TRIUMPH OF THE TECHNOCRATS
I caught the Presidential debate between Romney and Obama on radio. Several things struck me.
1.) It was almost unbearably boring.
2.) It was very wonky-- a debate between two technocrats.
3.) Neither man struck me as a leader. These are the kind of guys a leader will hire.
4.) Both operate within narrow parameters. There was surprising agreement between them.
5.) Neither is in any way an extremist or change agent.
What else to expect from a race between two Harvard grads, I guess?
Two further observations:
-The visual must've been important. I didn't "see" Romney as having the clear edge that everyone claimed. In this sense, it mirrored the famous 1960 Nixon-Kennedy contest.
-The experts say Obama's mistake was addressing the audience, while Romney addressed his opponent. Curiously, this is the opposite of the reason given by "experts" for why Kennedy won: that he addressed the audience, while Nixon addressed him. So much for the experts.
Or, there's no sure way of doing things.