The Day the Momentum Changed: And What Obama Needs to Do in the Debates to Keep It

It was Tuesday afternoon last week, and I was heading back from San Diego to the East Coast when I caught a piece of a speech on the economy by Barack Obama. I almost missed my flight because I couldn't walk away from it. My immediate response: This was a game-changer, and we ought to see a five-point shift in the polls if he keeps this up for the rest of the week.

I was wrong. The shift was bigger. He leapt from 2 points behind John McCain to 6 points ahead at one point by the end of the week. His newfound voice in fact yielded dividends. The question is whether he and his campaign will draw the right conclusions about why he earned those dividends or whether they do what they have done so many times before: drop their gloves and start getting beaten up again after having their opponent down on the canvas.

Indicting McCain

Mark Sept 16, 2008 as the date Obama may have turned the election around. What he did in that speech in Colorado was something he had only done once before, in his convention address: not just to inspire voters about himself and his vision for the future, but to make the case against John McCain. The truth, he stated with the razor sharpness of a good prosecutor making his closing statement, is that what McCain was saying in response to the extraordinary financial crisis that was unfolding "fits with the same economic philosophy that he's had for 26 years...It's the philosophy that says even common-sense regulations are unnecessary and unwise. It's a philosophy that lets Washington lobbyists shred consumer protections and distort our economy so it works for the special interests instead of working people...We've had this philosophy for eight years. We know the results. You feel it in your own lives. Jobs have disappeared, and peoples' life savings have been put at risk. Millions of families face foreclosure, and millions more have seen their home values plummet. The cost of everything from gas to groceries to health care has gone up, while the dream of a college education for our kids and a secure and dignified retirement for our seniors is slipping away. These are the struggles that Americans are facing. This is the pain that has now trickled up."

What had he just done? He had said implicitly, as he later made explicit, that the economic pain Americans are experiencing isn't accidental. It isn't an act of God. It is an act of ideology and incompetence, and it reflects the failed ideology of the Republican Party and the conservative movement whose standard bearer in this election is John McCain. And he had spoken in evocative ways about what is happening in real people's lives, not just about how McCain wants to privatize Social Security or seems indifferent to big businesses that are increasingly considering their obligations to their retiring workers optional, but about how the dream of a "dignified retirement" is slipping away. His terms were evocative, up close, and personal.

He went on to compare and contrast what he and McCain had done that might have prevented the collapse of the housing market (and with it the largest asset most middle class Americans have, the equity in their homes) and the tumbling of seemingly rock-solid financial giants like Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch. He took his listeners back two years, to February 2006, when he introduced legislation to prevent fraudulent or abusive mortgage practices. "A year later," he went on, "before the crisis hit, I warned Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernanke about the risks of mounting foreclosures and urged them to bring together all the stakeholders to find solutions to the subprime mortgage meltdown. Senator McCain did nothing." After walking his listeners through a timeline of events that transformed a topic that could so easily have seemed dull and lifeless into a riveting whodunit, he made clear that the mystery had been solved: "This is what happens when you confuse the free market with a free license to let special interests take whatever they can get, however they can get it. This is what happens when you see seven years of incomes falling for the average worker while Wall Street is booming...Americans have always pursued our dreams within a free market that has been the engine of our progress. It's a market that has created a prosperity that is the envy of the world, and rewarded the innovators and risk-takers who have made America a beacon of science, and technology, and discovery. But the American economy has worked in large part because we have guided the market's invisible hand with a higher principle-that America prospers when all Americans can prosper. That is why we have put in place rules of the road to make competition fair, and open, and honest."

This is the language of the heart, not the cerebrum. It raises not just the pocketbook issues that have Americans so worried but the values of honesty, fairness, and community that are central to what parents teach their children. It speaks of "rules of the road" rather than just "regulations." Sure, his words reflect a grasp of the issues that shines through, giving voters the sense that this is a man and a mind who understands what's wrong and how it needs to be righted. But what was present in this speech was precisely what has been absent from his campaign from the start: a sense of outrage at what Bush and those such as McCain who have been complicit in his malfeasance and mismanagement have done, and a willingness to put aside the campfire songs to tell a campfire story about his opponent as someone who is not the right person to lead.

