Transcripts, pensions and binders full of women were a few zingers delivered by President Barack Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney during the second presidential debate Tuesday night.
There were all sorts of responses, and I’m sure for Romney, regrets. Obama turned Romney’s five-point plan into a one-point plan. Romney said it was Obama’s record, not the Republican candidate’s tax plan that didn’t add up.
I love zingers. They add spice to boring political talk, especially when one can feel the emotion from the two parties. Many people view on politicians as if they are not actually people. I feel it is a good thing when the candidates show their emotional – and sometimes very humorous – sides.
Romney put the president on spot many times some of which had Obama unable to respond. Romney highlighted the national debt increasing by approximately $5 trillion under Obama’s administration, the unemployment rate staying been under 8 percent for the president’s first term, except September and the failure of the president’s promises on the campaign trail.
However, most people who watched the debate feel Obama did a better job answering questions instead of dancing around them.
Romney talked about how appalled he was that there were very few women in powerful positions when he was the governor of Massachusetts and that he consulted women’s groups to find women with the qualifications for the jobs.
Those same groups brought him his infamous “binders full of women,” a phrase that has blown up in the media, especially Twitter. He never answered the question, though, only saying that a strong economy will somehow translate into more women having better jobs.
Obama recalled his first signed bill: the Lilly Ledbetter Act, a bill that pays women equally for equal work. He went on to say that “we’ve…got to make sure that in every walk of life we do not tolerate discrimination.”
This is what undecided voters are looking for: less talk and attack, more substance and plans.
The president is better off giving a good, actual answer than Romney is.
A few days ago, Obama coined the term “Romnesia,” a play on words poking fun at the governor’s back-and-forth opinions on issues and his tendency to take back points of view.
This is not to say that Obama always answers questions and never lies or misleads – after all, he is a politician – only with much less frequency than Romney. Although it is no secret that I support the president, I do understand how irritating it can be to watch one rich man and one very rich man bicker back-and-forth like schoolyard children during “he said; he said” arguments.
However, I am glad that Obama was much more aggressive than he was during the first debate, though some say he was rude.
But when Obama wasn’t aggressive, he was criticized for being too passive. Besides, Romney was just as aggressive, if not more, during the first debate and certainly just as “rude”.
The president has better ideas, and though his record isn’t perfect, it’s hard to argue that he has not done as well as he could have considering what he inherited. Obama is more consistent and does not jump around on his opinions like Romney, and the president’s views on education – specifically college – women’s rights, marriage rights, all equality, immigration, clean energy and the environment are views that I am sure most readers of this paper agree with. He certainly has, and always did have, my vote.