What Obama did right, but also what he did WRONG in the debate.

[RBInMaine]

Obama was smoother and showed a bit more mettle than he had in many of the primary debates. He showed a command of facts and knowledge. He showed he could be a credible leader. Overall he was better on the economy than McCain. But here's where he went wrong: #1 TOO MUCH AGREEING WITH MCCAIN !!! (Tweety was right to highlight this.) OBAMA, STOP THAT SHIT !!! IT WILL HAUNT YOU BGTIME !! WE ARE TRYING TO FIRE THIS GUY'S PARTY !! YOU DON'T KEEP SAYING "John is absolutely right."...when you are trying to fire HIS party from office. #2 He needed to highlihgt McCain's pro-Bush voting record much moreso than he did. He did somewhat, but he needed to pound this point much more to squash McCain's "maverick" assertion. #3 He needs to stop being so "metaphysical" and talk more from the gut and the heart. Tell stories about actual people suffering in this economy. Talk about all the plant closings, etc. etc. He needs to do this bigtime in the next debate. BRING IT DOWN TO THE GROUND - TALK FROM THE GUT ESPECIALLY ON THE ECONOMY. #4 Finally,he needed to end with a firm statement about how we major CHANGE in the country and that McCain does not represent CHANGE at all but more of the same. In politics, you pick one or two clear themes, and you pound and pound and pound them home. CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE ! He didn't do it. - Overall, not bad, but too many missed opportunities in this one. In the next two debates, EVISCERATE MCBUSH AND THE R'S. TALK FROM THE GUT, POUND ON HOW THE ECONOMY IS KILLING MOM AND POP, AND DRILL HOME THAT McCAIN is MORE OF THE SAME AND WE CAN'T STAND MORE OF THE SAME !!

[FrenchieCat]

1. I see it in a more strategic manner.....Obama was artful......in how

he showed the stark contrast of Obama type 21st century politics against McCain's Cowboy/sheriff old politics of destruction. Obama came across as someone who can be seen as generous to others in order to make his point...exactly the type of diplomatic power we want to see to go and repair the world. McCain lost because he couldn't even look at Barack, which means he's not man enough to be a diplomat.

Politics aren't simple, and neither is Barack. He wasn't there to win over his base. Obama was there to win over the undecideds and the independents, and that is exactly who he appealed to. He is a very smart politician.

[Whalestoe]

2. Thank you for posting these pictures!

But, on a side note:

Does the hand ringing ever stop when things have been going so good for us?

[FrenchieCat]

3. Naw. Some here are Obama's biggest critics......

They want what they want without thinking of the objective....
Some folks believe that every single voter thinks just like they do.
Obama will win because he understands that this is not at all the case.
That's what makes him a brilliant politician, and why he will become the next president.

[RBInMaine]

6. He AGREED with the guy representing the party we are trying to FIRE. Was this a good move?????????

[FrenchieCat]

8. He killed McCain with kindness.....and showed up McCain for the petty man that he is.

Watch McCain's approval numbers start to drop.

Like I said, it takes a strategic mind to understand a politically savvy strategic move.

[RBInMaine]

23. The DANGER is the video they will use of Obama AGREEING and AGREEING and AGREEING.

[iceman66]

37. That will be seen as taking his remarks out of context,

and just the latest in a long line of cheap stunts from the McCain camp.

I don't see how anyone who has been paying even the slightest bit of attention could think Obama agrees with McCain.

[RBInMaine]

51. OH, BUT IT WORKS !! AND PEOPLE WILL BELIEVE IT. THEY'LL USE IT. BAD MOVE OBAMA !

[Essene]

33. Yes, when the opponent makes a good point you agree. This isnt petty zero-sum Fox News hour...

Americans do not want to see leaders acting like foolish TV commentators that can only speak in polarities and partisan talking points.

If Mccain says we need to cut spending, YOU AGREE. Obama then reframed the issues on his terms.

[treestar]

47. It would be seen as immature to disagree with every single thing

when McPain does say something true, there is nothing wrong with agreeing. They don't have to disagree on every single little thing. In fact, that would look petulant.

It's McPain who is petulant, and who would never admit it if Obama were right about something.

[RBInMaine]

4. We are trying to FIRE the Republicans. You can't do that by AGREEING with them time and again.

[Whalestoe]

5. So Obama made NO contrasts to McCain tonight?

[RBInMaine]

7. Didn't say "none". Just said, on the flip side, WAY too much AGREEING. You can't deny it !

[Whalestoe]

12. DENIED!

People like my mother, who are sick of politicians and sick of being deceived, find Obama's ability to agree and not be so mean-spirited refreshing!

I do too. I don't like people who try to bully others. Tonight the choice was clear: a bully or a President.

[RBInMaine]

18. So good, let's AGREE with people we are trying to FIRE. Why not just kiss their asses too.

[Whalestoe]

22. I'm gonna have to AGREE to DISAGREE

[No Elephants]

9. Yes, but you can be gracious and statesman-like without pounding home

"John is absolutely right." This is like "The surge succeeded beyond our wildest dreams." Unnecessary. That said, Obama WON the debate, period.

[RBInMaine]

10. WIMPY POST ! We are trying to FIRE the R's. Stop being a WIMP !

[RBInMaine]

11. By what measures do you say he "won"? I think it was about a draw.

[FrenchieCat]

13. Then you should think that.....

no one is stopping you.
As long as the majority of voters didn't agree with you, I'm gonna be just fine. :shrug:

[RBInMaine]

15. How many SCIENTIFIC polls have we seen so far on this ??

[Whalestoe]

16. 3?

All with a general consensus Obama won.

[RBInMaine]

17. Were they SCIENTIFIC or those subjective online things ?? Where can I see them?

[Whalestoe]

19. This is all I can give you.

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/09/the_post_debate_polls.html

They aren't the kind where we click and it logs our IP, that's for sure. Plus, Fox News even had a independent group that was overwhelmingly for Obama (Not that I know how accurate those are).

[iceman66]

38. McCain needed a big win. He didn't get it.

From McCain's perspective it was, at best, a draw. Most people would say Obama won.

[BanzaiBonnie]

14. Excellent analysis

and I understand about Obama's consideration of McCain. There was too much "John is right".

On the other hand, it highlighted the respectful manner in which Obama operated. This was in stark contrast to McCain's demeanor toward Obama. To borrow a phrase from another DUer who posted earlier, McCain was "grumpy, mean, and downright contemptuous of Obama" .

[Number23]

20. When McCain had the audacity to compare Obama to Bush....

In reference to Obama's "stubborn" refusal to concede that the surge had worked, Obama should have pounded him into a bloody pulp. Instead of going off on a tangent about his father coming to America because it was the land of opportunity, he should have castigated McCain. Something along the lines of "I know my opponent is not comparing me to George Bush when he has voted with Bush 90%of the time, admitted to doing quote 'everything in his power' unquote to getting the man elected and, more than likely has voted to put Bush in office, something I am proud to say I have not done. That would be funny if it weren't so desperate."

Obama's constant references that McCain was right was "intellectually generous" as one pundit put it, but you're right that he really needs to stop doing that because McCain damn sure isn't going to do it for him. I think Obama missed some good opportunities to really pound McCain.

Overall, I was impressed with both candidates, to be honest, and thought that the debate was quite good. It was good to see two candidates who both have obviously firm -- if varied -- grasps of the issues. Except for McCain's obvious and repeated attempts to deceive people about what Obama has actually said about certain issues (airstrikes in Pakistan for one) I think anyone who watched got a really good idea of how the candidates feel on the real issues of the day.

[RBInMaine]

24. We are large agreement. Not bad, BUT, too many missed opportunities on Obama's part.

[iceman66]

39. Remember this was only 'round one'.

Obama is not going to play all his cards this early in the game.

[Princess Turandot]

21. Keep in mind that the economy was not the intended topic of this debate..

it was added at the beginning because of the bank debacle this week. There will be a separate debate on domestic issues. They were supposed to talk about foreign affairs last night. If Obama had responded to those questions by returning to domestic issues instead, he would have looked like he was ducking the foreign affairs topic.

The 'McCain is right' howls are pure pundit claptrap. We shouldn't take that troll-bait. Obama used that expression 4 times, according to my search of the transcript. In 3 cases, he immediately used it to point out the actual deficiency in what McCain had said. (He did so in the 4th case as well, but was a bit more long-winded.) To whit:

>"But John is right we have to make cuts. We right now give $15 billion every year as subsidies to private insurers under the Medicare system. Doesn't work any better through the private insurers. They just skim off $15 billion. That was a give away and part of the reason is because lobbyists are able to shape how Medicare works."

