Skip to comments.Debate: Bounce or Debacle?
Posted on 10/10/2012 12:34:15 AM PDT by nathanbedford
What do the polls tell us, is Romney enjoying only a bounce from the debate which will eventually subside leaving him where he was before or at slightly behind Obama? Or was the debate the precipitant of a momentum wave which will carry through with increasing force to election day? My hunch is that it is the latter.
Many of us were perplexed by our inability to explain why Romney was unable to gain traction against Obama for so long when Obama's record was so execrable. We looked at the bias in the media, we considered the demographics of dependency and race, we said we must wait until after Labor Day, we were concerned about the evident disparity in the ads appearing in the air war, we deplored the ignorance of the electorate, and, finally, we turned our guns on the Romney campaign itself and declared that it was too passive and lacked killer instinct and the candidate himself lacked charisma.
After the debate we concluded that Romney prevailed so magnificently because we have the right side of the issues, he argued his case flawlessly, he presented himself as a regular human being contrary to Obama's caricature, he exposed the vapidity of Obama's presidency, all done directly to the people unfiltered by the media.
Since the debate we saw Obama's campaign desperately lurching like a Mexican jumping bean from one post to another pillar trying to find some way to stop the slide. The campaign has called Romney a liar, it has said that he is fatuous for wanting to defund big bird, it is derided him as a humbug. So far, it does not appear that the advantage running to Romney from his performance in the debate is decelerating. The question is will it deflate or will the momentum build?
I believe that the momentum will continue, although perhaps at a decelerating rate of increase. I choose to support that with the weakest kind of argument, argument by analogy.
I believe that the state of the race, or more particularly, the state of Obama's campaign, before the debate was like that of soft snow on a mountainside in a state of incipient avalanche held in place only by the weakest friction, liable to the slightest trespass to cascade to the bottom with increasing speed and momentum. There is nothing to stop such an avalanche until it bottoms out.
Avalanches occur because the footing of the structure is unsound, there is little to support it and nothing can stop it once it starts.
So it was with the Obama campaign. It was a tissue of lies, inflated with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of deceptive ads, covered by the media, enjoying the very weak friction of incumbency, waiting only for the alien touch of truth to send it to the bottom. I see nothing to stop the disintegration until Obama's numbers settle at his irreducible minimums dictated by demographics and dependency.
Until the snow field of lies finds bottom there is no intervening reason to suspend the laws of inertia.
I like it. Thank you.
What we are seeing is not all “Romney bounce” - much of it is Obama unmasked. A lot of it is the polls using the debate as an excuse to report the truth all along, that Obama is in heep big doo doo.
Obama unmasked or alternatively,
Well, it could happen that way, but we’d be fools to count on it.
A great read to start the day. I'm hoping you are right.
All I would add is that the dems are trying to build an electorate in which demoographics and dependency add up to an automatic democrat majority. Welfarism and identity politics glued together by resentment and class warfare is a toxic mix. And it's just about all the dems offer today.
I’m agreed and ...
... I also have with friends been using the weak analogy method ... but with the only alternative being numbers, which can’t express it ... what else is there until election day?
That this wasn’t damage measured along a continuum, but structural damage. That the boat isn’t just leaking, it was cut in half. That Obama’s popularity wasn’t reduced, but that the brand was destroyed. The image wasn’t reduced in size, the illusion was shattered. That this isn’t a swing, but the entire swing set was moved.
It really is a structural thing rather than something along a continuum - not a swing, not a bounce.
Somewhere I read today, maybe here or at a link, that Machiavelli said that once a leader becomes an object of contempt, hes doomed. I think that process was begun.
Avalanche - yeah in a way I think it’s more complete than anything I came up with ... because it includes that there is a whole lot of potential energy propped up on a virtually non-extant foundation, waiting for a little nudge, and what was the nudge? The singe, only, first time, ever ... in Obama’s entire political career, that he was ever so slightly challenged in a way that demanded he defend his positions or record.
Anyway - liked it. Similar concept I’ve been trying to get across to my D and R friends.
Run on much?
creating a Giant TSUNAMI.......
that will wash Obama and his minions into the dustbin of history.
Tomorrow I will send Romney/Ryan $20 that I absolutely cannot afford to part with. This is 1940 and we’re nearly out of Spitfires and Hurricanes whilst $188 million dollars a month worth of Messerschmitts, Heinkels, Focke-Wulfs and Dorniers are rolling off the assembly lines around-the-clock.
