For the 500,000,000th time... Obama did not lose that debate.

i agree with you. why democrats on du would not suport the president and put out the falme as the repugs did with ryan, .... i have no idea.

president was presidential. talked to the nation. and allowed romney to hang himself with lies.

but wtf.... if you want to pump romney energy, .... pat him on the back for a night of lies.

Substance people. Don't allow the 1%ers media make it about their perceived 'style'- they are morons!

Can't we just deal with them when we come across them? Lists are creepy.

And never, ever need to encounter proposals that run counter to what you think.

in - something, something zombie, and lists????

Okay

but cointelpro had a habit of instilling their own leaders to mislead people and groups to remain under their control

No one thinks he won. He was more right, but that's not the same thing.

Any time you find yourself telling everyone else to shut up, you can probably bet that you're wrong.

the substance. It looked like he lost. Romney created that impression. That is as deadly as losing righteously.

Put me on the zombie list if you want but impressions are what we have here, the idea that Romney got momentum by 'kicking the president in the slats' which is what a pug told me. We can run in circles here but the impression was created and he has to work against it instead of building on an obvious victory. That he didn't even say 47% is unbelievable. I love Obama and will vote for him but truth is truth. Impressions, not substance bought the viewpoint that Romney won. He can't do that again.

built in to these politically adapted "debates" and then someone wants to to go back to the classic rules. Too late. JFK/Nixon set in this long reaction/manipulation and whether you believe the League of Women Voters holds the most honest arbiter handbook all that was abandoned long ago.

False impression, fraud and corporate media manipulation is the gameboard. You can play astounding chess on that tilt and over go the pieces.

Not understanding how that applies to the event is astounding foregetfulness. Both sides in this maze of illusion get so full of themselves they get lost in it regularly. It is now tilted so badly in favor of the GOP even a professional liar can't beat them at their own game. Dem primary debates and GOP debates are not just ideologically different although they both carry on as if the only thing you can do is untinkingly fail expectations.

There was literally nothing Romney could do other than he did. He was a strutting dead man doing a puppet show bluff. That it seemed to work- on Obama- was a setback we have seen before as in Reagan's betrayal of mental and physical incompetence against a polite, factual, energetic Mondale. But the debate game does not end there. The GOP has a whole preset operation of gaming the media and polls after the debate to make the insignificant real. Mondale was never given any bounce or chance. His victory was turned into a tragic attack on the unclad Emperor. The Dems then as now had nothing except a few standard cheerleading tacks against the machine and a well bludgeoned populace.

"poor debate performance" "mean Joe". Were these Big bird 47% gifts from dangerously deceitful, unlikeable pro-plutocrats/screw America candidates? Even people who don't believe the meme serve the meme by merely repeating the lunacy.

Could for once, instead of trying to beat these obnoxious liars at their own disgusting game, put an honest one back in its place? Or even face up to what is going on and how it is resented when the perpetual Dem straight man script is not strictly followed while Mr. Yuk Yuk star gets to throw pie in the face?

Romney thing is it gives the perception that a weak candidate triumphed over a strong president. impressions count.

I also like the complaining about little paulie. It makes me smile.

I love it when "progressives" think McCarthy like tactics are a good idea! Yea, I'm going to be scared now to say what my opinion is now because of your list >

As some day it may happen that a victim must be found,
I've got a little list — I've got a little list
Of society offenders who might well be underground,
And who never would be missed — who never would be missed!

This G&S fan applauds.

as in...which 'leaders' are actually misleading people...

After the debate, who on MSNBC jumped all over Obama for losing....

who pointed out that everything Romney said were lies, and he was rude and obnoxious and likely cheated?

I will not call an outright liar a 'winner'.

Could the POTUS have countered the lies? Somewhat. Not to the degree that Biden slapped down Ryan.

But I think POTUS had room to let Romney do what Romney does best: Lie. And the media called out the POTUS for being weak.

