Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Sam Morris / Las Vegas Sun
President Barack Obama speaks during a campaign stop at Cashman Center Wednesday, Sept. 12, 2012.
Tuesday, Sept. 18, 2012 | 1 a.m.
COLUMBUS, Ohio — President Barack Obama's re-election campaign doesn't want to talk about what the Democrat is doing to prepare for the fall debates with Republican Mitt Romney. But aides are readily setting expectations — and not surprisingly, they want to keep them low for Obama while raising the stakes for Romney.
"While Mitt Romney has done 20 debates in the last year, he has not done one in four years, so there certainly is a challenge in that regard," Jennifer Psaki, Obama's campaign spokeswoman, said of the president on Monday.
With Obama edging slightly ahead of Romney in public polling seven weeks from Election Day, the three October debates could be one of the Republicans' best opportunities to break through with voters. But the high-profile events are just as crucial for Obama, who was an uneven debater during the 2008 Democratic primaries.
In that way, some of the Obama campaign's tactical lowering of expectations is also rooted in the truth. Aides say the structured — and time-limited — nature of the debates isn't a natural fit for Obama, who often is long-winded when answering questions during news conferences or town hall-style meetings.
Obama's campaign purposely has been vague about how he is getting ready for the debates and aides refused to discuss details of his preparations publicly.
But those preparations are well under way. Obama has held multiple practice sessions, some with Massachusetts Democrat Sen. John Kerry, who is playing the role of Romney. One of the president's practice spots is at the Democratic National Committee's headquarters a short drive from the White House.
Romney, on the other hand, has not hidden that he's been in the midst of intense debate preparation since early September. That's when aides announced that the GOP nominee would spend much of the week of the Democratic National Convention off the campaign trail huddling with advisers in private debate sessions.
Romney got started early in part to help him get accustomed to the one-on-one format he'll face next month. Most of his numerous debates during the GOP primary featured several other candidates.
The Republican nominee is doing timed, mock debates with Ohio's Republican Sen. Rob Portman playing Obama. Longtime adviser Peter Flaherty is standing in as the moderator, asking questions about both domestic and foreign policy.
Top Romney advisers, including strategist Stuart Stevens, longtime aides Eric Fehrnstrom and Beth Myers, and senior adviser Ed Gillespie, then dissect the sessions.
Among the locales Romney has picked for debate preps are a friend's home in rural Vermont and a Marriott hotel in Burlington, Mass. Obama may also practice at the presidential retreat at Camp David, besides using DNC headquarters.
Obama's campaign has tried to use Romney's intense public preparations to ramp up expectations for the Republican.
"We know that Mitt Romney and his team have seemed to prepare more than any candidate in modern history," Psaki told reporters traveling with Obama in Ohio on Monday. "They've made clear that his performing well is a make-or-break piece for their campaign."
Romney's campaign countered Monday by noting that the president will be the only one on the debate stage in November with experience in three general election debates.
But the Republican nominee, a former Massachusetts governor, has tried to tamp down expectations, too.
During a Friday night flight to Boston, Romney and Portman walked to the back of the airplane to offer birthday greetings to two reporters covering his campaign. "Can you tell us a little bit about debate prep? How's he doing?" a reporter asked Portman. The senator replied, "He's doing great."
Romney, laughing, quickly interjected. Turning to Portman, he said: "Say nothing more."
The candidates will meet for three debates: a domestic policy debate in Denver on Oct. 3; a town hall-style debate in Hempstead, N.Y., on Oct. 16, and a foreign policy debate in Boca Raton, Fla., on Oct. 22.
Vice President Joe Biden and GOP running mate Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin will meet for one debate in Danville, Ky., on Oct. 11 that will touch on both domestic and foreign policy issues.
Once again, the next US presidential election will be fixed.
Mitt Romney will be elected even though Barack Obama
will have received more votes in the 2012 election.
The political assassination will be perpetrated by Bush hiding behind Crossroads GPS, the most influential group of Neocons.
The Neocons will have Mitt Romney elected to first use him and then let him fall easy prey. All blames and responsibilities will fall on the new Mormon president for the events already planned.
The new World War of Religion is already a done deal behind the backs of all people which will be forced to fight for their own Countries in their obligation as citizens
www.wavevolution.org
I make a prediction. And I hope I'm wrong, but all things show otherwise.
There will be no debates.
Romney (and to a lesser extent, Ryan) are already paving the way for avoidance of any types of debate.
First is this continual throwing out there that "facts don't matter" all the time by the Romney/Ryan camp. They show no interest whatsoever in what they say to whoever they say it to whenever they say it. If they get caught, they double down or run away. That's been the strategy all along.
They are focusing their efforts at only certain base voters out there. No one else. Debates won't help them in this.
Second, there have been grumblings by the Romney/Ryan camp that they are throwing out there that the President and his administration will lie at the debates about anything. The only reason why this is said is so they have an excuse not to show up.
Third, there also have been things thrown out there that are subtle, but they're there, to imply that both President Obama and Vice President Obama, if there aren't any debates, it's their fault. Why is this talk thrown out there? Especially when it's not an issue? It's thrown out there to lay blame and make people think it's not Romney/Ryan's fault for no debates. Setting the stage.
Fourth, on Labor Day, when the Romney campaign was asked what Romney is doing, they stated he was brushing up and getting ready for the debates. Then, all of a sudden, the press is called and there is Romney jetting off in a power boat on a lake in New Hampshire, goofing off. That's preparing?
Fifth, Ryan, when asked once about his preparations for debate and who he was talking to, came out with a cryptic response, "Um..we'll be coming out with something about that soon." We're still waiting for whatever they're coming out with. In other words, he's avoiding. Because it's news he doesn't want revealed right now.
I hope I'm wrong. Because I'd love to see debates. But indications show Romney/Ryan will beg out and try to blame the other side for them not happening.
When the truth are lies and the lies are truth, it just don't seem advantageous for the Romney/Ryan ticket to sit down and make idiots out of themselves at debates.
Romney/Ryan will blast the country with attack ads from their voluminous money war chest. They want to buy the people. They don't want a country run by the people.
No debates. You heard it from me.
Good strategy. Get Romney to say that corporations are people and theat the 47% of the people that don't pay taxes directly at the Federal level are garbage.
@ColinfromLasVegas,
Your point of reason makes sense. The big question you posed...how do you Debate Lies, Distortions and Misleading Statements? This is the theme and the narrative of the Romney/Ryan campaign.
Good read!
The President has no excuse for a bad performance in the debates. After all, he has direct, intimate knowledge of all the facts and figures from working with them constantly, as well as access to information that others don't have. He shouldn't need a teleprompter after 3 and a half years in office.
The fact checkers will be all over any miscues by either Obama or Romney, it will be political suicide for them to deliberately say anything that is false or without some grain of truth to it.
I'll be looking for something so scary that it would force me to change my vote from NOTA to the other guy. For example, if Santorum had won the nomination I would be voting for Obama and not NOTA since Santorum is far more dangerous. But so far I see Obama and Romney as equally wrong for the country so NOTA is ahead in my view.
There is one other thing that could swing my vote to Obama: if it was a guaranteed lock that the Republicans would have 58 or more seats in the Senate. Even with 58 they could probably find a couple of religious Democrats to come around on some issues to make it a dangerous situation. But since that is highly unlikely I don't see my vote changing at this time.