As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Romney’s Brilliant Maneuver

Gov. Mitt Romney today pulled a bold move in the final debate with President Obama, opting for relatively limited verbal combat with his opponent while instead showcasing his knowledge of foreign affairs, adopting a presidential demeanor, and offering a sense of optimism for the future.

This strategy was the political equivalent of the Muhammed Ali Rope-a-Dope against George Foreman in the heavyweight boxing championship in 1974. Everyone expected a war, but Ali laid back on the ropes and let his bigger, stronger opponent pound away until Foreman was exhausted, and Ali knocked him out.

And I think Romney may have scored a knockout too.

Some commentators are suggesting Obama won because he scored more points. But I think such people are looking at this from within the paradigm of what they expected, and not what happened.

Everyone – including me – thought Romney would tear into Obama once again and engage in another slugfest, spending as much time as possible discussing the failures surrounding Benghazi. Instead, Romney completely walked away from Benghazi.

What Romney needed tonight was not to beat up on Obama – he had already proven he could do that – but to cast himself as a leader people will be comfortable having as their president.

He threw some jabs, but the knockout punch wasn’t delivered by fist, but by feint.

Romney stood tall while Obama appeared a little surly, eager to re-litigate domestic policy points that the two had already plowed through in two debates. By repeatedly demeaning Romney, Obama demeaned himself. The proverbial Martian visiting earth for the first time would have been convinced that Romney was the king the earthlings, not Obama.

The CNN post-debate snap poll gave Obama an edge, with 48 percent saying he won compared to 40 percent who thought Romney did. The poll as a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 point, a relatively large number.

But the impression that will linger through Election Day is that of the sunny guy to the left of the screen who seemed to have ideas about where to go and was interrupted repeatedly by the guy on the right who made lots of points but, in the end, had no new ideas, couldn’t defend his record the few times it was challenged, and seemed a little unlikable.

581 Responses to Romney’s Brilliant Maneuver

    • It was a rout for Obama. The President is clearly in control of foreign policy and knows how to play America’s role in the world to get things done. Romney is a Bush clone who would blunder from crisis to crisis and keep us in turmoil..

      Romney got totally nailed on the “horses and bayonets” exchange. Spouting superficial facts about the number of boats in our navy revealed how he works: dump mountains of pseudo-facts – talking as fast as possible – and hope that he appears credible. I dodn’t work, he got hung out to dry.

      • No, it was definitely not a “rout” as you and other head-in-the-sand liberals would like to believe. I’m afraid that you just saying it doesn’t make it so. Romney was cool and measured. The president was too hot, seemed irritated and was at times condescending. It did not look presidential and it WILL NOT play well with the independents that both sides admit will cast the crucial deciding votes.

        Before you call me a right wing tea party nut, I can assure you that I’m very proud of being an independent and have my entire adult life (I’m 45 years old) voted for the best candidate for the position. Not the best party, not the best orator or best looking, but the one who I felt could do the job best. In 2008, I pulled that lever for Obama. By 2010 I knew that I had made a mistake. It won’t happen again – I happily support Romney and will enthusiastically vote for him this year and I’m so looking forward to having him be my president for the next 4 years!

        • Well, the post debate polls showed 40 to 40. That is a rout in the debate business.

          But what really hurt Romney was his constant interruptions and his “if I talk real fast they can’t stop me” approach. He is the proverbial excrement tosser who throws everything at the wall and hope some sticks.

          For mouth speed, Romney won; for measured credible content, Obama wiped the floor with him. Romney looked like a little fish out of water.

          The

          • Well, the post debate polls showed 48 to 40. That is a rout in the debate business.

            But what really hurt Romney was his constant interruptions and his “if I talk real fast they can’t stop me” approach. He is the proverbial excrement tosser who throws everything at the wall and hope some sticks.

            For mouth speed, Romney won; for measured credible content, Obama wiped the floor with him. Romney looked like a little fish out of water.

            The

            • That “little fish” will be your next president – you better start getting acclimated to the idea.

              Oh, and “excrement tosser”? I may not know much, but this I do know: juvenile high school name calling is the most clear sign possible that Obama supporters are desperate and deep down in their soul know the end is coming.

              Take heart my liberal friend – the sun will come up on November 7th and with it a new dawn for our great country and I’m convinced 4 years from now America will be on the road to recovering her great spirit and reputation around the world.

                • Oh and I love the way you try to spin this:

                  Well, the post debate polls showed 48 to 40. That is a rout in the debate business.

                  Um, no – an 8 point difference with a margin of error of +/- 4.5 points (ie a 9 point swing is possible) is statistically a tie. I know you don’t like to hear it, but folks who go to college for a lot of years that do nothing but study math agree with me on this.

                  But if you’re interested at all in what a debate rout looks like, then look no farther than one of your favorite news outlets – CNN reported after Romney and Obama’s first debate:

                  A CNN/ORC poll of registered voters who watched the debate in Denver showed 67 percent believe Romney won the debate, while just 25 percent said Obama won.

                  So there’s a 42 point differential – that, my friend, is a ROUT and will ultimately prove to be the undoing of Obama.

                  I think honestly, people saw in that first debate a disengaged, aloof, above the conversation approach that literally scared them – I know personally I thought, is this the way he is every day – when meeting with foreign leaders, when making decisions about our economy, our military, our future? He’s since woken up to be a bulldog again, but only after having been exposed to a huge audience on his wedding anniversary and realizing that he can’t do his normal thing and attract voters – even He’s not THAT great!

                  Think about it – that’s scary stuff there!

                  • Uhm, you do realize that the 48-40 poll was one of several, right? If you aggregate and take the average, Obama won by an average of 16 percentage points.

                    Spin that, bud.

                  • Obama got routed in Debate 1. He won’t handily in Debate 2 and knock ed it out of the park in Debate 3. He lost much ground after the first debate; made it ALL up in the next 2. We now have a horse race, and we will have a winner in 2 weeks. That is lots of foot in mouth time” and I predict that Mitt will step in at least 1 more time. The man who brought you “binders of women” is capable of anything.

                  • “Um, no – an 8 point difference with a margin of error of +/- 4.5 points (ie a 9 point swing is possible) is statistically a tie. I know you don’t like to hear it, but folks who go to college for a lot of years that do nothing but study math agree with me on this.”

                    Uh…try again. Someone failed their statistics course. It means that somewhere between 52.5% and 43.5% think Obama won, or 40.5% and 35.5% think Romney won. Not a statistical tie. But keep talking like you know something..it is funny.

                  • Bill 3

                    Correction:
                    Obama 43.5 – 52.5
                    Romney 35.5 – 44.5

                    The difference is within the margin of error. So it is possible that Romney won 44.5 to 43.5. It is a statistical tie.

                    I have to say, starting a statement with “uhm” doesn’t make you sound smart, even when you are right. When you are wrong, it makes you sound like a fool.

      • I watched with four voting age females and they all said Obama probably won it as a debate but definitely lost the war. Summary – Romney will work well with others and Obama has failed to do so blaming others for his lack of success on his promises of a new way of doing business in Washington.

        • Were any of these females card carrying GOPers?. Any female who thinks they are better off under a Tea Party-Todd Akin controlled Republican Party are, with respect, crazy.

          • Glad to see that you think woman who vote for Romeny are crazy. Name calling will not convince me to change parties in fact, it makes me embrace the Republican party even more.

            • Obama thinks that he made points by attacking Romney, but Romney did not rise to the taunts, When viewed by an undecided voter, Romney looked calm and Presidential, in spite of nursing the flu. Obama, looking to fight the first debate all over again, sounded petulant and petty.. Obama was diminished by attempting to turn a debate on foreign policy into a re-hash of domestic policy, and by badgering Romney. In the end, Obama spoke to his base, and not to the voters whom he needed to persuade. .

          • And this is why nothing ever get done. If a female (or male) doesn’t agree a liberal they are “crazy”. I assure you sir that as an educated, non-crazy, established GOP female, I am defined by more than my “lady parts”. I can buy my own birth control and don’t need the government to be the surrogate father for my children.
            Last night Obama reminded me of a controlling, mentally abusive boyfriend. As one friend put it, it was like he was part of the law firm “Condescending, Petty and Peevish, ESQ” trying to make his case.

