Critics say Romney won the first debate

The importance of presidential debates are a common topic for debate. Many people claim that the debates have no bearing on who they vote for, so whether or not Romney and Obama could swing enough interest to their side through the debates to win is somewhat unknown. Many, however, tune in to see what the candidates have to say and do not hesitate to share their opinions afterwards.

Many raved and said that Mitt Romney won the first presidential debate, which was held on October 3, 2012. According to the Baltimore Sun, people had predicated that Romney needed to use the opportunity to convince people that he was the right option for America. He was well versed and had little trouble expressing himself during the debate, and the charm he conveyed won over a lot of viewers.

Romney was not met with total praise, however. Some felt that although he delivered his message with smooth words, what he said was not entirely truthful. Others also were upset because he said that although he loves big bird he would cut funding to PBS, a comment that has been blown up and shared through almost every news and social media outlet. It’s not surprising that Romney met some unfavorable responses because every candidate faces that, but the specific comments about his “lies” will likely be up for debate throughout the next month.

Obama had a less then stellar night, overall. He had trouble delivering his thoughts with the smooth presentation and his presences was hardly noteworthy. It was not like the usual Barack Obama that we are use to seeing and people did not hesitate to express their disappointment. Obama even made innuendos towards his poor performance. Some wonder if this is the beginning of his end.

How do you weigh in? Do you think Romney was untruthful, or are his critic simply attacking him? Did Obama just have a bad night, or has he already lost the people’s vote?

Does the young vote matter?

It’s no secret that the young generation of voters rallied around Barack Obama and helped push him into the presidential spotlight in the 2008 election. Can he count on that vote to carry him through 2012?

The Harvard Institute of Politics conducted a survey of voters ages 18 to 29 to see who they preferred. Obama had 43% of the vote, whereas Romney has 26%. In December, Obama was at 37% and Romney was at 26%.

Obama may still have the young vote in his favor, but he should not consider the presidency in the bag. The LA Times writes about how although young voters favor him, they are also less likely to vote or volunteer for campaigns.

John Della Volpe, polling director for the Harvard Institute of Politics, gives some reasons why the interest in voting may be tapering off. “There were some factors that led people to increase engagement in ’02, ’06, ’08 — Katrina, Iraq, Afghanistan, not agreeing with Bush, 9/11, and obviously Obama and the use of new tools to mobilize,” explained Della Volpe. Della Volpe went on to say as students focus on getting an education, paying loans and staying afloat, political involvement is not at the forefront of concern anymore.

That is part of the push behind Obama’s current trip. Obama is visiting the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of Colorado at Boulder and the University of Iowa this week. His main topic? How to keep the costs of college loans down. It’s a popular topic among the young voters, and if Obama’s message is loud and convincing enough, he might motivate some more voters to participate.

The problem Obama is running into? Romney voiced that he agreed with Obama’s focus. This could mean Romney could snatch some voters Obama was counting on. Overall, however, Romney has been focused middle class families.

What do you think? Do Obama and Romney need to fight to gain the young vote? Or will it be a different crowd of people who carry the election this fall?

Ann Romney vs. Hilary Rosen: Stay at Home Moms

Does a woman who has never worked have authority to speak about the economic struggles women in America face? According to Democratic consultant Hilary Rosen, no. Rosen appeared on CNN earlier this week and argued that Ann Romney shouldn’t be discussing the hardships women face since she is married to a wealthy politician and has not been employed.

“His wife has actually never worked a day in her life. She’s never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing in terms of how do we feed our kids, how do we send them to school and how do we — why we worry about their future,” Rosen said on Anderson cooper’s AC360. Rosen was immediately hit with criticism. Stay at home moms all across the nation stood up and fired back. Rosen attempted to clarify that she meant Romney should not rely on/ consider Ann to be his expert in regards to economic problems facing women.

Ann Romney stood up to fight for herself. “I know what it’s like to struggle. Maybe I haven’t struggled as much financially. I can tell you and promise you that I’ve had struggles in my life,” she said. She also created a Twitter account several hours after the AC360 segment and sent the tweet “I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work.”

Her son Josh sent a tweet out shortly afterwards that read “@AnnDRomney is one of the smartest, hardest working woman I know. Could have done anything with her life, chose to raise me,” and her son Matt tweeted videos of her speaking on  a newscast.

Romney’s camp and Obama’s administration have been debating for sometime over the female unemployment rate. Immediately following the incident, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney worked to distance Obama from the comments of Rosen. Michelle Obama weighed in on Twitter, tweeting “Every mother works hard, and every woman deserves to be respected.” Obama campaign manager Jim Messina also sent out a tweet that said “I could not disagree with Hilary Rosen any more strongly. Her comments were wrong and family should be off limits. She should apologize.”

The following day, Obama went on WCMH-TV in Ohio and stated, “It was the wrong thing to say. It’s not something that I subscribe to.” Obama went on to describe the efforts of Michelle and his own mother, and added “there’s no tougher job than being a mom.”

Romney supporters are coasting on the attention Rosen has received. “She did us a huge favor.  “Our female base doesn’t want left-wing feminists telling them how to live their lives. She’s healing our base for us,” a senior official in the Romney campaign told NY Daily News.

According to this Christian Science Monitor article, Romney must secure approximately 40% of the female vote to have a hope of beating Obama. Ann Romney has been a help to pull in the vote of married women and conservative mothers. Will this comment by Rosen push more people away from Obama and toward Romney? Or did Obama’s team do a good job balancing the boat? Only time will tell.

How do you weigh in? Was Rosen right to say that due to her lack of employment history Ann Romney is not qualified to speak on the economic hardships of women? Or did Rosen step out of line and insult stay at home moms?

Should Newt Gingrich Get out of the Race?

Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich have been fighting for the same goal for the last several months: The spot of the GOP candidacy. They have been opponents this whole time and have not passed up opportunities to out-do each other in debates nor attack each other in advertisements. They do not act friendly on the surface and many are wondering why late last week reports came out that they had a secret meeting.

According to ABC news Mitt Romney confirmed that he and Gingrich had a secret meeting the day before the Louisiana Primary. Gingrich had already been scaling back his campaign and cut back 1/3 of his campaign staff, according to the Huffington Post.

Romney said the meeting was not important or of significance. He told Sean Hannity in a radio broadcast interview “We’re pretty much in regular communication between the different campaigns and I said hello to Newt. Nothing new, nothing exciting except we keep a friendly discourse open.”

Romney added “We do meet from time to time and I’m sure that the Speaker meets with Rick Santorum as well but we don’t go off and report the discussions. But they are friendly and we discuss the issues, we discuss the way forward but we don’t reveal our secret campaign strategies.”

Gingrich has yet to pull out of the race, although many feel as though the time is coming near. The likelihood of Newt gaining enough support to sustain as the spring progresses is slim, but he seems to continue to move forward. Some speculate that Romney and Gingrich may have been trying to come to some sort of agreement during their meeting.

Gingrich told the Washington Times, however, that he had not been offered a position with Romney’s administration in exchange for dropping out.  “There is no agreement of any kind, and I plan to go all the way to Tampa,” Gingrich said in that article.

In regard to the changes within his campaign, he said he was “downsizing the campaign, not suspending it.” According to the Washington Times, some of the tactics he is using to downsize include ceasing the use of the campaign airplane or the two campaign buses.

 Gingrich had announced that he will tone down his attacks against Romney in his advertisements, and his main priority is making sure President Barack Obama does not win a second term. He did reaffirm, however, that he is not done fighting for the spot as the GOP nominee. “Romney has to earn this. It’s not going to be given to him,” said Gingrich.

As of Wednesday, March 28 the delegate count was as follows: Romney-568, Santorum-273, Gingrich-135 and Paul-50. The magic number of delegates to shoot for is 1,144. Romney has a substantial advantage now, but there is still a chance for another to take the lead. Some feel, however, that for the sake of Romney and Santorum moving forward in getting the nomination, Gingrich needs to drop out and let his delegate votes go to a stronger candidate.

How do you weigh in? Is it time for Gingrich to drop out? Or is this a fight he needs to keep fighting?

Is Romney Fighting Satorum or the Latino Population?

Is the Latino population being excluded in the scope of concern of the GOP candidates? According to campaign officials with Barack Obama, they are.

According to the Census Bureau, in 2010 16.3 percent of the United States population was of Latino and Hispanic decent. That is a significant enough portion that the Latino vote could have a noticeable impact in the election season.

An article on Fox News, a recent poll indicated that Latino voters favored Obama to the republican candidates six to one. Some suspect the reason behind that might be related to various GOP candidate’s views on immigration, and on the Latino population.

This became a hot topic this week due to a new campaign advertisement that Mitt Romney released. In his ad, which can be viewed here, he showed the significance of Sonia Sotomayor being appointed to Supreme Court, among many other issues as examples of opponent Rick Santorum being too liberal and not ready to be the GOP candidate. It seems like another simple move to try to rip down a candidate, but as with most political moves in the campaign season, this one is receiving some backlash.

Santorum voted to confirm Sotomayor to the federal circuit court in 1998, according to this CNN article. Sotomayor is a liberal democrat, a viewpoint that opposes the republican stance that Romney takes. Some think the ad was simple created to show how Santorum supports a more liberal agenda, but others are taking it in a very different context. According to Angelo Falcon, president of the National Institute for the Latino Policy, “This unprovoked attack is another example of how Romney and the Republican Party are pushing the Latino vote to Obama … They forget that Judge Sotomayor is an icon for the Latino community. It’s like attacking Martin Luther King or George Washington, for blacks and whites.”

David Axelrod, who works on Obama’s campaign staff, was quoted saying, “This Republican debate should be very concerning to people in Hispanic communities across this country … because you know you’ve seen particularly Gov. Romney use the Latino community as foils to try and gain advantage over his candidates.” The CNN article points to Romney’s “bold” stance against immigration and his vocal appreciation of Arizona’s anti-immigration as two ways Romney pushes against the Latino population.

The Latino population, according to Axelrod, could also view the GOP’s views on several primary issues including education, job training and health care negatively. Democratic National Committee Senior Advisor for Hispanic Affairs, Juan Seulveda, targeted in on Romney, saying, “Mitt Romney has shown time and again that he is after the Tea Party vote, not the Latino vote, and with each attack he locks himself more to his extreme positions.”

Romney spokesperson Albert Martinez said that Sotomayor was picked due to her “liberal sympathy” and Santorum did not do his part to oppose her appointment.  The CNN article pointed towards Newt Gingrich as well, bringing up the fact that he sent a tweet in 2009 calling Sotomayor a racist.

How do you weigh in on this issue? Is this a subtle racism from Romney masked in a campaign ad, or is it simply a GOP candidate attacking another candidate?