KPO'M

Debate #2 Reaction

6 posts in this topic

Basically, the questions here are who had the better debate performance, and whether today changed the dynamics of the race.

I heard the first 75 minutes of the debate on the radio, so at the risk of Kennedy-Nixon syndrome, I'll call this debate a draw. I'm not sure why McCain favors the "town hall." It didn't give them a chance to do the back-and-forth that established contrast. Given where he is in the polls, he needs a home run, and today he got a solid single. Today's debate might stem the tide, but he'll need more if he is going to win.

McCain sounded the strongest when he was talking about his health care proposal. He didn't use the rather grating "my friends" expression a single time*, and he sounded like he truly believed in his defense of an albeit imperfect market-based approach.

I think McCain's true roots came out in his plan to buy the houses of people who paid more than they could afford, and sell it back to them at today's lower price. How is that not collectivist? It will be interesting to hear how Palin supports that.

I thought Obama's response on Pakistan came across very strong. Naturally, his support of government came through very clearly.

* - I'm not sure how it came across on TV, but it got really grating after about the 20th time he said it. He had to have used it at least twice in just about every response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

McCain's stutter gets worse, and it doesn't help. He stammers and skips over words constantly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Basically, the questions here are who had the better debate performance, and whether today changed the dynamics of the race.

Well maybe that's the question for you, but the question for me is which candidate is most likely to protect or violate individual rights.

They both lost, but Obama lost more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Basically, the questions here are who had the better debate performance, and whether today changed the dynamics of the race.

Well maybe that's the question for you, but the question for me is which candidate is most likely to protect or violate individual rights.

They both lost, but Obama lost more.

Since there's an election in a few weeks, the question at hand is who did a better job making the case to the voters who will make the decision.

You and I, quite frankly, don't matter in this election. Our states are locks for Obama.

As for who lost more, I think McCain is sure doing his best to catch up! How else do you explain his idea of buying houses (perhaps from your neighbors in California) at inflated prices using our money, and then selling it back to the buyers at today's prices? Even Obama wasn't suggesting that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Basically, the questions here are who had the better debate performance, and whether today changed the dynamics of the race.

Well maybe that's the question for you, but the question for me is which candidate is most likely to protect or violate individual rights.

Debate performance is a poor indicator of who will win. Bush is a notoriously bad speaker when he doesn't have a script, and Kerry by most accounts "won" the debates in 2004. What determined the election, though, was not their performance but their ideas.

So long as Obama is able to hide his ideas from voters, and McCain continues to make concessions to socialism, I don't see a change in the race. Notice that the one time McCain took a significant lead was during the RNC, when others in his party came the closest to making a principled stand against Obama. He lost the lead as soon as he opened his mouth again, and now he's 9 points behind. The only thing that will save him at this rate is a lopsided voter turn-out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Debate performance is a poor indicator of who will win. Bush is a notoriously bad speaker when he doesn't have a script, and Kerry by most accounts "won" the debates in 2004. What determined the election, though, was not their performance but their ideas.

So long as Obama is able to hide his ideas from voters, and McCain continues to make concessions to socialism, I don't see a change in the race. Notice that the one time McCain took a significant lead was during the RNC, when others in his party came the closest to making a principled stand against Obama. He lost the lead as soon as he opened his mouth again, and now he's 9 points behind. The only thing that will save him at this rate is a lopsided voter turn-out.

How do you explain Clinton in 1992, then? Clearly Bush I performed quite badly in the debates, coming in third to Clinton & Perot. Bush I had better ideas than Clinton, though fortunately Clinton turned out to be a little bit less than our worst fears.

In any case, McCain's terrible performance is due mostly because he lacks good ideas. Not only did he make "concessions" to socialism, he actually went out and proposed even more socialism than Obama did last night, which was very difficult to do considering that Obama mentioned his health care proposal as a top priority. Spending $300 billion to bail out home borrowers who financed more house than they could afford, and then rewarding them by selling the house back to them at today's market is pure redistributionism on a grand scale. Plus, it sets a precedent for the future. Add to it his self-righteous mockery (twice) of a proposed $3 million grant to the Adler Planetarium and it's easy to see the lack of coherence in McCain's philosophy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites