Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

Rsix35 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:26:28 GMT

I stand by your original assesment that McCain won on content. Obama did present well, but offered no new content, dodged all tough questions, and leaned heavily on democrat talking points. He continually says he'll give 95% of American workers a tax break, I do not see how since 95% of American workers don't pay taxes (many don't make enough money and get all their tax dollars back currently, so I guess they get a bonus?).

His rebutal to his $900mil+ in earmarks was that compared to the overall budget, it's a small number. Yet there is ZERO mention of that in any of the mainstream media coverage, but I found it to be a pretty important figure.

I do think McCain was condescending and don't believe it helped. I do wish he would have done a better or more thorough job of explaining to people what will happen to their employment when the business tax goes up. I also wish he would have expanded on Obama's definition of rich, it's really a low number if you take cost of living into consideration rather than national average as if cost of living is a non-factor. 200k in Manhattan and LA is middle class.

I do wish the McCain camp would quit letting the democrats get away with putting the economic situation on Bush as he wasn't even in office when the problem started and many of the most vocal democrats in the Senate now voted for the deregulation then, and then opposed adding regulation numberous times since.

People are chosing to ignore the obvious and logical, that Obama = unemployment because they are so hopeful that a dramatic change from what is going on now just has to be better. Change is good, and necessary, but Obama's change is going to be bad for the middle class. The rich will stay rich, the lower class will have more beer money, and the middle class will pay for it all.

I have a little homework assignment for those who work in companies with between 50 and 500 people. Go ask your CFO if your job will be more secure or less secure if the business tax is raised. for those working in international companies, ask the CFO if the company will be more likely or less likely to offshore if the cost of doing business in America goes up. vote with your head, not your heart. You can't help anyone if you are don't have a job.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

EvasDaddy — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:34:04 GMT

Sure Romano. You were right, the majority were wrong. We're nothing but a pack of "low information voters" out here.

Facetiousness aside, have you considered the possibility that your "high information" may be wrong, and that like John McCain, you have wildly misjudged the intellect of the electorate?

Continue to watch the polls, "my friend". Your information quotient may benefit.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

ApostasyUSA — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:34:23 GMT

"This meant that Obama was left debating on McCain's best topics, but McCain hardly ever debated on Obama's best topics."

Uh....hello? Wasn’t the debate about "foreign policy"? Now how many times have the political pundits said that this is McCain's strength? You political writers need to get over yourselves.

I thought McCain looked mad the whole time and really do wonder what his temperament would be around world leaders. Here's how respectfully he talks to members of Congress:

"No, I'm calling you a f*cking jerk."

...to fellow Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, when Grassley asked "Are you calling me stupid?"

"Only an a**hole would put together a budget like this ... I wouldn't call you an a**hole unless you really were an a**hole."

...to Budget Committee Chairman and fellow Republican Sen. Pete Domenici, during a Senate budget hearing.

Here's what Republicans have said about McCain's temperament:

"He is a vicious person"

Former representative Charles LeBoutillier R-NY

"An embarrassment to the party"

Arizona GOP state senator Susan Johnson

"There is nothing redeeming about John Mccain...he's a hypocrite"

Former house GOP whip Tom DeLay

"The thought of him being president sends a chill down my spine. He is erratic"

Senator Thad Cochran, R- MS

"Hard headed is one way to say it. Arrogant is another way to say it. It's a quality about him that disturbs me".

Larry Wilkerson, former chief aide to Colin Powell

"What happens if he gets angry in a crisis...? It's the president’s job to negotiate and stay calm. I just don't see that he has that quality".

Former Arizona GOP chairman John Hinz

"His temper would place this country at risk...and the world perhaps in danger. In my mind that should disqualify him"

Former Senator Bob Smith, R-NM

"I decided I didn't want this guy anywhere near a trigger."

Senator Pete Domenici, R-NM

Now ask yourself...did you think McCain won the debate because he was thoughtful or because you like angry people??

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

gary99 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:46:20 GMT

Rsix35 said, "He continually says he'll give 95% of American workers a tax break, I do not see how since 95% of American workers don't pay taxes"

95% ??? Where can I find these kind of jobs :)

As for offering new ideas, considering that much of the nation was seeing Obama for the first time - these WERE new ideas to them.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

not.Brit — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:47:37 GMT

Of McCain, I've used the term "hold the line" in a previous comment (on "McCain's '$5 Million' Mistake") and it's particularly appropriate after the debate.

McCain has been making a series of decisions which are intended to "hold the line." He must give the Bush voters of 2004 a reason to vote for McCain in 2008. For more years than anyone cares to talk about, McCain has been a pariah of the conservative base. The conservative punditry threw their support behind him fairly early because he was the least bad option in the Republican field (and especially because they had all expected to face off against another Clinton). But the grassroots has been a much tougher sell.

All of the decisions coming out of the McCain campaign (erratic or otherwise) has been a play for these voters. An sky-view perspective of the last four months reads like an itemized base-pleasing to-do list. Without the built-in grassroots organizations like churches (exploited so perfectly by Karl Rove), McCain quite simply never had a chance.

And he's done well. He's been holding the line. As Obama makes inroads from several fronts, McCain could block his specific electoral progress by firing up the conservative base.

Until last week.

There is one reason, and one reason alone, that Obama "won" the first debate. It wasn't the economy. It wasn't the bailout. It wasn't McCain's condescension. It wasn't even Obama's flashes of brilliance.

It was Sarah Palin.

Her CBS interview was a joke, literally and figuratively. Katie Couric threw her softballs and she responded with a blizzard of incoherence. Nothing about her interview showed anything even remotely resembling "readiness." It was an unspinnable disaster.

McCain needed, absolutely NEEDED, to paint Obama as unfit, unready, scary, and naive (which is why the "condescension" sounded so rehearsed... because it was). But with a running mate that makes James Stockdale look like a brilliant public speaker, McCain was suddenly on defense before the debate even started. Sarah Palin is the new bar by which "readiness" is measured. Since McCain has argued (and continues to argue) that Sarah Palin is qualified to be President, Barack Obama only has to look more qualified than Sarah Palin to the American public.

With Obama now in the advantageous position, all he had to do was NOT look unfit, unready, scary, and naive. He didn't.

In short, the line was broken. McCain didn't lose the debate during the debate. He lost it this morning. He lost it around water coolers and in forwarded emails. He lost it when the morning news featured clips from both the debate and from the CBS interview.

And worst of all, he lost it specifically because of the decisions he thought would hold the line. Obama may have been great, but McCain lost the debate all by himself.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

Rsix35 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:48:18 GMT

I thought he won the debate because he provided content, rather than leaning on talking points. Obama kept cool, because he did not have to respond to anything. He kept quiet when something uncomfortable was pointed out about him or leaned on well, um George Bush. If you recorded, like I did, go watch it again.

None of the telling stuff like. $900mil+ in earmarks from Obama, not 1 visit to Afghanstan while on the committee made it to the mainstream media. Obama is guided by public opinion, which ever way the public sways at the moment, that's what he supports.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

Jerry in LA — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:56:53 GMT

You have to read between the lines a little to see why some of McCain's most poignant comments during the debate make him not suitable to be President and the leader of the free world.

McCain descried the bracelet he wears, then expressed, as he has often expressed, his feeling that the soldier would have died in vain if the United States suffers a "defeat" in Iraq. I think most people do not agree with this sentiment. I think that most people believe, as I do, that no American soldier ever dies in vain. The rationale for the war does not enhance or diminish, it is simply irrelevant to the unpayable debt which America owes to a fallen soldier and his or her family.

Notwithstanding McCain's expression of a view with which most people disagree, the poignance came when he said that he knows what it's like to be in a war that was not won. The poignancy lies in the obvious fact that McCain feels that his own wartime sacrifice was in vain because the Vietnam war was not won, was probably unwinnable from the start. And this profound personal hurt is something he cannot let go of.

I can't, no one can say that they would feel differently from McCain if they "walked in his shoes." But this man carries emotional baggage from his wartime experience which disqualifies him from serving as President of all the people of the United States. John McCain is a good, decent man, but his entire campaign stsrategy so far has been an ongoing effort to de-humanize Barack Obama. Now his strategy is backfiring. People can see that Obama is not dumber than Paris Hilton, that there is substance to the man. McCain can't get around the scar from his personal war wound. He will probably never quite understand why the qualities that allowed him to survive the Hanoi Hilton make him not qualified to be President.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

orion12 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:00:59 GMT

Andrew, I commend you for considering the views of others, even though belatedly, and reassessing your original verdict. I agree with you that expectations can affect our individual conclusions. This is why I earlier said, after you initial article, that we should base our verdicts on criteria we set up to judge the outcome of the debate.

In my case I did not expect anything from any of the candidates. I just listened to them and tried to objectively assess if they made sense or if they were really answering the questions. Also I wanted to know if what they were saying was realistic.

McCain's style was different from that of Obama's. In my view, a debate at that level should be intelligent and beneficial to the listener. I scored Obama highly because he was intent on giving information and answering the questions. His whole approach impressed me. On the other hand, McCain appeared ready for a boxing match. And unfortunately many Americans like that type of interaction, like the body-checking in hockey or getting your opponent down in football. I find that McCain was looking for scoring points rather than telling people what he will do. He was out there to sell himself using cliches that are now becoming tiring to listen to. I predicted he would not finish the debate without taking about his captivity. As someone said the American people are not stupid. They soon start to see through the smoke screen and are, I am sure, responding now to McCain's performance.

I at times wonder about Obama and his personality and how he manages to stay on an even keel. He was very presidential. He managed to keep his cool but was not a pushover. Indeed, many are dying to see him shout so that he can be branded as the irrational and rage-filled man who they would like him to be. He is in the lead because he has several attributes that appeal to a large cross-section of the population.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

Rsix35 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:02:13 GMT

Gary, you partially quoted me. 95% of American workers don't pay taxes, because a significant portion of them don't make enough money and end up getting all of their tax contribution back at the end of the year. So if they are getting an additional $1000, I guess it'll be a bonus for not making enough money to contribute.

Obama has been campaigning for 18 months, I seriously doubt this is the first time any American has seen him. He leaned on talking points, provided no decent rebutal to his record on earmarks, no decent answer as to why he never went to Afghanstan while on the committee, still has not acknowledged that he was wrong about the surge (not that I was for it, but a sign of a good leader is the ability to admit when you're wrong). He's done nothing at all ever to indicate that he's willing or capable of working across party lines. If you look deep (most won't bother because they don't want their bubble burst) you'll find nothing but a Democratic puppet with plenty of questionable skeletons. McCain certainly has flaws as well, but I don't see him costing me my job by oppressively taxing the SMB I work for into layoffs and more offshoring of jobs.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

CelticBrewer — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:08:40 GMT

This is the first time I've seen "Obama" and "Sensible" in the same sentence. I'll give the guy the benefit of the doubt and trust that he's sincere in the change he's promising. However, when you ask him how he is going to accomplish it, is scares me. It sounds just like the socialist government my family escaped from. We need change for the better, not Obama's change.

Andrew, you mention the "the mythical Ayers-Wright Chicago Elite Radical Obama." Just because he acts so presidential and rational does not mean he isn't still a radical with shady ties. People need to stop blindly following this guy because our current situation is so bad (a situation mainly caused by democrats). Take a real look at Obama and you'll be as scared as I am.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

ApostasyUSA — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:16:28 GMT

Not only do I think McCain's temperament is a problem, I think he is undereducated to be the leader of the free world. Examples:

Republican Presidential John McCain showed some confusion Wednesday night about the identity of the Prime Minister of Spain and exactly where that country of 40 million people is located.

In an interview with a Florida affiliate of Spain's Union Radio, McCain was asked, if elected president, would he invite Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero to the White House. "All I can tell you is that I have a clear record of working with leaders in the Hemisphere that are friends with us and standing up to those who are not and that's judged on the basis of the importance of our relationship with Latin America and the entire region."

Spain is a longtime NATO ally, has nearly 1,000 soldiers fighting with the U.S. in Afghanistan, and was the target one of the worst Al Qaeda attacks in 2004. It is also happens to be located in Europe, not the Western Hemisphere - and Zapatero is no johnny-come-lately: He's been in office for four years.

Where is Spain, John McCain?

Also, if one WERE to look at the policy positions of the candidates, you would see that this country could use what Obama had to offer.

McCain's Small-Business Bunk

He claims 23 million small-business owners would pay higher tax rates under Obama. He's wrong. The vast majority would see no change, and many would get a cut.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/146210

Will the Real Tax-and-Spender Please ’Fess Up?

“McCain is picking the areas where rates go up and ignoring the areas where Obama is trying to rebalance the tax code so that taxpayers would save,” said John Irons, research and policy director at the Economic Policy Institute, which is generally viewed as sympathetic to working families. Mr. Irons said that “the important thing is to look at overall impact on people” and that on this score, “the vast majority of the population, almost the entirety of the middle class, would see more from Obama than McCain.”

Economists have also criticized the methodology behind Mr. McCain’s assertion that Americans from all kinds of backgrounds could end up paying thousands of dollars more in taxes if Mr. Obama got his way. Several criticized him as apparently basing his claim on an average figure in which, as Mr. Irons said, “Bill Gates is mixed with you and me, and everything gets skewed.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/us/politics/13check.html

The Financial Times

Obama holds bipartisan economy talks

"Mr McCain’s tax and spending proposals would add an estimated $3,400bn to the US deficit over the next decade compared with an estimated $700bn deficit reduction from Mr Obama’s plans, according to the Tax Policy Center, an independent think-tank."

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e23cc97c-5cfa-11dd-8d38-000077b07658.html

"Talking points" aside, the facts speak for themselves.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

burf — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:22:40 GMT

Obama won the debate, simply because he showed he knows the issues. If people listened to all the GOP talking points, they wondered if Obama knew anything, was he just an empty suit, etc.

Obama showed he aint an empty suit.

So, just on that, Obama won... he was speaking to the undecideds, not those who've made the choice already.

Otherwise, who won,was in the eyes of the watcher - - McCain people thought he won, and Obama people thought he won.

@Rsix35: your comment at 2:48PM is hilarious. McCain has flipped on everything he ever stood for, including his anti-regulation legacy. So, saying that Obama is guided by public opinion is ludicrous. Also, stop with the earmarks already... it's a minuscule portion of the budget, and it's how, much of local infrastructure is supported. Throwing money at Iraq, wastes more in 2 months, than all earmarks. Stop following what you're told to think, and consider using your brain to draw your own conclusions.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

gpete — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:22:54 GMT

The reason Barrack dominated the intellectual aspect is that John's arguments are shallow, bull-headed talking points designed to appeal to the Republican Party mythos of small government, less taxes, and gung-ho militarism. The Republican reality is massive and unrelenting military contracts to a handful of huge corporations, fervid tolerance for criminal financial theft of our GNP, and a appalling love of dictatorships around the world. The Republicans have sold our future with debt financed by foreign countries. Their hollow words supporting patriotism should cause their bloomers to burst into flames.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

Rsix35 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:23:42 GMT

I was a huge Obama fan during the primaries, my liberal wife was the one with reservations. After he got the nomination, I started doing some digging so I could prove her wrong.... well, I'm pretty scared now. I believe he will win and I believe there will be an enormous amount of money made on "Don't blame me, I voted for McCain" bumper stickers.

Take a look at France, England, Italy, and Spain for the economic life of the average person, it's where you'll be soon. They offshore everything except high ranking business and project management, and low income necessary goverment gigs. The disparity between rich and poor is larger than here and the average person lives like a college student. I had to deal with their healthcare system while living and traveling there, it's horrible and they pay for it with an 80% gas tax and via 17-21% sales tax.This is not change I want.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

AZtruthteller — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:33:34 GMT

I am an Obama supporter. As I listened to the debate on the radio, I had the impression that McCain was doing a better job of presenting his case--not that the substance of his answers was better or even correct. But--perhaps with a bit too much swagger--he sounded confident and decisive. So it was a (welcome) surprise to me that so many viewers had a different impression. Of course I was not aware that McCain avoided looking at Obama, which suggested contempt, perhaps defensiveness, rather than confidence and decisiveness.

But what fascinates me is that your theory, which I think at least partially explains the differing perceptions of who won, means that the Republican ads which have worked to create the "mythical 'Ayers-Wright Chicago Elite Radical' Obama" were responsible for the expectations that Obama's performance blew away. So the McCain ads, in short, are the reason Obama was the winner! If so, that's a welcome bit of justice to this jaded Democrat.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

ApostasyUSA — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:33:55 GMT

Rsix35

Without using "talking points", can tell me why you are, "pretty scared now", that you think Obama will be elected?

Are you really scared, or are you just using "talking points"?

Why do I find your theory about the European social systems, and how they compare to your idea of an Obama administration, a poor analogy?

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

kdallas999 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:50:26 GMT

McCain represents his generation well. This is how it is because I say so and if you don't agree with me I'm going to get louder and angrier and attack you more and more viciously. You need me to take care of you. When something needs to be done you've got to go there and do it yourself! (and probably get up early in the morning too). Typical old guy.

Obama represents his generation well. There is always way more information than a soundbyte worth so you can't chime in with some sweeping position until you know all the facts and you can't explain it to someone in a 5 second quote. If you're going to do something big you bring together as many people, perspectives, and positions as possible. And it's possible to do important things without being in the same room as someone.

Believe what McCain wants to tell you from his authoriative sound bytes. Understand Obama by reading his book.

You're either of one generational mindset or the other.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

saveoursouls — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:51:12 GMT

It appears that many responders to this article are not representing the truth about their political persuasions, especially those who say they were once Obama supporters.

It seems that discord-committing Implants are the latest ploy.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

Obamanator — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:55:59 GMT

I don't think that most average voters score these debates according to who had the best tactics, eg. McCain trying to steer the discussion to his strengths. We listened to what was actually said and our general impressions of each and made up our minds.

In fact, McCain's transparent tactics of trying to control the discussion was a turn-off to me, and alsoo showed where McCain did not want to discuss issues. At the same time, I felt Obama handled McCain's issues effortlessly, cogently, and confidantly.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

Obamanator — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:00:45 GMT

kdallas999 --

What a really great comment! I share your view that this is a battle of genreational 'mindset'. I am Boomer myself, but I hope you are correct in your assessment of ypung people as being more thoughtful and not persuaded by sound bites and clear politcal taxtics and propaganda.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

ApostasyUSA — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:01:07 GMT

saveoursouls

The Republican attack system is very simple actually:

Create a grotesquely distorted caricature, broadcast the delusion at the top of your lungs, and hope that you manage to reinforce just enough cynicism and hopelessness to ensure the election of someone who truly cares only for funneling all of the country's wealth and power into the hands of a tiny, corrupt elite.

"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers," - Thomas Pynchon.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

not.Brit — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:05:48 GMT

@ ApostasyUSA

Rsix35 is what we call a "concern troll." First, he builds up his "credentials" as a supporters (which are almost certainly invented). In his case, he claims to have been a fan of Obama and calls his wife a "liberal." I believe neither of these things. Then, he presents some item or talking point about which he claims to be "concerned" (which almost always includes right-wing talking points and buzz words). Rsix35 went for European socialism. Finally, he presents some solution to this perceived problem (which will always benefit the opposition). In this case, the implication is that we should vote for McCain ("Don't blame me, I voted for McCain").

The best response to a concern troll is completely ignoring them. He has no intention of continuing the debate (since he built it on false presences anyway).

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

dem4ever — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:10:56 GMT

Is it only me that noticed? John McCain mentioned, during the debate with Barack Obama, that during his travels in Georgia he saw a large picture of Vladimir Putin. My guess is that it was an attempt to reinforce his position on Russian aggression. If he knew anything about that region he would realize that a vast number of Ossetians are Russian and in fact want to be part of Russia. I hardly think the picture was put there by KGB operatives, perhaps it was placed there by groups once again wanting to be part of Russia. Dropping a few difficult to pronounce names does not make one a foreign affairs expert. Senator McCain is the one that really 'does not get it' and is obviously out of touch with reality.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

enrichme — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:12:59 GMT

Obviously there is a lot to digest between the actual debate and the millions of echos that have bounced off the walls since.

I have never been so entrigued by others comments and never so confused. I wonder when it happened, when we all became small reverbs of our surroundings. Have we always been so forgiving and kind? So judgemental and blind? Have we spoke so cautiously of boiling the frog that we missed our own boiling pots?

Who won the debate? Why didn't McCain look at Obama? Die in vain? Obama, Just the facts! It's a lot to take in and harder to walk away with a clean taste in your mouth.

I won't make you read between the lines, I am a Maverick supporter, I believe in the core, but am not a hard party "girl".

