McCain won convincingly on points. 118-110.
U.S. Presidential Race: Official Thread
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran are here to talk about a frustrating 2 points dropped at Crystal Palace. They then discuss the regeneration of Old Trafford. Finally, Nik is joined by special guest Michael Statham from the Football Oranje podcast - who gives us a more in depth look at our EL opposition FC Twente, and then runs through the (many) Dutch connections currently at United.
Good I was about to say, in my opinion he easily took Obama to school, also what is with all these Bush haters trying to defend this irrational Obama stance on Pakistan, I mean some people just cant see the trees from the forest
Indeed
The full Debate can be seen here for those who missed it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7639075.stm
I'll be watching it when I get back from work.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7639075.stm
I'll be watching it when I get back from work.
ha ha ha ha is that the best you can do
There are different factions trying to get hold of the power. Going into tribal areas which were never part of Pakistan in the first place won't change much. There is little chance of fundamentalist taking power either way
Do I even need to respond more to a statement as idiotic as yours, tribal areas ummm that is still country of Pakistan
It's an artificial country you idiot. The tribal areas don't want to be ruled by Pakistan or anybody else. There won't be wide-spread riots, and nuke grabbing if some troops cross over
stop being stupid
its a part of pakistan and the US military have no right to be there without permission
its a part of pakistan and the US military have no right to be there without permission
FFS I really hope you´re not a US citizen voting for the next Prez of the US with an opinion like that
Not true... all of the pundits admired Obama for providing a, more than adequate, counterpunch to McCain's constant attacks on foreign affairs and policy.
Last night was the test to see if Obama could hold his wieght against McCain, he did that in spades. (ok, well spades might not be the best analogy - ummm)
Ummm Obama went nose to nose with the slumping and often frustated McCain. Obama showed the flexability that McCain did not. The only area that McCain gains points is on his experience and in an election year when old-school Washington DC style is not what the voters are looking for, McCain didn't score on the leadership points that he should have.
(Most of the above are points made by the wife of Alan Greenspan - Andrea Mitchell)
I agree with the most commonly viewed opinion of the broadcasters, that it was mostly a tie. A slight edge going to McCain because Obama didn't bring the fight to McCain, rather he was on the defensive most of the debate. For those that know the critical dynamics of debate, defensive isn't an attractive trait to the listener. Good thing is, McCain equalled Obama's defensive rhetoric with terribly defensive body language.
The plus side for Obama - there are two more debates. The younger Obama, Harvard Grad & and well trained in debate, will adapt and more than likely overcome in the remaining debates.
The other factor that didn't get much mention is McCain has been hiding in his bunker for the past week, he's likely to go into hiding, again. We've had two straight weeks of Obama soaring in popularity, whilst McCain has taken a nosedive. People aren't going to forget McCain not stepping up to the reporters during this troubling time of economic crisis and will be more likely willing to stand behind the man that they know will represent the true nature of the state of the nation in a time of crisis.
More importantly, McCain didn't denounce his party's actions or inaction concerning the plans for the economic crisis.
You have to look at the debate from the perspective that McCain needed to do something dramatic to stop Obama's momentum - not only due to the financial crisis - but also the fact that Obama is now leading by 5 points in Virginia and 2 points in North Carolina. I think McCain had a good debate by his standards, but so did Obama - and that means that McCain didn't do anything to make up any ground or stop Obama's momentum.
The only chance McCain has at this stage is to go negative by continuously labelling Obama as a tax and spend liberal, which in the end could backfire on McCain since he has already established a certain threshold of civility in the campaign.
The next problem for the campaign is to see how Sarah Palin is going to manage to last 90 minutes with Joe Biden when she hasn't been able to last 5 minutes with the likes of Katie Couric. The McCain people don't want to have to go into the 2nd Obama debate at a three week momentum deficit.
The only chance McCain has at this stage is to go negative by continuously labelling Obama as a tax and spend liberal, which in the end could backfire on McCain since he has already established a certain threshold of civility in the campaign.
The next problem for the campaign is to see how Sarah Palin is going to manage to last 90 minutes with Joe Biden when she hasn't been able to last 5 minutes with the likes of Katie Couric. The McCain people don't want to have to go into the 2nd Obama debate at a three week momentum deficit.
The only thing Joe needs to worry about is, coming across as too dismissive and overly confident - Biden does that without trying. Apart from that, Sen. Joe Biden outclasses Gov. Sarah Palin by miles.
In retrospect, one might look at how Obama and his people dismantled Hillary. John McCain isn't a person with many suprises. When closely analysed, McCain didn't have much in his bag of tricks, he played with the same Carl Rove tools of attack attack attack... Once, Obama comes back, he will likely turn up the volume on his attack.
Immediately, after the debate I sat and wondered why Obama didn't push McCain around on his past transgression with Keating 5 and hiding like a frightened school-girl, for the past week. The answer that I've come up with is, Obama cares more for the conditions of the negotiations on the economic crisis, knowing that he has two more chances to bodyslam McCain. For the sake of the negotiations, Obama did well to hold his punches. Point being, spilling too much GOP blood on the debate floor would have further complicated the economic solution process. (Not sure if I'm 100% on with this estimate, but a guess)
...Foreign policy eh....should have been McCain's meat and potatoes....
ooooooops...polls say something different....
The Post Debate Polls
CBS News: Obama won 39%, McCain won 25%, Draw 36%
Insider Advantage: Obama won 42%, McCain won 41%, Undecided: 17%
CNN: Obama "did better" 51%, McCain "did better" 38%
ooooooops...polls say something different....
The Post Debate Polls
CBS News: Obama won 39%, McCain won 25%, Draw 36%
Insider Advantage: Obama won 42%, McCain won 41%, Undecided: 17%
CNN: Obama "did better" 51%, McCain "did better" 38%
Why Voters Thought Obama Won
TPM has the internals of the CNN poll of debate-watchers, which had Obama winning overall by a margin of 51-38. The poll suggests that Obama is opening up a gap on connectedness, while closing a gap on readiness.
Specifically, by a 62-32 margin, voters thought that Obama was “more in touch with the needs and problems of people like you”. This is a gap that has no doubt grown because of the financial crisis of recent days. But it also grew because Obama was actually speaking to middle class voters. Per the transcript, McCain never once mentioned the phrase “middle class” (Obama did so three times). And Obama’s eye contact was directly with the camera, i.e. the voters at home. McCain seemed to be speaking literally to the people in the room in Mississippi, but figuratively to the punditry. It is no surprise that a small majority of pundits seemed to have thought that McCain won, even when the polls indicated otherwise; the pundits were his target audience.
Something as simple as Obama mentioning that he’ll cut taxes for “95 percent of working families” is worth, I would guess, a point or so in the national polls. Obama had not been speaking enough about his middle class tax cut; there was some untapped potential there, and Obama may have gotten the message to sink in tonight
By contrast, I don’t think McCain’s pressing Obama on earmarks was time well spent for him. One, it simply is not something that voters care all that much about, given the other pressures the economy faces. But also, it is not something that voters particularly associate with Obama, as the McCain campaign had not really pressed this line of attack. If you’re going to introduce a new line of attack late in a campaign, it has better be a more effective one that earmarks. And then there was McCain's technocratic line about the virtues of lowering corporate taxes, one which might represent perfectly valid economic policy, but which was exactly the sort of patrician argument that lost George H.W. Bush the election in 1992.
Meanwhile, voters thought that Obama “seemed to be the stronger leader” by a 49-43 margin, reversing a traditional area of McCain strength. And voters thought that the candidates were equally likely to be able to handle the job of president if elected.
These internals are worse for McCain than the topline results, because they suggest not only that McCain missed one of his few remaining opportunities to close the gap with Barack Obama, but also that he has few places to go. The only category in which McCain rated significantly higher than Obama was on “spent more time attacking his opponent”. McCain won that one by 37 points.
My other annoyance with the punditry is that they seem to weight all segments of the debate equally. There were eight segments in this debate: bailout, economy, spending, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Russia, terrorism. The pundit consensus seems to be that Obama won the segments on the bailout, the economy, and Iraq, drew the segment on Afghanistan, and lost the other four. So, McCain wins 4-3, right? Except that, voters don’t weight these issues anywhere near evenly. In Peter Hart’s recent poll for NBC, 43 percent of voters listed the economy or the financial crisis as their top priority, 12 percent Iraq, and 13 percent terrorism or other foreign policy issues. What happens if we give Obama two out of three economic voters (corresponding to the fact that he won two out of the three segments on the economy), and the Iraq voters, but give McCain all the “other foreign policy” voters?
