First Presidential Debate

[Fox 6]

Literal binders full?

[TheGame]

From just watching it, looks like Obama won the 2nd debate. But haven't had time to read over the fact checks yet. Obama was much more agressive, and the moderator was a bit more in control.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by TheGame

From just watching it, looks like Obama won the 2nd debate. But haven't had time to read over the fact checks yet. Obama was much more agressive, and the moderator was a bit more in control.

Ok after reading the fact checks, it even looks worse for Romney. I'm assuming Obama will win the third debate since it's only on forgein policy.

[Bond]

The debate seemed like a draw to me, with perhaps a slight edge to Obama.

I think Obama's campaign made two major tactical errors that may cost them the election: (1) Opting to label Romney an extreme conservative (which he's not) instead of a flip-flopper (which he is) and (2) failing to offer a plan for growth for the next four years / why the next four years will be any better.

[Vampyr]

Originally Posted by Bond

The debate seemed like a draw to me, with perhaps a slight edge to Obama.

I think Obama's campaign made two major tactical errors that may cost them the election: (1) Opting to label Romney an extreme conservative (which he's not) instead of a flip-flopper (which he is) and (2) failing to offer a plan for growth for the next four years / why the next four years will be any better.

I have been consistently surprised that Obama ignored every opportunity to call Romney out on changing his opinion on various things. No idea why they haven't done that.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Bond

(2) failing to offer a plan for growth for the next four years / why the next four years will be any better.

This, I think, is Pres. Obama's greatest failure in these debates. As simplistic as Pres. Obama wants to call Romney's plan, Romney has presented a plan while Pres. Obama has accepted the default position of the status quo.

Also, I think Romney's arguments on the economy have been far more effective than the President's. Even the CNN poll says that while Romney lost the debate, he won the economic portion by a landslide. In this voting environment, I think this will be weighted more heavily than Romney's "Binder full of women".

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Vampyr

I have been consistently surprised that Obama ignored every opportunity to call Romney out on changing his opinion on various things. No idea why they haven't done that.

It is quite puzzling, especially considering how effective the flip-flopper attack was for Bush against Kerry in 2004.

Originally Posted by Professor S

This, I think, is Pres. Obama's greatest failure in these debates. As simplistic as Pres. Obama wants to call Romney's plan, Romney has presented a plan while Pres. Obama has accepted the default position of the status quo.

Also, I think Romney's arguments on the economy have been far more effective than the President's. Even the CNN poll says that while Romney lost the debate, he won the economic portion by a landslide. In this voting environment, I think this will be weighted more heavily than Romney's "Binder full of women".

I agree. Karl Rove noted in the WSJ yesterday that the Obama campaign is switching from almost entirely negative advertising to almost entirely positive advertising, but I think it is too late. Short of a colossal world event or Romney implosion, I don't see anything taking away the momentum he gained in the first presidential debate.

[Professor S]

Another big mistake that Pres. Obama's mocking tone to his advertisements post-debates. So far he and his surrogates have attacked Romney's stance on Big Bird and female binders. These are funny, but I don't think they are effective.

In fact, I think the "Binders" comment, while a funny choice of words, is actually hurting Pres. Obama. Here is why:

There are two audiences who are going to hear the "Binders" talking-point from the left:

1) Those who saw the debate

2) Those who didn't see the debate

Those who saw the debate know that this was a poor choice of words, but that the context was then Gov. Romney attempting to create a more diverse government leadership. This was also the strongest part of his answer to a questions he basically avoided.

Those who didn't see the debate aren't going to know what the hell "Binders full of women" means, and either they will dismiss it or look for the context, and see that it is a positive image of Romney.

Here is the thing: Romney completely DODGED THE QUESTION because his real answer is not attractive in a debate setting, or election for that matter. Instead of going after the fact that Romney dodged the question, Pres. Obama's campaign is trying to latch on to an obtuse quote that actually draws attention to the only part of Romney's answer that could put him in a favorable light!

In the end, "Binders full of women" makes Romney look sympathetic to women!

[Bond]

I think the "binders" attack will be about as effective as the "Big Bird" ad. All of these trivial and lame attacks make the President appear small and un-presidential (especially when one considers these attacks are not coming from PACs, but rather directly from the Obama campaign).

It's also worth nothing the October jobs report will be released a few days before the election. I wouldn't be surprised if last month ends up being a statistical anomaly, and that the unemployment rate goes back up to 8.0% or higher.

[TheGame]

You guys are nit picking on Obama (Prof/Bond) but I think that Obama won this debate on every level. To me the coffin was nailed when they got to forgien policy, and Mitt got fact checked by the moderator. But even well before that Obama looked better in my opinion.

I have a feeling this election won't be as close as the media is making it out to be.

-EDIT-

Unless some type of financial meltdown happens in the next few weeks. If that happens, Obama is done.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by TheGame

You guys are nit picking on Obama (Prof/Bond) but I think that Obama won this debate on every level. To me the coffin was nailed when they got to forgien policy, and Mitt got fact checked by the moderator. But even well before that Obama looked better in my opinion.

I have a feeling this election won't be as close as the media is making it out to be.

-EDIT-

Unless some type of financial meltdown happens in the next few weeks. If that happens, Obama is done.

It's all opinion, so you can certainly feel that way. I think Pres. Obama had a solid win if measured topic by topic, but it was by no means a clean sweep. Romney is still much more effective regarding the economy, and polling numbers show this.

Overall, I've been thinking about Romney's surge for a few days, and Pres. Obama's campaign made a huge miscalculation: They made their campaign about the Romney the person, and not his views. Many of the ads they have put out concentrated on Bain painted him as a heartless person who ruined lives without a care, and even implied he killed someone with cancer. They painted Romney as a bad person, and not simply a bad governor or choice for president. In fact, the campaign has barely addressed Romney's public service record other than to applaud his HC plan.

When the debates took place, and not only did Romney come off as a reasonably compassionate person, but both Pres. Obama and VP Biden SAID HE WAS A GOOD PERSON in the debates when pressed. Their own words invalidated the implied content of most of their effective advertising.

[The Germanator]

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

Swing states polls still holding pretty well for Obama. Lots are pretty close obviously, but Nate Silver is a pretty smart guy and he seems to have a pretty good feel for the race statistically. Until his Electoral forecast actually swings in Romney's favor, I won't get too worried.

[Bond]

RCP provides a better aggregation (aka. higher standards) of the polls in my view: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...llege_map.html

[The Germanator]

Originally Posted by Bond

RCP provides a better aggregation (aka. higher standards) of the polls in my view: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...llege_map.html

Hmm, well...I know Silver got 49/50 right in 2008. I find it a little funny in that map that they give a "likely GOP" to states (AZ, NC) that Romney leads by 5.3% and 5.6% respectively, but they don't give that same designation to the two states (PA, MI) that Obama leads by exactly 5% each. Those states are worth 36 electoral votes. Maybe 5% is their cut-off for what is a "toss-up" but it's slightly misleading.

[Bond]

I suppose that's fair, but I think any cutoff between "toss-up" and "likely / leaning" will necessarily be arbitrary.

I like RCP because it's nonpartisan and only aggregates polls that poll consistently, survey likely voters, and come from reputable sources.