This is from The Washington Post this morning:
Who won the debate?
Mitt Romney 53%
Barack Obama 47%
49343 people have taken this poll.
That is, it comes from readers of The Washington Post which should tell you something. It comes at the end of an article by Jennifer Rubin who discusses the remarkable three-way exchange over Benghazi. The question had come from Kerry Ladka and this is at the centre of Rubin’s article:
Was Ladka satisfied with how the president responded? Simply no. ‘I really didn’t think he totally answered the question satisfactorily as far as I was concerned,’ Ladka tells the Erik Wemple Blog.
But don’t you know. That’s why the media moderator intervened to help the helpless Obama out.
Update on The Washington Post Poll:
Who won the debate?
Mitt Romney 57%
Barack Obama 43%
60412 people have taken this poll.
The killer story in the Wash Post is further down the page:
Tom
18 Oct 12 at 7:31 am
As the Obama campaign refuses to provide any tangible policies and with polls saying >50% would replace Obama if the right candidate came along, this election has turned into been a process of evaluating if Romney is up to the job.
I noticed that many of the “Gotcha” questions during the debate actually functioned as a way for Romney to address some real underlying concerns of the electorate.
e.g. Why are you different from George W Bush?
During a sales process with real purchasers we use similar steps to flush out concerns and to get them to point they need to purchase.
Romney hit questions liek that out of the park, and therefore I believe addressed the final resistance points.
The micro poll by CNN on issues reinforce this fact.
The WaPo poll indicates Romney closed the deal last night.
Token
18 Oct 12 at 7:39 am
This is the result of the latest Politico poll, but it reflect previous polls (which can be found here) which note a majority of voters want/would consider someone else.
PS: So it is clear how much Politico is an organisation that supports the Democrats, this is the type of people who work for them.
Experts say their polling is ok though.
Token
18 Oct 12 at 7:47 am
On benghazee, why is this still even being argued about, FFS?
At the time of the attack, obongo called it a “spontaneous demonstration by angry libyan village people”, blamed it on a tacky youtube video and then flew off to Vegas.
It took the vile cowards a full fortnight to own up to the fact that it was a well planned terrorist attack that resulted in four Americans, including the Ambassador, ending up dead – an attack that took place solely because of the staggering ineptitude of the obongo administration.
End of story, no further correspondence to be entered into.
Absolutely f*cking disgraceful.
Rabz
18 Oct 12 at 7:51 am
Because the agenda-driven liberal media knows busy people tend not to be obssessed with politics (like us), so it’s a great opportunity to lie to them to advantage the liberal media candidate without being called out for weeks.
This is corrupt? Fuck yeah!
Tom
18 Oct 12 at 8:23 am
If you watch the way Obama acted when being questioned by Romney you could see he was arrogantly expecting to be rescued (and duly was).
Token
18 Oct 12 at 8:30 am
Isn’t there a third debate planned? Can Ladka’s question simply be asked again?
2dogs
18 Oct 12 at 8:56 am
Ratings from last night.
The viewers watching on CNN & MSNBC combined don’t match Fox.
Token
18 Oct 12 at 9:02 am
SO the people have rejected the lefty MSM in favour of the more balanced MSM, ie FOx. That shows that the left in taking over the media has trashed it.
Rococo Liberal
18 Oct 12 at 9:06 am
Gallup: Romney 51, Obama 45.
People have switched off.
C.L.
18 Oct 12 at 9:10 am
Mittens still at $3.00.
Rabz
18 Oct 12 at 9:20 am
So Mitt was right about the 47% then.
Polymath
18 Oct 12 at 9:30 am
A US president had to be rescued from a politically neutral audience because he was unable to explain what his administration did? He was there! How pathetic. He is so weak a leader it is no wonder it happened. Who is really running the US? He must look like some sort of Ken doll to many voters.
I thought he looked like a leader who was out of touch with the organisartion he ran in the first debate. Hence he appeared lost. I have seen enough of those in business. This, for me, just identifies the type of leader he is.
Penndragon
18 Oct 12 at 9:31 am
What a bunch o’ patsies. Please….give me a break; the next debate on foreign affairs – Obama and Romney will agree on yet more funding (disguised as savings) and more interventionist policies. I like Ron Paul’s view: “Why are we intervening in other countries when we can’t even sort our own affairs out.” BANG!
Lysander Spooner
18 Oct 12 at 9:37 am
Almost like ti was stage managed and prescripted amongst the players, including the “moderator”.
Will
18 Oct 12 at 9:40 am
Almost like it was stage managed and prescripted amongst the players, including the “moderator”.
Will
18 Oct 12 at 9:40 am
Hey Lysander – remember how Ron Paul was going to storm the Republican National Convention and steal the nomination, because there is overwhelming support for him throughout the wider community?
How’d that turn out?
Alexnoaholdmate
18 Oct 12 at 9:43 am
Where did you get those figures from Steve? They don’t correspond to most of the figures published including those of the Wall Street Journal.
Adrien
18 Oct 12 at 9:51 am
Paul came third. He is too much of an oddball but his son may be Ryan’s VP pick one day. Being a Senator he has mor gravitas as well.
Even Fox shafted Ron Paul, which was quite disgraceful given that he basically came third and won some States.
.
18 Oct 12 at 9:54 am
Romney won the debate. How do I know ?
Death threats against Romney exploded on Twitter after the debate.
Imagine if these threats had been made against Obama – it would be all the MSM would talking about.
Keith
18 Oct 12 at 10:11 am
Please, continue with the pox on both your houses rants, its a free blog. I actually accept your statement.
I know that once I moved beyond a position that the perfect is more important than the possible, I decided based upon the evidence Romney will do much less harm.
I don’t see equal nuance in your viewpoint Lysander.
Token
18 Oct 12 at 10:15 am
The Tea Party / non-establishment Republicans saw what the RNC did in Tampa and won’t let them get away with it again.
They continue to work to get more members of the parliamentary caucus which is really sticking in the craw of the establishment republicans.
Rand Paul has financed some important adverts in support of the Tea Party senate candidate in Ohio:
Token
18 Oct 12 at 10:21 am
There’s a shrill insistence here, despite the majority and contrary view, that Romney won the second debate. Such denial is the mark of losers.
Cheer up! Your guy’s still ahead, but it’s a long way to go yet.
Adrien
18 Oct 12 at 10:23 am
Adrien, the Australian media does not vote.
These guys do and they were clear about the winner:
Thankyou, come again…
Token
18 Oct 12 at 10:28 am
Adrien, the Australian media does not vote.
Oh sure it does. The number #1 qualification for a Prime Ministerial appointment is to amuse and impress one’s hosts whilst dining at Cavan.
Would you mind providing a source for those figures old bean? The polls and the papers say Obama won just short of half the audience. This is hardly decisive. But Romney polled much worse. He decisively lost.
According to your figures, he won. Or are those other figures? I merely seek information.
Adrien
18 Oct 12 at 10:46 am
It is important to remeber that it is not a question of who won a debate, but who will best run the country.
A candidate may be the best debater in the world, but be a hopeless leader and vice versa. Too many people seem to worry more about how the the candidates put accross their views rather than the substance of their reviews. That is why the poll about the isues quoted by Token above is far more important about who ‘won’ the debate.
I am sure that if I went up against a professional lefty politician in a debate about the merits of quotas for women on boards, I am sure that I would lose, but that afterwards most people would agree with me that quotas are a bad idea. They would just say that I did not do a good job about arguing the case.
However, what the first Presidential Debate showed was that Obama was lazy and had underestimated his opponent. This goes to character. He is a terrible President because really he is an empty vessel promoted far above his ability by the proponents of identity politics.
Rococo Liberal
18 Oct 12 at 10:54 am
Shill Insistence – new Macquarie definition.
Keith
18 Oct 12 at 11:49 am
A candidate may be the best debater in the world, but be a hopeless leader and vice versa.
For example?
I agree with your first statement and your further observation that the emphasis is on style rather than the substance.
However I do find it interesting when people insist on a victory that didn’t occur. I’ve seen it happen before of course. I just wonder whether the people doing it, realize that this is so.
My considerations don’t extend to you RL. You’re usually quite aware of what is going. And know the right thing to say. Not the same thing most of the time.
Adrien
18 Oct 12 at 11:51 am
My examples would be many leftist leaders. But Kevin Rudd springs to mind straight away.
Rococo Liberal
18 Oct 12 at 12:24 pm
Adrien’s right, it was a draw. That’s bad for obama because he needed a victory. (he was never going to get a victory).
The ‘draw’ was due in large part to the moderator’s adjudication. For example, for nearly every question in the first hour she let Obama have the last word, and would frequently interrupt Romney if he tried to defy her and get the last word in himself. She ‘fact-checked’ him over highly ambigous and arguable facts, rather than letting the candidates argue it out and let the people decide. She interrupted Romney twice as much and gave Obama 10 percent more speaking time across the entirety of the debate.
These are the undisputed facts that pundits in America across the political spectrum are talking about today.
yet despite the moderator’s heavy-handed assistance, the best Obama could do was eke out a draw. So across the three debates so far the scorecard remains 2-0.
dd
18 Oct 12 at 12:24 pm
Example number two, John Howard, never the best debater, but a very effective leader.
Rococo Liberal
18 Oct 12 at 12:25 pm
“Would you mind providing a source for those figures old bean? The polls and the papers say Obama won just short of half the audience.”
@Adrien can you give us your “polls and papers” source?
Polling in the US seems all over the place, I’m keen to see a few different sources to see why they vary
scotty
18 Oct 12 at 12:25 pm
Let me explain what I mean by way of an analogy. I once saw rather duff production of King Lear. I also saw a great production of the 39 Steps in London recently. I would never say, however, that King Lear is an inferior work to the 39 Steps based upon the merits of each of these two productions.Similarly, I will not believe in statist talking points just because they are put me glibly.
