Second Debate: My Take

Didn’t get to see all of last night’s debate due to prior commitments but saw enough and various clips to get a good feel for it.

First, here’s two opinions from two bright men of the right.

Charles Krauthammer:

“Obama clearly had a good night,” Krauthammer said, asserting that on points, President Obama won the debate. “When Romney went large he did well, when Romney went small […] Obama got the better of him.”

Mark Levin:

Charles Krauthammer and his followers today are wrong. Obama did not win the debate on points or edge out Romney. Based on what? Obama could not defend his awful record, which Romney repeatedly hammered. In fact, Obama lied about his supposed role in increasing oil and gas production. He lied about creating jobs. He lied about Romney’s position on women’s access to health care. Does that give Obama the edge?

Obama sounded like a fool on the terrorist attack on Libya. Candy Crowley tried to rescue him with her own dishonest statement and intervention. But Romney nailed Obama. In fact, Obama’s false assertion and Crowley’s abuse of her role are the big topics of discussion this morning. And Obama was often angry and disregarded the rules and the clock.

So, on what basis did Obama edge out Romney? This debate changes nothing and Obama is stuck with his record. 

Here’s the thing: they’re both right. Sounds wishy-washy but they’re coming from two different, yet correct, perspectives. Krauthammer is giving the perspective on how the debate will play with the public as a whole both rational and irrational; a public that looks at things not always based on facts but rather like a boxing match where a punch is a punch even if there’s not much power behind it. Levin on the other hand is analyzing this from a purely logical point of view looking at the facts and less the presentation.

Bottom line, Romney went into this debate ahead of the game. He just had to not lose it in order to keep his momentum going. Obama excited his base but that’s chump-change in the grand scheme. All Obama has to worry about with his base is turnout. To win this election you need to get the independents and even with Obama’s “fiery” performance, Romney still wins them over on economic issues. As important as I think Libya is, the economy is still where this race is gonna be won or lost. After last night, advantage is still Romney’s. Now he needs to run some effective ads that make the points he wasn’t able to make at the debate.

Early voting starts Saturday here in Nevada. Get out there!

UPDATE: Great minds…what do they do? They think alike.

Advertisements

One thought on “Second Debate: My Take

  1. I thought Stephen Green had the most insightful comment of the night,, and the more I think about it (and the more I see of feminists in binder costumes, the more I think he's right:"So did Obama blunt Romney’s surge?My first thought is: No.Before the Denver debate, people had been looking for permission, for lack of a better word, to vote for the new guy. Because they knew the old guy, and they’d settle for him if they had to, but they weren’t really looking forward to FORE MOAR YEERZ. And Romney stepped up gave them that permission.Obama’s job was tougher: To win back people he lost in Denver. He might have gotten some of them back. And it’s for sure he energized the base tonight.But when someone is looking for a reason to leave, finally finds that reason — how do you win them back?I don’t know. And I’m not sure Obama knows, either."

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s