LOL! Nothing like stating the obvious after the fact. Some of us concluded this would happen before the debate.
Obama needed to snow people with BS to convince them the next four years will be better than the last four years - and he barely tried (I guess he knows he can’t keep repeating the same old nonsense of four years past).
All Romney has to do is hold out “hope”, and people will vote for him.
Excellent analysis, probably correct.
I’d like to proffer an alternative possibility, only a possibility, one I could never prove.
This race has been over since 2010.
The polling has been cooked to make it seem otherwise.
If you use 2008 election turnout models as a baseline, then look at the 2010 mid-terms, there’s an acute upward arc favoring Republicans. If it’s concluded that Obama’s policies brought us our decisive 2010 win, then why wouldn’t the upward trajectory have continued? Did Obama change any of his policies? No, he gave us more to dislike.
What we think we’ve been seeing was merely a media cooked-up concoction, a mirage, a myth that served a purpose for our adversaries. The specially-sauced polling and the belief that the media still had the power to persuade was all it took to distort reality and make us feel like this loser ever had a chance.
Neither, Bounce or Debacle, it was planned..
The next two Romney will be gang raped..
Because the next two will be closer to the election..
And Americans have been dumbed down so much, they will not remember the first one..
Americans remembering anything for longer than a week is rare.. very rare..
FReeper announces breakthrough in cure for the Ad Hominem Distemper-an Analogue of Tourette's Syndrome
I have pondered a while now the best way to help you with your condition. It is indeed perplexing because the regular nostrums like Ritalin seem to be of no avail. I debated offering personal counseling and I considered that I could recommend some rehabilitation centers where they can, with modern drugs, ease you through withdrawal before you embark on a 12-step program. But these are usually quite expensive and, barring a successful intervention, the patient has a very poor prognosis because he is unwilling to accept the treatment.
All the modern authorities report that the majority of patients once released from rehab inevitably wander back to their keyboards and commit the sin of personal attacks within a matter of hours. Alas, the hard and bitter truth is that the AD HOMINEM DISTEMPER which afflicts you and so many others with access to the Internet, has no known cure, as a recent article in The New England Journal of Medicine under this very title has concluded. The statistical relapse rate has been truly disheartening. That is, until now for I have by the grace of a benign Providence hit upon the solution to your compulsion which no doubt will be published in the next edition of the Journal under the working title, FReeper announces breakthrough to cure the Ad Hominem Distemper-an Analogue of Tourette's Syndrome. I will be pleased to send you a reprint upon request.
It all came to me as an epiphany when I contemplated your symptoms. The malady is easy to describe: The unfortunate patient, unable to deal with the substance of what he reads and bereft of factual answer for it, resorts to attacks against those whom he regards to be the author of his misery, much like the ancient Pharaohs who cut off the heads of messengers bearing bad news. Our modern Pharoah cannot, of course, physically decapitate anyone in ether-space so he becomes a mighty potentate astride his own keyboard and lashes out to assassinate the character of these cyber devils. After he has pushed the Reply button and sent his screed into cyberspace, he enjoys a rush of adrenaline and a psychotic high which, of course, is inevitably followed by a deeper low from which he cannot emerge until he finds another victim for his calumnies. The disease is progressive and up until now there has been no known cure. But I have found the certain cure and I am willing to give it away, free and without charge, out of Christian concern and solicitude for a fellow conservative. You may consider this to be charity but I am also motivated in the interests of science. Since my motives are altruistic you will observe below the absence of any claim of copyright for my breakthrough, I exact no excise for my good works. I do this not just to save you - but for all humanity, that is, to save all humanity from you.
My prescription, like all brilliant breakthroughs which are obvious only in hindsight for their simplicity and brevity, is analogous to the practice which has developed on the Rush Limbaugh radio program in which the caller, to express a whole series of complementary observations merely has to say: Dittos -and all is perfectly understood by everyone with no trouble or bother or any loss of time.
