McCain should have had Palin out there to save his ass for being horrible at this debate. I just love how everyone who claim they are "political experts or strategist" were saying McCain won...yet viewers thought Obama won. Most of the stuff McCain was talking about people didn't care about, we all know earmarks cant solve out budget problems and yet he acted like stopping earmarks was his whole economic policy. McCain couldn't even pronounce the names of foreign leaders, and couldn't strain his neck to look at Obama.
Debate Thoughts - Live Blogging

Even if Obama was on the defensive at times, he projected a clear sense of calm and conveyed a knowledge of the world that was, at bottom, reassuring. Far from being apologetic about his foreign policy vision, Obama unabashedly stuck to his contention that, simply put, he is right and McCain is wrong. He argued his case convincingly, with an unmistakable grasp of nuance and detail

Good morning Greg. Thank you - that's the debate I saw last night, too.
'

Now I don't feel quite so much like I've gone through the looking glass.

I'm guessing that a lot of people watching, those still undecided, saw Obama for the first time in this type of setting. I would think many of them were impressed and reassured by his command of information, his demeanor and his decency. He came off as "presidential" in the face of McCain's nasty, condescending sourpuss.

I think Obama may have benefitted more from this than most candidates do in these things, and more than most pundits may understand. While the talking heads were focused on the "boxing match" saying there were no knockout blows, Obama didn't attack enough, he agreed with McCain too often, they missed the real point: Obama looked like someone who is not only ready to be president but may well, for undecideds, be exactly what we need right now - a reasonable, intelligent, knowledgable and decent person.

Obviously I'm biased and want to see the debate as a positive for Obama. But I really think a lot of folks who were skeptical about Barack may have had their chief concerns allayed. He didn't have to knock McCain out - he had to gain people's trust. I believe he did.

Going into the debate last night, political pundits said that Barack Obama needed to show voters that he ISN'T a RISK. That he is competent and prepared to lead the nation. He did that.

Who actually ended up being the one that folks might consider a RISK -- was John McCain.

His anger, his know it all attitude, his condescending attitude, his warnings to others -- all put you in mind of a man that could 'blow' at any time. Voters were more likely to consider John McCain a RISK to vote for.

http://coonsey.wordpress.com/

Mr McCain appears to know that he's on the wrong side of the issues. Instead of discussing the economy, he speaks about earmarks. Instead of discussing the lessons of Iraq, he talks about the surge. Instead of addressing long-term energy solutions, he talks of drilling. Instead of discussing what he will actually do if elected, he chooses to speak about his myth of being a sheriff and maverick in Washington.

Mr Obama comes across as more presidential. His firm grasp of the issues and his understanding of our place in the world is impressive. In speaking about middle class Americans, he shows his empathy and where his priorites are rooted. He leaves no doubt that of the two candidates he is the one who will be looking out for the little guy.

I think that people are catching on more and more about Palin. Her no show on the spin segments was glaring.

I think the undecideds who don't think she is ridiculous simply have trouble believing that McCain could have possibly picked someone so in over her head.

As the realization sinks in that, yes indeed, she is as clueless as she seems the herd will start tending even more to Obama.

Lee Atwater (an evil man, but one who knew politics) once said that 40% of the country are Democrats, 40% are Republican and 20% are fans of pro wrestling. Wrestling fans know it is fake and will come to the conclusion that for a real world a fake like Palin won't do.

From:

Head of State

http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/anger-entitlement-and-contempt.html

Saturday, September 27, 2008

What A Debate Reveals: Anger, Entitlement and Contempt

What I found shocking reflecting on last night's debate was how angry and entitled McCain was, in a very open way.

McCain's manner was one of that who believed he should not even be on the same stage with this person. This indicates a person of extreme rights and extreme wrongs, not a statesmanlike persona, but an angry and impulsive one.

McCain carries strong ideas of what a liberal is, ideas that very little from his cherished ideas of who betrayed the nation during the Vietnam war. A stock character, driven and created by his own rage, carried, as it has been since the '70s, with a virtual ideological blindness--blinded by a contemptuous rage--that there are others who cannot understand the world the way he can. This is not judgment, but angry certainty. This is not readiness, but a just-contained rage that he should be confronted by such ideas.

You can see it in his constricted "can you believe it" rage at one who disagrees with him. This kind of contemptuous, angry dismissal of others ideas leads easily into the impulsive decisions of the last few months--generated with barely contained contemptuous rejection of those who would reject his ideas--only the most recent forms of those essential constructs--a contemptible media, easily fed with false notions and panaceas, as he believes they were earlier in his life; intellectuals, whose reason and deliberation is contrasted with the sharp, impulsive action that for his life has constituted a certain knowledge, and an angry, certain need to sweep away those who would stand in the path of righteous certainty.

