October 4, 2012 - 9:38 AM
Most political observers agree that Romney "won" the debate. I give him only a slight edge after factoring in content, and the degree of truth behind that content. Romney did clearly win the performance contest (aside from that creepy ken doll smirk between responses). He was fully engaged in the moment, and he put Obama on the defensive without looking overly aggressive. He battled. The President simply refused to push back on long debunked claims, and sounded flat and too cerebral.
It needs to be pointed out that much of what Romney said was misleading or vague at best, especially the repeated claim about Obama cutting Medicare. But style often trumps substance in the eyes of the undecided voter. And by that measure it was a big win for the challenger.
Here are a few good takes on both candidates:
Charles M. Blow on Obama's performance.
Paul Krugman on Romney's performance.
October 2, 2012 - 4:47 PM
I received this in the mail today. I give it an A for effort. There was no return address or name - just these three clippings. I suspect it's the same nameless wonder who calls to yell at me about once a week.
There are 2 things that strike me as odd with this. First, the reader didn't even care to scribble on my OWN cartoons to insult me (maybe he/she thought my work isn't good enough to deface). Using photos and a cartoon from the talented Nick Anderson gets bonus points for creativity. Second, the reader seems to call both Clinton AND Obama the "Antichrist." But isn't there only one Antichrist?? After extensive investigation on the internet (very reliable), I found that there is supposed many antichrists. Go figure.
Oh well, I will conclude with an example of the typical ho-hum hatemail I am used to. It's a response to my cartoon on Romney hiding his tax returns:
October 2, 2012 - 8:37 AM