Presidential/VP Debates

Jason Rees · Post by **Jason Rees** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 7:14 am

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/26/ ... ranscript/

Jason Rees · Post by **Jason Rees** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 7:28 am

Highlights:

MCCAIN: Senator Obama is the chairperson of a committee that oversights NATO that's in Afghanistan. To this day, he has never had a hearing.

The reply:

OBAMA: Look, I'm very proud of my vice presidential selection, Joe Biden, who is the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and as he explains, and as John well knows, the issues of Afghanistan, the issues of Iraq, critical issues like that, don't go through my subcommittee because they're done as a committee as a whole.

But that's Senate inside baseball. 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.

So let me get this straight... Obama's responsible in the Senate for oversight of NATO in Afghanistan... a location of major investment of troops and funds at the moment. He's done absolutely nothing in this area. That's just 'Senate inside baseball' to him. He's not even been a senator for a full term yet. He's not doing his job. And that's okay because his VP knows about Afghanistan??? That's his answer?!

OBAMA: I -- I just have to correct the record here. I have never said that I object to nuclear waste. What I've said is that we have to store it safely.
And, Senator McCain, he says -- he talks about Arizona.
LEHRER: All right.
OBAMA: I've got to make this point, Jim.
LEHRER: OK.
OBAMA: He objects...
MCCAIN: I have voted for alternate fuel all of my time...
OBAMA: He -- he -- he objects...
LEHRER: One at a time, please.
OBAMA: He objected...
LEHRER: One at a time.
MCCAIN: No one can be opposed to alternate energy.
OBAMA: All right, fair enough. Let's move on. You've got one more energy -- you've got one more question.

Obama lost his composure. Completely. He even laughed at one point while McCain was speaking. I had flashbacks to the first Bush/Gore debate.

Should be interesting how the polls do on who won the debate.

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 11:58 am

From CNN.com today:

Round 1 in debates goes to Obama, poll says

Before any yapping about media bias, read this from the same article:

OXFORD, Mississippi (CNN) -- A national poll of people who watched the first presidential debate suggests that Barack Obama came out on top, but there was overwhelming agreement that both Obama and John McCain would be able to handle the job of president if elected.

Most debate watchers agreed both McCain and Obama would be able to handle the job of president if elected.

he CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey is not a measurement of the views of all Americans, since only people who watched the debate were questioned and the audience included more Democrats than Republicans.

Fifty-one percent of those polled thought Obama did the better job in Friday night's debate, while 38 percent said John McCain did better.

Men were nearly evenly split between the two candidates, with 46 percent giving the win to McCain and 43 percent to Obama. But women voters tended to give Obama higher marks, with 59 percent calling him the night's winner, while just 31 percent said McCain won.

"It can be reasonably concluded, especially after accounting for the slight Democratic bias in the survey, that we witnessed a tie in Mississippi tonight," CNN Senior Political Researcher Alan Silverleib said. "But given the direction of the campaign over the last couple of weeks, a tie translates to a win for Obama."

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 1:53 pm

Gene

That is the biggest load of spin-doctoring I've heard in a "news" story.

Yes, source matters.

But it is all there. Let's take a look.

The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey is not a measurement of the views of all Americans, since only people who watched the debate were questioned and the audience included more Democrats than Republicans.

CNN? Query more Democrats than Republicans to make a point? Say it ain't so, Joe!

But here was the real gem.

"It can be reasonably concluded, especially after accounting for the slight Democratic bias in the survey, that we witnessed a tie in Mississippi tonight," CNN Senior Political Researcher Alan Silverleib said. "But given the direction of the campaign over the last couple of weeks, a tie translates to a win for Obama."

Oh man.... Thanks, Gene, I needed that!

- Bill

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 1:57 pm

My personal opinion - for what it's worth.

If it was "your" man, you thought he won. Essentially each candidate articulated his/her position pretty well. If you look closely enough, you'll know exactly what you are getting - for better or for worse.

I was a bit disappointed that - in a debate format - there was the same "labeling" of the opposition found in 30 second TV ads. You know... tie this person to that bad thing. {Sigh...} Is the average American that stupid, or are we witnessing the dumbing down of allegedly smart people?

- Bill

Jason Rees · Post by **Jason Rees** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 2:05 pm

Bill, people have always been treated that stupid by candidates. History has proven to them that they have to simply to get elected. Face it: there are alot of stupid americans out there, and they all get to vote.

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 2:52 pm

I don't know if we really are that supid, or if candidates are just playing to the cheap seats.

Cheers,
Gene

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 2:55 pm

I didn't see anything too objectionable in the article, Bill. Only those people who watched the debate would be questioned on their feelings on it, and there is no way to control someone's policital affiliation on the other end of the phone. But, believe what you wish.

Have a nice weekend!

Gene

TSDguy · Post by **TSDguy** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 6:22 pm

I thought McCain did a really good job of presenting himself as a republican, and if he actually believed anything he said I'd be all over it. McCain and Bush are populists, not republicans.

I put the debate pretty much even, since nothing happened. I was expecting Obama to destroy McCain, but for some reason he held back a bit. McCain was in one of his rare coherent states a well, just a few times did he start to completely lose track of what he was talking about. His voice would quiver a bit when he did that. I can't even imagine the pressure both of them must have felt.

Glenn · Post by **Glenn** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 11:34 pm

I think the results of the debate will not change the polls much (assuming we put a lot of stock in polls anyway). What is hurting McCain most right now is Palin, after her debaucle with Katie Couric highlighted that she would not be ready to lead if she had to replace McCain at the helm. I will be surprised if she is allowed to do another interview before the election, although the VP debate is coming up next week. I'm not sure McCain can do enough damage control. I really find it hard to believe that she was the most qualified female Republican he could find.

Bill Glasheen · Post by **Bill Glasheen** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 11:51 pm

Glenn wrote:
What is hurting McCain most right now is Palin, after her debaucle with Katie Couric highlighted that she would not be ready to lead if she had to replace McCain at the helm.

What am I missing here?

I know of Katie Couric; she's a UVa grad. She is a flaming liberal. I personally knew her sister. She was the wife of the chairman of cardiology at UVa when I was faculty there. Emily got elected to the Virginia State Senate as a Democrat, and was quite liberal. Katie sometimes tries to hide her political bias, but she's not very good at it.

The little I heard of the Couric/Palin interview is that Couric was hostile. (Example - Expecting Palin to cite numerous specific examples of legislative action by McCain over his entire 26-year career. Couric is an intellectual lightweight. No way could SHE do that without notes.) It was much like the ABC interview where Palin was asked a factually incorrect question (about the Bush Doctrine) that was meant to be a "gotcha."

Here's the thing, Glenn. Democrats and the more liberal media outlets repeatedly try very hard to discredit a Republican VP candidate. They tried (and somewhat succeeded) to make Quayle look bad, and George HW Bush got elected anyhow. They try to make Cheney look bad, and GW got elected anyway. Twice.

Analysts talk about the phenomenon a lot. The effort to bash the Republican VP candidate in the end is a service to the presidential candidate on the ticket. I liken it to Dennis Rodman on the Chicago Bulls. As long as he was being odd and incurred the wrath of the opposition, Jordan and Pippin were rarely cheap-shotted.

McCain is pretty much a moderate. He isn't liked by traditional social conservative Republicans. Palin wasn't put on the ticket to appeal to the center; she is there to shore up the Republican base and get them to show up at the polls. Everything I've seen - including the polls I've read today - shows that the strategy is working well. I just read an article today pointing to how she got Kansas back solidly as a Red state.

Stay tuned to the VP debate. This will present a more level playing field for Palin to show what she's made of. Lowering expectations of Palin may very well prove to be a mistake for her detractors. The same was done with Ronald Reagan before he debated Carter, and it made Carter look bad when Reagan held his own.

- Bill

Jason Rees · Post by **Jason Rees** » Sun Sep 28, 2008 12:23 am

I'm noticing alot of stuff is being fogged over in the press. Of all the articles from the last day, none of them (except Fox) mentioned that Kissinger has never espoused what Obama said he did.

None of them mention Obama loosing his train of thought, as shown in the quote I gave above. He got so flustered, he asked that the moderator move on to the next question. It was a clear retreat.

Only on Slate do I see even mention of Obama backing off of just about every issue.

Both of them share the worst moment in the debate:

"I have a bracelet."
"Why, I have a bracelet too. See?"

Jason Rees · Post by **Jason Rees** » Sun Sep 28, 2008 12:26 am

I agree, Bill. Palin is a wonderful lightning rod for McCain. In fact, Biden's proving to be a sort of lightning rod for Obama. Biden produces so many gaffes, it gives the press reason to ignore Obama's own.

I already commented in the McCain/Palin thread about Couric's gotcha question. I wish to God Palin had turned to her and offered to have McCain meet with Couric so she could ask him about his own record.

The left have lowered the expectations for Palin so far that only Biden can lose the upcoming debate.

mhosea · Post by **mhosea** » Sun Sep 28, 2008 1:35 am

Glenn wrote:she would not be ready to lead if she had to replace McCain at the helm.

And I thought Friday's debate showed that Obama wasn't ready to lead if he had to replace Biden at the helm.

Jason Rees · Post by **Jason Rees** » Sun Sep 28, 2008 4:51 am

LOL, Mhosea!