Democrats who think Obama won the debate are just whistling past the graveyard. Obama did a very poor job of defending himself and let Romney get away with whatever he wanted to say.

Where Obama missed:
* Not a single mention of the 20+ months of consecutive job growth after inheriting an economy which was losing 700,000 jobs per month.
* Not a mention of the fact that the $716 billion in Medicare "cuts" Romney was hanging around his neck are also in the Ryan budget.
* He let Romney paint him as a tax & spend liberal without noting that spending growth has been slower under his presidency than any of the previous 6 or 7 administration.
* He allowed Romney to say that Obama has killed domestic energy production without pointing out that things were slowed down due to the Macondo incident. A brief reminder of recent history would have been helpful here. All he had to say was he was in favor of developing domestic resources responsibly.
* He allowed Romney to claim that Massachussets has the #1 school system in the country without noting that Massachussets has had one of the top school systems in the country for decades--it was a perfect opening to point out that Romney was born on 3rd base and claimed he hit a triple. Obama could have crushed him here claiming it was the Democrats who controled Massachusetts for decades which built the school system. He could have even said "You didn't build that."
* He then allowed Romney to paint a pretty picture of vouchers and grading schools without pointing out that Massachusetts does not have a voucher program. He could have simply asked, "why are you promoting a program for the nation which the best educational system in the nation doesn't use?"

Even in the closing remarks, Obama was laconic. Here is an area where Obama could easily have a prepared speech, use his rhetorical skills, and paint a vision of where the nation should go. Instead he kind of said the next 4 years will be a slog like the last 4.

Romney did a very good job in form, if not substance. He made the same "ice cream and candy for everyone" argument that George W Bush made in 2000.
* We won't cut Medicare, in fact, we'll put $700 billion more into it.
* We won't cut the Military, in fact, we'll increase spending.
* We will cut taxes for everyone (even the 47% who don't pay?)
* Oh, and somehow, magically, the deficit will go down, because we always say that is very important.
* Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, oil & gas permitting, clean energy--all of the current rules will be eliminated and replace with what? Well, we won't give you any details, but it will be perfect!

Yet, because Obama let him say it without a strong rebuttal, he got away with it all.

I expect we will find the electoral map in much more doubt by the end of the weekend.

Good analysis of lost opportunities; I, too, was disappointed and gave Flip the "win" in the debate.

There are Democrats who thought Obama won?

"There are Democrats who thought Obama won?"

Are there? I thought he "lost" the first debate battle but gathered a ton of information to win the war.

Ken

Are there? I thought he "lost" the first debate battle but gathered a ton of information to win the war.

__________

Now that sounds like spin.

I hope he gathered something, possibly learned something.

"Look, we've had the worst recession since the last depression", just doesn't cut it.

Obama throws out some stuff, and he lets his herd of cats fight over the nasty details. As far as he's concerned, his throwing out some ideology is when his job ends. If need be, Obama can always get out and give a vague speech here and there, but he rarely communicates with those in the trenches.

I don;t think I've ever seen a President so far away from the action. From getting his daily briefings back in the office on an iPad, to wondering what's actually happened during his first term.

Now he confronts a warrior ex-CEO, that is used to leading, always followed up in the trenches, and comes out aggressively. Obama's simply a back room guy, not a President.

I expect we will find the electoral map in much more doubt by the end of the weekend.

Talk about a little over-reaction.

This was the worst showing in a debate since Kerry flattened Bush (I mean he wiped him out) in their first debate.

On the other hand, I think we can all agree that the President Kerry and his administration went on to to a wonderful job for America.

Chill. This was always going to be close and there is a LONG way to go.

AW

Talk about a little over-reaction.

I didn't say it was over, but those battle ground states are going to be much more in doubt now.

Good point about Kerry beating Bush in the debates. He clearly won all 3 debates and it still didn't bring him victory.

However, I have to say, Obama got beaten much worse than Bush. As a single event for the Obama team, it was a disaster.

And a couple more items:

* Obama never reached out to women--he could have used the "role of government" question to highlight the Lilly Leadbetter Act and pointed out that Romney opposes equal pay for women.

* Obama never reached out to hispanics--saying that the role of government is to manage the immigration process, highlighting the Dream Act and how Romney opposes it.

* He tried to use Bill Clinton's "it's math" line, but he didn't back it up. More spending, lower taxes, unidentified loopholes being closed does not equal a lower deficit. Something to that effect.

Yes. Obama had many opportunities that he did not capitalize on.

On the plus side, there's a lot to now talk about on the stump before the next debate and in campaign messages.

As someone here said, you never knew which Mitt was talking, and that seemed to put Obama off. Could be Kerry was not a good preparatory sparring partner - probably brought too much gentlemanly Kerry and not enough flip/flop lying Romney to the training bouts.

