Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kpete

(71,996 posts)
Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:57 AM Oct 2012

TAIBBI-Presidential Debate Aftermath: Mitt Romney Wins All-Important BS Contest While Media Drools


Presidential Debate Aftermath: Mitt Romney Wins All-Important BS Contest


..............


Romney's performance was better than Obama's, but only if you throw out criteria like "wasn't 100% full of shit from the opening bell" and "made an actual attempt to explain who he is and what his plans are." Unfortunately, that is good enough for our news media, which drools over the gamesmanship aspects of these debates, because it loves candidates who sink their teeth into the horse-race nonsense that they think validates their professional lives
...............................

...................

For God's sake – "I'll take programs that could be run more efficiently at state and send them to state"? Is that a joke? That's worse than a Bill Belichick answer: "What's our plan against the Broncos? We're going to watch the film and do what's best for our football team."

Reporters should have instantly pelted Romney with bags of dogshit for insulting the American people with this ridiculous non-answer, but he was instead praised for the canny "strategy" hidden in the response. Despite the fact that Romney is running as a budget hawk and yet has refused to name any actual programs (except Obamacare and PBS) he will cut, reporters gave him credit in the debate for being willing to be the bearer of bad budgetary news, because he essentially advance-fired Jim Lehrer on TV. Many also complimented the "humor" of the line about Big Bird.

Typically, Obama is the recipient of the breathless media plaudits for meaningless imageering and iconography, but Romney scooped it all up this time. Ugh. At least there are only two more!



Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/presidential-debate-aftermath-mitt-romney-wins-all-important-bs-contest-20121005#ixzz28Wy2SfP5
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
TAIBBI-Presidential Debate Aftermath: Mitt Romney Wins All-Important BS Contest While Media Drools (Original Post) kpete Oct 2012 OP
I would love to see him moderate a debate. JohnnyBoots Oct 2012 #1
I'd pay good money to see it.... Tippy Oct 2012 #2
Taibi or Jim Wright from Stonekettle Station. PDJane Oct 2012 #3
Hell, at this point I'd take David Gergen. JohnnyBoots Oct 2012 #4
I love Matt. I'd also like to see Rachel Maddow moderate. She would be outstanding, and fair. Voice for Peace Oct 2012 #5
The debates should be turned back over to the League of Women's Voters. bvar22 Oct 2012 #6
Bingo! BumRushDaShow Oct 2012 #7
We have the media and the audience we have. gulliver Oct 2012 #8
K&R Fire Walk With Me Oct 2012 #9
 

JohnnyBoots

(2,969 posts)
1. I would love to see him moderate a debate.
Sat Oct 6, 2012, 11:10 AM
Oct 2012

It would never happen, but it would be awesome and very healthy for our country. If people actually addressed the bull shit and made people accountable for it, it would do wonders for our 'Democracy.'

PDJane

(10,103 posts)
3. Taibi or Jim Wright from Stonekettle Station.
Sat Oct 6, 2012, 11:19 AM
Oct 2012

The debate might turn out to be somewhat meaningful instead of this media circus.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
6. The debates should be turned back over to the League of Women's Voters.
Sat Oct 6, 2012, 01:04 PM
Oct 2012

We haven't had a debate since they declined to have any association with the "debates" in 1987.
What we have now are shams.

[font size=3]"The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public." --The League of Women's Voters, 1987
[/font]

I'm glad I'm old enough to remember when to remember when the debates were about policy
and not Bumper Stickers, Zingers, Campaign Slogans.

gulliver

(13,186 posts)
8. We have the media and the audience we have.
Sat Oct 6, 2012, 01:38 PM
Oct 2012

I think Obama has a multi-debate strategy. He and his folks completely understand the media and audience we have. You really can't attack your opponent unless the audience wants you to. And you can't call your opponent a liar in a face-to-face confrontation unless they lie while you are face-to-face. "Your ad says..." doesn't work.

Obama didn't hit Romney with the things Romney was expecting, because Romney would have evaded them. And now that Obama has been lied to (and about) directly in the public forum, he can come back with "Mitt, last debate you said..." The audience will be more ready to accept attacks from Obama in the next debate.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»TAIBBI-Presidential Debat...