ChartExport-8.png

Post-Debate Poll Question — Final Results

We asked who you thought benefited the most from last night’s debate — and nearly 62 percent of you said Mitt Romney. Exactly 30 percent said no one gained an edge, while a little over 8 percent gave the advantage to Obama. Click the image below to enhance the results:

How about it, Ricochetti? Was Romney’s performance this commanding? Or are we underestimating President Obama’s resilience? Tell us in the comments. 

  1. ThePullmanns

    The way I looked at it was that Romney seems to have won on most substantive issues, especially on the economy. His performance was not so commanding that I would say he won by 30%. I think he won by about 5%. I would guess that most people that went for Romney on this think similarly. I would have called it a tie, but WhiskeySam and others have already pointed out what tipped it for Romney – Obama’s obvious lying.

  2. Mel Foil

    The press seems to treat these debates like Broadway shows. If the actor is emoting properly, they’re doing well. But the public may actually be listening to the script, and deciding if makes sense.

  3. Bryan G. Stephens

    The news the next day was how Obama and the moderator were wrong. That was the news of the debate. Romney wins.

    This is not a game: there is no winning on points. All that matters is votes and I don’t think Romney lost any, and I think he gained some. At best, Obama shored up base votes. A bit late in the game to worry about his base.

  4. Robert Promm

    This is kinda like preaching to the choir.  

    I would be shocked if a Ricochet poll turned out otherwise.

  5. Estwald

    Ditto what Mel said. If Romney’s bump from debate #1 is attributable more to the substance and the message and less to style and attitude, then nothing really changed in debate #2. The other side’s salesman may have improved, but the product did not.

  6. Lucy Pevensie

    I think the focus groups brought me around. If they skewed toward Romney–especially MSNBC’s focus group–then the net plus is for Romney. I’m guesing that some of that is on content (as Mel and Eeyore say) and some of it is related to the fact that twice now Mitt has demonstrated that he is not the soulless monster plutocrat Obama has painted him to be.

  7. SPare

    what I see here is the normal tendency for people to think that the side that they were previously committed to as having won.  It’s why I usually don’t trust my instincts on how things are going to play with the wider public.

    For instance, Obama’s verbal mannerisms just grate on me, in much the way that I’m sure Bush’s grated on those of the Left.  I have a pretty good idea of which statements are lies and which are facts, yet an uninformed voter probably has to parse based on body language to get an idea for who is telling the truth.

    The final thought that’s I’d leave is that the debate itself is of less importance than the narratives that get spun off of it.  Kerry probably won on points in the debate where he mentioned the phrase “global test”, but that was a devastating line that echoed for a couple of weeks afterward.  The missed opportunities with Libya and Fast & Furious have the potential for similar echos.

  8. Casey

    You people are really gonna be depressed when Obama wins. Me too but at least i can say I told you so.

  9. Joan of Ark La Tex
    Casey: You people are really gonna be depressed when Obama wins. Me too but at least i can say I told you so. · 2 minutes ago

    It’s a tie at best for Obama Casey, no need to get depress now, is there?

  10. Jimmy Carter

    My previous comment may be more appropriate Here:

    I go to work and Y’all have a poll and post the results before I can participate.

    Do the votes of Us Who work without being able to peekochet* count? Or is it just Me?

    *peek-o-chet [peek-o-shay]

    verb

    1. to sneek onto Ricochet’s website while at work, therefore being unproductive and wasting company resources.

    2.

  11. Last Outpost on the Right

    peekochet needs to become part of the official Ricochet lexicon.

  12. Whiskey Sam

    The apparent victory of Obama will appear less so as more and more groups admit they were wrong (Crowley) or that Obama was wrong (Planned Parenthood).  Obama will not come off as a winner after the damage his own words will do him.

  13. Leigh

    At the time I thought overall Obama tied or won, in terms of the debate himself.  But I think the after-effects favor Romney.

    First, who got good ad material out of it?  This might be my bias showing, but I think that favors Romney.  They had more moments worth replaying.

    Second, Romney’s very bad, no good, horrible moment was Libya.  Of course, this is exactly what the Obama team wants everyone to spend the next week talking about, right?

