President Obama came out unprepared and overconfident, yet strangely subdued, and never recovered. Mitt Romney came out aggressively attacking the Obama record on the economy and never let up. Obama missed numerous opportunities to counter Romney’s statements and forcefully point out the challengers’ misuse of some important statistics and lack of realistic proposals.
The referee, Jim Lehrer, lost control of the game within seconds
after it started. He let Romney evade
questions at will, allowed Obama to ramble on well over time limits, asked
questions most of the audience couldn’t possibly understand, and finally sat
quietly while both men talked over each other. The 78-year-old host of "PBS
NewsHour" doesn’t need better preparation for future debates; he needs an
immediate retirement from moderator duties.
It was a good showing for Romney and a bad outing for Obama
with questionable calls throughout by Lehrer.
10 comments:
Sadly, I will have to agree with you. It doesn't at all change my mind about who I will vote for though. I'm absolutely still convinced it must be Obama or another disaster like Bush.
You hit the nail on the head. But, like Kay says, probably won't change a whole lot of people's minds.
Nevertheless, I found the debate very heartening (admittedly, I only watched about half of it) b/c it clearly showed that Obama is not an alien devil (as the right-wingers would have us believe) and Romney is not a religious wacko (as the left-wingers would have us believe), but both seemed like reasonable, intelligent people who, though they disagreed on many issues, also agreed on a number of things, and they debated in a civilized manner that could serve as a good example for all of us.
Tom, I agree that the debates probably won't change a lot of minds. I've watched at least part of every debate for years. The only one I can remember anything much about was John F. Kennedy looking presidential while Richard Nixon looked like a devious politician (which he turned out to be). Despite that, I voted for Nixon, one of my worst decisions.
However, this election is looking like a close contest, and swaying just a few votes via a personal appearance on national TV could make the difference.
Obama looked extremely tired to me. But the debate won't change my vote for too many reasons to write. Also I really have no respect for Romney especially during the debate, for two other reasons: his continual sneering and looking down on the average Americans. Sorry folks, I guess I lived in Utah too long to feel comfortable with him!
Little Bug
Gabby, you nailed it. Just wish you'd been kinder when talking about old guys and retirement. I miss not having lunch with you on occasion so I can test my ideas against your sharp wit.
Yes, David, those lunches in beautiful downtown Ogden, Utah, were pleasant. I miss them. I think you have over-rated my wit.
Well said. Romney "won," whatever that may mean in the context of these debates that no one seems to pay much attention to.
As for Lehrer, he may as well not have been there. But that may have produced more the kind of debate that some folks say they want.
You should send your hotel at Niagara Falls a bill for selling us on a trip there. I don't know when it will be, but I will soon surprise my bride of 60-1/2 years with a trip to see the falls, based on your description and photos.
Your blog about the first debate was great, but surely did not inspire me to watch any political debate, ever! Lehrer turned out to be loser, for sure!
Your analysis is the most concise assessment of the debate I've read -- much better than the too many words I always end up using.
Lehrer may have been trying to facilitate more direct interaction between the participants, but his moderating responsibilities were too lax.
Romney's presentation appeared better, so he earns credit for that. But truth in content counts in debate and he spouted too many falsehoods to permit concluding he won.
Post a Comment