or did he, instead, reveal him?
The manner in which and degree to which the electoral geography continues to shift tectonically in the aftermath of the first debate and the number of people on all sides who believe without question that Obama did terribly in the first debate compared with one in particular who believed he had triumphed is beginning to paint less and less a picture simply of a political debater who happened to have been bested and more and more a picture like this:
Everyone said, loud enough for the others to hear: “Look at the Emperor’s new clothes. They’re beautiful!”
“What a marvelous train!”
“And the colors! The colors of that beautiful fabric! I have never seen anything like it in my life!” They all tried to conceal their disappointment at not being able to see the clothes, and since nobody was willing to admit his own stupidity and incompetence, they all behaved as the two scoundrels had predicted.
A child, however, who had no important job and could only see things as his eyes showed them to him, went up to the carriage.
“The Emperor is naked,” he said.
“Fool!” his father reprimanded, running after him. “Don’t talk nonsense!” He grabbed his child and took him away. But the boy’s remark, which had been heard by the bystanders, was repeated over and over again until everyone cried:
“The boy is right! The Emperor is naked! It’s true!”
The Emperor realized that the people were right but could not admit to that. He thought it better to continue the procession under the illusion that anyone who couldn’t see his clothes was either stupid or incompetent. And he stood stiffly on his carriage, while behind him a page held his imaginary mantle.
H. M. Stuart
Alexandria
1) You have no idea how weird the reaction to the debate looks if your exposure to the debate was reading the transcript. There must have been some killer body language going on, because the transcript doesn’t look all that far from a draw.
2) That said, I was actually expecting Obama to lose some ground in the first debate, for three reasons:
a) First debates usually favor the challenger.
b) Debating has always been one of Obama’s weaker communication skills (there’s a reason Maureen Dowd nicknamed him “Obambi” in the last election), and one of Romney’s stronger ones.
c) Polls, oddly given b), showed that most people expected Obama to win the first debate. Probably people were underrating Romney’s intelligence, because of his relative shortage of social skills.
So, not particularly surprised by the outcome, just by the intensity of some reactions. Then again, Andrew Sullivan in particular has always been prone to wild mood swings. I love Sully for his opposition to torture, among other things, but I think I’ll pass on the roller coaster, and just keep an eye on Nate Silver.
My good Lynn,
Does anyone other than Sullivan even pay attention to Sullivan anymore? At any rate, while I would concede that, between Obama and Romney, I might prefer that Obama represent the U.S. as its chief executive at a Star Trek convention or on The View, in venues any more demanding I would, frankly prefer, someone better than the effete nebbish who showed up October 3rd (I did watch the debate). Were it possible to administer the United States by brief or transcript, I might find your points more compelling. However, there appears to me to be an unbreakable link between that revealed nebbish and his diffident grasp of the realities of Libya which directly resulted in the imminently avoidable death of Christopher Stevens.
However, Ace of Ace of Spades HQ, of all people, would seem to agree with you, if in a damning-with-faint-praise sort of way:
H. M. Stuart
Alexandria
Ace of Spades is off on his diagnosis of Obama’s debating weaknesses. Wonkishness and brains aren’t what Obama lacks in debates; aggression is what he tends to lack (that’s why I mentioned Dowd’s “Obambi” nickname). I think this Psychology Today article nails it with its analysis of Obama’s personality, and the ways in which it doesn’t make debates easy for him:
The interesting thing, though, is that Obama’s apparent strong need to be a peacemaker (as pointed out in the article, and I agree with Steven Reiss here) actually seems to go along with a pretty aggressive foreign policy (escalated the war in Afghanistan, increased drone attacks, ordered a high risk attack within Pakistan that killed Osama bin Laden, went to war in Libya). Though he often seems like “Obambi” domestically, he doesn’t seem like much of an “Obambi” abroad.
I do agree with Ace of Spades, though, that part of what happened in the debate was that the public had way underrated Romney, pre-debate. I don’t want Romney as President, for various policy reasons (among others, his knowledge of foreign policy is weak and his instincts reflexively aggressive, and he has said that he wants to bring back torture – so I get a choice between a coolly realistic hawk and an aggressively triumphalist hawk). But it’s not his intelligence that’s at issue, and, in debates, Romney’s intelligence is tied with a personality way better attuned to shining in that particular situation than Obama’s is.
My good Lynn,
I believe what you are describing with respect to Obama’s foreign policy, certainly with respect to domestic policy, is passive-aggressiveness. Whether this is ultimately better or worse than any straightforward aggressiveness Mitt Romney or and other may or may not engage in is of course a matter of personal values preference.
Thus he intervenes in Libya, but only in a foot-dragging, minor way, while studiously avoiding having to deal with Congress and any sort of formal declaration. Thus he passively signs off on Osama plans decades in the tracking since the days of Michael Scheuer and before, but declines to actively risk ruffling Pakistani feathers by protecting the physician who risked everything to DNA-tag the Osama compound. He relishes playing video games with drones within the covert twilight of JSOC where having to confront others as Chief Executive or President is not a liability.
Thus a better ornithological description for Obama than hawk might be brood parasitic Cowbird. Certainly, with respect to domestic presidential achievements Bill Clinton would be the first to recognize Obama’s reflex to lay his eggs in the achievement nests of others.
H. M. Stuart
Alexandria
Romney full of ideas? Gimme a break. If “trim the federal budget” is an idea, so is “exercise more, eat less.” Without more detail, neither “idea” is worth the cost of a cold cup of bad coffee.