What is beautifully ironic is how McCain maintains this contempt even as he switches from one position to another in the opportunistic second--this is when the look of contempt and entitlement turns, for a moment, to anxiety and panic.

Soon, however, the gaze is back. No matter what the new position is--impulsively determined, desperately grasped--if only "they" knew better. If only "they" knew the truth.

This kind of ideological rigidity and certainty (note how Obama could not contain himself from smiling when McCain attempted to compare him to Bush in that regard) combined with impulsive decision making, from the "gut" of sure knowledge, is what has created the outcomes of the past 8 years.

It was--in a setting where one would not expect it to be, where one would expect McCain to contain it--glaring apparent last night.

This is an amplification of the last 8 years rather than a change.

We do not need to experience this type of decision making again.

Cite:

Head of State

http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/anger-entitlement-and-contempt.html

I really wonder what they are going to do about Thursday night. Thursday night is the best ratings night of the week. We are also in the middle of premiere weeks when alot of people are turning in to watch. The VP debate will have Survivor as a lead in.

My guess is that they will roll the dice and hope that the expectations for Palin are now so low that if they prep her enough she might beat the odds. They will also send her in with Christianist talking points and hope she will fire up the base. Or they might Old Yeller her between now and then.

There is a patriotic part of me that is hoping that they will dump her and bring in Mitt. Because there is an outside chance that the polls are way off about the Bradley effect and McCain could win. And while I think that Mitt is a complete sell out, he is infinitely more qualified to be POTUS than Palin.

They *have* to be thinking about throwing the Moose Queen under the bus.

They just lost this debate, and they're going down. They are looking straight at loss, less than 40 days ahead.

They've already shown that they've got as many stunts and Barnum and Bailey. And it's time to panic. It's an *exceedingly* dangerous move, sure it is. Only thing worse is not doing it.

My $.02:

Obama: Reassuringly prepared and confident. Came off as a serious and sane candidate ready for the job.

McCain: Not as confused as I thought he would be for 72 years of age and reported pre-debate chaos. As noted above, finds himself on wrong side of american majorities on the issues.

That likeability wipeout in the CNN poll 61-26 is reflected in both the Luntz and the Democracy Corps focus groups. More important in my view than the tie/w/l score, more important than tie goes to Obama is that likeability number

As far as the debate goes- a "draw."

What I find disturbing about the posts here as that no one got the impression that Obama came across as rude, shifty and snide.

He kept referring to Senator McCain as "John,"- while the Senator referred to his "opponent" as Senator Obama, as it should be.

He kept interrupting, shaking his head and- remarkably- said over and over "John is right." 8 times- I counted.

I implore you potential voters to PLEASE do some research on Obama's voting record in the Senate (voting "Present") and his background and the company he keeps.
Start at the website: www.obamawtf.blogspot.com
(Obama-What's The Facts)
And then Google the following:

Obama-Bill Ayres
Obama-Annenberg
Obama-Woods Foundation
Obama-Rev. G.D. America Wright
Obama-ACORN
Obama-Tony Rezko
Michelle Obama-Thesis
Obama- Late Term Abortion
Obama-Saul Alinsky
Obaama-Farrakhan
Obama-Moamar Ghaddafy

McCain-Palin is NOT 4 more years of the same,
as evidenced by John McCain's return to Washington to oversee all the Democrat coyotes in the henhouse- overseeing this "bailout."

And experience is the key here.
We don't need- no CAN'T AFFORD- to have a dangerous Socialist in the White House.

McCain-Palin 2008
Vote Out All Incumbants

First Obama Post-Debate ad:

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/zero_ad

I can't wait for the Biden/Palin debate!

Bring the popcorn!

I sat in a bar with about 50 people watching the debate during a political fundraiser for a local progressive supervisorial candidate. 46 were Obama supporters, 4 supported McCain.

The consensus: After about 20 minutes people were bored, turned it off and begged our band to start playing again. This from politically active people.

Nuance and detail only matter to the already committed. The undecideds will go with their overall impression and gut, not details.

The presidential debates are essentially worthless from here on out. The VP debate will only matter if there is a clear smack down.

A lot of the media/pundit reaction to this debate is leaving me befuddled. McCain won because he was more aggressive, because he was more on the offensive, because he spent more time attacking Obama than Obama spent attacking him. Or it was a tie, because neither candidate got in a zinger.

And there it is in the post-debate survey questions, too. Right in the middle of such things as "Was more intelligent" and "Seemed to be the stronger leader", there was "Spent more time attacking", as if that's an unalloyed good thing.

Huh?

It honestly would never have occurred to me to use "Spent more time attacking his opponent" as a criterion for deciding who won the debate. Attacks can be appropriate, or they can be wildly inappropriate.Their mere presence or absence means nothing. And frankly, I think I've seen enough to conclude that both candidates are more than capable of attacking their opponents. Believe me, an insufficient ability to attack the other side is very far from my concerns here. I'm pretty tired of it, actually.

What I wanted to see was what I did see. I got to see both candidates side by side talking about the actual issues that do concern me.

As far as "winning", I'd give it to Obama. My main criterion for "winning" would be something like, "which candidate's public standing and approval will improve because of this debate?"

Of course, this is filtered through my own personal lens, but I see it this way. I've always liked John McCain and have a great deal of respect for his personal experience. I've been leaning towards Obama on the issues, but there are certain questions about him that have always had resonance. And no, I'm not talking about the one about how he's a Muslim. The resonant ones are:

- Is he ready for this? He's still quite young and inexperienced.
- Is he too naive, especially about foreign policy?
- Can he be tough enough when the situation requires it?
- Is he really just an empty suit with a lot of charisma?

In short, he talks pretty, and that's a good thing in a president. But is that, after all, all there is to him?

Hillary Clinton's 3:00 am phone call ad took a lot of flak for being a cheap shot, and I guess it was. But it went right to the heart of the fear that I think a lot of people have about Obama. There's a lot to be scared about right now. Can he really handle it?

The debate went pretty far towards allaying my fears about that. He seemed competent. Knowledgeable. And, yes, calm.

He gets a lot of criticism for being so calm. But I *like* calm. There's enough anxiety going around right now, a little calmness is a good thing. It makes me feel more secure about him.

I think this was the best debate I've ever seen, and I've seen most of them since Carter/Reagan. Thank God, I say, that it *wasn't* about sound bites and zingers. That's exactly the kind of campaigning that's been turning me off to both parties. It's exactly the thing that both candidates claimed they wanted to get away from, but then ended up doing anyway. This was a breath of fresh air, and I sure hope the other two are the same way.

(BTW--Independent, female. Voted for McCain in the 2000 Republican primary and Clinton in the 2008 Democratic primary (here in Ohio we can switch like that). So that's where I'm coming from.)

Many of you are probably too young to remember this, but what you witnessed last night was:

Sonny Liston versus Cassius Clay (Mohammed Ali)
With McCain being Liston.

I think this was the best debate I've ever seen, and I've seen most of them since Carter/Reagan.

Wow - that's quite an assessment and I must say, I agree. I thought it was a good debate as far as debates go and I'm not a fan, actually. But I was very pleased with how things went, overall.

Thanks for sharing our view - it's illuminating. :)

John McCain's lack of temper control was on clear display. As Andrew Sullivan notes, McCain says "Horsesh*t" twice clearly when Obama handed him his ass about his Spanish confusion.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlan...

It was hilarious that Biden was blanketing the airwaves knowing that there would be no Palin counterpoint.

This coming week will be interesting as the McCain camp drama queen team will pull some crazy stunt to try to get Palin out of her debate.

John McCain's lack of temper control was on clear display. As Andrew Sullivan notes, McCain says "Horsesh*t" twice clearly when Obama handed him his ass about his Spanish confusion.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlan...

It was hilarious that Biden was blanketing the airwaves knowing that there would be no Palin counterpoint.

This coming week will be interesting as the McCain camp drama queen team will pull some crazy stunt to try to get Palin out of her debate.

Thank you, Kos, for posting Grumpy's "horseshit" moment,,,,,
"Horseshit"
27 Sep 2008 10:15 am

Yep: McCain clearly swore twice when challenged by Obama on his disdain for the Spanish prime minister. You can hear him cuss Obama out at around the 4:30 mark in this video. A little taste of what most of his fellow senators have had to listen to for the last two decades.

Do two "horseshits" a gaff make,,,, does grumpy potty mouth have anger issues,,,,, might someone out there get this wider coverage?

Me bad,,,,, not Kos but Andrew Sullivan.

If by "landing more blows" you mean McCain racked up a hefty tally of insisting "the surge is working, the surge is working" and "we are winning in Iraq, we are winning in Iraq," you have a point.

I would argue that repeating misinformation or outright lies over and over and over and over and over again is only landing blows on a strawman, not your political opponent.

McCain continues to run hard for the support of his far rightwing base at the expense of making a credible appeal to undecided voters.

McCain never laid a hand on Obama, but he pummeled the bejesus out of that strawman.

The reason why BO won the debate last night:

1. People didnt watch to see what McCain had to say on foreign policy because they already know that that is his area of expertise. what they wanted to see was the level of BO knowledge, understanding and grasp of foreign policy issues, and for the most part he was successful.

