In response to:

What The Debates Taught Us

Macroman Wrote: Oct 25, 2012 8:10 AM
Near the end, Hanson says, "So what did we learn from nearly five hours of verbal gymnastics? The image of competency and composure that Romney projected in the first debate was not altered by the second and has been confirmed by the third." Although I agree, I find the conclusion rather sad. Hanson's entire discussion, as with almost all the discussion by almost everyone else, is about HOW the candidates talked, not at all about WHAT they said. I bet that at least some of the 20-30% of the voters in the middle who decide elections also care more about substance than style. Neither Obama nor Biden seemed to know much, whereas Romney & Ryan did. If others see it that way, Romney wins solidly.
mistermilo Wrote: Oct 25, 2012 10:42 AM
macro-

I agree. The majority of pundits seem to be preparing for a Pyrrhic voctoory, just like the alst electionn. "Oh look hoe close we came--and it was because we wanted to show 50 million under 100 IQ voters how suave Romney can be".
Suave is for washing your hair sticking it to the other guy for his failures is for winning.
mistermilo Wrote: Oct 25, 2012 10:42 AM
That is not voctoory it's supposed to be victory.
jgraham887 Wrote: Oct 25, 2012 12:43 PM
Doesn't matter. Your entire post is silly.

The president of the United States in the last debate chose to go on the attack against his challenger, Mitt Romney -- and once again largely failed to convince the American people that he was the more presidential alternative.

But how did the once-messianic incumbent find himself in this fix of playing the catch-up role of a bar-room-brawling challenger rather than a calm and confident president? Despite running ahead in the polls for most of the year, Barack Obama has rarely achieved a 50 percent favorability rating, largely because of four years of dismal economic news. Obama himself had warned us...