Skip to comments.Did the Web Lead Obama Astray?
Posted on 10/27/2012 10:05:17 AM PDT by lbryce
Mickeys Assignment DeskBen Smith, We Have Your Next Column! Why has Obamas public campaign been so ineffective for the past month? Couldnt someone digitally sophisticated and untankede.g. Buzzfeeds Ben Smithmake a good argument that the President was led astray by the overhyped reality and promise of Internet Politics. Specifically, a) he exaggerated the power of his Web-friendly left wing; b) he overestimated the force of attack lines the Web-friendly left wing would find convincing, like pointing out, when discussing Iran in Debate #3, that Romney had once invested in a Chinese state oil company that was doing business with the Iranian oil sector; c) he fell for the netroots psychological impulse to fight back when he should have been borrowing, triangulating and coopting; d) he ended his campaign pushing lame internet-friendly rhetorical gimmicksRomnesia, The 1980s are callinginstead of tried and true substantive pitches about protecting Medicare and Social Security, etc. ** Memes instead of meat! His team is so Web-savvy theyve forgotten how to campaign . After all, Obamas aides are probably all on Twitter. Inevitably, if subconsciously, theyll tend to skew in favor of ideas that get them big instant Twitter love, as opposed to old-fashioned themes that will win over the unconverted. Webbische kopf. Im sure there are more possible bullet points.
Hard to believe Smith hasnt already written this.
[You'll be accused of contributing to false Obama Gloom-ed Don't you know Obama Gloom is really a brilliant strategy to motivate his supporters?]
The msm marveled at what was his supposed proficiency with technology in using the web, twitter to marshalling his resources to maximum effect as supposed electioneering genius.
But now, even that has proven to be another myth about him come undone. Zero, you truly are Zero.
I think they’re just plain stupid and arrogant. It’s a lethal combination.
And maybe Axlelrod and Jarret as well.
I don’t think that’s the case. They lost so much ground in early October, they have spent the entire month just trying to get their base back on board. This election always favored the challenger, and their strategy in September to create an aura of inevitability crumbed into a million pieces when the oppositions ads went on tv in October and the debate destroyed their entire strategy. They spent hundreds of millions to damage Romney, and face-to-face, Romney destroyed every one of their arguments.
Remember when it was “Bush Lied and People Died” Now it’s “People died and Obama Lied”
In the end, it makes no difference (to me.) Be it the Web, or as you insightfully make the case, of having to make up for lost time, his loss is our, the country’s, win.
Obama’s biggest problem was almost any Republican could beat him ~
This is about the Ben-Smithiest Ben-Smither of them all, Ben Smith.
His formula is to take any scandal that is damaging to Obama or Democraps, find a so-called ‘expert’ to deny it was a scandal, and then cite that ‘expert’ as proof that it is not a scandal.
Then any time the scandal is mentioned they automatically say it has been disproven by ‘experts’.
Self-manufactured proof. QED.
>>>Obamas biggest problem was almost any Republican could beat him ~ <<<
I’d like to politely disagree with you.
I think that any Republican with a scent of scandal would have his or her reputation destroyed in the style of Sarah Palin by the (fawning and syncophantic pro-Obama) media. Look at what they did to Michelle Bachmann’s husband, or Herman Cain’s former employees. It’s an old Alinsky technique of making your enemy live by his own rules - and, in this case, since the only rule that the left has is gaining power for its own sake, it’s hard to throw this one back at them.... unless, of course, you have led a spotlessly ethical and moral life and you cheerfully let your leftist opponent sputter on about your lies and greediness while looking more and more foolish and stupid the more and more you talk about it.
I didn’t support Romney during the primaries, but the way in which he is letting Obama and his supporters hang themselves with their own words and actions is actually quite masterful. This week the example is that awful, cringing video comparing a vote for Obama as the loss of virginity. Is there really a need to comment on that? Everyone I know who’s seen it, including some committed leftists, have thought it crude and tasteless. It is as if Romney is letting the left demonstrate what they do with power and showing how ugly it would be.
Of course, I still fear that Romney will simply turn out to be a Fabian socialist, or a placeholder for the inevitable. FDR was considered an airheaded playboy, too, and look what happened there. Maybe Romney will come out of the box as a Friedmanesque agent of change. We can hope.
God help us.
That is a very astute observation. Obama's going for zingers and losing touch with what is supposed to be his message.
His team is so Web-savvy theyve forgotten how to campaign .
Well, "web-savvy" in that they know how to turn a computer on and get the Interwebs, but it looks like they didn't know much more than that. They didn't know how to integrate the web with other media to put a larger strategy together.
Two points made on Red Eye about the Lena Dunham ad. First, in 2008 young Obama supporters made their own truly "viral" web videos and put them on Youtube. This time the campaign gave its stamp of approval to what was pretty clearly inferior work.
Second, people who watch Lena's show watch it to hate her and the other characters for being such stereotypical Manhattan artsy slackers. I haven't seen the show, but I came away with that impression from seeing her films.
That he is indeed absolutely zero. No skills to speak of. none. nada. His once considered brilliant oratorical skills have gone by the wayside as it became apparent that without his teleprompter, he was nothing more than a mumbling, stuttering, disconnected animatronic puppet.
Historically that is what oratory is, delivering a pre-written speech, or oration. It might have included speaking from carefully prepared notes. Speaking wholly off the cuff doesn't really qualify as "oratory" or "oratorical" and may not have played much of a role in 18th or 19th century politics. We don't know how well the orators of the past would have performed in a more intimate medium like television.
Beyond that, 30% or 40% of the country is going to hate any candidate and love his opponent or overrate the performance of one and underrate the performance of the other. The truth is somewhere in the middle, and the voters in the middle decide the election.
Check the keyword for Benghazi....absolute torrents of articles and statements.
Saw an abbreviated Brett Baer Special Report on the Benghazi coverup ,...attack this morning.
Expect more to be shown tonight and Sunday ...believe at 10 pm EST.
I have stopped referring to this guy as 0bama, or Zero, except for substituting “ZeroCare” for “obamaCare”.
He has been worse than zero, and has clearly taken us in a negative direction.
Therefore, I now normally refer to him as -bama.
Though that started out by my mistyping the “0”, I realized how aptly “-” fit there instead.
They have not succeeded in recovering since the debates started.
Check out the continuing trendlines since the first, Oct.3, debate: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/obama_romney_favorable_unfavorable.html
Very well stated. I agree that Romney has run a masterful campaign, and that not every GOP candidate could have beat -bama and his Alinsky team. I especially admire his restraint in hammering on Libya during the last debate. If he had, all the sound bytes would have been Romney vs Obama. Now, it is America vs. -bama, and -bama having to defend himself instead of fighting against Romney on the subject.
This, in addition to there really having been insufficient ‘known’ information available to hang on -bama and his crew at that time, and the uncertainty of knowing when the info would come out.
Be careful those Alabama fans will be all over you. :>)
I did a search on “Lena Dunham” since I didn’t know who she was, though I have seen that ad.
The top search results seem to indicate that it may not have a positive effect at all, in the end.
I have been cautioned about that!
I believe that Alabama fans always use Bama or ‘bama, not -bama.
I agree. Although Romney has actually impressed me over the past 30 days, and far surpassed my expectations, I think this election was ours to lose no matter who ran. Besides the first debate performance (and to some extent the selection and adoption of Paul Ryan and his reforms), any candidate would have gotten the same benefit of all the ads, the narrative, and desecration of the Obama record. Romney has done well, despite not really being overly exciting to anyone on an individual basis. A true conservative with campaign skills and a record that had more charisma would have totally blown Obama out already.
A lot of people are reluctantly supporting Romney. I had a conversation this week with a moderate Dem who did not vote for Obama in 2008 and doesn't like him, but still undecided. I think I got the vote. This person, as with a few others, are still somewhat hesitant on Romney because he is too much of a politician. I was surprised to hear there was still indecision this late.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.