Presidential elections often are decided by gut emotions, so it’s no surprise that Republicans last week skipped over the big policy questions.

They instead tapped into the national anxiety over the economy and the growing national debt, and argued that President Obama is a weak leader who is not up to the task of turning it around.

But let’s take a closer look at Mitt Romney’s plan. Nearly every speaker last week talked about the debt, and the party even installed giant tickers that showed its growth during each day of the convention. The message was clear: Obama has created a mess.

Here’s the problem: Most of the debt has been created by Republican policies. The Bush tax cut and the two unfunded wars are the biggest contributors. Putting the Medicare drug coverage on the credit card is another big one.

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the vice presidential candidate, voted for all that, and Romney supports it. Worse, both men want to cut taxes even further, in a way that delivers the bulk of the benefit to the highest earners. They promise to cover the cost by closing loopholes they will not name.

Be warned: To cover the giant costs of their tax cuts would be impossible without going after middle-class benefits, such as the deductions for interest payments on home mortgages and employer-provided health benefits.

Ryan, when pressed to name the loopholes he wants to close, says that they will be revealed only after the election, when Congress holds hearings. In an Orwellian leap, he says this will allow the American people to weigh in during a process that is “transparent.”

The debt is a serious long-term problem and the only practical answer is a bipartisan compromise such as the Bowles-Simpson plan. Obama deserves the hits he took for failing to embrace that — the biggest mistake of his presidency. But it’s special to hear Ryan target him on that point: Ryan was on the Bowles-Simpson commission and voted no.

As for jobs, the Democratic answer is to goose the economy by spending more on things like infrastructure and to worry about the debt later as the economy grows. That would help, but they don’t have the votes.

Romney’s answer is to cut taxes and regulations. That may sound familiar because it’s exactly what President George W. Bush did, with disastrous results. This one is an article of faith that is immune to evidence.

Romney also wants to increase defense spending, and his combative views on foreign policy are unnerving when combined with his lack of experience. Again, the ghost of “W” lurks.

One more curiosity of this convention: Romney and Ryan both emphasized the tragically high level of poverty in America, which is approaching 1 in 6 people.

A booming economy is the best antidote, as we saw in the high-tax Clinton years. But let’s face it: No president can promise that. Larger forces are at work, especially now that global economies are so linked.

But what we know is that Republicans are eager to cut existing supports for those in poverty. The Ryan budget slices deeply into food stamps and temporary support for the unemployed. The cuts in Medicaid spending are deeper than those he would impose on Medicare and would force states to cut off millions of beneficiaries.

So other than lamenting the problem, what would Romney and Ryan do? Their record suggests they would deepen poverty and expand it further into the middle class.

Most voters won’t dive deeply into policy details. They’ll cast votes on the basic question of whom they trust to revive the economy.

But if you pop open the hood and take a closer look, the Romney/Ryan plan is deeply flawed.

More campaign coverage