Support NeoGAF

[titiklabingapat]

I thought it was a very close debate, and I felt McCain won by a hair, mostly due to the foreign policy section. I don't think McCain won by enough to really help him that much. Obama definitely held his own and was even beating McCain pretty soundly in the early going. Things slowly shifted as the debate went on. McCain had a lot of good moments in the second half of the debate, and finished very strongly.

I don't trust the initial poll reaction though. There were some debates during the republican primary where Ron Paul won the post debate poll. That kind of instant poll seems to often be wrong. Obama probably did enough to keep McCain from turning things around at this point but we won't really know for sure who won until we see how the daily tracking polls shift and watch how the spin plays out. It seems like I can remember a few instant polls in the democratic primary where the inital reaction favored one candidate, but then the Polls moved in the other direction.

Are you talking about unscientific polls vs scientific polls? The CNN and CBS quick polls for tonight's debate are both scientific(iirc, the CBS one has 500 participants, with a MOE of 4.5%) whereas the Fox poll(Hannity and Colmes poll to be specific) was simply a viewer text poll.

 

[Krowley]

Link? I never heard of this (unless you are talking about online polls, which should be disregarded all the time).

I think it was a poll on fox news. Very vague memory. It may have been online or something, I'm not really sure.

I remember all the fox news comentators being really embarrased about it and trying to make excuses.

 

[numble]

I think it was a poll on fox news. Very vague memory. It may have been online or something, I'm not really sure.

I remember all the fox news comentators being really embarrased about it and trying to make excuses.

I looked up the Fox News polls and they seem to be text polls. Non-scientific.

 

[Servizio]

Nader, speaking on Afghanistan: "I can't believe that someone like Barack Obama, who comes from a third world background, is so insensitive to that area and its history..."

Maher:

http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x142/reilo/maher2.jpg

:lol

Nader is such a fucking quack.

Where are you watching this?

 

[Tamanon]

BTW, I think the clear victory for Obama at least from this debate was that McCain wasn't able to paint him as being for "surrender" and "defeat". He brought it up once or twice, but never tried to tie it around Obama's neck like Bush did to Kerry. He just kept falling back on the whole Petraeus angle, and it was odd, because it started to seem like he actually had no plan outside of whatever Petraeus said.

 

[kevm3]

Well this debate taught me that gaf knows jack about analyzing a debate. I thought it was a good debate. I thought it was mostly even. And anybody who thought Mccain schooled Obama like the early part of the thread suggested had their head up their asses. I felt mainly that however you felt coming in, you had some justification to feel the same most likely coming out. I won't speak for independents and will leave it to the polling.

I think that after watching those Palin interviews and seeing some of McCain's irrational behavior he's been engaging in recently, GAF just expected Obama to completely obliterate McCain, as if McCain would perform similarly to Palin in the Couric interview. Didn't happen and a lot of af got surprised at how close the debate was. The positive to take away from this is that Obama held his ground on McCain's strongest issue, which is foreign policy. This was the debate McCain had to knock out of the park, and the consensus seemed to be that he didn't do that. This moment was a great time for them to have a foreign policy debate, because it gives the ball to Barack in the fourth quarter to close this election out.

If they had the full economy debate now, Barack may have hurt McCain initially, but McCain would have a momentum changer in the later occuring foreign policy debate. He would have had time to reverse whatever negative press he was getting from the initial debate. It's kind of like what happened during the conventions. Barack had an awesome DNC, but McCain stifled a lot of that momentum with the media and public's initial enthusiam over his Palin pick and her speaking at the RNC. T

Now, by putting the economy debate as the later debate, Barack is able to have the ball in his hands to take the last shot of the game. This allows Barack to show his strengths and attack McCain on his greatest weakness closer to election day. If Barack knocks the economy debate out the park, then he'll likely be our next president.

The Obama campaign just needs to run some 'the fundamentals of the economy is sound' ads for the rest of the election, and bring that and 'I dont' know much about the economy' up in the debates. The good thing about having touched on the economy a bit in this debate was that it revealed some of McCain's hand. He's going to talk about cutting spending, eliminating earmarks and the such. If McCain tries to pin earmarks on Obama, all Obama needs to do is bring up Palin and her record with earmarks. "How can you be so against earmarks, but you pick a runningmate who has requested a significant amount of them? That's not walking the talk John."

