My Take on the Obama-Romney Debate

[Updated to add supporting data]

The last 24+ hours have seen a non-stop flurry of “OMG! Romney won the debate!” hand-wringing from the left. But Romney did NOT win the debate. He may have won the beauty contest portion, but that’s not the part that mattered.

Obama’s debate performance was exactly what was needed for the important goal of winning the election, even if it didn’t give those on the left the sense of satisfaction we might have felt if we’d been able to bash Mitt by proxy.

The right-wing’s machine had spent the entire week setting the stage for the “angry black man” attack strategy (thus the 8 year old video “surfaced” by Drudge of Obama speaking passionately to [gasp!] black people prior to the debate).

Obama completely killed their post-debate dog-whistle plans by being calm, professional, and honest. And in the process, he dramatically increased his approval rating AND his lead among independents. Romney gained only among republicans, who were going to vote for him, anyway.

Romney led 48 percent to 42 among independents in a Pew Research survey from April, which showed Obama ahead by 4 points nationally. Pew’s latest poll shows Obama overtaking Romney 44 percent to 42 among independents and opening up a 7-point lead nationally.

So in the only important measure – gaining among those who will swing the election – Obama won hands down, while also screwing up the pre-prepped ad campaigns from the opposing team. It was a two-fer.

Folks can stop wringing their hands, now.

22 thoughts on “My Take on the Obama-Romney Debate

  1. that drops the number below 8% has left the GOP scrambling for a message.

    What do they come up with?  Why conspiracy, of course!

    The Party of Smoke and Mirrors resorts, once again, to tinfoil hat logic as their only way to explain data that is unfavorable to their candidate.

  2. inititally thought Romney was stronger, but afterward I came to the conclusion that Obama came out ahead. There was only one presidential man on the stage and it was Obama. Romney still didn’t provide any facts while at least Obama tried to show why a plan may or may not work and he did it in a calm and collected manner. Obama dealt with the manic the way most should deal with a manic.

    One comment that I haven’t heard much in the press was the one where Romney said something like “the rich will be fine under my plan and under Obama’s plan”. To me that says that he agrees Obama tax rates are harmless to the rich.    

  3. had defended himself he would have been considered an Angry Black Man?   And the people who would have considered him an Angry Black Man would have voted for him in the first place?  Is it not possible for a politician to tell truth and also win election?

  4. Pet-peeve. Definitely.

    The polls you cite equal one thing, other polls have shown a post-debate bounce for Romney, others now show that bounce easing.Snap polls also showed Obama had the worst debate performance in the history of snap polls.

    All of these mean something. No one is “hand wringing” on this stuff. They just hold Obama to a higher standard than what he delivered. The fact that his favorables continue to rise and that the head-to-heads are returning to form is not a sign that he didn’t do a lousy job at the debate. You have to dismiss the other polls to conclude that.

    The unified field theory here is that the electorate is hyper-polarized and largely locked in. Everyone noted that he did a lousy job, but at the end of the day it didn’t change much.

    But taking that for granted would be dumb. He cant just expect to phone it in. If he screws up the next debate, what had been an episode of apparent ineptitude turns into the beginnings of a pattern of ineptitude…. and a pattern equals a new Obama narrative. And that would sink him.

    As long as he comes back strong next time, no problem – if, on the other hand, he bombs out again, you’ll start seeing the concerns of the “hand-wringers” become reality.

Comments are closed.