A good night for Romney
E. Thomas McClanahanI thought Mitt Romney had a solid win last night, even though the CNN snap poll found that most disagreed. But Romney did what he needed to do. I saw a president up there. I’m sure many voters saw the same thing.
Romney went toe-to-toe with Obama, kept his cool and frequently had the president on the defensive. I thought smoke would come out of Obama’s ears when the “apology tour” stuff came up, accented by Romney’s killer refrain, “they noticed.”
From the transcript: “And then the president began what I’ve called an apology tour of going to — to various nations in the Middle East and — and criticizing America. I think they looked at that and saw weakness. Then when there were dissidents in the streets of Tehran, the Green Revolution, holding signs saying, is America with us, the president was silent. I think they noticed that as well. And I think that when the president said he was going to create daylight between ourselves and Israel that — that they noticed that as well.”
Romney won the key exchange over China, although I disagree with his position that bashing Beijing and declaring China a currency manipulator is the best way to handle the problem.
Some people seemd to think the “horses and bayonets” line was a plus for Obama, which to me is puzzling. This was one of Obama’s most condescending and wrongheaded moments.
Romney mentioned our shrinking fleet and Obama replied, in effect, that of course the fleet is smaller; with time your military assets should change.
Here’s Obama: “Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets — (laughter) — 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. And so the question is not a game of Battleship where we’re counting ships. It’s — it’s what are our capabilities.”
The trouble with Obama’s flawed analogy is while we don’t need horses to any significant extent, we still need ships — and sorry, “counting ships” matters greatly. As our ships become more technologically capable and expensive, the costs of losing just one becomes a much heavier blow proportionately. So a shrinking Navy implies a more risk-averse national security strategy — something, to borrow Romney’s refrain, other powers will “notice.”
Romney did what is always tough for challengers to do. He showed he was up to speed on foreign policy and capable to stepping into the commander-in-chief role.
The first debate changed the dyanmics of this race utterly. The subsequent two — and the veep debate — did nothing to restore the political landscape to Obama’s liking. Romney is well positioned for the home stretch.
Mordecai Boone
7 months agoThe truth is you could have written your post before the debate because your mind was made up. There is no way anyone watching that debate could come to your conclusions. None of the snap polls gave it to Romney. We get it….youre a GOP hack.
George Hunsucker
Northland
7 months agothe big 0 went small, which is a reflection on him and his lack of progress except growing our national debt, the number of Americans unemployed and the number of Americans on food stamps.
jimmy ii’s condescending manner was not presidential, Romney was….
Phil Cardarella
7 months agoMac:
First off, we do not need as many ships as in 1916 — when MOST of the Navy’s ships were coal tenders, carrying fuel for the actual warships. We’ve gone nuclear.
Second — being a good Democrat — I am willing to have shipbuilding as part of a much needed jobs stimulus plan. But, we should raise the revenues to pay for it, right?
I guess you do not think it is appropriate to tell folks in other countries that our policies have not been 100% flawless (something THEY have noticed, Mac!) Personally, I think we OWE an apology to Iraq for invading it without justification and causing the deaths of 100,000+ Iraqis. And we owe an apology to the families of 450 American dead and the 30,000+ American wounded. When you do something wrong and stupid, you should at least apologize.
And, as important as Israel is, both strategically and emotionally? These guys are not running for President of Israel — all appearances to the contrary notwithstanding. Friendship is a two-way street, and Israel could cut us some slack, too.
Look, I happen to think that the idea that Mitt is qualified to be President because he was a successful businessman is foolish. The skill sets are totally different — ask the last successful businessman to hold the office, one Herbert Hoover. But the factis that the GOP ticket has less foreign policy experience than a kid who has gon on a People to People trip.
And, last night, we all noticed.
Phil Cardarella
7 months agoOf course, the figure ofr Americans lost in Iraq is @ 4500.
Harold Smith
7 months agoPhil, don’t be so hard on Mac - he sees the writing on the wall, or should I say LCD, and is punching up his portfolio so he can hit up Fox News for a job when the late, lamented Star is finally stripped of all sentient life forms and the computer at McClatchy Central does it all.
Want to hear some truths you will never read in this newspaper? Try Andrea Seabrook’s new blog and podcast DecodeDC (decodedc.com). She got fed up with lying politicians and not being able to call them on it, so she left NPR and struck out on her own.
Mac, I don’t think you’re a bad guy, I’ve even read a thing or two you’ve written I’ve agreed with, but columns like this will only make thoughtful people shake their heads.
The one reason Romney may be in a position to win this election is that his supporters, like Sheldon Adelson and the Koch brothers, have given him the hundreds of millions of dollars needed to buy up all the ad time they can until the election. At times like these, I love my DVR.
George Hunsucker
Northland
7 months agoWhen Romney talked about the big 0’s apology tour through the middle east, EXCLUDING OUR ALLY ISRAEL of course, the debate was over. All the big 0 could do was get pissed and then continue his attacks on Romney.
small ball from a small person…..
John W Mack Jr.
7 months agoHaha! The joke is on you. The count of Navy ships is going up right now, not down.
The horses and bayonets comparison is apt. Horses were replaced by trucks, jeeps, and other mechanized vehicles that greatly reduced the number of horses needed to get the same job done, and soldiers are not longer being issued bayonets en masse. The same thing with the Navy. We retired all of the battleships as they are obsolete. We have way more nuclear subs than we did in 1916. We now have females serving in the Navy. Time marches on… unless you are a republican.
Digby Willard
7 months agoMr. McClanahan,
Just a short note to tell you I enjoy your columns and look forward to reading them.
Even though I do not always agree with your viewpoint and conclusions, I find them to be well-presented and thought-provoking.
Ron Packer
7 months agoCute of Obama with his “horses and bayonets” schtick. However, as with his “corpseman” comment a couple of years ago, Obama showed his ignorance as Commander In Chief. I’m certain any E1 could point out to him that a submarine is not a “ship.” It is a “boat.”
If the President wants to be petty and condescending, I’ll be happy to return the favor.
George Hunsucker
Northland
7 months agoWhere are the Benghazi-gate blogs libs???? The big 0 knew 2 hours after the attack started and lied about it for 2 weeks…
What a “leader” we have….
Rachel Elaine Hines
7 months ago“Good NIGHT!” would have been my preferred descriptor for Romney’s showing also. LOL
JR Beillenhouser
7 months agoRachel, you won’t be laughing in two weeks. LOL.