Well, the long anticipated debates went off with more hitches than could have been imagined. The moderator, Jim Lehrer was completely out of control from the get go and the debate suffered as a result. The first topic, went approximately 13 minutes over the allotted time and the debate became a scramble for the last word, which oddly, Barack Obama was more than happy to concede.
Winners and losers in debates can be defined many ways and thus they become a subjective practice. There have been debates which have been clear cut in the past, but there were major flaws or events in those and this debate, despite the right's desire, missed all of that. Let's be clear. This was Obama's to lose and many people believe he did. Style points were awarded heavily to Mitt Romney and his enthusiasm seemed to impress many viewers.
In the first 45 minutes Obama seemed almost disinterested. He didn't have any pizazz and Romney showed a little flair. But if you closed your eyes and didn't watch the ever-twitching conservative and only listened to his words, you witnessed a man in trouble. A man who constantly repeated the same things he's been saying for months that we all know are falsehoods. And then he switched gears completely and changed his entire approach to health care and taxes in about three minutes. Obama looked as puzzled as any American listening should have. How does a man campaign on a premise for eighteen months and then just switch gears? Romney did this in 1994, 2004 and again in 2008. He's done it numerous times during this campaign and nothing will stop him. Romney did what every guy who has ever offended their girlfriend or wife has done in a panic. He said what people wanted to hear. In a spontaneous moment, he flat out lied and changed his entire platform in regards to health care and taxes. If you don't believe me, look it up. Obama, could have buried him on this, but in a moment of complete confusion, let Jim Lehrer change the subject. Obama was on the ropes and all but out. And then this, "For eighteen months he's been running this tax plan. Now, five weeks before the election, he's saying that his bold idea is "never mind." To me this was the moment of the debate when the towel should have been thrown in for Romney. Obama just performed the Rope-A-Dope to perfection, but he didn't finish him. He allowed him to get up and to continue. Why?
Cut to Al Sharpton. After the debates, conservatives analysts were giving Romney the belt. Liberals were confused and were hoping for a split decision. They were furious at Obama for not finishing him. This should have been his "get him a body bag" moment. It wasn't based on style points and many would argue that the issues seemed to be in Romney's favor too. And then Al spoke. First he said "The problem is this is 2012 not 1812" and referenced we have fact checkers and the Internet and we can hit a button and hear Romney saying things that contradicted nearly everything he said this evening. This was not only comical, but sadly true, as fact checkers tore through Romney's comments coming up with less than a quarter of his utterances to be factual. I thought it was over and then Sharpton delivered the coup de grace. "Romney made good testimony, but he will be indicted for perjury, because he was lying."
I started another paragraph so you had a chance to recover. If this was anyone other than Al Sharpton, this would have ended the election this evening. Imagine if Tim Russert was alive and said this? Imagine if Chris Matthews had thought of this or Rachel Maddow. It would be over. It was Al and his baggage won't let this be big news. Sure, liberal sites will eat it up, but respected media will let this become just another blip on a pretty crazy campaign trail.
I don't have any mathematical formula for who won and who lost, so I'll break it down the only way I can make sense of it. Loosely based on how my debates in college were graded. Each will be graded as 1/3 of the grade.
Organization and the ability to clearly state your argument
Obama - B. I'd argue that Obama stuck to his guns and what needs to be tweaked.
Romney - D. He argued what needed to be change, but never once explained his thoughts succinctly.
Argument and Rebuttal
Obama - C+. Obama seemed to be passive in his arguments, but his rebuttals at times were stellar.
Romney - B. His arguments were excellent, but his rebuttals lacked factual evidence.
Presentation and Style
Obama - C. I feel the passive, non-aggressive style while being so well armed was shocking.
Romney - B+. His take charge approach was widely accepted, but his lack of respect was worrisome.
Overall.
Obama C+ - his lack of attack was only saved by staying on point with factual statements.
Romney C+ - While winning the style section, his complete disinterest in factual arguments was alarming.
My feeling is that while the two debaters were pretty terrible for the most part, for completely different reasons, the real winner was the guy who got on screen and called out a man for lying and contradicting himself and trying to win on arrogance and style. Obama casually wiped the floor with the competition in 2008, but we're seeing, he's going to have to step up his game in the next two debates. Remember, if polls tell us anything, Obama was molding his speech to three states, which he mentioned specifically. I don't know if he lost ground in any others, but he may not have gained any either. This isn't finished and neither man should be overly confident. We used to live in a country where style usually won, but this is may be a different era. We'll see if it really is.
Winners and losers in debates can be defined many ways and thus they become a subjective practice. There have been debates which have been clear cut in the past, but there were major flaws or events in those and this debate, despite the right's desire, missed all of that. Let's be clear. This was Obama's to lose and many people believe he did. Style points were awarded heavily to Mitt Romney and his enthusiasm seemed to impress many viewers.
In the first 45 minutes Obama seemed almost disinterested. He didn't have any pizazz and Romney showed a little flair. But if you closed your eyes and didn't watch the ever-twitching conservative and only listened to his words, you witnessed a man in trouble. A man who constantly repeated the same things he's been saying for months that we all know are falsehoods. And then he switched gears completely and changed his entire approach to health care and taxes in about three minutes. Obama looked as puzzled as any American listening should have. How does a man campaign on a premise for eighteen months and then just switch gears? Romney did this in 1994, 2004 and again in 2008. He's done it numerous times during this campaign and nothing will stop him. Romney did what every guy who has ever offended their girlfriend or wife has done in a panic. He said what people wanted to hear. In a spontaneous moment, he flat out lied and changed his entire platform in regards to health care and taxes. If you don't believe me, look it up. Obama, could have buried him on this, but in a moment of complete confusion, let Jim Lehrer change the subject. Obama was on the ropes and all but out. And then this, "For eighteen months he's been running this tax plan. Now, five weeks before the election, he's saying that his bold idea is "never mind." To me this was the moment of the debate when the towel should have been thrown in for Romney. Obama just performed the Rope-A-Dope to perfection, but he didn't finish him. He allowed him to get up and to continue. Why?
Cut to Al Sharpton. After the debates, conservatives analysts were giving Romney the belt. Liberals were confused and were hoping for a split decision. They were furious at Obama for not finishing him. This should have been his "get him a body bag" moment. It wasn't based on style points and many would argue that the issues seemed to be in Romney's favor too. And then Al spoke. First he said "The problem is this is 2012 not 1812" and referenced we have fact checkers and the Internet and we can hit a button and hear Romney saying things that contradicted nearly everything he said this evening. This was not only comical, but sadly true, as fact checkers tore through Romney's comments coming up with less than a quarter of his utterances to be factual. I thought it was over and then Sharpton delivered the coup de grace. "Romney made good testimony, but he will be indicted for perjury, because he was lying."
I started another paragraph so you had a chance to recover. If this was anyone other than Al Sharpton, this would have ended the election this evening. Imagine if Tim Russert was alive and said this? Imagine if Chris Matthews had thought of this or Rachel Maddow. It would be over. It was Al and his baggage won't let this be big news. Sure, liberal sites will eat it up, but respected media will let this become just another blip on a pretty crazy campaign trail.
I don't have any mathematical formula for who won and who lost, so I'll break it down the only way I can make sense of it. Loosely based on how my debates in college were graded. Each will be graded as 1/3 of the grade.
Organization and the ability to clearly state your argument
Obama - B. I'd argue that Obama stuck to his guns and what needs to be tweaked.
Romney - D. He argued what needed to be change, but never once explained his thoughts succinctly.
Argument and Rebuttal
Obama - C+. Obama seemed to be passive in his arguments, but his rebuttals at times were stellar.
Romney - B. His arguments were excellent, but his rebuttals lacked factual evidence.
Presentation and Style
Obama - C. I feel the passive, non-aggressive style while being so well armed was shocking.
Romney - B+. His take charge approach was widely accepted, but his lack of respect was worrisome.
Overall.
Obama C+ - his lack of attack was only saved by staying on point with factual statements.
Romney C+ - While winning the style section, his complete disinterest in factual arguments was alarming.
My feeling is that while the two debaters were pretty terrible for the most part, for completely different reasons, the real winner was the guy who got on screen and called out a man for lying and contradicting himself and trying to win on arrogance and style. Obama casually wiped the floor with the competition in 2008, but we're seeing, he's going to have to step up his game in the next two debates. Remember, if polls tell us anything, Obama was molding his speech to three states, which he mentioned specifically. I don't know if he lost ground in any others, but he may not have gained any either. This isn't finished and neither man should be overly confident. We used to live in a country where style usually won, but this is may be a different era. We'll see if it really is.
Comments
Post a Comment