Romney debate 'win'-The Manipulation of the good will of the people-

[noel711]

An excellent analysis of the debate debacle, and how the Romney
team is taking advantage of a 'trusting' electorate
(altho for the life of me, I don't understand how people fall for such bull)-

Neil Buchanan nails it:
"What is new in this election is the extra step that the Romney/Ryan campaign has taken, in its cynical manipulation of the debate process. They are not just ignoring the rules of debate; they are preying on people’s deep-seated desire to believe the best of others. Romney and his running mate are able to stare people in the face and force them to either say, “I don’t believe you,” or else stay silent out of a misguided but understandable politeness. Many people simply do not want to say or believe such an unpleasant thing as that a person would straight-out lie, a tendency that the most manipulative salespeople in the world have always been able to exploit."

Romney as 'used car salesman..'

"This tactic was especially clever, because it put President Obama in an impossible position. Many post-debate criticisms of President Obama have centered on his passivity, noting that he failed, as one pundit put it, “to say three simple words: ‘You’re lying, Governor.’” The smarminess of Romney’s strategy, however, relies precisely on the voter (just like the car buyer) being repelled by such a frank statement by the President.

People do not, after all, want to believe that they are being lied to, and they certainly do not want someone else to call a sincere-looking person a liar, especially to his face. It is just plain rude! The liar/salesman can then look back at the victim and say: “He just called me a liar! Can you really look at me and believe that I’m lying?”

"Governor Romney’s debate “win” last week might thus have come at a very high cost. He is coming to be seen more and more as someone who is willing to say literally anything to get what he wants, from moment to moment. People are, it is true, often temporarily manipulated by such con men. But people quickly come to look upon them with great distaste. The key question for this election is whether people will have buyer’s remorse before, or after, they vote.

http://verdict.justia.com/2012/10/11/would-i-lie-to-you

[regnaD kciN]

1. The solution...

...is not to call Romney a liar, but to call his statements lies. More specifically, saying something like "I'm sorry, Governor, but that's simply not true" (preferably in the tone of a college professor reacting to one of his freshmen students insisting that Afghanistan is in South America) is not quite as confrontational (or potentially repellant) as calling one's opponent a liar, for it leaves open the possibility that said opponent is merely greviously misinformed.

[Lefty Thinker]

3. Or maybe humor

I wish that President Obama had said, "I wish that my elementary math teacher had been as forgiving about showing the work as Governor Romney would like the public to be about his tax plan."

[noel711]

2. And in our current climate, 'politeness' is weakness...

It seems as if the media wants a down-and-out slugfest.
And no matter what, Obama comes out the loser:
either he's an angry black man,
or he's weak and ineffective.

No middle ground; but I don't get Romney's rising numbers.
His phoniness, his facade of greasy falsehoods,
his voice makes me cringe.

Am I living in a Bizarro world..?

[ashling]

4. I'm tired of the whole win - lose dichotomy to describe the debates

As if it was scored like a sports event. If anything, it is more of a theatrical event. Pantomime, to be exact.

What did it reveal about the candidates. . . and that requires a more nuanced view.