Debate Fallout

Remember when President Obama was saying earlier this week how he expected to do only fairly at the first presidential debate and that Mitt Romney was a very good debater?  He turned out to be right.

Mitt wiped the floor with him.  He kept pushing and shoving and pushing and shoving, until something finally gave - Obama's re-election hopes. And Mitt did it telling a pack of lies - how he would not raise taxes on the middle class, how Obama cut $716 billion form Medicare when Paul Ryan's budget would cut the same amount from Medicare . . . Romney got away with telling lies already refuted and lied about not lying.

You know Obama did poorly when Chris Matthews says he thought the President's performance was appalling.  When Republican Steve Schmidt and progressive Ed Schultz agree with Matthews, the opinion of Obama's poor performance becomes more like fact. 

Optimists among the Democratic camp will note the Ronald Reagan did badly in his first debate against Walter Mondale in 1984, only to rebound in the second debate and win re-election in a landslide.  Yes, but Mondale gained ground against Reagan in the interim, even if it wasn't enough to overtake the President.  Obama leads Romney by only three points or so nationally; it won't take much for Romney to come out ahead.  The silver lining - the Nate Silver lining - is that Obama is given an 86 percent chance of winning in November and a 96 percent chance of winning if the election were held today.  But that conclusion was made before the debate. Also, Obama's lead is leaning on the edge, not unlike Veruca Salt's mom in "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" (the original book version) leaning over the edge of the hole that her daughter has been thrown into by Willy Wonka's trained squirrels used to shell nuts.  She needed just one gentle nudge to fall in the hole and follow Veruca into the garbage dump, and that's exactly what the squirrels gave her.  Get the picture?   Silver only predicts Obama winning by only four points.  A bad debate performance could have ended up changing the dynamic very quickly.  Obama's only hope is that the numbers don't change.  There's some hopey-changey stuff for you!   

One advantage for progressives is that Romney's proposed public broadcasting funding elimination got so much attention that the threat of PBS (and NPR) losing its funding was talked about all over Facebook. That should enrage the Democratic base.  It may not excite it, however. :-(

The biggest loser of the debate was Jim Lehrer. He's lost his touch in moderating debates, as both candidates - but especially Romney - ran afoul of the time limits and Lehrer was unable to regain control over the format (if hew ever had control at all).  Lehrer is 78; it's time for him to quit the news business while he's (barely) ahead.  No wonder he's completely disappeared from the PBS NewsHour already.  The PBS NewsHour might also disappear . . . and PBS.

Let's hope for a better performance by Joe Biden in the vice presidential debate next Thursday  even as liberals will be praying 'til next Thursday to all the gods that they can count.  And let's also hope that Candy Crowley  can run a far debate in the next presidential match-up on October 16.  Obama needs all the help he can get.

Not a good way to celebrate his twentieth anniversary, that's for sure . . ..