Romney Adopts Softer Tone in Critique of Obama - 3 views
www.nytimes.com/...tone-in-critique-of-obama.html
romney barack obama obama Finance economy election
shared by miles henderson on 24 Sep 12
- No Cached
-
miles henderson on 24 Sep 12This article is very interesting because of the timing of Romney's softer tone in the critique of Obama so soon after many voters heard about the 43% comment Romney made. I think if Romney wants any chance of winning, he really needs to watch what he says and make sure he isn't made out to seem like more of a bad guy in the media. Although Romney compliments Obamacare he still points out what he does not like about it, showing his strong stance on what he thinks is positive and what needs change. It is unique that Romney is pointing out positive aspects of Obama care, because the GOP have often used Obamacare as one of the reasons why he should not be president again.
- ...2 more comments...
-
John West on 30 Sep 12I tend to agree with you that being super partisan hasn't really worked for him so far, and that being a little nicer could be a good tactic. I like the point you make about Obamacare Just because he doesn't like it, doesn't mean that his policy needs to be entirely distinct from it in every way. This article reminds me of a conversation we had in our class about the "race to the center" that usually surrounds campaigning: since Obama and Romney have the far left and far right on their sides, the battle should be for the centrist voters. Maybe it's because of the general radicalization of his party (tea-party, etc.), but it seems to me that Romney hasn't been playing this game as much as he should. He can, and I would say should, be opposed to Obama in clear and distinct ways if he hopes to win, but I agree with you that it would be foolish to oppose him unconditionally. This attitude puts him in the position of bad guy.
-
Eli Melrod on 01 Oct 12I don't think Romney has said what he wants to keep or change at all. The idea that he could only keep the part about preexisting conditions is actually impossible when you take a look at the law. Without a lot of the portions of the act, the preexisting conditions pare doesn't work. By making all Americans essentially purchase healthcare, the healthcare companies can provide for people with preexisting conditions. Without that part of the law, it wouldn't really work for the insurance companies to profitably have people with preexisting conditions covered. I look at this as more rhetoric without substance. Check the article I posted about Obamacare and conservative ideals. I think it paints a nice picture of why Romney is screwed when it comes to talking Obamacare.
-
cody s on 02 Oct 12Yeah, this is an interesting call for Romney. I'm happy about it, but it certainly does seem calculated, especially his response of that he wants to keep "the part about pre-existing conditions." The phrase pre-existing condition is such an agitative buzzword, and it seems that this is a move intended to remove that specific buzzword from Obama's arsenal of rhetoric intended to pump up the base.
-
mabel taylor on 02 Oct 12I agree with what you said John about how this could be part of a Romney tactic of moving towards the center and I am curious what aspects of Obama's policies and ideas Romney would consider taking on. It's interesting to think about this in the context of your comment Eli, because it seems like a lot of the concepts that Romney latches onto simply don't work with the reality of a policy or with the Republican platform. Saying that he supports coverage for individuals with pre-existing conditions could make Romney more appealing on a human level, but if it is so detached from his general stance, it ends up being useless. I think a more well-thought out focus on centrists could be really beneficial.