Worldly Talk

Civil discussion and debate on real world events and issues.


United States Third Presidential Debate

 
I'm just here until twitter decides what the meme of this debate will be. My guess is Russia, but only because there was nothing as wonderful as big bird or binders.

There's always Bayonets and Horses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlictoatl View Post
Romney's debate strategy has been extraordinary. He came out in the first debate denying that his comments and agenda of the last many months was his actual agenda, throwing Obama for a loop.
From my perspective he came out and refuted the hundreds of millions in negative ads run about him in the last year or so. He destroyed the caricature of him and his policies those ads created by going out and explaining them. His policies are somewhat wonkish and when people take them and start with the hyperbole it makes it easy enough to refute once people start to sit down and listen to him explain them compared to the negative ads that had been run. I don't want to get into the nitty gritty details of each point of contention but I follow things pretty closely and, to me, he seemed to put forward a good explanation of his policies that I was previously aware of. Nothing in the debates that Romney put forth caught me by surprise and I've been paying attention to nearly everything since the primary debates started. His policies are fairly consistent if your views of them was formed by reading them and not other things characterizing them.

From what I heard/read (forgot which), and I haven't checked the math, Obama has almost completely stopped running negative ads about Romney where before the debates it was ~90% of his ad money was negative. The person saying this was some type of political consultant said people would study this election for years because of the way Romney handled the negative ads and destroyed the preconception of him and they're reanalyze how to use them and even look into whether they're as effective as previously thought.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savayan View Post
Speaking as a foreigner and what's equivalent to a hard left on the US political spectrum, he sounded uniformed about the nature of foreign policy. He seemed arrogant in his assumption that nations should bend knee to the US, and overly simplistic in how he proposed to approach other nations.
That's American foreign policy in its un-nuanced form, though. Most Americans think like that. Most Americans barely even know where other countries are, and they clearly must all think we're better than them, because they speak our language and send their refugees here.

Nuanced foreign policy doesn't win much, over here.

I think Savayan is right. There is already a 'horses and bayonets' twitter account. Also, 'Battleship'. I give myself brownie points though.

Horses and bayonets... I know even as a corpsman I went to Afghanistan with a bayonet ;o

@Atlictoatl: It's a shame, because it's what's needed. You can't just bludgeon the world into submission. China is rising, Russia is rising from the ashes. Neither are nations that can be dissuaded by landing a few thousand Marines. And even as we're seeing in the Middle East, landing a few thousand Marines isn't always beneficial to America's interests in the region.

@Powderhorn: True, but it's more of a utility knife that can be stuck on the end of a rifle. It's not one of these babies.

I suppose I'll even throw in my opinion on the debate:

I think Obama had a stronger showing in the debate, but only slightly. I think that he had a slightly more aggressive tone, and that he pressed his attacks. Romney, though given some openers, never seemed to press any of them. The question I really wanted him to ask was, "Mr. President, is Israel a close ally that we would defend as one of our own, or are we growing daylight between our nations?"

I think Romney mostly just wanted to keep the "status quo" on this one. He didn't want to do anything too spectacular because he's already winning in the polls. Some light jabs to keep in the game, but otherwise, I got the feeling he just didn't want to upset anyone and put off voters.

I did think Bob Schieffer, the moderator, was by far the best thus far. Very fair, and still maintaining control of the debate. That being said, the candidates also weren't trying to walk all over him either as in the previous debates.

Anyone else notice that Romney's most oft used line of the night was "let's take a step back?" That's what I'm wanting to avoid, when back means Bush years. He also claimed that China wants freedom- what universe is Romney living in?

If only I lived in a world where American politicians didn't have to bend over and spread'em for Israel. I don't know why either candidate would focus on it, we know that both parties want to take Israel out to dinner and get to know each other better.





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Blog   Myth-Weavers Status