Morning-After Analysis Of The Final Presidential Debate
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-10-23/morning-after-analysis-final-presidential-debate
President Barack Obama and former Gov. Mitt Romney met in Boca Raton, Fla., last night for their third and final debate. In the 90-minute program moderated by Bob Scheiffer, the president and his challenger sought to highlight their differences related to the U.S. role in the world, including America’s military budget, U.S.-China relations and the ongoing unrest in the Arab world. But both candidates also sought to lead the discussion to the economy and jobs, issues believed to be the central drivers of the upcoming election. Please join us to talk about what we heard from candidates last night and where the campaigns go from here.
Guests
E.J. Dionne Jr.
senior fellow at The Brookings Institution, columnist for The Washington Post and author of "Our Divided Political Heart: The Battle for the American Idea in an Age of Discontent."
Ramesh Ponnuru
senior editor for the "National Review."
Mark Landler
White House correspondent for The New York Times.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
The usual Diane panel of 3 liberals in love with Obama vs. a weak "Romney Supporter"... I wonder if Diane will raise Romney's Mormonism again today. Image being critical of Romney's lack of experience after they elected a neophyte like Obama. The left is really starting to smell of desperation as the affirmative action president is slipping.
ecgberht - For 1 - the intelligence at the time did NOT say it was a terrorist attack - the intelligence said EXACTLY what the the administration said at the time. Even now, the only known perpetrator says they were responding to the video. Everything you said is based on the LIES perpetrated by Faux that the administration was trying to "cover up". ALL the facts show this could not be FURTHER from the truth - the administration's statements exactly mirrored the intelligence reports they were getting. As new info has come in, they have updated their stance - unlike Bush Co who took YEARS to admit the intelligence about WMDs was faulty. Once again - quit watching Faux - it makes one look foolish.
Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan have received briefings on matters otherwise limited to the President and his staff for some time now.
One point overlooked is that when Obama came into office he had ZERO foreign policy experience or any experience in governing for that matter. Romney by personal experience and public sector experience is head and shoulders above where Obama started. Any reasonable mind recognizes these differences. Foreign policy is usually a safe place for an incumbent to hang his hat simply for the reason the electorate pays little attention too it. President Obama was counting on this but as fate would have it his policies blew up in his face before the election.
Richard - Good comment but "she" is a HE.
polls. And I think everyone saw what they wanted to see. I saw Obama with an amazing grasp of diplomacy and foreign policy in today's world whereas Romney wants to go back to failed tax policies put forth by Republicans in the past.
Panel of the Diane Rehm :
Do you not remember the Inaugural Address in 2008...(President Barack Obama)
Read the text from that address and then ask yourself about the economic situation... .. he said it would take more than one term to resolve the economic problem.
I just heard one of your guests refer to Mr. Romney as unflappable. That is our President's MO.
Here is how we know the level of partisanship of this guest; in the first debate - the President was unflappable and this was unacceptable. Now, as Romney's positions flip flop so goes his campaign envoy.
The President proved his leadership style: calm, deliberate, thoughtful and the goal of all relations with other nation's leadership to make the case for "Democracy".
The meeting last night was not about Mitt as much as it underscored the effectiveness of this President.
Like a ship the wheel has been rotated...the rudder has caught and the ship is turning for our economy's benefit, personal responsibility and a positive face for Democracy worldwide.
The most recent version of Mitt Romney clearly demonstrates that he has the backbone of Gumby. It's fine to change your views over time. But, in Romney's case, he's changed his schpiel so many times even he can't remember what he said last. Certainly not a good presidential trait.
While Romney's repeated complaint that "attacking" him doesn't constitute a strategy is true as far as it goes -- is this the first thing he's said during the campaign that's accurate? -- he certainly shouldn't get the free pass he apparently feels entitled to either as a job creator, an ethical businessman, an effective executive or a moral actor. Also, this comes from someone whose entire campaign has been based on calling Obama inadequate, weak and ineffective and offering only platitudes, generalities, numbers that don't add up and endless lies as his own response.
