All Talked Out - Debates Over - Who Won?

[Teremia]

Your "no-holds-barred" debate idea is interesting, Whistler! I would certainly like to see them have to ask each other direct questions and then HAVE to respond!

Or have a moderator willing to ask questions no one expects to see.

I also heard "Jim," not "Tom." I thought he meant Jim [Lehrer] and went back to John.

I thought it was a draw, as far as performance goes. I disagree with both of them on a lot of issues, like bringing Georgia (etc.) into NATO, offshore drilling, oh, lots of things . . . . but so it goes.

[Cerin]

I didn't realize the next debate would be in the town hall format. I suppose they're both used enough to smaller gatherings from campaigning that they should handle it. Who will be the moderator in that debate?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Tom Brokaw

[Primula Baggins]

I generally agree that they both did well, which means (effectively) that Obama won, he being ahead going in.

As an Obama partisan I was a bit annoyed by McCain's condescension, but it may have been an effective tactic.

We shall see.

[WampusCat]

I like Whistler's idea.

But I'm torn between cage fight and mud wrestling. Better yet, a pie-throwing contest. Food fight at 20 paces!

[yovargas]

I watched the 1st 20 minutes or so and got too bored and frustrated with the typical politician-speak to bother watching more.

[ToshoftheWuffingas]

Now I saw only the last half (at 3am) where they were debating foreign policy. I missed the financial crisis though I saw clips from it afterwards. This sort of stuff is meat and drink to British politicians who have to make their views known in the Parliamentary bear-pit.
I found both a little clumsy in their own individual ways and agree with those who basically thought it a draw and with those who thought their own man did best.
Mccain obviously had a game plan to run down Obama at each opportunity while Obama took each question as an intellectual exercise and only run MCain down when he remembered to. It stuck out like a sore thumb that Mccain tried to get in as often as possible that he was good for military veterans. If he in fact hasn't been during his time as senator it will bite him in the bum.
Mccain came across as a rigid thinker and Obama as a flexible one.

[Túrin Turambar]

Now I saw only the last half (at 3am) where they were debating foreign policy. I missed the financial crisis though I saw clips from it afterwards. This sort of stuff is meat and drink to British politicians who have to make their views known in the Parliamentary bear-pit.

It’s interesting to compare that style of debate with the far faster and more aggressive Parliamentary one. In my view, neither is particularly ideal. Overall, I probably prefer the town hall format the most.

[sauronsfinger]

Watched the debate a second time..... read about 15 political columnists with their take on it .... heard news coverage of at least six polls of viewers ... and read the comments here. So with all that behind me and a night of sleep, here is what i believe about the first debate.

*** The political pundits seems to feel that McCain had a small victory on points. He finished strong and had his best moments in the last half hour with his repeated "you are not ready" line of attack. However, he scored no knockout blow or in any way did anything to change the dynamic of the race.

*** The public seems to side with whoever they liked going in to the debate. Most Obama voters think their man won and the same for McCain. Independents seem to be breaking for Obama but not overwhelmingly.

*** How will McCains demeanor be judged by the public? He refused to look at Obama in the eye, sneered alot, and was dismissive to him more and more as the debate went on. Will this be seen as smug or even rude? Jury is out on that one.

*** Obama missed several key opportunities for heavy attack - but thats not his game and it does not come natural to him. His best stuff was in attacking McCain on Iraq with a string of "you were wrong"(s).

*** With foreign policy behind them, it can only get better for Obama in the next two debates where McCain is not playing to his strong suit.

*** And why oh why does Obama and every other Democrat in the world keep letting McCain brag about the Surge like it ended the war in Iraq? Why does he not just say. "sure, you can put massive numbers of heavilly armed and well trained troops into a small area and get targeted results. No doubt about that. But when you look at the political goals that the Surge was suppose to achieve, they are solely lacking and have failed to materialize." Why is the Surge simply treated as a success or failure solely on its military side without equal treatment for its political failings?

