What wonderfully biased questions from the second debate (town hall) for Obama. And cheers where none were allowed (responding to whether Obama had called the Libyan attack terrorism, which Romney kept insisting he didn't, and the moderator in the end stopped dead by saying he did), which shows that the audience was against Romney. Romney was again great, but so was Obama this time around (phew, after last time's rather catastrophic performance). But...
Romney has a clear "message" for the economy: jobs. He's banking on this one to win the election. Romney is also seriously alpha in comparison to Obama. In the first half, he does it in a polite way, though: tough but not insulting, persistent but not aggressive. He may be completely inconsistent compared to his primary statements, but based on these two debates, he is running a great economic sales pitch (whether I personally agree if it what he truly believes or will do is irrelevant).
Obama's economic message is unfortunately confused. On energy, Romney was right to point out that no-one will believe Obama is an oil-coal guy. And his dual strategy pitch with renewables will just anger environmentalists. His mere body-language, unsure whether to sit or stand, whether to attack or remain politely quiet, backfires in comparison to Romney's confidence. On politics, the tables turn. But will politics make the election? I doubt it, not in these times of economic crisis.
I truly and honestly believe that Obama is the better presidential candidate. That he is, with his style, a better leader. Who needs another gung-ho alpha leader in the world? Especially with the policies that Romney favors.
Will the alpha factor decide the election?
Enjoyable analysis there! Managed to see only the end half of the debate but I agree with what you're saying. Romney's message of 'you don't have to settle for this, we can do better' is appealing to many, I'm sure.
ReplyDelete