There are several ways to judge a debate: on substantive points, on demeanor/tone/how presidential, on whether expectations were met, on how it played with the audience.
As a passionate Obama supporter, I would give him the edge in all categories. But neither candidate hurt himself; no major gaffes; no soaring phrase that will echo around the internet.
Regarding expectations: McCain didn't have a meltdown or senior moment; he didn't sound as erratic as he has seemed recently; and he did display his knowledge of the world. He needed not to mess up, and he didn't (oh, sure some minor things). But about all he did was not hurt himself on the topic that's supposed to be his strong point.
On the other hand, Obama needed to prove that he is presidential, that he can hold his own on foreign affairs and national security, and to give crisp, succinct, forceful answers. He did all that admirably. And he was forceful in correcting McCain's frequent distortions of his record. He looked presidential. And, remember, the tallness factor? The taller one usually wins. Pretty obvious when they're standing on stage together.
I think a McCain supporter would be reassured that he didn't mess up. I think an Obama supporter would feel very proud of his superior performance.
A group of 500 uncommitted voters were instant-polled by CBSNews: 40% said Obama won the debate; 22% gave it to McCain, with 38% calling it a tie. In addition, 46% said their opinion of Obama had improved, while only 7% said it was worse.
My take-away memories: Obama saying to McCain: "You pretend like the Iraq war started in 2007" (with the surge). "You were wrong on the war. I know it. You know it. Everybody in American knows it except John McCain. He was wrong, and that's not the judgment we need."
And McCain? If he had said one more time that "Senator Obama doesn't seem to understand . . . " (he said it 6 times; I counted), then one fine TV set would have had a shoe aimed squarely at the old man's image.
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
Three focus groups -- one by a Republican pollster, one by a Democratic pollster, and one with an a group of independents -- all gave the win to Obama.
The independent group: 61% to 39%.
By far Obama remained more cool and confident than McCain. However, Obama needs to stop trying to connect McCain to Bush and just go after McCain and his record. Why not bring up the Keating 5 in debate.
Here is what I think
http://joe6-packnews.blogspot.com/
We Obama supporters are so nervous about this thing that we have trouble knowing the truth when we see it. There was only one Presidential contender on that stage. The other guy was a curmudgeon. As Turkana of the leftcoaster said, "Cleaning up the messes left by the Bush Administration will require so much intelligence and patience and maturity, and John McCain has conclusively proved he has little of any of that. His career is spiraling to an ignominious end. It’s time for him to go back to Arizona, where he can enjoy his declining years, kicking dogs and yelling at children.
Thanks for your comments, Danny Boy and Mickie (you far from "Boring Old Man").
I liked Gail Collins' comments in this mornings' Times. "McCain had been a walking political soap opera for days, and then on Friday night he just looked like a small, slightly grumpy grey guy."
Despite the pundits trying to give him his due, I think this will prove to be his dowwnfall. And, if any doubts linger, poor Sarah will finish off the deal next week, reflecting badly on his judgment in choosing her.
Sarah was his Hail Mary pass; it was beginning to backfire. Then his Superman dash-to-save-DC stunt was ah attempt to get a do-over Hail Mary. And it backfired.
Give him credit that he made it through last night without a meltdown or a senior moment; but he needed more than just getting through. It should have been his shining hour.
It wasn't. And the voters know it.
Before we get too positive about the debate - and I thought Obama clearly won - I want to tell you what I heard today from almost everyone I spoke with at a bookstore where I was doing a workshop. Most of these people are Obama supporters, although some mainly because they're anti-Republican.
Not one person, out of 6 white moderates, thought Obama won the debate. I was stunned. Two thought it was a tie, and 4 thought McCain won. When pressed mainly it was because he was such a mess during the week, that the fact he could stand up and talk was a success. Others said he looked strong on the issues, and knowledgeable about foreign affairs since he'd been so many places. A couple mentioned Obama was too serious.
These are Obama voters. I just don't get it.
I sat in a theater that was about 50-50 black and white, and they scoffed at McCain at all the appropriate places, and applauded Obama for his well-deserved responses.
That's interesting and a bit troubling, Richard. I too know some Obama supporters who called it a tie. Perhaps they were hoping for a blow-out, dramatic mow-him-down kind of moment.
But I think Obama took as his task convincing the uncommitted voters that he is ready to be president and commander-in-chief, that he can be trusted to protect us, and that he understands their needs. Also that he can be forceful, crisp, and succinct as well as professorial and nuanced.
Many of us didn't need convincing and maybe were looking for more so we could know he had blown McCain out of the race. But he did what was needed for the uncommitteds.
I predict they will begin moving to him in the real polls, not just the insta-polls from last night.
Yeah, well I kept wanting Obama to say more. I think he has decided long ago that he doesn't want to come across as the angry black man, or too flippant, or something like that. I like his demeanor. He projects calm and seriousness. Last night, though, McCain was also calm, after a disasterous week. I do think Barack met the Commander-in-Chief threshold, and with the tide of change in this country should do well in the election. Realclearpolitics.com has Virginia in his column now, and I've seen tight polls from NC. Somebody said McCain is spending money in Indiana, which is great.
This is a really good ad:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/27/obama-slams-mccain-for-no_n_129896.html
There are also some interesting results from a Democracy Corps focus group of 45 undecided voters in St. Louis who had voted 2:1 for Bush in 04. After the debate 1/4 moved to Obama and 1/4 to McCain; the rest remained the undecided.
Yet these same people said that Obama won the debate by 38/27%.
Even more significant, I think, is that the group's strong positive reaction to Obama on a personal level zoomed up from 40% to 69%.
www.democracycorps.com/focus/2008/09
To spell out why I think that is so significant: that big jump in "strong positive reaction on a personal level" may speak to the puzzle of why Obama's polls haven't seemed to reflect what should be a landslide for a Democratic candidate.
Some people think it's racism; I think it's also the unease of just not feeling he's been tested and tried enough to feel confidence in him; plus the sense of his inexperience and short time on the national scene.
I would say this jump up reflects that unease being addressed last night. He looked presidential, seemed in command of the issues, was forceful.
I'm going to predict he'll have a double-digit lead by the end of next week.
I just found this debate analysis by James Fallows at The Atlantic. He makes a similar point, saying that Obama supporters may have been disappointed because he didn't fight back harder, make a harsh closing statement as did McCain, etc.
But Fallows says: Obama's "real battle was to make himself seem comfortable, reasonable, responsible, well-versed, and in all ways "safe" and non-outsiderish to the audience just making up its mind about him."
So his was a larger goal than scoring tactical points against McCain; it was a larger strategy of reassuring the uncommitted voters about him.
http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/on_strategy_and_tactics.php
Post a Comment