Jeff Greenfield--"as one sided [a debate] as I've ever seen"

[woolldog]

ouch.

Although the Stockdale VP debate in 92 was more one sided, imo.

http://news.yahoo.com/after-the-debate-debacle-for-obama--we%E2%80%99ll-find-out-if-we-have-a-race.html

[FrenchieCat]

1. I didn't listen to this guy when he was on CNN......

So is there a reason I should be listening to him now?

Didn't think so.

[still_one]

2. jeff greenfield is a right wing asshole, and has been one for some time after he left nightline with

Ted Koppel

[TroyD]

3. Wasn't Jeff Greenfield one of RFK's speechwriters?

I don't think he's right-wing.

[still_one]

24. He might have been, I don't know, but I do know when he left nightline his commentary seemed to move

to the right in my perception

However, the statement that he made regarding this debate is a lot of hyperbole, again in my view

[Floyd_Gondolli]

4. Thanks for proving Greenfield is alive

I thought he shuffled off this mortal coil sometime after the 2000 selection. He's definitely been residing in the where are they now file.

[WI_DEM]

5. Let's move on--we know it wasn't a great night, no need to keep wallowing around

about it. There are three more debates and those will be as important.

[mzmolly]

6. How does one properly prepare to debate someone who changes positions

every hour?

[woolldog]

7. I couldn't begin to tell you molly

But this was bad. The stammering, the lack of preparation, the nodding in agreement while Romney was lying and on and on. Just an impossible performance to defend.

[TroyD]

9. I didn't understand that either

Obama needs to change his body language

1. No more nodding in agreement with Romney

2. No more saying Romney & I basically agree on this issue (PROVIDE CONTRASTS)

3. No more looking away to the side when Romney is speaking (CNN commented on the lack of eye contact Obama made with Romney)

4. No more smiling or looking guilty when Romney attacks him

5. No more looking down the whole time Romney is speaking

[mzmolly]

10. I think I'd stammer as well, if someone came into a debate with brand new

positions on many important subjects, and lied his ass of, while feigning a command of the facts. It's like trying to reason with crazy. How does one do that, effectively?

On an up note, debate expectations for Obama are greatly lowered, and Rmoney will have to "perform" in the future. This time, he'll be called out on his bologna given he's on the record with his new ideals.

[TroyD]

11. 'I think I'd stammer as well, if someone came into a debate with brand new'

I'm sorry, but there's no excuse for Obama not realizing by now that Romney is a PATHOLOGICAL LIAR.

If I were debating Romney tonight, or if Ted Kennedy were here, he'd be giving Obama the same advice - assume that Romney will change his mind on every issue and lie about everything.

Remember:

Ted Kennedy vs. Mitt Romney - "My opponent is multiple choice"

[woolldog]

12. you're one of the few posters on here who gets it. nt

[TroyD]

15. Thanks : )

How best do you think we should try and convey what Ted Kennedy was trying to get across about Romney?

[woolldog]

18. seems to me that every time he comes up with new policy or arguments

like he did in this debate, that opens the door. And Obama's got to seize it there and ask how the american people can trust him when he changes his policy every five minutes. And when Romney says "no I didn't change my mind" Obama says "you're doing it right now as we speak" and keeps hammering home the idea that Romney changes his policieis so much he cant be trusted, we don't know what his policies really are....then contrast that with Obama's steadiness, how he's kept his promises etc etc

[mzmolly]

38. How about something like "There's that etch a sketch again."

Going forward of course.

[mzmolly]

13. I think the first step, was allowing the public to see what Rmoney has to say of late.

The second step, will be calling Rmoney on his b.s. "My opponent is multiple choice" is far more effective, once you can demonstrate it with clarity.

[woolldog]

16. A skilled debater would've done that during the debate.

[mzmolly]

17. I dunno. Do you want to play your cards early

in the game and spook your opponent into stopping the lies? Or, do you want to wait until the next debate and show your new ammunition?

[woolldog]

19. yea but now I have to deal with RWers

telling me for the next 2 weeks that all the crap they say about Obama (see he needs a teleprompter, he's an affirmative action President, Romney is much smarter) is true. They're intolerable.

[mzmolly]

20. I'd rather hear about a tele-prompter, than a man without any truthful positions.

[gkhouston]

30. But he didn't need a teleprompter. He knew what his positions were, and for the most part

he didn't let the Romney sideshow derail him from outlining his plans, nor did he let Romney make him look angry. Romney needed to grab some headlines with this debate and he's done that -- by lying and behaving in a domineering manner. Some of Romney's biggest negatives are that people suspect he's dishonest about his taxes and Bain and that he's an unsympathetic jerk, and Romney just gave us video that heightens those concerns.

I've known liars who do the bullshit blitz with a side serving of verbal intimidation. In the short term, it cows people, but when you step away from it, you realize that you've been manipulated by an asshole and that strategy's not so successful a second time.

[mzmolly]

40. "bullshit blitz"

Love it!

[hamsterjill]

34. I don't know the answer to that either.

But early voting is already in progress in some states, and I saw THAT argument used here for the times that Obama was trending comfortably ahead in the polls.

So I would have to ask the same question as to the logic in waiting for the remaining debates to "seal the deal".

Honestly, I'm not arguing and I do not know the answer. Mine is simply an observation.

[AverageJoe90]

22. That is becoming more and more plausible the more I think about it.

Hasn't Obama always been real good at rope-the-dope type strategy?

[mzmolly]

26. Yes

he has. And, when it becomes apparent we liberal critics say "ohhhhh, now I get it!"

[AverageJoe90]

28. Sometimes it takes a while. =) nt

[jsmirman]

29. I cannot fathom how this flummoxes some of you

I'm going to repeat myself here:

You say that he's shaking the etch a sketch and every time the guy makes up one of his positions, call him a fucking fabulist and tell everyone you have a website set up (hint: barackobama.com) where you can compare what he said six days ago with what he said tonight.

