What did we learn from the first debate?
Romney had energy, and frankly, he had to show some kind of emotion. He could not go folksy because that doesn't seem quite him.
President Obama appeared like he wanted to be somewhere else.
Jim Lehrer probably wanted a bit more control over the debate, but his questions were wide open and created real back and forth between the candidates. In past debates it seemed as if the candidates could have had the debates on separate nights. For me it was refreshing. For others, it may have been off putting.
Couple that with how wonky the debate was. Fact Checkers rejoice: you will be earning your pay today. From the $5 trillion tax plan to the 716 billion in "cuts" or "savings" to Medicare, whichever you like, there was a steady stream of numbers and statistics that may have moved many to bang their heads against the wall. Who's right? Probably both, just to certain degrees.
The debate was a win for Romney. But from most analyses, debates matter little. What seems to have a greater effect is the coverage in the news media. This is more complex now than it was twenty years ago because the American public seems to be sorting itself into partisan media diets. That is to say that Republicans tend to hear from fellow Republicans and Democrats hear from fellow Democrats.
I'm just wanting to see what Saturday Night Live does. That may be more important than the actual debate.
