US presidential debate liveblog

Verdict: a win for Obama has Romney imploded over Libya.

 

10:48PM

I'm going to give this one to Obama. Even without his opponent's implosion on what should have been his greatest weapon - Libya - the President was assured and calm, but aggressive too. My only caveat is that viewers may respond poorly to interruptions - but those were balanced by Romney's constant whining about how much time he had.

CBS's snap-poll has Obama winning, by 37% to 30%, with 33% saying it was a tie. More polls will be coming in over the next 24 hours.

 


10:40PM

The final question is a doozy. “What do you believe is the biggest misperception that the American people have about you as a man and a candidate. Debunk those misperceptions.”

Predictably, though, the candidates pay only lip-service to it and instead take the opportunity to make their own summings-up.

MR “Thank you. It seems that some campaigns are attacking a single person. In the course of that, I think the President's campaign has tried to paint me as someone different than who I am.” He tries to address the hidden video footage of him. “I care about 100 per cent of the American people.”

Then he goes on a quick-fire bullet-point list of his experiences.

“I spent my life in the private sector, not in government. I want to make my experience help people. … I am a man of god. I was a missionary for my church. I served as a pastor for my church. .. As Governor, I was able to get almost everyone insured. … Our schools were number one in the country.”

He ends: “If I become President, I'll get America working again. - I've done these things.

Obama spends even less time on the question: “I think a lot of this campaign has been devoted to this notion that I think government creates jobs. That's not what I believe. I believe the free enterprise system is the greatest engine of prosperity the world has eve known. But I also believe that everyone should have a shot, everyone should have a fair chance.”

He saves the 47 percent answer for the very end. “I believe Romney's a good man. Loves his family, cares about his faith. But I also beliuve that when he said that 47 percent of the country believe themselves victims, think about who he was talking about. Veterans. Students. Soldiers overseas, fighting for us right now.

He ends: “And I want to fight for them. That's why I'm asking for your vote.”

 


10:35PM

Final questions, the second-last on China.

"Macs, iphones are all manufactured in China because labour is so cheap. How can we persuade to come back?"

Romney: "The answer is very straightforward. We can compete with anyone, as long as the playing field is level. China has been holding down their currency, cheating. We have to make Ameica attractive for entrepreneurs."

Obama is less optimistic in tone: "There are some jobs that are not going to come back. I want hi-wage-hi-skilled jobs. That's why we have to invest in advanced manufacturing. When we talk about deficits, if we're adding to our def for tax cuts on people who don't need them, and we're cutting down on education for the people who will invent things - we will lose that race."


10:27PM

Blake Hounshell, the Managing Editor of Foreign Policy magazine, is astonished.

 


10:20PM

A great line from Obama. “The suggestion that anybody in my team would play politics or mislead, is offensive, Governor. That's not what we do. That's not what I do.”

But now, in what is perhaps the deftest political move of the campaign, and certainly the pivotal moment of the debate, Obama lays a trap for Mitt Romney, talking about a speech he gave in the Rose Garden the day after the debate where he referred to the Benghazi attack as “terrorist.”

“Can we have that for the record?” says a triumphant Romney. “Can we have on the record that he said that?”

Obama doesn't even have to spring is trap himself. As Romney advances on Crowley, Obama sits back, with a grin on his face like the Cheshire cat.

“He did say that, actually,” says Crowley. Romney blusters and recovers, but his confidence is shot.

 


10:15PM

Libya question. “Who was it denied the requested extra security at the embassies?” This is the danger question for Obama, but he fields it deftly.

“Noone is more concerned about the safety of our ambassadors than I am,” says Obama. He claims to have given an instruction to 'beef up' the embassy security. He promises to “find out what happens, and everybody will be held accountable.”

“You don't turn national security in to a political issue, he says to Romney, attacking him for sending the press release on the day of the embassy attacks.

“I think the President just said correctly that the buck does stop at his desk, and he takes responsibility for what happened,” says Romney snidely. “ But I find it more troubling that the day after the assassination, when apparently we didn't know what happened, the President flies to Las Vegas for a political fundraiser. … These actions, taken by a President, have symbolic significance.”