Rococo Liberal
18 Oct 12 at 12:32 pm
“and gave Obama 10 percent more speaking time across the entirety of the debate.”
Actually, most of the time discrepancy is because Romney kept asking Obama questions during his own time. I’m pretty sure most were meant to be rhetorical, but Obama took advantage and jumped in to make a point or two.
“She ‘fact-checked’ him over highly ambigous and arguable facts”
I thought the candidates asked her to weigh in on that – Romney wanted it “on the record” or something, and Obama wanted to catch Romney in a technical untruth (the gist was correct, but Romney chose his words badly).
Jarrah
18 Oct 12 at 12:48 pm
Was chatting with a Ron Paul supporter who was a delegate the other day. He tells a story of basically being ignored within the internal GOP goings-on. He lost me on a pile of technical US politics speak, but the gist was that the people running the GOP don’t want to know about the noisy Ron Paul supporters, and quietly wish they would go away and form their own party.
But for most of them it’s not about getting Ron Paul elected, most of them know he is too old and has ran too many times. They’re more interested in forming the next generation of the Republican party. On that score, they’ve already got the game won, as long as they don’t lose their focus and become statist idiots in the meantime.
brc
18 Oct 12 at 12:56 pm
Adrien’s right, it was a draw.
Nice try DD, but that’s not what I said.
RL It’s easy to think of leftist leaders who are effective speakers but not good leaders. Apparently Carter gave good speech. Kennedy did so and he was way over-rated. And then there’s the various psychos in the medieval parts of the world. Roosevelt was both an excellent speaker and politician. Largely because he disguised his monarchical ambition by being an evocative populist.
John Howard did not become Prime Minister until he had pulled up his bootstraps as a communicator. I think he became a very effective communicator eventually but it was not a natural talent he possessed, true.
I think the third Earl Russell expressed best the democratic axiom that eloquence is dangerous. I haven’t personally made up my mind about Obama because I haven’t paid attention much to politics for about three years.
But coming back into it what is staggering is Obama’s ability to create a cult of celebrity around him. I’ve only read parts of his (first) book but it is deliberately designed to cultivate a certain persona. The American right have a problem this time because the best propagandists are on the other side and are most definitely united. I also find their running theme that Romney is a corporate front man amusing considering the abundance of assistance the incumbent has received from Microsoft and Condé Nast etc.
For me this election occurs at a distance. It’s interesting what you see at that perspective. The third debate should be a corker.
Adrien
18 Oct 12 at 1:00 pm
Given that Betfair is a betting exchange (where punters cover bets wagered by other punters), and that the US Elections are brokered from an International Pool (predominantly from the UK), I am amazed that current polling (Gallup & Rasmussen) is not being reflected in the Betting market. A Betting exchange is not like traditional bookmaking- the weight of money previously wagered has no direct influence on current odds, yet Betfair still has Romney at 3.25. It looks as though British punters have been brainwashed by their MSM just as thoroughly as Australian punters (at the TAB or Sportsbet) have been as to the invincibility of the Kenyan.
Cold-Hands
18 Oct 12 at 2:50 pm
On the subject of polls, Rasmussen swing state poll has Obama in the lead again (after 8 days of Romney leading). But the “Electoral college” map hasn’t changed for weeks:
Obama: 237 – Romney: 181 – Toss-up: 120
Does anyone know how often that map is updated?
SteveC
18 Oct 12 at 3:26 pm
The electoral college map on realclearpolitics.com changed a lot. They had Obama within 10 votes of getting the 270 with Romney at 180. He’ s now back to 200. The Intrade odds haven’t done anything substantial though and still have Obama on 60% or so.
John Mc
18 Oct 12 at 4:14 pm
Token
Lindsey Graham ought to be put to pasture just like Dick Luger.
.
18 Oct 12 at 4:22 pm
You could check the Realclearpolitics.com map, as it gets updated quite frequently. Rasmussen are only one polling organisation, and they’re polling some states quite infrequently.
However, RCP’s allocation is a bit curious as Florida and North Carolina are now both considered likely Romney/Ryan wins, but RCP has them in the greyed-out ‘toss-up’ category.
dd
18 Oct 12 at 7:01 pm
Best summation of the second debate
NoFixedAddress
18 Oct 12 at 7:09 pm
reagan was behind until late in the 1980 election when he surged after the debate with the “are you better off than four years ago” question.
Jim Rose
18 Oct 12 at 7:48 pm
Many people have wondered why the audience at the Obama-Romney town hall was filled with 2008 Obama voters. That’s because that’s who all the “undecideds” are. gallup had great difficulty finding 2008 McCain voters who qualify as undecided.
And as Powerlineblog observes:
dd
18 Oct 12 at 8:08 pm
that was a point made at the link provided by ‘nofixedaddress’, by the way. Lots of other interesting points there as well.
dd
18 Oct 12 at 8:10 pm