Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: GlockThe Vote

Brilliant, exactly right.

He could have won the debate in one exhange, instead he tied/lost it....on Obamas worst topic, a subject he has lied about and has no credibility he some how managed to make Romney look bad and escaped real exposure for this scandal.

Romney had better come out swinging next time and lines like these that cut deep are exactly the ammo he needs. If he doesn’t cut Obama down sharp he will only try it on again.


7 posted on 10/17/2012 6:03:28 AM PDT by UKrepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: UKrepublican

I just don’t understand how I can type something in 2 minutes on the fly liek that and romney can’yt after days of debate prep?

WTF!!!!


8 posted on 10/17/2012 6:10:56 AM PDT by GlockThe Vote (The Obama Adminstration: 2nd wave of attacks on America after 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: UKrepublican
Romney had better come out swinging next time and lines like these that cut deep are exactly the ammo he needs. If he doesn’t cut Obama down sharp he will only try it on again.

The idea of being aggressive versus graciously cutting deep logical holes in the opponent with a minimum number of words is something that most people, including debate consultants and politicans, don't get.

Getting "pushy" aggressive, i.e., going into the other's personal space, pointing at them, showing anger through body language, raising one's voice, etc., all leave the debater wide open for being labeled as anything from disrespectful to crazy in the all-important spin time following the debate.

Most importantly, if one is aggressive in these ways, it wins nothing in the most crucial effect: the effect on the mindset of the viewer as they watch the debate. The implication - even if most people are not aware of it - is that unable to verbally spar, one is resorting to the non-verbal. It's a tacit admission of defeat.

Successful verbal sparring delivers logical blows. Every big logical punchline that bares your opponent's lies sticks in the mind of the voter. It's similar to the tactics attorneys use in presenting cases to juries: get something to be said that the jury/viewer can't get out of their mind, something big and obvious. Often it is done with questions rather than statements, i.e., it's what the opponent does not say that sticks in the viewer's mind. To make it clear for the viewer, one can even tell the viewer that the opponent will not answer this before one asks the question.

This debate was the longest one in history - it's still going on. Because Obama did not answer the question on Libya yet. The nice gentlemen in the audience asked: a) WHO denied the requests for additional security at the Libyan consulate and b) WHY. He asked in such a way that it appeared that he and his friends who came up with the question really would just like to know the answer, and rightfully so. If I was debating the WH occupant, I would most certainly (and most calmly and pleasantly) pressed and pressed and pressed for an answer to the gentlemen's question. Every time I spoke, I would simply ask the same question in one quick sentence. The debate could not move on until Zero responded and said he did not know the answer to either one. At that point, I would turn to the audience and the camera: WHO - WHY - 35 days and still no answer.

Pacing is important: sometimes saying a lot and going fast works well. But most often, successful debate points are made short and sweet; the debate can be slowed down to a snail's pace, simply ask a simple question and keep on it. Ok, no answer, ask another simple question. Do a whole series.

Then at convenient point, ease up on him. Turn to the audience, and do your little one minute diatribe as if you're sitting across the kitchen table from the viewer. Simply point out - still no answer to these questions and list them out very succinctly. Ask the viewer: if you ask a simple question and get no answer but a whole discourse on talking points, we all know what that means. Turn and walk away, don't stand there for one second looking at the viewer with nothing to say. Wait to stand up and start talking until everyone else is done and everyone is waiting for you to speak. Don't compete for the stage. If being talked over, say I'll wait until you're done and go sit down. Over and over. Do not ever allow an interruption. Hold the room in the palm of your hand or go sit down.
11 posted on 10/17/2012 7:22:18 AM PDT by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson