Coffee House

Why wasn’t Barack Obama more focused in the debate?

4 October 2012

11:39 AM

4 October 2012

11:39 AM

OK, cards on the table: I’m a big Obama fan. I desperately hope he wins next month, and I’m reasonably confident he will. But even to my biased eye, he clearly put in the weaker performance of last night’s debate. He knew his stuff, and had plenty of good points, but threw them out in such a way that none of them really stuck. ‘Is the reason that Governor Romney is keeping all these plans to replace secret because they’re too good?’ would have been a great line had it not been smuggled out at the end of an overlong response. The President’s answers were just too waffling to make an impact.

It’s very rare that I watch Obama speak and think ‘I could’ve said something better’. In fact, I don’t think it’s ever happened before. But it did a few times last night. I know that, as the Americans say, it’s always easy to play Monday morning quarterback, but why didn’t he — when Romney attacked him for not getting bipartisan support for his healthcare reforms — say ‘I’d love to have got some Republican votes, but it’s kind of hard when they say their top priority is denying me a second term, instead of helping the millions of hard-working families around the country’? Congress is massively unpopular, and the Republican Party is not much better off, so taking a shot at both is hardly a risky strategy. And when Romney touted his time as Governor of Massachusetts to prove his own bipartisan credentials, why didn’t Obama hit back with a quote from one of the many Massachusetts legislators who say he was rubbish? He could’ve just picked one from his own campaign ad.

[Alt-Text]


And earlier in the debate, why did Obama let Romney be the only one to talk about growing the economy to reduce the deficit? Why didn’t he respond with ‘Governor Romney is right that we’ve got to grow the economy, but the way to do that isn’t by cutting taxes for millionaires, it’s by investing in American workers, just like we did with the auto industry’? The message might be a bit Ed Balls-y, but it’s also pretty popular — as the Obama camp clearly realises, having made it a big theme of their convention. Indeed, the fact that Obama didn’t deliver a stand-out line about saving General Motors (perhaps contrasting it with one of his favourite Romney lines: ‘Let Detroit go bankrupt’) is almost hard to believe.

I doubt last night’s debate will change the state of the race much — Obama’s still the clear favourite, and that’s not just wishful thinking on my part. But I do hope the President turns up to the next two debates far more engaged and gives far more focused answers. If only he’d managed that last night, we’d all be talking instead about how silly Mitt Romney looked when he said ‘I love Big Bird’.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
  • Wilhelm

    Testing

  • Jez

    It’ll all come out in the wash.
    Two more live debates. No spin possible. The men themselves.

    The liberal left’s utter nightmare.

  • Mike Barnes

    As Romney proved, it’s easy to win a debate if you lie through your teeth and the moderator doesn’t bother checking you out. Romney denying his 5tn tax cuts and his contortions on Obamacare was embarrassing, but nobody seemed to notice because, erm, Barrack looked sad or something.

    How appalling, people judged on appearances and not the lies they tell.

    Seriously, that was as good as it gets for old Mittens, he cannot lie any better than that and Obama cannot be any worse at picking him apart.

    It’s almost as if it’s a game-plan or something, Obama is saving the best insults for the last debate. Rope-a-dope I think they call it in America.

    • Augustus

      ” Obama is saving the best insults for the last debate. Rope-a-dope I think they call it in America.”
      So what’s he goin’ to do? He can’t run on his record. He doesn’t have any new ideas. And he knows it: His body language oozed annoyance (How dare this man? How dare he not behave like John McCain? Can you believe this guy?), a sense of defeat was on full display. Perhaps he wants to lose, because Romney sure wants
      to win.

    • Jez

      Obama slipped to the canvass last night without a blow being landed.

  • Jay Fahey

    Gee, your right-wingers are as frightening as our right-wingers.
    Jay Fahey, New York

    • Jez

      BOO!

    • Frank P

      You should truly be frightened, Jay. From the crow family I assume? What a carrion! What has happened to your country for the past four years is truly terrifying. You should be very, very afraid an you have just one month to begin the attempt to rectify things – but it may already be too late.

  • Hexhamgeezer

    ..Tit

  • Hexhamgeezer

    Tit

  • Austin Barry

    Obama cares about Obama: a strutting, sneering gob of self-regard who has forgotten to work at his job. He just wants to wave his arms at his dim-bulb fans and the Liberal masturbating media. Hopefully he is finished.

  • Austin Barry

    You would detect a whiff of racism in a black coffee or a post-Guinness stool.

    • telemachus

      We all have to be alert
      The EDL are ever present

      • http://owsblog.blogspot.com Span Ows

        The EDL aren’t racist. Tit

        • telemachus

          Not at all
          Their creed is Islamophobic
          But the practitioners are pure racist

  • Daniel Maris

    Sorry I think I was mixing him up with the even kookier preacher out in Guyana.

  • Daniel Maris

    It’s not the same as Greeks borrowing from Germans though and the dollar is the world’s leading trading currency which means they are better able to borrow without putting their currency in freefall.

  • Kevin

    cards on the table: I’m a big Obama fan

    Yes, we knew that already. It helps explain CH’s deafening silence on the 9/11 murders in Benghazi.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_2FI6O6Q7XPG6KCIUFIPXMYDCZ4 john

      No time for Benghazi, but plenty of time for a piece on constituency boundary changes in the following days!

  • June

    People have found out what an empty vessel Obama really is. He won last time (and may still do) not because of him but because of the prevailing self-loathing of Americans. They vote for him because Obama in spires defeatism and an apologetic existence. He has also got them hooked on government handouts and socialism. Romney/Ryan have got an uphill struggle. They stand for small government, freedoms, and above all self confidence – none of the things that is appealing to the US voter. So you’re right, Obama may win again.

    • June

      “inspires”

  • Q46

    “It’s very rare that I watch Obama speak and think ‘I could’ve said something better’.”

    Clearly you have never seen him without a Teleprompter in front of him reading a prepared screed.

    Also a re-run of the old promises and rhetoric won’t work now he has failed to deliver and patently has nothing new to offer.

  • Q46

    “It’s very rare that I watch Obama speak and think ‘I could’ve said something better’.”

    Clearly you have never seen him without a Teleprompter in front of him reading a prepared screed.

    Also a re-run of the old promises and rhetoric won’t work now he has failed to deliver and patently has nothing new to offer.

  • Augustus

    “Why wasn’t Barack Obama more focused in the debate?”
    That’s because Obama has a lot of problems with the facts. He comes across as arrogant, and didn’t even look Romney in the eye when he corrected him. Arrogant people often fail. He thinks he is king and Michelle certainly spends government money like she is a queen. Arrogant people can also be successful if they are actually as good as they think they are. Unfortunately, a man with only the experience as a community organizer has no reason to be arrogant. But Obama is a false Messiah, lost without his
    script writers and autocue. A front man for a fawning media, desperate to hide the truth
    and obscure the facts.

    • Bogbrush

      But Romney too, when he cared to use them, was very shifty with his facts; and it seems, when one looks at the fact checkers, that indeed Romney was more lax than Obama with these very facts. So, rather than using this facility to post a load of fact-less bile and drudgery (Michelle Obama using government money like a queen? Really? Someone seems to have a lot of problems with the facts…), and merely lowering the tone of what could be an interesting debate, please keep your ‘opinions’ to yourself, unless you care to substantiate them.

    • Bogbrush

      But Romney too, when he cared to use them, was very shifty with his facts; and it seems, when one looks at the fact checkers, that indeed Romney was more lax than Obama with these very facts. So, rather than using this facility to post a load of fact-less bile and drudgery (Michelle Obama using government money like a queen? Really? Someone seems to have a lot of problems with the facts…), and merely lowering the tone of what could be an interesting debate, please keep your ‘opinions’ to yourself, unless you care to substantiate them.

  • Liberanos

    I wonder why people are so much more more vituperative about Obama versus Romney than they are about Miliband versus Cameron.
    Is it because, in their hearts, people find it hard to see fundamental differences between the latter, while in the former they are all too apparent?.

    • anyfool

      Because a man is a liar it matters not if he is black or white, Obama is in a position to do more damage hence the more vitriol, the other geek Miliband is a lying backstabbing turd “ask his brother” but hopefully will never be in a similar position to Obama, hopefully this will answer your concerns.

  • Daniel Maris

    I could never be a fan of a man who spent 20 years attending, every week, that kooky church led by the Rev. Jeremiah Jones. However, Obama is reasonably competent. If we were enjoying 2% growth, as the USA is, then Osborne would be creaming his trousers.

    Why he put in a poor performance I don’t know. I am not sure he was ever v. good at debate – he’s more a speechifier isn’t he? He had a v. poor (if nice) opponent last time. Romney is a bit more effective before the cameras, although I don’t rate him.

    My prediction: Obama will do a lot better next time because he’s definitely a trier.

  • Daniel Maris

    I could never be a fan of a man who spent 20 years attending, every week, that kooky church led by the Rev. Jeremiah Jones. However, Obama is reasonably competent. If we were enjoying 2% growth, as the USA is, then Osborne would be creaming his trousers.

    Why he put in a poor performance I don’t know. I am not sure he was ever v. good at debate – he’s more a speechifier isn’t he? He had a v. poor (if nice) opponent last time. Romney is a bit more effective before the cameras, although I don’t rate him.

    My prediction: Obama will do a lot better next time because he’s definitely a trier.

  • Daniel Maris

    I could never be a fan of a man who spent 20 years attending, every week, that kooky church led by the Rev. Jeremiah Jones. However, Obama is reasonably competent. If we were enjoying 2% growth, as the USA is, then Osborne would be creaming his trousers.

    Why he put in a poor performance I don’t know. I am not sure he was ever v. good at debate – he’s more a speechifier isn’t he? He had a v. poor (if nice) opponent last time. Romney is a bit more effective before the cameras, although I don’t rate him.

    My prediction: Obama will do a lot better next time because he’s definitely a trier.

  • Daniel Maris

    I could never be a fan of a man who spent 20 years attending, every week, that kooky church led by the Rev. Jeremiah Jones. However, Obama is reasonably competent. If we were enjoying 2% growth, as the USA is, then Osborne would be creaming his trousers.

    Why he put in a poor performance I don’t know. I am not sure he was ever v. good at debate – he’s more a speechifier isn’t he? He had a v. poor (if nice) opponent last time. Romney is a bit more effective before the cameras, although I don’t rate him.

    My prediction: Obama will do a lot better next time because he’s definitely a trier.

    • anyfool

      The US is not enjoying 2% growth when you are borrowing 1 dollar for every 5 spent you do not have growth, if you are poorer via owing more at the end of the year than at the beginning you are shrinking not growing regardless of the size of the pot you are pissing in.

  • Jebediah

    As Brits can we drop the “I love Obama” sycophantic fanzine crap? Try focusing on the facts. As in the previous article the Spectators bias is horrendous. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I’d like to read articles that at least pretend to be balanced.

  • Jebediah

    As Brits can we drop the “I love Obama” sycophantic fanzine crap? Try focusing on the facts. As in the previous article the Spectators bias is horrendous. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I’d like to read articles that at least pretend to be balanced.

  • Jebediah

    As Brits can we drop the “I love Obama” sycophantic fanzine crap? Try focusing on the facts. As in the previous article the Spectators bias is horrendous. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I’d like to read articles that at least pretend to be balanced.

  • Jebediah

    As Brits can we drop the “I love Obama” sycophantic fanzine crap? Try focusing on the facts. As in the previous article the Spectators bias is horrendous. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I’d like to read articles that at least pretend to be balanced.

  • truthoid

    Why is this a Spectator blog?

  • truthoid

    Why is this a Spectator blog?

  • truthoid

    Why is this a Spectator blog?

  • truthoid

    Why is this a Spectator blog?

  • Baron

    Jonathan Jones smells a winner: “Why didn’t he (Obama) respond with ‘Governor Romney is right that we’ve got to grow the economy, but the way to do that isn’t by cutting taxes for millionaires, it’s by investing in American workers ……”

    That’s what so wrong with you lot, the messiah’s supporters, you twist stuff, you spew trash, heart warming trash, of course, but bullshit nevertheless, first, it ain’t cutting taxes just for the millionaires, second, what the heck does ‘investing in American workers’ stand for, ha?

    Why don’t you get it? America was the greatest when the Government wasn’t investing in American workers, check it out, Jonathan, if you don’t believe Baron, she was the greatest when the Government didn’t interfere with everything in that domain of the society where American workers made their living, but only created conditions for private capital cum initiative to invest in undertakings that furnished whatever it was the markets wanted, in the process also providing jobs for the American workers. It was the consuming millions that called the tune, not the producing workers, who were, like it or not, only a part of the facilitating part of the equation. It cannot be any other way unless one wants to swap capitalism for a centrally planed economy, something akin to what the Slavs, some Germans, the Chinese were indulging in, a model of the economy in which the workers pretended to work, the Government pretended to pay them.

