Presidential Debate #1 Observations

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

This thread focuses on observations related to the first Presidential Debate, scheduled for October 3rd. Participants share pre-debate thoughts, commentary during the debate, and reflections on the candidates' performances, while emphasizing the importance of keeping discussions centered on the debate itself rather than broader political issues.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that both candidates are attempting to lower expectations ahead of the debate to make their performances appear more impressive.
  • It is suggested that incumbents have an advantage in elections, but challengers may perform better in debates due to having no record to defend, although this can backfire if they are overly aggressive.
  • Concerns are raised about the effectiveness of the debates in influencing voter opinions, with some questioning whether anyone truly changes their views based on what is said.
  • Participants express skepticism regarding the candidates' plans to support the middle class and education, questioning the specifics of their proposals.
  • There are mixed opinions on the candidates' performances, with some feeling that Obama could have been more aggressive and others believing Romney performed slightly better.
  • Several participants express frustration with the debate format, noting that candidates often do not adequately address each other's arguments or provide clear solutions.
  • Links to opinion pieces are shared, highlighting questions that could be posed to the candidates regarding the economy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express a range of opinions about the candidates' performances and the effectiveness of the debate format. There is no clear consensus on who performed better or whether the debates will influence voter opinions significantly.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention the lack of clarity in the candidates' plans and the potential for misleading statements during the debate. There are also references to the debate's relevance to different audiences, including those outside the U.S.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to individuals following U.S. politics, particularly those interested in the dynamics of presidential debates and their impact on public opinion.

Greg Bernhardt
Admin
Insights Author
Messages
19,910
Reaction score
10,919
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 :)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
9pm tomorrow, you should clarify.
 
Greg Bernhardt said:
Please keep debate of issues to a minimum.
After all, they will.
 
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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jack21222 said:
9pm tomorrow, you should clarify.

added, thanks!

Jimmy Snyder said:
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?
 
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
 
Last edited:
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 said:
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
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
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?
 
  • #12
Greg Bernhardt said:
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.
 
  • #13
I watched only first 15 minutes or so. Got bored when they appeared not to be properly addressing each other arguments.
 
  • #14
I can't watch anymore. Too much spinning. Including "facts" that are unsupported.
 
  • #15
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...
 
  • #16
Gale said:
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.
 
  • #17
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.
 
  • #18
Gale said:
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. . .
 
  • #19
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? :frown:
 
  • #20
Astronuc said:
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? :frown:

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
 
  • #21
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.
 
  • #22
Astronuc said:
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? :frown:

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.
 
  • #23
Jack21222 said:
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...
 
  • #24
Astronuc said:
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? :frown:
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.
 
  • #25
Astronuc said:
Is there another choice? :frown:

China
 
  • #26
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.
 
Last edited:
  • #27
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.
 
  • #28
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.
 
  • #29
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!
 
  • #30
Gale said:
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.
 

Similar threads

News USA Final 2012 Presidential Debate (#3) Observations
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
12K
News USA Presidential Debate #2 Observations
  • · Replies 133 ·
5
Replies
133
Views
15K
News Does 'pack journalism' shape the science news we read?
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
News Stop "Fox News North" - Avaaz.org 21M Global Campaign Network
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Programs Really need advice on what to major in
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
April Fool's Physics Papers 2026
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
404
News UK Diplomats slam Blair on Mid-East
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
News Bush Honest & Trustworthy Until How Many Lies?
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
12K
News Using M.R.I.'s to See Politics on the Brain
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
News Separation of Church and State May God Bless the rest of us?
  • · Replies 99 ·
4
Replies
99
Views
13K