Thanks to the internet, we can find views that are congenial to our own and live in the kind of opinion bubble that the MSM has been creating for its readers and viewers since …. forever. So after reviewing my favorite websites to get their take on last night’s Foreign Policy debate between Romney and Obama (check out Krauthammer), I decide to check the ideological opposition. The first one I read was the Washington Post’s Richard Cohen. He wrote a “pox on both your houses” column, but put his thumb on the scale for Obama even while calling him a liar.
But he concludes with this:
The result, though, was that he [Romney] could draw few distinctions to Obama on almost any foreign policy issue. The night went to the president — but given the esoteric nature of the subject, election day may be a different story.
I think this is a very important point. In the paragraph preceding the last one Cohen says:
For Romney, caution was clearly the byword. He has closed with Obama in the polls, and the last thing he needs is to rattle the electorate by ratting some sabers. That will not close the gap with women voters.
All the polls and focus groups tell us that "it's the economy stupid." It’s obvious that Romney could have gone after Obama on Libya and we on the Right would have cheered. But Romney already has us; not least because he is not Obama and we desperately want this horrible four-year nightmare to end. What Romney needs are the mushy “undecided” voters who don’t want a bellicose President who will drag out a war that has gone on too long or start others when people are suffering at home. Romney was not going to let Obama paint him as a warmonger.
The Romney strategy for this debate was to make no new ripples and allow the tide that is sweeping Obama out of office to continue. That’s a man who won’t allow his emotions over rule his judgment. That’s the next President of the United States.
No comments:
Post a Comment