They're already setting it up so Romney can claim a win if he avoids a major gaffe.

I wish we didn't have to wait till fall.

I doubt he'll become addicted to Romney.

they discuss issues of the right, generally from a right perspective and framed for the right. Thus Republicans have a natural advantage.

RMoney, on the other hand, answers every question with "Why aren't we talking about jobs and the economy?" Not that he's got anything to say about jobs or the economy.

If that's all he's got, President Obama is going to run the debates. Easily.

None of the Republic talking heads is talented enough to dumb down the debate enough to make Mittens look good.

And he just says whatever he darned well pleases without recourse to what question was actually asked. Say what you will about Gov. Palin, and granted that it was just one debate, but she stubbornly and doggedly stayed on her course of action and refused to be engaged on any issue.

I don't know that the tactic will work in a presidential debate, but it sure as hell kept Palin from saying too many stupid things during the long vice presidential "debate" in 2008. And, as could be predicted, Palin's failure to answer any questions was effectively papered over by her adoring fans in the media outlets (e.g., the doughy pantload himself, Jonah Goldberg).

thriller (or maybe a brilliant chess strategy, whereby the person using it moves chess pieces as if they are checkers

on national teevee. With all cameras on him.

It's either that, or he'll freeze stiffer and more wooden than an oak.

It will also be interesting to see if he attempts his vulcan shoulder grip again. I'm sure O will be prepared, regardless of which Mitt shows up at the debate.

Take your pick. He can't have it both ways.

I'm trying to remember what the question was in one of the Republican debates where Newt just whipped out and laid the smack down on the moderator. It was one of the most brilliant political moments I've ever seen.

A moment of real righteous wrath might win the sympathies of the audience. It's when a candidate starts sounding like a kid who wonders why the other kid got more ice cream on his cone that crucifies a candidate politically.


ETA: Oh yeah, here it is.

the part about how Grinchie was trying to impeach the sitting president over his "personal pain" while cheating on his wife.

Seriously though I'm expecting Rmoney to lose it during the debates like he did with Rick Perry.

He knows he'll get his ass kicked if he shows up. So he may just self-righteously refuse to show up.

Bake

affair that it really won't mean anything, and there will be no way that Willard can screw it up.

Remembering the Bush vs. Gore debates, we should not be surprised at how the media, through camera angles, formatting, moderator choices, will do more to determine who "wins" the debates than the abilities of the candidates.

These are not unbiased, objective, news events designed to elicit truth. There is no way in hell that Bush should have been in the same room as either Gore or Kerry, yet the media managed to portray Bush as succeeding.

Maybe Obama should not schedule any debates. As long as the economy is not a disaster, and gas can stay below $4 a gallon, having debates just give Romney free t.v. time.

But both of them put together have about half of the oratorical skill of President Obama. While I would agree that both Gore and Kerry won the debates with Bush, the victories were not knockouts, they were settled by the judges after 15 rounds.

It is hard to say what will happen in these debates as the rules are always negotiated, but if it gets at all scrappy, Obama wins in a walk. Gingrich and Santorum got under Mitt's skin. Gingrich can turn a phrase, but is largely just a bully, Santorum, well even a broken watch is right twice a day. Obama is a skilled surgeon by comparison. He can slice and dice and barely leave a scar.

In a real debate, Obama would win at a walk. But the presidential debate isn't the same thing. The format prevents an actual debate breaking out. What I suspect will happen is that firstly, the right-wing echo chamber will lower expectations so much that Romney will be declared the victor if he avoids a massive gaffe (Obama, naturally, will be judged a loser unless he comes out with speeches rivalling Cicero) and Romney will take the Palin approach of memorising talking points, spitting those out as often as possible and just ignoring the question.

certainly don't vote on teh basis of them. If they did, Bush would never have won. Twice.