« Snap Polls Give Debate Win To Obama | Home | Election Central Morning Roundup »

Obama Scores Clear Win In Low-Key Debate

The debate's relatively low-key tone, combined with a series of exchanges that Obama won by at minimum a marginal amount, translate into a clear, even decisive win for Obama tonight. There's no point in mincing words: Time is running out for McCain.

As multiple observers have pointed out, McCain needed to jar the electorate into seeing this race in a new way. It isn't even clear if McCain even tried to do this tonight -- there was no moment where he appeared to make an aggressive bid to take down Obama or grab the initiative. McCain did try to hit Obama by saying that the presidency is no time for "on the job training," but the attack was a stale one that we've heard before. There was no mention of the words "William Ayers."

The subdued tone of the debate was partly a function of tonight's format -- one that McCain's people, ironically, wanted and saw as playing to his strengths. But it hamstrung McCain from doing what he needed to do tonight. The format placed the onus on the candidates to "connect" with voters, rather than to land haymakers on each other.

The first big test for both candidates, tellingly, came not from an exchange between the two but from a voter's question. Teresa asked why we should trust either party when they'd both landed us in this mess. It was an invitation for the candidates to reproduce Bill Clinton's famous moment in the 1992 debate against George H.W. Bush, when he approached a questioner and spoke directly to her economic distress. Both failed the Bill test, but any draws at this point favor Obama, as did the focus on anyone but each other.

The candidates, aware of the constraints of being in an intimate setting with voters, edged into attacking each other, and even there, Obama, at a minimum, held his own.

Again, the challenge for McCain was to land a haymaker, and that just didn't happen. McCain launched a hard hit on Obama by repeating his familiar claim that Obama will hike taxes on middle class families and small businesses. But Obama aggressively rebutted those claims at length, with authority and conviction.

The bottom line is that the stage mostly belonged to Obama tonight. In a very telling moment, a veteran asked the candidates whether, if Iran were to attack Israel, would they immediately commit to military force to defend Israel or would they wait for approval from the U.N. Security Council. McCain bonded skillfully with the veteran, called for increased international sanctions on Iran, and attacked Obama for saying he would meet with the country's leadership.

But Obama refused to cede the moment to McCain. He agreed that of course we would defend Israel and would not wait for international approval to do that. But in a striking moment, he approached the veteran and told him in clear, practical terms that it's important to use every diplomatic tool at our disposal to prevent the horrific scenario his questioner had envisioned.

Obama's victory was at its most evident in the contrast between their closing statements. McCain's closing argument had a meandering, almost pleading quality to it. McCain's argument seemed to be that because he served his country honorably, and has handled crisis ably in the past, he deserves the job. Obama's answer, by contrast, focused on what he would do for Americans if they elected him, and was relentlessly in sync with his message.

Time is running out for McCain. It's that simple.


236 Comments

| Leave a comment

Our new battle cry:
"THAT ONE '08"

Not that one, THAT ONE!

That one is the change we need! THAT ONE'08!

With the Obama logo in the "o" in "ONE."

Right on. That T-shirt is going to be awesome!

Surprisingly dull, and we have an entire month to go!


That makes me so happy for THAT ONE!!!

Frankly, I didn't find the debate dull. But again, I unashamedly admit, I was mesmerized by the grace, confidence and aptitude of Barack Obama.

Also, Greg, this debate will be looked in a much different light, once we all move away from it. This is a very notable moment presidential elections, and we'll see it differently a few months or years from now.

user-pic

I think this will look like 1932 all over again, once perspective is injected. There will be important differences though. Herbert Hoover went solo as the albatross, but McCain will be grafted to Bush and Cheney in that role. Perhaps with time McCain will be seen more as a victim and Bush as the solo villian, Cheney as the diabolical side kick (or vice versa).

The hole we are in is not as great (yet) as 1932. And maybe we can still avert the rise of reactionary regimes around the world (Russia?). But the refutation of Republican economic duopoly of supply-side+laissez-faire is even more dead now than it was in 1932.

While our aristocracy will surely want to bring it back, the outside world will not let them come back. I mean this quite sincerely. The horrors that the Republican policies brought the world after 1928: the depression, Hitler, Japan, WWII, the Holocaust should have been a permanent bar from this duopoly ever coming back again, but it did when Reagan emerged.

We may avoid the melt down of the 1930s this time (hopefully) but the world isn't going to let us repeat this a third time. If the American people won't step in and stop it, I am quite certain the world is going to organize itself to prevent a three-pete. And that might even mean an anti-republican military alliance that stretches from the Atlantic to the the Pacific in Eurasia.

That's the shape I think this election will take on as we pull away from Novemember 2008. This melt down wasn't necessary. It was predictable. The rest of the world wants to get on with economic growth and the ideologically free persuit of what makes them happy (ie. Pragmatism).

It's sunset for the Reagan revolution.

you lost me with the conparison of Japan, and Hitler with American Republicans...

Care to elaborate?

Indeed. I'm no fan of the Republican Party by any means, but I don't think they deserve to share the stain of the Nazi holocaust; at least not alone (I mean just as many politicians blind or indifferent to the threat of Hitler in the 1930s had 'D's next to their names as had 'R's).

I think Tim might have meant (American Neo-)Fascism, perhaps connected to the Republicans by way of Prescott Bush's lucrative association with the Nazis, but I really have no idea unless he cares to clarify.

Certainly Reagan's mission was to pick up the ball and run with it Gipperly after Nixon's disastrous fumble. These things do run in cycles and the Republican elements have been trying very hard (and may have succeeded--jury still out) in turning us into a fascist state since 1980. I too have wondered how long Russia & China would put up with the crap before they got together (at the behest of nearly the whole rest of the world) and decided to send over a nuke or three and settle things once and for all. Instead they seem to have decided to try & win the Last Great Oil Grab & along with, in the case of China, buying up tons of US loans (oops--that didn't quite work out so well...but they're the Middle Kingdom, they can take the hit). Exploitation is always more efficient than destruction and one can even claim to be acting out of some sort of humanity into the bargain.

Can Obama give us back some of our dignity as a country? Yes, I think he can. Can he perhaps accomplish some other worthwhile things? Again, I think so. But he can't do anything about the fact that the planet is running out of oil, which is the major differing factor between today and the Great Depression. So although I too am looking forward to January, I'm not holding my breath for the "happily ever after" line.

user-pic

Agreed with all points, but that McCain's reinforced his "angry old man" image calls into question and dulls attacks that his campaign needs to call Obama's fitness into question.


user-pic

Yup, the "fitness" issue may really be McCain's stamina. I think Americans sense that we're in for some tough years ahead that will require a considerable amount of energy and nimble thinking.

Interesting comment.

user-pic

that creepy smile of his throughout pissed my wife off.

It was dull for the first hour, but heated up nicely eventually. I must admit to missing the "That one" line in real time. I was probably emailing Josh with a witty comment he didn't post.

Obama took the lesson of Debate 1 and sharpened his Iraq answers tonight. Sure it was a zinger, but it was better than the hair plug line.

user-pic

Yep.  The big story is the attack dog that didn't bark in the night.  (Emphasis for Tweety's benefit.)  No Bill Ayers attack from McSame; no major meltdown.

I kept checking the clock, hoping it would be over soon.  Listening to McSame is a real chore.

user-pic

Yup. You tune out.

Maybe because he's better at making jabs behind Obama's back rather than to his face. A coward perhaps?

user-pic

A coward for sure, but that's not it.

He couldn't bring it up himself.  Answering the audience questions gave him no time or opening.

Maybe he thought his lobbying earlier today would get Brokaw to bring it up, but Brokaw didn't take the bait.

Its obvious " that one " won the debate.

user-pic

I could do mcShame's lines:

"My friend, I know how to fix ..... (fill in the blank). I've already done that before. You can look at my record [of lies]. America can do anything. We are the best. We can do this. Because we've done this before. And by the way, my opponent [more lies].

It was the same refrain, no matter the question.

Plus, did others feel that at times he leaned so close to women, they cringed?

At one point I said to my wife "Now he's gonna go over and breathe on her. Yuck!"

You nailed it. That about sums up the old guy's "performance" tonight.

user-pic

Everybody expected McCain to go after Obama on Ayers etc. and he never did. Does this mean that McCain got cold feet about bringing it up in front of 50 million people? Is this something that his people figured out doesn't actually have any pull with anybody outside of the base? Is Sarah Palin just flying solo when she brings this stuff up - is it just a matter of "free Sarah!"? Or is John McCain just too big of a big pussy to actually look Barack Obama and the American people in the eye and make such accusations and insinuations?

I don't know, but hopefully in the future, a McCain insider will write up an honest account of this campaign and when he/she does, it will be far more interesting than the "Lives and Times of David Axelrod."

I don't know why anyone took seriously McCain's claim that "Tuesday night" might be a good time to take the gloves off. Almost everyone agreed that a town hall debate format is terrible for negative attacks. I suspect that the negative attacks will continue in both McCain's and Palin's speeches, and we will see a string of negative ads from them. I also expect that we will see much more negativity from McCain in the final debate.

However, I do think his campaign has learned to a certain extent that he simply must address the economy more directly, and he tried to do that tonight. I expect we will see more of that.

I hope Obama has learned that he must stop getting ensnared in their mud and continue to emphasize his policies and plans for the future. There's no good reason for him to tarnish his brand and seem defensive. The few independent voters I've heard from already thought that McCain actually was more focused on answering questions last night. I disagree, but still, at this point, Obama needs to take the last debate as if McCain isn't even there and speak directly to the concerns of the American people.

I second that.

I think his (relatively) positive campaign and demeanor is why he is ahead in the polls. Throwing mud just detracts from that. It is a fine line though, not to fall in to the Kerry swift-boat trap of assuming Americans are above that kind of stuff.

user-pic

McCain's base will go crazy over his 300 Billion dollar plan to buy the mortgages.

But, he'll spin it in a way where he can say, "See! I'm standing up to my own party!"

He wins 5 maybe 6 converts. 32,312 stay home and don't vote at all.

user-pic

Yeah, I thought McSame did well with that mortgage-buyout thing.

According to the instant-response theater on MSNBC, so did Democrats and independents.  But Republicans hated it!

I expect that this is an early sign that McCain is *finally* going to start talking about economic policy. I think he will continue to be negative on Obama, and Palin will be crazy negative. But I expect a pivot from the McCain camp toward issues.

Obama better be ready: stay specific, direct, and answer the people's questions. I actually don't think he did that good of a job at that tonight. I just think McCain's answers were more jumbled and incoherent.

I admit to being a bit surprised at the awesome snap poll results.....not that O had the edge but so large an edge


This as always the most important number...GREAT NEWS FOR JOHN MCCAIN

more likable 65%-28%
user-pic

I wish Obama had answered the question about what will Americans be asked to sacrifice differently. I wish he would've said that, at the very least, a simple task like using a tire pressure gage would help the nation and our individual pocketbooks. The McCain camp made a "joke" out of this. Krugman said he thinks such realities fall on deaf ears because Americans don't want to do the "work" required. We're in the shitter for sure if we can't pull off something as taxing as that. I have a sickening feeling Krugman had something in that thought of his, though, and that's why Obama doesn't say such things anymore.
He is a nimble politician.

Halprin on McCain's current chances:
"...more grim than is commonly discussed."

(on Charlie Rose)

Wonder if Halperin will still "give the week" to McCain.

LOL

If there is a way, he'll make it happen. Something like Obama failed to exceed expectations or some other bullshit.

As multiple observers have pointed out, McCain needed to jar the electorate into seeing this race in a new way. It isn't even clear if McCain even tried to do this tonight -- there was no moment where he appeared to make an aggressive bid to take down Obama or grab the initiative

Surprising that so many of you LEFTIE TAX n SPENDERS missed it

THE BAD LOAN BUYOUT....that was his gambit

Boy the conservatives r gonna love that one

user-pic

But the RIGHTIE BORROW n SPENDERS won't be fazed a bit.  It's just more finance-charge dollars out of our pockets into theirs.