Issue Priority Obama McCain
Economy 43 --> 29 14
Iraq 12 --> 12 0
Foreign Policy 13 --> 0 13
==========================================
Total 41 27
By this measure, Obama “won” by 14 points, which almost exactly his margin in the CNN poll.
McCain’s essential problem is that his fundamental strength – his experience -- is specifically not viewed by voters as carrying over to the economy. And the economy is pretty much all that voters care about these days.
EDIT: The CBS poll of undecideds has more confirmatory detail. Obama went from a +18 on "understanding your needs and problems" before the debate to a +56 (!) afterward. And he went from a -9 on "prepared to be president" to a +21.
TPM has the internals of the CNN poll of debate-watchers, which had Obama winning overall by a margin of 51-38. The poll suggests that Obama is opening up a gap on connectedness, while closing a gap on readiness.
Specifically, by a 62-32 margin, voters thought that Obama was “more in touch with the needs and problems of people like you”. This is a gap that has no doubt grown because of the financial crisis of recent days. But it also grew because Obama was actually speaking to middle class voters. Per the transcript, McCain never once mentioned the phrase “middle class” (Obama did so three times). And Obama’s eye contact was directly with the camera, i.e. the voters at home. McCain seemed to be speaking literally to the people in the room in Mississippi, but figuratively to the punditry. It is no surprise that a small majority of pundits seemed to have thought that McCain won, even when the polls indicated otherwise; the pundits were his target audience.
Something as simple as Obama mentioning that he’ll cut taxes for “95 percent of working families” is worth, I would guess, a point or so in the national polls. Obama had not been speaking enough about his middle class tax cut; there was some untapped potential there, and Obama may have gotten the message to sink in tonight
By contrast, I don’t think McCain’s pressing Obama on earmarks was time well spent for him. One, it simply is not something that voters care all that much about, given the other pressures the economy faces. But also, it is not something that voters particularly associate with Obama, as the McCain campaign had not really pressed this line of attack. If you’re going to introduce a new line of attack late in a campaign, it has better be a more effective one that earmarks. And then there was McCain's technocratic line about the virtues of lowering corporate taxes, one which might represent perfectly valid economic policy, but which was exactly the sort of patrician argument that lost George H.W. Bush the election in 1992.
Meanwhile, voters thought that Obama “seemed to be the stronger leader” by a 49-43 margin, reversing a traditional area of McCain strength. And voters thought that the candidates were equally likely to be able to handle the job of president if elected.
These internals are worse for McCain than the topline results, because they suggest not only that McCain missed one of his few remaining opportunities to close the gap with Barack Obama, but also that he has few places to go. The only category in which McCain rated significantly higher than Obama was on “spent more time attacking his opponent”. McCain won that one by 37 points.
My other annoyance with the punditry is that they seem to weight all segments of the debate equally. There were eight segments in this debate: bailout, economy, spending, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Russia, terrorism. The pundit consensus seems to be that Obama won the segments on the bailout, the economy, and Iraq, drew the segment on Afghanistan, and lost the other four. So, McCain wins 4-3, right? Except that, voters don’t weight these issues anywhere near evenly. In Peter Hart’s recent poll for NBC, 43 percent of voters listed the economy or the financial crisis as their top priority, 12 percent Iraq, and 13 percent terrorism or other foreign policy issues. What happens if we give Obama two out of three economic voters (corresponding to the fact that he won two out of the three segments on the economy), and the Iraq voters, but give McCain all the “other foreign policy” voters?
Issue Priority Obama McCain
Economy 43 --> 29 14
Iraq 12 --> 12 0
Foreign Policy 13 --> 0 13
==========================================
Total 41 27
By this measure, Obama “won” by 14 points, which almost exactly his margin in the CNN poll.
McCain’s essential problem is that his fundamental strength – his experience -- is specifically not viewed by voters as carrying over to the economy. And the economy is pretty much all that voters care about these days.
EDIT: The CBS poll of undecideds has more confirmatory detail. Obama went from a +18 on "understanding your needs and problems" before the debate to a +56 (!) afterward. And he went from a -9 on "prepared to be president" to a +21.
yeah...McCain won....
I see you read fivethirtyeight.com too.
now for the VP debate.....
look out for Palin talking about moose burgers and diaper changing speed in Domestic policy....
look out for Palin talking about moose burgers and diaper changing speed in Domestic policy....
So were the borders of Iraq you idiot
Fox News....'fair and balanced'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wup4nsIWe8A&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wup4nsIWe8A&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/
Can i just add that as a neutral who has absolutely no direct stake in the elections and no preference for one candidate over the other, I actually though Obama by far came across as the more balanced, cultured, knowledgeable and likeable candidate. I just did not dig McCains "i know him, i know her, been there, done that" attitude...
I'm not all that trusting in the polling numbers...
But if the numbers that you've posted are true, there has to be a lot to do with McCain's dreadful body language, that and his Carl Rovish approach.
Last night, the pundits pointed out the historical flub of Nixon vs. Kennedy. They pointed out that Nixon lost because he agreed with Kennedy, too much.
The historical fact that was missed, and is pointed out in political science classes and media classes - it is appearance the defeated Nixon. The comparisson of the younger Kennedy vs. the balding and nervous Nixon... the viewers found more confidence in Kennedy.
There are even great significant differences in this race... Obama comes across as commanding the issues with a fresh perspective. As opposed to McCain's poor posturing and often dismissive attitudes. Need I mention McCain looks to be knocking on death's door?
But if the numbers that you've posted are true, there has to be a lot to do with McCain's dreadful body language, that and his Carl Rovish approach.
Last night, the pundits pointed out the historical flub of Nixon vs. Kennedy. They pointed out that Nixon lost because he agreed with Kennedy, too much.
The historical fact that was missed, and is pointed out in political science classes and media classes - it is appearance the defeated Nixon. The comparisson of the younger Kennedy vs. the balding and nervous Nixon... the viewers found more confidence in Kennedy.
There are even great significant differences in this race... Obama comes across as commanding the issues with a fresh perspective. As opposed to McCain's poor posturing and often dismissive attitudes. Need I mention McCain looks to be knocking on death's door?
You mean his actual experience
We've been going across the border into Pakistan quite frequently in the past. The only difference now is that the power dynamic inside Pakistan has changed.
That's quite a big difference
McCain needs to demonize his opponent....to fight him...remind you of someone else?
Obama hit McCain on points...and the fact he agreed with McCain only served to strengthen his image as someone who is bipartisan and works with his opponents...
most of all...voters thought Obama was Presidential....that was always one of the reasons independents may have held back.....
if Obama becomes President, look back to this first debate.....
Ummm no it's not, Pakistan's new leader was on American tv over the past few days saying, 'I fully intend to co-opererate with the US intentions to capture or kill Bin Laden and you can have a trial in Pakistan or NY...'
So, he doesn't sound much different from Musharaff. If anything he seems to be more willing to allow US intervention when it comes to the Taliban. I would bet he'd love for the US to come in and wipe out a few of the troubling tribes. For the stability of Pakistan, to have the US do it, that'll be the less his country will have to pay for...
I'm sure Obama has got a winning gameplan. It's the New Jersey insticts within me that wanted Obama to come out and slap that old fecker around like a $2 whore.
McCain could probably still take Obama who I doubt has been in an actual fight in his life
Agreed. But it wouldn't stop us from doing it again if we felt we had the AQ hierarchy in our sights.
... and beyond rediculous.
It was a joke, if they were the same age would there be any doubt though, and I am not the one who resorted to the saying one Obama would bitch slap some geriatric who has nerve damage all over the body because of war/torture injuries
Brings up the question, What has Obama done to serve his country?????????
Brings up the question, What has Obama done to serve his country?????????
One which Obama can't even answer, but dont worry "I'll do it when I am President and we invade Pakistan
@ Alex's desperation,Not looking for the McBush campaign, is it buddy
I think McCain did better on the issues revolving around foreign policy, whereas Obama's points about the economy and healthcare were stronger. Overall, I would have to say that McCain edged this one, although frankly I think a lot of Americans are quite sick of Iraq and Afghanistan and want someone who is more focuses on issues at home.
I didn't say without permission. It's called reading comprehension. Learn it.
It was hilarious when McCain was talking about seeing a Putin poster in Georgia and from that, he knew that the war was coming.