Permalink to Expect Obama to Underperform Again in Second Debate

Expect Obama to Underperform Again in Second Debate

 

According to the narrative of most journalists, President Obama has developed the political equivalent of Steve Blass disease. Blass was a Pittsburgh Pirates hurler who came up in the late Sixties with a bang – he won eighteen games in 1968, including seven shutouts, and threw two complete games in the 1971 World Series, allowing only seven hits and two runs. He finished second on the team MVP voting behind only Roberto Clemente. But two seasons later, Blass lost his control practically overnight, taking on a bizarre inability to throw strikes. There was no explanation for it — the stud pitcher suddenly was walking nearly a batter an inning. The New Yorker piece on the tragedy illustrates his desperation:

He consulted a psychiatrist, an optomotrist, unusual forms of pitching practice, tried transcendental meditation & hypnosis… His collapse is unique, no other player in recent baseball history has lost his form so suddenly & never recovered it.

 The reason I don’t buy the conventional wisdom that Obama will bounce back and win the debate tonight is because I don’t think he has Steve Blass disease. I think he lost his fastball long ago, if he ever had it. Molly Ball is one of the few journalists to notice that this really is the Obama who’s been here all along; the press (and therefore the people) just haven’t noticed.

At the Univision forum, host Jorge Ramos pressed Obama hard on his failure to enact immigration reform, and Obama had no good answer. “You did not keep your promise,” Ramos charged. Obama responded with a rambling answer about how busy he’d been with the economic crisis and how little cooperation he got from Republicans. Ramos didn’t let him off the hook: “A promise is a promise,” he said. Obama’s answer was an airless civics lesson… Elsewhere in the Sept. 20 interview, Obama made the startling statement that “you can’t change Washington from the inside, you can only change it from the outside.” He blamed the deadly storming of the Benghazi consulate on reaction to an incendiary American-made video even though other members of his administration had already begun describing it as a preplanned terrorist attack. He went rather easy on Romney for his recently revealed “47 percent” comments. And the president was greeted by a markedly less enthusiastic response from the audience than Romney had gotten the night before; Romney’s campaign had packed the room with supporters while Obama’s team didn’t bother… All of these comments were minor slips at worst, but they showcased a president who was less than quick-on-his-feet in the less demanding format of a national television interview.

And now he needs a knockout. But he won’t get it.

 My expectation for tonight is that Obama will again underperform expectations. More Americans expect the old, fraudulent image of “everything to everyone” Superman Obama to show up. But put me down for the small portion of bettors who think the president will make the mistake of overcorrecting, coming across as petulant, personal, and small-minded where he wants to seem tough. A townhall debate is not the format to go gunning after Romney on his business career – you want to seem empathetic, hopeful, inspiring in a townhall, not crassly political and aggressive. Al Gore learned this lesson the hard way (Dingell-Norwood!).

The real concern for Obama ought to be showing the American people that he has a policy vision for his second term that really will turn things around.

In a stark warning on the eve of the second presidential debate, veteran Democratic strategists Stanley B. Greenberg and James Carville write in a newly released memo that the campaign “has reached a tipping point” that could cost President Obama reelection if he does not present a more compelling vision for the next four years. “The first debate really did disrupt the race and presents a painful real-time test of what happens when the president tries to convince people of progress and offer[s] a very modest vision of future change,” the two say in a Democracy Corps memo cowritten with Erica Seifert, a senior associate at Greenberg’s polling firm. “Voters are not looking for continuity, but changes that help the average Joe.” In an interview, Greenberg said that at the first debate, Mitt Romney caused many voters who are worried about the nation’s direction to view him in a new light, mostly by convincing them he had aggressive plans to improve the economy — even as Obama conveyed little about goals of his own.

The memo is here.

Obama’s initial strategy of using surrogates and ads to drive down Romney was wise because it largely insulated the president from having to make the case himself. If he chooses to do so tonight, and fails, his campaign may not be salvageable.

This essay was adopted from The Transom, a daily email newsletter for political and media insiders, collecting news, notes, and thoughts from around the web.

— If you wish to join the conversation on this post, we invite you to become a Ricochet Member. Enjoy great content and podcasts, post your own opinions, converse with leading figures on the Right, and much more. Ricochet – The Right People. The Right Tone. The Right Place. 

Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s growing community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Members have made 29 comments.

  1. Profile photo of Keith Rice Inactive

    From whose perspective would he be underperforming? I’ve considered him to be a buffoon for quite some time, it would be almost impossible for him to underperform in my eyes.

    But yes, I see him confidently reaching for a great moment only to fall as flat as the vacuous nature of his “vision”.

