Did Obama throw the debate out of boredom?

[Nye Bevan]

Interesting theory.

The interesting question is why our normally very competitive president charged into the debate with all the enthusiasm of a boxer who'd taken a big bag of cash to take a dive. A lot of people have theories to explain this. Al Gore actually blamed it on altitude in the Mile High City. Many conservative commentators fingered Obama's arrogance. He figured Romney was a lightweight and thus didn't prepare for a real fight. I have another theory, one that requires a brief biographical diversion but I think the payoff will be worth it. So bear with me. In my freshman year of high school, I stupidly signed up for an Earth science class. It was absurdly easy but by the time I worked this out, the deadline to switch classes had passed. That left me stuck with a dumb class with a ton of homework and regular tests that I would ace.

The syllabus showed us how the work was weighted and I could do math. If you could ace the tests, you could get away with not turning in a lot of the homework. It's not that I didn't do most of the homework. I did, but the turn-in box was right next to the recycle bin. When it came time to turn the assignments in, I would get close and float the paper and see where it landed. Apparently, I was a lousy shot because 40 assignments didn't make it in. Final grade in the class: A.

I was throwing assignments in the recycle bin for the same reason I suspect Obama threw the first debate: to create a hole that I had to climb out of and thereby keep it interesting. Obama, most of his biographers agree, has a great capacity for boredom in government but really enjoys campaigning. Given the Republicans' free-fall in the polls lately, if Obama had put Romney away in the first debate, that would have effectively ended the campaign.

Instead, Obama has turned this into a real fight. Romney will get more money and a bump in the polls and Paul Ryan will rip the hair plugs right out of Joe Biden next week in their match-up. And then Obama and Romney will face off again in front of a townhall audience. Literally every watcher will wonder if Obama will bring his A-game. This approach may be reckless or arrogant or any number of other things that give political consultants heart palpitations. It's also one hell of a way to stave off boredom.

http://www.splicetoday.com/politics-and-media/did-obama-throw-the-debate

[quinnox]

1. oh, come on

Now I do have an open mind, and if I gave even asmall bit of credence to the idea of Obama throwing the debate, it would not be due to his having a strong case of boredom, but because of shadowy high level figures who are above the government and are the real controllers.

[dems_rightnow]

2. Uh yeah.

That makes sense.

[OldDem2012]

3. Did you post your comment out of boredom? nt.

[cthulu2016]

4. No. JFK or Clinton? Maybe. Obama? No.

JFK was an adrenaline junkie and Clinton creates chaotic situations because he knows he is better than his opponents in crisis mode.

But "no drama Obama" is aptly named.

He had some theory of how to perform and it wasn't a good idea, and was poorly executed to boot.

That's all.

[Nye Bevan]

6. That actually makes sense. I'm a fan of Occam's razor myself.

I thought it was an interesting theory that I hadn't seen before, but I guess it's not the most plausible scenario.

[BumRushDaShow]

5. Um no.

There's an issue going on in the undercurrent of world affairs that happened this past week that I expect the President is weighing heavily, and that has to do with Turkey and Syria. And this is mainly because Turkey is a NATO member and "an attack on a member is an attack on all members", and the Turkish Parliament authorized the use of force. Meanwhile, our country has no more money and no more "willing" fighters, nor can it get out of this easily given so many rethug predecessors who demanded we foot the bill and bear the burden for an endless stream of reckless global interventions.

The silliness of the infotainment-fixated "news" media is getting worse and worse and we wonder why this country has descended into the depths of "Honey Boo Boo", "Snooki", Caribou Barbie's dysfunctional family, and insisting upon use of a "sports analogy" for serious questions of policy.

[dkf]

7. "Paul Ryan will rip the hair plugs right out of Joe Biden" LOL.

What is this...death cage match time?

[Jennicut]

10. LOL!

I hope Biden will smack his Eddie Munster smirk right off his face...and pound his budget crap ideas in to his face.

um wait. No I do not. This is kind of sick that politics is considered macho and violent.

[dkf]

11. Haha Biden will certainly do that verbally. The guy has passion.

I think it's gonna be fun!

[Jennicut]

12. Oh, he will do it verbally no doubt.

Actually, I think Joe is the best debater out of him, Romney or Obama. I have not seen any Paul Ryan debates but have watched a lot of his speeches and he is very dry and bland.

[lunatica]

15. Ryan's sincerity act is the most insincere thing I've witnessed in a long time

His pauses while looking directly into the camera as if it was a woman's eyes is laughable. His forgot-his-dentures smile is plain stupid, and his nut hefting is obvious. He shakes hands in a way that obviously highlights his bulging biceps. In the parlance of my youth he's a male chauvinist pig.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Or, maybe, into boredom?

The debates, and the whole campaign, are, basically, (expensive) advertising and showbiz. And, because of that, it's boring. Like a game show pitting Contestant A against Contestant B running an obstacle course with the media acting as judges.

“Now, the man on the stand he wants my vote,
He's a-runnin' for office on the ballot note.
He's out there preachin' in front of the steeple,
Tellin' me he loves all kinds-a people.
(He's eatin' bagels
He's eatin' pizza
He's eatin' chitlins
He's eatin' bullshit!)”

Bob Dylan

[alcibiades_mystery]

14. Indeed, the theory is actually a vicious attack on Obama

encapsulated in this statement:

"has a great capacity for boredom in government but really enjoys campaigning"

That's a typical right wing attack on Obama. And it's a load of hooey. Obama seems to thrive, rather, on the boring intricacies of policy. The post then manages to load this one in:

"This approach may be reckless or arrogant "

Reckless and arrogant. Two additional right wing attacks on the President.

Obama is dedicated, enlivened by policy and governance, and careful with the stewardship of the nation. This right wing hit piece theory argues precisely the opposite, in nearly Hannity mode. A disgraceful hit of a "theory."

[JaneyVee]

9. No. Romney broke the rules of debating and Lehrer was too soft to enforce them.

The bar was set so low for Romney that even having him string together a coherent sentence would have gave him a win. Obama didn't lose the debate, Romney ran from his own policies regarding taxes, healthcare, education, & spending. Hard to debate someone that is not relying on facts.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

13. no

higher polls make voters complacent - need to push for money. Also to be in the background so Romney can define himself and also hang himself. Provided good ammo for attack.

[Aerows]

16. I always did worse in

easy classes. Hard classes that made me work for it were better for me.

That said, I don't think this was what happened. I think the President was drained from having to deal with shots fired on the ground between Syria and Turkey, and any number of other things that a President has to deal with. That's what made Romney's disrespect of President Obama so childish.