 

[Bishman]

I thought it was a tie. It is good to see the pundits saying that Obama won. Next up is Biden vs Palin. After that, Obama's poll #'s should go up and clinch this election.

 

[Krowley]

Are you talking about unscientific polls vs scientific polls? The CNN and CBS quick polls for tonight's debate are both scientific(iirc, the CBS one has 500 participants, with a MOE of 4.5%) whereas the Fox poll(Hannity and Colmes poll to be specific) was simply a viewer text poll.

Sounds like it's probably just a fox thing then. I remember getting a kick out of that situation during the primary.

But like I said, we'll see. Most of the people on GAF are pretty active political watchers and it seems that many came away feeling that McCain was winning the debate. I wasn't participating here during the debate, but I felt the same way. Apparently a lot of people at home saw it differently. We will have to see how it spins out.

 

[titiklabingapat]

Sounds like it's probably just a fox thing then. I remember getting a kick out of that situation during the primary.

But like I said, we'll see. Most of the people on GAF are pretty active political watchers and it seems that many came away feeling that McCain was winning the debate. I wasn't participating here during the debate, but I felt the same way. Apparently a lot of people at home saw it differently. We will have to see how it spins out.

One blogger put it best: McCain was, inadvertently or otherwise, targeting the pundits with his delivery style whereas Obama opened, and delivered, on his biggest strength: the economy. By the time McCain got his bearings 40 minutes later, most people, the one that really mattered, already switched channels.

I agree that a wait and see approach is best, but I'm feeling pretty good.

 

[Escalation]

McCain looked awkward and flustered for much of the debate. Funny how he couldn't even look at Obama.

 

[Nibelung Valesti]

Some votes/impressions from Italy (I know you guys don't give a shit, it's just to show how people perceived the debate from abroad).
La Repubblica (Left):
Title "Bush is the defeated"
McCain: 6- out of 10.
People were not expecting much from him, so he delivered more then expected. He just repeats "Obama is not ready/is inexperienced" over and over.
Obama: 5+ out of 10.
The opposite of McCain, people were expecting a lot from him, therefore he failed to deliver that much. He talks with complex words (too complex...) and in his attempt to appear "warm" he actually appears "cold"..
Jim Lehrer: 7 out of 10.
The best of the game. He's older then McCain, and yet he looks more "alive" then both the candidates.
Il Corriere della Sera (center/governative):
"A duel without any winner. They talked about foreign policy and economy, but none of them has showed plan to face the crisis. The first impression is that McCain was advantaged, since he's prepared in foreign policy, while Obama managed to resis untill the end, with some great attacks but with a lot of mistakes too (he said «John is right» too many times).
Il Giornale (right/conservative):
The first presidential debate ends with a tie. There were no "huge mistakes" or gaffes. Obama was more prepared in economics while McCain was indeed prepared in foreign policy. They were pretty vague on a solution to end this economical crisis, but for McCain the main route is to contain the public expenditure, while Obama wants to keep it for the education and heath care reform.
Il Sole 24 Ore (the Italian equivalent of the Financial Times/The Economist and so on):
Match is tied, but Obama made a huge mistake saying "John is right, but..." so many times while McCain attacked mr.Obama multiple times "You're wrong, you don't understand". They attacked each other on the war in Iraq, with Obama comparing McCain to Bush, but the impression is that the match ended up with a tie.

Meh, took me long enough to write this >_<

 

[Zoe]

Wow, it's so weird coming back from a Democratic watch party, and now reading that lots of people thought McCain won :lol

(not surprisingly, there was a lot of heckling and booing whenever McCain broke out his buzz words and attempts to garner sympathy)

 

[devilhawk]

Some votes/impressions from Italy (I know you guys don't give a shit, it's just to show how people perceived the debate from abroad).
La Repubblica (Left):
Title "Bush is the defeated"
McCain: 6- out of 10.
People were not expecting much from him, so he delivered more then expected. He just repeats "Obama is not ready/is inexperienced" over and over.
Obama: 5+ out of 10.
The opposite of McCain, people were expecting a lot from him, therefore he failed to deliver that much. He talks with complex words (too complex...) and in his attempt to appear "warm" he actually appears "cold"..
Jim Lehrer: 7 out of 10.
The best of the game. He's older then McCain, and yet he looks more "alive" then both the candidates.
Il Corriere della Sera (center/governative):
"A duel without any winner. They talked about foreign policy and economy, but none of them has showed plan to face the crisis. The first impression is that McCain was advantaged, since he's prepared in foreign policy, while Obama managed to resis untill the end, with some great attacks but with a lot of mistakes too (he said «John is right» too many times).
Il Giornale (right/conservative):
The first presidential debate ends with a tie. There were no "huge mistakes" or gaffes. Obama was more prepared in economics while McCain was indeed prepared in foreign policy. They were pretty vague on a solution to end this economical crisis, but for McCain the main route is to contain the public expenditure, while Obama wants to keep it for the education and heath care reform.
Il Sole 24 Ore (the Italian equivalent of the Financial Times/The Economist and so on):
Match is tied, but Obama made a huge mistake saying "John is right, but..." so many times while McCain attacked mr.Obama multiple times "You're wrong, you don't understand". They attacked each other on the war in Iraq, with Obama comparing McCain to Bush, but the impression is that the match ended up with a tie.

Meh, took me long enough to write this >_<

This is pretty much the exact sediments of the US press. The Wa Post and NY Times, CNN and MSNBC all have articles saying about the same. Seems Gaf at first thought McCain won big then thought Obama killed and is now settling with a near tie, give or take. Hard to pick a clear winner here.

 

[kevm3]

That's the impression I got. It pretty much ended up as a tie. Both of the candidates spoke well on the issues of their expertise. I think this benefits Obama, ultimately. If Mccain can only tie Obama on his strong issue, what will happen when he has to debate Obama on his weak issue? This wasn't an overly impressive showing by Obama, but he did what he had to do.

 

[Darth Sonik]

I watched it on CNN, and that seems to have been a very different experience from where they used split screen.

In the fullscreen format it seemed like a relatively close debate with two very different people / styles / P.O.V.'s.

It seems that a splitscreen format gave a very different impression. Can someone find out who presented it in each style? It would be interesting to see the ratings and how it was presented on each channel.


My Thoughts:

McCain was vague on ideas, cited his vast experience, aggressive but with weak attacks.

Obama parried those attacks easily, cited nuanced ideas, exuded competence & confidence.

 

[kevm3]

Ouch, if you hadn't seen it, Joey B. tearing into McCain:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QdT-xMe2-s

Awesome Obama video. He comes off as very presidential here. This guy needs to be president:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvbhvP_N3Vw

 

[KRS7]

I thought the debate was a wash. I think many Obama supporters on this thread felt the same way. I am happily surprised he did so well in the snap polls.

McCain exceeded my expectations. I was surprised when he brought up Ukraine and the Russian lease of Sevastopol. He actually earned a few points from me for bringing up an issue that, while rarely talked about in the MSM, could cause some major problems in the future. But I am sure most American's had no idea what he was blabbering on about. Same goes with his assessment about the impact on the oil pipeline from Azerbaijan going through Georgia. Obama seemed hesitant to name names and point out important strategic interest, other than generalities, like stopping loose nukes.

Obama didn't live up to my expectations, but they were probably too high to begin with. He did get some good zingers in there, but he needed to go into more specifics on foreign policy and not spend so much time defending himself from stupid attacks. McCain was able to keep him on the defensive about talks with adversaries and strikes on Pakistan. I wish Obama pushed McCain's "bomb Iran" song a little harder. Obama easily won on the economics front. McCain seemed uncomfortable defending his atrocious tax plan, and Obama did a good job linking that to Bush. This bodes well for the future economics debate.

I was doing other house work while I was watching. I only looked up at the television once in a while to see the opinion tracker after certain comments or statements. I was trying to see if I could predict the red, blue, and green trajectories after each controversial statement or exchange. I didn't watch enough to notice all the body language mistakes McCain apparently made. That is probably why I am surprised Obama did so well. If this was only on the radio, McCain would of probably done better.

