Who won the debate? That is the all important question. From my own personal vantage point, no one won, which someone pointed out means Obama won. By virtue of being ahead, a tie means he is still ahead. McCain has been desperate for a game changer, and he didn’t get one at the debate.

Of course, the pundits are pundits, and actual voter reaction is most important; so here it is:

CBS Insta Poll: Obama 39%, McCain 25% and 36% not sure who won

MediaCurves.com: Independents gave Obama a 61% to 38% win.

CNN: Obama “did better” 51%, McCain “did better” 38%. Men even split. Women Obama 59% to McCain 41%. (Maybe as my classmate pointed out McCain in HDTV is not pretty)

Insider Advantage: Obama 42%, McCain’s 41% and 17% not sure who won.

And of course, Sunday’s Gallup Tracking Poll: Obama 50%, McCain 42%

Things the pundits said that I think are important:

Pat Buchanan (Also, how did this right wing yahoo/semi-racist warm his way into my heart with his charmingly unbiased reporting) recalled that while working for Reagan, the cowboy did not do that well in a debate against Mondale. But as the media buzz grew people’s perceptions of Reagan’s victory grew to above 80%, despite Pat’s belief that Reagan was terrible. So expect this again and forever.

John McCain visibly could not stand Obama. McCain never once looked Obama in the eye.

McCain got angry a few times, repeatedly told Obama he didn’t understand, and appeared flummoxed. Not to mention, McCain kept referring to how old he is. While Obama stayed calm and was not afraid to agree with McCain. Possible perception being that McCain is an angry old man with a temper (we have heard this before).

When Obama gave his laundry list of things he believes McCain was wrong about, McCain retreated to talking about how he stands up for wounded veterans (a point having nothing to do with Obama’s complaints). At some point he will be perceived as hiding behind the flag.

McCain’s best moment was when he said the next president won’t have to worry about winning the war in Iraq, but instead when and how we leave. This is an extremely good mantra for his campaign.

Obama did not do well on the Iran issue. And the exchange about Henry Kissinger was silly.

My thoughts:

McCain really did look grumpy, angry, insert various adjectives he needs to avoid here. Substantively though, he did rather well especially considering the first third of the debate was on the economy, the subject he has failed to talk about correctly for quite some time. On the flip side, Democrats don’t do well on foreign policy, the next two debates won’t be on foreign policy, and Obama avoided damage.

McCain was constantly on script and Obama was not. McCain said Obama just doesn’t understand, and yet Obama seemed to understand foreign policy quite well.

McCain’s views of the crisis in Georgia are horrible (please see my post on the CIAR panel on the conflict).

Obama missed the opportunities to point out that we still haven’t found Osama, at least not in a clear way. Just say, “Where is Bin Laden?” and say it a lot. Also, Obama’s stance on Iraq is becoming increasingly convoluted. He is trying to explain that McCain was wrong to want to go in there in the first place, but he can’t reconcile this with the success of the surge. He should point out that McCain advocated for the surge under the pretext that it would give the Iraq’s the opportunity to come to a political solution, but no political solution has come to pass.

Obama’s best moment was when following John McCain’s explanation of how the dead soldiers bracelet that he wears around his wrist proves he understands the troops better, Obama replied, “You know John I have a bracelet too…”

So basically, if stylistic issues matter, Obama probably won by a lot simply because McCain would not condescend himself to make eye contact with Obama. On the other hand, if substance matters it was a draw and both sides should be kicking themselves for failed opportunities to win.

Finally, John McCain was born before the Depression ended (1936). So when at the beginning of the debate he said that this financial crisis was the worst in his life time, he either incorrectly remembered when he was born or has come full circle and now believes that we are royally screwed.

Up next, Joe “I have foot in mouth disease” Biden v. Sarah “Every time I open my mouth I cause a crisis” Palin in what will undoubtedly be a glorious if not cringe worthy circus side show…Sweet!!!

Wow…Palin reminded me last night why I never played hockey, the parents are too vicious. That was one hell of an attack dog speech. She even called her self a dog. She came out swing. If you are any of the following Palin attacked you for not putting country first: Obama, the Obamas, Biden, the media, a democrat, a liberal, a San Franciscian, a Hollywoodian, an East Coaster, a Gay, a Muslim, a Jew, someone who can’t skin a moose, Caption Spock, etc.

