The dominant media narrative today is 'Romney Lied' That's a clear win for Pres. Obama.

. . . and the PBS isn't shy about putting it to viewers (and potential supporters of public television) just like that: Romney wants to kill Big Bird!

Not the headline he was expecting, I'd imagine.

Knock me over with a feather!

The real take-away is here:



That is no win in my book. But I've read here that I'm just self-deluded.

Let all the squaking and flapping and "He failed!" "He's a loser!" play itself out. POTUS is calling out the liar on the campaign trail today.

And there are two debates to go. How will Romney "win" those when it's pretty well acknowledged that he lied his way through debate #1 the day after?

It was nothing but easily refutable wall-to-wall lies from Money Boo Boo. I've never seen a performance quite like that from any politician, even the little Chimperor or Tricky Dick. Those two told the truth inadvertently at times. Romney is constitutionally incapable of telling the truth about anything once he gets past "I am Mitt Romney."

People think he's a smug, untrustworthy, lying asshole for one reason - it's who he is and anyone can see it.

That's a new one! And a GOOD one, too, hifiguy!

nervous Pervus,Willard must have had his magic undies on backwards or the Oxie kicked in. Can't imagine Willard be in the Oval Office,F--ing scary,bomb Iran,Blow them back to the stone age shit. Just like Cheney.
.

President Obama won the "trust" of Americans last night.

Thanks for your posts. They are edifying.

The dominant media narrative everywhere else is that the President blew a big opportunity last night and Romney made himself more acceptable as an alternative.

That's the narrative? That makes him 'acceptable as an alternative?'

In what universe? Where are these voters who now see Romney as an 'acceptable alternative?'

That's as weak an outcome as Romney could expect. There's not ONE of his attacks that survived the interim between his glib performance and the headlines.

And its hardly surprising. Debate performances are rarely judged on their substance as much as they are on style. And having the dominant media narrative be that Romney's campaign got a big shot in the arm last night is not what the President wanted or needed and its not something we should take lightly.

Yes, there is some, and hopefully growing, attention being paid to the substance of Romney's performance. But one almost certainly would be mistaken if they thought that the narrative going into the next debate is going to be "will Romney lie again". Rather, its going to be "can the President regain his mojo". I think he can, but the media narrative will be that burden/pressure is on the President to improve his performance in the next debate.

So, as much as I agree with you that the substance should outweigh the style and as much as I hope that turns out to be the case, its simply not credible for you to claim that the "dominant" media narrative today is that Romney lied.

Romney didn't emerge with ONE talking point perpetuated by the media other than he bested the president in this one debate.

On the other hand, 'Romney lied' will remain, long after all of these esoteric judgments have faded. That's what critics should have spent their time on today; not bashing the president for some meaningless judgments on style that will evaporate with Romney's next demonstrated lie.

.... can OP show me some examples of the "dominant media narrative" on sites that are mainstream and my neighbors, who are not political junkies might see.

Put simply, the dominant media narrative is that Romney won decisively. I will NEVER EVER understand this kind of delusional "thinking". It's not any different from the freeper delusion that all the polls are fixed. Being that out of touch with reality is absurd and childish.

Obama may well survive this but making up your own alternative history is silly.

______________

The 'delusion' is thinking that 'winning' the debate translates into an enduring narrative.

To wit: Romney went into this debate with a solid definition generated by the Obama campaign and the President as an elitist, a prevaricator, and a corporate-type basically unconcerned with the needs of average Americans.

Moreover, Romney, facing a steady decline in polls in states where he NEEDS to actually win the contest that counts, came into this debate with a desperation to do more than portray President Obama as a lousy debater. Romney needs to either peel off Obama votes or expand his base to include a sizable chunk of the narrow contingent of 'undecideds' left to influence.

Those are gargantuan tasks which he didn't come close to achieving last night. He can't build a voting majority on the charge that President Obama is a lousy debater. His ace in the hole was supposed to be the weak economy. Show me the plethora of articles which are carrying Romney's attacks to the President today. Show me where the media is perpetuating ANY of Romney's attacks from last night.

President Obama has the advantage today of echoing the media in declaring Romney an inveterate liar. I shouldn't have to list the articles and criticisms for you. Go and look. Don't just delude yourself into thinking that ANY of Romney's bullshit is going to influence the voters he needs to attract in these final weeks of the election. If he (or anyone else) thinks he furthered his candidacy by slick-talking his way through the debate, look no further than the referendum from the press on what he actually conveyed. That was his challenge; not gaining the title of a glib frat boy in a debate.

The post-debate glow of the win will be short-lived. The lies are with him for life now.

Romney just regurgitated the same angry narcissist bullshit he does at EVERY stump speech. And now he's being fact checked and it's not pretty. And regardless of what some media are saying the PEOPLE are saying that Mitt was sweaty and scary.

