Narrative relevance of Horses and Bayonets
The defining moment of the third 2012 presidential debate came in the form of what Republicans considered a gaffe and Democrats judged a knockout punch by Obama. The comment was made in response to an allegation from Romney that ‘our Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1917.’ Obama replied: "You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916, Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets because the nature of our military's changed." "The Navy said they needed 313 ships to carry out their mission," the Republican candidate continued. "We're now at under 285. We're headed down to the low 200s if we go through a sequestration. That's unacceptable…show more content… Unlike Big Bird, which was perceived by many conservatives as unimportant or a gaffe, Horses and Bayonets was considerably more contentious. Obama’s comment emerged from a debate in which he was perceived as the winner by progressive and neutral arbiters. His comment, therefore fed into the media narrative of horse race aspects, in which the quote was referenced as a well delivered punch line and was used as evidence of Obama’s win. Conservative, however, using the #TCOT (Top conservatives on Twitter) Tried to seize the moment as proof that Obama as out of touch with military reality, conservative news organisations tried to push the same point in their post-debate analysis (Freelon & Karpf, 2015). This critique of conservatives fed directly into previous stories in the media, throughout 2012 of Obama’s proposed defence cuts. Many feared Obama’s proposal to cut defence spending would leave Americas at home and abroad vulnerable. The moment fed in to…show more content… Many cartoons featured Obama and Romney playing battle ships, but one particular example that brought the statement to life was syndicated cartoonist Cal Grondahl’s image, in which Romney is looking over a military unit procession, with the title of the image “Civil War Re-enactors Will Supply All the Horses and Bayonets President Romney Needs.” Unlike Big Bird and Binders, which Romney was widely criticised for, the horses and bayonets comment by Obama, is seen as harming Romney, not himself. Some may conclude this reflects a media bias, in cartoonists’ favouritism toward Obama and lack of support for Romney; others may conclude it was a zinger that did not backfire against Obama but rather implicated Romney as being out of touch on foreign as well as military affairs (Conners,
