May 28, 2017

Obama Won The Debate Americans Wanted to Hear

Romney: All Show and No Substance

  I went to the East Orange City Hall this evening to listen to the Obama-Romney debate.  When the debate set was tested, it was discovered that people couldn't hear well when it was set on CNN, and then it was switched to MSNBC.  East Orange, of course, is a black city.  When the two candidates appeared, I saw a cool and collected Barack Obama.  I saw a President who had his facts; I saw a Romney who was rude, testy, nebulous, and I saw a moderator who allowed Romney to walk all over the place without asking him questions.  I saw Obama who provided facts, and spoke about what his administration has accomplished and what it intends to accomplish in the next four years.

Romney was totally incoherent at times, denying every plan he had put forward before. The moderator, Jim Lehrer, did a very poor job of not restraining Romney from interrupting Obama all the time.  It was a disgraceful performance on his part.  In fact, at times, you saw his eyes were closed, and he should have realised that he was too old to do the job.   As far as the crowd at City Hall was concerned, Obama won the debate hands down.

It was a shock when we returned home to hear the pundits on MSNBC shouting about Romney winning the debate.  Already, the same punditry class is beginning to question whether by not providing specifics on anything he has promised to do, if Romney really did himself any good.  His was a performance without substance.  It would appear from the commentatoriat that they prefer an individual who was all show and couldn't provide any details of what he intends to do for the country.

I believe President Obama will rebound from whatever damage the critics believe he inflicted on his campaign.  Many times in 2008, he was counted out, but rebounded.  As Republican staunch Romney defender, Ari Fleischer noted, "One big caveat. Romney won, but winning debates doesn't always mean winning votes. But in a close race, every vote counts."

The pundits can say whatever they want, but the fact remains it is the voters who will decide.  Already, according to Susan Saulny's article in the New York Times, "At Debate-Watching Party in Suburban Ohio, Voters Are Less Than Thrilled," and she went on to recount how those people were not swayed by Romney's performance especially for not providing specifics.  Read it below:

Jeremy Gardner, 32, a software developer and independent voter, hosted a small viewing party in a cozy living room where his two Chihuahuas were jumping around, looking truly excited. Before the debate, the tensions were building. (There were partisans in the room.) “I’m getting an eye twitch!” said Heather Jernigan, Mr. Gardner’s sister-in-law. An Obama supporter, she worried that even if he did well, his opponents would give his performance a negative review. “Rainbows could shoot out of his ears and it wouldn’t matter,” said Ms. Jernigan, who works for an insurer. Mr. Gardner was open to being swayed, but said he was leaning toward Mr. Obama. Brent Jernigan, 48, a business consultant who is married to Ms. Jernigan and likes Mr. Obama, is the ultimate solo fact checker. It was his fact-checking on Facebook that cost him his aunt’s friendship. What did those gathered here want out of the candidates’ performance? “I want to see an actual plan from Romney,” Mr. Jernigan said. “I’d like to see Obama be very forceful in defending his own actions as president. And I wouldn’t be opposed to a highly entertaining moment from Romney, something like, ‘I can see Russia from my house!’ ” After the debate, the group did not shift their views. “I don’t know the specifics of these things, so some of it didn’t mean a lot to me,” said Mr. Gardner, the host. “Like I said before we started, I hate the ‘I’m going to repeal what you did and do something that’s better!’ Who doesn’t want to hear that? Basically nothing changed for me.”


  1. Anonymous says:

    Interesting commentary! I support the nest man for the job, however I must admit feeling a bit bamboozled by MR’s new tone and arrogance towards Pres Obama. I anxiously await the VP debate given the new climate change in the race for the Whitehouse 2013. Thank you.

    • Presidential debates have shown the incumbent to lose the first debate, although this should not give us comfort in what people feel was Obama’s poor performance. Hopefully, Vice President Joe Biden will redeem the Democratic ticket as he did during the convention.

  2. I was very disappointed by Ed Schults’ comments. He has been such a good supporter of the President. I think that got in the way of his thinking.

    President Obama and those around him know what they are doing. He did not want to come out as the angry Black Man

    Romney made a fool out of himself back tracking on every thing he has said and done in the past.
    The president will use it to bury him.

    That is my two cent

    • You are right, it was the biggest letdown I have ever seen as supporters leading the charge to savage their own candidate as the MSNBC crowd did on Wednesday night. Fox News would never have done that to Romney even if he did a poor performance. Here was a group of people who saw Romney lie his way throughout the debate, yet instead of seizing on that to puncture the Romney’s praise from the right wing nuts, they chose to savage Obama’s performance, giving cheer to the Fox News crowd. It is unforgivable, and Ed Schultz was still blabbering about the same thing last night.

      He needs to take a break and calm down. Maybe he should move over to the Fox News, and spew his new nonsense. With him, Chis Matthews, Rachel Maddow, who needs an enemy.

  3. Dr Dr. Onyeani:

    Even though, I am a stunch or biased supporter for Obama, nobody can convince me about his poor performance last night. The spin master can do their best, but boxing and Politics are not the same.

    In boxing, the ref. can call somebody out for committng fouls such as low blows, etc. In politics, the moderator(ref) does no call out any of the candidates for any lies/distortions. In boxing, most times the winner emerges accidentally, through one lucky punch or consistent flurries. In debates, the opposite is the case.

    So please, lets set the spin aside and talk frankly that our man did not perform well becasue one of the tenets of a good debater is to use your opponents words to score your points. In other words, you have to be able to think on the fly or on the spot. Unequivocally, in my personal opinion, our President lacked that capacity to think on his feet and it showed up last night.

    Watching the debate, it seemed that Rommey and his camp knew that Obama does not have the ability to counter lies/distortions with facts and figures. I had made such an observation long time ago about our president even when us want to play sychophancy. He may be a great debater to others, but last night he lost miserably both in style and content. People like that are typical of those who excel in many exams because of their ability to study the right materials, the provebial perm three from five in Nigerian parlance or their ability to regurgitate a bunch of crammed materials in exams. But should the question be twisted a litle bit, they fall on their faces while disappointing those who already regarded them as smart people. In Nigeria, years ago, many people resorted to ascribing such an academic woe on a “Juju or Ọtụmọkpọ” from an ememy; our usual finger-pointing to rationalize failures, mediocrity, etc.

    We should call a spade a spade because our president was very flat and disappointing last night. Otherwise, why could he forget to mention his strengths about killing Osama Bin Laden? How could he fail to mention the 47% Americans that Rommey wrote off? How come he could not be emphatic about turning an economic he inherited from a negative infinity into the positive side on the mumber line? How could our president not mention Bain Capital as Job Killers instead of Job Creators? How come our President did not find a way to question why somebody who has been hidding his money in off shore banks and hidding his tax returns want to be trusted as president? How couldn’t he be prepaid, using the kind of facts and delivery Bill Clinton used during the Democratic convention? Honestly, his failures in the debate started manifesting during the Convention when Bill Clinton and Joe Bidden made better presentations. But we put on our blinders until last night. We will all fail, if we refuse to let the campaign know that we cannot be donating money if the president lacks the fiestiness to go and fight to defend his records while calling out the republicans in their outrageous lies/distortions. This is utterly important because the average American does not under all those policy mombo-jumbo. As a result, they don’t know who is lying or not not because all politicians have a way to distort things to confuse the average voter. Honestly, all people see is the presentation and fire to crush the opponent. Politically, Rommey crushed our president last night

    If I seem harsh, please don’t blame me because “to whom much is given, much is expected”. I don’t take kindly when people cannot pass a simple exam even with an “expo”. Why should a president whose abilities are being marred by the Republican Congress lack the ability to link his setbacks to such a “Drag” by Tea-Baggers and the Republican establishment?

    Our president looked too scared last night and was smiling so much.It was a joke. He looked so meek and apologetic, a Jim Carter – moment the Americans dislike with a passion. If he ever has any chances of re-election, he better go back to the drawing board to unearth facts to demolish Rommey and his Republican gang. They are hungry and thirsty to unseat him in November. The mid-term election should be an eye-opener to those of us who will constantly rationalize our failures. Rationalizing with Boxing or Rope-a-dope does not cut it at all!

    I am worry-sick of our “no-show” in last nights debate. Onye kwe Chi ya ekwe!



    Mazi Ogbonna

    • Mazi- In many instances you are right; howeever our President was dignified and kind to his opponent. That is to be expected at the first encounter. If the President follows your advice and many others comments, there is no reason that the independents will shift back to him. When you look at the bottom line the Republicans are grasping for straws. Their concepts are from the 1950’s and as we know most adults from that era are moving on. They will move on even faster if Romney is elected (if his supposedly medicare vouchers ever got approved). Mitt’s father was a gentle man and intelligent, who got whiplashed by using a phrase “brainwashed.” Obama needs to pull out the truth and frankly say that obstructionist behavior by the Tea partiers is doing its best to destroy progress. America first- party second.

  4. Mazi, what I found disturbing was the frenzy of unmitigated assault on the President by the crowd at the MSNBC, which as I said would never have happened on Fox News. They should have been discussing the 27 lies that Romney had told, rather than focusing on the President’s performance. They did a big disservice to the electoral process.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: