I guess it should surprise no one that the campaign of the man who last night demonstrated deep confusion on the difference between tactics and strategy would release this:
Just as McCain is deeply, hopelessly, and, at his age, irreparably confused about the difference between tactics v. strategy (something that is pretty appalling given his alleged military expertise, Biden is exactly right here), so too is his campaign confused about the difference between style and substance. If what you took from the debate last night was that Obama simply agreed with McCain on every issue, you are, to put it simply, a fool. Now, this sort of nonsense is to be expected coming from the McCain campaign and from the professionally silly among us, but it should not be cause for concern among Democrats. When Obama agreed with McCain last night, in almost every case it was agreeing that there is a problem so self-evident that to disagree would make one seem insane or out of touch. In almost every case he agreed in order to allow himself to gracefully contrast himself. See for yourself. In every instance he claimed McCain was right, he then went on to either contrast himself with McCain or to show that McCain’s approach to solving the issue is wrong:
“Well, I think Senator McCain’s absolutely right that we need more responsibility, but we need it not just when there’s a crisis. ”
***“Well, Senator McCain is absolutely right that the earmarks process has been abused, which is why I suspended any requests for my home state, whether it was for senior centers or what have you, until we cleaned it up.
And he’s also right that oftentimes lobbyists and special interests are the ones that are introducing these kinds of requests, although that wasn’t the case with me.
But let’s be clear: Earmarks account for $18 billion in last year’s budget.”
***“Now, John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he’s absolutely right. Here’s the problem: There are so many loopholes that have been written into the tax code, oftentimes with support of Senator McCain, that we actually see our businesses pay effectively one of the lowest tax rates in the world.”
***“But let’s get back to the core issue here. 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.
They have done a brilliant job, and General Petraeus has done a brilliant job. But understand, that was a tactic designed to contain the damage of the previous four years of mismanagement of this war.”
***And, John, I — you’re absolutely right that presidents have to be prudent in what they say. But, you know, coming from you, who, you know, in the past has threatened extinction for North Korea and, you know, sung songs about bombing Iran, I don’t know, you know, how credible that is.
And so on. As you can see, Obama is clearly not agreeing with him on substance- this is Obama’s style. He works from a point of agreement, and then moves to differentiate himself and or to attack. Everything is”You are right, but…”
I know that this bothers some of you, but it is one of the things I like about Obama. I think it is a graceful and gentlemanly way of debating. Additionally, it works really well in the type of format they had last night, where they are allowed to provide lengthy comments and responses. It may not be as effective in a different type of format, where it really may seem that all Obama does is agree with someone and then get cut off by the buzzer before supplying the “yes, but.” Last night, though, it was exceptional. Obama was able to come across as a decent, earnest, and honest fellow of integrity who was confident enough to point out when his opponent was right before contrasting the differences between the two of them, while McCain sat hunched over the podium grimacing and unable to look his opponent in the eye.
At any rate, if you still can not understand this, I propose a test. Gentlemen, the next time your wife asks if you love her, say “Yes, but there are things I wish were different about our relationship and I think I may love other women more.” The next time your wife asks you if still think she is beautiful, answer “Yes, but you are starting to sag and look a little old.” The next time she asks you if she is fat, say “No, but…”
Get back to me after you get out of the hospital.
*** Update ***
A great piece from James Fallows.
*** Update #2 ***
Eager to prove that he, too, is profoundly stupid, Jeff Emanuel at Red State serves to further illustrate my point- if you thought that Obama was saying he agreed with McCain last night, you are a fool.
Anonymous Jim
I agree with Comrade John that this is Obama’s way to be gentlemanly and follow with distinctions. One way that Obama can tweak it and tweak McCain in subsequent debates would be to start by saying: “I am glad John agrees with me on this” or, even better if the situation warrants, “I am glad John finally agrees with me on this though it is not reflected in his record.” That might be good for 2 “horeshits”.
Laura W
This is why you can raise $800 in a couple hours with leftovers for kitty toys.
You have a great sense for when we need to be riled up, and for when “some of us” need to be talked down.
I feel surprisingly good today, for all the ketel one, cheap rose, and brownies and ice cream.
I need to go fork over my $25 to Obama. Wish he took paypal. So much faster.
oh really
You’re absolutely right, John, but…
KCinDC
The logic of the ad isn’t terribly clear. Obama agrees with McCain three times, and therefore he’s not ready to lead? I suppose agreeing with McCain is a dangerous indicator, but I don’t think I’d go quite that far.
Alternatively, suppose I’m a low-information voter who likes McCain’s positions but is a little worried about how his age might affect his performance in office. Does this ad let me know that I can get similar positions with a younger, more energetic candidate if I vote for Obama?
Comrade Colleeniem
I still can’t believe that McCain wants to argue that The Surge (TM) is a strategy. That was irresponsible, and I think all national security voters were probably taken aback by that. This man graduated from the Naval War College? I would like to see some of his papers, you know, to show his work.
Spot On, Comrade Cole.
