Debating Over Last Term, Candidates Say Little of Next
By PETER BAKER <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/peter_baker/in dex.html> · WASHINGTON After three debates and four and a half hours of nationally televised exchanges, Americans have learned that <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/16/us/politics/transcript-of-the-second-pres idential-debate-in-hempstead-ny.html> President Obama has a smaller pension than his opponent and <http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/primaries/candidates/mitt-romney?inline=n yt-per> Mitt Romney <http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/05/new-star-on-the-stump-big-bir d/> wants to get Big Birds beak out of the federal trough, that <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/joseph_r_jr_bi den/index.html?inline=nyt-per> Joseph R. Biden Jr. likes to smile and <http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/candidates/paul-ryan?inline=nyt-per> Paul D. Ryan drinks lots of water. But they have not learned as much about what the next four years might look like. With <http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/2nd-debate-also-a-ratings- hit-drawing-65-6-million-at-home-viewers/> tens of millions of Americans tuning in to the debates, the four candidates for president and vice president have spent most of their time on the biggest public stage of the campaign fighting more about what happened in the last term than what should happen in the next. Mr. Obama and Vice President Biden defended their record but gave only a modest sense of their agenda should they be re-elected, beyond arguing for staying the course because the other side would return to what they called the failed policies of the past. Mr. Romney and his running mate, Mr. Ryan, did offer a vision of sorts for replacing what they called failed policies of the present, but they declined to give the kind of details that would help voters evaluate what it would mean for them. As a result, voters are left to extrapolate from the signals sent during the debates what the future would hold under an Obama second term or a first term of a President Romney. Americans can make interpretations from the values and concepts expressed, even if there are few tangible plans to consider. The viewers know what these candidates believe, said William A. Galston, a former adviser to President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore who now works as a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. But they dont know what these candidates would do. In postdebate appearances on Wednesday, both the president and Mr. Romney seized on what they saw as their opponents deficiencies. The president still doesnt have an agenda for a second term, Mr. Romney told a rally of supporters in Chesapeake, Va. Dont you think that its time for him to finally put together a vision of what hed do in the next four years? He added: I just think the American people had expected that the president of the United States would be able to describe what hes going to do in the next four years, but he cant. At his own rally in Mount Vernon, Iowa, Mr. Obama said: Governor Romney also took another stab at trying to sell us his $5 trillion tax cut that favors the wealthy. Once again he refused to tell us how hes going to pay for it. Usually when a politician tells you hes going to wait until after the election to explain a plan to you, he said, they dont have a pleasant surprise in store for you. Over the course of three debates, the two sides have provided clues. Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden, in effect, asked voters to ratify the path they have already set. They promised to finish carrying out the health care plan passed in the first term and to seek higher taxes on the wealthy to whittle away at sky-high budget deficits. They vowed to continue clean energy initiatives and fight erosion of womens rights. It has sounded like rear-guard actions preserving what they see as their accomplishments. There was little of the sweeping ambition envisioned four years ago. Mr. Obama made clear on Tuesday that while he still wanted to rewrite the nations <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/i/immigration_ and_refugees/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier> immigration laws, Republicans stood in the way. The words <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/science/topics/globalwarming/index.html? inline=nyt-classifier> climate change were never uttered by a president who in 2008 vowed that his watch would be remembered as the time the planet began to heal. He spoke only once, in passing, about building roads and bridges, once a key part of his jobs plan. The agenda outlined by Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan would invariably reverse the nations direction, but voters were left to guess exactly how. Mr. Romney used the phrase I know what it takes seven times on Tuesday night to assert his ability to create jobs and fix the economy, in effect asking voters to trust him. He vowed to repeal and replace Mr. Obamas <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics /health_insurance_and_managed_care/health_care_reform/index.html?inline=nyt- classifier> health care law but did not say with what. He promised to repeal and replace Wall Street regulations but did not give specifics. He defended plans to lower tax rates by 20 percent but would not say what loopholes and deductions would be eliminated to offset lost revenue and keep the deficit from exploding. The candidate with the most specific plans for the future was Mr. Ryan, who vigorously defended <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/05/health/policy/05health.html> his proposals to revamp Medicare and <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/s/social_secur ity_us/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier> Social Security even though Mr. Romney has distanced himself from the details involved. Mr. Ryan defended the vagueness of Mr. Romneys tax plan by saying, We want to work with Congress. It is certainly true that describing many details upfront could complicate negotiations with lawmakers, as well as alienate voters whose ox might get gored in carrying out the hard choices that will confront the next president. At the same time, it could make it harder for the winner on Nov. 6 to claim a mandate for action if voters do not buy into some of those hard choices. The debates have been mostly confirmatory rather than policy changing, said Tom Cronin, a political scientist at Colorado College. We plainly have choices and their presidencies will assuredly be different, and the vast majority of debate viewers have learned this. But that is different from winning a mandate for major policy changes. Thé Mulindwas Communication Group "With Yoweri Museveni and Dr. Kiiza Besigye Uganda is in anarchy" Kuungana Mulindwa Mawasiliano Kikundi "Pamoja na Yoweri Museveni na Dk. Kiiza Besigye Uganda ni katika machafuko"
_______________________________________________ Ugandanet mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. ---------------------------------------
