Romney Mops the floors with McCain

[_dartagnan]

This was from last night's debate:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEaklHCDvKU

[_Who Knows]

This was from last night's debate:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEaklHCDvKU

He's certainly a better debater, no doubt about it.

[_dartagnan]

McCain just strikes me as a wussy, every single time I see him in a debate. This is the main reason I wouldn't vote for him.

His head is frequently down, usually murmuring like he doesn't know what he should say. Is this how we can expect him to keep his composure when dealing with world leaders? God help us all.

You have to stand up and be tough as a leader. McCain is always pretending to be honorable, but what he did recently was hardly that. He knows he was wrong, and Romney is right to take the high horse and make him look stupid for doing it. Romney said something like, "Who knows more about my positions, me or you?" and I think that immediately resonated with people.

[_cinepro]

Wow. Romney is a master debater.

[_Scottie]

What are these dial tests?

[_Jason Bourne]

I don't get it. How can anyone support McCain over Romney after this and the last debate. Yet all the heavy reublicans are rolling out their endorsement for McCain. I think McCain will get it but man I am nervous. If he is the guy I may vote for Hillary or Obama!

[_bcspace]

I don't get it. How can anyone support McCain over Romney after this and the last debate. Yet all the heavy reublicans are rolling out their endorsement for McCain.

Because not all Republicans are conservatives.

Also many Republicans erroneously believe that a shift to the center will attract more voters. Problem with that is why would a Dem vote for a liberal Republican when he can vote for a liberal Democrat? It's better to differentiate and therefore, Republicans will always do better with a more conservative candidate.

[_DonBradley]

A quick wit, alpha-male behavior, and being more articulate than the next guy are not--I should hope--the only, or most important, things a citizen would look for in a president.

Oh...I have to tell this. It just popped into my mind. Years ago I read through the voluminous diaries of Joshua R. Clark, father of J. Reuben Clark, Jr. The elder Clark, like his more famous son, had a great interest in politics, and was, of course, an ardent Republican. On a trip to Washington, DC to visit his politician son, Joshua R. Clark got to see Woodrow Wilson give a speech. Clark's judgment on the man was emphatic: "His is not the head of a great statesman. It's too small."

Wilson's most prominent achievements as president were in the field of international relations---statesmanship. But, judging from the size of his head (evidently too much smaller than Teddy Roosevelt's), his skill in this area was merely illusory.

Somehow this country has survived presidents who were small-headed pencil necks (Wilson), chronic depressives (Lincoln), 'cripples' (FDR), a bit callow (JFK), a bit doddering (Reagan)...but we'd never survive one who ever mumbled. People like that couldn't possibly earn the respect of their peers and acquire political clout, like, say, a longtime powerful position in the United States Senate--much less the Presidency. Never!

Don

[_Mary]

In terms of international relations, I think what many British want to see is a strong American leader who is a dove rather than a hawk.
Bush is seen (maybe understandably so) as a Hawk, and an oil baron hawk at that. People don't like him, and they don't like Blair for tagging along with him
over foreign policy.

Crumbs though...I'm surprised Romney has got this far,...maybe there is a chance for him afterall...
Isn't McCain, a Veteran? For those of us who don't study American Politics, we immediately think of 'warmonger'. In effect McCain, was a professional killer.
But then you get Romney who dodged the call through a mission. So he doesn't know diddly squat about what it's like to fight in a war for soldiers (like Bush), and so would probably find it easier to send soldiers off to die from the comfort of the oval office. (Why can't leaders, 'lead' their soldiers in battle, if their own lives were on the line, surely it would make them think long and hard whether it was worth it?)

McCain is an unknown over here, Romney - the Mormon, Obama and Clinton.

I'd plump for Clinton....(her husband was a great leader in my opinion)

Mary

[Guest]

I should have mentioned another noted mumbler, and relatively poor debater--George H. W. Bush, who demonstrated his abilities as a statesman while serving as a US Representative, US ambassador to China, US ambassador to the United Nations, director of the CIA, vice president, president, and, as president, an effective builder of international coalitions and proponent of Middle-East peace.

If we'd had this level of foreign-policy competence in the presidency during the latest regime, the past several years might have been quite different.

Maybe this gene skips a generation?

Don