The arguments in brief: one's based on personal fantasy, one's based on historical abstraction
by digby
I think these two essays in the latest issue of TIME magazine spell out pretty clearly how the two sides see this election:
The essays making the case for each nominee are by E.J. Dionne, the author and liberal Washington Post columnist, and Rich Lowry, the author and editor of the conservative National Review. Lowry’s closing argument strikes some petty notes (calling Obama “high handed,” contemptuous of opposing political views and displaying “shocking classlessness”) while Dionne makes a historical case for the gulf between the parties today (arguing Romney’s plans are “more suited to the Gilded Age” while Obama’s belief in a safety net harkens to the Progressive Era”).
The Republicans are making a highly personal case against a fantasy Obama who has been a hardcore leftist contemptuous of bipartisanship, while the Democrats are making an abstract case against GOP elitism and extremism. Sounds about right.
.