In Wednesday night's debate, Romney won on style while Obama won on
substance. Romney sounded as if he had conviction, which means he's
either convinced himself that the lies he tells are true or he's a
fabulous actor.
But what struck me most was how much Obama allowed Romney to get away
with: Five times Romney accused Obama of raiding Medicare of $716
billion, which is a complete fabrication. Obama never mentioned the
regressiveness of Romney's budget plan -- awarding the rich and hurting
the middle class and the poor. He never mentioned Bain Capital, or
Romney's 47 percent talk, or Romney's "carried-interest" tax loophole.
Obama allowed Romney to talk about replacing Dodd-Frank and the
Affordable Care Act without demanding that Romney be specific about what
he'd replace and why. And so on.
I've been worried about Obama's poor debate performance for some time
now. He was terrible in the 2008 primary debates, for example.
Expectations are always high -- he's known as an eloquent orator. But
when he has to think on his feet and punch back, he's not nearly as
confident or assured as he is when he is giving a speech or explaining a
large problem and its solution. He is an educator, not a pugilist, and
this puts him at a disadvantage in any debate.
Romney stayed on script. If you look at a transcript of his remarks
you'll see that he repeated the same lines almost word for word in
different contexts. He has memorized a bunch of lines, and practiced
delivering them. The overall effect is to make him seem assured and even
passionate about his position. He said over and over that he cares
about jobs, about small businesses, and ordinary Americans. But his
policies and his record at Bain tell a very different story.
The question now is whether Team Obama understands that our president
must be more aggressive and commanding in the next two debates -- and
be unafraid to respectfully pin Romney to the floor.
Enlarge Charlie Neibergall/AP Republican
presidential nominee Mitt Romney and President Obama talk after the
first presidential debate at the University of Denver on Wednesday.
Mitt Romney may have given his campaign something of a reset with his performance in the first debate against President Obama.
He
appeared more comfortable on stage than the incumbent, and was able at
least to lay the groundwork for a message of bipartisanship that could
appeal to remaining undecided voters.
Of
course, it's not clear yet whether the debate will create enough
momentum to offer Romney an advantage heading into the next debate, let
alone through Election Day. Perhaps some of the inevitable post-debate
fact checking will challenge Romney's credence on certain points.
But
it's notable that Obama failed to do much of that himself, launching
far fewer attacks during the debate than his aggressive campaign
advertising strategy suggested he might.
Here's a quick review of five takeaways from the first debate in Denver:
Obama Looked Tired And Sounded Defensive
Obama's
advisers noted before the debate that the president was having a hard
time finding much unbroken debate practice time, and much of what he did
have was devoted to boiling down his positions to fit the time limits.
All of this showed.
Romney looked straight at
his opponent, often wearing a confident Mona Lisa grin. Obama looked
down at his notes or over at the moderator, Jim Lehrer of PBS, only
occasionally looking directly into the camera.
Aside
from his body language, some of Obama's answers came across as wonky.
Both men offered laundry lists of their ideas, but Obama failed to craft
a compelling case for his own record or second-term agenda, instead
repeating complaints that he had inherited a mess.
What's
more, he failed to go after Romney aggressively. There was no mention
of Bain Capital or Romney's dismissive videotaped comments about the "47
percent" of Americans who are dependent on government.
Only
in the last 20 minutes of the 90-minute debate did Obama land much of a
blow, complaining that Romney was keeping the specifics about his tax
plans and his approaches to health care and banking regulation too much a
secret.
Romney Grasped The Mantle Of Bipartisanship
Romney
said he didn't want to lay out anything other than broad principles
during the campaign, because he found out as Massachusetts governor that
a "my way or the highway" approach doesn't win over legislators.
Even
before Lehrer had made "partisan gridlock" the subject of his final
question, Romney stressed the importance of bipartisanship. He said that
something as important as the federal health care law should have been
passed on a bipartisan basis (it received essentially no GOP support)
and paid homage to the working relationship of Republican President
Ronald Reagan and Democratic House Speaker Tip O'Neill in the 1980s.
"I
had the great experience — it didn't seem like it at the time — of
being elected in a state where my legislature was 87 percent Democrat,"
Romney said, "and that meant I figured out from day one I had to get
along and I had to work across the aisle to get anything done."
Given
consistent Republican opposition to Obama in Congress — some have
called it obstructionism — no doubt Democrats will question the
sincerity of Romney's embrace of bipartisanship. But it's a message that
could be welcomed by voters, particularly centrist independents.
You're A Drinking Game Winner If You're Middle Class
Both
candidates were at pains to pay tribute to members of the middle class,
again and again. Each referred to specific members of the middle class
they had met along the campaign trail, who had gone back to school or
were now out of work. Each insisted his plan would do more to help such
people out and create middle-class jobs.
Obama
argued that Romney's plans to cut taxes and increase military spending
would necessarily cause the deficit to balloon or "burden" the middle
class, because there would not be sufficient savings available to offset
their cost by ending deductions or closing loopholes.
Romney
insisted that his tax-cut plan would impose no such hardship. "I will
not, under any circumstances, raise taxes on middle-income families," he
said.
When Candidates Have The Microphone, They'll Keep Talking
Romney
sought to refute a study Obama had cited to show his tax package would
hurt the middle class was wrong: "There are six other studies that
looked at the study you describe and say it's completely wrong," Romney
said.
Many of the candidate's responses were
like that: Sometimes arcane, often straying from the original question
that Lehrer had asked. At one point, Romney used an education question
to repeat a charge that Obama had squandered billions on unsuccessful
green-energy programs.
Nearly all politicians
use debate questions merely as jumping-off points, concerning
themselves with highlighting policies they deem most important. Both men
did that Wednesday, ignoring Lehrer's frequent invitations to confront
or question their opponent directly, in favor of rattling off other
arguments of their own.
Partly as a result,
the debate's intended format, of 15-minute segments each covering six
different topics, was broken almost immediately, leaving only three
minutes for the final segment.
Lehrer
struggled unsuccessfully to cut off the two candidates and redirect them
to the supposed topic at hand. A stammering Twitter handle called
@SilentJimLehrer went up during the debate, quickly attracting thousands of followers.
Democrats Will Want To Retool For Future Debates
For
all his oratorical gifts, Obama has sometimes struggled in debates. He
was often out-mastered during the long series of debates during the
Democratic primary season in 2008 and hasn't had much practice since
then — except for his debates against Sen. John McCain in 2008.
Republicans,
meanwhile, have been nearly salivating for months at the prospect of
the vice presidential debate, which takes place on Oct. 11. They believe
Romney's running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, has the
intellectual and rhetorical firepower to wipe the floor with Vice
President Joe Biden.
That may prove to be
wishful thinking. Ryan has put many of his own ideas on ice while
serving as the loyal No. 2, while Biden is deeply versed in both
domestic and foreign policy.
But Obama's
lackluster performance — coupled with Biden's remark Tuesday that "the
middle class ...has been buried the last four years" — will leave GOP
partisans giddy with anticipation of next Thursday's debate.
