An Honest Appraisal of Tonight's Debate

I do not want to be just another voice from the Democratic base "spinning" the performances we saw tonight to the benefit of my favored candidate, Barack Obama, regardless of my true perception. The aspect of the debate that most concerned me about Obama's strategy tonight was his allowing John McCain repeatedly to utter the charge -- I think 10 or 11 times -- that Obama "does not understand" this issue or that issue. At one point McCain even said that Obama didn't "get it" -- which is Obama's line. I could not help but think of the 2004 Dick Cheney-John Edwards debate when the older, gray haired, more "experienced" Washington hand successfully upbraided his younger colleague diminishing his intellectual acuity and grasp of the issues. I cringed every time McCain said, without a forceful counter statement, that Obama "did not understand" the problems facing the country right now. Obama and his brilliant campaign strategists know far more about this kind of thing than I do and I have been proven wrong before, but allowing your opponent to question your "understanding" of the issues I think is a direct put-down and it requires a direct response in real time.

I think Obama missed many opportunities to forcefully counter McCain's frame he put on the issues -- in particular the financial and economic meltdown we are currently facing. I believe that Obama did not articulate or focus the righteous anger that is emanating from millions of Americans -- Right, Left, and Center -- who are outraged by the $700 billion welfare program for Wall Street investors. It is a Populist issue that cuts Obama's way yet he did not capitalize on it.

I did not like seeing McCain, the old Washington hand, setting up the frame of the economic debate as one on spending and taxing. Obama might have shifted the frame to deregulation and "trickle down" economics that have clearly failed. Or at least done so more forcefully. The Democrats are already saddled with the trope of being weak -- I think a little Bobby Kennedy spunk and fight in his blood tonight would have played well for Obama, particularly with working-class voters who value standing up for yourself.

I think Obama let McCain off the hook on the economy. McCain had a horrific week and Obama allowed him to redeem some of the damage inflicted since the financial meltdown came to dominate the recent news cycles. Obama simply missed many opportunities to jab back at McCain. Let me put it this way: If I were in a debate with some right-wing warmongering professor who was questioning my "understanding" of the world I would be offended and hit back hard.

Also, Obama said too many times that he "agreed" with McCain or McCain was "right." I wouldn't give that up, and in the same vein I would not allow someone to question my "understanding" of the difference between "strategy" and "tactics," especially a man who clearly does not understand the difference himself.

Barack Obama did not win this debate. I don't think he lost it either. But McCain was given far too much leeway in my opinion without counterpunching, which might reinforce the trope that Democrats don't know how to fight.

Televised presidential debates in the current era are not panel discussions on policy differences among wonks or debates about which Senate committee has jurisdiction over what. And promises about what you plan to do after becoming president don't mean anything either because everyone knows that the economic meltdown is going to severely circumscribe the options of the president by the fiscal reality, and the Congress will play a big role in any case -- so all that is left is a theatrical performance where average citizens get a chance to evaluate the two men as people.

I also wish Obama would have at least mentioned James Meredith's struggle of 1962 at Ole Miss -- but maybe that would have been impolitic.

In the final analysis, Obama is correct on all of the vital issues facing the United States of America at this time -- the strongest part for Obama was when he told McCain he was "wrong" on the war in Iraq and "wrong" on many other issues as well. He might have driven that idea home with more force and passion. I have no doubt that Obama's caution stems from not wishing to be framed as "angry" or overly excitable, and he didn't want to be seen as partisan (or passionate). His supporters, like myself, want him to fight with passion, but the politically smarter move might be what he did tonight. At least he did not arm his detractors with charges that he is petty or vindictive. I want to see a total repudiation of the last eight miserable years -- and I know that most Huffington Post readers feel that way too -- but tonight's debate showed me that Obama might still win the election, but we won't be getting the kind of repudiation of the Bush years we all so desire.

