May 21, 2013

October 2, 2012


No Need to Watch the Debates: Here (in Advance) Are the Reactions

No one really has the inclination to sit through tomorrow night’s Presidential debate, right? In this day and age, we just want to cut to the chase—who will be judged the winner?

And in this single regard—judging who won—the outcome is a foregone conclusion. Thanks to powers I never knew I had (and to the great folks at the Media Research Center), I have been able to capture for your benefit video excerpts from Thursday’s TV shows (and Friday’s, and Saturday’s, and Sunday’s… ad infinitum, or rather—ad electionem, since they don’t need to carry on beyond that point), which are self-explanatory.

Here, for example, is Piers Morgan’s take on the debate:


And here is the incomparable Chris Matthews, with superlatives that only he can summon:

 


As for Mitt Romney? How did he do? Well, here is (former) CNN correspondent Bob Franken, telling you what he thinks of Republicans like Gov. Romney:

 


Once again, I give you Chris Matthews on the Republican point of view:

 


And for a fresh perspective on the Republicans, here is Thomas Roberts, of MSNBC live:

 


And—oh, but wait: Here is Howard Fineman, formerly chief political correspondent for that formerly leading and influential periodical Newsweek:

 


Not even Paul Ryan could escape the devastating media critique. Here is the Today show co-host Ann Curry, questioning him about the sheer cruelty of his proposed budget:

 


Oh, yes—the celebrities’ reaction to the debate. How could I have forgotten? Here, for instance, is David Letterman waxing flatulent over the President’s courage:

 


And, for a parting shot from Hollywood, how about this one from Sean Penn:

 

 


Now, do you see? I have just spared you hours and hours of the doldrums. You don’t need to wait for Wednesday night—instead, take your spouse out and enjoy a nice dinner. And instead of turning on the TV for the rest of the week, go to the library and check out a book you never would otherwise have considered. (If you would like a suggestion, you might try Erasmus, The Praise of Folly.) You will thank me on Sunday.

Share this story:

Recent Related Posts

Comments

Facebook comments are closed.

12 comments

Thanks for suffering, so that we don’t have to, Allan!

gulp

[1] Posted by Sarah on 10-2-2012 at 11:04 AM · [top]

Chris Matthews truly is one big turd.  I am simply amazed that anyone with an ounce of sense watches his show.  Even if you want to do a “Sun Tzu” and know your enemy, more than just a few minutes of Chris leaves you feeling like you stepped in something nasty, stinky, and hard to get off your shoe.  Maybe we should give Chris the “political scat” award, although these videos prove he has stiff competition.  confused

[2] Posted by Daniel on 10-2-2012 at 02:58 PM · [top]

Yes, I saw a survey of results on Goggle this morning.  They all agree that Obama won handily.  Sigh!  Don’t you just love time travel?

[3] Posted by Ann Castro on 10-2-2012 at 03:44 PM · [top]

A betting pool on the journalists’ response to the debate to raise money for missions, anyone?

I predict an 87% favorable response to Obama regardless of what he says, doesn’t say, or gaffes.

I predict a 13% grudgingly favorable response to Romney, also regardless of what he says, doesn’t say, or gaffes.

I further predict, in an effort to project objectivity, polls by journalists to show how correct their prejudgements were.

Dollars to donuts?

[4] Posted by dwstroudmd+ on 10-2-2012 at 03:44 PM · [top]

A lot of people - especially undecided voters - watch the debates. It is really the only chance a Republican candidate gets to reach the voters without filtering by the Obamedia. Because so many voters watch the debates for themselves, false reporting will hurt the media more than the GOP candidate.

Not that that will stop them. The mainstream media are knowingly sacrificing their reputations - and therefore their long-term viability - because they think authoritarian socialism is a goal worth sacrificing for.

[5] Posted by Roland on 10-3-2012 at 12:43 AM · [top]

Just please don’t play the drinking game of taking a drink every time Obama lies.

I don’t want anyone dying of alcohol poisoning out there.

[6] Posted by Newbie Anglican on 10-3-2012 at 06:42 AM · [top]

I think that my time will be better spent as I read “Mohammed, Charlemagne & the Origins of Europe” by Hodges & Whitehouse.

[7] Posted by Stefano on 10-3-2012 at 08:28 PM · [top]

I listened to the whole debate but only watched on TV for about 20 minutes. You all will be surprised to know that the PBS commentators are giving Romney a slight edge. They say the President’s fans on Twitter were disappointed that he was not aggressive enough.

I thought their debate performances were pretty even. But that will help Romney more, since voters were able to hear his real voice straight from his mouth without the Obamedia bias.

Neither candidate emphasized that we are facing a major crisis - that truth remains well hidden.

[8] Posted by Roland on 10-3-2012 at 09:56 PM · [top]

I have to tell you I was shocked but I think Romney cleaned Obama’s clock. 
Even Bill Mahr tweeted out, “I think he does need his teleprompter.”
Wow.

[9] Posted by Jackie on 10-3-2012 at 10:17 PM · [top]

This round up on BBC of various “pundits’ views” on the debate was very interesting. 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19827388

Almost all commentators seemed to give Romney the win (albeit sometimes grudgingly), except MSNBC, which just didn’t quite seem to be able to go there:

It’s impossible to judge a winner tonight. It’s not up to anyone on the debate stage or in this room. The answer is in the polling, and we will start to get that next week. If there’s no movement in the polls this debate will mean nothing. It would have been entirely neutral. There was nothing said in that debate that was memorable 10 minutes later.

[10] Posted by Karen B. on 10-4-2012 at 07:05 AM · [top]

A betting pool on the journalists’ response to the debate to raise money for missions, anyone?

I predict an 87% favorable response to Obama regardless of what he says, doesn’t say, or gaffes.

I predict a 13% grudgingly favorable response to Romney, also regardless of what he says, doesn’t say, or gaffes.

I further predict, in an effort to project objectivity, polls by journalists to show how correct their prejudgements were.

Dollars to donuts?

[4] Posted by dwstroudmd+ on 10-2-2012 at 02:44 PM

Oops!  I was off by 50% or so!  But it is less than 24 hours and the wheel is yet turning!

I DID get the “GRUDGINGLY” correct.

[11] Posted by dwstroudmd+ on 10-4-2012 at 09:16 AM · [top]

Cautionary note:  For those of you old enough to have watched the Reagan/Mondale debates in 1984, recall that Reagan, in the first debate, did very poorly, looking, old, tired and confused.  He came back big time in the second debate and buried Mondale in the election.  I don’t expect Obama to have the lackluster performance that he had last night the next time around.

[12] Posted by Dallasite on 10-4-2012 at 05:33 PM · [top]

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.

Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.