# September 26 - The First Obama-McCain Debate **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 26, 2008, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357 "2008-09-26T16:49:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 27
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/521 "2008-09-27T13:52:53Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > When McCain made the comment that Pakistan was a “failed state” I could not comment right away why it was dumb, the reason was that using the 12 point index from Foreign Policy this year Pakistan is number 9 in the failed state column,\*\* Iraq is number 5\*\*. In fairness, it’s reasonable to infer that this was intended as reference to the mess in the Waziristan tribal zones, not Pakistan as a whole. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/522 "2008-09-27T13:56:42Z")
> [@C3](#): > > And how are the conservative sites spinning it? Are they running the “McCain Wins Debate” ad, or did the campaign already up the purchased time yesterday morning? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/523 "2008-09-27T14:08:39Z")
They both lied. They implied their programs will be full speed ahead after giving wall street a couple trillion dollars. The money already committed to the financial institutions is a trillion. Now they want another 700 billion . No programs will be going ahead. If McCain wants to go ahead with a tax cut for the fat cats with that going on he is nuts. If Obama wants to go ahead with the programs that are expensive ,he is nuts. The debate was a waste. I wanted Obama to say everything is on hold. We have to stop and slowly analyze the damage the financial geniuses caused. We can commit to nothing going ahead. But McCains tax cuts are insane. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/524 "2008-09-27T14:09:23Z")
On the whole I think the debate was a draw. Since I am for Obama I of course tended to like his answers better but honestly I think they both did fine. I did notice that McCain refused to look at Obama. Mind you I was in no way looking for such subtleties to pick on but it became very apparent to me over the course of the debate. Subservient monkey? Funny but I doubt it…perhaps McCain deemed Obama unworthy of recognition. I don’t know but I thought it odd and in semi-bad form. I also noticed McCain blinking off the scale. Again this was nothing I set out to watch for and indeed it wasn’t until about 2/3 of the way through it even registered to me. Perhaps McCain did not have blink mania the whole time and I just spotted a blip of blinking…no idea. Also not sure what that really says about McCain except that he was stressed whereas Obama, by that measure at least, was more comfortable. In case you think the blink thing comes out of nowhere I checked (before posting this) and it seems it has been studied and noted in previous presidential debates. > [@](#): > > **II. The Blink-Feeling Connection** > In the late 1960s, a number of us studying electroencephalography (EEG) were having difficulty with the occurrence of eyeblinks, which were getting in the way of accurate measurement of brain waves. In the early 1970s, it occurred to me that blinks might be important in and of themselves and were not just a pesky artifact that ruined our brain wave measurements. This interest in blinks eventually led to a body of research findings from my laboratory showing that blink frequency was increased during difficult stressful attention tasks where participants were responsible for multitasking but was decreased when pleasant feelings were produced by drugs. > > Based on this laboratory research and work published by other investigators, I described in 1976 the following hypothesis (an educated guess about the association between two factors), which was two years later named the “hedonia-eyeblink frequency hypothesis” (Tecce et al., 1978). It is now called the eyeblink-hedonia hypothesis (Tecce, 1992). > > ``` > “One hypothesis is that positive or pleasurable states (such as those produced by amphetamine) accompanying elevated arousal are usually associated with lowered eyeblink frequency, whereas negative experiences (such as annoyance, fatigue, fear, and intimidation) are usually associated with increased eyeblink frequency.” (Tecce & Cole, 1976, p. 198). > > ``` > > **III. The Blink-Stress Connection** > Stress is a discomforting experience. Consequently, as predicted by the blink-hedonia hypothesis, when people feel stressed they tend to blink more frequently. The average blink rate for someone relaxed is 10 to 20 blinks per minute (bpm). Talking increases the rate to about 20 to 25 bpm. When someone appears before a television camera, blink frequency increases to 30 to 50 times a minute because of “audience stress.” As a blink rate climbs above 50, and especially when it gets above 70, it indicates an increased level of stress. > > In this context, an interesting historical event occurred on August 8, 1974. Former President Richard M. Nixon gave his resignation speech on television and appeared calm, cool, and collected. But he showed episodic bursts of blinking above the normal 50 bpm cut-off. This rapid blinking during stress is called the “Nixon effect.” This observation suggested that it might be worthwhile to study eyeblinks and stress in political situations, such as debates by candidates for the U. S. presidency. > > **IV. Previous Presidential Debates and Elections** > As can be seen in Table 1, of the seven presidential elections for which televised debates are available, in six elections the candidate who blinked the most frequently during debates eventually lost the election. In the seventh election, that of 2000, the faster blinker (George W. Bush) lost the popular vote but won the electoral vote. This accuracy of blink rate in the prediction of the eventual winner outright was compromised in the 2000 election by other nonverbal expressions of candidate then Vice President Albert A. Gore, Bush’s opponent. Gore showed behaviors that might have projected a negative image to viewer-voters, for example, looking down, double blinks, and blink bursts of three per second or more. > > SOURCE: [http://www.bc.edu/schools/cas/meta-elements/html/teece\_analysis\_2004.htm](http://www.bc.edu/schools/cas/meta-elements/html/teece_analysis_2004.htm) ---
**Author:** ![RyJae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@RyJae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RyJae)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/525 "2008-09-27T14:15:33Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > They both lied. They implied their programs will be full speed ahead after giving wall street a couple trillion dollars. The money already committed to the financial institutions is a trillion. Now they want another 700 billion . No programs will be going ahead. If McCain wants to go ahead with a tax cut for the fat cats with that going on he is nuts. If Obama wants to go ahead with the programs that are expensive ,he is nuts. The debate was a waste. I wanted Obama to say everything is on hold. We have to stop and slowly analyze the damage the financial geniuses caused. We can commit to nothing going ahead. But McCains tax cuts are insane. ``` Both candidates are for a bailout yet neither has a plan to pay for it. Well other than, maybe the trash paper will become less trashy, but no plan for trash paper becoming more trashy or staying the same. ``` ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/526 "2008-09-27T14:17:43Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > I think a couple of times he said things that seemed like they were supposed to be funny, but of course nobody laughed because the audience was tightly controlled and made no noise. And he didn’t help by laughing at his own duds. It’s like a 70 year old Chandler Bing. Cringeworthy. ---
**Author:** ![RyJae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@RyJae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RyJae)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/527 "2008-09-27T14:18:55Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > On the whole I think the debate was a draw. Since I am for Obama I of course tended to like his answers better but honestly I think they both did fine. > > I did notice that McCain refused to look at Obama. Mind you I was in no way looking for such subtleties to pick on but it became very apparent to me over the course of the debate. Subservient monkey? Funny but I doubt it…perhaps McCain deemed Obama unworthy of recognition. I don’t know but I thought it odd and in semi-bad form. > > I also noticed McCain blinking off the scale. Again this was nothing I set out to watch for and indeed it wasn’t until about 2/3 of the way through it even registered to me. Perhaps McCain did not have blink mania the whole time and I just spotted a blip of blinking…no idea. Also not sure what that really says about McCain except that he was stressed whereas Obama, by that measure at least, was more comfortable. In case you think the blink thing comes out of nowhere I checked (before posting this) and it seems it has been studied and noted in previous presidential debates. Yeah the Washington Redskins winning or losing has a better percentage of determining the winner than the blinking game. 17 outta 18 presidential elections. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/528 "2008-09-27T14:19:00Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > The more I think about it, the more I think McCain failed on one point. He tried to draw attacks on Palin. He said “Miss Congeniality” at least twice Oh come on! She’s an FBI agent _posing as a supermodel!!_ ---
**Author:** ![RyJae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@RyJae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RyJae)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/529 "2008-09-27T14:20:06Z")
> [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](#): > > Oh come on! She’s an FBI agent _posing as a supermodel!!_ You just don’t understand. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/530 "2008-09-27T14:21:36Z")
> [@RyJae](#): > > Both candidates are for a bailout yet neither has a plan to pay for it. Well other than, maybe the trash paper will become less trashy, but no plan for trash paper becoming more trashy or staying the same. I actually thought it was kind of a bullshit question. Neither one of them, contrary to any bluster they may try to show, have anything whatsoever to do with the current negotiations that are going on to shape this thing, and very little input or influence one way or another. If either of them started promising specifics, that later weren’t delivered, they’d be skewered. And since neither of them knows what the final product will look like, it would be impossible, not to mention reckless, to start making specific claims about how things would change under their administration. It’s just an unknowable at this point, for either candidate. ---
**Author:** ![RyJae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@RyJae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RyJae)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/531 "2008-09-27T14:29:05Z")
> [@Shayna](#): > > I actually thought it was kind of a bullshit question. Neither one of them, contrary to any bluster they may try to show, have anything whatsoever to do with the current negotiations that are going on to shape this thing, and very little input or influence one way or another. If either of them started promising specifics, that later weren’t delivered, they’d be skewered. And since neither of them knows what the final product will look like, it would be impossible, not to mention reckless, to start making specific claims about how things would change under their administration. It’s just an unknowable at this point, for either candidate. It may be reckless and it would take balls to stand up on national television and say, they will not endorse any plan that doesn’t have X, X or X. That’s what I want in my President. Someone willing to say fuck my party, I want what the people want. They may not be able to make the current bailout plan into what they want, but at least they can lay it out so I and the hundreds of millions of other citizens can see just what they think. Playing it safe is politics as normal, not change. Just in my separate office of 5 people we all have 5 differing views on a project. You would think of the 100’s in congress those within the same party would actually disagree a lot more than they do. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/532 "2008-09-27T14:29:16Z")
McCain was hammering on the earmarks like they matter. In view of present conditions ,Obama should have laughed him off stage for that. The economy might be in hock for 2 trillion dollars and he is whining about cutting earmarks. The debaters planned well in advance. Neither one changed their tactics enough to reflect the present economic conditions. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/533 "2008-09-27T14:30:10Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > When McCain made the comment that Pakistan was a “failed state” I could not comment right away why it was dumb, the reason was that using the 12 point index from Foreign Policy this year Pakistan is number 9 in the failed state column,\*\* Iraq is number 5\*\*. He didn’t say Pakistan was a failed state now. He said that it was a failed state when Musharraf took over. From the transcript: > [@](#): > > I don’t think that Senator Obama understands that there was a failed state in Pakistan when Musharraf came to power. Everybody who was around then, and had been there, and knew about it knew that it was a failed state. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/534 "2008-09-27T14:38:58Z")
> [@RyJae](#): > > Yeah the Washington Redskins winning or losing has a better percentage of determining the winner than the blinking game. 17 outta 18 presidential elections. 😃 I agree and I am not so sure about using blinking as a predictor of outcomes…seems a bit of a stretch to me. However, it is one of those things people react to subconsciously. Humans give off and read all sorts of body language that we process without being distinctly aware of it (usually). McCain blinking (and the part I noted he was blinking like crazy…unfortunately I did not think to pay attention to that earlier and at that point my GF insisted we leave the bar we were watching it at so I did not see if it was just an aberration) can ultimately lend at least some of the explanation for why Obama polled better. People just get an uneasy feeling without necessarily being able to point to a specific cause. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/535 "2008-09-27T14:47:31Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Kissinger may say that but the reports then gave other impression: > > [Free Foreign Policy Advice - CBS News](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/16/opinion/diplomatic/main4453263.shtml) > > Sorry, nice try, but if that was reported then Kissinger or how the media reported it is to blame, not how Obama then read and used the reported news. No. Kissinger favors talks, without preconditions, but NOT by the President. So, sorry, but nice try. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/536 "2008-09-27T14:54:00Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > No. Kissinger favors talks, without preconditions, but NOT by the President. Does McCain favor talks without preconditions by _anybody_? ---
**Author:** ![RyJae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@RyJae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RyJae)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/537 "2008-09-27T14:55:44Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I agree and I am not so sure about using blinking as a predictor of outcomes…seems a bit of a stretch to me. However, it is one of those things people react to subconsciously. Humans give off and read all sorts of body language that we process without being distinctly aware of it (usually). McCain blinking (and the part I noted he was blinking like crazy…unfortunately I did not think to pay attention to that earlier and at that point my GF insisted we leave the bar we were watching it at so I did not see if it was just an aberration) can ultimately lend at least some of the explanation for why Obama polled better. People just get an uneasy feeling without necessarily being able to point to a specific cause. Well if you want to use body language, and mannerisms not looking at Obama was bad. And the licking his lips was creepy, to me anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/538 "2008-09-27T14:59:30Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > No. Kissinger favors talks, without preconditions, but NOT by the President. > > So, sorry, but nice try. IIRC, Obama made that specific point: these talks would be done by lower-level diplomats. He openly scoffed at the idea that anyone would think the president would go talk with Army/Dinner Jacket without any groundwork being laid. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/539 "2008-09-27T15:02:42Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Does McCain favor talks without preconditions by _anybody_? I’m sure he does. The point is, as he explained more then once, is to not take a leader that is nutty and legitimize him in the eyes of the world. Or elevate him in the eyes of his own country. The lower down the pole you go, the more okay it is. But the leaders know the game, too, and they won’t meet with someone to far down the totem pole. So low level talks to low level. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2008, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357/540 "2008-09-27T15:05:54Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > IIRC, Obama made that specific point: these talks would be done by lower-level diplomats. He openly scoffed at the idea that anyone would think the president would go talk with Army/Dinner Jacket without any groundwork being laid. > > Daniel Yes, he did make that point. But that is NOT the position he had in the debates during the primaries (twice, IIRC). That is why Hillary repeatedly beat him over the head with it. And what McCain did last night. What Obama needs to say is that he misspoke, or something like that. Because he did say it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357.md?page=26) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/september-26-the-first-obama-mccain-debate/465357.md?page=28)