This NY Times article on the debates contained some interesting information, and this tidbit in particular got on my nerves:
At the insistence of the McCain campaign, the Oct. 2 debate between the Republican nominee for vice president, Gov. Sarah Palin, and her Democratic rival, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., will have shorter question-and-answer segments than those for the presidential nominees, the advisers said. There will also be much less opportunity for free-wheeling, direct exchanges between the running mates.
McCain advisers said they had been concerned that a loose format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a disadvantage and largely on the defensive.
Well gee then, McCain campaign, maybe it wasn’t such a great idea to nominate her against someone who is known to be a seasoned and strong debater?
The good news is that I think regardless of the format, Biden is going to verbally kick her ass.
On the other hand, I do have to ask myself what the hell Obama thinks he’s doing here:
Mr. Obama successfully sought to flip the proposed topics for the first and third debates, so foreign policy is now coming first and economic and other domestic issues come last. There is a second debate, in the format of a town hall meeting, in which the candidates will sit on director’s chairs and take questions from the audience and Internet users on any topic.
The debate commission had proposed that the first debate be on economic issues and the third on foreign policy — in part, people involved in the process said, because the first debate is usually the most watched, and many voters rank the economy as their top concern.
Mr. Obama wanted foreign policy first to show viewers that he could provide depth, strength and intelligence on those issues, his advisers said, given that Mr. McCain consistently wins higher ratings in opinion polls as a potential commander in chief.
Mr. Obama wanted domestic issues to come last; advisers said that they believed even before the start of the financial crisis that the election was most likely to turn on the state of the economy and that he wanted the final televised exchange to focus on those concerns. He has argued that Mr. McCain would continue the economic policies of President Bush.
Clearly, I’m missing something. You’d think that the first debate being about domestic issues would be wildly in Obama’s favor and I can’t imagine why he’d be the one to seek to change it. It’s especially mind-boggling when you consider that foreign policy is McCain’s strong suit — not because he’s right, but because people are stupid and tend to fall for that “we’re gunna kill us some terrorists!” bullshit. I’m guessing that Obama think he can win discussions about the Iraq war, but that doesn’t really seem to be at the top of most people’s agendas anymore.
You really better fucking know what you’re doing, Obama.
The following NY Time articles about the debates really pissed me off, not because of the news they contained but because of way they’re written. The article about McCain’s debating style lists all of his strong points first, and his weaknesses at the end of the article — the article on Obama’s debating style does the exact opposite.
It’s not only unfair, but in my opinion just plain false. Did Obama stumble in a few debates? Yes, but against all-star debater Hillary Clinton. He’s not going to be debating against Clinton this time, he’s going to be debating against McCain, and the fact is that Obama kept improving as time when on. And except for his occasional one-liner about, yes, killing terrorists, I found McCain to be an atrocious debater. He speaks softly, and I’d say he’s just as long-winded as people accuse Obama of being during debates. He’s stiff, he’s awkward, he looks like he’s reading off of talking points, and then there’s the creepy inappropriate smile. Being able to crush a shallow dope like Mitt Romney doesn’t mean that he’ll be able to do the same with Obama. In fact, when thinking about what’s coming up, I’ve had pictures of the Kennedy/Nixon debate dancing in my head now for weeks.
What are your thoughts on the upcoming debates? Predictions? Concerns? Are you optimistic or pessimistic?
{ 9 comments }
I don’t remember anymore where I read/saw this, but they were discussing the back and forth the Obama camp was doing about the debate schedule. Apparently, they wanted to move the first debate from Mississippi b/c focusing on domestic issues might open the door for racial undertones. When the debate rulers said the location couldn’t be changed, the Obama camp asked for the focus to be foreign to avoid that and for the reason you stated.
I have no idea what this is going to be like, but my hope is that they’re planning something really good as far as tone, prep, etc. so that Obama does get to show up McCain. Of course, he could crash and burn, but if he actually does win the debate or it comes out as a draw, starting with foreign issues, IMO, will put Obama on top in the one area where McCain is seen as the leader. It seems Obama’s going for the “go big or go home” strategy here.
I think that he wanted to get the one where he might do weakest out of the way first. Then leave the domestic one as topmost in voters minds as they go to the polls.
I was thinking that Journeywoman, but the problem is that as the article states, most people watch the first debate. Also, I feel like the media tends to set the narrative about who’s “winning” after the first debate and then generally sticks with it regardless of what happens in the other two.
I think journeywoman’s point makes a lot of sense, even with the caveat you’ve mentioned, Cara.
The conventional wisdom I’ve been hearing is that the current economic crisis benefits the democrats, and Obama specifically, and as long as the attention stays focused on the economy, he’ll do well. Assuming that the country’s attention WON’T stay focused on the economy for the next month and a half, I can understand trying to bring the focus back to domestic issues and the economy before the election.
Even if fewer people watch the actual debates, people will still be watching the news and hearing what’s being featured in the news cycle.
I hope you’re right, Jo!
I think that this was an excellent move by the Obama camp for a few reasons. In 2004, Bush performed rather poorly in the first debate. In the subsequent two debates his ‘average’ performances were declared victories by many media pundits.
If Obama happens to do poorly or is perceived as the loser in this debate then he will be able to use that (via media punditry) in the subsequent two debates. If he were to do poorly in the third debate then he would not have another debate to improve. Additionally there is little danger of a strong McCain showing being the last thing in voters’ minds as they head to the polls. Essentially a loss just equals two chances to cash in low expectations and forty days to recover.
Also, historically the first debate has been the most viewed. However, Friday debates in the past have always received poor ratings because people go out and stuff. The intense public interest in this race will pump up viewership (like it did for the conventions) for the second two debates while the early weekend will deflate viewership for the first debate (though I expect all three to have higher than normal viewership).
This is not a question about whether there will be a debate on foreign policy; there will be. I almost see this trade in topics as so extremely benefitting Obama that the VP debate format change was the payment/concession Obama had to make to get the foreign policy debate switched to the front.
So a few predictions… The chances of a blowout victory by either candidate are relatively low because neither McCain nor Obama are strong debaters; Pres. Clinton or Pres. Reagan could run laps around either of these guys. The media of course likes to talk about things and they will go bonkers over these debates. However, in the past, debates more often than not have very little impact on the horserace; I expect that to happen here. Additionally, in an increasingly partisan media (blogs included) victory will be declared for their respective candidate whether they “won” or not.
I was pretty teed off about the shenanigans the McCain camp pulled as well, Cara. That is why he should have never plucked Palin in the first place. Biden will smash Palin in the VP debates.
I was thinking that Obama didn’t want to end on foreign policy partially to not let McCain start pumping the fear factor into America so close to the election. I was thinking of the family guy where Lois wins the election just by saying “911″ and “America”.
It could be that Obama may have been afraid that the whole POW angle in foreign policy will elicit sympathy/fear of the other and wanted that to be overshadowed by focusing on the Economy later to keep that in people’s mind.
Re: the articles…I believe having your strong points listed last is actualy in favor of Obama. If a person reads the entire article ending on a positive note will be remembered as that was the last thing said.
As for the debates…I am almost giddy with anticipation. Obama/Biden have this thing locked. If Biden can actually stay on point (this is key) he will crush Palin without breaking a sweat. I cannot wait to see it. As for Obama/McCain this should also be an easy three point shot. McCain has continually had to be prompted by his handlers and has misspoken on so many occasions, that no matter how much he prepares I am convinced that he will mess up. McCain/Palin are like chum in the water. I only wish the Cannuck debates would be half as interesting as the US debates are going to be.
Comments on this entry are closed.