« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

This Debate Changes Nothing, It’s Still the Economy Stupid

This debate will be dissected and discussed, but in a debate where much was argued and little resolved, this debate will not change much. The President said much that one could argue with – misleading negatives on Romney, and an overfocus on minor distraction issues. It was surprising to hear the President sound indignant over the ‘politicization’ of the Libya fiasco, after a month of Obama administration’s highly political game of CYA operations and misdirection on what happened. It was somewhat damning that President Obama has such a barren set of talking points that he had to recycle his Planned Parenthood one five times.

But this debate will not matter. Results matter. This election is about the economy. “Equal pay” means nothing if you are equally unemployed; student loans don’t help but hurt a graduate who can’t find a job. Talking about the middle class means little if the middle class is crushed by lower incomes, rising prices, and fewer opportunities. Illegal immigration is down? Yeah, a jobless phony ‘recovery’ will send even illegal aliens into self-deportation mode.

In 3 minutes during this debate, Romney laid out exactly what was wrong with the Obama record and why he doesn’t deserve re-election. He asked the better question than “Are you better off?”. Romney said that “You know better … the last four years haven’t been good”. He gave the one useful and important takeaway from this debate:

“This election is … about who can get the middle class to a bright and prosperous future”.

This is the election in a nutshell.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • commonsenseobserver

    Still, peace through strength is as important as prosperity through freedom.

    • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

      Hmmm. Our strength depends on our prosperity to fund it, and we cannot have national security without economic security nor control our destiny if wehave sold the next generation to the Chinese bondholders.

      …. so I guess I disagree. At a time when no large foreign power threatens us but our gravest threat comes from our $16 trillion debt and a stalled economic engine, the economy IS the #1 issue of this election.

      • commonsenseobserver

        Trade? The skills gap?

        Certainly, the economy and national strength depend on each other. So the former is the #1 issue, but not the only one. There must be a broad and sweeping case against the policies that have weakened America, and one for an America with renewed peace and prosperity.

        • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

          Well, Romney offers all that, so I think we are just quibbling over priorities. Most Americans will vote based on the economy – ‘pocketbook issues’ – and Romney pegged the question exactly right.

          I feel extra gratified because 3 weeks ago I laid out what Romney needed to say to win … AND HE HAS MOSTLY SAID IT!

          I said Romney needed to say: “This election is about who can fix our broken economy and put us on a footing to avoid that next crisis”

          http://www.redstate.com/wosg/2012/10/02/what-romney-needs-to-say-to-win-by-ten-points/

    • APA Guy

      The economy is THE issue in this election, CSO. Every poll shows that…every focus group says that. Indeed, everyone on the planet seems to get that except you.

      • commonsenseobserver

        Not the ONLY one, that’s for sure.

  • celador2

    Romney said he would lower taxes, and open up energy production. He was impressive on economic recovery. Obama has a weak record on jobs and made a claim that he is responsible for five million private sector jobs. Who, when, where and what?

  • sengokunadeko14

    I used to be in the “debates/conventions don’t matter, it’s all about the economy” camp too…until I saw what happenned when Mitt Romney clobbered Obama in the first debate.

    Obviously, in the 21st century, average Americans are still tuning into the debates (perhaps more so than ever). I’d have to say that debates do matter.

    • commonsenseobserver

      Not this particular one, I think, nor the Vice-Presidential one. Hardly conclusive enough.

    • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

      Well, you are right that MOST debates don’t matter. This was one of those typical debates.

      Debate #1 mattered because Obama had and has a campaign devoid of new ideas but full of “you cant vote for the evil, rich guy” attacks. That attack only works if Romney plays the part; Romney in the debate punctured big holes in Obama’s attacks and millions of independents realized that Romney would make not just a plausible alternative but a BETTER alternative. that debate was the most consequential debate since 1980 Reagan-Carter debate, created by the same environment – media bias plus an incumbent who simply attacks the Republican and thinks that is sufficient will create “undecided” voters who need to see for themselves. Seeing Romney unfiltered has given millions the opportunity to make their own judgements.

      This is why, btw, the biased moderators were shutting down Romney and Ryan before they finished their points while letting Obama and Biden yap overtime. That and biased questions ‘shape’ the debate so you cant hear the candidates unfiltered. No matter. Romney in 3 minutes (see video above) destroyed Obama’s reelection campaign. Obama has had that bad of a record that its not too hard.

      For all the back and forth jockeying last night, it was remarkable that Obama did NOT present any real 2nd term agenda, nor did he change the equation from the first debate. “Vote for me because the other guy is an evil extremist” doesnt work when the other guy is anything but that. Romney’s 5 point plan has 5 more points to move the economy forward than Obama does.

  • APA Guy

    Yes indeed…and per Gallup today, Obama has a bit of a hill to climb: Romney 51 Obama 45

  • http://www.justintribble.com Justin Tribble

    Obama has now used the “bunch of binders full of women” in a campaign stump speech today, which suggest the campaign is grasping at straws.

    Romney’s comments about hiring women in his administration were very effective, backed up by the truth (the group that gave Romney the binders/resumes praised him in 2006).

    I’m failing to see how what he said is in any way a gaffe. I’m completely confused by it. I heard Twitter was abuzz, why? Are they just desperate to find something? Isn’t it a good thing that Romney got all of these resumes from women and considered them and then hired a bunch of them, had a female Lt. Gov and female chief of staff in Beth Meyers?

  • Pingback: Scottie Coursey

  • Pingback: Hien Jou