Obama not ready for Romney onslaught
Debate may not stir undecided voters
DENVER Mitt Romney came out of his corner during Wednesday’s presidential debate like a hungry prize fighter and delivered a paralyzing beating on U.S. President Barack Obama that both he and the American public will long remember.
But the question on everybody’s mind is: Will it have any lasting effect on voters, particularly the critical five per cent who pollsters believe are still undecided?
The debate showed that Obama was ill-prepared for the Romney onslaught. He was not ready for a pummelling. He should have been. The Republican candidate’s performance throughout the primaries gave Obama plenty of warning of the heavyweight whirlwind heading his way.
Romney’s former rivals for the Republican nomination could have taught Obama a thing or two about the unrelenting aggressive, squarejawed debating style of this former hedge-fund manager, who made himself a multimillionaire targeting companies where he could “harvest” employees from their jobs.
In Wednesday’s debate, Romney drove home his punches, then followed up with just the right amount of compassion towards the middle class that Romney claimed Obama has “buried for four years.”
Winning one debate does not win an election. John Kerry beat George W. Bush in 2004 in the first and second debate and still didn’t win. Yet if Obama does not pick himself up and get nasty, his fortunes could change. Flash polls after the debate showed a complete reversal of fortunes, putting Obama behind on all the major issues.
The disquieting thing for Democrats is Obama doesn’t have much experience in mean, back-alley scraps. His 2008 opponent, John McCain, was a bit of a puffball in comparison to Romney. Americans have never shown much sympathy for losers. So if Obama doesn’t pick himself off the mat in the next debate Oct. 11 in Kentucky, he could be out of the game. Even Democrats admitted that the beating was that severe.
Obama started out well. “Four years ago we went through the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression,” he said. “Millions of jobs were lost. The auto industry was on the brink of collapse. The financial system had frozen up.”
He went on to remind Americans that the climb back has been tough, but five million private sector jobs have been created, the auto industry has come “roaring back” and housing starts are rising.
And that was it. He then talked about education and training, which, compared to job creation, are not high on Americans’ wish list.
Romney swept all that aside. The past was the past. At issue was Obama’s record, not George Bush’s. Romney launched into the president for creating bigger government, bigger deficits and higher taxes. He called it “trickle-down government.”
“That’s not the right answer for America,” he said. “I’ll restore the vitality that gets America working again.”
And that was his basic message, which he drilled home at every opportunity no matter what the topic. His energy told the story: I’m strong and vital; Obama is spent and on the mat.
The gap between the two candidates and how they regard the role of government is enormous. Their polarities exist on two different planets. That could be Obama’s saviour. Democrats have to hope that for many Americans there is simply too much at stake in this election to base a vote on a verbal beating of the president of the United States.
Obama and his wife celebrated their 20th wedding anniversary on Wednesday. Romney congratulated them and suggested that a presidential debate is not the most romantic place to celebrate a marriage.
It was a friendly touch. But it was also a warning of what was to come. Obama missed the nuance and was off his guard for the entire evening.
Romney won this round because his punches were unrelenting and his style unforgiving. Obama lost because he seemed more interested in remaining presidential than in beating back an enemy who takes no prisoners.