All in all I thought it was a pretty good debate. I’m glad I didn’t have that instant poll thing, and actually part of me feels like I shouldn’t have participated in this thread (real time) either. I found both of them worth listening to on their own merits, such that I could make my own judgment.
For Biden/Palin, though, I’ll be breaking out the popcorn.
McCain did better than I thought he would, but in dissing ethanol he lost the farmers. This is a close election, and many farmers vote, and they tend to vote republican. Missouri, Iowa, Indiana and Wisconsin are all states in play and this hurts him there.
I wanted Obama to hit harder, but I am not sure that would have been helpful in winning the people who he needs to win. I did not see anything that would shake the Obama faithful, and I did see much that could ease the minds of those on the fence.
I don’t know what it is, but I cannot stop giggling over this!
I thought it was pretty much a draw. McCain may have slowed the bleeding he’s been suffering over the past few days. However, this is one McCain needed to win handily, on his purported best subject, and he didn’t do it.
Having failed to make up any lost ground, he now hands the baton to Palin for the next leg. McCain’s in trouble.
Meanwhile in the SDMB Pun Patrol F117, high above chicago, Lt Elucidator is being given a target…
I agree mostly. Obama won on points but it is hilarious how some liberal sites are spinning this already. Blowout? not even close.
It is a quote of that great philosopher of the Too Old to be President crowd, Abraham Simpson.
And how are the conservative sites spinning it?
Well, it didn’t actually HAVE to be a blowout to be disastrous for McCain. This was supposed to be his bailiwick, his area of expertise, his sphere of influence…foreign policy! And it was a draw at best. Not a good performance for McCain.
And next Thursday pits Palin against Biden. I almost feel sorry for her already.
You and I were, as the saying goes, “raised right.” And I think that many of the “undecideds” are of our generation. The kids may not think that symbolism is important, but those who will make a difference in this election know the difference between “classy” and “jerkish.” Obama is NOTHING if not classy, and classy is what we want in a president. We’ve had QUITE ENOUGH of oafish and stuck up, thankyouverymuch. :mad:
Generally as an obvious and strong (though not necessarily overwhelming) McCain victory, of course.
In a previous thread I had put it like this -
Well, I think that each won as much as they could. McCain was lively enough and did a good job at staying on a message of distancing himself from Bush while satisfying his core. Obama minimized his "uh"s, gave clear definitive answers (loved his “I have a bracelet too” comment), showed that he could be in charge and relatable and that his change wasn’t so scary.
Both sides will declare victory and, in a way, both will be right. Polls will be uneffected by the debates although they will reflect the fall-out from McCain’s grandstanding for a few days to come.
What do you suppose the odds of them coming through the other debates without McCain sounding as condescending, and Obama not sounding like a kid stammering his way through his first debate club meet?
As with most debates, both candidates gave disappointingly few concrete, concise answers (especially on the economy). I don’t know why I still expect them to, but…
I think the difference in demeanors might actually redound to Obama’s favor with seniors. On Fox, Frank Luntz had a panel of undecided voters who he was gauging for their responses (the majority of whom were saying better things about Obama than McCain), and one of the things a couple of the older people mentioned was that Obama had called McCain “John,” throughout, while McCain never called Obama “Barack” or really even acknowledged him with eye contact. A small thing, maybe, but something that apparently bothered them, and something I do think that people of a certain generation will notice. Basic courtesy means something to them, and they saw Obama being a nice, polite young man and McCain being surly in return.
wow; i must have been watching some other debate… 'cause i didn’t see this part of it at all (bolding mine)
Me too!
Call me crazy, but I thought Obama was a clear winner in this one. Interesting how people’s perceptions differ. McCain looked like he was on the defensive throughout, but especially on foreign policy. Obama would list issues or strategies or facts in that enumerated style of his, and McCain would respond with stuff like “But everyone knows I’m no Ms. Congeniality…I have years of reaching across the alse!” or “I told Reagan that Lebanon was bad idea, and I was right!” Okay John, that was 45 years ago or whatever. What are you doing now and what are you really going to do in the future?
His refusal to look at Obama or even address him by name made him look petulant and passive aggressive. It seemed as if he went out of his way to speak as if his opponent was not present, and it just looked bad. What I observed was that the more condescending McCain was, the more Obama seemed to crank up the nice guy stuff. I’m wondering if this was intentional.
Being an Obama supporter, I know that I’m biased. But I think on both style and substance, Obama won.
And FWIW the early post-debate polls give Obama the nod fairly handily. FWIW.
But call it, as I did, a draw, in that each accomplished their goals. Right now in particular that’s a bigger deal for Obama than for McCain. There is a fairly large number of people who are a bit disgusted with McCain right now; they just need to feel satisfied and not scared by Obama and they’re his. His performance will satisfy them.
Debates are all about perception, not about issues, or who had a better handle on the facts, or who got in more jabs. None of those things matter in and of themselves.
What matters is that undecided voters see in the candidates something they can support. In 2000, Dubya was an incoherent mess in terms of actual facts in the debates, but people liked his affected “honest Joe” persona. In that political climate, it resonated with them more that Gore’s command of facts but inconsistent on-camera personality.
Independents may have seen in Obama that he has far more substance in his ideas and command of issues than he has been accused of having. Some independents have been worrying that Obama’s inexperience is too much of a liability. I suspect much of Obama’s performance will assuage those doubts. McCain’s frequent “Senator Obama doesn’t seems to understand” to them will have seemed repetitive, condescending, and obviously not true: Obama clearly did understand what he was talking about. Only the most ludicrously partisan hack saw a lack of understanding in Obama’s responses.
It was also obvious that McCain was going overboard in misrepresenting and misconstruing Obama’s positions. Devout repubs who don’t care about facts will undoubtedly say McCain scored points, since Obama spent a lot of time rebutting McCain’s falsehoods about his positions. That sort of dirty pool plays well to the devout, but to independents, I suspect not so well. McCain was too obviously exaggerating or flat out distorting Obama’s actual statements.
In the end, I think Obama did a good job showing that he is not, in fact, a mere celebrity, an empty suit. In fact, he’s a skilled politican who knows what he’s talking about. That is obvious, and I think a very important achievement to get people who want to support him but are nervous about it on his side.
On the other hand, McCain showed a lot of shrewdness and was deft in getting in jabs (mostly cheap) in at Obama. Cheap or not, they hurt in that Obama had to spend so much time answering them. It reminds me of how creationists score points against legit scientists by spewing so much crap that the scientists are entangled trying to get it all sorted out. It’s dishonest, but effective at tying up your debate opponent. McCain used it effectively if dishonorably.
I still think most independents won’t be swayed by that. McCain’s smirking condescension didn’t come across in an appealing way.
More importantly, however, McCain came across as intelligent and in command of his ideas. There was no sign of wackiness or Abe Simpson-like babbling (well, mostly not). Independents who may have been worried that McCain was starting to crack were undoubtedly reassured. He is absolutely a competent candidate (if one ignores his absurd campaigning blunders this week and in picking Palin.)
It is honestly refreshing to see that the candidates are both such highly informed, articulate people. McCain is far, far above Bush in debate skill, and a match for Obama or probably anyone.
My guess is that the polls will not show much change after this debate. Perhaps slightly more independents will start saying they’re for Obama would be my best guess, since I think he showed he can handle himself well, and since I think McCain’s style was abrasive and sanctimonious.
Pundits will say the person who won is the candidate who they already want to vote for anyway, so that’s never of any use.
The question is, as always, in which candidate did people see someone they can vote for? I think Obama did better with independents. McCain however did better in making his base happy than Obama did.
Did anyone else notice McCain getting visibly angry when Obama would nail him on things McCain had said personally in the past? Like the the bit about the prime minister of Spain: it looked like McCain was grinding his teeth (or perhaps maybe viciously biting his tongue).
Yes, at one point I thought I saw him getting red. He looked away at that point, found someone in the crowd and smiled and nodded. He did control his temper better than I had thought he would, considering some of the things I read leading up to the debate.
He also got a bit flustered (I thought) when they were talking about sitting down to talk to rogue leaders.