>"I think Senator McCain's absolutely right that we need more responsibility, but we need it not just when there's a crisis. I mean, we've had years in which the reigning economic ideology has been what's good for Wall Street, but not what's good for Main Street."

>"Now, John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he's absolutely right. Here's the problem: There are so many loopholes that have been written into the tax code, oftentimes with support of Senator McCain, that we actually see our businesses pay effectively one of the lowest tax rates in the world."

>"Well, Senator McCain is absolutely right that the earmarks process has been abused, which is why I suspended any requests for my home state, whether it was for senior centers or what have you, until we cleaned it up.

And he's also right that oftentimes lobbyists and special interests are the ones that are introducing these kinds of requests, although that wasn't the case with me.

But let's be clear: Earmarks account for $18 billion in last year's budget. Senator McCain is proposing -- and this is a fundamental difference between us -- $300 billion in tax cuts to some of the wealthiest corporations and individuals in the country, $300 billion."

transcript: http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debates/transcripts/first-presidential-debate.html

[pokercat999]

25. And he could have said every one of those points without

saying McSame was right. For instance he could have said, "While it's true that ON PAPER, business taxes are high the hidden facts in that statement are that......

No reference to "and he's absolutely right" which gives McSame much too much credit for a coherent thought.

You will shortly see an ad with Obama saying over and over "and John McCain is absolutely right". I can see it now, Obama saying it with the announcer finishing up with "John McCain, right on Medi-care, right on Iraq, right on taxes and right on the economy".

Not a good thing.

[RBInMaine]

26. EXACTLY. They will parse and HAUNT him with all that AGREEING with McCain talk ! BAD MOVE !!

[Princess Turandot]

44. Saying 'it's true, but' ain't that different than 'you're right, but..'..

everyone uses those expressions in their daily speech, reflexively, to cushion disagreements. I doubt few people interpreted it to mean that he agreed with him in substance. They listened to what he said next.

As to ad sound-bytes, if he worried about that with every word he said, he'd be paralyzed.

[Bonn1997]

27. Great Post...I'll add a few comments

First, I think Obama did a pretty good job overall and I have tremendous respect for him. He's much tougher and a much better campaigner than Gore or Kerry was. HOWEVER, I agree with every one of your points and have thought all campaign including last night that he needs to be tougher. A few examples to add to yours: (a) It's a mistake to let Sen. McCain talk over you. It looks like you're weaker. I'm not saying Sen. Obama should start screaming too, but he should have pointed out something like, "John likes to interrupt. He's a lot louder than me. Unfortunately, loud and wrong is what we've had for the past 8 years. It doesn't work. Imagine if you're at a conference with leaders of other nations and you loudly interrupt every time you disagree with them..." (b) It's a mistake to let Sen. McCain get away with saying "Senator Obama doesn't understand..." I wanted Sen. Obama to say forcefully somewhere, "What John doesn't understand is..." I think the perfect time would have been after Sen. McCain said we're safer now than we were the day after 9/11. I wish Sen. Obama had said something like, "WHAT JOHN DOESN'T UNDERSTAND is that we're less safe now than we were the day he and George Bush decided to stop fighting the terrorists who attacked us and instead invade Iraq." (c) It's a mistake to let people equate being wrong on the surge (McCain's view of Obama) with being wrong on the decision to go invade Iraq (Obama's and most of the public's view of McCain) when there would be no surge to vote on had we decided to keep fighting the terrorists who attacked us instead of invading and occupying Iraq. Obama was tough at times--a lot tougher than previous Democrats have been--but I wish he'd more forcefully highlighted how many bad judgments Sen. McCain and George Bush have made.

[RBInMaine]

48. GOOD REPLY. I AGREE !

[sshan2525]

28. You never agree with your opponent......

while Obama clearly won, he would have neen even more potent if he had omitted the "I agree with John"'s.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

29. Obama should flat-out say: John's "experience" didn't help his judgment when it came it to Iraq,

the mistake of the decade.

He allows McCain to pound him on the Surge. What about the INVASION?????

He should also hammer that McCain's experience didn't help him pick a suitable running mate!

As for the economy, he should take a page from Reagan. His mantra should be: After 8 years of an economy that embodies the McCain's republican beliefs -- ARE YOU BETTER OFF??

