2008 U.S. Presidential Election: First Debate

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Given Obama's messianic levels of oratorical skill one would expect McCain to have been completely annihilated, instead we get more complaints that the GOP is being mean, wtf.



Obama spoke intelligently, with composure, dignity, and respect for his opponent. He stated his case in clear, concise, and thoughtful tones. He did not evade questions, and was able to look at both McCain, Leher, and the worldwide audience.

McCain rattles on like the old uncle at a BBQ who likes to tell stories of years past, being condescending to everyone, and avoiding clear answers to important questions. And he wouldn't even look at Obama. Is he a racist or just shy?

I think Obama did just fine...in fact, let's see what the next 2 debates bring.
 
Ok

it looks like all the reports are in
Obama won

hands down

he should get a 5- 8 point bump in the polls over the next 7-10 days


and the second debate Obama will put McCain down for the count.
 
Ok

it looks like all the reports are in
Obama won

hands down

he should get a 5- 8 point bump in the polls over the next 7-10 days

According to whom? You? I haven't seen any pollster claim that such a bump is to be expected.

Or is this about bumping up expectations so there can be a big production when Obama isn't leading by 937 points? How could that be??
 
Ok

it looks like all the reports are in
Obama won

hands down

he should get a 5- 8 point bump in the polls over the next 7-10 days


and the second debate Obama will put McCain down for the count.

I would ask you to quote a source but I think I just did.
 
According to whom?

I think it was you that referred me to FiveThirtyEight.com: Electoral Projections Done Right for more accurate interpretation of polling data.


They are projecting Obama to win the Electoral college vote 317 -221.

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.
 
First of all, they are not predicting 317-221. The number you are seeing there does not correspond to actual electoral votes, it is a projection based on popular vote numbers and trend lines, etc. In fact if you look at it closely, it says 317.8-220.2 - obviously that can't be so.

Second, if you already went there then I'm surprised you didn't bother quoting this:

A variety of reactions to the debate seem possible to me, including (in rough order of probability): i) a small gain for Obama; ii) no effective change; iii) a larger gain for Obama; (iv) a small gain for McCain.

which of course goes contrary to what you were saying with respect to a huge 5-8% bounce.

:shrug:
 
Given Obama's messianic levels of oratorical skill one would expect McCain to have been completely annihilated, instead we get more complaints that the GOP is being mean, wtf.



no, that's quite incorrect. Obama is not considered a superlative debater the way he is considered the best speaker arguably since Kennedy. generally speaking, HRC was the best Democratic debater, and McCain was the best GOP debater. further, last night was on foreign policy, supposedly where McCain is amongst the self-proclaimed best minds on the planet, the one who sees evil for what it is and the one who believes that war is a perfectly legitimate way to get countries to do what we want.

it was supposed to be McCain who was supposed to win, Obama just had to look like he was in the same league as the oft-venerated McCain.

and he was. and is.
 
According to whom? You? I haven't seen any pollster claim that such a bump is to be expected.

Or is this about bumping up expectations so there can be a big production when Obama isn't leading by 937 points? How could that be??


i would absolutely like him to have a solid 5-8 point lead going into 11/4. he's going to need it to overcome white racism.
 
i would absolutely like him to have a solid 5-8 point lead going into 11/4. he's going to need it to overcome white racism.

He already has a 5 pt lead in nearly every national poll.

Another 5-8 pts on top of that, which is what deep was proposing, would be a landslide of epic proportions.
 
Unfortunately, ain't it the truth.
The white racism part.....
 
you realize, of course, that if Obama wins by anything less than a landslide, then it's an enormous failure on his part.

You could'nt be more right. If Obama wins by say 6-8% in the popular vote and comes away with a large lead in the electoral college (320-330) he will be able to go to Washington with alot of clout. He then can use the election to point to Americans wanting Washington to change and a wholesale endorsement of his policies. Though if I were able to vote for Obama I would still want him to be as bi-partisin as he promised.

Winning the election is still great, but he needs a large endorsement from the people to be aggresive changing the way things are done.
 
You could'nt be more right. If Obama wins by say 6-8% in the popular vote and comes away with a large lead in the electoral college (320-330) he will be able to go to Washington with alot of clout. He then can use the election to point to Americans wanting Washington to change and a wholesale endorsement of his policies. Though if I were able to vote for Obama I would still want him to be as bi-partisin as he promised.

Winning the election is still great, but he needs a large endorsement from the people to be aggresive changing the way things are done.



i think you might have missed my sarcasm.
 
It's effectively over in my eyes. Palin was McCain's last big hurrah with the debate giving him a slight glimmer of hope. Her just being a woman wasn't enough to tip the polls in his direction permanently although it was better that choosing another stodgy old GOP guy to run alongside him. I think no matter how inadequate her answers are or how often her inexperience (& ignorance) rings true, her place on the ticket will only help McCain as she'll court some white female voters that just don't give a damn about the issues. Any gain is better than none.

On to the debate, Obama effectively held his own with foreign policy & terrorism which was the only advantage McCain had in the polls. He easily thwomped MacDaddy in the economy section. After that debate, people came flocking back to Barack and it would now take a major guffaw in one of the next two debates to stop him from securing the Presidency. Meanwhile, he's guaranteed some sort of boost in a few days after Biden handily trumps Palin in the VP debate. Not only did she sit in the backlight for two weeks and make relatively few campaign appearances, but she's also spent all of that time prepping for that debate. It's pretty much the last chance for her to woo back some white female voters and be anything more than an insignificant positive for McCain. Either way, it won't make a hell of a difference and the best she can hope for is matching Biden which is pretty unlikely. Look for her to use the "I'm a woman" business a lot or mention her children. :down:
 
Couldn't agree more.

