Romney lifts flagging campaign in first debate with Obama
MITT Romney aggressively challenged President Barack Obama in their first debate on Wednesday night, seeking to recharge his campaign after weeks of setbacks, while a subdued incumbent largely passed up chances to attack a rival he said was hiding his full plans.
“I just don’t know how the president could have come into office, facing 23-million people out of work, rising unemployment, an economic crisis at the kitchen table, and spend his energy and passion for two years fighting for Obamacare instead of fighting for jobs for the American people,” Mr Romney said, referring to the healthcare overhaul the president championed. “It has killed jobs.”
Working to present a moderate image to undecided voters and calm anxiety about his candidacy in Republican circles, Mr Romney offered no specifics about his proposals on tax cuts, government regulations or healthcare. When Mr Obama pressed him on that point, Mr Romney accused the president of “mischaracterising” his plans. “You may keep referring to it as a $5-trillion tax cut, but that’s not my plan,” Mr Romney said. Later, sparring with Mr Obama over the Dodd-Frank financial regulation law, Mr Romney responded to the president with: “That’s just not the facts.”
Mr Obama said Mr Romney’s tax and healthcare proposals would harm the middle class and that voters should be concerned about the lack of details available to them before the election.
“At some point, I think the American people have to ask themselves, is the reason that governor Romney is keeping all these plans to replace secret because they’re too good?” Mr Obama said as the debate turned to the 2010 healthcare law.
“Is it because that somehow, middle-class families are going to benefit too much from them?”
Democrats, Republicans and nonpartisan observers said Mr Romney had delivered a performance that might give him a boost with fence-sitting voters, refuting some of the most damaging arguments against his proposals while appearing equal to the job of the presidency as he took his first turn opposite Mr Obama.
“Romney dispatched the caricature, but he also heightened, I believe, the perception of his competence,” said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, a professor of political communication at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania.
“The Obama performance was adequate, but not as strong.”
The first of three match-ups this month between Mr Romney and Mr Obama came as recent polls have put the incumbent ahead. Republicans came away encouraged about their candidate’s post-debate prospects.
“For the first time, Mitt Romney framed this election on his terms: ‘It hasn’t worked under Obama; here’s how I’ll make it work if you elect me’,” said Republican strategist Keith Appell. “This is what voters want to hear and I suspect he will get a bounce out of his performance.”
David Plouffe, Mr Obama’s top political strategist, said the president accomplished his goals, putting a “testy” Mr Romney on the defensive and appearing “more steady”.
Mr Obama “pursued this vagueness argument against Romney very aggressively”, said Bill Carrick, a California-based Democratic strategist. Still, he said Mr Obama had been too careful “not to appear defensive”.
Mr Obama said at one point he inherited “two wars that were paid for on a credit card, two tax cuts that were not paid for … and then an economic crisis.” He pointed to his $4-trillion deficit reduction plan, which includes $1 in taxes for each $2.50 in spending cuts. It requires “a balanced way,” he said — with some new revenue and some spending cuts.
From the start, Mr Romney made a point of rejecting Mr Obama’s characterisations of his policy proposals, particularly Mr Obama’s assertion that he is proposing a $5-trillion tax cut that would primarily wealthy.
Mr Obama said Mr Romney had proposed individual income, investment and corporate tax cuts that nonpartisan analysts have estimated would reduce federal revenue by $5-trillion. Further, his proposed financing of the cuts — curbing or eliminating deductions or exemptions for high earners — did not come close to offsetting that cost. He called Mr Romney’s plan “top-down economics”, in which “middle-class families are burdened further”.
Mr Romney argued his tax cuts would not increase the deficit, lower the share high earners paid, or raise taxes on the middle class. “I’m not looking for a $5-trillion tax cut.”
That drew an incredulous response from Mr Obama, who said: “For 18 months, he’s been running on this tax plan and now, five weeks before the election, he’s saying that his big, bold idea is ‘Never mind’.”
On the issue of Medicare, Mr Romney did not dispute Mr Obama’s assertion that Republicans would transform the government health service for the elderly into a voucher programme. “That’s for
benefit
the future people, right, not for current retirees,” he said, interrupting.
Mr Obama, looking into the camera to speak directly to voters watching at home, responded: “So if you’re 54 or 55, you might want to listen, ’ cause this will affect you.”
Mr Obama and Mr Romney were both working to appeal to a small yet crucial group of persuadable voters who either have not yet decided on their presidential choice or could still be moved to change their minds.
Mr Obama twice mentioned his plan to hire an additional 100,000 maths and science teachers, and Mr Romney said he too valued “great schools, great teachers”.
The president highlighted a provision in his healthcare law that requires insurers to cover people with existing health conditions, noting that Mr Romney’s plan would not guarantee such coverage.
“Pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan,” Mr Romney said. His proposal would guarantee such coverage only for people who have continuously been insured in the past. Bloomberg