I don’t see how he’s gained any ground from this empty gesture.
It looks like it was stupid to me, but I am biased.
I expect he still will make commercials criticizing Obama for putting his campaign above the country, but frankly, criticism of Obama in this way will ring hollow for most people.
Yeah, strikes me as pretty pathetic, but I’m sure plenty of people consider it a tremendous effort on his part.
Just checked, and the debate is set for 8 pm CDT. Anyone know details as to the format, moderators, etc?
Sorry I’ve been so out of it, but how many debates are planned? Any schedule of different subject matter, formats, questioners, etc?
Just pulled this from the CPD.
Update to Debate format: The first presidential debate will focus on foreign policy and national security; the third presidential debate will focus on domestic and economic policy. The second presidential (town meeting format) debate will include any issues raised by members of that audience and online, and the vice presidential debate will include foreign and domestic policy.
Would assume tonight will be on the economy, tho.
I think it’s going to be in the eyes of the beholder on what, if anything, he’s gained by this gesture. A lot of folks around my office are talking about it and most seem to have had their impressions of McCain favorably improved by this thing. Certainly if we judge by the reaction on the Straight Dope Message Board then this has been a transparent and fatally flawed gesture that has cost him the election (the SDMB having previously leaned heavily toward McCain before all this happened, of course).
Guess we’ll see. My wife and I are stocking in snacks and stuff and having a few friends over to watch the debate together (and smoke cigars and drink heavily afterward), so we’ll see how it goes.
This is what Dick Morris thinks.
Just to continue my conversation with myself
So, a debate a week for the next 4 weeks.
I find myself actually looking forwrad to watching TV!
Listening to C-Span again this morning on my way to work most of callers thought he should be at the debate and had no good reason to “suspend” go to Washington.
He’s pretty desperate to erase 9/15/08 from people minds.
From the link: "Then McCain comes out of the process as the hero who made it happen when the president couldn’t and Obama wouldn’t. He becomes the bailout expert. "
Dick Morris lives in his own little world. He’s the same tool who proclaimed Sarah Palin an “unbelievable superstar.” He also added about her:
“Normally when a woman candidate attacks a man, she risks coming across as shrill and strident. Instead, Sarah Palin is really kind of like a British politician who uses humor and sarcasm and wit and sass in a charming way to attack her opponent.”
I looked up “shrill” in the dictionary and it said, “Dick Morris is an idiot.”
Yeah, he’s got his thumb on the pulse.
Well, he is a maverick, you know.
Sure I agree that he is wrong, but perhaps this is McCains reasoning.’
Of course McCain has said again and again that his is not an expert on the economy. Which kind of undermines him selling himslef as a “bailout expert”
And a Legend of the West.
Clarification request: what does “this gesture” refer to? McCain’s “suspension”? His un-“suspension”? His traveling to DC? All (or none) of the above?
I didn’t really think more clarity would be required but the alleged suspension of the campaign and his trip to Washington.
Why specifically were they impressed? So far as I can work out, McCain basically just swung by DC for a few hours between attending a few other interviews and speeches, and that when he’d left, Congress was further from agreeing to the Paulson plan (which McCain supports) then when he got there.
I’m not asking to start a debate on whether McCain deserves any credit for helping solve our current economic woes, I’m just curious as to why those who think he does deserve such credit (your co-workers, apparently) think that.
I also would be interested in hearing the bases for their impression. However, I suspect they would not be able to explain it well. It will be sufficient in many peoples’ minds that they are impressed; they don’t need - or particularly want - to examine why.
These are the type of people who appreciate soundbite and theatrical campaigning. They like a good story, whether or not it is supported by the details.
The ultimate question, I suppose, is come November just how many of these folk will make their way to the polls.
