The debate, who won and who lost

- October 23rd, 2012

Who won and who lost this debate?

Well that depends on who you listen to. It also depends on whether you crave instant analysis or a change in the polls.

Last night SNN’s Bryn Weese was quick to point out that it is changes in the polls that each candidate seeks.

Our own snap poll online gave the debate to Romney while CNN’s poll said 48 for Obama and 40 for Romney.
Not everyone on the left was happy with the debate or Obama at the end of it though. MSNBC’s Chris Matthews thought both candidates talked too much about Israel.

Over at Fox, Charles Krauthammer said Romney won decisively.

The round up of analysis over at SDA includes this line form Yural Levin at National Review.

Even more astonishing, to me, was Obama’s ignorant and gratuitous insult to the U.S. Navy, describing Navy ships as the equivalent of horses and bayonets.

Your thoughts below…..

Categories: American politics

Subscribe to the post

8 comments

  1. Dave Simpson says:

    Obama was weak but Romney didn’t throw any game changers. It was fairly obvious from the general disdain Obama was showing that he is aware of how the campaign is going, and his current standing in the polls.

    The condescending Obama will be a turn off to undecided voters (especially women) who generally are looking for the candidate who appears more willing to support a bipartisan approach to problem solving.

    Obama Fact check:
    The opening assault of the war on terror was a cavalry charge (on horses) by American Special Forces. And the US marines corp still uses bayonets.

  2. dj says:

    “Even more astonishing, to me, was Obama’s ignorant and gratuitous insult to the U.S. Navy, describing Navy ships as the equivalent of horses and bayonets.”

    He said no such thing. He said the military had changed since 1916 and that they used less horses and bayonets and that the navy had submarines and aircraft carriers that were not invented in 1916 so yes the USA required fewer ships. There was no insult just fact. Anyone who watched the debate knows Levin is plain and simple full of it.

  3. V. Grace says:

    Not surprisingly, you forgot to mention the CBS poll: 53 Obama / 23 Romney, and Reuters has Obama 48 / Romney at 33.

  4. Stephen Smith says:

    What a pile of crap on the Obama comment. You just can’t help spinning anything. The comment was based on a stupid falacy of Romney that more equals better which is a nonsense. Ships from WW2 were faster than todays ships, because they needed to be to chase and catch the enemy. Nowadays missles. radar and satelites do that job, so ships can be further away and still have 10x or more the destructive power of their older counterparts, hence you need fewer of them, hence the aircraft comment.

    Assinine comments don’t make you look good. Shape up or ship out Brian!

  5. Graham says:

    Quoted above: “Even more astonishing, to me, was Obama’s ignorant and gratuitous insult to the U.S. Navy, describing Navy ships as the equivalent of horses and bayonets.”

    Even more astonishing to me is the fact that anyone could be ignorant enough to think that Obama was comparing the United States Navy to horses and bayonets! What he was contesting was the absurd idea that one could measure a navy’s capabilities by simply comparing the number of ships from two entirely different eras – nearly a century apart. Obama countered by pointing out that the US military had fewer horses now than then – for obvious reasons. Times have changed. The US navy has more firepower than all other navies put together today – centered on twelve aircraft carrier battlegroups. The only potential enemy state with even one full-deck carrier capable of launching fixed-wing aircraft, is China, which is deploying a carrier it bought from the Russians, and which can fly smaller numbers of inferior aircraft compared to its US counterparts.

  6. Rich Clarke says:

    Describing US ships as horses and bayonets???? Seriously.

    Here’s a from memory paraphrase of Obama’s remarks.

    Mr. Romeny, you’ve said the Navy doesn’t has fewer ships than before. Well it has fewer horses and bayonets.

    How is that a comparison? Just because two things have a similar charactetistic, (in this case their decreasing quantity over time), doesn’t mean they’re comprable. This is you simply looking for something to pin on Obama – who, by the way is the smarter of the two (but we can debate that another time).

  7. Rich Clarke says:

    David Simpson – Fact check.

    Obama said there were fewer bayonets, not no bayonets. You’re correction seemed to assumed he said the latter.

  8. George Wyndham says:

    For those who use emotion as thought, Obama won.
    Those who think, Romney won.
    For those who really think, they realize the people are losers no matter who everyone else thinks won.
    When it costs around a billion dollars to run for the Presidency of the US, who do you think is going to have their needs met?
    Elections are pointless anymore.
    The Government in power wiggles a few near pointless distractions and everyone looks, they grab your wallet and give the contents to their pals.

Comments are closed.