McCain Blinks. How Obama Did It.
How did Obama beat McCain's erratic grand-standing on the debate? By constantly standing up to him and turning his erratic stunt against him.
McCain said it was time to drop everything, including campaigning, and stay in Washington until a bail-out deal was done. Obama turned that argument back on McCain and said "Presidents need to be able to do more than one thing at a time." Note also how that line also cleverly, but indirectly, underscored the issue of McCain's age.
McCain said focusing on the economy meant the debate should be postponed. Obama turned that argument back on McCain and said that it was more important than ever for the public to hear from the two men who would be President.
Obama never wavered on his insistence that he would be in Mississippi to debate. Obama was constant where McCain was inconstant. And Obama applied jujitsu to all of McCain's arguments.
The result: McCain blinked. McCain had said "we must meet until this crisis is resolved" and his campaign would work "to delay Friday night's debate until we have taken action to address this crisis." And yet the crisis was not resolved when McCain was forced to flip-flop (again) and go to Mississippi with his tail between his legs.
McCain will no doubt grandstand throughout the debate. But Obama has already figured out how to beat the bully. Don't back down, and don't go on the defensive. That looks weak to the viewer because it is weak.
The best debate advice I can ever offer is the strategy that Obama already demonstrated here: The ideal response to any attack is to simply counterattack, ideally using your opponent's own words against him.
Since McCain holds both Obama and the truth in utter contempt, that should make winning the debate even easier. Jonathan Chait offers perhaps the definitive explanation in his New Republic piece, "Liar's Poker," for why McCain has fallen so low in his serial lying that his old friends don't recognize him and that even uber-deceiver Karl Rove thinks he has gone too far:
"The contempt that many McCain aides hold for Barack Obama," The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder wrote this summer, "rivals the contempt that McCain held for Mitt Romney a year ago." As Time reported, "McCain and his aides now view Obama with the same level of contempt they once reserved for tobacco-company executives, corrupt lawmakers and George W. Bush. They have convinced themselves that Obama is not honorable, that he does not love his country as much as himself."The pattern here is perfectly clear. McCain has contempt for anybody who stands between him and the presidency. McCain views himself as the ultimate patriot. He loves his country so much that he cannot let it fall into the hands of an unworthy rival. (They all turn out to be unworthy.) Viewed in this way, doing whatever it takes to win is not an act of selfishness but an act of patriotism. McCain tells lies every day and authorizes lying on his behalf, and he probably knows it. But I would guess -- and, again, guessing is all we can do -- that in his mind he is acting honorably.
How do you deal with a man who things it is honorable to lie constantly?
Throughout the debate, Obama should calmly and repeatedly point out McCain's erratic, flip-flopping on the economy and his many incorrect domestic and foreign policy judgments. The point is not so much to get McCain to flare his well-known temper -- although that would be a nice side benefit. The point is to draw out of McCain as many of his now-standard lies as possible, since, as I've written, endlessly trumpeting those lies is the key to Obama's Can't-Lose Debate Strategy.
Obama does not need to respond to and debunk every McCain lie during the debate. Indeed, I'd suggest doing that only for a few of the biggest and most blatant whoppers. Obama really needs to be above the fray, not constantly calling McCain a liar, and certainly not getting into picky arguments about half truths and word choice. It is really the job of Obama's war room and his surrogates to list and repeat every one of McCain's lie.
The bottom line of winning campaigns never changes: If you aren't attacking, you're not winning.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Joe, if I may say so as someone who's been in the biofuels business for 25 years, we need to make sure that Barack focuses and sharpens his message to emphasize "domestic renewable transportation fuels" instead of just mentioning biodiesel which he did about three separate times last night.
This is especially true since the first thing out of McCain's mouth when asked about what programs he would cut to address the $700 billion hole this bailout deal creates was cutting the "ethanol subsidy," not that it would make much of a difference.
At least Obama made the point, quite accurately, that McCain over his entire career in Congress hasn't voted to support a single piece of legislation that would do anything to reduce U.S. dependence on fossil fuels.
