This week’s “Saturday Night Live” had a sketch portraying “Day 3″ of MSNBC’s coverage of “the worst thing that has ever happened anywhere”—the debate on Wednesday night. This brilliant bit of parody (no, my wife doesn’t work there any longer, so this does not require a disclaimer) captured one of the strangest aspects of the liberal response to Barack Obama’s performance: The masochistic insistence on going over and over and over just how bad and awful and terrible Obama was.
But was Obama really that terrible? The argument he was rests on the presumption that he failed to make his case and failed to call Romney out. He did fail at those, but as Yuval Levin argues in today’s must-read blog post, that may be due more to the fact that he doesn’t have a case to make and can’t call Romney out so easily; he’s spent the year running against a caricature of Mitt Romney, not on the grounds that he has a positive agenda for a second term. Romney did not let Obama’s distorted descriptions of his policies go unchallenged, and Obama’s inability to come back at Romney is in part the result that all Obama has are allegations, not substantial criticisms.
There’s a reason why Democrats, liberals, and Obama camp followers are concentrating on the debate. They want to isolate it, scapegoat it, and push it over the cliff. They want to say it was a bad night, an off night, a misfire, a lousy game…because anybody can have one of those.
This inadvertently hilarious New York Times story this morning lays out the apologists’s explanation: “Mr. Obama does not like debates to begin with, aides have long said, viewing them as media-driven gamesmanship….Mr. Obama made clear to advisers that he was not happy about debating Mr. Romney, whom he views with disdain. It was something to endure, rather than an opportunity, aides said.”
On the face of it, this is absurd: If he views Romney with disdain, why wouldn’t he relish the opportunity to crush him in a debate? Debates aren’t dates or dinner parties or business meetings; they are contests, and Obama is a very competitive person. Why would he only “endure” one, given how utterly wonderful he is? As for “media-driven gamesmanship,” what does Obama call going on David Letterman’s show, or Jay Leno’s, both of which he seems to enjoy mightily?
Oh, and don’t forget that “Obama’s debate preparations were hindered by his day job, his practice sessions often canceled or truncated because of events.” Yeah, because Romney wasn’t at all busy in the weeks leading up to it.
But, see, now Obama has seen the game films. Now he knows where he went wrong. Now he can come back strong. That’s the comforting thing about focusing on Obama‘s performance. A performance can change. Don’t forget, Ronald Reagan had a bad first debate in 1984 and a great second debate and won by 20 points.
Well, yes, Reagan did, but the economy was creating a million jobs a month and growing at an annual rate of 9 percent that year. Walter Mondale wasn’t going to win that election unless Reagan coded on stage during the second debate. What are the comparable national conditions that call for an Obama reelection? That the unemployment rate is now where it was when he took office four months after Lehman collapsed? That three-fifths of the electorate says the country is on the wrong track?
Obama can do better in the next debate, to be sure…but how? By calling Romney a liar? Does the Obama team think Romney will have no effective response to that accusation in the next two debates? The desperate way Obama and his team are harping on Romney saying he wants to cut funding for public broadcasting shows the condition in which they find themselves. Is his case for reelection that he wants to save Big Bird?
The president didn’t lose the debate on Wednesday because he performed badly on Wednesday. He didn’t perform well, to be sure, but others have done much worse with less fallout.
He lost the debate because he’s been a bad president.
What has gone unnoticed by the media and left since the debate has been Romney's total evisceration of Clinton's convention speech. By focusing on his inability to reach across the aisle, the time he spent on Obamacare and his failed energy investments, you cant make the Clinton case anymore. That counter argument needed to break through the media filter.
ok
At one point, the Obama said something like: n n"This election isn't about the last 4 years, its about the next 4." or some such. n nRomney should take that clip, and juxtapose it with any of a hundred lethal stats pertaining to the last 4 years. n nThe add might close with something like: 'Mr. President, this election is precisely about the last 4 years, and role you played in making them worse than they might have been.' -or something better. I don;t earn a million bucks a year thinking these things up, but there are people who do. n nIn any event, the possibilities with that Obama soundbite, where he is obviously running away from his record in a very graphic fashion, are endless.
0bama: "This election isn't about the last 4 years, its about the next 4." or some such. __Romney should take that clip, and juxtapose it with any of a hundred lethal stats pertaining to the last 4 years. __Good idea! Send it to Romney headquarters.
The media is hard at work trying to make the debates a sideshow, now that their man has been shown to be as incompetent in them as he is as POTUS.
This is pretty ironic because Obama IS the MSM's creature, and oh BTW, with 60 to 80 million viewers the debates ARE media events of the first order.
