The Official 1st Presidential Debate Thread

[TheCheese]

If I were to score this, I would have given the debate to McCain, but it wouldn't be on merit. Obama has more to lose in these dabates than McCain has to gain. Obama thrives in these academic setings where he can pontificate on his positions without interruption. He loses some of his composure with the quicker back-n-forth and the sniping usually found in these debates. It happened tonight with Obama, while McCain didn't choke like I thought he would.

McCain came across to me as very old and stiff. The "Obama doesn't understand" bit will work for the republican base, it will infuriate the left, but I'm not sure it will win the middle. Does McCain need to solidfy his base with the Republicans? I am also dissapointed but not surprised to see him switching to a more conservative position. His renewable energy kick might be tomorrow's soundbite. I thought all of arizona was against solar energy and McCain's been there long enough with no real change. I could be wrong, of course, my information on this issue is second hand from some very liberal Arizona folks.

I also am very unimpressed with Palin as the VP choice. To me she is a lightweight who may need more VP OJT than Obama's OJT as president should he win in November. I was really hoping that Huckabee would have been McCain's VP. McCain, with Huckabee as the VP, might have been able to stay more moderate while projecting a more beleivable maverick role with Huckabee bringing over the conservatives. Now it seems he has to carry the ticket. Once, or maybe if, the dems take the kids gloves off with Palin she could become a liability. I hope they are able to get her ready for the VP debate with Biden because he might just light her ass up.

Just like Cheney lit Edwards ass up, but unfortunately it did not impact the poles what so ever. However that could change because Palin is going to draw more media attention to the VP debates than the presidential debates. We'll see.

[Kiwon]

Although I don't see this debate as being a game changer, I thought McCain did a pretty good job of keeping Obama on the defensive. However, it remains to be seen if McCain's dismissive attitude toward Obama will help him or hurt him. At any rate, I expect Obama to be more aggressive next time.

Obama probably will be elected POTUS one day, but even if I liked him I really don't think he's ready. He just turned 47 last month. He could be in and out of the White House by age 56. He then probably would have another 20 years of public service left to give.

There is a slim chance that somehow he might turn out to be an effective leader despite his thin resume, but there is little doubt that he would be an even better leader with more experience in Congress.

The DNC is backing moderate democrats into a corner with the insinuations about racism, etc., if you don't vote for Obama. What about those people who honestly feel that he is being rushed to the national stage before he's ready?

Obama and company hurt themselves badly by failing to choose Hillary as VP. That one move would have appealed to enough moderates and independents, not to mention women, and secured this election for a first-term senator.

[Kiwon]

Henry Kissinger believes Barack Obama misstated his views on diplomacy with US adversaries and is not happy about being mischaracterized. He says: "Senator McCain is right. I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level. My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Senator John McCain. We do not agree on everything, but we do agree that any negotiations with Iran must be geared to reality."

Posted by Stephen F. Hayes on September 26, 2008 10:55 PM Weekly Standard

Obama stumbled badly here.

Now watch the MSM jump to his defense.

[LL2]

They were saying on CNN that historically the debates historically do not affect the voting patterns, if at all it's very slight. The only time the debates made a real difference was when Reagan ran for president the 1st time.

[packinpatland]

What a shame he (McCain) can't get his facts straight.

According to the National Archives, late on the afternoon of June 5, 1944,
Eisenhower scribbled a note intended for release accepting responsibility for
the decision to launch the invasion and taking full blame in the event the
effort to create a beachhead on the Normandy coast failed.

In the letter, Eisenhower takes responsibility but makes no mention of
resignation

[mraynrand]

I was really hoping that Huckabee would have been McCain's VP.

Not a chance. It would have flamed out big time - vote for your Grampa and his Pastor - and get a free bar of Lava soap.

[LL2]

I was really hoping that Huckabee would have been McCain's VP.

Not a chance. It would have flamed out big time - vote for your Grampa and his Pastor - and get a free bar of Lava soap.

Huckabee is a good man, but I agree. McCain wouldn't have had a chance with him on the ticket. He would be 15 points behind Obama instead of 3 or 4 points behind.

[texaspackerbacker]

Pacfan, welcome. This is the first I've seen of your posts in here.

I think the "Senator Obama doesn't seem to understand ......" comments were DESIGNED to infuriate the left. I do think, however, that they were effective with modrate and undecided voters, as well as the base--as he went on from there to point out exactly HOW Obama's thinking was flawed. BTW, I think one of the leftists it got to was obama himself, who seemed to have a consistently pissed off look on his face--the kind of thing commentators, at least, say turns off voters.

One thing I especially liked about McCain's debate tactics was that he would be mild, positive, and general in his first response to questions. Then, in the follow up, he would hit Obama with the haymakers--often a barrage of them--when Obama had less time to respond. That's the kind of sneakiness you'd expect the young guy to pull on the oldtimer instead of vice versa.

GB007, how would you define a "strong" response on the economy? What would you have liked either or both to have said?

[packinpatland]

"One thing I especially liked about McCain's debate tactics was that he would be mild, positive, and general in his first response to questions. Then, in the follow up, he would hit Obama with the haymakers--often a barrage of them--when Obama had less time to respond. That's the kind of sneakiness you'd expect the young guy to pull on the oldtimer instead of vice versa. "

Yup........that surely was impressive.
So were the stories with tiny violins playing in the background........

[BallHawk]

They were saying on CNN that historically the debates historically do not affect the voting patterns, if at all it's very slight. The only time the debates made a real difference was when Reagan ran for president the 1st time.

I would say that the debates made a difference in the Election of 1960 (Kennedy v. Nixon.) Kennedy was behind before the first debate and then jumped out ahead after the first debate a lot of that due to Nixon looking physically bad. After that Kennedy never looked back.

[Tarlam!]

German Press is calling it a "draw".

I think they are pretty neutral, although they have been describing Barry in messianic ways.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Both came across weak on the economy.

And that is really SAD!

The Democrats and Republicans are in the heat of an excrutiatingly sensitive negotiation, huge polititical and financial consequences. The candidates will ultimately both have to sign-off on the final deal to make it work. It is TOTALLY ridiculous and inappropriate to have an open debate on the negotiation at this moment.

John McCain has been harshly criticized for his suggestion that the debate be postponed until a deal is struck. THIS WAS NOT A POLITICAL STUNT, IT WAS A WISE AND SENSIBLE SUGGESTION. Obama and his media minions all said McCain was playing politics, but they were the ones scoring political points.

Jim Leherer foolishly opened the debate by trying to get the candidates to commit to the version of the plan that has been publically reported. Of course neither would commit. Both just gave their canned stump speeches about economic policy that they have been reciting for months.

McCain came the closest to saying anything substantive on economics last night, he tipped his hand as to the approach he favors. He said that the bailout should be in the form of loans, rather than totally turning control over to the government.

[falco]

the debate really sucked IMHO

neither candidate swayed me either way - mccain looked old and obama prattled on ... he needs to get away from that whole john kerry "nuanced" thing because it doesn't sell to the public

disclaimer - i only watch parts, so i'm basing this on what i saw

[texaspackerbacker]

They were saying on CNN that historically the debates historically do not affect the voting patterns, if at all it's very slight. The only time the debates made a real difference was when Reagan ran for president the 1st time.

I would say that the debates made a difference in the Election of 1960 (Kennedy v. Nixon.) Kennedy was behind before the first debate and then jumped out ahead after the first debate a lot of that due to Nixon looking physically bad. After that Kennedy never looked back.

CNN is in denial.

The debates were major factors in both 2000 and 2004 when people had a chance to compare the extreme leftist crap spewed by Gore and Kerry, compared with the normalcy, decency, and pro-American agenda of Bush.

While I think McCain clearly outperformed Obama in the debate, Obama was playing "defense", and thus, not blown out completely. Wait 'til the next one when Obama starts exuding arrogance and elitism as he puts his agenda of social programs on display for America. That was Gore and Kerry's downfall--ASSUMING that the people would buy (literally) the left wing garbage. That same assumption will bite Obama in the ass as it did Gore and Kerry.

The worries: That maybe Obama will adopt the Bill Clinton model of NOT showing his true colors (no pun intended) until after the election. Also, that maybe McCain will not do enough to draw a distinction between Obama's crap and McCain's normalcy and restraint on spending.

[Harlan Huckleby]

What a shame he (McCain) can't get his facts straight.

According to the National Archives, late on the afternoon of June 5, 1944,
Eisenhower scribbled a note intended for release accepting responsibility for
the decision to launch the invasion and taking full blame in the event the
effort to create a beachhead on the Normandy coast failed.

In the letter, Eisenhower takes responsibility but makes no mention of
resignation

Joe Biden said yesterday that FDR went on TV in 1929 to calm the nation after the stock market crash.

The stock market crashed in 1932, Herbert Hoover was president, and TV had not been invented yet.

Who cares about these gaffs?

It is only the small-minded, petty people who get excited about McCain conflating "takes full blame" with "resigns". It probably has been repeated that he offered to resign in popular mythology.