Debate Outcome: Early Warning Signs
The last presidential debate of the season got off to a quick start that signaled a quick end for Romney.
Debate Outcome: Early Warning Signs
John Baer, Daily News Political Columnist
Monday night's third and final presidential debate started off with some early warning signs both for Mitt Romney and for viewers.
I suspect due to both that there were lots of clicks around the country as remote controls took audiences to either the Monday Night Football Bears/Lions game or game seven of the National League championship.
Not only did Mitt start out with a signal of discomfort, but President Obama landed quick hits so early that switching channels seemed a real option.
I'm not suggesting Obama skunked Mitt the way the Giants took the Cards 9-0. It was more like the Bears beating the Lions 13-7.
(As you might imagine, I like it when bears win.)
Snap polls after the debate gave the round to Obama. A CNN poll said Obama 48, Romney 40. A CBS poll said Obama 53, Romney 23 with 24% undecided.
But it was the start that pretty much seemed to end things.
In opening remarks, Romney began to make a reference to his and Obama's appearance at the annual Al Smith Dinner (a night for trading funny barbs aimed at each other) last week in New York but then, inexplicably, puddled into this:
"We were together at a humorous event a little earlier (actually four days ago) and it's nice to be funny this time, not on purpose. We'll see what happens."
Huh?
I immediately thought, uh-oh.
Then, within 10 minutes Obama launched some barbs that Mitt must have thought were neither nice nor funny. The President mentioned Romney's reference to Russia as our number one geopolitical threat and tagged Mitt with, "the 1980s, they’re now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because, you know, the Cold War’s been over for 20 years."
Then came Obama's jab, "every time you've offered an opinion you've been wrong," followed by the assertion that Romney offers "wrong and reckeless leadership that's all over the map."
At about this point, the pro sports world probably picked up some viewers.
Then maybe 30 minutes into the 90-minute debate, came a reprise of past debates with Romney talking about unemployment, his five-point plan, 12 million jobs and anything to get off the topic of foreign policy, as Obama re-fired charges about small businesses in Massachusetts suffering under Romney and the need to hire more teachers, which prompted moderator Bob Schieffer to point out "we have heard some of this in the other debates."
I figure somewhere in there, ratings for baseball and football really went up.
The race, no doubt, remains tight and seems headed to a photo finish. But the last debate, from the beginning, was a boost for Obama -- and the sports world.
Just a baffling strategy by Romney. To use your football analogy, he looked like he was taking a knee and running out the clock. For Romney to agree with Obama on Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan and not to attack Obama on Benghazi makes it appear that Romney either thinks he was way ahead and just did not want to offend anyone or that he was so afraid of being forced to give specific answers that he simply rolled over. How can anyone know what Mitt stands for in foreign policy at this point?— Palestra Jon- The reason Mittens seemed so "onfused and incoherent and had no original ideas of substance", according to the NY Times, is because the idiot has no idea what he is talking about. Hopefully someone let this moron know that Iran isn't "Syria's road to the sea" since the two countries AREN'T CONNECTED. This lying scoundrel illustrated his foreign policy "experience" is pretty much limited to yuan-dollar conversion.— CiceroSpuriousDeodatusTheSecond
- Obama wanted to handle all naval threats with aircraft carriers with nuclear bombs and submarines with nuclear missiles last night.
The US Navy size would be the same as before World War One,about 200,older ships,none new being built.
Obama's only options would be to go nuclear or do nothing with Naval Power because we wouldn't have the quantity or variety of ships.
Romney proposed a right-sized,modernized,varied US Navy,capable of handling many different 21st Century challenges,like expanding Naval China.
Wake up,John and watch the tape of Debate Three.
Obama slipped in his plan for having only a nuclear explosion option overseas while you were encouraging watching Monday Night Football.
Obama is showing he is dangerously incompetent to be America's Commander-in-Chief.
For all humanity,measured,realistically planning-ahead Mitt Romney must be the next President.— penllynjohn - Amazing how the republicans love Romney because he is a "fiscal conservative" and yet when it comes to military spending they don't care whether it's needed or not...http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/05/barack-obama/obama-says-romney-would-spend-2-trilllion-military/ — smallestsmurf
- No need for nuclear, we have enough missiles on the ships to send anyone back 100 yrs from hence they came.
— gibby58 - penllynjohn: No one could be more dangerously incompetent than someone who wants the Neo-Cons back in the WH after the Bush years.
3 trillion. Cost of the Iraq war. 900 Billion to Halliburton. 5 billion to Black Water. Both companies moved their headquarters out of the country to avoid paying taxes on the billions we gave them.
Then next you will be complaining about the debt.
Forget dangerously incompetent. Your just a flaming idiot.— Bush Destroyed America - Besides. We have more ships now than we had under Bush. Idiot.— Bush Destroyed America
- penllynjohn-you are a dope...You have Mittitisis. Is's a disease that people like you can't contol. It's Mitt love. We have the largest Navy in the world. We don't need more ships. We need a leader! It's OBAMA!!!!1 Not Mitt the Twit.— kingofpoker
- This debate reflected nothing other than the campaigns' internal polling numbers. Based on the debate strategies, Obama is in big trouble, even in Ohio. Obama has lost Florida and North Carolina, and his ridiculous condescending snark about the Navy just wrote off Virginia, home of the largest Navy base in the world.
This election comes down to Ohio, and when Ohioans coalesce around Romney like the rest of the country is doing, it will be interesting to watch the Obama campaign thrash.— Mr. Smith - Unemployment in Ohio is now at 5%, and none of Romney's lies can change that. This country IS on the right track, and we can't afford to go back to the failed foreign and domestic policies of George W. Bush.
- @BDA and MrPoker, since calling people names makes a position correct, you are both smelly, self important half wit buffoons passing gas on a couch covered in the same daisy print cover your mom put on 40 years ago. You can wash it, but you'll never get the stench of your idiocy and rotting wasted life out of it.— rich67
- Well, focus groups in Ohio, Fla. NC all gave the victory to R. Here is why? O looked snarky and not likeable. R looked Presidential . Obama won on pts. but when eco. foundations came up on supporting FP, Romney crushed the Prez. And R looked Presidential. Common sense voters are looking for a leader. O looked petty and a community organizer. Benghazi not even brought up but now we know our inept and how uncaring O was. R was big picture and O still had no agenda. Common sense voters will lean toward R as the two weeks go on. I pray Pa. does too and if NJ ever woke up, the game would be over.— Koons
Mr Smith is another Righty drinking the Fox koolaid. So Obama will lose VA because of his "ridiculous condescending snark" about ships. Yeah, Obama just lost a key demographic of sailors who take that comment personally. Thanks for the laugh!!
— wokmaster- Mitt was simply running out the clock while the Chair desperately tried to score...but BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!— Mr. Underhill
John is the author of the book "On The Front Lines of Pennsylvania Politics: Twenty-Five Years of Keystone Reporting" (The History Press, 2012). Reach John at baerj@phillynews.com.
