For Immediate Release:
October 17, 2012
The Debate Brawl: Boardroom Boss versus President
Richard O’Dor East Carolina University
The second presidential debate at Hofstra University was unique. It will be remembered as one of the most aggressive debates of the last several decades. In contrast to his passive performance of the first debate, President Obama came to fight, and he did.
For the first debate, Governor Romney’s strategy was winning by using power words (taxes, jobs, economy) and adding the illusion of detail by numbering his responses. He continued the same tactics in the second debate. Fighters lose when their punches become predictable, especially if the punches have no real power behind them. Knowing the opponent’s every punch allowed Obama to weaken Romney’s performance.
Romney responded to the first question from a 20-year-old college student by claiming two points. Romney threw his second punch by misstating, “with half of college kids graduating this year without a college.”Obama hit back with three. Another miss-landed punch occurred when Romney was discussing equal pay for women. He sidestepped the equal pay question by focusing on hiring more women as governor of Massachusetts. Romney claimed he received “Binders full of women” when attempting to hire more woman in the state government.
Punching and counter punching with numbers continued throughout the evening until the moment of opportunity came for landing a big punch. Romney’s illusion of detail was destroyed by Obama reducing Romney’s five-point economic strategy toone, “Governor Romney doesn’t have a five-point plan. He has a one-point plan. And that plan is to make sure that folks at the top play by a different set of rules.” Obama destroyed the illusion of details with two-punches. The use of “Romney says he’s got a five-point plan?” emphasized that what his opponent says, and its reality, are not the same. This second punch highlighted that numbers are not substance. Being dazed with the hit, Romney began to spar more with the moderator, Candy Crowley of CNN’s “State of the Union.” Romney’s bullying worked against Jim Lehrer, but Martha Raddatz of ABC News set a precedent in the vice presidential debates,debate moderators were no longer going to take punches!
Romney’s indignant boardroom boss act wouldn’t work in this fight. Obama was hitting back and the ref had shown up. Crowley was stiff-armed a few times when Romney would hold his arm out as though he was commanding traffic to stop; it was Crowley’s voice that was the target of Romney’s hand signaling her to hush. Romney also rebuffed Crowley’s follow up question onself-deportation by waving her off.At one point, Crowley responded to Romney’s disruption by asking him to sit down.
Both Romney and Obama interrupted the moderator and talked over her. The candidates differentiated themselves in the way they interrupted. Romney’s approach was more offensive. Because he used the same aggressive approach with Lehrer, it didn’t appear sexist. However, the camera angles showing Romney’s movement toward Crowley framed the hostility more than the first debate.
Obama used the room more effectively, engaging the 82 undecided voters. Romney’s arrogance may have played to his constituents, but seemed to turn off the undecided voters in the audience. For instance, on the high cost of gas, Obama’s response linked the price of $1.85 to the bad economy. He commented that Romney’s policies could reduce the cost of gas by destroying the economy again as these same policies did during the Bush administration. The audience reacted by laughing.
When Romney went toe-to-toe with Obamademanding the president answer him, the Republican CEO turned fighter was actually down and being counted out. The confrontation was that of a boss in a boardroom versus the president.
Romney’s strongest moment was his response to the question, “Mr. President, I voted for you in 2008. What have you done or accomplished to earn my vote in 2012?” Romney’s vocal tone and demeanor was much stronger than the President’s. It was also a strong visual moment for Romney. He looked presidential, but this was overshadowed by his overall approach for the other questions.
Obama doesn’t like to personally attack an opponent. He typically attacks their policies. But the last question, and Romney’s claim of supporting 100% of the public, forced Obama to talk about the 47%. It was made more powerful because it was the final statement of the debate and came on the heels of Obama’s big uppercut of the night,that Romney has a one-point economic plan, “to make sure that folks at the top play by a different set of rules.”