Well, here’s one person’s take. Either this is a crisis of near unprecedented proportions or it isn’t. If it is, as Wshington seems to think and Obama and McCain seem to agree, then it is absolutely fitting that the candidates suspend a debate for a few days and do what they can in Washington. Both candidates have a great deal of clout within their respective parties. Whether or not either of them offer up the Plan of All Plans is not the issue. What is needed in consensus, and each of them can help in that regard. Admittedly, McCain is in a better position to do this than Obama. That’s no slight on Obama, it’s just a reflection of the tenure and the relationship they have with their colleagues over time. Also, McCain has overtly reached across the aisle before on not insignificant issues, the Immigration plan (:rolleyes:) being the most recent.
So, I do commend McCain for adopting a stance of, as he put it, “all hands on deck”. I don’t blame Obama for wanting to goon with the debate. From a point of fact, his presence wouldn’t be as helpful as McCain’s. But I do think it could be (have been) helpful. I think he underestimated his influence. I also think Reid and Pelosi told him to stay away because they wanted McCain to stay away. They didn’t want a scenario where McCain swoops in and saves the day.
The people in Washington lied to us (Surprise!) when they said they had a deal almost finalized. The House Republicans were not on board. The hopes were that they wouldn’t have the balls or backbone to hold things up at the last minute. But they did. McCain was right about this. All this talk about “Why’s he going back? They have a deal!” was complete bullshit.
So, good for McCain. I do think that the best way Obama could have played it (as I said yesterday) would have been to agree completely with McCain, announce the suspension of his own campaign and fly back to DC. I think that would have fit very well into the brand he has built. As it stands, I think he limped through it, but is not hurt by this. Not in my eyes, at least.
Well, I can’t really speak for everyone I was listening to today. For my part I thought it was a smart political move on McCain’s part. It didn’t fly well here on the SD, but then this isn’t exactly McCain country. I think a lot of people see things a bit differently than the common view around here.
I found this article on CNN that perhaps expresses that contrary perspective (I await the dismissal posts with hardly bated breath):
The thing I’ve noticed in a lot of the heated Palin debates is that much of this stuff rests on one’s perspective. A lot of things I’ve heard Palin attacked on are actually considered strengths by other people. I think this entire issue is again a matter of perspective. Here on the SD it was seen as McCain running away (as if he’s scared of the debate HE maneuver to get in the format he wanted)…which is complete horseshit and wishful thinking. Or it’s seen as a crass political move…which of course it is, to a certain extent, as if that’s a bad thing or unusual in an election. Like his choice of Palin it was an interesting political gamble…just like much of what Obama does are politically motivated gambles. It’s the skewed perspective though of the echo chamber here that seems to only allow for one interpenetration of all things Obama or McCain and dismisses any other viewpoint as automatically wrong…or false.
Like a big balloon being slowly inflated I see a lot of 'dopers simply Peat and RePeat(ing) the accepted meme and reinforcing it back and forth until it becomes fact. YMMV of course.
Thanks, xtisme. I think it can only be judged “smart” after we get a better sense of its impact. Now, “risky” and/or “daring”, I’ll fully give you.
And that was part of my clarification request – despite magellan01’s explanation, I don’t understand how people can see it as anything more than a “political move”. So I was curious as to what exactly they thought was favorable (assuming it was more than just the politics of the thing).
In line with that, the conclusion of your article quote:
Which is just weird…although not surprising, as his list of article titles seems to have a decidedly rightward lean. At any rate, Mr. Navarrette thinks McCain’s “suspension” was an example of having his “priorities straight”. And yet, the article’s exposition is devoted to the idea that the candidates need to “make plain what they would do to fix the crisis” and “show that they have the will, courage and strength to get us [to the solution]”. I think it’s safe to say that a really, really good place to do that is…at a debate that is expected to be viewed by 100 million Americans. And I’ve seen something that said that Lehrer is going to lead off with a question about the economy, so it’s on the plate.
Now, I acknowledge that I did a little selective editing there, for it’s not clear whether Mr. Navarrette was talking about the electorate or McCain’s fellow legistlators. But honestly…which is more important in this case? Giving McCain the benefit of the doubt (and it’s a huge giveaway as far as I’m concerned), are we really supposed to think that behind-closed-doors bargaining for a day (actually, night) is going to settle the nation more than presenting himself and his thoughts to the nation as a whole?