Edited by Kathleen Weinberger
Romney Takes a Step
Published in El Pais
(Spain) on October 5, 2012
by EDITORIAL (link to original)
He didn't have a home court advantage, but the opinion is practically unanimous: the Republican Mitt Romney clearly defeated the current president, the Democrat Barack Obama, in the first of the three televised debates. This was a stretch in the race to the White House that will be decided Nov. 6. Romney, on the offensive after his recent errors, was the less favored of the two rivals, but he came out of Denver with a much more conducive image.
We should establish what it means to win a debate in North American elections: Is it necessary to speak better and present clear and convincing government proposals, or is it enough to redeem yourself with good body language and project a dynamic image? Remember that according to many, John F. Kennedy won the first televised debate in American history against Richard Nixon because the Republican appeared with a bad shave and a sweaty forehead.
In any case, Romney undoubtedly prepared better for the encounter than his rival: He managed to dominate the playing field, appearing moderate and attractive while the president seemed tired, confused and sometimes even absent. The numbers and plans for economic growth and the creation of employment made up the basis for which Romney has some possibility of victory.
If we examined the debate as far as content is concerned, neither contender completely disarmed the other. Romney correctly emphasized the difficulties with which the economy struggles. Obama simply defended himself, but without passion or really reaching the voters like he did four years ago with his chant: Yes, we can. In any case, there are two other debates, in which Obama´s headquarters can count on the fact that when his rival speaks about the role of the U.S. in the world, he will appear as a child before the professor. From this, the president will recover from this beating and mobilize his voters.
Normally, the debates change the direction of the vote very little in the North American elections. The positive aspect of such a civilized quadrennial ceremony is that it has been undertaken, a great number of spectators watched and those who did feel that they know the candidates better. In Romney’s case, his secret weapon is that it opened the possibility that the voters see him differently than they have these last months.
We should establish what it means to win a debate in North American elections: Is it necessary to speak better and present clear and convincing government proposals, or is it enough to redeem yourself with good body language and project a dynamic image? Remember that according to many, John F. Kennedy won the first televised debate in American history against Richard Nixon because the Republican appeared with a bad shave and a sweaty forehead.
In any case, Romney undoubtedly prepared better for the encounter than his rival: He managed to dominate the playing field, appearing moderate and attractive while the president seemed tired, confused and sometimes even absent. The numbers and plans for economic growth and the creation of employment made up the basis for which Romney has some possibility of victory.
If we examined the debate as far as content is concerned, neither contender completely disarmed the other. Romney correctly emphasized the difficulties with which the economy struggles. Obama simply defended himself, but without passion or really reaching the voters like he did four years ago with his chant: Yes, we can. In any case, there are two other debates, in which Obama´s headquarters can count on the fact that when his rival speaks about the role of the U.S. in the world, he will appear as a child before the professor. From this, the president will recover from this beating and mobilize his voters.
Normally, the debates change the direction of the vote very little in the North American elections. The positive aspect of such a civilized quadrennial ceremony is that it has been undertaken, a great number of spectators watched and those who did feel that they know the candidates better. In Romney’s case, his secret weapon is that it opened the possibility that the voters see him differently than they have these last months.