Obama wasn’t that bad at the Denver debate. We saw, for the most part, the same Obama we saw in the Democratic primary and Presidential debates of 2008. Obama was Obama.
What we saw, and what the polimedia is trying to keep us from a)realizing, b) acknowledging, c) crowing; is that Willard Mitt Romney was just light years better than Obama on every level. That’s why the media has been pushing the “Obama was bad” meme as hard as they have been. I sort of bought into it myself after hearing to repeated. but that wasn’t what really happened.
What really happened is that Mitt Romney simply was that good, that dominating, and there was nothing Obama could have done differently. He did bring his “A” game. He just isn’t in the same league as Romney was. There was nothing Obama could have done to change his fortunes that night short of running down the Republican challenger with his armored limo before the debate began.
This leads to the next obvious question. Ace says Romney was great… but was he? What if Mitt Romney just had a decent night, maybe a “B” or “B+,” but not an an “A” or “A+”?
What I’m asking—with a Matthewseque tingle—is, “What if that wasn’t the best Romney can do?”
Romney will easily win the remaining debates no matter what the moderators try to do to stop his momentum if he comes out remotely as well as he did in Denver, because we have seen Obama at his best, and know he has no reserves to call upon. He’s a completely known quantity, a bike with one gear and a steering wheel locked hopelessly in a hard left turn.
If Romney has more horses under the hood, and the cascade of scandals continues to fall against Obama, is a 400 electoral vote victory a real possibility for Romney?