    You may have not spotted it, but the Marxist inspired economic idiocy imploded almost everywhere more than 20 years ago.

  • Baron

    Jonathan Jones smells a winner: “Why didn’t he (Obama) respond with ‘Governor Romney is right that we’ve got to grow the economy, but the way to do that isn’t by cutting taxes for millionaires, it’s by investing in American workers ……”

    That’s what so wrong with you lot, the messiah’s supporters, you twist stuff, you spew trash, heart warming trash, of course, but bullshit nevertheless, first, it ain’t cutting taxes just for the millionaires, second, what the heck does ‘investing in American workers’ stand for, ha?

    Why don’t you get it? America was the greatest when the Government wasn’t investing in American workers, check it out, Jonathan, if you don’t believe Baron, she was the greatest when the Government didn’t interfere with everything in that domain of the society where American workers made their living, but only created conditions for private capital cum initiative to invest in undertakings that furnished whatever it was the markets wanted, in the process also providing jobs for the American workers. It was the consuming millions that called the tune, not the producing workers, who were, like it or not, only a part of the facilitating part of the equation. It cannot be any other way unless one wants to swap capitalism for a centrally planed economy, something akin to what the Slavs, some Germans, the Chinese were indulging in, a model of the economy in which the workers pretended to work, the Government pretended to pay them.

    You may have not spotted it, but the Marxist inspired economic idiocy imploded almost everywhere more than 20 years ago.

  • Baron

    Jonathan Jones smells a winner: “Why didn’t he (Obama) respond with ‘Governor Romney is right that we’ve got to grow the economy, but the way to do that isn’t by cutting taxes for millionaires, it’s by investing in American workers ……”

    That’s what so wrong with you lot, the messiah’s supporters, you twist stuff, you spew trash, heart warming trash, of course, but bullshit nevertheless, first, it ain’t cutting taxes just for the millionaires, second, what the heck does ‘investing in American workers’ stand for, ha?

    Why don’t you get it? America was the greatest when the Government wasn’t investing in American workers, check it out, Jonathan, if you don’t believe Baron, she was the greatest when the Government didn’t interfere with everything in that domain of the society where American workers made their living, but only created conditions for private capital cum initiative to invest in undertakings that furnished whatever it was the markets wanted, in the process also providing jobs for the American workers. It was the consuming millions that called the tune, not the producing workers, who were, like it or not, only a part of the facilitating part of the equation. It cannot be any other way unless one wants to swap capitalism for a centrally planed economy, something akin to what the Slavs, some Germans, the Chinese were indulging in, a model of the economy in which the workers pretended to work, the Government pretended to pay them.

    You may have not spotted it, but the Marxist inspired economic idiocy imploded almost everywhere more than 20 years ago.

  • http://www.coffeehousewall.co.uk/ Coffeehousewall

    I have to ask why Jonathan Jones is also writing for the Spectator when he describes himself thus…

    Liberal Democrat; Obama supporter; numbers geek.
    I write for The Spectator’s Coffee House blog.

    Why is a Liberal Democrat writing for the Spectator? What is the agenda? If the Spectator really is taking a nose dive into the gutter of socialism then we do need somewhere else to pull together decent, interesting and brutally honest conservative comment on current events. It is becoming clear that the Spectator is not that place.

  • http://www.coffeehousewall.co.uk/ Coffeehousewall

    I have to ask why Jonathan Jones is also writing for the Spectator when he describes himself thus…

    Liberal Democrat; Obama supporter; numbers geek.
    I write for The Spectator’s Coffee House blog.

    Why is a Liberal Democrat writing for the Spectator? What is the agenda? If the Spectator really is taking a nose dive into the gutter of socialism then we do need somewhere else to pull together decent, interesting and brutally honest conservative comment on current events. It is becoming clear that the Spectator is not that place.

    • Jez

      Because they can?

      And do not pollute their purest form liberalism with your non compliant heretic poison.

      They may want you sent to prison.

    • Jez

      Because they can?

      And do not pollute their purest form liberalism with your non compliant heretic poison.

      They may want you sent to prison.

    • Jez

      Because they can?

      And do not pollute their purest form liberalism with your non compliant heretic poison.

      They may want you sent to prison.

    • Jez

      Because they can?

      And do not pollute their purest form liberalism with your non compliant heretic poison.

      They may want you sent to prison.

    • ScaryBiscuits

      The Telegraph’s previous owner, Conrad Black, served 42 months in prison on what some might say were trumped-up charges. Indeed, some were proved to be as Black taught himself law in prison and proved that the charges were unconstitutional. Arguably, his real crime was to offend the US establishment by being too openly right-wing. Perhaps the Barclays twins don’t fancy the same fate.

    • ScaryBiscuits

      The Telegraph’s previous owner, Conrad Black, served 42 months in prison on what some might say were trumped-up charges. Indeed, some were proved to be as Black taught himself law in prison and proved that the charges were unconstitutional. Arguably, his real crime was to offend the US establishment by being too openly right-wing. Perhaps the Barclays twins don’t fancy the same fate.

    • http://www.facebook.com/fraser.nelson.9 Fraser Nelson

      The Spectator never was that place. The inventor of the modern Spectator, Alexander Chancellor, had it right when he said “the Spectator is more of a cocktail party than a political party”. God knows I disagree with Jonathan on most things politics, but I always learn something from his posts. If you’re after some kind of pub bore, monochrome politics, please do look somewhere other than Coffee House.

      • Jez

        But it’s not even that Fraser. A cocktail party is where you get pissed and talk bollocks- with a 100% spectrum of arseholes.
        This is becoming a spectrum of a 95% left wing contributors that are very thinly trying to not go full whack with there political views.
        And when was the last time you went to a pub Fraser??

        • http://www.coffeehousewall.co.uk/ Coffeehousewall

          I agree with Jez. Fraser has just told most of us to f*ck off.

          The most recent posts are from a LibDem think tank and a LibDem MP. The previous posts are from a LibDem supporter.

          Even when the alternative voice posts were being posted they were an alternative socialist view of the original socialist post!

          • http://www.facebook.com/fraser.nelson.9 Fraser Nelson

            Coffeehousewall, if you feel the content of this blog is so bad why do you come back here all the time?

            • http://www.coffeehousewall.co.uk/ Coffeehousewall

              Fraser, anyone running a successful business knows that it is easier and cheaper to keep existing customers than to find new ones. I used to purchase the print Spectator for many, many years, and have been a committed customer and am still loyal to the possibilities of the brand. There is something wrong with a business when it says to its committed customers, “Why do you come back here?”, with the intent to say, “Please p*ss off and don’t come back!”

              I come back here because I DO remember what the Spectator has been. Never monochrome, and never simply a representation of the Conservative Party, (thank goodness), but never filled with socialist comment. socialist think-tank reflections, and Westminster Bubble foam such as is the case at the moment.There is a hope, a slim one, that if you are reminded of what the customers expect you might actually deliver it!

              I come back here, as you must know if you read the comments from other people, simply for the comments and not presently for the posts, most of which I could find on the Guardian website. But those of us who have posted here for some years have been telling you that for some years and we have been ignored. Successful businesses don’t ignore their most committed customers. If you think that commenters are a nuisance, and it seems that you do since you have already closed down the Coffee House Wall here, then you will actually be tellling us that your customers are a nuisance.

              I would expect a long-standing conservative publication to listen to criticism and do something about it. With a couple of phone calls you could have a couple of decent conservative blogs. But it is clear you do not want to do this. Only you know why. Of course you are running a business, and you may have decided with the owners to reposition the Spectator. But don’t treat commenters as idiots or a nuisance. Your print sales are falling. I bought the print edition for years, and would still be if you provided content I wanted to read. If you are losing customers because of what you are providing then that would be addressed in a business. it would be a mistake to consider that digital subscribers all have the same committment to the Spectator that the thousands of print subscribers and purchasers you once had displayed. There was no reason for you to lose any of the print subscribers that you have done.

              Successful businesses listen to their customers and provide what their customers want if it is possible. I do not believe that it is not possible for you to resource conservative material as a matter of course, with occasional forays into socialist sources. But at present it is the complete opposite.

              So I come here, hoping you will have some decent conservative blogs (and I don’t mean Conservative Party, they are not coterminous), and looking out for the best commenters whose names are known to your most loyal, and most longstanding website visitors.

      • Jez

        And where’s Korski when you need him?

      • Jez

        And number three…. :-)))….
        “If you’re after some kind of pub bore, monochrome politics, please do look somewhere other than Coffee House.”
        I think you’ve just told the majority of the people that read and can actually be arsed to contribute to the CH- thus making it work, to f*ck off with that?
        (i think i should become a lefty to be honest, the horrible undermining little sh*t that i am) ;-)) x

      • Owen_Morgan

        I learn something from Jonathan Jones’ posts: as with every other journalist (should that be “journolist”, in his case) currently writing on American affairs, he refuses to advance beyond his own self-evident prejudices (I think this is the first time he has admitted to them, but they have been on display for long enough). Harnden, Foster, Mardell are all the same. It makes their opinions (and they are opinions, not true reporting) utterly worthless. That goes for Jones, in a very big way. It makes me wonder how much trouble these people take to reach the facts – not very much, I suspect.

      • Owen_Morgan

        Since you mention the term “pub bore”, I have to ask, were you drunk, when you wrote that (because, although this may be hard for a Glaswegian to understand, insulting one’s customers isn’t generally regarded as acceptable in the rest of Britain)?

    • http://www.facebook.com/fraser.nelson.9 Fraser Nelson

      The Spectator never was that place. The inventor of the modern Spectator, Alexander Chancellor, had it right when he said “the Spectator is more of a cocktail party than a political party”. God knows I disagree with Jonathan on most things politics, but I always learn something from his posts. If you’re after some kind of pub bore, monochrome politics, please do look somewhere other than Coffee House.

    • ArchiePonsonby

      I completely blame the Bizarreclay Bros!

  • Jez

    Obama probably let his game slip due to listening to the majority of the msm both at home and abroad that also want desperately to see him reelected.

    All the indicators are looking at some terrible home truths being played out for the international liberal establishment.

    The polls have been seemingly stacked, he really has had zero idea on how to pull the US out of its economic nose dive, he’s wasted billions on green job creation initiatives, he went fund raising as the fires still we’re being put out in Benghazi, the Middle East is in a state of flux……. and when power politics out there are consolidated there’s a pretty nailed on chance they’ll be hostile to the West and very focused on Israel.

    You like him because he’s a liberal, he’s black and it somehow addresses some misconceived notion that this balances out whatever swirls about your heads regards past injustices.

    The Republicans may oppose attempting to wildly spend out of recession but the media is opposed rapidly against anything they perceive as not ‘like them’.

    It’s the real world out here. Driven by results that Obama has not delivered.

    • JohnOfEnfield

      correction TENS of billions – almost ONE HUNDRED BILLION. Always to his “mates”.

    • JohnOfEnfield

      correction TENS of billions – almost ONE HUNDRED BILLION. Always to his “mates”.

    • JohnOfEnfield

      correction TENS of billions – almost ONE HUNDRED BILLION. Always to his “mates”.

    • JohnOfEnfield

      correction TENS of billions – almost ONE HUNDRED BILLION. Always to his “mates”.

    • McRobbie

      I recall listening to a republican conference in which the matter of medical care was raised and the question was asked what should happen when someone takes seriously ill and can’t afford hospital charges – the shout from the republican audience was “let him die”. Any party in a civilised society that has that view does not deserve any support. At least Obama is trying to make america more protective of the weak.

      • Jebediah

        Is that the same conference where they wanted to make pies out of kittens and puppies?

      • Owen_Morgan

        Obama makes the weak weaker and the poor poorer… How does that improve their lot? He bungs huge sums to democrat cronies with doomed “renewable schemes”, while intentionally driving up the price of fuel for ordinary home-owners, motorists, businesses and haulage companies. Those price-rises destroy businesses wholesale. How’s that for “protecting the weak”? (Oh, but it’s all right… Obama will just tell those business-owners and their employees and their dependents, “You didn’t build that.”)

        His policies put people out of work, in millions. He has to juggle the figures, to exclude those in despair of ever working again, to pretend unemployment has somehow fallen. A great way to “protect the weak”.

        His State Department is well on the way to abandoning Poland and the Czech Republic to Russia and Israel to her neighbours. It recently abandoned several of its own employees to al-qaeda. That sounds like being “protective of the weak”, doesn’t it?

