Presidential Smackdown III: The Final Battle

The third Presidential Debate just finished at Hofstra University on Long Island. It was the most combative and personal of the debates, and I think certainly the best debate and the one most useful to the voter. Someone with a moderate level of skepticism and/or media literacy could gain from this debate a basic grasp of the contrast between the two candidates on a variety of issues, including energy policy, tax policy, trade policy, health care... the real substantive issues. There was also a long exchange about "negative campaigning," in which the debate moderator, CBS anchor Bob Schieffer, asked them if either of them would make the accusations they'd been making on the trail to each other's faces, something that has bothered me throughout and earned Schieffer my biggest cheer of the night.

The candidate story seemed to be that McCain was either "combative" or "feisty," depending on your point of view, and Obama was mostly playing defense, with a few very clear explanations on issues I hadn't heard from him on that I enjoyed but I'm not sure will go over soundbyte-conscious pundits. McCain's supporters have been asking him to really take it to Obama, and he did. (ACORN is fundamentally undermining American democracy? Really? But that's another post...) However, I think it might be a mistake for McCain to dial up the anger. He's been falling farther and farther behind the more angry he seems. He doesn't wear it well. So he's placed in the bad position of having to attack to make up ground but not coming off well when he attacks. Obama was cool and collected, and McCain was attacking and sometimes not very coherent.

Even MSNBC thinks McCain may have "won on points," and it's entirely possible he had good arguments. You'll notice here I'm talking about his presentation. It got to the point sometimes that I didn't know what he was getting at. He brought up "Joe the Plumber" at least 20 times (CNN was counting), and I'm not sure what he was getting at. We'll see if that resonated with people who, y'know, aren't me. But I want to go back to the presentation, because I think the policy speaks for itself and you can make your own decisions. More than pretty much any other debate I've ever seen, this debate was in split-screen. McCain seemed angry when Obama criticized him. Obama smiled and shook his head when McCain criticized him. That is a big difference.

People will remember the section on "negative campaigning." McCain spent a long time harping on Rep. John Lewis' recent comments, basically demanding an apology from Obama which he didn't get. Obama actually brought up the McCain supporters literally calling for his head, which surprised me, and McCain's response was basically, as far as I could tell, that some of his supporters were veterans. I think McCain didn't do himself favors in this section, despite the extremely vocal demands of his supporters.

So this is the last debate. If you're still undecided... who are you? Are you living under a rock? Or maybe you're like my dad, who spends weeks shopping around for the simplest items. The vote's in 19 days.

Presidential Smackdown II: Return of the Awkward Q & A

Some initial reactions on my part to the second Presidential debate, which just finished in Nashville, Tennessee. It wasn't real spectacular in any respect. After the two nationwide campaigns threatened to reach levels of animosity unprecedented in a mass media-era election this week, the debate was relatively free of that, on the surface, anyway. They clearly don't like each other, which is interesting on one level, I suppose. What we got, actually, was something approaching an actual, substantive debate.

These candidates have big differences on a lot of issues (which, after the looong primaries, is a bit refreshing), and they, for the most part, did their best to elucidate them. But there wasn't much new for those of us who've been paying attention, with the possible exception of McCain's poorly explained proposal about the government buying mortgages. Overall, things were just very stilted. Part of that was the format and rules, part of it was Brokaw's somewhat weird follow-up questions (which came off more as what one particular old guy was interested in than what the country wanted to hear) and part of it was the candidate's determination to stay relentlessly on-message. So, though we ask for substantive debates, we got one here and it was pretty boring.

The general media consensus is probably going to be that it was basically a tie, and a tie goes to Obama because he's ahead. I can't really dispute that in any way. I find it hypocritical that they can yell at each other day-in-day-out, and then show up and smile at each other. It's one of the things that drives me nuts about my day job, probably the biggest thing, because that's the fundamental disonnect in politics, and it bothers the crap out of me.

I feel like I'm not saying much, but neither did the candidates.

Sarah Palin winks at America

Video evidence of perhaps the most talked about aspect of the Vice Presidential debate the day after... Sarah Palin's bizarre winking. I guess I missed it, but America sure didn't.

http://www.spike.com/video/sarah-palin-wink/3042408

I've been having trouble embedding videos. I can't get more than a small portion of the "embed" link from YouTube to cut and paste. And it said the html for the Spike.com video was incorrect. Is there something I'm missing?

Vice Presidential Smackdown: Vice Harder

Some quick thoughts on the Vice Presidential debate that just finished. I personally was bothered by Sarah Palin, but I don't think a lot of Americans will be. This is where I have a fundamental difference with a lot of my countrymen and women. I don't think it's too much to ask the Vice President to put gs on the end of words when they go there, or to use words the way they were actually meant to be used. And yet afterwards on CNN the commentators, on either side, universally praised how "folksy" Palin was. Just because people seem to like it doesn't mean it's actually a good thing. Is she going to be in the room with Putin, as the current cliche goes, saying "I'm hopin' and wishin' we can find some positive impacts for our folks back home"?

Okay, rant over. I'm going to try not to do that too often. In terms of actual analysis, I think that Biden did a fairly good job of calling Palin on any outright lies she made without seeming petty (he didn't call her on calling Gen. McKiernan "General McClellan," for example). Palin tried her darndest to do the same, but I don't think she made many of her points with the same specificity. She also said a few things that may come back to bite her. She said she agreed with Vice President Cheney on the subject of expanding the powers of the Vice Presidency. She said she is not convinced humans are responsible for global warming. These are positions that I'm not sure are in tune with what people are looking for.

I think it was a decent strategy on Palin's part to try to link Obama and Biden to "looking backward" when Biden tried to link McCain to the failed policies of the Bush administration. It worked rhetorically to shape the debate the way she wanted it. Biden, however, did not let that effect his own strategy, which was to do just that. In my opinion, "looking backward" or not, every time McCain/Palin talks about changing something from the status quo, Obama/Biden should come back with "Republicans have had the Presidency 20 of the last 28 years. Republicans have controlled the Congress 10 of the last 12 years. Why hasn't any of this happened before now?"

It was sometimes frustrating how much Biden insisted on sticking to the "3rd Bush term" idea, at the expense of offering more coherent versions of his own ideas. It may come off as overly negative. However, I don't think that will be an issue in the long run in a campaign where Democrats seem to often say good things about John McCain but Republicans resolutely refuse to say anything positive about Barack Obama. The "attack dog" role is a traditional one for a Vice President candidate, so the Presidential candidate doesn't have to get their hands dirty.

The usual question after these things is "well, who won?" That is of course completely subjective. I think Gov. Palin gave Sen. Biden the openings he needed to really ram home any advantage he may have had, and I'm not sure he followed through on those. I think he may have performed better overall, but I recognize that many reasonable people may disagree. Many people thought Palin's performance here would hurt the McCain campaign, and I don't think it really did. However, McCain's been steadily losing ground lately in several key states, and I doubt Palin did anything here that would change that.

In other news... wow, the Cubs are in trouble. You'd think I would have seen that coming, but I definitely didn't.

Bits: Space Herpes Edition

-CleanTechnica has posted an article about a "Magnetic Air Car" that purports to be the world's first fuelless car, and hopes to be available by 2010. Apparently, it uses magnets to send compressed air through an enclosed space. "The resulting airflow is then converted to torque." I think there must be more to this than I'm understanding, since I was unaware of air's magnetic properties.

-Sorry Howard Stern, Stephen Colbert is the new "King of All Media." He will be making a guest appearance in the upcoming "Amazing Spider-Man #573." Apparently, in the Marvel Universe, Colbert is a presidential candidate. Can I go live there? The issue's out October 15.

-CNN has managed to come up with what may be the lamest story ever to believably have the headline "Man Punches Shark After 'Death Scream.'"

-Free TV on the Internet: This past week's "Saturday Night Live," with the now-famous Palin/Couric sketch, along with a debate parody and some decent work from Anna Faris, of all people

-The other candidate for "Headline of the Day"... From io9.com: "Space Herpes Is Final Cylon on Battlestar Galactica"

Presidential Smackdown I

As I've said, I certainly don't want to make this blog exclusively political in nature, but it seemed necessary to at least post something about the first presidential debate, which too place earlier tonight in Oxford, Mississippi. I think that both Sen. McCain and Sen. Obama did their jobs well. They each framed their points the way they wanted to and neither came off as excessively unreasonable. I enjoyed this particular format because it allowed for real debate, a back-and-forth between the candidates, which moderator Jim Lehrer did a good job of encouraging. If debates are simply a series of questions posed to the individual candidates, then we get the same answers we get every day in stump speeches. But if they're talking to each other, than we often get genuinely new insights into the way these people think.

A few examples: Obama framed McCain's tax policy as "tax breaks for the wealthy." McCain argued that "reducing the business tax" would encourage businesses to flourish here in the US. I'm not sure I agree with McCain, but this was the first time I had actually heard him defend his position on this issue in a coherent way. He at least sounded like someone I could reason with. Alternatively, McCain challenged Obama on one of his pet issues, earmarks. Obama explained coherently why he believes that this is not the sole solution to our budgetary issues. He made McCain come across as a little crazy on the subject. McCain did his best to do the same to Obama on the issue of Iraq withdrawal, but American support for that action is so across-the-board that I don't know if he could succeed.

McCain consistently tried to frame the foriegn policy issue in terms of experience, a subject he returned to over and over. This is what he needs to do to Obama on that issue. Obama, alternatively, needs to present this election as one of the past versus the future, which as I have explained I think it very much is. I was most struck in that respect, unexpectedly, by the exchange concerning policy towards Russia. Obama chastised Russia for some of its recent actions, but warned against "returning to a Cold War mindset." McCain led off his opening statement on the question by saying, "I have looked into Vladimir Putin's eyes, and I saw three letters: K-G-B." Obama succeeded at very clearly making that a debate about past thinking versus moving forward into the future