VPOTUS took Ryan to the woodshed. And the media said VPOTUS was too aggressive.

I think POTUS will now dissect Romney with a quieter touch. And the media can spin themselves into the ground.

If your polls go down after a debate, you lost

if they fake the polls (they wouldn't do that!) to promote their plan to manufacture consent

Then what do we really know about the truth anymore?

As Karl Rove says, they create reality now...

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."[2]

It would be great to say "we won because we told the truth!" But that just isn't the case.

The "winner" is the guy who swayed more people. Unfortunately that was that jackass Romney.

Yeah, President Obama knows better how to debate him next time, but now we're fighting upstream.

does that make it so?

Voters cannot, in reality, change the shape of the Earth.

They can, however, change the occupant of the white house.

Will we just automatically believe the media, knowing it is controlled by people who stand to make money off of pretending the world is flat?

And voters swayed by a liar doesn't mean he "wins." It means those voters are pushovers. Who are these people who changed their minds or decided on that one debate? People who will change their minds easily again.

There's no "winner" except on Nov. 6

Does that make it true?

Fuck no.

Believe me, I wish it was. But debates aren't decided by who told the truth.

of those saying President Obama lost are saying so because they hear Democrats saying he lost, he was off his game, he didn't do X or Y?

If Democrats had started with "Wow, how do you debate with someone that everyone in the building knows is lying?"; rather than, "OH NOES", I suspect the number saying he lost would be less and the polls would reflect something different.

What do you think?

Rationalization doesn't help anything or change any facts...

A loss is a loss...

I hate it, i really do.

but, it has SIGNIFICANTLY altered the trajectory of a growing lead for our President to putting Romney in front.

I don't get it, I REALLY don't get it.

But, the reality of the NUMBERS is now undeniable.

he is going to use that strategy again, no doubt about it. Will it work again? We don't know yet. Obama called him out after the debate, it was too late to affect that debate but maybe it will make Mitt's strategy less effective going forward. And maybe Obama will adjust his own strategy in the next debate. We will have to wait and see.

Snippet..



http://www.eclectablog.com/2012/10/really-democrats-have-you-learned-so-little-about-barack-obama-in-five-years.html

For someone with his intellect and grasp of grammar, that's about the same as a loss.

it was`t even that close.

and who "won" them. Since there is no way to score, there is no way to declare a winner in any case. That's where the pundits show they are not really thoughtful commentators. All they could talk about was style and no substance. The idea of anyone winning these is ridiculous either way.

from "who spoke the most facts and the least falsehoods?" (the classic standard of winning a debate) to "who had the most flash?"

I'm not crazy about what the American people went for, but your moral indignation and a handful of quarters still won't get you on the New York Subway.

I don't fucking give one good G** D*** about how it was done.

You lose a debate when the race changes because you couldn't come up with the most simple responses to the most obvious and foreseeable tactic and the perception of you as a candidate and your opponent as a candidate change, and not in your favor.

It's like people don't understand what our actual fucking goal is on November 6th.

It's Victory, in case anyone needed a cheat sheet. Not a whole bunch of bullcrap whiny complaints.

Election stealing is a legitimate complaint. "My opponent got away with a lot of stuff in a debate because I was too weak to stand up to him"? That is whiny bullcrap. And it's useless.

where the truth falls to second place against style and poise.

Gotcha.

Whining about unfairness about stuff that just sort of happened (who knew Lehrer would be THAT pathetic) is pointless.

The only truth will be who has the right to be in the Oval Office in January of 2013. That's it.

And every other race I'd like to win, that lukewarm Obama has severely compromised now.

But I want a win, and trying to move the pieces back around into different spots on the chessboard for a game that's already been played - silly nonsense.

(1) Obama Now Realizes How Badly He Lost the Debate Here he said he choked.
(2) Obama says he was 'too polite' toward Romney in first debate He was too polite.

Look, even President Obama knows he lost the debate. He says he will not make that mistake again.

