The reaction to the Obama Romney debate is that Romney won. The GOP did a commercial showing Obama staring down while Romney spoke and also making a facial movement, that they call a smirk when Romney said 23 million are out of work under Obama.
Another view is that Obama was taking notes while Romney was speaking and so looked down. The facial movement might be a smirk, but could also be Obama’s reaction to Romney pushing a GOP talking point.
The reaction to the debate is partly Obama body language. It is partly this type of reaction. Partly, Obama was aloof and detached. Obama did not bring much passion to the debate. The Left is very upset that Obama did not push talking points like the 47 percent, Cayman Islands, Bain Capital, etc.
In mathematical thinking, we are supposed to think in terms of proof. Did Romney prove his plans or criticism of Obama were valid? Or did Romney simply headline his arguments in the debate and the actual substance of his argument is on his webpage or in briefing books or think tank position papers?
Mathematical thinking is about the substance that backs up the headlines. But based on the headlining by Romney that was more aggressive, he is said to have won the debate. Does that mean if Romney’s proposals were implemented they would work? Does it mean if Obamacare is repealed, that health care will be better?
These are not decided in the debate. So why should the people impacted by Obamacare or Romney tax cuts and benefit cuts react based on body language, enthusiasm, etc?
Are we governed by the mathematical thinkers or by the crowd at the Colosseum? It would seem it is the crowd. They put thumbs up or down and that decides who wins. That decides what policies are tried. But that doesn’t decide what policies will work. The arena crowd doesn’t control that. Nor does it deal directly with that.
So we are governed by the emotions of the arena crowd based on whether Obama takes notes and looks down while taking notes. This determines our fate?
What can mathematical thinkers do to change this? To be ruled by such an arena crowd is to forsake rationality controlling our affairs. It is unacceptable.
It can be objected that the debate simply exposed Obama as an affirmative action leftist empty suit just as Clint Eastwood showed. But even so, why didn’t the independent middle see that already? We are still back to the fact that they should have seen that in 2008 and not have to wait for Romney to show it in a debate in 2012 where Obama shows he doesn’t care about the job of president.