via Washington Post

I have been sitting in the same position for 48 hours straight. It’s been a hellish two days where I don’t think it’s possible to get any more busy than I already am and then – yep, you know where I’m going – something else comes up. While I sit here stringing an insane amount of sentences together, I’ve been listening to commentary about the debates.

It’s background noise and occasionally something will grab my attention like Romney’s Campaign Director of Something or Other telling Andrea Mitchell that Obama is lazy. Sununu then went even farther on Fox News by saying that Obama is stupid too. Rush, because he was probably high, was all: that Obama guy was handed everything; from his Harvard education to the presidency to the teleprompters for his speeches.

The people with no souls, oh how they multiply.

There’s a special place in hell for the Drudge Report and its stupid fucking cop lights circa Geocities who felt compelled to launch into a tirade because Obama was shifting his weight behind the podium.

After a full 24 hours of this nonsense, about two seconds ago I came to a revelation about how this debate and what’s being said can be used as an example of what to do / what not to do in real life.

Obama stuck, for the most part, to the facts and stayed on message. A boring message, but a message nonetheless. He was aloof, yes, and wasn’t engaged. He looked down, he, maybe, doodled, and didn’t interrupt Romney. He wasn’t passionate, he didn’t “fight” and let his facts speak for themselves.

And quite quickly he was called a loser.

Not that I was alive then, but let’s go back to Nixon and JFK. Nixon, not a guy that was particularly easy on the eyes was drowning in his own sweat while JFK was young, vibrant and pretty during their debate. JFK won, hands down.

Is perception 9/10′s of the truth?

As of right now, poll numbers haven’t changed (a 1% uptick for Romney is not a change), so it appears that the only people freaking out about Obama’s performance and Romney’s “win” are the die-hard politicos like me and pundits. The regular voter, if they were watching, was probably bored to tears. Even I had to step outside. The trickle down of mass media goes like this: Obama lost, Romney brought it. Can you believe it?

None of us will probably ever run for President, but I’ve written twice over the course of two weeks about how I really don’t care what people say about me and what other people do. But, given last night’s debate, regardless of truthiness, if things are said with a smile and conviction is it to be believed? In a sense, if the person saying it believes their own lies, does it win?

On one hand when you run for political office, you have to care about the OPP (other people’s perceptions), but most of us are better if we don’t. Maybe Obama – and I am not saying this is okay because he needed to bring it – thinks Romney is funny. The ol’ flip-flopper that will say anything in the moment even if he was against it for 18 months. Going further, I would be frustrated as fuck to have to repeat myself time and time again.

Is our memory that short where Romney – or anyone for that matter – can say something as ridiculous as President Obama extended the Bush tax cuts because he wanted to. Conveniently forgetting that the Republicans almost shut down the federal government over extending the cuts because unemployment insurance was attached to it. Obama extended them for two years rather than further harm the struggling unemployed.

I don’t have an answer, but when faced with what someone tells us as opposed to what we know of a person, do lies with a smile win out over who cares and the facts?