      • Bill: “You don’t work,…” no surprise there. In four years, President Obama increased American ground forces in Afghanistan by 30,000, helped install the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Libya, backstabbed Poland and the Czech Republic, ignored/insulted Israel and grossly offended Canada and the UK. His Syrian policy has been to do nothing; perhaps not a bad idea, but surely not a stroke of genius. And on the homefront? Oh – my – God…

        • Allow me to correct you, my misinformed friend. After G W Bush, the greatest bumbling warmonger ever, the perception of the US was at an all time low. I lived outside America for part of his sorry tenure,and, I assure you, America was a laughing stock.

          Obama didnot install the Muslim Brotherhood; he supported the Arab Spring and DEMOCRACY – which led to an MB Administration. Thats what happens in a democracy – especially when they have deposed a ruthless dictator supported by the US for 3 decades.

          The Canadians love Obama, and as for the British….Romney went there at the beginning of the Olympics and totally pi**ed them off, to the point that the Prime Ministerand the Mayor or London blew him off like a goofy schoolboy on International TV.

          Mitt is a tactless, no-empathy loose cannon.

          • Ummm.. you are aware that Conservative talk shows aren’t allowed in Canada or the UK?

            For example Sirius satellite radio broadcasts in the US aired Michael Savage but Sirius Satellite radio in Canada DID NOT. This was strange because both countries used the SAME SATELLITE. (the difference was programmed into the ground receivers)

            A lot of what American talk show hosts say would be prohibited as “hate speech” in Canada and Britain.

          • I’m sure the queen was able to cool off about the supposed “Romney gaffe” after listening to the iPOD full of Barack’s favorite songs given to her by Obama in 2009 and stare at the Winston Churchill bust that England gifted us with after WWII that Obama unceremoniously gave back upon entering office. Puh-lease when it comes fauxpas and foreign dignitaries, Obama wins hands down. http://www.geek.com/articles/apple/president-obama-gives-queen-ipod-full-of-mp3s-but-will-the-riaa-sue-2009043/

            • David Cameron’s smack down of Romney was the biggest, most public, most devastating ever seen in international politics. Cameron says nicer things about Putin than he said about Romney. Mitt was smoked. He deserved it.

              • Romney said nothing disrespectful. He was asked a leading question by a journalist and answered it honestly. In retaliation, David Cameron INSULTED the city of Salt Lake. That says a lot more about Cameron than Romney.

                I am not surprised, nor do I care, that a person so lacking in decency would prefer Putin over Romney.

                And, with “respect”, the fact that you also seem to prefer Putin to Romney says everything we need to know about you.

                • Greg: The insult about Salt Lake City was a shot at Mitt. And it was dead on. Mitt is tactless and a bull in a China shop. This is why he would be a terrible foreign policy President.

                  • Bill: you are a typically half-witted liberal who lacks any sense of propriety, and really has not made a valid point in all your pathetic, seething vitriol in your many posts above. Here is David Cameron’s response to Romney’s very mild criticism:

                    “We are holding an Olympic Games in one of the busiest, most active, bustling cities anywhere in the world,” Cameron said. “Of course it’s easier if you hold an Olympic Games in the middle of nowhere.”

                    Really now– to any sensible, objective person, does that truly constitute the, “biggest, most public, most devastating [smack down] ever seen in international politics.”?

                    I think not. I don’t know your lunacy stems from the fact that you know the end is near for your precious Anointed One, or because you went off your medication, but my hope for you is when you do regain some semblance of mental stability, you will look back at your pathetic screed here with shame and embarrassment and try to atone for yourself by not being such a pitiable a.s.s. hat in future blogs.

          • I am both Canadian and American and I live in Asia. Obama’s policy of appeasement and meekness on the world stage is seen as weakness. He does not do the aggressive relationship building with leaders required to confront foes, strengthen allies and to work with the opposition in any kind of bipartisan manner. In short, he does not want to do the work that a president must do. His policies of spending and debt accumulation are destroying the country which is bad for the world’s economy also. I am a citizen of the world and Obama needs to go NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • Yeah, in control of foreign policies with 4 American deads, Al Qaeda on the rise, loss of two pro-American states, Egypt and Libya, Iran on the eve of possessing nuclear weapons. Just talking and talking doesn’t in control. No wonder the moron Obama is elected because of guys like you.

        • No new wars, an end to Iraq, a crippling of Al Qaeda, and zero attacks on American soil. A fine record. The handling of the Iran situation is a delicate matter. Thank God it is Obama in charge rather than Mitt the loose cannon. Romney has the ability to get us back into lots of useless conflicts. As a Bush clone, he is a danger to himself, America, and the World.

          • Just because the Obama administration (via the Pentagon) refuses to classify the Fort Hood “work place violence” as terrorism, despite Hasan’s yelling allahu akbar before killing 13, and just because the Obamo administration can’t get their story straight on Libya (consulates, embassies and the like being sovereign soil) doesn’t mean there have been zero attacks on American soil.

            Perhaps if Clinton had responded with more than missile strikes to the 1st World Trade Center bombing – 1993; Bombing of the US Embassy in Saudi Arabia – 1995; Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia – 1995;
            Bombing of the US Embassies in Africa – 1998; and Bombing of the USS Cole – 2000 we’d be having a different conversation.

          • And lets remember him going to London for Olympics and insulting British by saying they didnt have enough security and the same week insult the Palestinians by saying Jewish people were smarter. Yes this is the person we want in the White House. Another Republican with hoof in mouth disease

            • Comment about London Olympics:
              “The stories about the private security firm not having enough people, the supposed strike of the immigration and customs officials — that obviously is not something which is encouraging,”

              Where is the insult?

              Comment about Israel:
              “Culture makes all the difference,” Mr. Romney said. “And as I come here and I look out over this city and consider the accomplishments of the people of this nation, I recognize the power of at least culture and a few other things.”

              How does this equate to saying the Jews are smarter than the Palestinians?

              Did you forget about Google, Sharri?

            • Mitt Romney sweat through the conversation, while his only apparent goal was to repeat Obama as best he could. He was in wayyy over his head and sounded like a 5th grader. The American people aren’t dumb enough to elect this man, even if the republicans continue to cheat (which they will.)

            • Hardly. Their Olympics was the best ever – highlighted by David Cameron’s and Boris Johnson’s TKO of Mitt Romney. I think Mitt won a Gold Medal in Social Ineptitude.

      • As a matter of information, our ground forces still have bayonets for use on their rifles and if you check your history some of our Special Forces used HORSES in the early fighting which led to the defeat of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Just POINTING OUT how your Socialist messiah botched up the facts—-AGAIN!

      • Hey, Bill, has anyone told you lately that you are a boor and an opinion troll? It isn’t your place to correct every poster on here, and, frankly, it makes you look like a partisan idiot. 50% of the posts here are yours: do you think that you are the only poster who matters?.

      • Bill you must be one of those 47 percenters due of all the free time you seem to have calling people who do not agree with you stupid ( Tolerant Liberal). You and Chris Matthews are going to have to use artificial means(Viagra) so that you can get your Obama tingle back up your leg, because he is about to be fired by all of us. And no we will not cover your prescription costs for you or Mr. Matthews. You will have to pay for it.

      • What leftist group is paying you to troll websites? Too bad the obama economy can’t provide you with a productive way to make a living.

        Oh well, there’s always food stamps. Haven’t you heard? Everybody is getting them nowadays! Nothing quite like the thrill up your leg that you get when you borrow money from your children and grandchildren!

        • Jason: I appreciate your kind and instructive words. But, I am retired, financially comfortable, and probably better educated than you. I just happen to think Mitt is a danger to American civil society. What are your claims to fame?

          • Claim to fame?

            I have no fame nor do I seek it. And after all how could anyone be more relevant than you, Bill, what with your money and education?

            Instead of spending your days spamming message boards why don’t you try getting out in the sunshine and doing something useful? Work a soup kitchen, deliver hot meals to shut ins, do something real rather than preen in the mirror telling yourself how compassionate you are.

      • I’m only commenting because I’ve seen almost this same statement spammed all over the internet throughout the day. Even here on Keith’s article!

        I don’t think this debate was “won on points” and Keith’s article is absolutely correct. There’s “poll avoidance” right now, except for Gallup and Rasmussen that are on their regular schedules.

        Tomorrow, Gloria Allred will come out with her “surprise” (if possible). If it is the woman who said Mr. Romney counseled her to give her baby up for adoption and not have an abortion while he was a Mormon bishop, well – it’s all over! For Gloria Allred! I hope. She can give all the press conferences she wants, but nobody should cover them.

        Either candidate could win, but no matter how much liberals say that yelling, laughing, rolling eyes, grimacing, insulting and denigrating are “winning,” they’ll never, ever win.

    • Romney was brilliant! His self-control led to his ability to meet all of his objectives of this last debate. Obama, on the other hand, simply got angrier and angrier when he realized Romney was above his insults. Who was more presidential? Romney! Who will be our next president? Romney!

      • As I have said, don’t pop the Champagne just yet. Romney was not above the insults, Obama’s critiques of Mitt’s flip=flopping, inept foreign relations skills, and the “horses and bayonets” blew Mitt off the stage. Angrier and angrier? Maybe, but Mitt got slaughtered

        • The WH flip and flop on the story of Libya. Obama said it is his duty as a commander in chief to keep American safe. Well, he failed the test. As he puts it, it is not optimal… Bill, don’t kill yourself if Obama loses.

    • @Bill Bill, What Flavor Pool-Aid are you drinking? You can say many things abut this joke of a President, but clearly He is clueless on Foreign Policy. The Entire Middle East is on Fire, All except For the Worst of the Bunch ( Iran) Which Your guy ignored when they were protesting for freedom. I would not be surprised if he gets endorsed for Re-Election by The ASS in Iran. For the First Time in History We watched in REAL_TIME 4 Patriots Die. ( While Obama was too busy sleeping) to care.. or even worse Did not care. One day somebody in this administration is going to hang for that one…..

      • Disagree. He has been the best foreign policy President in a long while. He has nearly undone the massive damage of the Bush era. In 4 more years he will get us back to a respected world leader.

  1. “Unlikable” is an understatement Keith…the pResident looked like a petulant playground bully and he articulated NO new direction for the future ( and by the way…the SEALS got OBL, whom we had been looking for since wayyyy before 9/11, and not the Bamster).
    Just sayin’….

    • The only thing I would have wanted from Romney was more on Libya, but other than that, he did what he needed to do. Obama kept referring to Romneys policy as,”wreck less”. He was pretty much on the same page as Obama, so what was he talking about? Hard to debate with someone who agrees with you. I think Mitt played this well. I hope everyone else thinks so.

      • I have heard many of the TV pundits say that he said exactly what he needed to say about Libya. He didn’t need to go on the attack mode on Libya. What he can do is when becomes President is order a full investigation on what happened and then have charges brought against those who did not do their job if necessary.

      • “wreck less”

        Are you serious? Please do us all a favor and keep your opinions to yourself. You are obviously not in any position to cast a legitimate vote on anything.

        “Hard to debate someone who agrees with you”

        Yeah that’s not a debate. It’s someone who is supposed to be introducing reasons he would be better than the current president merely saying he would keep things the same. Bravo, you were all tricked by empty rhetoric once again.

        • @ RealDeal. What do you want to be when you grow up? No matter how hard Obama polishes his turd of a presidency its still a turd. A debate is the wrong format for the election validation process anyway. It would be better if the President had to sit for a performance review with the cold hard facts. In this case if Obama was CEO he would have been fired.

          The mood is for change away from hollow HOPE and back to reality.

        • Typical lib. Keep your opinion to yourself??? Anything you don’t want to hear you want muzzled. You & your kind are like little kids that cover their ears and yell “la la la la la”. GROW UP; open your mind and mabye you’ll learn something new.

        • May I remind you, “RealDeal”, that YOU are NOT the moderator here?

          Where do you come off telling who can and can’t comment here? If you had it your way, the only comments here would be yours.

          And I can tell you, it would be one sterile selection of comments.

        • WRONG.
          .
          Romney already laid out his five point plan for fixing the economy. People believe that he has the experience necessary to be successful – they know obama can’t because he has had four years and it has only gotten worse.
          .
          All Romney needed to do in the foreign policy area was to prove that he knew what was going on – after the disastrous obama administration the bar was pretty low.
          .
          Romney was playing chess during the debates while obama was playing Rock-em Sock-em robots. Romney won hands down – and revealed the Dummy-Rats as simpletons into the bargain.

          • Romneys 5 Point Plan is a hoax. It is slick packaging, as if he were trying to sell something to a hedge fund.

            As Obama said, the numbers don’t hang together, the tax cuts, military top up etc, will enlarge the deficit Day 1.

            !2 million new jobs???? How, Show me any economic analysis that supports this “out of thin air” number. Why not 50 million? It would be as credible as his bogus claim.

            Energy Independence??? Stolen from Obama.

            The Plan should be called “5 Point Smoke and Mirrors”.

            • 1) Obama has incurred Trillion dollar deficits for each of the last four years. All that Romney has to do is to reverse what obama has done and we will be well on the road to recovery.

              2) Reagan’s policies resulted in 20 million new jobs in 1980-1984 when the US was a smaller country than it is now. Simply reversing obamas crazy regulatory policies would probably be sufficient to produce twelve million new jobs. Traditionally recessions have ended after eighteen months – this one has been going on for four years thanks to obama.

              3) Energy independence was Newt Gingrich’s idea. Obama’s idea was to cut drilling permits in half and buy windmills from China. Predictably obama’s energy policy was an abject failure like the rest of his administration.

              Fortunately for the US new drilling technology (Fracking), has greatly improved our productivity – this technology was exclusively provided by the private sector. None of it was provided by the government – even though obama is taking credit for it.

              • Floyd:

                You have drunk gallons of trickle down kool aid.

                Reagans tax cut did create jobs – but not 20 million. Bush’s tax cuts created NO jobs and the massive deficit we labor with today.

                Bush inherited a massive surplus from Clinton – the golden years of American growth and presperity – and turned it into a deficit in no time. After his crazy tax cuts we had a shortfall of 170 Billion in 2007, 460 billion in 2008and over a billion in 2009. Not all tax cuts are good.

                Energy independence….seems like Romney is counting Canadian oil reserves as our own. The Canadian might not see it that way – in fact, if you read up on the issue, you will see that they don’t.

                As for fracking, most innovations come from the private sector; who disputes that?

                Mitt’s Plan is rubbish. I am surprised he convinced someone as shrewd as yourself.

                • Floyd:

                  You have drunk gallons of trickle down kool aid.

                  Reagans tax cut did create jobs – but not 20 million. Bush’s tax cuts created NO jobs and the massive deficit we labor with today.

                  Bush inherited a massive surplus from Clinton – the golden years of American growth and presperity – and turned it into a deficit in no time. After his crazy tax cuts we had a shortfall of 170 Billion in 2007, 460 billion in 2008and over a trllion in 2009. Not all tax cuts are good.

                  Energy independence….seems like Romney is counting Canadian oil reserves as our own. The Canadian might not see it that way – in fact, if you read up on the issue, you will see that they don’t.

                  As for fracking, most innovations come from the private sector; who disputes that?

                  Mitt’s Plan is rubbish. I am surprised he convinced someone as shrewd as yourself.

                  • [[Reagans tax cut did create jobs – but not 20 million. ]]

                    WRONG
                    http://www.reaganfoundation.org/economic-policy.aspx
                    unemployment also fell from 7.6% to 5.5% and family net worth increased by 27%.

                    [[Bush’s tax cuts created NO jobs and the massive deficit we labor with today.]]

                    WRONG
                    From June 2003 to December 2007, the economy added 8.1 million jobs, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The unemployment rate fell to 5% from 6.3%. Real GDP growth averaged close to 3% in the four-plus years after that, and the budget deficit fell steadily from 2004 to 2007.
                    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/07/a-tale-of-two-charts-bush-tax-cuts-created-jobs-unlike-obamas-spend-your-way-to-hell-plan/

                    [[Bush inherited a massive surplus from Clinton – the golden years of American growth and presperity – and turned it into a deficit in no time.]]

