Comments about ‘Blame media for stunning Romney victory’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Oct. 8 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Mad Hatter
Provo, UT

A bloodbath? Not even a bloody nose. I realize that politics is filled with hyperbole and grandiose commentary, but this certainly wasn't a major turning point. It was a disappointing debate. Jon Stewart and Bill O'Reilly has a much better discussion, but these things don't allow for the back-and-forth argument one expects in debate where issues are discussed with clarity and substance.

Sure, Obama was a disappointment when he had the much better position to begin with. And Romney, appearing as New Romney, looked straight into the camera and with a straight face said: "I didn't say that. That's not my position."

Now, I won't get into the partisan bickering that takes the place of real political debate in this country, but what we have is a media frenzy to select "the most popular guy". When Newt Gingrich said that Mitt Romney will say anything to get elected back during the primary and now denys what he said and when the Obama administration appears to be clinging on rather than espousing a vision, what are we, as voters, to do.

Did Romney win? No. But he didn't lose.

American Fork, UT

I blame the media for giving us what we want, not what we need. That's why entertainment news shows and reality tv and mitt romney exist. It's not common sensse. And it's certainly not real, in any sense. It's just the reality we'd like to live in for an hour.

Orem, UT

If not for people like Mad Hatter, the sentiment would be unanimous, Romney clearly won that debate. The question is why?

Romney supporters insist that it was because the debate really showed both candidates' real positions and abilities. Without a teleprompter or his liberal friends in the media pitching him softballs to hit out of the park, Obama struggled. He couldn't defend his record or his vision for changing America. Lame attacks against Romney by distorting his positions didn't work like they often do in front of a union rally.

Obama supporters insist that it was because...Romney lied, Obama didn't get enough sleep, the air in Denver was too thin (Al Gore), or some other lame excuse.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Clint Eastwood told us what to expect. Was he prescient? Could he really see the future?

Obama was an empty chair. He did exactly what he has done all during his Presidency - nothing! He might as well have stayed home.

America got a very good look at Romney and at Obama. We saw for ourselves which of the two could think on his feet. We saw for ourselves which of the two could "tick" off points that would end this recession. We saw for ourselves which of the two was "blaming" big oil for our problems - while spending $90 BILLION tilting at windmills.

It is no surprise that the polls reflect what we saw.

We saw Obama as he really is - a pretender.

We say Romney for what he really is - a pragmatic businessman who is willing to sacrifice "big bird's PBS program" for the economic health of the country.

Orem, UT

The beauty of Romney's PBS comment is that, in spite of the media's spin, he is not trying to sacrifice Big Bird. Some things that the government currently supports can do just fine without the subsidies. Take away government funding for PBS and Sesame Street will continue to be created and broadcasted.

Same for a ton of other government subsidies. (And before all the liberals start spouting off about all those "oil company subsidies", lets be clear about the difference between the government writing you a check and the government letting you take a legitimate business tax deduction that lowers the amount you must give to the taxman. They are not the same thing!)

Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: Mad Hatter Provo, UT
"A bloodbath? Not even a bloody nose."

Either you haven't seen the latest polls following Obama's failure to perform or else you've chosen to ignore them.

The first debate changed the opinions of very few who have already made up their minds on who they will vote for. The scary thing for Obama is what his failure did in the minds of the undecided voter.

No, it wasn't Bush's fault so it must have been Romney's fault.

Craig Clark
Boulder, CO


"....Carville said that Obama came to the debate to have a conversation. Romney came to the debate with a chain-saw...."


Cute, as Carville generally is, but not insightful. Romney came prepared, Obama came overly-confident, and the media came to cover a sporting event. How many times did we hear the metaphor 'showdown' used by the media in promos in the days leading up to the debate?

CNN, expecting an Obama trouncing of Romney, skewed its post-debate polls to the GOP to keep the dramatic intensity alive and was embarrassed when the poll made the Romney rout look like a tidal wave had hit. They turned their fury on Obama for "not showing up" as they put it, and paid no attention to Romney once again neatly side-stepping questions he didn't want to touch such as when he was asked whether his Medicar plan was to voucherize it. Lehrer didn't press him on it.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments