Scott Galupo identifies the main strength of Bill Clinton’s convention speech:Steven Taylor thinks Clinton was correct when he said:
But the case he made against Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan was devastating.
It was, and it was all the more devastating because Romney and Ryan made no concerted effort to make the case for their ticket and their agenda last week. ........... Ryan was supposed to be the presidential ticket of the “data-driven” manager and his budget wonk sidekick, and between the absence of any significant policy discussion last week and what happened tonight that has lost all credibility. Clinton outperformed both of them in terms of discussing policy details, and underscored just how meaningless the “campaign of ideas” phrase has been. Ryan fans had been convinced for over a year that the election had to be a contest over “big ideas,” and when it came time to engage in that contest their party leaders didn’t even try.
In Tampa, the Republican argument against the President’s re-election was pretty simple: we left him a total mess, he hasn’t cleaned it up fast enough, so fire him and put us back in.It appears they are running a Bob Dole rope a dope campaign thinking that not being Obama will be enough. It didn't work for Dole and it won't work now. Steven Taylor again:
However, the Romney campaign, especially as manifested by the RNC’s messaging, is failing to do two important (and interrelated) things: 1. Explain how Romney will do better than Obama. 2. Explain how Romney will do better than Bush. A successful campaign needs, I would argue, to be able to say how he would do better than the incumbent, but he also needs to explain what he would do differently than the last time one of his co-partisans occupied the White House.The "policy" discussions at the RNC were little more than Republican talking points - very little policy. Anyone who says they are going to cut taxes, increase defense spending and balance the budget does not deserve to be taken seriously.