Liveblogging Absurdity
Posted on September 26th, 2008
by Daniel Larison |
|
Obama’s opening statement was his standard theme, complete with a reference to a “defining moment,” and McCain’s was an appropriately meandering answer that somehow ended up talking about job creation and foreign oil. He seems to have been taking lessons on how to give answers from his running mate. Now he’s bragging about his call for Cox’s resignation, and returning to his old song about the evils of greed and corruption. Convergence continues–both will vote for the bailout.
McCain naturally follows up by saying that we should control spending. He’s back on his hobbyhorse: earmarks are a gateway drug! Pork and earmarks are evil! Studying the DNA of bears is bad; Alaskan studies of seal DNA is presumably desirable. Oh, no, Obama supported earmarks! McCain is actually going to make the argument tonight all about earmarks. He’s already losing and we’re not even through the first half hour.
Is it just me, or do their fiscal disputes seem absurd in light of their agreement on the bailout?
“Two thousand! Two thousand” McCain says, talking endlessly about earmarks. Obama is doing quite well, especially as compared to some of his clumsy primary performances. McCain is starting to let his contempt for Obama show. He keeps laughing like some sort of disturbed gremlin. Obama has avoided his old habit of disjointed, professorial answers. McCain is back on his anti-spending kick. Ethanol subsidies and earmarks are in his sights! He is making a solid effort at avoiding the questions about priorities, unless he thinks ethanol and unnecessary defense contracts are the burning issues of the day. His answer is a more elaborate “finding efficiencies” response. Lehrer notices that neither of them answered the question. Now Obama is fumbling as he tries to avoid committing to anything. Google-for-government has made a return appearance. Lehrer is getting annoyed. McCain: let’s have a spending freeze on everything except defense, veterans’ benefits and entitlements, which is to say the vast majority of the budget.
This debate seems strangely disorganized.
It took 40 minutes for McCain to mention the “surge.” It seems that the debate over the war tonight is going to be another exercise in talking past one another: the “surge” worked, the war was wrong, we’re winning, took our eye off the ball, and repeat. McCain: stop talking about the past! Let me now rehash Obama’s record on the “surge.” Obama: you want to talk about the past? I’ll tell you about your views on Iraq! McCain: Obama doesn’t understand the difference between a tactic and a strategy (of course, McCain thereby shows that he doesn’t understand the difference, since he has called the “surge” a new strategy countless times). “Let us win!” McCain says in his best Rambo impersonation. McCain is in his full-blown self-righteous mode. I can’t imagine that undecided voters are responding well to his tone, but then I don’t really understand undecided voters. McCain stupidly reminds people that Obama wanted soliders out of Iraq last March, which is what people want.
Obama makes his points about Afghanistan, showing that he does actually know what strategy means and McCain does not. Now he’s on to Pakistan–look out! Wait for the McCain “he wanted to bomb Pakistan” rebuttal. And…there it is! He’s actually right that there needs to be Pakistani cooperation, but he doesn’t seem to understand that the problem with launching strikes without their permission is not just something you shouldn’t talk about but also something you shouldn’t do. He also doesn’t seem to know Zardari’s name. Obama reiterates his bad idea about launching strikes into Pakistan without their permission, but gets a good dig against McCain’s belligerency. McCain: it’s okay if I want to start a war with Iran, because I once opposed sending soldiers to Lebanon. McCain goes down his roll call of different interventions, inexplicably reminding people that he supported interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo. Obama: “You don’t muddle through.” McCain: Obama didn’t go to Afghanistan earlier!
On Iran, McCain recites the usual litany: no second Holocaust (there isn’t going to be one), no arms race (there might be one, which would make the Iranian threat much less dangerous), we need a League of Democracies (stupid!). He has pretty effectively avoided answering how any of this relates to U.S. national security. Obama works on his anti-Iranian hawkish pander, claiming (falsely) that he has always supported labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. Obama scores the easy point that the League of Democracies is useless in handling Iran. McCain bungles Ahmadinejad’s name. Now it’s time to talk about talks “without preconditions”! Obama scores another easy point by citing Kissinger’s endorsement of talking to Iran. Obama makes his preparation vs. precondition distinction, which he uses to obscure what his original answer on this last year really was. Obama hits him on the Zapatero gaffe. McCain keeps repeating his claim that he would be “legitimizing” other regimes, which is the basic error of his view. McCain is getting petulant. How in the world has Henry Kissinger become the center of this debate?