How can this be fucking complicated?

You point out that a candidate who already has credibility problems appears to stand for nothing because what he is saying tonight is thoroughly at odds with everything he's said the last year.

This is so painfully obvious.

Our fucking President took the night off on the most important night of the whole campaign. And that is bullshit.

I don't care what else is going on. I just don't.

Because if Romney wins, I seriously want tickets for the moon colony and I am *terrified* of space travel. But I think Romney in the Oval Office is a massive threat to the globe - I find the odds frighteningly high that he would get us to WWIII in five easy pieces.

What could possibly be more important than preventing that???

[mzmolly]

32. Why is it too late

to counter the lies?

I do not think a so called debate win will translate into an electoral lead.

[jsmirman]

33. I hope it's not, but you had free tv, and the first debate

the Conventions, the first debate - these are massive opportunities where people don't have much of anything else they can watch (unless they are sports fans and fans of a few particular teams (like myself)) - and a campaign's message is broadcast to a very wide audience. And the first debate has the added benefit of your "viewpoints" (quotation marks for Romney) being put forth under chance of hostile fire, unlike a convention.

What comes after? Ads, web ads, campaign speeches... none of these have the same breadth of audience. You're either paying for them and hoping someone will pay attention or you're putting an ad or a speech out there and hoping people are really willing to be interested.

To say nothing of the fact that people are currently voting.

It's not irredeemable, one hopes, but it breathed life back into a moribund campaign that could have had the stake through the heart last night, and it failing to seize your best opportunity to connect with a uniquely captive audience.

[mzmolly]

37. I agree on breathing a bit of life back into the Romney

campaign, but my gut says the impact on the polls will be minimal. I think American's are well aware of Romney's elitist/lying baggage.

[jsmirman]

39. We'll see - I'm finding a successful form of pushback

is that I acknowledge Obama's poor performance and point out all he needed to do was accuse a liar of cognitive dissonance in maintaining two contradictory viewpoints simultaneously.

I consider it one of the more bristly backhanded compliments/concessions I've made in a long while.

[mzmolly]

41. I think that's a good plan.

[BootinUp]

8. Greenfield? Who gives a fuck what that RW hack says!

[progree]

14. I always wondered about this "undecideds" thing, like we've got it in the bag because of our polling

margins and there being so few undecideds.

A memorable quote from this article:

"One of the enduring myths of campaign analysis is that you can actually count the number of “undecided” voters by asking voters if they are undecided or not. Sometimes, significant numbers of voters actually change their minds. That’s how Reagan turned a small lead into a landslide in 1980. It’s how Gore won the popular vote in 2000, and how Kerry got back into the race in 2004."

=================================================
There are sure a lot of people on DU in other threads that are saying the same things that Greenfield is saying about Obama's debate performance. The most positive of the majority of comments that I've read are like, well, he didn't lose too badly, not bad enough to really matter. Or wait til tomorrow when the fact checkers weigh in and the Obama team makes commercials.

[woolldog]

21. bandwagon effect

There are plenty of soft Obama and Romney voters just waiting to jump on the bandwagon of the "team" they feel is gonna win.

[TroyD]

23. That's why the media narrative & debates are still important

I hate it that some people tonight are saying 'debates don't matter'.

We don't know that yet.

Obama has had the momentum lately, as have the Democrats in the Senate races.

Don't blow it.

Otherwise, Richard Carmona, Shelley Berkley, Claire McCaskill and others will be at risk of losing.

[writes3000]

25. Some people get off on "the sky is falling"

Some people get off on anxiety. Others get off on being the first one to be negative so no one ever hurts them.

Must be exhausting. Poor Jeff Greenfield.

[Robeysays]

27. lol nah he did fine.

everyone got turned off by mitt at some point at some time.

one sentence quips, said briefly.

lying sons.

loving to bring his money back.

removing mortgage deductions.

knows a thing or two about off-shoring.

I thing 50 billion for clean energy is dumb.

"rich people, that number goes away" speaking of the "17,000, or no 23,000, or wait 50,000, hard to keep up with mitt" deductions cap for income taxes.

I like obama care, ...for states.... ....but i like obama care.... for the states.

big bird and shit

i want to repeal obama care, blah blah blah.

and the more people that google the 716 billion quip will find out it was waste.

people are not as dumb as us on the left assume. stop smelling your farts and feeling down.

rnomey did not win this debate.

the dude said a lot of shit side ways that i could easily see offending 6% of the electorate every time.

he did it every time he spoke. multiple times. the guy is out. of. touch.

[AverageJoe90]

42. Agreed. nt =)

[geek tragedy]

31. He's right--Obama looked weak, tired and out of answers.

Obama didn't mention the auto industry when talking about jobs or the role of government. Didn't have a crisp talking point on ANY question.

He will be behind within a week. Terrible.

[progressivebydesign]

36. Oh please... the media is wiping the floor with Romney right now...

the lies are being exposed. Your user name is fitting...

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

43. Too bad the same amount of people who watched the debate....

....aren't watching the shows you and I watch.

[progressivebydesign]

35. 1 person bullied the moderator, disrespected the POTUS, and acted like a crackhead..

lied and smiled thru the whole thing, while talking over everyone.

So yes, one-sided, in a way. But have you ever had some ASSHOLE show up at your party and just talk about himself the entire time, telling stories no one wants to hear, and never letting anyone else talk??? That was Romney last night.

He is an absolute narcissist. He is CLASSIC case. Just because he was overbearing and loud and creepy, doesn't make him someone people want to vote for. More people were turned off by him.... He just rehashed the lies from his PAC ads and speeches, and he's paying for it right now.