Gibbs: Obama Will Bring ‘Different Game’ To Next Debate

but he's asking too much. Democrats are feeling dispirited right now and the only thing that's going to bring them back up is to see their candidates do well in head-to-head debates. Biden could start the process tomorrow if he takes it to Lyin' Ryan. But Obama's second debate against Romney is key. If Obama does well, Democrats will regain much of their enthusiasm. If he flubs again, it's all over.

I do mean pissed. This is more than just our Barack, this has become a civil rights issue for thousands of people and they will vote.

You know, the one whose membership apparently dislikes their candidate, until he lies his way through a manic, bizarre debate "performance" and then they all get hard & wet for him suddenly.

I suppose the damage is done in that regard - many Republicans who didn't want Romney are now apparently for him (that was probably going to happen eventually anyway - most people in that party would vote for the Devil himself if he were their candidate.)

Democrats (and hopefully most independent voters) know that the President is far and above the only sane choice this year.

Gibbs is right - instead of wringing our hands, or as I like to say - curling up in the fetal position - we need to act, even in a small way, if that's all we can personally do.

...regardless of how our candidate looks at a 2-hour televised event.

Find Clinton's speech where he spoke of what Obama did domestically and Kerry"s and Biden's that spoke of his foreign policy. Remind yourself of what the real accomplishments were and where we started in January 2009.

Turn the Reagan question against the Republicans by making the base year early 2009, where we were losing 800,000 a month and where the stock market was spiraling down to around half its high! Remember that we were bogged down in two wars - and Afghanistan was far worse than it had been in 2003. The economy is recovering, slowly but surely - the actual deficit for this year was lower by $200 billion to 1.1 trillion.

Some always said that we need to work like we are behind back when we were clearly ahead. That is even more true now. Sorry, but there is no time for us to break down because of a poor debate performance. Consider whether the Republicans did that in 2004 - and Bush was far worse! (yes, I know the instant polls did not say that - likely because there were more Republicans who would never ever have told a pollster even if they admitted it to themselves.) No, one of the main responses to the 2004 debate was that while Kerry was an outstanding debater and Bush wasn't, Bush was a "great" President.

lol

"dispirited" defeatist (a member of your team, if you like) on another thread:

"Can't you keep your dreary, despondent and defeatist droppings off of even one thread?

What does your gratuitous debby-downer dreck add to the discussion?

How does this post advance the Democratic campaign one centimeter? (Presuming that moving forward to a Democratic victory is your genuine purpose?)

Go take some Cymbalta, down some Prozac--and quit dumping on the rest of us who are working and hoping for an Obama/Biden victory in November."

It looks like a lot of you are.

I think for myself and call 'em like I see 'em. Sorry if it hurts your feelings.

just don't presume anyone else calls them the same as you

I am part of it.

You insult us for not thinking for ourselves, while at the same time, you decided it was ok for YOU to assume that all Democrats are feeling dispirited, then you get upset because we disagree with you about how WE feel? Hmmmmm.....where have I seen that kind of spin before?

harder to defend foreign policy than the economy. Everyone lives in the economy and personally knows whether they are better or worse off. Foreign policy it is much easier to BS your way through. Sure Obama can say we killed Bin Laden. We got out of Iraq but it isn't going so great over there now. He doubled down in Afghanistan and it looks more and more every day that we should have just got out when the people we are supposed to be training are gunning our people down on a daily basis.

The last debate is foreign policy.

The final debate will be strictly foreign policy.

http://www.2012presidentialelectionnews.com/2012-debate-schedule/2012-presidential-debate-schedule/

Romney is weak on connecting with people and weak on foreign policy.

pressure on the President to perform at the next debate. Hope he doesn't go overboard on the energy and enthusiasm. He might be made to look awkward and out of character and then Ed Schultz will critize him for that.

debate.

The President needs to focus on all the things he should have said in the first debate and work them into his answers. And he has to be prepared to respond to all of Romney's lies on Obama's foreign policy. He has to vigorously go on defense and offense. He shouldn't worry about being perceived as too aggressive.

What he MUST NOT do is be passive and seem like he's apologizing for the Administration's policies.

challengers generally win the first debate. Rachel Maddow did a first segment on this last week. I recommend you go look that up.

I think Obama is going to be way stronger because now he knows exactly what he's dealing with. Everyone was crying about him looking down and writing all the time: what I saw was a look on his face saying "oh no, he di-in't just say that..." and wrote it down---and interestingly, he was using a lot of what mittiot said at the debate in his stump speeches and ads over the course of the next week. mittiot hasn't used anything Obama said, nor his demeanor, at the debate against him in the interrim.

A reporter in Michigan got ryan on the record saying that Obama hasn't instituted any restrictions in the gun laws since he was in office--and that is flying in the face of the nra's ad running saying that he did.

I'm one of those Dems who is unwavering in their support of the president. I'm not distracted by shiny, sparkly lies like apparently some seem to be. It would take a hell of a lot more than Obama's performance at one debate to make me stay home on election day.

Why wasn't "an energetic, enthusiastic president" always the plan?

I've been hearing over and over again how the president really won the first debate because (among other things) he was calm and cool. If "calm and cool" wins debates, why change it?

I'm glad to hear they're rethinking that strategy for the second debate. I'd like to see my president confident that he has the right ideas and not afraid to explain to people why he's right.

wins debates for people who look at them logically. For a lot of the dumb masses, and we have a lot of them in this country, their idea of who won a debate is by judging who waved their dick around the most. I would apologize for oversimplifying 50% of our population, but, truth be told, half of America is just stone cold stupid. Not ignorant, not uninformed- stupid.

how they're going to vote by now. The debates are intended to go after those who not logical, not informed or maybe just outright stupid. If Obama doesn't challenge Romney, the people who aren't logical can be convinced of something that doesn't make any sense, and those who are not informed can be lied to.

I love that description. It's the best one I've heard that describes what Romney did at that debate and, as many of us already knew, Romney was only bragging about the size of his dick and it really isn't that big. I think Obama is going to do a good job of pointing that out (and laughing) in the next two debates.

And there is no doubt Romney will be lying like a rug.

But Obama needs to call him out on his lies, every single time.
When I was prosecuting cases (for over 34 years) I loved impeaching witnesses for the other side. Every time you point out one of their lies you make your argument stronger.

Letting Romney bloviate and lie in front of a national audience encouraged his arrogance. Now Romney will be over-confident and even more boastful in the next debate because he thinks he got away with lying. Obama purposely gave Romney plenty of rope to hang himself. At this point, it may appear that it was not a wise strategy, but I think we will see the method to Obama's madness. Obama is going to hit Romney hard and make him look like the fool that he is.

Perhaps John Huntsman and Caroline Kennedy can be in the audience with Michelle to intimidate Romney a bit. Facts and smarts won't win the debate when Romney will say anything, deny everything and attack, attack, attack. It's easy to attack and pretend to know it all than to carefully set forth a foreign policy based on fact and reason and expertise. The experts always lose unless they are President Clinton who can combine folksy with brilliance and the ultimate put downs. Perhaps President Clinton should be Obama's debate partner. Kerry is much too polite and removed from the down and dirty level of politics. Romney's foreign policy will get the U.S. into more wars - perhaps that is his ultimate employment program - constant conflict.

but Obama won that debate. WON IT! according to several people here on teh DU. why is Robert Gibbs being a cutten runner? i blame Will Pitt for this. his influence is just too far reaching.

No contest. And we like a good brawl!