Skip to main content

Q: Why did Obama throw that first debate?
A: Because he wants to work with a Democratic congress. That's why.

Let me explain...

1) Before that debate, Obama was clearly trouncing Romney in ALL the polls.

2) THAT indicated to conservative donors -- specifically to right-wing SuperPACs laden with gobs of cash useful in ANY election they choose -- that they would be wasting their money by spending it to get Romney elected.

3) AND THAT indicated to those same SuperPACs that they should spend their money on Congressional races instead of the presidential race so as to protect Republican control of the Senate and the House which HAS been looking increasingly tenuous lately, especially so for the Senate.

So here is the Obama campaign's simple plan:

- FIRST: Blow the first debate
- Give GOP SuperPACs hope of winning the White House
- Divert their money away from Congress and towards Romney

- THEN: Win the next three debates
- Demoralize the GOP base reducing their will to vote for Congress

- THUS: Win the White House, Senate, AND the House!

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  He didn't "throw" it! (20+ / 0-)

    As he himself said, "Who was that Romney guy that showed up???" I maintain he was in shock much of the time, figuring, "Okay, this guys seems ... disturbed, best thing to do is let him run his mouth."

  •  You forgot .... "PROFIT!" (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MKSinSA, Jimdotz, annieli
  •  Can we stop with the crazy theories? (20+ / 0-)

    Nobody wants to lose a debate. I personally don't think his performance was as bad as has been decided by the media and it seems most people.

    •  I think it's "crazy theory" (4+ / 0-)

      as in, this diarist is hardly the first to come up with this idea.

      As for why it's crazy: Virtually no one here thinks Obama's less than good at what he does (even if we disagree with him about it.) But it's crazy to believe that Obama can plan to win a debate. Obama would be crazy to plan for such a turnaround as a key part of his strategy, and I'm sure he's not crazy.

      Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

      by Nowhere Man on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 06:10:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think that Robme listened to ... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jimdotz

        Lawrence O'Donnell and took his advice to over-ride the moderator and be aggressive.  Lawrence and his big fat ego.

        "Republicans are the party that says that government doesn't work, then they get elected and prove it."-- PJ O'Rourke

        by nocynicism on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 06:53:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  His ego is quite large, I really like L. O'Donnell (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Jimdotz

          but have a difficult time watching his entire show because of his ego getting in the way. He should just give it a rest, and while I am on the subject, I love what Jon Stewart said about Chris Matthews response to the debate, "look at what you did President Obama, you broke him, now he is no good to anyone". That was one of the funniest things I heard said about Matthews.

    •  Gotta keep it close!!! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jimdotz, Sharon Wraight

      That's the media's job, exaggerate the meaning of things and then readjust when it swings too far in the other directions. Repeat as necessary. Luckily for them, the same people aren't polled repeatedly. It's always a new crop with fewer and fewer truly undecided nincompoops.

      (-9,-9) pragmatic incrementalist :-P

      by Enterik on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 07:20:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Don't blame the media, you sound like a Republican (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jimdotz, shypuffadder

        Obama didn't turn in his best preformance, it was O.K., but O.K. was not enough when you had a crazy man foaming at the mouth because he was going to lose after all the years he has run for President. Romney was sweating, Obama wasn't, that should tell you something.

        •  Description not Blame... (0+ / 0-)

          ...the media is what it is.

          I agree that Obama doesn't need to take the same risks to win the media beauty and style contest. It's a stable strategy in balance with his other responsibilities as POTUS.

          (-9,-9) pragmatic incrementalist :-P

          by Enterik on Mon Oct 08, 2012 at 07:24:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I agree, with the exception of his closing (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jimdotz

      statement, I think that was very weak, but who knows by that time he was so done with this bullshit, and he just didn't care so he resorted to parts of his stump speech. Barack Obama is not the best Debater the world has seen, but he is a damn good speaker, and I expected alot more from the closing statement.

