Saturday, September 27, 2008

The morning (or afternoon) after

So, the debate happened. Grampy McSame pulled a bluff to try to delay the inevitable, but it didn't work. And it actually helped continue his downward spiral!

I thought Obama was spot on last night. I wasn't overly impressed with him in any of the primary season debates, and was honestly a bit concerned leading up to last night. But the McCain distractions only worked in Obama's favor.

I thought Obama's answers were delivered with clarity, brevity and substance... as opposed to McCain's meandering and pandering!

That said, though, McCain did better than I expected he would.

I'll probably chop up the audio for Monday morning's podcast. But in the meantime, what did you think?

We now have a message board!! Look for the link to your right, just below my picture. (Or just click here) Please post away....


Anonymous said...

I find the post-debate coverage and analysis to be in some ways more interesting than the debate itself. One thing to keep in mind: if there is one single task that the media in general (there are a few exceptions--we must always be wary of talking about the media as a single unit) hates to is to declare a winner in a presidential debate--even when it's clearly obvious who performed better (and in this case it was clearly Obama, and several major polls are showing that American debate watchers have reached that conclusion, by large pluralities, and in one case, by a majority).

Most political reporters are very afraid of offending a large number of supporters of the losing candidate, and the declaration of a winner can easily lead to charges of media bias.

There is also a fundamental desire among many reporters to keep the race close--for obvious reasons, a tight race is a better story--election blowouts, unless they are accompanied by some kind of unusual drama, are basically dull. Nailbiters are exciting. So even if the major polls are showing a ten point advantage for Obama on the day before election, much of the media will find a way to report the race as skin-tight. Some intelligent, well-meaning folks might say this is good for democracy, but I disagree--news coverage should always be about accuracy, and that extends to reporting poll results. If we deem the poll worthy enough to report, it should be reported correctly and not be "spun".

There is also a vast reluctance to abandon certain "narratives" that early in a campaign achieve the status of political "urban myths". One of those narratives this year is that McCain is the national security expert in this race. Even though, as Barack pointed out last night, McCain was a cheerleader for the invasion of Iraq and joined Cheney in saying that we would be "greeted as liberators". I also loved it when Barack noted that McCain always wants to talk about the Iraq War as if it began last year, with the so-called "surge", which in spite of popular mythology, has not "worked".

However, there is one early narrative that will now be largely abandoned--that was the much-talked about theory that if Barack performed well in the first debate and stood shoulder-to-shoulder with McCain, the race would be Obama's to lose. To continue this narrative now, would be too close to predicting the race for many reporters.

John said...

Missed the debate I was out on the town, caught the highlights on CNN and MSNBC. Yeah McCain is aloof and Obama has the skills. I can't wait till Thursdays’ VP debate at Wash U in STL. This Palin chick makes GW look intelligent.

cystokid said...

Please spread the word!

A few community organizers are setting up a "town hall meeting" with Congressman Ron Klein on Oct.5 at 7:00P.M. to discuss Barack Obama's platform.

Location: Old School Square Cultural Arts Center- Gymnasium
51 N. Swinton Ave
Delray Beach, FL
Everyone is invited!