2012 - The Economist, Great Britain, blog: "For anyone wondering why Mitt Romney avoided drawing any distinctions between his foreign policy plans and those of Barack Obama (during the presidential debate on Monday), this should clear it up. This isDespite the assumption that any mention of the economy would be bad for the President, it was also a fight Obama largely controlled. He won a solid victory on foreign policy in large part because he was more coherent than(Scott Olson/Getty Images). “All these presidential and vice-presidential debates, look how constricted these debates have been when you've had two parties there — the Republicans and the Democrats.” — Justice Party presidential candidate RockyDespite competition from two sporting events, the third debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney attracted a large home viewing audience.The third presidential debate was supposed to showcase the candidates' foreign policies. Instead, we saw two candidates tap-dance around the serious issues to appeal to voters who want their government to turn inward after a decade of conflict abroad.
Related External LinksDaily Kos: Hints of a post-(third) debate Obama bumpBeck: God 'guided' Romney to lose final debate | The Raw StoryThird-Party Debate - Taking Note - The New York
No comments:
Post a Comment