    •  I think... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jimdotz, secret38b

      it's more a consequence of him being blown away by Romney's audacious lying and not knowing how to respond.

    •  I thought is was a wash (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ivote2004, Jimdotz, shypuffadder

      My friend came to my house when over half the debate was over and asked my how Barack was doing, and I said I thought it was tit for tat. This meant to me both were holding their own, but I was watching on MSNBC when it was over and after they had a fit about all the things Barack could have brought up I began to see his performance more negatively. But regardless, it is time to move on, figure out how to help get the president reelected, and when we do, this first debate will be forgotten.

  •  Heh ... now there's a theory with punch (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jimdotz, natedogg265, WB Reeves

    or maybe spiked punch. Could be - we'll see. That would be your 4-dimensional chess alright.

  •  I'll give you credit (6+ / 0-)

    At least you know that it's tinfoil.

    He didn't throw the debate, and these diaries are really embarrassing.

    "...and if proud Americans can be who they are and boldly stand at the altar with who they love...then surely, surely we can give everyone in this country a fair chance at that great American Dream." ~ Michelle Obama

    by BoiseBlue on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 06:01:57 PM PDT

  •  Now I've heard everything (7+ / 0-)

    This site has really moved beyond the reality-based world with all the excuses and theories for why Obama did so poorly in the debate. Could it be that Obama just did poorly, period? But claiming that Obama intentionally lost the debate?? We're starting to act like the wingnuts.

  •  Yeah, I for one don't believe he "threw" it (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    davidkc, Jimdotz, phonegery, WB Reeves

    But I do believe, as I have stated before, that the end result of that debate may benefit our house and senate candidates in the way you described.

    I know that Obama has grapefruits, but nobody has them big enough to sacrifice an opportunity to end Romney's campaign.

    •  I think they benefit more if people vote (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jimdotz

      for the top of the ticket, especially the low information voters. It is just what people do, and probably what they will do in this election, with all the negative advertisments, unless you are a true beleiver, you just want it over with and you will vote, but you don't really give a damn who the hell wins for anything else.

  •  Also, can we move on from the damn debate? (6+ / 0-)

    It is over and we have voters to persuade and to get to the polls.

  •  Seems kind of convoluted (5+ / 0-)

    I would like to THINK that's what happened. But I believe he was 1) surprised by the rMoney who showed up and the historical number of lies he threw around, 2) Had been told to be "Presidential" and possibly 3) as one of our diarists posited, was told to hold back so as not to add to the "angry black man" meme. I hope the last one is not true. But then every time I think people are "beyond" something, they astonish me with their stupidity and racism. But again, I'd like to THINK your theory is what happened!

    •  the "angry black man" meme is real (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      phonegery, Jimdotz, Tonedevil

      I have no doubt that was part of Obama's thinking, either intentionally or not. He's had to deal with that crap his entire life, and it's been heightened to the nth degree now that he's president. Black men are held to a different standard than white men in this country. Black men have to be near perfect or risk being slapped with some racist stereotype. My life partner of 17 years is black and a very successful professional, and I've seen him have to deal with this all that time.

      But with all that said, I still think there are ways for Obama to be more effective in future debates despite the extra hurdles he has to face.

      •  do you know how appallingly insulting that sounds? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jimdotz

        The idea that the president is so terrified of a racist stereotype being attributed to him that he can't even reveal his own identity.

        You've just gone out there and said that Obama has such high victim potential that he has to be afraid of his own shadow.

        Shame on you.

        Yes, the 'angry black man' meme is real.  Why the hell should Obama give a rat's ass?

        •  Oh please, insulting? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jazzyjay, Tonedevil, Jimdotz

          The only one talking about the President being "terrified" is you.

          Generations of Black folks and people of color have lived and died struggling with the realities of white racism. Would you call recognizing that fact the same as insulting them? Would you likewise characterize it as identical to labeling them as "victims" who were afraid of their "shadow?"

          If not, how is recognizing that the President has to negotiate this same terrain an insult?

