President Obama, wholly absent from the first debate two weeks ago,  finally made an appearance at the second debate held at Long Island’s Hofstra University on Wednesday. But not the Obama of 2008 that advocated hope and change but rather one tempered by time and the realities of being commander and chief.

This time around his message was clear: stay the course.

It was certainly not a message that would inspire millions or give relief to those millions that think America is on the wrong course but he held to his convictions, and in doing so finally made the case for why he should be given four more years in the top job. A difficult task but not an impossible one.

Unemployment is down to record levels since he took office, consumer confidence  is up to a five year high and, despite news to the contrary, he’s reduced the deficit. However, he didn’t mention either of these rather apt talking points which makes his accomplishment even more astounding.

The President’s general strategy was to run on his record and attack Romney on his plans. With the exception of the questions on energy, Libya and assault weapons, his record was good enough to run on.

A rather simple strategy one would think but it has not been one Democrats have been eager to embrace. Obama’s record is far from stellar but it does have its strong points. However, for too long now he’s allowed the Republicans to spin his accomplishments into failures.

And in listing his successes in every response and owning up to his actual failures Obama changed all that. This was abundantly evident on the issue of Libya, easily his most passionate response of the night. For the first time the President  said that he was ‘ultimately responsible’ for the events of Benghazi, but stopped short of taking responsibility for his administrations mishandling of its aftermath.

Conversely, Romney’s strategy was to attack the President’s record. And there was much of it that was open to attack. His argument boiled down to: ‘We can’t afford a repeat of the past four years.’

It’s an argument that many would consider valid and one he argued with great vigour.

But it was when his answers contained vague statements and anecdotes that he seemed to flounder a little. On the first question of graduate jobs, Romney listed two things that needed to be done but then didn’t say how he would get them done. And on the issue of pay equity for women he provided an anecdote about his time as Governor which avoided the question entirely, turned out to be only half true, and seemed to suggest women can’t work late because they have to cook dinner.

Certainly the most memorable moment  of the night was moderator Candy Crawley’s instant fact check of Romney’s assertion that the President did not say ‘acts of terror’ in his Rose Garden speech the day after the attack on the US embassy in Libya.

Romney’s argument, while factually correct, was bogged down on the semantics of ‘acts of terror’. There is an argument to be made about what the President meant when he said ‘acts of terror’ but not one about whether he said it or not. Romney was too quick to pounce on the tasty morsel to think twice about what he was saying. He had equated ‘acts of terror’ with terrorists. Libya is something the President is definitely vulnerable on and it’s likely Romney waited all night to have it asked.

And while the left will point to this as the moment Romney lost and the right will consider it as proof that the moderator was biased, it is not the most interesting take away from the debate. As visually interesting that moment was it was Romney’s response to a rarely asked question about what made him different from President Bush that in essence defined his entire candidacy.

He listed his differences as seeking energy independence, getting tough on China, expanding trade in Latin America and balancing the budget. President Bush said he’d do all these as well. By virtue of his answer Romney has said he’ll be exactly the same as Bush.

The former President  has been someone the Romney campaign has spent the entire election running away from. Bush is wildly unpopular and people still blame him for the mess the country now finds itself in. The Republican party is still trying to define themselves post-Bush — do they connect themselves to his legacy or completely detach themselves. He was mentioned only once during the three day Republican National Convention and that was by his brother, Jeb Bush. But in one fell swoop Romney undid months of careful planning and aligned himself with Bush doctrine.

Obama, seeing an opening, went for the jugular.

‘You know, there are some things where Governor Romney is different from George Bush. George Bush didn’t propose turning Medicare into a voucher. George Bush embraced comprehensive immigration reform. He didn’t call for self-deportation,’ Obama explained. ‘George Bush never suggested that we eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood, so there are differences between Governor Romney and George Bush, but they’re not on economic policy. In some ways, he’s gone to a more extreme place when it comes to social policy.’

And immediately Obama painted Romney as Bush 2.0; fiscally identical but socially more extreme.

Despite this Romney did have a strong night but it became evident that as the debate wore on that Obama was inching ahead in the argument. But this was not the knockout blow Obama wanted and definitely needed.

Since the first debate Obama has been ceding ground to Romney in the polls and with early voting now open in 40 states the share of available votes is reducing every day.

While a CBS poll of undecided  voters and a CNN survey of all debate viewers scored President Obama as the winner it’ll be a few days before swing state polls are released that factor in the debate.

However, any victory or loss is sure to be short-lived as the third and final debate is scheduled for Tuesday. With one last chance to present their case to the American people and with only two weeks till election day everything will be on the line.

Up until now Romney has been consistent, and Obama has improved even though there was no place to go but up from his previous performance.

The final debate will focus on foreign policy. The topic is not considered to be Romney’s strong suit and with 15 of his 22 foreign policy advisors coming from the Bush administration it will be interesting to see whether he will continue, much to the chagrin of Republicans, to align himself with Bush doctrine — if not by his statements then by his policies.

Rameez Abdeen is a second year student studying a Bachelor of Journalism at La Trobe University. You can read more of his views on American politics on his blog or follow him on Twitter.