Second Pres Debate: Who Won?

[The Painter]

Yes, he's been harping on that one - our beloved JREF president is not happy about it.

From your link;

A lot of great scientists got their first glimpse of the stars in a planetarium.

Their first look at the stars??? Why didn't they just go outside??

Pssst. they are not really stars. They are little dots of light that represent the stars. In the computer age, aren't planetariums obsolete?

 

[chipmunk stew]

Best line of the night went to Obama:

Senator McCain, in the last debate and again today suggested that I don't understand. It's true. There are some things I don't understand. I don't understand how we ended up invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11....[wide-ranging criticism of Bush/McCain foreign policy follows]

 

[Sasha]

My mother's response had me chuckling (she's 67 years old) - she had thought that McCain sounded like a querulous doddering old bloke, she watched the debate live last night and she said she was astonished to learn that he is a querulous doddering old bloke - in her words "He couldn't get a job at B&Q." (B&Q are a large UK DIY chain who are well known for employing older people.)

Her opinion of the debate matches my own - boring, stiff and not a debate just a format for each candidate to spout off their prepared sound-bites, Prime Minister questions it is not! On balance I would say McCain came across slightly better.

I thought the same thing - it's not a debate at all, just a stand-up recitation. I fell asleep after 45 minutes. I came here this morning hoping I had missed some inciteful speech or even a well-laid zinger but it sounds like the whole thing was just a yawner.

 

[Tricky]

The VP debate was much more interesting. After watching the debates, I'm wishing Biden had won the nomination and Obama was his VP pick. And Sarah was wearing a bikini.

 

[seayakin]

Her opinion of the debate matches my own - boring, stiff and not a debate just a format for each candidate to spout off their prepared sound-bites, Prime Minister questions it is not! On balance I would say McCain came across slightly better.

Unfortunately, I have to agree with this completely and as others have said, debates are not so much a discussion of issues but stump speeches with their talking points given out of standard order.

I think the only thing that might change this is if you have a moderator who has power and the ability to try and force candidates to answer a question. Unfortunately, the campaigns would probably never agree to such a moderator.

 

[BenBurch]

Obama is moving into "landslide" territory eh? I sincerely hope that all the Democrats adopt such a ridiculous stance based on nothing but hubris, it may just turn this thing around in the long run.

Don't kid yourself Ben. I admit that Obama is winning. But 375 electoral votes? That's just laugh out loud kool-aid drinking nonsense. You are giving him states that are currently still very, very very close.

How do you like your dish of crow prepared?

 

[Puppycow]

Linky

 

[BenBurch]

From your link;



Their first look at the stars??? Why didn't they just go outside??

Pssst. they are not really stars. They are little dots of light that represent the stars. In the computer age, aren't planetariums obsolete?

Well, if you lived in Chicago, you'd know that you can never see but a few stars even in the best of circumstances. And very very few of us are favored in this day and age with an absolutely dark sky, so the only way you can appreciate how many stars there are, or that you can see the Milky Way or the Magellanic Clouds or M-31 or the Orion Nebula by eye is in a planetarium.

Only in a planetarium can a teacher be assured a clear "night" for the execution of a planned lecture, and most primary school children simply cannot be gotten to a dark field in the middle of the night for one anyway.

And Planetariums are essential for teaching stellar navigation.

And yes, some people have vision that cannot correct for infinity, and they cannot appreciate the heavens except in a planetarium, or they have defects on night vision such that only in a planetarium, where you can increase the brightness of the objects far beyond what is natural, can they see any of them at all. I have spoken to several.

So, you can argue for luddite ignorance if you want to; it does not reflect well on you or your movement or your candidate.

 

[Puppycow]

Linky

 

[BenBurch]

[qimg]http://www.surveyusa.com/chartfx70/temp/CFV1008_085743204A9.png[/qimg]

Linky

Image link did not make it.

