The first presidential debate is over, and opens the discussion between the candidates on many key topics such as the national debt, jobs in America, and tax cuts.
You know, all of the typical stuff politicians love to talk about.
Both men began with strong opening speeches focusing on their strong points, but Romney quickly moved into the offensive concerning the tax cuts and the national debt, challenging the president on not making good on the promise to cut the deficit in half.
President Obama responded mainly by trying to steer the focus of the debate towards plans he has made and is working on enacting with Congress, claiming that taxes need to be increased to generate revenue that will pay for the nations deficit, primarily drawing from the wealthier members of the nation who have benefited from deductions and benefits in the past.
Romney scoffed the the presidents proposals, citing that the numbers do not add up and targeting the rich will not pay for the billions that are logged in the books. The president, agreeable all night, politely declined.
It set the tone for the entire debate, as the president came off as being subdued that evening. He didn't seem to square his shoulders and his behavior was evasive towards certain topics. Romney, on the other hand, was aggressive and eloquent in his counterpoints, which I had never expected from him. I had never paid as much attention to the Republican candidate because of the jokes made on shows like the Colbert report, but I see now how much the GOP would wager on his chances as the next president.
It will be interesting to see the next debate, that's for sure.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/10/04/us/politics/20120804-denver-presidential-debate-obama-romney.html?smid=fb-share
You could have done better with this material. For example, how did the arrangement of the stage affect our perception of the debate? What about the issue of "split screen' viewing?
ReplyDelete