Media Tries to Manufacture Momentum for Obama

The great one, Mark Levin mentioned last night how the media would spin the second presidential debate.  He knew it before the new day even came upon us.  Then today, Rush predicted the same thing: that unless Mitt literally wiped the floor with Obama in every minute of the second debate Tuesday night, that the narrative would be built to shower Obama with post-debate praise.

And they were right.  Obama apparently got his groove back.  This is the impression one gets listening to the usual Obama media.

The last time he had his groove was when he was a candidate in 2008.  But with the plight of unemployment or the spike in gas, electric, and food prices, it seems as though he lost it the day he took office.  As Governor Palin said, “Candidate Obama” didn’t have a record, but “President Obama” sure does.   Candidate Obama hadn’t done anything but give a speech but was given a Nobel Peace Prize just after taking office with no accomplishments under his belt.

This explains his arrogance and petulance.  His supporters adore him.  They treat him as if he is their baby boy and act like hysterical mothers worried about him getting roughed up by the better players in the world of politics.

Chris Matthews said Obama’s debate performance was the best we’ve ever seen of Obama.  If Obama sent a thrill up Chris’s leg in 2008, do we want to imagine what must have happened on Tuesday if Matthews really believes what he says?

Over at YAHOO News, Jeff Greenfield headlines his article: Obama Wins the Second Debate.

The commenters have a different opinion:

One says:

Jeff says “If Obama had performed this way at the first debate, the election would have been over.” I say if the media wasn’t Obama’s protector and BFF, Romney would be up 10% over Obama in the poles. And with that said, I still think Romney will win by 6% of the popular vote and will take Ohio ensuring him the win with enough electoral votes.

Another says…

I would disagree with this article. I think it was about a tie. However, I think Romney’s message offered more hope for the future! I will vote for Mitt Romney based on the past 2 debates!


Obama won??? I think not. All he did was repeat the same old lies and inaccurate descriptions regarding # of jobs created.

They go on and on.

Over at the Huffington Post, they work tirelessly.  In their best effort to imitate a Drudge headline, the top of their page reads:  “BARACK IS BACK!”

I didn’t know he was missing.  He campaigned magnificently in 2008.  He did it so well that he continued to campaign while he was supposed to be running our country as president for four years.  What changed between then and now other than more people are unemployed and our nation is another six trillion dollars in debt?

The difference, of course, is he got a little loud.  He got loud and defiant because he’s not used to answering tough questions on his record.  So of course he began saying things that were blatantly untrue knowing darned well Candy Crowley wouldn’t resist running to his defense.

When the topic of Libya came up, Crowley became the first moderator in history to fact check a candidate’s statement by correcting Romney.  She said that Obama called the Benghazi attacks an act of “terror.”  Her statement got applause from forum participants.  Now that the real fact-checkers are out, she has to walk her comments back.

Mediaite is reporting Crowley’s post-debate admission; that Romney was right.  She’s trying to spin it as a word technicality.

Huffington Post on the other hand posted the entire incident as a headline: Candy Bites Back: Romney Shot Down in Debate Fact Check, Audience Applauds.

It’s been a couple hours since Crowley corrected herself and of course, Huffington Post has yet to correct their front page headline or article.

Further, over at CNN, Alan Schroder explains how Obama “aced a comeback!”

But let’s take a look at the polls:

While CNN’s general poll taken by their own readers puts Obama ahead of Romney by 47-39 when asked who won the debate, another poll by the network says that Romney did much better on the economy – and by a larger (whopping) 18 point margin.

Similarly, CBS says Obama won by seven points (33% said neither won), yet on the economy which remains the most important issue to voters, 65% trust Romney over 37% who trust Obama.

Huffington Post’s poll even shows the president winning by just a few points.

I suspect that CBS’s and CNN’s flash polls occurred before the articles started pouring in about Crowley walking back her fact-check during the debate which is why the Huffington Post is running with it as long as they can.

Polling still going on either puts Romney ahead or at a tie with the President:

YAHOO’s poll of more than 150,000 polled has the two tied at 50% each.

Other examples of closer polling include this one, this one, here, and others.

No matter how you view it, Barack Obama’s big “comeback” was a dud.  The media’s incessant need to manufacture momentum based on this debate performance either proves how much they really are in the tank for the President or they’re simply used to the mediocrity and decline in standards which have taken place since he was elected in 2008.

(1302 Posts)

Leave a Reply