[demo dutch]

30. they'll use it against him

[Vinca]

31. I agree somewhat with everything except point #1.

Finding agreement with the opposition demonstrates an ability to work with both sides. Tweety's full of shit.

[RBInMaine]

52. NO ! This is a FISTFIGHT ! You don't put your hands down. C'mon. GET TOUGH !

[Essene]

32. I offer the following counter-arguments (& present real problems for Obama)

#1. Obama is right to agree with Mccain on "big points" where they agree. Independents and undecideds are not impressed by jerks who obviously are just disagreeing for partisan scoring. Remember, Bush Jr did this approach with Gore in 2000 on foreign policy and it kept him afloat in an area where he was seen as less expert. The important part is that overall, Obama seemed to be MORE focused on the big points claiming that the GOP (and Mccain) lost focus on our real needs both on domestic and foreign policy.

#2. Obama constantly made Mccain look like Bush #3 on both domestic and foreign policy, by effectively attacking the last 8 years and showing Mccain to hold a "more of the same" philosophy across the board. He didnt HAVE to explicitly do the "Mccain voted with Bush 90%" talking points. So, i'm not really sure what your criticism is on this point because i think Obama masterfully handled this strategy. Most interestingly, on the things where Mccain likes to differentiate himself from Bush, Obama didn't take the bait & instead focused widely on how the Republicans have dropped the ball: the surge, earmarks, afghanistan, etc.

#3. Obama needs to not pretend he is Clinton with the story telling. It works fine when he's alone on stage, but not with Mccain. Mccain's primary strength is in his grampa story telling, and Obama can only hope to undermine the credibility of those ploys like he did last night with the "i have a bracelet too" comment. In that context, Obama cannot afford to try to out name-drop and story-tell Mccain. He got into trouble with the Kissinger stuff. I do not think Obama was being "metaphysical" whatsoever, and as long as he has the time to "bring it home" to the core big picture points he is making, then he's fine. He sometimes makes complicated arguments, and it would be nice if he would "bring it home" with more compelling zingers and analogies.

#4. He should NOT get into the change stump speech stuff at all. Quite the opposite, he just needs to focus on gravitas and looking presidential. The debates for him need to be the SOFT SELL, not the hard sell stuff about change. That's implied. Nobody wants to hear him say "change" 100 times in a debate. They DO want to hear him talk broadly about how the economy is in trouble because of greed in washington, about how america needs to regain its standing in the world and about how we need to focus on our real enemies in the war on terror.


Whew, that was a lot... :D

Obama's real problems:

• He needs to throw harder punches and more memorable lines on Mccain's biggest weaknesses and hypocrisy
  
  
• He needs to have a better response on the spending issue. He's won the tax cuts issue and needs to do the same on spending now (without getting too specific)
  
  
• He needs to better undermine Mccain when he is lying. without getting defensive, he needs solid lines which permanently register Mccain as a complete lying, nasty "old school" politician.
  
  
• Directly challenge Mccain with yes/no questions on stuff like going into pakistan with actionable intelligence about osama bin laden. Forcing Mccain to quickly yes/no on that is a game changer, especially if he follows up with something like: do you deny that we've dropped the ball in tora bora and in focusing like a laser on al qaeda?. Make Mccian pay for Bush's follies and his own BS.
  
  
• He didn't repeat & combine his punches on stuff like "bomb bomb bomb iran" and such. These are powerful lines, but they need to be 1-2 punches instead of being easily forgettable jabs. Let Mccain stumble for a moment, and then come back and emphasize the point. Just jabbing and running is great meat for the crowd but it's easily forgotten.
  

[Princess Turandot]

41. I think that the bracelet comment was useful..

even if a bit awkwardly delivered. McCain uses it for emotional blackmail. Obama kind of took the sails out of that by making the point that John's bracelet was not 'unique' nor was his view that we needed to have more of our soldiers die in order to honor the thousands who already have died, the only option.

[Essene]

46. exactly. mccain's personal story ploys are stale and easily predicted and countered

but obama shouldnt try to beat him by being MORE personal.

