2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumAs Gregory just let slip - Mitt served up a big plate of ads and stump talking points for Obama...
They came pouring out of Mitt like a broken sewer pipe, stinking up the place with the stench of the lies. Some even came with helpful bullet point numbers attached. Sure the debates are important...but don't forget where these elections are won and lost - in the trenches, in the battlegrounds, with the TV ads, with the visits and speeches.
Mitt served up a heap of stuff to work with. Roll the tapes!
renate
(13,776 posts)It's Opposite Day!
Jeff In Milwaukee
(13,992 posts)livetohike
(22,165 posts)tomorrow. To me, Mitt looked nervous - not energetic and that little smirk he gave after he was finished speaking reminded me of a 5th grader pleased with him/her self.
He never told anyone exactly what he would do. He never said the word "voucher" in regards to Medicare and Jim Lehrer didn't press him enough - on anything.
and-justice-for-all
(14,765 posts)and peddling the bullshit. Obama just let him ramble because Obama knows that all that shit that came from Robocorp tonight will be fact checked and Obama's guns will be reloaded from here till November.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)The initial assessment of the talking heads will be that Romney was the winner because he seemed more angry/passionate. But he was talking nonsense and has created a huge vulnerability. Namely that he is just making this shit up as he goes. He has no plans for any of it. This is the angle they will be working.
"If he can't tell us what he's really doing on taxes, can you trust him on Social Security?" etc.
I wish Obama would have fought back a bit more but clearly their strategy was to let Romney put himself on record as much as possible. Obama has a lot of money left and you can bet much of what Romney said tonight will appear in ads in swing states in teh next week.
Justice
(7,188 posts)Native
(5,943 posts)Obama to hit back hard. Isn't it strategically smart to NOT press Romney on his bullshit and just let the lies fester (put the plate in the warmer oven to later feed it to the masses on a perfectly set table?). I mean, if you give the guy a chance to clarify some stupid comment (like replicating RomneyCare state by state, but hey, that's not a national plan), you're only giving the guy a chance to clarify and/or correct. Isn't the reason for attacking to make someone look bad? Why do you need to attack when someone has already done the job for you?
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)avaistheone1
(14,626 posts)Got to say I agree with Gregory on this one.