Will Romney’s non-combative posture work?

While the conservatives are (1) congratulating Romney for his decision to appear “presidential” by not challenging the President, and (2) putting down Obama for the astonishing pettiness of some of his attacks on Romney (a criticism with which I agree), they are missing the fact that Obama overall looked pretty good. As in the second debate, he kept his gaze on Romney and his expression was alert and strong. He looked like a strong and confident man, a leader. I do not share the conservatives’ view that he looked small or angry.

Daniel Pipes’s view of this is similar to mine. He writes at The Corner (“Romney stumbles on foreign policy”):

… Obama presented himself tonight and in the other debates as profoundly different from the president he has been. Someone not versed in his ideology and his record would not realize his distaste for a powerful United States (e.g., “I said if I got bin Laden in our sights I would take that shot”). He sounded like a nationalist, making punchy patriotic statements, speaking with a smooth eloquence, and showing himself at ease and in control. The question is, how many people will be fooled by this performance?

Indeed. And, since Romney kept agreeing with Obama instead of attacking his positions and exposing his falsehoods, there is no reason for the Great Uninformed Masses not to be fooled by Obama’s performance. Where would the Democrats be, if it weren’t for the Republicans?

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 23, 2012 08:59 AM | Send