Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

CRH

(1,553 posts)
Fri Oct 5, 2012, 12:52 PM Oct 2012

Obama's Revised Debate Strategy, ...

Obama's Revised Debate Strategy-

How do you debate a person who - ...

~ completely turns about face on his own often repeated positions.
~ distorts all of your positions and actions.
~ fabricates statistics and studies to support his new at the moment positions.
~ adopts your own positions as his own.

You use the arsenal of flip flopping and disingenuous positions along with their supporting distorted statistics and supposed fact, to illustrate the true history of your opponents actions and accomplishments. You do so with the tools their very own campaign has given you. Once you have driven the nail home, you hit it on the head again, and again, and again, until it is so imbedded it can't be extracted, and the damage such that viewers can't be distracted.

You can not, debate a serial liar and person of no boundaries, like a gentleman and look 'presidential'. We have just witnessed how the truth can be twisted until it is unrecognizable, or worse, hijacked as one's own accomplishment.

When President Obama crosses the stage to the podium for the next debate, with in his grasp will be a notebook candidates use to carry carry their notes. Within the President's notebook, should be the only tool Obama needs to destroy his prevaricating opponent.

It could be orchestrated for the theater presidential debates have become, like this:

After introductions have been completed by the moderator, when Obama has his first comments he should open with:

During the last debate distinct problems arose when I tried to debate the differences of policy and governing philosophy with Mr. Romney, (do not give him the honor of a title like governor). Mr. Romney's positions, past statements, and past actions all suddenly changed to contrast historical record. It was like resetting an etch a sketch. (Now the president withdraws from his notebook an etch a sketch). He lifts the clear plastic cover erasing the contents and says, 'see now I stand for nothing, have never been anything, have never done anything, now I'm not accountable for anything, ... and now I can say anything!

Then point by point, ...

First Mr Romney was proud of Romney care in Massachusetts, then it was only good for individual states, now individual mandates are bad, and preexisting conditions uncovered in his 'present' proposal. (At this point Obama lifts the plastic on the etch a sketch). No problem Mr. Romney, you now stand for nothing, have done nothing, and you can say anything.

And taxes, across the board 20% reductions, elimination of estate taxes, and elimination of the alternative minimum tax. Over ten years a reduction in revenues of five trillion, ... oh you say, "I don't have a five trillion tax cut. I don't have a tax cut of a scale you are talking about." (As Obama is once again lifting the top sheet of the etch a sketch) he says, "now that this part of your record has been erased and you once again stand for nothing, that means you do not have to tell us what loop holes you would close to pay for your erased tax cut."

And that 716 billion dollars you say I cut and that you will return to Medicare, the 716 billion in medicare savings the bipartisan Affordable Care Act legislated, is that the same 716 billion dollars your nominated VP put in his plan to pay for part of the tax cut you just erased? (As the president again lifts the plastic on the etch a sketch) he says, "that should also erase your misrepresentation of the documented truth. Once again, you stand for nothing, have not said anything, and now you can say anything."

We could go through all the misrepresentation of fact you presented in our last debate, (as the president lifts the plastic on the etch a sketch) he says, "but let us save you the trouble of changing your positions and statements and simply acknowledge, you have been erased, you stand for nothing, whatever you have said means nothing, you are accountable for nothing, including anything you might say or do in the future. You are the unaccountable, etch a sketch, candidate.

"Oh and by the way, you know the 2010 and 2011 tax returns you finally released? ( As he holds the etch a sketch in front of the camera). We don't need this for that, you have already erased all that might inform us of your character and reporting practices. That all other candidates for president have released many years of tax returns need not bother you, after all, the information in past filings is but a ... (up with the plastic on the etch a sketch) away.

The President: - "Now Candy, could you repeat the question?"

... And every time in the debate that follows if Mr. Romney changes the facts, his statements, or his past positions; when it is the presidents turn to respond, each discrepancy described with a one line sentence, (as the plastic is lifted yet again), and erased.

I think even a pathological liar like Willard, might be unnerved, and left in the ruins of his own past actions.

Presidential? No. But staying above the actions of others allows the results and perception of, the last debate. It then lives on with the pundits and media and becomes a tainted reality and sadly, historical perception.




4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Obama's Revised Debate Strategy, ... (Original Post) CRH Oct 2012 OP
I really like the revised debate strategy landolfi Oct 2012 #1
Hope you are right, ... CRH Oct 2012 #2
I just realized another reason Obama didn't kick tuckus: remember Al Gore in 2000? yurbud Oct 2012 #3
Yeah and the catch 22 is, ... CRH Oct 2012 #4

landolfi

(234 posts)
1. I really like the revised debate strategy
Fri Oct 5, 2012, 01:39 PM
Oct 2012

but I don't think history will actually call this a R$ win. That's the kneejerk media reaction of the last 2 days. In the long term, I think it will be viewed as one of the final nails in the coffin--the night we saw R$ lying, unethical, misrepresenting himself (again), and being especially petulant, argumentative, disrespectful, and unlikable.

CRH

(1,553 posts)
2. Hope you are right, ...
Fri Oct 5, 2012, 01:50 PM
Oct 2012

Not often do pundits voluntarily retrace their first comments. The media seems to cling to partial truths and when historical content is needed, shovel the tainted reality as supporting fact.

We shall see.

yurbud

(39,405 posts)
3. I just realized another reason Obama didn't kick tuckus: remember Al Gore in 2000?
Fri Oct 5, 2012, 02:15 PM
Oct 2012

First too passive then too aggressive according to the press?

If you don't stick to the accepted narrative and range of debate, namely that conservative ideas are the only acceptable ones, you will be mocked or shut out by the MSM.

CRH

(1,553 posts)
4. Yeah and the catch 22 is, ...
Fri Oct 5, 2012, 02:44 PM
Oct 2012

When you are not aggressive you are described as lacking passion, uninterested, aloof, ineffective, didn't want to be there, etc.

The media is crafty at framing their story no matter the occurrence or reasons. They really don't answer to anyone or anything, including often the truth. Remember what they were able to do with the Dean Scream, and the uncontested effectiveness of swift boating. No investigative reporting of either, yet both were basically lifted to saturation coverage by a media intent to influence.

If you are going to be kicked no matter what you do, wait until the other party strikes then unload on them. The biggest effect is what the viewers will take away, wimpy casper milquetoast or bold and decisive. Is the truth to be indiscernible because lies go uncontested, or should one risk, forcefully presenting the truth?

How much can you allow the press to form the issues define the debate and then control the dialog after the results. Best to put on a show of power then to passively await your fate.



Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Obama's Revised Debate St...