My antidote for your Ad Hominem Distemper is simplicity itself: Whenever you feel an attack coming on do not resist, for that only leads to the cold sweats, rather, you should embrace it because, after all, acceptance of the disease and your powerlessness over it are the first steps in your recovery. Do not try to avoid your keyboard but eagerly reach out for it. We know that you have nothing to say about the substance of the matter, we know that you've been confused by the reality with which you have been confronted, we know how feverish and insecure you feel as a result, we know how much you feel the need to blackguard someone. Nevertheless, go confidently to your keyboard without any anxiety that you will compulsively vituperate - as though you were some wretched victim of Tourette's syndrome - and take your keyboard stoutly in hand to gallantly type the following:
(recent results of phase lll clinical trials have shown that the better course of therapy is to encourage the patient to write the word in italics and in bold letters because it seems to bolster self-esteem, a pathological deficiency common to all these unfortunates)
Now there, dont you see how much easier and lighter you feel in your soul? Instead of betraying to the world the poverty of your intellectual estate, you have made a clean breast of your ignorance, which is different from rank stupidity, and it is anyway the first step in your recovery program. More, you will be awarded points because you show the world that you are a bigger man and by no means petty. The therapeutic effects of this balm cannot be overestimated. Phase llB and pivotal phase lll clinical trials have shown that, although my remedy may be sublime, it is not wholly perfect because it brings no cheap and easy rush, no high, but then no crash either, no withdrawal, no need for the next fix. Instead, you can have your life back.
It’s obvious you are a legend in your own mind and in love with the sound of your own keyboard clicking away. You were so proud as a peacock of your vanity, lots and lots and lots of words, stating what is now obvious to all, and when I (and another poster) pointed that out, your little feelings got hurt and your fantasies of winning a Pulitzer Prize went “poof”.
When you have calmed down from taking your petulant little tantrum, I’d suggest you study the Gettysburg Address and understand why it is considered genius. It takes no talent to bloviate on and on. Talent is required to concisely make your points.
I always enjoy your posts.
Interesting to see the trolls skulking about. Hmmmm.
2) "Nothing like stating the obvious after the fact. Some of us concluded this would happen before the debate." -Mr. Dem,post#8
Nothing like producing evidence of your second sight. I challenge you to produce evidence that you "concluded this would happen before the debate." If you cannot, we are free to dismiss you as a drive-by poster who takes shots of opportunity to feed your own ego and one who is in desperate need of therapy for keyboard Tourettes.
There you go again with the royal "we". So you have promoted yourself as the assigned spokesperson for everyone (more proof of what I said, you are a legend in your own mind). Or you could just be schizophrenic and both of you are posting...
Obama, in that debate, was downright disturbing on many levels. I think this and I know what a loser the guy is. I can’t imagine what some wishy-washy “independent” was left feeling. It is going to be hard to wash that impression away. (though I never doubt the recklessness of the “moderate independent”)
You accuse me of belaboring the obvious, you claim that you "had concluded" it all along, but there is one difference between you and "us"
you are a self-inflated liar as well is a sneak poster.
Drive-by somewhere else and shoot from cover at people you can intimidate and bully-that is what you are good at.
Here's an example of how I succinctly made the points you are trying to make in your OPUS vanity within hours of the debate, not like you, taking a week and lots and lots and lots of words.
Thu Oct 04 2012 06:26:15 GMT-0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) 6 of 16
Toto pulled curtain back last night and the entire nation saw that Obama was just a giant humbug, a fraud, an empty chair. Just like in the Wizard of Oz, once the curtain is pulled back, there is no such thing as pulling it closed again. It's over!
Plus what's up with taking up the identity of the first Grand Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan? That's also very bizarre.
You have not proved your boast, you have deflected.
You claim special distinction for what you posted after the debate to cover your lie about having so concluded before the debate. Posting shortly AFTER the debate is not difficult, here is mine:
"Has the Rino Saved the Republic?
vanity | October 4, 2012 | Nathan Bedford
Posted on Thu Oct 04 2012 11:57:43 GMT+0200 (W. Europe
Daylight Time) by nathanbedford
It will not be necessary to adduce arguments to conservatives on these threads that America was on the brink of the precipice and liable to cascade over into the void of debt. We must either radically change course or surrender this great experiment in liberty to the statists led by Barack Obama. The odds that Obama could be stopped seemed to be lengthening as the Romney campaign was running out of time and out of geography.
I believe that as at 9:29 PM Eastern standard Time America was hurtling toward that void. An hour and a half later it might just have happened that Romney managed to reverse the arc of this election and opened for himself a realistic chance to win. An empty suit is like a soufflé, when the air goes out the whole thing collapses. Obama is the classic empty suit who has been propelled since infancy through the best schools (from the most exclusive prep school in Hawaii to Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard Law), bestowed with great honors (president of the Law Review, Nobel Peace Prize) and into posts (instructor at University of Chicago Law School, Illinois State Senator, United States Senator, President of the United States of America) for which he was qualified only by virtue of his race and his radical ideology. The whole contrivance imploded last night as the air went out of Obama's campaign in one great rancid and embarrassingly public fart.
