The First Presidential Debate--Who Won ?

[Peace]

With tonight's Presidential Debate starting at 6PM please do not vote until the debate is at least 1/3 over..If at all possible can a Mod keep this closed until the debate is at least 1/3 over ?

I started this early to position the actual polling at the top and to keep one discussion going rather than having a bunch of debate polls pop up.

[KingYaba]

I think I'll bet on Senator Obama with this one. Surely Vegas has the odds somewhere, right?

[Doctor Q]

The poll is closed for now, but will be opened while the debate is in progress.

[kabunaru]

Obama should win. McCain should just decide to which of his houses to be in. :p

[rdowns]

McCain is starting 3 lengths behind. He said he wouldn't show until an accord was reached on the bailout. No accord yet here he is.

[redwarrior]

I'd like to know (and I wish this were a part of the poll), who will watch and vote who decided way before the debate. Most of us have already made up our minds on this and will view the debates from that angle. I'd like to hear more from people who are going to actually watch the debates and come to a tentative decision.

[iShater]

We already know the outcome. What waste of airspace. :D :p


Just kidding, I am sure it will be fun. Too bad I will be on the road. :o

[redwarrior]

We already know the outcome. What waste of airspace. :D :p


Just kidding, I am sure it will be fun. Too bad I will be on the road. :o
Don't worry, by the time they stop replaying it, we'll all have it memorized.:rolleyes: But of course, not in the context that was originally intended by the debaters.

[sushi]

Don't worry, by the time they stop replaying it, we'll all have it memorized.:rolleyes: But of course, not in the context that was originally intended by the debaters.
That much is certain. :)

[yojitani]

Who will make the fewest gaffes?

[voxnj]

The poll is closed for now, but will be opened while the debate is in progress.

Since McCain released a web add campaign this morning claiming "McCain Wins Debate" -- I see no politically neutral reason why the polls aren't open right now.

I demand the right to vote!!!

[Peace]

The poll will open at 6:45PM west coast time. This will give people watching a chance to actually observe and think about it. I'm trying to make this a good poll..


Thanks folks..

[rdowns]

Since McCain released a web add campaign this morning claiming "McCain Wins Debate" -- I see no politically neutral reason why the polls aren't open right now.

I demand the right to vote!!!


Here's the ad.

http://www.mydd.com/images/admin/mcain_debate.gif

[MacNut]

Is it me or has neither side answered the questions.

[rdowns]

Looks like they're going to play nice with each other.

[MacNut]

Looks like they're going to play nice with each other.Good luck getting me to watch then.:p

[Mike Teezie]

I think that the outcome of this debate will be a draw, unless someone looses a massive gaffe.

Obama is not a great debater by any means, so basically all McCain has to do is not die up there, and he squeak out with a tie.

[MacNut]

Neither of them are masters at it.

[Lord Blackadder]

So far it's pretty dull...

This is a debate that can be lost, but not won. :rolleyes:

[MacNut]

Obama seems to be stuttering more than McCain.

[yojitani]

Obama seems to be stuttering more than McCain.

Are we watching the same debate? McCain started off not making sense and he's getting stripped by Obama on tax cuts/breaks right now.

[MacNut]

The both of them don't look comfortable. Obama has trouble starting and McCain has trouble once he has started.

[Mike Teezie]

I can't decide how I feel about this format, with them interrupting each other.

[MacNut]

I can't decide how I feel about this format, with them interrupting each other.I like the idea of a lead question and letting them go at it, but they are not debating each other.

[scotthayes]

It's now 2:30 in the morning in the UK and I'm still waiting for a debate. So far it's just a stump speech from both of them. Guess I'm spoilt with our weekly Prime Minister's Question time.

[MacNut]

Can we open the poll and add "neither" so I can vote.

The questions are all over the place and I am lost.

[scotthayes]

"The lessons of Iraq are you can not have a failed strategy" No s*** sherlock

[Topher15]

Obama, which is not exactly surprising.

Anyone who says the US economy is strong doesn't have a chance!

[dual64bit]

Jim.. Tim... I mean John

Geesh, get the names right...

[zioxide]

I love how McCain never answers the ****ing question. His laughing is a ****ing joke too.

[dual64bit]

Tatic and strategy are not the same thing...

ahh, geesh, you are running to be president, not captain of the army!

[danny_w]

I like the idea of a lead question and letting them go at it, but they are not debating each other.
Unfortunately they aren't addressing the questions either. They keep changing the subject and will never answer the question, either one of them. Jim Lehrer is having a Dickens of a time trying to get a sensible answer out of them.

[Peace]

McCain seems to be not telling the truth and Obama isn't calling him on it.

[abijnk]

I wish Obama had responded on the nuclear energy charge and the charge that he raised taxes on those making $42,000. Both were bald faced lies that have dispelled by several different places.

[BigHungry04]

Unfortunately they aren't addressing the questions either. They keep changing the subject and will never answer the question, either one of them. Jim Lehrer is having a Dickens of a time trying to get a sensible answer out of them.

Politicians never answer the questions that are asked of them. I wish they would. I like Barack Obama, and I like John McCain, I would love to be able to decide who to vote for, but they don't answer the damn questions. Answer them so those who are undecided can decide, please.

As typing this, Obama is actually answering a question about Afghanistan. He is really answering it! Kill me now, I've seen everything.

[atszyman]

Bah, I'm only about an hour behind, now past the first question, based on the comments it sounds like it'll get better, but not that much.

I'll vote when it's over...

Although right off the bat, I will definitely admit that I am biased one way...

[yojitani]

Oh dear.. America has already been bombing places in Pakistan and in the last week shots have been fired between US and Pakistani troops. McCain is lost here.

He's also partially wrong about Musharraf. He was seen as a dictator of sorts within Pakistan... especially by the time the US became involved.

[abijnk]

Here comes the POW story!!!!

[BigHungry04]

Oh dear.. America has already been bombing places in Pakistan and in the last week shots have been fired between US and Pakistani troops. McCain is lost here.

They're refusing to attack the terrorists in their country. Someone should go after them. We should try diplomatically first of course. When all else fails, war is the only option.

[MacNut]

Am I watching a debate or a campaign speech.

[scotthayes]

guess the score is even on who has the best bracelet

[BigHungry04]

Am I watching a debate or a campaign speech.

Its a campaign speech. And yes they both have bracelets. Hooray bracelets! I want one too!

[valdore]

I'd say this debate is a wash so far with a half hour left - although I've known all along I'm for Obama.

[atszyman]

Am I watching a debate or a campaign speech.

Over the last few years, they haven't differed much.

Question, talking point, pseudo-response talking point, Question, repeat....

I'm on the taxes budgetary question #2...

Wow, McCain found $3,000,000 to cut, out of our >$300,000,000,000 deficit. Unfortunately the only places to make those kinds of cuts are the Military, Social Security, Medicare or Debt payment... where is he going to find the other $297,000,000,000?

[scotthayes]

Iran having nuclear "weapons" will NOT cause a second holocaust. That is pandering to the Jewish vote.

[BigHungry04]

"A league of democracies." Its too bad the UN allows evil communist countries and dictatorships into their organization, or we'd already have that.

[CalBoy]

While I am hands down an Obama voter, I think that McCain's insistence on not answering Lehrer's questions and personally attacking Obama has left him on top of the debate for now. :o

[tringo]

Ahmamamamamma...oh ****, ack majadinad, nope....ac, ack ......

Lol, McCain is having trouble remembering his international dictators.

[Benjamindaines]

Iran having nuclear "weapons" will NOT cause a second holocaust. That is pandering to the Jewish vote.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

[scotthayes]

What is McCain's obsession with not talking to countries like Iran and Cuba. You can not just refuse to talk. Have a look at Northern Ireland.

[abijnk]

I think Obama just scored with the Kissinger reference.

[freeny]

Having trouble putting the kids to sleep tonight. Lying in bed with the baby and keeping up with the debate on this thread via my iPhone...

[scotthayes]

Wondered how long it would be before Obama mentioned McCain not meeting with Zapatero or knowing who he is.

[MacNut]

Fight Fight Fight

[atszyman]

Having trouble putting the kids to sleep tonight. Lying in bed with the baby and keeping up with the debate on this thread via my iPhone...

Get a DVR, of course you'll always be behind but you can get the kids in bed before you start watching... also frees you up to swear at the TV, and type in this thread more easily...:D

McCain stored some points with me on examining cost-plus contracts for defense, it's a really broken system.

[scotthayes]

McCain needs to read this... Former U.S. secretaries of state say they support talks with Iran (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1021344.html)

[Lord Blackadder]

The "preconditions" debate seems more a discussion of syntax than anything else.

[rdowns]

Obama missed a golden opportunity on the Kissinger reference. He should have said, your VP nominee also made the same misstatement with Katie Couric the other night and Ms. Kouric confirmed that Kissinger said that.

[atszyman]

OK, he just talked about the stuff he fought with Bush on (for me, I'm a bit behind). Unfortunately he seemed to stop the disagreements 2-4 years ago.

When is the last time you heard about him being a thorn in the administration's side?

[BigHungry04]

Fight Fight Fight

To Russia:

"I thought you all embraced democracy!"

"We were lying."

If Georgia joins NATO, and Russia goes to war with Georgia, guess what? We go to war with Russia. Ever heard of General Winter? We're so screwed.

[freeny]

Get a DVR, of course you'll always be behind but you can get the kids in bed before you start watching... also frees you up to swear at the TV, and type in this thread more easily...:D

McCain stored some points with me on examining cost-plus contracts for defense, it's a really broken system.

the TiVo is running but by the sounds of it I'm not really missing anything of substance.

[James17]

Watching the debate live from BBC here in the UK, it is very interesting listening to some of their plans. When Obama spoke about Bin Laden, he said something along the lines of "get him and kill him" in a normal manner, it's striking how American politicians say things like that in such an acceptable way when in the UK you would "never" expect words like that from our politicians.

[Cleverboy]

Obama started off rough, and McCain was seeming snappy and spry. McCain got less snappy and rougher, Obama got more comfortable and fluid. Now they're about on the same level of comfort. McCain was scoring far more "personability" points in my book (more understandable, practical examples that people can "get"). Obama made up some ground, but he's still coming off a bit erudite in the end.

These are certainly two very smart guys. I have to say, McCain is looking a LOT better than he usually does. Make-up has done a great job.

~ CB

[scotthayes]

As all polls show McCain stronger on foreign policy I think that Obama has handled this debate very well. Granted the first 40 minutes were on the economy.

So I'll chalk this one up to Obama. He gave clear and precise answers, McCain seemed to talk a lot about how long he has been in the Senate as his answer to foreign policy.


And there is the POW story, saved until the very end.

[NT1440]

POW referance in the closing statements!? im schocked i say shocked!
:rolleyes:

[yojitani]

Obama started off rough, and McCain was seeming snappy and spry. McCain got less snappy and rougher, Obama got more comfortable and fluid. Now they're about on the same level of comfort. McCain was scoring far more "personability" points in my book (more understandable, practical examples that people can "get"). Obama made up some ground, but he's still coming off a bit erudite in the end.

These are certainly two very smart guys. I have to say, McCain is looking a LOT better than he usually does. Make-up has done a great job.

~ CB

I thought Obama did a good job of highlighting his philosophical differences.

[abijnk]

Watching the debate live from BBC here in the UK, it is very interesting listening to some of their plans. When Obama spoke about Bin Laden, he said something along the lines of "get him and kill him" in a normal manner, it's striking how American politicians say things like that in such an acceptable way when in the UK you would "never" expect words like that from our politicians.

Yeah, but, you know, its actually pretty easy to be nonchalant about the death of the man who did this...

[freeny]

Watching the debate live from BBC here in the UK, it is very interesting listening to some of their plans. When Obama spoke about Bin Laden, he said something along the lines of "get him and kill him" in a normal manner, it's striking how American politicians say things like that in such an acceptable way when in the UK you would "never" expect words like that from our politicians.

I think osama may be the only person you can say that about off the hip here (aside from some of bin ladens cohorts). I can't think of any other person who a US politician could say that about and no one in the room would flinch.

[James17]

Yeah, but, you know, its actually pretty easy to be nonchalant about the death of the man who did this...

I completely agree with you I was just pointing out the barrier of acceptance and great divide in the severity of the action that should be taken if Bin Laden was captured. You would never hear anyone over here saying "get him and kill him" as I can remember when politicians here refused to comment on Saddam Hussein receiving a death sentence as they simply said "let the Iraqi people decide through their own judicial system" were as an American Politician may have said, him getting the death penalty was the appropriate outcome.

[aethelbert]

I recorded it so I was about forty-five minutes behind ya'll when I stopped listening to that rhetorical, off-topic bs from each side. Now off to something more productive, like reading macrumors.

[abijnk]

I completely agree with you I was just pointing out the barrier of acceptance and great divide in the severity of the action that should be taken if Bin Laden was captured. You would never hear anyone over here saying "get him and kill him" as I can remember when politicians here refused to comment on Saddam Hussein receiving a death sentence as they simply said "let the Iraqi people decide through their own judicial system" were as an American Politician may have said, him getting the death penalty was the appropriate outcome.

That's very true.

[freeny]

I completely agree with you I was just pointing out the barrier of acceptance and great divide in the severity of the action that should be taken if Bin Laden was captured. You would never hear anyone over here saying "get him and kill him" as I can remember when politicians here refused to comment on Saddam Hussein receiving a death sentence as they simply said "let the Iraqi people decide through their own judicial system" were as an American Politician may have said, him getting the death penalty was the appropriate outcome.

I think we (bush) referred to sadam as "bringing him to justice"

[mcdj]

If we're strictly counting uses of the word "fundamental", I think McCain won, but not by much.

[TheAnswer]

Guess I'm spoilt with our weekly Prime Minister's Question time.

Gosh how I wish we had that here.

Iran having nuclear "weapons" will NOT cause a second holocaust. That is pandering to the Jewish vote.

I'm glad I'm not the only one that saw it that way.

[KingYaba]

I thought they both handled themselves well. No clear winner. I thought McCain looked a bit nervous during the opening but he got comfortable as time went on. Both had their moments... no clear winner on this one. Very different from last year when I walked away from the Bush v Kerry debates saying Bush got smoked.

[balamw]

I thought they both handled themselves well. No clear winner. I thought McCain looked a bit nervous during the opening but he got comfortable as time went on. Both had their moments... no clear winner on this one. Very different from last year when I walked away from the Bush v Kerry debates saying Bush got smoked.

As that performance demonstrates winning the debate and "smoking the competition" doesn't necessarily translate into victory.

McCain comfortable? He consistently looked irritated or perhaps constipated, someone forget to take his Metamucil today?

Both candidates were nowhere near as comfortable or confrontational as in Bush debates. They played to their bases, and I really don't think either of them won over any undecideds with their performance today.

I watched on NBC and thought it was interesting that Palin turned down their offer to comment after the debate and they sent in Mr. 9/11 himself in her place. McCain still had the gall to go after Obama on experience, even though his hand-picked #2 was nowhere in sight? That's supposed to inspire confidence in his choices?

B

[mcdj]

Obama started off rough, and McCain was seeming snappy and spry. McCain got less snappy and rougher, Obama got more comfortable and fluid. Now they're about on the same level of comfort. McCain was scoring far more "personability" points in my book (more understandable, practical examples that people can "get"). Obama made up some ground, but he's still coming off a bit erudite in the end.

These are certainly two very smart guys. I have to say, McCain is looking a LOT better than he usually does. Make-up has done a great job.

~ CB

Exactly why this and most other debates are useless, because people typically make their decisions on who won based on these superficial criteria, instead of what was said...not to mention that these superficial criteria are often the only thing worth discussing.

America's Next Top President indeed.

[Cleverboy]

Wow, Joe Biden was SNAPPY in his follow-up on CNN's coverage. Crisp, observant, and smart. Good job. when Wolf Blitzer commented that it'd be nice to hear from Palin, Anderson Cooper scoffed and mutter, "Don't hold your breath." That... was hilarious. I saw Campbell Brown smirking to herself. I was too.Exactly why this and most other debates are useless, because people typically make their decisions on who won based on these superficial criteria, instead of what was said...not to mention that these superficial criteria are often the only thing worth discussing. Well... its funny, my comments may seem pretty superficial, but like you said, and like I've heard prior to the debate... this debate was going to hinge quite a bit on character tonight. People know the general lines. CNN had their live people-meter. Republicans responded positively to GOP issues, Democrats responded posititively to Democratic issues... but Independents were most distinguished when they disapproved of "sniping" attacks, like McCain's condescension of Obama by saying, "You're naive" or "You don't have the judgement or experience to know what you're talking about" -type of comments. I thought that was interesting.

~ CB

[zap2]

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

I would......Iran isn't stupid, small counties like that are looking for the "back up, don't invade, we have a bomb" card, not the drop the bomb.


Plus there is little evidence that they are working for a bomb. Our CIA and the UN have said they are NOT.

I can sleep soundly on that issue tonight

[atszyman]

Finished, I definitely agree it wasn't a shellacking and probably won't change any minds.

It'll be interesting to see the FactCheck.org and media spin over the next few days.

On to Thursday!

[joepunk]

I think McCain was way too condescending and not once ever looking at Obama.

I think it was a tie. Either that or Jim Lehrer won.

[abijnk]

You know, going back through some clips, both of them were wearing WAY too much makeup. :o Obama looked like a mannequin and McCain looked embalmed.

[Aranince]

There were many times Obama agreed with McCain. I don't know what to think about that. Honestly, if Obama agrees with McCain so much, why not elect McCain since he has a bit more experience.

[wakka092]

The first thing I noticed was John McCain's constant smirking and chuckling. From my perspective, he seemed cocky, unfocused, and the condescension that everyone else has been noticed. And Barack Obama's the "elitist?" McCain often veered far from the question to give some completely unrelated response. Also, he said nothing of domestic plans and policies, but the old ************ about Democrat = More taxes. McCain acts like he could read the future and know the surge would work. You should not be able as a presidential candidate claim you were behind something that just happened to work by chance and then claim you were right all along.

However, Obama seemed cool and collective, obviously frustrated at times (who wouldn't; it's a debate) but otherwise focused and responsive, and MUCH more respectful than John McCain was to him. He actually talked about his domestic policies.

Both were vague about how the bailout plan would affect their budgets, which is expected.

I can't wait to see the vice-presidential debate. Biden's got that wrapped up already. If Palin can't even as McCain's VP talk to the media supporting her running mate how can she defend herself against another VP candidate?

[mgguy]

While Henry Kissinger did say that the US should negotiate with Iran without preconditions, he opposes the President doing so. He does NOT think the president should talk to Ahmadinejad without preconditions.

[Aranince]

The first thing I noticed was John McCain's constant smirking and chuckling. From my perspective, he seemed cocky, unfocused, and the condescension that everyone else has been noticed. And Barack Obama's the "elitist?"

To be fare...Obama did the same. McCains smirking and laughing is because Obama had no idea what he was talking about.

[wakka092]

To be fare...Obama did the same. McCains smirking and laughing is because Obama had no idea what he was talking about.

Obama did do the same, but with far less frequency than McCain.

[Aranince]

Obama did do the same, but with far less frequency than McCain.

Must have been watching CNN...

[CalBoy]

To be fare...Obama did the same. McCains smirking and laughing is because Obama had no idea what he was talking about.

I'd like to know what exactly Obama got wrong, seeing as how ABC and PBS indicated that his facts were pretty much spot on.

[Iscariot]

Poll Results Suggest More Uncommitted Voters Saw Obama As Debate Winner

Thirty-nine percent of uncommitted voters who watched the debate tonight thought Barack Obama was the winner. Twenty-five percent thought John McCain won. Thirty-six percent saw it as a draw.
[link (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/26/politics/horserace/entry4482028.shtml)]

[donga]

To be fare...Obama did the same. McCains smirking and laughing is because Obama had no idea what he was talking about.

Obama "smirked" because mccain went over time way too often and lied way too much. Mccain was visibly upset because obama was speaking the truth and mccain didn't know how to respond except with more lies

[Cleverboy]

Well... some polls coming in. First, I picked up on this subtly, but McCain would not look at Obama, but Obama obliged the moderator and spoke to McCain. Very impersonal behavior from McCain. Also, the CNN roundtable noted that Obama called Senator McCain, "John", while McCain called Obama "Senator Obama". A sign of disrespect from Obama?

Anyway, here's the poll on who some Independents think won the debate...

Poll Results Suggest More Uncommitted
Voters Saw Obama As Debate Winner
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/26/politics/horserace/entry4482028.shtml
CBS News and Knowledge Networks conducted a nationally representative poll of approximately 500 uncommitted voters reacting to the debate in the minutes after it happened.

Thirty-nine percent of uncommitted voters who watched the debate tonight thought Barack Obama was the winner. Twenty-five percent thought John McCain won. Thirty-six percent saw it as a draw.

Forty-six percent of uncommitted voters said their opinion of Obama got better tonight. Thirty-one percent said their opinion of McCain got better.

Sixty-six percent of uncommitted voters think Obama would make the right decisions about the economy. Forty-four percent think McCain would.

Forty-eight percent of these voters think Obama would make the right decisions about Iraq. Fifty-eight percent think McCain would.

We will have a full report on the poll later on. Uncommitted voters are those who don't yet know who they will vote for, or who have chosen a candidate but may still change their minds.

The margin of sampling error could be plus or minus 4 percentage points for results based on the entire sample. Interesting if nothing else.

~ CB

[Aranince]

Obama "smirked" because mccain went over time way too often and lied way too much. Mccain was visibly upset because obama was speaking the truth and mccain didn't know how to respond except with more lies

No idea what debate you were watching...

[donga]

No idea what debate you were watching...

the one that happened just 30 minutes ago. you know, the one where mccain couldn't even look his opponent. the one where obama won....

take your blinders off

[CalBoy]

No idea what debate you were watching...

I seem to recall Lehrer trying to get McCain to stop talking due to time on more than one occasion...

And I'd still prefer an answer to my question.

[Aranince]

the one that happened just 30 minutes ago. you know, the one where mccain couldn't even look his opponent. the one where obama won....

take your blinders off

You mean the one where Obama was on the defensive most of the time?

Honestly. Of course the left is going to root for the left, and the right is going to root for the right. No amount of debating is going to persuade any opponent to changing opinion.

[Topher15]

Obama made up some ground, but he's still coming off a bit erudite in the end.

You say this as if it is bad.

[donga]

You mean the one where Obama was on the defensive most of the time?

since you didn't refute my point, i see that you agree that obama did win and that mccain couldn't even look at obama. what would you think of a person who couldn't even look you in the eye let alone look at you at all when talking to him/her?

speaking more objectively: they both spoke to their bases and didn't sway too many independents. 39 days more to go....

[mgguy]

McCain may not have been looking at Obama because he wasn't talking to him but rather to the viewing audience. It is somewhat artificial to act as if you are talking to someone you really aren't addressing just because the moderator is pressing you to do so. It can be perceived as even a little confrontational to speak directly at your opponent when at the same time you are strongly criticizing their point of view on policy. Good way to instigate a fist fight.

[NT1440]

You mean the one where Obama was on the defensive most of the time?

Honestly. Of course the left is going to root for the left, and the right is going to root for the right. No amount of debating is going to persuade any opponent to changing opinion.

so being on defense means you lost a debate? He was only on defense because he had to constantly try to correct mccains lies about him, and often powered through obamas objections. Mccain just wouldnt shut up. Its kinda hard to not be defensive when always having to degend yourself from lies (duh). I still think obama continued his trend of talking about policy rather than talking about the openent with a little bit of policy here and there.

[Aranince]

so being on defense means you lost a debate? He was only on defense because he had to constantly try to correct mccains lies about him, and often powered through obamas objections. Mccain just wouldnt shut up. Its kinda hard to not be defensive when always having to degend yourself from lies (duh). I still think obama continued his trend of talking about policy rather than talking about the openent with a little bit of policy here and there.

What are McCain's lies?

[Iscariot]

No amount of debating is going to persuade any opponent to changing opinion.

It's my opinion that the common thread the left and right should be sharing is disappointment. This debate will not come off as a tie (with both sides claiming victory) because there were two equally matched visionaries on the stage, but because rhetoric, complacency and mediocrity took the place of integrity, prescience and leadership.

[NT1440]

What are McCain's lies?

There were numerous times i saw that obama had to waste his follow up correcting when mccain purposefully misrepresented obamas policies. Ill have to watch again for direct quotes tho.

[TheAnswer]

You say this as if it is bad.

Well, what I think Cleverboy is attempting to indicate is that, while erudition in itself is not a bad thing, being perceived as trying to talk down from a more learned position, as a instructor or teacher would (erudite has its roots in the Latin verb erudire: to instruct or train), might have some amount of negative political consequences that could effect the outcome of this election.

See how that feels??

[Phrasikleia]

There were many times Obama agreed with McCain. I don't know what to think about that. Honestly, if Obama agrees with McCain so much, why not elect McCain since he has a bit more experience.

George Bush has more experience too, but I sure wouldn't want him in the White House for another term.

[Aranince]

George Bush has more experience too, but I sure wouldn't want him in the White House for another term.

Yes...but Bush isn't running so we don't have to worry about that.

[TheAnswer]

What are McCain's lies?

1. Eisenhower's second D-Day letter never mentioned resigning from the Army (http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/d-day-message/images/failure-message.gif).

[mgguy]

Obama criticizes McCain for agreeing with Bush so much of the time, but tonight he agreed with McCain several times. Gee, does that mean he supports some of Bush's positions? That would be hard for many posters in this forum to swallow.

[CalBoy]

McCain may not have been looking at Obama because he wasn't talking to him but rather to the viewing audience.

While that certainly would have been good of McCain to do, according to Charles Gibson and Diane Sawyer, it turns out that he was indeed just making eye contact with Jim Lehrer the whole time, even though Lehrer said not to do that.
It's my opinion that the common thread the left and right should be sharing is disappointment. This debate will not come off as a tie (with both sides claiming victory) because there were two equally matched visionaries on the stage, but because rhetoric, complacency and mediocrity took the place of integrity, prescience and leadership.

Sadly, all debates really accomplish is letting candidates get the chance to fail in a way that is not substantially important. Kennedy looked more calm and collected than Nixon, so he comes out on top. Reagan quips, "I want you to know that also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience." and suddenly everyone agrees that he's won.

That is the nature of Presidential politics; they embody figureheads as opposed to genuine buffs of political knowledge.

[TheAnswer]

2. The Whopper™: McCain's $379 billion lie.

From AP (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26908942/)

MCCAIN: In a discussion of how the government could shrink spending, he said: "Look, we are sending $700 billion a year overseas to countries that don't like us very much."

The comment echoes one he made in his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention earlier this month, when he was talking about money the U.S. spends on foreign oil. FactCheck.org says the U.S. this year is on track to spend $536 billion on imported oil — not $700 billion — and nearly one-third of that comes from friendly nations: Canada, Mexico and Britain.

[Aranince]

1. Eisenhower's second D-Day letter never mentioned resigning from the Army (http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/d-day-message/images/failure-message.gif).

Noted

Obama criticizes McCain for agreeing with Bush so much of the time, but tonight he agreed with McCain several times. Gee, does that mean he supports some of Bush's positions? That would be hard for many posters in this forum to swallow.

Yea, I don't know if its because Obama couldn't come up with anything else to say, or if he truly agrees with McCain.

[CalBoy]

Yes...but Bush isn't running so we don't have to worry about that.
You mean McCain and Bush differ in their policy positions?

No one told me...
Obama criticizes McCain for agreeing with Bush so much of the time, but tonight he agreed with McCain several times. Gee, does that mean he supports some of Bush's positions? That would be hard for many posters in this forum to swallow.

Obama and McCain were only agreeing on superficial topics that any voter would agree with (we need accountability in government, we need to fix the economy, etc).

When Obama and McCain vote together 90% of the time like McCain has with Bush, we'll talk.

[Aranince]

You mean McCain and Bush differ in their policy positions?

No one told me...

How Bush is for the bailout and McCain is against it?

[CalBoy]

How Bush is for the bailout and McCain is against it?

McCain is against it?

Funny, I thought he flew to DC to ensure its passage went smoothly.

Or is McCain still against it because, "the fundamentals of the economy are still strong?"

[Aranince]

McCain is against it?

Funny, I thought he flew to DC to ensure its passage went smoothly.

Or is McCain still against it because, "the fundamentals of the economy are still strong?"

He went to Washington because he didn't want this thing rushed and not thoroughly inspected. The funny thing is, the whole meeting was going fine until Obama entered the room, then it fell apart. Even the democrats are saying that.

[yojitani]

He went to Washington because he didn't want this thing rushed and not thoroughly inspected. The funny thing is, the whole meeting was going fine until Obama entered the room, then it fell apart. Even the democrats are saying that.

My source calls yours out:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/the-role-of-joh.html

[abijnk]

What are McCain's lies?

1) Obama voted to raise taxes on people making just $42,000 per year. LINK (http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/more_tax_deceptions.html)

2) Obama does not support nuclear energy. All you have to do is read Obama's energy plan to see this.

He went to Washington because he didn't want this thing rushed and not thoroughly inspected. The funny thing is, the whole meeting was going fine until Obama entered the room, then it fell apart. Even the democrats are saying that.

Source?

[CalBoy]

He went to Washington because he didn't want this thing rushed and not thoroughly inspected. The funny thing is, the whole meeting was going fine until Obama entered the room, then it fell apart. Even the democrats are saying that.

Seriously, where do you read your stuff? :confused:

The only reason the deal came to an impasse was because the House minority leader decided to throw out his surprise plan at the last minute.

McCain and Obama have nothing to do with this deal, and their presence didn't help or hurt the process (now Henry Paulson's kneel, we can debate :p)

I'm poking fun at McCain's decision to "suspend" his campaign on Wednesday, when in reality his presence (and again, Obama's too-although Obama didn't "suspend" his campaign or make a big deal of this, so that's why we're picking on McCain) did nothing to help or hurt the process.

[mgguy]

When Obama and McCain vote together 90% of the time like McCain has with Bush, we'll talk.
They probably vote together most of the time, since most votes are on minor procedural matters that have nothing to do with policy. It would be more meaningful to discuss how often people vote the same way on major policy issues. I've read several places (I can't reference here) that McCain has actually often voted against major legislative bills supported by the president (though sadly they did both support the comprehensive immigration bill which alienated their base).

[Beric]

Mc Cain was right, Obama doesn't know the difference between strategy and tactics.

McCain was way better than Obama on foreign policy, and did just fine on economics.

Of course, this forum would say Obama won, even if he just said, "um" the entire time. ;)

[abijnk]

(I can't reference here)

Huh? :confused:

[yojitani]

Personally, I thought the one place where McCain won the debate was in regard to Iraq, oddly enough. Obama was too backwards looking and did not seem to address the issue of what to do now. So the surge 'worked' according to McCain and McCain says keep troops there until it the situation is fully stabilized. He displayed his neo-con creds with the line about having an 'ally in the region' once Iraq is settled. McCain made it all sound good and Obama did nothing to upset this pipe dream. Instead, Obama prattled on about bad decisions and troop levels in Afghanistan. He could have said something about trying to form new alliances/ support etc. The US clearly has bitten off more than it can chew and neither candidate knows what to do, it seems.

[Aranince]

Seriously, where do you read your stuff? :confused:

I'm doing research now about the bailout meeting, and it seems like you are correct. McCain and Obama really didn't do much. Because of that, McCain's whole campaign suspension seems like an overreaction.

[yojitani]

Mc Cain was right, Obama doesn't know the difference between strategy and tactics.

And that is demonstrated where?


McCain was way better than Obama on foreign policy,
I disagree. He didn't know what Kissinger - who should be in prison anyway - had said. and his policy of 'not talking' doesn't work. His whole thing about legitimating viewpoints is just paranoid horse dung.


and did just fine on economics.

Kinda. If you still believe in trickle-down economics, Obama probably sounded like a madman.


Of course, this forum would say Obama won, even if he just said, "um" the entire time. ;)

The FORUM has SPOKEN! ;-)

[chrmjenkins]

Mc Cain was right, Obama doesn't know the difference between strategy and tactics.

McCain was way better than Obama on foreign policy, and did just fine on economics.

Of course, this forum would say Obama won, even if he just said, "um" the entire time. ;)

Actually, in an interview following the debate, Joe Biden (on CNN) quite succinctly pointed out that John McCain had not referred to the difference between tactics and strategy correctly.

[CalBoy]

I'm doing research now about the bailout meeting,
So you decided to base your previous statements off of pure belief? :confused:
Because of that, McCain's whole campaign suspension seems like an overreaction.

Exactly. McCain took a serious risk in deciding to "suspend" his campaign, and I think it's largely shown itself to have been a mistake.

[gibbz]

He went to Washington because he didn't want this thing rushed and not thoroughly inspected. The funny thing is, the whole meeting was going fine until Obama entered the room, then it fell apart. Even the democrats are saying that.

You have to be blind to miss another clear political ploy by McCain. This campaign "suspension" was nothing more than an attempt to manipulate public perception. It has been noted he was a distraction, even for the Republicans. He came out like the "Maverick" that he is proclaiming that he wouldn't be at the debate if a bailout plan fell through. Guess what? No plan, yet there he was. Once again John McCain panders to the political choice.

Also, it would have been quite convenient had he missed the debate, pushing back the VP debate. I am an independent and have tried to give Palin the benefit of the doubt, but I have had enough. See here:

On Russia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iv6CRObROV0

On Israel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8Km8L3FBWI

General economic talk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKakxNRxe6g

On the bailout
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T96nA8RR6KM

After repeated attempts to defend John McCain's deregulation record.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xpb7z_PjbAs

Go to the 5:00 mark and see what led to the previous non-answer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP12aNzocSc&feature=related

Now McCain and his supporters want to talk about Obama's judgement? What about his by picking this inept person as second in command of our country? His judgement here is just plain stupid. Defend that choice after hearing her talk.

Don't worry if you can't come up with a good defense. Just find some later and get back to me.....

[Aranince]

Don't worry if you can't come up with a good defense. Just find some later and get back to me.....

I know this sounds ridiculous, but YouTube is blocked for me. We'll see what happens next Thursday at the VP debate. I'll be watching closely.

[zioxide]

next Thursday at the VP debate.

I'm guessing it's going to be televised on comedy central?

[donga]

I know this sounds ridiculous, but YouTube is blocked for me. We'll see what happens next Thursday at the VP debate. I'll be watching closely.

if a democrat said something like this, they'd be ripped to shreds by repubs.

[mgguy]

if a democrat said something like this, they'd be ripped to shreds by repubs.

What makes you say that?

[motulist]

Okay, both are politicians, which by definition means they both are slippery snakes, but McCain definitely came off as more of a snake to me. He really tried to manipulate the public with distortions and maybe even outright lies. McCain is not trustworthy at all.

http://www.factcheck.org/

So in my book, in tonight's debate McCain acted like a manipulating liar, and Obama showed he's incredibly well versed on almost every important topic.

Obama wins.

[63dot]

Obama got more points on the economy, where McCain's strongest point was detailing his bipartisanship.

Neither directly answered questions but Obama looked more prepared.

Where it came to foreign policy, there were no surprises with Obama supporting the war in Afghanistan more and McCain more for the war in Iraq. Both seem to consider Iran a big threat which I disagree with.

I think Obama may have won over a few more independents but like CBS News said, there was no knockout punch.

If the next debates are this dry, the numbers with Obama at over 50% and McCain at 48% will probably hold until election day. The debates are McCain's last chance to get even or a lead and tonight was not helpful for his campaign.

[JG271]

I don't know, i haven't seen it yet.
Is there anywhere i could see the entire debate online? Thanks.

EDIT: Oops, just found it on the BBC.
Seems like Obama is winning, although you don't really win or lose a debate... public speaking was always his strength i guess.

[BoyBach]

I cannot believe that I stayed up to 4-in-the-morning to watch this rubbish. A resounding "meh" for me. I guess they must have changed the meaning of what a 'debate' is when I wasn't looking.


guess the score is even on who has the best bracelet

What the bloody hell was that part of "The Debate" about? It was toe-curlingly bad.

[Thomas Veil]

Lucky me. :mad: My internet was out during and after the debate, so I was frustrated in my attempts to post my own opinion here. Anyway.

Personally, I thought the debate was a draw. I'm concerned, however, that the public perception will be that McCain won. Obama came off better than I expected, but so did McCain. He wasn't stammering for answers, although the answers he did have were largely disingenuous.

By my count, McCain called Obama naive and said that "he didn't understand" at least six times. I kept waiting for Obama to say, "John, you keep saying that, and it's very condescending. I do understand, I just think you're dead wrong." But Obama didn't do it. Perhaps he felt if he gave McCain enough rope, McCain would make himself look bad. And perhaps he did. We won't know until we see the public reaction. If they think McCain won the debate because he kept scoring all those patronizing remarks, then Obama was wrong and he should've called McCain out on that.

I also waited -- all debate long -- for Obama to put down McCain's big boast that "the surge worked". First of all, that strategy is both arguable and fragile. But mainly I think Obama needs to say, "Fine, you want to be congratulated for fixing up a mess that you in part created. But why shouldn't we hold you to blame for creating that mess in the first place? If you'd listened to me, you wouldn't have had to have a surge because you wouldn't have had a war."

ADDENDUM: Holy crapoli. I just looked at some of those clips gibbz provided. The Vice Presidential debate is gonna be a slaughter. I feel sorry for Palin in advance of it.

[rdowns]

In discussing how to shrink spending, McCain went on some screed about sending $700 billion overseas to countries that don't like us. WTF? Since when does the government buy our oil?

[Dont Hurt Me]

And when did the U.S. taxpayer become financier to foreign lands? Im voting for someone to represent me and my fellow citizens here in America not in Zimbabwe or some new Stan.

We have bridges falling down and they want to send " our" $$$ to Iraq.

[Lord Blackadder]

I thought it was a fairly dull debate. Neither side wants to make the big gaffe, so they play it very conservative.

[Dont Hurt Me]

I thought it was a fairly dull debate. Neither side wants to make the big gaffe, so they play it very conservative.
I agree 100%, fell asleep halfway through it.
Its clear Big $$$ runs these guys period.

[Lord Blackadder]

Its clear Big $$$ runs these guys period.

I don't think it's that...but someone pointed out that it's very easy to lose a debate like this by making a mistake, but nearly impossible to "win". So the solution is to be conservative. Talk a lot, without saying much of anything.

[Erwin-Br]

There were many times Obama agreed with McCain. I don't know what to think about that. Honestly, if Obama agrees with McCain so much, why not elect McCain since he has a bit more experience.

Obama agreed with McCain on the issues and causes of many of the problems that were discussed, NOT on how to handle them. Not on the solutions.

[scotthayes]

I cannot believe that I stayed up to 4-in-the-morning to watch this rubbish. A resounding "meh" for me. I guess they must have changed the meaning of what a 'debate' is when I wasn't looking.




What the bloody hell was that part of "The Debate" about? It was toe-curlingly bad.


Can you imagine if they had to something like PMQs every week :D

[TheAnswer]

Can you imagine if they had to something like PMQs every week :D

Sadly, I don't think we have enough bracelets. ;)

[Aranince]

Obama and McCain were only agreeing on superficial topics that any voter would agree with (we need accountability in government, we need to fix the economy, etc).

Obama said:
* "I think Senator McCain's absolutely right that we need more responsibility…"

* "Senator McCain is absolutely right that the earmarks process has been abused…"

* "He's also right that oftentimes lobbyists and special interests are the ones that are introducing these…requests…"

* "John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he's absolutely right…"

* "John is right we have to make cuts…"

* "Senator McCain is absolutely right that the violence has been reduced as a consequence of the extraordinary sacrifice of our troops and our military families…"

* "John — you're absolutely right that presidents have to be prudent in what they say…"

* "Senator McCain is absolutely right, we cannot tolerate a nuclear Iran…"

I'm not sure agreeing with your opponent is the best thing to do in a debate if you are trying to win. Then again, Obama may be trying to show that he is bipartisan...I didn't get that message.

[Desertrat]

To amplify a bit on an earlier comment by CalBoy: I have a friend who was a Democratic Party activist. He listened to the Nixon-Kennedy debate on the radio and was saddened by how Nixon won. The next day he read the morning paper, with views based on those of the TV audience: Kennedy won.

It's always been a bit spooky to me how people's perceptions can vary so much, just from watching somebody's discomfort without regard to the content of what's being said.

Same sort of deal for me, with the Spiro Agnew "Nattering Nabobs of Negativity" speech. I read the text in the next day's newspaper. I couldn't understand the fuss over his recitation of fact. Sure, it was "spun" to his viewpoint, as expected, but he was speaking factually. Of course, since it was an attack at many in the media, you can imagine the editorial "interpretations" of the Meaning Of It All. :D:D:D

IMO, these "debates" are best listened to, not watched. Turn the TV to the wall. It doesn't matter who looks or does not look at whom, nor about how their makeup is done, or if either gets a sinus attack and forgot his hanky.

'Rat

[abijnk]

Obama said:
* "I think Senator McCain's absolutely right that we need more responsibility…"

* "Senator McCain is absolutely right that the earmarks process has been abused…"

* "He's also right that oftentimes lobbyists and special interests are the ones that are introducing these…requests…"

* "John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he's absolutely right…"

* "John is right we have to make cuts…"

* "Senator McCain is absolutely right that the violence has been reduced as a consequence of the extraordinary sacrifice of our troops and our military families…"

* "John — you're absolutely right that presidents have to be prudent in what they say…"

* "Senator McCain is absolutely right, we cannot tolerate a nuclear Iran…"

I'm not sure agreeing with your opponent is the best thing to do in a debate if you are trying to win. Then again, Obama may be trying to show that he is bipartisan...I didn't get that message.

Hahaha, typical. :rolleyes: I love how you don't include the entire quote, very McCain-ish.

Please see this post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=6311683&postcount=8).

[Aranince]

Hahaha, typical. :rolleyes: I love how you don't include the entire quote, very McCain-ish.

Please see this post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=6311683&postcount=8).

Yes, I read that. I was just posting it to post it...not to argue my claim.

[Peace]

The one thing that bothered me last night was not once did Obama tell the audience that McCain has missed 138 out of the last 140 votes in the Senate.

[scotthayes]

Yes, I read that. I was just posting it to post it...not to argue my claim.

Well surely that is just spreading misinformation.

[TSE]

McCain surprisingly did good, actually. Obama did okay, he got a little dumbfounded when they talked about Russia, but besides that he did ok.

But...

Democrats, Republicans, same poop different pile.

[abijnk]

The one thing that bothered me last night was not once did Obama tell the audience that McCain has missed 138 out of the last 140 votes in the Senate.

I think that could have really misfired. Obama hasn't exactly made every vote either.


On another note, I think its interesting to look at Factcheck.org's analysis (http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_debate_no_1.html).


McCain and Obama contradicted each other repeatedly during their first debate, and each volunteered some factual misstatements as well. Here’s how we sort them out:

* Obama said McCain adviser Henry Kissinger backs talks with Iran “without preconditions,” but McCain disputed that. In fact, Kissinger did recently call for “high level” talks with Iran starting at the secretary of state level and said, “I do not believe that we can make conditions.” After the debate the McCain campaign issued a statement quoting Kissinger as saying he didn’t favor presidential talks with Iran.

* Obama denied voting for a bill that called for increased taxes on “people” making as little as $42,000 a year, as McCain accused him of doing. McCain was right, though only for single taxpayers. A married couple would have had to make $83,000 to be affected by the vote, and anyway no such increase is in Obama’s tax plan.

* McCain and Obama contradicted each other on what Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen said about troop withdrawals. Mullen said a time line for withdrawal could be “very dangerous” but was not talking specifically about “Obama’s plan,” as McCain maintained.

* McCain tripped up on one of his signature issues – special appropriation “earmarks.” He said they had “tripled in the last five years,” when in fact they have decreased sharply.

* Obama claimed Iraq “has” a $79 billion surplus. It once was projected to be as high as that. It’s now down to less than $60 billion.

* McCain repeated his overstated claim that the U.S. pays $700 billion a year for oil to hostile nations. Imports are running at about $536 billion this year, and a third of it comes from Canada, Mexico and the U.K.

* Obama said 95 percent of “the American people” would see a tax cut under his proposal. The actual figure is 81 percent of households.

* Obama mischaracterized an aspect of McCain’s health care plan, saying “employers” would be taxed on the value of health benefits provided to workers. Employers wouldn’t, but the workers would. McCain also would grant workers up to a $5,000 tax credit per family to cover health insurance.

* McCain misrepresented Obama's plan by claiming he'd be "handing the health care system over to the federal government." Obama would expand some government programs but would allow people to keep their current plans or chose from private ones, as well.

* McCain claimed Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower had drafted a letter of resignation from the Army to be sent in case the 1944 D-Day landing at Normandy turned out to be a failure. Ike prepared a letter taking responsibility, but he didn’t mention resigning.

For full details, as well as other dubious claims and statements, please read our full Analysis section.

[rdowns]

The one thing that bothered me last night was not once did Obama tell the audience that McCain has missed 138 out of the last 140 votes in the Senate.

John McCain has missed 412 votes (64.1%) during the current Congress.

Barack Obama has missed 295 votes (45.9%) during the current Congress


They should both be ashamed of themselves. Source (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/senate/members/).

[bobber205]

What little respect I had left for McCain is now gone.

Several times Obama would try to look his opponent in the eye. Not once did McCain look at Obama.

That's a huge insight into the character of McCain...

[CalBoy]

Obama said:
* "I think Senator McCain's absolutely right that we need more responsibility…"

* "Senator McCain is absolutely right that the earmarks process has been abused…"

* "He's also right that oftentimes lobbyists and special interests are the ones that are introducing these…requests…"

Again, these are things that virtually any taxpayer would agree with.

It's like asking both of them if the sky is blue; of course you're going to get agreement.

Where they differ is how to address major issues, which Obama did expound on during his rebuttals.


* "John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he's absolutely right…"

I've add emphasis to clarify that Obama was referring to the de jure tax rate, but he hammered out how our tax code is riddled with so many loopholes that businesses pay a de facto rate that is embarrassingly low.

* "John is right we have to make cuts…"

Again, who wouldn't agree to such a broad statement?

* "Senator McCain is absolutely right that the violence has been reduced as a consequence of the extraordinary sacrifice of our troops and our military families…"

And he goes on to say that the "surge" is irrelevant because the initial invasion (which McCain supported) itself was a major error.

* "John — you're absolutely right that presidents have to be prudent in what they say…"

Again, this is a very simple truism. No presidential candidate would say that they should be imprudent.

* "Senator McCain is absolutely right, we cannot tolerate a nuclear Iran…"

Again, Obama (and most of the world, in fact) does not want to see another nuclear-armed nation. The difference between the two is that Obama would not rush in with guns blazing and then expect magical providence as Bush McCain would.

[Peace]

John McCain has missed 412 votes (64.1%) during the current Congress.

Barack Obama has missed 295 votes (45.9%) during the current Congress


They should both be ashamed of themselves. Source (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/senate/members/).

I agree. They both should be ashamed. McCain in particular.

McCain talked about how great Gen. David H. Petraeus was and he didn't even vote on his confirmation.

[Chandler Adaway]

So I watched it.
I'm not democratic nor republican, and I don't, well didn't have a preference on either one.

So I watched it with an open mind.

I think both could have done better. I mean, one of them is going to be our leader for the next four years, you know?

Obama did a great job when the subject of taxes came up, but when he had to talk about Russia, he failed miserably in my opinion.

Though, John played a good "I know what I'm talking about" act, when, as the facts got released after words, he didn't.

John seems smart though. I wish they would get together on the subject of our war in Iraq, because I think both of them have their ups and downs about it.

John seemed kind of rude though.
I mean, after he had his couple of minutes to talk, and it was Obama's turn, he would interrupt him, and a few times, Obama just said, "Whatever, move on". I thought that was kind of crappy. He didn't even let him defend himself.

I'm looking forward to the next one with the vice's.
Then I'll decide.

Of course, I'm 15, so I can't vote anyways. :rolleyes:

[jb60606]

Of course, I'm 15, so I can't vote anyways. :rolleyes:

Doesn't matter. At least you're paying attention which is more than anyone can say for 99% of the other 15yr olds in America.

Cheers

[abijnk]

Doesn't matter. At least you're paying attention which is more than anyone can say for 99% of the other 15yr olds in America.

Cheers

Exactly! I think its great that you are paying attention! My brother is 16 and I don't think he even knows who is running...

[Badandy]

I've add emphasis to clarify that Obama was referring to the de jure tax rate, but he hammered out how our tax code is riddled with so many loopholes that businesses pay a de facto rate that is embarrassingly low.


Citation needed.

[bobber205]

Citation needed.

That's about as obvious as it gets if you know anything about taxes.

[nick9191]

Watching the debate live from BBC here in the UK, it is very interesting listening to some of their plans. When Obama spoke about Bin Laden, he said something along the lines of "get him and kill him" in a normal manner, it's striking how American politicians say things like that in such an acceptable way when in the UK you would "never" expect words like that from our politicians.
Here they just punch people and shag their secretaries.

[Badandy]

That's about as obvious as it gets if you know anything about taxes.

No, it isn't, and apparently you don't know much either from reading your previous posts about how you hate Republicans for complaining about taxes. Not only do wealthy people and companies get taxed (and pay) even more than regular folk, people like you then have the audacity to say that they don't contribute their fair share. What a crock of...

ExxonMobile for the previous quarter:

Income before taxes: $22.2 billion
Income after taxes: $11.68 billion

Source: http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=ii&q=NYSE:XOM

[Peace]

No, it isn't, and apparently you don't know much either from reading your previous posts about how you hate Republicans for complaining about taxes. Not only do wealthy people and companies get taxed (and pay) even more than regular folk, people like you then have the audacity to say that they don't contribute their fair share. What a crock of...

ExxonMobile for the previous quarter:

Income before taxes: $22.2 billion
Income after taxes: $11.68 billion

Source: http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=ii&q=NYSE:XOM

Speaking of Exxon/Mobile

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB120787836194406873-9hkXWaP1KUUE6_4xrzlnmz_w2gM_20090411.html?mod=rss_Whos_News

The CEO made 16.7 million dollars in 2007.

How much did you get?

[mactastic]

Personally I think McCain won the debate. He took the fight to Obama with every opportunity, and Obama seemed rocked back on his heels far too often. Obama was weak on his rebuttals to some of McCain's more serious charges, including the earmarks (and how much has your VP nominee taken in earmarks Senator McCain?) and allowing McCain to say that Obama "doesn't understand" far too many times. Obama should have forcefully addressed that charge right then and there.

Obama also didn't take enough advantage of the McCain campaign's ties to lobbyists. That line should have been pounded every time McCain started talking about how he was the one who understood how to cut wasteful spending.

However, while McCain may have won the debate (at least in my eyes) on points, he didn't "beat the spread" considering that this was supposed to be his strong suit. Obama comes out of this better than McCain because Obama was able to hold his own in an arena where he was expected to do poorly.

The McCain camp didn't help themselves by spending so much time and energy portraying Obama as a foreign policy lightweight; only to have Obama show up on the stage and not fit that stereotype.

I think that the outcome of this debate will be a draw, unless someone looses a massive gaffe.

Obama is not a great debater by any means, so basically all McCain has to do is not die up there, and he squeak out with a tie.

Neither of them are masters at it.
Not a single master debator on the stage, eh?

[Badandy]

Speaking of Exxon/Mobile

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB120787836194406873-9hkXWaP1KUUE6_4xrzlnmz_w2gM_20090411.html?mod=rss_Whos_News

The CEO made 16.7 million dollars in 2007.

How much did you get?

What does that have to do with anything?

I made out pretty well with my Exxon stock over the past year thank you very much. And just because I didn't make $16 million last year doesn't mean that I'm going to vilify someone who does just out of jealousy and pettiness. Don't you think the CEO of a company that posts profits of $11 billion per quarter deserves a little more than you and I? I certainly do, and I think $16.7 million is quite reasonable.

[Peace]

What does that have to do with anything?

I made out pretty well with my Exxon stock over the past year thank you very much. Don't you think the CEO of a company that posts profits of $11 billion per quarter deserves a little more than you and I? I certainly do, and I think $16.7 million is quite reasonable.

Do I think the CEO of a corporation that rapes me should get a lot of money?


NO.

and I also think you personally should pay more taxes.

[Badandy]

Do I think the CEO of a corporation that rapes me should get a lot of money?


NO.

and I also think you personally should pay more taxes.

Very mature response.

I'll address your first point, then your second.

a) YOU choose to buy what they sell. That's consensual.

b) You have no idea what I make.

[bobber205]

Very mature response.

I'll address your first point, then your second.

a) YOU choose to buy what they sell. That's consensual.

b) You have no idea what I make.

If we don't have any idea, then tell us and how much of it is taxes.

Secondly, most of us dont' have a choice if we buy gas or not. That's a dumb argument. it's not like he made that much money off of DVD sales or something.

[Peace]

Very mature response.

I'll address your first point, then your second.

a) YOU choose to buy what they sell. That's consensual.

b) You have no idea what I make.

"I made out pretty well with my Exxon stock over the past year thank you very much."

That implies a lot.

[Badandy]

If we don't have any idea, then tell us and how much of it is taxes.

You mean the exact numbers I posted from publicly available financial statements about 6 posts up from this?

Secondly, most of us dont' have a choice if we buy gas or not. That's a dumb argument.

Of course you have a choice. You live in Oregon I believe, yes? Portland is a great city to bike around in (if you had used a little foresight and gotten a job/residence that is easy to bike to/from), and while you will feel the effects of rising petroleum prices in consumer products, you won't have to pay for gas much. Add this personal choice to the fact that Exxon's profit margin is not high compared to other businesses (their record profit is merely a byproduct of the volume they sell), you really don't have leg to stand on.


"I made out pretty well with my Exxon stock over the past year thank you very much."

That implies a lot.

Exxon (XOM) had a great percentage return in 2007. You're going to get mad at me because I happened to own it and make some money off of it? You're going to judge my entire lifestyle and tax bracket by the fact that I own some stock? You should really drop this issue right now. Not only do you not know how much I make (and I will not tell you, either), you have no point. I pointed out that a company pays a huge amount (and percentage, I might add) in taxes and you somehow think it appropriate to respond with some completely irrelevant information that exposes your jealousy/hatred for someone who is doing better than you and think that it was a valid point? I've argued with many people on this board in the past, but the lack of intellectual prowess and abundance of character flaws you've displayed here are near unmatched.

[bobber205]

You mean the exact numbers I posted from publicly available financial statements about 6 posts up from this?



Of course you have a choice. You live in Oregon I believe, yes? Portland is a great city to bike around in (if you had used a little foresight and gotten a job/residence that is easy to bike to/from), and while you will feel the effects of rising petroleum prices in consumer products, you won't have to pay for gas much. Add this personal choice to the fact that Exxon's profit margin is not high compared to other businesses (their record profit is merely a byproduct of the volume they sell), you really don't have leg to stand on.

Ahaha. I don't live in Portland. Or Salem. Ha.

Not every town has good public transportation or "biking".
If you didn't make alot of money each year, then there's no way you wouldn't tell us.

[Badandy]

Ahaha. I don't live in Portland. Or Salem. Ha.

Where you choose to live is your choice. If it's in a place that necessitates lots of travel, that's your problem. The fact is, companies like Exxon, through economies of scale and having a very modest profit margin, make oil available at prices that compare favorably to the rest of the post-industrial world. Look, I really have no qualms with you right now bobber. You claimed that if I knew anything about taxes, I'd see how companies don't pay enough. I picked one, and pointed out that they provide the government with $40 BILLION in taxes per year, on about $40 billion profit.

If you didn't make alot of money each year, then there's no way you wouldn't tell us.

Not only is my financial situation irrelevant, you're being led astray by thinking that my non-disclosure means anything.

[Peace]

Where you choose to live is your choice. If it's in a place that necessitates lots of travel, that's your problem. The fact is, companies like Exxon, through economies of scale and having a very modest profit margin, make oil available at prices that compare favorably to the rest of the post-industrial world. Look, I really have no qualms with you right now bobber. You claimed that if I knew anything about taxes, I'd see how companies don't pay enough. I picked one, and pointed out that they provide the government with $40 BILLION in taxes per year, on about $40 billion profit.



Not only is my financial situation irrelevant, you're being led astray by thinking that my non-disclosure means anything.


I'm a disabled Vietnam Veteran with Asbestosis. I get about $3600 a month to slowly die for your right to gouge America..

How much do you make?

[BoyBach]

A video highlighting Sen. McCain's superior Foreign Policy credentials. (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=xG1aOORf8Pc&eurl=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/27/the-most-stupidest-mccain_n_129840.html)

Now, that's insight, intelligence and experience!

[TheAnswer]

"I made out pretty well with my Exxon stock over the past year thank you very much."

That implies a lot.

I'm picturing some Mac geek on his futon in his mother's basement and a single Exxon stock certificate with kiss and slobber marks on it. :p

[SwiftLives]

Where you choose to live is your choice. If it's in a place that necessitates lots of travel, that's your problem.

I'd like to offer a slightly different perspective here:

My place of employment is located in an area not served by local public transportation. You're suggesting it's my fault for accepting the one job offer I recieved after 6 months of searching and ten+ interviews?

So I should just sell my house and move closer to my place of employment? The implication that you're making - whether it's intentional or not - is that we can just up and move. Unfortunately, it's very difficult to sell a house right now, and for someone in my position, it makes very little financial sense.

There are other ways to conserve gas. I refuse to drive faster than 60mph on my way to work. It takes maybe 2 minutes longer to get there, and I'm getting an additional 2 miles to the gallon. I also occasionally carpool with coworkers, but logistically, that is difficult for me.

Finally, I do want to see energy companies get tax breaks - but only if it comes at the cost of exploring and researching and implementing renewable energy. (I know. That's very idealistic of me.)

And I will side with you that you're under absolutely no obligation to share anything about your financial situation.

[rdowns]

Obama should run that as his next ad.

[bobber205]

Where you choose to live is your choice. If it's in a place that necessitates lots of travel, that's your problem. The fact is, companies like Exxon, through economies of scale and having a very modest profit margin, make oil available at prices that compare favorably to the rest of the post-industrial world. Look, I really have no qualms with you right now bobber. You claimed that if I knew anything about taxes, I'd see how companies don't pay enough. I picked one, and pointed out that they provide the government with $40 BILLION in taxes per year, on about $40 billion profit.



Not only is my financial situation irrelevant, you're being led astray by thinking that my non-disclosure means anything.

I guess we all should live in one big city huh?

[motulist]

I can tell you for a fact that McCain is very bad on veteran issues. Due to confidentiality matters I can't tell you how I know this, but I promise you I have it on very good authority that McCain is bad for veterans. I'd really like to tell you how I know what I know, because I'm sure some of you McCain people will call BS on me since I don't cite any sources, but I promise you that I'm telling you the truth. I have a very significant contact related to veteran issues who tells me about how bad McCain is for veterans.

[yojitani]

I can tell you for a fact that McCain is very bad on veteran issues. Due to confidentiality matters I can't tell you how I know this, but I promise you I have it on very good authority that McCain is bad for veterans. I'd really like to tell you how I know what I know, because I'm sure some of you McCain people will call BS on me since I don't cite any sources, but I promise you that I'm telling you the truth. I have a very significant contact related to veteran issues who tells me about how bad McCain is for veterans.

There's no point to saying any of this unless you can at least reveal in what ways McCain is bad for vets. According to the vets in my family who have served in vietnam, gulf war 1, and no conflicts in between (just service during those years with fewer conflicts after GW1), republicans are not good for veteran benefits - they've all struggled especially during the last 6 years... but that is totally anecdotal.

[Badandy]

I'm a disabled Vietnam Veteran with Asbestosis. I get about $3600 a month to slowly die for your right to gouge America..

How am I gouging America? You don't know me.

How much do you make?

That is irrelevant. I haven't even said anything where my personal income would legitimize/negate any point I've made.

I'm picturing some Mac geek on his futon in his mother's basement and a single Exxon stock certificate with kiss and slobber marks on it. :p

Two shares. You were off by 100%. :D

You're suggesting it's my fault for accepting the one job offer I recieved after 6 months of searching and ten+ interviews?

It's not about fault in your case. It's just a matter of living with the consequences, and that would mean accepting that you will have to pay for transportation to and from work (and at a much lower price than anyone in Europe is paying I might add). I do the same thing.

Finally, I do want to see energy companies get tax breaks - but only if it comes at the cost of exploring and researching and implementing renewable energy. (I know. That's very idealistic of me.)

I completely agree with you here and I, too, am probably a little idealistic in that department. The only issue I took a position on was someone who said companies don't pay a lot in taxes, to which I pulled up the income statement of the largest company in the world. Thousands of other are out there as well to look at.


I guess we all should live in one big city huh?

If environmental conservation is important to you, then yes, you should. But if you want to live a life where you are more of an individual and want some freedom of movement (at the expense of the environment), then you need to realize that some of the additional needs you have (transportation, etc...) will be met by the private sector and that jealousy or ignorance shouldn't dictate how you view those companies that fulfill your needs pretty damn well.

[motulist]

There's no point to saying any of this unless you can at least reveal in what ways McCain is bad for vets. According to the vets in my family who have served in vietnam, gulf war 1, and no conflicts in between (just service during those years with fewer conflicts after GW1), republicans are not good for veteran benefits - they've all struggled especially during the last 6 years... but that is totally anecdotal.

Most veterans' and friends of veterans' anecdotal experiences mirror your own. If you're looking for specifics on how McCain is terrible for veterans, there's plenty out there on the web already that I can point you toward without breaking any confidentiality.

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/

[Peace]

I can tell you for a fact that McCain is very bad on veteran issues. Due to confidentiality matters I can't tell you how I know this, but I promise you I have it on very good authority that McCain is bad for veterans. I'd really like to tell you how I know what I know, because I'm sure some of you McCain people will call BS on me since I don't cite any sources, but I promise you that I'm telling you the truth. I have a very significant contact related to veteran issues who tells me about how bad McCain is for veterans.

I already know.

[mgguy]

I think Badandy has handily won the debate with Boober. Wait, I forgot the original topic was McCain vs. Obama.

[neiltc13]

I watched some of this and I found Obama's smugness to be massively unappealing.

[Thomas Veil]

I think Badandy has handily won the debate with Boober. I don't see it.

I watched some of this and I found Obama's smugness to be massively unappealing.McCain wouldn't even look at Obama, but he kept saying that Obama doesn't understand, and Obama is naive...and you found Obama smug??

[Melrose]

I watched some of this and I found Obama's smugness to be massively unappealing.

I've been struck by this during his whole campaign.

The little smirks and condescending smiles tell a lot about what type of person he is.. I'm not saying McCain is picture perfect himself, but those little bits that Obama throws in are really off-putting in anyone, let alone someone who's running for the nation's top job. It's reminiscent of how Bush was during the 2004 debates.

In the end, both sides will say they won the debate, and proponents of each will come out swinging for their respective candidates; It's all politics: Both sides have repeatedly jabbed at each other about things they themselves do or have done. Like CNN says, it's a draw. Neither party scored a hit.

[Badandy]

I don't see it.



HERE (http://www.lenscrafters.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/home|-1|11151|10051|/LensCrafters/Lens_US/Home/LensCrafters_Home_Page)

[.Andy]

I think Badandy has handily won the debate with Boober.
Thanks for adjudicating. We'll PM you next time a debate comes up.

[bobber205]

I think Badandy has handily won the debate with Boober. Wait, I forgot the original topic was McCain vs. Obama.

Hot.
Can't even bother to copy and paste my name = :rolleyes:

[mactastic]

HERE (http://www.lenscrafters.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/home|-1|11151|10051|/LensCrafters/Lens_US/Home/LensCrafters_Home_Page)

Very mature response.
Badandy, debate Badandy...

[Iscariot]

If environmental conservation is important to you, then yes, you should.

+1

[tyr2]

Is this available (legally) online anywhere? It seems my video didn't record the More4 showing tonight for some reason.

[Chandler Adaway]

Is this available (legally) online anywhere? It seems my video didn't record the More4 showing tonight for some reason.

Here you go.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-nNIEduEOw

[Badandy]

Badandy, debate Badandy...

I couldn't resist :D

[luminosity]

Hmm, nobody seems to have pointed out that audience polls show a pretty clear win for Obama, and that McCain's angry approach was a turnoff for a lot of people. Not looking at Obama didn't help him either.

[.Andy]

Not looking at Obama didn't help him either.
What was with that? Surely he'd had some body-language coaching before getting up there. Was it a purposeful ploy to appear disinterested and/or disdainful to throw his opponent?

[CalBoy]

Citation needed.

I'm not sure how cite Obama's words during the debate, because I don't remember at what point during the debate that question came up, but if you watch it again, you will see that McCain makes the assertion that businesses pay too much in taxes, and Obama refutes that by saying that loopholes reduce the rate dramatically.

If you want evidence of Obama's statement, I suggest you take a look at the amount of corporate income in the economy (for companies over a certain net worth) and then compare that to the amount of tax revenues that come from corporate income taxes.

I assure you they do not correlate.

[donga]

anyone catch this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1rZBmk0DYU

mccain spreads lies, then can't handle it when something bad is said about him. if this is true, totally unbelievable that he'd cuss on live tv with so many people watching. he truly hates obama

[.Andy]

anyone catch this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1rZBmk0DYU

mccain spreads lies, then can't handle it when something bad is said about him. if this is true, totally unbelievable that he'd cuss on live tv with so many people watching. he truly hates obama
It sounds like he mumbles "of course" more than saying "horsepoo" to me.

[Cleverboy]

anyone catch this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1rZBmk0DYU

mccain spreads lies, then can't handle it when something bad is said about him. if this is true, totally unbelievable that he'd cuss on live tv with so many people watching. he truly hates obama I'm desperately trying to believe he's saying, "Of course, it..." and then "'Course it..." before giving up on his response, while Obama is allowed to make his full statement (as directed by the moderator). "Desperately", only because its a silly notion (McCain would no better), however I just don't "get" the way McCain talks. He sounds and acts in the weirdest way to me, especially when he cuts himself off.

~ CB

[donga]

It sounds like he mumbles "of course" more than saying "horsepoo" to me.

I'm desperately trying to believe he's saying, "Of course, it..." and then "'Course it..." before giving up on his response

why would mccain respond with "of course"? "of course i didn't know spain was our nato ally...?"

i still think it was an expletive

[.Andy]

i still think it was an expletive
Why on earth would he say horsepoo whilst on mic on national debate? You (and others) are reaching for something when there is nothing. There's plenty to criticise both candidates for during the debate without resorting to fiction.

[Badandy]

I'm not sure how cite Obama's words during the debate, because I don't remember at what point during the debate that question came up, but if you watch it again, you will see that McCain makes the assertion that businesses pay too much in taxes, and Obama refutes that by saying that loopholes reduce the rate dramatically.

I saw the assertion, it just wasn't a legitimate one.

If you want evidence of Obama's statement, I suggest you take a look at the amount of corporate income in the economy (for companies over a certain net worth) and then compare that to the amount of tax revenues that come from corporate income taxes.

I assure you they do not correlate.

I already posted ExxonMobil's financial statement numbers for income before tax and after tax. There are thousands more companies available with public information on all that and in the ones I've looked it, I haven't seen any really low numbers. I mean, Exxon is pushing 50% of their income to taxes. 50. I know people who run small businesses. Sure, they can expense certain things, and even if they are slightly "liberal" with their write-offs, I can assure you that they still pay a boatload in taxes.

[tyr2]

Here you go.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-nNIEduEOw

Great, Thanks.

[Thomas Veil]

Badandy, debate Badandy...* smirk *

[Cleverboy]

why would mccain respond with "of course"? "of course i didn't know spain was our nato ally...?"
i still think it was an expletive Starting ANY sentence off with "of course" is a natural way to debate in my book... you start by acknowledging common ground, as in "of course I realize Spain is a member of NATO" and then make your extended point by building on top of it, like "--but, I do not think its appropriate to acknowledge who I will or won't meet with before I'm President." Unfortunately, an answer like that would have ruined McCain's strategy in two ways: 1.) McCain had resolved early on never to agree with anything Obama said, simply make everything a statement of fact as you see them. This would later factor into ads, by painting Obama as someone who agreed with McCain but not vice-versa. 2.) McCain clearly did not want to play "defense" at anytime. In fact, his debate strategy seemed intended to be one that sought to belittle and ridicule Obama's stated opinions.

So, he stopped himself from engaging in that thread of conversation.

~ CB

[mactastic]

I couldn't resist :D
You never can... :D

[iGary]

I only had to watch 5 minutes to decide that Barack won.

He's our next president.

McCain's last misstep with suspending his campaign will go down as what lost him the election.

[mactastic]

McCain's last misstep with suspending his campaign will go down as what lost him the election.
And of course, he needed to suspend his campaign because he was urgently needed in DC so that he could personally help broker a deal on taxpayer handouts to iGary's SO ;)... er, not so much (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/27/politics/fromtheroad/entry4482838.shtml):
Even though his campaign is no longer suspended, John McCain is staying in Washington this weekend to keep working on the bailout legislation. He will not be visiting Capitol Hill, however, preferring to work out of his campaign office.

“He can effectively do what he needs to do by phone," said senior adviser Mark Salter. "He’s calling members on both sides, talking to people in the administration, helping out as he can."
My emphasis. Basically Salter is admitting that the campaign suspension was a cheap photo-op ploy. It wasn't done because McCain puts Country First, it was done because McCain was desperate to change the media narrative -- and possibly put off his debate and maybe even scuttle the VP debate.

Of course, everyone knew that he could do everything he needed to do by phone. Which is why that stunt failed.

[CalBoy]

I saw the assertion, it just wasn't a legitimate one.

Then why did you want me to provide a citation? :confused:

I'm not the one who debated; I was just filling in the blanks that Aranince had conveniently left out.

I already posted ExxonMobil's financial statement numbers for income before tax and after tax. There are thousands more companies available with public information on all that and in the ones I've looked it, I haven't seen any really low numbers. I mean, Exxon is pushing 50% of their income to taxes. 50. I know people who run small businesses. Sure, they can expense certain things, and even if they are slightly "liberal" with their write-offs, I can assure you that they still pay a boatload in taxes.

We've had this discussion before, and everyone else has pointed out to you that if we all got to pay taxes on our profits only, we'd be quite happy.

The fact is, Exxon pays very little in taxes relative to its gross, which is what the rest of us have to pay our taxes on.

Now, you might be right in saying that taxes should only be based on profits, in which case, I ask you to tell me how we could adjust the system so that individuals only pay taxes on their "profits" (or income after expenses if you will).

Furthermore, Exxon is only one company. It does not represent all of corporate America.

If you want some evidence of loopholes in action, here's a story for you. Link (http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=5561455)

The critical part is this sentence about half way through:

More than 38,000 foreign corporations had no tax liability in 2005 and 1.2 million U.S. companies paid no income tax, the GAO said. Combined, the companies had $2.5 trillion in sales. About 25 percent of the U.S. corporations not paying corporate taxes were considered large corporations, meaning they had at least $250 million in assets or $50 million in receipts.

And, if you want further evidence, why don't we look at Federal receipts by source?

As it turns out, only 14% of the Federal budget is paid for by corporate taxes, which is interesting, because I'm very much inclined to believe that corporate income far exceeds 14% of our economy. Link (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/pdf/apers/receipts.pdf)

In fact, according to the Census Bureau, there are 113,146,000 households in the country, and that the mean income is $60,528. This means that total household income in the nation is equal to $6,848,501,088, or just about half of GDP. Link (http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032005/hhinc/new06_000.htm)

Even if you propose that a significant portion of the remaining half of national income is distributed in ways that are not favorable to corporations, it's hard to believe by the numbers alone that corporate income in the US is only $1.96 trillion (which is 14% of the remaining income in the economy that is not from households).

No matter how you slice and dice it, corporate income is not equal to corporate income taxes paid in the US.

[bobber205]

^^ At above post.

http://www.seattlechoralcompany.org/Images/applause.jpg

Excellent reporting. :cool:

[CalBoy]

^^ At above post.

Excellent reporting. :cool:

Tehehe

Thank you. :)

[solvs]

I know I'm late to the party, but I missed part of the debate, and mostly was listening to it. I didn't think Obama did that great (though I guess I expected more) and didn't think McCain did that bad (though I guess I didn't expect much). I mean, obviously Obama won (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/26/debate-reviews-go-to-obam_n_129803.html). That was no question. Just thought it should have been more of a decisive victory, and I don't think it was. It was only afterward, watching pieces and listening to commentators go over every little thing, did I see what they meant. McCain didn't really look at Obama. He did appear angry, and all the "you don't understand"s did appear condescending.

While those who already would have voted for McCain are relatively unswayed because he didn't utterly fail, and those who are for Obama still would be, even if some may be disappointed he wasn't stronger. But as I said in another thread, Obama wasn't talking to us. He was talking to the moderates. The independents who are tired of the partisan bickering. While McCain talks a good game about being a maverick, his talking points and style were all right wing. Obama agreed with McCain, then laid out specifics (something you'd have to look hard to know otherwise) and said some really reassuring things to those who don't really know him. Based on polls, he got to who he was talking to (http://www.thedemocraticstrategist.org/strategist/2008/09/debate_takes_edge_obama.php).

All McCain did was shore up the base, and in some cases turn off the moderates.