Drudge poll scores it a little over 2:1 for McCain. That sounds about right.
I thought McCain should have made more of the fact that liberating Iraq was a serious blow against terrorism. After all the pain and doubt from 2004 to 2006 people are understandably afraid to make this point, but it is undeniably true that the Hussein regime was a major terrorist-sponsoring state, second only to Iran in virulence. They reached out to Al Qaeda and its affiliates. They publicly offered bin Laden asylum. They openly sponsored Palestinian suicide bombings. Leaving doubt about whether they had WMD was unacceptable in a post-9/11 world, which was why it had 70% support at the time. Our execution could have been better, but it was a good idea then and it’s still a good idea now.Â
I also think that when Obama rather snottily brought up the humorous “bomb Iran” song and some hyperbolic comments regarding N Korea, McCain should have countered with the Ayers card. Obama looked petulant and petty anyway with his “coming from you” remark, but pointing out that Obama had some level of relationship with an unrepentant terrorist that bombed the Capitol would have been devastating as Obama’s complaint centered on McCain’s national security judgment.
{ 12 comments }
Agreed of course on Iraq.
On who won the debate: Drudge skews heavily rightward, no?
I thought it was uninspiring. I expected better from both of them.
But if I had to score it, I would call it a draw.
I’m just impressed when Obama can put together two intelligent sentences without his teleprompter.
/kidding
I’m just getting back at all the lefties who said that anytime Bush could get through a debate.
Sorry again:
I SWEAR TO GOD Senator Obama HAD AN EARPIECE IN tuned to his ADVISORS!!!!!!1111!!!!/////!!!1111
/snark
So while Iran escapes sanctions, we decide to back the guy who supports, you guessed it, sanctions. Drudgereport scored it in Obama’s favor? No kidding really? They were always such a leftist publication. The daily KOS, which IMO is just as trustworthy of a publication says Obama won by a landslide.
On substance, McCain won hands down. He’s definitely a Commander-in-Chief, while Obama comes off as a polished college kid, running for Student Body President at a fancy university.
But …..if the objective is to win the Presidency (hint: it is)Â I think Obama ultimately prevailed. He held his own ground, was well prepared, and took no major damage.
It’s kinda like 04′ — I thought Kerry mostly outperformed Bush in the debates, yet still gained little, if any, political traction.
HB
Drudgereport scored it in Obama’s favor? No kidding really?
Meant to say McCain there…
Well, Drudge does skew heavly rightward, but compering it to Daily Kos is not only unfair but ludicrous if one has actually read the two sites.
From a pure performance perspective, I’d call it a draw. Obama had the edge in style and smoothness, McCain had the edge in facts and experience. Neither by enough to make any difference.
But in part because conservatives billed this as the forum where Obama would make a pratfall and bloody his own nose, Obama wins handily from any sort of political perspective.
This advances Obama’s claim to be a competent President and it doesn’t advance anything at all for McCain.
CosmicConservative’s last blog post..VP in spiked heels
CC:
I dunno, Obama made a couple of Pratfalls last night. The big one, in my mind, was the "Henry Kissinger agrees with me that we should have unconditional talks with the President of Iran" lie. A close second goes to "I have a bracelet too! Gimme a second to read the name of the soldier off of it" gaffe.
But you’re right. Considering how gaffe-prone and boneheaded the Big Zero can be he did well.
It was the “Straight talk express” vs. the “Smooth-talking a good game express”
"Well, Drudge does skew heavly rightward, but compering it to Daily Kos is not only unfair but ludicrous if one has actually read the two sites."
Apples to oranges in any case. DailyKos is basically a giant blog community (where the opinion and partisanship is in open and detailed display), whereas drudge is basically a news aggregator with headlines and story selections that are crafted to tell generally right-leaning narratives.
I’m not sure, though, that the audience of drudge leans as heavily conservative as the editorial decisions do. A heck of a lot of people left and right read drudge.
""Henry Kissinger agrees with me that we should have unconditional talks with the President of Iran" lie."
This one I find sort of interesting, because it depends on what you mean by "we."Â Kissinger now insists that he thinks that it’s bad that the President should do it, which is how he tries to insist that Obama is wrong: but the fact remains that he essentially supports high-level talks to Iran.
I’m not sure what substantive distance there really is between the President and the President’s direct foreign policy subordinate talking to someone is, but the key area of dispute is over whether we should have a list of demands made up that must be fulfilled before even sitting down and talking. Kissinger pretty clearly agrees with Obama that that’s not something worth pouting over.
I think that’s right. Talking to a foe at all should never be played as a bargaining chip on its own, even if the for might try to spin it to their benefit. If you have a list of demands, it might just as well be the best place to get them a hearing.Â
There are certainly legitimate tactical arguments to be made about whether the President should do it or not, but I don’t think any side of them is life or death, or a sign of poor judgment.
Bad’s last blog post..Ghost Haunts Dumbells, Say Dumbells
I’m not sure what substantive distance there really is between the President and the President’s…
Huge. You forget how grossly misplayed the photo of Rumsfeld meeting with Saddam in the ’80s was by the left. Diplomats or advisers from both sides meeting is one thing (it isn’t a photo-op), presidents meeting with presidents or advisers is completely different and shows tacit approval (and would be a huge proopaganda bonus for the President of Iran. It might be OK to be in contact with them to state out or demands, but having the President do it is a bad idea.
And that is what Obama stated (previous to the debate) he wanted to do.
Comments on this entry are closed.