General Discussion

treestar

(82,383 posts)

35. Do we know this for sure?

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 02:21 PM

Oct 2012

The uninformed voter may still not like the way Mittens talked in that first debate. They'd still have to agree with his positions in that debate. They could still find out they were different from his previous positions and realize he can't be trusted. The voter who decides solely on that debate is mythical and even some of those beings might decide Obama came across better or was more aligned with whatever they might think.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

44 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Romney Won Using a Debate Technique Called the Gish Gallop [View all] sasha031 Oct 2012 OP

I was callng it flim-flammery, or snake oil salesmannery SaveAmerica Oct 2012 #1

yes it's what's going on in Ma right now with Brown sasha031 Oct 2012 #6

His 1st statemnt defund PBS sasha031 Oct 2012 #2

what a great observation cilla4progress Oct 2012 #10

romney was a liar before the debates, and was still a liar after the debates. /nt still_one Oct 2012 #3

Hey! He's Lying for the Lord! DollarBillHines Oct 2012 #19

How do you counter it ? former-republican Oct 2012 #4

Simply stating what the opponent is doing would do the trick. Marr Oct 2012 #16

So this should be the moderator saying something like that not the President former-republican Oct 2012 #18

He is paying a price BlueStreak Oct 2012 #17

Would a strong debate moderator stop it ? former-republican Oct 2012 #5

Perhaps their party's nickname should be GGOP KansDem Oct 2012 #7

PBS; 'Betrayal of Democracy' showed upi402 Oct 2012 #8

I know someone who does that all the time. silverweb Oct 2012 #9

Ha, I had the displeasure of divorcing one of them. cr8tvlde Oct 2012 #22

That must have been interesting. silverweb Oct 2012 #25

Thanks. Me too. He's now County Chairman of a Political Party in a Blue State. cr8tvlde Oct 2012 #33

What is this "won" shit? Wednesdays Oct 2012 #11

Thought this was some kinda weird dressage thing... Blue Owl Oct 2012 #12

Sounds like the perfect strategy for Republicans. Baitball Blogger Oct 2012 #13

If this is true why is he declared the "winner" flamingdem Oct 2012 #14

If the loser of the debate was determined by who lied the most, it would definitely be bullshit Mitt Incitatus Oct 2012 #15

Pretty fancy name for "lying your ass off." pamela Oct 2012 #20

this is the essence of the whole repuke party right now and bbgrunt Oct 2012 #21

His eyes were blinking like a fast spinning pulsar Warpy Oct 2012 #23

More at rationalwiki pokerfan Oct 2012 #24

I'm very sure he did not win. Cnn's wrap up was disgusting. busterbrown Oct 2012 #26

We have several long-term trolls who specialize in this technique. Judi Lynn Oct 2012 #27

How would that technique work on DU? Nye Bevan Oct 2012 #42

And that's how you get swing votes folks! flyguyjake Oct 2012 #28

How did he "win?" treestar Oct 2012 #29

Your right... flyguyjake Oct 2012 #31

Have any of the pundits tried to inform anyone else treestar Oct 2012 #32

He only appeared to win pokerfan Oct 2012 #34

Do we know this for sure? treestar Oct 2012 #35

We will soon know pokerfan Oct 2012 #40

Mitt won in much the very same way that the Imperial Japanese Navy won the Battle of Pearl Harbor. Ikonoklast Oct 2012 #38

Wow, I'd never heard that before davidpdx Oct 2012 #30

New term to me but very apt description of the debate. Thanks kr PufPuf23 Oct 2012 #36

Mz Palin tried it marions ghost Oct 2012 #37

Mitt Romney is nothing but a con artist. reformist2 Oct 2012 #39

In know this strategy well ThoughtCriminal Oct 2012 #41

Excellent explanation. hifiguy Oct 2012 #43

"Speed-lying" n/t ProfessionalLeftist Oct 2012 #44