Tonight's debate is not going to do John McCain any favors. On the contrary, it was the most lopsided of the four events in the post-debate snap polls. SCHIEFFER: All right. We're going to move to another question and the topic is leadership in this campaign. Both of you pledged to take the high road in this campaign yet it has turned very nasty. Senator Obama, your campaign has used words like "erratic," "out of touch," "lie," "angry," "losing his bearings" to describe Senator McCain. Senator McCain, your commercials have included words like "disrespectful," "dangerous," "dishonorable," "he lied." Your running mate said he "palled around with terrorists." Are each of you tonight willing to sit at this table and say to each other's face what your campaigns and the people in your campaigns have said about each other? And, Senator McCain, you're first. And, Senator Obama, you didn't repudiate those remarks. Every time there's been an out-of-bounds remark made by a Republican, no matter where they are, I have repudiated them. I hope that Senator Obama will repudiate those remarks that were made by Congressman John Lewis, very unfair and totally inappropriate. So I want to tell you, we will run a truthful campaign. This is a tough campaign. And it's a matter of fact that Senator Obama has spent more money on negative ads than any political campaign in history. And I can prove it. And, Senator Obama, when he said -- and he signed a piece of paper that said he would take public financing for his campaign if I did -- that was back when he was a long-shot candidate -- you didn't keep your word. And when you looked into the camera in a debate with Senator Clinton and said, "I will sit down and negotiate with John McCain about public financing before I make a decision," you didn't tell the American people the truth because you didn't. And that's -- that's -- that's an unfortunate part. Now we have the highest spending by Senator Obama's campaign than any time since Watergate. MCCAIN: Yes, real quick. Mr. Ayers, I don't care about an old washed-up terrorist. But as Senator Clinton said in her debates with you, we need to know the full extent of that relationship. We need to know the full extent of Senator Obama's relationship with ACORN, who is now on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy. The same front outfit organization that your campaign gave $832,000 for "lighting and site selection." So all of these things need to be examined, of course. MCCAIN: And it's not the fact -- it's not the fact that Senator Obama chooses to associate with a guy who in 2001 said that he wished he had have bombed more, and he had a long association with him. It's the fact that all the -- all of the details need to be known about Senator Obama's relationship with them and with ACORN and the American people will make a judgment. And my campaign is about getting this economy back on track, about creating jobs, about a brighter future for America. And that's what my campaign is about and I'm not going to raise taxes the way Senator Obama wants to raise taxes in a tough economy. And that's really what this campaign is going to be about.
McCain was winning the debate early on, responding with surprising vigor and detail on the economy. But then came this:
What if McCain had stopped right there? He gets in a marginally compelling talking point about the town hall meetings, but then steps back and shares the blame.
When Senator Obama was first asked, he said, "Any place, any time," the way Barry Goldwater and Jack Kennedy agreed to do, before the intervention of the tragedy at Dallas. So I think the tone of this campaign could have been very different.
And the fact is, it's gotten pretty tough. And I regret some of the negative aspects of both campaigns. But the fact is that it has taken many turns which I think are unacceptable.
Instead, McCain continued as follows:One of them happened just the other day, when a man I admire and respect -- I've written about him -- Congressman John Lewis, an American hero, made allegations that Sarah Palin and I were somehow associated with the worst chapter in American history, segregation, deaths of children in church bombings, George Wallace. That, to me, was so hurtful.
McCain's implication that Obama was principally responsible for the negative tone of the campaign was simply not going to be credible to most voters. Certainly, the Obama campaign has been negative at times -- more often than either the Al Gore or John Kerry -- and on several occasions explictly misleading. But voters came into the debate thinking by 2:1 margins that McCain was running a negative campaign and Obama a positive one. To try and fight against that tide was a significant mistake.
And as though to prove the point, just a few moments later, McCain attacked Obama on Ayers and ACORN, using particularly hyperbolic rhetoric in the latter case:
And then, just a few moments after that, came this:
Could that sequence possibly have been any more awkward? Mere seconds after reminding America that Willie Ayers was a terrorist, McCain flatly asserted that his campaign was all about the economy. You might expect to see two paragraphs like this interspersed through different parts of the transcript. You certainly do not expect to see them back to back. It's as though you could see avatars of Steve Schmidt and John Weaver perched atop John McCain's respective shoulders, wrestling for control of his message.
Obama, it should be noted, was not particularly effective during this exchange (especially considering that he should have prepped for this kind of sequence days ahead of time), eliciting a lukewarm response from the dial groups. But it turned out that he didn't have to be, as McCain was left with just enough rope to hang himself. And from that point forward, the dials looked like the S&P 500 every time that Obama finished one of his responses and McCain began his. The voters had been pleasantly surprised with the McCain they saw in the first 20 minutes of the debate. But after that disingenuous sequence on negative campaigning, they basically gave up on him.
10.16.2008
Where McCain Lost It
by Nate Silver @ 2:10 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

450 comments
First?
Can Obama reach 100%?
Will Obama confound the model trying to find a scenario where McCain can win?
im surprised that i am having more faith in the american people day by day.
