Obama's strong, forceful performance countered many previous perceptions of being weak. However, throughout the debate, some of his attacks seemed to be slightly petty. One of the most notable from tonight was his sarcastic response to Romney's criticism of the reduced Navy size.
"We also have fewer horses and bayonets, 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."Although admittedly funny, these comments may appear condescending to some viewers. Romney was definitely less aggressive and forced to speak defensively as Obama pushed his way through the debate. Obama also seemed prepared for many of Romney's attacks, such as the statement about Obama ignoring Israel in his "apology tour," responding with ease to these accusations.
Overall, the debate touched upon the different foreign policy topics it intended to, but it often digressed into an argument over domestic issues. For example, Obama often referred back to the need to increase spending for education and at a few points, the topic notably shifted to domestic economic policies. Bob Schieffer, the moderator, attempted to draw the focus back to foreign policy, but both candidates often brought up domestic policies throughout the debate.
While Obama's strong performance draws positive attention towards him, the significance and impact of this final debate is still questionable. However, with election day drawing closer and with such a tight race, any advantages are important for either candidates.
5 comments:
I feel like in tonight's debate, on a lot of foreign policy issues, Romney agreed with Obama on the current state of affairs but for some reason was irritated to concede. I wasn't sure if Schieffer really wanted both candidates to digress into education and economics once again, but I guess the topic helped tie things such as America's role in the world and the rise of China in the global economy together well. One thing I noticed that was quite interesting was that when Obama went after Romney and said something on the edge of sounding like an ad hominem, Romney would snap back with comments like
"...attacking me is not an agenda. Attacking me is not talking about how we're going to deal with the challenges...". Undoubtedly, one of Romney's goals in these presidential debates would have been to try and negate the nearly staunch conservative picture that he established for himself early on, and he did a pretty good job taking views more in the center, at least for the time being. I felt that Romney's attempt to appear more moderate and even reserved in this debate might have helped him a little with undecided voters, especially in swing states.
I think Romney was definitely playing it safe last night and I believe that he could have gone on the offensive much more to draw some clear contrast between himself and Obama. However, it was good for him that he appeared to agree with much of Obama's foreign policy, since this will undoubtedly make him look more moderate to undecided/independent voters. I think Obama had one clear advantage which was that he has a foreign policy record to run on and it is unclear what Romney would do internationally since he has not had a chance to prove himself yet.
While Romney did have some snarky remarks/comments and arguments with the commentator for more time, Obama appeared to be on the offensive and quite condescending at points, such as his sarcastic "less horses and bayonets" response which seemed overly condescending and slightly rude.
I agree with you Alvin. Romney seems to have become less aggressive than his first debate. I feel like this is due to Obama's more aggressive approach which forces Romney into more defending and less attacking. Obama seemed to focus on topics he succeeded in such as saving the auto industry his success against Al Qaeda in order to become even more aggressive. It is funny though because Obama's aggressiveness and Romney's more laid back approach are clearly viewed differently such as in this fox news blog (http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/10/22/debate-preview-who-could-see-a-big-shift-after-final-presidential-debate/#more-97345) where a one writes that Romney kept his cool while Obama was mad half the time while another writes that Romney just did not seem to be on top of things.
On another note, despite Obama’s great performances and memorable highlights in the last two debates such as his statement in the rose garden and yesterday’s bayonet statement, Romney does still seem to remain on top according to this gallup poll (http://www.gallup.com/poll/election.aspx). I think this just goes to show that as we near election day, more people will have already made up their mind.
Personally, I liked what I saw from Romney in this debate. Instead of attacking Obama, Romney showed himself off as the guy with the answers. He had heaps of information on the issues abroad and I believe he successfully portrayed himself as a capable commander in chief. Later, he shifted the debate over to domestic issues, an area he has a strong advantage in. I would have liked to see Romney deliver a few blows to Obama during the debate, specifically with the Benghazi incident. Perhaps Obama was the winner in the debate because he was always on the offensive, that does not mean that his performance will benefit himself more than Romney.
Post a Comment