Published: Monday, Oct. 8 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT
A bloodbath? Not even a bloody nose. I realize that politics is filled with
hyperbole and grandiose commentary, but this certainly wasn't a major
turning point. It was a disappointing debate. Jon Stewart and Bill
O'Reilly has a much better discussion, but these things don't allow
for the back-and-forth argument one expects in debate where issues are discussed
with clarity and substance.Sure, Obama was a disappointment when he
had the much better position to begin with. And Romney, appearing as New
Romney, looked straight into the camera and with a straight face said: "I
didn't say that. That's not my position."Now, I
won't get into the partisan bickering that takes the place of real
political debate in this country, but what we have is a media frenzy to select
"the most popular guy". When Newt Gingrich said that Mitt Romney will
say anything to get elected back during the primary and now denys what he said
and when the Obama administration appears to be clinging on rather than
espousing a vision, what are we, as voters, to do.Did Romney win?
No. But he didn't lose.
I blame the media for giving us what we want, not what we need. That's why
entertainment news shows and reality tv and mitt romney exist. It's not
common sensse. And it's certainly not real, in any sense. It's just
the reality we'd like to live in for an hour.
Well Mad Hatter, according to James Carville (Democrat Spokesman), he has a
different view. Carville said that Obama came to the debate to have a
conversation. Romney came to the debate with a chain-saw. In Carville's
opinion, Obama was AWOL.The significant "bounce" in the
polls (take a look at the latest Pew poll where Romney now leads among likely
voters 49% to 45%), seems to verify Carville's assessment that Obama got
buried by Romney. That is a 6-point swing from the September poll where Obama
led 51% to 43%.
If not for people like Mad Hatter, the sentiment would be unanimous, Romney
clearly won that debate. The question is why?Romney supporters
insist that it was because the debate really showed both candidates' real
positions and abilities. Without a teleprompter or his liberal friends in the
media pitching him softballs to hit out of the park, Obama struggled. He
couldn't defend his record or his vision for changing America. Lame attacks
against Romney by distorting his positions didn't work like they often do
in front of a union rally.Obama supporters insist that it was
because...Romney lied, Obama didn't get enough sleep, the air in Denver was
too thin (Al Gore), or some other lame excuse.
Clint Eastwood told us what to expect. Was he prescient? Could he really see
the future?Obama was an empty chair. He did exactly what he has
done all during his Presidency - nothing! He might as well have stayed home.America got a very good look at Romney and at Obama. We saw for
ourselves which of the two could think on his feet. We saw for ourselves which
of the two could "tick" off points that would end this recession. We
saw for ourselves which of the two was "blaming" big oil for our
problems - while spending $90 BILLION tilting at windmills.It is no
surprise that the polls reflect what we saw. We saw Obama as he
really is - a pretender.We say Romney for what he really is - a
pragmatic businessman who is willing to sacrifice "big bird's PBS
program" for the economic health of the country.
The beauty of Romney's PBS comment is that, in spite of the media's
spin, he is not trying to sacrifice Big Bird. Some things that the government
currently supports can do just fine without the subsidies. Take away government
funding for PBS and Sesame Street will continue to be created and
broadcasted.Same for a ton of other government subsidies. (And
before all the liberals start spouting off about all those "oil company
subsidies", lets be clear about the difference between the government
writing you a check and the government letting you take a legitimate business
tax deduction that lowers the amount you must give to the taxman. They are not
the same thing!)
Re: Mad Hatter Provo, UT"A bloodbath? Not even a bloody nose."Either you haven't seen the latest polls following Obama's
failure to perform or else you've chosen to ignore them.The
first debate changed the opinions of very few who have already made up their
minds on who they will vote for. The scary thing for Obama is what his failure
did in the minds of the undecided voter.No, it wasn't
Bush's fault so it must have been Romney's fault.
VST,"....Carville said that Obama came to the debate to have a
conversation. Romney came to the debate with a chain-saw...."==========Cute, as Carville generally is, but not insightful.
Romney came prepared, Obama came overly-confident, and the media came to cover a
sporting event. How many times did we hear the metaphor 'showdown'
used by the media in promos in the days leading up to the debate?CNN, expecting an Obama trouncing of Romney, skewed its post-debate polls to
the GOP to keep the dramatic intensity alive and was embarrassed when the poll
made the Romney rout look like a tidal wave had hit. They turned their fury on
Obama for "not showing up" as they put it, and paid no attention to
Romney once again neatly side-stepping questions he didn't want to touch
such as when he was asked whether his Medicar plan was to voucherize it. Lehrer
didn't press him on it.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments