Getty Images
One of the main drawbacks to televised political theatrics is that we tend to evaluate the events in an unconstructive way. We see players on a stage, after extensive rehearsals, playing to a packed house, and we judge them as if they are actors -- who seemed "crisp" and looked "confident."
In other words, we invariably value political theater on its theatrical qualities, watching to see who knew their lines and delivered them more effectively.
By this measure, when it comes to determining who "won" last night's debate in Denver, I'd argue the conventional wisdom is right: it wasn't close. Based on style and performance, Mitt Romney did all of the things a "winning" debater is supposed to do.
Did he know his lines? Obviously, yes. Did he deliver them well? Flawlessly. I argued last week that Romney's "strength as a debater is wildly underappreciated" and "if Democrats expect Romney to falter in the debates, they're making a big mistake." Last night illustrated what I was talking about.
President Obama, meanwhile, was listless and timid. He stumbled on his words. At times he seemed distracted and unfocused. There were key opportunities for the president to go on the offensive, but for whatever reason, he chose not to engage. For pundits checking boxes -- who gave the appearance of being "in control"? -- Romney excelled.
But all of this overlooks an element I like to think is sometimes important: substance. The men on the stage last night aren't actors; they're candidates for the nation's highest office. Delivering lines well is a nice quality, but as the dust settles, it's worth pausing to reflect on whether those lines were true and reflect reality in any meaningful way.
Indeed, it seems to me Romney thrived in large part because he abandoned the pretense of honesty. And as it turns out, winning a debate is surprisingly easy when a candidate decides he can say anything and expect to get away with it.
Romney told viewers his proposed $5 trillion tax cut isn't really his proposed $5 trillion tax cut. He suggested he could eliminate a $1 trillion deficit by going after Big Bird. He said his non-existent health care plan protects those with pre-existing conditions when in reality the exact opposite is true. He cited trumped up "studies" from far-right ideologues as if they're legitimate, assuming the public won't know the difference. He said a deficit that's shrunk has actually "doubled."
And when Romney wasn't repeating falsehoods, he was furiously shaking an Etch A Sketch, rolling out yet another version of himself.
This new model -- version 8.0? 9.0? -- likes regulations of the financial industry, wants to work with Democrats, thinks his Massachusetts health care law was a great idea, and has no use for the goals of his running mate's budget plan that Romney enthusiastically endorsed. Does this in any way reflect the candidate who's been running for president the last year and a half? No, but the Republican assumes most voters won't realize and most news organizations covering the campaign won't tell them.
He might very well be right.
But as Romney and his supporters take a victory lap this morning, it's fair to note their success was a triumph for style over substance.
Leave a Comment:
I have to say, I found the debate last night completely unpalatable. After following the election for the last 12+ months, Romney again came up with new lines. I had previously noted that he was a Chameleon, but last night he seemed to have a silver tongue as well. Of course, with the number of lies he has told his nose has been growing everyday. I don't know what is truth or lies when it comes to Mitt. I still feel he is out of touch when he thinks it is okay to talk about Public Television and Big Bird, but he won't admit the deductions he is looking at will hurt the middle class more than ever. He has said he doesn't care about the 47%-I feel this is obvious. This man doesn't believe in helping people get an education, he has told people to go borrow money from their dad if they want to start a business. My husband thinks he is from another planet because he is so out of touch, but he has been practicing to sound like he is one of us---but he isn't. My concern is not those who have been watching him over the last year, it is those who are just tuning in as the voting time nears. I want protection from the "anti female" candidate. I want to make sure the young women of today do not have to fight like I did, and believe me I did have to fight to be recognized and paid for my performance in my career. I am also concerned that being a woman will still be considered a "Pre Existing Condition" when it comes to health care if people like him are able to overturn the "Affordable Care Act". We have to stop the Chameleon from getting into office. He isn't for "We the People".
Just so you know here is the person you are voting for.
http://www.akdart.com/obama1.html#100
THANK YOU for this very excellent article! For a minute I was worried that the entire media audience was duped by the wannabe liar-in-chief! Whew. I do believe our President will sharpen his claws & handle the slippery fish much better next time.
We''ve lived close to four very long years of style versus substance. I'm ready for some substance, not pretty speeches and appearances on all of the talk and late night shows. I am ready for a real president. Someone who knows and cares about budgets. Obama hasn't gotten a budget passed in at least what?....3 years?
Exactly what I was thinking - there he goes, lying again, and again, and yet again! Everything opposite of what he has been saying for the past 18 months plus! He came out all hyper, bobbing and weaving, dodging the punches Obama was going to hit him with! Unfortunately Obama was cool - way too cool. I kept saying - lies - all lies - get him. But he must have been told to keep his cool but he overdid it. What things he did come back at Romney on, ran of his back like water off a duck. He just came back and repeated his lies over and over again, even when challenged a second time. And Obama didn't get hot up into his face - it's not his character. But I want a cool headed president, not one who bobs and weaves before he's even hit! Don't like debates that are so scripted and rehearsed like this - all the "right" answers memorized.
http://www.youtube.com/user/SamGreatUncle?feature=mhee
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_pgfWK3sxw
promote these videos of the real mitt romney
This is fine for what it is, but what I'm desperately trying to find are RECENT comments, by Romney, uncut, that show him contradicting what he said in the debate last night. So far, no love. Any help?
https://twitter.com/politifact
Goto this website and you will find that Obama was lying just as much, if not more than Romney. All you libs call one guy a liar, then sit there and say things like "obama calmly stated the facts.
