Well, my predictions just before the second debate have come true. (I'm not sure what the "gaffe" that the media will choose to amplify - I'm guessing Obama's statement of how he was calling Libya a terrorist attack "the next day.")
Obama was definitely more...insistent. So I guess Democrats can say he did "better."
Romney was as aggressive as before, so Republicans will claim "Romney won again."
As for my opinion? Both lost. Big time.
The reason that debates don't affect polls/voters? It's because the candidates don't say anything that we haven't heard before. They stick to their speaking points, and avoid the question.
Q: What about gun control/AK-47?
Obama: I'm taking a broader approach to control violence. Like school system and education. Romney will not hire more teachers like me. This is why my education plan is good....
Romney: Controlling violence is important, and I think that keeping youths in school and happier families will make things better. Let me tell you why Obama is wrong....
Depressing. Neither candidate will talk about what voters want/need to hear. Both candidates will find some way to talk about whatever their advisers say will win them "points."
And by improving their "debate score" both candidates just depress voters looking for content.
As for style? Romney did as well as in his first debate. Obama improved, but he still sounded like his Saturday Night Live caricature. (Its his rising/falling inflection.) Obama didn't say "Umm" as often, but he did seem to keep insisting for more time...
I will say that Obama's final response was the smoothest of the night. ("What is the major misperception of you by voters?) Romney: I care about 100% of America. Obama: Government doesn't create jobs. I care about everyone, and that's why I am asking for your vote.
I think the closing comment was the strongest moment in the debate. Romney (smooth at answering other questions) - seemed like that insincere televangelist that's been bothering me.
Obama really does care about 100% and really is trying and will fight. (My problem is that him trying and fighting may not be the most effective plan, and will definitely add to the deficit.) But Obama was "himself" at the end. (When he was "actively trying to be aggressive - Obama wasn't "himself.")
I think Romney's extensive debate practice has been paying off style-wise, but his content is non-existent (other than to say "Obama is bad, and let me tell you my non-specific non-plan.).
I suspect my previous "conspiracy theory" (Obama intentionally underperformed at the first debate) is unlikely - if that happened, Obama would have outperformed at this debate.
Obama improved, and he will improve some more (style-wise) at the third debate.
Content is another story though...
No comments:
Post a Comment