Why Obama Will Lose All Three Debates

4est_4est_Gump

Run Forrest! RUN!
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Posts
89,007
Why Obama Will Lose All Three Debates
Monty Pelerin, The American Spectator
October 8, 2012

President Obama had a terrible debate last week. Supporters and opponents were shocked that he could be so off his game. They shouldn't have been. That they were indicates that they don't understand Obama's serious, likely insurmountable re-election problem.

Obama supporters and detractors expect the old Obama to show better form in the next debate. But that is not going to happen! It cannot, because Obama's critical problem is not correctable.

Obama's Real Problem

The media seemed more surprised by Obama's performance than Romney's. It was Romney who was the surprise and exposed Obama's Achilles heel. Daniel Henninger observed (my emphasis added):

... no one expected or predicted that Barack Obama could be so pushed off his game or look so flustered in a contest of articulating ideas.

Obama's problem, to put it politely, is his looseness with facts. He is the quintessential "sound-bite" president. Truth for him is whatever he chooses it to be, whatever is necessary to turn things in his favor. His self-aggrandizement and arrogance, coupled with a hero-worshiping media, has enabled him to such an extent that it is possible that he no longer believes there is truth other than what he wants it to be. That is his problem, and it has been reinforced for most of his life.

Obama created his own fantasy bubble. He began by inventing history in two so-called autobiographies. Challenging anything in his self-created Alice in Wonderland world brought automatic charges of racism and other attacks from his defenders. After years of living in his bubble, one wonders whether Mr. Obama even knows objectivity or truth. This psychopathology was reinforced by admirers to the extent that Obama has made it a key tool in his political arsenal.

Until last week, it barely mattered. No one called him on it. Then Mr. Romney jumped into Obama's bubble, bursting it in front of millions of viewers. Obama was run over by a blizzard of facts, few of which he even tried to counter. Romney's buzzsaw approach was respectful but relentless. All Obama could offer were empty campaign slogans and other platitudes.

Slogans and false claims may work with Kool Aid imbibers. Non-worshipers, however, are capable of differentiating between hard data and BS. The head-to-head conversation between these two candidates was not filtered through the media. It was devastating for Mr. Obama.

Opinions and judgments were changed and formed during this debate. Obama was not a beneficiary of this flux. For viewers with any objectivity, in order to believe Obama, you had to resort to a variant of Groucho Marx's sensory question: "Do you believe what you just heard or what the media is telling you?"

The debate was a debacle for the president. He was reduced to the empty chair used as a prop by Clint Eastwood. His body language and his style can be improved, but not his facts. Reality is what it is and not what he claims or wants it to be. Obama is unable to stand up to a principled, respectful, prepared opponent wielding facts and truth. Romney's courage and performance were impressive, but they could not have been successful without the truth on his side.

Truth may be suppressed for a while, but it ultimately breaks out. Two former presidents observed its importance in the role of governance:

A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -John F. Kennedy

I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts. -Abraham Lincoln

John McCain was correct regarding President Obama being better-prepared for the next debate. He will have improved energy and cosmetics. These improvements will matter little. The next debate will be just as devastating.

Imagery no longer cuts it for Obama. He needs to improve his facts, but they speak for themselves, and Romney will make sure they do. The facts are devastating to Obama. He cannot distort them when someone confronts him. Mr. Romney lives by facts -- a practice necessary to be successful in business. He will come to the next debate with at least as many as he exhibited in the last one. If he brings the temperament of a golden retriever and the instincts of a pit bull, Obama may not show up for the third debate.

To understand how hopeless President Obama's case is, one need only understand economic conditions. Romney does, and he has the skills to communicate these issues. Obama cannot deal with the facts, as they all go against him. That is his problem, and it is insurmountable so long as Romney counters his false claims.

DirectorBlue puts Obama's problem into perspective with a devastating comment and chart:

IBD%2010%208%2012.png

As Investors Business Daily puts it, President Obama's case for reelection rests on five economic claims, every single one of which is false. Every. Single. One.

So long as Romney sticks with these basic facts, Obama is helpless. The next debate is "town hall style." It may provide a bit more protection for the Liar-in-Chief, depending upon the ground rules. That remains to be seen.

In a one-on-one conversation, Obama is toast! Even with a teleprompter, the facts destroy him.

And so goes the election. And, he already had it won, but now the undecideds are swinging to Romney...
 
But what does the American Sphincter say?


I guess we'll sit here and wait for their rebuttals.


3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . . .


*spit*
 
AJ just posted a graph illustrating the stimulus stopping the recession.

And he's pulling a Vette, saying that Investors Business Daily said something... When it was actually an op-ed they hosted. :rolleyes:
 
But what does the American Sphincter say?


I guess we'll sit here and wait for their rebuttals.


3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . . .


*spit*

Yeah in 2000, 2004, 2008, the Democrats had something of substance to offer in their discussions, so full of "knowing" how best to run an economy, well, they had their chance and it seems that failure has rendered them muted by hate and seething lashing out rather than offering ideas. They just cannot seem to say, I want more of the same with any enthusiasm...
 
Well, I am one am voting for Obama to give them a full second half of their longed for lost decade.