Obama: Russia is very aggressive and a threat to the region; Russian actions were unwarranted. Russia has to leave South Ossetia and Abkhazia (good luck with that one!). Affirm fledgling democracies! He rattles off names of small countries. MAPs for Georgia and anybody else that wants one! But no Cold War–this sounds just as ridiculous as when Palin says it. Oh, and nonproliferation. Despite having sold out completely on this issue, Obama is still getting hit for “not understanding” so-called Russian aggression. McCain: There’s a pipeline! (It’s a pipeline that had nothing to do with the war, but there is a pipeline.) McCain waxes poetic about Saakashvili as usual. The two of them are indistinguishable. It’s very depressing.
Best other liveblogging line of the night comes from Alex Massie:
McCain says “off-shore drilling is a bridge.” To Nowhere, obviously.
McCain lies about Obama’s position on withdrawal. All the things that annoy me about Obama’s position (premising withdrawal on conditions on the ground, consulting with commanders “on the ground,” etc.) McCain pretends don’t exist. McCain is a flat-out liar. Weirdly, after pushing back against McCain all night, Obama lets McCain get away with it.
McCain: “There are some advantages to experience, knowledge and judgement.” If only he had the knowledge and judgement. Did McCain just claim that he is the more flexible candidate when it comes to foreign policy? This is crazy stuff.
Happily, it is now finished.
Update:
A poll of undecided voters rated Obama the winner 40-22% with 38% saying it was a draw. That is more in line with my impression of how the debate went. Maybe I can understand something about the mind of undecided voters after all.
Also, the theme song of the week, since Kissinger has been in the news a lot lately: an old classic.
Second Update: Quin Hillyer and the CNN viewer panel rate Obama the winner.
Third Update: Halperin grades Obama as having done better than McCain. The CW has now been firmly entrenched. The telling thing is that this has happened in a debate for which a lot of us assumed McCain wasn’t very well-prepared (he was busily grandstanding in D.C. saving the world, after all) and focused on a subject where McCain is supposedly some grand master and Obama is allegedly a novice. Obama proved that the idea that he is somehow not well-versed on foreign policy is nonsense. From here on out, McCain is in a lot of trouble. In future debates he can’t just keep saying, “Earmark reform, drill, baby, drill, maverick” and expect people to pay attention to what he says.
Steve Benen grades the performances with almost the same marks that Halperin and Andrew give. Especially after the last two weeks that the McCain campaign has had, McCain really needed a decisive win to give him a much-needed boost. His bailout-related stunt, at best, neither won nor lost him anything, and at worst it will saddle him with the bulk of responsibility for whatever Congress produces or fails to produce. If a deal is reached, and most Americans hate the bailout idea, McCain will suffer the backlash; if the deal fails, he is excoriated by pundits and journalists until Election Day. Considering all of that, McCain’s possibly eking out a tie with someone whom he regards as a naive fool is actually a serious defeat.
Fourth Update: Frank Luntz’s focus group responded more favorably to Obama. Curiously, that focus group wanted more emotion from McCain and not from Obama, whom a lot of bloggers seem to have regarded as too detached.
Fifth Update: Are there any Republicans who still wish Palin could have filled in for McCain? I didn’t think so.
Filed under: politics
Everything, thus far, about this debate seems to be absurd to me. I thought about trying my hand at live-blogging, but, I think, I’d prefer to tally McCain’s use of “earmark”.
Festooned!
At least you’re not drinking every time he said. I thought about making an earmark-related drinking game, but I didn’t want to lose consciousness.
Well, I bought a six-pack, but I do try to avoid irresponsible drinking, at least with good beer, such as the organic raspberry wheat that I have. I, too, should prefer not to lose consciousness, although the insipidity of both candidates’ remarks may cause me to, anyway.
[...] I am most certainly not watching the debate September 26, 2008, 6:37 pm Filed under: politics, war … but I’ll do my best to fill the gap by reading Daniel Larison’s and Alex Massie’s liveblogs. [...]
Good call on McCain’s list of exceptions to freeze – I was sitting here thinking the same and hoping Obama would nail him on that. He did end up mentioning the war.
Like the gremlin comment. I actually thought McCain came out looking calmer and more composed; Obama seemed jumpy. And I’m 150% in the tank for Obama.
Now in foreign policy, McCain predictably looks less comfortable.
“If Pakistan is unwilling to cooperate”
we probably should respect that, right?
And Obama has put China and Russia in the same category, of non-democratic nations (because democracy is the only acceptable form of government).
“McCain bungles Ahmadinejad’s name.”
Anyone else starting to think that McCain might have suffered a stroke? (I say that only half in jest.) All of sudden, he seems to be struggling not just with “Ahmadinejad” (the name of the president of, in Obama’s words, a “rogue regime”), but with quite a few words.
President Palin, anyone?
HOLY SHIT, McCain just called Saakashvili a “great young president”.
Apologies for the language, but it was, I feel, necessary. I nearly spat out my beer.
I agree with your point abt Obama’s position on the ex-USSR countries. He shd have gone into the principle of respecting Russia’s concerns about US political and military incursions right next to Russia
Lehrer did Ok, but let’s face it, Jon Stewart is the only man for this job.
Boy, I’m sure happy that McCain could sneak in the “blood and treasure” shibboleth before the end.
Mark Shields just called foreign policy McCain’s “wheelhouse”.
Apparently these wheels are broken.
Obama did not close strong. He allowed McCain to claim the offensive that the latter did using lies and employing experience vs naivete. I think overall its a tie although McCain will probably get a poll boost from his performance. Obama did not mess up and passed the presidential test, IMO. Obama’s worst mistake was to not focus on national security in his closing – instead he went into articulating the high-level argument of the connectedness of issues eventually impacting national security. Too abstract to appeal to the independents. He should have hammered the point about national security square on.
I scored it a tie: they both sucked.
Maybe I am influenced by how poorly Obama used to do when he debated Clinton, but I thought he did so much better than he has before that it has to be scored as a win for him. McCain was more aggressive, no doubt, but it is my impression that it translated into contempt and condescension, which are the things that everyone has been saying that Biden has to avoid when he debates Palin. He used the word naive how many times? He was scolding him as if he were a school master, but it is far from clear in any of the exchanges that he knew more. Obama was not forceful enough, but he was so much more focused than he was earlier in the year. McCain came off, in my view, as a snide, bitter old man. His comments betrayed the sentiment of, “How dare you even think that you can compete with me.” This is what Clinton thought, and it destroyed her. McCain is desperate for something to go right in his campaign, and now that the debate focused on his alleged “strength” is behind them he is going to start flailing even more desperately and angrily.
Also, am I correct in understanding that McCain’s Iraq policy is we have to stay there in order not to hurt our soldiers’ feelings? That seemed to be his central thesis on Iraq. If we pull out, feelings will be hurt.
Nonetheless, I’ll bet McCain gets a slight win from tonight. He attacked and Obama defended.
I liveblogged this for the local paper’s political blog (OC Register, TotalBuzz), along with 5 others.
The moveon.com crowd is going to be sadly disappointed if BHO wins. I see the foreign policy differences between the two as matters of style and nuance.
Anyone who entertains the notion of Georgia and Ukraine joining NATO is a prisoner of folly. A “peacenik” who jabbers about attacking the Pashtun lands of Pakistan is a gibbering fool, a dissembler, or both.
They were both evasive and tentative about the economic crisis, which obviously neither understands (I’m not saying I do). They managed to annoy Lehrer with their evasiveness. Lehrer did a fine job, and I’d prefer Oxford-style debates with no press at all.
From a horserace perspective, they were pretty evenly matched, both pretty coherent and reasonably courteous. I thought McCain’s answers were more accessible to an American audience. Obama didn’t really take him on, and sounded a bit professorial (no offense, I used to be one and my son-in-law is).
This debate was not a game-changer. Because Putin isn’t eligible, I’m still leaning to Barr.
When I say they both sucked, I just mean I didn’t find any reason to pull a lever for either of them this November in this “debate.” I agree that McCain came off poorly. About halfway through I had a recollection of an old Bugs Bunny/Daffy Duck cartoon where Daffy wants some prize or award or something and keeps shouting “Mine! Mine! Mine!” which seemed to sum up McCain’s attitude. And early returns seem to show Independents watching the show breaking slightly for Obama. But after the spin cycle finishes, who knows what will come out of the wash?
PS: thanks for the liveblog, I enjoyed it!
Whoops, editing issue there. I agree with Daniel about the condescension to Obama. It was a little bit outrageous, especially in light of the fact that Obama seemed anything but naive up there. (Wrong about several things, but not stupid.)
In fact, I got a weird little racial undertone feeling from the entire episode. Not saying McCain’s a racist–he seems like he’s just a complete jerk–but man it didn’t sound good.
My gut fear is that McCain’s tone scored points with racist Democrats–who are probably this year’s soccer moms bloc.
Obama passed up too many opportunities to batter McCain. He was too passive and conciliatory; even if they have precious little to disagree about, McCain’s constant condescension and belittlement: “Sen. Obama doesn’t understand X” should have bristled Obama a little more–his cool customer persona runs the risk of seeming inhuman if he doesn’t get at least a little indignant over this nut McCain acting like he’s taking him to school.
But then again, maybe I’m vicariously projecting myself onto Obama, because while I only resent Obama, I fear and detest McCain. I was rooting for Obama to clean McCain’s clock, or for McCain to pass out on stage. Bottom line, Obama is afraid to appear as if he’s not showing McCain a certain kind of deference. He’s not confident in his ability to go for McCain’s jugular, even considering the limited room to maneuver, both being establishment shills. But Barak could have hung GWB around McCain’s neck a lot more effectively. Obama still comes across as a professor. He may be calm and collected, but he’s not relaxed.
Maybe Obama didn’t respond enough, but I think he was gambling on the recognition from the audience that McCain kept saying that about every issue where his own answers were not very good. If someone is constantly saying that his opponent doesn’t understand anything, it may be because he is trying to avoid revealing how little he knows about it. Obama will get credit for remaining respectful while being critical, and McCain will be seen as a cranky old man who has no respect for his opponent. Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t see how that dynamic works for the guy who’s already behind.
[...] Larison is pretty damned funny, and worth a read, especially on Obama’s weaknesses. [...]
I caught only the last half of the debate but from a *extremely* superficial point of view: its a tie but stylistically an Obama win. I expected Obama to flounder but this is Obama’s best debate to date. McCain was way too condescending – he just looked too mean. Again, this is an extremely superficial read but McCain just looked too much like an “angry old man” while Obama looked more presidential.
I thought Obama point at the end about the Bush/McCain lens like obsession on Iraq at the expense of all other foreign policy was strong, and so did others around me.
It really is dead on. Iraq is not the center of the fight against terror, and the fight against terror should not the center of our foreign policy. For some reason we seemed overly focus as a nation on Iraq/Iran and the middle east in general. I wonder why that is…
Bottom line, I think Obama has passed a big test, and while I look forward to the slightly more sane foreign policy he will bring, I do not look forward to his domestic agenda at all.
Well, McCain’s quick off the draw. Because I gave him $50 8 years ago against W I’m still on his mailing list and his post-debate email just hit my inbox. After the normal “wasn’t that debate great for America” invocation, he warns:
“n a few hours, I will return to Washington to resume negotiations with the Administration and Congressional leaders from both parties to forge a bipartisan solution to our economic crisis.”
Wunneful. Just shoot me. Please.
the best play-by-play I’ve read…I can’t stop laughing. thanks can’t wait for the VP debate.