Romney was hungry, Obama was flat (CNN)
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/04/opinion/gergen-debate-upset/index.html
Editor’s note: David Gergen is a senior political analyst for CNN and has been an adviser to four presidents. A graduate of Harvard Law School, he is a professor of public service and director of the Center for Public Leadership at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government. Follow him on Twitter.
(CNN) – What an upset!
Before the first presidential debate, voters were telling CNN by nearly a 2-1 margin that they expected an Obama victory. Many commentators were ready to hold a coronation for the president. Now, by more than a 2-1 margin, voters who watched the debate are saying that Mitt Romney won it — and we have a horse race on our hands.
Romney was one of the two big surprises of the night. His performance was head and shoulders above anything he has displayed so far. He drove the debate, had a coherent message that focused on jobs, showed a superior command of detail, was empathetic toward people hurting, and looked the president in the eye. He came in hungry.
President Obama was the other surprise. He was unusually flat, failed to go after Romney on point after point (47%, Bain, corporations are people, etc., etc.), rarely looked Romney in the eye, and seemed annoyed.
My hunch is that no one has talked to him like this since his election (except maybe Bibi Netanyahu), and he was shocked that Romney denied he had ever proposed a huge cut in taxes (which he has). The net result was that Obama seemed to withdraw emotionally just when he should have launched a counteroffensive.
We won’t know until the dust settles whether Romney has truly shaken up the race. After all, John Kerry as challenger beat President George W. Bush in debates and lost the election.
In this case, Democrats are already charging foul against Romney for misstating facts. More to the point, we know from the past that incumbent presidents often come into a first debate a little complacent, lose, and then come roaring back in a second encounter (think Reagan 1984). Obama is highly competitive and will surely be loaded for bear next time.
But the first night goes down as a big upset for Romney — and it is now more likely that this race will go down to the wire.
5 Responses to Romney was hungry, Obama was flat (CNN)
-
Jeff Swanson says:
Sir
Thanks for your sensible commentary concerning the debate, with just enough analysis to inspire us to really think about what was said….and how the comments were perceived. We depend on you for such wise and balanced commentary. You do not try to tell us what to think. Rather, you offer insight which helps us think deeper about the process of politics. Thanks!! -
William Blaylock says:
What is more arrogant: Assuming 47% of the population are victims and will never vote for you, or assuming 47% of the population is so stupid that they will vote for you no matter what? No one, not even Sarah Palin or John Edwards, has been so unprepared for a debate in the history of American politics. It was a disgrace and an insult to the citizens of this country. Last night, the “President” was standing on the left side of the stage. Wake up America! Obama will never recover from this one.
-
And to make my point an Ohio poll just came out where President Obama was 9 points ahead last week has closed to just 1 point today. I don’t remember but did John Kerry get a 8 point bump in the polls after his debate?
And to Jeff’s point that you don’t try to tell us what you think, Really Jeff? Did you not read his comments about how he THOUGHT President Obama should have gone after Romney on point after point (47%, Bain, corporations are people, etc., etc.)
My guess is that Romney was more prepared for the areas he was most vulnerable and would have turned it around on Obama failed presidency.
But it looks as if Obama believed the rhetoric that you and the rest of the liberal media are throwing out there about Romney which left him completely unprepared.
-
Dear Mr. Gergen,
I always appreciate hearing your thoughtful comments. I would believe that Obama could have benefitted from a tougher practice stand in – say Bill Clinton. What concerns me is that Mitt Romney’s switching positions & beliefs seemingly on whim as well as his history as ‘vulture capitalist’ are consistent with cluster B personality: such as antisocial & narcissistic type. Would you look into this?
You are a fool and an idiot when you say. We won’t know until the dust settles whether Romney has truly shaken up the race. After all, John Kerry as challenger beat President George W. Bush in debates and lost the election. Can you say Swift Boat? In 2004 did Bush make the worst economy since the great depression even worse? No he looked Presidential in a time of war while you liberal commentators proudly announced every military hero that died in the war in an effort to make Bush look bad and mysteriously stopped even acknowledging there was any war going on once President Obama took office. I don’t think that Hitler got any better press than you guys give Obama.