Posted on 10/23/2012 5:20:30 AM PDT by C. Edmund Wright
If anyone still doubts the Gallup Poll -- and common sense -- showing that Mitt Romney is way ahead in the polls, all they had to do was watch the third presidential debate to have their minds changed. Romney put the game into the "four corners" stall, running out the clock while turning away numerous chances for easy slam-dunks and taking care not to stop the clock. Barack Obama, meanwhile, was pressing, slashing, and committing all kinds of fouls. Referee Bob Schieffer, not wanting to share in Candy Crowley's sordid legacy, let the players play. That's the good news. The bad news is that since Mitt is ahead and George W. Bush is the devil, we have to pretend that it was indeed Obama, with Crocodile Dundee's knife clenched between his teeth, who brought Osama bin Laden to justice.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Try pre-1913.
Mitt must be convinced he is going to win because he played that really, really safe.
That strategy has always driven me crazy, but it appears to be working for him.
Glen Becks radio guys this morning think that Mitt’s campaign realized that most men would be watching Monday Night Football and there would be more women viewers of the debate who would want less arguments and more facts.
Who knows?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Maybe, but I think a bolder strategy would work even better - but that’s not Mitt.
I think Romney did what he could given the circustances.
That is 0’s unrelentless attempts at defining Romney. Not to mention 0’s usual lying BS.
Romney once again came out looking Presidential.
Sherry,
An excellent summation of the issues! Thank you.
Sherry,
An excellent summation of the issues! Thank you.
Gosh - almost like putting a bag of dog crap on a porch, lighting it and ringing the doorbell. If Mitt had changed the tune to talking about the Bush-Cheney conservatism that led upt to Osama's demise, it would have been a disaster - truth be damned. Mitt understands that and his folks understand how to best try to oust Zero. "Sneaking" through a debate laden with land mines would seem to be the smart way to go unless you're a Thelma and Louise type...
The one place in the debate that I jumped up in glee, believing Mitt would blast the ball off of the tee was the Moderator’s direct question on whether they would go on record stating that an attack on Israel was an attack on the US. I thought the peacocks answer was nuanced e.g. “We will stand with them’”. I had hoped Mitt would look the camera in the lens and say, an attack on Israel is an attack on the US. As the peacock was babbling it did cross my mind that Israel is attacked on a daily basis and the question might have been more nuanced itself than I first perceived. None the less, it was the democrats that said ‘No Israel, No Israel, No Israel’, three times before their DNC leadership disregarded their vote and did the political expedient thing, overriding their vote on the platform. Their words and vote stand however not only on Israel but more importantly on their vote on God in their platform. ‘No, Israel, No Israel, No Israel, no God, No God, No God’
The consequences of this will not go away on November 6 but a battle in the war of ages may be won.
Oh, on that you and I agree. But we are in this situation because we are ALWAYS fighting these fights in the short run, and taking the expedient way out. Bush made his own name toxic by never fighting back. He made Cheney and Rumsfeld toxic for the same reasons. That went on for 8 years. You are right, no time to reverse that in one debate. But why are we here in the first place? Wimpy short term thinking to win the friggin moderates.
But that’s the problem. At some point, we must stand up for the truth and take the short term slings and arrows. Reagan did in 79-80 and Newt did in 94. (yes, newt succombed in 95-96 but that’s another story). Both Reagan’s win and Newt’s win (Congress turn over) led to some damned good governing.
Polls don’t show that at all.
In fact, even PPP says more are leaning Romney despite an Obama “win.”
Why? Because though he gave up “points,” Romney appeared presidential.
I’ve always assumed he was floating in his loafers but I’d never heard that Moose was fixing to divorce him over it.
If you think about, it’s *all* digital humor, here.
We’re all binary Bozos on this bus.
;]
Seems to be a conservative "illness". They take the reins and then prove their ideas work better, then succumb to a combination of lethargy and buying into the Left's rhetoric and baiting. It would be nice indeed if they could stay focused instead of being diverted by extraneous "issues". The Left never gives up and the Right never leverages the full advantage once they obtain it. We're probably doomed in the long run but it would be nice to be able to believe we have at least recognized the right track for a while. If we had a fraction of the conviction the Left does, we'd never have dropped so far.
And, if you recall, when Bush had unemployment at 5.5%, Harry Reid and the media trumpeted the catchphrase “jobless recovery.” They are hacks if nothing else.
Mitt Romney is going to be our next President.
Want to bet?
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.