Letter: Substance over subterfuge
Tucked into the column by Ben Clarke on Wednesday, Oct. 3, is an extremely telling point. “Romney had the money to make his case; he lacked the message,” says Mr. Clarke. I interpret that statement in two ways: 1) an informed electorate cares more about real ideas than money, and 2) the Republican party nominated him; it is they who lack a message, and Romney has been given the unenviable task of presenting that non-message to the country.
Mr. Clarke goes on to list some of the sound bites that people will remember (47 percent, $10,000 bet, multiple Cadillacs, complete with their own elevators), neglecting many others, the bipolarity of the candidate, and his play-acting populism (I feel your pain). I, for one, am glad people will remember these tidbits of insight into the psyche of the candidate and the party, but I will not agree with his premise that Obama will not win, but rather Romney will lose. Substance always wins over subterfuge, and this election will be a clear example of that.
BARRY T. McCOLGAN