Challengers normally do better in debates than incumbents,

simply because he/she only needs to point out that the president hasn't done well, especially when the economy isn't in great shape.

However, the problem is, whether the challenger has a solution to address the issue he/she points out.

Romney has promised to lower the tax and cut the deficit, by CLOSING LOOPHOLES. Honestly, I think that's bogus or disingenuous to say the least. US spends more than they take in. Closing loopholes is important, but you have to quantify it. What loophole gives you what. Without that, it's emptier than the suggestion to just fire a rocket at the carrier:)

所有跟帖： 

• 他至少看到小生意在解決就業問題上的重要性，可總統顯然不重視。 -看熱鬧的北京人- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/03/2012 postreply 18:54:21

• I disagree. Obama is trying to categorize small businesses, -Warsteiner- ♂ (60 bytes) () 10/03/2012 postreply 18:58:49

• To me, empty promises still beat wrong promises -vest2005- ♀ (374 bytes) () 10/03/2012 postreply 19:02:51

• I am all for flat tax rate to everything and everyone, without a -Warsteiner- ♂ (607 bytes) () 10/03/2012 postreply 19:08:39