Romney plans to deliver extemporaneous "debate zingers"

When did it begin? With Al Gore's sigh? With H.W.'s wristwatch-gazing? With "There you go again"? When did presidential debates begin shedding their cloak of broad, competitive competence and start wrapping themselves in the make-or-break "moment"? The NY Times:

Mr. Romney’s team has concluded that debates are about creating moments and has equipped him with a series of zingers that he has memorized and has been practicing on aides since August.

Pathetic. By Team Romney's standards, Henny Youngman would have made the perfect POTUS. (Well, at least we would have laughed our way to Armegeddon.)

There are, indisputably, certain "moments" to avoid, such as Gerald Ford's otherworldly declaration that there was "no Soviet domination" of the quite obviously, ruthlessly dominated. Others--sighs and wristwatches, for example--seemed harmless enough by comparison, but in reality they loomed just as damning. Why? I can only guess: They provided the media, I suppose, with a "hook"; something on which they could hang an analysis of an entire debate. The bastard sighed! Off with his head!

We left it to an aging actor, though, to begin "creating moments"--the perfect frame shot, the exquisitely well-rehearsed scene, the talk-of-the-town "zinger" of "There you go again" or "I won't exploit my opponent's youth and inexperience." That was it, I guess; the beginning of the end--the nascent span was rather brief--of the presidential debate, as a debate. Instead, it was showtime.

Comments

[Janicket]

This may not go quite as planned. Twitter is already on fire with #MittZinger:

https://twitter.com/i/#!/search/?q=%23MittZinger&src=hash

I'm trying, and failing horribly, to envision Romney flawlessly executing an off-the-cuff, brilliantly spontaneous zinger he's been rehearsing for weeks.

[Peter G]

Well it's pretty much his last chance. His previous strategy of trying to sell his vision of America, that of a shining gated community on a hill just wasn't panning out. It doubtless appealed to some. If you can get past the socioeconomic minefields and across the alligator infested moat, struggle up the hill in the teeth of the machine gun fire, you too may be admitted to the Elysian fields with perpetual minimal tax rates forever handed down to generation after generation who will never have to worry about an ivy league acceptance letter or, horrors, don your country's military uniform. Lots of people like lotteries too. So now we have zingers. Yea, that's the ticket.

[Janicket]

LOL Peter, thanks for that!

[Joy]

I think his team is setting the bar too high for him on the zingers. I can't envision him "zinging" anything without looking awkward.

[AnneJ]

I'm with the majority here. I just cannot envision Mitt Romney all of a sudden becoming an easy going, eloquent zing machine. Just the fact that he has to study and rehearse at being spontaneous with a sense of humor proves that he harbors none of those qualities and I predict (and hope) that standing next to Obama will prove that.

[Janicket]

Also, too: I've read that Mitt's team has provided a set of the canned zingers to various media/Drudge types, so that they can be prepared to pronounce him the victor with the best line(s) of the debate, have most of their story already written before the thing even begins.

What odds that the Obama team gets (or already has) hold of the zinger sheet, and that the President will pre-emptively weave them into his comments so that Mitt can't hit a single, let alone a home run?

Example: Obama standard stump line: "People want a hand up, not a handout."

Romney preplanned zinger: "You say people want a hand up, not a handout, but the only hand they'll get from you is in their pockets!"

Obama pre-emptive strike: "I believe that people want a hand up, not a handout, but my opponent wants to put his hand in every retiree's pocket and give the back of his hand to the working poor."

Or sumpin like that.

[eimle]

Why practice zingers? Because it makes for great TV. Fox news will be all over them declaring Romney the winner because the gave them soundbites they can play over and over again, driving up ratings. Republicans are convinced that what makes for great viewership on Fox News will also get them votes, hence no need to come up with a detailed tax plan, no need to discuss what loopholes they would close. Let's just come up with Zingers.
This is the con Murdoch and Ailes have played-convincing conservatives that what's great for rating is what's great for votes. They are turning into a channel full of Baghdad Bobs.