Presidential Campaign

President Obama won the third debate, but did Mitt Romney win the White House on Monday night?

At times, as the debate progressed, Romney looked like a bystander, stage-struck to be so close to the actual president of the United States. Towards the end, before he recovered with a strong finish, Romney even began to babble, not quite sure what defence to mount against Obama's continual attacks on his flip-flopping in foreign policy statements. But, for all this...

President Obama chose to go on the attack in the third presidential debate last night; in a sort of reverse 'rope-a-Hope' strategy the challenger attempted to defuse the pummeling by not quite praising the president's efforts but, rather, agreeing with him whenever it was even remotely possible. This was the Obama of 2008, though the pounding spoke less of hope and change & more of a desperate attempt to please his base.

I was born and raised in Jerusalem. Most of my work colleagues are Jewish, and despite the growing tension between Jews and Palestinians in Israel, years of working together have made us quite close. I speak Hebrew fluently, as well as my native Arabic, and I have always engaged my Jewish acquaintances with the same openness and respect I would give to anyone else.

At the annual employee appreciation party for the upscale Jerusalem hotel where I work as an accounts representative, one of my Jewish colleagues, a good friend, had too much to drink. She asked another co-worker and me to give her a ride home. When we arrived at the apartment she shares with her family, she assured us that she would be able to continue on her own. But when she exited the car, she promptly lost her balance. As we got out to help her, a group of nine Israeli-Jewish teenagers approached us and asked what was going on. We responded in Hebrew that everything was fine so they began to walk away.  With a look of concern, my friend turned to speak to me. “Ibrahim,” she said, less quietly than intended, “leave them be.”

Today I know that if my name had been Avraham, and not Ibrahim, I would not have been attacked that night several weeks ago. Ibrahim is the Arabic version for the Bible’s Avraham. Nowadays, however, instead of hearing the slight variation in pronunciation, people hear Palestinian, or Jewish. And, within seconds after my friend uttered my name, I felt the pressure of a hand grab my shoulder, as eight other men joined in pummeling my body. One of my attackers struck my left leg with a heavy iron rod, shattering the bone and sending me to the ground. I remember trying to protect my face, while I faded in and out of consciousness.

I had nine pins and one metal plate surgically embedded into my leg to help it become whole again. During the period I was hospitalized, my mother visited me as often as she could. I needed and wanted her to be with me, yet a deep sense of fear engulfed me every time I knew she would come to the hospital. Would my mother be attacked? Would others hurt her simply because she is Palestinian?

This fear is new to me. One month ago I would have told my younger sisters to make as many Jewish friends as possible, to understand and experience the lives of others and to share their own lives. But I love them and I care about their safety, and I can no longer encourage them to be anything but cautious.

Israel’s political leadership speaks about Palestinians as an unfortunate demographic reality, at best, and a military threat at worst. Several recent, highly visible attacks against Palestinians, including my own, have resulted in criminal investigations and indictments, though many do not. The situation is worse in the West Bank, where almost 90 percent of cases involving Jewish settler violence against Palestinians are dropped without prosecution. Settlers move between the West Bank, Israel, and West Jerusalem with ease; we shall soon see whether West Bank impunity does too.

Those who attacked me are victims of this environment.  I cannot hate them. They need rehabilitation, not punishment, and the same is true of our shared society.

I am now physically recovering. I will eventually return to my job and work side-by-side with my Palestinian and Israeli-Jewish colleagues. I realize now, however, that we are facing a much greater threat than fear of what happened to me weeks ago, and what could happen again. The threat emanates from the power of hatred, incitement, and the intolerance that is permeating Israeli society at a rapid pace.

Public statements issued by Israeli officials affirming that attacks on Palestinians qualify as terrorism are not enough. As long as Palestinians, the indigenous people of the land, continue to be cast as intruders, often by politicians and religious leaders, the number and severity of attacks will increase. The leaders of Jewish-Israeli society, and those outside of Israel who influence them, must recognize, appreciate, and affirm that we Palestinians are here to stay and not going anywhere. This land is big enough for all of us provided equal rights are extended to all.

The American presidential candidates, however, appear oblivious to the discrimination Palestinians face and the dual system of law -- what some are now calling Israeli apartheid -- that exists here. President Obama and Gov. Romney are willing to talk about Iran and Israel, but are content to put Palestinians, our rights, and our freedom, on the back burner. They talk about Egypt, Libya, and Syria and how to liberate them, but overlook that our oppression by Israel is one of the central problems gripping the Middle East today. The candidates should discuss the Israeli occupation and colonization of our land at this week's foreign policy debate in Boca Raton.

Abu-Ta'a is a Palestinian resident of East Jerusalem.

If there are any female voters out there still thinking about voting for Mitt Romney and his fellow Republicans, I have a binder for you. Not the one Romney mentioned during last week's presidential debate at Hofstra University. No, my binder is full of examples of why the GOP war on women is real. 

If you consider each of them on a stand-alone basis only, then you'd be right to conclude the Republican track record on women's issues is merely pathetic. However, when they are lumped together, one after the other, they should make make a grown woman blush or angry. Or both.

Here are the unvarnished facts:

Two debates down. One -- on foreign policy – to go.

Last Tuesday night the candidates sparred over the tragic attack in Benghazi. The question of how the United States should engage Libya and the region is important, but let’s hope tonight that the conversation around terrorism extends beyond questions about consular security and who knew – and said -- what, when.

270 minutes. That's how long the leading candidates for president and vice president have stood on stage in front of the American people without mentioning a challenge as big as the national debt, education, health care, and national security: climate change.

It's not that they haven't had plenty of opportunities.

The war in Afghanistan is winding down. Now comes the hard part.

Two weeks remain in the campaign for the presidency, and foreign policy will be in full view. Tonight's debate will focus on foreign affairs, and Afghanistan is sure to play a central role in these discussions. The big question surrounding everything will be: What next?

The political career of former Governor Mitt Romney brings to mind the 1983 Woody Allen movie “Zelig.”  The main character of that movie was Leonard Zelig, a human chameleon, who took on the look and characteristics of whatever group he happened to be with. During the recent primaries former Republican presidential contender Jon Huntsman called Romney a “perfectly lubricated weathervane” given the ease with which he changed positions.  Then there is the sign going around the Internet advising voters to have patience as Romney will agree with their position on the issues eventually. This charge moved from the purely metaphorical given the allegations that Romney applied spray on tan before appearing on a national interview on the Hispanic television network Univision.

Political pundits seem to agree that “the Latino vote” will swing the election for Obama. They see Hispanics as the fastest growing electorate. They cite polls showing Latinos favoring Obama almost two-to-one, and they believe that Republicans have a fatal problem with Latinos because of “harsh anti-immigrant” rhetoric. Hence, growing Latino populations will turn swing states blue, and Hispanics will decide the election for Obama. Right?
 
Wrong! Winning the Latino vote in 2012 is far more elusive than pundits and Latino advocates claim.  

Most political analysts would agree that if one poll gives different results than most others it is probably wrong. This is surely true of the recent Gallup Poll showing Mitt Romney with a seven point lead over Barack Obama.

You don’t have to compare the Gallup poll with any other survey to expose its flaws. A check of the internal consistency of this poll yields such implausible results that its findings are almost certain to be wrong. The key to this analysis is comparing results for registered voters and for likely voters.

Most poll readers assume that there is large falloff between registered voters and people who vote in presidential elections. In truth, most non-voters are not registered. The overwhelmingly majority of registered votes participate in presidential contests.