Romney's non-rally rally in Ohio.
Earlier this month, I wrote about the Cuban Missile Crisis as a critical leadership test for our presidential candidates. How would each candidate, Mitt Romney and President Obama, have reacted in the event of a confrontation in which the slightest error or kneejerk response would have precipitated a chain reaction leading to nuclear war? It comes as no surprise that I believe President Obama would be more likely to pass this test because he's displayed an acumen for being thoughtful, prudent, steely-eyed and centered in a crisis.
Mitt Romney, on the other hand, has twice failed that test.
First, in his bungled too-soon reaction to the Benghazi attack when he issued a press release slamming the president before the end of the 9/11 commemorative political moratorium and before the fires had stopped burning at the consulate. It was an embarrassing display of awkwardness and amateurish opportunism. (Incidentally, if perchance Romney wins, I'll need to make a hotkey for the word "awkward.") Romney followed it up by further embarrassing himself on the subject during the second presidential debate.
Second, of course, was his transparently self-aggrandizing and equally as bizarre reaction to Hurricane Sandy.
Now, I don't expect that Romney would somehow gain control over federal resources and begin to deploy relief assets to various storm-stricken regions. But at a very basic level, a candidate's reaction to a crisis can speak volumes about how the would-be leader would react. [continued]