Debate analysis

[ugarte]

I don't want this to descend into partisan rancor - and if it does I apologize in advance. Regardless of how you feel about the underlying issues (to the extent that you can parse that out), how do you think the debate went.

It was interesting and a lot more substantive than I expected.

From my perspective, Obama clearly won the early financial crisis part of the debate. He effectively blamed the cause of the debate on the deregulation of the financial industry and painted McCain as a champion of that deregulation. (Again, I know some people think that Obama is wrong on the facts there but that is outside the scope of what I'm asking. Whether right or wrong, I think Obama made a convincing case.) I also think Obama did a good job minimizing the meaning of earmarks in the context of the cost of the war and other tax breaks.

On the foreign policy side, I'd call it something of a draw, which is sort of a win for Obama. I think McCain showed that he has knowledge and experience but I don't think he showed that Obama doesn't. The more contentious of McCain's accusations are easier to make when there isn't someone to respond. When he made them in a forum in which Obama could refute them immediately (he meaning of "no preconditions", for example) they lose some of their force.

I'm clearly an Obama partisan, so it is entirely possible that I'm seeing things through that prism and I'm curious as to how other people feel.

[Beeeej]

Leaving aside substance for a moment, I thought both of them had "style" problems.  McCain's smile looks too much like a creepy old grimacing guy, and Obama kept waving his finger and wanting/trying to interrupt, as if refuting a point was more important than letting McCain finish.  Obama also stammered a bit when excited about getting to a prepared point, and I thought McCain was overly and too frequently disingenuous when using memes like "defeat" to describe Obama's Iraq plan.

That having been said, I think this was McCain's debate to lose because foreign policy experience is supposedly his trump card over Obama.  But as one commentator responded afterward to McCain's laundry list of 35 years of foreign crises, places he's visited, and dignitary name-dropping (many of which he mangled, by the way), "I was in Tbisli, too, but it doesn't make me right."  I think Obama held his own, which in a debate McCain should be expected to win is a pretty strong showing, and the instant polls afterward certainly seem to agree.  CBS's poll of undecideds showed 46% liked Obama more, and only 7% liked him less, after the debate than before.

[Jordan 04]

[quote Beeeej]I think Obama held his own, which in a debate McCain should be expected to win is a pretty strong showing, and the instant polls afterward certainly seem to agree.  CBS's poll of undecideds showed 46% liked Obama more, and only 7% liked him less, after the debate than before.[/quote]

Well FOX News' text poll had McCain winning 82-16!

[Beeeej]

[quote Jordan 04]Well FOX News' text poll had McCain winning 82-16![/quote]

I imagine there are less scientific ways of taking a political poll than 1) including only FOX News viewers and 2) asking people to text in order to be counted, but at the moment I'm having a hard time coming up with one.

[Lauren '06]

Either I'm bitter or I haven't watched enough presidential debates in my life, but it sounded like the usual slogan-swapping to me.  ("I saw this crisis coming years ago!" "Well I've been there, and this expert-guy has been my friend forever!" "Past eight years!" "Defeat in Iraq!")  I also enjoyed how they both refused to answer the "what wouldn't you be able to do in this economy" question for at least ten minutes.

McCain got off more than a few "Senator Obama doesn't seem to understand"s, but I thought they fell flat, and Obama did a good job characterizing McCain's statements as unfairly spinning his actual position.  Maybe because he interrupted more.

To be honest, I'm not sure why I watched.  Hyper-politicizing everything fills me with despair, and that's exactly what debates do.  Ugh.

[DeltaOne81]

[quote Beeeej][quote Jordan 04]Well FOX News' text poll had McCain winning 82-16![/quote]

I imagine there are less scientific ways of taking a political poll than 1) including only FOX News viewers and 2) asking people to text in order to be counted, but at the moment I'm having a hard time coming up with one.[/quote]

Well, maybe we could get a poll of people signed up for special alerts from the Drudge Report.

[ugarte]

[quote Jordan 04][quote Beeeej]I think Obama held his own, which in a debate McCain should be expected to win is a pretty strong showing, and the instant polls afterward certainly seem to agree.  CBS's poll of undecideds showed 46% liked Obama more, and only 7% liked him less, after the debate than before.[/quote]

Well FOX News' text poll had McCain winning 82-16![/quote]
If 16% of the people watching on FOX thought Obama won, that's trouble for McCain.

The snap CBS poll had Obama winning (IIRC) 40-22 with 38% calling it a draw.

