To many watchers (including me), that just seemed rude on McCain’s part. Obama was addressing him as a colleague and a peer and McCain didn’t have th decency to respond in kind. His refusal to reciprocate Obama addressing him by his first name (especially when it was combined with McCain’s refusal to look Obama in the eye) came off as petulant and contemptuous, not respectful. It’s one of the reasons he came off badly in the post debate polls.
Anyway, my answer to the OP is that it depends on the previous relationship. It’s appropriate for colleagues in the Senate. It would seem less appropriate as an address for a sitting President.
on another recent thread about ‘Characteristics of Americans’ (or similar) I would have put, if I had recalled it in time, ‘tendency to immediately start addressing people you have just been introduced to by their first names, thereby assuming an unwarranted degree of familiarity’. This is just a cultural thing; a German would probably address his work colleague as Herr Schmidt even if he has worked with him for twenty years.
Yes, Dr. Obama certainly wouldn’t have done it that way as a German candidate. If they were close personal friends and both used first names consistently they could get away with although it would sound weird. Obama unilateraly addressing McCain by his first name would be acceptable if McCain was a child or Obama wanted to make clear that he doesn’t consider him his equal (and because McCain outranks him etiquette-wise Obama couldn’t even suggest that they both use first names.)
Yes, of course. My whole post was just supposed to highlight how the situation would have been handled according to our manners (which differ clearly from American manners in this case.)
McCain is obviously significantly older than Obama. For things like forms of address the older person takes precedence unless that is outweighed by a clear hierarchical difference. In this case both have the same position and certainly neither is the boss of the other. Of course there are often gray areas were there is no discernable difference between the participants and in other cases you can get away with small violations of protocol. However initiating the use of first names with a person who is a generation older than you just isn’t done without a very good justification - especially not in public when you are trying to make a good impression. I cringed a bit when I first heard Obama call him “John” although I knew that it is a completely different situation in America.
Do German media refer to politicians by the title of their office Bundeskanzlerin Merkel or by social title Frau Merkel. And even in the US McCain outranks Obama for purposes of ceremonial protocal (him having greater senority in the Senate).
Pointless trivia: this is the largest age gap between candidates in American history; McCain is Obama’s senior by nearly 25 years, whereas Dole was just over 23 years older than Clinton.
Palin referred to Obama as simply “Barack” a few times during the debate with Biden. She never once referred to him using the title Senator. A tactical decision I suppose. Have they ever even met?
Since Obama used both terms, it’s hard to see the usage of “John” as being disrespectful. The same is also true, obviously, of McCain using the more formal “Senator Obama.”
ETA: Interestingly, Biden only once referred to Gov. Palin as Sarah, and then quickly corrected himself to include her title:
Meanwhile, the whole “Can I call you ‘Joe’?” gambit is a tough one to handle–could Biden have told her “I’d rather you didn’t”?
I don’t think so, not without seeming snootly and putting on airs. And as it happened, she was sandbagging him, setting up her later “Say it ain’t so, Joe” line, not even trying (as it seemed) to introduce an informal tone to the debate. Now I wish he would have said, “Of course, and what shall I call you, Governor?”
Many other languages have the ‘sie’ - ‘du’, ‘vous’ - ‘toi’ thing to grapple with as well. At least we don’t have that any more (except in some low dialect versions of English which still use thee and thou)
I’d probably count Yorkshire dialect as such; you’d certainly only use such an informal pronoun in intimate or free-and-easy company, and certainly not on a TV debate, unless it was as a calculated insult.
I think this may be just because many female politicians are married to or otherwise share a name with male politicians. It’s a bit awkward to refer to the Democratic runner-up as “Clinton”, since (depending on the context) that could refer to Bill or Hillary, and even if the context is clear, it still forces the listener to stop and think for a moment about it. Likewise, “Dole” could be Bob or Elizabeth. But I don’t think I’ve ever heard Sebelius or Pelosi referred to as just “Katherine” or “Nancy”: They get the same treatment as any other prominent individual, with first and last name at first mention in an article, and just last name thereafter. Palin you do occasionally see referred to as just “Sarah”, but rarely in a serious context like a newspaper story.
I hope a late comment on this is OK - “Prime Minister” is not a title, it’s a job description. So it isn’t correct to refer to “Prime Minister Brown” any more than it would be correct to refer to “Bank Clerk Smith” or “Postman Jones”. You could say “The Right Honourable Gordon Brown, Prime Minister”, but most British people would not bother.
MPs can, if they’re being ridiculously formal, use a construction like “The Honourable David Smith, MP”.