About the Author (Author Profile)
hiding in the openComments (21)
Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed
Sites That Link to this Post
- The Great Debate « kavips | September 27, 2008
Connect
Connect with us on the following social media platforms.
1. Obama
2. “I’ll be your huckleberry.”
With the caveat that the debate only mattered to those who haven’t been paying enough attention to have made up their minds already (and who therefore wouldn’t be sure what the facts were in the first place), I think the answer is:
1. McCain (on points, but not by nearly as much as he needed to cover the spread)
2. The bit where McCain lampooned Obama sitting down with the President of Iran.
Don’t throw things for #1–my complete argument for that conclusion is here
http://delawarelibertarian.blogspot.com/2008/09/if-tonight-was-first-time-you-paid.html
if anybody cares…
1) Obama
2) When he told Mcinsane how wrong he was about the Iraq war.
All the snap polls show Obama won across the board.
gee Steve was wrong….
but I’m sure he wrote a lot of words to try and convince you he souned correct
My thoughts:
McCain did better than I thought, but I was expecting a rambling angry man. The majority of the debate was on McCain’s home turf. He should have wiped the floor clean with Obama.
He did not.
Obama held his own, and may have even tied or won on foreign policy versus McCain. McCain needed a knockout tonight, and he did not get it. Obama matched him, and thus he wins the debate. Remember, McCain is behind, and he needed a knockout blow tonight to catch up, and he did not get it.
Stylistically, McCain loses dramatically. He was angry, and he mimicked Al Gore with his sighs. He was patronizing and condescending. The American people in the past have said they do not like that at all. Indeed, McCain did not at any point tonight look at Obama. That is not presidential.
Obama engaged McCain, respected him, looked him in the eye and looked the most presidential up there.
So overall, substantively I call it a tie, which means Obama wins. Stylistically it is a landslide for Obama. Thus Obama wins tonight.
As for the moment that stuck with me: the moment when McCain admitted for the first time we tortured during the last eight years. That is news, and a major gaffe on his part. Also, when Obama mentioned McCain’s unpresidential and inhuman singing about bombing Iran.
DD I think I agree with you far more here than I disagree. It’s hard to separate the two questions (who won the debate as a debate and who got what he needed tonight). I agree completely that McCain did not get what he needed, although I think he’s going to do better with undecideds on the basis of tonight than you think.
The question is whether undecideds will see McCain as angry or passionate, Obama as cool-headed or cold, and we all have a tough time being objective and not seeing what we want to see.
As a debate, pure and simple, I brought with me the prism that I don’t think Obama is a very good political debater, and I didn’t feel like he did anything to change that feeling for me. That, however, is independent of the issues and the facts.
I completely agree, however, that McCain needed something he could at least claim as a homerun and he damn sure didn’t get that, which makes him now dependent on Sarah taking on Joe. Not where I’d want to be.
Pat Buchanan of all people just made a great point. He said McCain won on points, which is the point you are making. But he said these debates are not decided on points. For example, he said he thought George W. Bush lost every debate he has ever been in.
My take:
McCain won the first part of the debate simply because he deflected from the bailout and distracted on budget issues and pork. Obama should have been more forceful here.
Obama won the second part. He was more forceful and he definitely had more zingers.
I think in a couple of days the “you were wrong” clip will be what people remember, along with McCain’s hostile body language.
I do think McCain probably stopped the bleeding in his poll numbers simply by appearing sane.
As more and more reaction comes in, it appears to be a blow out win for Obama. So we will see.
I was really struck by the McCain body language — not as bad as the Tom Gordon body language with Chris Coons, but he was clearly unhappy to be engaged with Obama. McCain kept up distorting the Obama positions that had been fact-checked ages ago (and keeping up these distortions in spite of being roundly debunked is one of the big reasons that the press is very unhappy with him) and Obama pretty matter-of-factly kept pushing back on these.
The problem with McCain owning a foreign policy debate is that his foreign policy positions are now BushCo’s. Any fluency he may have is necessarily restricted now by the fact that he is tied to the neocon project, so he gets to sound formulaic and doctrinaire.
Obama had the tougher task here — he needed to look fit and ready to lead, needed to reassure the doubters (many of whom are just now seeing him for an extended period of time) and demonstrate that he belonged on that stage. In contrast to McCain who looked angry and uncomfortable, and who ungracefully rambled off into side tangents designed, I’m sure, to get him back on a script he was more comfortable with. I’d give this, on points, to Obama, since he had the tougher bar to clear tonite and he certainly did it.
Casandra M, I would say that you have a very good handle on the debate tonight, great coverage. The only thing I would add is the narrator lost control of the debate after the first question, it got off track of the subject and he let it stay off track.
Actually, Don G., Lehrer was PERFECT. He did what a moderator should do. Throw out a topic and let the candidates go at it, all the while he fades into the background.
I hate those debates where Brian Williams or Charles Gibson are always yelling TIME or interupting the candidates to repeat the question.
This was a perfectly moderated debate, and the questions were good.
Yeah, dd I loooooved this format. I liked that the candidates could engage each other. I think it really helped Obama because he could correct McCain’s distortions right on the spot (Obama could’ve done that more, IMO)
I don’t think there was a ‘clear’ winner. What matters is that Obama maintained a steady, even demeanor while McCain was clearly agitated. Even when Obama would try to engage him, Mcain would not look at him.
ui
you loved our format! which allowed you to tolerate theirs…
But correcting McCain too much could have backfired.
Yesterday I was really worried about the debate. Foreign Policy was – supposedly – McCain’s strong suit. McCain didn’t shine on this subject, and I think his Pakistan and torture gaffes will hurt him in the end.
But this debate wasn’t a major game changer. The game changer will happen next Thursday. Palin will help McCain lose the election. I’m half expecting camp McCain to have her fake an illness (or something along those lines) so she doesn’t have to debate.
I agree with Mike Barnacle’s assessment. The many undecided voters who were watching the debate who “didn’t know Obama” well enough to make a decision were able to see he is worthy of being President. That was the important outcome of the debate. I think — all issues aside.
“Stylistically, McCain loses dramatically. He was angry, and he mimicked Al Gore with his sighs. He was patronizing and condescending. The American people in the past have said they do not like that at all.”
People just didn’t like Al Gore back then. They were being polite and trying to deflect it to “style.”
FYI, he might have won if he hadn’t distanced himself so far from Slick Willie.
Al Gore did win.