Last night the two presidential candidates faced off in a town hall style debate for round number two. Fingers were pointed, calculated paces stepped, and the fervor of the election is reaching its peak. Pundits said that Obama needed a strong performance to recover from his flat showing in round one. He delivered.
The economic visions of the economy vary on certain levels between the candidates, yet in many ways it’s the same. What can a President actually do for the American economy? Here are some possibilities:
- Improve international agreements establishing more free trade zones to reduce prices of American exports in other countries and allow American businesses to profit.
- Shift funding and subsidies to areas that are growing to improve the rate of hiring.
- Maintain access to affordable credit for start ups, and reduce regulation for registering and forming new businesses.
- Promote American products around the world, and especially at home by developing a culture of buying American.
We only heard vague references to these ideas last night, while Mitt Romney spewed about cutting taxes and the price of a gallon of gasoline. He is selling out to get elected, basically telling everyone they can have anything they want. It’s hypocritical because of the way that Romney derides the so-called entitlement society that we have lived in. When asked directly last night to name one loophole in the tax structure he would close to address the deficit, he evaded the question entirely. The moment was awkward to say the least, but typical of his campaign: a complete lack of detail to explain how any of these ideas work. Mitt Romney has even resorted to talking about how his policies would benefit the middle class.
Obama’s style improved, and he used the final comment to bring up Mitt Romney’s 47% comment. This was crucial, that 47% has become commonplace, with only a few weeks left, it doesn’t look like it’s going away. Romney didn’t have many sympathy points going into the race anyway, but he angered a lot of people, people who probably would’ve voted for him.
In the end polls showed that people felt like both Obama and Romney did well. Romney was supposed to excel, the subject matter is after all what people respect him for, yet Obama was supposed to bounce back from the negative reviews of the first debate. The outcome was quite near what was expected, though a few missteps for Romney give the contest to Obama.
Round three of the presidential debates, centering on foreign policy, comes next. It’s a huge advantage for Obama, but there is much to lose. However, nobody in America wants to hear hawkish talk coming from a business suit who successfully evaded service in Vietnam and who compared his sons campaigning for him to having a son serving in Iraq or Afghanistan. Romney has zero credibility. Obama’s cool, diplomatic approach to world events should have the next debate sewn up, but as always a surprise could shift the tide.