        And how about fourteen Mexican teenagers (I’m counting only the dead ones), shot with guns deliberately sent south of the border by the Obama administration, in the “Fast and Furious” operation. Was that protecting the weak?

    • McRobbie

      I recall listening to a republican conference in which the matter of medical care was raised and the question was asked what should happen when someone takes seriously ill and can’t afford hospital charges – the shout from the republican audience was “let him die”. Any party in a civilised society that has that view does not deserve any support. At least Obama is trying to make america more protective of the weak.

    • McRobbie

      I recall listening to a republican conference in which the matter of medical care was raised and the question was asked what should happen when someone takes seriously ill and can’t afford hospital charges – the shout from the republican audience was “let him die”. Any party in a civilised society that has that view does not deserve any support. At least Obama is trying to make america more protective of the weak.

    • McRobbie

      I recall listening to a republican conference in which the matter of medical care was raised and the question was asked what should happen when someone takes seriously ill and can’t afford hospital charges – the shout from the republican audience was “let him die”. Any party in a civilised society that has that view does not deserve any support. At least Obama is trying to make america more protective of the weak.

    • The Masked Marvel

      Jez, talking of people opposed to anything “not ‘like them'”, that’s exactly how the BBC’s North America editor, Mark Mardell, keeps describing the Tea Party’s opposition to wealth redistribution. He says that they really oppose only redistributing wealth “to people not like them”, i.e. not white.
      http://youtu.be/mVw1iyYrN_o?t=55m30s

  • Bluesman

    It is often said that ideas originate in the US and cross, in time, to the UK. However, we in the UK had to suffer the charlatan Tony Blair long before the US had to endure Barack Obama. At least Blair could win a debate.

    To paraphrase an American politician – Mr Obama, you sir are no Tony Blair.

  • Bluesman

    It is often said that ideas originate in the US and cross, in time, to the UK. However, we in the UK had to suffer the charlatan Tony Blair long before the US had to endure Barack Obama. At least Blair could win a debate.

    To paraphrase an American politician – Mr Obama, you sir are no Tony Blair.

  • ScaryBiscuits

    The people who love Obama are the same sort of people who queue for an iPhone: victims of media hype, buying their opinions off-the-shelf them instead of thinking for themselves.

    • telemachus

      No he cares
      Unlike the desperate loony right Romney
      The only thig going for Mitt is that he is not part of the scary American Religious Right

      • ScaryBiscuits

        He cares. That would be why he promised to half the deficit and then doubled it. He cares. That would be why his health reforms have excluded millions and raised taxes for the middle classes.
        Telemachus, as ever, you mistake insults for arguments.

  • james102

    No autocue?

  • Owen_Morgan

    Following the ludicrous Biden boast that Obama had killed bin Laden and saved GM, the reply was: “Osama is supposedly underwater and GM definitely is.” The last thing Obama wants to risk is getting the US voters to focus on his corrupt, criminal and ultimately futile “rescue” of the American car-industry. If Jonathan Jones paid attention to any news source other than MSNBC, he might not scrawl such unadulterated drivel as his piece here.

    • HooksLaw

      GM is a fraction of the car company it was with thousands of jobs gone and it is no longer responsible for past employee health care. Some salvation

  • Frank P

    How a Spectator hack can declare his love for Obama after the past 5 years of hearing him lie to his back teeth as he attempted to extend, on behalf of his string pullers, the Long March through Western Civilisation, is beyond any rational comprehension. The man is a raving ‘socialist’ which in any political language is a euphemism of a follower of Marx and his mutations.Romney exposed him as hollow, gauche, weak and wobbly. He is useless without the teleprompter. You Sir, are a Kool Aid drinker and a useful (?) eejit. You obviously just produce this crap from the scripts supplied to you and never read the commentary on your posts – or anybody else’s posts. Amazin’!

    Could you direct me to your hagiographic obit on Eric Nobspawn; I’m sure you must have published one somewhere?

    • Baron

      hear, hear, and once more HEAR

    • Baron

      hear, hear, and once more HEAR

    • Baron

      hear, hear, and once more HEAR

    • Je

      Marx was a citizen of the west. Scandanavian Socialism is more succesful than Anglo Saxon City Mile Economics

Close