2. The "look" - BO just "looked" more like a leader. he was calm, reassuring, showed that he can keep a level head under pressure, and that he responds in a thoughtful manner. Contrast that with McCain who was very aggressive, demeaning and came of as somewhat stubborn on some issues which reminded them more of Bush.

Check out all the fact check posts in today's edition of Informed Comment http://www.juancole.com/

Slightly off topic: I think there should be a law that Jim Leher be the exclusive presidential debate moderator for all time. After the ludicrous tenor and childish questions from the primary debates, Leher's moderation and his questions, I think, were pitch perfect--as was the format.

Or maybe just PBS moderators. We'll see how Gwen Ifell does next week.

Tena, cement overshoes is a flawless description of what will be Palin's effect on McCain.

I wish I was a fly on the wall at the Palin household last night.

She has claimed - repeatedly - that she has more experience than Obama. Well, now that she has observed the depth of Obama's supposed lack of experience in this debate, it will be fun to watch her in in the Palin/Biden debate PROVE just how she is more qualified. Fun, I tell you!

My new blog is my take on Steadfast Strong Leadership, and how America has found that, if it is wise enough to do the right thing,

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/09/america-you-watched-the-presid.php

Please read it, and recommend if you think it provide some food for thought. Thanks.

John McCain led every single discussion including those Oilbama, who voted for the Bush Cheney Energy Bill McCain opposed, had first. McCain drove the discussion and as usual Oilbama said Me Too. Not in those words but we Clinton supporters remember how Oilbama always agreed with Hillary. Never offered anything new. Oilbama takes the safe road of agreement and the MSM cheers him on like he is more than the empty suit sexist pig that Oilbama clearly is.
Good to see Zogby's National poll of 9/25 has McCain leading Oilbama, 45.8-43.8
Unlike other polls incorrectly showing Oilbama leading Zogby has the distinguished track record of correctly polling the last 3 Presidential races. The fact that Palin is on the Republican ticket when Hillary wasn’t even vetted by the sexist Pig that is Oilbama will turn out to have been the major gaffe of Axellimprod and Company, and the tipping point of this tight election. I like Biden but he cannot even say hello in under 1000 words.

Talk about elite and stuck-up. McCain appeared to feel as though this black man shouldn't even be running for president let alone looking at him. Hey, he feels that all Obama can do for him is shine his shoes. In the South years ago a black man had to look down at his feet when a Caucasian person walked by. McCain seems to be living in the past. He was very cold and condescending. You would think that he would not act like that since he has a child living in one of his houses who is even darker than Obama! But she is not African-American. But she is probably considered more as pet who was rescued from certain death.

FACT CHECK:

Kissinger agrees with Jim Baker that we SHOULD TALK TO OUR ADVERSARIES.

"I agree with Jim".

Starts about 1:10.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6gziWq38D4

And I have to say that the reference to Teddy Kennedy at the beginning just struck this political junkie as a shameless attempt to appear "bipartisan".

I was disappointed with Obama's too laid-back style when McCain was talking about Russia and Georgia.

It's well know that the altercation was started by Georgia and Russia's actions were expected but the intensity was way more than what was thought necessary by the west.

Also, its' well know that when the USSR was collapsing, Bush 41 promised the Soviets that NATO would respect their borders and not encroach on Russia's borders by annexing the Eastern Block nations into NATO; give them a neutral zone.

That went out the window with the baby and bath water under Clinton and Bu$h 43 was even more in-your-face about it.

A diplomat with foreign policy expertise would know the best way to keep Russia in the game would be to work with them, keep the demilitarized, neutral zone intact (no NATO membership), but steer Russia to accepting a trade zone area made up of those buffer nations that both western Europe, eastern Europe, Russia and western Asia would have free access to. It gives Russia enough room to breathe and gives the former eastern the opportunity to industrialize their infrastructure to meet the demands of both east and west.

Obama would have been able to oneupmanship McCain in his own proclaim territory of expertise and prove foreign policy can be accomplished without the use of force and sabre rattling McCain is so fond of using

Greg,

I know you're being a little ironical in this post. But comparing Sarah Palin to O' was always an insult to human intelligence and no better example than last night.

The real story- McCain couldn't able to establish he was better than Obama on FP expertise. McCain kept saying "I know these people.." "I worked with them..." "I've been there..."

Obama actually explianed what he knows and he proved an awful lot than McCain. It's amazing people take it for granted McLame knows- I've never really seen him talk much FP with any sense ever.

Obama showed he is know an awful lot more about FP- and McCain was lucky taking refuge behind the false myth that he knows FP.

In his own words, McLame being a FP expert is horse shit.