                    WRONG
                    The surplus that you attribute to Clinton was really the product of Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America”. At the time Clinton fought tooth and nail to prevent the Contract from being implemented – but failed. Afterwards he was willing to take credit for the success of Gingrich’s policies because he is a typical Dummy-Rat – completely devoid of a moral compass.
                    http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/76709/who-created-the-1990s-surplus-clinton-or-the-gop#

                    Bush was blamed for the economic downturn that was caused by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. Bush tried 17 times to get Fannie-Mae and Freddie Mac to tighten the requirements for getting mortgage loans but Frank insisted that the program was solvent.
                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM

                    [[Energy independence….seems like Romney is counting Canadian oil reserves as our own.]]
                    Canada is part of North America – look it up (in an “atlas”).

                    [[As for fracking, most innovations come from the private sector; who disputes that?]]
                    Obama does – he was the one that said: “You didn’t build that”.

                    You lose – Game, Set and Match – thank you for playing…

                    NEXT !

                • The massive surplus under Bill Clinton is a myth. If you exclude the social security excess, which should not have been used for running the government, the largest surplus was $1.6 billion. At that rate it would take 10,000 years to pay off the current $16 trillion debt.

                  The largest amount of revenue into the federal government came under GW Bush.

                  Get the facts from the OMB.

                • @Bill

                  rubbish?

                  I should have known you were Brittish from the way you defended that boor Cameron.

                  If you had identified you nationality from the start, I wouldn’t have wasted my time reading your inane posts.

                  Why don’t you mind you own business?

                  • Greg:

                    I am American, you putz. But, if you were British I would have treated your comments with due respect. I suspect most posters from the UK are making more intelligent comments than you are.

            • Ill take Romey’s 5 point plan, over Obama’s 5 trillion dollars added to the deficit plan. How can any of you liberals criticize Romney with a straight face, after what Obama did to the economy? There is absolutely nothing Romney could do, to make the economy any worse than it already is. Thanks to Barry. You must be under 18, to say something that stupid. Go play some video games, the adults are talking.

              • Brian, If you are an “adult” then surely you can grasp some basic stuff. Obama has enlarged the deficit – too much in my opinion. But, after the Bush recession crashed through the world economy, they only way to mu=itigate was stimulation – fiscal and monetary. Every government did it. Directionally, the right thing, When Obama came to cut the deficit Boehner and the House Tea Party walked away from a done deal because it entailed some overdue tax increases on high incomes. Cutting the deficit under a Tea Party House is not possible

                If you would like the name of some books on elementary economics, which you appear to need, I can recommend some.

      • Romney would have been nuts to argue the details with a guy who will lie about anything, and could claim that he had internal documents and could obfuscate and confuse an already confusing sequence of events. I hope before hand that he would fore-go that approach and am thankful that he did. I don’t believe that Romney could have won an exchange that Obama, who will say anything, had prepared for for 3 days.

      • Romney would have been nuts to argue the Libya details with a guy who will lie about anything, and who could claim that he had internal documents and could obfuscate and confuse an already confusing sequence of events. I had hoped before hand that Romney would fore-go that approach and I am thankful that he did. I don’t believe that Romney could have won an exchange that Obama, who will say anything, had prepared for for 3 days.

        And as others have pointed out, the fact that Obama had been preparing for this for 3 days and then couldn’t use the preparations, just served to frustrate and infuriate Obama more. And it showed.

    • Ok, so just to be clear, Obama orders the of Bin Laden after his is found (they had watched him for weeks first), but he had nothing to do with it. It was the SEALS. Mind you, he could have said not to kill him. They could still be watching Bin Laden now. But he ordered Bin Laden to be killed, but he had nothing to do with it, it was the SEALS.

      So, private companies shed 3 million jobs. Private companies, not government, but private firms. THAT is Obama’s fault, even though the shedding of jobs started before he was even sworn in.

      What private companies do = Obama’s fault. What Obama orders to be done = Not his fault at all in any way shape or form and shame on him or anyone else for suggesting otherwise.

      Good, now I am clear. Thanks.

        • *you’RE

          Grammar be d@mned!!

          Let me get this straight. You support a candidate that wants to cut funding to teachers and put more money towards higher paying jobs that will ipso facto stir the economy, correct? And yet you can’t adhere to a simple grammatical rule we learned in 4th grade?

          And your kids, who now are sardined into a class with 45 other kids also won’t receive the one-on-one attention they need in order to be taught grammar, math, etc properly meaning they won’t even be qualified for these high paying jobs you all crave.

          Fool’s logic.

          • I support a candidate that wants to cut funding to the teachers UNION – the union doesn’t care about the teachers, or the kids.

            Class size isn’t the problem. In Japan the average class size is 50 students – they don’t have any problem educating their students.

            The problem in the US is maintaining discipline in the public schools. Teen pregnancy, rape, assault and murder are the problems that we face here – the result is poor graduation rates, illiteracy, and a total inability to compete in the job market. cutting class sizes isn’t going to make any difference.

            And the teachers unions aren’t going to do anything about those problems either.

            We need to implement voucher systems so that parents can use tax dollars to pay for private schools.

            Supporting the current system is a fools errand.

          • Cut funding for teachers immediately! I hate to tell you teach; you are all a huge part of the problem and you are union nipples who think far too highly of yourself and your government ‘status’ – SCHOOLS SHOULD BE PRIVATIZED and taught by providers who are not under contract, but actually TEACH. A real provider would embrace their job knowing their student’s success AND failures are a direct result of their performance.

            You’re a fool.

          • Nips,
            that should be:
            “You support a candidate WHO wants to….”
            “ergo” not “ipso facto”
            Your last paragraph/run-on sentence is missing two commas, after KIDS and PROPERLY, and one period after ETC.
            Thanks for playing, please try again.

      • Let’s see. Obama is solely responsible for Bin Laden’s death, yet he and his staff watched the Benghazi attack live in the WH as it unfolded over 9 hours and did nothing, then claimed that the highly organized and operation they had watched with their own eyes was just an unpredictable mob.

        If Obama isn’t evil, he is at least a rank amateur.

        • What is really sad is that a US jet from our base in Sicily could have been there in an hour; and commandos could have been there in three!

          That’s enough defense to keep our people alive and wipe out the terrorists (even if they’re carrying DVDs of the YouTube video–sorry, I couldn’t help but skewer the administration’s excuse for the attack).

          But the big question is why was no help ever sent? Is the administration so imbued with anti-war sentiment they won’t even scramble a jet or two or deploy a contingency of commandos to save US lives?

          Sad, sad, sad! For whatever the reason, it’s time to replace this do-nothing administration.

      • Private Companies…laid people off…because OBAMA did not follow through on expanding the the ax Base with STIMULUS money to create jobs and spur the economy..
        YES Private Companies laid people off..YES that is OBAMA’s Fault.

        Obama said in 2008 that he knew what he was taking on.. He out lined a plan to build infra structure, expand the tax base, use SHOVEL READY JOBS…… Rebuild DETROIT MICHIGAN…And NEW ORLEANS…..Obama didn’t do ANYTHING to complete the job…

        Stimulus went to Solyndra like compaines and to purchase MADE IN CHINA…Merchandise.

        Barry has a bad habit of talking a great game… But not following through on the Court…
        So yes, because Obama didn’t follow through with the plan he told AMerica about during the election, he caused more damage and layoffs at Private companies .

      • Obama gave the order, and deserves credit for that. But Obama never bothers to credit the anti-terrorist infrastructure that made catching OBL possible. Oh, and while Obama was taking his 587th victory lap, AQ attacked our Libyan Embassy (de facto US Territory) and murdered our Amassador, 2 Navy Seals, and a Marine. Since this attack didn’t square with Obama’s narrative that AQ was on the run, he cooked up a lie, blaming a poorly made video and a NON-EXISTANT riot for the deaths. When confronted, Obama had the unmitigated gall to blame Gov. Romney for politicizing this tragedy. As a Navy Combat veteran, Obama’s crass political use of the Armed Forces disgusts me. He has brought dishonor on the Office of the President, and I hope and pray the American public hold him accountable and send him to defeat on November 6th.

        • What are you talking about? Did you bother listening to Obama’s speeches after getting Osama? He never, ever took full credit for the finding and killing of Osama. He gave credit to the seals and the intelligence community.

          Anyone who tries to claim that Obama had little involvement in the finding and killing of OBL is completely ignorant of the situation. He made it a top priority after it had been put on the back burner by the previous administration. He also made the gutsy decision to go in when they weren’t even sure Osama was in the compound, and many people (including Biden) argued against the strike without further intelligence or permission from Pakistan.

          Just deal with the fact already that Obama was largely responsible for the finding of Osama. Trying to deny it takes away any level of credibility you may have, and shows you to be a complete biased partisan.

          Now, I absolutely agree with you that the handling of the Benghazi attacks was atrociously done. He clearly tried to figure out the best way to deal with it in terms of the election, which I think is pretty terrible. However, Romney most definitely deserved criticism for his response as well. He immediately tried to score political points before any of the dust had settled, and made a fool of himself in the process. Instead of admitting that he was wrong, he double downed on his original statement.

          As to the relation of the video to the Benghazi attacks, it was part of the CIA’s talking points memo on the 15th.

          http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/us/politics/explanation-for-benghazi-attack-under-scrutiny.html?pagewanted=all

          • It took Obama 6 months to finally make the decision to kill Osama, and even that required another night’s sleep to finally, FINALLY make it.

            I see no reason to re-elect Obama.

            None

            (For full disclosure, I have 2 sons in the military and they don’t think their CIC is cutting it.)

          • “Largely responsible”? Good grief…. Obama can’t even get Dr. Shakil Afridi freed from a Pakistani jail where he is serving a 33-year term for aiding US efforts to nab OBL. Obama talks big about cooperating with Muslims in the ME, yet when someone sticks their neck out, Obama leaves them to the tender mercies of the ISI. Obama is “largely responsible” for Dr. Afridi’s fate, yet I don’t hear the Left calling for justice for an ACTUAL hero.

            As for links from the NY Times, save yourself the time/effort. The “Newspaper of Record” is little more than a cash-hemorrhaging Obama house organ. I will smoke a fine cigar and sip 12-year-old single malt Scotch when I hear that the times is bankrupt (shouldn’t be long now…).

            I appreciate your respectful tone. I rarely read anything from the Left that doesn’t drip with hatred and vitriol. Thanks for the post.

          • I almost never read, much less reply in this type of forum. This time, though, I couldn’t help but wonder how it must feel to defend a President whose actions and resulting consequences necessitate continual defense. Don’t you faithful few ever tire of toting the water for this obviously failed President? I did watch the debate last night and came away miserably sorry and embarrased by the very small liar that we backed with such enthusiasm just four years ago. Go ahead and hang up your bucket and call this President what he really is – a completely shameless failure.

        • Jeff – thanks for serving. Dunno what you did, but I suspect it wasn’t J2 or J5. Who knows…

          It is interesting and sad, that the very next day Romney was calling for answers to a day old problem. And, the facts were in short supply. A wait until we can gather the data and package it for non-classified discussion in a public forum took 14+ days!

          Fast rewind: Cole, WMD, 9/11, and 1,000s more… Hmmm, wonder how long It took for the American people to know what happened – down to the tiniest detail.

          Geez. Romney tried to politicize the death of 4 Americans on day 2. That alone disqualifies him in the eyes on a million+ voters. Shame on him.

          Do over for President Obama. Our sitting President should have made the brief remarks he did on day 2, and then SHUT UP. Silently, he should have directed his entire teams to figure it out, and shut up already on guessing. STFU… Heck, maybe this is what he did…

          But then the GOP would not let it be solved in the normal military way. Ut uh… Nope. Press, press, press. Geez, you would have thought Monica Lewinsky was running around in the West Wing offering favors. The “liberal press” was just as hungry for a selling byline…

          So, from Day 3, it goes south, and THAT IS the Presidents fault. Period. He was in a no win situation and charted a course that resulted in confusion of the American people. The GOP fanned those flames and so did the press. By Day 4 it is a public relations nightmare. Shame on President Obama for not figuring out a better way to execute a military / diplomatic response while mitigating the risk of a GOP led, Romney stoking, press invoking, Lewinsky-level, carnival event….

          And, no one wonders why politicians are not trusted and become cartoons much faster than Lindsay Lohan on a bender….

      • Funny how Obama takes credit for things successful, but (PUBLICLY) throws others under the bus when all fail.

        I get a wave of nausea when I have to see him strut on stage and pump his chest. His attempts to be the funny man while debating and campaigning are epic fails and reveal the sour and sophomoric narcissist that he’s always been.

      • Corey, you are only partially right about the killing of Bin Laden. It was a long effort started with Bush with many people tracking him down. It is true that they finally found him and killed him under Obama. But for Obama to claim the whole credit is absurd. Remember too, that Clinton had a chance to kill him when they spotted the bad guy. They notified Bill, but he went golfing and dragged it out till the opportunity was lost.

          • Petards are explosive devices, much like hand grenades, and when one throws one at the enemy and it hits something (like a branch of a tree) and bounces back onto the one who threw it and explodes, that’s “hoisted by your own petard”.

            And that’s what Obama did last night–he threw petard after petard after petard and Romney was never phased; instead, you could see Obama get angrier as time passed.

            Again, only one of the participants last night was presidential, and it wasn’t the one throwing petards. It was the one who watched those petards land in his opponents lap (with some, like the comment on bayonets, not exploding until today).

      • Really? You honestly are that blind to think in any way this is a good thing for Romney?

        Pretty much every snap poll from last night is saying the same thing, Romney got it handed to him.

        • CNN had it 48% Obama, 40% Romney.

          But the author is right: the knockout that Obama needed simply did not occur. All Romney needed to do was look calm, cheerful, and presidential, which he did.

          As an aside, I wonder what the viewership was for this debate, given that Monday Night Football and NLCS were both showing at the same time.

        • You people are so stupid.

          Romney set a trap for obama, told everybody what he was going to do, and obama STILL walked right in.

          I know you’re not very bright so I’ll explain it to you – that way you won’t be left holding your dick saying: “what happened” on November 7th.

          Obama’s biggest asset was his “likeability” – he always remains aloof from every policy decision – and allows his surrogates to take the heat. Particularly with women that was the decisive factor and gave him a ten point edge over Romney.

          Conversely the obama team has spent more then $200 million portraying Romney as a horrible black-hearted monster. Someone who will send your job to china and your kid to war in the middle east. As a result of these lies, Romney’s approval rating was low.

          Obama tried to remain aloof during the first debate but failed abysmally. Romney was polite but persistent – hammering obama on his indefensible domestic record. Obama came across as detached and incompetent.

          After debate one only a huge gaffe by Romney could have turned things around for obama. Crazy Joe Biden just managed to make himself (and his ticket by association), look unhinged. In the second presidential debate Romney looked calm, collected and completely in control when it came to economic matters. Obama looked mean-spirited and childish – predictably his favorability rating started to drop, particularly with women.

          By the third debate obama had no choice but to swing for the fences. He tried to get Romney riled up but short of punching him in the nose there was no way that was going to happen. Obama looked like a petulant schoolboy while Romney looked like… the President of the United States.

          Game, set and match Romney.

          Now go home and console yourself with the thought of a Hillary/Sandra Fluke ticket in 2016.

          • Great take on this laugh-fest. I guess the President’s faithful few who are not too embarrased to show their faces MUST find some solace in something – anything. Let them have their victory dance – it will be short lived.

          • Turbo: So many words; such little thought. Your analysis is totally in your dreams. Romney set a trap??? The only trap was Romneys yap, which ran incessantly and gave Obama enough raw material to destroy him, which he did. The Pres laid a serious whuppin on the flip-flopper.

          • Great analysis Floyd! And I thought the Donks were all about understanding “nuance.” (Also, a big a shoutout to all you fine conservatives here!) I voted in NC today and the line was pretty long, yet the Dems at their parking lot booth had very few people talking to them the whole time I was in line outside. One of them walked up to me and my wife, mentioned some Clerk of Court they were supporting, and tried to hand me some literature and a sample Democratic ballot. You know what I did??? (This is great!!!) I politely took it and told them to have a nice day. (Because that’s how us conservatives roll bitches! We’re all …decent ‘n shit!) Some commenter on another article had a GREAT idea…. FIREWORKS! We need to celebrate like the damn FOURTH OF JULY when we kick that miserable excuse of a President out of office Nov 6th.

        • Winning the debate does not always translate to winning votes. I felt like Obama “won,” but I have no intention whatsoever of voting for him. And last night I saw polls that indicated that more viewers were swayed toward Romney than were swayed toward Obama, even while Obama was said to have won the debate.

  2. I hope you’re right. I was outraged by O’s performance (and I mean that in every sense of the word, the phony) and disappointed in Romney’s. I don’t think we’ll lose any Romney voters to O, but I am concerned about the “undecideds.” (Who ARE these people?)

    • Happy Customer, you would enjoy PPP’s post 3rd debate polling. While it too gives the edge to Obama on points, the sub-questions of independent voters “are your more or less likely to vote for Obama/Romney?” are telling:

      A PPP poll of independents who watched the debate found that 32 percent are more likely to vote for Obama after the debate, while 48 percent are less likely to do so. In the same vein, 47 percent are more likely to vote for Romney, with 35 percent less likely to. (hat tip to Powerlineblog)

      Obviously, Romney’s tactics seem to have worked in his favor amongst independents.

  3. I see this as a tie for the bases.
    Republicans will be pleased at Romney for the most part (though many including myself thought Romney should have pointed out some more of The President’s mistakes – such as calling Assad “a reformer”, not pointing out that taxing the rich will help the debt, and adding to Scheiffer’s question about the doctor who helped us get bin Laden being in jail).

    The Democrats will see Obama as tough, angry and kicking Romney’s butt (as they’ll say he deserved).

    How will the independents see this? I’m guessing those on the fence will say that Romney has proven he can handle foreign policy. Others will say, Romney didn’t differentiate himself enough from Obama’s policy.

    All in all a tie goes to the runner…this case Romney. The President needed to show Romney was weak and unfit. He didn’t show that at all.

  4. I can imagine that the debate was watched with interest in Jerusalem. The Jerusalem Post online has two interesting articles.

    The first one points out that Obama said in the event that Iran did attack Israel, the US would stand with Israel, but he never said how. Romney on the other hand stated, “if Israel is attacked, we have their back, not just diplomatically, not just culturally, but militarily.” That is a huge difference than, “If Israel is attacked, America will stand with Israel.” (http://www.jpost.com/VideoArticles/Video/Article.aspx?id=288908)

    The second is an op-ed piece by Rafael Medoff regarding the Sudan and Obama’s “‘troubling’ genocide policy.” Medoff points out how in the Sudan there has been massive human rights abuses, and yet the Obama administration has been silent on what it happening. (http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=288847)

    One lie on top of another. One failure after another.

    • I was wondering what your assessment might be. Good catch shofar and excellent build on Kieths insights. I’m really interested in the tune in numbers even or down from previous debates. Most folks are “tuned” in to the economy and don’t even know who Mr Benjamin Gazi is.

    • excellent links.

      My biggest complaint on the President when he said, “They have ships that go underwater called Nuclear submarines.”

      Did he really go into a junior high debate with Romney?

      • Yeah–that was really caustic and childish–to me anyway. The Navy does go by total ships–it’s tradition–the subs, I believe would be in there. Obama’s whole demeanor was tense and sort of pouncy and almost feral–and his hairline looked funny or different and his weird bent thumb coming at me and at me… Who was he glancing at to his left–ValJar? When he tried to segue to how much he loves education, I went to Real Housewives for a break. I am a multitasker!

        • I think that even though he is an arrogant SOB, he knows he is up against a superior opponent.
          Subs are called ‘boats’.
          He is so used to talking to brain dead college and high school students, he forgets intelligent adults are listening.
          Romney allowed him to make a fool of himself last night, and he did.
          His condescending attitude toward Romney was disgusting and obvious.

              • Obama’s comments had nothing to do with the vessel count. He was just pointing out the Mitt doesn’t understand how war works these days. You don’t need hundreds of ships the Navy doesn’t want. You just need to make sure the ones you have kick ass. China has 1 aircraft carrier and its built on the hull of an old Russian ship. Our Navy is fine.

                • Our Navy won’t be fine if Obama is re-elected. The serviceable life of a huge portion of our submarine, cruise, and destroyer fleet is nearly up. In addition, we must continue to build new carriers to not only replace aging ships but also to maintain the infrastructure required to construct these leviathans. The reason China only has one is because they lack said infrastructure. But as China turns it gave to the horizon, you can rest assured they will attempt to build a blue-water Navy, complete with the ability to project power via super carriers. I don’t need a lecture from some dope-smoking former community organizer to understand the importance of US Naval superiority, I spent much of my life ensuring it.

                  Oh, and YOU’RE WELCOME…

                  • No the Navy wil not be fine under 0bama. My son is a Navy Pilot. He is seriously considering getting out, if 0. is elected and he is not the only one. They have to make do with old replacement parts in planes, everything is cut back, just too unsafe for the guys.

                  • @ Jeff – your post started out with promise. Thought we going to learn something or at least gain some insight. And then came the unsubstantiated innuendos, some silly statement on China that would be worth exploring, and then the obligatory disparaging remark with respect to our Commander In Chief.

                    I observe Jeff, that the President was “talking to” the American voter and watching world, but he delivered the history lessor “AT” Romney, who apparently needed it… Frankly, I have more faith in you than I do Romney when in comes to Big Navy. You seem to have a clue.

                    RT

      • Winning the debate is a useless metric, as it is almost always based on substance alone, and completely subjective. Romney destroyed Obama in the first debate, yes, on substance, but Obama self-immolated in front of 70 million people. With respect to the ships comment, if I were Romney I would have said “Mr. President, you said you wanted to pivot to Asia. Do you think the Chinese are not building hundreds of ships a year?” Obama is just so lost. As I said months ago, he doesnt even really want the job anymore. Romney will oblige that.

      • It was a perfect reply. It showed that Romneys debating tactics are pathetic. He gets a bunch of pseudo-facts – number of ships – and spews them out so fast that the moderator can’t stop him.

        Obama just exposed that Romney’s factoids are irrelevant and, frankly, stupid. It was a great moment. Mitt looked like a schoolboy who got caught cheating on a spelling teat.

    • I liked how Romney said he would already know that Israel would attack Iran. This wouldn’t BE a surprise attack if there was a Romney administration. That was the knockout punch on the subject of Israel!

  5. I agree. MrObama was poised for another fight and kept jabbing at MrR.
    All he got back from MrRomney was a rebuke that summed up the whole of O’s campaign; a personal attack is not an agenda.

    The President sounded peevish, petty, and rude.
    MrShieffer was the best referee, but the questions were loaded in MrObama’s favor.

    Personally, I prefer MrRomney’s vision of a strong America and the best military that money can buy. The best defense is a strong offense.

  6. According to MSNBC the President is the winner by a mile, and Mitt Romney is a delusional liar. In this alternate world Ann Romney is a shrew and Michelle Obama is a saint..

    • I flipped over there–Rachel had her worried face on, though, and Matthews was rumpled and looked like he would burst into tears–how oh how, asked he, could Romney say things he does not believe–well, how do YOU, Chris–Tip O’Neill would not know you now.

  7. @Cindy Lou – Yes, I heard Bob Sheiffer say “Obama Bin Laden”, my wife & I looked at each other, then laughed so hard I spilled my my beer in my lap. Romney was gracious, didn’t miss a beat, and answered his question. I agree with Keith’s anology about “Rope a Dope.” Romney’s handlers saw the undecided realtime graphs of opinion from the last debate. Romney only went into negative territory when they argued. Obama came looking for a rematch to the fight, Romney wasn’t going for it. When Obama attacked, it made Mitt look eminately reasonable, calm, and Presidential. Pretty smart move.

