Mitt Romney's performance in last night's foreign policy debate was eerily reminiscent of Barack Obama's performance in the first debate.
Romney seems to have gone into the debate with the same strategy Obama used in his worst performance:
- Stay calm, try to look presidential
- Don't challenge your opponent
- Run out the clock
As poorly as that worked out for Obama, I think Romney fared even worse.
(continued below the swirl)
For one thing, it's easier to look presidential when you're the president. When you're the challenger, that demeanor just makes you look like you didn't show up for the fight.
Second, by not challenging Obama, Romney must have pissed off a huge percentage of his base. When Glenn Beck is tweeting "Why even vote?" you know you're not scoring points with conservatives.
And it's silly to run out the clock when you're not even in the lead (I guess Romney is watching too much CNN and Fox News).
Finally... given the topic of last night's debate, I believe Romney's strategy was a misstep that could prove fatal. It's one thing to appear "weak" in a wide-ranging debate (as Obama did in the first one) but it's something else entirely to appear weak in a debate on foreign policy.
Most voters don't pay a lot of attention to the nuances of every world issue. But they know they want a strong leader going face-to-face with the heads of foreign governments.
Mitt Romney came across as somebody who would shrink in the presence of authority. And, as Obama repeatedly pointed out, he has no core values, no "Romney doctrine" that voters can assess.
He looked like a man who will take any position that suits his political needs, and a man who is afraid to put up a fight. And this in his last major moment of the campaign.
Across from him was a strong, intelligent, reasonable Commander in Chief with a mastery of the issues and the confidence to make difficult decisions with America's security in mind.
A few weeks ago Barack Obama lost a debate. Last night Mitt Romney lost an election.