Blogger Widgets

Tuesday 23 October 2012

Obama leads with 8 Percent in US presidential debate

President Barack Obama had another face off with Dominican Republic candidate Mitt Romney for being defensive on foreign policy in their final presidential debate on Monday.
With two weeks left until Election Day, the high-stakes debate strayed frequently into domestic policy, with Romney seeking to bolster his argument that Obama had bungled the U.S. economic recovery.
While tamer than the second debate last week in New York state, the matchup had its share of zingers and putdowns, most of them doled out by an aggressive president eager to stop a surge in polls by the former Massachusetts governor.
“I know you haven’t been in a position to actually execute foreign policy, but every time you’ve offered an opinion, you’ve been wrong,” said Obama.
“Attacking me is not an agenda,” was Romney’s frequent retort, alluding to Republican accusations that Obama had not laid out enough of a policy plan for a second term.
Snap polls declared Obama the winner, but 60 percent of people in a CNN survey said Romney was capable of being commander in chief, accomplishing a key goal set out by his advisers.
A CBS News poll said 53 percent believed Obama won the debate, versus 23 percent for Romney and 24 percent calling it a draw. The CNN poll put Obama as the winner by 8 percentage points.

Transcript of the Third Round of the Obama-Romney Presidential Debate, October 22, 2012.....Part 3

ROMNEY: Well, my strategy is pretty straightforward, which is to go after the bad guys, to make sure we do our very best to interrupt them, to -- to kill them, to take them out of the picture.

But my strategy is broader than that. That’s -- that’s important, of course. But the key that we’re going to have to pursue is a -- is a pathway to get the Muslim world to be able to reject extremism on its own.

We don’t want another Iraq, we don’t want another Afghanistan. That’s not the right course for us. The right course for us is to make sure that we go after the -- the people who are leaders of these various anti-American groups and these -- these jihadists, but also help the Muslim world.

And how do we do that? A group of Arab scholars came together, organized by the U.N., to look at how we can help the -- the world reject these -- these terrorists. And the answer they came up with was this:

One, more economic development. We should key our foreign aid, our direct foreign investment, and that of our friends, we should coordinate it to make sure that we -- we push back and give them more economic development.

Number two, better education.

Number three, gender equality.

Number four, the rule of law. We have to help these nations create civil societies.

But what’s been happening over the last couple of years is, as we’ve watched this tumult in the Middle East, this rising tide of chaos occur, you see Al Qaida rushing in, you see other jihadist groups rushing in. And -- and they’re throughout many nations in the Middle East.

ROMNEY: It’s wonderful that Libya seems to be making some progress, despite this terrible tragedy.

But next door, of course, we have Egypt. Libya’s 6 million population; Egypt, 80 million population. We want -- we want to make sure that we’re seeing progress throughout the Middle East. With Mali now having North Mali taken over by Al Qaida; with Syria having Assad continuing to -- to kill, to murder his own people, this is a region in tumult.

And, of course, Iran on the path to a nuclear weapon, we’ve got real (inaudible).

SCHIEFFER: We’ll get to that, but let’s give the president a chance.

OBAMA: Governor Romney, I’m glad that you recognize that Al Qaida is a threat, because a few months ago when you were asked what’s the biggest geopolitical threat facing America, you said Russia, not Al Qaida; you said Russia, in the 1980s, they’re now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because, you know, the Cold War’s been over for 20 years.

But Governor, when it comes to our foreign policy, you seem to want to import the foreign policies of the 1980s, just like the social policies of the 1950s and the economic policies of the 1920s.

You say that you’re not interested in duplicating what happened in Iraq. But just a few weeks ago, you said you think we should have more troops in Iraq right now. And the -- the challenge we have -- I know you haven’t been in a position to actually execute foreign policy -- but every time you’ve offered an opinion, you’ve been wrong. You said we should have gone into Iraq, despite that fact that there were no weapons of mass destruction.

No comments: