Is Obama overrated as a candidate? (Why I don't like Chris Cillizza)

[LiberalFighter]

I'm not even going to include any excerpts from the jackass.

If you want to read his article over at the WP it is here. Link

Everyone should tell Cillizza that he is an overated reporter/writer. I see him tear apart Obama too many times for stupid reasons without doing the same to his opponent.

[BlueCaliDem]

1. Cilliza is another GOP hack posing as a reporter.

I can't stand the guy, and you're right . . . he tears Democrats apart and gives Republicans a HUGE pass. I won't even bother with reading any of his tripe. It's just regurgitated rightwing talking points anyway.

[grasswire]

2. HACK

It's time for us to start exposing the hacks and stooges.

[Blaukraut]

3. He's Andrea Mitchell's favorite guest contributor. That should tell you everything. n/t

[underthematrix]

4. Just tweeted Chris the following

still voting EARLY, still voting PBO, still voting every DEM down ticket. But by all means keep yr BS up!! Tweet the sorry fool and let him know u r still going DEEP BLUE as EARLY as possible.

[Cha]

5. Chris Cillizza is an asshole..that's what assholes

do.

[geek tragedy]

6. Obama is overrated as a candidate and underrated as a President.

That debate showed that his skill at communicating and driving a message is much weaker than people think.

His ideas are generally right, but he for whatever reason doesn't argue for them particularly well.

He won the Democratic nomination because he was right on Iraq vs those who voted for it.

He beat McCain because it was a wave year for Democrats and McCain flamed out over the economy.

He's not 1/2 the talent that Bill Clinton is. He's more disciplined, but much less effective at communicating.

[JoePhilly]

7. Obama is also unwilling to lie. Mitt had no problem lying, and Obama wouldn't do it.

That's the real difference.

And Bill Clinton isn't running ... but he is campaigning for Obama ... try to keep up.

[geek tragedy]

8. That doesn't excuse his debate performance.

Forget about lying, he had no answer for Romney's claim that tax cuts for rich people produce jobs. He had no coherent answer regarding what he saw the role of the federal government being.

He didn't talk about the auto rescue in a debate about job creation.

He didn't talk about jobs created by wind and solar energy.

Etc etc etc.

It was a politically incompetent performance.

[JoePhilly]

12. So how would you like to hold Obama accountable for his debate performance??????

I mean, I've noticed you post on his terrible performance in multiple threads ... surely you have some method in mind to hold him accountable ... as you said ... we can't EXCUSE his performance.

Well, what should we do to him?

Please ... I'm listening.

[geek tragedy]

13. Well, those campaign emails asking for money

aren't drawing donations from our household like they did the week before the debate.

If/when he regains our confidence, that will change.

[JoePhilly]

20. That's your plan?

Sounds good ... btw ... I'm bumping mine up because of the new UE number ... that added to my confidence in Obama.

Didn't help you apparently.

[underthematrix]

46. Really? The donations have dried up

Well that's interesting because it seems have continued to flow nonstop to PBO and the DCCC. I thought PBO did a great job with the debate. He allowed mittnocchio to tell as many lies as possible. He got of his way and let him play the compassion card to 62 million viewers, 75% whom knew he was lying because he only tells the truth in quite rooms with other 1% greedy righties. The real job creators are the consumers who buy the 1percenters products. Most pundits have jumped on the "PBO gave a poor debate performance", while failing to point out the lying orifice mittnocchio used to spew nostop lies. I guess the American people are smarter than the pundits because they seem know mittnocchio was lying and lying and lying. The MOST IMPORTANT statement made by PBO was following: "this is where budgets matter because budgets reflect choices". In other words, mittnocchio's mouth was moving but the truth is in the numbers - 5 trillion dollar tax cut mostly for the rich. Cutting the deficit by firing BIG BIRD and Jim Lehrer, repealing OBAMACARE, which will increase the number of uninsured, including seniors and children, dismantling the safety net for the poor, food stamps, school breakfast and lunch programs, and massive cuts to education that will eliminate opportunity for the children of the middle class and working poor. This is just to name a few.

[phleshdef]

54. He doesn't need your money. He has all the money he needs to finish this election as it stands.

Get over yourself. If "debate performance" is the shallow criteria for which you base your support on, then fuck your support. No one gives a shit.

