- Special Sections
- Public Notices
On Oct. 3, the first of three presidential debates between President Barack Obama and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney took place.
During the debate, we witnessed two very different men with two different ideas for the future of America. However, I feel that neither of the two candidates truly gave any details for how they were going to accomplish their policies.
During their discourse, neither candidate seemed to answer any of the questions posed to them and spent most of the debate returning to the same subjects. It was almost as if both presidential candidates had prepared what they wished to say during the debate and did not plan on answering questions.
Nonetheless, unlike Obama, Romney somehow managed to introduce his points in a way that made it appear as if he were answering the questions, while Obama appeared to be utterly lost as he rambled on, without any attempt to answer the questions posed to him.
Overall, the media have made it clear that Romney won this first debate, which is not uncommon for a challenger.
My first impression was that I disagreed with the general consensus, but on second thought, after having watched the debate a second time, it was apparent that the media’s perception was true. During the debate Romney was very aggressive, he repeatedly spoke over the moderator and also interrupted the president a few times, but what made his arguments and lectures effective was his conviction.
Romney was able to speak with such certainty of his facts that few took time to question them, including the president himself.
Overall, Obama seemed out of touch in his debate with the governor.
He rarely looked at his opponent and spent most of his time either speaking to the camera or simply looking down at his notes. The problem with Obama’s strategy — that is if there was one — was that he appeared weak. Instead of standing up for what he believed in, he simply smiled cynically.
The problem with the president’s approach toward the debate was that he had no enthusiasm. We saw none of the avid campaigner that fired up crowds and won a decisive victory in 2008. The shocking thing was that the next day, just after his dreadful performance, Obama was back to being his inspirational self when he returned to the campaign trail.
The debate was very unfocused, repetitive and overall quite boring, and as far as debates go, it was bad.
Although, obviously, the challenger’s performance during the debate was far better than that of the president, I do not believe that the debate has truly given either candidate a major advantage.
We still have about a month of campaigning, during which we will have two more debates between the candidates, where anything could take place.