I expect to see intensity among Republicans increase and intensity among Democrats decrease. I even expect to see a measurable if limited fall off in support by African-Americans for Barack Obama.
I expect to see increased donations to Romney and to the Republican cause and a decrease in donations to Obama and to the Democrat cause.
I expect to see improvement in Romney's poll numbers nationwide and in the swing states of more than the traditional one and 1/2 to 2% accruing to a challenger who wins the first debate.
I do not expect it, but I would not be surprised to see a few of the mainstream media deciding it is not too late to save their reputations and restore their integrity.
I expect to see a much more aggressive Obama in the next debate but I expect that will reveal a very unseemly personality who will not contrive to be effective but only petty and he will not restore his image from tonight's debacle.
I expect Paul Ryan will be able to cope with Joe Biden whom I expect to be much more aggressive than he otherwise would have been, but it will not avail.
I expect to see a more robust and aggressive line of attack assumed by Romney's surrogates in the immediate future. I expect to see an aggressive congressional investigation into Benghazi, for example. I expect to see breaks in the ranks among Democrats over this and other issues in the wake of emergence of whistleblowers and the need by careerists to save themselves. I expect to hear demands that Romney make specific his plans for the economy no more.
In short, I expect to see the arc of the campaign changed toward Romney's favor. I have no idea who will win this election, that is still too close to call. Obama still has the levers of the presidency and he is fully capable of triggering an October surprise and he will have plenty of cover to do so in the flaming middle east. An October surprise is an option which has concerned me since my last vanity in March: Never mind the Ides of March, beware the Surprises of October
The Rino did what he had to do last night. He now has a chance to win this election but only if he does more of the same from now until the last ballot is cast. As Robert E Lee replied when asked if the South would win the Civil War, "we will win if it be God's will and every man does his whole duty."
Romney did his part, now we must do ours, it might still not be enough."
Just as your attempt to deceive the thread by referring to post debate replies to cover for the absence of your alleged pre-debate "obvious" conclusions, your backhanded reference to my avatar and nom de plume is another effort to deflect from what you have done and, I might add, typical of your snarky posting technique. I have no interest in educating you, but if the reader is curious he can consult my about page which has a full explanation.
Meanwhile my charge stands stark and not rebutted in the absence of you producing proof:
You are a liar.
Some of us concluded this would happen before the debate.
You are demanding proof in the form of a post. Show me where I ever said I "posted" my conclusion? Where? You are embarrassing yourself by carrying on and on calling me a liar and demanding proof, SIMPLY BECAUSE YOUR READING COMPREHENSION SKILLS ARE LACKING. But I think the kneejerk stupidity is because I DENTED YOUR PRECIOUS LITTLE EGO, BY NOT FAWNING OVER THAT DRIBBLE YOU WROTE, THAT IN YOUR MIND WAS A MASTERPIECE. Obama also is a legend in his own mind and any criticism makes him go off half cocked, just like you did here.
BTW - That utterly bizarre Tourette’s response was your Big Bird ad, Jump The Shark moment. The same drastic overreaction. The same urgent need to want to get even, due to a fragile over inflated ego getting tweaked.
You prefaced your initial comment in post #8 with "LOL" because it was so absurd to make observations which you had "concluded" before the debate. But you still have no citation. I have one for you, it is one of your own.
In fact the closest you came was after the event when you made favorable reference to Governor Christie:
"Thu Oct 04 2012 14:19:20 GMT+0200 (W. Europe Daylight Time) · 10 of 123
MrDem to jimbo123
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie predicts presidential race will be turned upside down after first debate "the presidential race will be turned upside down on Thursday morning after GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama debate each other for the first time"
CHRISTIE NAILED IT! TEAM ROMNEY KNEW EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO! All the nervous nellys peed on themselves needlessly." (emphasis in italics only supplied)
But you were not one of those "nervous nellys" were you, Mister Dem? You did not pee on yourself, oh no, you are too clever for that. You knew all along did you not? It is a pity that you neglected to put what was so obvious to you but not the nervous Nelly's on the record. Oh how easy for you to elevate yourself over the fictive "nervous nellys" and appear so omniscient in retrospect.
Is it possible that you were not actually lying but that you actually came to believe what you needed to believe about yourself and how smart you are and how stupid everybody else is? Interesting philosophical question whether it is a lie if the liar really believes the lie. Did you really believe the lie?