Comrade Ivan Fookinov (fmrly: Conservatively Liberal)
Doesn’t bother me a bit that Obama leads a swing and hit with an ‘agreement’. It is a nice way to lead into a point that he is making about something, it is just his style of communication and it works. I know that Obama was clearly aware that McCain’s campaign is grasping at straws now and would use anything that he says positive about McCain against himself. They should have paid attention to that little fact but they are too desperate to even think before leaping off of a cliff.
They don’t hesitate, they don’t blink or think about it first. Palin was right about that point, and not just about herself. It is a campaign style that they have consciously decided to run with.
Right off the cliff. I can hear the RoadRunner (Obama) in the distance saying Beep Beep!
:)
EL
Laura, have you considered using Actblue.com? Register once then just login and it’s a lot like using paypal.
Joshua
Unfortunately, that only applies to people who actually saw the debate. (Although it’d be nice if Obama put out an anti-quotemine ad that highlighted the “buts”…) For those who didn’t, it just feeds into that tired old “They’re both the same, so what does it matter?” cynicism, which no doubt was the whole point from McCain’s perspective.
(Aside: If Obama is apparently so naive and inexperienced, what does it say, exactly, if the Tried and Tested Marverick can’t actually distinguish himself in terms of positions and judgment? Just playing devil’s advocate on the assumption that the McCain ad was fundamentally correct, which it obviously wasn’t.)
KCinDC
Why did they use a good photo of Obama for the intro, and a bad video clip of McCain for the “I approved this message”? Are they trying to make McCain look old and sick? Is this a real McCain ad?
tBone
Good post, John. It really irritates me to see so many Democrats getting the vapors about this. Obama wasn’t talking to us; we’re already set on voting for him. All of that stuff was aimed squarely at independents and undecideds who don’t share the negative view we have of McCain.
In that light, Obama came off as gracious (but firm in his convictions), while McCain looked like a rude, patronizing jackass. That’s going to be the lingering image from the debate, which is not a plus for McCranky.
Polls seem to suggest that it was exactly the right
strategytactic for Obama, so the Cassandras need to relax.TheFountainHead
Debate 1: Mr. Nice Guy
Debate 2: “John, you’re just out of touch.”
Debate 3: No more Mr. Nice Guy
That’s the plan and they’re sticking to it.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
I’ve been saying all along he is grace under pressure personified. What those crazy Hillbots and McCainiacs see that bothers them so much leaves me mystified.
Okay, you made your point, but personally I think you’re giving out dangerous advice to those who want to remain married.
Tom
That is the DUMBEST
politicalad I’ve ever seen.They must hold the American people in utter contempt if they think they’ll by that.
And not only is weak to highlight four mere instances in which Obama agreed with McCain, but there’s no PAYOFF. They just show Obama agreeing with McCain four times, then questioning if he’s ready to lead… there’s no correlation there. It makes no sense.
Wini
Laura, I gave mine through John’s ActBlue page. Very easy.
Tzal
This is getting a lot of attention in various quarters, and someone asked whether or not Obama did this on purpose. I get your point that it is in Obama’s nature to be agreeable, but I think he wanted the press and McCain’s camp to take notice of his agreeability. I think Obama went out of his way to agree with McCain.
I expect McCain surrogates to focus on this as a line of attack over the next few days, and to routinely get called out on it. It looks like McCain is attacking Obama for being bi-partisan. And, as you point out, he wasn’t agreeing with him on substance anyway.
It’s one thing to attack an opponent’s strengths, it’s quite another to steal an opponent’s strengths and make them your own. During this campaign, McCain has tried to emphasize how bipartisan he is. Can he continue to do that if he attacks Obama for being agreeable? And Obama can begin to make the case that he is the more naturally bipartisan candidate. It will take a few weeks to build this argument, but Obama laid the foundation for that argument last night.
CMcC
Comrade John, you write: “I know that this bothers some of you, but it is one of the things I like about Obama. I think it is a graceful and gentlemanly way of debating. Additionally, it works really well in the type of format they had last night…”
Thank you for this post. Many on the left (like at Firedoglake) don’t seem to understand this. Amazing.
“It” doesn’t just work “really well” in a debate. It is essential to effective bipartisanship, statemanship, and leadership.
If McCain cannot even look a Democratic rival or a foreign leader in the eye, let alone say something nice about him or her, how can be reach across the aisle or negotiate effectively?
After 8 years of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Karl Rove (who have now morphed into John McCain), Americans seem almost incapable of recognizing a bipartisan, statesmanlike leader when one actually appears before them.
EL
Good points, Tzai, I hadn’t thought of it as an endrun around McCain’s “better bipartisan” argument.
For those of you who need a laugh, favorite mocking Dkos diary headline last night was “WAAAAAH! Obama Didn’t Bite His Throat Out On TV!!! WAAAAHHH!”
Laura W
Hey thanks for the Act Blue reminder! Earlier this morn I meant to click on to learn more about it. I think I confuse it with something at Kos, or something I made up? I thought maybe the $$ went to various Dem candidates and I wanted to give full amount to Obama.
I shall go register now.
Onihanzo
Except that McCain is not his wife. The man’s his political opponent and rival for the White House. Don’t agree with the smirking sonuvabitch when he’s wrong. Hit him repeatedly on what McCain is incorrect about, a list that SHOULD’VE kept Obama talking for most of the night. Not demurring to the buzzard’s bluster about places he’s “visited” (And Obama should’ve smacked him down on the “visit to Iraq” front. Surely to god I’m not the only one who remembers McSame arguing that Iraq was as safe as a shopping mall, while wearing armor and surrounded by an armed entourage).
The simple fact that he let McCain off the hook on the bastard’s long record of deregulation advocacy, esp. while the economy is on the forefront of everyone’s mind, is a mistake Obama needs to correct and fast. HE’S part of the current economic problem. Don’t smile and concede ground to him. Knock his ass in the dirt about it.
Jesus, even Katie Couric roasted the McCain campaign on that front. Where was Obama?
Louise
I think Obama was smart as hell to be a gentleman in this debate, because McCain’s disdainful performance came across clearly and suffered by contrast, and there is still every chance that McCain will demonstrate even poorer behavior in one of the next debates, and suffer even more by contrast.
Further, I think Obama’s performance helps keep a lid on reasonable Republicans who might speak out for McCain out of loyalty to party, but who really hate the way he behaves behind closed doors. I think some of them will just sink into the background, or do as little as possible for him, the more it looks like “gentleman from Illinois” is more reasonable than Horseshit John.
Montysano (All Hail Marx & Lennon)
Via Sully, just another example of “What if Obama had done this instead of McCain?”
What if a colored fella with a funny name was debating a whiter-than-white candidate, and during the white guy’s statement, had uttered “Horseshit”?
As I said last night: I have lost any perspective regarding this race. McCain is a vile, creepy, condescending troll who seems to take extreme umbrage that some uppity Negro has the temerity to climb up in his face. My guess is this: BO started slowly with the jabs last night, will ramp it up in #2, and by debate #3 will manage to elicit a full-on rage-gasm from McCain.
jane
You need to take out the comma after “case” in the text under the video.
It changes the meaning in a way I don’t think you really intend….
Tzal
Obama has his own debate ad up. Compare and contrast. . .
Rick Taylor
That ad didn’t make a bit of sense to me. I wonder what it looks like to undecideds. Even the ending, quickly answering their own question with “No” just in case anyone said anything else didn’t make much sense.
Comrade Scrutinizer
I heard a lot of handwringing during the liveblogging on the GOS about this, and I was surprised that they just didn’t get it. There are three things going on here. First, as you said, Obama was using agreement to highlight the contrasts between McCain and him. Second, Obama was playing McCain. He kept goading McCain to the edge of a blowup, but kept him just this side of it. Made McCain look like a grumpy old fart who was barely on the edge of control, and that’s a lot more effective than having McCain actually blow up.
Most important, though, this is who Obama is. He’s serious about being a consensus builder, and part of that involves being able to concede points. Dems and liberals who are looking for someone to put the Republicans in their place are going to be deeply disappointed with an Obama Presidency. Obama isn’t trying to shove it to the other guy, he’s actually interested in *gasp* building a government that works.
Comrade Mary, Would-Be Minion Of Bad Horse
John, you’re absolutely right that Obama wasn’t caving to McCain by agreeing with him. And there may even be a way to explain Obama’s rhetoric to people, although he may have to simplify things a bit. As I said in the debate wrap-up thread, this could actually be a real advantage for Obama if he can make this into a soundbite, a strong surrogate response, an ad, or a debate tactic:
Comrade John Cole
I will say this one final time. Obama plays long ball.
The McCain campaign throws the haymakers you think are so effective. They throw them every day, and each day they think they have the knockout punch that will turn the campaign in their favor.
How is that working out for them?
Tortoise, hare. Foreman, Ali, And so on.
oh really
I listened to the debate and came away with a very different impression from what I’ve gotten from the few brief clips I’ve seen.
From what I’ve seen so far, the visuals were extraordinarily in Obama’s favor. Sometime this weekend I’ll watch the whole thing. I may even turn the sound down. Coupled with appearances, Obama comes across much, much better than he did with audio only.
I’ve listened to debates before and gotten very different impressions from audio only versus audio andvisual.
One of my favorite McStunt moments was when he told us all, as if we needed to be told again, what a maverick he is and, not just him, but that running mate of his too. A couple of super mavericks.
The funny thing is not long after the convention I remember seeing a video clip in which McAngryOldMan actually said he doesn’t really like being called a maverick or words to that effect. The guy really needs to get his story straight.
He doesn’t like to talk about being a POW, doesn’t like being called a maverick. What next he doesn’t like not being Miss Congeniality of the Senate.
It’s going to be interesting to see what he has left in the second debate. I fear (with a huge gaping grin on my face) that he used up all his zingers in round number 1.
How many more times can he say Obama doesn’t understand? Is he going to remind us again that he’s a maverick? And how many times in the next debate will he thrill us with the knowledge that he wasn’t Miss Congeniality in the Senate?
He’s a tired old man, running on tired ideas, failed policies, and a mountain of lies. One regret I have is that there doesn’t seem to be any way Obama can crush McPOW in the biggest electoral landslide ever. I know it’s mean-spirited, but at this point I’d really like to see him humiliated. (I’m sure his evident dislike of Obama will make any defeat extremely painful.) And what would make it even sweeter, would be if it was obvious that the reason he lost so big was because he’d picked the worst vice presidential candidate ever. If that were to happen, I might almost begin to believe that justice is possible in this sorry world.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
I think Obama plans to do that during the next debate, which is more focused on economics.
EL
Laura, the beauty of ActBlue is that it has many, many fundraising pages for a wide variety of dem candidates. You may be thinking of DKos Orange to Blue page, with option to give to a list of promising candidates.
You can pick a single candidate to donate to, of course, and I’ll put in a plug for John’s Balloon Juice for Obama page.
Joshua
Ever notice that asshole riot cops always get pissiest when up against non-violent peace protestors? Same thing. They come out looking for blood, and it really, really irritates them when their opponents don’t give them an excuse to get it.
Really, the point of all the craziness is that they’re trying to goad Obama into fighting just as dirty as they do, because they know the only way they stand a chance is to bring him down to their level. Much to Obama’s credit, he hasn’t taken the bait, not when it was Hillary provoking him and so far not when John McCain’s doing it, either.
tBone
We’ll file this under “just doesn’t get it.”
Angie
I find this 2008 presidential election the most interesting so far. It even has most European countries spellbound. Everybody hopes Obama wins, but most of them fear that McCain will win in the end… (him being somekind of a war hero, or POW).
jakester
too embarrassed to use anything from your own guy, eh McCain campaign? Hard to blame you. Although I do love the end of the commercial. Hint: if you have to answer your own rhetorical question … That’s not a good sign
McCain campaign to America: Oh dear God, please be as stupid as we think you are!
oh really
The surge is a tactic.
The strategy is to say and do whatever it takes to win.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
Perhaps you haven’t noticed, Jujitsu is not a Christian sport and Obama is a true Christian (I don’t like many but I like his brand of Christianity) and he will take the high road, not beat up someone, it’s against his religion.
Sit back and watch how this is done, he is gaining popularity for his grace, not his ass kicking posturing (the latter is indicative of McCain and how is that working out for him?)
Onihanzo
I’ll freely admit that Obama’s pacing is exactly what I admire about the man. He seems to adjust and adapt and does so without overextending himself.
But what I would like to see is a genuine discourse about why in god’s name McCain should be granted ANY belief he can lead when his unrelenting desire for deregulation has put us in this damned mess. And Obama is just the person to bring that discourse to the American people and to highlight why those policies have been a disaster.
If he’s waiting on the other two debates to discuss it, to bring it all to a slow boil, so be it. But you have to admit the iron was hot as hell last night.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
Thanks, I never looked at it from that angle. The way those crazy people speak, they seem to think he goes around insulting people right and left every chance he can get, and it’s just not true. I was lost on why they felt this way, this puts it into a whole new perspective. Thanks again.
Comrade Mary, Would-Be Minion Of Bad Horse
Err, how is pointing out the absurdity of the McCain campaign’s spin, with good humour, against Obama’s religion? He doesn’t have to be mean or condescending: he just has to assert his position, gently
caric couric cossakmock McCain’s position, and voila! Maybe you took my use of the term “ass-kicking” a little too literally.Rick Taylor
This “not ready to lead” slogan is not going to work well for McCain, because it gives Obama a low bar to clear. It makes it sound like he’s a light weight, inexperienced without a command of the issues. But Obama comes across as serious dignified intelligent candidate (and did again in this debate). McCain’s attacks have been so disrespectufull (Paris Hilton???), and Obama just keeps being a gentleman; that can’t be good for McCain’s campaign.
Comrade Scrutinizer
I’m getting tired of the armchair political “strategists” telling us what Obama should do. Wake the fuck up. Obama doesn’t play the gotcha game, and his present tactics are going to win him this election.
oh really
I just realized the Senate could elect John McCain “Miss Congeniality.”
Joshua
(I should clarify that I don’t think that all cops are assholes. I regularly protest in Boston, and the BPD have been pretty cool cats for that. But at the same time, I know people in other states who’ve been tear gassed, beaten, held without access to food or water in overcrowded cells, etc… Small town cops seem to actually be worse about this, really.)
Laura W
Totally irrelevant comment ahead:
Yesterday my 6 year old cat, Sadie, suddenly was sitting in front of the tee vee, riveted. In all our years together, I have never seen her look at the tee vee screen.
There is some new commercial with a tortoise and hare and she was transfixed by the hare as it raced across the screen. She thought it was a real bunny.
I hope this does not mean that my precious Sadie is an undecided voter or a wingnut.
D. Mason
Oh but there is! Agree with McCain = not ready to lead. According to the McCain campaign anyway. They must really hate their candidate.
Laura W
I’m going to assume those are rhetorical. I, for one, am eagerly tuning in so that he can inform me once and for all that he has conclusively determined that the study of bear DNA was in fact NOT a criminal issue but indeed one of paternity. I have lost much sleep over this unresolved issue.
Comrade Scrutinizer
No, Obama isn’t that person. Obama showcases his own record, talks about his policy proposals, and puts his own quality as a potential leader (especially, as circvs points out, his grace) on display. It’s up to others to compare and contrast Obama with McCain. The MSM is doing that, and most find that Obama is the more effective leader. Jeez, even Pat Buchanan is saying that Obama looks presidential. If Obama goes on attack, then he plays into what the McCain campaign wants. Doing what your opponent wants you to do is always a prescription for failure.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
It’s not the pointing out, it’s the how it’s done. Jujitsu is a violent tactic, even if no physical punches are thrown. Obama’s style is to not participate in such, if you have observed him. He has other ways of getting his point across, and he will, just has he’s been doing.
slightly_peeved
If I remember correctly, anyone looking at the arguments each side made figured that Gore whomped Bush in the 2000 debates. But because of eyerolls, and not looking enough like ‘one of us’, a lot of the popular media thought and commented that Gore lost.
If Obama just hammers McCain, he wins the argument, but he doesn’t necessarily win public perceptions. The perfect tactic for Obama is to win the argument in a way that looks good to the public – and his gracious style of debating, combined with his habit of addressing the audience at home, seems to be a good way of going about it. Ripping out McCain’s throat is not.
One clever thing Obama does is that when he really hits McCain, he does it with a smile – see the comments on Spain. McCain looked very pissed at that point; Obama looked as calm as usual.
Comrade Mary, Would-Be Minion Of Bad Horse
Yes, it’s a martial art. In the real world, it involves grappling with people. But as a political metaphor, it carries all of the connotations I’ve bolded above.
oh really
Of course he looked pissed. He couldn’t remember where Spain is or whether or not it is part of the Axis of Whatever.
He may also have been pissed because he thought Obama might propose bombing Spain, wherever it is, before he (McCain) got the chance.
harlana pepper
Maybe it’s cuz you haven’t been at it as long as the rest of us who got sand kicked in our faces back in 2003 and slandered for being traitors because we opposed the war, or you’d get why we want to see Obama sucker punch McCain instead of claiming he really liked the idea of making up nasty names for Iran’s military.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
Well most people describe it as a kick-ass technique, and that’s what was being suggested above. I guess Karate or Tai Kwon-Do would have been a better choice for the suggestion, but, the idea was that some here want Obama to start kicking ass.
If you have observed Obama long enough, you get a sense that he believes in Christian morals that don’t promote violence. He is not going to use dirty tactics, the man is seriously trying to emulate Jesus.
I have found it so interesting in this election that we’re dealing with a dirty tactics of the “Son of Cain” vs the grace and high minded tactics of a man who truly believes in the Beatitudes. It really does seem to suggest there is something other-worldly going on here (not that I believe in such).
Comrade Nixon Hailfire Palin
You nailed it. The ad looks like it was slopped together in five minutes by people snickering about how Obama agreeing with something McCain said made him a loser.
Onihanzo
It’s not about going on the attack, Scrutinizer, it’s about exposing the failures of laissez faire fellation. I know in this day and age of ad hominems and pejoratives a-go-go it’s difficult for most of us to conceive an actual debate of substance without it getting foul. But it is possible.
You make it sound as if Obama wouldn’t be capable of making an argument against it or by simply mentioning McCain’s record without spitting in McCain’s face. Obama is more than capable of keeping the dirt from touching him while still raising cogent arguments as to why past policies have been abject failures. It certainly wasn’t a problem when he rightly mocked our focus in Iraq.
Do you honestly think most Americans are even aware of McCain’s involvement or even fucking understand what deregulation is? So by your rationale, in order to look presidential and statesmen-esque, that issue has to be off the table? Nope, nope can’t discuss it or Obama might sully himself “stooping to their level”.
Any others, pray tell?
Laura W
Thanks Wini and EL, for holding my hand and walking me over to the right Act Blue page.
Paid my drinking bill from last night and tossed in a little tip. Got my account all ready for next Thursday.
Yikes.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
I fully expect Obama to address both deregulation and Keating Five during the next debate, and to do it gracefully. If he doesn’t, I will be totally surprised.
The only thing he has done so far that I don’t agree with is that he seems to not comprehend that Georgia went into South Osettia first. Understandable, as it seems most people seem to not realize this.
harlana pepper
I’m sorry if I don’t apparently ‘get it,’ yet. I think I, like a lot of others, are suffering from Eight Years of Bush/Republican Thuggery PTSD. Because black has been white, up has been down, for so many years, I for one am frozen and mute, not in fear, but as a purely Pavlovian response.
