Three quick reactions:
1. Romney blew the Libya part of the debate. But can anyone explain why debate moderator Candy Crowley felt the need to jump in to defend President Obama during the debate? And didn’t she get it wrong? Apparently Republican (and Democratic) preparation of the intellectual battlespace before the debate didn’t induce Crowley to shy away from becoming part of the story.
2. Is Chinese currency manipulation really as important as Romney thinks it is? At best, I’m thinking that the finger-pointing at China hides at least three fingers pointing back at us as the sources of most of our economic problems. Of course, some of the results we see (especially in manufacturing) are due to natural market forces in a free(r) trade system (and thus not necessarily bad things).
3. Wouldn’t it be great if someone with a more classical liberal bent got to ask one of the questions? Someone I read on-line tonight (can’t remember) noted that the questioners seemed like typical New Yorkers — who are far even from the median national voter. Don’t the questions seem slanted towards an activist model of government/the executive?