JB5
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 690
|
Post by JB5 on Sept 26, 2008 21:22:44 GMT -5
The audience reactions are almost always positive. Does this mean most Americans (or most CNN viewers) support both candidates? Or did they give the audience free beer beforehand?
|
|
JB5
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 690
|
Post by JB5 on Sept 26, 2008 21:23:40 GMT -5
I posted too fast. The question on Russia has pretty much produced a flatline from the audience. Nobody cares that Putin was in the KGB and that Ukraine should be in NATO.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Sept 26, 2008 21:33:03 GMT -5
John McCain's violating a clear HoyaTalk rule: "Saying something doesn't make it so". He keeps repeating "Sen. Obama doesn't understand..." over and over, without really making that point.
Also, his reaction face is fairly terrible.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Sept 26, 2008 21:39:06 GMT -5
My feeling is that this debate changes nothing. Both candidates were on message and gaffe-free. Conservatives are going to think McCain did great and Obama was terrible, and liberals will think the exact opposite. No one's changing their minds over this. My prediction is that the polls remain unchanged.
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,920
|
Post by Filo on Sept 26, 2008 21:48:10 GMT -5
My feeling is that this debate changes nothing. Both candidates were on message and gaffe-free. Conservatives are going to think McCain did great and Obama was terrible, and liberals will think the exact opposite. No one's changing their minds over this. My prediction is that the polls remain unchanged. Agree.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Sept 26, 2008 22:02:29 GMT -5
I agree too. Then again, I'm pretty drunk right now.
(once again . . . Gotta love the iPhone.)
|
|
|
Post by PushyGuyFanClub on Sept 26, 2008 22:08:51 GMT -5
Obama agreed with John an awful lot. As some pundit said, that's already been cut into an ad. But this was a good debate. Both guys were on mark with their points and it exceeded my expectations given that I was prepared for the worst after the debacle that was this week in the economy. I'm a single issue voter though. :-)
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,477
|
Post by TC on Sept 26, 2008 22:09:46 GMT -5
I thought McCain was doing great in the beginning on the economy and then completely lost it with all the smarmy stuff and not being able to say Ahmadinejad. So pretty much a draw.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Sept 26, 2008 22:10:32 GMT -5
Obama agreed with John an awful lot. As some pundit said, that's already been cut into an ad. But this was a good debate. Both guys were on mark with their points and it exceeded my expectations given that I was prepared for the worst after the debacle that was this week in the economy. I'm a single issue voter though. :-) I keep telling you that there are more issues than the legalization of prostitution, but do you listen? Nooooooo.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Sept 26, 2008 22:38:11 GMT -5
My feeling is that this debate changes nothing. Both candidates were on message and gaffe-free. Conservatives are going to think McCain did great and Obama was terrible, and liberals will think the exact opposite. No one's changing their minds over this. My prediction is that the polls remain unchanged. Agreed, for the most part. As a liberal and an Obama supporter, I was a bit disappointed that Obama didn't attack McCain hard enough on some issues. Given the amount of Bush bashing that was going on in the debate, I really thought Obama would have scored a lot of points if he had more forcefully connected McCain to Bush. He kept saying "this administration has done XYZ," when it may have been more effective to say "this REPUBLICAN administration has done XYZ." He only mentioned McCain's support of Bush on 95% of votes once in passing, and he didn't mention many places where McCain has supported Bush. One of Obama's best weapons has been to connect McCain to Bush, and we didn't see enough of that tonight. In fact, I thought McCain did a very good job of distancing himself from the Bush administration. But all in all I thought both did a very good job. This debate was home turf for McCain, and he performed as expected, hit his major talking points, and looked very presidential. Obama did a very good job of staying with McCain on McCain's strong points, and also looked like somebody who's very capable of running the country well. The best thing for me was that this was actually a debate. The past few elections have seen debates that mostly consisted of a series of campaign speeches by each candidate, with almost no substance and no interaction. I'm really happy to see that they loosened the rules this time to allow real debate. Both candidates were a bit awkward at the start and wanted to just exchange speeches, but to his credit Lehrer insisted on some back and forth and direct responses to each other. At one point Obama jumped in immediately after one of McCain's comments, and from then on it was a real debate. Regardless of who you support, I think we can all agree that this was far better than anything we saw from Bush/Gore or Bush/Kerry.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Sept 26, 2008 22:39:42 GMT -5
My feeling is that this debate changes nothing. Both candidates were on message and gaffe-free. Conservatives are going to think McCain did great and Obama was terrible, and liberals will think the exact opposite. No one's changing their minds over this. My prediction is that the polls remain unchanged. Agree wholeheartedly with this statement. Also would like to add that Obama-McCain Debate 1 >>>> Bush-Kerry Debate 1.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Sept 27, 2008 8:43:47 GMT -5
I have not read any other comments on this thread nor have I read or listened to any talkheads so this is my unfiltered reaction to the debate.
With about 20 minutes still to go in the debate my wife said he (Obama) is one of the most boring persons she's ever had to listen to. I have a different but, in some ways, similar reaction. What I saw in McCain in the debate was a real person with emotions and fire, someone who was talking to the American people. What I saw in Obama was a very articulate public speaker who talked over the American people. What I saw in Obama was the John Kerry syndrome, one of someone lecturing to the public rather than talking to them. He did not come across as someone I want in my TV every night for lecturing and scolding.
On substance, the first part where somehow the financial situation became part of foreign policy I thought both candidates were awful, both refusing to answer the question as to whether they supported the bailout or not. On the subject of whether the bailout would make either of them alter their plans by cutting back on things, neither offered anything substantive, Obama instead offering us new spending programs rather than what he would cut while McCain offered little (earmarks) and a quick reference to maybe freezing all departments except veterans, defense and one other - but he said this as an off the cuff remark and never seemed to mean it.
On actual foreign policy, by his repeated references to things he had done and the people he had conferred with, McCain made a very strong case that Obama does not have the experience necessary to become President. He easily was more convincing on Iraq, Presidential negotiating with Iran and Israel and he made strong points on his experience with relation to Kosovo and Bosnia. Obama held his own on the subjects of Russia and North Korea but neither said anything of note.
Overall, a good night for McCain.
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Sept 27, 2008 9:28:51 GMT -5
I thought it was a pretty even debate for the most part. agree that each side is going to think their side won.
ed brought up one point when I was like WTF did McCain really just say that, when he said he would freeze everything except defense and 2 other programs. It definitely sounded like he did not mean to say that. besides that McCain was fine besides the fact that he reacts really awkwardly and he got overly emotional at times.
Both canidates at times didn't answer the question and talked about unrelated stuff and told stories that didn't really connect. I don't think either canidate was boring though.
|
|
thornski
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 155
|
Post by thornski on Sept 27, 2008 9:47:00 GMT -5
As one of my professors said, and I think he's right, in the long run, people really only remember debates for a few things. 1) Pure gaffes (think Gerald Ford and no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe); 2) One person looking "out of their league" or unprepared (think Bush during the first Bush-Kerry debate); and 3) body language (think Nixon vs. Kennedy, Bush HW checking his watch in 92, Gore sighing in 2000, etc).
Basically in the long run, no one remembers if you edged the other guy on policy. And the problem is everyone always thinks their guy won on policy because...well...you agree with your guy on the policy. That's what makes debates so hard to evaluate.
In this debate, to use some sports analogies, McCain may have won barely on points, but there were no knockouts. It was very close to a draw in my mind. But then again in the expectations game, this was supposed to be McCain's home turf, and Obama stood with him toe-to-toe. So we'll see how that plays out.
In terms of evaluating by those 3 things I listed above, 1) neither person had gaffes; 2) both people seemed competent and not out of their league; but 3) whether it's relevant or not, I think a lot of the analysis will focus on McCain's demeanor (not looking at Obama, looking a bit grumpy at times).
EDIT: Probably should take these with a grain of salt, but the main instant polls after the debate (CNN & CBS) along with several focus groups of undecideds mentioned actually seem to have Obama edging McCain here, which I found a bit surprising. But as someone said, it's often that the public will have the exact opposite reaction as the pundits.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Sept 27, 2008 10:58:21 GMT -5
To be fair, McCain's McCain did not exclude defense, veterans' assistance and "one other program" in his spending freeze proposal . It was defense, veterans' assistance and entitlement programs, which is a pretty ginormous chunk of government spending. But it was a bit of a "whoa!" moment. (Of course, me and the guys I was watching with all said we would have preferred it if he has INCLUDED entitlement programs in the spending freeze. ) Obama I thought held his own in the foreign policy portion. I only saw one gaffe (referring to the Iranian military as the "Republican" Guard, instead of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard). No, it wasn't that big a deal, but I don't think it's fair that if Sarah Palin had made that mistake, people would be all over her for it. I do think McCain hammered him pretty hard on foreign policy issues, but again, as someone said, I think that because I agree with McCain's foreign policy positions. Anyway, good fun for all.
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,668
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Sept 27, 2008 13:23:53 GMT -5
On substance, the first part where somehow the financial situation became part of foreign policy I thought both candidates were awful, both refusing to answer the question as to whether they supported the bailout or not. On the subject of whether the bailout would make either of them alter their plans by cutting back on things, neither offered anything substantive, Obama instead offering us new spending programs rather than what he would cut while McCain offered little (earmarks) and a quick reference to maybe freezing all departments except veterans, defense and one other - but he said this as an off the cuff remark and never seemed to mean it. Ed, I agree with you on this. I came home late (had to interview a student for Georgetown), so I missed the first 30 minutes. I got in on the tail end of the financial part of the debate. Jim Lehrer repeatedly asked both candidates some specific questions about the bailout/financial woes without too much luck. I would have liked to hear some more definitive statements by them on the economy.
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Sept 27, 2008 16:37:55 GMT -5
My honest feeling was the debate was pretty much of a draw, and a bit on the boring side from both guys... for the most part. I saw the snap poll results that had Obama winning, but snap results don't necessarily translate to long term impact.
I also heard many say the leading candidate "wins" a draw. If that is true, it benefitted Obama more than McCain.
I am also delighted that no one is accusing Jim Lehrer of bias... or even mentioning him at all. That is a bit like a tough, hard fought, basketball game, after which no one talks about the refs. Great. I thought he did an excellent job.
PBS's Gwen Ifill narrates the next one -- the VP debate. Anyone think that is to avoid the accusations of gender bias? Tom Brokaw and Bob Schieffer handle the remaining presidential debates. Glad to see The Commission on Presidential Debates pulling out the biggest and most respected guns for these four TV occasions.
The VP one could be make or break for the Republicans. Palin needs to improve enormously on her recent Katie Couric appearance. Biden just needs to be careful what and how he says anything about Palin. If she isn't able to rise to the occasion and fumbles as badly as she did with Couric, it will reflect badly on McCain and be extremely tough for the Republicans to recover.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Sept 27, 2008 16:43:11 GMT -5
On the VP debate, Biden's job is to attack McCain policies IMO. Focus on McCain and attack the guy who isn't in the room. If he does his job, Palin's lack of qualifications will be clear just visually and tonally.
McCain's campaign is in a perilous period and has been so ever since the Wall St. meltdown. Unfortunately for Republicans, his campaign does not exactly inspire confidence in its ability to come up with answers to some of the critical questions.
McCain's "does not understand" package was utterly tone deaf given Obama's electoral success. There are quite a few people out there, including this one, who "do not understand," and many of them (though not this one) are waiting to be convinced.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Sept 27, 2008 17:54:38 GMT -5
One thing I thought McCain did very well was constantly talk about his experience. He seemed to open every statement with "I've been to ________," and I thought that was pretty effective.
I think Biden needs to do something similar in the VP debate. He doesn't have to say "she doesn't have experience," but if he goes on and on about how much experience he has, I think it will highlight Palin's lack thereof, especially on foreign policy issues.
I think Biden also needs to work very hard to come across as a nice guy. The Dems have done a good job of painting him as a genuinely good person (and I think there's a lot of truth to that portrayal), and I think that's something that can benefit him and Obama a lot. I think there's a very good chance that Palin will try to look sharp in the debate by overplaying her barracuda/pitbull act, and I think Biden's nice guy act could really undercut her a lot. Palin's supporters like her because they think she's one of them. If Biden can come across as the candidate you'd rather have a beer with, he could do a lot of damage to Palin's support. Biden needs voters to see him in the debate as somebody they like, somebody they trust, and somebody they feel safe with.
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Sept 27, 2008 18:01:35 GMT -5
One thing I thought McCain did very well was constantly talk about his experience. He seemed to open every statement with "I've been to ________," and I thought that was pretty effective. I think Biden needs to do something similar in the VP debate. He doesn't have to say "she doesn't have experience," but if he goes on and on about how much experience he has, I think it will highlight Palin's lack thereof, especially on foreign policy issues. I think Biden also needs to work very hard to come across as a nice guy. The Dems have done a good job of painting him as a genuinely good person (and I think there's a lot of truth to that portrayal), and I think that's something that can benefit him and Obama a lot. I think there's a very good chance that Palin will try to look sharp in the debate by overplaying her barracuda/pitbull act, and I think Biden's nice guy act could really undercut her a lot. Palin's supporters like her because they think she's one of them. If Biden can come across as the candidate you'd rather have a beer with, he could do a lot of damage to Palin's support. Biden needs voters to see him in the debate as somebody they like, somebody they trust, and somebody they feel safe with. Agree with that, and would add... Biden shouldn't talk too much. He tends to go on and on. The less he talks, the more Palin will.... and she will sink herself. It's like hitting against a pitcher that can't throw strikes. Don't help him out by swinging too much. Instead, give him enough rope.
|
|