All Talked Out - Debates Over - Who Won?

[sauronsfinger]

I would give it to Senator McCain, nor for what he did so much but for what Senator Obama failed to do.

Somebody should tell Obama never ever ever to say "your'e right Senator McCain". How many times did he do that? Eight times? Never say that. It only makes your opponent look good.

The other failing of Obama was failing to slap McCain down hard when he was so partronizing and condescending to him saying many times that Obama just did not get it or did not understand or did not have the experience. Obama needed badly to stop him dead the first time he did it but let it go and McCain wisely kept using the line again and again.

I know others here do not prize the quality, but this is a street fight and Obama is no street fighter. McCain is. And that is why he won tonight.

I suspect by the end of the weekend we see a McCain national TV commercial where we see Obama saying over and over again that McCain is right.

[halplm]

I don't think anyone won, but I'm making my post in the other thread about my impressions.

[Dave_LF]

I don't know, SF. I watched on CNN; they had little trendlines that showed how much the Republicans, Democrats, and independents in the audience approved of what was being said at any given moment. Every time McCain got condescending, the independent line started falling (but the Republicans loved it, naturally).

Also, Obama stock went up 3 points on the Iowa electronic markets, for what that's worth.

And the independents in this focus group give it to Obama by nearly 2 to 1:

http://mediacurves.com/

[Holbytla]

Too close to call for me. Both had their moments but there was far too much rhetoric from both of them.

Both of them were poor on the financial crisis.
McCain appeared a bit more seasoned, but he doesn't seem to get the war in Iraq never should have happened and he still thinks in terms of victories where none is possible.

As far as overall feeling towards the candidates McCain reminds me of a long time successful baseball coach but the game has passed him by.
Obama isn't as smart as he thinks he is and could use some humble pie.

Overall too much spin surrounding a few good moments.

I suspect Thursday's debate will provide more entertainment. If you like train wrecks anyway.

[Cerin]

I didn't think it was street-fighty at all. I don't know what Obama could have done about the 'Sen. Obama doesn't understand's'. Trying to argue that he did understand might have looked bad and just emphasized the phrase. It was very annoying, but I don't know how he might have handled it.

I think they both did well enough, they both had their strengths and weaknesses. What stood out to me? McCain's refusal to engage with Obama, almost as though he regards him with contempt or abhorrence. He wouldn't even look at him. And that Obama was forceful enough and conveyed sufficient energy.

[vison]

I heard the first part on the radio, and watched the second half on TV. I think it was basically a draw, which in essence translates as a win for Obama - since I have been told over and over again that he's a poor debater.

McCain was snotty and condescending. That will annoy people, if he does it again, and why wouldn't he? He thinks it works. Well, yeah, some people might have been wondering why Obama didn't call him on it, but then, in a way Obama was giving McCain enough rope to hang himself.

Every question, McCain began by attacking Obama. Every question, Obama answered the question.

Obama shouldn't "change" his style, because it's an act of "defense", or "response" to what some people see as McCain's strength. Obama will score more points by being himself, and I hope he does.

[Whistler]

McCain was perhaps condescending at times, but I thought it rather disrespectful that Obama (who is of course considerably younger than McCain) persisted in calling his adversary "John" while McCain respectfully called Obama "Senator Obama."

Once Obama even called him "Jim," supposedly by accident.

[Dave_LF]

A CBS poll also shows that independents think Obama won. This is based on first impressions, obviously:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/26 ... 2028.shtml

[halplm]

Too close to call for me. Both had their moments but there was far too much rhetoric from both of them.

Both of them were poor on the financial crisis.
McCain appeared a bit more seasoned, but he doesn't seem to get the war in Iraq never should have happened and he still thinks in terms of victories where none is possible.

As far as overall feeling towards the candidates McCain reminds me of a long time successful baseball coach but the game has passed him by.
Obama isn't as smart as he thinks he is and could use some humble pie.

Overall too much spin surrounding a few good moments.

I suspect Thursday's debate will provide more entertainment. If you like train wrecks anyway.

Well, having failed to not read people, Like I said I wouldn't , Holby, I agree dwith you completely. I thought that was odd enough to comment on

[Cerin]

McCain was perhaps condescending at times, but I thought it rather disrespectful that Obama (who is of course considerably younger than McCain) persisted in calling his adversary "John" while McCain respectfully called Obama "Senator Obama."

Once Obama even called him "Jim," supposedly by accident.

I thought it was 'Tom' he called him once. It turns out he was about to relate a circumstance involving a fellow legislator named Tom something, and it occurred to me that that was why he mistakenly said 'Tom'.

Also, I think the reason McCain always used 'Sen. Obama' was because he refused to address Obama directly, almost as though it would be beneath him to do so. When Obama addressed Sen. McCain, he called him 'John', which I don't think was untoward in direct address since they are colleagues.

edit to add quote and additional thought

[Lurker]

Canada's CTV's reporter Tom Clark is saying that McCain won.

I quote in the immortal words of Senator Obama "McCain is right!" Repeat after me "McCain is right!" "McCain is right!"

Therefore, McCain won.

[halplm]

McCain was perhaps condescending at times, but I thought it rather disrespectful that Obama (who is of course considerably younger than McCain) persisted in calling his adversary "John" while McCain respectfully called Obama "Senator Obama."

Once Obama even called him "Jim," supposedly by accident.

I didn't even notice that, but now that you point it out, it's true.

I think Obama seemed more willing to argue with McCain, which is something I'd like to see. But at the same time it might lead to incomprehensable debate, which doesn't get anywhere.

Not sure what to think about that.

[halplm]

I thought it was 'Tom' he called him once. It turns out he was about to relate a circumstance involving a fellow legislator named Tom something, and it occurred to me that that was why he mistakenly said 'Tom'.

He did say "Tom" once, and I thought that was funny, but wouldn't hold it against him

[halplm]

sorry for posting this twice, but if the discussion is here rather than the other thread, here's my impression:

I haven't read anything about what has been said, and I don't intend to read any more tonight, but I thought I should post my impressions as one of few non-obama supporters around here.

On the Economy issues at the beginning, I thought they both sounded like idiots. They have proved they don't know anything about how to do what needs to be done. Obama scored points with his 95% tax cut statements, but lost them by never being able to say what he would cut with the bailout. McCain gained points by saying he would stop earmarks, but lost points because that's not the key issue, which neither really addressed.

On Foreign policy, I think they both did well, and Obama made good points on Afghanistan, while McCain made good points on Iraq.

McCain was definitely more on the attack with Obama's experience. I don't think that will play any better than Obama's continued expression of distaste for Iraq.

Each side will claim victory, but as Foriegn policy is McCain's strong point, the most either side can truly claim is "As expected."

On debate style, neither won. They both had good moments, and they both clearly had moments where they were flustered.

I did like the debate format. I thought the moderator did well in making them stay on topic.

Personally, I think if Foriegn policy is the main issue in the eleciton, McCain wins, and that was shown tonight. But I don't think that will be the deciding factor. And on the economy, which has been the focus of the week, McCain is behind, and the most that this debate did, is bring him back to "not crazy."

McCain was definitely able to claim more knowledge of foriegn policy, but it was stuff no one would care about, so I doubt it will sway anyone.


If there were undecideds that care most about Iraq, they might have gone for McCain tonight, but I think that group is very small.

Other than that, I don't think this debate will sway anyone that hadn't made their mind up so far.

As a last thought, I'm trying to think of anything that either said that was new information for me... To be perfectly honest, I don't know of anything from Obama, except perhaps his willingness to act in pakistan without talking to them first. I don't know if that was distorted or not, though. For McCain, he made the point that the only way we'd win in getting Bin Ladin in Pakistan or Afghanistan, is to gain the support of their peoples. I don't recall that strategy (or is it tactic, I'm not sure ) being discussed before.

Hope you all enjoyed it... I got kind of bored, but not totally

[Padme]

It was a tie and McCain needed to hit it out of the park, and he didn't.

Thing is this was supposed to be McCain's strongest debate, since it was on foreign policy. Sure he did a good job, but the bottom line is Obama held his own against McCain. McCain needed more than that to win.

[Frelga]

Like Cerin said, he said Tom because he was thinking of the other Tom fellow. It was unfortunate, but not lethal.