Here's a few facts for you:
The White House covered up Al Qaeda attacks on our embassy, blaming a movie, while our people begged the white house for more security.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2208940/Benghazi-attack-Now-Hillary-Clinton-hints-Al-Qaeda-blame-Libyan-consulate-assault.html
Small businesses are defined as 500 in annual revenues, not giving out high risk loans of a half billion dollars to half baked startups that have zero revenue(Solyndra Scandal) in the name of "green energy".
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-09-18/news/ct-met-kass-0918-20110918_1_solyndra-loan-guarantee-obama-fundraisers-obama-white-house
So have some constructive debate, not just finger pointing across the isle.
the real mitt romney lives here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/SamGreatUncle?feature=mhee
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_pgfWK3sxw
everybody, let not gt too excited about mitt's lies last night at the debate he's use to them by now.. and here is the proof!!
http://www.youtube.com/user/SamGreatUncle?feature=mhee
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_pgfWK3sxw
These are from 1994. I really can't make up my mind on candidates based on what one or the other of them said or thought nearly 20 years ago. If Romney is lying about his positions today, surely there are good vids of him saying the opposites in THIS campaign. Right? You folks have been opposing him for a while, so I'm counting on this being a place to get the links.
Here are a few facts on last nights debate: https://twitter.com/politifact
Conclusion: Both People have a level of honesty and dishonesty.
White House Scandal, blaming a movie for Al Qaeda attack on our embassy:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2208940/Benghazi-attack-Now-Hillary-Clinton-hints-Al-Qaeda-blame-Libyan-consulate-assault.html
Small Business Defined as 500 Million in Annual Revenues does not give the Prez the authority to squnader a half billion dollar loan to a half baked "green idea"(Solyndra Scandal) see link below.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-09-18/news/ct-met-kass-0918-20110918_1_solyndra-loan-guarantee-obama-fundraisers-obama-white-house
So all you dems out there preaching "holier than thou" as if Romney is some kind of anti-Christ, and Obama is "all truth"? For everything you can come up with, I have 10 links of liberal lies/scandals/misuse of public funds.
Whtever happened to being an American?
So stop with the hate rhetoric and start discussing issues, which are:
1. Term Limits of 12 years for Congress and House
2. Increase Presidency limit to 12 years so he can actually do a job for a decade.
Until we have term limits, then the lobby, back door finance deals, and money corrupt.
What we should be doing is saying to both sides, enough is enough, and state by state vote on a national referendum on term limits.
Enjoy!
What should be the take-away from last night's debate was the frame in which Big Bird was mentioned. According to Romney, he is not going to keep or fund any programs that do not pass his "critical needs" test.
What, by Romney's definition, is a "critical need?" Unneeded or unwarranted military spending; school vouchers; what else?
Perhaps it would be well to take a step back from looking at the form of last night's debate and spend more time looking at the substance.
Multiple guess test: which of the following do you believe would be included in Romney's List of Critical Needs (things he would be willing to borrow money from China to fund)?
"Style over substance" is often hurled out Obama...
...poetic justice that Romney won the first 2012 debate with style over substance?
Regarding: Look for the Truth.....it sounds like a bunch of conspiracy theories. Barack Obama is a Christian and I know he is not perfect. But I believe he feels he is doing what is right. However, Mitt is all about the rich and his bottom-line.
Romney may well have invented a new political flip flop technique by being both for and against Obamacare and financial regulation simultaneously. It is truly something to be admired in the strangest way possible.
Okay, I get it. You guys who are all in for Obama HAVE to beat Romney up after the fact. But I'm a guy who might have voted for Obama before last night, and I have a question for those who claim Romney reversed his positions: how do you know? And how can I know you're right? I've scoured the net looking for HARD examples of Romney claiming something other than what he described last night, and I can't find it. If he's lying, I want to know it. But all I find are Obama-friendly sites claiming Romney means "This" when he says "That." I want it in Romney's words, in context, preferably in a video. So can you give me a link?
Check out the Gish Gallop - soon to be renamed Mitt's Gallop ...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/04/1139926/-Romney-Won-Using-a-Debate-Technique-Called-the-Gish-Gallop
Okay, but this just rehashes and restates what Romney's alleged to have claimed, or meant. I need something hard and fast. There are hours of tape out there. I need to track these lies down.
I don't know why Obama did not challenge him enough on all his new flip flops in this debate
http://www.realcampaignfeeds.com
I think Obama was flat because he has never debated with someone as dishonest as Romney was last night. He changed his answers to make his position look better, at times to polar opposite answers while never leaving the stage to change. As he lies were challenged, he grew more confident he could lie his way out. I wonder how President Obama has not learned that the GOP does not care what lies they are told, they WANT to be lied to.