 

[Puppycow]

In Striking Contrast To 1st Debate, State of Washington Sees Obama As ‘Clear Winner’ of Round #2

Immediately following last night’s town-hall debate, SurveyUSA interviewed 1,000 state of Washington adults, of whom 741 watched the debate. Of debate watchers:

54% say Obama was the clear winner.
29% say McCain was the clear winner.
18% say there was no clear winner.
After the first Presidential Debate, Washington State gave McCain equal marks with Obama. Last night, Obama margin is almost 2:1.

Debate audience was split on whether candidates spent too much time, or just the right amount of time, attacking each other. Audience was 21% Republican, 40% Democrat, 38% Independent. This is significant because it means some Republicans may have lost interest in the race. Republican audience was larger for the 1st presidential and the vice presidential debate. Republicans by 7:1 saw McCain as the clear winner. Democrats by 11:1 saw Obama as the clear winner. Independents, the most critical and coveted group, broke 5:3 for Obama.

 

[Puppycow]

Image link did not make it.

Hmm. It appears on my screen. Oh, well. You can click the link. It shows that 56% of Californians polled by SurveyUSA thought that Obama won the debate. 26% thought that McCain won.

California, By More Than 2:1, Sees Obama as ‘Clear Winner’ of 2nd Presidential Debate
SurveyUSA Breaking News - 3 hours ago
Just as California did after the 1st presidential debate, just as California did after the vice presidential debate, CA judges Barack Obama the “clear winner” of the 2nd presidential debate. Immediately following last night’s town-hall, SurveyUSA interviewed 1,250 CA adults, of whom 904 watched. Of debate watchers:

56% say Obama was the clear winner.
26% say McCain was the clear winner.
18% say there was no clear winner.

Debate audience was split on whether candidates spent too much time, or just the right amount of time, attacking each other. Audience was 27% Republican, 45% Democrat, 26% Independent. Republicans by 5:2 saw McCain as the clear winner. Democrats by 8:1 saw Obama as the clear winner. Independents, the most critical and coveted group, broke 5:3 for Obama.

 

[not_so_new]

I said this a page or so back but I will say it again.

Everyone is complaining that they didn't answer questions etc. but..... they had a minute (which they often went over) to give answers to some pretty heavy questions.

Do we honestly expect them to be able to get into deep, drawn-out nuts and bolts answers to so of the most important questions of our time?

When they are given 1 minute to present a policy that in some cases took years to develop is it fair to say that their replies are less than complex?

And let's look at the audience for these replies, what is the depth of the average American's understanding on these issues? Rule number ONE of any speaking engagement Know Thy Audience.

A minute IS just about enough time to present a good sound bite and not much more. Blame the short attention span of the voters, blame the debate format, blame the network coverage and blame the candidates to agreeing to this format but don't blame them for sticking loosely to it.

The only way around it in my eyes to to ask fewer questions and let both candidates free form, debate each other toe to toe. That does not happen in American politics so I think the blame is on all of us for wanting or accepting short sound bites.

 

[Puppycow]

Not sure why SurveyUSA polled these non-swing states, but that's what they have.

 

[Pookster]

Obama was more in command of his answers again. McCain again seemed too intent on trying to jab at Obama. There were a lot of miss opportunities where McCain could've put Obama's back to the wall if he had focused more on articulating his positions better. He came across as "I know I can do the job, trust me", instead of actually demonstrating he had a grasp of the issues (he was better though on foreign policy).

Obama obviously benefits the most from last night. He held his own when he could've easily been upstage by McCain in a setting Obama was perceived beforehand to be weaker in. Obama looked Presidential. He seemed in command of himself and his answers. He wasn't overly negative. That should continue to help the perception of him with undecideds.

McCain hurt himself with his style and presentation. He seemed to realize Obama was doing well, and it frustrated him ... and it showed.

 

[quarky]

I fell asleep, but it felt like I won.

