PDA

View Full Version : First U.S. Presidential Debate



Moose
09-26-2008, 09:25 PM
This debate was basically in 2 parts:


Economy:


Mccain failed in an opportunity to paint obama as a clear supporter of a bailout that is going to create 700 billion dollars to give to corporations who screwed up and letting the middle class pay for it. Mccain could have said that is why he went to washington, to prevent such a thing, but he did not.

he could have reversed the whole "i'm for the middle class, and your not" thing, but he didnt.

I think he lost on the economic debate of this first debate, but not so much where it will change anyone's mind on him. I think the talk on spending helped mccain a lot. I think that allowed him to control one part of the economy he is strong on.

Still, his lack of talk involving the middle class and health care is extremely concerning and really needs to be addressed. Obama mentioned plenty of that. It may not be realistic under his current tax plans, but he at least mentions it and discusses the reality of it.

i think mccain should have asked obama how he plans to only increase taxes on the top 5 percent of the U.S., and at the same time, pay for all of the huge spending he plans to do. it doesn't make total sense, but mccain never brought it up, and obama never had to sweat.


Foreign Policy:

on foreign policy, it was clearly in mccain's favor, and at times obama seemed out of touch and never gave anything specific as mccain. It seemed mccain just knew so much more than obama on the specifics of foreign policy.

I think mccain clearly painted a picture of what must be done and what is realistic, whereas obama did not. Like mccain avoiding things such as the middle class and health care, obama avoided giving specific answers on the foreign policy questions is concerning. It makes it seem he doesn't understand the certain threats and future circumstances. Mccain even made a rather bold prediction telling the world to look towards Ukraine involving the Russia situation. Obama didn't seem to show this foresight.



so basically, you have obama looking clean on one point, and mccain looking clean on the other.

i dont think anything really changes for the decided voters. I think undecided voters will still be undecided and will wait until all of the debates are over. And the election may also be decided on how the bailout turns out and how mccain can use that to his advantage, or how obama can use that to his advantage against mccain.


It was a pretty good debate where no one looked stupid, but also showed clear differences in world views. There will be another debate on the economy, so that will give us a clear view of what each candidate can and will do and what is realistic for them to do and also what may help or hurt.


...Your thoughts?

KHWHD
09-26-2008, 09:29 PM
I heard that McCain has ads out already with Obama saying "I agree" to McCain, over and over again. Apparently they were already made public shortly after the debate was televised.

I also noticed that McCain kept saying that Obama doesn't have the knowledge or experience whereas McCain thinks/says that he does.

IamSam
09-26-2008, 11:04 PM
My personal favorite line (paraphrased):

McCain: I did not support the president's viewpoint of torture...

Really John? I mean...the fact you had your nads prodded by some angry Vietnamese wouldn't have persuaded you at all...would it?

jacknife737
09-26-2008, 11:10 PM
I am wayyy to drunk right now, but on Sunday, when i've had time to go throught the transcript, i'll give you my opinion.

Edit: i am realaly looking forward to this, since i feel as if you can't give an honest opinion unitl you actually read what the candidates have had to say...

Edit; even though i'm drunk i have a suspicion that i'm really going to disagree with a lot of what "moose" wrote

XYlophonetreeZ
09-26-2008, 11:13 PM
All I know is that this debate was supposed to be about foreighn pocily. Ind I know that McCain never once gave a clear reason why not meeting unilateraly with our enemies wasn't some kind of "punishment" for them. PS i'm drunk so ask me again when i'm sober.

jacknife737
09-28-2008, 02:37 PM
Well, although he held his own concerning the economy, McCain is simply on the wrong side of this issue; his line about a “spending freeze” in particular made me cringe. The way kept rambling on about “out of control government spending”, when he is representing the ruling party made him look foolish.

