The one thought that kept repeating itself in watching the first debate between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama is this:
“Obama looks like he doesn’t know how to defend a record.”
He’s been in office since 1996. Surely he’s figured this out by now.
Not exactly.
In 1996, Obama was elected to a Chicago state senate seat in a 90% Democrat district. He had to run in 1998, but to show you how little of a race that was, Obama was re-nominated unopposed with 16,792 votes. The Republican that year was nominated with 401.
Obama waltzed to a 45,486 to 5,526 re-election. That is Obama’s only re-election campaign – a campaign that any breathing Democrat, and many non-breathing ones, would’ve won.
He was unopposed the rest of the way in the State Senate. He won a US Senate seat and never defended it.
Now, here he is.
The only re-election experience Obama has is defending a seat where Republicans are lucky to get 10% of the vote. Debating is meaningless in a race like that.
Obama the non-incumbent is a formidable debater, in situations where he doesn’t have to defend anything. He’s not responsible for anything. He’s all promises and all “hope and change.”
But re-elections are “What have you done for me lately” affairs. It takes a certain talent to debate defending a record while sounding like you’re on offense. Reagan did it. Clinton did it. W did it.
Obama obviously doesn’t know how to do it. “My failures aren’t my fault” isn’t going to cut it.
Romney and Obama meet for 2 more debates. If Obama doesn’t realize he’s not in Illinois with a 90% cushion, the Democratic National Committee might as well opt to keep Obama on the bench and let Mitt Romney debate a chair.