No, Mister Dem, you did not forecast the effects of the debate, Governor Christie did and you stole his thunder after the fact in post #8 to make yourself appear wise just as you are a drive-by poster to make others look small and yourself large by comparison.
Really?! Once again, you display a profound reading comprehension problem. Maybe you need to spend less time writing words, and more time understanding them when used.
When a person immediately uses LOL when responding to another poster, 99.9999% of the time is means they are laughing at what that poster said. The other poster said "Run on much?", and I laughed that they were making a note of your habit of using too many words and running on and on. Don't feel too bad, Obama does the same thing.
You are Big Bird Ad mode and hence will keep spouting off foolishness like that last nonsense. The hards facts are you embarrassed your in this thread by your thin-skinned, overreaction to my comment. When you are in a hole, rule #1 is stopping digging.
Unable to explain credibly what is wrong with Mozart's work product and looking increasingly foolish before the court, and the king falls back on the absurd criticism: "It has too many notes, yes, that's it, it has too many notes" Contrary to your assertion, I never complain about critics who express difference of opinion, or who properly correct misstatement of fact, but I do object to posters who repeatedly resort to the ad hominem. It adds nothing to the exploration of the subject, it diverts the thread, it taints Free Republic, and it undermines conservatism. When a drive by poster such as yourself resorts to the ad hominem repeatedly he must be called out and rebuked for the good of the conservative cause.
If you think a post has "too many notes," you do not need to read it. If you want to criticize at least make it a constructive criticism, avoid the ad hominem, and for heavens sake, do not predicate your criticism on a false premise and do not use the occasion for self aggrandizement. In other words, do not criticize because you "concluded" the matter in issue when you do not have a shred of evidence to support your brag.
Avoid being snarky, if you think there are too many words or too many notes you might better offer an improved version. That is why you were bitch slapped with satire when you, for not the first time, made me the object of your need to belittle others, and that without the courtesy of a ping. To satirize you as a recidivist for Keyboard Tourettes is quite appropriate, hardly to jump the shark.
I hope you pause the next time before you pull the trigger.
You stumble over basic reading comprehension, demonstrated by your complete ineptness at understanding my use of LOL, and yet you equate yourself to a genius like Mozart, him with music, you with words. You prove what I said earlier, you are a legend in your mind. Talk about spectacular arrogance without cause. I feel like I’m in coo-coo world dealing with you.
my LOl like the LOL absurdly egotistical Once agina. But OF COURSE you considder yourself Mozart, a genius.., that why you stumbled.
Let me hasten to foreclose what I anticipate will be your thrust that I am comparing myself to Mozart, I am not, I am comparing you to the King.
Immediately you make this assertion:
"you equate yourself to a genius like Mozart"
And then in the same breath you assert for the second time:
"You stumble over basic reading comprehension "
You are clearly hopeless. Anyone reading this thread will see that words have utterly no meaning for you if they are inconvenient. You are a hypocrite, you accuse me of what you brazenly do on both sides of my post.
Sir, you do not need remedial reading, you need redemption.
You are to be pitied.
I see my point about “too many words” is just not sinking in. I can understand why. You use too many words not to communicate better to the community but as an occasion for self aggrandizement. Blowhards do this. They stroke their egos by blathering on and on, in love with the sound of their own voices, or in your case, your own words. Bill Clinton comes to mind with his 3 hour speeches. And another sign of the self-aggrandizing blowhard vanity poster? If anyone criticizes their masterpiece, they get unhinged, “How dare anyone criticize the Great Mozart Wordsmith? How dare they?”
The reader will know how I feel about your conduct. I hope you amend your conduct for the good of Free Republic. I will extend you the last word, I am going to bed and I will sleep soundly without the briefest thought of you.
Let it be so.
Another thing to consider is just why so many people watched the debate. The numbers were very high—over 70 million viewers. To me this speaks to people who haven’t made up their minds. They’re willing to see what Romney can do. So your analogy is spot on; Team Obama is resting on a very shaky foundation!
I also keep wondering why the media and Obama team keep fighting the outcome of the debate. They lost! The perception is set, and cannot be changed with words. People saw and heard what they saw and heard. It seems to me that all the excuses have reached the “cost of diminishing returns” and they should just shut up and move on to the next debate. But they seem to think they can’t possibly be wrong, or that Obama can’t be wrong.
They are truly caught in their own web of propaganda.
They actually believe themselves!
Find a mirror, and say your spiel again.
You embarrass yourself with a bizarre personal attack on a fine poster. What have you written? Would be instructive if you have anything except childish feces flinging.