i didn't watch the presidential debate last night; i never watch presidential debates.
ok, that's not strictly true--i did watch all of the mccain debates, on the off-chance that one of his opponents would say something sufficiently incendiary to send the good senator flying across the podium at him. sadly, that didn't happen.
i didn't watch the debate last night because i knew it would tell me nothing i didn't already know about these two candidates. there would be nothing spontaneous about the evening, because these are careful, disciplined, tightly-controlled men--perhaps the only thing they have in common.
but watching the aftermath today, i gotta say it's fascinating to see the left start to wake up to the reality i recognized about their messiah long ago. basically, what you had last night was a grown-up version of the high-school valedictorian going head-to-head in a battle of wits with jeff spicoli, and apparently it wasn't pretty.
but, of course, before acceptance must come denial:
chris matthews opines with spittle flying that mr. obama just needs to get up to speed by watching more MSNBC, and he'll be fine.
bob woodward explains the president's poor performance by theorizing he must've been preoccupied with some weighty foreign-policy issue that prevented his full engagement.
but my favorite by far, from the aptly named charles blow--a new york times columnist, no less:
yeah, that's it, mr. blow--it's all part of his brilliant master plan.
the truth which is suddenly dawning, gentlemen--and which has been out there all along for anyone willing to look beyond the hype--is that your guy really isn't very engaged, very strong, or very smart.
(but in his defense, even cicero woulda had trouble debating his way outta the mess that obama has made of his presidency--that is a defense, right?)
will i watch the next debate? oh yeah--there's blood in the water now, the pressure is on, and the potential entertainment value high. perhaps an overly-smug mitt will stumble; or perhaps the president will surprise us, but i don't see how--i mean, how can you possibly hope to ace next week's SAT when you've only spent five minutes in each grade between kindergarten and high school?
1 comment:
It is now three days from the first debate and that is now old news.
The Friday morning jobs report stepped all over Romney's story line of a great debate performance. At best, Romney got two really good days (news cycles) out of the debates.
Do the debates matter? Yes, but not that much. In the crazy accelerated pace of today's reporting world, debates are quickly supplanted by more recent news events.
BTW, the polling that was done in 2000 showed people who watched the first debate favored Al Gore. But then the Bush spin about the sighing took hold and the chatter after a couple of days was that Gore lost with his patronizing tone.
The conventional wisdom is that Romney won the debate but that Obama won the jobs report and everything stays the same with Obama ahead. We'll see what happens.
Post a Comment