I thought Bob Scheiffer did a very good job. He was a lot more like Jim Lehrer than Candy Crowley, that is for sure. Both Obama and Romney did well. Obama was more combative, but he also came across as being more on the defensive. Romney was more focused on the big picture and his vision for what America's larger role in the world should be. Romney appeared to be primarily focused on being presidential and laying out his own agenda, although he did get a few licks in along the way. I thought Romney was more effective in accomplishing his objectives for this debate, which were to appear presidential, to lay out his ideas and to steer clear of any unnecessary conflict with the president in order to improve his aura of likeability. Obama's primary objective on the other hand was to convince voters that Romney is not an acceptable alternative as President, and that Romney is a warmonger and someone who cannot be trusted. On these points, Romney was clearly more successful. It may be that Obama is scored by some as the winner of this debate because he was more aggressive. If that turns out to be the consensus, then it is my sense that Obama has once again won a tactical victory, much like he did in the second debate. But Romney was more effective on a strategic basis. Obama is again not likely at all to receive any appreciable bump in the election polls from his performance in this debate. With 14 days left to go, Romney appears to be well positioned to win this election, barring some sort of major game changer, which Obama will no doubt attempt to manufacture. However, it certainly does not appear that there were any game changers tonight.
I find it amazing how divorced from reality this entire post is. There's absolutely no empathy for one's opponent, no attempt to understand why their views have appeal. Just frothing hyperbole and caricature. Talk radio has been full bore behind Mitt since he secured the nomination, especially when people were doubting him leading up to the 1st debate. Beck is a huge supporter of Romney. <iframe src="http://mlb.mlb.com/shared/video/embed/embed.html?width=400&height=254&content_id=24705413&property=theblaze" width="400" height="254" frameborder="0">Your browser does not support iframes.</iframe>
Codman is one of those posters who had no exposure to politics until the 2008 election, and suddenly he's an expert. Plus he's very biased towards Obama -- perhaps because he's a Quannel liberal
I think this debate settles the question (at least to the Romney camp) whether Obama mishandled the Benghazi affair. Romney did not go to this issue.
I think Mitt didn't want to walk into the trap of politicizing this during the debate. Leave that job to the pundits and surrogates.
How's that? He's still losing every swing state except Florida and North Carolina. If Romney's going to win this election, he needs to take the most evenly split states, Colorado and Virginia, and then flip either Ohio or the combination of Nevada, Iowa, and New Hampshire. Fail to win one of those states and it's over. That's not well positioned. The odds of Obama retaining the White House at this point are still pretty high.
He is winning New Hampshire, Colorado, and Virginia. He is now tied in Iowa. Wisconsin and Ohio are both within the percentage of error. He has even brought PA so close that it may come into play. Overall the tide is in Romney's favor. The surge has slowed since the second debate but it is still trending Romney.
I fell asleep watching the debate, no lie. To be honest they both appeared to be saying the same thing, which was boring. I guess Romney wasn't taking the aggressive line as he's already rebounded and just needed to appear electable. The election could go either way.
Obama with huge poll margins in this debate, even bigger than Romney's first debate win in comparison. Let's see how big of a bounce he can get in the next days, week.
The problem is that even though Obama scored more debate points and was on the attack more often. The other poll numbers show Romney as more likeable and people said they are more likely to vote for him. Obama seemed desperate tonight. While Romney presented himself and his platform to the whole country. While Obama ranted to the left and unsuccessfully tried to paint Romney as a neocon warmonger. But we shall see.
i saw the 1st half of the debate. both candidates came across as puppet whores, and seemed to agree with each other on nearly every issue, as would be expected when they are carrying out the same agenda for the same paymasters. so that moves us along to the question of which one of these tools would simply make the preferred talking head on television over the next 4 gloomy years. obama was definitely the more polished speaker, but also came across as combative and smug at times. romney stuttered and smiled too much when getting hammered by his opponent. in the final analysis, i would say romney wins this debate, simply b/c the american people ironically, might see a genuineness and sincerity in romney's lack of coherency and over -the-top plastic facade. they may think to themselves "this act probably isn't fake b/c his handlers wouldn't let him look so fake then." it's like fake fake is the new real. they might view him as a refreshing new rollout when compared to obama's perfectly manicured teleprompter pinpoint delivery...
