Bookeristas on two continents offer differing views on last night's town hall-oriented debate:
Crystal Wright: "Romney Prevailed Over Obama, The Angry Man Without A Plan"
Asserts the conservative Republican blogger and Romney supporter in Washington, D.C.:
"Romney looked confident and trustworthy while Obama came across as a cad
doing everything to protect his job, including lying about what caused
the deaths of four diplomats in Libya. As the dust settles on the
charade of punditry analysis, which ruled the second presidential debate
a tie, I think the polls will reveal another Romney surge because no
one, least of all voters, likes an angry man, full of blame with no
plan. That’s what Obama is."
Chidike Okeem: "Obama Crushed Romney With His Rebuttals, Zingers"
Asserts the Nigerian-British conservative blogger, who lives in California: "Overall, Obama had excellent zingers and rebuttals. Did I agree with the
philosophical bent of most of his points? No. However, I can put my
ideological bias aside and judge a debate fairly. Romney’s rebuttals
were decent, but nothing to write home about. Obama’s rebuttals were
brilliant. One of Obama’s most refulgent rebuttals was the point where
he deftly diffused Romney’s desperation-driven attack on his
pension — during a question on immigration of all topics! (See
1:04:00 in the debate video [here].) Romney asked Obama, 'Have you looked
at your pension recently?' Obama said, 'You know, I don’t look at my
pension. It’s not as big as yours so it doesn’t take as long. I don’t
check it that often.' The audience laughed, and Obama diffused the
entire point that Romney was trying to score. Romney allowed Obama to do
this because Romney doesn’t understand that asking a question isn’t the same thing as making an argument! Romney gives his opponents perfect opportunities to diffuse his points with zingers."
Armstrong Williams: "Draw"
The conservative Republican commentator in D.C. and Romney supporter didn't see anything special from either candidate: "My guess is that this one is effectively a draw. We didn’t see
anything new, not even the angry president — he’s always angry on the
stump — and most likely both sides will like what they saw. Republicans
will like how Romney did, and Democrats will like the red meat that
Obama threw them. As for independents, if any of them weren’t watching
Justin Verlander’s masterpiece against the Yankees, who knows what they
think? They saw a tense argument; maybe it wasn’t as tense as the debate
between Representatives Brad Sherman and Howard Berman, whose policies
and last names are so easy to confuse, but it was uncomfortable. Both
men were quick on their feet, were well-prepared, and presidential."
Asserts the French conservative blogger (original op-ed in French): "This uncompromising debate had the merit of revealing Obama's character, since he likes to hide behind an image as a man of reflection, a consensus builder, and mindful of others. So totally unworthy of the office, we have seen the world superpower's leader revel in criticizing his Republican rival on his person, while being well supported by the journalist who mostly 'moderated' the debate in favor of the Democrat. The height of this 'impartiality' was reached with the journalists' cheers following Obama's ad hominem criticism. In this, he was simply vulgar."
Neoafricain adds: "Mitt Romney is the presidential candidate President who is really the most qualified on these issues [like the economy, free trade, and energy policy] for many years. Serenity, competence, responsibility, and a presidential look: being far better on the two main issues which are national security and the economy, Mitt Romney won this debate."
Asserts the moderate-conservative Republican blogger in Maryland: "After last night's debate, if anyone tells you Mitt was forceful and Obama was angry, state to them, clearly, they are affected by stereotypes of the "angry Black man" because Mitt Romney was rude as hell and showed no respect. Period. That is all."
Bookerista Debate: Who Won The 2nd Presidential Debate?