“This was an attack by terrorists, and it calls into question the President's whole policy in the Middle East,” he says, echoing Paul Ryan's words, “what we are witnessing on our TV screens is the unravelling of the Obama foreign policy.”

But attacking him for attending a fundraiser is a low blow.

 


10:09PM

“Mr President, have you looked at your pension?” Romney outbursts. “Have you looked at your pension? You have investments in Chinese companies too.” The two are up in each others' faces again. “I haven't looked at my pension recently, says Obama, “it's not as big as yours, it doesn't take as long.”

 

The candidates are sniping at each other hard now, both shouting at once.


10:06PM

"Let's speak to the issue of self-deportation," Crowley says to Romney. "No. No, no," he answers tetchily.

 


10:00PM

New question for Romney, on immigration. "Let me step back and tell you what I want to do broadly. This is a nation of immigrants. We welcome people coming as immigrants. We welcome legal immigrants. I want it to be streamlined, I want it to be clear. I also think that we should give green cards to people who graduate with skills that we need. People around the world who gradiate in science and math get a green card stapled to their diploma," he answers.

"I will not grant amnesty to those who have come here illegally. I will not give drivers licences to those here illegaly. The kids of those who come here illegally, those kids should have a pathway to become a resident."

"We need to fix a broken immigration system, and I've done everything I can on my own to do so," says the President. "I've sought assistance from congress too. We want to streamline the immigration system. ... We do have to deal with our border, so we've put more border patrol on than at any time in history, but if we're going after people who are here illegally, we should do it smartly. Go after criminals."

 


9:51PM

The next question is on the differences between Bush and Romney, from a supposedly-undecided voter who starts with "I fear Republicans"...

"Bush never suggested turning medicare into a voucher - Bush embraced comprehensive immigration reform," answers Obama.

 


9:44PM

A question about equal pay for women is hijacked by Twitter for an unfortunate turn of phrase by the Governor, in which he claimed to have "binders full of women". The phrase immediately floods the social networking site.

 


9:39PM

The Washington Post's Ezra Klein is unimpressed by Romney's tax promises.

 


9:36PM

Romney is standing very awkwardly as Obama plays the Big Bird card, about Romney's proposed cutting of PBS. Obama is certainly winning the body-language war. Crowley is asking Romney questions and he's standing in front of her, arms held in front of him, like a schoolboy being ticked off by his headmistress, while Obama looks relaxed and happy.

 


9:33PM

Candy Crowley is the best moderator so far. She's allowing a lively - very, very lively - debate, but taking no nonsense from the candidates either, and favouring neither of them.

 


9:28PM

A tax question for Romney, on child tax credit and education credits. Are they important to him? "I want to bring the rates down, and simplify the tax code, and get middle income taxpayers to have lower taxes," he says. But how is he planning to do it? 

"No capital gains tax on anyone earning under $200,000," he promises. But how is he going to pay for it?

Obama's up, and he's echoing Romney on cutting taxes on the middle classes, and promising tax cuts on small businesses. "But if we're serious about reducing the deficit," he says, "we've also got to make sure that the wealthy do a little bit more." Every Democrat watching is wishing he'd turn to Romney and ask one question: "How, Governor Romney, are you going to pay for it?"

 


9:20PM

Price of gas is the question.

"Very little of what Governor Romney just said was true," says Obama, attacking Romney's proposal of coal as an energy alternative. That's far further than Obama ever went in the last debate in terms of attacking the arguments of his opponent. Romney's on the attack as well. "That's not what you've done in the last 4 years. "Not true governor Romney."

Both candidates are now standing. Are they going to fight? Romney tries to interrupt, Obama talks over him: "what you're saying is just not true."

One thing is true. This debate is a million, billion miles away from the previous.

 


9:14PM

 

“You said I said we should take Detroid bankrupt”, says Romney angrily. “You DID take Detroit through bankruptcy. You did exactly what I recommended!” This is actually a good point. Obama's attack ads, of which – especially in Ohio – there have been a hell of a lot, don't quite go into the complex differences between the two's plans – which was more about exactly how those bankruptcies should be managed.

 

He smirks at Obama.

 

“Governor Romney doesnt have a 5-point plan, he has a 1-point plan. That's to make sure people at the top play by different rules.” The President's answer is a slight dodge – but his style, this time, is bang on.

 

“That detroit answer – way off the mark,” interrupts Romney petulantly. Obama smiles. He knows he's doing better. This is an entirely different President from two weeks ago.

 


9:09PM

Obama's learned his debate-lessons well. He's looking up, smiling - not Biden-style, but smiling. "It's 100% better," says Debbie Welly, one of the family with whom I'm watching. "So much better."

He's looking Presidential.

 


9:07PM

First question is on college prospects. "The key thing is to make sure you can get a job when you get out of school," says Romney, deftly moving the question onto his home ground. "I know what it takes to create good jobs again."

"I presume I'm going to be President."

"Your future is bright," says Obama. "I want to build on the 5 million jobs we created in the last 15 months alone. ... I want to build manufacturing jobs. Governor Romney said he wanted to let Detroit go bankrupt..."

 


9:02PM

The audience are all uncommitted voters - organisers say they hope to get 13 questions in this evening. On previous performance, we'll be lucky to see 8 or 9. Expect the crucial Benghazi Embassy question to come early.

Tie-fans: Barack is wearing dark red, Romney striped blue.

 


8:53PM

This analysis of poll-bounces after debates by the New York Times' Nate Silver is excellent.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/16/no-guarantee-of-obama-rebound-in-second-debate/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 


8:40PM

The onus will be on President Obama tonight to improve upon his performance on October 3. The expectations game is a really tough one. On the one hand, Obama has to be more assertive than he was last time in order for Romney not to seem like the more dominant, optimistic and passionate candidate - no more looking down proffessorially and taking notes for the President. However, Obama must also avoid being as aggressive as Joe Biden was in the Vice-Presidential debate in order not to come off as rude or arrogant. This is an incredibly tough tightrope to walk.

The debates are much rawer and unprotected moments for the candidates than the rest of the campaigns. Romney is not to be underestimated. He's charming, quick, and evidently unafraid of abandoning his previous policy positions in order to score debate-points - a luxury an incumbent doesn't have.

It's going to be a tense night for President Obama, which is unfortunate - because the best way for him to win is for him to look like he's enjoying himself. Which, I think, is hard for the President.

 


8:33PM

 

This debate is a little different from the last one, as it's formatted as a town hall-style meeting. That means the candidates will be responding from questions from the audience - though microphone cut-offs (as agreed earlier in the depressingly detailed Memorandum of Understanding between the two candidates) will prevent audience members hassling the candidates for answers a la Question Time. The Memorandum provides, among other things, for TV cameras to be "locked in place", though "able to tilt".

Tonight, the candidates will be seated "on director chairs (with backs), before the audience which shall be seated in approximately a horseshoe arrangement as symetrically as possible around the candidates."

The moderator, Candy Crowley, is CNN's chief political correspondent.

 

 


8:30PM

 

Hello and welcome to the New Statesman's live-blog of the second Presidential debate.

Obama and Romney during the debate. Photograph: Getty Images

Nicky Woolf is reporting for the New Statesman from the US. He tweets @NickyWoolf.

Daily Mail
Show Hide image

Who "speaks for England" - and for that matter, what is "England"?

The Hollywood producer Sam Gold­wyn once demanded, “Let’s have some new clichés.” The Daily Mail, however, is always happiest with the old ones.

The Hollywood producer Sam Gold­wyn once demanded, “Let’s have some new clichés.” The Daily Mail, however, is always happiest with the old ones. It trotted out Leo Amery’s House of Commons call from September 1939, “Speak for England”, for the headline on a deranged leader that filled a picture-free front page on David Cameron’s “deal” to keep Britain in the EU.

Demands that somebody or other speak for England have followed thick and fast ever since Amery addressed his call to Labour’s Arthur Greenwood when Neville Chamberlain was still dithering over war with Hitler. Tory MPs shouted, “Speak for England!” when Michael Foot, the then Labour leader, rose in the Commons in 1982 after Argentina’s invasion of the Falklands. The Mail columnist Andrew Alexander called on Clare Short to “speak for England” over the Iraq War in 2003. “Can [Ed] Miliband speak for England?” Anthony Barnett asked in this very magazine in 2013. (Judging by the 2015 election result, one would say not.) “I speak for England,” claimed John Redwood last year. “Labour must speak for England,” countered Frank Field soon afterwards.