[treestar]

62. I said the same thing below but not nearly as succinctly!

Politicians need supporters, not beauty contest judges! Supporters of this type are overly high maintenance for any campaigner!

[treestar]

61. That is really dumb politics

You're treating it like some sort of contest where you decide who is prettiest or decide who did the best dance.

You have to support a politician. You can't be judging the one you choose to support like that. It's not like punishing Obama for a bad debate is going to help you get what you want in a President. It's just flirting with maybe Mittens being President.

That sentiment is all over DU and it's just dumb. Obama doesn't suffer much harm if he loses - maybe some one term President crap in the media - but he can have a life after the Presidency, maybe a less stressful and better one with more time with his family. It's you and us that suffers by this view of it.

What Senators and Congresspeople do you have? Are they Rs because you don't think the Ds did a good enough job campaigning and you've never helped?

Attitudes like yours keep Republicans in power. They know how to support a candidate at least. Few or none of them love Rmoney but they would never do anything like you're describing.

[Arkana]

66. $181 million in September.

Your argument is invalid.

[creon]

55. Imagine

Imagine that you are the top campaign advisor to Obama.
And you are, now, giving him advice on how to debate.

Please list the advice that you would give Obama.

[geek tragedy]

57. Put double time in preparing for Romney.

Prepare for two different Romneys.

And brag about your fucking record. Speak from conviction, with vision. Forget the small ball. Go for the jugular, not the capillaries.

Be hungry.

[creon]

67. ok

That makes sense. Should work.

[cr8tvlde]

11. I see it as The Professor vs. The Huckster

describing both Bill and Mitt. Both could successfully sell cars. Obama's like the Loan Officer.

[geek tragedy]

14. Hucksters win elections.

Bill Clinton was a salesman with the smarts of a professor.

[Drunken Irishman]

18. If that's the case, Gingrich would've been president...

Your own point defies reality. Clinton didn't win because he hucked a ton of shit at the wall.

[geek tragedy]

27. Clinton is the most gifted politician of the past 40 years.

A combination of communication skills, instincts, policy smarts, and an ability to feel the emotional pulse of the electorate.

[Drunken Irishman]

30. And yet, he still couldn't pull in a majority of support in either of his national elections...

Obama has already and is on the verge of doing it again ... becoming the first Democrat to win a majority of the vote in two election since FDR.

Go figure, eh?

[geek tragedy]

34. Perot denied him a majority in 1996.

And, the country was a lot whiter and more conservative. Look at the 1984 and 1988 elections.

Obama was on track for 50%+ last Tuesday. He's got work to do to get back on track.

And part of that is A LOT more debate prep. No more pizza runs, no more trips to Hoover Dam.

[Drunken Irishman]

43. Excuses ... excuses...

The fact remains, Clinton couldn't convince enough Americans to elect him with a majority ... even with the country at peace, even with an economic boom underway. AS good as he was, he still had his limits!

Clinton is a great campaigner, but even all his campaigning couldn't convince a majority of the country to vote for him.

[JoePhilly]

25. Is that why Bill signed Gramm-Leech-Bliley?

And again ... Bill is not running. Bill is a smart guy, good campaigner, he also screwed the pooch on a number of occasions.

Obama isn't perfect either. But he IS the candidate. And wishing that Obama was more like Clinton, or FDR, or Lincoln, or anyone else is a rather useless activity.

[Drunken Irishman]

32. Clinton had his major flaws too...

For one, he never won a majority of the vote in either of his presidential elections. That means, on the whole, more Americans voted against him than voted for him ... this especially in '96 with a booming economy, a lower deficit, lower unemployment and a barely breathing candidate in Bob Dole.

Clinton was good ... but let's not pretend he's some political god. I'd take what Obama is setting up to do over what Clinton did in the 90s.

[geek tragedy]

35. If a Perot-like self-funding populist billionaire were running this year,

Obama wouldn't get 50% this year. No certainty he'll get 50% this year.

[Drunken Irishman]

40. And if Obama had a 1996-like economy...

He'd win at least 55% of the vote. Face it ... Clinton, for all his good, still couldn't muster a majority of the vote in either election. That's pretty telling.

