- Joined
- Jul 29, 2009
- Messages
- 34,478
- Reaction score
- 17,282
- Location
- Southwestern U.S.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
For voters, all 3 debates had different purposes:
* The first debate was all about Romney... Who he was and whether he was for real or not. He passed with flying colors and changed the entire race.
* The second debate was about both candidates. Was the first performance by both just a fluke, could the president bounce back, and could Romney stand strong? The answer was "no" it wasn't a fluke and "yes" on the other 2, and that's precisely why the polls didn't change and it didn't effRomney'sneys momentum.
* I believe fhe 3rd debate was more about Obama than it was about Romney though. I think many unhappy 2008 Obama supporters were looking for a reason to support him again. Looking for some reason to justify giving him another chance in spite of the economic failures. In my opinion, that would have required a Romney melt down combined with a strong performance by Obama, and that didn't happen. Yes Obama did give a strong performance, but once again Romney held his own and looked very presidential.
The bottom line on what the debates accomplished:
* Romney effectively made the case that he is qualified to be president. He conducted himself well, has the experience necessary, a history of working with both parties, and a track record of success that instills confidence in voters.
* Except for the first debate Obama held his own, but it wasn't enough in my opinion to overcome what can only be described as a misguided (his focus on Obamacare rather than jobs & the economy) and ultimately failed first term as president.
Conclusion:
These debates without a doubt decided the upcoming election and I think that decision will mean we have a new president the next 4 years. Mitt Romney wins.
* The first debate was all about Romney... Who he was and whether he was for real or not. He passed with flying colors and changed the entire race.
* The second debate was about both candidates. Was the first performance by both just a fluke, could the president bounce back, and could Romney stand strong? The answer was "no" it wasn't a fluke and "yes" on the other 2, and that's precisely why the polls didn't change and it didn't effRomney'sneys momentum.
* I believe fhe 3rd debate was more about Obama than it was about Romney though. I think many unhappy 2008 Obama supporters were looking for a reason to support him again. Looking for some reason to justify giving him another chance in spite of the economic failures. In my opinion, that would have required a Romney melt down combined with a strong performance by Obama, and that didn't happen. Yes Obama did give a strong performance, but once again Romney held his own and looked very presidential.
The bottom line on what the debates accomplished:
* Romney effectively made the case that he is qualified to be president. He conducted himself well, has the experience necessary, a history of working with both parties, and a track record of success that instills confidence in voters.
* Except for the first debate Obama held his own, but it wasn't enough in my opinion to overcome what can only be described as a misguided (his focus on Obamacare rather than jobs & the economy) and ultimately failed first term as president.
Conclusion:
These debates without a doubt decided the upcoming election and I think that decision will mean we have a new president the next 4 years. Mitt Romney wins.