The Mail’s invocation of Amery was misconceived for two reasons. First, Amery wanted us to wage war in Europe in support of Hitler’s victims in Poland and elsewhere and in alliance with France, not to isolate ourselves from the continent. Second, “speak for England” in recent years has been used in support of “English votes for English laws”, following proposals for further devolution to Scotland. As the Mail was among the most adamant in demanding that Scots keep their noses out of English affairs, it’s a bit rich of it now to state “of course, by ‘England’. . . we mean the whole of the United Kingdom”.

 

EU immemorial

The Mail is also wrong in arguing that “we are at a crossroads in our island history”. The suggestion that the choice is between “submitting to a statist, unelected bureaucracy in Brussels” and reclaiming our ancient island liberties is pure nonsense. In the long run, withdrawing from the EU will make little difference. Levels of immigration will be determined, as they always have been, mainly by employers’ demands for labour and the difficulties of policing the borders of a country that has become a leading international transport hub. The terms on which we continue to trade with EU members will be determined largely by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels after discussions with unelected bureaucrats in London.

The British are bored by the EU and the interminable Westminster arguments. If voters support Brexit, it will probably be because they then expect to hear no more on the subject. They will be sadly mistaken. The withdrawal negotiations will take years, with the Farages and Duncan Smiths still foaming at the mouth, Cameron still claiming phoney victories and Angela Merkel, François Hollande and the dreaded Jean-Claude Juncker playing a bigger part in our lives than ever.

 

An empty cabinet

Meanwhile, one wonders what has become of Jeremy Corbyn or, indeed, the rest of the shadow cabinet. The Mail’s “speak for England” leader excoriated him for not mentioning “the Number One subject of the hour” at PM’s Questions but instead asking about a shortage of therapeutic radiographers in the NHS. In fact, the NHS’s problems – almost wholly caused by Tory “reforms” and spending cuts – would concern more people than does our future in the EU. But radiographers are hardly headline news, and Corbyn and his team seem unable to get anything into the nation’s “any other business”, never mind to the top of its agenda.

Public services deteriorate by the day, George Osborne’s fiscal plans look increasingly awry, and attempts to wring tax receipts out of big corporations appear hopelessly inadequate. Yet since Christmas I have hardly seen a shadow minister featured in the papers or spotted one on TV, except to say something about Trident, another subject that most voters don’t care about.

 

Incurable prose

According to the Guardian’s admirable but (let’s be honest) rather tedious series celeb­rating the NHS, a US health-care firm has advised investors that “privatisation of the UK marketplace . . . should create organic and de novo opportunities”. I have no idea what this means, though it sounds ominous. But I am quite certain I don’t want my local hospital or GP practice run by people who write prose like that.

 

Fashionable Foxes

My home-town football team, Leicester City, are normally so unfashionable that they’re not even fashionable in Leicester, where the smart set mostly watch the rugby union team Leicester Tigers. Even when they installed themselves near the top of the Premier League before Christmas, newspapers scarcely noticed them.

Now, with the Foxes five points clear at the top and 7-4 favourites for their first title, that mistake is corrected and the sports pages are running out of superlatives, a comparison with Barcelona being the most improbable. Even I, not a football enthusiast, have watched a few matches. If more football were played as Leicester play it – moving at speed towards their opponents’ goal rather than aimlessly weaving pretty patterns in midfield – I would watch the game more.

Nevertheless, I recall 1963, when Leicester headed the old First Division with five games to play. They picked up only one more point and finished fourth, nine points adrift of the league winners, Everton.

 

Gum unstuck

No, I don’t chew toothpaste to stop me smoking, as the last week’s column strangely suggested. I chew Nicorette gum, a reference written at some stage but somehow lost (probably by me) before it reached print.

Editor: The chief sub apologises for this mistake, which was hers

Peter Wilby was editor of the Independent on Sunday from 1995 to 1996 and of the New Statesman from 1998 to 2005. He writes the weekly First Thoughts column for the NS.

This article first appeared in the 11 February 2016 issue of the New Statesman, The legacy of Europe's worst battle