Ayoon Wa Azan (the debate was polite)

Democracy, in my opinion as someone who comes from undemocratic countries, is the belief that the sum total of the citizens’ ignorance, like the multiplication of negatives, becomes positive, pushing them to ultimately choose the best candidate during elections. I have reached this conviction after living for a long time in democratic countries, including the United States, Britain and France. I then returned to it as I heard Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both say correct yet extremely contradictory things in their first televised debate. Romney said that Obama’s first term was a failure, citing the ongoing deficit, high unemployment levels and the increase in the number of Americans who depend on food stamps. Obama said that employment in the private sector grew, that the automotive industry has come out of its ordeal and that the housing market has improved. All the above is true, but Romney believes that Obama’s return to the White House will mean the continuation of the crisis which he failed to address over the past four years. Meanwhile, Obama warned that if the Republicans return to the White House, then this will mean a return to the same policies that had led to the crisis to begin with. This is also true, and for the benefit of my Arab readers, I want to add a factual piece of information known to the Americans. In short, George W. Bush had been handed over a surplus of one trillion dollars by Bill Clinton, but left Barack Obama a deficit of one trillion dollar, and other trillion-dollar commitments related to ongoing wars, and the treatment of soldiers wounded and disabled during these wars for decades to come. With the continuing financial crisis, the Republicans wrested control of the House of Representatives in the 2010 midterm elections, and they subsequently obstructed every single plan by the president for economic reform. This is also another fact. Now, I will continue with an opinion, and the reader is free to accept or reject it. I believe that the Republicans in the House preferred for the economic crisis to continue, along with the suffering of the Americans, for the sole purpose of blaming Obama for it in the hope that this would push him to lose the next election. The debate was polite, and the only point that Obama left without commenting appropriately on was the fact that he accused the Republican candidate of seeking a tax cut for the rich. Romney’s response was something to the effect that Obama was repeating this accusation, or lie, so that it becomes entrenched in people’s minds, but that it was not true. But it is definitely true. Indeed, Bush was able to pass laws that expired over specific time frames, enacting tax cuts for the rich, claiming that this would stimulate the U.S. economy. Nevertheless, the figures, which cannot lie, show that the U.S. and global financial crisis continued since then, and even worsened. And yet, the Republicans want to extend tax cuts for rich people like Romney himself, on the grounds that it helps stimulate the economy when it was a key factor that led to economic ruin under the Bush administration. During the debate, I found Obama calm as usual and could not be provoked, but he should have shown a stronger fighting spirit. The immediate polls that followed the debate gave Romney’s performance high grades, albeit some put Obama ahead of him. The Israeli newspapers said yesterday that Romney won by the knockout blow, basically because this is what they want to be true. I have the polls in front of me. I will omit the names of the organizations that held them, and only cite the numbers. 67 percent in one poll said that Romney won against 22 percent who said Obama won, while 32 percent said that they tied. In another poll, 38.9 percent said Obama won and 35.5 percent said that Romney won. According to a third poll, 47.8 percent said Obama won, compared to 25.4 percent who said it was Obama who won the debate. I can perhaps conclude from these figures that Romney’s performance was a lot better than people had expected, which also means that Obama’s performance was below the level expected of him. The most important question now is this: Is Romney’s good performance enough to dramatically change the previous polls, in which Obama was five or four points ahead of Romney? What will ultimately matter are the swing states, as these will decide the election. Obama is ahead in all of these states, but I will wait for the second and third debates this month to see whether the poll figures will remain the same, or budge in favor of this or that candidate.  -- The views expressed by the author do not necessarily represent or reflect the editorial policy of Arabstoday.