Mitt Romney won last night's debate by pundit scorecards. He'll lose the week, though, as the media begins to digest his claims and press him for the specifics of his "plan" at odds with his last eighteen months of campaigning, and frequently, reality.

Much of the reviews last night were about theatrics. Mr. Romney was giving the performance of his life. Anything less and he would hit a death spiral from which his campaign would not recover.

Yet the week following this debate will be about uncovering the substance of it. Here, Mr. Obama is clearly the winner. Mr. Obama may not have had much flash last night, but he let Romney be Romney, and Mitt's mendacity knows, apparently no bounds.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-ross/mitt-romney-can-lose-for-_b_1938896.html

Those who think Obama could have "ended it" last night just want this over now. Yes, we all do, but the Obama campaign know better, and they are working this beautifully.

Even the very worst thing a candidate can spout-- lies, lies, lies

Being considered a liar is a pretty negative thing. In fact, it stinks to high heaven.

GOBAMA!!!

Can't wait for the town hall debate. Mute needs to be exposed even more.

Romney's Church (Mormons) teaches its O.K. to lie. Just google "lying for the lord"

Just a sample of what you will find: For the Mormon, loyalty and the welfare of the church are more important than the principle of honesty, and plausible denials and deception by omission are warranted by an opportunity to have the Mormon organization seen in the best possible light.

... is that he SHOULD have done a complete faceplant. This debate was SO different from what everybody was expecting, because he has a million liabilities--one for every lie he's told and every piece of videotape there is that proves it.

I kind of suspect that anybody watching this who had absolutely no previous knowledge of the nominees and their strengths and weaknesses would be that it was a draw between one guy who was kind of mild-mannered and polite and another guy who was a bully.

In fact, the campaign downplayed the suggestion that he'd floor Romney in their first encounter.

Don't lose sight of WHO Romney needed to speak to in that debate. I seriously question that his main challenge was to prove to them that he was more glib and manic than his challenger. if that's all he carries away, he's a clear loser.

and he wants to kill Big Bird. That's what I'm seeing.

that Mitt Rmoney wanted to kill Big Bird and she started crying uncontrollably. It took me a good 15 mins to get her to calm down. I think MittWitt lost her vote today...lmao!

"Better be thought the fool, then open ones mouth and have it confirmed"

He didn't know when to shut up.

That is not a good thing. He needs to learn to fight for us on the left instead of just taking our support for granted and expecting us to support him.

Like I said on another thread I think Obama was letting Rmoney hang himself last night. As the saying goes, "Never interrupt your enemy while they are making mistakes." It seems to have worked because all people are talking about today is all the lies and how much of an ass Mitt came off as last night.

media outlets that truly are liberal news organizations ran headlines this morning that Romney took it to Obama...and those were the kindest reviews.

You have to really have blinders on to not see that the dominant narrative coming out of last night is that Obama got whipped in a bad way. Now they have a chance to turn it by pointing out all of the lies Romney told, hopefully that will be the dominant narrative in a few days, but is certainly not there yet.

blinders? inform yourself . . .

Over the last year, the mainstream media has started experiencing a drop in viewership. According to RT, CNN has had a 50% drop in viewership between March 2011 and March 2012. And Fox News, a 17% drop. Just to be different MSNBC had a 3% increase, but this seems to be unusual in the current trend.

http://digitaljournal.com/article/322326




More people under 25 get news from digital (60 percent) than “traditional” sources such as TV, radio and print (43 percent).
http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/189819/pew-tv-viewing-habit-grays-as-digital-news-consumption-tops-print-radio/

I also see a lot of Big Bird stories and how Jim Lehrer lost control of the debate.

The only media narrative I can find, at least in anything widely-read or watched by average voters (sorry, websites only read by progressive political junkies don't count), is "ROMNEY WOOOOOOON!!!!!"

. . . and completely miss the myriad of other sources where folks get their news these days.

No point in trying to convince you away from the hacks.

So maybe there are some progressive sites out there validating people's desire to turn an obvious whipping in the eyes of the public into a win for Obama, but that is not the dominant narrative. Personally, I think we are much better served to point out Obama's failings and demand more from him next time.

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/189819/pew-tv-viewing-habit-grays-as-digital-news-consumption-tops-print-radio/



more significant:

Only about a third (34%) of those younger than 30 say they watched TV news yesterday; in 2006, nearly half of young people (49%) said they watched TV news the prior day,” the report says.

Twenty-eight percent of people 18-29 reported they watched local news regularly. In 2006, the report notes, that figure was 42 percent.
Many young people don’t consume news

It’s not surprising that more people under 25 get news from digital (60 percent) than “traditional” sources such as TV, radio and print (43 percent). One rather striking finding:




even more relevant;

Pew Study: Local TV Remains Most Popular Local Info Source

The survey found that the majority (64%) of adults use at least three different types of media each week for info about their local community, and 15% rely on at least six different kinds.

"The survey echoes longstanding research that more Americans report watching local TV news than any other source."

Same thing as calling him a liar...