Presidential Debate

[Matteo]

Me and my wife just finished watching the debate a few hours ago. Wondering if anyone else had a chance to watch it and wondered what they thought.

I felt like both candidates were strong on many issues, however I felt like McCain looked weak and uncomfortable at times while Obama was direct and resolute. It bothered me that McCain would not stop giving personal anecdotes and Obama would not stop talking about Afghanistan, to the point of exhaustion.

They both managed to not answer many of the questions though, they always seem to be able to do that in these debates.

I guess I would give the edge to the Obama, but it was pretty even for the most part on the topic of actual issues.

[Beldaran]

I though Obama was way better than McCain.

McCain gave his stump speech for every answer, while Obama gave thoughtful, reasoned answers. I don't think Obama will live up to his promises, but he certainly looked like the better choice tonight.

[Icey]

I agree with Bel. I think Obama was very much stronger tonight. Whereas McCain kept citing having "been there" as evidence of his experience, I guess, Obama actually talked about substance to back up his foreign policy beliefs. I mean, great, you've been to all these places, but that doesn't mean you have the best judgement or any requisite knowledge to deal with them. It was rather annoying actually, I was hoping he would say something different or better.

I look forward to the VP debate, which are always bottom of the barrel. Can't wait to see Biden and Palin top John Edwards' 04 performance for horrible debating. Biden will say a lot of things that are factually inaccurate and ridiculous, while Palin will say things that are full of nonsense verbiage and are failed attempts to hide her lack of knowledge on every subject. Fun!

[Trevelyan_06]

while Palin will say things that are full of nonsense verbiage and are failed attempts to hide her lack of knowledge on every subject. Fun!

You forgot about her using God as an answer at least a few times. Looking like a deer in the head light when asked a question she doesn't have a cheat sheet for. Plus random nervous, fidgety, and evasive actions/words.

As for Biden, I'm telling you guys he's Tessio from the Godfather. Look it up. He just needs a little darker tan.

[rock_nog]

McCain only agreed to debate at the last minute, and so he didn't have time to prepare, because he had previously been spending his time actually trying to solve this economic crisis.

/already anticipating the Republican response to the debate.

[Matteo]

McCain only agreed to debate at the last minute, and so he didn't have time to prepare, because he had previously been spending his time actually trying to solve this economic crisis.



Foreign Policy is supposed to be McCain's strong suit. Not having time to "prepare" is one sorry excuse for a lackluster showing.

[Modus Ponens]

McCain only agreed to debate at the last minute, and so he didn't have time to prepare, because he had previously been spending his time actually trying to solve this economic crisis.

/already anticipating the Republican response to the debate.

Ugh. I know this isn't your opinion, but I'm going to criticize it anyway. Debating your fellow candidate so that the public may get an idea of who will better handle an economic crisis is a part of handling the crisis.

[rock_nog]

I just felt bad for Jim Leher. You know, he's sitting there trying to get answers to questions and trying to stick to the rules, and the candidates just keep going off on tangents and such. Must be a very frustrating job, moderating a presidential debate.

All in all, firstly, it was nice to see both candidates actually coherent and articulate for a change (watching Dubbya speak is always painful). Also, I really feel that foreign-policywise especially, Obama seemed a lot stronger than one would've expected given the fact that foreign policy is allegedly McCain's area of expertise.

[elise]

Here in the Netherlands they say on the news that Obama was the best.

because he had previously been spending his time actually trying to solve this economic crisis
The one he also recently denied there was..............:confused:

[AtmaWeapon]

McCain only agreed to debate at the last minute, and so he didn't have time to prepare, because he had previously been spending his time actually trying to solve this economic crisis.

/already anticipating the Republican response to the debate.Now I'm just a tinfoil hat guy that's very dissatisfied with the current administration, but I read the situation as something completely different.

The first request for the bailout was a grab for golden parachutes. $700 billion, no questions asked because it's "important". Yeah, right. So then we move on to, "I'm not going to the debate if you don't vote this plan through." It kind of makes me wonder who McCain knows that would be the recipient of some of this cash. Personally I think we ought to do it but force the resignation of the entire board of every company that takes money; no severance package, no benefits, no retirement. It's supposed to be a great shame to ask the government to give you free money. In other times and cultures, these guys would already have their guts on the ground/brains on the wall. Instead, they know they can count on "America" to make up for their mistakes.

Also, keep in mind that McCain and his crew felt like the economy was sound until the past few weeks. My guess is we'd rather have him excluded from restructuring plans as his mind for economics leaves me wanting.

Anyway, I read a transcript and McCain seemed not unprepared to debate but unprepared to answer important questions. When the moderator has to say, "Back to my question, do you have an answer?" (happened after McCain's first response to "Where do you stand on the bailout?") then you are wasting everyone's time.

