Asia Poole

      This debate was intended to clear up both sides Foreign Policy plans. Once the debate started it was clear that they declared it a National Economy debate. The question is who started the change in conversation? Well, that would be Romney. The, even more than the first debate, flustered Governor consistently contradicted himself and was corrected be fact-checkers around the world. For instance, Romney said "Muslim nations need to help themselves... but we need to help their leaders" and "We can't kill our way out of a situation... but we will get them" and, my personal favorite, "I have 5 simple steps to bring in more jobs...(before this night) I have a 59-point plan to raise the amount of jobs." With Romney being all over the place, he dug his on grave in this debate. Not to mention his lack of question answering. America just wants the straight to the point answer to their questions, and Romney just could not deliver. This is how we continuously ended up back on the topic of the Economy. This also further proved that he may not actually have any plans for any issue in America. He just kept hitching along on what President Obama said, then finishing his rant with a non-factual statement about what Obama has done wrong. Romney left me with one huge question, "WHAT WILL YOU DO!?!?", and that pertains to every topic.

       President Barack Obama came a long way from his first debate. At first he was entirely passive, then he became incredibly aggressive, and in this last debate everything seemed just right. He was enough of both that people could just focus on what was being said rather than how it was being said. He, too, said a few key things in this debate that could either make or break his campaign. He placed a international stamp on our alliance with Israel and a choke-hold on Iran. "Israel is our greatest ally in the region, we will stick by them if [they remain in tact]" "As long as I'm President of the United States, Iran will not get a nuclear weapon." This definite statements about foreign policy (the little time they stayed on the topic) could have done serious damage to the campaign. He can lose, or gain, voters.

       I believe it is clear that Obama, for the third time, won the debate. The difference is that now we don't just have to base it on information alone, because he won all around. The most popular quotes of the night had to be:

  "Romney: Navy has fewer ships than 1917. Obama: We have fewer horses, bayonets too."

       and

  "Romney, you keep on trying to airbrush history." - Obama

    Who won the debate? Vice President Joe Biden won the debate tonight. He won due to substance, much like Obama last week, and energy alone. When I say energy I'm just talking about alertness, I'm talking about the vibe he brought on and carried on stage. He had a very confident and sure of himself attitude which was way more demanding than Ryan's attitude. Ryan was clearly nervous because he continually drank water. One physical reaction to nervousness is having dry mouth. Knowing this, and seeing the constant worry in his eyes let the viewers know that he was nervous. Unlike last week's debate, this one was clear for the most part. The viewers were able to get a more in depth insight into foreign policy, abortion, and medicare.

    Biden did have an issue with interrupting throughout the debate. We all know he is a man that speaks his mind and does it instantaneously. Tonight he was able to control that a lot better, but he still struggled. Romney had this same type of problem going on last week. He would often cut off the mediator and President Obama. This is when candidates need to be reminded of debate etiquette. They just need to wait their turns. For me, this matter a lot because I need a leader that can conduct their selves properly. Hence, why, in some part, Romney did not win the first debate and Biden barely won the second debate. Of course, etiquette is more important in a President more than a vice president.

    One big factor for this debate was the topic of abortion. For the first time in history both candidates for VP are Catholics. Generally, I would say that the religion of a political figure should not matter since legally religion should not affect government. When asked the question how does their religion affect their stance and choice of laws on abortion, the two of them gave half-different answers. Paul Ryan said "The policy of the Romney administration will be to oppose abortion with the exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother." Because as a Catholic he believes life begins at conception and is taking that theory and applying to the policy on his and Romney's ticket. The "incest" comment seems to me to be touching on the subject of eugenics. Whereas Biden has the same PERSONAL beliefs, key word being personal, but he and Obama choose to be pro-life. He said "Life begins at conception, that's the church's judgement, I accept it in my personal life. But I refuse to impose it on [others]". This is in large part why Biden did so well. He was able to give his personal opinion and keep his political opinion separate, in which Ryan was not. We need a government that can keep America's best interest in mind without clouding their judgment with personal beliefs, whether they are religious beliefs or behavioral beliefs. 

The first Presidential debate was slightly disappointing for both parties to say the least. It was filled with digs and jokes at one another, and even the mediator. Speaking of the mediator, he had a very hard time wrangling these two political giants. He was often cut off and silenced by Governor Romney, and occasionally President Obama. For instance, Romney at one point told the mediator, not verbatim, "No, I have to respond", then continuing on to argue his point of view. Obama, after being told his time was up, jokingly stated "I had five seconds until you cut me off", then continued to speak for about one minute. Once you take out all of the fluff in this argument you can walk away with just enough information to choose a front runner in the debate. Romney often got lost in the rebuttal and only skimmed the top of his plan of reform on just about every topic. He frequently used the 'blame game' technique and pointed out several things Obama does wrong. Obama focused less on trying to make his opponent look inadequate by pointing out his (Romney) faults and more on explaining the choices that he (Obama) stands for. His approach was a little more self focused than Romney's. At one point Obama points out that Romney has not yet described in depth what his points are. Romney just got flustered, defensive and immediately went on the attack. In another scuttle between the two, Obama points out how Romney doesn’t want to enforce hiring more teachers to ensure educational strength in the nation. Romney comes back with one of his infamous “I love…” statements. He says “I love grade school. I think teachers are great.” This rebuttal did exactly what Obama was trying to prove. Which is why, after my analysis, Obama seems to have won this first debate, despite what many of the polls say.