A draw is as good as a win… for either McCain or Obama… so which is it? September 27, 2008
Posted by WorldbyStorm in US Politics.trackback
The consensus is in, the candidates drew although McCain shaded it slightly. Interesting since although the nominal topic was international issues the economy – as would be predicted – dominated proceedings. I thought that McCain came across as more discursive, Obama as more snappy. What did come through – and this may be of more benefit to McCain, is that he seemed to actually enjoy the cut and thrust and relish to the opportunity to spar. That they shared jokes (or at least chuckles) sat oddly with Obama’s more considered approach.
So, if it is a draw, then in whose favour was it? I’d say McCain, but he’s had such a terrible terrible week – not the least of it being his off again on again campaign – that that surely should see some real damage wreaked on his already soft polling numbers.
Can we wait for the Vice-Presidential debate? We cannot!
Still, for a view on how some see these matters consider the following very distasteful image and piece from supposed Hillary Clinton supporters (and hold on a second, I’m pretty agnostic about Obama and I’d have slightly been more in favour of her as nominee until the slow motion disintegration of her campaign during the primaries – much of it self-inflicted). I’m usually immune to much of Freud’s musings, but in this case it’s hard reading that site and seeing the curious concentration on personality to the exclusion of all else not to wonder about the motive forces at work. Sure, an undigested and undisguised hostility to Obama, but what else? What else?
The Cedar Lounge Revolution 
I don’t think there was a consenus that there was a draw. Or at least, not in the polls.
Also, even if it was deemed a draw, with Obama pulling ahead, McCain would have needed a stronger performance to recover from the (current) trend.
LikeLike
I missed that Ciarán. Cheers. Wow, so people thought Obama won. Very interesting.
LikeLike
Polls aside I would be inclined to agree with WBS. It was closer to a draw, at least close enough for people to draw their own conclusions. It makes me think of the Kennedy/Nixon debate which was televised where imagery was so important and where content took a back seat. That being said Super Tuesday comes to mind. It was also a draw but it shouldn’t have been. This debate was where McCain was supposed to shine and he was good showing that while he can’t stump for shit he do the back and forth rather well. The problem is that he needed to give Obama a black eye so that he wouldn’t be eaten alive when it comes time to debate domestic affairs and the economy. Especially coming off of the will he/won’t he leading up to the debate. We’ll have to see what kind of combos Obama can land in later debates. Though I too wait expectantly for the VP debates.
LikeLike
-Specifically, by a 62-32 margin, voters thought that Obama was “more in touch with the needs and problems of people like you”.-(from FiveThirtyEight, linked in comment 1) Remember during the primaries when the punditry were proclaiming that Obama could not relate to the working class?
Remember Hillary’s landslide in W.Virginia? McCain now leads Obama there by 4%.
Last night’s topic was supposed to be McCain’s strong suit,-the military, foreign policy experience, fitness to be commander-in-chief etc. And Obama came across as just as ready.
The strange thing about last night’s debate was that neither candidate had anything important to say about the greatest economic crisis since the Depression.
The trend should continue in Obama’s favour, but its too close to call, (and remember too the N.Hampshire primary)
Next week its Ms. Congeniality Alaska vs. blabbermouth, and plagiarist, Biden. Should be more entertaining than last night.
LikeLike
I do agree, the Veep debate should be the really fun one. Bearing in mind how desperate the Reps have been to keep Palin away from a live mike. Biden is someone I don’t like very much, but he does a good line in barbs, so I can see him shining in the back and forth.
LikeLike
The strange thing about last night’s debate was that neither candidate had anything important to say about the greatest economic crisis since the Depression.
{First, I should say I didn’t see the whole debate. Probably 2/3 of it at most.}
Couldn’t agree more. I found it strange that neither candidate seems to realize how much things have changed. There is going to be a period of serious retrenchment now and neither one of them talked about that. Maybe neither wants to be the bearer of bad news. I was expecting to hear that domestically and internationally the United States needs to alter course to suit the changed economic situation. I was expecting to hear that there will be less money for education, health, welfare, the military, nation-building, etc.
I was heartened that neither seemed to want to jump into the protectionist straitjacket, but I think it may still make an appearance. {Or did I miss that?}
LikeLike
“Biden is someone I don’t like very much, but he does a good line in barbs, so I can see him shining in the back and forth.”
I hold no brief for Palin but if she had said half the foolish things that have come out of Biden’s mouth recently, the McCain campaign would have been finished weeks ago. That said, he should do fine in the tightly controlled format of this debate.
“I was expecting to hear that domestically and internationally the United States needs to alter course to suit the changed economic situation. ”
I wasn’t. The bad stuff will wait until after one of them takes office next year.
I thought McCain did quite well as the ‘debate’ went on, but the dullness was such that I doubt many viewers hung in that long, although I haven’t seen any viewing statistics. Obama is still not especially strong in the format but thanks to Clinton’s thoughtfulness in staying in the race, he has improved to a level where he is not likely to make any major mistakes, which is all he needs to do at this point.
Given recent events on the economic front and the failure of the bailout package, I do not think this debate or the future debates will be of much consequence, however.
LikeLike
It’s very telling that Obama would see Venezuela as a ‘rogue state’. Although unsurprising given the militaristic noises from him and the likes of Samanatha Power with respect to Venezuela and the repeatedly elected* Chavez…
http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/16946
“In fact, if the comments of his senior foreign policy advisor Samantha Power are any indication, it’s not a hopeful picture. Power, a strong supporter of the 1999 US bombing of Serbia, referred to Chavez’s domestic policies as “very problematic” in a recent interview, and implied that Obama would be looking for a change in Venezuelan policies.
“If…Chavez continues to deviate from what Obama thinks are international norms that should be adhered to domestically, then that’s a problem,” said Power. [8]
Power went on to say that the Obama administration would focus on “what Chavez does badly from the standpoint of the Venezuelan people.” This begs the obvious question: isn’t it the job of the Venezuelan people to decide that?”
[…]
“Obama has also laid out plans to expand the US military, which seems to imply that he would not be averse to using military action. Obama’s Senior Foreign Policy Advisor Samantha Power certainly isn’t, as she expressed in a recent interview:
“There are national security and humanitarian challenges out there that are going to require American attention, and sometimes that’s going to require military attention,” she said. [9]”
* (despite coups and all manner of CIA skullduggery… the latest of which was only a few weeks ago but there was another one of those ‘Operation [fill-in-the-irony-is-dead-name-here]’ prior to the referendum last year.
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/2914 )
LikeLike