I thought Obama came across well. He kept calm, was forceful when needed, he was firm, he did not do nearly as much hemming and umming as is his want. McCain did all right, although he did fidget, and played with his papers when Obama was talking.

Of course, Republicans think McCain did better, and Democrats think Obama did better. It's the independents that count. If MediaCurves report that Dave posted is correct, then Obama "won". Another significant point on that chart was that over a quarter Republicans agreed with Obama on the financial recovery plan.

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. )

Now I'm looking forward to the VP debate. Someone said over on Twitter, all Biden has to do is memorize one line, "Could you please explain what you mean, Governor?"

On a tangent, I thougth CBS's website tag, Horserace 08 is disgraceful. Horserace? The fate of the greatest power in the world is in balance and they call it horserace?

ETA: Did anyone do the drinking game?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I thought it was basically a draw. Which is good news for Obama. I did think that McCain was quite condescending at times. But he also came across as the more forceful personality. But Obama did hold his own in the few heated exchanges. Particularly when he engaged McCain directly, which I though he did well at. I agree with Cerin that McCain's failure to engage directly with Obama did not come across well. As for Obama using McCain's first name, and McCain using "Sen. Obama" I thought that was probably mostly a generational thing. And perhaps some element of McCain being uncomfortable with using the name "Barack". But that of course is speculation on my part. I was frustrated that neither of them would answer Lehrer's direct question about whether they would support the bailout, but Obama did a better job of at least addressing the substance of the question. I did think that McCain's attempts to paint Obama as "not getting it" on foreign policy probably was effective with some voters, although I found it off-putting. McCain had more "one-liners" but Obama had the two best ones: the one about not sitting down for tea with the Iranian president, and the best line of the night, when he responded to McCain's IMO ridiculous suggestion of a complete spending freeze other than military and veteran spending by saying that McCain was responding with a hatchet when a scalpel was what was needed.

[Whistler]

Hm...how did I confuse "Jim" with "Tom?"

Just once, I'd like to see a debate in which the moderator simply says, "You have one hour! Start debating!" and the debaters fight it out as they see fit, with no holds barred and no rules whatever.

Yes, the result could be chaos––but wouldn't that be informative in itself? The question of how a candidate would handle himself in a (somewhat civilized) fist fight is an important one. The way one responds to polite questions, given a set space of time without interruption, is no way of judging how he'd perform going head-to-head with a hostile foreign leader. The real world isn't so neat and tidy.

Just a random thought, perhaps better for another thread.

[vison]

Hm...how did I confuse "Jim" with "Tom?"

Just once, I'd like to see a debate in which the moderator simply says, "You have one hour! Start debating!" and the debaters fight it out as they see fit, with no holds barred and no rules whatever.

Yes, the result could be chaos––but wouldn't that be informative in itself? The question of how a candidate would handle himself in a (somewhat civilized) fist fight is an important one. The way one responds to polite questions, given a set space of time without interruption, is no way of judging how he'd perform going head-to-head with a hostile foreign leader. The real world isn't so neat and tidy.

Just a random thought, perhaps better for another thread.

Well, you know, Whistler, that such a thing is unlikely to happen in the real world, not only in a TV debate. When would either of these guys, or any other world leader, actually go head-to-head with a hostile foreign leader? One on one? I can't see it happening, to be honest. There are always going to be agendas and notes and translators, etc., and the more hostile the leaders are to each other, the less likely it will ever be one on one - thankfully! Although it might be fun to give them boxing gloves . . .

I liked Mr. Obama's calm, and his thoughtful demeanor. I didn't like Mr. McCain's constant "Sen. Obama just doesn't get it". Once was okay, anything after that you just sound snotty. But they both did okay, and I didn't die of boredom.

Your idea of an hour free-for-all is intriguing, but I daresay it would be hard to watch. I wouldn't watch it, it's bad enough when my grandkids do it - which I never let get to an hour.

I take the snap polls with a large grain of salt. I doubt that anyone is going to change his/her mind because of tonight's debate. The McCain people think he did well, the Obama people think he did well and in fact, they both did.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

It will be interesting to see how the next debate between them goes, in the "townhall" format that McCain feels most comfortable with.