:cool:
 
no one expected or predicted that Barack Obama could be so pushed off his game or look so flustered in a contest of articulating ideas

Obama has no game. Just bullshit

We've known for some time that naive liberals hate facts and logic. President Platitude gives them neither, and they love him for it.
 
no one expected or predicted that Barack Obama could be so pushed off his game or look so flustered in a contest of articulating ideas

I kind of agree with you. The President didn't bring any game and therefore it doesn't make sense to credit Romney for knocking him off it.
 
no one expected or predicted that Barack Obama could be so pushed off his game or look so flustered in a contest of articulating ideas

Obama has no game. Just bullshit

We've known for some time that naive liberals hate facts and logic. President Platitude gives them neither, and they love him for it.

It is the magic of the teleprompter and hope!

If you imagine as hard as you can, long enough and often enough that this is a wonderful economy, then maybe, by repetition, you can make it sound true to yourself, but as Mitt so eloquently pointed out, you are never going to convince an adult to disregard his lying eyes, ears and reason...

;) ;)
 
It is the magic of the teleprompter and hope!

If you imagine as hard as you can, long enough and often enough that this is a wonderful economy, then maybe, by repetition, you can make it sound true to yourself, but as Mitt so eloquently pointed out, you are never going to convince an adult to disregard his lying eyes, ears and reason...

;) ;)

It has nothing to do with a teleprompter. Obama does very well in front of crowds, doing his thing just walking around with a mic. He does formal speeches very well as well. He's a mediocre debater.

In contrast Romney is a good debater (albeit a bit gaffe-prone at times) and is a mediocre speaker.
 
It is the magic of the teleprompter and hope!

If you imagine as hard as you can, long enough and often enough that this is a wonderful economy, then maybe, by repetition, you can make it sound true to yourself, but as Mitt so eloquently pointed out, you are never going to convince an adult to disregard his lying eyes, ears and reason...

;) ;)

I loved it when Mitt lectured Obama... he has five boys and knows bullshit when he hears it.
 
*chuckle*


If merc is the best the Democrats can muster, then not only will the debates be a landslide, but so too will the election...

Do not believe what you see people! Your eyes and ears lie! Listen to me and ye shall "know" the truth just as surely as I "know" it!
 
I loved it when Mitt lectured Obama... he has five boys and knows bullshit when he hears it.

And when he told him that he was not entitled to his own facts...



Even Cutter finally had to admit on TV that they were lying about the $5 trillion.

Nobody is going to vote for a known liar, especially when he's been called on it; three times like Peter before the cock's crow...
 
It has nothing to do with a teleprompter. Obama does very well in front of crowds, doing his thing just walking around with a mic. He does formal speeches very well as well. He's a mediocre debater.
.

Obama is good at whipping his minions into a frenzy with unicorns, rainbows, and kumbayah. I LOL when I saw his lemmings moved to tears during his acceptance speech.

It doesn't matter that he's spewing nonsense, but that he spews it so well.
 
And when he told him that he was not entitled to his own facts...

Mitt used a tired old line he stole from another debate, saying it really fast and almost under his breath... BRILLIANT you say!

Romney lied his ass off on numerous occasions and IS entitled to his own "facts". True of false?
 
And when he told him that he was not entitled to his own facts...



Even Cutter finally had to admit on TV that they were lying about the $5 trillion.

Nobody is going to vote for a known liar, especially when he's been called on it; three times like Peter before the cock's crow...

Obama will become very aggressive during the foreign policy debate - in other words he'll double down on the empty rhetoric and ratchet up the volume. You know, the stuff his supporters love.
 
Mitt used a tired old line he stole from another debate, saying it really fast and almost under his breath... BRILLIANT you say!

Romney lied his ass off on numerous occasions and IS entitled to his own "facts". True of false?

If he lied why didn't the clever and superintelligent Obama catch him?
 
Obama will become very aggressive during the foreign policy debate - in other words he'll double down on the empty rhetoric and ratchet up the volume. You know, the stuff his supporters love.

Highly doubtful. Besides, foreign policy isn't an easy thing to be aggressive on. It's necessarily nuanced and multi-faceted for a sitting president, though we're sure to hear how simple things are from Romney.
 
Obama will become very aggressive during the foreign policy debate - in other words he'll double down on the empty rhetoric and ratchet up the volume. You know, the stuff his supporters love.

That said, it’s hard to totally blame those who see a conspiracy, simply because this administration, by far the most callously and pervasively dishonest in my lifetime, has given critics so much fodder in so many other areas. To name just a few:

Its lethal, reality-denying decision-making in Libya and the Middle East, leading it to ramp down and deny adequate security protection to Americans in dangerous situations when it clearly should have been increased.

Its craven yet still unadmitted willingness to flood Mexico with guns which could only be “traced” after their murderous use.

Its open political favoritism in “green jobs”-related loans and grants.

Finally, in a brazen repeat of what occurred during the 2008 presidential campaign, the president’s campaign has again “chosen not to use AVS (Address Verification System) in screening contributions made by credit card,” potentially (i.e., more than likely) “accepting contributions from phony names or accepting contributions from foreigners, both of which are illegal.”

;) ;)

http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-job-market-still-stinks/?singlepage=true

He is going to come off no better, maybe even worse on foreign policy...
 
Its open political favoritism in “green jobs”-related loans and grants.

Half of which went to corporations that declared bankruptcy according to Romney in the debates. Because three companies out of 29 is half.

Republican math.
 
Back
Top