Is there anyone here who has been on a high school or college Debate Team?

[CTyankee]

It seems to me that last night we were watching Debate Performance Art. It struck me that Mitt was probably on a Debate Team in prep school or college. There was a definite "feint and parry" routine to what he was doing that kept Obama off kilter. Mitt seemed to always know what his next "move" would be, rather like a fencing team member.

Obama could use some advice from Elizabeth Warren who was a champion debater in high school and clearly shows her expertise going against Scott Brown.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought I was watching a performance of debate techniques that had long been practiced and developed into a skill. Obama needs to learn how to deal with Debate 101 Techniques.

[aikoaiko]

1. Political debates have very little to do with competitive debating any more.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

5. Very Little?

You're being too charitable. These aren't debates, whatever the "commission" might care to call them.

[CTyankee]

6. I was really talking about techniques that are developed. I know that Debate is an academic

area of study. I never studied Debate but I sure thought I was experiencing a debate "performance" employing certain "moves" by the debater. I note that skill with Elizabeth Warren (who also has real substance unlike Mitt) and I've just seen it with Romney. Hence, my wondering if he had had formal debate traininig which he adapted for his own purposes last night. I think it was designed to make Obama seem clumsy and not as light on his feet. Not the words so much as pure stage craft...

[fleur-de-lisa]

2. Give him a break . . . he has a real job!

And one that he does quite well, I might add. And I, for one, am glad he's the guy in the White House right now.

And Wrongney has been fucking off and dicking around waiting for his chance at the POTUS for years! He's bound to have a decent day once in a while. God knows he's had enough bad ones. His foot will be right back in his mouth at the next debate!

[marshall]

3. Obama was tutored in the art of debate by John Kerry

I'm not sure what Kerry's background is in debate.

[CTyankee]

9. this is what I don't get. Kerry's watched Mitt for a long time so he must have known something

like this was likely, even if Kerry himself was not a debater in school. Why didn't he prepare Obama better?

[Canuckistanian]

4. Big difference - you're not allowed to lie in a school debate

If you're found to have made things up, presented false data as fact or outright exaggerated, your title would be revoked.

Credibility is absolutely crucial.

Apparently not so in presidential debates.

[flamingdem]

10. I wonder if Jim Lehrer was supposed to hone in on Mitt's whoppers more

.. maybe he believes all that garbage

[PatSeg]

11. I was thinking the same thing

I did belong to the debate club in high school and we had to be factual in order to win a debate. We weren't graded on "style".

[CTyankee]

17. That's why I called it "performance" debating. Using all the techniques to deliver a bunch of lies.

Of course, it wouldn't stand the scrutiny of a high school debate team. I'm talking about well developed "act" kind of like the way Reagan did it.

[PatSeg]

26. I suppose we live in a substance averse world

People want a "good show", facts be damned.

[GoCubsGo]

22. You're also not allowed to talk over the moderator.

And, when the moderator says "Time's up.", time is really up. The things Mitt did last night would get him disqualified in any high school or college debate, lies or no lies.

[CTyankee]

24. You are right. You couldn't get away with this in a real school debate. I thought Romney was just

employing the techniques to deliver lies. It was all an act. But most people don't know that. So they say "Oh, he WON the debate!" You and I know that in real debates, you can't tell a bunch of lies. But this was a performance. Mitt assumed his "role" and played it using a skill set of techniques with no substance...but it fooled an awful lot of people.

[porphyrian]

7. President Obama performed as planned.

He was Presidential. He answered the questions he was asked and he stood there and took it while Romney lied, flip-flopped and attacked him overaggressively. Romney came across as a smirking, condescending, disrespectful, bullying asshole. Romney lied so much because he knew that the remaining undecideds weren't going to listen to what he was saying. President Obama let him look like a manic prep schooler who just noticed a scratch on his Ferrari. The President also avoided taking the bait that may have made him appear to be an angry black man. Obama didn't fail, he won. People just don't get it yet.

[flamingdem]

15. Considering the lies and aggression coming from Romney, he won

The technique used by Romney was blathering fast spoken bullshit where it's next to impossible to pick out which lie to respond to -- and still Obama got several good zingers in -- but the media is conveniently avoiding repeating those -- and instead is focusing on style issues

[CTyankee]

27. So the issue is the focus on style issues. This really bothers me.

Surely there is a way that we can be just as forceful with substance, and not just lies and hot air. We let the MSM set the narrative and then we don't come up with a better way of presenting our own narrative. It's something Dems have to work on...

[flamingdem]

31. If Obama focused on style the MSM would call him out for that!

Their goal is controversy and their running hard with this scenario.

Classic storytelling also: the hero is under the most incredible pressure and odds are against him.. sometimes I wonder if it's just built in that humans create stress -- in this case Obama is ahead so it seems manufactured

[former-republican]

18. There was no strategy

Can we be honest and say the President was unprepared for this debate.