[RBInMaine]

53. Here's what's wrong with your analysis of my analysis.

1) Again, in politics you pick THEMES and stick with them. Sure, you can vary your language in how you present them, and present them in numerous ways, but you stick with THEMES. You don't float around here and there. Cut through the bullshit and hammer home MAJOR THEMES. Remember, "It's the economy stupid!" ?? Obama's opening was too unfocused, and his closing stunk ! NO ONE CLEAR THEME !
So you're wrong there. Kerry lost in '04 in large measure because he was too wishy washy. No clear THEME !!

2) This is a CHANGE election cycle. We are trying to FIRE the R's from the White House. Yes, he did link McCain to Bush a few times, but NOT ENOUGH. And when McCain came back with his "maverick" line, Obama didn't counter again. This is one of the primary THEMES of the election. It should have been pushed harder.

3)You ALWAYS bring the campaign message down to the ground with a few from-the-heart annecdotes about ORDINARY AMERICANS you have met who are SUFFERING. It makes you seem HUMAN and in touch with what people are going through. You don't have to overdo it, but Obama comes off too aloof. He needs more "from the heart and gut" talk, and not all the "from the head" metaphysical facts and figures. He thinks too much like a professor when he needs to remember and "bring home" those folks he used to work for on the South Side of Chicago.

4) OF COURSE he needs to reiterate his "campaign stump speech" points to a degree. It is all ONE campaign !! You need to understand the idea of THEMING in politics. You have a campaign MESSAGE; a NARRATIVE around which all else revolves and which you continually harken back to. THIS is what we have lacked in Democratic politics since the Clinton years: a clear, powerful NARRATIVE that you stick to and focus on like a lazer beam.

I also agree with many of your follow-up points, but what I have said, with all respect (as someone who has worked enough campaigns now), are damn good pieces of advice for team-Obama. HE NEEDS TO WORK THE NARRATIVE AND STICK TO IT !!

[iceman66]

34. I think he did very little 'wrong'.

Every time he said McCain was "right" about part of an issue, he went on to explain why he was actually WRONG about the larger picture. He also did a pretty good job tying McCain to Bush and I expect he will talk in more depth about the economic issues in the other debates.

I agree that he could have had a stronger ending, but then the debate ended rather abruptly.

[daggahead]

35. 2 things ..

I wish Barack Obama would have asked John McCain why he voted against funding for the veterans so many times when McCain said he has always "been there" for veterans.

I wish Barack Obama would have stayed on point on the first topic and brought up how John McCain helped deregulate the financial industry resulting in our current financial "crisis."

[Essene]

36. Obama is right to stay away from the "insider baseball" strawmen, at least in the debates

Going after Mccain for "voting against funding veterans" is just a disaster and insincere. That may work on blogs, but not in the big time debates with them face to face.

Almost all of these claims about how congressmen "didnt support" such n such are completely fake, because they take 1 part of a huge sausage and pretend that a vote against that huge sausage is thus a vote against that 1 part.

As Obama pointed out, this cuts both ways.

He was right to just deflect those types of arguments and in the debates he oughta avoid them.

[RBInMaine]

50. YUP!

[all.of.me]

40. The media has picked up on the 'You are absolutely right' thing.

Obama was being polite. You should say something nice before you criticize. He did say, 'You are right, BUT...' more than once. I did hear this in the analyses last night, too.

I'd have slammed McCain on excessive spending in the beginning and suggest we get out of Iraq to put that money here. I'd have pointed the finger right at his involvement in the financial crisis

I'd have slammed him loudly on his voting record, 90% with Bush.

But you have to admit, it was hard for Obama to get a word in when McCain was on a bashing roll. Obama was laughing at the ridiculous-ness of it, and more than once, he just let it go and let Jim get on with the next question, which I thought was very gracious and mature.

[RBInMaine]

49. NO, little time for "GRACE" with the R's ! YOU ATTACK THE ASSHOLES !!

[ecstatic]

42. I'm positive the nail will meet coffin in their next debate. McShame is on the ropes

waiting for the final blow.

[LWolf]

43. I can't agree or disagree;

I only heard about 5 minutes worth, on the radio in the car. I was helping someone move last night, and their tv was out in the truck.

I DID hear him agree with McCain during that 5 minutes, and I didn't like it. That, and pointing out McCains record on Iraq, is the only thing I got to hear him say. McCain then jumped in to patronize him, and to point out that he "didn't know the difference between a tactic and a strategy." :eyes:

[Montauk6]

45. What about a different angle?

Instead of "I agree with John," he could try "I'm glad that John agrees with me on this point."