Posted on 10/23/2012 4:31:30 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: I think it's unequivocal, Romney won. And he didn't just win tactically, but strategically. Strategically, all he needed to do is basically draw. He needed to continue the momentum he's had since the first debate, and this will continue it. Tactically, he simply had to get up there and show that he's a competent man, somebody who you could trust as commander in chief, a who knows every area of the globe and he gave interesting extra details, like the Haqqani network, which gave the impression he knows what he's talking about. But there is a third level here, and that is what actually happened in the debate.
We can argue about the small points and the debating points. Romney went large, Obama went very, very small, shockingly small. Romney made a strategic decision not go after the president on Libya, or Syria, or other areas where Obama could accuse him of being a Bush-like war monger. Now I would have gone after Obama on Libya like a baseball bat, but that's why Romney has won elections and I've never had to even contest them. He decided to stay away from the and I think that might have actually worked for him.
What he did concentrate on is the big picture. People don't care what our policy on Syria is going to be. They care about how America is perceived in the world and how America carries itself in the world. And the high point is when he devastatingly leveled the charge of Obama going around the world on an apology tour. Obama's answer was ask any reporter and they will tell you it wasn't so.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Okay. You win. Vote for Obama. You’ll be welcome to his screeching and pettiness.
Please find transcript online of debate and read - I was unable to listen to any of debates - have had to rely on transcripts.
Tonight everyone is saying that Mitt lost- I disagree if you read the transcript towards the end there is foreign policy question posed to Mitt Romney- he makes a compelling argument- although he is constantly interrupted by Obama and Schieffer- he ties a strong economy to strong USA.
I posted on another thread that Romney made compelling argument- I had response from someone who watched debate- freeper agreed that argument came across live the way I read it.
Having said that to anyone reading - we know what Obama is- can we afford another 4 yrs of is vision of America- or should we take chance of different view that Mitt is proposing.
I know what I will do do you??
I believe it may be get undecideds on board.
As to not watching debates- I am unable to listen to sing song cadence of Obama- since his first speech 5yrs back- it is similar to finger nails on chalk board
Loved the soviet music in the background. The only thing it was missing was the smug mussolini chin lift by Obama!!!
By the way, you didn't go to Israel.
By the way, they noticed.
Obama wanted to goad Romney into a mud fight. Romney refused to take the bait.
Was that the right strategy? We’ll know in two weeks.
Sometimes being a man is letting your opponent self-destruct on national TV.
When Obama said “I” stood with the people of Tunisia and Libya, Romney should have hammered him with the fact that both countries are unstable messes. He should have then reminded Obama that he also stood with the people of Egypt and that nation is also a disaster. Yet when the people of Iran called for freedom, Obama said nothing.
Ah... I said Romney did what he had to do. WTF are you taking that screws with your cognition so effectively? Whatever it is, stop.
I’m going to disagree because I know how that debate would have handled it. Romney would have had about 2 each 2 minute shots at cramming a gazillion details on a still-unfolding situation into a coherent argument.
I watched Bret Baier’s hour long documentary on Benghazi the other night. Even THAT ended with Bret saying there are many questions. So, if with graphics, living humans, and expert commentators, Bret had to consume an entire hour, then Romney would have had a heck of a time selling that message in 4 minutes worth of talking time.
But, I could be wrong.
The polls will tell if Romney’s strategic approach last night was a victory or a blunder.
I love you.
I pray that Romney's tactics pay off.
Great show by Brett.
I still think that in terms of impact, Romney stunk like rotten tomatoes.
Excellent analysis!!!! Well thought out and thorough.
Excellent analysis!!!! Well thought out and thorough.
I’ll see your Elmer Fudd and lower you a ‘My Pet Rock’.
I know Romney wanted to project a bright future, but it would have been fulfilling if he had made a quick stinging rebuke about the Lybia fiasco in his closing statement.
LOL, I was thinking the same thing. If Tony Snow was still alive it is exactly how he would have described Obama's behavior.
At one point the Teleprompter Messiah started interrupting Romney, and Mitt said “Excuse me, I’m speaking”. Classic.
I whole-heartily agree. I have said the same thing on this forum numerous times: "Good thing you aren't running the campaign."
Too many people want someone to preach to the choir. DO that...and you will get a VERY enthusiastic 40% of the vote. People fail to think of strategery [sic] when looking over this stuff. Obama had to shore up his base...and Romney already HAD his base shored up because they hate Obama. There is a small % of people out there on the fence that could decide the election...and that was his target.
And however regretible and sad as it may be...those people on the fence do not think like us...but their vote counts the same. ONE.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.