First Debate: Part 1
I made sure to record all of the post-debate analysis shows that I enjoy but still have yet to watch them. I haven't read a single article about the debate yet either. I have ignored all polls thus far as well. I've now given myself more than 24 hours but less than 48 hours to allow the debate to sink in. I isolate myself to allow myself to truly form my own opinion on this, even if it ends up sounding like many pundits out there. I'll talk a bit about the economic part of the debate but this was supposed to be about foreign policy and that's really my main focus about this debate. I'll be making a few different posts on the debate. Now, let me get to it...
I'm torn between a draw or a minor loss for Mr. Obama which actually helps the Obama campaign. Sen. McCain needed a game changer and with the absence of any gaffe by either man Mr. McCain didn't get one. Foreign policy is what Sen.McCain has essentially staked his campaign on and he didn't improve his standing on that but he may have at best (for the McCain campaign) put a ceiling on the level of readiness to be Commander-in-Chief for Sen. Obama. If in fact he accomplished this then he kept the race tight. Obama, outside of needing to look presidential, his biggest goal I thought was to make his case and explain that his plan for Iraq is not in fact defeat (it isn't). He attempted to directly do that once. It was nice to hear that both Sen. McCain and Sen. Obama didn't even know who they were talking about:
MICHAEL WARE, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT BAGHDAD: And Tehran will be surprised to learn that there are late forces of the Republican Guards as opposed to the Revolutionary Guard. ...Know thy enemy obviously doesn't apply in the presidential debate.If you just listen to the debate on the radio and/or read the transcript, on substance this was a draw. We, excuse me, political junkies learned nothing new last night but the stark differences were certainly emphasized. If you're a voter that just started around the conventions, you probably learned a great deal. If that is the case, here is a live fact check done by the Washington Post during the debate. Here is the fact checking from factcheck.org And here is the fact checking done by politifact.com
That Mr. McCain could never look at Mr. Obama was very odd as was McCain's lack of not looking into the camera. On style Mr. Obama won by a landslide -and his biggest goal was to look presidential, look safe. Mr. McCain certainly tried for humor but very little of it seemed to land. I do chuckle everytime he does the Bear DNA joke. Mr. Obama however looked directly into the camera a few times and was willing to look right at Mr. McCain who seemed like the only one he wanted to talk to was the moderator.
Shocker alert: They both stuck to there talking points.
1 comments:
On both style and substance, McCain won the debate. On foreign policy, how did Obama look "safe" or "Presidential"? He spent most of the debate on defense when it came to the surge, no preconditioned meetings with Iran, the absurdity of saying in public we would attack Pakistan w/out their knowledge, the clear not understanding of Russian agression against Georgia. On style, McCain was constantly on the offense, well informed of all the issues and unlike Sen Obama looked assertive in his worldview. On substance, this was a landslide for McCain. Obama's support for higher taxes would cause a Depression. on health care, blasting away at the need for a new massive govt beauraucy that would hurt families. on energy, making Americans aware of Obama's very tepid support of offshore drilling and his opp. to nuke energy, on iraq, blasting Obama for being so completely wrong on the surge and mocked Obama's comments to O'Reilly that the surge exceeded his wildest deams. On Iran, McCain destroyed Obama's plan rhetorically asking "When the Iranian dictator says we will annihilate Israel, what are we going to say in reply 'no. you cant'?" I thought after that debate, that Sen Obama was even less qualified to be Commander in Chief
Post a Comment