** If you want a line that would have been played on every news show in America and would have been talked abotu in moring coffee shops, barber shops and bars by Joe Six Pack, here it is

Obama should have said this about Bin Laden at the same time he said he is still sending tapes here and hiding in Afghanistan..

"Every time he sends one of those tapes here its like he is giving America the finger and mocking us. Its about time we went over there and broke that middle finger right off and gave him some good old fashioned American justice."

Average folks, plain speaking folks, blue-collar folks would have loved a line like that and it would have give Obama instant street cred.

[Dave_LF]

Everyone keeps saying "no major gaffes". But what about McCain's stated desire to freeze the budget except for the Department of Defense. The man literally said "I won't give money for education or health care, but I will give it for more war". I haven't heard anyone jump on him for it, though.

[ToshoftheWuffingas]

Given the negative images of Obama that have flowed out since the beginning of the year, all he had to do was stand there and look calm, intelligent and capable and he was aleady in benefit. He did that easily.

A good way to bracket Mccain with the current administation would have been to say Senator McCain and President's advisors were wrong about the Iraq invasion, the American people now realise this even if he doesn't.
I noticed that Obama got in his Kenyan origin and used that to explain his name. I suspect that had been scripted in. Did anyone else spot 'scripted' moments that the candidate was anxious to squeeze in whatever the pretext?

ETA, Dave, good point. Again Obama could have responded, 'Everything senator? Everything?' and left a little pause for it to sink in.

[sauronsfinger]

dailykos has an excellent roundup of many of debate polls and opinions of pundits...

http://www.dailykos.com/

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I thought Obama's response to McCain's "spending freeze" was perfect and actually defined McCain very well. He said that McCain wanted to use a hatchet when a scalpel was what was needed. If he had focused on McCain only wanting to spend money for defense issues, he would have come across as too soft. But he immediately said "we have to focus on education."

I'm encouraged to be hearing that polls are consistently showing that independents and undecideds think that Obama "won". I can never predict how these things wil be interpreted by others.

[sauronsfinger]

Voronwë , if you are encouraged by those numbers, these will also make you happy.

from CBS

THE DEBATE’S EFFECT ON OPINIONS OF THE CANDIDATES
(Among uncommitted voters who watched debate)
.......... Obama ...... McCain
Better 46% ........ 32%
Worse 8 ...............21
No change 46 ......... 47

Nearly half of those uncommitted voters who watched the debate said that their image of Obama changed for the better as a result. Just eight percent say their opinion of Obama got worse, and 46 percent reported no change in their opinions.

McCain saw less improvement in his image. Thirty-two percent have improved their image of McCain as a result of the debate, but 21 percent said their views of him are now worse than before.

Why did voters' image of Obama improve? Many volunteered that they were impressed by his poise and knowledge about the issues, that he was more knowledgeable about the issues than they thought previously. When it came to McCain, those same voters said he "didn’t control himself well under pressure," that he was "angry and bad-tempered," and that he "talked too much about the past."

You should really go to dailykos and read all the stuff there and especially watch the Foxnews video.

[Cerin]

Why is the Surge simply treated as a success or failure solely on its military side without equal treatment for its political failings?

Because the press has bought the success line, so it is endlessly repeated and has been accepted as fact. The surge did succeed in reducing violence, the larger goal of the surge is forgotten by most.

Did anyone else spot 'scripted' moments that the candidate was anxious to squeeze in whatever the pretext?

I thought I identified a few from McCain, though I don't remember now what they were, except for the reference to himself and his running mate as 'mavericks'.

[Primula Baggins]

Consensus this morning does seem to be that Obama won, which is more than he needed. He also seemed to impress people as "presidential" and even-tempered more than McCain did. There are evidently a fair number of voters for whom this was their first long look at Obama, and he seems to have used the opportunity well.

The next presidential debate is a town hall format, which McCain handles really well and where Obama's "uhs" and "ums" get more prominent. But the final one, the last before the election, is a formal debate on domestic policy, and that's got to be good for Obama.

[Inanna]

Not only uhs and ums, Obama shows his Professor roots very clearly in these debates. He'll give complicated, explanations to both sides of a question, explore nuances, and in effect, lose his audience.

Its one of the reasons why I like him, this both-side viewing, but it doesn't make him a good communicator in a town-hall format.

[Primula Baggins]

So far they've been pretty canny in addressing his weaknesses—there were very few ums and ahhhs last night—so I'm confident that they're working on that.

[anthriel]

Of course, Republicans think McCain did better, and Democrats think Obama did better. It's the independents that count.

Dear Frelga is right again. And I just realized that I am a Very Important Person in this election! I am not a wishy-washy centrist undecided person! I am an Independent Who Counts!

Of course, as an undecided centrist type, I see it as a draw.

Just as in the Rick Warren "debate", I felt both men were absolutely themselves, and both were strong in their way. There were no "killing" blows. I'm rather glad about that, actually. I think these debates are relished by some as a spectacle akin to gladiator fights or bear-baiting. Someone needs to come out in pieces to satisfy the public's blood lust.

And they BOTH were heavily scripted. I agree with holby and hal: oy. We should just market these things as Soundbites, Etc.

I suppose Barack (I will try the informal, to see how it feels) will get some flack for admitting that John (okay, it feels weird) was right, or had some good points. I think that is a shame. One of the things I really LIKE about Barack (don't think I like this at all) is his... civility. John (must. stop. can't. do this.) did have some good decisions in his lengthy career. It seems a shame that his opponent would be skewered for acknowledging that fact.

As for Sen. Obama (oh, sigh. MUCH better) hemming and hawing or Sen. McCain fidgeting, do these have to be signs of some sort of moral failure? Remember, I have met Sen. McCain (repeatedly, actually). He DOES fidget. He shuffles his feet and plays with his wedding ring and gives the impression of a man whose thoughts are racing ahead of himself all the time. For all those times I read about the "doddering old fool" kind of descriptions of this man, I thought: they have not seen him. He has ten times the energy of most people. He's sharp as a whip.

(He's also not very tall. In my heels, I was easily taller than him. Not that it mattered. His presence is pretty big, no matter his physicality.)

And I LIKE Sen. Obama's "umms and ahhs". It speaks of a man who is composing his thoughts, and giving a well-thought-out answer. As long as he doesn't stand there for 5 minutes and drool before giving a response, I think taking a few seconds to decide what to say is a refreshing -- and positive-- difference from most politicians.

Remember, too, that this was a foreign policy debate, which was supposed to be McCain's time to shine. (Edit: x-posted with Padme who alreadys aid that. )

I think that if the whole debate had been on foreign policy, McCain would have been the easy victor. However, about 30% of the debate was on economics, a disaster tied closely in the public mind (although it really started with deregulations put into effect by the then-Pres. Clinton and a Republican congress, there's lots of blame to go around) with Republicans. McCain's going to wear the egg on his face with the economy, and a debate on the economy is not going to naturally go in his favor.

ETA: Did anyone do the drinking game?

Ah, Dear Frelga. I wish I had! Darn these children and their need for a coherent mother...

[vison]

The one thing I really didn't like about McCain was his appallingly bad manners, in that he didn't once look at Obama, not even when they were shaking hands at the end. His snotty condescension could maybe be overlooked - after all, he's much older and has been around the mulberry bush a few times - but he was discourteous, speaking to Obama as if he was an untried boy.

Obama's manners were perfect, gentlemanly. He was not drawn on to be snotty in return. It is more noticeable on second viewing.

Does it mean anything? *shrug* Who can say? Good manners are not a prerequisite for public office, but they are a prerequisite for being a gentleman. I also understand that Obama HAS to be perfect in his demeanor.