jjamie12 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 For someone who claims that Mitt Romney hasn't given any detailed plans, President Obama somehow has a lot of details about what Mitt Romney's plans do and don't do, doesn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 For someone who claims that Mitt Romney hasn't given any detailed plans, President Obama somehow has a lot of details about what Mitt Romney's plans do and don't do, doesn't he? I did point that out, I believe. Most people won't pay attention to the debate itself, just the reporting and sound bytes afterwards. Doesn't matter. Obama won on sound bytes and the reporting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I did point that out, I believe. Most people won't pay attention to the debate itself, just the reporting and sound bytes afterwards. Doesn't matter. Obama won on sound bytes and the reporting. Obama won on sound bytes? I missed them I guess... To me the thing helped Romney. But the overwhelming takeaway I have is just...how terrible the entire debate was. It was sad b/c it was like the moderator said going in "I'm going to keep these guys on point and make them go back and forth, on point" and then after the first 5 minutes he said "I'm going to sit there and do nothing and let them both just say anything." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjamie12 Posted October 4, 2012 Author Share Posted October 4, 2012 I did point that out, I believe. Most people won't pay attention to the debate itself, just the reporting and sound bytes afterwards. Doesn't matter. Obama won on sound bytes and the reporting. Did you? I'm watching the debate from my DVR, so I'm not up to speed on what the media spin is afterward yet. It just seems like a really interesting attack angle, given all the details that President Obama seems to know about. Anyway... I'm sure you're right that he'll win on soundbites and reporting. On to the next segement for me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Ed Schulz: "the president was disappointing tonight" Pat Buchanan on Fox: "that was one of the finest debate performances I have ever seen in terms of substance. Chris Matthews: Romney was "winning tonight." . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 What I looked for was Romney being able to get his message out on the MSM without being filtered. They can cut and paste afterwards, but it won't change much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjl2nd Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Ed Schulz: "the president was disappointing tonight" Pat Buchanan on Fox: "that was one of the finest debate performances I have ever seen in terms of substance. Chris Matthews: Romney was "winning tonight." . Damn liberal media!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I followed a running transcription from someone on another board. She is deaf and got a new cochlear implant recently but needs the transcription to clearly know what is being said. Even she could make out the panic and despair in Obama's voice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Damn liberal media!! lol...actually a good little point you make here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Damn liberal media!! Ok, that was funny! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 lol...actually a good little point you make here... Yup that even the liberal media couldn't spin this one in Obama's favor. That's how bad he was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Obama won on sound bytes? I missed them I guess... We haven't yet heard the chosen sound bytes, have we? To me the thing helped Romney. But the overwhelming takeaway I have is just...how terrible the entire debate was. It was sad b/c it was like the moderator said going in "I'm going to keep these guys on point and make them go back and forth, on point" and then after the first 5 minutes he said "I'm going to sit there and do nothing and let them both just say anything." Obama's problem in the debate was largely with Lehrer, just as Belichick's were with the ersatz refs: "Don't they know they're supposed to be on my side? Where's my help?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 (edited) Edit: wrong thread Edited October 4, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjamie12 Posted October 4, 2012 Author Share Posted October 4, 2012 But the overwhelming takeaway I have is just...how terrible the entire debate was. It was sad b/c it was like the moderator said going in "I'm going to keep these guys on point and make them go back and forth, on point" and then after the first 5 minutes he said "I'm going to sit there and do nothing and let them both just say anything." Maybe he let them go because this was one of, if not the most, substantive debate between Presidential nominees in, like, (what was it Chuck Todd said? Oh right) the modern era? I find it shocking that anyone could possibly think that the 'overwhelming takeaway' from what we saw last night was 'This moderator really stinks.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 (edited) I find it shocking that anyone could possibly think that the 'overwhelming takeaway' from what we saw last night was 'This moderator really stinks.' Republicans: Romney trailing in polls = the polls are flawed Democrats: Obama pwnd in the debate = the moderator is flawed Edited October 4, 2012 by /dev/null Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 (edited) Republicans: Romney trailing in polls = the polls are flawed Democrats: Obama pwnd in the debate = the moderator is flawed But.... Expecting a D turnout = 2008, in 2012...is flawed. Especially when you consider that D registration is down...everywhere. Sooner or later...you all are going to have to own the fact that these polls were crap, and that I was right...60 days ago, when I first found the turnout problem in a Quin/NYT poll, long before anyone was saying anything about it. I certainly didn't get it from some media clown. (Remember when I wrote about baby boomer effect on elections, you liked it, and you asked me if I got that from somewhere? No. I do my own work.) And... Why would Democratic expectation that a PBS moderator would control the debate and try to shut down Romney...be flawed? Look: Romney even told old Jim that if elected, he was coming for them(PBS funding), even though he likes Jim and Big Bird. So, it's reasonable to expect Lehrer would have tried to help out...if he could have. The fact that Lehrer couldn't do anything was an effect...not a cause. Edited October 4, 2012 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjamie12 Posted October 4, 2012 Author Share Posted October 4, 2012 Especially when you consider that D registration is down...everywhere. Is this really true? Where do you get your source data for this type of analysis? Frankly, everything else I've read (which is, admittedly, not very much about this issue) says the opposite, doesn't it? Wasn't Nate Silver saying the opposite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I loved it when, near the end of the debate, Barry said to Lehrer "you're doing a great job," to which Lehrer replied "uh, no." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I loved it when, near the end of the debate, Barry said to Lehrer "you're doing a great job," to which Lehrer replied "uh, no." Did he really?? If so Lehrer just moved up a couple of notches in my book. That is if you can move up notches in a book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 (edited) Is this really true? Where do you get your source data for this type of analysis? Frankly, everything else I've read (which is, admittedly, not very much about this issue) says the opposite, doesn't it? Wasn't Nate Silver saying the opposite? Do you REALLY want me to post EVERY single thing I have on this? OR, are you...by referring to Nate Silver( ) being sarcastic? If so, then you can deal with all the whining about the length of that post...I will blame it all on you. How about we start with something simple instead: https://docs.google....gxQ0F4OVE#gid=0 First, read the explanation at the top. Now, see? That's a sample of 648,755 of almost certain, never mind "likely" or "registered", voters....slightly more than a dubiously-sampled poll of 1000, isn't it? See the, now 8.5%(each time I look at it, it's different, has been as high as 11.5...low as 7%), swing away from Obama? See the ~196k missing votes(last time this was 151k)? Understand...there's nothing that says that these votes all can't be there next month. This is the first time this spreadsheet is being done, so there's no way to compare rate of "votes" at this point in time vs 2008. However, the trend in the data is obvious, and, as I said in the (), relatively consistent. And, before you say: yeah but Obama is still...stop...understand that Ohio Rs historically vote at the polling place more than Ds. Kerry had more requests than Bush, QED. This is also congruent with the decline in polling place registration of the top 3 Democratic counties in Ohio. In fact, their registration is down by double digits...one by 44%? Newsflash: I think that 44% is BS, also. Why? Because massive swings in these numbers, away from the historical norms, is BS, until somebody can show me sound data otherwise. No different than saying 2012 is a D +8-13 turnout election, and weighting your poll that way. In 2008, with a perfect storm of conditions...it was D +7. Do ANY of the conditions that created a D+7...exist for Obama today? No. Democratic Registration is down, because it's supposed to be down. We should expect it to be down. The only question: where is it down...and by how much? Edited October 4, 2012 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts