Debates are at best subjective, and Democrats, who are angry that President Barack Obama did not parrot the things they wanted him to say, joined with the gluttonous media, which had been planning on crowning Mitt Romney the winner in the first Presidential debate, and attacked the President for losing the debate.
I have to say that I watched the debate last night and was amazed at how flustered Romney seemed. At times he sputtered out of context, just throwing up anything that entered his mind, without making logical sense. The President on the other hand was calm, cogent and competent, at times schooling the mendacious governor on the impracticality of his proposals.
The President pointed out the fallacy of Romney's argument:
When you add up all the loopholes and deductions that upper income individuals can -- are currently taking advantage of -- if you take those all away -- you don’t come close to paying for $5 trillion in tax cuts and $2 trillion in additional military spending. And that’s why independent studies looking at this said the only way to meet Governor Romney’s pledge of not reducing the deficit -- or -- or -- or not adding to the deficit, is by burdening middle-class families.
The average middle-class family with children would pay about $2,000 more. Now, that’s not my analysis; that’s the analysis of economists who have looked at this. And -- and that kind of top -- top-down economics, where folks at the top are doing well so the average person making 3 million bucks is getting a $250,000 tax break while middle- class families are burdened further, that’s not what I believe is a recipe for economic growth.
The President schooled Romney on math:
Well, for 18 months he’s been running on this tax plan. And now, five weeks before the election, he’s saying that his big, bold idea is “never mind.” And the fact is that if you are lowering the rates the way you describe, Governor, then it is not possible to come up with enough deductions and loopholes that only affect high-income individuals to avoid either raising the deficit or burdening the middle class. It’s -- it’s math. It’s arithmetic.
I even loved the President’s jab at Donald Trump:
But under Governor Romney’s definition, there are a whole bunch of millionaires and billionaires who are small businesses. Donald Trump is a small business. And I know Donald Trump doesn’t like to think of himself as small anything, but -- but that’s how you define small businesses if you’re getting business income. And that kind of approach, I believe, will not grow our economy because the only way to pay for it without either burdening the middle class or blowing up our deficit is to make drastic cuts in things like education, making sure that we are continuing to invest in basic science and research, all the things that are helping America grow. And I think that would be a mistake.
Democrats have accused the President of being weak in last night’s debate were we watching the same debate? The President used the Clinton record to indict Romney and his claims:
Jim, I -- you may want to move on to another topic, but I would just say this to the American people. If you believe that we can cut taxes by $5 trillion and add $2 trillion in additional spending that the military is not asking for -- $7 trillion, just to give you a sense, over 10 years that’s more than our entire defense budget -- and you think that by closing loopholes and deductions for the well-to-do, somehow you will not end up picking up the tab, then Governor Romney’s plan may work for you.
But I think math, common sense and our history shows us that’s not a recipe for job growth.
Look, we’ve tried this -- we’ve tried both approaches. The approach that Governor Romney’s talking about is the same sales pitch that was made in 2001 and 2003. And we ended up with the slowest job growth in 50 years. We ended up moving from surplus to deficits. And it all culminated in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
Bill Clinton tried the approach that I’m talking about. We created 23 million new jobs. We went from deficit to surplus, and businesses did very well.
As I said in a previous post, I can understand why Republicans are claiming their guy won; they actually believe in the policies Romney espoused. It is no surprise they would stand up for their guy. Heck, they were even claiming that polls showing the governor trailing the President these past few weeks were all wrong.
But for many Democrats who declare Romney the winner, are they saying Romney was persuasive in his argument concerning his policy pronouncements? Is that really what it was? Did the governor actually win them over? Really? Or are they saying stylistically Romney, who, as I said, appeared flustered throughout the debate, and at times even sweating, out did the President?
If this is a stylistic argument, then Democrats are once again demonstrating that they are nothing like Republicans, for Republicans would never claim President Obama the victor in any debate based upon stylistic considerations, absolutely not!
But, here we are, in a close election, Democrats are letting it be known loud and clear that Mitt Romney was the absolute victor tonight, leaving low information voters and others who might have missed the debate to conclude that Romney’s policies won the night…. And maybe those who had been leaning toward the President might just decide to give the mendacious governor a second look. The same Romney who appeared determined to hide how he would accomplish the things he has been claiming as the president pointed out:
It just reminds me of, you know, he says that he’s going to close deductions and loopholes for his tax plan. That’s how it’s going to be paid for, but we don’t know the details. He says that he’s going to replace Dodd-Frank, Wall Street reform, but we don’t know exactly which ones. He won’t tell us. He now says he’s going to replace Obamacare and ensure that all the good things that are in it are going to be in there and you don’t have to worry.
And at some point, I think the American people have to ask themselves, is the reason that Governor Romney is keeping all these plans to replace secret because they’re too good? Is it -- is it because that somehow middle-class families are going to benefit too much from them?
No. The reason is, is because, when we reform Wall Street, when we tackle the problem of pre-existing conditions, then, you know, these are tough problems and we’ve got to make choices. And the choices we’ve made have been ones that ultimately are benefiting middle-class families all across the country.
Democrats continue to throw temper tantrums at this President for not saying or behaving the way they want him to behave. Many are complaining that the President did not mention Romney's 47% comment. So what? The President and his team have been beating Romney over the head with that very same comment for over a week, and will continue to do so until the election.
Barack Obama approaches problem solving in many ways that are unique to Barack Obama. He will not always behave the way we want him to, or use rhetoric exactly as we command him to use it.
Still, I think he has done well by us, and, just as Republicans stood up for Mitt Romney and fought to even dispel countless polls that showed their guy trailing the President for weeks, Democrats, assessing last night's debate, and knowing the truth of what the President spoke, should have backed their guy and refrain from joining in the media's pre-planned elevation of Mitt Romney.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
Bold segments highlighted by diarist.