I have two thoughts. One, I am not sure being angry and hateful and vengeful towards others is really an effective tactic. What if, God forbid, democrats actually do love their country? What if San Francisco actually loves this country? What if love for country is not really a questionable thing? Beyond being divisive it is insulting. Last night Palin looked like she was going to lead the convention out into the streets with touches and pitch forks laying waste to anyone from St. Paul to Hollywood. At first I thought Country First was a good pitch for, “John McCain, the maverick, who stood up to his party and put country above the elephant.” But he first had to allow 3 days of the party he once fought. I have come to realize ‘country first’ means Obama and all democrats are unpatriotic. Yet again Bush steals McCain’s message.  

The second, thing I would like to point out is that Obama in his convention effectively turned the tables. Obama, and the democrats, effectively learned how to attack the Republican’s. Leading up to the convention day after day McCain would attack Obama’s energy plan, his speeches, his supposed love of arugula (I’m more of and endive man). Obama was constantly on the defensive. Then Obama figured it out and started attacking first. He started putting McCain on the defensive. Then McCain forgot how many houses he owned and then Palin’s family had some babies-mama’s problems. The point is when you listen to the entire Republican convention they have been on the defensive. They are not talking about their policies. And more importantly they are not guiding the debate they are responding to the debate.

The reason this matters is conventions are the best time to gain or pick up ground. If you are on the defensive no matter how nasty Palin’s words were they were still within a narrative shaped by Obama.

I hear that McCain tonight promises to put forward some policies. This would be a good idea because right now they are not playing their own game.

After skipping day 1 of the RNC to watch Hurricane Gustav, thankfully, miss New Orleans, the RNC’s first two days became one.

Notes about the RNC: The first thing that I noticed was the simplicity of the stage, especially when it is compared to the flash and glamour of the DNC’s stage. The stage of the RNC is really minimalist and frankly kind of ugly. This is of course either stupid or brilliant. It either feeds their armature at govt image or feeds the image they want to create of the Dems as elitist. My guess is the second.

The script is not really but kind of surprising. McCain hates the culture wars. That is why the Dems in the Senate like him. McCain has always been lukewarm about the issue of abortion and frankly doesn’t like talking about it. He isn’t a social conservative but he has no problem voting that to expand his base. Palin is a culture warrior. Since adding her to the ticket we are now back in the culture wars.

Abortion, the gays, religion, blah blah blah let’s fight…

With this comes the tactics of Bush and Rove that McCain back in 2000 despised. They will attack Obama’s patriotism and every Democrat’s patriotism…a la ‘country first’. Then they will attack the media for being biased. Now the media is biased in a sense. Fox News is biased, MSNBC is in part biased, and various people on CNN (Glen Beck and Lou Dobbs) are biased. But Wolf Blitzer, Tom Brokaw, Katie Couric? Give me a break.

John McCain says the coverage of Palin is sexist and biased. Yes the biased people have taken sides. But McCain claims the non-biased people are now biased. This is crap. They are vetting Palin because that is what reporters do. They did it to Obama…a la Rev Wright…and Palin gets no special treatment.

I leave you with Joe Klein of Time Magazine’s words or McCain’s attacks:

September 3, 2008 2:04

Angry Amateurs

Posted by Joe Klein

The story of the day out here in Minneapolis is the McCain campaign’s war against the press. This has been building for some time. Those of us who have criticized the candidate–and especially those of us who enjoyed good relations with McCain in the past–have been subject to off-the-record browbeating and attempted bullying all year. But things have gotten much worse in recent days: there was McCain’s rude, bizarre interview with Time Magazine last week. Yesterday, McCain refused to an interview with Larry King, for God’s sake, because Campbell Brown had been caught in the commission of journalism on CNN the night before, asking McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds what decisions Sarah Palin had made as commander-in-chief of the Alaska national guard. (There was an answer that the unprepared Bounds didn’t have: she had deployed them to fight fires.)

So what’s going on here? Two things. McCain is just plain angry at us. By the evidence presented in the utterly revealing Time interview, he’s ballistic. This is a politician who needs to see himself as the man on the white horse, boldly traversing a muddy field…any intimations that he’s gotten muddied in the process, or has decided to throw mud, are intolerable.

