Wednesday night’s debate encouraged Republicans and may have disappointed Democrats.
Mitt Romney was the more aggressive. President Barack Obama held back.
Romney’s points came in harping on the persistent high unemployment numbers and his claim that he will create 12 million new jobs in the coming four years.
Obama responded with a demand for specifics that will be made over and over again between now and Nov. 6.
Both men handled themselves presidentially — which is to say that neither made personal attacks or indulged in dramatics.
At this late stage of the campaign, these assessments are calming. The guy and gal in the street can feel comfort from their professional deportment: the take-away from those 90 minutes is that the union will survive until 2016, regardless.
But important differences were emphasized. Romney hit hard on the Republican themes of lower taxes and greater responsibilities for the states. Obama stressed the nation’s responsibility for a quality education system and the opportunity to bring health care costs down through the National Affordable Care Act (Obamacare.)
Romney gave Obama an opening by saying that if he wins, he would expect the other 49 states to create statewide health care plans similar to that which he helped create in Massachusetts when he was governor. That would be the way, he said, to bring health care costs down while providing all Americans health care coverage.
Good luck with Kansas, Mr. Romney. The number of uninsured Kansans is rising. The state government is showing not the slightest interest in creating a state-funded program to reverse that trend. If Gov. Sam Brownback has a Massachusetts-style health care initiative on his must-do list, he has kept it under lock and key.
IT IS IRONIC, but Mr. Romney made the Republican case when he wised off at a high-dollar fundraiser in May and said that about 47 percent of the American people pay no income tax, feel victimized by the system and depend on government handouts to keep body and soul together.
He hasn’t denied that statement and has, instead, repeated it and said the debate should be about the role government should play in our society.
Maybe the next two debates will touch on that theme.
Wednesday night both agreed a good education was critically important. But if either said how they would (a) increase funding to individual school districts so they could upgrade their faculties, or (b) find other ways to increase student learning, I missed it.
The opening debate was polite and bloodless. Depend on the next two to turn up the volume. The undecideds make up their minds late. They will be the targets on Oct. 16 and Oct. 22.
At the townhall style debate Oct. 16, Romney will be forced to defend his support of low taxes for the rich. The following week, when the focus is on foreign affairs, he will be asked to contemplate the consequences of his unqualified support of Israel’s aggressive stance toward Iran. Is he really ready to start another Middle East war?
October will be full of political fun.