[JoePhilly]

41. Who gives a crap?

Clinton is not running.

There is no Perot like entity running.

There is Obama, and there is Romney. That's it.

Obama stopped a second depression. Has UE down from a high of ~10.2% to ~7.8%. Saved the US auto industry. Killed OBL. Ended the Iraq war. Ended DADT. Supports Gay Marriage. DOW has recovered all of its losses, saving 401ks across the country.

But you ignore all that, and have apparently lost "confidence" in Obama because he had a bad debate.

The RW also ignores all of those achievements as they argue we should vote for Romney.

[geek tragedy]

49. As I said, he's underrated as a President.

He's been a better President than Clinton was.

[treestar]

63. Exactly how the hell does this help get him elected?

"Improving" him at the last minute by threats of withheld vote? These people. Especially when Obama won the Presidency of the US once already. And is the first black man to do it. Frankly, FDR and Clinton didn't have that issue so it was easier for them.

[bak3000]

29. Well

Obama WAS a Professor---and unlike your disdain and bitterness over 1 setback in a BRILLIANT campaign, MILLIONS of our non-fairweather supporting households will choose not to fold our arms and poke our lips out like spoiled brats. Instead, we'll put tracks to grasses and boots to asses to ENSURE that lying azz plutocrat gets nowhere near the White House.

It's about time these "character" insults---peddled by Sununuu, bit the friggin dust. OUTRAGEOUS!

President Obama is the LEADER of the free world AND the Democratic Party. Not Bill Clinton! He's just a surrogate. PERIOD!

[NYC Liberal]

15. Actually, he's one of the best campaigners in a long time. He and Clinton are.

You focus on one particular skill -- yes, debating is a special skill -- and extrapolate it to the entire campaign. But that's not true at all. He is a very gifted orator, and he's also great at talking with people one-on-one. There are many ways of communicating and, like everyone else, he is better at some than others. But what he is good at, he's extremely good at.

[geek tragedy]

17. He's not comfortable campaigning on ideology.

That's a pretty big weakness for the leader of a major party.

As Krugman says, when it comes to a battle of ideas, he goes for the capillaries.

[Drunken Irishman]

19. Bullshit.

[geek tragedy]

23. Do you think he won the battle of ideas at the debate?

Do you think that people who aren't ideological in nature would have found his big picture more compelling than what Romney was selling?

[Drunken Irishman]

26. Like I said ... bullshit.

Your whole point is so flimsy it's not even worth my time. But I'll humor you because of how wrong you are ...

Obama had one bad debate. Oh well. Get over it. It's not going to cost him the election and if you believe it will, then you're more ridiculous than the point you're trying to make. Obama beat Clinton in debates four years ago ... he won every debate against McCain handily four years ago ... and now I'm supposed to believe, because of one bad debate performance, he's somehow inferior as a candidate, speaker and communicator?

Well shit ... if that's the case, how'd he get this far in the first place?

Don't answer that ... because I'm sure your answer would be just as laughable as your initial reply.

[geek tragedy]

36. How many terrible debates did Clinton have?

Obama is somewhere between Clinton and Gore in skills as a candidate.

[JoePhilly]

31. Actually ... yes.

What's the coverage been since the debate ...

1) Romney won.

2) Romney lied his ass off.

That's it. Romney did not win a debate of ideas ... he told an endless repetitive stream of lies. No one is now saying that Romney's ideas are better. What everyone is saying is that Romney's ideas are a mystery. No one knows which Mitt Romney will appear tomorrow.

That's why Romney had to go on Hannity to walk back the 47% comments.

[geek tragedy]

38. Is that why Obama's enjoying such a bounce after the debate? nt

[JoePhilly]

44. Obama's bounce will come after the 7.8% UE numbers get factored into the polls.

But I won't be surprised if you are not impressed.

And on edit: What kind of DU member is happy to see Obama not get a bump after a debate??? As I look at your posts, you do appear to be HAPPY that Obama didn't do well ... AND happy he has no post debate bump.

[whathehell]

52. Have you ever heard of a "bad day"?

Most people have at least one, on occasion.

[geek tragedy]

59. Not being able to say why you want or deserve to be re-elected is more than a bad day.

We're not talking about being rusty or too many pauses in delivery.

We're talking about not showing up to play, not having his head or his heart in it.

He had nothing to say.

[whathehell]

60. If he does it again, I would agree that's something is seriously wrong,

but, on occassion, things like that DO happen. You know, in all the speculation

that has been going on on the tube, the web, etc, no one has proposed one

simple possiblity...Has anyone considered that he was physicallly ill that night?

Have you ever had to "work" when you were sick as a dog?...I have, and I can tell

you that I was as absolutely OFF my game as he was that night.

[treestar]

64. What people?

You are speaking for some unknown people here. Really you are only telling us you were very impressed with Rmoney. And that's admiration of changing stances on issues, lies and inaccuracies, interrupting the moderator and the other debater and apparently thinking he was "selling" something pretty good.

[Jennicut]

39. Bill Clinton is the most talented politician in the last 30 years.

But he also has a lot of faults as a person.

[Cosmocat]

48. oh, for crying out loud

he got shouted over by a juiced up craven lunatic lying at the rate of a fib every two minutes in a debate.

Obama is a pretty darn special guy. There are AlWAYS circumstances with presidential wins. Clinton is special, too, but he benefited GREATLY from Ross Perot to get in the first time.

Different strengths - Clinton can chat it up anytime, anyplace. But, he never had 100,000 people pile into a stadium or in the streets in another country to hear him speak.

overated ...

Seriously?

4 days ago the right wing was about ready to commit suicide and had chalked up a loss. One overhyped debate and now we have democrats parroting their childish, caught up in the moment typical hyperbole ...

[asjr]

9. Cillizza and Chuck the Toad are

joined together at the hip.

[smorkingapple]

10. Come on guys, it was a fair assessment

Obama has flaws which have been pointed out here many times. I'll give you that the part about faking his like for Romney was reaching but I don't think that shows Cilizza is anti-Obama. What it does show is that the constant looking down backfired as I knew it would during the debate.

He simply is not a fighter in the way we would like him to be. In many ways he's "conservative" in the dictionary meaning of that word. He simply will not take major chances unless he's backed into a corner. To be honest, the race speech was the only time he showed a serious set of balls and that's because the Rev Wright fiasco could have ended him early.

If he were a boxer and landed a shot that wobbled his opponent, he wouldn't chase, stalk and try to knock him out. He's the type to stay back and not take chances that might open him up for a counterpunch.

I hate this part of him as most of you do. You also see it as a weakness but it's who he is for better or worse. And God forbid if he loses, it will be because he didn't demolish Romney when he was reeling and allowed him back into the fight. You know this is true.

[Drunken Irishman]

16. Uh no it's not...

Obama didn't get where he was by being an overrated campaigner. This is just a subtle way of suggesting Obama is only where he's at because he's black ... he hasn't earned it. Bullshit. People like Obama don't just luck into winning elections.

And your last comment is utterly laughable. If Obama loses, it won't be because of some goddamn debate. Jesus.

[geek tragedy]

21. He's a savvy executive, strong leader, great organizer and strategist.

But, his skills at communicating are limited--compare Clinton's DNC speech to the best political speech Obama has made while in office.

He's really handcuffed himself this election cycle because he's concluded that soaring rhetoric and big ideas aren't going to win the election.

And, if he loses, the #1 reason will be his implosion at the debate.

[Drunken Irishman]

22. LOL

Oh shit, you're serious?

You lose all credibility when you imply Obama is not very good at giving political speeches. OMG! That might be the dumbest comment I've ever read on DU.

[geek tragedy]

24. He gave great political speeches in 2008.

Since then, not so much.

[Drunken Irishman]

28. Then you haven't been paying attention.

Sucks for you.

[bak3000]

42. FICTION

is Mitt Romeny's favorite past-time........ You should consider offering him your service.

President Obama is likely to go down as the GOAT of speechifying in the Presidential realm. His cadence and tenor is the most powerful since King. Why do you think the repubs mock him about it? Because it's a strong suit. Heck, even his democratic opponents 4 yrs ago did the same. He captivated the World with his speaking and STILL does!

