The debate will focus on domestic policy and be divided into six time segments of approximately 15 minutes each.
The moderator Jim Lehrer will open each segment with a question, after which each candidate will have two minutes to respond. The moderator will use the balance of the time in the segment for a discussion of the topic. Political expert doesn't expect debates to change minds Despite the pressure for the candidates to perform at tonight's debate, Romney may not be able to overcome his earlier gaffes. Host Ric Young talks with Political Science Professor Joel Grossman of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland: First let’s talk about who’s got the most to lose? Now, obviously the incumbent President Barack Obama, he is as I said a smooth orator or a smooth operator if you will, he of course has to remain in the game. Is Mitt Romney, the challenger, the one who is the most to lose in this debate? Well, generally speaking we say that the challenger has the most to win and the incumbent has the most to lose, obviously there are some debates when there is no incumbent but here we have one, because the incumbent has to defend the record that is certainly uneven and is open to attacks. But the challenger also needs to establish a certain amount of credibility and I think that’s the test that Mitt Romney has because all the polls show that his credibility with independents and those who are part of the Republican base has gone down quite a bit. So, he needs to establish not that he is smart, everybody accepts that he is a smart guy, but that he is in command of things and that he actually has some ideas that might work. Let’s take a couple of things that he has been saying in the past, they haven’t been really seen as politically safe. For instance when the Consulate in Libya was attacked and of course information was coming out slowly, we did not know that the Ambassador was killed at that time, but Romney to my understanding, he came out and made some statements disparaging President Barack Obama’s foreign policy in the Middle East. That was for many a pretty bad gaff. It was and he tried to make up for it in subsequent statements but, you know, nobody reads those subsequent statements. On the other hand I don’t think that would materially affect his chances by itself. But if seen as a general pattern of inaptitude, then it might hurt. Given the fact that he is a bit weaker in foreign policy and as you remember last summer he made a few gaffs in Germany and primarily in England, it just was rather indelicate as some might say regarding his hosts there. Will this really remain in the memory of the voter as he talks about foreign policy? I think the answer is no unless the issue comes up again. And it is quite possible that President Obama will bring it up in the debate and in a sense force the public to rethink about it and to remember it. But if Obama doesn’t press it, then Romney of course is totally very happy to let it go. If the moderator brings it up… That will have the same effect. And we don’t know what questions will the moderator ask. Remember that these are not really debates… Right! As that word is understood because the candidates are not responding to each other, at least not directly, but they are answering question from a third party. Plus there are so many ground roles when both sides… Yes, I understand that. And we call them debates but all I’m saying is that, you know, in the tradition of the arts for debating and parliamentary debating and things like that this is not really a debate. It is an event and it of course has become institutionalized. So, I can’t remember when we last had something other than three presidential debates and one vice-presidential debate. That seems to have become the norm. Given these last few weeks of the campaign there are those who say that the Republicans have taken to almost a race-based campaign. We’ve got the attacks on Barack Obama regarding the welfare situation. And it has been proven that his legislation that he signed changing the welfare requirements isn’t that people don’t have to work, it just gave the states more options in dealing with that aspect of the law. And there’s been some things that Newt Gingrich has been saying recently about President Obama not understanding his rhythm and that he relaxes by playing basketball and things like that. Some are saying that these are just coded words to the hard right base or to the undecideds. Well, I think at this point most campaigning is to the base, shall we call it the base+, each side wants to keep its own base and not lose people or have them defect. That’s relatively unlikely and then each side has a kind of group of people who might vote for them and perhaps probably will vote for them but aren’t sure – those are the people who are at issue right now. One of the problems that any president has in this kind of a situation is that he can’t completely stop being president and so he must make decisions that may provide an opportunity for his opponents to screw up some points. Sometimes, as you suggested with the Libyan, things may backfire as it certainly backfired on Romney. But sometimes the President may have to make a decision that will cause people to question his ability or his motives or whatever and President can’t control these things, I mean they just happen. And for example the film about Mohammed and all the attack on the American embassies around the world, Obama went to UN and talked about free speech which was I think exactly the right thing to do. One big issue has been of course all the money that has gone into this campaign. Absolutely! The most expensive presidential campaign ever. Just looking down the line to 2016 do you think both sides will be spending even more? I’m afraid so, I mean inflation will guarantee that. Even if they spend less it will seem like more. I personally agree with Obama that Citizens United case was a dreadful decision by the Supreme Court, both in its public impact and also as a matter of constitutional law. I think it was dead wrong but what I think doesn’t matter, what John Robert thinks matters. And I see absolutely no likelihood that that decision will change, the only thing that might change it is if Obama wins and several of the conservative justices leave the Court and he appoints more moderate replacements, then they could rehear the case or they could take up the issue again if somebody brings it and overturn it. But I don’t think that’s going to happen. Source: Voice of Russia