All by itself this distinction between the candidates -- Barack's support for and McCain's opposition to domestical
McCain seem to be a loose cannon. I would be very concerned about his decision making, he seems like he'll blow at any moment. Great military hero but not even tempered enough to be in charge & he shows poor judgement. Obama/Biden 08
"doing whatever it takes to win is not an act of selfishness but an act of patriotism
This is the view of someone who decides that the end can justify the means. Once adopted all morality and ethics fly out the window - "it's nasty but it has to be done" - and is the slippery slope that ends at Auschwitz and Hiroshima/Nagasaki - and Guantanamo.
Once demonstrated it should be an automatic disqualification for any position of power.
Oh I wish everyone else saw it this way. I still don't understand how those who consider themselves "Christian" endorse that tactic.
Erratic is exactly the right word to describe McCain's behavior at this point. After watching the Palin/Courc interview, the idea that this man puts country first is an absolute joke. Nobody in their right mind would put this woman a heartbeat away from the presidency.
"They have convinced themselves that Obama is not honorable, that he does not love his country as much as himself"
i really really don't understand where they get this from. i've never felt that obama was all into himself - if anything, one of the best things about him is his humility and down-to-earthness. just because someone has charisma and is able to inspire and unite people does not mean that they are into themselves!
i wish i could understand the way they think because i feel like i am sometimes living in an alternative universe than them. and i wasn't for obama until he became the nominee and to tell you the truth, the more i see him in action, the more impressed i am.
Obama's trump card was the debate commission. Obama offered to turn the debate into a personal town hall, so McCain needed to win the PR war by a large margin to offset handing Obama a free 90-minute infomercial on every major news network.
With two podiums, a moderator, audience and only one candidate, McCain would have been the straw man in a debate and Obama would be free to take swipes at him and look like the hero for having shown up.
There's no way McCain could afford to give away that advantage, so better to attend the debate starting from behind rather than to leave Obama free to talk directly to the entire nation without paying a dime.
Just shows where his real priorities are doesn't it. "Country First" my a**. Its all a poltical gambit when he says he suspending??? his campaign to be the hero of the day.
Will the voters see this as the total collapse of McCain's cynical stunt which it is, or will the corporate media, hate radio, and the right wing successfully spin it into a further "proof" of McCain's "leadership"?
Given the way the past 8 years have gone, I'm thinking the voters will buy the latter.
There will always be that thirty-something percent who buy that stuff.
It took more than 30% to win the White House two times. It took more than 30% to go to war with a country on a lie. It took more than 30% to ramrod the Patrot 'Act, Military Commissions Act and the worst one of all the FISA bill through...
I NEVER VOTED FOR ANY OF THESE THINGS. Can you say that? So you see there are plenty of stupid people out there.
A lot of Blue Star families will be there - put them up close so Mac can see them - he'll flip. I hope some members of the families of POW/MIAs are there, too, he despises them. He can't control his anger and they could push him over the top.
McCain is a deciever at its best...My only hope is that those people who are so easily decieved dont fall for this crap...he is running scare for his political life...
"How did Obama beat McCain's erratic grand-standing on the debate? By constantly standing up to him and turning his erratic stunt against him".
Love the article, but have to disagree with the premise.
Obama beat McCain simply by staying on message and refusing to be rattled by what has amounted to a series of hail mary's by McCain. Obama didn't DO anything but stay true to himself and his contract with the American people. He has always said that this election was about WE THE PEOPLE. Which makes you spot on in terms of constancy.
But in terms of who beat who, McCain beat himself. In panic mode, in a desperate attempt to save his bid for Prez (as opposed to saving America) he went all-in and lost.
For now.
Most of all, Obama stayed calm. In scary times that's exactly what people want to see. Funny that his unflappable, "professorial" attitude used to be considered a drawback.
I couldn't agree more.
"If you aren't attacking, you're not winning": Well said! It's especially easy when your opponent is a liar for he will be exposed and looks like a deer in the headlight. But, since liars are very wise, they will counter attack as if they are on high ground! This is exactly what McCain-Palin have been doing. Obama: be aware!
PALIN: POST-TURTLE. Someone put her up the post. She couldn't climb up there by herself. McCAIN-PALIN: LUST FIRST, COUNTRY LAST, RECKLESS JUDGMENT, LIES, SECRECY, CRONYISM. Vote for OBAMA-BIDEN: INTEGRITY, KNOWLEDGE, GOOD JUDGMENT, BY PEOPLE & FOR PEOPLE.
The stereotype of the "redneck" is actually based on truth. Uneducated millions in the South vote for the Republicans because they're "Christian" and believe that Democrats are evil "secularists" and "elitists".
Of course, the right-wing isn't christian or christ-like at all. And the Democrats are the only ones in Washington who have some decency and humanity and morals. America suffers from stupidity and ignorance that doesn't exist in the educated masses of Japan and Canada.
Wow. You took the words right out of my mouth. And I'm from the south. The Neocons are nothing but liars. And the number one way to beat them is with the TRUTH. But unfortunately we live in a country where ignorance outweighs smarts.
Actually, there are some good, decent Republicans out there. But they're not in the leadership of the party. You are absolutely correct in your observation that "America suffers from stupidity and ignorance that doesn't exist in the educated masses of Japan and Canada." How else can you explain someone as dumb as Bush winning TWICE as president?
Another southerner, here. Stupidity isn't the core of the southern Republican. Many of them were Democrats - then Dixiecrats when Strom Thurmond bolted from the Dems over --- uh, SEGREGATION ! Considering the truth's of Strom's personal hypocrisy, I find it logical that many southern repubs enjoy their superiority to the masses -- judging others, wanting to legislate morality. Their vulnerability to all the righteous spin weaving is because they are Pharisees, not Christians. (Remember, the Pharisees justified betraying that guy.... J E S U S ... for political reasons.) So now they find any and every 'justification' they can to NOT vote for a black man. (Voting for a woman named Hilary would have been hard, too, but some of them could have rationalized it in the face of the facts of the past 8 years.)
Obama should open the debate by congratulating McCain on already winning. John McCain: inventor of BlackBerries and time travel.
This was asked ->How do you deal with a man who things it is honorable to lie constantly?
Simple elect the other guy.
It's ok, he doesn't need a landslide. He just needs to win.
Every day, in every way, things are getting better and better. Honest.
There are a lot more people who don't care about skin color now than there were in 1960. Today, I believe we have enough. Obama is exceptional, and people can see that.
Actually, WE DO need Obama to win in a landslide, both state-by-state and in the Electoral College, the former because we need to establish a solid Democratic majority in both houses of Congress that only a huge turnout will generate from top to bottom of teh ticket and as to the latter, we need a comfortable margin to prevent GOP ballot shenanigans like we've seen to our sorrow in Florida and Ohio.
Exactly.
Why don't the polls say 70% for Obama and 30% for McCain? Why isn't it a landslide?! That's what it should be logically after the crap of Bush and Republicans. But America is still too racist... That's the problem. America hates nonwhite people.
That's a huge and unlikely margin, though. Even a landslide would be just under 60-40.
because 40 odd percent of the nation is repub and the base will show up for him.
There have been reports that note that Obama has garnered 52% of the vote, and that the no candidate in recent history, who has over 50% at this point in the process has lost .
Also, one has to take into account who is being polled. My own anecdotal observations in my own relatively small (say maybe pop. 30,000 and the great majority of those people are white) town have been that there are far more Obama signs and bumper stickers than McCain--at a margin of about 1 McCain sign for every 50 Obama signs.
Polls only suggest generalities; to paraphrase a great thinker: "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics
I think an interesting question is, "why hasn't the white war hero blown the polling wide open?"
Obama/Biden 2008/2012
Seeing McCain and Palin going down in the polls, and they really do not represent who they want to win, I believe a significant number of Republicans will decide to stay home on election day because the know he can't win anyway.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
