MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus:         Newsletters 
Wednesday, October 1, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 68.0° F  Overcast
Collapse Photo Bar

Impressions of the Debate

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Francis Di Domizio » Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:14 pm

Just out of curiosity, How do people define "Winning the Debate"? I get the impression there are several different views of what that constitutes being thrown about.
Francis Di Domizio
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2475
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 8:11 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Huckleby » Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:21 pm

pjbogart wrote:Huck, let me give you a specific example of why I think Obama won on substance, even if you feel he lost on style. Mitt Romney has proposed a 20% across the board cut on taxes. The CBO scored this cut and says that it will cost $5 trillion over ten years. When asked how he planned to pay for the tax cut, Romney stubbornly kept saying, "it's revenue neutral, it doesn't cost anything."

Romney coceded that he might be able to do the full 20% if enough deductions could not be found.

I agree that Romney lost on substance with taxes.

I'm a bad judge of any of this, because I'm a political junkie and I find close to 100% of Romney's positions to be bullshit. It's hard for me to relate to the people who were persuaded by hit rapid-fire bullet points.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6635
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Huckleby » Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:22 pm

Francis Di Domizio wrote:Just out of curiosity, How do people define "Winning the Debate"?


1) Leaving a strong personal impression - character & personality.
2) Persuading more of the persuadable than your opponent, reflected by polls
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6635
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby rabble » Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:54 pm

Huckleby wrote:
rabble wrote:The only ones who get the substance are the ones who are listening and trying to GET the substance. It's not the unconverted you're talking about - it's the lazy, stupid, and unwilling.

Your thesis is that the post-debate, 5% swing to Romney consisted of the lazy, stupid and unwilling.

Obama had won just about 5% in the polls in three months prior to the debate. The same lazy, stupid, and unwilling people?

Who the hell knows? Maybe they're from that freeloading 47%.

Huckleby wrote:I would say the common attribute of the persuadable is that they are politically disengaged. They don't have all the facts organized in their heads. They are looking for a presentation of substance that makes a side of the argument seem to make sense.

Your thesis is that they're too stupid to check facts. I guess I'd have to agree, with one caveat: That five percent jump happened after the lame steam media told everybody who won. They didn't know Romney won till the TV lady told 'em so.
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6218
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Huckleby » Wed Oct 10, 2012 10:04 pm

rabble wrote:That five percent jump happened after the lame steam media told everybody who won. They didn't know Romney won till the TV lady told 'em so.


I don't believe it. People react to what their gut tells them.

My own reaction afterwards: Obama did a poor job, Romney did well but came-off as unlikeable. It didn't seem a complete blow-out, I thought Obama had some strong sections. The analysis did make me feel more negative towards Obama.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6635
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby pjbogart » Wed Oct 10, 2012 10:54 pm

Huckleby wrote:
rabble wrote:That five percent jump happened after the lame steam media told everybody who won. They didn't know Romney won till the TV lady told 'em so.


I don't believe it. People react to what their gut tells them.

My own reaction afterwards: Obama did a poor job, Romney did well but came-off as unlikeable. It didn't seem a complete blow-out, I thought Obama had some strong sections. The analysis did make me feel more negative towards Obama.


So you don't believe it, but you admit that it affected your perception as well? Go back and read the first ten posts on this thread, looking back at reactions while they were fresh in our minds. Note that the naysayers all referenced post-debate analysis.

Now go back and watch some clips of the debate with an open mind. See if you think the analysis is a bit over-reactive.

I'll pound this pavement until it gives, I swear. The media wants a horserace and Obama was running away with the election. The notion that Romney hit a home run is absurd... he hit a fly ball to center and Obama lost it in the sun. Good for a double, but he's no Babe Ruth.
pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6164
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Prof. Wagstaff » Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:44 am

pjbogart wrote:The media wants a horserace and Obama was running away with the election. The notion that Romney hit a home run is absurd... he hit a fly ball to center and Obama lost it in the sun.


I say, fuck the election and bring on the Horse Baseball League!
Prof. Wagstaff
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 8905
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 6:35 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Stella_Guru » Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:21 am

Slick Willy wrote:
Meade wrote:He is the personification of All style; No substance and people (most disturbingly for his supporters - women and young voters) are just now beginning to see through him. Thus, his radical drop in the polls.

That's funny, because in this last debate, I would say exactly the opposite; he was all substance and no style.

Yes, Obama was all substance and the guy who stood on stage flat-footed and unprepared was the real Obama. He said, "You know, I suspect that on Social Security we've got a somewhat similiar position." Also, "Romneycare and Obamacare are effectively the same, a Republican idea." President Obama dropped his Democratic act showing his true political self, a corporate politician who is in general agreement with his crime partner Romney. Dems are refusing to admit what they see.
Stella_Guru
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1216
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 7:08 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby wack wack » Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:41 am

Huckleby wrote:
wack wack wrote:
Huckleby wrote:You can not seperate style from substance.


Where do you come up with this stuff? Of course you can. Those who listened on the radio absolutely did separate style from substance, and recognized the truth about the bully Romney.

There is a "truth" about the bully Romney? Don't you understand that this is an opinion?


Yes, Huckleby, and not just an opinion but an intentionally absurd opinion. Almost as absurd as suggesting style and substance can't be separated.

The truth of the debate, and this IS truth, not opinion, is that Romney made many assertions and pronouncements which largely or completely conflicted with his previously asserted, well-recorded positions. People who weren't suckered by his style saw right through this.

Is it just my opinion that information must be real and true to count as substance?
wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3154
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Slick Willy » Thu Oct 11, 2012 9:15 am

Stella_Guru wrote:Yes, Obama was all substance and the guy who stood on stage flat-footed and unprepared was the real Obama. He said, "You know, I suspect that on Social Security we've got a somewhat similiar position." Also, "Romneycare and Obamacare are effectively the same, a Republican idea." President Obama dropped his Democratic act showing his true political self, a corporate politician who is in general agreement with his crime partner Romney. Dems are refusing to admit what they see.

Obama may be a corporatist Democrat, but there are still some distinct differences between him and Romney. Romneycare and Obamacare are similar, but not exactly the same. Romney is proposing vouchers, which is a terrible idea, because the poor and middle class will get the short end of the stick. Their stances on public education and helping college students are also very different. Their tax plans aren't the same, which we would clearly see if Romney were to take office, because he definitely believes in trickle-down economics. The tax loopholes that Romney would eliminate would hurt the middle class much more than the rich. Romney is avoiding giving details about his tax plan for a good reason. There's no question in my mind that Obama is going to be better with foreign relations, and we'll see that in the coming debates.
Last edited by Slick Willy on Thu Oct 11, 2012 9:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
Slick Willy
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 366
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:54 am
Location: Madison, WI (Allied-Dunn's Marsh Neighborhood)

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby scratch » Thu Oct 11, 2012 9:48 am

pjbogart wrote:The media wants a horserace


I think this is at the heart of the recent spate of media attention to shifts in polling results that are frequently within the polls' margin of error, but are nonetheless breathlessly reported as major shifts.

That being said, Obama continues to remind me of Carter in 1980. Carter was rolling along with a consistent but underwhelming lead in the polls until Reagan unleashed the "There you go again" thing and the "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?" gambit. A good slogan delivered by a facile smiling dork with impressive hair will beat policy and a grasp of reality any time. If Obama doesn't turn it around in the next debate ("it" being perceptions, not necessarily reality), he'll join Carter, Mondale, and Gore as incredibly ineffective candidates.

Any chance Obama could call in sick for the next one and have Bill Clinton substitute for him?
scratch
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 741
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 1:00 pm
Location: Dane County

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Oct 11, 2012 10:22 am

First presidential debate did little to sway swing state voters, poll says

The big boost GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney got from the first debate with President Barack Obama didn't carry over into how voters are likely to vote in Wisconsin and two other swing states, according to a new poll.

The Quinnipiac University/New York Times/CBS News poll released Thursday found that while voters felt Romney won the debate on Oct. 3 by a 4-1 margin, the boost didn't make much difference to likely voters in Wisconsin, Virginia and Colorado.

Remember, it's all about Electoral College votes, not the nationwide popular vote.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19923
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Francis Di Domizio » Thu Oct 11, 2012 10:34 am

Wisconsin voters gave the edge to Obama 50 percent to 47 percent in the new poll, while a poll taken in September had the president ahead 51-45.
In Virginia, Obama gained a point to 51-46 from a 50-46 edge in September.
Colorado voters put Romney up by a point, 48-47, compared to Obama up by a point with the same percentages in September.


Bill Novak has an interesting definition of "little to sway swing state voters"

3 point swing in Wisconsin (Romney up 2, Obama down 1)
Romney taking the lead in Colorado (granted by a 1 point)

Neither are huge changes, but a reversal of the lead, and a 3 point swing doesn't really seem to fit Novak's premise that
The big boost GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney got from the first debate with President Barack Obama didn't carry over into how voters are likely to vote in Wisconsin and two other swing states
Francis Di Domizio
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2475
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 8:11 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Radical Cheerleader » Thu Oct 11, 2012 10:53 am

scratch wrote:Any chance Obama could call in sick for the next one and have Bill Clinton substitute for him?

I think Obama will actually do much better at the next two debates, but it's true that Bill can debate his ass off. He would never sit back and try and be polite the way Obama did no matter how little he prepared for a debate or how much his opponent changed positions on issues. That guy is ready to debate at a moment's notice, because he still lives and breathes politics and is extremely well read. Plus, he has a fire in his belly that I just haven't seen from Obama lately.

Aside from the recent display of Clinton's abilities when he spoke off the cuff for half of his speech at the DNC, watch him go at it with Chris Wallace in an interview on Fox News in '06.
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
His passion and his ability to think quickly and use all of the facts he has at his fingertips makes him someone whom everyone may not support but at least respect
Radical Cheerleader
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 11:14 am

Re: Impressions of the Debate

Postby Huckleby » Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:16 am

Radical Cheerleader wrote:I think Obama will actually do much better at the next two debates

I don't think either of the next two debates will be opportunities to undo the damage of the first debate. Obama does well in town hall format, but it won't reverse the impression of weakness he left in direct confrontation. Foreign policy debate is problematic because of Libya.

The election is tied, and I have no idea what will be critical factor. Who really knows what the persuadable voters in Ohio and Florida are thinking.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6635
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

PreviousNext

Return to National Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar