At Debate, Romney Plays for Independents and Moderates
By Carl Wicklander | 10/07/2012 | Elections 2012, Headline, President | 34 Comments
Credit: Gage Skidmore
There is little unanimity in American politics, but one instance is that former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney won the first presidential debate last week in Denver.
Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard praised Wednesday as “the best night of Romney’s bid for the presidency and that includes his 2008 campaign.” National Review editor Rich Lowry commended that Romney, “not only won on substance, but won on optics, demeanor, and emotion. He flat-out won.” Comedian and Obama supporter Bill Maher borrowed phraseology from the populist right when he joked on Twitter, “I can’t believe I’m saying this, but Obama looks like he DOES need a teleprompter.”
The unique aspect of Romney’s debate performance was its substance. At times, Romney has been criticized for campaigning as if he was still contesting the GOP nomination: by appealing to the predilections of the right. His selection of Paul Ryan for vice president, his accusations that the Obama administration wanted to “sympathize with those waging the attacks” on September 11, 2012, and his fundraiser comment that “47%” of Americans are “dependent on the government” and how he does not have to “worry about those people” have all been steps that, despite his record as a moderate governor, inferred that he was flattering the right wing of his party.
To the chagrin of his supporters, Ryan has been underutilized and on Thursday, Romney admitted that his “47%” comments were “completely wrong.” However, this and the Wednesday debate were parts of a campaign strategy to keep the base happy while Romney plays for independents and moderates.
Bucking many in his party on taxation, Romney said he would not “reduce the share of taxes paid by high-income people.” He also attempted to placate both free marketeers and others by calling regulation “essential”:
“You can’t have a free market work if you don’t have regulation.”
On entitlements, Romney presented himself as the one who would save Medicare. Frequently criticizing the president for taking $716 billion out of Medicare to pay for the Affordable Care Act (ACA), Romney promised “no change for current retirees and near-retirees,” while emphasizing that younger generations will have a choice between “the current Medicare program or the private plan.” Romney criticized himself for his characterization of the president’s plan and his own. He portrayed himself as the protector of Medicare.
On health care, Romney did not recoil from his Massachusetts plan that is often described as the forerunner to the ACA. Choosing not to dwell on the similarities of each policy, Romney emphasized the bipartisan nature of his versus the partisanship that accompanied the ACA:
“We had Republicans and Democrats come together. . . . What you did instead was to push through a plan without a single Republican vote . . . instead of bringing America together and having a discussion on this important topic, you pushed through something that you and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid thought was the best answer and drove it through. What we did, in a legislature 87% Democrat, we worked together. Two hundred legislators in my legislature, only two voted against the plan by the time we were finished.”
Romney’s strategy as personified in the immediate reaction from the debate seems to bear his strategy out. Borrowing a page from his 2002 gubernatorial campaign, Romney reminded independent voters that at least his health care plan had bipartisan support while President Obama’s did not. Undecided voters watching the debate on NBC noted how Romney “stepped up” and changed the way they thought about the former governor and Romney appears to be regaining momentum with independents.
Automated polls conducted on Thursday by Rasmussen and We Ask America showed some contemporary movement. Although Romney remained static in Ohio, he gained two points in Virginia and four in Florida. The gain in Virginia is significant now that the Constitution Party’s Virgil Goode, a former congressman, is officially on the ballot. Goode, who has polled as high as 9% in his home state also appeals to Republicans and independents, so Romney has an unusual amount of competition for this vote.
However, Nate Silver, a statistician who blogs for the New York Times warns:
“Polling trends can sometimes be odd in reaction to news events. One factor is that supporters of a particular candidate may be more enthusiastic, and more inclined to respond to surveys, after he gets a favorable development in the news cycle.”
It took time and several mistakes for the Romney campaign to slide. It will take more debate performances like Wednesday night’s to credibly change the game. Without that, his momentum may evaporate. Mitt Romney made a pitch for independent and moderate voters, and he looks to keep it up.




Leave Your Comment →
34 Comments
Matt Metzner
10.07.2012
@mmetzner
This week’s debate was the first of three debates. I’d expect Obama to perform well and the expectations to be higher for Romney in the next two. Remember the extent supporters went to bring expectations as low as possible for Romney. It’s not a matter of who wins, but who exceeds expectations.
Susan Manning
10.07.2012
Yes.
Rita Jones
10.07.2012
yes but don’t know that i can trust him not to approve all the extreme base policies
Daniel E. Mills
10.07.2012
He is not getting this Proud Independent Vote.
Leslie Schneider Boen
10.07.2012
Not getting mine either.
Duncan Webb
10.07.2012
Neither Romney nor Obama is getting my vote.
Cindy Sherwood
10.07.2012
He plays to whatever his audience is!
Noël Barna
10.07.2012
as does barry… plays to whatever his audience is…
William Boardman
10.07.2012
Evidence of Romney v. Romney is cast.
Obama contradictions harder to come by,
but real enough for torture, Guantanamo, drones.
Rich Kluender
10.07.2012
Without a doubt he threw his conservative backers under the bus at the debate.
Tom Terrell
10.07.2012
A liberal and a conservative walk into a bar and the bartender says, “Hello, Mr. Romney.”
Keith Pyron
10.07.2012
I’m ignoring the debates as long as they ignore Johnson/Gray!
Kevin Hall
10.07.2012
No. He lied like the cumbag that he is.
Eric Sullivan
10.07.2012
Nope sticken with Gary Johnson!!
Matt McKibbin
10.07.2012
Do you think Romney even made a rational argument while up on stage? How can you say that social security or medicare isnt completely bankrupt. How do you debate the macro economy without once mentioning the private central bank that fixes interest rates at 0.0 percent by printing trillions of dollars and handing them out to its political favorites like Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan etc. Its all nonsense.
Jeremiah Warwick
10.07.2012
Only to be seen as the lies they are.
Jeremiah Warwick
10.07.2012
Corp America will not get my vote. Ignoring the Goldman Sachs/Soros show.
Nicholas Giambattista
10.07.2012
If you are Indepent and you vote for Mitt or Obama then you are not really Independent. I say vote for your own party.
Sara Patricia Morrison
10.07.2012
He mopped up the floor with Obamas butt.What debate did you people see?
William Boardman
10.07.2012
Obama may have lost the debate, but Romney wasn’t very good
except in a narrow stylistic sense. The picture atop this article
perfectly captures his fatuousness.
Michael Snider
10.07.2012
He communicated and spoke well but that doesn’t mean I’m going to vote for him. I won’t be fooled
Revjack Minister
10.07.2012
for goodness sake vote for Johnson
Dan Richards
10.07.2012
I still have not seen anyone I am wanting to vote for. Yes he mopped the floor with Obama, but that is no challenge. I still am not much in favor of either one.
Duc Luong
10.07.2012
obama needs to bring up the 47% comment in the next debate
Ken Willey
10.07.2012
I think he was trying to attract the Paul supporters. It did sound like he was channeling Paul a few times.
Johnny Ritchie
10.07.2012
Flip flop, lies, and deceit, like most of the lobbyist bought Congressmen, screw the people, hail and heed the lobbyist.
Edward Theilmann
10.07.2012
I wouldn’t vote for either one of these slimy corporate puppets and really don’t care what they say because most of it is lies and deception and what little truth that there is usually pertains to non issues that have no meaning anyway
TheArtist Chartrand
10.07.2012
Lies and Flip Flopping from the real “47%” mentality that he has. He is an elitists, and anti-poor people, anti women’s right to their own reproductive health, he haves the women on the View except Republican. Elizabeth Really? He wants to keep women in their place, bare-foot and pregnant no matter how she got pregnant (consensual or non-consensual). He is a scary man.
Blaz Gutierrez
10.08.2012
@blazgutierrez
I’m still not entirely sure what it means to ‘win’ a debate. Can someone shed some light as to why these are important?
William Boardman
10.08.2012
@williamboardman
“Winning” is in the eye of the beholder —
and the loudest beholders are talking heads.
You’re right, “winning” is chimerical
and you’re right, there’s no real measure of “winning” (except perhaps the election).
Mostly, in any meaningful way, the debates are almost pointless.
Carl Wicklander
10.09.2012
@carlwicklander
That’s a good question. “Winning” a debate is highly subjective, but it almost entirely values style over substance, and unfortunately, a lot of voters probably base their decision on what they see rather than what they hear, read, or research.
A lot of commentators noted that it just looked like Obama didn’t want to be there. Plus, Romney looked more confident than Obama. That doesn’t say much about the actual policy differences between the candidates, which admittedly, were minimal.
Alex Gauthier
10.08.2012
@alexg
Republicans in congress wouldn’t have voted to bring Abraham Lincoln back to life if it was Obama’s idea, let alone healthcare reform. Obstructionism is only a viable strategy for those who don’t seek out the details for themselves.
William Boardman
10.08.2012
@williamboardman
When you’ve sworn to uphold the constitution and
all that that implies about the national good,
obstructionism is surely not a form of patriotism,
and seems to me a kind of chicken treason.
Debatepopular
05.10.2013
@debatepopular
No doubt it was the meorde the three debates and gave him momentum although it was not enough.