Comments on: It’s Almost Debating Time

By: Renee

Renee — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 02:57:22 +0000

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.

By: mzbitca

mzbitca — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:00:42 +0000

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.

By: jovan byars

jovan byars — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 21:44:31 +0000

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.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 19:57:12 +0000

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.

By: Cara

Cara — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 19:53:36 +0000

I hope you’re right, Jo!

By: Jo

Jo — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:53:35 +0000

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.

By: Cara

Cara — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:13:34 +0000

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.

By: Journeywoman

Journeywoman — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:53:11 +0000

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.

By: frau sally benz

frau sally benz — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:49:39 +0000

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.