Marco Rubio is the latest to note the lack of a Presidential agenda. But why listen to this from some righty when we have the NY Times making the same point? This is from their coverage of the second Romney-Obama debate:
But [prospective voters] have not learned as much about what the next four years might look like. With tens of millions of Americans tuning in to the debates, the four candidates for president and vice president have spent most of their time on the biggest public stage of the campaign fighting more about what happened in the last term than what should happen in the next.
Mr. Obama and Vice President Biden defended their record but gave only a modest sense of their agenda should they be re-elected, beyond arguing for staying the course because the other side would return to what they called the failed policies of the past.
Over the course of three debates, the two sides have provided clues. Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden, in effect, asked voters to ratify the path they have already set. They promised to finish carrying out the health care plan passed in the first term and to seek higher taxes on the wealthy to whittle away at sky-high budget deficits. They vowed to continue clean energy initiatives and fight erosion of women’s rights. It has sounded like rear-guard actions preserving what they see as their accomplishments.
There was little of the sweeping ambition envisioned four years ago. Mr. Obama made clear on Tuesday that while he still wanted to rewrite the nation’s immigration laws, Republicans stood in the way. The words “climate change” were never uttered by a president who in 2008 vowed that his watch would be remembered as the time “the planet began to heal.” He spoke only once, in passing, about building roads and bridges, once a key part of his jobs plan.
Obama's agenda? Four more years of blaming Bush and failing to work with Republicans.