Comments

[CanadianSteve]

People, there are still two debates to go, and these will focus on domestic issues and the economy (definitely not McCain strong suit)! McCain needed a solid win Friday night so that he could go into the next debate with a renewed sense of momentum. After mishandling his response to the financial crisis, Palin's weak performance in the Couric interview, and his absurd campaign stunt on Thursday, he needed a win to help himself get back on track. Clearly, that did not happen.

I believe that Obama did manage to hit McCain a few times, especially on the subject of McCain support for the war in Iraq ("you were wrong"). In the end, Obama did not need to deliver a knock-out blow, he simply had to show that he could stay calm under pressure and clearly state his positions on various foreign policy issues. Considering that McCain came off as grumpy and condescending, he only helped Obama, not himself. I do believe that Obama could have been a little more aggressive on confronting McCain's lies during the debate, but then again Obama has done a damned good job at running his campaign, so I think that we can defer to his judgment.

[Joseph A. Palermo - Huffpost Blogger]

Thanks for the great comments and links -- I think in retrospect Obama did much better than my initial impression. We wanted to see him draw some blood after all of the lies and tricks the McCain campaign has been playing in recent weeks. No one in America thinks the oil companies deserve a $4 billion tax break other than John McCain and I wish Obama hit that one harder and repeatedly. He couldn't say anything about McCain's flip flop on torture or his dismal record supporting veterans because it would just lead McCain to a long war story about how he knows torture, wagging a finger at Obama, and he knows veterans, because in Vietnam blah, blah, blah . . . but on tax cuts to oil conglomerates Obama cannot lose -- the other issue about the bailout Obama had to be cautious because if something isn't done, as Bush recently said: "This sucker is going down!"

[jplposts]

Mr. Palermo - right on.
Obama can say that experience tied to the Keating Five is not the experience our economy needs.
That national security means being able to help out in natural disasters like Katrina while protecting our security interests.
That a leader is consistent, measured and visible in his approach during a crisis, which is what Obama has been and McCain has not.
That 8-plus houses and 8-plus cars and 8-more years are not what this country needs.

[hyjanks]

I don't know what war you've been in, Joseph, but the winner of this battle showed patience, humility, grace and resolve. All that was missing was something to metiphorically put him out of his misery.
That's the way wars of the mind are won, bubba.

[elroybug]

Please seeJames Fallow at atlantic.com for a much more thorough and thoughtful analysis of this debate and the overall genius of the Obama campaign:

http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/on_strategy_and_tactics.php

[dadw5boys]

McCain is billed as a War Hero and he is an old man.

Too hard an attack on him and hid record will be billed by the Republicans as cruel and mean.

How do you attack him on his support for Bush and votes against everything he now claims to support ?

McCain votes are what will show him for the LIAR he is!

[dayala]

I thought Obama was flat and missed so many opportunities to slam McCain on both the economy and foreign affairs...when McCain said..."he's doesn't understand"...Obama should have countered.."I don't understand and the American people don't understand please explain to us, for all your self-proclaimed experience, why are we facing an economic crisis and a resurgence of Al Qeada and Taliban in Afghanistan."

instead of saying:
"I agree with Sen McCain....." or "Sen McCain is right....."

he should say:

"notably Sen McCain agrees with many of my positions on......."
he needs to learn how to rephrase those types of comments so that he's comes off looking like the originator of that position.

on the tax issue:
the only tax cuts you seem to advocate for are corporations and Wall Street investors, you never mention tax cuts for Main St.

when McCain started with his "love" and "taking care" of veterans why didn't Obama ask:

"Sen McCain tell the veterans why you voted against Webb's GI-Bill, why did you vote against"...and list all the bills McCain voted against over his 26yr career.

Obama is not a quick thinker on his feet and exacerbates it when he injects those stammering sounds at the start of every sentence. I noticed he had that under control at the beginning.

Biden was awesome when he gave his analysis of the debate and made spot on comments I wish Obama had made.

[GwenElle]

Great points. I was particularly displeased with Barack's constant agreeing with McCain and his inexplicable failure to call McCain on his vote against Webb's GI-Bill. I also wish that Barack would stop that stammering. Very annoying. He also needs to speak more in emotional terms -- not rage, but visible compassion for what Americans are experiencing during these difficult economic times

I have the sense that Barack is focusing on so many things at once that he misses the moment. I particularly feel that he is deliberately focused on not making a mistake, particularly the mistake of reminding America that he is a black man, and I mean that beyond the obvious hue of his skin. Barack just simply cannot risk exciting the racial fears of white America.

You will notice that Black America is not calling Barack on his obvious failures to mention issues or occasions of historical and cultural importance to African Americans. We understand the tight rope that he is walking, trust him to be true to himself and to remain connected to the community. We believe in him beyond the obvious bonds of race.

Finally, who wins and loses these debates is largely irrelevant. I don't know what the percentages are, but quite often the *winners of the debate* go on to lose the presidential race.

[ywinfield]

Hey, GwenElle...

The reason that ENLIGHTENED African Americans aren't "calling Obama" on his failure to expound on "African American issue" is because, if Obama should win this election, he's OBLIGATED to focus on ISSUES that concern ALL AMERICANS. To that end, he's NOT supposed to be the voice of Black America - He's supposed to be the voice OF ALL AMERICANS...

BTW, I'm a 38 yr. old Black Woman form the "south", and former STAUNCH Hillary Clinton supporter who has chosen NOT to vote for Obama. It's PAINFULLY CLEAR that Barack Obama lacks the EXPERIENCE, CHARACTER, and INTEGRITY to lead our country. More specifically, he's smug, arrogant, and lacks the integrity (and courage) to stand by his convictions - assuming he has any...Obama will say whatever you want to to get your vote...

Furthermore, I find his insideous "race baiting" tactics repugnant and devisive. Obama has masterfully played the "race card" from the very beginning of this election cycle - Sen. Obama has uses race to innoculate himself against any critism of his GLARINGLY SPARSE record of achievement during his tenure in public office. Moreover, I am sooooo tired of the Obama "camp" shreiking racism whenever someone dares to state the obvious - Senator Obama HAS NO RECORD OF LEADERSHIP on ANY SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE (that he hasn"t "flip-flopped" on)...

John McCain may tell a few lies - Barack Obama IS A LIE.

[Pdubya]

and those that become president rarely change the country. oh?

yes.

"Allow me to issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes its laws!" Amshell Rothschild

we have a plutocracy, complicit in the Dem/Repub administrations since the inception of the Federal Reserve. Most all of the administrations and congress have been tools. Lead by the nose by fiat money.

Return to our constitution.

[Pdubya]

"missed opportunities'?

see my other post on the Presidential Commission on Debates.

[Pdubya]

maybe you'll just realize that there isn't a dime's worth of difference between them on the actual policies.

non-interventionism

monetary policy


and don't lecture me on strategy, tactics, bills, or rhetoric.

policy change, if you understand that, will lead this nation back to success.

neither offer that.

they are not in control.

[criquet]

I don't agree with this assessment.
Obama demonstrated the intellectual capacity and necessary temperment to lead.
He also reinforced his change message wonderfully by showing he is willing to listen and accept that someone from the Republican side of the aisle could be right. He is showing how he would be bipartisan not just talking about it.
His legal training in accepting what could be agreed and clearly moving to deal with contentious issues shows he would not only be Commander-in-Chief but Diploma-in-Chief.
He showed that he is a classy well-mannered gentleman fit to represent the USA not like the ill-mannered, narrow,unnecessarily combative and not that clever train-wreck that was his opponent.
That's why Obama won the debate among the independents who watched and appealed to women who seem to see problem-solving in much the same way.
It was an astute and well thought out strategy that may work.

[Pdubya]

if you're an independent and speaking for yourself, fine. most independents realize that there isn't a dime's worth of difference between the plutocracy. This has been witnessed over and over with CRA, Brenton Woods breakdown, usurpation of military command structure, illegal wars, the Patriot Act, Sarbanes-Oxley, FISA and now the "bailout".