The foreign policy questions were a bit of a tossup, where both candidates made strong cases. I do think that Obama made stronger cases concerning the topics of Afghanistan and particularly Iran. I thought the brief exchange about “what would Kissinger say” was just silly. One thing I will give to McCain is his position on Iraq. Now I am against the current war, but the future of Iraq is a lot brighter today, then it was a year ago. However, he played right into Obama’s line about ignoring Afghanistan (the main front of the US fight against international terrorism, although you wouldn’t know it looking at the US media or even current government policies) the way he kept focusing on Iraq and simply dismissed Obama’s concerns. I also thought McCain sounded quite reasonable when discussing Russia.

I overall, I think Obama made the strongest case, when you examine their positions on individual issues (and given Obama’s slight post-debate bounce in the polls, many voters feel the same way). There was no decisive victory for ether side, however I feel that McCain failed to successfully separate himself from the current administration, he can talk about reforming Washington all he wants, but he still represents the ruling party that is responsible for many of the current problems that America faces today

Little_Miss_1565
09-28-2008, 07:31 PM
Mccain failed in an opportunity to paint obama as a clear supporter of a bailout that is going to create 700 billion dollars to give to corporations who screwed up and letting the middle class pay for it. Mccain could have said that is why he went to washington, to prevent such a thing, but he did not.

he could have reversed the whole "i'm for the middle class, and your not" thing, but he didnt.

I think he lost on the economic debate of this first debate, but not so much where it will change anyone's mind on him. I think the talk on spending helped mccain a lot. I think that allowed him to control one part of the economy he is strong on.

1. McCain is for the bailout. He came out swinging at first against it but the GOP pulled rank and suddenly he's all about it as a means to prop up a failing economy. So I'm not sure what your first point is about.

2. McCain is not particularly in touch with the middle class, so saying this when Obama is clearly more in touch with the middle class would be ridiculous.

3. McCain's party is responsible for the most insane increase in government spending ever. And spending freeze? How does he plan to spend 100 years in Iraq on no dollars? Tony Stark's toys don't come cheap.

Llamas
09-28-2008, 07:54 PM
3. McCain's party is responsible for the most insane increase in government spending ever. And spending freeze? How does he plan to spend 100 years in Iraq on no dollars? Tony Stark's toys don't come cheap.
This part of the debate pissed me off SO MUCH. "I want a spending freeze, except for defense". How is staying in Iraq forever defense, especially at this point?? Not to mention, staying in Iraq seems to be more costly than the things Obama wants to spend money on- and, to me, less important.

Moose
09-28-2008, 09:17 PM
he said he'd consider a spending freeze and there would be exception to what would be frozen.

also, he was not for the initial bailout proposal. that was made obvious. and on monday when it gets passed, we will see, once both candidates examine the bill (if they even do) what their positions are on it.


also, mccain has been finding big spending by the government for years.

and the republican party in the past has had great dislike for mccain. that is why he lost the primaries in 2000. he is not well liked because he doesnt always go along with what they want.

he and the bush administration have not gotten along for a long time. the supporting of each other, much like with hillary supporting obama, are for political reasons.

Mota Boy
09-28-2008, 10:08 PM
also, mccain has been finding big spending by the government for years.

and the republican party in the past has had great dislike for mccain. that is why he lost the primaries in 2000. he is not well liked because he doesnt always go along with what they want.

he and the bush administration have not gotten along for a long time. the supporting of each other, much like with hillary supporting obama, are for political reasons.John McCain has voted with President Bush 98% of the time this year, 95% the year before and 95% the year before that. John McCain got all "mavericky" after he lost in 2000 not because he was a maverick, but because of a whisper campaign in South Carolina that claimed he'd fathered an illegitimate black child. That was when he vowed never to fight dirty, eight years before he'd hire much of those same people for his own campaign, one that's accused Barack Obama of wanting to teach "comprehensive sex education" to pre-schoolers.

And as for McCain fighting "big spending" by government...

John McCain opposes earmarks. That is explicitly what he mentioned in the debate, that he'd fight earmarks to save our budget. Well...

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/images/2008/09/13/earmarks.gif

Yeah. Good job on that, McCain. If you think that cutting earmarks is going to save our budget, I've got a bridge in Alaska to sell you.