Land Mines for Liberals
I watched the debate. Much of it at least. Both Obama and Romney make my flesh crawl, so I had to take breaks. It’s over though. I don’t think a winner has been officially declared yet. I have debated the debate with some friends, and perused some Facebook Posts, but otherwise haven’t looked at how the pundits are reacting to the debate. My raw unscripted reaction as it were:
First off, I was appalled at how the mainstream media framed the debate. At least the channel I was watching made a big deal about how much “momentum” Romney had, and they so much as said that Obama had to win big to get back in the race. Yes, the election of the president of the most powerful nation the world has ever seen reduced to a shallow popularity contest at best. Racing cockroaches at worst. Hmm, did I type that aloud? As an aside from the facile shallowness of this approach to a presidential debate, it also sets Obama up to fail. Unless he dominates Romney, he loses. Say what?
Then, the questions. Every one I heard, and I heard most or all of them, seemed like a carefully constructed liberal land mine. IE a question designed to trip up liberals, basically questions that the conservative ideology on was very clear, so any answer that didn’t satisfy that was doomed to fail. There were no questions where Obama could shine. How the hell did this happen? Was the debate specifically set up so that Obama would fail? Hmm.
Worse, when presented with these clearly biased questions, instead of going on the offense, Obama fell back on liberal talking points. My favourite was the gun control question. Obama’s record on gun control is zilch, in fact he has let some gun control laws lapse without a fight. Even then, he has been endlessly pilloried by the right as a threat to gun ownership. So what does he do when the question comes up? He talks about gun control! He might as well have announced he was the anti-Christ. He could have pointed out that the Supreme Court had ruled that the second amendment guaranteed the Right to Bear Arms, and pretty much left it at that. It’s not like he was going to lose any liberal votes. Instead the next issue of the National Rifleman practically writes itself.
That in a nutshell was why I think by accident or design Obama threw the debate and the election. He preached to the choir, when he needed to appeal to Ron Paulists, intelligent conservatives, hard-core green voters, and militarists. I know this because I’m a card-carrying member of all four. Obama failed to redirect his message at the people he most needed to reach. This is the kiss of death. Granted Romney did no better, but he didn’t have to. All he had to do was look presidential while he pontificated, and he was golden. Romney looked Reaganesque to me, that may be all it takes to get a white back in the White House.
Granted I am biased, and there is absolutely no doubt that people’s preconceptions will colour how they view this debate. “They saw a game” as it were. I saw Obama set up to be a clown, and despite his best efforts, he came off as one. His liberal base is already crowing victory I see, but I also see that conservatives have ample new ammunition. There are advantages to having friends and associates from all over the political spectrum. I get to hear everyone’s prejudices. This makes me the most prejudiced one of all.
So my current thinking is that Romney is going to win the election, and the liberals are screwed no matter what happens. If things go great (snort, but it could happen) then of course Romney saved us all! And if things go to shit, it was all Obama’s fault!
Obama has been pwned. I hope I’m wrong.
(The above image is claimed as Fair Us under US copyright law. It’s not being used for profit, etc. It’s from the Facebook group: Binders Full of Women. yes, things move quickly in cyberspace. I used it because I thought it was funny, and an example of how quickly memes explode these days. Within an hour of the debate and Romney’s “Binders full of women:” remark there’s already a viral response to it. Such an age we live in. )