Townhall Debate Results

I'm not a pundit, and I have not listened to the post-debate news, but I have an opinion.
I sat in a mixed public audience at the Hammer Museum in West Los Angeles. I heard the mostly liberal audience applaud politely when they thought Obama scored and one woman, with a big mouth, who vocally chastised Romney whenever she felt he was wrong.
Otherwise, it was myself and my two friends, being extra-polite and keeping our mouths shut.
And I saw the CNN audience reaction graph. (see Luntz Focus Group results here)

So, here is what I saw:

Obama and Romney ran a close tie. Again, like the election, this is a close race.

A tie favors Obama. All he had to do was better his last performance.

BOTH candidates looked presidential.

When they got into it, I watched the CNN audience response slide into the negatives. Bantering is a negative. Politeness is a positive. So when anyone held back from comments, they won points with that undecided audience, especially among those women, who are the main target audience.

Obama did not hold back. He attacked Romney with claims that Romney was telling falsehoods. Each time he did, which was EVERY time he spoke, he went into the negative territory with women.

Obama and Romney had one job last night. It was simple. Convince undecided voters to cast their vote for that candidate. Obama failed. He once again, spoke ONLY to his base.

LIBYA

That, in a nutshell, will be the takeaway from this debate. The rest is blah, blah, blah.

Crowley handed it to Obama. "Didn't Secretary Clinton take full responsibility for that?" The moderator fed the president an "out" from the seriousness of this situation.

The President stood up with self-righteous anger, claiming that he was "friends" with the whole diplomatic corps. Sure he is! Those were his plumbs, handed out for good fund raising in the election four years ago. AND HE GOT HIS TOP FUNDRAISER KILLED!

It was the ONLY time I have EVER seen Mr. Obama register that deep-seated, self-righteous anger that is born of a conviction. The conviction, however, is based on his lie- that he did "all he could" to insure their safety. No way he did.

Self-righteous anger is the worst kind to reason with. There is a basis in truth, but it is smeared with a big story to build it into a wall of lies. And here we are again...

The WH is involved in a controversy of lies. This is about a coverup. It has progressed now to a coverup of a coverup. The WH and POTUS are trying to tell us that they didn't tell us what they told us.

The state department turned him down when he asked for security. They ignored 9/11. They blamed a video and threw that man in jail!

But the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton and the President of the United States, Barak Obama, went out and taped advertisements to run in foreign countries to apologize for a video that had NOTHING TO DO WITH LIBYA! Obama spoke to the United Nations and APOLOGIZED over and over again to the world about a video that had nothing to do with the attack!

They went out there to bolster up their lie. And we all know it. We saw it. You cannot tell a lie over and over and make it anything more than a lie. Especially when four people are dead!

Watergate, Whitewatergate and Benghazigate

The biggest difference in all these scandals here is that in Benghazi people were killed and their families want answers. So do the American people. "Dead" is a permanent condition.

It is only a matter of time before the videos from those terrorists start to surface. The Ambassador was dragged through the streets, tortured and sodomized by foreign objects. You and I know that there are videos of those savages performing that torture on this man. Its only a matter of time before those iPhone pics come out.

Results of the Debate?

All I can say is that the President may have won on points. He may have won because a tie is all he needed. But he opened the door to hell with Benghazi and Crowley, in her efforts to aid him, only gave leverage to the concerns of Americans across the country. He lied, people died. 

Next week, the debate is on foreign affairs. Whoooa! With his history with Netenyahu and Israel, and this scandal in Benghazi, I would not want to be him.

What I predict is that he will say he is winning the war on terrorism and act superior to Mitt because he knows so much more. It won't fly. He will say he killed OBL. So? Got out of Iraq. So? Drawdown in Afghanistan. So?

Can he say that America is more well-loved across the world because he is in office? No. He said that would happen, but he may be liked by other countries, but he is not respected by our enemies. I almost expect him to say, "Give me that flexibility and I will show you!" The flexibility he said he would have AFTER the election into a hot mike in Russia. . .

And this is where the rubber meets the road on Benghazi. We shall see.