By Gel Santos Relos
Less than three weeks to go and Americans will make the all-important decision that will determine the course that the nation will take in the next four years.
Will we re-elect President Barack Obama and give him our full trust and support, so he can lead the country “forward, not backward” and complete the programs he has started to help the middle class, which he and the Democrats say is key to America’s recovery?
Or do we elect former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and allow the Republican challenger to “lead America back” and implement the Republican prescription of lower taxes and small government toward “real recovery?”
The US Presidential Race 2012 has indeed taken a nail-biting twist, after what many people from both political fence have described to be President Obama’s “flaccid” and “lackluster” performance in the first of three debates.
In contrast, Gov. Mitt Romney’s strong and aggressive performance in the first debate has exceeded expectations, and has given the general impression that he won the debate.
The polls following the first debate has supported the perceived shift in momentum in favor of Gov. Romney, setting back the game to a virtual tie. But TIME Magazine’s Alex Altman writes and puts this issue in perspective: “That’s exactly the same position the two candidates were in on Labor Day, before Obama received a post-convention bump of his own. The debate didn’t dramatically alter the race; it restored its equilibrium.”
Assuming Altman is correct in his assessment, and that there is still no clear winner in the race to the White House, the second debate on October 16 would be critical for both parties.
I am writing this article on the eve of that consequential face-off between Obama and Romney, and perhaps as you are reading this article, we would already have made up our minds as to who the winner is for second debate.
But if the public discussions leading up to Tuesday would be our indicator, then the focus of the American people watching the debate would be more on “style,” rather than “substance.”
People have been anticipating on how both candidates would “perform” in front of undecided voters in a town hall style debate -- how each would be able to answer these ordinary folks’ questions with confidence and clarity in substance.
I personally have been eager to to see how moderator Candy Crowley would be able to reign in on these powerful candidates so no one would be able to dodge questions and instead give talking points that bolster their campaign agenda.
I heard people are looking forward to the second debate with the kind of excitement akin to the anticipation of the next episode of their favorite telenovela or reality show. Would the meek be more aggressive? How would the contravida fight back? How would the body language and facial expression of each candidate reveal their lies? Intimidation? Aggression? Strength? Weakness? Who would look more “presidentiable”?
It seems at this point, the transcript of their argument will not have much of an impact among voters who may have already decided whom they want to be President. No matter what the fact-checkers say regarding the claims of each candidate during the debate, the Democrats would claim victory for Obama, while the Republicans would still say that Romney won debate number two.
It is the perception and judgment of ‘undecided” voters that would be critical.
Romney, however, would have gone into the second debate in a better position, than where he was two weeks ago--- with improved “likeability.” According to a recent poll by Politico/George Washington University released last Monday, Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney is now viewed favorably by a majority of likely voters.
This has narrowed the President's lead over Romney on "likeability" to only 22 points in polls conducted a week ago - down from 28 before the debate. A strong positive Romney performance would potentially erode further Obama’s lead, thanks to undecided voters, especially those who are not issue-driven, but who would go with the guy they like better.
The same argument, however, may be said for Obama supporters who just voted for him in 2008 because they “liked” him, but did not necessarily know much about his policies and programs. Case in point: Obama’s “likeability” rating remains higher than his “job approval” rating. Could Romney knock down Obama’s “likeability” further, or would Obama inflict that upon himself based on his debate “performance?”
A challenge that Romney would have to hurdle in the debate would have to be the voters' perception that he does not understand nor feel the plight and problems of the middle class. To this date, Obama has continued to have an edge over Romney on this issue of "connecting" with the middle class and struggling Americans. Romney's debate "performance" could potentially disprove this, if he would be able to "connect" with the undecided voters in the town hall debate.
Obama had reportedly been not too excited about debates, calling them “superficial,” “theatrical,” which could probably somehow explain his lackluster "performance" in the first debate. But this president could not win the election if he would operate on “what the world should be,” instead of “what the world is now.” Superficial or not, the world would be watching this second debate-- and this could make or break his campaign.
In the next edition of this column, we would be talking about the verdict -- if Obama had been successful in explaining to the American people how he had made their lives better off now than they were four years ago; how his programs could truly move the nation forward to help the middle class achieve their American dream. We would determine if he was able to deliver his so-called "substance" in a “style” that would resonate among voters, if he was able to make them feel that he was fighting for them, and that he deserves another four years in the White House.
Or, as Republicans have predicted, would the second debate prove Romney to be the stronger, more presidentiable candidate (in both style and substance) and diminish Obama’s chances of being re-elected?
Abangan!
(My Asian Journal Column Article, October 17, 18, 19, 2012)