          He's a politician running for re-election, not some mythic hero. He doesn't have the luxury of not giving at "rat's ass" about the prejudices of others.

          Why would you introduce such defamatory characterizations into the discussion?

          Nothing human is alien to me.

          by WB Reeves on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 08:30:54 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  look again at the way it sounds. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Jimdotz

            the president can't act a certain way because he'll be portrayed as an 'angry black man'?  You really can't discern between strong rebuttals to questions, challenging assertions, and strong answers and this 'angry black man' concept?

            My point is:  who the fuck cares what a few racist fearmongers might say?  Does Rush Limbaugh define the way the president has to act?

            I never ONCE suggested the president was terrified.  You misread, so you need to work on that.  I said that's what the (false) portrayal suggests.

            And yes, he damn well has the luxury of not giving a rat's ass about wacko peoples' prejudices.  Should, say, a religious Jew not wear a yamulke because of other people's prejudices?

            •  Don't be ridiculous (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Jimdotz
              I never ONCE suggested the president was terrified.  You misread, so you need to work on that.  I said that's what the (false) portrayal suggests.
              Actually it's you who misread. I said the only one talking about the Pres. being terrified was yourself and that is factual. No one used the word but yourself and your suggestion that it, or any of the other insulting characterizations you raised, were implicit davekc's comment is completely off the wall.

              Nothing human is alien to me.

              by WB Reeves on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 10:32:04 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  I thought this too at first, but I don't any (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        WB Reeves, Jimdotz

        longer, the only way to get past that is to get angry and there was plenty of reason to get angry when you are in a situation like that, someone lying like a rug to your face. More so than the angry black man theory is the fact that Obama's demeaner has served him well in the past. Like when he was running against John McCain, and the night of the Correspondents dinner when the plans to kill Bin Laden were moving forward. People like and respect him for his cool and calm demeaner, you could say it is one of the Aces he keeps up his sleeve, you hear Michelle talk about it all the time, that very little upsets him, he is always on an even keel. To get angry and lay into Romney would not be in character, as much as we would like it, he felt it would not serve him well, nor would it be very Presidential.

  •  So it's more of that 12th dimensional chess?! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jimdotz, annieli

    I would have never guessed!!@1!  I was going with the Saturday Night Live Hypothesis, myself, which strikes me as equally plausible...

    "In a nation ruled by swine, all pigs are upward mobile..." - Dr. Hunter S. Thompson

    by Jack K on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 06:10:08 PM PDT

  •  lack of downballot money may be a silver lining (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cachola, Jimdotz, KJB Oregon

    But Obama didn't throw the debate.

    He just didn't do very well.  And knows it.  And from all accounts intends to do a lot better next time.

  •  President Obama DIDN'T throw it. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    phonegery, Jimdotz, jalenth

    He was tired, distracted by the latest Middle East developments, and unprepared for Romney's slick, used car salesman mendacity. He simply lost. He needs to bring his A game next time.

    Check out my blog Romney the Liar right here.

    by Yosef 52 on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 06:12:12 PM PDT

    •  He scored the points. Not the usual efortless (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jimdotz, annieli

      beauty, but scores never the less.   And Yes, I still love him tomorrow.

      I give the Big Bird to those who say Obama lost the debate.

      by 88kathy on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 06:30:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Obama followed the rules they agreed to for the (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jimdotz

      format. Mitt didn't. President Obama didn't come prepaid for the new energetic and lying Mitt and he couldn't adjust fast enough for the all the blatant lies Romney was telling.

      He was rusty, didn't practice enough or took the importance of the debate seriously enough. Seeing the reaction of the people and the media, he'll have a better strategy for the next two.

      Biden will be prepaid for the lies that Ryan is going to spew too. The team knows what to expect now and they'll be better prepared.

