“My opponent doesn’t understand.”

McCain’s right. He doesn’t.

You’re right: “I agree with John” is the takeaway line of the night, and for all the wrong reasons for McCain, even as he releases an ad trumpeting it.

Obama feels comfortable agreeing with McCain because a statesman knows he can agree on some points with an adversary but not others. And each time Obama agreed on one point, he went on to say he disagreed on several more larger points. These are, of course, missing from McCain’s ad.

McCain sees any agreement as a sign of weakness. Then again, McCain sees even speaking with an adversary as a sign of weakness. I’m surprised, given McCain stance on negotiating with Iran, that he’d debate Obama without preconditions.

The larger issue here is the message of both campaigns. Obama’s campaign, as he said at the DNC, is not about him, but about us: do we want a statesman to speak for us or a soundbyte? McCain’s campaign, as his actions just this week, has shown is all about the gotcha, the dramatic gesture, the pinhole view of world, the soundbyte.

Do I know who won the debate tonight? No, although I don’t have much faith in American going for the statesman.

In the context of the debate, McCain performed well, and most likely won. But from a wider view, Obama has undone much of what people have and are saying about him.

The biggest complaint about Obama is his experience, particularly with foriegn policy, but Obama held his own. Not that a debate makes experience, but perception is reality.

And even though Obama seemed weak on the economy issue, this was a foreign policy debate and there will be another on economics.

I would also correct you also: McCain didn’t stare Obama down. In fact he never once turned his way, even as Lehrer encouraged them to engage one another, and after some initial reluctance Obama began addressing McCain directly. I’m sure some people will think this as petty but effective a tactic as Clinton never mentioning Dole’s name in 1996. But to many people it came off as churlish.

Again, though, it goes to the character of his campaign and the type of people he hopes to vote for him.

1. I was extremely troubled by Sen. Obama’s constant use of “John.” I can’t put my finger on whether I thought it was arrogance or overly familiar, but it was troubling.

2. I watched the debate on CNN because I love those little instant triggers where the audience of supposedly undecideds (yeah, right) give instant feedback. I noticed something very, very interesting here, and it subtle but it was enough to give me tremendous hope for Nov. But first, let’s mention that whenever McCain went on the attack, his appeal to independents dropped below the mid point. (Didn’t seem to have the same effect on D and Rs, though, and I didn’t notice the same dip for Obama attacks). But those same independents had one thing that was consistently below for Obama. Just a quick flash, but notice what happens whenever Obama said, “When I’m president.” Every single time, that independent dial dropped below the mid point. There’s just something there that people aren’t comfortable with. AP polls and all might suggest racism. I’d say it has more to do with a picture that became very clear to me: We’re about to buckle into a car that’s on a NASCAR track. Do we want someone who has been around the track a few times or someone who just got his learner’s permit.

“I agree with John.” -Obama

NPDA Rules pretty much say if you agree with the proposition team, you won’t win the debate.

As you might have guessed, Obama didn’t win the debate.

Videotape will be Obama’s downfall. Someone send a note to McCain. He needs to hold Obama’s feet to the fire and be passionate. Call him a liar when he’s lying! Straight talk is what America needs, not another Ivy League word parser. We had one of those and I still don’t know what Bill meant when he said that “it depends on what your definition of is is”.

on this debate. Seems most think it was a tie. Which to them means Obama won because foreign policy should be a slam dunk for McCain. I watched this thing, I thought McCain looked slow and unprepared for the first 40 minutes. Then he caught fire for the rest of the debate and came back for what I thought was a definite victory.

My sense is however that this campaign going in the direction of Obama. He is unqualified to lead, yet I think the American public may take a gamble on him at this point. Just a gut feeling.

McCain nailed Obama on Obama’s ridiculous saber-rattling to Pakistan. McCain also made a keen observation that certain regions in that area have been ungovernable since at least the time of Alexander the Great.

I’m going to do some thinking about the unthinkable. I don’t think the American people or Congress are going to agree on any military action against Iran regardless of who is the next President, even if Iran tests a nuclear device along with the missile capability to strike Israel, assuming that Israel has not by that time launched a preemptive strike. I also do not believe that admitting either Georgia or the Ukraine to NATO is wise considering that the United States would be required to go to war with Russia should there be a continuation of the current Russian occupation of Georgian territory or an attack on the Ukraine. In the current situation the United States simply has no good or even palatable options with respect to either Iran or Russia. Sanctions just don’t work.

I am concerned that McCain is sending a very mixed message to swing voters claiming he will reduce spending.

but I disagree. Morris seems to think that McCain should have hammered Obama on the fact that he went to Washington, suspended his campaign, etc, etc. However, what good would it have been for McCain to claim something about running to Washington when no deal has been signed off on?
Keep in mind I like Dick Morris, but he’s wrong sometimes. I distinctly remembering him saying he thought Kerry would win after the first debate.

While I agree with most of the comments, I wonder if we’re not having an echo-chamber moment.

My wife, who is Republican, is conservative, but nowhere near into politics as I am, thought McCain got simply crushed by Obama. She couldn’t even bear to watch after the halfway point, and thought McCain simply can’t do public speaking. That, my friends, is a non-good sign.

The Frank Luntz panel afterwards was not positive for McCain either. I don’t know how much stock I put into that panel, but… doesn’t seem to me that McCain walked away in clear triumph.

And his lackluster defense of capitalism, lackluster defense of free markets, was not exactly a high point of the campaign.

-TS

My favorite highlights from Obama (in no particular order):

• ”John, When You Keep Talking, I can’t hear ME”

• ”Uhhhhh….”

• ”Look at MY pretty bracelet.”

• ”Uhhhhh….”

• ”I served on the Veteran Affairs committee, I’ve worked with Veterans for seven years, I have a lot of friends in the Senate who are veterans, so I’m manifestly smarter when it comes to Veterans than John McCain.”

• ”Uhhhhh….”

• ”John, When You Keep Talking, I can’t hear ME”

• ”John, When You Keep Talking, I can’t hear ME”

• ”John, When You Keep Talking, I can’t hear ME”

• ”Uhhhhh….”

• ”Uhhhhh….”

• ”Uhhhhh….”

I think you get the point.

That’s too unstateman of Obama.

Obama has said “John is right” 9 times.

They can’t admit their far left views in presidential debates with millions watching. One reason dems lose 7 of 10 pres elections and known leftists never win is that their disagreeable statements are on tape and their votes are recorded.

[Ah, yes, the old trick: put your post in as a comment. Silly me. - Moe Lane]