This debate is driving me nuts.

[_subgenius]

Ceeboo -

The public perception of the debate is that Romney won.

That perception is not just a "public" one, and that perception is in accordance with reality...Romney actually did win. The really small minority of people that consider Obama the winner are incorrect.

This is driving he media coverage to enough of an extent that he probably will get a 1-3% bump in the polls for it over the next week or two. Given that he is only down 3-5% in the first place, this is excellent news if you are a Romney fan, which you apparently are. You don't seem to have the capacity to move past this celebration, but this horserace stuff should really be kept distinct from how awesome you think Romney was at articulating policy and overarching vision.

keep telling yourself that and it might come true...but click your ruby slippers together first. Your conspiracy theory ramblings here are the musings of a sore loser. The mature choice is to admit the loss and move on to fight another day. Trying to deny what occurred is merely a degradation of credibility and an unnecessary distraction.
Your injured ego refuses to admit the fact of reality, Romney won, and now you are trying to rationalize it away - when the fact is that Romney won the debate and Obama lost it. This is the only conclusion that matters - any derivatives from that are speculation.

On that front, Romney quite clearly was lies, self-contradiction with his own recent campaign, and platitudes. He basically "won" by being really aggressive and smirky about that. Lest you accuse me of bias, I don't think Obama on the other side was winning any kind of actual academic debate either. I'd think this is what you, obviously passionate about politics, would care more about.

he was not winning any kind of any kind of debate, which is why most sober minded people agree that Romney won. However, it has already been shown that both Romney and Obama were putting forth "lies, self-contradiction with his own recent campaign, and platitudes" - so that point is irrelevant.

So I'd think you'd get over your brief horserace high and be disappointed in the show of it all. It's absolutely absurd that this is the process we choose to pick our presidents.

If Obama had won, you surely would not have considered the process "absurd".....that being said, what is so absurd about it? It was the same process that got Obama elected....oh i see...you are correct...absurd.

[_subgenius]

I'd heard that American youths were mass debaters...at least I think that's what I heard...

which i am sure peaked your interest on the topic

[_Drifting]

If Obama had won, you surely would not have considered the process "absurd".....that being said, what is so absurd about it? It was the same process that got Obama elected....oh i see...you are correct...absurd.

Sit down subby...

I agree with your post, one cannot have it both ways.
Now, assuming Romney won (I have no idea if he did or didn't but that is immaterial to my question), does success in the debates usually lead to success in the election proper?

[_Drifting]

I'd heard that American youths were mass debaters...at least I think that's what I heard...

which i am sure peaked your interest on the topic

I'm guessing you meant 'piqued'...

"piqued" - past participle, past tense of pique (Verb)
Verb: Stimulate (interest or curiosity).

Do American schools have spelling teams too...?

[_krose]

My, but isn't Ceeboo giddy. This really seems to be like a sporting event, where the fans talk 'smack' about their guy doing well.

But I have a question for you, C. I know you are very happy about your guy's performance on the 'playing field,' but do you think he won on policy? Did he win anyone over to his policies? And what are those policies now, anyway? Much of what he said last night was very different from everything he ran on in the primaries.

[_Ceeboo]

Hey Sub

That perception is not just a "public" one, and that perception is in accordance with reality...Romney actually did win.

Bingo!

The mature choice is to admit the loss and move on to fight another day.

Bingo!

Trying to deny what occurred is merely a degradation of credibility and an unnecessary distraction.

Bingo!

when the fact is that Romney won the debate and Obama lost it. This is the only conclusion that matters - any derivatives from that are speculation.

Bingo!

most sober minded people agree that Romney won.

Bingo!


Be careful, Sub, posting like yours above aren't real popular round these parts.

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Ceeboo]

Hey krose

My, but isn't Ceeboo giddy. This really seems to be like a sporting event, where the fans talk 'smack' about their guy doing well.

But I have a question for you, C. I know you are very happy about your guy's performance on the 'playing field,' but do you think he won on policy? Did he win anyone over to his policies? And what are those policies now, anyway? Much of what he said last night was very different from everything he ran on in the primaries.

Krose (and all of my other beloved liberal democratic friends), this was a Presidential debate. In any debate (from junior high on up) there is usually an outcome to a debate.
(That's why they have them).

People usually prepare for, practice, and attempt to win against the opponent they are debating.

If you (or anyone else) believes that Obama won this debate, I am fine with that.

I stand firmly on my belief that Romney, without question or exception, absolutely destroyed Obama in this debate.

I wouldn't say that "I was happy about my guy's performance on the playing field", but I would suggest, that as someone who wathed the 'game', there was indeed a complete domination that took place last night.

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Analytics]

For the last 30 minutes, Romney just took a knee (I admire his sportmanship for doing that)

Peace,
Ceeboo

What is taking 'a knee'?

In football, when the quarterback gets the ball he can "take a knee" by kneeling down on one knee, ending the play. The analogy is that the game was almost over, Romney had the ball, and could have scored at will. But rather than embarassing his opponent by needlessly running up the score, he ended the game by taking a knee.

[_Analytics]

Krose (and all of my other beloved liberal democratic friends), this was a Presidential debate. In any debate (from junior high on up) there is usually an outcome to a debate.
(That's why they have them).

People usually prepare for, practice, and attempt to win against the opponent they are debating....

How should this debate be scored? If it's in terms of which person had the best one-liners, acted most earnest and passionate, and did a better job of man-handling the moderator, Romney won.

But it would be interesting to see how debate judges would score this. Debate teams are scored on opening positions, arguments, rebutals, and closing statements. Points are awarded for clarity, organization, relevance, and factualness.

Based upon that type of criteria, I think Obama had the edge, but granted it was a very low scoring event.

[_krose]

Ceeboo, you are still talking about this as a sporting event. My question was: "Did he win anyone over to his policies?" What about substance?

I understand that debates are competitions in schools, much like math olympics. A sporting event, in other words.

But here we are talking about actual plans for actual policies that benefit or hurt actual people. It's pretty juvenile to focus on the sporting, competition aspect and ignore the substance of policy.