Debate Crack Van

Be here tonight for all the fun, becauseOMG UNLESS OBAMA CURES CANCER LIVE ON STAGE WE’RE DOOMED:

Although Obama’s ability to show some fight — or, at the very least, not look like he wants to get off the stage as quickly as possible — will be the dominant story line of Tuesday night, there are a few other interesting narrative strands to keep an eye on. We’ve plucked out three of those most interesting below.

Ah. That will be the dominant story line. Because … Because it just will. The Washington Post has no ability to decide what will and will not be the dominant story line, but here’s some other crap you should probably pay attention to.

Those “narrative strands” do not include whether either candidate will be truthful in any way, or will just cheerily make shit up as they go along. They’re all stuff like this:

To make up the ground he needs to in critical swing states such as Ohio, Ohio (and, yes, we know we mentioned Ohio twice — it’s that important), Virginia and Colorado, Romney probably needs another win in Tuesday’s debate — if not one as lopsided as he scored in Denver. Knowing that, and with Obama almost certain not to lie down as he did in the first debate, can Romney still shine?

I don’t know. I think it will depend on the brand of polish he uses that morning.

There is absolutely no content in this story. There are no facts whatsoever. It’s all fashion coverage, and hey, don’t get me wrong, I love me some fashion coverage, but somehow this got into the politics section as some kind of debate preview. Someone needs to rectify that mistake.


6 thoughts on “Debate Crack Van

  1. Is being the best debater in any way, any corellation with being the best president? Or how people vote?
    Barring any major gaffes, will tonight change anyone’s mind? (example, famous gaffe when a town hall asked Bush how the economy had affected him personally and he was so shocked that he couldn’t put together an answer).
    We already know that Obama (as a person of color) has to avoid appearing either mad or uppity. We know that Romney seems most at home in appearing condescending. We already know that the sheeple will ignore the fact checkers and the pundits will favor form over substance.
    I’m getting too cynical.

  2. I missed you guys last week for the veep debate because I was with my OFA group at a party. I’ll be doing that again tonight, so I’ll really miss y’alls snark again, dammit. I don’t think my phone could handle the crack van, but I might try it.
    Oh, and I brined a turkey breast in Jack Daniels and smoked it today. So, I’ve got that going for me. Even without HAMS!

  3. Because this is the kind of horse-race bullshit the media loves. Allows then to talk about “appearance” and “presentation”–the things that TV has told us matter most. Form over substance. Who wants to deal with things like actual facts and issues? Who in the MSM wants to have to actually think?

Comments are closed.