It is no accident that his poll numbers jumped after his convention address, when commentator after commentator said something along the lines of, "Hey, he can throw a punch." And it is no accident that his numbers jumped again after a speech -- and several days of continued attack on McCain's ability to lead the nation out of the economic wilderness -- with words like these: "Make no mistake: my opponent is running for four more years of policies that will throw the economy further out of balance. His outrage at Wall Street would be more convincing if he wasn't offering them more tax cuts. His call for fiscal responsibility would be believable if he wasn't for more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, and more of a trillion dollar war in Iraq paid for with deficit spending and borrowing from foreign creditors like China. His newfound support for regulation bears no resemblance to his scornful attitude towards oversight and enforcement. John McCain cannot be trusted to reestablish proper oversight of our financial markets for one simple reason: he has shown time and again that he does not believe in it."

But what was different about this speech wasn't just the words. It was the way he delivered them. Obama has always been a brilliantly inspiring orator, at least when he chooses to turn on the electricity. But he has always seemed to shy away from a fight, and you don't beat an incumbent party on the ropes by making the election a referendum on the challenger. This time Obama spoke with a dignified but aggressive air of authority that screamed the words, "Commander-in-Chief." He made people feel comfortable with the thought of putting their families' economic security in his hands. He stood tall, with his tall visage framed between two flags, in a way that seemed both presidential and unwavering. And he did not waver the rest of the week, as he peppered his speeches -- and McCain -- with the kind of tough humor we have not seen from him, as when he taunted, "If you think the fundamentals are sound, I have a bridge in Alaska to sell you," and "The old boy network? In the McCain campaign, that's called a staff meeting."

I hope he and his advisors do not take away the wrong message from this speech, that it was his six-point policy prescription at the end that turned things around. Sure, that prescription was good to hear, just as the meat he put on the bones of change in his convention address was important in spelling out what change it is we are supposed to believe in. But I left for the East Coast before he ever got to those policy prescriptions, and I already knew this speech was a game-changer.

What Obama Needs to Do in the Debates

Unfortunately, with a four-point lead that means little, especially for a black candidate who needs to be up by 10 points in battleground states to be safe, the game isn't over yet. The next potential game-changer is his first debate with John McCain, and what he needs to do in the debates is precisely what he has not done thus far in that format, and what no Democrat other than Bill Clinton has done effectively in decades: to connect with voters in a way that makes them feel like they know and share his values, feel confident that he will keep them and their families safe, and will do right by people like them.

How does he do that? By following some basic principles, many of which Democrats would do well to follow in every debate at every level of government:

1. Think of your answers as sandwiches, with emotionally evocative and values-driven language at the beginning and end and with the "meat" in the middle. Emotionally evocative opening and closing statements serve three functions: they draw voters' attention (one of the major function of emotions from an evolutionary standpoint), they signal voters what you are passionate about, and they provide the sound bites that will be replayed over and over on television. The emotional "bread and butter" at the beginning and end can elicit or address voters' anger, hope, concerns, sense of patriotism, faith, or whatever informs your position and moves voters, or it can be a story from your own life or the lives you've encountered on the campaign trail. That is the bread and butter of what voters will remember. Follow it with the "meat": first, how we got here (indicting the GOP for what it has done and making the causal link to the pain people are experiencing and our moral standing in the world), and second, a very brief bulleted description of what you plan to do (no more than three points, which is the most voters will remember). For example, on health care, start with something like, "I believe in a family doctor for every family. Right now, 50 million working Americans and their families can't take their kids to the doctor, and the rest of us are watching our co-pays shoot through the roof and our security disappear as insurance companies are raking in record profits." Then compare McCain's "you're on your own, pal" plan that would knock 150 million people off their employer-provided insurance (which would scare the hell out of most voters if they only knew about it -- and for good reason) with your own, emphasizing the most central points of your plan: if you're happy with your doctor or health plan, you will be able to stay with what you have; if you're not, you'll have choices, including not only an array of private plans that will have to compete for your dollar but the same plan members of Congress get. End with something that again inspires emotion, "If that plan is good enough for people like me in the Senate, it's good enough for the people who pay my salary -- the American taxpayer."

2. Clearly enunciate your principles in virtually every response. Why do you take the position you do, and how does that principle reflect mainstream American values? Get to the specifics after you've established the principle, because it cues voters that you're a person of conviction. The usual Democratic statements such as "I'm for the Second Amendment but for limited regulation of x,y,z" is not a principle, any more than was Al Gore's debate response in 2004, that he supported regulation of new handguns but not old ones. (What's the principle? That old guns are rusty? Voters saw through it and thought he wanted to support gun control but didn't want to say it.) Here's a principle, and one that distinguishes him clearly from McCain and the GOP: "My basic principle on guns is this: I believe in the rights of law-abiding Americans. That's why I support the rights of law-abiding Americans to own firearms to hunt and protect their families, and why I support the rights of parents to send their kids to school in the morning and know they'll come home safely." That sets the framework for a principled position, for example, against assault weapons (e.g., "If you're hunting with an M-16, you're not bringing that meat home for dinner").

3. Look at the audience and know where the camera is at all times. In his Saddleback performance, Obama split his eye contact between his interviewer, Rick Warren, and his shoelaces. He rarely turned to the camera and his broader television audience. Eye contact and body posture are crucial nonverbal cues in primates including humans, and voters unconsciously process those cues about dominance, sincerity, and so forth. Downcast eyes readily suggest shame, low status, or evasiveness. McCain had been coached by a good media coach to respond to his interview with direct eye contact, often using his name, and then to pivot away toward the audience within one to two seconds. Democrats routinely fail to make use of people who can help them enunciate their positions with strength, conviction, and humor.

4. Avoid dispassionate, meandering, intellectualized answers. Nuance and emotional appeal are not mutually exclusive. Sure, it's harder to enunciate a principle that recognizes ambiguity than one that emanates from a Manichean worldview of the good guys vs. the bad guys. But people are often relieved when someone speaks to their ambivalence. It isn't hard to say that business is the engine of our prosperity but that leadership is about keeping that engine on the right track. Nor is it hard to say what most people feel in their gut, that government shouldn't be in the business of forcing one person to live by another person's faith, which is why Sarah Palin has no right to plan our families for us, but that you ought to have a very good reason (e.g., the mother's life or health is seriously in danger) to abort a late-term fetus.

5. Inspire and indict. As I argued in The Political Brain, and in multiple posts here, you can't win a campaign with one story (about why you should be elected), and no one has ever won the presidency by saying only nice things about himself and his opponent. You have to control the dominant story of who you are (and answer attacks on that story directly and immediately) and the story of who your opponent is and why he's not the right person for the job or the times.

6. Don't run from any issue. State your principles clearly and with conviction, and if you worry that the public isn't with you, turn that into a virtue (by making it a mark of genuineness and courage). The failure to state a clear position on hot-button issues has been a standard Democratic error for decades. Republicans never make this mistake. They've been running on a position on abortion that's at 30% in the polls for years--that life begins at conception, and there's no room for compromise--and this year they've even taken the more extreme position that every rapist has the right to choose the mother of his child. If Democrats don't run on abortion and contraception this year, when Republicans have governed or threaten to govern with positions so far to the right that you can't find them on a map of America (e.g., forcing teenagers to have their rapists' babies, perpetuating the cycle of poverty by making contraceptives unavailable to poor women, teaching only abstinence when it's nearly impossible to name a Republican who ever practiced it--they deserve another 3 Alitos and a Scalia for good measure.

7. Don't run from any attack. Answer it with an attack on the attacker. The two biggest mistakes Democrats repeatedly make are to fail to answer an attack and to get on their heels and try to answer every charge. Answer the weakest link in your opponent's attack and go after him for making it. For example, Obama could easily have addressed the "elitist" charged by simply saying, "Let me get this straight. The guy who has to ask his staff how many homes he has, whose wife says you just can't get around Arizona without a private jet, and who's worth over a hundred million dollars is calling the black guy who just recently paid off his student loans elitist? That dog ain't gonna hunt."

8. Don't worry about looking like the angry black man. People don't see you that way. Your bigger worry is that you don't look masculine, muscular, and aggressive enough. Don't let grandpa push you around. (And Joe, that goes for soon-to-be Grandma Palin.)

9. Remember your first mission: to convey, particularly to white voters who are on the fence, that you share their values and understand and care about people like them. Speak their language, talk about what you want and fear for your kids (which is likely the same as what they want and fear for theirs), and don't hide your values in the fine print of your policy prescriptions. Speak from the gut about what matters to you. A campaign isn't a debate on the issues. One strong values statement (e.g., "It's time we had an economy that works again for people who work for a living") or one strong metaphor (okay, something other than lipstick on a pig) is worth a thousand ten-point plans.

10. Remember your second mission: to make people worry about what would happen if they vote for McCain and Palin. Do you really want to lose your employer-based health insurance and be left on your own to fend for yourself? Do you really want a return to coat-hanger abortions and increase the rate of unwanted pregnancies among poor women and teenagers? Do you really want your teenage son drafted (since there's no other way to maintain our security while keeping tens of thousands of troops in Iraq and deterring people with "the right stuff" from signing up and staying in the military)? Stress your theme of unity, and contrast it with the hate-fest in Minneapolis and the divide-and-conquer tactics the Republicans have been using since Lee Atwater and Karl Rove came on the scene.

11. Use humor, especially when throwing a punch. Humor is disarming, and well-timed lines will be replayed on cable over and over and will be the only thing people who didn't watch the debate will know about your performance.

12. Don't "dumb down" your language, but use words that connect with people and don't make them feel ignorant. They don't need to hear about "marginal tax rates." They need to hear what's going to happen to their paychecks if you're in charge of the tax code. Avoid all acronyms and Washington inside baseball. If you're about to say "S-CHIP," try instead, "I believe people who work for a living ought to be able to take their kids to the doctor when they're sick. Plain and simple. My opponent thinks that if your kid has asthma or you have a bad back and can't get health insurance because of a 'pre-existing condition,' tough break."

13. Keep in mind at all times what stories the other side has effectively told about you (you're an empty celebrity, uppity, elitist, weak, and outside the mainstream) and counter them at every turn. Keep in mind at all times what stories you want voters to be telling the next day about your opponent (that he's out of touch with the concerns of everyday Americans; that if you like how things are going now, vote for him; and that he claims to be a straight-talking maverick, but it's hard to know which McCain would show up at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue because he's been on virtually every side of every issue), and reinforce them at every turn.

14. Remember who your two audiences are: the people who support you already who you want to show up at the polls, and the people who are on the fence who you want to get off on your side. Don't worry about offending people who already detest you and everything you stand for.

15. Be genuine. Don't take any position you don't really believe in. People can tell. And you don't need to be anything but genuine. The American people agree with you on about 80% of the issues, and as Stan Greenberg and I recently found in polling 10,000 likely voters and putting together a Handbook for Progressive Messaging, Democrats can win on every one of the major issues, from economics, to abortion, to national security, to the role of government, with well crafted, emotionally evocative messages.

This isn't an exhaustive list, but it's a start. Personally, I'd throw away the briefing books and study this list. The debates won't be won or lost on who jams the most facts into 90 minutes. McCain can't tell a Sunni from a Shiite. If you don't know your position and the reasons for it on every issue after two years of campaigning, you're not going to learn it this week, so don't bother trying. There are more important things to get right--like making eye contact with your audience.

People want to know who their potential President is, and they want to like, trust, and be able to identify with him.

That's what Obama needs to accomplish in the debates.

Drew Westen, Ph.D., is Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry at Emory University, founder of Westen Strategies, and author of "The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation," recently released in paperback with a new postscript on the 2008 election.

Comments

[BillCarson]

Another great article, Dr. Westen. As others have already stated, I hope the Obama camp is listening!

[Nikkicolew]

I echo that! I REALLY hope the Obama camp is listening. I think he should go for the jugular.

[EllaP]

What a great post!! I've been reading George Lakoff and others about re-framing the Progressive message in terms that make sense for us. Thank you, thank you Mr. Westen for putting it so well! Now how do we make sure the Obama-Biden people read this and take note?

[bish66]

Wow! 14 pieces of advice! Obama does seem to do a lot wrong in his debates so far. Maybe that is why Clinton swept the floor with him time and again.

