Foreign Policy Main Focus on Tonight's Debate
In the final Presidential debate, the main focus will be on foreign policy and how each candidate's policies differ and will be more beneficiary than the other's respective policy. However, foreign policy has been reported as voter's "last topic of interest" in several polls. However, both the Romney and Obama campaign believe that foreign policy is the topic that will make voters solidify their vote. Romney campaign has been criticized for not showing strong foreign policy leadership, but the four deaths in Libya (obviously under President Obama) have promoted the Romney ticket. The Obama campain has received praise in ending the Iraq War and the killing of Bin Laden, but has received criticisms for the four deaths in Libya.
I think that tonight's debate topic can be beneficial to both candidates. Foreign policy will give chance for Mitt Romney to prove the American what has been deemed to be his weakest point. He has the opportunity to show his potential leadership in the oval office, instead of having rumors and stories being thrown around. On the other hand, Obama has always proven strong in foreign policy. To me, it's his "specialty." He's never had a weak moment in debating the topic, and that could negatiely affect Romney tonight. We're two weeks and a day away from a crucial election. It's crunch time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I believe both candidates will have pressure on them tonight. Obama still is being criticized for the government's response to attacks in Libya. Romney still has to prove himself in foreign policy. It will also be interesting to see how both candidates address the Iranian nuclear threat. With the election so close, neither candidate can afford to show weakness in an area that is so important to voters.
ReplyDeletePolls seem to indicate that Obama had a slightly more favorable performance than Romney in the third debate, but viewership for this debate was much lower than the previous two debates (exacerbated by competing air time with football and game 7 of the NLCS). While there were certainly some quotable moments (the comment about bayonets and horses could definitely be spun by either sides), I don't think this debate will really have much importance to the average voter.
ReplyDeleteI found it interesting how the topic of the debate was foreign policy, yet that is the subject that voters are least interested in hearing about. The major point of the debates is to allow undecided voters to consider their options and choose a candidate. In fact, the audience of the debate was chosen from all the undecided voters that were surveyed in a Gallup poll. Perhaps the lack of interest in foreign policy explains why the number of viewers was considerably less than the number of viewers of the previous debates.
ReplyDeleteWhile this was the last political debate, there was less attention paid to this debate in that voters today often vote based on the economic policy plans of the candidates, as has been shown to be a huge topic of debate in this election, rather than action overseas. The American people vote based on their money and the two presidential candidates showed this in the debate when in the closing both avoided answering the final foreign policy questions with their tangential comments of how their economic policy plans will benefit the nation.
ReplyDeleteThe primary issue in this election, in my eye, is what's going to happen to the money of the American public, like what Lauren said. It's not to say that social and foreign affairs aren't important topics but they have taken a back seat to the struggle over the defict and the economy.
DeleteI am surprised that not many many voters were least concerned on foriegn policy. I like that americans have put the economy and healthcare on the top of their list of crucial topics. I must criticize the article over obama fulfilling his promises when he ran in 08'. Obama did not get troops out until the end of 2011. yes he did get Osama bin laden, but why did he have to wait so long to get the troops out. "We marched right in, we can march right out"-Ron Paul.
ReplyDeleteIt makes sense to me with the current state of the economy that the American public puts more value into the candidates economic plans especially considering the candidates have very similar plans for the biggest foreign policy issue, the war in Afghanistan.
ReplyDeleteBoth candidates have similar foreign policy plans. What the candidates differ in is the way they will reach their end goal.Since the candidates have the same end goal and Americans are very interested in foreign policies, this debate probably didn't sway any voters decides. You would think they would place the most crucial debate(economy) last.
ReplyDeleteThe lack of interest on the average voter's part in foreign policy provided for a comparatively weaker poll result after the monday night debate. Also, the two candidate's stands on foreign policy are very similar, which leaves little to be decided on whom will prove to be more effective in this area.
ReplyDeleteWhile not as critical to the voters, there was no way Obama was going to lose that debate unless he fell asleep again. He is the president, and so has access to information pertaining to all sections of the world that Romney doesn't. He has four years of experience on the world stage, while I don't think Romney has had any besides business. Obama had more resources to be prepared with than Romney, so there was absolutely no way Romney could have gotten him off guard.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jeff that the way people are prioritizing issues makes sense considering the economy. This makes me wonder why they would use a topic people were least interested in to have the candidates make their last impacts regarding the debates.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Liz and Jeff about people prioritizing their issues but I find it surprising that foreign policies aren't very high up. People should care more about them because they some how, if not directly, will have an effect on the majority of Americans.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kira. I believe that the lower amount of viewings during the second and third debates would decrease because some people would believe that they only needed two debates to make their decisions. Foregin policy is a very boring topic and that is just my opinion and that too would cause less people to watch. With the debates being over, I am surprised at the amount of voters who are undecided, but I believe any more than 3 presidential debates would have been too many.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to read this pre-debate article once the debate has already taken place. Both candidates had an advantage and a disadvantage coming into the discussion. Obama's previous foreign relations have been positive, yet the negative publicity from the deaths in Libya create a disadvantage. On the other hand, Romney uses Obama's negative publicity as his own upper hand, but his previous lack of foreign policy does not look good.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sara. I feel as though the last debate did not sway any voters. Being 18 and able to vote, I did not feel as if the debate a few nights ago helped me understand the strategy of either party well enough to sway my vote from its original standpoint.
ReplyDeleteI agree with those who put foreign policy at low interest is a good thing. There are many problems in America regarding the economy and other things. Right now, our focus should be fixing ourselves especially considering the foreign policy plans for both candidates are relatively similar.
ReplyDeleteForeign policy is the crust at the bottom of the importance trash can in the minds of Americans. People don't know enough about the world outside our hemisphere, let alone our country or state. I partially blame the government and news networks for not making foreign affairs of extreme importance to them because if Americans were to be more exposed to the issues than they would take more interest. If asked about the issues in Syria and Gaddafi, I would know almost nothing about the topic, and I wouldn't blame myself for not looking it up because i partially didn't know there was a large issue in that country until recently.
ReplyDelete