    Third, and again this might be me, but Romney’s style usually seemed more presidential to me than Obama.  He was too aggressive at times, but I think Obama cancelled out any negative effects from that by his own manner.

    Romney’s voice can be very reassuring: you can imagine him taking charge and comforting the nation after a disaster.  Or proclaiming “morning in America.”

    It’s a draw in the sense that if you came out of the last debate liking Romney better, I don’t think you changed your mind.  That’s a loss for Obama.

  14. Last Outpost on the Right

    I agree with Whiskey Sam. The Obama strategy – abetted by Crowley – seems to be to say anything, even if it’s patently false. They figure that no one will remember the correction, but they will remember the lie, along with their emotional reaction to the lie. People will therefore lend more credence to the lie than to the truthful correction. 

    But this is a mistake. The second debate garnered less attention. And the administration is developing an aura of obfuscation and misdirection. The eventual result will be as damaging to Obama’s reelection effort as the river is to the stone… only faster. 

    - José

  15. Casey
    Pseudodionysius: Obama has no record, no transcripts and no hope. · 8 hours ago

    Luckily, he has all those votes to compensate.

  16. Tom Riehl

    Debates can’t be judged like sports.  There is usually no clear winner or loser, except for the 1st presidential debate this year.  Romney had substance, and Obama had no plan to elucidate.  Romney’s trajectory towards a landslide is unstoppable.  The damage to Obama was done in the first debate when it became obvious to tens of millions of our citizens that Romney is not a  rich, unfeeling and  undeserving meanie.  Obama wasted about $500M painting him as some kind of detached plutocrat, which he decidedly is not on plain inspection.  I’m not counting chickens, but I still predict a landslide.  If Piers Morgan is willing to desert the One, that gives cultural approval for some to follow suit.  I may die of heart fibrillations before three weeks elapse!

  17. Essgee

    The more they analyze the debate, the stronger the performance by Romney.

    He did have a slip on Libya…didn’t have it down well enough to clarify his point.  If we know anything about the man, we must understand he won’t let that happen again.  This week’s error will turn into next week’s command of the issue during the foriegn policy debate–in other words, he will be peaking when everyone has been discussing that particular issue  all week.  He should be able to expand on it, clarifying it…and it will stick this time.

    Additionally, I think his business acumen gives him a global perspective Obama doesn’t have, and a way of arguing that economic conditions can cause or be caused by world events.  I think his belief in the values of American will greatly enable him to explain this as a part of his policies going forward as well as give him a foundation for explaining why the Obama foreign policy has been a disaster.

  18. Jim W

    I have a suspicion the “binders full of women” hysteria and Crowley’s intervention on the Libya question will both turn to Romney’s favor over the next few days. Obama embracing Big Bird and binders in his stump speeches makes him look small-minded and non-substantive compared to Romney, who is offering clear examinations of our nation’s problems, and solutions that go beyond “squeeze the rich.”

    Obama hasn’t got a record worth running on, so he plays schoolyard taunter.  I think voters are getting fed up with the excuses, and are seeking results.

  19. Pseudodionysius

    Obama has no record, no transcripts and no hope.

  20. Walker

    Romney won it, and by a mile!!  What astounded me was how the conservative punditry (with some few exceptions) acted almost as shills for the liberals — on Fox News no less!!  For me, they sounded like elitist snobs.  Can these wits of wisdom drink nothing else but the mainstream kool-aid?  I believe the public sees right through our faux commander-in-chief, and no longer feel guilty about voting for someone else.  By voting for a man of color they were freed to look elsewhere in 2012, and I believe they are.   Also, I think Clint Eastwood was more knowledgeable in characterizing Obama and Biden than any of our talking heads.  Romney came through as genuine — including his “gaffes” on the “binders”.  I’m betting that ordinary Americans will see a man who knows the facts and is not going to be intimidated by the mainstream henchmen of the Democrat party in communicating with voters.  I’m confident that the voters will get it the way they got it in 2010.  Now if only our Beltway punditry will  get on board.  Once again, it’s going to have to be the voters that lead — not the media!