It is time to let this go and move on. Sometimes we have to roll with the punches and go on to the next fight.

<joke>

Romney on the other hand, couldn't find the truth with both hands if it was stapled to this butt.

Personally, i think w all need to move on to the next fight. Living in denial is both pointless and soggy.

When people keep repeating the RW meme that changes goal posts where bashing the opponent is "leadership" when their side does it but is "bullying" when your side does it, and your own so-called "progressive" media pundits agree, then the circular firing squad mentality is created. Can you imagine if Obama came out like a Biden? The pile-on would be historically viscous.

I expect Obama will calibrate to the middle of the extremes.

simple first grade logic.

simple rope a dope.
feign for the first 14 and take the punches.
then knock out on 11/6/2012

but then people have doubted him since day one.
and had egg on their face each time they doubted him

Just ask President Hillary44...she can share a funny with us when she is Hillary45 come 1/2017 and looks back on 2008.

and remember, in past elections, even Barry Goldwater, Bob Dole, Mike Dukakis, and Walter Mondale and George McGovern thought a last month surge they felt, was going to mean victory, only to get their asses kicked by the eventual winner.

rememeber, a real man allows a bully to kick sand in their face without feeling they are nothing, and then return another day, using their smarts, instead of their fists.

Mitt shot his load. All he has left are blanks. Obama is Toto. He pulled the curtain on the whole fascade.

because he was unprepared to DEAL with those lies, ESPECIALLY knowing the fucking MEDIA will not deal with those lies

Really, do we have to have this conversation every SINGLE time something doesn't reflect well on Obama? It's not our jobs as citizens or Democrats to "spin" things. It's a valid point that Romney lied his tail off, but a lie unanswered becomes the truth.

Obama stared at his shoes. He mumbled. He hesitated. He cast about. He did not even respond to Romney repeating the "$716 billion cut from Medicare" line 9,000 times.

You can't do that in a debate and "win" under any rubric.

Romney came off looking far better than he had a right to, and Obama had the ability and the responsibility to stop him. It's one thing to point out that Romney was dishonest, but it's another to ignore the fact that Obama did nothing to counter it effectively.

We're supposed to be the ones who are smarter than this.

...it's about an unexpectedly poor performance by Obama which has led to the race now becoming closer.

It matters not that we on DU see through Mitt's bullshit: DU will not win the election for Obama! Yet a complacent attitude could lose it.

Thankfully, Obama (I believe) got the message and will be on his game Tuesday. He needs to WIN (even if in performance) so we DEMS can win in a month. He sure as fuck better see he lost, because a repeat of his "bad night" could be a deal breaker for our chances.

edit: Now Biden won! Obama got some reminders on how to kick ass in debate last night

Biden won last night.

I don't need a pundit tell me who I liked in a debate. Neither do most people.

There's no shame in having a bad night. He admitted he had a bad night. He's moving on to the next one.

I think the debates are stupid, anyway.

but otherwise i agree and have been saying it for a week. you can't WIN on lies. it disqualifies.
i understand that the president was not at his best, but romney brought nothing but deceit and i will not concede the win under those circumstances. i don't think anyone should.

What President Obama "lost" was the media spin that continues to this day. I recorded the debate but purposely did not watch it until AFTER I watched the "LIBERAL" media on MSNBC spin it. Tweety did more damage to the poll numbers than Mitt. I watched the President's jaw clenching and knew he wanted to "attack" but evidently, that was not how he and his advisors decided to play it.

If RawMoney gets elected, it will be because the majority of my fellow Americans are even dumber than I think they are (DU'ers not included in that assessment) and I'm moving to Botswana.

the public who saw the debate think Mitt Romney won it and Barack Obama lost it and this has greatly strengthened the Mitt Romney campaign and weakened the Obama campaign. I doubt that it will cost him the election. But it might.


Uncertainty, in the presence of vivid hopes and fears, is painful, but must be endured if we wish to live without the support of comforting fairy tales. - Bertrand Russell

Democrats slam their ONLY HOPE over the head for "not quite performing to our standards".

If we all agreed, would it change ANYTHING? Will Obama suddenly be leading in the polls again? What the hell do you want, consensus?

Will a consensus of DUers help?

he could have done better by pointing out Romney lies. It is disgraceful that Romney can lie and still be in the running for President. The News media said he lost, MSNBC was having a fit all except "the Rev".

touch a woman, saw a woman in trouble trying to cross a deep stream. One of them took her in his arms and carried her to the other bank, sat her down, and walked on with his friend.

Some time later the other priest started carrying on about their rules, chastising him for acting as he did, and asked "What about your vows never to do that?"

The other priest looked at him and said "Are you still carrying her? I put her down back at the stream".


Let it go...what happens from now on out is more important.

But in the frame of popular opinion, he got his ass whooped. He also had it whooped by the media. I also disagree with the rope-a-dope mentality. I think the President just had a very terrible debate and got some terrible advice in respect to the strategy he employed. Issues like Benghazi are really starting to hurt the President amongst the wishy-washy low information voters (a.k.a. stupid people).

Romney's starting to lead in the polls and the bounce is not evaporating. It's clearly a result of the debate. Biden's performance was stellar, but VP debates don't turn the tide.

IMO, Obama needs the performance of his life in the town hall setting to stop the bleeding. It's amazing to me that one debate has had this kind of effect, but the entire race is starting to head towards toss-up.

He was not happy about his performance.

The majority of people think he had a bad performance. If he didn't say otherwise, people would consider it disingenuous. His information was there, but his performance was not. Debates are as much theatrics as it is content. Obama was limp and too stuffy. He never brought up 47% (I think he was told not to) and he did not challenge Romney at all. It was a shocking performance in that respect.

This next debate he has to walk a fine line because of the format. Town halls are a different beast. I think we're waiting for the last debate for him to unload.

.. told him not to bring up the 47%, that handler should be FIRED.

This is not a gentlemens sport, especially with Romney.

Obama better go for the jugular or he is in trouble.

Don't worry he learned his lesson and won't let it happen again.

is to explain to the public your positions on issues - and you don't do that clearly - and to point out the other guy's lies and negatives in their positions and plans - and you don't do that clearly.....and the voters decide that they want to vote for the other guy because of that debate....you've lost the debate.

If your criteria is that you had the more honorable demeanor, positions, honesty, and you think you did do that, then you won.

It all depends on your definition.

But to hide from the truth is never a good idea, IMO. You can't move forward, if you don't know where you've been.

The numbers tell the story. It's pretty much acknowledged across the country that Obama didn't do well, and the numbers reflect that. People who disagree with you aren't en masse being fooled, or else they wouldn't disagree with you. They disagree with you.

I think Biden definitely won last night, as surely as Obama did not win last week. I don't need a pundit to tell me what to think. I have eyes, ears, and I saw the debate. It didn't change my vote, of course. He had a bad night. He IS human.

He didn't call mitt's bs out and he seemed disinterested in the debate. Not accepting reality is right-wing territory.

...then, for all practical purposes, Obama lost the debate. Even if Romney, in effect, won by cheating. (Which Obama should have called him on. Heck, even I believed a couple of the lies, because Obama didn't come back and say they weren't true!)

Maybe you're scoring the way a judge would on a High School debate team. In that case, maybe you have an argument that Romney didn't win. But in this case, the task was not to "win on points" but to persuade more of the persuadable. By that measure, based on how the polls shifted, I think it's fair to say that Obama lost.

To me, he looked like a schoolboy being scolded up there. If I knew nothing more that what I saw at the debate, I'd probably vote for Romney! Luckily, I know better.

that effect was an increase support for Romney. Are they correlated? how else can you explain?

Let's be empirical and live with evidence. Leave the alter-reality style for the repubs.

Sure, there is some subjectivity involved, but he lost and to me it was very clear. But of course anyone can think anything they like, for example, some people think Justin Bieber is a musical genius or so on, and will never be convinced otherwise.

But you are right about the debate.

are going to milk it.

Romney's debate bounce is bullshit.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251138192

Let's see if Biden's win has an effect. They're already dampening its impact because CNN and some pundits gave it to Ryan.

Obama lost - even he and Joe know it

....and there would have been no reasonable doubt as to who won the debate.

Unfortunately, the media "stars" we have today are on the conservative corporate payroll and the chances of getting an honest commentary are about as good as discovering kangaroos on Mars.

bunch of cowards more concerned with Janet Jackson's "malfunction" than with the truth of what was in Bush's past (which after all was said and done, no one actually suggested the words in the memos were false, just a rightwing character asssassination that never was proven, but by then Dan was canned and no one but Martha had his back.

Shame on CBS
shame on 60 minutes(in all irony on that)
shame on his bosses

and we were the losers.

(and of course the other talking heads made millions off of mocking people like Dennis Kucinich in debates by wasting America's time talking about UFOs(referring to Russert)

and Brokaw made millions with books on the greatest generation.

Plants at the NY Times (blair) and Judith Miller.

and corporations buying all the news that is now not fit to print

The media is the water in which politicians swim. A politician's job is to get good coverage.

...How do you propose that the President get good coverage when the mainstream media is bought and paid for by the very large conservative right-wing corporations that own them?

Just curious, but how many comments critical of the President do you intend to post? Are you trying to run off Obama supporters?

That is what you are saying. Since there is no way for the president to get good coverage, why even bother having an election?

You don't seem to realize that your viewpoint is much more dispiriting than mine.

You are the one driving off Democrats. "It's fixed people... Obama won the debate but through some sort of fraud it became one of the most damaging debate losses we've ever seen."

In my world where Obama isn't a pitiful child to make excuses for Obama can win a debate.

In your world it is impossible for him to win a debate.

Who's the downer here?

Doing my best to ignore.

you are automatically disqualified, and fail with a zero score.

What is the motivation for this continual debate at this time?

He didn't refute anything Romney said.

he came in second.

Get over it and hope that the President brings his "A Game" for the next round.

tell a lot of lies, but the next debate may show the country that Romney is the biggest flip flopper we ever seen.

The last "Presidential Debate" in the USA was held in 1984,
and was hosted by The League of Women's Voters.

The League of Women's Voters officially declined to host the 1988 "debates" because of demands made by the Campaign Marketing teams of BOTH Political Parties.


What we have today are Television Media/Campaign Events masquerading as "debates",
and, like American Idol, whoever "they" want to win, WINS!!!!
DRAMA, Jerry Springer Manufactured Controversy, and maintaining the illusion of a Horse Race are much more important to The MEDIA than boring stuff like Policy, Honesty, Accuracy, History, and Good Judgement.

Wanna know WHY President Obama "LOST"?
He was pulling too far ahead in the polls.



[font color=firebrick][center]The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR. [/font][/center]

[font size=5 color=firebrick]Solidarity![/font]

You'd have to use debate rules from another planet (or Rush Limbaugh's house, but maybe that's redundant) to conclude that Romney won. Under conventional rules, if you lie, you lose.

But I think the President was stunned by the out and right lies that Romney was saying!

You wouldn't have had to post this thread if Obama hadn't lost that debate. The only thing that matters is public perception, particularly in a democracy. The task at hand is Obama winning (or at least tying in) the next debate. This will be particularly true if he calls out Romney on all his bullshit and flimflammery.

But chasing after an argument we've already lost won't do you any good. I'm sorry to be the one to tell you this. But I'm serious about being on the reality-based side of life.

I never thought Obama lost the debate.

Lance juiced himself up with all sorts of illegal chemistry to win his cycling races.

rMoney juiced himself up with a Gish Gallop of lies, and in my view, should be disqualified.

Al Sharpton said it right!