Posted on 10/17/2012 1:04:21 AM PDT by ETL
When the evening began, one observation dominated the conversation: “If President Barack Obama has another debate like the last one, the election’s over.”
When the evening ended, I was struck by a different thought: If Obama had performed this way at the first debate, the election would have been over.
In every debate, whatever the format, whatever the questions, there is one and only one way to identify the winner: Who commands the room? Who drives the narrative? Who is in charge? More often than not on Tuesday night, I think, Obama had the better of it.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Jeff Greenfield is a Yahoo! News columnist and the host of “Need to Know” on PBS. A five-time Emmy winner, he has spent more than 30 years on network television, including time as the senior political correspondent for CBS News, the senior analyst for CNN, and the political and media analyst for ABC News. His most recent book is "Then Everything Changed: Stunning Alternate Histories of American Politics."
Get a room!
how does anyone figure obama won ..he couldnt even win with the moderator debating for him.
Barf!
The extra ten minutes Obama got in the first hour where he lied non stop mattered. Overall it was a draw.
BS ...Obama did not win this debate , he lied his way thru it and as the Fact Check’s kick in it will look worse and worse for him . People are tired of his BS and they just don’t buy the snake oil anymore . BIG difference between what he says and what he does , or doesn’t do .
From the same article:
“In a larger sense, however, Obama’s success is unlikely to have anything like the impact of that 1980 debate, nor will it likely alter the terrain of the campaign as the first debate of 2012 did. Had the Obama of this debate showed up two weeks ago, he might well have ended Romney’s effort to present himself as a credible alternative to the president.
That opportunity vanished that night. While it’s clear that Obama’s performance will revive the enthusiasm of his supporters, it seems unlikely that it will cause those impressed by Romney to reconsider. Like they say in show business, timing is everything.”
Apparently Greenfield hasn't heard about the results of tonight's Frank Luntz focal group.
Frank Luntz focus group of mostly of former Obama voters say they now support Mitt Romney
"A Frank Luntz focus group made up mostly of former Obama voters say they now support Mitt Romney."
"Forceful, compassionate, presidential," one participant said.
"Confident and realistic," said another.
"Presidential," another told Luntz.
"Enthusiastic," another reacted.
"Our next president," one man said.
"Dynamo, winner," said one more."He's lied about everything. He lied to get elected in 2008, that's why I voted for him.
I bought his bull. And he's lied about everything, he hasn't come through on anything.
And he's been bullsh***ing the public," one member of the focus group said."
I don’t agree.
It won’t change the momentum of the race that favors Romney.
And few are interested in foreign policy, the last debate to be held next week. It comes up against Monday Night football.
Obama needed a Hail Mary play and at best he drew even.
That’s a loss in his book. When you’re losing, you’ll clutch at anything in desperation.
It looked that way four years ago when Obama beat McCain in their debates and Republican partisans made excuses for their candidate.
Now the Obamaniks are rehearsing them for theirs. You know what its like to be at a political funeral. Its not a pretty sight.
Jeff, nice try there but no cigar for your spin. Its already yesterday’s news.
Thanks! Will check it out.
I sincerely hope many more than you think are interested in it. Because Romney should mop the floor with "flexibility" Obama on foreign policy, that treasonous, America-hating, Israel-hating, islamo-fascist-supporting, Russia-appeasing, commie SOB.
Oh well, someone has to try this...
No... Obama did not win. At very best it was a tie, but everything I have read so far indicates that Romney came out slightly ahead and the moderator is becoming the story due to her blatant favoritism.
Focus groups were aware that she was intending to act outside her assigned role, so they noticed when she did. She damaged her credibility and the credibility of the debate forum, but it’s unlikely to do her or Obama much good in the long term.
Obama needed a knockout. He didn’t get it.
Advantage Romney.
Shove it, Greenfield. Your god did not win.
Romney won HANDILY. He was smooth, articulate, knowledgable, agile, and contradicted a good many lies with ability and conviction.
Obama was blustering, lying and verbose. He worked up a forceful outrage over Libya at one point and may have dominated except for Romney's refusal to be cowed; Romney came back and very effectively challenged what he said.
Clear winner was very definitely Romney despite the chatter saying otherwise.
Jeff Greenfield? He probably wrote the headline before the debate even started.
cute!
‘Xactly!
I made that up yesterday, prior to the debate.
No, it would have been a draw, you bed-wetting dweeb. Obama might have won on rhetoric but he would have lost on facts. In part, Romney won last week because many voters finally saw him without the filter of a corrupt news media. They saw the same Romney tonight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.