I figure once a liar always a liar.

I am now saying the same thing about Romney.

How about we make sure the high expectations are OVER THERE, where they belong? The 'kos diarist is correct: President Obama only has to show up and do marginally better than last time. The President has already won a national election. It is Mitt who has something to prove.

There was so much armaggedon here, that he's definitely not going to just "show up".

But he's not going to go rogue and do a loud blustering attack either.

He will calibrate it and will need to tailor it to a "Town Hall" format. The problem will be Creepy Crawly and he might have to just walk all over her, and that's just fine with me.

conjunctions are important.

The difference between win and lose last time was the President allowing Romney's lies to grow legs. Had he not done that, we'd have a different story.

It would have resulted in a "Yes it is. No it isn't" game with no solution.

Lyin' Ryan was the easier one to smack down because he is still a novice - not much higher than a Jindal. And since he was smacked down, it will be easier to smack Rmoney down because Rmoney and Lyin' are still at odds with each other as well..

because an unchallenged lie becomes truth in that scenario, and that sucks, but it is true.

With that being said, i thought it was more than a little unfair to hold President Obama accountable for MITT ROMNEY'S LIES. Romney was the one who told lies in front of millions of people. Instead of the media narrative being, "Hey Mitt, why did you lie your ass off?", it because "Hey President Obama, why did you LET Mitt lie his ass off?", and that's bullshit.

And in this case, it was not so much the gobbledy gook that Rmoney spouted, but it was his bullying over the sleepy moderator. And it was the media narrative that pushed the idea that "bully" = "strong" no matter what was uttered.

Which is why Biden just blew Lyin' away when he used the same tactics, except with facts.

So now the media has "moved the goal posts" and "changed the rules", because they didn't want their little boy "bullied".

Thus we are back to square one - and we'll see "The Eagle and the Hawk". (apologies to John Denver... )

but not in "prime time"

The media narrative was NOT that Romney was "strong". It was that he WON. It was that he was crisp, and had charisma.

and notably, during "prime time" when 70-some million were watching. Remember Bill Clinton's "Arithmetic"?

And the "win" WAS due to bullying - there was nothing "crisp" about what he did... and the same style practiced against the hapless VP nominee was cause enough for the media to then stammer and stutter, and call it a "draw", despite what would have been a clear "win" based on their previous criteria. And by "win", I don't mean based on polls of viewers who they don't care about. It's based on talking head spin.

I.e., if President Obama had done a "Biden" on Romney, then he would have received the same sort of vitriol (but much worse) as Biden did, resulting in the media declaring it either a "tie" or a "slight win" for Rmoney. And this is because they insist on following their statistical narrative by citing the "challenger almost always wins the first debate" meme.

The key now is to "win" enough for the media to claim it is a "draw", because that is about as far as they will be willing to go when it comes time to declare it. They don't want to lose all that Kochroach money.

Anyway, am off to bed. Long day!

You keep thinking that the platform is bigger, or even the same as it would have been had the President taken it to him right then and there.

President Obama is going to receive "some sort of vitriol" regardless.

Also, President Obama was NOT "bullied". At ALL. That's just flat out wrong on its face.

were "all choir"? Really? You're kidding right?

And my point WAS that "President Obama is going to receive 'some sort of vitriol' regardless". Exactly. So if he had literally walked over and smacked Rmoney upside the head or stood there completely silent the whole time, he would have been called "a loser". And this is because of the media's "incumbent always 'loses' the first debate" spin.

And I disagree about Rmoney's behavior. He was rude, uncouth, bullying, and boorish. His complete disregard for acting like a civilized human being while simultaneously showcasing his diarrhea of the mouth lying tactic, meant that a number of domestic topics were not discussed at all, including many that people were interested in hearing about. Like a petulant spoiled child (and he was George Romney's youngest and it shows), he was going to have his way and bullied himself into doing just that.

That's not "leadership". That is grown man acting like a spoiled brat having a temper tantrum.

We can agree to disagree but I stand by my statement.

You CAN'T continue to postulate the same thing....that the fact checking somehow negates the lying.
YES THAT'S WHAT I AM SAYING. I am saying that the prime time lie was met with a 'flash in the pan' correction, and your pretending otherwise is just getting SILLY.

It's like a newspaper running a headline, and then the next day, they run a correction in their back pages. THE HEADLINE WAS ALREADY PUT OUT THERE.

You can disagree about Romney's behavior all you want. You demand that *I* agree to it.

Jesus.

Aaaaaay-*FUCKING*-men
what's romney going to do if he can't get away with non stop lying?

his "momentum" and business prowess being a "closer" that he will just *crush* President Obama. If Mitt Romney does not HANDILY defeat President Obama, it is clear he is unfit for any office.

Mitt should *have* this. Hands down. It's HIS forte.

The upcoming one is "town hall" format, and can include anything.

President Obama's strong suit is the stump.

Mitt Romney's strong suit is the debate.

fuck talking to Romney

awful performance last time. That's a fact. If he does a "little better," and Romney does the same or he does a "little better" also...Obama's numbers may continue to slide.

He may not need to knock it out of the park, but it needs to be a draw, at least.

I like the truth. You can still be a strong supporter, while also supporting the truth.

Obama knows what he needs to do. I guarantee you that he doesn't think he needs to do "a little better," and that's not what his staff is telling him.

