[ilgipper]

This narrative ‘won on points’ is so demonstratively incorrect, I hate it when people try to use it. Obama didn’t even show up in the first debate. This time, he showed a pulse and tried to go on the offensive. He failed, but simply by beating expectations from the first debate, he somehow ‘won on points’. I think he helped with his base be showing he cares about winning. On substance, he was not good, and points are scored with substance and winning debate points, he did not do that too many times last night.

[snarkytart]

This narrative ‘won on points’ is so demonstratively incorrect, I hate it when people try to use it. Obama didn’t even show up in the first debate. This time, he showed a pulse and tried to go on the offensive. He failed, but simply by beating expectations from the first debate, he somehow ‘won on points’. I think he helped with his base be showing he cares about winning. On substance, he was not good, and points are scored with substance and winning debate points, he did not do that too many times last night.


This is great post! So very true and I'm tired of the "won on points" nonsense.