Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Fri 04/19/2024 View Thu 04/18/2024 View Wed 04/17/2024 View Tue 04/16/2024 View Mon 04/15/2024 View Sun 04/14/2024 View Sat 04/13/2024
2012-10-23 -Election 2012
WaPo - O Kept R "On His Heels"
The focus of the last of their three debates was supposed to be foreign policy, but both Romney and Obama used their time to talk about the issues most important to voters: jobs, the economy and the budget. They talked about the auto bailout, school class sizes and Romney's tax plan. At several points, CBS's Bob Schieffer, who served as moderator, tried to bring them back to foreign affairs and national security, but sometimes to no avail.

Romney appeared cautious, especially during the early stages of the debate, but grew more assertive as the evening went on. Throughout the debate, Obama seemed eager and ready to take the fight to his opponent, drawing on his experience to draw contrasts with the challenger. At times, as Romney offered pointed criticism of his policies, Obama glared directly at him.
The nerve! He's President, you know!
Romney's central critique was that Obama had been weak in the face of "a rising tide of chaos" and tumult in the world. When Obama charged that Romney has been "all over the map" in his policies, the challenger responded by saying, "Attacking me is not talking about how we're going to deal with the challenges that exist in the Middle East."
But the tactic might get him re-elected.
But Obama pressed his case that Romney's worldview as well as his prescriptions for the domestic front were not just wrong but also rooted in the past. "When it comes to our foreign policy, you seem to want to import the foreign policies of the 1980s, just like the social policies of the 1950s and the economic policies of the 1920s," he said.
Clever, catchy, and tough to refute in 25 words or less. Also meaningless.
Although the two had argued at last week's debate about what happened in Libya and whether the administration had been slow to identify the attack as an act of terrorism, the issue never got a full airing on Monday.
And not much of an airing in the WaPo, either.
At one point, Romney argued that he would not support budget cuts to the military, pointing out that the U.S. Navy had reduced its fleet of warships to the lowest number since the early 1900s. "Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets," the president countered, "because the nature of our military's changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines."
Who writes this stuff, the ghost of Johnny Carson?
White voters side with Romney by a 15-point margin (56 to 41 percent), while non-whites break heavily for the president, 78 to 19 percent. Among African Americans, the margin is overwhelming: 94 to 2 percent.
What an interesting observation!
The seesawing battle for voters now has Obama with the edge on the enthusiasm front: 64 percent of Obama's backers say they are "very enthusiastic" about his candidacy, higher than the 58 percent of Romney's who are that engaged behind his run. Still, Obama's popularity trails his 2008 levels.
That's the best news in this article!
Posted by Bobby 2012-10-23 05:55|| || Front Page|| [9 views ]  Top

#1 We are zero for four consecutive seasons and ticket sales continue to decline. Time for a new coach. We shall see who gets the "heel" in a few short weeks.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-10-23 06:54||   2012-10-23 06:54|| Front Page Top

#2 I thought Obama looked rambling, all-over the board in his comments, petty, snarky, and not in touch. Since he has been campaigning non-stop for the past two years, it is very likely he is not in touch with the day-to-day affairs of government and really does not have a clue of what's going on.
Posted by JohnQC 2012-10-23 09:07||   2012-10-23 09:07|| Front Page Top

#3 The last two debates have been pretty much draws. Obama made his followers comfortable with voting for him, Romney didn't scare independents and his base. I'll bet the current poll trend stays the same while the MSM trumpets that O thrashed everyone in front of him.

Just ignore the focus group.
Posted by DarthVader 2012-10-23 09:32||   2012-10-23 09:32|| Front Page Top

#4 I think I would have preferred to see Newt in this debate. Romney made some good points. I particularly enjoyed his comment about how Putin would find more backbone after the election, as opposed to more flexibility. But overall, I didn't see as much difference between the candidates as I wanted to see. Granted, I'm the kind of individual who wanted to hear Mitt say he was gonna nuke the Mad Mullahs and the Paks too. But there were too many times, for my liking anyway, when he admitted that he agreed with the president. I thought he was also way too lenient with the Chinese when he made the assumption that they don't want war. Well, maybe they don't but the way they've been building their navy and threatening their neighbors you could have fooled me.
Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-10-23 11:25||   2012-10-23 11:25|| Front Page Top

#5 I agree with what you state EU6305, but I think Joe Average is either unaware of or likes our current foreign policy, so in that regard it would be Hi, I'm Mitt Romney, and I will be consistant with our current foreign policy with the exception of a working domestic policy, I will not bow to foreign kings, and I have better hair.
Posted by swksvolFF 2012-10-23 13:45||   2012-10-23 13:45|| Front Page Top

#6 Romney does have better hair. One thing I noticed when they shook hands before the debate started is that Romney is an inch or two taller, appears to be healthy and vigorous and has a full head of hair. This is not insignificant.
Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-10-23 14:09||   2012-10-23 14:09|| Front Page Top

#7 No, you didn't want to see Newt. Newt would have been a terrible candidate -- it's the one that Champ could beat.

Newt has a number of good qualities, but he's undisciplined as all get out, and his time as a Speaker was a disaster for the Pubs. He's an ideas guy, not a process or policy guy, and ideas guys don't make good Presidents (see Wilson, W., for details).
Posted by Steve White 2012-10-23 14:58||   2012-10-23 14:58|| Front Page Top

#8 Sincerely hope you're right. We'll find out on Nov. 6.
Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-10-23 15:55||   2012-10-23 15:55|| Front Page Top

#9 "you seem to want to import the foreign policies of the 1980s"

US foreign policy was successful beyond the wildest imagination of any 'rational' political observer.

Freedom was expanding then, no sane person proposed that the West adopt civil rights restrictions based on communist doctrine.

The President of the United States did not apologize for the denigration of the Soviet Union, he denigrated the Soviet Union and its political ideology.

Obama apparently thinks that this policy was wrong, perhaps not in spite of bringing down the Soviet Union but because it brought down the Soviet Union.
Posted by Knuckles Bumble4520 2012-10-23 16:20||   2012-10-23 16:20|| Front Page Top

17:49 lord garth
17:26 trailing wife
17:21 M. Murcek
17:17 lord garth
17:03 trailing wife
16:57 trailing wife
16:57 trailing wife
16:41 swksvolFF
16:36 swksvolFF
16:26 Skidmark
16:25 Grom the Reflective
15:31 European Conservative
15:30 Grom the Reflective
14:45 NoMoreBS
14:39 NoMoreBS
14:39 Frank G
14:35 NoMoreBS
14:31 NoMoreBS
14:30 Penguin_of_the_Desert
14:17 NoMoreBS
14:04 swksvolFF
13:48 NoMoreBS
13:40 Frank G
13:40  









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com