Granted he didn't WIN that debate until the GOD DAMNED TRUTH shows up.

But on facts? Obama had it. On TRUTH? Yep. He had that too.

He let Romney lie, and then said one too many times that 'he and mitt agree'.

And I *PROMISE* you, Obama's staff wants us all saying that Mitt Romney is formidable and that he has been prepping for these debates his whole life, and we expect a Romney win, because Romney is a "closer" and all.

You see, while people were screaming left and right that vp Biden was going to slaughter Ryan, I maintained that Ryan would win the debate.

PLEASE CONSIDER WHY THAT IS A GOOD STRATEGY (because it is).

I fully expect Mitt Romney to handily win this next debate. He is formidable. He is a 'closer'. (figure it out, the OP might help you)

He just needs to be white.

could be partly explained by surprise at the fact that none of the positions that Rmoney was defending were positions he'd previously been running on. I kind of suspected that this might happen, and I'm sure the Obama people were aware of the possibility, but they may not have thought it a likely enough strategy to make it a focus in their preparation.

Now the game is up. Rmoney is not going back to his more conservative self just to throw the president a curve ball (unless he wants to make it extremely obvious just how dishonest he is) and everyone is well aware of the likelihood that he will lie his ass off. Whether or not Obama needs to be much better in the second debate, I think it is likely that he will improve noticeably.

I fully expect Mitt Romney to win. Hands down.

Fully. This is ROMNEY'S strong suit.

forcefully, but not getting into an argument. Just call him on his bullshit and don't make any statements that will give the fact checkers anything to work with.

I cannot be the only one not fooled by all of these so-called polls. I have no problem with them at all. But it seems that rommney's numbers keep rising even though he continues to lie and even make up new ones. His numbers keep rising even after biden kicked paul lian-ryan's arse! So whats the deal here. Rommney's poll number hardly rose or fell after the republican convention, but because of one debate he's all-of-a-suddent the man!! I'M NOT FOOLED! I'M VOTING FOR OBAMA!

They always say that the first debate tends to be lost by the incumbent but the town hall format has its own unique challenges. During Obama's last election vs McCain there was no incumbent so he had it a little easier. All the questions were hypothetical, asking how each candidate would handle certain scenarios.

This town hall debate Tuesday will be closer to what Bush faced in 2004. Obama's judgment will be tested not only by Romney but by people in the audience. Some of these questions from the audience won't be easy to answer. In 2004 Bush's big problem was that Iraq was expensive and costly with human lives and the whole weapons of mass destruction reasoning had basically been revealed to be a farce. Most of the questions Bush faced were about that and his judgment there but he was able to successfully utilize neocon tactics of playing up patriotism of how the world was a better place based on his war while also utilizing fear to make the case that Kerry was weak and would be a risky change during a war.

Obama will face questions more like this:

"You said you were going to do X but I still can't find a job. What can you differently now?"

Those questions won't be easy to answer and Romney will get to counter right after so on every question that is directed at Obama it will feel like 2 critics against him. This tends to play badly on live TV. I noticed in 2004 that they didn't do the split screen during the town hall debate due to all the walking around. If that's the case again it will probably benefit Obama because so much was made about his note taking last time. Obama did pretty well in the town hall setting against McCain but he wasn't at all aggressive toward McCain. He's going to need to be this time or it will feel like it's simply the President on trial and that's not how they're going to want things to appear.

Bush, either by being stupid and hard-headed, or just from being well-coached, took most of the pointed questions pretty well. He engaged in eye contact and seemed very determined to answer each question. Obama has a tendency to sort of say, "Fair point. I hear you but" with just his facial expressions. He needs to drop that politeness and be a little bit more direct and passionate the moment the question ends. He needs to show more passion than he did not only in the last debate but also the last town hall debate he had with McCain. One of the best things I read about the last debate on style was the argument that the Presidency is a job interview and Romney came in prepared, hungry, and focused so it seemed more like he deserved it. Bush showed some emotion in his and it seemed to help him. It made people relate to the challenges of being President while making it appear as though he still wanted the job. A lot of people felt that Obama gave off the vibe last debate that he didn't want the job any longer and that he looked defeated. He needs to seem hungry again. he needs to seem like he loves being President because of all the good that can be done and all the good that's still to come. He needs to seem optimistic that another term will make a big difference and he absolutely needs to nail Romney any chance he can get for his past job performance as governor of Mass, and his often shape-shifting beliefs.

Given the challenges of the town hall format, and the fact that he's likely to see more questions directed at him negatively than Roney, It's hard to imagine how he could possibly hit a home run to the extent that Romney did unless Romney gaffes or freaks out but if he comes in prepared, focused, energetic, and hungry for the job again I think he'll at least come up with a draw or a modest win and that would be good enough to build some momentum and craft a narrative.

The average American will continue to dislike him or return to disliking him.

Romney gained so much precisely because he didn't come off, during the debate, like the jerk he's been represented as... (and which, imo, he truly is but that's now on the Dem's side to remind people of as a matter of values and character).

When we lower expectations, we look better at the end.

The M$M will spin a Romney win.

No matter what Obama does they will paint the performance as too weak or too aggressive.

NOT Obama.

They are going to try to steal it again.

We need every single dem and left leaning person to vote.

The onus is on ROMNEY to catch up after Biden's win.

The onus is on ROMNEY not to lie his ass off again