The corporate, also lying, MSM and repub. pundits have to say that their guy won
Did Romney really win??
We know that PBO is not a street fighter nor a liar...more a master chess player.
Last night, PBO silently realized that the Sociopath CEO was 'OUT'on center stage denying whatever came up regarding his own current 2yr political platform.
Obama slightly stepped back and allowed Romney the liar to flap his arms, w/ his fearful eyes and his eerie nonstop sociopath's smile...and lie for 90 straight minutes to the whole world. (28 lies in 37 minutes were immediately caught by professional fact checkers).
Last night, Romney shamed himself, his father, mother, entire family, his campaign and party.
Last night Romney shot himself ...in the Heart.
Obama silently looked down as Romney's suicide careened across the globe.
CHECKMATE !!!
If anyone has followed Romney`s campaign over the last year you would know he is flip flopping and lying. If lying made him the winner of the debate that is shameful!!
I thought Obama was fine. I don't need a quizmaster or a clown for my president. Romney was clearly lying, was wrong on his facts, and Obama pointed this out again and again if a person was actually listening. Rachel, shame on you for leaving it to David Ploufe deep into the post-debate coverage to point out the extent of Romney's mendacity. Shame on you. Lying repeatedly in a debate does not characterize the performance of a man who "won" that debate, no matter how hysterically the media coaches the public to believe that. As for the gleeful right-wingers hiding behind their little boy cub scout nicknames on this thread, it's an indication of your character that you revel in the extent to which your candidate lied convincingly, and its par for the course for a group that sends other people's children to fight and die for oil profits and empire while worshiping men who yearly re-enact a human sacrifice out in the woods of Bohemian Grove.
Sincerely,
Ted Tyson
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Beautiful, Ted.
Mitt did what Mitt does best: lie about his economic policies and pretend to fire people like Jim Lehrer and Big Bird. I tell ya, the guy's got all the charm of a stomach pump.
I don't think a single debate matter, however Obama really needs to figure out his strategy with the foreign policy debate. It will have to be more than about Bin Laden, especially since the attacks on the embassy in Libya.
Apparently alone in America, I thought Romney was completely revealed as a nervous fraud. The guilty are always the loudest. His demeanor and thin skin reminded me of exactly the qualities I don't want in our foreign or domestic policy. I thought Obama kept his dignity and nailed Romney effectively repeatedly. Obama was also substantive and plausible while Romney talked in disconnected sentences. He came across as offensively anxious and did a stunning, complete 180 on some major policy issues. The press won't let him get away with it. Although MSNBC's debate hosts were so over-the-top disappointed in Obama afterward, that I, for the first time, saw them as capable of absurdity.
I seriously can't understand how Obama didn't eviscerate this guy. Obama lost the crowd with every "uhhhh" that he uttered between every forced word. His cadence was downright painful to listen to. He needed to spend a few evenings smoking cigars and drinking scotch with Bill Clinton and learn how to speak in a conversational setting.
At the end of the day, anyone who is not a news junkie, who watched that debate walked away from that feeling a lot better about Romney and a lot worse about Obama. The fact that Romney was not accurate in his statements doesn't matter. Elections are about people's feelings about the candidates, and Obama failed miserably last night. Here's hoping the next one goes better. Much better.
I "watched" the debate last night with my family and had a different perception than what pundits concluded. My opinion was based solely on content, tone, and inflection because I am legally blind. I could not see either candidate so stance, posturing, smiling or any of those factors did not play into my conclusions. Romney sounded quite disrespectful to me, not only to the moderator and the president, but to the general electorate. He apparently thought that we had forgotten everything he's been telling us for months, fashioning a brand-new Romney for TV. I also noted many things that the president said--how Massachusetts Democrats could teach the US House Republicans how to cooperate, how Medicaid/Medicare offers people a group rate on insurance instead of the much less powerful individual (if you can get it) insurance programs, and the $5 trillion in tax cuts that have been the cornerstone of both Romney and Ryan's budget forever--among many other points.
Perhaps Romney makes a better pit bull, but do we want an aggressive hostile take-over attitude in the White House? And what about how he will implement all his (apparently brand new) policies? I listened closely but heard no details of any of his policies and plans, just avowals that what the president said about him was untrue. He even managed to insult Spain in the debate, to add to the other nations of the world he has denigrated and alienated.
But some people seem more interested in turning our political system into a reality game show where the most obnoxious and deceitful wins the prize. This election is critically important to our survival, but it is not Survivor:USA.
To those who thought Mitt Romney won last night, next time: Listen with your ears and minds, not with your eyes. I bet you will get a more accurate reading.
Hooray for New Mexico Voter! Why does it take someone who really is blind to see the truth? Republicans, traditionally, are all about what's in it for themselves (much the same as Mormons, by the way. taking care of "their own"). Democrats care about and fight for "the people"--and always have. Listen with your ears from now until election day--not with your eyes--and hear what the real truth is. I'[m going to try listening from another room next time--what a great idea! Thanks New Mexico Voter!