Just like many, I have been watching, listening and mining for the golden answers for tomorrow. Most days I believe I have found the closest match and the brightest future for myself, my children and my "un-informed" neighbors.

I get very defensive when I hear folks like Jerry in LA write about war time and how a soldier never dies in vain... I don't really know why, but my blood pumps a bit faster and I think of all the soldiers who were forgotten and discarded after the great "Hanoi" Hilton "vacation"... a soldier never dies in vain, I wish I believed that... I watch mothers cry and picket the white house... strangers to that soldier spit on his grave for being involved and you can say with a straight face no soldier dies in vain... I only pray that every American will go to sleep tonight and truly know the sacrafices being offered to them and hope that your tale of a soldier never dying in vain were true...

I do believe that McCain threw out the Naive card one too many times, but do understand where he was coming from. Unfortunately, the naive viewer/voter was also prey and this did not make him look patient or calculated as the next Commander must present. Obama did win there, but he too was not without a very full toothed smug grin more than once.

In the notes from Rsix35, good point... the comment about only being 17billion for 'beer nuts' was disheartening, 17 billion in my book is never-JUST regardless of the appropriation or comparison.

There are many more points made by Rsix35 that I found favor with and far too many facts left to disect for this post... afterall, I am one of the Americans WILLING to work... Obama, this phrase scares me... we will only make it easier for those who are WILLING and continue to hand feed those who are not, is this what you are saying?

To my fellow posters... here's to battening down the hatches and anchoring in for a long night come Thursday!

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

ApostasyUSA — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:18:56 GMT

@ not.Brit

Nice. We are seeing more of this each day. It's like reverse psychology.

The Rovian Republicans are trying to create an "opinion-base" simulacrum.

It's an attempt to distort our Democratic system, just like "operation chaos".

I don't know why people play along with it, but I find the tact rather treacherous.

Deceit has become the Republican Party.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

Retsos Nikos — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:29:57 GMT

The title "Oxford Debate" brings to mind the real Oxford Debate at Oxford University in 1985 in which the savvy and sophisticated prime minister of New Zealand David Lange trounced the then right wind evangelist Jerry Falwell. The Obama -McCain debate was generic by comparison to the Lange-Falwel. McCain sounded like a broken vinyl record with the needle stuck

on the "Obama does not understand!, and Obama doesn't know," refrain on a continuous spin.

That certainly verified McCain as a neurotic candidate that tried so hard to convince the viewers that Obama is either too naive or too ignorant to be president. That in fact offended the intelligence of many viewers. I think Jim Lehrer should have asked McCain -after having heard about 10 time McCain's parroting about Obama's ignorance- this question: Senator McCain: You have repeated about 10 times that senator Obama either "doesn't know, or doesn't understand." Do you think senator that Mr. Obama is too ignorant and too naive to be president? {Sorry, Jim. But you should have gotten off your list of questions for a few minutes, and have put Mr. McCain on the spot to give the viewers a "Yes" or "No" answer. But you proceeded in a mechanical fashion, and that decency -McCain's repetitions rose to the level of indecency- issue was left uncut in the debate grinder.}

I, however, expect the Obama campaign to get justice on the Sarah Palin - Joe Biden debate.

That debate would certainly rise to the David Lange- Jerry Falwell level by virtue of the wide knowledge of Joe Biden that mirrors that of David Lange, and the ineptness of Sarah Palin that will mirror that of Jerry Falwell. The idea of another real Oxford Debate on October 1 is

percolating in my mind as I see another brains mismatch that will expose whether naivete and ignorance is the domain of Obama -as senator McCain is relentlessly panting - or if it is just the the whole substance of his campaign. Nikos Retsos, retired academic

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

danielledaniel — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:37:43 GMT

It's late, and it's Obama with the ball. He shoots and...

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

lucy2008 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:43:27 GMT

Mr. Romano,

I agree with you and thought Senator Obama won the debate for similar reasons. However, I think this debate helped shore up Senator Obama's "presidentialness" with those that were leaning his way. I think it maked their viewpoint stronger and created good will which will help him going forward during the coming weeks. This is valuable, too.

Second, contrary to pundits and journalists, not all of the "talking points" are weighted equally by the average viewer. The beginning of the debate had the most important subjects, the economy and financial crisis. In this case, Senator Obama won the points and made clear his policies (even though not exactly asked for them) in a coherent vision. Senator McCain was somewhat incoherent during this section and his focus on earmarks over and over (something important to him but not to viewers) was annoying. He had no vision other than "cut taxes for the wealthy and corporations". Really discouraging. Someone needs to talk to him about how to package this in a way that sell to people vs. his party.

On Foreign Policy and National Security, most people have weighted their interest with Iraq/Afganistan, "make us safe from terrorism", and then "all the rest". Senator McCain won all the rest talking points, but this wasn't all that interesting to most of us. So what? Noone won the talking points for "safe from terrorism" because both answers were idiotic. For Iraq/Afganistan, Senator Obama won the debate. For a plan going forward, McCain said about the same, and Obama presented a new way forward. Unfortunately I think most people didn't watch the entire debate and missed the ending. Another reason why Senator Obama won the debate.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

Rsix35 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:43:42 GMT

not.brit & ApostasyUSA

You're tools. You don't know me, don't even begin to try to explain me, I bought the line hook lines and sinker just like you. Difference is, I was actually able to look at them both objectively and not just stick to my party (which is the real problem with people like you). My family is filled with crazy right wingers, who constantly send me democrat conspiracy mail. I consider myself an independent that leans a little to the right fiscally, and early on I really liked Obama's message. I still like the message and a lot of the things he wants to do, I just don't like where he plans to get the money to pay for it. Id' prefer he tax me directly, take an extra 5% from me, I don't need it.... I do however need my job. It's that issue alone that causes him to lose my vote.

For the record, I think McCain was a tool for picking Palin, has anger issues as mentioned here, and does favor rich people. Now for some reality, when rich people have more money, I have more opportunity, and when the companies I work for have less of it, I have less security.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

Rsix35 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 21:18:50 GMT

Without using "talking points", can tell me why you are, "pretty scared now", that you think Obama will be elected?

During the primaries (which I stated is when I was leaning Obama's way), I did not pay much attention to the details, just the message. After the 4 years we've had, some change would be very refreshing.

When it was narrowed to 2 candidates, I decided to dig in and see how each planned to accomplish what they claimed they were going to do. Most of my family are far right conspiracy fox News nut jobs.

Without using talking points (I purposefully avoid party line new outlets for actual news)

The part that scares me, is the business tax (not the reference to the individual 200 - 250k tax that is loosely tied to small businesses). Trying to find any detailed plan whatsoever is a problem, there are just lots of generalizations. There are a number of areas of concern for me in my situation however that there are details for, no cap on social security contributions, rasing the payroll tax cap (employers have to match this amount). His record indicates significant support for the "earned income credit", which is named inappropriately, because it has nothing to do with earning anything. I morally oppose this credit as it rewards people for not making over a certain amount of money in a year and the reward increases with the number of children they have. He talks about higher taxes for the top 5% at the same time says no higher taxes for those making less than 200 ind. or 250 fam., while the top 5% starts closer to 150k/individual. Which is it going to be the top 5% or those making 200 - 250?

The tie to European socialism is clearly stated below. I lived there, dealt with the "free" health care. Aside from is sucking (if you are not dying plan on a 2 week wait to see a doc), It was extremely expensive and everyone paid for it. $8/gallon for gas (80% of which was tax used to help pay for healthcare) and VAT (value added tax or more commonly know as sales tax here) of 17% - 21% depending on which EU country you were in. Combine those taxes with the high income tax they pay and you end up with 2 brackets of people, poor and rich. The middle class are the ones with a roof over their heads and the ability to go backpacking for a could weeks out of the year.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

ApostasyUSA — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 21:48:02 GMT

Rsix35

Awe.......you said "tools". I guess you are just negative and see the world as such?

One poster warned me of responding to your comments, now I know why. Although.....I do see passion in your ramblings.

For me.....the Democrats win in 08...there is no debate.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

poetician — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 23:16:44 GMT

Andrew,

While I am a huge fan of your blog (balanced journalism is so refreshing these days) I must respectfully disagree with your appraisal of Friday's debate. The fact is, low information voters have heard Obama speak. They don't know who he is, but they at least know that he is not some wild-eyed radical. Every low-information news outlet from the Ellen show to Entertainment Tonight has covered Obama. His first impression has been made and established.

Friday nights are typically the weeknights with the lowest tv viewing audience. Most people are watching movies, playing games, going bowling, or whatever their pleasure is. Friday night is not when you reach low-info voters. They're more likely (although still not very) to watch the Saturday Night Live satire than the actual debate. I can guarantee you, more of these "low-info" voters who shun the MSM will draw their conclusions from Jay Leno's Monday night monologue than the actual Friday night debate.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

froy1100 — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:01:26 GMT

Rsix35, yes, in Europe we have to set up a date to see a doctor, if it's not an emergency, but not even the richest people here advocate to supplant our system for a profit-driven one where lobby-powered insurance companies try their best to reject your treatment when you need it the most.

And if you think there is no middle class here, please get your head out of your ar*e. America has a much higher level of poverty than Western Europe, except Italy. Check the Human Poverty Index: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States

If we accept to pay a higher level of taxes is precisely because this way wealth is better distributed among the population and we can get the most basic services even if we get unlucky at some point of our lives. Go on, say it's socialism, communism, stalinism... nobody here will change it for your crumbling system.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

Caleb Murdock — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:07:33 GMT

Despite what that poll said, I do think that McCain's disdainful attitude will work against him. Obama is Mr. Spock -- objective, dispassionate, somewhat aloof -- and I think that adds to his presidential appeal. In comparison, McCain's version of Dr. McCoy isn't going over very well.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

theverysmartestever — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:45:39 GMT

You're backpedaling, Romano, because this one time, you got it totally wrong. I've been reading Stumper for a few months now and been impressed with your insight and hard work. In this case, however, you just watched the wrong debate. McCain wasn't focused or on message or on attack. He was rambling, vague, old-looking, cranky and weak. Even when he sort of came into his own when the discussion turned to national security, he was short on specifics and long on name-dropping. Obama came out with clear proposals, clear ideas and he went directly after his rival, even as he pointed out the areas upon which they agreed. That's why the debate helps him win over independents. He showed himself to be the better candidate: more calm, more cool, more focused, more presidential. Only you and a few people at Fox News thought otherwise — until the polls forced you to backpedal.

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

haynessemperfi — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 17:32:08 GMT

With less than two months before the election, Republicans and Democrats are driving it home: This is the election of the century.

And they're right: There is a lot at stake this year. This could be the year we change the lives of million Americans by providing them with decent health care and millions more with a living wage. It could be the year that we listen to the many Americans and Iraqis and withdraw occupying forces. It could be the year that we cut the near-trillion dollar defense budget, repeal NAFTA, revoke the Patriot Act and the illegal wiretapping FISA bill, build a green energy infrastructure, discipline runaway corporations and reign in the manic speculation driving the current food and housing crises.

That is Ralph Nader's plan, anyway-to offer Americans what the polls show they want.

So, while John McCain sings about bombing Iran and Barack Obama uses rhetoric about "smart" and "dumb" wars to stay in dumb wars and start new "smart" ones, Nader stands for strongly negotiated peace in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan. While Obama dismisses his earlier commitments to fair trade as "overheated," Nader would replace NAFTA with uniform environmental and labor standards. And while McCain chants "drill, baby, drill," and Obama prepares to replace Big Oil with Big Corn or Big Nukes, Nader calls for a renewable infrastructure.

But the Democrats tell us that we cannot vote for Nader because there is too much at stake this year. After eight years of George W. Bush, the argument goes, we cannot afford another Republican. We must rally behind the change party. And for the most part, students are buying it. Emphatically anybody-but-Bush and unfamiliar with the Democrats' duplicity, these students mistakenly believe that ousting the current administration will exorcise the demons of war, jingoism and economic imperialism they represent.

http://www.dailycal.org/article/102803/considering_the_third_option

http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/2008/09/22/nader-open-the-debates-for-third-party-candidates-like-bob-barr-cynthia-mckinney-and-me.html

www.votenader.org

re: Oxford Debate, Take Two: The Importance of Expectations

missionmom — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:48:25 GMT

I'm not sure why the "combative" writer who called John McCain a "100 year old retard" even gets to be heard. Anyone who speaks like this and uses the word retard as slang deserves to be ignored.This is supposed to be a forum to discuss the candidates and their views and the debate, not high school name calling. What a waste of space.