Romney looking presidential? I guess if you believe that a secretive multi-millionaire deeply involved in a dodgy religion has your best interests at heart. I'm no great fan of Obama, as I have asserted here and elsewhere, but he seems more genuine and credible to me than the humanoid corporation R-Money does.
One more thing: why have we heard nothing about the merits of continuing the War on Drugs in any of these debates or even in the entire campaign? I realize that both candidates ostensibly support it, but it doesn't seem defensible either by conservative or liberal rationales.
Glad our socialist friends from Sweden and Switzerland are chiming in. But I have to tell you it is not much of a surprise you favor Obama and his on air shillmisters..
What has happened to the Tea Party in this race? They never liked Romney. Have they taken their ball and bat and went home?
I thought that I often saw Governor Romney display a rather wimpy version of the Joe Biden smirk last night. Interesting that no one has mentioned that.
Last night would have been an excellent moment to discuss climate change. I find it curious Schieffer didn't mention the subject, the first time it was not discussed in a debate since 1988.
soundpam wrote:
"ecgberht - For 1 - the intelligence at the time did NOT say it was a terrorist attack - the intelligence said EXACTLY what the the administration said at the time. Even now, the only known perpetrator says they were responding to the video. Everything you said is based on the LIES perpetrated by Faux that the administration was trying to "cover up". ALL the facts show this could not be FURTHER from the truth - the administration's statements exactly mirrored the intelligence reports they were getting. As new info has come in, they have updated their stance - unlike Bush Co who took YEARS to admit the intelligence about WMDs was faulty. Once again - quit watching Faux - it makes one look foolish."
This is a repeat of what you wrote the first time, only longer. You missed this part ... "and document your accusation."
Here's an example:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/us/politics/explanation-for-benghazi-a...
test
Did I hear Gov. Romney say that he would do away with Unions when he was talking about teachers and education?
Interesting comments this morning.
The fact that the news media lie to forward their own agenda is a given, they are entertainment and controversy brings in the money.
The fact that the candidates lie about their beliefs and plans for our future is terrifying.
Truth and honesty are not only discouraged in our present society but also when truth is spoken the speaker is jumped on by others surrounding them.
Seems odd that the majority claim to believe in the "Holy Bible" but at the same time encourage lies - against one of the ten rules their God gave them.
Scary world we live in. Scary indeed.
So... when Governor Romney said "Attacking me is no talking about how we're goig to deal with the challenges that exist in the Middle East, and take advantage of the opportunity there..." what opportunity do you think he is referring to?
partisan politics wrote:
"Glad our socialist friends from Sweden and Switzerland are chiming in. But I have to tell you it is not much of a surprise you favor Obama and his on air shillmisters.."
I had to look up "shillmisters..." I still don't know what this means...
Let me just say that it would be difficult to find a society more wedded to liberal capitalism than Switzerland (including its socialist party). It is worth repeating that we would sit slightly to the right of Ronald Reagan if he had not been excommunicated by the US Republican party...
Ferdnam:
Shillmister must be some sort of device for delivering a fine mist of water to a shill, which may be some sort of exotic plant that requires a high-humidity environment in order to thrive... LOL
mellifluous wrote:
"Romney looking presidential? I guess if you believe that a secretive multi-millionaire"
Secretive? Seems to me that the Democrats have dug up every bit of dirt they think they can on him!
"deeply involved in a dodgy religion"
I thought religion wasn't supposed to matter?
"has your best interests at heart. "
Yes, I do. I have been a supporter of Romney since 2008. In hindsight, I'm glad he didn't end up getting the nomination then because no one could have beaten Obama in that election cycle and now-a-days you only get one bite at the apple.
