Many of you may have watched Mitt Romney's nomination acceptance speech made last night at the Republican Party convention being held in Tampa. I did, and have only four comments I consider to be of substance:

• first, take away the over-riding 'noise', much of what he said about what needs to be done in America with respect to deficit reduction, job creation, trade practices makes sense to me. Whether he or anyone else who sits in the White House will be able to achieve these things is quite another thing, as lots of things that make sense in life go sideways. Rhetoric is fine, but the devil is always in the details, and only when the 'rubber hits the road' are one's ideas and actions meaningfully tested. Neither Mr. Romney nor anyone else is likely to reverse globalization and get America back to the days of 'Leave it to Beaver', 'The Nelson Family', and 'Archie Bunker' - and for Main Street Americans that is a shame, but nonetheless in my view a reality;

• second, importantly I think his multiple personal attacks and denigrating comments aimed at Mr. Obama were unnecessary, and detracted both from what he had to say and from him in his personal capacity. I don't think his approach 'looked good on him', thought it unnecessary, and think if he wanted to attack Mr. Obama on a personal level he ought to have left that for Paul Ryan and others do it while he took a 'presidential high road';

• third, I thought his reference to Mr. Obama's lack of business experience - which I consider quite accurate and quite important - flew directly in the face of his selection of Paul Ryan as a running mate. This where the Vice-President becomes the President if the President dies in office or leaves office for any reason; and,

• four, I think that based on his apparent business success Mr. Romney must command a high level of respect within any organization he manages and very likely must be seen in those settings as a serious 'authority figure'. For me, he does not bring the toughness and charisma to the podium I think he must bring every day to the office.

I received an e-mail from a Canadian reader who expressed the view that I was "way out of touch" in the comments I made in yesterday's Newsletter with respect to Paul Ryan. That reader reached this view because of what he suggests were the "over 25 journalists and news organizations that where appalled by the number of lies and half truths or situations taken way out of context by Mr Ryan" during his Wednesday evening speech.

I wrote and thanked the reader for his comments, and added the following, which I think is a useful addition to my Newsletter commentary yesterday with respect to Mr. Ryan and his Wednesday evening speech:

I purposely used words like "enthusiastic", "sincere", "well-intentioned", "idealistic" and "high-energy" when expressing my thoughts on what I saw in Ryan two nights ago. I didn't use the word "honest", because that is a word I would have to research very long and very hard in connection with Ryan or anyone else - and even then might well 'get it wrong'.

I should tell you that, apparently like you, I am somewhat taken aback by the references by journalists yesterday to what I largely heard them say to be 'out of context' or 'incomplete' statements made by Ryan on Wednesday night. Of course those things have already, and will going forward, come back to haunt both him and Mr. Romney in coming weeks.

I am always open to constructive criticism, which I took this reader's e-mail to be. Please write at info@stockresearchportal.com.