Looks like I'm being proven right again. On issues that will decide this election, Romney pitched a shutout. October 17, 2012 CBS Poll: Romney Wins 65-34 on Economy; CNN Poll: Romney Wins 54-40 on Economy, 49-46 on Health Care, 51-44 on Taxes, 59-36 on Deficit, 49-46 on Leadership, All in Favor of Romney You now, as far as "Debate Winner" it's pretty close with those registered voters. CBS gives it to Obama, among registered voters 37-30. CNN's registered voters gives it to Obama 46-39. But on actual issues -- the ones that will determine this election -- Romney destroyed him. CNN's focus group claimed they thought Obama "won." They had it something like 14 for Obama, 15 draw, 6 Romney. But even that group said this-- on the question of "Who offers a better vision for the future?," Romney edged Obama 18-17. Now that's very slim. I wouldn't read too much into that. But consider: More people think Romney presents a better vision for the future -- the quickest possible shorthand for "who should be President?" -- and yet he didn't "win" the debate? You always have to question what the criteria people are employing when you ask them who "won." I think people are rating the performance. And narrowly saying, on performance, it was a close thing, but edge to Obama. But ask about who actually reached them on the most important issues, and it's Romney, all the way. So they seem to be distinguishing between performance and substance. Romney wins the substance, pretty clearly. I'll take it. And give Obama his charity performance points. More: Foreign policy, Obama edges 49-47. But this is amazing: Did Obama offer a clear vision for solving the country's problems? 38% Yes 61% No 61% No. Wow. How about that asked about Romney? 49% Yes 50% No A Specatator Culture: Americans have gotten pretty sophisticated about judging performance, especially after 10 years of American Idol. We shouldn't assume that when people answer the question "Who won the debate?" they confuse that question with "Who did you find more persuasive?" They might actually be offering a sophisticated analysis: "I think this guy won on debate performance points." But then ask them "Who actually persuaded you?," and they might answer a completely different way. It certainly appears that's what happened here tonight. More: NumbersMuncher has even more of the below-the-topline polling questions. Romney wins. So here's what I think happened. Initially people polled were so shocked Obama was not a corpse, they initially thought he had out pointed Romney. But then when asked for specifics, they came to their senses and pretty much said, wait Romney won on this that and the other—all the stuff that matters—on substance. Bottom line, Romney won over the voters at debate #2.
After their next debate they should have the candidates stand on stage while Cowell, Jackson and Paul critique them. I don't know what the clear vision the 38% saw are talking about other than going after the rich.
Romney got his ass handed to him on a silver platter. The left manned up and admitted when Obama got waylayed by Romney in debate #1. Why is admitting the obvious so hard to do for the rightwingers? Romney clearly got trounced on last night. It's not the end of the world. There's always round 3.
Perhaps you didn't read the op. When you get beat in all the substance issues it is pretty hard for any rational person to consider this "trounced."
"Trounced" by winning on all the important issues that will decide this election. Makes perfect sense. I'm just glad to see you back in the Obama camp. That pinky toe you dipped into the "hai guyz i'm an independent!!!1!!1" pool was kind of disturbing.
Actually on points, most had this a draw. But on substance, the facts simply show Obama losing across the board. I would guess that if the Obama campaign could choose between winning the general, or winning on the economy and all the other big issues, they'd pick the latter as well. Because they know the formers means Obama looked much better, but the latter means votes. I'm just reporting the polling data.
Liberals keep playing the "WHY CAN'T CONSERVATIVES JUST ADMIT OBAMA WON?!?!?!! WE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT ROMNEY WON!!!" card. Here's the problem, liberals didn't have a choice with debate #1. It was 100% spinproof fact that Romney beat Obama in just about every way. To say Obama won that debate would be foolish and people would have laughed. Last night, Romney won on many key issues, often by large margins, according to most polls. It's completely debatable whether Obama won on "style" or overall impression. I certainly don't believe Obama won last night. I've seen no real reason to believe that. I understand why his supporters want me to believe that, and why they want everyone to just accept Obama won, but that's not convincing in the least. If Romney would have blown it like Obama blew it in debate 1, I'd have no trouble saying Obama won, but that didn't happen. You will find nobody out there who thinks Obama won last night willing to admit that Romney lost like Obama lost in the first debate. Nobody sane, at least.
Even if I thought it was a tie I'd admit it, but I just don't see how Romney winning on the economy by 2-1 in liberal polls is a loss. Sorry just can't do it.
Registered voters. Liberals love those. Dead people who haven't been purged from the lists are registered voters. College freshmen trying to get laid are registered voters.
