So, I watched the debate late last night and want to write down my thoughts before I read all the news people's takes on who won and what-not. I find it annoying when the commentators analyze the debates for all of America right afterward before people have time to make their own. I feel like people will feel pressured to agree with the "professional's" analysis -- and heaven knows that depending on which outlet you are listening to, the analysis is usually pretty bias to give the outcome they desire. So I'm writing this before reading any other analysis. I'm interested to see if other people thought similarly to me. As you read this, remember that I am partial to Mitt, so that bias may come out, but I seriously watched this debate with an open mind - and although I know who I am voting for, I was not expecting what I saw. I thought the debate was an overall positive. Definitely not as entertaining as the Republican primary debates - and thank goodness! We have two competent sounding individuals discussing the most important issues of our day - its not meant to be entertaining.
SOME POSITIVE THINGS I NOTICED:
#1 - I thought general tone of the debate was cordial. I thought it was nice that Mitt and Obama were able to discuss things without it getting heated and they both genuinely appeared pleasant to one another, both before and after the debate. I liked how the two families got together afterward and introduced each other. The whole interaction appeared very genuine.
#2 - I'm glad that the debates focused on the actual issues and not crap like tax returns, college transcripts, birth certificates, past gaffes, etc. We actually got to hear the views of each person and their guiding principles, which was very helpful.
#3 - I liked that the candidates had more time to expand on ideas and discuss the issues, they weren't necessarily contained by a time limit. I think this led to more depth and greater ability for each to defend their comments.
MY ANALYSIS OF BODY LANGUAGE/APPEARANCE/RATE & TONE OF VOICE
Obama: This is where Obama lost me. I don't know why, but he appeared off his game. He looked bored and didn't exude any passion (which I think is weird because if you watched the debates 4 years ago, he showed passion -- in fact, that was one of his major selling points). He looked down at the podium a lot and didn't look at Mitt when he was addressing him (both when Obama addressed Romney and when Romney addressed Obama). There was just something missing from his usual demeanor which only showed itself during the informal times before and after the debate. He spoke very slowly, almost to the point where I lost interest in what he was saying - it seemed like he was struggling to find the right words to say and his "uhhh" (which has been mocked on SNL) drove me nuts by mid-debate. All-in-all I think Obama had a rough night in this area.
Mitt: In my opinion, this was Mitt's strongest area. He looked directly at Obama when speaking and when being spoken to, showed some emotion and passion, but maintained a calm exterior. He was able to smile and use his hand gestures to emphasize his ideas. Mitt looked presidential. He kept a nice brisk pace when speaking and didn't stumble over his words as much as he did during the Republican debates.
MY ANALYSIS OF THEIR PREPARATION/FACT-CHECKING
Needless-to-say if you are competing in a presidential debate you spend a lot of time preparing. Both candidates seemed to be prepared and well-versed in their own and their opponents plans. I think Mitt demonstrated a superior ability to show that he is aware of the issues and the state of the union (remember him throwing out that information at the beginning about the # of training programs and different entities in government) - clearly he has down extensive research. I'll give Obama a bone here though and state that because he is the actual president, it is assumed that he knows the state of the union and where things stand, so he probably doesn't have to go out of his way to prove that he is aware of what is going on. I also think that both candidates stretched the numbers a little when describing their plans. They both took the most optimistic view of their own plans and the most negative of the others. And when the fact-checkers come out I'm sure the liberals will say Mitt made more blatant errors and the conservatives will say Obama made more. I don't think either party is deliberately misinforming the American people, but they each have their own different perspective and view on how government/the economy works, and depending on that view and which data you are actually looking at, their statements would be justifiable if you are looking through that particular lens. I think both candidate raised good questions about the other's plans. I thought Obama's question about specific details in his plan was a great question and totally fair. I also think Mitt answered it well, although I would have added, "Mr. President, you tell me I don't have specific plans... well, that may be true - but you haven't shared any specific plan details of your own!" I really wish he had said that to him because I would have laughed.
OVERALL IMPRESSION
You may have noticed that I didn't make a section about substance or the individual views of the candidate. I side with Mitt on most things, so obviously I agree with his substance and views more than Obama's, so that column just wouldn't be fair.
Overall, I really think Mitt had the better debate. Just his demeanor and energy was much better than Obama's (and I'm not saying that because I don't agree with Obama's policies). I think he was much more effective in conveying his ideas. I don't think either had the best debate of their life and neither really gave us significant details about their plans -- but this isn't like the Republican debates where everyone has a similar end goal, with minor differences on how to get there -- these two men have a fundamentally different view of the path that America should take. And I think we got a picture of that last night. I am excited for the other debates!
Now, I'm going to go read all the commentary on the debates -- time to weed through the bias on both sides and see what they think!