HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » The Greatest Tactical Err...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 01:24 PM

The Greatest Tactical Error Of The Romney Campaign ?

Willard Romney went into his third debate with our president, sitting on a imaginary lead he never had. He thought he could run out the clock. It's the same calculus that Ken Norton and Oscar DeLaHoya employed in their boxing matches with Muhammad Ali and Felix Trinidad. They didn't have a lead. They played it safe. And they both lost hotly contested decisions.

No soup for you. Willard Romney. you pusillanimous, platitudinous, and prevaricating plutocrat.

11 replies, 1806 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 11 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Greatest Tactical Error Of The Romney Campaign ? (Original post)
DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2012 OP
JRLeft Oct 2012 #1
DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2012 #2
ncgrits Oct 2012 #3
demwing Oct 2012 #5
lunatica Oct 2012 #6
geek tragedy Oct 2012 #4
DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2012 #7
geek tragedy Oct 2012 #8
DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2012 #9
lillypaddle Oct 2012 #10
DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2012 #11

Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 01:26 PM

1. You mean Oscar De La Hoya sat on his lead and ran the rest of the fight.

Felix Trinidad never ran he kept coming forward. But I get your analogy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JRLeft (Reply #1)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 01:28 PM

2. I Need To Fix My Post. I Wasn't Thinking

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 01:36 PM

3. I hear your last sentence in the voice of Sylvester the Cat! LOL!



you pusillanimous, platitudinous, and prevaricating plutocrat

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ncgrits (Reply #3)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 01:38 PM

5. or Daffy Duck

I was just waiting for a "He's despicable..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ncgrits (Reply #3)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 01:39 PM

6. That's a lot of spit

Or should I say thpit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 01:38 PM

4. He focused on scoring points with voters rather than winning the debate.

What he should have learned from Obama's implosion in the first debate is:

there is no substitute for victory.

The candidate's 1st, 2nd, and 3rd priorities are: win the effing debate.

Get the better of your opponent. Put him on the defensive. Act like you're the alpha.

From Conan the Barbarian:

Tribal elder: Conan, what is best in life?

Conan: To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #4)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 01:44 PM

7. It's The Battle Of Narratives.

The Rombots argue that only the first debate mattered and Romney's victory was so complete that the subsequent debates didn't matter. I never bought into that argument. It contradicts the primacy and recency effect. People tend to remember the first and last thing they saw or heard and forget everything in the middle. Even if the first debate had the larger effect the third debate or rubber match couldn't be discounted.

Kasim Reed, an Obama surrogate makes a similar analogy. He said "Muhammad Ali lost his first fight to Joe Frazier and got knocked down in the process but came back to win the next two fights. History remembers victors." Ironically, Frazier fans try to make the same argument that the first fight was the most important but almost all boxing fans acknowledge Muhammad Ali was Joe Frazier's ring better.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #7)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 02:01 PM

8. Part of it quite frankly is that Romney just had no angles on Obama

when it came to foreign policy. Obama's much more comfortable in that subject matter, and has pursued relatively non-ideological, centrist goals. Romney was just out of his depth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #8)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 02:26 PM

9. I Never Thought O Was Behind But It Makes A Great Story

Romney had his ass kicked in the third debate. To stay with sports parlance Obama "schooled him."

What's great about it is he didn't even try to fight back. He was emasculated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 02:32 PM

10. pusillanimous?

uh oh. I expect that to be on the forbidden words list!

(just kidding ...)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lillypaddle (Reply #10)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:03 PM

11. It's A Fifty Dollar Word For Weak/nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread