Roger Simon at Politico agreed with my conclusion posted here after the debate last night that John McCain was the winner. However, Simon apparently did not find the first presidential debate between Obama and McCain as boring as I did. (Keep in mind that I was mentally comparing the mediocre performances of Obama and McCain to previous outstanding performances by Hillary Clinton, and I’m still not convinced that either of the two men is qualified to be president.)
Simon writes:
“John McCain was very lucky that he decided to show up for the first presidential debate in Oxford, Miss., Friday night. Because he gave one of his strongest debate performances ever.
“While Barack Obama repeatedly tried to link McCain to the very unpopular George W. Bush, Bush’s name will not be on the ballot in November and McCain’s will.
“And McCain not only found a central theme but hit on it repeatedly. Obama is inexperienced, naive, and just doesn’t understand things, McCain said.
“Sure, McCain is a pretty old guy for a presidential candidate, but he showed the old guy did not mind mixing it up. He stood behind a lectern for 90 minutes without a break — you try that when you are 72 — and he not only gave as good as he got, he seemed to relish it more.
‘“At least twice after sharp attacks by McCain, Obama seemed to look to moderator Jim Lehrer for help, saying to Lehrer, ‘Let’s move on.’
“True, the majority of the debate was fought on McCain’s strongest ground: foreign affairs. And true, McCain’s feet were not held to the fire as to why he urged the postponement of the debate in order to secure a financial bailout package in Washington, but then decided to show up without any such agreement in hand.
‘“But it didn’t seem to matter much. McCain just pounded away on his central argument: Obama just didn’t ‘understan’ how to deal with Pakistan; how dangerous it is to meet with foreign leaders without preconditions; how serious the Russian invasion of Georgia was; the price of failure in Iraq.
‘“He doesn’t understand, he doesn’t get it,’ McCain said of Obama, also saying, ‘There is a little bit of naiveté here.’
‘“It was as if McCain was paying Obama back for that moment in Obama’s acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention when Obama said McCain would not serve America well, ‘not because John McCain doesn’t care; it’s because John McCain doesn’t get it.’
“But McCain seemed to get it Friday night. He certainly knew enough to try to turn his age into a plus and not a minus. ‘There are some advantages to experience, knowledge and judgment,’ McCain said.
Read more.
Welcome to Katalusis for progressive views on politics, religion, environmental issues, and popular culture. (Photo of the Mississippi River from the University Club in St. Paul, MN.)
Hi virginia:
ReplyDeleteyour claim about mccain "winning" the debate last night surprises me. OK, he really "won", but only if you judge victory on rudeness
this morning, after looking at an array of post-debate musings and polls, it looks as if public opinion thinks that either obama "won" or it was a tie, which puts you in a minority?
actually what the pundits claim about winners and losers doesn't count that much.
the test that obama passed was his command of foreign affairs, something that the rightwing had been bad-mouthing for a long time.
also your position on the matter of obama not being in the senate when he stated his opposition to america's preemptive attack on iraq
comes as a surprise. as an issue, why does senator/not senator really make a difference? he expressed this opinion as an illinois state legislator, and -- if challenged -- would have had to defend the position
let's hope that the belligerency-bellicosity era is behind us, and that we rejoin the world community.
listening to the rudeness -- and cold war mindset of mccain and then seeing that early polls suggest that the public wasn't sucked in with -- is very encouraging.
but we'll see. next week biden comes up against palin
incidentally, an irish newspaper reported yesterday that after the debate, biden would withdraw, to be replaced by [?]. did you hear that?
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
ReplyDeletevirginia, your readers will be interested in the the data on the post-debate reactions
Hi Raymond. Thanks for stopping by. Just a couple of points. As I mentioned in my previous post written immediately following the debate, I was struck by Obama’s rude behavior in interrupting McCain in mid-sentence almost every time it was McCain’s turn to respond, and I was disappointed that Jim Lehrer did not intervene. I thought Obama appeared nervously defensive in jumping the gun repeatedly.
ReplyDeleteAbout Obama’s repetitious anecdote about opposing the Iraq War from the beginning. An Ill. state legislator at the time, he opposed the war by making a speech at an anti-war rally where no political risk was involved. In debates, in campaign flyers, and at rallies, he has failed again and again to mention that he was not in the US Senate at the time the resolution was passed and therefore, did not vote against it. Thousands of Americans have been left with the impression that Obama actually voted against the resolution, which to my mind is outright, calculated deception. A friend of mine who is an Obama supporter was shocked the other day when I explained that he had not been in the US Senate at the time.
And speaking of rude behavior, throughout the primaries and general election, I’ve been stunned by the sexism, misogyny, profanity and just plain lowlife behavior of Obama’s netroots supporters at sites like Daily Kos and the Huffington Post.
It was refreshing to receive your note expressing your opinion intelligently and courteously. Again, thanks for stopping by.
P.S.
The early responses to public opinion polls following a debate usually change within a few days.