Presidential Debate #1 Observations

[Greg Bernhardt]

Use this thread for commentary on the 1st Presidential Debate. It starts at 9PM EST Oct 3rd. Please keep debate of issues to a minimum and focus on observations strictly relevant to the debate.

I'll be watching the live stream online at http://www.youtube.com/politics

Moderation will be strict. Have a nice day :)

 

[Jack21222]

9pm tomorrow, you should clarify.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Please keep debate of issues to a minimum.

After all, they will.

 

[russ_watters]

Pre-debate observations:

1. Both sides are working hard to lower expectations, in order that they may easier exceed them.
2. Incumbents have an advantage in elections, but challengers have the advantage in debates since they have no record to defend. It is a double edged sword though: attack a likeable President too hard and it can backfire. So Romney needs to be ultra-respectful to the man, while slamming his policies.
3. Romney needs to knock this out of the park to have a chance in the election. Score a draw and it is all but over.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

9pm tomorrow, you should clarify.

added, thanks!

After all, they will.

Times like this I do wish we had a "like" button lol


Does anyone have a list of what the six topic segments will be?

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

1. Death
2. Taxes
3. War
4. Disease
5. End of the World
6. Jimmy Snyder
2012 Presidential debate schedule.

This just in, the debate topics for tomorrow night are:
The first three segments will focus on the economy.
The last three segments will focus on "health care, the role of government, and governing."
Topics for 10/3

 

[SHISHKABOB]

My English professor spent a good half hour of class explaining to us why it's such a great thing that Jim Lehrer is the mediator for these debates. I might watch it if I get the chance. I am a little bit uncertain of who I really want to vote for, and I think these debates will help me. Or rather, I hope that they will help me.

 

[russ_watters]

A pretty good matched pair of Op-Eds on "What We Would Ask Obama/Romney...":
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2012/10/02/presidential-debate-obama-economy/1609445/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2012/10/02/presidential-debate-romney-economy/1609449/

 

[Astronuc]

A pretty good matched pair of Op-Eds on "What We Would Ask Obama/Romney...":
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2012/10/02/presidential-debate-obama-economy/1609445/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2012/10/02/presidential-debate-romney-economy/1609449/

All good questions!

I wonder if either candidate is prepared to effectively deal with the economy during the next 4 years.

Some don't think so - Analysis: Candidates' deficit plans don't add up
http://news.yahoo.com/analysis-candidates-deficit-plans-dont-add-150403612--finance.html

The are pointing fingers at each other, not offering a cogent solution
Obama, Romney take fight over economy—to LinkedIn
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-romney-fight-over-economy-linkedin-164753493--election.html

What we face in the near term - U.S. "fiscal cliff" a risk to global growth, Europe to tell G7
http://news.yahoo.com/u-fiscal-cliff-risk-global-growth-europe-tell-165148790--business.html [Broken]

 

[Evo]

Will this thread be open to anyone regardless of if they can vote in the US election? Or will it be based upon actual voter opinions?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Open to whoever watches

 

[Evo]

Open to whoever watches

Super, just was wondering if we were looking at a US response or a more liberal general response since members outside the US tend to have more liberal views.

Although it would have been interesting to see the two differing viewpoints in different threads.

 

[rootX]

I watched only first 15 minutes or so. Got bored when they appeared not to be properly addressing each other arguments.

 

[turbo]

I can't watch anymore. Too much spinning. Including "facts" that are unsupported.

 

[Gale]

I agree with Rootx and Turbo... What exactly are people hoping to see/hear in these debates? Does anyone actually change or form an opinion based on what is said?

I sort of feel like the president could probably be spending his time doing more productive things...

 

[SixNein]

I agree with Rootx and Turbo... What exactly are people hoping to see/hear in these debates? Does anyone actually change or form an opinion based on what is said?

I sort of feel like the president could probably be spending his time doing more productive things...

The debates are for a small proportion of America that hasn't been Gerrymandered to death. For the rest of America, I don't know if it matters.

 

[Evo]

I'm not even watching the debate, the season premiere of Supernatural is on, after that it's "Life After top Chef".

I already know for whom I am voting.

 

[FalseVaccum89]

I agree with Rootx and Turbo... What exactly are people hoping to see/hear in these debates? Does anyone actually change or form an opinion based on what is said?

