otherwise, you don’t think that the MSLM will declare him a winner.
Oh…you’re absolutely very, very wrong.[/quote]
No I clear said I believe for the AVERAGE AMERICAN to give Obama the win and lean back toward him he has to give the performance of a life time. The media would undoubtedly give him the win if he farted his answers.
[/quote]
Ha ha…I sure hope he tries to answer that way. I would have to say that performance would be most entertaining.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
The TV debate game is all about expectations. Each candidate and their backers try to lower the expectation for their particular candidate then when the debate begins and he beats expectations it’s called a win. That is how the game is played. It doesn’t matter how you and I think it’s played that IS how it’s played.
Secondly, Obama did so poorly the first time out the voters have lower expectations of his capabilities. Hence, when he shows up happy upbeat and says a few smart things he has exceeded expectations.
Simple.
[/quote]
I think we disagree because, and correct if I’m wrong, but you believe the media will say Obama won if he shows up and just does better than before thus expectations are very low. I believe most people in the real world have very high expectations for the President because of how poorly he performed and because they truly expect more for the guy they backed.
[/quote]
You have it backwards my friend. When someone performs poorly expectations are always lowered. And yes the MSLM will say Obama won if his performance is even close to Romney’s.[/quote]
I personally believe for Obama to win the debate he not only has to outperform Romney, but also give a top notch academy award winning performance…so I’m not really wrong I just have a different perspective.[/quote]
So you’re saying that in order for the liberal media to declare Obama the winner he has to give a “top notch academy award winning performance.” Otherwise, you don’t think that the MSLM will declare him a winner.
Oh…you’re absolutely very, very wrong.[/quote]
No I clear said I believe for the AVERAGE AMERICAN to give Obama the win and lean back toward him he has to give the performance of a life time. The media would undoubtedly give him the win if he farted his answers.
[/quote]
Ha ha…I sure hope he tries to answer that way. I would have to say that performance would be most entertaining.[/quote]
Meh I don’t think the town hall format really offers a huge chance for a move. Frankly since likability and empathy are so big here, it’ll be tough for candidates to call each other out or really dominate IMO. I for one am actually glad that the mod can ask follow ups-if not, they both could probably say whatever the hell they wanted with no repercussion.
My curve ball is to expect specifics from Romney on economic policy if he gets a chance. IMO its his game now to throw curves as the debates and try to counteract Obama’s current attacks. From Obama, I will expect him to point out inconsistencies in Romney’s statements on the trail. It should be entertaining, and I think a draw is likely but will both be called by the media and actually be an Obama win in a way. He got destroyed the first time around in public perception, so if he can show life and reasonably perform that’ll be a bump right there. A lively draw IMO helps Obama more than Romney.
[quote]CornSprint wrote:
Meh I don’t think the town hall format really offers a huge chance for a move. Frankly since likability and empathy are so big here, it’ll be tough for candidates to call each other out or really dominate IMO. I for one am actually glad that the mod can ask follow ups-if not, they both could probably say whatever the hell they wanted with no repercussion.
My curve ball is to expect specifics from Romney on economic policy if he gets a chance. IMO its his game now to throw curves as the debates and try to counteract Obama’s current attacks. From Obama, I will expect him to point out inconsistencies in Romney’s statements on the trail. It should be entertaining, and I think a draw is likely but will both be called by the media and actually be an Obama win in a way. He got destroyed the first time around in public perception, so if he can show life and reasonably perform that’ll be a bump right there. A lively draw IMO helps Obama more than Romney.[/quote]
I would agree with this, with the exception of the Romney curve you think he is going to throw. I don’t expect specifics on his plan. Maybe one or two, but not many at all if any.
Agree, a draw helps Obama, and a lively draw will siphon a touch of momentum away from Romney, which will ultimately help Obama more. I believe Obama tries to hit Romney as politicizing the Libya debacle up front, as I expect a question on Libya to be one of the first asked in the debate similar to the VP debate. Romney needs to bat that particular ball and attack out of the park–if he does, he gains points that will likely linger beyond the debate even if it is a draw/slight advantage Obama: this will be because he may help to squarely frame the next news cycle in very direct and unflattering terms towards the current admin.
If he doesn’t bat that question out of the park in public perception he better be on his damn toes and in best form the rest of the debate because Libya is his “big stick” to strike with ala TR’s proverb. That’s the biggest stick he has–economy and record are both tools he can use but the Libya situation is the big and very hot potato being thrown around. He’s got to put it square in Obama’s hands and be likeable doing it. Failure to succeed with that means a much harder debate for Romney to keep momentum alive with.
