Not only was Republican candidate Mitt Romney victorious in last week’s debate, Romney’s victory was also historic, according to Gallup polling data released Monday. The majority of Republicans, Independents and 49 percent of Democrats named Romney as the winner.

Overall, 72 percent of debate watchers favored Romney and, as a result, the five-point gap between Romney and President Barack Obama closed among registered voters in post-debate polling. Immediately afterward, the candidates were tied, both at 47 percent.

The first debate went well for Romney and badly for Obama in part because of the media. It is hard to say whether Obama’s hiding from the White House Press Corps or the media’s reluctance to ask questions has done more to leave the president unprepared.

Obama stood alone. Lacking notes and teleprompter, he was unable to justify his previous four years of policy. Instead of refuting Romney’s positions with facts, Obama misrepresented Romney’s positions, a tactic that worked — only until Romney resumed talking.

In each instance of this, once Romney explained his position, debate watchers realized Obama had just attributed a position to Romney that Romney does not hold. For example, when the candidates exchanged blows regarding the Dodd-Frank banking legislation, Obama asked a rhetorical question.

“Does anybody out there think that the big problem we had is that there was too much oversight and regulation of Wall Street? Because if you do, then Gov. Romney is your candidate. But that’s not what I believe.”

Romney responded, saying, “Sorry, but that’s just not — that’s just not the facts. Look, we have to have regulation on Wall Street.”

Romney went on to explain Dodd-Frank. Romney made it clear that he would not arbitrarily do away with Wall Street regulation despite Obama’s claims, because conservatives do not see regulation in the simple terms of less and more.

Conservatives see regulation on a continuum of usefulness. Regulation should protect the free market as a whole. Laws should protect individuals’ rights, but not individuals’ interests. In other words, the market — not government — should pick winners and losers, and laws should ensure competition.

This is the function of useful regulation, and regulation that does not have this function should be removed notwithstanding regulation regarding non-excludable and non-rivalrous public goods (such as clean air).

Romney took on the difficult task of clarifying this conservative position, and it was a success. He argued that Dodd-Frank should be repealed and replaced, making the point that conservatives’ regulatory philosophy is quality over quantity.

Like Obama, Romney also stood alone on stage. Unlike Obama, Romney benefited from standing alone because he was unabridged and unfiltered by media bias. Except for a solitary community organizer, there was no one around to misrepresent Romney.

Due to this clear view, Romney’s ideas won the majority’s favor by wide margins at least for an instant.

Michael Stikkel is a junior computer engineering major. His column appears weekly. He can be reached at mcstikke@syr.edu.

Published on October 10, 2012 at 2:59 am