And now with inflation, there isn't a nickel's worth.

The Debate in a Nutshell
Posted by James Ostrowski at September 27, 2008 08:00 AM
McBama favors the Billionaire Bailout.
McBama won't say what programs have to be cut to pay for the Billionaire Bailout.
McBama thinks "we should never hesitate to use military force."
McBama wants to escalate the other unwinnable "land war in Asia" (Afghanistan).
McBama is not sure about whether to start a third unwinnable land war in Asia, against nuclear power Pakistan.
McBama would go to war against Iran for the sake of Israel if necessary. He is not sure if he wants to talk with the Iranians before bombing them.
McBama thinks that Russia is the villain in Georgia.
And the winner of the debate is: Ron Paul, who said recently that there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the two parties.

[zurcl]

i agree.

[Brokenduck]

I wish Obama would show more passion. The are passionate times. He is calling for change. WHY? The reason is that we are at the end of this country's most disasterous presidency ever. What that entails is the very reason why Obama should be passionate. If anyone wishes me to define that, all I can say is that the late Peter Camejo was the last candidate for higher office to display the right blend of passion, experience, and knowledge of the issues. I don't get emotional with politics, but I literally cried both times I heard Camejo speak. Obama is nowhere close to Camejo where this is concerned.

I think the reason why people generally like Obama is that they project all their hopes and dreams on him, thinking that he somehow represents them. He does not, however much he probably wants to or has it in his heart of hearts to do so. He is a child of his ambition for office and his handlers are doing all they can to make sure that he stays to the script. I saw that last night during the debates. He praised the "surge", he praised Israel, he lambasted Iran.....the Democrats are just trying to be the flipside of the same coin as the GOP.

[CaptainStormfield]

Perhaps this will put the debates into some perspective you you. Although I do agree with some of your points, Frank Luntz is the man. Focus group of undecided voters from Nevada.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i23rDuymLwk

[tuttlemsm]

It may be worth pointing out that this article demonstrates exactly the kind of self-defeating magnanimous "fair-mindedness" of which it accuses Obama.

[londongal]

Mr. Palermo, Obama is tough, but aren't people just tired of fighting?

[johnie2xs]

The painful truth is that the voters that have to be brought in, respond to that which Obama DIDN'T do. Painful as it is, these mouth breathers have one hand in their pants and the other on a Budweiser.

[Brokenduck]

What fighting? The only fighting I've noticed in the last fifteen years has been the Republicans slapping the Democrats down. The change I've been praying for is a little reciprocity.

[tuttlemsm]

"I do not want to be just another voice from the Democratic base "spinning" the performances we saw tonight to the benefit of my favored candidate, "

Why not, really?

This is why progressive voices lose. We feel conscientiously obligated to turn in goo-goo, fair-minded analyses while the Republicans shamelessly influence the media toward the bent that they are always right, patriotic and good while progressives are always wrong, anti-American and evil.

While I appreciate the intellectual honesty of this approach, less intellectually inclined people just see it as vacillation. They go with the Republicans because "they mean what they say and they say what they mean," no matter how wrong-headed. Their wrong-headed ideas have conviction, and that's what resonates with middle America.

It's time for progressives to start bringing knives to the knife-fights. Our guy won. Theirs lost. This is no time for subtlety.

[ritareader]

I completely agree with your sentiments. After the debate I felt so let down. This one statement from Obama that could have turned the whole thing around for me.

"John, what has your 26 years of experience and the Republican leadership gotten us besides bogging us down in an endless war that is sucking billions out of our country, destroying our economy, and helping us make enemies around the world".

[Pdubya]

He didn't state that because that would be AMERICAN. He is a New World Globalist, just like McCain. See my other posts regarding the bailout. Our choice was BAD or Worse. They just delayed it politically, but opted for the WORSE.

www.campaignforliberty.com

It is time to revolt folks.

Hoarde. Save. Pay down your debt. Buy gold and silver. And some ammo, if you have the stomach for it.