What did you think of the first Presidential debate between John McCain and Barack Obama? Time Magazine weighed in thusly:
Barack Obama – Grade: A-
Went for a solid, consistent performance to introduce himself to the country. He did not seem nervous, tentative, or intimidated by the event, and avoided mistakes from his weak debate performances during nomination season (a professorial tone and long winded answers). Standing comfortably on the stage with his rival, he showed he belonged — evocative of Reagan, circa 1980. He was so confident by the end that he reminded his biggest audience yet that his father was from Kenya. Two more performances like that and he will be very tough to beat on Election Day.
John McCain – Grade:B-
McCain was McCain — evocative, intense, and at times emotional, but also vague, elliptical, and atonal. Failed to deliver his “country first versus Obama first” message cleanly, even when offered several opportunities. Surprisingly, did not talk much about “change,” virtually ceding the dominant issue of the race.
What do you think?
Who won the first Presidential debate?
- Barack Obama blew McCain away! (61%, 31 Votes)
- John McCain was the man! (20%, 10 Votes)
- Why were Bob Barr and Ralph Nader excluded? That sucks! (19%, 10 Votes)
Total Voters: 51
Loading ...
it was a dismal and boring debate by two candidates who shouldnt be in the white house.
Bob Barr wasn’t included because he didn’t meet the 15% threshold required to get there, neither did Ralph Nader. If you want an alternative view please visit http://www.bobbarr2008.com/issues/ with an open mind. Take a look at the issues page and evaluate how you feel verses how he feels and see how you match up.
You might be surprised.
*McCain….lacking the common courtesy to look at his opponent even once
during the debate……. showing no class…….that we can’t believe it. Why didn’t McCain NOT mention the name of his opponent during the entire debate as well? Why is it….that even when McCain says something we agree with…..we can’t stand him?
I see the debates as a chance for regular people to get to know the candidates. Some of us are political watchers, but most people just try and catch up enough to cast their vote responsibly by doing a small amount of research – mostly relying on the news and debates.
Author John Grisham said that race is absolutely a factor in the current election. I agree with this assessment and challenge anyone to take a simple test: If you owned a company and you had two candidates being considered for the top position in your company, which would you choose by looking at their resumees? One is hard working and brilliant and would hire underlings who bring decades of experience in the field and a proven track record.
The other guy likes to take risks, is not a quick study and prefers to hire underlings who are not quite ready for prime time.
As these debates unfold, you will see people “getting over” the blackness factor and catching up to speed on who has the temperment, intelligence and the presidentialness to lead this country. McCain represents the old GOP guard of the past 7 years. MOST people don’t like what’s happened under Bush, so the closeness in the polls is most likely attributed to the quiet racism that is still present in our society.
I DVR’s the debate.
I watched it twice. The more you watch it—Obama–a lot of generalities and no experience base to pull on. Good delivery of non specifics and talked over McCain a number of times–without McCain jumping on him.
McCain had some specifics but did not go for the jugular when he could of. It appeared he was trying hard to be a Mr. Nice Guy–time to take off the gloves.
It gets down to just who do you trust your life and wallet with. Considering the the somewhat shady past ( Franklin Reins, and the Chicago bunch/crooks )of Obama and his lack of worldly exposure–you make your choice.
Where is Grover Cleveland when we need him.??
I prefer an adult in the White House.
Donno, Joe. I watched the debate last night and reviewed it this am on Youtube. You missed the 5 clearly defined points of what Obama thinks need to be addressed for the bail out? Not general, imo. McCain certainly had a lot of really OLD war type stories that he fell back on and I noticed that he got knocked down points by the observing raters on CNN when he went off track like that.
Obama is still just a scary black guy to a good number of folks. He just doesn’t “seem” right/trustworthy:
http://www.courant.com/hc-ctstan0927.artsep27,0,5339242.column
The white lady at the dry cleaner wanted to talk politics, specifically Barack Obama.
She liked the Illinois senator, she said, but there was just something she couldn’t quite express that was preventing her from voting for him.
“I just don’t know about him,” she blurted.
What, I asked her a bit exasperated, did she not know about the man. He’s a 47-year-old African American raised mostly by a single white mom. He graduated from Columbia and Harvard, has been a state and U.S. senator for 11 years, has lived in Hawaii and Indonesia, written two books and endured a bloody slugfest with Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary. He is a married man with two children. His wife is also an Ivy-League-educated lawyer.
Well, she said, fighting for words, she was concerned that if Obama got elected, somehow it would embolden black people — black men, in particular — to feel entitled.
And what if, she said haltingly, a black president meant a change in the country’s power structure? And what if, she continued, this new black power structure decided to treat whites the way whites had historically treated blacks?
Another made for OJ moment in your mind RV?
jose s.- Please, tell us who “should” be in the White House? It’s easy to be a crank.
I think the grades given are probably accurate and scored fairly. That being said I think they both passed with high marks. In my mind that didnt help if I was undecided all it showed is they both could do the job. Mccain has an ‘old school’ approach and Obama has a more pragmatic approach.
I found myself being incredible thin skinned when hearing what the pundits had to say immediately after and last evening while discussing this with a friend from the other side of the aisle a couple of thigs became clearer to me. First, I’m a political junkie and have greater awareness of the details than those not so inclined and that they tend to come away with an impression. My friend had the “something about Obama I still don’t trust” impression from the campaign in general. While I ranted about the failed philosophy of deregulation or the failed philosophy of international relations, each pronouncement was countered with the pronouncement that I was a liberal democrat and so my declaration of facts was suspect followed by the declaration that this is crazymaking and is not interested in the kind of research needed to prove or disprove my pronouncements. This is why “the man you would most like to have a beer with” is winning elections in America.
Ron & Anna -
Your comment about Sen. McCain’s lack of common courtesy cuts both ways. I listened to the debate and it was very noticeable that Sen. Obama referred to his opponent by first name only – John. His refusal to show respect to a senior senator is not the first time he has dismissed recognition of stature. He did the same to Sen. Clinton – he continually called her Hillary.
Sen. Obama is skilled at saying nothing and that is why I chose to listen to the debate. I did not want to be taken in with pillars, fancy podiums and Hollywood settings.
That’s why I find it utterly amusing that Sen. Biden continues to shoot barbs about the Road to Nowhere, when we know damn well that Obama and Biden voted for this pork belly project . Sen. McCain did not. In fact, I think Biden voted twice for the Road to Nowhere boondoggle. Meanwhile, Biden has his own pork belly bridge in Delaware. Apparently he’s seeking $11 million for a summer bridge. What was that comment about lipstick?
I don’t think this country needs a Harvard-bred attorney as its leader in chief. He’s too slick.
I’ve been very busy and haven’t devoted my undivided attention to the blog this week, and frankly, many of the stories bore me to death… except this one (sorry guys – with all due respect, it’s sort of been the Vern and RV show around here).
What’s that thing people ‘just don’t quite trust about Obama?’ His name is George W. Bush. People are wondering if it’s prudent to replace the man who is arguably the worst POTUS of the last 100 years or so with someone who is essentially his exact opposite merely because of that fact.
It’s not Obama they second-guess, it’s Bush and the potential responses to his destruction of our system of government. I think I made the Obama/W connection a while back. The fact that McCain insists he’s a maverick, but it still connected to Bush in the minds of most Americans, provides people with a ‘slight change’ vibe from him.
With Obama, the voters, cynical as ever, aren’t sure whether or not he’s overreaching and setting us all up for a massive failure and a subsequently growing government. In fact, I think many people who are considering voting for Obama simply wished they had voted for John Kerry four years ago.
SMS