Ken

Romney won on style points, but dishonestly. The stupid are jumping up and down and banging their chests over the bully beating up the smart kid.

The debate was a microcosm of the R-Money dishonest campaign as a whole, say whatever you think the audience want to hear at that moment, regardless of anything you've said in the past. The telling moment was when Obama went after the $8 trillion Romney deficit increase and he acted like Obama was the one with the facts wrong. Romney imaginary plan 17B has no such $5 trillion tax cut, it cuts taxes and cuts the deficit with magic. Obama was clearly struggling to keep his cool as Romney flipped and flopped all over the stage like a boatload of Asian Carp and Obama couldn't pin him down. He loves Obamacare again and would keep all the good parts while making it better with a magic wand. He also took credit for Massachusetts education, when his whole term made the state worse, 47th in job creation.

I am sick that the whole campaign comes down to this, but I honestly never expected Obama to be able to overcome the lies and money. Now, lies swung the momentum back the other way. If Romney wins, America will get what swing voters deserve for failing to educate themselves on the issues.

"Good point about Kerry beating Bush in the debates. He clearly won all 3 debates and it still didn't bring him victory."

That is because the right wing media loved the man-child Bush. They also love Romney. Never underestimate the power of the right wing media.

Bleh.

"The stupid are jumping up and down and banging their chests over the bully beating up the smart kid."

Obama's smart? With his record over the last 4 years and his desire to continue it another 4 years puts his smarts in question.

Nice bullet points. Unfortunately they aren't necessarily accurate.

You might want to check FactCheck. Obama did not defend because his record is indefensible. FactCheck shows that where he did try to defend, he exaggerated or simply lied, and did so MUCH more frequently than did Romney.

I know this is not a popular position on this highly partisan board, but, nonetheless, it is true, like it or not.

As someone here said, you never knew which Mitt was talking, and that seemed to put Obama off. Could be Kerry was not a good preparatory sparring partner - probably brought too much gentlemanly Kerry and not enough flip/flop lying Romney to the training bouts.

Ken
__________________

It's usually a lot easier to call people names and use little buzzwords, than it is to talk about Obama. Notice how nobody's really done that? Sure, we can blame Kerry, Jim Lehrer, Romney, the lighting, anything but Obama's lack of anything to talk about.

He's been President for almost 4 years now, time to discuss why he doesn't have anything more to say than what he failed to deliver already.

That is because the right wing media loved the man-child Bush. They also love Romney. Never underestimate the power of the right wing media.

Hahahahahahahahaha! That has to sound lame even to you.

"That is because the right wing media loved the man-child Bush. They also love Romney. Never underestimate the power of the right wing media.

Hahahahahahahahaha! That has to sound lame even to you. "

What is right wing media?
Fox? Where its company policy every conservative comment gets responded to by a liberal and vise versa? That's as close to 50/50 you will find in the media. But then again when the norm is about 80/20 liberal bias i can see how 50/50 seems right wing, lol...

Chill. This was always going to be close and there is a LONG way to go.

Agreed. Based on previous experience, Romney is good for at least 3-4 major gaffes before the election.

I think that President Obama went into the debate with a faulty game plan. He was obviously too reserved. He quietly stated some (if not all) of the facts.

People obviously aren't interested in the facts. They want a show. This reminds me of the Reagan-Carter debate when I couldn't BELIEVE that the majority of watchers thought that Reagan won. At least Reagan was an accomplished actor, so that part makes sense.

How Robo-Mitt managed to convince people that he is, in fact, a human being makes no sense to me.

But it ain't over 'til it's over.

Jack

"I think that President Obama went into the debate with a faulty game plan. He was obviously too reserved. He quietly stated some (if not all) of the facts. "

Actually

Factcheck is hammering Obama (not Romney) about things said in the debate, care to retract your statement?

* Obama never reached out to women--he could have used the "role of government" question to highlight the Lilly Leadbetter Act and pointed out that Romney opposes equal pay for women

This is a good point, and one they are likely to correct next time.

I watched the debate on CNN and there was a fairly consistent gender gap for women in favor of Obama when he spoke about healthcare. He did a lousy job of making a personal connection when talking about such.

"Factcheck is hammering Obama (not Romney) about things said in the debate, care to retract your statement?"

Seems to me that Factcheck hammered both of them fairly equally.

Good point about Kerry beating Bush in the debates. He clearly won all 3 debates and it still didn't bring him victory.

But that is only because Kerry had so much farther to go to catch up to Bush. Look at the trend line here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/how-much...

You will see that in all other elections since Kennedy, the winner of the debates won the election. Kerry had significant gains on Bush after his wins but it was simply too late. There was an 8-point swing in Kerry's favor from the first debate to the last.

Bush beat Gore with an 11 pt swing after the debates.

Obama beat McCain with a 7 pt swing after the debates.

And of course Reagan beat Carter with 9 pt swing after the one debate.