The only thing I'd add is that Biden needs to pace himself, so as to not come off looking like he's beating up a woman.
 
The only thing I'd add is that Biden needs to pace himself, so as to not come off looking like he's beating up a woman.

If he'd "beat up" a guy, and two guys would beat up each other-well she's trying to get the same job so I think the standard should be the same. Did anyone come off as "beating up" Hillary Clinton (other than some members of the media)? She held her own pretty well, she knows her stuff and could debate very well. I think she beat Obama in the debates, but that's just my opinion. I think Sen Obama's a gentleman by nature so I think that's how he treats everyone, male and female.

If there's a female President or VP are we going to say that world leaders should have a different standard of treatment for them? Shoulder rubs a la Bush?

Christian Science Monitor

What it's like to debate Sarah Palin

I know firsthand: She's a master of the nonanswer.
By Andrew Halcro

from the October 1, 2008 edition

Anchorage, Alaska - When he faces off against Sarah Palin Thursday night, Joe Biden will have his hands full.

I should know. I've debated Governor Palin more than two dozen times. And she's a master, not of facts, figures, or insightful policy recommendations, but at the fine art of the nonanswer, the glittering generality. Against such charms there is little Senator Biden, or anyone, can do.

On paper, of course, the debate appears to be a mismatch.

In 2000, Palin was the mayor of an Alaskan town of 5,500 people, while Biden was serving his 28th year as a United States senator. Her major public policy concern was building a local ice rink and sports center. His major public policy concern was the State Department's decision to grant an export license to allow sales of heavy-lift helicopters to Turkey, during tense UN-sponsored Cyprus peace talks.

On paper, the difference in experience on both domestic and foreign policy is like the difference between shooting a bullet and throwing a bullet. Unfortunately for Biden, if recent history is an indicator, experience or a grasp of the issues won't matter when it comes to debating Palin.

On April 17, 2006, Palin and I participated in a debate at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks on agriculture issues. The next day, the Fairbanks Daily News Miner published this excerpt:

"Andrew Halcro, a declared independent candidate from Anchorage, came armed with statistics on agricultural productivity. Sarah Palin, a Republican from Wasilla, said the Matanuska Valley provides a positive example for other communities interested in agriculture to study."

On April 18, 2006, Palin and I sat together in a hotel coffee shop comparing campaign trail notes. As we talked about the debates, Palin made a comment that highlights the phenomenon that Biden is up against.

"Andrew, I watch you at these debates with no notes, no papers, and yet when asked questions, you spout off facts, figures, and policies, and I'm amazed. But then I look out into the audience and I ask myself, 'Does any of this really matter?' " Palin said.

While policy wonks such as Biden might cringe, it seemed to me that Palin was simply vocalizing her strength without realizing it. During the campaign, Palin's knowledge on public policy issues never matured – because it didn't have to. Her ability to fill the debate halls with her presence and her gift of the glittering generality made it possible for her to rely on populism instead of policy.

Palin is a master of the nonanswer. She can turn a 60-second response to a query about her specific solutions to healthcare challenges into a folksy story about how she's met people on the campaign trail who face healthcare challenges. All without uttering a word about her public-policy solutions to healthcare challenges.

In one debate, a moderator asked the candidates to name a bill the legislature had recently passed that we didn't like. I named one. Democratic candidate Tony Knowles named one. But Sarah Palin instead used her allotted time to criticize the incumbent governor, Frank Murkowski. Asked to name a bill we did like, the same pattern emerged: Palin didn't name a bill.

And when she does answer the actual question asked, she has a canny ability to connect with the audience on a personal level. For example, asked to name a major issue that had been ignored during the campaign, I discussed the health of local communities, Mr. Knowles talked about affordable healthcare, and Palin talked about ... the need to protect hunting and fishing rights.

So what does that mean for Biden? With shorter question-and-answer times and limited interaction between the two, he should simply ignore Palin in a respectful manner on the stage and answer the questions as though he were alone. Any attempt to flex his public-policy knowledge and show Palin is not ready for prime time will inevitably cast him in the role of the bully.

On the other side of the stage, if Palin is to be successful, she needs to do what she does best: fill the room with her presence and stick to the scripted sound bites.
 
Palin is a master of the nonanswer. She can turn a 60-second response to a query about her specific solutions to healthcare challenges into a folksy story about how she's met people on the campaign trail who face healthcare challenges. All without uttering a word about her public-policy solutions to healthcare challenges.

I can completely see how this worked in the past. However, it seems like the American public may have reached their threshold of folksy stories, and this election cycle, they want solid answers.

I hope I'm not wrong.
 
The thing with her mastery of the non-answer is that non-answers are all she's been giving so far in interviews, and they don't seem to be doing her any favors. She's going to have to bring some substance or else she's toast. Cutesy stories may win her some empathy points, but she's got to rid herself, at least partially, of the perception that she simply doesn't know or understand what these issues are about. Based on what we've seen so far, that might be a tall order.
 
I vote for a separate thread. My vote counts ... don't disenfranchise me! :sad:

I don't believe you should be disenfranchised

but perhaps some other suggestions and opinions

just a little open government and democracy :wink:

could we add this suggestion into the discussion before we make a decision?

modify thread title to:

Presidential Election: First Debate and Vice Presidential Debate



Palin and Biden are not in a separate election
but will be elected with McCain or Obama.

And no doubt, the V P debate will bleed over to how well the ticket is doing as a whole.
 
I think all the debates should go into one thread, to avoid cluttering the forum.

But then again, I'm Canadian and so I don't get a vote. I'll just let the Americans decide my fate and live with the results. :wink:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom