Debates are won and lost on demeanor. How the debaters conduct themselves spins voter perceptions toward or away from candidate policies more than the policies themselves. We've seen it time and again.
So Obama will use the same strategy he used in 2008: be plain, bland, and polite. It worked because McCain's temper tantrums didn't need a lot of prodding and those eruptions of anger turned away a good number of would-be voters.
The Obama debate strategy was, in other words, 'give the other guy enough rope...' There was little counter-punching and there was even less in the way of direct challenging during those debates.
My point is that Robert's debate analysis is tremendously over-engineered. McCain at least had some credibility when he was running. romney's credibility is non-existent and his positions (and history) virtually indefensible. Even the friends of mine who are off the charts with their, let's call it, "anti-socialism" openly tell me they can't stand romney.
In 2004, dubya at least made a strong effort to appear like he cares about 'the little guy' and became a guy people wanted to have a beer with. romney's sneering contempt for the unrich is such that he won't even try to fake empathy - and that'll continue to be obvious during the debates.
So here's all the debate analysis you need:
Romney will lose because very few people can stomach rich bullies.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
No comments:
Post a Comment