EFTA01113869.pdf
dataset_9 pdf 199.1 KB • Feb 3, 2026 • 3 pages
POS POLITICS
Obama Handily Wins Third Debate
By Matt Zeller - October 22, 2012
Tonight's third Presidential debate featured a battle between Obama the Professor-
in-Chief vs. Romney the student-who-didn't-do-the-reading. As someone who has
ADD, even I had trouble keeping up with many of Governor Romney's non-linear
arguments. Indeed, Romney's desperation to hit all of his talking points and critiques
at all costs came at the expense of appearing Presidential. Presidents and leaders
don't just critique problems they offer specific solutions on how to fix them -- in that regard, Obama
handily won.
Romney clearly can memorize the talking points Dan Senor and John Bolton feed him -- hence his
obsession with Israel and Iran -- but they all need to look at a map, because last time I checked Iran has
a whole ocean border with the Indian Ocean (I'm still not sure how Syria is Iran's path to the sea). Also, a
pre-emptive attack on Iran will do nothing but unite the Iranian people with the Ayatollah's for at least
another generation -- Obama gets that, Romney scarily does not. The last thing America or the planet
needs is an American war with Iran. While Governor Romney clearly wanted to use Israel against
President Obama as much as possible, the President's story about visiting the Holocaust memorial and
shelled Israeli cities while Romney held fundraisers was one of the most poignant and moving moments
of the debate.
In fact, I'd argue too much time was spent on Israel and Iran and not nearly enough on what I think will
be the single most important foreign and economic policy development of the 21st century -- the
emergence of the Chinese middle class. The day China's middle class can replace the US middle class as
consumers is the day China no longer needs to fund our debt. President Obama at least attempted to
talk about long-term competitiveness of American labor via improved education standards because we
need to be able to make things better and cheaper than everyone else. Sadly, neither man offered up
enough specifics on policies that the US could enact to protect the American economy from the loss of
China's investment. Now is the time to solve our coming China problem -- not 10-20 years from now
when China decides it no longer needs us to buy its goods to keep its economy growing. .
I found it striking that Afghanistan got such little mention (in comparison to Iran and Israel) as we still
have just under 100,000 troops in Afghanistan. Once again, neither candidate acknowledged the truth
about American involvement in Afghanistan -- that we will remain in combat in Afghanistan potentially
until 2024. Governor Romney absolutely incorrectly screwed up when he said we will be finished in
Afghanistan in 2014. America signed a treaty to train the Afghan Security Forces till 2024. Combat won't
stop simply because we bring home "combat troops" (i.e. the 82nd Airborne, 101st Airborne, etc...). I
was an adviser to the Afghan Security Forces, I got shot at on my 13th day in country and many days
Page I 1 of 3
EFTA01113869
thereafter and yet I wasn't technically a "combat troop" -- the same will happen to our advisers for the
next ten years.
Sadly, the conversation of Pakistan was also too limited. Pakistan is the most dangerous country on the
planet (a state sponsor of terrorism, Osama Bin Laden's last sanctuary, and the greatest proliferator of
nuclear weapons and material on the planet). The US-Pakistan alliance has essentially collapse over the
last decade and yet neither candidate offered specifics on how to fix that relationship. The US must find
a way to keep Pakistan from falling apart or Afghanistan and Iraq will look like a cakewalk.
Also, what happened to Europe? Their economy is on the verge of collapsing and could take ours with it
-- yet not a single mention during the debate.
I enjoyed the discussion of Syria but I still can't find a difference in either candidate's policy towards the
conflict. Indeed, while neither candidate wants to commit the US militarily to Syria, this probably is not
possible - esp. if the conflict expands to Turkey and Jordan, our staunchest allies in the Middle East. I
had hoped both men would have offered specifics on how to address the growing regional war in the
Levant.
I found the limited conversation of US drone attacks frustrating and supremely disappointing. Lethal
drone strikes have become the weapon de jure of the war on terror and could actually move people (i.e.
the children of the killed) towards terrorism in the future I found President Obama's acknowledgement
that we need to move people away from terrorism refreshing, but to do that, we actually need to
expand literacy as literacy increases the access to the marketplace of ideas. We need to prevent today's
children from becoming tomorrow's terrorists, but to do that, we'll likely have far greater success with
words, not drones.
Had I been Mitt Romney's debate coach, I would have had him congratulate President Obama off the
bat for getting Bin Laden. Such a move would have come across as magnanimous and would have taken
the bite out of President Obama's forceful narrative on what it means to be a President: "When we bring
those who have harmed us to justice that sends a message to the world...because that's the kind of
clarity of leadership (that a President must make]." Conversely, I would have never have allowed
Romney to call himself a son of Detroit who's father ran a car company. Most sons of Detroit and their
fathers worked the line and not in the board room. Romney continued to come across as out of touch
with the American middle class. A point further exacerbated by the President's criticisms of Romney's
business practices that helped send many of those Detroit jobs to China. Indeed, it took three debates,
but President Obama finally pointed out that Romney helped pioneer outsourcing to China.
President Obama came across the most Presidential and coherent when he tied the ending of the Iraq
war with increased resources for fixing things at home and taking care of our veterans. As a veteran, I
applaud the President for taking the time to acknowledge the need to take care of our veterans -- a
point Romney did not make once in all three debates.
President Obama continues to be the most culturally in-tune President in modern American history. His
use of David Spade throwaway line "The 1980's called and want their foreign policy back" was
Page 12 of 3
EFTA01113870
simultaneously hysterical and powerful. Even more poignant were President Obama's statements
regarding the changing nature of warfare, especially the "we used to have horses and bayonets" line.
President Obama's correctly asserted that warfare changes and evolves to demand new weapons and
tactics -- a lesson that sadly many politicians and US government officials never learn. For example, the
US military spent billions of dollars on the F-22, an aircraft designed to fight Soviet MiGs but now finds
itself unused as we face enemies who fight with IEDs and small unit ambushes. We can no longer afford
to learn the lessons of the last war during the first moments of the next one.
Finally, thank God President Obama acknowledged that we all hate campaign ads -- a sentiment with
which I'm confident all Americans can agree.
Follow Matt Zeller on Twitter:
Page 13 of 3
EFTA01113871
Entities
0 total entities mentioned
No entities found in this document
Document Metadata
- Document ID
- 2ccae684-77d1-4488-9890-b461ce7dc47a
- Storage Key
- dataset_9/EFTA01113869.pdf
- Content Hash
- 5327085ee515d95860670544733828c0
- Created
- Feb 3, 2026