I sort of feel like the president could probably be spending his time doing more productive things...

Heh. Pretty much. . .

 

[Astronuc]

They both seem to want to support the 'middle class', but I'm not sure how.

They both seem to want to support education - more teachers, more training, more opportunity to go to college. But it's not clear to me how. Training for what?

Both mentioned support for small business.

I remain skeptical.

Is there another choice?

 

[rootX]

They both seem to want to support the 'middle class', but I'm not sure how.

They both seem to want to support education - more teachers, more training, more opportunity to go to college. But it's not clear to me how. Training for what?

Both mentioned support for small business.

I remain skeptical.

Is there another choice?

They both seemed to be on same page but neither answered how they are going to do what they are saying. I believe neither of two answered how to deal with deficit in the first 15 minutes

 

[Jack21222]

I am an Obama supporter, but I think Romney came out slightly ahead in this debate. The difficulty came where Obama said Romney would do x,y, and z, and Romney responded passionately that he rejects x,y and z, but Obama kept repeating "Romney will do x, y, and z."

It's quite possible that Obama is right, and Romney was being disingenuous about what he rejects, but it just came off a bit like Obama was attacking straw men.

On the other hand, I don't think Obama did terribly. I think he could have possibly been a little more aggressive against Romney, but he seemed to be (to use a football reference) playing a prevent defense. Instead of going for the sacks and interceptions, he was just trying to hold Romney to a field goal.

 

[danielu13]

They both seem to want to support the 'middle class', but I'm not sure how.

They both seem to want to support education - more teachers, more training, more opportunity to go to college. But it's not clear to me how. Training for what?

Both mentioned support for small business.

I remain skeptical.

Is there another choice?

On the bright side, it isn't "You're wrong."..."No, you're wrong!" But this makes me really skeptical as well, especially the both sides supporting small businesses. But lies wouldn't really be a new thing in a political debate.

But yes, there is another choice, Gary Johnson.

 

[Gale]

I am an Obama supporter, but I think Romney came out slightly ahead in this debate. The difficulty came where Obama said Romney would do x,y, and z, and Romney responded passionately that he rejects x,y and z, but Obama kept repeating "Romney will do x, y, and z."

It's quite possible that Obama is right, and Romney was being disingenuous about what he rejects, but it just came off a bit like Obama was attacking straw men.

On the other hand, I don't think Obama did terribly. I think he could have possibly been a little more aggressive against Romney, but he seemed to be (to use a football reference) playing a prevent defense. Instead of going for the sacks and interceptions, he was just trying to hold Romney to a field goal.

I don't really understand how people judge debates. The commentary after the debate said much the same as you, and added that Romney came out to win while Obama was merely trying to maintain the status quo (polls saying that he's ahead.) Thus, the one who aims to win often does win... and so Romney's aggressiveness vs Obama's more casual appearance seemed to win the day. Indeed, they even noted that Romney had a few more "zingers".

Personally, like I already said, the whole thing seems like a bit of a waste of time, especially for the president. Of course Romney was more aggressive, he has to be. Isn't it always that way against an incumbent? I'm pretty sure people expected as much BEFORE the debate, so what's the surprise?

Also, speaking of Gary Johnson, how bout the hubbub regarding him being barred from the debate? Did anyone watch his commentary? Apparently he was live on twitter and youtube...

 

[Evo]

They both seem to want to support the 'middle class', but I'm not sure how.

They both seem to want to support education - more teachers, more training, more opportunity to go to college. But it's not clear to me how. Training for what?

Both mentioned support for small business.

I remain skeptical.

Is there another choice?

If you have been following what Obama is doing/has done and what Romney is saying, the differences would be fairly clear. You can't watch a few minutes of tv and know what's going on, IMO.

 

[Pythagorean]

Is there another choice?

China

 

[Gale]

Okay... so I piqued my own curiosity and now I'm watching Gary Johnson's youtube video of him responding to the debate.

I have to admit, I made a lot of similar comments while I was watching... But clever quips are pretty easy to make. It would be interesting to see him in a debate I think.

Also...
Poor Big Bird! Sooo many funny stuff going around about Sesame Street now.

 

[dydxforsn]

Romney did really well in the debate. I'm proud of him! Looks like he's really improved over the course of the republican primary. Though I can't quite see how voters who haven't done their research could have based an opinion off of that debate policy wise. Not enough facts and implications of what would happen under those policies were examined (What's new?).

That being said, I definitely support Obama over Romney. But if one were to base who won the debate using the metric of who gained the most for their campaign, I would say Romney won the day.

 

[edward]

I was disappointed in the they walked all over the moderator. Obama did it several times on the time limit. Romney made it clear that he was in charge, not only running over the time limit, but actually interrupting and talking over Jim Lehrer.

 

Well one thing is that this was a very, very good debate. Very good on substance, and the candidates were both very respectable towards one another. Romney I think did a great job in showing himself as a human being instead of the robot that he has been portrayed as. He also showed himself as passionate-seeming, compassionate, and Obama's equal intellectually.

While I don't know if I'd say Obama lost this one, he didn't dominate it. He came off rather flat. He also did not display good body language, as it looked like he smirked and also he would look down a lot when Romney was talking to him, whereas Romney would look at Obama when Obama was talking to him.

However, this was a debate about domestic issues, nothing on foreign policy. It will very interesting in the future debates to see how Romney performs on foreign policy as Obama has been president now for a term. Also, while Romney had a good debate tonight, sometimes he performs poorly in debates as well. And Obama will probably come back tougher for the next debate. Will be very fun to watch!

 

I agree with Rootx and Turbo... What exactly are people hoping to see/hear in these debates? Does anyone actually change or form an opinion based on what is said?

The average person doesn't follow policy or politics much. They form their opinions based on the debates. Heavens, could you imagine the caliber of government we'd have if everyone in the country cared as much about political and policy issues as they do about football, American Idol, Jersey Shore, and so forth!

I sort of feel like the president could probably be spending his time doing more productive things...

The debates are a good thing as the President and his opponent should have to answer questions and debate with one another. The President should have to answer why he should be president for another term and the other guy should have to answer why he should be allowed to be president in the first place.

 

[PAllen]

I know who I'm voting for (not Romney, not Obama), but Romney clearly won, and got everything he could hope for from the debate. It will be interesting to see how the polls shift.

 

[Evo]

The average person doesn't follow policy or politics much. They form their opinions based on the debates.

Nah. Most people won't even watch the debates and have already made up their minds, very few are swayed by debates in this sort of situation. We have a known and an unpredictable unknown, IMO. Not much will have changed.

 

Nah. Most people won't even watch the debates and have already made up their minds, very few are swayed by debates in this sort of situation. We have a known and an unpredictable unknown, IMO. Not much will have changed.

Perhaps (I am no expert). But I would think that with the economy the way that it is, lots of people would watch the debates in this type of situation. If the economy was doing fine and the unemployment rate was at 4%, then people overall would probably be a lot less interested. People paid attention with the Reagan-Carter debates in 1980. But we will see.

 

[Pythagorean]

It seemed like Obama thought he was just going to coast through it and didn't expect Romney to have upped his public speaking game so much. Romney came out really strong and Obama tried to just play it cool.

No new insights about their campaigns really came out of this debate. It's basically everything that's being going on in their campaigning, just face to face.

 

[KiwiKid]

Nah. Most people won't even watch the debates and have already made up their minds, very few are swayed by debates in this sort of situation. We have a known and an unpredictable unknown, IMO. Not much will have changed.

Not sure if you're speaking solely about elections in the USA, but if not, I have a comment. During the election a month ago here (in the Netherlands), debates really *did* matter. The socialist party held about 40 seats in parliament in the polls, with the labour party having only 15 or so, but they pretty much switched places after a debate or two. The labour party is now the second-biggest party in the Netherlands.

Of course, I'm not sure whether any of this applies to the USA. We don't have only two parties (some would say we have too many), so there generally are fewer people being totally cool about one party, and totally hating another (and thus making debates not matter). It happens, but perhaps not as much as in the USA. There's also the fact that the socialist party and the labour party switched places, of course, and those aren't *that* far apart. It would be much more strange if the people's party for freedom and democracy (a more right party... in European terms) switched with the socialist party, for example.