 

[Schlep]

Ouch, if you hadn't seen it, Joey B. tearing into McCain:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QdT-xMe2-s

 

[Blackface]

That's the impression I got. It pretty much ended up as a tie. Both of the candidates spoke well on the issues of their expertise. I think this benefits Obama, ultimately. If Mccain can only tie Obama on his strong issue, what will happen when he has to debate Obama on his weak issue? This wasn't an overly impressive showing by Obama, but he did what he had to do.

It wasn't a tie. Obama dominated Mccain so bad, I started to feel sorry for him. Mccain got various facts about foreign policy wrong, he didn't talk about the future unless he was attacking Obama, or defending him self from Obama. He brought up dead troops when questioned about his plan on Iran, he brought up past wars and his experience when talking about Iraq, yet had no plan for it outside of "The Surge is working and "We are winning". He was called out on voting the wrong way on almost every single topic that has mattered in the last 4 years. He said Pakistan was a failed state, yet in the same breath said America should continue sending them billions of dollars a year. He said the economy is in a crisis, when a week ago he said "The economy is as strong now, as it has ever been". He lied about what Obama has and has not done. He purposely attempted to manipulate what Obama was saying, and got called out on it, and even had Kissinger thrown back in his face, to which his only response was "I have known him for years, we should talk to him". He laughed at the fact of sitting down and talking to a country instead of BOMBING THEM. He laughed at the notion of sitting down and talking to a country that has lost lives helping fight a war in Iraq AMERICA STARTED, and happens to be a NATO Alie. He tried to play the sympathy card by pulling out his bracelet, and stopped the moment Obama pulled out his. He wants to cut spending for everything except the military and big business, which would cripple the American education system, and sciences more then Bush has. He also lectured Obama for more then five minutes about not knowing what strategy and tactical mean in the military, then went on to say the Surge was a strategic move, when in fact, it was a tactical one

Mccain looked like a flip flopping, out of touch money grubber, who knows less about foreign policy and the economy, then his running mate.

It was a slaughter.

 

[Grug]

Can't wait to see Biden debate Palin.

It's going to be a bloodbath.

 

[syllogism]

Sometimes the public sentiment shifts on the days following the debate, but right now it's clear Obama had more to gain here and as such did even if objectively the debate was more of a tie.

e: tie substance wise, Obama came ahead in style

 

[kevm3]

I wonder if the media will talk about the fact that Palin was mysteriously absent after the debate?

I honestly think it's a good thing that Biden hasn't been getting too much media coverage prior to this upcoming debate, mainly because it'll let his arguments hit much more harder, because people haven't heard them a thousand times. Why did Rev. Wright lose it's impact? People heard it a thousand times. When people watch the debates and a lot of them see Joe for the first time and then see Palin, I think that will be devastating, given everything goes along to plan. People who haven't been following politics much will be like, who is this guy and why haven't we hard him speaking more? Wow!

If Biden hits McCain as hard as he just did in that clip and can push Palin off of regurgitating talking points without bullying her, it's going to be a lonnnnggg night for the McCain campaign.

 

[devilhawk]

Ouch, if you hadn't seen it, Joey B. tearing into McCain:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QdT-xMe2-s

Awesome Obama video. He comes off as very presidential here. This guy needs to be president:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvbhvP_N3Vw

After the debate, Olbermann praised McCain's rebuttal to the Obama's Iraq statement. Olbermann was saying that it was the most succinct and best answer to the attacks Obama makes about Iraq. McCain countered with the point that the next president won't have to deal about going to Iraq. They have to with leaving, when they leave and how they leave it. I have never seen Olbermann more positive about McCain than in that 3 min segment. It was really weird.

 

[Red Scarlet]

I wonder if the media will talk about the fact that Palin was mysteriously absent after the debate?

I hope so, as that, to me, says a whole lot about her viability as a real political candidate.
Amir0x really should add the downloadable debate in the first post, though.

 

[Synth_floyd]

McCain should shave that ugly comb over he has. That's all I have to say. Otherwise they gave pretty similar performances.

 

[devilhawk]

Mccain looked like a flip flopping, out of touch money grubber, who knows less about foreign policy and the economy, then his running mate.

It was a slaughter.

Certainly entitled to your opinions, however bat shit they may be.

 

[PantherLotus]

Not sure if this made the rounds but it's awesome to see reporters reduced (emboldened) to speak honestly and openly about the obvious, made only more stark by his equivocating, trembling co-anchor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8__aXxXPVc&feature=user

 

[a Master Ninja]

go go go

Thanks, just finished watching. Wow.

Obama spent the bulk of his time trying to make himself look good.
McCain spent the bulk of his time trying to make Obama look bad.

I'd like to see McCain spend more time giving people reasons to vote for him, rather than reasons you shouldn't vote for Obama. He didn't clearly state his own positions or plans.

 

[kevm3]

After the debate, Olbermann praised McCain's rebuttal to the Obama's Iraq statement. Olbermann was saying that it was the most succinct and best answer to the attacks Obama makes about Iraq. McCain countered with the point that the next president won't have to deal about going to Iraq. They have to with leaving, when they leave and how they leave it. I have never seen Olbermann more positive about McCain than in that 3 min segment. It was really weird.

McCain does indeed know what he is talking about when it comes to foreign policy. Nobody can really deny that McCain has a level of competence on the matter of foreign policy, whether you agree or disagree with the position in which he wants to take this country.

Where I agree with McCain to an extent is that we shouldn't rush out of Iraq. Where I agree with Obama is that we should indeed set out a timeline. If Obama can give the impression that he is willing to set a timeline that won't hastily get out of Iraq without considering the repercussions, then he'll be in a good position.

Where I think McCain's potential problem area is the issue of multitastking on the important issues. Here is what I mean. McCain shows that he's got chops when it comes to foreign policy, but can he come across as credible on economic issues? Barack's strong suit is the economy, but he's showed that he's no slouch when it comes to foreign policy. There wasn't a huge gulf that was evident when McCain and Obama talked about foreign policy. But can McCain similarly bridge that gap when it comes to the economy?

If Barack plays his cards right and stays fairly aggressive, McCain will have serious problems. What can McCain say if Obama says, "John, how are you going to reform Washington and bring real change to the economy when you've been in the Senate for over 20 years and haven't brought that significant change? Change isn't a slogan. Change requires action... Action that is contrary to what you've been doing. In fact, you've voted with Bush on his decisions on how to manage the economy and when we look at your economic plan, it's remarkably similar to what Bush has enacted. So how can you talk about change, when your actions show that you're bringing more of the same?"

"We've had 8 years of tax cuts for the rich and for corporations and we've seen that it hasn't worked. If the rich got tax cuts for 8 years, I think it's the middle class's turn. John, not once have I heard you mention the middle class during your speech. Finally, you said you're for cutting earmarks and pork-barrel spending, but why didn't that factor into your choice of VP? Governor Palin has a history of earmarks."

I think McCain has a much wider gulf to close in regards to economics than Barack did when it came to matters of foreign experience. A lot of people may not have seen Barack as credible as McCain on foreign matters, but they do see him as competent. With McCain saying things like, "I don't know much about the economy" on record and "the fundamentals of the economy are strong," can McCain portray himself as a credible figure? I think it's a monumental challenge for him.

 

[mj1108]

I'd like to see McCain spend more time giving people reasons to vote for him, rather than reasons you shouldn't vote for Obama. He didn't clearly state his own positions or plans.

That's all he's done even before the debate. No concrete plans or ideas. Just "We're going to fix Washington!" "Reform! Reform! Reform!".

When you don't have a plan or you're merely running on the plans of the current administration, you really don't have anything else to do but attack your opponent.

 

[HylianTom]

I'm finally able to sit down for the first time all night here at work.
(Side note: there's something about a presidential debate on a Friday night that apparently makes people want to go out and party, hurting themselves into a trip to the ER. It sucks.)

From what I've gleamed here and elsewhere in 20 minutes of reading online, is it safe to conclude that the trajectory of this race will essentially remain unchanged after this debate? Will polls maintain their holding pattern where Obama is leading by middle-single digits? Because with the VP and economy debates coming-up, if this is where things stand, McCain seems kinda screwed.

 

[SouthernDragon]

McCain did better than expected at some points, but I have theories as to why.

Obama's controlled his method of speech, and sounds more confident and knowledgable.

McCain was really polarizing. Obama tended to please all three main groups.

*saw CNN's real time people poll*

 

[Keio]

According to the best polling site FiveThirtyEight.com Obama won in the polls that matter, for example:

Obama went from a +18 on "understanding your needs and problems" before the debate to a +56 (!) afterward. And he went from a -9 on "prepared to be president" to a +21.

As a more lighthearted thing, I tried Wordle.net to create a tag cloud out of the debate; it's a brilliant tool!

 

[Huzah]

Has this been posted?

http://www.kmov.com/video/index.html?nvid=285793&shu=1

"The Barack Obama campaign is asking Missouri law enforcement to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading TV ad during the presidential campaign."

So Barack Obama's campaign is enrolling Barack supporting law enforcement officers and prosecutors to join a "Truth Squad" and use their official government jobs to threaten political speech they determine to be "untruthful" or "misleading."

What the fuck is this shit?

 

[Synth_floyd]

Also, what was with Jim Lehrer trying to goad the two into a fight? It came off as really tacky.

And if McCain has been fighting pork barrel spending his whole career, then he's been doing a pretty shitty job of it. By his own words it has tripled in the last 5 years.

And I love how Obama always refers to the "middle class" as if 95% of America is in it. Though most politicians do this. Apparently in America there's only the "wealthiest 1%" and then the "middle class." Everybody's the middle class!

 

[Agent Icebeezy]

Thanks, just finished watching. Wow.

Obama spent the bulk of his time trying to make himself look good.
McCain spent the bulk of his time trying to make Obama look bad.

I'd like to see McCain spend more time giving people reasons to vote for him, rather than reasons you shouldn't vote for Obama. He didn't clearly state his own positions or plans.

That has been his entire campaign in a nutshell dude.

 

[The Chosen One]

:lol @ PoliGAF

I'm so gad I Gaf-blocked myself during the debates. Kevm is right. Some of you absolutely had ridiculous expectations going in assuming Obama would trounce McCain. Just because McCain occasionally stumbles on the campaign trail doesn't mean he's an idiot. I watched just about all of the Dem and Repug primary debates, I knew Obama had a challenge going in. McCain isn't the greatest debater but he knows how to deliver quick clear and concise answers. Something Obama struggles to do. The Saddleback forum should have warn you guys that Obama was going to need to bring his 'A' game to do well in the debates. It certainly wasn't a given.

A few random thoughts:

- People who wanted Obama to be a bloodthirsty politician probably thought Obama lost. These are also the people who complained that Obama said "I agree" too much. However when I watched the debate I barely noticed it. The few times I did noticed it, I admired that he was willing to recognize he had common ground in certain areas instead of being bullish just to be bullish. Besides there were plenty of areas where they disagreed, so I don't think it minimized the distinctions at all. But maybe I think this way because I'm a crazy Independent...

- It was funny listening to them answer the "what programs would you postpone or cut?" question. Obama answered the question by mentioning all the programs he was going to add to the budget.... :lol

- I thought Obama did very well on foreign policy overall. McCain did some solid name dropping (which was good) but I noticed not once did he address the issue of him supporting the war in 2002-2003. Obama had the best moment of the night with his "you were wrong!" flurry. McCain's only response the entire night was, "The Surge", "The Surge", and "The Surge". He didn't offer up any new ideas or direction for our foreign policy. He really sounded like more of the same. I think that's why Obama did well in the snap polls even on foreign policy.

- Obama landed some hard body shots with the "Bomb Bomb Iran" and "muddle through Afghanistan" quips. Some here complained that Obama didn't deliver it hard enough, but McCain was about to explode both times right underneath the surface. He gave long and very defensives responses to both of those comments and he clearly looked agitated. Like I said, those were good body shots by Obama. It wasn't as showy as a uppercut but it did damage to McCain and made him appear irritable the rest of the debate.

- I also think both dropped the ball on the economy. McCain didn't say much of anything and Obama didn't really connect with the everyday hardships out there as much as he could have.

- It's funny how McCain gave NO explanation for why he was at the debate and the whole campaign "suspension" thing. I think realized they made a mistake and were hoping voters would forget McCain's little stunt the last couple of days. There was no attempt to ride in on a white horse.

