38 Comments
Bwog’s White House Bureau Chief James Downie live-blogs the presidential debate.
For those of you who want to watch the debate with your fellow Columbia students, the Dems, Repubs, and CPU are hosting a watch party in Tasti Lounge at 9 p.m.
10:37: The debate comes to an end. Overall, it’s probably a missed opportunity for McCain: the unique circumstances of this debate have made him only stay about even with Obama, and this was supposed to be his best chance to score a knockout blow. Also, it was a much smarter debate than in recent campaigns, with much of the night focused on policy, even if it wasn’t the current crisis.
10:35: McCain says Obama’s not ready for the presidency, also claims he’ll “love veterans and take care of them.” Obama closes by evoking his father’s admiration of America, and contrasting that with the current foreign views of America. He says “we need to send a message to the world” to change perceptions.
10:33: After McCain declares America much safer since 9-11, and Obama focuses on nuclear proliferation, following Al Qaeda outside of Iraq, and world perception. McCain signs off by saying Obama doesn’t understand something else, while Obama ties America’s standing in the world back to attitudes at home.
10:27: Yet another question McCain pauses on before answering. The gap in preparation hasn’t been huge, but it’s been perceptible, and one has to wonder how much better McCain would’ve done with more preparation and more foreign policy questions.
10:25: Is it really helpful to Obama is to “correct the record” every instance that McCain strays a little bit?
10:23: McCain is doing better on these non-Iraq questions, at least partly because he is not closely associated with the surge. Too bad the debate’s about to end.
10:19: Columbia alum shout-out as McCain commends Saakashvili. Both candidates want to be tough with Russia while clearly treating them differently from, say, Iran.
10:15: “Oh please” sighs McCain. The “young whippersnapper” effect grows.
10:13: Every time McCain says “what Senator Obama doesn’t understand,” he comes off as arrogant and sneering.
10:07: Obama brings up negotiation instead. McCain butchers Ahmadinjad’s name three times in going after Obama’s openness to negotiation without preconditions.
10:05: McCain’s tying almost every foreign policy question back to Iraq, without any pushing from Obama. He must be really confident that Americans are with him on the surge.
10:03: It’s almost as if McCain didn’t expect the Iran question, and he’s jumped right to forming a league of democracies, blaming Russia, and protecting Israel.
10:01: It’s the battle of the bracelets now.
9:58: McCain’s favorite person in the 80s was Ronald Reagan? Subtle!
9:57: Obama accuses McCain of being impulsive as well, “singing songs about bombing Iran,” and defends his Pakistan strategy. Obama calls it a 20th-century mindset. McCain, in his response, chides Obama for not being around when Pakistan was first dealt with.
9:54: Obama argues for increasing more troops. McCain hints at staying in Iraq for longer, but he also goes after Obama for suggesting being tougher with Pakistan.
9:50: There are so many possible frames an undecided voter can take out of this Iraq section, depending on whether they think the whole war, the surge, or the current situation is most important. For news clips, though, Obama’s “you were wrong” will probably do well.
9:45: Obama fires right back, saying McCain is “acting like the war started in 2007.” He’s done his best to take it to McCain.
9:44: Obama: “we have to use our military wisely, and we did not use our military wisely in Iraq.” McCain says the next president will only be focusing on the current situation, not the past, and focuses on Obama rarely visiting Iraq.
9:41: “What are the lessons of Iraq?” McCain says that the surge has worked, and that America will succeed leading to a stable ally/fledgling democracy in the region. It’s a more precise answer than the ones he’s given during the economy section. How well will Obama pivot?
9:38: McCain says that he will best control spending; Obama fires right back that he voted for all the Bush administration’s budgets. It’s almost 9:40, and we’ve just hit the foreign policy section.
9:35: For those of you who are interested in live focus group reaction, check out MediaCurves.com, which has live dial-based reaction.
9:34: McCain suggests that we should seriously consider a spending freeze, which seems a bit of an overreaction considering that he didn’t mention it the first time he answered the question.
9:31: McCain focuses on the size of government, talking about waste. Lehrer points out that they aren’t changing anything.
9:28: Obama uses a question about what he’d have to give up for the bailout to outline plans on getting off of foreign oil, college affordability, and infrastructure. Obama’s lead answers have been very compact and detailed.
9:25: This has been 25 minutes on the economy, but the last 15 have been about things that aren’t related to the Wall Street crisis.
9:23: The first instance of candidates talking over each other, and we’re only 23 minutes in.
9:21 – The debate’s been about tax cuts and earmarks, hardly favorable ground for Obama, though he’s trumpeting the “95% will lose” figure. Obama accuses McCain of supporting tax loopholes. Lehrer is really encouraging them to go at each other.
9:19: Obama better start moving this debate off of earmarks soon – McCain’s public image is heavily wrapped up in fighting earmarks. Instead, he’s challenging McCain on them. Also, a photo of the Tasti Lounge crowd is below the fold.
9:17: Obama meanwhile is trying emphasize how he’ll help the average American.
9:15: McCain criticizes his own party and earmarks. Each of his responses seems to be focused on integrity in some way or another.
9:13: Lehrer pushes Obama to say his response directly to McCain; McCain jokes that it’s because Lehrer thinks he’s deaf.
9:11: McCain deflects the question, and promises accountability in his administration. Obama responds that we need more responsibility, “but not just when there’s a crisis.” He brings back the “Wall St. vs. Main St.” theme.
9:10: Lehrer pushes them on whether they will support it. Obama points out that they haven’t seen the language yet.
9:07: McCain’s answer is not nearly as tight as Obama’s, but he’s also putting on the sympathy more than Obama.
9:05: Obama blames the crisis on the Bush administration, “which Senator McCain supported.” He is coming out swinging.
9:03: First question is on their thoughts on the financial crisis. Obama calls it the “worst crisis since the great depression.” He looks directly into the camera, bashing executives and pushing “Main Street.”
9:01: And we’re on. For the record, Bwog is watching PBS’s coverage. The first thing to note is that, unlike previous debates, Jim Lehrer can actually ask follow-up questions.
8:51: It’s unlikely that there has ever been a crazier run-up to a debate, nor a more decisive event so close to an election than the banking crisis of the past week. What most voters will miss tonight is that, while McCain and Obama will have to formulate some sort of plan to tell viewers, the plan that Congress and the White House agree upon will be what they’ll have to accept.
8:48: Let’s get right to it. Tonight’s debate comes to us from Ole Miss. It will run for 90 minutes (broken down into nine nine-minute sections), and will be moderated by PBS’s Jim Lehrer. The debate was originally supposed to focus on foreign policy, but, given the events of the past week, both campaigns have acknowledged that there will be economic questions as well.
Loading …
38 Comments
@oh.hello.there PS (again!) to white republican: You dug your hole far too deep from the beginning, stop trying to cover up for it and just get out! You should realize that you’re in the minority (um you know you go to Columbia right?) and you are NOT winning over an convert on Bwog. Give it up. Also, much of the shit you’ve posted is ultimately so ludicrous only you could possibly believe its true.
No hate for McCain, simply for the way you’re presenting your beliefs/facts. Share all your ideas all you want, just don’t be so high and mighty about it.
@oh.hello.there Hahaha… No, I’m not getting into an in-depth political analysis of the deabte on Bwog. I talk with actual people for that. Instead, on here, I decided to post some basic overarching views about the debate as a whole. Sorry for being shallow and simplistic. But good job to you for using “lapsus linguae” to show how incredibly smart you are.
Plus, I would never criticize Obama as ageist. How absurd! McCain is as old as Moses, no one’s debating that fact. We all know he’s ancient, get over it.
@last time i checked, biblical characters lived to be 100+ years old.
God actually loved them.
@oh.hello.there PS: my post comes off a little defensive towards McCain, which was not intentional. I just feel like he is usually slighted in the media (and on college blogs), where people over-criticize McCain while not fully deconstructing what Obama is saying beneath his glittery words.
A huge detractor for McCain is his choice of Sarah Palin. I can’t even begin…
@Take a gander Gasp! Why Hello-there, haven’t you heard from this discussion? If you doubt McCain’s capabilities you’re an ageist! You don’t support Alaska-from-my-house Palin? SEXIST!
It’s quite logical. yes, yes, quite logical.
*cue to another well-written reply meant to cover the 4 blatant logical fallacies the ”real republican” keeps trying to peddle.
@oh.hello.there What makes me laugh is when people disregard McCain simply because he is a white Republican candidate post Bush, and not really listening to what the man has to say. He is so much more a moderate than people make him out to be.
While McCain occasionally came off as a bit rude towards Obama, Obama also looked foolish and young for repeatedly calling McCain “John,” and his attempts to interrupt McCain (Mac simply held his ground and continued talking).
Both men presented very solid, thought out responses to their questions. Yes, Obama’s strength lies in his eloquent speaking skills (we already knew that, duh), while McCain’s lies in his background in the field. I have no idea who I’m voting for come November, and this debate didn’t help much.
McCain came out on top, Obama needs to some more maturity, and both of them need to get down and dirty and display some real politics in the upcoming debates.
And while I will not delve into the actual issues discussed, everyone should know that nothing Obama has proposed is radical “change.” It might be different from the Bush Administration, but it is certainly nothing original. Analyze both sides of the argument, do not blindly rush into them.
Finally, this debate should have just been turned into a complete discussion on Wall Street economy in today’s crisis. Most of the foreign policy stuff has been heard before (certainly some new twists last night, though nothing huge), while the current issues with economy are pressing and vital.
@... the republicans have done a terrible job and deserve to be fired. mccain has trouble standing up and palin has trouble standing up to katie couric. if elected, neither of them will be playing much of a decisive role by the end of the first term.
@real republican white democrat
I’ll respond to your post a little later as my fingers are tired from typing on the iPhone (hence the number of spelling errors) but I think you make a number of value points and I’d like to address them.
I do agree with your closing statement sadly though I do believe there is a large difference between the two candidates in actual fiscal policy application rather than their rhetoric.
Two points I’d like to leave on, though I will return to discuss the tax program points you made,
1. The alternative min tax is a horrible policy/law that should be EliMinated for individuals and corporations. It’s truly a monsterously horrid code.
2. It’s impossible to give 95% of the people a tax cut she. Less than 60% (being generous) actually pay any tax. As well the burden on that mythical remaining 5% is disproportionally high.
Again thanks for the intelligent posts and civil discourse.
@very white democrat Thanks. (I think that was directed at me?) Always glad to debate policy.
Re your mention of McCain’s fiscal conservatism: that argument gets a bit shaky when you examine the deficit projections of the candidates’ tax plans. This study rips into Obama and McCain both pretty well, but the 4-year debt increase projection is $1.2 trillion higher for McCain:
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411750_updated_candidates_summary.pdf
“Both John McCain and Barack Obama have proposed tax plans that would substantially increase the national debt over the next ten years, according to a newly updated analysis by the non-partisan Tax Policy Center. Neither candidate’s plan would significantly increase economic growth unless offset by spending cuts or tax increases that the campaigns have not specified.
Compared to current law, TPC estimates the Obama plan would cut taxes by $2.9 trillion over the 2009-2018 period. McCain would reduce taxes by nearly $4.2 trillion (see Summary Revenue Table and Tables R1 and R2). These projections assume the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire in 2010 and that the Alternative Minimum Tax is fully effective with 2008 exemptions.”
(The study includes a few variations on these projections, mostly based on educated guesses since the campaigns are generally evasive about budgetary specifics.)
Anyway, if these projections are ballpark accurate, McCain’s yearly spending plan would have to be about $300 billion lower than Obama’s just for the two of them to be inflating the debt at an equal rate, and that doesn’t really square with the reality of what they’re proposing. (Forget balancing the budget — that’d take $1 trillion in cuts each year from what we’re spending now, which is outrageously large and improbable.)
In short, I don’t think there’s a fiscal conservative in this race.
@real republican you see….
This I can respect. You’ve thought about it came to your conclusion and I can respect that. I disagree with you but respectfully so. We are going to disagree, it’s natural because we all have different priorities and perspectives, spewing talking points without basis or reason is what irritates me.
Thank you for adding to the discussion and discourse
@very white democrat I just have no respect for the belief that Sarah Palin would make a good vice president, regardless of how many other voters do. If that makes me an elitist, fuck, I guess I’m an elitist.
But my reasons have nothing to do with her accent, her family, her home state, her appearance, her educational background, or any of the 103084 x 10^23 red herrings that get bandied about (either foolishly by libs or in fits of exaggerated indignance by wingnuts). And even though I think most of her policy positions are crap, that’s not what bothers me most.
What really gets me is that in her few unscripted moments on camera, she’s appeared disturbingly incurious, unsteady, and ill-informed for someone who — if President McCain were to resign/become incapacitated/die — would be called upon to restore order.
For chrissake, Charlie Gibson tied her in knots with the most rudimentary policy questions (as did Katie Couric and — astoundingly — Sean Hannity). McCain’s campaign didn’t even trust her enough to go on TV and shill for the top of her ticket last night, as is customary after debates. They hauled in Rudy instead.
I’m not voting for McCain, but I can at least see his appeal and respect that he understands the ins and outs of federal government. I just think his pick of Palin is utterly reckless and cynical.
@real republican “fake” black republican
It has nothing to do with a challenge to ones sexuality it has to do with a challenge to ones honor or dignity. Replace sweetie with idiot or stupid or the word ignorant it doesn’t matter. The condescending tone of the word is what warranted a response.
There arestill places (many of them in fact) where ones honor and dignity matter. Where their parents teach them values and where if yiu to intend to insult someone with words you’d better be prepared to back them up with actions. It’s not coincidence that this is where many of our heroic soldiers come from, having been instilled with the idea that words can only take yiu so far and that they are usrless unless yiu have the resolve to stand up with courage and defend those words. rhetoric without resolve to act is nothing more than rambling of the weak.
@real republican black republican
At first I was going to reply cordially because I had read your comments as looking for an educated discussion after re-reading I see them as condescending as your original post.
First, obviously I had no way of knowing yiu were a woman hence my initial reaction (which has now proven to be acurate) that your sweetie comment was condescending which it was. Regardless, I would never had made the comment knowing yiu were a woman.
Next I NEVER said democrats are the only ones who sweat. Now yiu see why we don’t need SC justices that interpret rather than read what the constitution says.
What I said is why do LIBERALS (not dems there is a difference) need to use vulgarity in their POSTS. Everyone swears. It’s a fact of life. Being vulgar in a public forum is uncalled for. It doesn’t add to the discussion and is uneccessry.
I doubt yiu honestly think I’m stupid so I’ll just let that comment slide and get to the nuts and bolts.
If you’d really like to have a discussion of why obamas fiscal policy is horrible I’d be open to discussing it buy if yiu were truly a fiscal conservative you’d be appalled at his plans, his record and the direction he’d take this country.
Last point every election 8-14% of republicans vote for the democratic candidate. This election will be closer to 8 than 14. I think yiu should be much more concerned with the number of registered democrats who will not vote for Obama, he wi be lucky to reach 85%, especially in PA MI VA and CO. Which is where this election. Will be decided.
Hopefully you’d like to engage in an intellectually based factual conversation on obama fiscal policies if you’re truly a fiscal republican.
@"Fake" Black Republ. PS. You know what they say about guys that are so threatened by the thought of being perceived as feminine, right ‘sweetie’?
They
@"Fake" Black Republ. “Lastly your closing line, with is implied vulgarity, reveals your true leaning”
I was going to write a long, albeit rightfully condescending post explaining to you that despite coming from a family of registered republicans and business owners who favor the party for fiscal reasons, I was not voting in this particular election on that basis alone (which is clear is you actually read my two previous posts) but then THIS gem came out….Did you actually just say that?
Roughly translated: Only democrats swear? Seriously? Are you really THAT stupid and biased?
But I guess threatening to slap a woman (which is what I am, btw if you hadn’t caught on) for calling you sweetie is a much more flattering portrayal of the party…I mean gee sailor, you should be on pins.
Call me a democrat all you want. It doesn’t exactly change my registered party affiliation now, does it?
And coming from such a fine specimen like yourself….it may downright be a compliment.
Toodles,
@real republican spending should be the last word
@Real Republican Black Republican….
Yes I call you out for not being real Republican because you are obviously not. Instead, most likely, a Kos or O troll set out to try and make people believe that the Republican base is anything but what they are, which is elated to have Governor Palin as the VP pick.
You are not a Republican because your words give you away.
1. If you were a fiscal conservative you would NEVER vote for Obama who would, along with Congress as his partner, institute the largest growth of government and unnecessary social spending since LBJ and before him FDR. It will be a calamity, and it will take decades to try and reverse the damage done. We have seen how hard it is to try and ween people off of the government assistance programs that they have grown accustomed to and not expect and demand. If you were truly a fiscal conservative there would be no question you would vote for McCain who has been a pork buster his whole career, and Governor Palin who has been PROVEN to be a fiscal conservative. Whereas Obama has never, not one time in his short career, voted for a tax cut of any sort. If you doubt this please look at the record.
This is not partisan rhetoric. If you had told me you were voting for Obama because you didnt want to go to war for any reason, or you thought we needed more social spending, or you liked his views on social issues I would have understood your decision, but to say youre a fiscal conservative voting for Obama proves it was just a talking point memo you were reciting, not a valid arguement based on educated research.
2. You give yourself away with your DNC/KOS/O talking point memo post here. McCain is old and we have to be afraid of Palin. KOS and the 0 campaign have instructed its minions to go to conservative sites and spout the same, posing as Republicans in order to disillusion the base with the hope of retarding turnout. Doesnt work.
Again, its ageism and its discrimination, just the same as it would if something vile had been said about Obama or Hillary. I wouldnt stand for that, and I wont stand for this no matter how you try to paint it. McCain’s doctors, have assured us of his health, he has a history of longevity in his family (see his mother) and if you were truly concerned with the health of a candidate you would be concerned over Obama’s smoking, which, as Doctor’s will tell you, is a significant health risk.
Lastly, your closing line, with its implied vulgarity, reveals your true leaning. Why is it impossible for a liberal to state a coherent point without littering it with vulgarity or profanity or both. It boggles the mind.
Lastly, if you called me sweetie to my face youd find yourself on your backside with a fat lip.
oh thats another thing, if you were a true Republican, you would never vote for an appeaser who would prefer to turn the US into another effete EU clone with no backbone and bogged down with uneccesary social speding.
@fwiw Brinkley on the debate:
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/09/27/alan-brinkley-on-last-night-s-debate.aspx
@... …and the winner is: john mccain! with a record 47 eyeblinks/minute.
@ugh it really annoys me that mccain always calls obama “senator obama,” whereas obama is always like, “JOHN.” it makes him look like a brash upstart: a junior senator.
Obama tried to talk through McCain when it wasn’t his turn too often. McCain won the whole Kissinger argument. Obama definitely succeeded in making McCain sound like Bush 3.
@i must say McCain totally directed the debates in the direction he wanted them to go. When it came to the economy he only talked about taxes. I still think Obama has improved a lot since the days of HRC. I kind of miss her debating skills though, she would have made McCain cry.
@Anonymous Ahmadmamdnamdan–
Ahmdandjaenahmahan–
Amamadnahdahdhamah–
Ahmadinejad
@Black Republican Any way you slice it, this was an even debate. Both had their serious flaws, both made some good points, no one blew the other out of the water.
Of course McCainers will say Obama squirmed Obamites will say McCain stumbled to make any impression but there was no clear winner.
Hence the situation mostly stays the same as it was before….Advantage Obama.
(which in my book isn’t really a bad thing. i won’t have Palin as president by 2011 when McCain goes into bedrest! I mean, are you kidding me?!!)
@True Republican First of all your closing comment about McCain going into bedrest is based on discrimination and you should be ashamed. You are implying that hes unfit because of his age which is the EQUIVALENT of his being unfit because of his race or sex.
Second, your comment about Palin gives away your true political leanings. You are not a Republican, my question is why hide your true allegiance?
Anyway, despite all of that I quasi-agree with your statement that all is as it was before. If you were pro McCain you are still pro McCain and vice versa.
What the debate did show to those scant few in the country who are undecided is that McCain is ready to be President now, he has command of the issues and he wont back down when challenged, Obama, while knowledgeable, looked like what he is, the junior Senator from Illinois.
BTW why is is so hard for Demcrats on the national scene to use a Republicans proper title as Senator McCain did when he referred to Senator Obama as Senator Obama. A little decorum and respect is warranted, its SENATOR MCCAIN, not John.
@Black Republican Oh sweetie that was….painfully stupid to read. I can only imagine how mind-numbing it must have been to write.
It is not ageism to be believe that a 72 year old man who has had 4 bouts with cancer, could in the next 4 year suffer partial or complete physical breakdown. It’s logic. I bet you consider doctors recommend people over 60 not to go on roller coasters to be discrimination too right?
And me not supporting Palin (for reasons made ample clear in the past 2 weeks by every media outlet)….means I’m not a republican? Are you kidding? So if McCain chose a comatose patient as his running mate I should support that decision without any hint of personal opinion or thought? I guess that’s what makes you a “true” republican…Bravo.
I’m sorry to wet the paper for you, but I’m just one of the many registered republicans (for fiscal reasons rather than conservative views, for the record) voting democrat this year based on, among other factors, the very real chance that Palin could be president by 2011.
….ya dumb piece of…
@that is such a bullshit argument and it really irritates me.
unlike gender or race, age actually impacts how your body and mind work. it’s not a personal attack, like race on obama or gender on palin, it’s a realistic one. i mean, mccain doesn’t know how to use a computer. that is because of his AGE. not because of a lack of resources. i’m sorry, i don’t want someone who doesn’t know how to use a computer running my country. i understand there are bigger issues at hand, but that is a HUGE red flag, and it really raises questions about how much mccain understands the needs of the nation and of young people in particular.
@EAL Actually, it hurts McCain to type excessively, due to his war injuries. But of course the Huffington Post or MoveOn.org will never tell you that…
@that's his job to clarify that. when you say “i don’t know how to use a computer–i leave that up to cindy,” don’t expect people to just let that slide. if he wants people to know that’s why he can’t (or won’t, really) use a computer, it’s up to him to clarify that. we’re not supposed to just draw that abstract conclusion.
and, playing devil’s advocate here, if he can’t type due to his war injuries, what else can’t he do? just another reason for people to question his abilities because of his age. (which they have every right to do. it is their country. people have a right to raise these questions.)
@the only reason mccain referred to obama as senator obama was so that he wouldn’t slip into a lapsus linguae and say something else–note the portion of the debate when he said “senator obama” most
by the way, seeing how simplistic your claims are and how shallow your premisses are, you probably would’ve criticized obama as ageist if he WOULDN’T HAVE said John.
@Really I thought Mccain got owned for most of this debate.
@to clarify Obama was much more substantial, more creative, and more tight with his Economic ideas, while mccain kept harping on about an $18b spending freeze and earmarks, which judging by the audience reaction, people saw through. He honed in on that issue, while Obama had a much bigger plan for things.
Wrt foreign policy, yes Obama was on the defensive, because Mccain kept distorting his positions. Obama, in defending himself, didn’t give an inch and I felt that in going after Mccain’s rhetoric, actually made him look like a bit of a fraud. And I don’t think Mccain has extensive knowledge on foreign policy issues, certainly not more than Obama, if he doesn’t know that Al Qaeda are Sunni. Throwing out a bunch of names like Chavez and Putin does not make you a foreign policy expert.
@random There were definitely no knockout punches in the debate, however McCain definitely came out on top on this one.
Obama was caught off-guard by McCain saying he would freeze spending. He finally conceded he would cut some of his health care policies.
A strong point for Obama was that he kept looking at McCain throughout the debate while McCain looked at the moderator. I’m sure the McCain crew took notes on that one.
Obama got a good sound bite in with the whole “you were wrong” on Afghanistan.
Obama made a small mistake by mentioning that he would take care of the veterans at the end because it allowed McCain to end on a very strong note.
Overall, the discussion concerning the economy was lackluster with no candidate having a strong solution.
McCain clearly won the foreign policy segment with his extensive knowledge on the issues and of names of foreign leaders. Did Obama even name one?
How many times did Obama say, “I agree with Senator McCain,” or something along those lines?
@I also thought mccain was on the offensive more and had Obama defending himself a lot–especially on earmarks and when they both started inexplicably pointing to Kissinger ?!? as some sort of venerated expert. I thought the 95% of americans getting a tax cut was obama’s best bit and should be the hook during the next debates.
McCain actually did a solid job on separating himself from Bush with the energy bill vote and his attempt to tie Obama to Bush at the end. I also don’t like how much Obama agreed with McCain–Obama has to learn to stop being the nice guy above the fray! His campaign has gotten on the attack but he seemed to forget it in this debate.
I think McCain won this debate but Obama didn’t make any major mistakes and there was pretty much a built in advantage for McCain so it wasn’t that bad. Obama will be on neutral and then favorable territory the next two debates though. He needs to go back and figure out how to bring his campaign strategy into debates.
@talking to iran This whole talking to Iran issue has been so twisted from where it started. Obama was asked in the primaries if he would be willing to meet with heads of state like Ahmadinejad, Assad and Chavez without precondition. He said he would. Kissinger was asked about this, and supported direct talks at a lower level; that is, he has not come out for presidential talks. McCain echoed this – lower level, and even ministerial-level, is ok, but presidential is not.
These are the facts, and this is the distinction. Using Kissinger to support presidential level talks is simply wrong. If we’re going to have an honest debate about the candidates’ views on this subject, let’s get the basics right first.
@some comments 1. for obama’s sake he better not try to interrupt mccain during the next debate. i think that it made him look bad, especially since mccain just calmly kept going.
2. mccain’s strategy tonight was clearly to point out that he’s older than obama and that he’s been more places and knows more people.
@.... #1 just got owned.
@oh? Are you kidding me!?
McCain consistently was on the offensive. He got under Obama’s skin and made him squirm.
AND. Those constant smirks from Obama. Really?
And put some names on your analysis. I’m sick of the lack of personal accountability for Bwog.
@Bwog The first line of this post is:
“Bwog’s White House Bureau Chief James Downie live-blogs the presidential debate.”