Specifically, it was Obama's facial expressions and overall tone not only with Romney, but with PBS' Jim Lehrer, the debate's moderator. Obama looked annoyed, perturbed, and snippy - which took away that cool, crisp, poised person we've grown accustomed to since he took that national stage at the 2004 Democractic National Convention. And a big thing that's helped Obama is the use of teleprompters on the campaign trail and his time in the White House.
 |
| Mitt Romney and President Obama in the first debate Wednesday. |
Like Obama, Bush was ahead in the polls and had enough support heading into the first debate that would coast him to another term. And like Romney, Kerry's biggest campaign flaw is that he flip-flopped the issues.
But during their first debate on September 30, 2004, Kerry successfully hit Bush on economic and foreign policy measures. Instead of offering tactful responses, Bush stumbled with his responses and occasionally flashed a scowled toward his opponent.
Let's face it. It's tough running for re-election when you're President of the United States and the economy is in the tank. It's worse when your supporters and members of the press are expecting you to mop the floor with your challenger during the debate - only it sets you up for failure.
 |
| John Kerry and President Bush at their first debate Sept. 30, 2004 |
But then she played an interesting soundbite of Obama sounding less charismatic while downplaying the upcoming debate. It then got me thinking if Obama would just take it easy instead of forcefully going after his opponent and Republicans in Congress.
It turns out Obama struggled against Romney's attacks on national television and allowed himself to get zinged not once, but twice.
As I said Wednesday, this isn't the end of the election and Obama still has time to rebound from this. Only now he has to prove that Romney's performance was not only a fluke, but that Romney presented half-truths and lies about his policies - something fact checkers pointed out Thursday morning.
Whatever happens, I just hope Big Bird doesn't become the trending topic on Twitter.
Well someone has got to kick this off, right Cagleink? Here we go. It seems as though you are grasping at straws to find hope for your dog in this fight.
ReplyDeleteThe bottom line is that Obama simply was not prepared and Romney’s performance wasn’t a fluke. Romney was prepared and had conviction, period. Keep in mind, it has been suggested over and over and over that Obama is the ‘smartest person and president ever’ and he has gotten a free pass from virtually all media outlets. (Read my previous comments about Obama’s narcissism also) In the debate, he was actually challenged in front of the country and he just didn’t know how to react because that hasn’t happened to this degree before.
This was the first debate, which arguably may turn out to be the most watched one, and Romney didn’t win only because of the above mentioned. Romney won the debate because people came to realize that this economy should have and would have recovered much more quickly with more conservative leadership in the White House. He also was able to paint a picture of what it would be like if Obama were to be re-elected. Before the debate most people didn’t know Romney or his philosophy but are now buying his message because they have heard it for the first time.
As a result, people are starting to come together and agree that government programs and spending have never created a real sustainable job, ever. Obama spends time (like most liberals) overcomplicating issues, claiming a monopoly on compassion, and sending a message that we all need more government in our lives but people are starting to see through it. Romney was very effective in explaining that this is a spending problem, businesses need motivations for hiring once again, and people desperately need reasons to spend in this economy.
Relating to your comments about the 47% comment and Bain Capital not being brought up, I wish they were brought up. Most government employees will not understand this but Bain Capital is a huge success. Regarding the 47% comment, if I were Romney I would have responded with “the government is funded by private businesses and at its current and projected spending levels it is unsustainable. The fact is that our economy has suffered as a result of a catastrophic government-spending problem. For those of you great American’s working in the public sector here is the truth, you have been lied to. Politicians purposely mislead you by promising to protect your job and benefits in order to get your vote. I wish this wasn’t the case but our country needs to reduce spending in these areas to become solvent and prosperous once again.”
Lastly, I love how poverty among minorities, long term unemployment rates, jobless rates among recent college grads, and food stamps are all at the highest levels ever and Obama’s solution is to tax the rich so they pay their “fair share.” Does anyone actually believe this will help our dire situation?
How exactly am I grasping for straws to root for Obama? Bush was in the same situation eight years ago and had the same result. This was just a mere observation and not an excuse-making agenda to push. I think it is you who is reaching a little with your opening line.
DeleteMy point is that most people on the left, not necessarily you, are searching for ways to downplay Obama’s poor performance. Usually history is used as a predictor of the future but in this case I don’t think there is a strong correlation and therefore find it interesting to pick Bush’s poor performance as a historical example.
DeleteA CNN pole conducted after the debate showed 67% of people poled said Romney won the debate and no presidential candidate has ever topped 60% since it inception in 1984!! This sample also polled more Dem’s than Rep’s. (source: CNN.com)
I am not trying to offend you or your writing, because really do I enjoy it, but am trying to elaborate on the topic you have raised from a different point of view.