      •  its prety bad when you realize over half the (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jimdotz

        people on this site were more prepared    how tough would it have been to out debate the lying scumbag    how do you ever say you have similar position   the more I think about that debate the more furious i become. Its actually hard to believe he got a degree at Haqrvard

  •  Rosey, rosey glasses. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jimdotz

    Everyone Chill the fuck out! I got this - unknown but credited to Barack Obama

    by natedogg265 on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 06:13:22 PM PDT

  •  A: To get to the other side. n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jimdotz
  •  We need to teach the term to voters. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    88kathy, Jimdotz, annieli, drmah, Tonedevil

    The Gish Gallop.  

    Then count the lies that Romney told.  What was the lie that used the fewest words?  (I care?)  What were the most lies in a row?   Use it as a point of discussion.

    Time is a long river.

    by phonegery on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 06:19:25 PM PDT

  •  In point of fact (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jimdotz, PALiberal1

    His convention acceptance speech was somewhat lackluster and perhaps a harbinger of what was to come. Something is different about him and I hope it will be brought to heel before Nov. 2, after which time he can go through whatever personal challenge he's facing any way he chooses.

    •  Maybe he doesn't like being president? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jimdotz

      I'm not saying that with any disrespect, but the job is pretty grueling. I could see him no longer enjoying it at all, despite wanting it so badly in 2008. Obviously he'd never retire or throw it because it would ruin his legacy and make him a "failed president", but that could be why it doesn't seem like his heart is in it as much this time.

  •  Is this a snark diary? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jimdotz

    If so I don't see it in your tags.

  •  Whether or not it was deliberate. . . (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jimdotz, drmah, Tonedevil, ivote2004

    Obama seems to have survived the loss with minimal damage.  Romney has fired all his best shots, and the President still has a full quiver.  This "born again liberal" Romney is an easy target.  Everybody is all jumped up a month out from the election.  I would love to play a hand like the Obama team has.

    Now The Prez and his crew get to show just how smart they really are -- the opportunities are there.

    Bene Scriptum, Bene Intellectum.

    by T C Gibian on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 06:25:28 PM PDT

    •  And don't forget for one minute, we now (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jimdotz

      have the Muppets on our side, what a deal. Who would have guessed that Romney would have screwed this up too? Look at all the people he has aleinated with his big freaking mouth. The same way when you go to a restaurant to eat, you don't piss off the Chef, you also don't piss off the Muppets. There will be hell to pay!

  •  He got what he wanted out of the debate. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jimdotz, Tonedevil

    Not a Hollywood climax with Romney running for the door slobbering, I want my Ralfalca.  

    I was disappointed there was no car chase, but today I am happy with the results.

    I give the Big Bird to those who say Obama lost the debate.

    by 88kathy on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 06:27:57 PM PDT

  •  No way did he throw it. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jimdotz, KJB Oregon

    What you point out may end up being a fortunate side benefit, in the end, but no way did he intentionally take it on the chin. There's just too much at stake, too much time still left, and he didn't go into the debate with a completely insurmountable lead. Taking back congress doesn't matter unless you have the presidency, and Obama is smart enough to know that the presidency wasn't sewn up yet.

    Don't know what was at play. Bad day. Tired. Went too far to the extreme in adopting a calm, nonconfrontational demeanor. Maybe was taken aback by the blatant lies and thought it best to absorb them rather than take the risk of a new, unprepared strategy on the fall. I don't know.

    Regardless, it wasn't fatal, the damage is limited, and the Obama team has a lot to work with. There's lots of campaign fodder that came out of the debate. And Romney has to walk a nearly impossible line of trying to woo undecideds without alienating his base.

    •  Yes, look at the recent commercial (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tonedevil, ivote2004, Jimdotz

      about all his lies, and then ending with if you can't trust him here, then you  can't trust here, (oval office). It is all about who do you trust now, the devil you know or the one you don't. That ad was not just meant for us, it was targeting, undecided, independent and even some Republican voters, and I think it is one of the best yet.

  •  some of you guys are really, really nutty. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drmah, Jimdotz, Neuroptimalian, PALiberal1

    Can't you just accept the loss and move on?  is it THAT difficult?!