Funny watching the right spin. Obama's our candidate except when he's not. You guys are hysterical.
"…Mr. Obama made clear to advisers that he was not happy about debating Mr. Romney, whom he views with disdain. It was something to endure, rather than an opportunity, aides said.” …" n n If you factor in that 'insight' from the NYT with the Michael Lewis profile in VF, that indicates a man who maybe wants to debate his bff, Erdogan? n
No, Jay Z, or perhaps even Beyonce.
I think Obama would lose to Elizabeth Hasselbach, at this point. n n
I am keeping all my fingers crossed hoping the Obama team response continues to be, "my opponent is a liar," arguably the most self-destructive campaign theme ever.
If that SNL parody was "brilliant", what am I a genius?
Yes. n nNext question.
It's what happens when a reader tries to debate a leader. n nIt's what happens when a TOTUS tries to debate the next POTUS. n nObammunists are toast. Sorry Tingles.
Just a minor prediction: Obonehead will cancel his participation in the last debate, to focus on the campaign!!! n nI can see it happening, especially if the next debate goes as the 1st one, as cancelling the 3rd debate will be ego preservation!!! n nLet's do this: Never vote for a democrat again — NEVER!!!
I agree with your prediction that Obama will cancel the last debate, but I predict it will be because he must urgently attend to some – probably international – crisis. (Something about a dog’s tail wagging.) It may almost look legitimate, sort of like last Friday's unemployment numbers.
He can wag the dog if he doesn't eat it first.
At one point Obama said if didn't turn the economy around then he didn't deserve a second term. Today I herd a snippet of a speech wherein he claims that he's running for a second term to "prevent" the policies that caused the problems, i.e. Republican policies. Obama is a figment of the media's imagination, and his excuses for his policies and his failure in the presidential debate wear thin.
Can ANYONE here tell me what Mitt Romney believes? He hates the middle class, as he admitted before his billionaire pals, then he apologizes. He wants to extend the Bush tax cuts AND add a 20% across the board tax cut, then he doesn't. He's a flip flopper who has NO values, NO morals, NO views save those he thinks he needs to get elected. He doesn't hold a single view from day to day. He's a liar, a trader with the enemies of America. He has NO plan because whatever plan he has changes like a weather vane. You conservatives nominated this nihilistic monster. He had no dedication to this country, only to international capital. Fine. If he's elected he'll sell out the US so his friends can practice more trickle down. Thanks guys.
The sheer enjoyment of seeing Odumma continually looking down made the case obvious that this joke will never know what to say without his teleprompted script. Hopefully this moron's ineptitude became clearer to the many millions who were not accustomed to seeng him unscreened by the liberal media. Trust is might have helped a few of them wake up to reality since it is obvious the prez isn't going to do it before them.__I am in the process of getting one of those bobble heads that you put in the back of your car showing the character looking right to left and back patented. The Obamma bobble head should make a perfect Christmas present for those who already have a mini teleprompter to put in the back window. Believe me Odumma will never be able to tell the truth about anything if his life depended on it. My biggest hope is that he will get out of the political scene and go be a co-host on the daily talk show circuit. What a looser!!
"He lost the debate because he’s been a bad president". I agree. When Mr. Obama was elected the expectation was that he would learn on the job. Unfortunately he did not
Re: "…he was not happy about debating Mr. Romney, whom he views with disdain. It was something to endure, rather than an opportunity, aides said.” n nWhat kind of man is Obama, to have "disdain" for a political opponent—in this case, a man who represents half of the voters of the United States? Is this another "guns and religion" moment, where Obama tells us what he thinks of the American mainstream, i.e., the citizens of America whom Michelle is NOT proud of! n nThis election is not about "who wins or loses." It's about whether the United States falls into the hands of radical leftist ideologues, who history tells us are adept at putting democracies to sleep permanently. n nOne way or the other, we will get what we deserve this November. Obama is the culmination of several decades of bad choices made daily by ordinary Americans. No one forced us to educate our children in the shoddy way we have, nor to choose NOT to educate the nation's black and hispanic inner-city kids—who now have a huge opportunity to take their revenge, thanks to the 26th Amendment. A n nnd Obama, a born Pied Piper, knows precisely how to channel their revenge: remember his promise to create a youth corps larger than our military, and more generously funded? You think that was just something he said in passing? Barack Obama? n nThese folks are playing for keeps, and they mean to reach a critical mass of "transformations" that will literally "flip" this nation over effortlessly into a thing of their own creation. We, fools that we are, nominate an ineffective and naive politician, Mitt Romney, to oppose him. And this, in spite of his "win" in the first debate! n nMitt didn't "win" anything the other night. Obama lost! By now, most Republicans are glad just to know Mitt's alive and conscious, because we had our doubts on both scores! But "alive and conscious" isn't going to deny Barack Obama et al. their shot at making America over—into creature of their own persuasion ! No, to beat Obama we needed a hero, or a heroine—a political genius with a tough character and the gift of rhetoric that can persuade voters to replace a sitting president in time of crisis. We didn't send that kind of politician to the first debate, did we? n nWe must remain skeptical that Barack Obama will "lose" again. If he does, I will conclude that he is not the evil genius I have always maintained he is. But I'm not holding my breath for that. I'm just hoping, against hope, that for the last four years I've been wrong in everything I thought and said about our first black president.
"No, to beat Obama we needed a hero, or a heroine" I'm sorry, but that's exactly what we DON'T need! Look what electing a messiah, hero, or whatever superlative description you want to put on him, in 2008. How'd that work out? Not so jolly well, I'd say. No, what we need in this election is a competent leader who knows how to turn things around. Mitt ain't perfect, but we ain't electing perfect this time around. I'll take competence over hero worship any day of the week. I left my heroes behind when I grew up.
Mr Podhoretz is absolutely right. Obama had a bad night because the last 4 years of his Presidency have been a failure and a nightmare. The worst UNEMPLOYMENT since the Great Depression, More DEBT than in the history of the world, and he median income has fallen over $4,000. That is nearly a months salary for the average American even though everyone is working harder. That is what Obama has delivered in 4 years, and worse…he has NO PLAN except to repeat it for 4 more years. NO PLAN to improve everything. Meanwhile on Wed night Gov Romney showed us what a President is suppose to look like. Gov Romney showed us what a PLAN to restore growth and jobs is! I just finished looking a PEW Research poll. The first taken after the Debate. This is likely voters. Gov Romney 49% Obama 45%. Gov Romney has a national lead of 4%, and this is a 12 pount turnaround from the last PEW Research poll of Obama 51, Romney 43. Folks…we have hope that President Romney will restore growth, jobs, and Prosperty to our nation. I'm headed to his website to give until it hurts.
Relatively speaking yes. Absolutely, no. He himself stated that he was no great debater. The leader of the pretentious "academia" VS a successful and decent businessman! Pr. O represents a far left narrow vision of the world.
"He lost the debate because he’s been a bad president." n nExcellent piece of writing, five by five on all counts……. n nWe have been saying for a long time…… nThe Emperor has no clothes….. n nHe is going down in November like a cold beer summit in July….bank on it…..
Actually I'd go further, what happened in Denver is that Obama supporters had the equivalent of seeing their parents naked. It just happened to be in front of millions of people on television and they are still recovering from the shock of it. n nNow it's Paul Ryan's chance to make Biden look like a senile old duffer.
"Mr. Obama made clear to advisers that he was not happy about debating Mr. Romney, whom he views with disdain. It was something to endure, rather than an opportunity." n nthis is an interesting view into Barack Obama's personality. we already knew he thought he was Romney's intellectual superior (a safe bet; Obama thinks he's just about everyone's intellectual superior). but now we also know he also saw the debate as a waste of his time–like he resented having to take time away from another appearance on The View or something. n nI guess maybe we should have known that too. it does seem like the presidency often gets in the way of Barack and Michelle's life. I can't remember another president so bewitched by the trappings of office and so unhappy about having to fulfill the duties. most of the presidents in my lifetime have been wonks of one sort or another, even the bad ones. Obama just doesn't seem like he cares.
It's got to be that Obama's staff must be the worst in history. He is here in California today to dedicate a national monument to Cesar Chavez, the famous farmer worker who created the United Farmworkers. Yet he repeatedly pronounces his name as See-zar (like Caesar, the Roman ruler) instead of Say-zar (Cesar) like his name is actually pronounced in Spanish. Now you'd think the staffers would have educated him on that in advance.
It's got to be Obama's staff that must be the worst in history. He is here in California today to dedicate a national monument to Cesar Chavez, the famous farmer worker who created the United Farmworkers. Yet he repeatedly pronounced his name as See-zar (like Caesar, the Roman ruler) instead of Say-zar (Cesar) like it is pronounced in Spanish. Now you'd think the staffers would have told him that in advance.
Romney is to Obama as Krauthammer is to Klein as Man is to Boy.
Exactly! n nIt isn't 0bama's debate performance that should concern everyone, it's His job performance!