- By most of observers Obama either tied or won the debate. Those snap polls are important because that's usually the narrative that gets out there by the media the next day. Time is running out and Obama is getting in a very good position. The momentum everywhere is going in his favor even in places like Missouri! He just needs to avoid any major mistakes the next 30 some days and he will be the next President.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Certainly entitled to your opinions, however bat shit they may be.

What exactly did he say that was wrong?

Unless of course you were just responding to that one inflammatory sentence. Kind of hard to call his opinions batshit, when you ignore the entirety of his post and respond only to his closing.

But then again you believe McCain edged Obama out on foreign policy. Who out of the two is running on their "expertise" in the field? Who of the two mangled nearly every word out of his mouth about the subject?

I'll give you a direct hint...

McCain.

 

[Timedog]

I think the "I agree" thing was a planned tactic by the Obama camp. It probably looked better to undecided voters than to most of us.

 

[elostyle]

I'm halfway through the debate now and somehow McCain always comes back to cut spending, cut spending, cut spending...

 

[Agent Icebeezy]

I think the "I agree" thing was a planned tactic by the Obama camp. It probably looked better to undecided voters than to most of us.

McCain in one side was unwilling to look at Obama while Obama was willing to concede that his opponent can be right in the broader picture in some areas, but they fight over some significant details. It appears that is what a lot of people are taking away from this.

I keep going back to the you were wrong parts, but they hit with precision. There wasn't any mincing of words and for this to be about McCain's forte and to be told he was wrong over and over again and McCain not follow up, I think that was damaging to him.

 

[Barrett2]

My thoughts: McCain did well, but considering that foreign policy was supposed to be McCain's turf, I think Obama handled himself well.

I doubt this debate will shift the polls, both candidates seemed to be speaking to their constituencies. McCain definitely had moments of looking flustered, and often seemed to speak only in lame cliches, but he managed to always come back with a quick jab.

If every debate is like this, I think we can still project a win for Obama. Remember, McCain is trailing, he needs to win these debates, and if each debate is a draw, McCain remains behind the curve.

 

[Cymbal Head]

Did I hear McCain say "Iran has a lousy government, so they have a lousy economy"?

 

[kevm3]

My only really big fear for the VP debate is if Joe says something like,"Although I disagree with her policies, she's qualified to be VP." That line will trounce any thumping he's able to deliver. Please, no unneeded courtesies! Now is the time to win!

 

[syllogism]

My only really big fear for the VP debate is if Joe says something like,"Although I disagree with her policies, she's qualified to be VP." That line will trounce any thumping he's able to deliver. Please, no unneeded courtesies! Now is the time to win!

He's going to say that if asked. It won't matter as he isn't the one who has to decide.

 

[Rekki-Maru]

McCain was too grumpy, i bet he was just mad because he had to show up to the debate and miss the wheel of fortune.

 

[FitzyDog]

Whenever Obama was speaking McCain looked like he wanted to crap his pants with a giant smirk on his all over his face, besides that McCain appealed to emotion while Obama was very logical.

 

[Keio]

One key point I think is that after the debate, McCain and Obama now draw in "being ready to be president".

The attacks the GOP has tried to hit Obama with have lost ground ("Is he ready to lead?") while McCain failed with the economy and failed to distance himself from Bush policies.

CNN Poll:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/27/debate.poll/index.html

A national poll of people who watched the first presidential debate suggests that Barack Obama came out on top, but there was overwhelming agreement that both Obama and John McCain would be able to handle the job of president if elected.

I'm listening to McCain close with his POW POW POW. That's weak compared to Obama's "restore USA's reputation as the greatest country".

 

[Agent Icebeezy]

My only really big fear for the VP debate is if Joe says something like,"Although I disagree with her policies, she's qualified to be VP." That line will trounce any thumping he's able to deliver. Please, no unneeded courtesies! Now is the time to win!

I think that Biden is just going to take what Palin says and turn it on its head and go after John McCain since what will come out of her mouth will be talking points and by the end of the night, she's going to be reminiscent of a sound recorder that has been rewound and just hit play on the talking points.

 

[syllogism]

One of Biden's biggest advantages is that he knows Mccain really, really well and Palin barely knows anything about him