[porphyrian]

29. If we're being honest, your statements here are wrong.

The Obama team has been more on top of this election than any Democratic team in our lifetime. Do you really believe that they just stopped short of last night's debate? You may not understand the strategy yet, but just wait and watch.

[former-republican]

33. I think they let the President go out there unprepared for Romney's lies and

how to counter them.

He just let Romney lie with out challenging him

[porphyrian]

34. The President let Romney look like a lying asshole to the world for 90 minutes.

That was no mistake or lack of preparation.

[grantcart]

8. Nothing similar in format or anything with HS debate that has rules and honor.

BTW Romney avoided anything that had a competitive edge in high school and college.

The only extra curricular activity he engaged in was cheer leading, something that is designed to provide nothing but positive feedback and win friends.

[CTyankee]

12. Well, he certainly had some clever moves against Obama last night. And sure, his lies are

going to be exposed and torn down. there has to be a very effective way of defending against such obvious "techniques."

[grantcart]

20. Have you seen the ads floating around DU today. They are devistating against Romney. And they will

be seen by 10 times the number of people that saw the actual debate.

Then there is the 47% ad which makes all of the debates moot and reminds people that they cannot trust Romney.

Very effective before, very effective today and very effective tomorrow.

[CTyankee]

25. I know they will be effective. Nevertheless, the whole meme of the debates is who "wins" and who

"loses." That's the premise we're dealing with, if we want to be honest about it. We saw slick moves last night, specifically designed to win in the terms we all agreed to.

This gets to the basic question of what does "winning the debate" mean?

[PatSeg]

13. Does protesting against protesters

count as competitive?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. Not On The Debate Team But I Took Debate In High School

You would be penalized if you just made things up.

[former-republican]

23. this ain't high school

Politics is a dirty game winner take all.

People who choose to take the high road usually end up going home the loser.

That's just the way it is.

[jsmirman]

16. There is more to coming across as Presidential than "appearing" Presidential

the first time I saw the debate, the sound was off, and I gotta tell you, Romney looked calm and forceful to me.

Vote for President Milquetoast is not a compelling campaign slogan.

And if those were "techniques..."

The openings were a mile wide - they cried out for someone who could just put one foot forward in front of the other...

[jsmirman]

19. And from decades of watching any sort of political debate

I find that trained debate silliness, with its binding rules and indirect form of engagement is stomped all over by direct, forceful, logical confrontation on a political stage.

[obamanut2012]

21. They are timed press conferences, not debates

I honestly see no point whatsoever in them for Presidential elections anymore.

[Bonhomme Richard]

28. Never for get that Romney made his career convincing people.......

to part with millions of dollars.
He did by telling them what they wanted to hear. The truth wasn't part of the sell. All that mattered was the outcome.

[Chan790]

30. Which kind of debate?

There are two different styles of competitive debate (3 if you include mock-trial) at the collegiate level with two entirely different competitive procedures and rule books. (held at separate events and with separate national championships.) I was a champion parliamentary debater in college.

• Forensic debate which is what most people think of when they think of debate. This is what Warren did in HS. It's the competition that gets all the attention. I'm not the right person to explain it as I only watched it and never participated.
  
• Parliamentary debate which is designed to mirror the procedures and practice of a legislative body (typically the House of Commons of the UK) and is explicitly a team-format requiring a minimum of two people per side. Lying is not only permitted, it's encouraged if it strengthens your position and can be done artfully in a way that makes rebuttal with citations and facts impossible. The goal is as much to win on argumentation as to trap your opponent into an indefensible position. Its competitive-field at the collegiate level is made up nearly entirely of philosophy and political theory majors.
  
  To answer your question, Mitt Romney was not to my knowledge a debater of either type in college. I don't think he'd have been successful in either format. He lies too much for forensic and he lacks the calm temperament needed for parliamentary.

[CTyankee]

32. I was talking about using debate techniques but not rules, since he is known to lie and he lied

last night. But that isn't the point with these "debates." It's the performance that counts. As long as we agree to "debate" in this fashion we will continue to "win" or "lose" by those rules, which would never stand up in a real debate...

[DonRedwood]

35. yes--debate champion (oregon H.s.) and 54 college awards in national competitions.

I think Obama allowed Romney to lie all night long , and the more he lied and got away with the bigger the lies got. Obama knows there is a whole media operation ready to talk about the lies...so he stepped back and let Romney tie the rope around his own neck.

He could have fought, and wined but his entire speaking time would have been: "Romney is lying". Instead he just stuck to the facts. Notice any news today saying Obama was lying? Nope. It's all Romney lied and lied.

[mrs_p]

36. yes, I had an OP about it last night

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021464672

But I had an opposite impression than you. Talking over the other side and presenting lies and interrupting the moderator would have cost me a debate, not won me one.

[CTyankee]

37. Of course! Yet we accept the term "debate" when it truly isn't.

Some talking head this morning said Mitt was delivering a "performance." Exactly. Performance as in "acting."

[mrs_p]

38. agreed - all theatrics, no substance. nt