And speaking of "since then, not so much"---did you not see the United Nations speech a couple weeks back? And then the CGI speech on human trafficking? We're talking HISTORIC speeches on the SAME damned day man. So, it's perhaps time to clean that wax and get to listening.

Also, go check out the UAW Speech he gave during the Spring!

[geek tragedy]

58. Those weren't political speeches, though.

He's toned it down, because he wants to appear a sober leader for a nation that is determined to endure moreso this it dares to hope.

[bak3000]

65. EVERYTHING

is viewed in the prism of politics. EVERYTHING! But, even by your standards, how can you contend that a UAW speech is NOT political? And have you by any chance had the pleasure of watching the POTUS on the campaign trail? There have been days where he most certainly "fires it up".

It's time for you to ditch the WHINING and start WATCHING.

Even TEABAGGERS insist "Obama gives GREAT speeches....yada yada yada"! So, if you can't attribute positive qualities that even these unreasonable rightwingers are willing to concede, what does that say about your TRUE feelings for the President?

Are you one of those "supporters" who backed another candidate in 2008 and at every little hiccup decides to project your infinite BITTERNESS?

And if so, when does it stop? Hillary was appointed, Joe Biden was selected & Edwards "fuqed up"! It's time to move FORWARD!

[Cosmocat]

50. AGREE

4 days ago the republicans were ready to commit suicide and had resigned themselves up to a loss.

they do what they do - get snarky, mean and childish in the moment, and all full of themselves are spouting this overrated BS about the president, and somehow democrats are parroting a republican negative frame ...

WHISKY
TANGO
FOXTROT

[Cosmocat]

51. i would disagree with this assessment

He is infinitely tougher than people give him credit.

He simply refuses to let people or the moment dictate to him.

He also has a very zen like approach to things.

He does not get caught up in the moment.

4 months into his presidency, he had given the order to have somolian pirates have bullets put into their heads, and was rolling eggs with kids on the white house lawn while it was going down.

The OBL raid - he had pretty much everyone advising against it, and he ordered it, and was doing the annual press dinner when it was going down.

Lybia, his GENERALS told him to go the cya route of just doing a no fly zone. He said not good enough, and they came up with the assitance to allow it to be successful.

Romney was a half psychotic lying sack of shiite in the debate, and by all rights should have been panned for the substance of what he said and his overbearing and jacked up performance. Obama was not great, but, the debate was framed the way it was because the media WANTED to tout Romney after the debate.

[NCLefty]

33. He "tears Obama apart"?

He said Obama isn't a good faker. I can't argue with that I guess, nor does it sound bad. The he said Obama is a pragmatist, cautions, doesn't like throwing punches. He also said he was the most talented speech-giver currently operating in politics.

His question is, "is the president overrated as a political candidate?" Do we expect too much from him? This is hardly tearing him apart. And it's an opinion piece, hardly worth our time freaking out over.

I'm new to this site but I am already struck by how defensive some people get about... well everything. I served my first jury yesterday and the post I had to judge was cited for being a "possible troll," and it wasn't at all. It was just someone upset about the debate performance, someone who wanted the president to fight harder. Maybe you guys don't see the flaws in your own side or want to talk about them but that's not realistic -or- normal. I see the other side as being the one that demands everyone tow the party line, cover up anything embarrasing, and refuse to talk about its flaws out loud. I think we're better than that :p

[budkin]

37. He's not a conservative but he is a jackass and a troll

He used to be on Olbermann all the time.

[NCLefty]

45. And what did he do?

Last edited Sun Oct 7, 2012, 08:18 PM - Edit history (1)

I watched Olbermann briefly but I don't recall any specific CC moments. Was he trolling the left?

[budkin]

53. Seems to be more in recent years... he's liberal but don't think he likes Obama

He was pretty tame on Countdown... in more for a humorous take on things

[NCLefty]

56. Thanks for the link :)

[My Pet Goat]

47. Obama is crushing on the expectations game and this article is part of that picture...

Don't think expectations are important? Witness even MSNBC's meltdown after the debate. Obama merely has to turn on a competent performance next debate and the story will be how he fought back from a belly flop. Of course he might belly flop again, but I don't think so. The public interest in how he will do this time might actually yield an audience viewership level close to the first debate.

[Godless in Seattle]

68. "The Fix" is FIXED