Given that McCain is so fond of the town hall meeting format, I was really surprised to see him leave the stage area so quickly. You'd think he'd want to mingle with potential voters and get in a few more photo-ops. I'm guessing he was too agitated to stick around -- wouldn't want to risk the chance of having to look at Obama again.

But Obama remained on stage for several minutes longer, interacting with audience members -- a class act. There were even a couple of suposedly "undecided" voters who asked to have their pictures taken with Obama.

I doubt they're undecided now.

(in the voice of John Stewart) Land...slide!

user-pic

McSame?  Not so much.

That's the consummate Bill Clinton move. Talk to every one of those people if it takes an hour.

Yeah, I noticed the picture guys, too. That only Obama was there for pix - not that anyone would have wanted their picture with McCain - and people wanted their picture with Obama and got them, more than anything made it a slam-dunk for Obama.

Elitist, my ass. Elitists don't hang around after a performance to make nice with the proletariat.

People really, really LIKE Obama. They want to get close to him.

Step aside, Bill Clinton. There's a new Big Dawg in town.

I'll give McCain credit for not sinking to the low of Ayers etc. He was meandering and his jokes fell flat, and lied about taxes and stuff, but...he was in the realm of being a reasonable person. Anyway, I do wonder if the campaign will continue to send Palin out to incite hatred and resentment given McCain's semi-honorable (or at least civilized), if fatally weak, performance tonight. Do they really think that will be effective?

I understand your sentiment, but it says something when we give a candidate credit for not implying his opponent is a terrorist sympathizer.

Very well said.

Good point, I was just trying to be gracious to McCain in his defeat! It just seemed to me like he slipped back into his "old" (not quite so foul) mode a bit esp toward the end, like when he admitted that "Sen. Obama is right" (was it about Russia? I forget).

I think McCain is starting to accept that he will lose. He's moving out of the anger phase.

He will have Palin say it, just like he already has. Do you really believe that Palin came up with that smear. How the hell would BarbieCuda have a clue about William Ayers.

McCain put the words in Palin's mouth, so he deserves no credit. He did not bring it up tonight, because he did not have the guts to say it to Senator Obama's face.

The only way McCain could have won was if he refused to show up to the debate because, he believed The Other One was a Terrosits!

Exactly.

The fact that McCain shook Obama's hand and spent time in the same room as him tonight means that McCain is now someone who palls around with terrorist sympathizers. LOL.

See how stupid that whole attack is.

"That One" may have wrapped this up.

http://pufferfish.typepad.com/

Jolly good. If I were a citizen of the USA I'd be sure to vote for that Thatone one.

When my grandmother's memory started go, she began referring to my stepmother (with whom she had a difficult relationship with, at best) as "She."

Whether it was strictly senility or a combination of forgetfulness and truth telling, I'll never know, but McCain's slip sure is reminiscent.

Since "That One" is the one, no real harm was done.

Sorry, Greg. But I disagree on the "low-key" point. I think that's what CNN and other channels are trying to say right now, perhaps in an effort to make the race seem closer than it really is. I'll paste my comment from the previous thread here to explain why I think this way:

I think as liberals (or progressives, or whatever the fuck you want to call yourself) we're WAY too cautious. I felt that way while following Josh's live blog during the debate. He was indicating that Obama was winning, but only cautiously so.

I'll say this: I think it was a slaughter. There are no bullets left in McCain's gun. He repeated things from the last debate ("I looked into his eyes and saw three letters k-g-b") that just made him sound like he had nothing to offer. He even did damage to his own base by offering to, in their eyes, socialize mortgages.

It was a fucking wipe-out, folks. Don't believe the hype that would pretend things are still close.

Agreed, but the media still wants to generate public interest by being provocative-- it's good for revenues.

<