What Romney brings to the office are skills, hard-nosed intelligence, and experience; as a business man, as a governor, and as a leader. When I have seen Romney in debate, one thing has struck me. That is that he not only looks, but ACTS like a leader. He is in charge. In the primary debates and in the Presidential debates, he has looked like a CEO addressing an employee - questioning, holding them responsible, etc. That's the kind of leadership I want to see in the oval office. In 2008, we elected an inexperienced community organizer - unfortunately, that's exactly what we got.
Tenacious-G wrote:
"Ferdnam:
Shillmister must be some sort of device for delivering a fine mist of water to a shill, which may be some sort of exotic plant that requires a high-humidity environment in order to thrive... LOL"
Aaaaah! OK! Thanks... ;)
terry.goyer wrote:
"I thought that I often saw Governor Romney display a rather wimpy version of the Joe Biden smirk last night. Interesting that no one has mentioned that".
Actually poster lolapearl did. She said,
"I think everyone saw what they wanted to see".
Ferdnam wrote: "Let me just say that it would be difficult to find a society more wedded to liberal capitalism than Switzerland'
Is this "liberal capitalism"
Switzerland is an expensive country. If you asked a Swiss why this is so, he would probably talk about rents, the high standard of living, and high wages, but if you look more closely you will find that the main reason is the oligopolistic-corporatist structure of Swiss industrial, retail and distribution enterprises.
What does that mean? It means that people in Switzerland restrict competition as much as they can, organizing cartels and guilds to arrange oligopolistic prices which are far higher than the real value of the commodities or services involved. For example, with many imported goods the importer doubles the factory price and then sells to the retailer, who doubles it again. Thus the consumer ends up paying 4 times the factory price because there is no effective competition between sellers. In another country, sellers compete and lower their prices to attract more business, but in Switzerland they do not. Another example: In Switzerland, most trades are protected by corporations or guilds which restrict the number of people allowed to practise their particular trade, and set high, mandatory prices for their services. The funny thing is that these corporations are canton-based and so there are usually 26 different corporations for the same trade, each with its own price structure.
In response to ecgberht, we are in this mess because of the prior administration. Romney has filled his advisor pool with cronies from the Bush crowd and if he's elected, expect more of the same. Romney doesn't have stances of his own, he says what he thinks voters like to hear!
ecgberht wrote:
"... I have been a supporter of Romney since 2008...
What Romney brings to the office are skills, hard-nosed intelligence, and experience; as a business man, as a governor, and as a leader. When I have seen Romney in debate, one thing has struck me. That is that he not only looks, but ACTS like a leader. He is in charge. In the primary debates and in the Presidential debates, he has looked like a CEO addressing an employee - questioning, holding them responsible, etc. That's the kind of leadership I want to see in the oval office..."
Well, this explains a lot... Thank you for this explanation...
It is interesting to note that you thought that his performance in the first debate was that of a leader who is in charge and addresses an employee...
I viewed him as a bully driven by a thirst for "personal power" for his own personal advantage as opposed to "socialized power" for the sake of others (McClelland).
Anything to make the sale is Romney's approach which is a typical businessman's attitude...
We must agree to disagree. You will get to vote. And I won't.
And that is fine.
Best...
@ partisan politics
Unfortunately, you know little about Switzerland... And the little you mention is not quite accurate...
ecgberht wrote:
"When I have seen Romney in debate, one thing has struck me. That is that he not only looks, but ACTS like a leader."
The operative word here is 'acts.' Romney has put in pretty solid 'performances.' But talk is cheap (especially for Romney) and hopefully most voters will see through his facade.
shill /SHil/Noun: An accomplice of a hawker, gambler, or swindler who acts as an enthusiastic customer to entice or encourage others.
I should have wrote it this way "shillmeister" , how about a little creative thinking out there! I have little doubt you understood exactly what was meant, but found it more appealing to go anal.
anal-of, relating to, characterized by, or being personality traits (as parsimony, meticulousness, and ill humor)