I read somewhere today that the challenger tends to have the advantage in the first debate. Hopefully that was the case here.
It does seem like the incumbent has a disadvantage in that he's busy trying to run the country on top of campaigning, while the challenger can spend that "run the country" time in debate prep.
I heard that Obama was in a NATO meeting all day. Is this true?
I read that on the Huff Post's debate blog.
eta: About Syria and Turkey.
Can a debate tank an election? I haven't been able to watch it yet, and people appear to be in mourning.
I don't know if that's poor scheduling, or deliberate ballsiness, or what.
Debates too scary for you? Watch Supernatural instead.
I think we're seeing some of what were called the lowering of expectations. If Romney managed not to actually say "Let them eat cake" and didn't start proselytizing for the Mormon Church, people would call it a win.
I haven't been able to watch it yet, and people appear to be in mourning.
I went to watch it at the local Democratic office and people there seemed fairly positive after it was over. I suspect the company you see it in makes a difference; I've seen some places claim Obama got no zingers off at all, and I saw him get at least 3 good ones off.
It's such an odd thing. CNN is giving me DOOOOOM. But then they said all their polls were done by phone. And then I thought, "oh, it's the old people."
I feel kind of bad about that. Am I in privilege-land? Do people still have landlines?
Can a debate tank an election? I haven't been able to watch it yet, and people appear to be in mourning.
I think it's conceivable, and there are arguments that the debate was indeed significant in Kennedy v Nixon and Carter v Reagan. I don't see it here though. I do think Romney was the definite winner, not just against expectations, but there wasn't anything that'll really change people's minds. Obama didn't make any particular stumbles, reactions when he was talking were decent enough and Romney didn't score any real body-blows.