See also US Elections Video: The 1st Obama-Romney Debate
Photo: ReutersWho won tonight's debate? The answer, according to political scientists, depends on how and where you watched it, and how the media report the result in the post-debate deluge of analysis and opinion --- in 2004, a group who watched with no input from network experts believed Democratic challenger John Kerry won, but those "assisted" by network analysis argued that George W. Bush had performed better.
So, with the caveat that this is an immediate reaction to the debates with no influence whatsoever from post-debate commentary, a verdict....
President Obama may be an excellent public speaker, but tonight he illustrated how delivering a speech or lecturing differs from debating. Public speaking, to be effective, requires talking slower, and frequent pauses convey you are considering your options in how to explain an important point. Debating requires a more forceful and faster delivery of your arguments, and "err, err, erring your way through an opinion only suggests a lack of conviction in your beliefs.
That is why Mitt Romney 'won' this debate. He appeared more committed and convincing when explaining his solutions to America's economic woes. Those ideas may appear to be nothing more than wishful thinking when the answers are dissected, but the perception Romney gave was that he has a coherent plan to restore US fortunes. The bottom line to take from the debates was that Mitt Romney appeared Presidential; the actual president less so.
Will that be enough to shift the polls in Mitt Romney's favour? Did he "win" by a margin that will have the Obama campaign worried. Perhaps not --- history suggests that these debates do not matter.
But Mitt Romney has at least boosted his chances of convincing wavering undecided voters to back him.