Romney Debate Strategy: Truth . . . the Final Frontier


Well, DAMN!  You know how it is when you laugh so hard you start worrying about passing out?  you can’t see for the tears in your eyes? can’t catch a breath before another wave of hilarity hits? 

Well, that just happened to me when I landed on Politico and read Kevin Robillard’s piece on Mitt Romney’s plan to become a one-man, real-time fact check team during his upcoming debates with President Obama.  I’m wondering “is he a buzzer, or perhaps, a gong man?”  Or maybe, to show he’s up to speed, he’ll bring a little audio fx pad along.  Or, maybe Ryan’s told him about the nuns’ trick? the old ruler across the knuckles.

I suppose Mitt thinks all of this is necessary because a) he’s losing, b) he’s a bully and c) he’s a lumberjack and he’s Okay (sorry, just a little Romney-esque campaign humor.  Plebs never get this stuff.) 

Romney leaked his hardline debate stratergery to the Good Morning America crew, earlier in the month:

. . . I think the challenge that I’ll have in the debate is that the president tends to, how shall I say it, to say things that aren’t true.  I’ve looked at prior debates. And in that kind of case, it’s difficult to say, “Well, am I going to spend my time correcting things that aren’t quite accurate? Or am I going to spend my time talking about the things I want to talk about?

Evidently, Mitt’s now made up his mind.  He’s going to play Truth Enforcer and to hell with “what he wants to talk about” because, truth be told, he still doesn’t quite know what he wants to talk about . . . to tax or not to tax . . . that’ll come to him later “in quiet, private rooms” or “in the light of day” or maybe just riding in his car elevator.  Who knows?

I’m guessing that this plan actually came crawling out of the maw of Team Romney who connected the dots between Paul Ryan’s trousers flambe performance at the Republican Convention and the big boost in Obama popularity after the world pegged Ryan as an even more audacious liar than his running mate.  Ergo, if Romney calls Obama a liar, good polling for Romney should ensue, eh?  It has Team Romney foolishness written all over it, IMO.

At this point, I can’t think of much that would be more entertaining than watching Mitt play “debate truth monitor” unless, of course, it would be watching him smirk his way through a concession speech.

Posted by Bette Noir on 09/27/12 at 03:25 PM • Permalink

Categories: PoliticsElection '12MittensNuttersPaul Ryan

Share this post:  Share via Twitter   Share via BlinkList   Share via   Share via Digg   Share via Email   Share via Facebook   Share via Fark   Share via NewsVine   Share via Propeller   Share via Reddit   Share via StumbleUpon   Share via Technorati  

I think the key for Obama is to rattle Romney.  Romney has a bad temper, and he’s not used to being contradicted.  If Obama can work words like “shambles” and “stench” into the debate, I think Romney will start to lose it.

I imagine Romney’s response won’t be a buzzer, but a Reaganesque “there you go again”.  He’s that desperate, and that dumb.

What conession speech?  Should Romney deservedly lose, I fully expect him to try and challenge the results, either claiming voter fraud, or maybe even finally joining his surrogates in going full metal birther.

And when he finally does concede, I expect he’ll send out one of his sons to deliver the news.

I’ve been saying for months—at least twice!—that O and the Dems should bait Mittens.  There’s something impulsive and oblivious about Romney that lands him in the soup every time.  Maybe it’s the sense of impunity he has w/ regard to a lifetime of flip-flops and lying.  And the career of an executive who knows he’ll never be fired.

In retrospect we may all (along w/ media yakkers) end up saying that it was inevitable that Obama destroy Mittens in the debates: Obama, with his cool reserve, Mitt with his ya-gotta-love-me effusiveness and bone-deep obliviousness of how actual people react to things.

This new wrinkle—Mitt patrolling for untruths—is a gift from the comedy gods.  My ongoing fantasy is that Obama says, “I have a short list of untruths you’ve said about me over the past six months,” and produces a cash-register roll of paper that unspools for a hundred feet.

Instead of a concession speech, I predict that Romney will stage his own “occupy” of the White House and refuse to budge.  It will be such fun to see him carted off in tails and tophat (and not to mention, the monocle).

You know why Romney’s going after the truth kick—from his own face:  defending against Obama’s character assassination.

First thought:

Huh. Crafty sumbitch rigs that assassination to look like a suicide, too, doesn’t he?

Second thought:

Character assassination? Well you hold it right there, because my imaginary friend has gone missing!

He’s a stitch, that stench.

Looks like Romney is playing some one-dimensional chess here. He’s thinking that Obama will totally fall for this and be so afraid of being called out that he’ll just mumble his way through the debate - that should turn things around in a hurry.

defending against Obama’s character assassination

Wow, listen to that whole interview if you want to actually have the smell of flop sweat waft through your monitor. 

I’ve been saying for months—at least twice!—that O and the Dems should bait Mittens.

Totally agree.  RMoney’s going to start out loaded for bear because a) Obama’s one of the blah Help as far as he’s concerned and he has to condescend to debate the Help and b)he doesn’t react well to anyone disagreeing with him or challenging him with hard questions.  Obama, with his trademarked cool and calm demeanor, should be able to bring Willard into a frothing meltdown about halfway through.

@JoyP - thanks for the visual!

It will be such fun to see him carted off in tails and tophat (and not to mention, the monocle).

Looks like Romney is playing some one-dimensional chess here

God damn it, why didn’t I think of this?  May have to steal.  FYI.

Page 1 of 1 pages

Sorry, commenting is closed for this post.

<< Back to main