"Late and Sour"

In Jay Nordlinger’s article “Late and Sour” on National Review Online, he discusses his views and observations of the second presidential debate. Keep in mind this is a Right-leaning blog, most-likely intended for Republican viewers.

                He starts off by making a list of Romney’s faults during the debate. Then he proceeds to point out what he believes Obama did well. Jay Nordlinger is a Republican. I’m sure many Liberals who read this article found it refreshing that a Republican doesn’t believe that Romney  did as well as he could have in the second debate. I can’t say that I’m fully disagreeing with everything he discusses, because I’m not. There are things I agree, and disagree with him on; but I’m going to cover the latter.

                He starts off by saying:  ““It would be nice if Romney didn’t say “less jobs.” And “the reason is because” — over and over again.”” Sure maybe it would be nice, but who really cares? This personally doesn’t bother me…maybe this statement of Nordlinger’s is just a smidge over-critical?

                He also claims that Romney didn’t give strong answers. While I disagree with this statement, I will say that Romney did seem to be a little less aggressive and not as in control than the first debate.

                Next, he discusses how Romney had moments during primaries when he became “rattled” and would “stumble” over his words. I didn’t watch the primaries, so I don’t know if this statement is true or not; I’ll take Nordlinger’s word for it. I did however watch this debate, and in no way did Romney seem to be rattled. As I said before, he may not have been as aggressive as in the first debate, but I did not think he stumbled over his words in the second debate any more than Obama did. They both had moments where they had to stop and gather their thoughts before moving forward; I would think this is semi-normal.

                He continues by saying that Obama was “strong” and Romney wasn’t. Yes, Obama came out much more aggressive this time around than in the first debate. Personally, though, I believe both candidates could have been stronger.

                Nordlinger’s article is thought provoking, and worth reading just because of that. If you’re also wanting a non-biased critique of both presidential candidates, this is a great article. I do disagree with him on some points, such as the ones I’ve listed, but I will say that I agree with him on other points as well. Neither candidate is perfect, no one is, and that’s what this article is about.