Nevertheless, the most important point is missing: For Pete's sake, at least TRY TO UTTER COMPLETE SENTENCES WITHOUT REPETITIONS, FALSE STARTS AND STUTTERING­S!!!!!!!!!

Otherwise, people will never believe that you are the gifted orator every pundit claims you are.
Otherwise, people will never believe that you could talk tough with Iran, Cuba and other countries.

[Questinia]

He's a lot better at that now. Embrace Obama.

[postman606]

Every time I've seen someone mop the floor with someone else, the person doing the mopping was still standing. Hillary is over.

[FACINGREALIT]

It is much easier to debate man vs man than for a man to debate a woman - one tear by her and the election is over - remember how Hillary won New Hampshire after being down 10 points? She found her voice.

Obama just needs to show his passion that is so known by those in Chicago but not on the national stage. He is finding his way, especially on the economic mess we are in and that passion just needs to translate over to his foreign judgment, of which Obama has a lot. He is a very wise man who needs to be able to speak to all of america his love for country and its citizentry as a whole without worrying about being perceived as angry. Which is a REAL problem many black men face in america - their passion is seen as anger.

[JohnnyBoyyy]

Mr. Western, I feel better just reading your analysis of how Mr. Obama can incorporate your WELL WRITTEN ideas into his debates with Blinky McSame. I sense that you have great respect his oratory talents, his "Comander-In-Chief" presence, his uncanny grasp of how America can return to our greatness. And may I add - Mr. Obama is so in tune with the long journey he has taken to get to this point in his life that he exudes "Mr. Koool".

With the turn of events in his favor recently with the "bailout", I am counting the days till this first debate!

Now is no time to be bashful. Our way of live is at stake and McSame/Pain will surely destroy what is left of America and bring more shame upon us from every nation on the planet.

Thank you, Mr. Western, for making my night a better one than I have had in a longgg time during the long primary and campaign.

This is OUR Time - This is OUR Moment.

Obama/Biden '08/12!!!

[englishprof]

I believe he's been doing exactly what he needs to do: act Presidential. I, for one, have confidence in entrusting myself and our abused country into his hands and getting rid of the bankrupt (in every sense) Republican incompetents and criminals.

[AndrewInToronto]

I think you might be right too. It was profound for me to hear conservative commentators like George Will and Sam Donaldson refer to Obama's behaviour this week past as "presidential" in marked contrast to that of McCain's around the bailout and mortgage issues for average Americans. John has lost his Teflon in areas now and I suspect (or at least hope) that even networks like ABC will not be so likely to defend McCain's commitment to gross ignorance and policy incompetence.

[ashcom]

A question. I received an e-mail from Gov. Palin asking for a campaign contribution. From that e-mail:

"When I joined John McCain as his running mate, I knew I was in for a roller coaster ride of ups and downs on the campaign trail. But, I want you to know that I joined John McCain and the others on our ticket in this great election because I'm putting our country first. "

Who else is on the McCain/Palin ticket?

What don't I understand?

[JNagarya]

I would guess she means "First Dude" Todd Palin.

Or Monty Python?

Or McSame blinks, but she doesn't blink?

Lipstick on a Cheney?

Bush in a skirt?

[Manchurian]

Who else is on the ticket? The invisible yet very real presence of an evil Rovian entity.

[rosal]

Who else? Bush of course. Same policies, same everything

[boing007]

I'm still apprehensive that McCain will trip him up.

I hope Barack Obama can get McCain's goat and make him turn purple with rage and vindictiveness on national TV.

[FACINGREALIT]

McCain will lose it on the issue of the surge - guaranteed. He is too stubborn to concede the surge issue and will debate that point to a fit of anger...he is a POW you know.

[FOXYLADY]

I pray that Obama is not to 'soft' with McCain because he is an old many and prisoner of war veteran! It seems that McCain used this experience too often! Obama is sincere in his plans and hopes for our country...­........an­d this old woman has lots of experience with 'politicians' and 'fast talking lying men' . Therefore, again, I pray that Obama doesn't go easy on McCain but points out the fallacy in his plans and facts. It seems that McCain 'twists' the truth a whole lot.......­.just like his fello Republican Bush......­.....the pres that got the United States into the mess it is in now.......­.......

