Their second debate Tuesday night, could have serious consequences on the last three weeks of the campaign. The point of no return approach to the two candidates for the U.S. presidential election, that clashed Tuesday night in their second debate televised in Hempstead, New York.
Facing 80 undecided voters, who were invited to ask questions not known in advance, and face 20 a Republican rival to new-found euphoria, Barack Obama had the leisure of procrastinating. It was ‘out of the Woods’ if he wanted to recover its initial position of favorite.
During all the first part of the campaign, he seemed assured of winning pretty easily with Mitt Romney. But the first duel on 3 October in Denver went through there, revealing to the American public a Republican candidate more spontaneous and combative, in contrast to a surprisingly borrowed Obama. Enough to cause one of the most spectacular reversals of opinion of recent history across the Atlantic: the last polls published before the second of the three planned debates confirmed the slight advance of Romney on Obama, by 48% compared to 47%. A month ago, the tightest polls gave Obama Winner by 49% against 46%. “The stakes could not be higher, watched Tuesday the Democratic strategist Tad Devine.”. Obama acknowledged its very poor performance in the first debate. He knows he must do much better this time. “If he could not, Romney could continue its momentum,” which could prove irresistible.
Lack of empathy
Forced to attack, the tenant of the White House plays his hopes. But the “more aggressive” approach advocated by the outgoing president’s campaign team for a week carries a risk. “The difficulty is that the “townhall debates” (debate facing the audience) are amenable to this type of aggression ‘, says Tad Devine. In this rare exercise of direct democracy, candidates must take care to respond forthrightly to their fellow citizens, with tact and persuasion, while reserving their ‘aggression’ to the opponent.
In this game of pool to three bands, Barack Obama seems to hold an advantage, having already achieved an excellent performance against Republican John McCain in 2008. But the 2012 campaign is nothing like the previous, with a democratic candidate who barely find good carburation and a Republican “from the dead”. Both, moreover, does this time “a particular empathy” of the electorate, according to Amy Walter, ABC News: Obama with its vaguely haughty Professor tunes during the first debate and this to decrease at the height of his opponent, Romney with his clumsiness of multi-millionaire is laboring to make “close to the people”.
“This campaign has always been more moving that pollsters wanted to have us believe, corrects Terry Holt, a Republican strategist.” “It is a race between a (president) coming out that people would enjoy, but whose policies are unpopular, and a challenger who seems to have good recipes, but that has failed so far to create this strong link with voters.”
If questions were to address the major concerns of Americans (job, resuming economic, debt, health coverage), foreign policy, to which the third and final debate will be devoted to October 22, might play Tuesday surprise guests. In addition to China, “manipulative currency” according to Romney, it is the drama of Benghazi and the death of the American Ambassador in Libya that could cause problems to Barack Obama (see below).
Aware of issues, the two men had been encouraged, by the experts who surround them, to be cautious: in the past, these debates to the public took like a presidential pitfall for some candidates. In 1992, the incumbent president George h. w. Bush was surprised consulting his watch and adjusting his pants, two gestures of annoyance that would prove to be devastating for him. In 2000, Democrat Al Gore to the burly came a little too close to his Republican rival George w. Bush, whose mocking grimace sparked the complicit laughter of assistance. In 2008, Republican John McCain was mocked for having a little too much surveyed the scene, giving the impression of “search for his dog”, according to the good word of comedian Jon Stewart.
He returned Tuesday night to Mitt Romney and Barack Obama to avoid the pitfalls inherent in this subtle choreography to keep all their chances in the final sprint.
The Race For The Dollar Beats Records
The month of September is that all records in the race for money that animates the American presidential. Mitt Romney has managed to raise $ 170 million, a sharp increase from August, when his total was 111 million. Barack Obama continues to lead and himself broke his record month latter with 180 million. It amounts out of ‘Super Cap’, the political action committees funded by companies and lobbies.
In this category, the camp of Mitt Romney than Barack Obama. A spokesman for the former Governor of Massachusetts predicted that October would be even more fruitful. Each camp claims a majority of less than $ 250 individual donations. The two candidates are well gone to both be the first in the history of the United States to have reached $ 1 billion each. September 30, Mitt Romney camp threw 839 million, that of Barack Obama 947 million.
A substantial portion of these funds is guzzled right now in a barrage of negative advertisements in the nine “swing states” that will determine the election. But the real effectiveness of the latter, in view of the amounts spent, divides experts.