[RichH]

[quote Section A Banshee]Either I'm bitter or I haven't watched enough presidential debates in my life, but it sounded like the usual slogan-swapping to me.  ("I saw this crisis coming years ago!" "Well I've been there, and this expert-guy has been my friend forever!" "Past eight years!" "Defeat in Iraq!") [/quote]

Yeah, but it makes for a pretty good drinking game.  

Political events become more fun when you treat them like sporting events.  While in Ithaca for Homecoming, we didn't have a good answer as to "where can we watch the debate with a crowd and have fun doing it?"  We had a crowd at "bar" on the Commons (also had the Mets & Brewers on), and other reports say that the debate was on in Pixel in C-Town.

[Lauren '06]

Ah, but the ultimate drinking game will be the VP debates this week.  I expect to be thoroughly entertained.

[billhoward]

Heard 30 minutes on radio driving back the hotel then saw most of rest on TV.

Radio: Seems like a reprise of the Nixon-Kennedy debate of 1960 where radio listeners couldn't see Nixon's five-o'clock shadow or dark suit that merged into the background or the creepy look. So on radio, Nixon then and McCain now seemed okay.

TV: McCain seemed unhappy to be there when not speaking.

Overall: One of these two guys is going to be president? What a disappointment. They seemed to be bickering over who did or didn't waste $7 billion. Not much useful to say on either side. McCain may have gotten in a few licks mentioning "naivite" on the part of that kid Obama. Obama at least offered up one program that was so important it wouldn't get cut regardless, one of the few specifics I heard.

I wondered if McCain would turn into a hothead when Obama got under his collar; didn't happen. I wondered if Obama would sound like Michael Dukakas II Policy Wonk who'd put you to sleep with long discourses; he didn't fall into that trap but he also didn't have many memorably lines beyond "what you say is liberal, John, is just me standing up to George Bush's wrong ideas."

Now on to the VP debate. I hope Tina -- sorry, Palin -- doesn't melt down and start babbling again. It's funny when it's done for effect on SNL and pretty embarrassing when someone high up can't formulate a thought under pressure. From there it's one step beyond to babbling like the Miss Teen USA contestant from South Carolina.

If it was a draw as some suggested, this was the the debate that probably played best to McCain's strength - foreign policy.

[KeithK]

I made a concious choice not to watch the debate even though I am thoroughly engrossed by politics and the election.  Realistically there is absolutely nothing that Obama or McCain could say that would change my vote in November.  So watching would be either an exercise in cheerleading or lambasting the other guy.

As is usual, opinions of the debate "results" track pretty well with people's partisan leanings.  From what I have read and heard in analysis, strong conservatives tend to think that McCain had the better of things handily while liberals tend to think that Obama was superior.  Neither had any obvious winning or losing moments.  How this will play to those who are on the fence is unclear to me.  I am pretty skeptical about the immediate "undecided" polls that the various outlets perform right after the debate. Only time will tell.  (Plus, there's been some serious gaming of polls lately in terms of weighting by party affiliation.)

[Robb]

[quote KeithK]I made a concious choice not to watch the debate even though I am thoroughly engrossed by politics and the election.[/quote]

Same here - I felt that a nice walk on Newport Beach was a much higher priority!  

[jtwcornell91]

[quote Robb][quote KeithK]I made a concious choice not to watch the debate even though I am thoroughly engrossed by politics and the election.[/quote]

Same here - I felt that a nice walk on Newport Beach was a much higher priority!  [/quote]

At 3am Central European Time, I just opted for sleep. :-)

[DeltaOne81]

I watch them to see if anyone screws up or to form my opinion of how they did. But, like Keith, agree that it'd never change my mind - although from the opposite side.

Independent voters seem to have come down on Obama's side by a modest margin (10 points?), but it may have been an expectations thing. Where all he  had to do was show he could be presidential and well-versed. I think he did that, even if you disagree with him - and McCain's "what you don't understand" were for the most part proved untrue.

I think it really is an expectations game though - because I expected more of Obama and less of McCain, so I came away thinking McCain did the better job. Obama missed a bunch of punches and McCain landed a few more - at least in the upfront economic portion - than I expected.


If that's true, one thing Palin's got going for her this week is the expectations game is long since won. If she puts together one coherent sentence - and avoids any massive flubs - she'll exceed common expectations it seems.

If she holds her own on ever a modest portion of the subjects, it'll go a ways towards undoing much of the damage that the Couric, etc interviews have done.

Heck, maybe that was the plan all along.

[Killer]

Just wondering, what with Sarah Palin's "hockey mom", and I guess what can best be called "soon-to-be-hockey-mom-in-law" credentials, does this thread risk being the first to be split by Beeeej and moved to the Men's Hockey forum?