[jesmer e]

O, I hope someone pays serious attention to that excellent advice about how to frame Obama's message. I do marketing and p.r. for a living, and right from the beginning of the campaign, I thought his media skills needed tweaking. He's so good before big crowds, but he has to learn to the technique of thinking of the camera as an entity, behind which millions of people are watching and listening.

[Anthrofreak]

And you think he's going to be shown up by stammering, bullet point-reading, gaffe prone McCain? The real reason I think McSame wants to meet in these little "intimate" town hall meetings is so that he can engage in a shouting match where he thinks he can gain the upper hand by being louder, no matter how wrong, inaccurate or dishonest he is. If you watch any of the Republican pundits or strategists on the MSM shows, they usually ruin any chance of elevated factual discussion because they just shout everyone else down. Obama is on top his game. OBAMA/BIDEN 08!!

[Kassandra]

Well, he's doing it now on CSPAN. Obama is taking it to them, baby!

[pattio66]

"-- and this year they've even taken the more extreme position that every rapist has the right to choose the mother of his child. "

I'm getting that printed on a Tshirt and wearing it EVERY DAY between now and November 4!

[jdbk52]

That statement really burned me up. It's a trueful statement at that. No one else has the right to tell me what to do in that situation. No one tells the rapest to become sterile to prevent these pregnancies. Sure they can go to jail. Who is left to pay for the upbringing if she can't part with the baby? [Then it's her choice to keep it! ] Right? I have not heard one pro-life conservative say "we should help these mothers with any kind of aid." No to the contrary they say "it's not my baby"!When they [rapist] comes out they can do it again. The female has no say if that happens [the pregnantcy]. And give me a break with [It's God's will.

[franklin opt]

Sen. Obama needs to make point #4 - "Avoid dispassionate, meandering, intellectualized answers" - his first goal. He is aware of his verbose communications style. Mr. Obama needs to leave this "comfort zone" and HIT the POINT every time. He will only get 30 seconds to make an impression and viewers will be tuning in and out. Many will not watch the entire debate. He can't get off the subject, explain the nuances before the main point or seem evasive. Not even once.

[FOXYLADY]

RIGHT FRANKLIN..­.....GOOD POINT.....­..OBAMA HAS TO 'HIT THE POINT' AND QUICKLY WITH 'FACTS AND FIGURES' W/O EXPOUNDING TOO MUCH ABOUT IT!!

[Anthrofreak]

Exactly. Most Americans have the attention span of a kitten so we don't wanna distract them with all those wordy explanations about how and why the Republicans don't care about them or this country.

[old salty dawg99]

Obama cannot do this since he doesn't know what point he stands for since he has been on all sides of every issue since the campaign began and he has fogotten which lies he is using now.

[JNagarya]

Uh -- admit it, "salty": your real name is McSame.

It's that bad, is it -- that you have to log on, yourself (after denying you know anything about computers! -- LIAR!), and spew your lies at Obama from behind a lie as to who you are?

Poor baby! Go beat up on the NY Times again because they told some inconvenient truths about your being "in the tank" with lobbyists, lobbyists, and lobbyists.

[Buddy McCue]

The sounds of desperatio­n...

[BillCarson]

>what point he stands for since he has been on all sides of every issue since the campaign began and he has fogotten which lies he is using now.

I think you meant McCain...

The McCain FlipFlop Lists...
http://www.alternet.org/election08/90956/
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/flipflops

[MegWe]

old-salty: you are very bad at Rovian politics: i.e. accuse the opposition of that which YOU are actually doing. Very funny.

[CJWausau]

Mr. Westen writes a good article. However we have a society that is simply out of touch with reality. Too many want too much. On the 'humanitarian' side, a lot of people really do need a whole lot of help, but we have too many in Congress that are giving themselves way too much, while at the same time they are pandering to the right wing and corporate elites eliminating regulation that history has proven must be in place. Too many have learned how to take too much from the system and American is on the slippery slope, the manure is being spread upon us, and it is raining on our economic parade.

But even more distressing is the state of too much of our public that does not have the ability to comprehend, and to sort fact from fiction in what politicians are actually saying. As an Independent, I would not have chosen the current candidates, however being saddled with these, there is only one option and the names say it all. Obama-Biden have the possibility of creating Optimism and Opportunity Building and Breathing new life into America; while with McCain-Palin we are doomed to certain Misery and Pain subjected to more of the same.

[FOXYLADY]

I AGREE TOTALLY, CJWAUSAU..­..........­.I FEEL AS YOU DO AS I WOULD HAVE ALSO CHOSEN TWO DIFFERENT CANDIDATES­...BUT....­WE HAVE WHAT WE HAVE.....A­ND DO NOT NEED 'MORE OF THE SAME' THAT WE'VE HAD FOR THE PAST ALMOST 8 YEARS. TOO MANY 'VOTERS' DO NOT DO THEIR HOMEWORK AND THEREFORE TAKE, AT FACE VALUE, ALL THAT THE CANDIDATES PROMISE. WE HAVE TO TAKE NOTICE AND 'REMEMBER' WHAT'S BEEN SAID AND ACKNOWLEDGE THE LIES AND MACHINATIONS OF MCCAIN.

[JNagarya]

STOP YELLING!

[IraWill]

Well put.

For a good example of O. doing much of this, check out his "debate" with Bill O'Reilly. Far from using his typical professorial style, he showed passion, intelligence, humor and determination. It was actually fun to watch, and much more effective than the love fest with Olbermann that same evening.

NET: O. has the fire in the belly, and just needs to find the way to let it flow on command, and not just when getting shouted down by a professional bloviator.­..

[steve23]

Dear Mr. Will, I disagree on O'Reilly. He was on the defensive many times, when O'Reilly hit him hard. He's not good on defense. He tried to interrupt O'Reilly during those defensive moments - and if you watched it more carefully, he was sitting forward in his seat the entire interview - a clear sign of someone on the defensive, and uncomfortable in their skin. Otherwise he would be sitting back in his seat, acting confident and more Presidential. He couldn't do that because he just doesn't have enough meat on his bone. Sorry

[JNagarya]

Sitting forward in one's seat is an assertive position -- not defensive.

But you watch FOX as if it were valid, actual news, so you wouldn't know propaganda from shinola.

[ElBruce]

I tuned out before you got to your 15-point plan too.

While a lot of other Obama supporters were extolling the virtues of his lofty "yes we can" speech, the one I found most riveting was the "Wall St. Needs Main St." speech delivered to Wall St. stockholders in July. With the precise set-em-up and knock-em-down argumentation of a master philosopher, he nailed down precisely why neither the average Joe nor the most freewheeling trader should see a disconnect between consumer conditions and the apparent health of the stock market. He also made a forceful argument for the modernization of security regulation - not more regulation and not less, but regulation that makes it possible for Wall St. to offer innovative financial products without either being restricted by regulations or falling through their Republican-created loopholes (aka deregulation).

As with so many things, Obama has proven to have an uncanny degree of prescience on these subjects. He had the solutions in hand before America even realized it had a problem. Those solutions are needed as much now as they were then. It's just become more apparent to most.

Remember: everytime a Republican says the word 'Reform" you can substitute the word "destruction" to get their real meaning. We saw this in the 90's when Welfare "reform" destroyed welfare. They tried to "reform" Social Security, but failed. Now McCain wants to "reform" financial oversight.­..

[BillCarson]

>everytime a Republican says the word 'Reform" you can substitute the word "destruction"
Exactly!

Reform

1) To do away with
2) Dismantle
3) To make worse

syn: Modernize

RepublicanSpeak to Plain English Translation Dictionary

[Grit]

you forgot #4 more money in my pocket.

[FOXYLADY]

As for "reform' with the Republican­s.........­.that is a fallacy...­.....and a huge one....the only way they reform is to give big business and their cronies fat paying jobs and benefits..­...practic­ally live with lobbyists and really don't have a clue what the "Average American Citizen" needs and wants. IT'S THE OLD BOYS CLUB OF COUNTRY CLUBS, LARGE HOMES, BIG CARS AND BULL %$#

[LeaderofMen]

The writer only just now got it? Good god, man. Where have you been? Obama has been the Commander-in-Chief from the moment he stood in Springfield, IL and announced his candidacy.

Obama/Biden '08