Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

From the time of the debate, I have always wondered what Obama's advisors thought was the best strategy. History has shown that the challenger wins the first debate no matter what, which is followed by a post debate bump in the polls. Its pretty easy for a candidate to attack an encumbant by highlighting the failures of the last four years. But it is difficult for the encumbant to do the same especially when the opposition changes (lies) about their position. The debate did force Romney to make statements about his policies (although he still did not offer many details). Therefor, I do think there is a component of strategy to what happened.

 

I find the statements regarding altitude a bit pathetic. If there were only windows in that auditorium that could be opened...

Posted

I agree, although I don't think Obama really had that "bad" of a day. I think it isn't his style to be an attack dog and he doesn't speak quickly. He is "professorial". Since everyone understands the Mitt isn't a dribbling idiot and is capable of talking, the expectations are more realistic now.

If the president goes after Romney every time he says something hypocritical or implausible or contradictory (like bashing Obama as elitist for going to Harvard), the president would quickly find himself only voicing negativity and looking like a bully instead of a leader. I think Romney's campaign knows this and continues to throw out absurdities to provoke Obama into lashing out.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.