2012 U.S. Presidential Election

[a completely inoffensive name]

After sleeping on it, I have decided that the worst performance was by Lehrer. Whether you agree with Romney or not, the comes a point where the moderator has to say, no be quiet we have to move on to the next subject. Romney won because he forced his way into having the last line on the every single topic. Plain and simple. Obama wasn't really timid, he was calm and took time to say what he wanted to say. He only looks bad in comparison to Romney's rapid fire points and his determination to win the rhetorical positioning. This is not to say that Obama didn't blunder, because his big blunder was in allowing Romney to be the only one pushing Lehrer around for an extra 10 seconds.

All in all, I think this type of debate is toxic and should be abandoned. MRD takes the cynical route once again and misses the distinction between past and present. Debates used to be held by the League of Women voters who generally did the job of moderating properly. As in all debates, it is more of how you say it than what you are saying, that much is true. However, before we would have a synthesis of common facts and personal rhetoric blended to create two opposing view points that essentially gave interpretations from differing political ideologies. Now we have reached the point where the moderator is just a mouth to ask a question, and each candidate is entitled not just to their own opinion, but their own facts. The first 30 minutes of the debate can be summed up as:

Obama: Here are my numbers.
Romney: Here are my numbers.
Obama: Those numbers are wrong.
Romney: Your numbers are wrong.
Obama: No your numbers are wrong.
Romney: No, yours.

Repeat ad nauseum.

I might not even watch the third debate since it is in the same set up as the first. The second debate based on a town hall style might provide a more constructive outcome for the public discourse, but all the questions will be screened, so I doubt it.