General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe consensus analysis from this morning's news shows is that Romney lied...
...and that Obama didn't do anything about it.
Therein lies the problem
6000eliot
(5,643 posts)If we know he lied, why would we turn around and vote for him?
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)and Romney continued to lie. At some point you have to wonder when President Obama starts looking bad for pushing back. If the person you are debating tells a lie every time you refute him or her, what can be done? Seriously? What can you do? You end up looking like you don't know what you're talking about.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)not a bad thing.
you cant when with a liar. it is a consistent back and forth, unless a third person is going to call out the lie and stop the back and forth
how petty would obama look spending all his time challenging the lie and romeny lie some more. then obama is tainted with being "angry" "argumentative" right there with romney.
i know this. i see it enough on du. when i address a poster that lies and misrepresents, and my intent is solely to present reality adn truth, i am tainted right along with that poster.
i do not get praise for going after the lie.
annabanana
(52,791 posts)lunatica
(53,410 posts)No one is even pretending that he didn't spit out one lie after another at rapid fire intervals. How can anyone call someone on a lie when ten more follow it in rapid succession?
Obama did the right thing to simply tell the truth and rely on his record. The fact checkers will be doing their job.
porphyrian
(18,530 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)She was never going to vote for him ... but now she hates him with a white hot passion.
And with each lie he told, she got angrier.
If she's like other women, Mitt's "win" might be very short lived. I can imagine a significant amount of blow back.
PRETZEL
(3,245 posts)was seething by the end of this. She kept calling bullshit on Rmoney all nite and sided with the President on every turn.
It was actually quite amusing.
Kber
(5,043 posts)He was absolutely astounded that Romney could change his positions on policies he's advocated for the bast 18 months.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)kurt_cagle
(534 posts)I have a slightly different take than most. I don't think that Obama did well on the debates, but that a big part of that was the fact that the man who he was planning to debate against never showed up.
Obama's a deep thinker, but not necessarily a fast one. He's a fairly classic introvert. He came in expecting to debate the Tea Bag Mitt, and instead he got Mr. Moderate. Romney is an extrovert - he's a salesman, someone who talks fast, thinks shallow, is far less concerned about facts or accuracy and far more concerned about making the sale. About 30 minutes in, it was obvious to me that Obama realized he was in a no win situation - get aggressive and get painted as the Angry Black Man, appeal to the (non-existent) moderator and be seen as a rule's lawyer, or simply let Romney rant and hope to mine the situation for sound bites after the fact.
Romney gained a little ground after the first debate. Good - it will make Democrats a little less complacent. He did so by repudiating his positions from the last six months, by throwing his VP under a bus, and by making some pretty major mistakes of his own (Big Bird is going to hurt him - Big Bird is waiting in the alley beyond 123 Sesame Street with a large lead pipe.) Romney's going to be seen by undecideds (which are admittedly thin on the ground right now) as attempting to pander, and he may have lost some of his base last night as well.
I don't think this was Obama's strategy initially, but I don't think the evening turned out as badly as some here paint.
Tigress DEM
(7,887 posts)Rich people can do that, you know. Hire people to tell them what they want to hear, but when you sit in the Oval Office, only the Actual Facts will get the job done for the American people.
Robme was successful in MA with an 82% or was it 87% DEM legislature. COULD it be that having a NON-Obstructionist party in the MAJORITY was MORE of a factor in Robme's success than Robme's lame ass governing?
I'm just saying.
arthritisR_US
(7,291 posts)overlooked. Astute, and I thank you for making it!
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,426 posts)i recognize that President Obama probably didn't have time to give that sort of response but, yeah, Mitt didn't have to contend with a legislature determined to see him "fail" like President Obama has. When was the last time that a Republican President had to deal with an obstructionist Democratic Congress like this. For crying out loud, even after Bush stole the Presidency from Al Gore, Democrats in Congress didn't declare that they wished to see him fail nor did they declare war on Bush and filibuster everything to death. President Obama probably would've been able to do more if the GOP weren't bent on obstructionism- but I gather that that would've been pretty hard to delve into seriously even though it is true IMHO.
On the Road
(20,783 posts)that is the best possible framing of the debate. I am delighted -- everyone last night seemed completely oblivious to the content and focused on the style.
moondust
(20,002 posts)you're likely to get bogged down in the muck and have time for little else.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)and get mired in point-for-point corrections. Then he's playing Mittens' game.
fugop
(1,828 posts)Mitt Romney, Liar, Liar.
I sure hope that's how SNL portrays it.
FSogol
(45,514 posts)Quantess
(27,630 posts)They have 2 more debates...
JPZenger
(6,819 posts)On Morning Joe this morning, the commentators were told by Obama's staff that their primary concern going into the debates was to maintain Obama's likeability, which they consider his strongest asset. Therefore, he purposefully was told not to hit back too hard.
There will be plenty of time for return jabs in the coming weeks. Biden is ready for a knockout.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)look the same as the one from 2008. She said he looked defeated. I have not watched so do not know.
beac
(9,992 posts)However, like many older folks for whom 9pm is past bedtime, she's up at the crack of dawn every morning watching the TV.
Her anaylsis of the debate she didn't watch? "Romney lied."
This is what she heard on the morning shows and what many other seniors heard this morning.
I'm sure FOX news viewers heard otherwise, but they were never going to vote for Obama anyway.