I don't think Obama can clean this up or fix things. I think it'd take 4-5 terms worth of people determined to end corruption in combination with kicking half of Congress out and replacing them with like-minded people. However, Obama's not making me feel like he's got the concerns of the stupidly rich in mind. That's going to change if he's elected, but in this case I prefer to be lied to instead of promised nothing more than the continuation of the current loopholes and bailouts.

[rock_nog]

Well, according to McCain's defense, when he said the fundamentals of the economy are strong, he didn't mean that we weren't having problems. Frankly, I have no idea what he meant by fundamentals, and I just keep picturing the switch from barter to a currency-based economy.

[AtmaWeapon]

Well, according to McCain's defense, when he said the fundamentals of the economy are strong, he didn't mean that we weren't having problems. Frankly, I have no idea what he meant by fundamentals, and I just keep picturing the switch from barter to a currency-based economy.Funny, I picture it more as, "I don't know what I'm talking about either, but if I say this people will calm down and think I'm under control."

There's nothing fundamentally sound about an economy that has banks so important to the economy that one tanking can ruin it all and allows them to lend credit to anything with a pulse. For the past 5 years all I've seen on "financial tips" news clips and web sites is to stop living on credit. Maybe Merrill Lynch should have got their investing tips from CNN?

*edit* Also, I'm really curious how, if McCain spent the past few weeks working on the bailout plan instead of preparing for the debate, he had really weak answers to questions like, "Where do you stand on the bailout plan?" It seems like that's one he should have nailed, what with spending the whole week working on it.

[phattonez]

I'm surprised that everyone here is giving Obama the advantage. Frankly I didn't see an advantage either way. It was a tie with foreign policy, and on the economy both are equally worthless.

[rock_nog]

If you want my really candid take on the situation right now, I think McCain is starting to suffer in the same way that Hillary did during the primaries. During the primaries, Hillary and Obama were neck-and-neck for most of the time. However, toward the end, Hillary seemed to start to lose it, I think because she just assumed that she was going to be the nominee, and even though Obama wasn't leading by a huge margin or anything, he wasn't being trounced like she expected.

Now, we're starting to see the same thing with McCain, I think, and it goes back to his pick of Palin as his VP. It seems to me that he's starting to panic because he just assumed he would win. No, Obama's not pummeling him or anything, but he's keeping up the pace, which I think is part of why we keep seeing this, well, erratic behavior (to borrow the Obama camp's take on McCain). I mean, just watching the foreign policy debate, McCain seemed to be a bit flustered, I think, because I think he expected to blow Obama away on foreign policy and it didn't happen.

That's just my take on things.

EDIT: Phattonez, I think it really depends on your personal views. I agree that the economy wasn't a strong point for either of them, but foreign-policywise, I definitely agree much more with Obama than I do McCain. McCain's just too heavily focused on this tough-guy approach to diplomacy, and I think we've seen that it doesn't work.

[phattonez]

And Obama is talking about invading Pakistan if we have a lead on Obama. That's a dangerous road to go down. Not very smart on his part.

[vegeta1215]

I watched part of the debate but I turned it off after a while cause all the bickering and finger pointing was giving me a headache. I tend to favor democratic party views, but I refuse to be affiliated with a party. My vote is not set in stone - I'll vote for who I like the most and who I think will do the best job. But what I saw last night didn't push me either way, and that was disappointing.

[Beldaran]

During the primaries, Hillary and Obama were neck-and-neck for most of the time. However, toward the end, Hillary seemed to start to lose it,

What universe do you live in?

Towards the end, Obama was losing almost every single primary and he was bleeding electoral votes. Hillary made her greatest surge at the end.

[rock_nog]

No, I was talking about Hillary's handling of her campaign. She started to lose a grasp on her campaign toward the end. I wasn't talking votewise.

[Matteo]

And Obama is talking about invading Pakistan if we have a lead on Obama. That's a dangerous road to go down. Not very smart on his part.

You did watch the debate right?
Obama clearly stated several times that he would not invade Pakistan. We are already occupying parts of Pakistan in order to corral the Taliban and Al Kaeda (sp?). He was simply stating the need to ignore/refuse the Pakistani government if they continue to refuse to aid our quest to end the terroristic threat there.

[phattonez]

He said that we would go into Pakistan and take out Bin Laden regardless of Pakistan's approval. Don't you think that Pakistan would view that as an invasion? It's very dangerous.

[rock_nog]

I don't like it any more than you do, phattonez. Obviously, I would hate for this country to be put in a position where we didn't have Pakistan's permission - the region in question is a hotbed of terrorist/Taliban activity. But, let's say we happen to get solid info on where bin Laden's hiding, and let's say we can't get Pakistan's approval to go in and capture him. What do we do? On the one hand, we clearly don't want to send military forces into Pakistan without permission. However, we also don't want bin Laden to escape.

I just don't know. I really don't like the idea of sending military forces into Pakistan without permission, but bin Laden is a major threat. I'm almost willing to say that bagging bin Laden would be worth the hit to our relationship with Pakistan.

[phattonez]

Pakistan has nuclear weapons and can enter a full scale war against us. Bin Laden is a nuisance in comparison.

[Matteo]

Pakistan has nuclear weapons and can enter a full scale war against us. Bin Laden is a nuisance in comparison.

Weapons and tactical experience that WE have given them.

The cycle continues.

[AtmaWeapon]

Look, Pakistan may have nuclear weapons, but we've got REX and RAY, not to mention Arsenal Gear. We'd not only shoot their nukes out of the sky, we'd use the penis laser to completely obliterate them without any need for nuclear retaliation.

I've got a buddy visiting family in Pakistan right now it makes me sad every time I read a news article about action over there because it makes me wonder how he's doing.

[Trevelyan_06]

Pakistan has nuclear weapons and can enter a full scale war against us. Bin Laden is a nuisance in comparison.

Not true. Pakistan has nuclear weapons yes, but they aren't the huge strategic missiles that the US and USSR had pointed at each other. The largest nuke detonated by the US (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_the_United_States) comes in at 15 megatons, and we have a range of 8,100 miles. In comparison, Pakistan's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction) largest was 36 kilotons with a max range of 3100 miles.

While the nuclear capabilities of Pakistan can't be ignored, they can't really get into a "full scale" war with us. Yes they could kill a lot of our troops and fuck up the environment by detonating nukes, but in the end we would simply outclass them and they don't have the range to launch nukes at our homeland.

Bin Laden, on the other hand has actually attacked American soil, has threatened to do so again, and the capabilities to do it. As Mattdwr said, we have troops there already. Obama was merely stating that given hard evidence of where Osama is, he wouldn't let Pakistan stand in the way of getting to him. This is not dangerous. If Pakistan wants to start a nuclear war over us going in to capture a terrorist they aren't going to find very much support in the world community.

[rock_nog]

Personally, I could understand Pakistan being pissed with us for doing that, but war? Seems a bit extreme to me.

[phattonez]

Just turn it around. Imagine Pakistan coming into this country to capture someone who bombed one of their embassies. They come in with helicopters, planes, ground troops, etc. Militarily, it will always be perceived as a threat unless there is a prior arrangement.

[rock_nog]

Well, obviously they'd see it as a threat, no question there, but there are levels of response, especially when it comes to an ally, and especially when it comes to a region which honestly isn't really even under Pakistani control (technically, yes, it's within their border, but there isn't really any Pakistani presence there, which is why it's such a haven for terrorists).

[Prrkitty]

Another issue with the debate was when they were questioned over education...

McCain couldn't and wouldn't stop talking about what he'd do for the Veterans. It's like he refused to talk about the education of our younger generation and would concentrate more on those that have "already come thru".

Don't get me wrong... yes Veterans do need more. But our younger generation needs a better education because they're the future of humanity.

[rock_nog]

To be fair, domestic policy really wasn't the focus of this debate. Hopefully, we'll hear more on the candidates' positions on education later.

[Trevelyan_06]

Just turn it around. Imagine Pakistan coming into this country to capture someone who bombed one of their embassies. They come in with helicopters, planes, ground troops, etc. Militarily, it will always be perceived as a threat unless there is a prior arrangement.

If we were hiding one of their terrorist or allowing them to hide via our poor control over an area of our country, they would in fact have a case for coming in. If they indeed had the ability to come into our country which they do not.


If we had a big terrorist cell sitting in say Utah that was attacking other parts of the world and we weren't doing anything about it because we either couldn't or didn't care then those countries under attack would have a right to come in and put a stop to it.

That being said though, America would make every effort possible to capture the person that had bombed the Pakistani embassy. Pakistan isn't helping us with the terrorist, and there is some evidence that they might actually be helping them.

[rock_nog]

You know, I don't like to suggest it, but one does have to wonder. I mean, let's say they just don't have the manpower to control that region. Why not invite us in?

[Icey]

You know, I don't like to suggest it, but one does have to wonder. I mean, let's say they just don't have the manpower to control that region. Why not invite us in?

I didn't see this earlier, otherwise I would have replied then.

The Pakistani public would never accept that. They believe (probably rightfully) that increased US action against terrorists has actually inflamed extremist passions and encouraged more violent actions in their country. So inviting the US in would be political suicide. Also, the regions of Pakistan that are not governed are that way out of respect for the various tribal groups and leaders that have always resided there.

[rock_nog]

Thanks for clearing that up. That's just horrible, I must say.