Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Romney-Obama: Second Debate Analysis

The second Presidential Debate just ended and between the format itself, Candy Crowley as the moderator, Mitt Romney's performance and Barack Obama's performance, I have a lot of thoughts on this.

First, the format. It stinks. Get rid of it. This Town-Hall style format was developed in 1992 to show off Bill Clinton's "I feel your pain" abilities and it worked for him. It also worked well for George W. Bush, and for Obama, it works well, especially with plants. But now, it's worn out its usefulness. The questions that were taken tonight were worthless, contained many a false premise and were meant to take attention away from the president's lack of a record. Furthermore, the people reading the questions could not even clearly read their questions; even having a Naked Gun moment (Frank Drebin as Phil Donahue) with one of the questioners. Because of these format issues, very little was accomplished.

Looking at the moderator, Candy Crowley was the absolute worst moderator in debate history. Already promising to shirk the debate contract, she was true to her word. Her bias was already known and in this debate, it clearly showed; whether letting Obama speak 90 seconds past the clock expiration, cutting off Mitt Romney's responses, changing the subject when Romney brought up Fast and Furious and doing untrue fact-checking to validate Barack Obama's lies on Benghazi. Obama had the time advantage and she was sure to see that he had it. This should be Candy Crowley's last debate, she is an embarrassment to the field of journalism and Republicans must fight harder to make sure that a more fair moderator, such as Bret Baier or Megyn Kelly, are at the helm of a 2016 Presidential debate and beyond.

Now, the candidates. Barack Obama had to be more "on" tonight and had to be more aggressive. While he seemed more engaged, what came out of his mouth made absolutely no sense. Whether talking about job creation, Benghazi, Mitt Romney's record, George W. Bush or endorsing a false premise on issues from Iraq, to Afghanistan, to women's issues, he was lying! There was nothing truthful about what he was saying and many are mistaking his defensive nature for confidence. He clearly did not like being challenged and it can be seen in his face. Furthermore, Obama was gutless in bringing up the 47% comment in his closing statement, when he knew that Mitt Romney could not respond. Obama's body language also came into question; whether the return of the dismissive smirk or the stupid Napoleonic pose while sitting down.

On the other hand, Mitt Romney faced his likely most hostile environment to date; between the moderator, interruptions from the president and stupid questions from audience members. While he should have been prepared for this, should have been more aggressive and he should have continued over Candy Crowley's interruptions, which could have forced a Reagan-esque moment. Additionally, Romney could have handled the Benghazi question a lot more forcefully and directly. On the plus side, Romney continued to rely on the facts of failures by this president over the past four years, laid out a clear plan for the first four years of a Romney administration and connected well with the audience members; especially the first questioner.

Even though Obama will be called out on his lies, Mitt Romney could have been more aggressive, and the MSM will call this a convincing win for Obama, I don't believe this debate will change the polls very much. There is one more debate coming up next Monday, on foreign policy, that will be crucial for both candidates. And on we go to November 6th.

No comments:

Post a Comment