My friend Leslie over at Parsley's Pics posted an article, "God Forbid Should Biden Not Perform Perfectly," in which she chides "fickle liberals" for continuing to focus on bemoaning their disappointment in President Obama's debate performance last week.
Another friend commented that liberals finding Obama's debate performance to be lackluster are not responsible for Obama's slipping in the polls.
I agree that in spite of the incessant fixation on Obama's "poor" performance from some liberals, there is no direct correlation of the criticism from some of the President's base and current polls that show him with fewer Electoral College votes than last week.
However, the chronic complaining hasn't accomplished anything positive either. Liberals and conservatives have for the most part already decided who gets their vote. The target group in these last few weeks are the Undecided. As the candidates rev up their appearances and their ads, each hopes to grab those who are undecided and tip the scales in their favor in the hallowed swing states.
The problem that I have with liberals and the noisy critique from some quarters lamenting Obama's debate style is that it aides the opposition in keeping the focus on trivialities rather than substance. The other problem that I have is that the undecided are important and the way to snag them isn't with expressions of disappointment in the president's performance. He has a staff to evaluate the weaknesses of his debate performance and how to liven it up so that he too can present fluff over substance and thereby compete with Romney.
I just don't think that continued expressions of disappointment about the first debate communicates any reasons to the undecided why they should support the president. No one is going to be drawn to support a candidate whose own base keeps declaring him to be a loser.
It's similar to a business that's floundering. If you want to attract investors to shore up the business and make it profitable again, you don't do so by publicly focusing on the company's failings.
The media keeps rehashing the debate as if Obama's IQ suddenly dropped by 30 points. It was a misstep and instead of wailing and gnashing of teeth, my view is that we, meaning liberals, need to do everything that we can to shift the focus back to the issues and meet the fixation on style over content with solid facts. Facts are unchanging, unlike Romney's version of reality.
I'm not interested in in-house debates among liberals. We all want the same thing. What we have here is a difference in approach. I think that getting Obama re-elected is the priority and we need to do whatever it takes to make that happen, including cutting out all the in-house bickering among liberals about our candidate. As lousy as Romney is, and as much as some elements of the GOP are unhappy that he is the candidate, for the most part, they publicly stand behind him. Conservative bloggers don't as a rule express any serious displeasure with Romney's performance, even when he tells 27 lies in 38 minutes. (Fact Check: Romney Told 27 Myths in 38 Minutes During the Debate)
We've beaten the debate performance drum long enough; I think it's time for a new rhythm.
(I was feeling down after hearing on the evening news that Romney was polling higher after the first debate, until I checked out Nate Silver's blog, 538: "Mitt Romney gained further ground in the FiveThirtyEight forecast on Monday, with his chances of winning the Electoral College increasing to 25.2 percent from 21.6 percent on Sunday." All increases are not equal.)--Oct. 8: A Great Poll For Romney, In Perspective
Yes, I think public self-flagellation isn't the ticket. There are just under four weeks remaining -- that's a long time in political terms. The certified, poll-tested, reptilian-focus-grouped dino-prescription for the president and veep is to get out there and be enthusiastic in running on their record. They can't just assume undecided voters (however few or many there are) -- or even more or less decided ones -- remember that record. The mythical average voter most likely judges candidates on a basis so shallow and perfunctory that it would shock most of us. I'd say that episode of The Simpsons in which Homer makes his choice impulsively for Mittens, is rewarded with a glimpse the mysterious tax returns, and then gets sucked through a tube to a slave-labor factory in China is about right.
ReplyDeleteSo you have to get out there and DEFEND YOUR RECORD -- which, first and foremost, means reminding people what that record is. I think Joe Biden won't mind doing that one little bit -- he's good at debates and hardly afraid to point out the other guy's shortcomings. That's a good start, because Romney/Ryan have enough shortcomings to reach the moon, if you string 'em together.
Unlike Republicans who will goose step in unison no matter how absurd the issue, or how wrong the comment, Democrats expect more from their leader.
ReplyDeleteObama is probably the most conservative Democrat to ever hold the White House, and his liberal critics have been around since his beginning.
Parsely's Pics has a history of intolerance towards those liberals who complain about Obama's job performance, not just complaints about his debate performance.
As a liberal not wanting to follow the goose stepping tactics of Republicans, I think Obama should be exposed to liberal criticism, listen to those complaints, not try to silence those complaints. or label them as hurting the party, or the president. Criticisms can be the best guide to improving the party.
Oh, and by the way, I believe the second debate is coming up in just six days: Tuesday, October 16, 2012, 6:00pm–7:30pm Pacific Time. (Not sure about Jurassic Standard Time -- have to check.) Now, does anybody have any doubt that our dear brothers and sisters The Media will be all a-twitter about the prospects for that second debate? They'll pump it up to something like Thrilla-in-Manilla level, I guarantee it. This is entertainment from their perspective -- the prez needs to use that to his advantage and OVERPERFORM. In less polite terms, he needs to kick him some Mittens ass and kick it good.
ReplyDeleteThe next debate will cover foreign policy. Already Rmoney is trying to burnish his credentials by spouting BS that appears critical of administration policies but actually says NOTHING.
ReplyDeleteKnowing in advance how the MSM reports the news – preferring zingers and sound bites over content and substance - here is what Obama should say about Rmoney:
In 1963, President John F. Kennedy expressed his support for the German people with this phrase: "Ich bin ein Berliner". Considering Governor Romney’s numerous foreign policy gaffes this year alone, perhaps he should honestly and finally admit to the American people: "Ich bin ein beginner!"
Octopus wants a residual for quotation rights - payable in crustaceans.
Really "Anonymous?" Really? Did you read the article? I actually quoted a very astute comment that Octopus made on another blog. If you should decide to climb down from your lofty pedestal and read the article, you'll notice a bunch of links at the end from many other liberal "liberal-bashers" who seem to agree with me. (Psst: It's bad manners to talk about people behind their backs, especially when hiding behind the cowardly "Anonymous" - classy)
ReplyDeleteBut I agree with Sheria. It's time to quit debating the debate and focus on getting this man reelected.
More important. I've read your blog and seen the poor manner in which you treat those (liberals) who disagree with some of Obama's decisions during the last 3 years. The coward is the one who won't allow different opinions within the same party, or demand loyalty even when the messiah is wrong. That's Republican party tactics, a class in intolerance.
DeleteBecause I don't "always" agree with some liberals, mainly those on the hard left, I'm the one who is being intolerant and using GOP tactics??? Go figure. I think you're just pissed because I probably kicked your ass off, whoever you are.
DeleteDisagreement is not intolerance. The coward is the one afraid to speak up and when we have a choice only between a dishonest spokesman for dangerous purveyors of dangerous policies and a less than perfect Obama, and Obama unable for the most part in overcoming the largest filibuster effort in American history, then I'm going to remind the President's critics of just how things are and of just what they support by their snarky, snickering, and arrogantly condescending comments.
DeleteIf I find so many of those critics to be narrow minded and overly concerned with niche interests, I'm going to mention it. I'm not here to soothe you or feed your self esteem no matter how much that ruffles your feathers.
When I hear idiotic arguments about Obama being a Messiah, I'm going to call them idiotic arguments and I'm going to suspect the writer of being a Republican since I've yet to encounter any real Democrat who doesn't see that disgusting gambit as an attempt to distract from the obvious fact that people like Palin and McCain and Ryan and Romney and Bush and Cheney and a long list of others are and have been unsuitable for public office and that their economic policies are in turn fantasies designed to delude the weak minded, neurotic, angry and uneducated American public.
Nobody but the Radical Right has ever called him that and he's not, but he's better as you will find out to your dismay if you succeed in getting a lying puppet like Romney and a radical anarchist like Ryan into position to dismantle America and what's left of her freedom.
Disagreement is not the same as not allowing dissent. An appeal to any coalition between Democratic factions is none of the things you describe and if the Republicans are arguing that compromise is weakness, who then are you emulating? Who do you think you're fooling?
Capt. Fogg: xxxooo x 250+
Delete"it aides the opposition in keeping the focus on trivialities rather than substance."
ReplyDeleteAll they have is the trivial and the worn out fables. Why is no one talking about how this economic debacle was caused by the Republican policies still being touted and about how badly they abused us for predicting it (Liberals hate America and that's why they're 'talking down' the economy)
Why aren't we mentioning the way they used the same arguments against Clinton and how wrong they were then? Hell they used the same "Sympathizing with the enemy" and 'tyranny' and hating capitalism against Kennedy.
They have one trick and we keep letting them get away with it, keep dignifying every stupid challenge by replying to it.
They're focused only on defeating Obama, they have nothing to offer but vague and disgraced generalities and we're worried about 'debates.' The undecided? All 27 of them? Unless the TV in the cuckoo's nest is turned on they don't even watch. You don't change minds that were made up before Obama was born; you don't convince people with reason or argument or debate, you get the majority off their asses and into the polls. You volunteer to drive people, you badger the lazy and you get them to vote.
Couldn't agree more. Charles Blow writes in a NYTimes opinion piece:
Delete"I can understand a certain amount of unease in the Obama-supporting public in general, but within the left-leaning press it’s inexcusable. Only the laziest political commentators could look at the current state of play and see doom for Obama. In fact, the panic among professional liberal pundits is a bit like screaming fire in a theater showing a Michael Moore documentary. Cut it out and grow up!
While the profession is still obsessing about the last debate and Obama’s stumbles, Mitt Romney is strutting around with his bad math pitching himself as a born-again moderate. He is selling vast tax cuts on the vaguest of specifics. It’s like one of those childhood lullabies that sounds good until you realize what it’s actually saying: that the bough breaks and the baby falls."
http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/10/premature-desperation/?smid=fb-share
Good luck on this one...
ReplyDeleteAin't gonna happen in this election cycle in my never humble opinion...
As this is a nation that gleefully elected Richard Nixon and George W Bush twice and spent 8 years trashing Bill Clinton, suing Bill Clinton and mocking not only his attempts to punish Al Qaeda but the 8 years of strong economic growth, the downsizing of government and reduction of entitlements, I have to agree.
ReplyDeleteThis has been a nation at war with itself since it emerged and it will be until it once again splits in two. Unfortunately we no longer have a clear geographic boundary that we can easily split along, so one side has got to occupy and suppress the other. Since most people are of mediocre intelligence, inadequate education and as Nietzsche said, fond of delusions, I expect to see the worst possible outcome to this election. The natural state of government has been a kind of feudalism and that's what the rabble in the street and the Dukes and Princes in their castles are cheering for.
Stupid is as stupid votes.