Debating the Aftermath
October 4, 2012 4 Comments
Like most progressives, I was disappointed that President Obama did not attack Mitt Romney with more force yesterday. It’s good to see that Obama is hitting back today, and my gut instinct is still that he’ll still carry the election day. Today’s reaction demonstrates that his campaign gets it, even if he lost it for an evening.
I have two thoughts emerging in response to the debates.
1. Progressive can’t rely on President Obama alone. There need to be an ever-increasing number of progressive voices out there, so that the weight of a single debate lessens. I say that with the belief that the campaign cycle moves quickly and Obama’s loss will probably count for less than some pundits (and most conservatives) think.
2. Progressives need to continue to push President Obama from the left. Obama has a worrying tendency to endorse conservative Tea Party idea about the importance of reducing the deficit before the economy improves. Bowles-Simpson is B.S. — it’s bad politics and bad policy. Plus, he responds more to criticism than to compliments, which is why I actually think that the result of yesterday’s debate will make him much sharper next time around, and criticism from the left can actually improve his political success, as it did when loud-mouthed lefties pushed him into getting rid of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.
About Matthew
Hey Matthew, Jim Fallows wrote some realistic stuff: the media’s campaign narrative was bound to change one way or another last night no matter what happened, and it will change again. Probably very quickly. As you note about the campaign cycle.
“The iron law of political coverage is “the story has to change.” For several weeks the story had been: Romney gaffes, widening Obama lead. It was going to change one way or another last night. A bad Romney night might have led to a “time for a landslide!” tone. Now it’s “Obama shocked, new spring in Romney’s step.”
“The story will change again. Already we’re getting the “hey, don’t go overboard on the Romney Knockout” theme. If the Obama team is lucky or successful, the next story will be: Pyrrhic victory for Romney, as many of his claims last night get picked apart. If Romney is lucky, the story will remain: Obama on the slippery slope toward defeat. And of course tomorrow’s job numbers will be worked into either theme. “
That makes a lot of sense to me; thanks for sharing! It’s like panic in the morning, caution in the afternoon, and looking for a new narrative the next day. I would worry about the politics, but for all their notable steadiness in 2008, Obama and team also displayed an ability to learn quickly and adjust.
Both your points are well made and completely valid. I agree that, in the whole scheme of things, the results of last night’s debate will get swept away and replaced with other factors during other news cycles. But I would hope that the president recognizes how even a temporary downturn can lead into more negativity, both in the media and among voters. I would like to see him bringing a bit more game to the next debate. Romney is full of crap, but he can sell that crap pretty well to those “low-information” voters out there who are still unconvinced or undecided. I want the president to call that stuff out in front of the audience while he has their ear, rather than waiting for the press to sort it all out the next day. Hopefully there are enough “loud-mouthed lefties” saying the same thing, and Obama and his campaign will hear it and take heed.
I think you’re right that the downturn needs to be addressed, and I’m hoping that yesterday’s jobs numbers will make sure that Romney’s bump in the polls is temporary. And yes, Obama needs to bring more game to the table in the next debate. I’m pretty sure he will, as I remember that in the 2008 election he seemed to rise to the occasion whenever his back was against the wall.