    • #1
    • October 16, 2012 at 11:24 am
  2. Profile photo of Commodore BTC Member

    What’s hilarious is the MSM can’t help themselves and wait until after the debate to start spinning, so they end up inflating expectations for Obama. We’re already being told how good he is in this format. 

    I remember that health care town hall where Obama told the woman with the sick mother she might be better off taking a pain pill rather than getting treatment. 

    • #2
    • October 16, 2012 at 11:27 am
  3. Profile photo of Mel Foil Inactive

    By now, Obama must think the strike zone is about six feet wide. That’s what his pitching coaches in the liberal press have done to him.

    • #3
    • October 16, 2012 at 11:29 am
  4. Profile photo of robberberen Inactive

    All true. But the “momentum reversal” narrative will hinge on Romney’s performance — not Obama’s. In a setting where “real voters” are asking the questions, the media will have the power to take a single loose phrase from Romney and spin it as evidence that he simply cannot connect with normal people, face-to-face.

    Consider: In the first debate, Romney slipped and used the word “poor” instead of “low-income” or some similar politically-correct phrase. He quickly caught the error and corrected himself. In a traditional debate format, it did him no harm. But in a town hall format, the result would have been different. The camera would have returned to the “regular guy” Romney had just called “poor”, and the media would have their story.

    The danger is not Obama. The danger is the setting, and the Media.

    • #4
    • October 16, 2012 at 11:38 am
  5. Profile photo of Israel P. Member

    Blass is an announcer for the team that pretends to be the Pirates today.

    • #5
    • October 16, 2012 at 11:38 am
  6. Profile photo of mask Inactive

    Obama is the master of the rambling non-answer and this habit will serve him ill in the townhall debate format. He also doesn’t have a public plan for his second term – he only has the tired ideas he’s been peddling for the last 4 years (class warfare, social justice, fair share, etc).

    I also agree that he’ll try to come across as tough and overcompensate.

    • #6
    • October 16, 2012 at 11:50 am
  7. Profile photo of schwastl Inactive

    As a Cardinals fan, Blass’s story reminds me of Rick Ankiel’s. And it makes me sad.

    <end baseball aside>

    • #7
    • October 16, 2012 at 11:50 am
  8. Profile photo of mask Inactive
    Mel Foil: By now, Obama must think the strike zone is about six feet wide. That’s what his pitching coaches in the liberal press have done to him. · 20 minutes ago

    This is why the liberal reaction to the last presidential debate made me happy. It was mostly Romney’s fault for being a lying liar and pretending to be a moderate instead of the reich wing extremist we know he is! The Obama bubble only got more impenetrable. And tonight we’ll see the results once again.

    • #8
    • October 16, 2012 at 11:51 am
  9. Profile photo of Benjamin Glaser Member

    Blass was a far more accomplished pitcher than Ankiel.

    This diehard Pittsburgh Pirate fan loves listening to the dulcet tones of sweet Steve Blass’s voice for, unfortunately, home games only now. He’s a great color guy. 

    • #9
    • October 16, 2012 at 11:57 am
  10. Profile photo of Jason Fletcher Inactive
    I’ve said for a long time that Obama is the kind of coward who will only hit you when someone else is holding your arms. It’s showed up in his prior elections in which he essentially disqualified his opponents, his public forums where he can speak and his targets can’t (Supreme Court at SOTU), and the plethora of negative ads run by him and his allies. With Jim Lehrer moderating, Obama didn’t have anyone holding Romney’s arms (plus, Romney wanted to hit back), and he came off poorly as a result.Ben, given that, the wild card is Candy Crowley. Will she try to kneecap Romney (as Raddatz was more apt to do to Ryan), and will he let her? If so, if Romney ends up fighting with the moderator instead of Obama, Obama might just glide through and get the headlines he wants. But if Romney can stay focused on Obama and go mano-a-mano, then Obama will be in richly deserved trouble, and I agree with you in that case that he won’t do well.
    • #10
    • October 17, 2012 at 1:03 am
  11. Profile photo of Nealfred Member

    Make a note of the time. Just thought I’d chip in. This debate will be more of the same.Obama may even perform worse than the first debate. The President is empty.

    • #11
    • October 17, 2012 at 1:16 am
  12. Profile photo of genferei Member

    Ricochet – The Right People. The Right Tone. The Right Place.

    Um. OK. (“Where everybody knows your pseudonym…”)

    • #12
    • October 17, 2012 at 1:17 am
  13. Profile photo of ConservativeWanderer Inactive
    genferei:Ricochet – The Right People. The Right Tone. The Right Place.

    Um. OK. (“Where everybody knows your pseudonym…”) · 0 minutes ago

    I actually kinda like it.

    When I was in seminary (before you ask, never finished it), they stressed both grouping points in threes, and using alliteration whenever possible.

    Both tend to make the information memorable, and that slogan is using both techniques.

    • #13
    • October 17, 2012 at 1:21 am
  14. Profile photo of Doc Inactive
    Doc

    I had coffee with a friend today. I live in the swing state of VA. She is low information voter who is not crazy about Obama but is afraid to vote for Romney because of his “war on women”, and she thinks he lied during the debate. She admitted that she didn’t watch the debate but read up on it after the fact. Lovely. I spoke to her at length and convinced her to vote for Romney. I urged her to go do it immediately after we finished our coffee. We can vote early here and I feared she would change her mind if she went home. She laughed at me but promised to watch the debate tonight. She said if she liked what she saw, she would vote go to the early voting center on Friday and vote for Romney.

    Romney needs to deliver tonight. It will not be easy because he will have two opponents rather than one, but the situation with my friend is probably representative of what is going on all over the country. I am praying with everything I have that Romney closes the deal tonight.

    • #14
    • October 17, 2012 at 1:25 am
  15. Profile photo of Doc Inactive
    Doc
    Nealfred: Make a note of the time. Just thought I’d chip in. This debate will be more of the same.Obama may even perform worse than the first debate. The President is empty. · 9 minutes ago

    Time noted. I want more than anything for you to be proven right.

    • #15
    • October 17, 2012 at 1:27 am
  16. Profile photo of Valiuth Member

    The alliteration is a bit unimaginative…I mean they just use the word “Right” over and over and over again. 

    How about:

    Ricochet- A Conscientious, Conservative, Community. 

    Now that is alliteration. 

    • #16
    • October 17, 2012 at 1:29 am
  17. Profile photo of Cunctator Inactive

    If I hear “millionaires and billionaires” and “corporate jet owners” yet again tonight, and Obama still retains some support post-debate, I will be saddened

    • #17
    • October 17, 2012 at 1:29 am
  18. Profile photo of Jim Lakely Contributor

    Love the Steve Blass reference. Pretty apt, but I think of Obama more like Tuffy Rhodes.

    In the Cubs’ home opener in 1994, Tuffy hit three home runs against Mets ace Dwight Gooden. Lots of Rotisserie players quickly grabbed Tuffy off the waiver wire, thinking they had lucked into a stud. But Tuffy slugged just 5 more and batted .234 for the season. 

    That’s how it’s been for Obama. Victor Davis Hanson has written a lot about how the Obama we saw flop in the first debate is the Obama we’ve had all along. His latest on that theme is here.

    As an aside: Tuffy washed out of the bigs by the next season, but went on to a long and successful career in the Japanese leagues. Obama will do the same: Washing out of the big leagues of American politics, but having a long and successful career on the lecture circuit.

    • #18
    • October 17, 2012 at 1:32 am
  19. Profile photo of Lucy Pevensie Member

    I don’t read much legacy media, but I followed a link from RCP and landed on this gem of an opinion piece in the LA Times, of all places. I almost fell over when I saw the following sentence about why Romney won the first debate:

    So while there were obvious differences in presentation, there were also big differences in substance. And maybe those differences were just as persuasive, if not more so, than the candidates’ energy gap.

    In other words, maybe Romney won because people actually liked his proposals and ideas better than Obama’s. If the LA Times can see this, maybe it is all over?

    • #19
    • October 17, 2012 at 2:02 am
  20. Profile photo of Foxfier Inactive
    ConservativeWanderer
    genferei:Ricochet – The Right People. The Right Tone. The Right Place.

    Um. OK. (“Where everybody knows your pseudonym…”) · 0 minutes ago

    I actually kinda like it.

    Hm.

    “Where everybody knows your ‘nym/And they’re always glad you’re… Jim…”

    … um… Trying again.

    “Where everybody knows your nomAnd visitors are free to come, You want to go where there will be discussion polite and saneYou want to got and get skin in the game.”
    • #20
    • October 17, 2012 at 2:02 am
  21. Profile photo of Dave Roy Inactive

    I think Obama will overcompensate as well, coming off as way too aggressive.

    Whatever happens, I don’t think an Obama “win” helps him very much, unless Romney makes a huge gaffe of some kind. A “loss,” however, and I think it’s the end of the Obama campaign.

    • #21
    • October 17, 2012 at 3:44 am
  22. Profile photo of EJHill Member

    As Yogi Berra was quoted as saying, “Ninety percent of this game is half mental.”

    The whole of this Presidency has been intellectually detached – detached from the real mood of the country, detached from legitimate criticism and, most importantly, detached from any reality. Why should he or anyone else involved engage now?

    Where the people saw crony capitalism he gave them more, when people in his own party said, “Jobs first,” he gave them ObamaCare, when they thought the right would wither and die in face of a black man in the White House, he gave them a GOP stiffened with a Tea Party spine.

    And his foreign policy has been based on the same fantasy. They would love him and therefore US because he was black, had a hint of an Islamist background and he simply wasn’t George W. Bush. The world would be reset simply because he existed.

    There’s no reality there.

    • #22
    • October 17, 2012 at 12:02 pm
  23. Profile photo of Paul A. Rahe Contributor

    Ben, I suspect that you are right. He will come across as an angry, mean-spirited man. He will hate being there and being questioned, and it will show. Romney’s task is to maintain his equilibrium and answer questions in the manner of a mature adult. That is all that is required.

    In the meantime, both sides should can Candy Crowley. If she is not willing to play by the rules, she should get the boot. It would be good for journalists everywhere.

    • #23
    • October 17, 2012 at 12:02 pm
  24. Profile photo of ConservativeWanderer Inactive
    Keith Rice: From whose perspective would he be underperforming? I’ve considered him to be a buffoon for quite some time, it would be almost impossible for him to underperform in my eyes.

    But yes, I see him confidently reaching for a great moment only to fall as flat as the vacuous nature of his “vision”. · 36 minutes ago

    I dunno, every time I think a Democrat can’t sink any lower, they manage to find a way.

    • #24
    • October 17, 2012 at 12:04 pm
  25. Profile photo of Shane McGuire Member

    First, never trust a woman with a noun name. I’ve stood by that policy my whole life, and it’s always served me well. (My apologies to all of the Ambers, Crystals, Summers, and Jades out there. It’s just a general rule, with exceptions, and I’m sure you’re all, uh, exceptional.)

    Aside from that, Obama’s entire legacy comes down to 90 minutes tonight (or however long this debacle will be). If he loses tonight, the foreign policy debate won’t matter unless Romney says Lebanon is a French pastry best served with powdered sugar and fruit.

    If he starts scoring points early, for instance, if the first question is about 47% which would give him a clean opportunity to be aggressive, he’ll win tonight. If he gets down early, just look for him to start randomly yelling, “Bain!,” “47%!,” and “Opposed Auto Bailout!,” and “Middle Class Tax Hike!” at random points throughout the night.

    My BIG concern is that the first question is a veiled attack at Romney.

    • #25
    • October 17, 2012 at 12:22 pm
  26. Profile photo of slublog Inactive

    Obama’s performance will hinge on his ability to hide his contempt for Mitt Romney. That contempt is what led to his failure at the last debate. Obama was not prepared, he looked bored and put-out by having to share the stage with someone he doesn’t respect, and he let the mask down with every irritated smirk. 

    So the real question is whether the last debate gave Obama enough respect for his opponent to prepare for this one. My guess is no.

    • #26
    • October 17, 2012 at 12:34 pm
  27. Profile photo of Copperfield Member

    Good post, Ben. Thank you. 

    It seems to me Molly Ball has it right. President Obama has always seemed “situationally smart”. He can appear thoughtful & wise by talking sympathetically about both sides of an issue and has a talent for demagoguery (the refuge of cowardice) & strawmen (the refuge of intellectual dishonesty). His most substantial challenge (likely insurmountable), though, is his lack of an executive mindset. Effective executives not only have to know specifics of and take positions on issues, but have to tie those positions together in a comprehensive vision. Then their messaging must be succinct and always in fealty to the larger vision. President Obama seems to have reflexive positions (withdraw America globally, tax the rich fairness, etc.) but he either can’t tie his positions into a larger vision, or can’t be honest about his vision if he has one, becuase it is so antithetical to most Americans’ worldviews… so he fillibusters and tries to appear thoughtful. He’s an analyst and rhetorician of sorts, but not a clear-headed executive. Without media cover and up against an intelligent, competent, energetic executive, he is exposed. This executive incompetence is clear in the Woodward book, too. 

    • #27
    • October 17, 2012 at 12:37 pm
  28. Profile photo of Eeyore Member

    “– If you wish to join the conversation on this post…”

    Since we’re doing baseball – “Ben Domenech, pinch hitting for Rob Long…”

    __________

    Again, with the analogy, Obama would probably redeem himself tonight if he just hits solid singles, and the media will declare him the “best all-around player” since Abe Lincoln [or Ty Cobb to stay in the analogy]

    But I suspect his ego may get him trying to swing for the fences, which is unlikely to succeed, unless he gets pitched one of those “Mr. President, how does it feel to be so awesome” lobs.

    • #28
    • October 17, 2012 at 12:38 pm
  29. Profile photo of Sandy Member

    There are endless pre-analyses of the debate out there, but this is the only one I’ve seen that has value. Not that there isn’t plenty of room for worry.

    • #29
    • October 17, 2012 at 12:45 pm