 

[The Painter]

Well, if you lived in Chicago, you'd know that you can never see but a few stars even in the best of circumstances. And very very few of us are favored in this day and age with an absolutely dark sky, so the only way you can appreciate how many stars there are, or that you can see the Milky Way or the Magellanic Clouds or M-31 or the Orion Nebula by eye is in a planetarium.
And yes, some people have vision that cannot correct for infinity, and they cannot appreciate the heavens except in a planetarium, or they have defects on night vision such that only in a planetarium, where you can increase the brightness of the objects far beyond what is natural, can they see any of them at all. I have spoken to several.

So, you can argue for luddite ignorance if you want to; it does not reflect well on you or your movement or your candidate.

I see you completely ignored my question about computers making planetariums obsolete.

If I lived in Chicago?? Yeah, we don't have any lights in New York.

Oh and please tell me what is my movement and who is my candidate? Just because I don't like Obama, doesn't mean I like McCain. You assume a lot.

 

[Denver]

...I know, he is an older guy and he lived through a lot in Vietnam and that effects his mobility. That said, he looks stuff (because he is) and I think that effects his "likability" while he is up and walking around.

My girlfriend / parter said that when he says "my friends" with his body language it almost seems like an attack, almost too forceful. I think this is a really bad format for McCain.

The whole "My Friends" thing is an interesting tactic. I don't think it is meant to actually trick anyone into thinking he is our personal friend. As you noted, McCain has an age element. Rather than ignore this, a good strategy would be to play up its strengths. Such as the experience that comes with age.

The whole "my friends" thing hearkens back to earlier times, when politicians made speeches on radio or in black and white news reels, when we didn't have the internet to discover, analyze, and spread the dirt on the candidates like we can today. There was more trust, even awe (and fear), of the high level politicians, and the belief that it was they and their decisions that guided our nation. Growing up to be president was sometimes seen as the ultimate goal in school.

So I think McCain is using that phrase to try to create a mood that makes people connect him to those earlier times. To "The Good Old Days".

Good luck with that.

 

[Pookster]

I said this a page or so back but I will say it again.

Everyone is complaining that they didn't answer questions etc. but..... they had a minute (which they often went over) to give answers to some pretty heavy questions.

Do we honestly expect them to be able to get into deep, drawn-out nuts and bolts answers to so of the most important questions of our time?

When they are given 1 minute to present a policy that in some cases took years to develop is it fair to say that their replies are less than complex?

And let's look at the audience for these replies, what is the depth of the average American's understanding on these issues? Rule number ONE of any speaking engagement Know Thy Audience.

A minute IS just about enough time to present a good sound bite and not much more. Blame the short attention span of the voters, blame the debate format, blame the network coverage and blame the candidates to agreeing to this format but don't blame them for sticking loosely to it.

The only way around it in my eyes to to ask fewer questions and let both candidates free form, debate each other toe to toe. That does not happen in American politics so I think the blame is on all of us for wanting or accepting short sound bites.

The format sucked. It was a huge impediment to getting the kind of answers most wanted. Both candidates were forced to turn to their stump speech soundbites because of it. But of the two, Obama actually did answer some of the questions fairly well, IMO. McCain attempted to, but was just a little too clumsy because he was constantly trying to include jabs at Obama. There just wasn't enough time to do both.

 

[not_so_new]

The format sucked. It was a huge impediment to getting the kind of answers most wanted. Both candidates were forced to turn to their stump speech soundbites because of it. But of the two, Obama actually did answer some of the questions fairly well, IMO. McCain attempted to, but was just a little too clumsy because he was constantly trying to include jabs at Obama. There just wasn't enough time to do both.

I agree. I think that Obama is winning these debates in most people's eyes because he is doing a better job of staying on point and answering the questions mostly as they are asked.

McCain spent way too much time attacking last night and given a limited time to respond there wasn't enough time to do both as you said. Funny but most pundits feel McCain "had to attack" but if in the end that cost him the debate what was the point.

Obama just looked more calm cool and collected because he wasn't looking for a shot at McCain every chance he could find an opening. McCain on the other hand just seemed to be always playing from behind because he was always looking to counter Obama instead of presenting his own plan clearly.

At least that was my take and judging by the polling numbers I have seen I think a lot of people agree with me.