It’s a win but...

            Mitt Romney scored big against Barack Obama in the first of three rounds of presidential debates. Even between libs and the GOP the general consensus is that Romney won. There needn’t be any huge argument about it—simply follow a lot of big democrats on Twitter and the blogosphere and the answer is obvious. Even the DNC painted that this could very well happen and Obama himself alluded to such a possibility a few days ago.

            Notable points, both verbal and non-verbal include:

-       Mitt using humor more successfully

-       Obama’s constant (though not complete) refusal to look at Mitt Romney

-       Mitt’s focus, versus Obama’s tangents

-       Obama’s stutter and slow moments (which is characteristic of his speech—not a slight on him, but this mannerism certainly didn’t help)

-       Mitt handled the moderator well (refusal to be bullied) while Obama did not—some are arguing that Obama snapped at Lehrer once or twice.

-       Obama tried to invoke the power of math, Romney invoked actual numbers—often and with relevance.

-       Mitt owned the counterattacks.

-       Obama is not a great speaker under pressure, off the cuff.

-       Mitt was on offense all night, and Barack never got a chance

-       Obama was more general. Mitt was more specific.

-       Romney was having fun. Barack was not.

All this being said, there’s some notable things to discuss. First, as the DNC put it (and yes it’s spin, but it’s got some truth), Romney was historically in a good spot to win this one—which he did. Barack was ill-prepared—as one Reuters commentator told Greta van Susteren: “I recognized the President’s performance tonight—the same one I had in college when I felt like I didn’t need to study for an English exam because I already knew English.” Perhaps Obama prepared the wrong way, and expected the wrong attacks. Perhaps. But it’s highly arguable that he won’t make that same mistake twice. Conversely, Romney knew Obama’s playbook and had done his own research and study. When Obama called upon the power of the almighty Independent Study, Mitt knew which one and had 4 more that said something different. Love him or hate him, Mitt wasn’t lucky—he was prepared.

Also of note is how clean the fight was. Romney didn’t mention Barack’s newly surfaced videos, or questionable friends (Wright, Ayers, etc), and neither did Obama mention the “47%” remark or Bain Capital. Some of these attacks might have fit into the debate context, but the two seemed to be quite content hitting each other above the belt. Again, this may not happen next time. Obama likely feels the need for an “edge” and the “47%” or Bain might be appealing as a way to get that edge. (Of course this opens the possibility that Mitt could do that exact same thing to keep his edge). Either way, Romney should be prepared—Obama never really got his offense going tonight, and he’ll want to taste blood during the next debate. Mitt should be ready to dodge some fast punches in 13 days.

Now that Obama knows how Mitt will fight, he’s going to work on his technique. First round to the challenger—certainly…but there are two debates to go. If Mitt wants to keep this up, he needs a decisive victory over the next two debates. While Obama has prep time to analyze Mitt’s attacks and plan his own, Romney has to plan his deflections and counterattack.

Among other things here’s a shortlist of points not pressed, not touched upon, and possibly to be used and considered for next time:

-       Romney ran a terrific offense—he was at his best. Can he keep being his best?

-       Lehrer was honestly a weak moderator. Compared to Obama’s own flat performance and a helpless moderator, Romney couldn’t help but look strong. The moderator next time may not be such a push over.

-       Obama should hit and even belabor the points where he feels strong—this may help keep Romney out of the groove and run the clock down.

-       Mitt’s 47% and Obama’s little race video might pop up. Both need attacks and both need parries and deflections.

-       When ObamaCare resurfaces (as it will) Mitt can easily win the point with one line: “ObamaCare needs to be repealed because the people want it repealed and the majority of Americans don’t support it—even though the President and a democrat congress rammed it through.” In this way Mitt can defend RomneyCare and attack ObamaCare.

-       Mitt should use Libya as evidence of a failed foreign policy. This is going to be a tough plot of beans to defend for Obama—because Libya has “botched” and “scandal” written all over it like obscene words in a bathroom stall.

-       Neither one can afford to let the other get in the groove first. Obama was on his heels 97% of the night. He doesn’t like that feeling—so he’s going to try to "return to sender". Mitt’s job is make sure Obama stays on his heels.

All in all, the debate definitively went well for Romney, and the win was certainly needed. But his excellent performance needs to be repeated, and then repeated again. Obama must go on heavy offense now, but with the additional topics coming up Mitt has little to lose on foreign policy and Barack has little to gain. Additionally Obama is a bit behind on financial issues as well. Even so, it’s arguable that the advantage is still to Obama, as the safe alternative to Mitt Romney. If Mitt wins next time Barack will definitely be behind the count—and he may not recover. It’s still anyone’s game, but Romney made a decisive point to be everything he needed to be. If he keeps it up he’ll likely have two more wins—and possibly a presidency in his pocket. Still, it’s not a one-man show and Obama wants to retain his seat of power for as long as he can. Part of Mitt winning involves Obama losing, and that’s something the president won’t give up easily.