    Obama was pissed at his own performance.  Perhaps you should apprise him of this 73rd dimensional chess game that was so sly and subtle he wasn't even aware he was playing it?

  •  Don't be silly. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jimdotz

    No, he didn't throw the debate. He did have an off-night, although not nearly as bad of one as most people think, and Romney's performance (not his actual statements, which were bald-faced lies) was very good.

    HOWEVER, what Obama is very, VERY good at is turning lemons into lemonade, and pivoting VERY quickly.

    He had a poor performance while Romney simultaneously had an excellent performance--but the moment it was over, he and his team recognized it, analyzed it, and within a few hours had already figured out the correct way to utilize it.

    1. Immediately pound the shit out of Romney for his numerous, blatant lies

    2. Pounce all over the "Big Bird Wagon" the moment they saw that it was going viral on FB/TW

    3. Realize that by giving such a stellar performance the first time, Romney has just raised his own expectations tremendously for the next one--which happens to be in a Town Hall format, where Obama is generally far more comfortable (and where Romney is generally not...many of his worst soundbites ("Corporations are People" etc) have come from "questions from the audience" situations.

  •  Paul Krugman explained why Obama (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tonedevil, Jimdotz

    lost the debate. He was on ABC's This Week with George and he said that Obama gave a poor performance because:

    This is classic Obama. He really, really wants to be the president of national unity. He has always wanted to be the reconciliation candidate. And his instinct always in confrontations is not to go for the jugular but to go for the capillaries. He did the same thing in 2008. People forget just how weak his campaign was thru August of 2008, when he was refusing to make the obvious case against McCain and then he toughens up (cross talk here) … and he really needs to have his back against the wall.
    I tend to agree with this because there are two kinds of human beings: tyranni:who resort to aggression, deception, bribery, and hatred to get what they want, who work against the common good, and democrati: who play fair and who work for the common good.

    These two groups, tyranni and democrati are engaged in an eternal Darwinian struggle which has one dominant characteristic: when tyranni push forward to take power, democrati almost always step back to let them pass.

    Mitt Romney is a tyrannus, Barack Obama is a democratus. Romney pushed forward to take power and Obama stepped back to let him pass.

    Each man was being true to his nature. Most people are true to their nature. It takes an act of discipline to overcome one's inclinations. Romney does not have that kind of mental control, but Obama might. We shall see, won't we?

    Might and Right are always fighting, in our youth it seems exciting. Right is always nearly winning, Might can hardly keep from grinning. -- Clarence Day

    by hestal on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 08:02:58 PM PDT

  •  Who knew that we elected Mr. Spock? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CookyMonzta, Jimdotz

    Raise your hands.

    Nothing human is alien to me.

    by WB Reeves on Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 08:37:07 PM PDT

  •  Just wow (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jimdotz

    While you may be right that there is some unintended upside that ought to be turned to advantage, I kinda think no politician deliberately loses a debate.

    I do tend to be boringly conventional, but if I were the President and my advisers came into the Oval Office and said, "Hey, boss, we've got this great idea! You should just act like a pin cushion and let that asstard win the debate," well, I'd probably toss them out on their keesters and find some new advisers.

    Of course, I'm no political operative or grand electoral strategist so I could be over-thinking this a bit.

    •  Except that those same advisors, in 2008... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Redneck Aeschylus

      ...came to him with a plan to defeat the Clinton Machine that involved virtually ignoring states with early primaries in favor of states with early caucuses -- a radical departure from conventional wisdom. He took their advice and won with it in 2008. So why not trust them now with another unconventional strategy?

      Support the Fair Wages Tariff!

      by Jimdotz on Mon Oct 08, 2012 at 12:59:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Unconventional (0+ / 0-)

        Unconventional works better when you're behind the odds. That said, we'll know someday when the book comes out. All of this stuff fascinates me - I'm not good at it, but it does* fascinate me.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site