J. Michael Neal
Wake the fuck up. To date, Obama and his campaign have shown that they know a lot more about politics than the rest of us. At this point, when I do think he’s wrong, I stop and ask myself whether there’s any reason to think that I know better than he does.
Bill H
We’re getting into numbers that will require astronomy methods to describe. Two more debates to go, so we will be using elements on the order of light years.
My take on Obama’s difficulty in the economy part of the debate is that he was prepared for things to do with Wall Street, regulation and issues related to the current crisis. McCain pulled earmarks and general spending out of his ass, and Obama was thrown for a loop. He tried to get it back onto subjects relevant to issues of today, but McSame loves him some earmarks.
As a former debater, there were times that I was thinking to myself, “No, don’t go for that, he’ll bog you down in it if you do,” and each time Obama let it go and moved on to what he wanted to pursue, and so of course the pundits slammed him for not having the killer instinct. The pundits who were saying “McCain won it on points” don’t know how to score debates, because most of the “points” they were giving McCain would have been scored in a formal debate as non sequiters and/or non-responsive.
In the “one-liner” trash talk contest that poses as today’s political debate Obama doesn’t do very well, but this format was pretty close to a formal debate format, and Obama does very well indeed in that arena.
SGEW
. . . so hung-over. Why, oh why do my drinking game rules have to be so predictive? I knew what kind of night it would be when I got to check off the “Obama wears a flag pin” and “McCain does NOT wear a flag pin” boxes at the top of the show.
The “Someone says ‘wall street’ and ‘main street’ in the same sentence” rule wrecked us early. Then the “torture” buzz word brought us home.
Anyhoo . . . .
This is something that has been noticed long ago, when Obama was a prof at Chicago. Remember: Obama is a living-constitution, Brennan-style, human rights & Int. law advocate ConLaw guy, and Chi-Law is a (mostly) hardcore, Posner economic theory, stern constructionist institution. And Obama held his own, and forced his conservative sparring mates to take him seriously and give him non-grudging respect. “Yes, you’re absolutely correct that Hamilton said that, and the words are clearly there, but I believe that the intent was . . . ” etc.
Here’s an example, from TNR:
It’s one of the things that makes Obama such a strong contender, and makes him so appealing to liberals and conservatives alike. (see, e.g., Cole, John; Sullivan, Andrew; et. al.)
TheFountainHead
I think in a formal debate you’d also get docked points for muttering “horseshit” while your opponent was talking.
SGEW
Sully’s retracted that.
It took a bit of willful belief to think he cursed.
(and it would’ve been a grand 3 points in my drinking game)
Comrade Scrutinizer
Actually, I think that most Americans are more intelligent than you give them credit for. People do know that the policies that the Republicans (including McCain) have been pushing for the last 25 years are bankrupt, and that we need a change. They just want to be sure that Obama is the guy to take them there.
As far as Obama hitting McCain on McCain’s policy failures, he’s already doing that. I heard a lot of “You were wrong, John,” during the debate last night. I heard “You’re right that this is a problem, but you aren’t the credible choice to solve the problem.” I know that some people are disappointed that Obama isn’t “kicking sand in McCain’s face.” Frankly, it’s time that politicians started acting like adults. Obama has been doing that all through his campaign, and its paying off.
Obama standing on stage and lecturing McCain about the Keating 5 and deregulation might be fun to hear, but Obama has to be careful in those areas. Four of the Keating 5 were, after all, Democrats. The deregulation that led to this financial crisis, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that repealed Glass-Steagall, was approved 90-8 in the Senate, had bipartisan support, and was signed by Clinton. There’s plenty to muddy the water there, and makes lectures by Obama dicey.
Comrade Napoleon
Relax everyone, Obama did fine. If it was me up there I would have handled it differantly, but it wasn’t, and what you saw I think when you get right down to it is exactly what Obama is like. I really don’t think you are going to see it change.
In any event I think what his campaign is banking on is that after 8 years of Bush and 14 years of Republican sillyness, that at the end of the day even if people don’t agree with Obama on everything they are going to want to vote for someone who 4 years from now they think they will likely still be proud of their vote for him and proud of the fact that he is their representative to the world. Hence he stays classy.
Meanwhile Johnny Drama just doesn’t have those qualities.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
So what you’re saying is you feel a need to have a good skirmish and it doesn’t matter if we win the war? (correct me if I’m wrong, but that sounds like what you’re getting at here).
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
True, but John McCain is the Republican foam on the rootbeer in both of these issues through is relationships with Keating and Gramm. It’s also true that both have a lot of significance with what is going on in our current circumstances. I agree it’s dicey, but I still think he’ll find a way to address both.
Jess
Cute kitteh stories are never irrelevant.
I didn’t think the debate would change any minds when I saw it last night, so now I’m pleasantly surprised that so many people, especially undecideds, were impressed with Obama. It seems his gentlemanly tactics (there’s that word again…) made him much more likable in voters’ eyes. This, sadly, trumps policies and wins elections, so we’re fortunate to have the whole package in Obama. I think he’s wise to err on the side of courtesy rather than aggression, especially with race issue in play.
Jess
Cute kitteh stories are never irrelevant.
I didn’t think the debate would change any minds when I saw it last night, so now I’m pleasantly surprised that so many people, especially undecideds, were impressed with Obama. It seems his gentlemanly tactics (there’s that word again…) made him much more likable in voters’ eyes. This, sadly, trumps policies and wins elections, so we’re fortunate to have the whole package in Obama. I think he’s wise to err on the side of courtesy rather than aggression, especially with race issues in play.
gwangung
No, he thinks it therapeutic if the Dems go up and throw sombody against a wall right now.
SGEW
My kitty is attacking my ankle right now. She does not understand why the glowing box that she is not allowed to sit on is more interesting than her. She has a good point (and rather sharp ones as well).
Everyone wants to pull a Friedman every now and then, and tell some little guy to “suck on this.”
Revenge is a powerful motivator.
Comrade Scrutinizer
I’m curious to see how (and if) he goes about it. I assume he’ll point out how deregulation has led to the mess we’re in, and tie McCain to deregulation. I wonder, though, whether he’ll use Keating as a part of that. Is it better to confront McCain directly with it, or keep it in his pocket and make McCain afraid that he’ll come out with it? The former would draw blood; the latter would give him more control.
I was surprised about him not mentioning that Georgia was the aggressor, too. I have a feeling that to acknowledge that would have been bad politics, since the narrative is “the poor Georgians”, and since the Russian response was over the top anyway.
The other thing that surprised me was Obama giving McCain props on the torture issue, when McCain voted for the MCA. I have no idea where that came from.
oh really
I suggest you put together a list of serious questions (science, history, government, mathematics, current events etc.) and take it to a supermarket or mall parking lot.
Randomly select people and ask them to answer the questions.
I doubt you’ll repeat that opinion afterward.
SGEW
Not to mention McCain’s opposition to reining in the C.I.A.’s use of waterboarding and other “harsh interrogation techniques.”
I think what Obama was doing was reacting to McCain’s blanket statement of “opposing torture”: McCain stated his position (which, although false, is admirable) and Obama basically said: that is a good position, let’s move on.
I’m not surprised that Obama didn’t nail McCain on the torture issue: most people will simply not believe that McCain, a victim of torture, could possibly support it. It’s horrific that he does – so horrific it’s hard for people to swallow. I don’t know if it’ll come up again (I hope it does), but I think that Obama is going to back off from the issue and play to the more obvious attacks on McCain (i.e., McCain is crazy and stupid).
ronathan richardson
That McCain ad was all at once dishonest, ineffective, and stupid. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a more useless ad.
zuzu's petals
I was glad to see Obama right in there with an ad that started off with “Senator McCain is absolutely right” that the violence has been reduced because of the sacrifice of the troops … and then launched right into “you were wrong” repeated three times.
http://www.youtube.com/user/barackobamadotcom?ob=4
Devasting.
SGEW
I was talking to a friend of mine just now, and he was talking about his die-hard, hardcore Republican father in TN.
The father, who has been firmly in McCain’s camp, is now wavering. He might (might) even do the unthinkable thing of votin’ for th’ black liberal guy. Strangeness!
But here’s the thing: one thing this guy really liked was when Obama agreed with McCain. Especially on foreign policy and/or national security issues. This is an issue where a lot of these conservative voters inherently mistrust Democrats – especially some young liberal anti-war guy – so every time Obama appears to agree with a Republican position he appears to be “strong” on defense. With the very noticeable exception of the decision to invade Iraq, which hardly anyone (except McCain and W., natch) think was a smart idea.
So keep on airin’ the “Obama agrees with McCain” ad, idiots. How can these people think they’re going to win?!
Comrade PeterJ
Obama was going for an attack at the end of one of the topics, it was about storing nuclear waste and I’m pretty certain he was going mention that McCain didn’t want any of it in his own backyard. But Lehrer wanted to move on to a new topic and McCain knowing what was coming did everything he could to talk over Obama, so Obama dropped it.
I bet Obama would have gotten something from Nevada out of it.
FLILF Hunter
Exactly. George Bush (Karl Rove) pushed the “Uniter/Divider” bullshit and people bought it. Everyone… EVERYONE… in this country got burned on that one.
Right now we are Truly & Seriously Fucked(tm) and the only way out is a united citizenry. Nothing will get done without strong majority consensus — not just in Congress, but throughout the country. The Rove 50% + 1 strategy will doom us, and Obama knows it.
Could he go out there and make the hard base play and eviscerate McCain? Sure. And the hard left would rejoice. But where would that leave him in office? With half the country firmly allied against him. That’s where.
He needs to win “clean.” If he does, even those that vote for McCain out of habit or “least of evils” will eventually feel like President Obama isn’t the worst idea in the world. Nearly everyone’s gonna need to be on board for the coming national rehab.
zuzu's petals
I’ll bet he finds a way to get it in at least once.
Leslie
But the ad makes Obama look very Presidential and diplomatic which I associate with leadership. It also reinforces his campaign position on changing the rancor in Washington D.C. Obama’s consistency is more reassuring to me than McCain’s erratic and unpredictable behavior.
Tsulagi
Yeah, before I’d say something like that I’d make sure I’d already put the second and third locks on my gun cabinets. And hid the chainsaw; all the knives. And then stay away from standing on pavement. Piss off a latina in that way at your peril. Wife has reminded me a few times Lorena Bobbit is Hispanic.
Comrade ellie
I haven’t read all of the comments, so someone may have mentioned this, but Obama’s debating style was a hit with Independent voters, based on the polling. Apparently, Independents want someone who will reach across the aisle and work with the other party. I think this is why Bush won: he said he would work with the Democrats and he did, in Texas, when he was governor. These are the voters that Obama is going after.
Cheezu Steaky
I don’t get what that ad is trying to say — that Obama’s agreement with someone as stupid as McCain revealed his unreadiness to lead? Well, OK, then!
Jon H
I don’t know why McCain’s camp is playing this up.
If McCain is trying to influence undecideds, won’t they just think “I like McCain, but he’s awfully old and Palin’s a joke. But Obama must be okay, if he agrees with McCain on some things. Plus he’s young.”
W.E.B. Adamant
You know, I saw this ad and could only think of two things:
1. Let’s say I’m an undecided Republican. I see this commercial but I didn’t get to see the debate. I’m really leaning McCain, because I’ve bought into the narrative that Obama has the most liberal voting record in the Senate. Then I see this ad, and I see how McCain is pointing out that Obama agrees with McCain on issues – and that agreeing is bad. Which makes me wonder what Obama really said that McCain was so gung-ho to make an ad based on the fact that the opposing candidate actually agreed with my favored candidate.
2. Then I see the end of the ad which says Obama’s not ready to lead. By the content of the ad, you’d think that that it was just as much of an ad against McCain!
Darkrose
Obama plays political Aikido, letting McCain tire himself out and using the energy of his attacks against him. Someone on the GOS described it as ducking when your opponent throws the first punch. And the second. And the third. And the fourth–at which point his momentum carries him through the plate-glass window you’re now standing in front of.
Dickie Moe
It’s surely not a sign of intelligence to “like” someone who talks out of both sides of their mouth, like Obams does. How can anyone in their right mind support someone who (even though he too has a bracelet), says one thing, then eats his own words in the same sentence?
That is not anything new, or any kind of debating technique for the big zero: The scumbag has been hiding his connections, his past, his record, and even his opinion. It’s not a debating technique: It’s called bold faced lies.
HRA
Whoever had a hand in preparing Obama did an exceptional job. I am not taking away the fact of Obama being intelligent and able. His usage of “I agree” was more than I have seen mentioned anywhere so far. McCain did not expect it nor was he prepared for it. In fact some of McCain’s body language and expressions in response showed he could not respond naturally to them and it was really bothering him.
Dickie Moe
Sucker MC to the rescue.
“I agree with HRA” but in fact, Obomber did an exceptional job in proving himself an inept idiot: a “one quip wonder” whose one quip is, “I have a bracelet too”. Me too. I have one. A bracelet and everything.
Even Katie (shit weight) Couric can’t polish that turd. Much as she tries.
Paul
There is a reason why Red State does not allow user comments.
Brachiator
Yep. Fallows gets it right:
There is no point in Obama pointedly attacking McCain in this first debate, especially when McCain is so hellbent on conspicuous self-defeat.
Prior to this, many Republicans — and some Independents — may not have seen Obama debate before. Some of these people may not have watched significant portions of the Democratic Primary debates, content to have their view of Obama filtered through Fox News and the narrow ramblings of conservative blogs.
And although things may change, the first impression is that many people did not like what they saw of a prickly, contemptuous Maverick, but did decidedly like what they saw and heard from Obama.
And McCain has boxed himself in. Obama may be able to get more assertive in future debates, but McCain could not possibly become more combative than he was in this first debate, short of deliberately insulting Obama. And if he becomes softer, more reasonable, McCain would undercut his previously shrill insistence that Obama doesn’t understand things as clearly as McCain does.
In short, Obama used the essence of ju jitsu in making McCain use his supposed “strengths” against himself, leaving Obama cool, calm and untouched by silly attacks.
Best of all, McCain and his handlers might think Obama incapable of a stronger attack. This would be incredibly foolish in debates on economic and domestic issues, which McCain has already noted is not his strong suit.
Fallows makes another interesting point about Obama’s ability to step up his game, a point apparently missed by posters who insist that Obama needs to attack more:
Obama has varied his approach in dealing with Clinton and now in the first debate with McCain. Obama’s approach here was more focused than in the first “preview” debate at Pastor Warren’s church. To give him a little credit, McCain altered his approach a little as well, but he misjudged both his audience and Obama.
That Obama will do well in the next debates is not a slam dunk, but he is in a much more comfortable position than is McCain.