Nice flat declaration there, but a kid that grew up watching Howdy Doody on TV in a time of postwar prosperity is much different than one who listened to news about fighting the Germans and Japanese on the radio during a period of wartime rationing.
And in any case, if discussion of generations is going to have any meaning at all, we might as well stick to the ones that have been in use for half a century or more.
Kissinger may say that but the reports then gave other impression:
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.
I only managed to catch the portion where they discussed earmarks, and I have to say that, while I like Obama’s platform better, I thought McCain did a lot better during the debate.
Obama just didn’t have a good response to McCain’s points regarding the 18billion in earmarks, and got hammered by it twice before coming up with the “line by line” answer, Which I think was meant to refer to a line veto (is he going to be pushing for that?).
On a similar note, he spoke on Obama’s planned tax increases on companies chasing them overseas, his plan for $5000 per households for medical care, and obama didn’t counter hard enough with his own points. I still don’t really know his answers to those 2 points, and I certainly don’t think he walked away the winner of that segment.
Perhaps I didn’t listen to the other parts if the debate where Obama spanked McCain, but based on what I heard, and if I didn’t know the policies of McCain and Obama, I’d certainly be tempted to vote for McCain. Obama’s ums and ahs certainly didn’t help him either.
I certainly hope that biden does a lot better…
So much for trying to be a little even handed on this message board. Oh well.
For more rigorosity, look to CNN and CBS’ post debate polls.
Apparently McCain’s refusal to make eye contact with Obama was a big factor.
It has been an issue throughout that Obama composes his thoughts while speaking and has used “uh” as a filler as he constructs his next paragraph. It was one of the issues that I was specifically looking for him to have improved upon in order to be able to achieve his objections for this debate. He did succeed to a large part. Mind you they were not gone completely but they were hardly there. Maybe elfkin accidently turned on a rebroadcast of one of the primary debates?
Interesting point brought up about Bill Clinton and John McCain. As demographic generations go, the “Silent Generation”, born 1925 to 1945, was thought of very differently than the “Boomers”, born 1946 to (by most definitions) 1964. Born in 1936 McCain was solidly of the Silents and born ten years later Bill was the leading edge of Boomers. Yet they are closer in age than many other Boomers are to Bill.
From a practical POV it does make as much sense to lump them together, being only ten years apart as it does to lump Bill with someone born in the latter years of the Boomers (like me).
A detailed analysis of why the public scored Obama as the winner in the post-debate polling so far.
Earlier 538 had made the point that McCain’s gambit raised the stakes of this debate. No doubt more people were watching it than before and a McCain blow-out here could have been a gamechanger. But a disappointing performance, and those numbers seem to point to that among the target audience for the candidates, would really make an Obama lead almost impossible to overcome. Hopefully next Thursday drives the stake all the way through.
Referring to JMs inability to look at Barack, a TP poster said…
That’s my favorite quote on the debate.
I was hoping that Obama would have brought up the fact that he voted against the unnecessary going to war with Iraq, that is the cost of our now being so far in debt and the unnecessary loss of lives,( both American and Iraqi). Had we not gone into Iraq when we did, we may have well had the Afghanistan war won, as it is, it is now growing in strength. So Obama’s foresight shows him to be the better man for our country. We already have a shoot first and ask questions later policy. Putting some one on the defensive is not a way to win peace. Understanding a situation and if force is needed that is one thing,just going off all macho is not.
Monavis
For what is worth i think MCain did better, apparently most of the ppl watching thought the opposite, i would make a lousy politician :).
Me too. I said before I thought it was a tie, but this morning woke up thinking McCain had slightly edged him, mostly for the reasons cited upthread; he scored some early points, got Obama on the earmarks issue, and kept Obama responding to his digs. He made errors. The “Senator Obama doesn’t understand tactics/strategy” dig was an error because 95% of English-speaking people also don’t know the difference. We’ve had bright posters on the SDMB clearly demonstrate a misunderstanding of those words.
But I was obviously wrong. I still think McCain did better, but I’m only one guy (and don’t have a vote anyway.) Who won is determined by how the electorate saw it, and they saw Obama win, so that’s what matters. I don’t know precisely why anyone would think he kicked McCain’s ass but there it is.
I’m surprised Obama’s “I’ve got a bracelet, too” comment isn’t being played up very much in the TV analysis. THat was certainly a cringe-worthy moment.
That’s OK. I haven’t paid much attention to debates ever since I saw Jimmy Carter nail Ronald Reagan’s ass to the wall back in 1980. It’s just not possible to figure out how ‘the people’ will feel about these things.
Not sure I see why. McCain obviously planned to discuss his bracelet in advance, had several weeks to make sure he had the name of “his” soldier memorized; Obama, whose speaking style contains pauses, paused briefly while constructing his sentence, so it referred to the person who gave him the bracelet, rather than the person whose name was on the bracelet. This is what you’re going to make into a major issue, or even any kind of minor issue? Reeks of desperation, gotcha points, sandbagging, posturing, grandstanding, drama-queening–in short, John McCain’s major character flaws on full public display.
When did I say it was a “major issue?” I certainly don’t think that. But it was awkward enough to qualify as a “moment,” I think.
And you’re being charitable when you say Obama’s speaking style “contains pauses.” I’d say it more often than not contains a lot of “uh” and “eh eh eh” and “um” and “you know”!
The site fivethirtyeight.com has enlightening commentary on why Obama won and McCain failed and why political junkies are scratching their head. Their position is that McCain played to the pundits and Obama talked to the TV audience about themselves. Simply mentioning “middle class” several times (which McCain didn’t do once) and clarifying his tax plan scored major points. The kinds of people who post about the debate on message boards are trying to figure out how it will play out in the spin zone. They were watching and responding like pundits. Most Americans were watching because they’re scared and they wanted to be comforted. They responded a little bit better to Obama.
regarding the uhs…ummm… you knows…
an interesting tell of pres. clinton and sen. clinton is the “uh”. if either of them uses an uh or um, they don’t have faith in what they are saying, or caught off guard. both of them are very, very, good at speaking off the cuff. they listen to the question or comment, pause a bit, then give a response fluidly. if there is an uh or um, that is trouble.
sen. obama responds immediatly, and constructs as he goes on. he is more like sen. kennedy in this. both uh and um. should sen. obama not uh and um it means he has his answer plotted out ahead of time.
i was very struck by sen. obama’s lovely manners. not only to sen. mccain, but also to the moderator. i believe his being raised by grandparents give him an edge here. when you deal with people older than you, you get to the point were you just step back, let them believe what they want, and do what you know needs to be done.
i also thought of the crabs and seals when sen. mccain mentioned earmarks. i think there was a way to bring it up without saying who it was.
i have a bracelet too. yep, there are two ways of thinking on this war. sen. mccain doesn’t seem to see that.
The problem with that is that he didn’t vote against it. He was still an Illinois state senator at the time. He DID disagree with it and made that very clear at the time and more recently in the primaries.
I meant that as a rhetorical question, as in, “What the hell did you expect?”
He didn’t vote against it. He spoke out against it, but he wasn’t in the US Congress when the vote was taken back in '02. He got elected in '04, remember.