  8. Forgot to say – Shofar was dead on. Obama said “We will stand with Israel.” What a weasel, if Israel (God forbid) was ever overun, Obama would sit on his hands and say “Hey, I never said we would provide military assistance…”
    What a “Benz Oh Na”…

      • Maybe Obama, Panetta and SecNav Mabus are planning on recommissioning IX 21, wouldn’t that be a hoot!

        When Obama talked about how we have flat tops and subs, all I could think of was TR’s comment about the “Big Stick.” TR’s Big Stick was the Navy, and he is probably spinning right now watching what is happening to the greatest naval force in history.

        Maybe HRC can channel Teddy and see what he thinks, after all she talks to Eleanor – http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/10/eleanor-roosevelt-talked-to-hillary-this-week-bill-clinton-makes-astonishing-channeling-claim-2484094.html

      • @ Langley – go fact check yourself on two levels. What Big Navy wants, they largely get. Second, a quick glance at the planning cycle for ship building largely leaves the current administration out of this particular LCS debate – good or bad.

        Simply, your boy was schooled. Period.

        PS. Don’t forget to complain about the new uniforms and mushy vegetables in the chow hall…

        • I think you may have missed the larger point. We’re discussing who will be the next commander in chief and you’re splitting hairs about warship building cycles.

          • For commander-in-chief I like the guy who was in charge when Bin Laden got killed vs. the guy who will be a carbon copy of the one who ignored Bin Laden and attacked Iraq.

          • @Rebobo2 – larger point not missed. I was replying to a post that was not factual on too many levels to debate. Clearly, the intent was to say our current CIC is bad for the Navy with his past policies leading the way on the LCS, et al. Just wasn’t so… Geez, so many areas to have a good dialog. Why pick one and then proceed to start off with a lie / uninformed conclusion as the basis of indictment. Ignorance unaddressed remains ignorance…

            Lets talk F22 / FA 35, etc., etc. Hell, let’s talk what does our enemy of 2035 look like and what the heck our Current President is doing to help move us to platforms to address these unknown threats? Room for improvement for sure! But no, let’s pick a fact from 1916 and stick our chin out there… Geez, I am glad our President just metaphorically slapped him a couple times rather than decking him with further data that would have made Mitt’s head explode right on camera…

          • Romney is no Commander-in-Chief. He is rash, indecisive, and unable to listen to anyone. Good leaders listen twice as much as they speak. Romney has the ratio backwards.

  9. I believe that Romney’s strength, confidence, and transcendence in this debate was summed up in two words–“Mr. President”. Obama has been everything but deserving of that salutation, yet Mitt transcended, with those two words, all the smallness and pettiness of Barack Obama with a profound respect for the rule of law, the Constitution, the American people, while he showed himself to be worthy of the office that he so humbly deferred to. The presidency is greater than any man who has had the privilege of serving in that office, and Mitt, unlike Barack Obama, understands that.

    Good luck President Romney! The American people need your help.

  10. Great analysis. Romney came on stronger at the end of the debate while Obama was reduced to babbling talking points. His death stare and overall nastiness cinched for me.

    Obama can’t tolerate being criticized in the slightest. They must warn him about his expression but he is who he is: mean.

    When I read that this was a strategy I understood what I had seen in a new light. The Obamas were outsmarted.That must kill Axelrod.

    • Didn’t like the “death stare” on the split screen. I guess BO wanted to appear tough and try to intimidate MR. Looked like a bully. Oh, he is.

      • Petulant and petty sums up the angry man child on screen right. That split screen was ugly to see. Reminded me of a school yard bully all the while turning to B.S. for help. Candy Crowley not available for comment

  11. …catching up this morning, around the web (we’re up at 4:30 a.m., so the debate is too late for us): an interesting thing I’m picking up is (except for the note of srdem54), virtually no mentions of the moderator webwide. That’s as it should be.
    One of the guys was so gutsball (Powerline guy?) that he watched the football game and then watched MSNBC to see who won.
    We love watching the debate the next day.

  12. Good analysis Keith. I turned to my wife during the debate and said “wow, rope-a-dope”. Great minds think alike. obama came across looking like a spoiled kid. Gov Romney and his team had the right strategy. Chicago politics doesn’t play well on the national stage, Go Mitt!

    • @Just2old – well, if you liked seeing your boy get pummeled by demonstrating a complete lack of knowledge on foreign policy – I hope you brought out the popcorn….

      Oddly, you express that our Presidents command of the stage (read as his knowledge and decisive performance) doesn’t play well on the national stage… Wrong. I’ll tell you what does resonate – Romney is out of his league and that is dangerous – the World knows it AND more importantly Americans know it.

      • Command of the stage? He looked like what he is: a narcissistic, bitter, p*ssed off little man that has gamed his way or been pushed/pulled over EVERY hurdle in life. Have you read DREAMS? Isn’t it amazing! A guy that NEVER WROTE ANYTHING other than 2 lousy poems and 1 crappy letter to the editor of the Columbia magazine suddenly (after skipping out on the first deadline and NOT returning the advance) produces the “best” political auto-bio ever! Even more astonishing is how much it sounds like “just a guy in the neighborhood’s” FUGITIVE DAYS. Bwahahaaa!

        Well, it’s fun to see him have to actually compete. Makes him very, very cranky. What an utter POS, just like that enormous beard he’s “married” to. Can’t wait until BO is fired and the ball gag they’ve had in this hag’s mouth is taken out. I guess she won’t be so proud of her country all over again!

        • @ Star. I would lecture you if I thought for even a moment you had the capacity to entertain a competing doctrine / approach / and or set of possible alternatives / outcomes – but, the moment thankfully passed. I will stand on my statement – Romney demonstrated a profound ignorance of foreign policy.

          Worse, what little he may know results in poor deductions, ill informed shifting policy, and promotes foot in mouth disease. Worse still, the 8th grade view of the world he was able to articulate results in the prostitution of a sustained position. If Mitt were asked what is favorite color was, he would “sincerely” look in the voters eyes and say “plaid”…

          All this adds up to insincere + ill-equipped = dangerous.

  13. I’m reading a lot of comments on other blogs where people are writing that they wanted to see more punch from Romney; and they feel he was not doing himself any favors by being calm and reasonable.
    But, the first debate was a TKO for Romney – by being totally prepared and catching the totally unprepared Obama off guard (who, btw did himself no favors with his dismissive and disdainful demeanor) he won the debate. The second debate was more of a match up for both of them and Romney showed he could go toe to toe with The Comrade. This debate showed that Romney is presidential (again calm and reasonable), which brought out the petulant babyness of our esteemed President. Not a good look for him. Once again, Obama did himself no favors with his attitude. Looking to the moderator for help to end Romney’s talking points was especially telling.

  14. I just watched the debate and I agree on your analysis, Keith. Romney had the right approach and he again looked like the Leader while Obama looked a little desperate. And he looked unhealthy as well, poor fellow. Good comments here as usual.

  15. Excellent analysis, Keith. We were disappointed when Romney passed on Libya, and seemed to agree with Obama’s policies more often than not. After the fact, it is evident that Obama wanted to paint Romney as an aggressive war monger and he failed. In my opinion, Romney’s high points were the “apology tour” (ouch), describing the debt as a national security issue, and Obama’s message to Putin about having more “flexibility” after the election. In the whole, Romney won the debate because he has a presidential demeanor. Obama behaved like a bitter, angry guttersnipe trying to pick a fight.

    • @Susan – really? Won the debate on “presidential demeanor”? There are so many other important points to consider, um, like, the Governors choice of tie…. Also, he looked good and blinked well as he was getting soundly whipped on the world stage… Yeah, important qualities to be sure.

      Good news, Wikipedia is more popular now since Mitt spent the last week boning up on Geopolitics and Foreign Policy…

        • @ Susan. Very well then. Agreed. For a guy who lost the debate on subject, content, applicability, fact, policy, and substance, Mitt looked good lying on his back having been decked a few times. He also looked good hugging our President while doing the clinch maneuver so as not to receiving a more thorough beating – and he looked good doing it.

          Agreed, for a loser, the Governor had the best demeanor I have seen in a long time. Score one for Mitt. Plan executed, job well done!

      • RT….Of course Romney played this the way it was planned…a masterstroke. Barry lost his cool and was bitter. Believe me–this and Slow Joe’s performance turned some women off. We will see just how many in less than 2 weeks.

        Oh…and I love the pic of Romney with his newborn baby that is flying around on algoresintrawebs. This, too, was planned and will win thousands of women.

        And, sure….”presidential demeanor” is tangible. That you don’t understand that figures, because you are impressed with the little fraud, Barry.

        • Legtingle – agreed. I understand and am in agreement. The plan to lose and look good losing went well. Need more babies to kiss…

          And, funny, all this time Romney had a 6 point plan! The 6th point lose debates and look good doing so. Appear clueless and uniformed and be humble while expressing same. Well done.

      • Presidential demeanor might just encompass Romney’s ability to articulate specific plans, wisdom to not play in the mud being thrown by the opponent (Obama) and confidence in the American people to look at both men on the stage and decide which man is more trustworthy without the bitter attack dog tactics done in the closing minutes by Obama. Obama came across as a small and brittle, Romney as gracious and smart. Americans truly do have two very different candidates from which to choose.

        • @ PamK – a well written response and on many levels appropriate. I would add that in the final analysis, substance is more important than style. We can probably both agree we a performer short on “a desirable personal style” is less desirable over one short on capabilities.

          Oddly, but no surprise, we debate Big Bird, Binders, Bayonets, and Battleships. We voters collectively publicly demonstrate disdain for such 30 second sound bites, but immensely enjoy and engage on this level… Ah, what goes on behind closed doors…

  16. What we didn’t hear last night – Romney: Since we’re here to debate foreign policy, I’m genuinely curious about something — why do you noticeably bow to other foreign leaders — is that an Indonesian custom?

  17. I got so mad at the whole bayonet/horse thing BO tried it was insulting and showed his total ignorance of the military. My grandfather road horseback in
    war his son a tank WW2 both are the Calvary and they used horses in Iraq and
    Afghanistan nd they still use bayonets.

  18. I agree Keith! Obama seemed petty and it got worse when Romney wouldn’t engage with him. You could see that he had a bunch of jab phrases he had in his arsenal but couldn’t use them because there was no opportunity. Towards the end, Obama started using them out of context and all. They made him look desparate, petty, and small. You could tell Obama was angry. It was like the little short kid poking the big kid in the chest and trying to get him to hit him. Romney was like the gentle giant. He was looking down at the small one like he was a small gnat that was easy to ignore. I think this worked for women and the nonconfrontational undecided. Just keep praying that this worked. Obama must go.

    • Save Us: Even Obama’s sitting posture made him look like the small one. Hunched over, like a lion wanting to leap and kill. Romney sat tall, engaged responsibly and in my mind, won big time.

  19. I firmly believe that Nobama spent 90% of his time preparing to discuss Benghazi in that debate. I can’t help but believe he put all of his eggs in coming up with a defesne for Benghazi, and even had his best speech writers he could find come up with a real “zinger” of a statement to put Romney “in his place” (along the lines of “your’e no John Kennedy”).

    Instead, Romney played it cool, and once again, totally got under Nobama’s skin by not playing into his very well-scripted game plan.

    And Nobama had to take that totally awesome “zinger” back to his dressing room and wonder what might have been if Romney had just played along…

    • When Benghazi came as the first question, Obama must have thought: Great! I am fully prepared to answer that question and I am going to again cry out loud “offensive!!” But when Romney did not pick up the issue, he was a little dizzy and off-balance. Romney will not give him that chance. People already believe WH is on a shaky ground. Enough said. He rather spend the time selling himself on other things.

  20. I guess all the GOP spinners got the same memo. The President knocked Romney out last night. Anyone who saw it otherwise saw what they wanted to see.

    • What happened, was Romney hewing to the advice of Sun Tzu: “To defeat your enemy, you must pretend inferiority, and encourage your enemy’s arrogance.” And man oh man, did Obama ever look arrogant. That’s not going to play well in the middle: on one side, preezy hopenchange snarking off every chance he got; on the other, a smiling, civil, sunny challenger who turned the other cheek and acted more presidential than the president. Obama may have out-blustered Romney, and may have been viewed as more aggressive, but in the process he also managed to make a few critical mistakes (e.g., sequestration will not happen.) He overplayed his hand, a la Joe Biden, and the only bounce that will give him is a dead cat bounce.

  21. Agreed. Good analysis. One does not always win a war by winning every battle. Romney looked Presidential. It is largely in the Upper Midwest’s hands now. The rest of us can only pray that the heartland chooses wisely to kick Obama out.

  22. I think this analysis is exactly right………………gee, won’t it be nice to actually have someone with real intelligence back in the white house ?

  23. Everyone knows the reason Romney could not attack Obama at last night’s debate — because Romney has NO foreign policy with to attack the president with. Mitt simply agreed with every stance Obama chose. Polls say Mitt win the first one debate, and got blasted in the last two.
    Check the CBS snap poll to find Obama with a 20-point victory.

    • Emma, In the first debate Romney needs to show that he is not a monster as the liberals painted him to be. He succeeded, big time. In the second debate, Romney needs to keep his momentum going while Obama tried to stop it. Obama failed. In the third debate, Romney wants to achieve a few goals and tie up some loose ends. He also succeeded–even the liberal media admits it. So really, how do you evaluate success vs. failure in the debates? Obama did succeed in the 2nd and 3rd debates to rally his base. But he failed to provide a vision why those undecided and disappointed should give him the second chance. Can you tell his future visions, and how he plans to fix the economy and the deficit? Can anyone? He said we should be patient. It will work. It will just take more time. In other words. He is saying that it will “eventually” work out if we stick with him. He has done so much damages in the past four years and even if Romney is elected, I doubt he is able to fix it in four years. Majority of the people think the country is on a wrong track, and the first step to set a new course is to change the leader in the WH.

      • indi – “So really, how do you evaluate success vs. failure in the debates?”

        I think Emma scores debates pretty much the way MSLSD does – with blind ambition and cases of kool-aid.

        • Sadid, I think Obama is the king of blind ambition… Yeah, I also saw the CBS independent focus group for Ohio where 2 out of 10 raised their hands to vote for Obama and the rest, for Romney. Even the moderator was surprised. Obama won. Didn’t he?

          “Romney could not attack Obama because Romney has NO foreign policy with to attack the president with?” He did not need to say anything. Obama’s foreign policy failures speak for themselves.

  24. I agee, more importantly Romney delivered a well placed sting to Obamas campaign, meaning they still don’t know they were beat, rofl. While Romney targeted every single swing state; in fl he supported israel but exposed obamas lack visiting israel even once during his term, va he talked up military (then watched obama impale himself by ridiculing military use of bayonets). So while Romney used the debate to garner support from swing states, at the same time he showed them how obama doesn’t support/care about them. This is why Romney outsmarted obama and team. Romney went for the win with swing states and independents. Well done Romney, well done.

  25. Your analogy to Ali’s “rope-a-dope” strategy missed out on the fact that after Foreman got tired, Ali knocked him out.

    Romney certainly sat back on the ropes and let Obama pummel him, but Romney never threw a knockout punch. That’s why the post-debate polls all show that most people who saw the debate on TV or heard it on the radio concluded that Obama won.

    • You missed the point entirely. The knockout punch was a feint. Obama tried again and again to bait Romney into a fight. Romney stayed above the fray and let the little community organizer punch HIMSELF out.

    • Only problem is the fight won’t be over until Nov 6. We’ll see who wins then. I would very much like to see a Romney KO, but will gladly settle for a win on points.

  26. I recognized the rope the dope strategy Mitt used. He certainly came off as more presidential, in fact it looked like Mitt was the president and Obama the challenger. Mitt is much smarter than Obama. I hope America has learned its lesson of voting for a man that is not vetted, that hides his records, that pals around with communists. May God help us all if they did not. I had a family member call last night right after the debate and she and her husband are both voting for Mitt. He has my husbands and my vote. In fact I know of noone who is voting for Obama, or at least they are not saying that.