The second thing is more insidious: Steve Schmidt has decided, for tactical reasons, to slime the press. He wants the public to believe that there is an unfair–sexist (you gotta love it)–personal assault going on against Palin and her family. This is a smokescreen, intended to divert attention from the very real and responsible vetting that is taking place in the media–about the substance of Palin’s record as mayor and governor. Sure, there are a few outliers–and the tabloid press–who have fixed on baby stories. That was inevitable….the flip side of the personal stories that the McCain team thought would work to their advantage–Palin’s moose-hunting and wolf-shooting, and her admirable decision to have a Down Syndrome baby. And yes, when we all fix on the same story, whether it’s a hurricane or a little-known politician, a zoo ensues. But the media coverage of the Palin story has been well within the bounds of responsibility. Schmidt is trying to make it seem otherwise, a desperate tactic.

There is a tendency in the media to kick ourselves, cringe and withdraw, when we are criticized. But I hope my colleagues stand strong in this case: it is important for the public to know that Palin raised taxes as governor, supported the Bridge to Nowhere before she opposed it, pursued pork-barrel projects as mayor, tried to ban books at the local library and thinks the war in Iraq is “a task from God.” The attempts by the McCain campaign to bully us into not reporting such things are not only stupidly aggressive, but unprofessional in the extreme.

 

So as the campaigns and the media tries to figure out how to weather hurricane Gustav it looks like the GOP has another storm heading their way.

From Reuters…poor girl…

To rebut rumors, Palin says daughter, 17, pregnant

Mon Sep 1, 2008 12:02pm EDT

By Steve Holland

ST. PAUL (Reuters) - The 17-year-old daughter of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is pregnant, Palin said on Monday in an announcement intended to knock down rumors by liberal bloggers that Palin faked her own pregnancy to cover up for her child.

Bristol Palin, one of Alaska Gov. Palin’s five children with her husband, Todd, is about five months pregnant and is going to keep the child and marry the father, the Palins said in a statement released by the campaign of Republican presidential candidate John McCain.

Bristol Palin made the decision on her own to keep the baby, McCain aides said.

“We have been blessed with five wonderful children who we love with all our heart and mean everything to us,” the Palins’ statement said.

“Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support,” the Palins said.

The Palins asked the news media to respect the young couple’s privacy.

“Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family. We ask the media, respect our daughter and Levi’s privacy as has always been the tradition of children of candidates,” the statement concluded.

MCCAIN KNEW

Senior McCain campaign officials said McCain knew of the daughter’s pregnancy when he selected Palin last week as his vice presidential running mate, deciding that it did not disqualify the 44-year-old governor in any way.

In the short period since she was announced last Friday, Palin has helped to energize the Republican Party’s conservative base, giving the McCain camp fresh energy going into the campaign for the November 4 election against Democrat Barack Obama.

McCain officials said the news of the daughter’s pregnancy was being released to rebut what one aide called “mud-slinging and lies” circulating on liberal blog sites.

According to these rumors, Sarah Palin had faked a pregnancy and pretended to have given birth in May to her fifth child, a son named Trig who has Down syndrome. The rumor was that Trig was actually Bristol Palin’s child and that Sarah Palin was the grandmother.

A senior McCain campaign official said the McCain camp was appalled that these rumors had not only been spread around liberal blog sites and partisan Democrats, but also were the subject of heightened interest from mainstream news media.

“The despicable rumors that have been spread by liberal blogs, some even with Barack Obama’s name in them, is a real anchor around the Democratic ticket, pulling them down in the mud in a way that certainly juxtaposes themselves against their ‘campaign of change,’” a senior aide said.

(Editing by Howard Goller)

Palin winning Miss Wasilla qualifying her for the Miss Alaska contest.

Maybe John McCain is a genius and Palin was just what the doctor ordered, but on the surface it seems super dumb to me.

The pick of a completely inexperienced politician from Alaska has certainly changed the tenor of the debate. But not in McCain’s favor. It turned the Media’s focus to his age. A 72 year old man who has battled skin cancer and general oldness could die at any moment. And as the constitution explains this upgrades the VP to the P. So McCain becomes president, his skin cancer returns, he dies, the runner up for Miss Alaska is the next president.

That has been the narrative in the News. Suddenly this election has become a referendum on President Palin. The news has all but killed off McCain. He wanted a game changer and instead he gave us a reason to question his ability to stay alive if president.

So naturally there must be another reason for this. I think it’s a Republican scheme to destroy affirmative action. For the first time in the history a woman was actually selected for a job devoid of any ability simply based on her gender, and the results are horrifying.