I'm surprised that Obama won - he seemed to go back to his Uhs and Uhms during the debate.
The question is, then, where does McCain go from here? Talking about the issues gets him creamed. His October surprise, if that's what Ayers was, has totally backfired. Is there anything short of terrorist attack that will move the needle back to the point where it's a genuinely competitive race, much less an even one, by the time November 4th is here?
I really do feel sorry for McCain sometimes... until I remember that he not only has run a smear focused campaign, but has also actively created an atmosphere of political violence.
I think it is insane that an even bigger deal is not being made about the fact that it took McCain a week to either realize or speak up to say that people yelling "kill him," etc., is not ok. To top it off, he certainly hasn't spoken up very loudly.
Where McCain Lost it:
Putting up air quotes when sarcastically saying Obama wanted to protect the "health" of the mother in abortion cases.
No doubt that screwed him.
McCain essentially called for Obama's assassination with his absurd voter fraud allegations
When John McCain claimed that Barack Obama and ACORN were "perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy" he outed himself as a reprehensible demagogue.
Voter fraud is a fiction.
In reality, not ACORN has perpetrated fraud, fraud was committed against ACORN in some instances by dishonest paid canvassers who turned in made up registrations. While an occasional problem it is not a big deal because ACORN and the registrar use various cross-checks to weed out bad registrations. But most importantly, bad registrations are completely worthless because they simply do not translate into actual votes! Suppose the name "Hulk Hogan" somehow slipped through onto a voter list, that greenish guy would still have to show up in person with his drivers license before casting a ballot. It's absurd!
John McCain knows full well that no voter fraud is even possible here. In addition, he knows full well that preventing people from exercising their right to vote is the real problem, and that his own party is employing such cynical abuses in Democratic precincts in swing states.
His outrageously false claims have one transparent goal, however: to plant the myth that Obama is stealing this election. He knows exactly what the lunatic radicals among his followers will make of this: That the right thing to do is to assassinate an illegitimate usurper: "Sic semper tyrrannis!"
Stocks for sniper rifles just went up.
John Sidney McCain III, this campaign turned you into utter scum.
I like the Electoral Vote distribution graph: McCain's red line has flat-lined.
On the exchange above - Obama is just a very decent man and being nasty is not in his dna. Unlike McCain who is suffering from PTSD and could explode at the drop of a hat. McCain lost it, even though he didn't lose it, but could easily have lost it big time
Maybe this is the wrong spot for it, but can someone explain something to me about the odds in the right-hand column? When it says 75% for "Obama loses OH, wins election," does that mean you're projecting a 3-in-4 chance that Obama will lose Ohio? Or just saying even if he loses Ohio he has a 3-in-4 chance of winning the election anyway?
I thought this whole portion of the debate was a winner for Obama. Every minute spent talking about this Ayers non-issue - which only the GOP base cares about in the slightest - was a reminder of how unhinged McCain's campaign has been as we slide into potentially the worst economy since the 1930s (if I am to believe the doomsaying stories).
It almost didn't matter how Obama handled it. In the oddest way, the longer Obama stayed technically "on the ropes" here, the more it helped him. And for good measure, he got to roll off some of the bare facts about his association with Ayers, for the 2% of the undecided voters who actually care.
I thought Obama summed it up succinctly in his close of that part, saying "I think this says more about your campaign that it does about me".
clarkejeffrey:
I completely agree. that really pissed me off.
McShame also lost it when belittling women's rights with his air quotes of "Health" while referring to abortions when the mother's health was in danger. Listening to McShame describe it, women will fake their lives being in danger just to have a late term abortion. What an insensitive ass the angry old fart is.
Thanks Nate,
BTW, I think you were very balanced with how you analyzed the debate tonight. We appreciate your analysis tremendously.
Public Service Announcement. Ignore Champion88 and vote in this online global poll for the US president.
http://www.iftheworldcouldvote.com/
Thank you.
What people don't seem to understand about the "October Surpise" is that it hits the headlines every day the dow loses 5% of its worth. The October surprise has come nearly every day the past two weeks, and that's why Obama has been surging in the polls and now has a sound lead.
American's 401k's are the October surprise.
MN Senate Polling Graph
Final Debate: Live Analysis
Obama 361, McCain 177
McCain did what he was told by the "conservative" base--come out swinging, hard and often.
Unfortunately, he was boxing his own shadow rather than Obama for most of the debate. The "health of his candidacy" has been sorely compromised by a number of gaffes, and although he connected for some blows on Obama, he will be lucky to not see his numbers drop further.
His favorability numbers have been trending to 40%, or lower. Will they keep going lower? How low can he go?
I am very heartened by the fact that McCain's campaign has cratered as he has gone so smear focused. I hope that future presidential campaigns take note of this.
PS: I might do one more update on the church crowd's views of the ticket after this Sunday or the next large group hanging out we do. (I've been reporting the incredibly unscientific but interesting (I hope) progression of a large group of fellow churchgoers at my Baptist church.
So far the swing has been away from any enthusiasm garnered by the Palin pick. Everyone has quit defending her as a plausible candidate. Several still LOVE her ideas on social issues, but even they find her scary as a potential president in waiting.
The reason I may do one more post on this is that I think McCain's refusal to commit to anti-abortion judges explicitly is going to hurt him even more than anyone realizes. That is the last "justifiable" reason for voting for McCain according to several of my fellow churchgoers. They are back to holding their noses (squeezing tight), but still feeling that one ticket is better on this issue. This muddies those waters a bit.
I do wonder when they will ever realize how cynically they are used by the Republican party. I'm also personally convinced that abortion is wrong, but I'm not dumb enough to miss that a certain party simply uses the issue for votes, while another certain party seems to really care about "the least of these" to a much greater degree.
Been watching some of the British news coverage as I get up. Mostly it reports on the tone of the debate, BUT Sky News (part of the Fox stable mind) was saying slight McCain win (though pointing out that Obama won the instant polls). Someone suggested that Americans maybe has stopped caring about McCain now? But I think the passage Nate points to is important. I think sometimes the public have there own election narrative, and I think part of ot this time is 'spring cleaning' and getting rid of the old. I wonder if some of McCain's campaign themes might have been more effective against Senator Clinton. But Obama is something entirely new and best resembles a personification of change.
Another thing that the British news picked up on that I haven't seen many of the US news websites respond to. It was the McCain line about 'If you wanted to run against George Bush you should have run 4 years ago.' But I wonder if Americans really buy that argument. McCain is clearly a lot more Bush than Obama is, and if you want change, then Obama is obviously the guy. But also McCain is running a typical republican campaign in many ways really. Smear the opponent, talk about Foreign Piolicy and taxes and thats about it. I think Americans have tried that for the last 2 elections and want something different this time. (Maybe not in a landslide showing, but slearly enough).
I also thought McCain's tone was a bit deperate. Not seen much of the debate yet, but what I have seen has McCain sounding pretty desperate, just in tone. Sort of 'please, please like me.'
Overall though, if McCain hasn't narrowed the polls across the board this time next week, we can start planning our campaign celebration parties.
McCain's insufficient answer to his smear campaign had him teetering, but he fell off totally when he wrote off all later-term abortions as "extremists finding excuses." For shame. His demeanor over all was too angry and hungry. This really was the grumpy old John McCain talk show hosts have been joking about for months.
I thought that Donna Brazille summed it nicely tonight by commmenting that it was John McCain's best debate which is like saying that "Fat Albert lost a little weight."
I assume McCain's going to lose his senate seat as a result of all this... or do I have too much faith in Arizona voters?
@jUUggerrnaut:
While I agree that the ACORN story is a non-story, you're missing the point. Republicans are setting themselves up to have the (largely non-existant) voter fraud excuse for when Obama wins. Hopefully the margin is so huge nobody cares post-election.
Also, Hulk Hogan is not green. "Sniper" rifles do not have special stocks (and guns are not your enemy).
I agree completely with Ryan, a few comments above. The economy shattering beneath us was the "October surprise" to most people. I was surprised, weren't you? And Obama has handled THAT with dignity, grace, and authority. While McCain has flailed around like a fish out of water. Bar any massive national security disasters, nothing else could possibly be worse, certainly nothing McCain brings up in an ad or a stump speech.
Obama has had his trial by fire, and emerged on the other side to be seen as a strong leader and a figure to rally around in crisis. Anything else is just small potatoes at this point.
Forgot to read my post before submitting. I meant "late term," not "later term." Pulled a McCain.
WilliamMarinovic
... of the org ?!
What is really sad that even though McCain has displayed a frightening lack of stability and intelligent discourse, and at the very least implicitly approved of violence against Obama, is that some states will stay blood red.
What an appropriate color.
I can see MT, LA, and GA possibly flipping, but the rest will choose an unstable old man who has an absolute moronic nutbag for a running mate.
michelle-lee
Fair enough Goldwater didn't descend to the tone of McCain's campaign, but he remained in the Senate for some 18 years after losing in 64. Arizona seems to like losers! (McCain actually replaced Goldwater as Senator from Arizona, when Goldwater retired.)
In fact Goldwater didn't run for reelection to the Senate in 1964, and was elected back into the senate in 68. (For what thats worth!)
I agree that the Republicans are setting up the ACORN story to cast doubt on the election results, but eventually the MSM will make the distinction between voter reg. fraud and voter voter fraud and suppression
Gerald - They're saying "even if he loses Ohio he has a 3-in-4 chance of winning the election anyway" He has a nearly 20% chance of losing Ohio. You can see in the other scenarios he often wins Colorado or Florida even if he loses Ohio.
"I assume McCain's going to lose his senate seat as a result of all this... or do I have too much faith in Arizona voters?"
Way too much faith.
Maricopa County(the most populated county in AZ by far) keep re-electing this monster.
If McCain is in denial about something as straightforward as the facts of this campaign, one has to wonder what other facts he'd be unwilling to acknowledge as president. The economy has not been the main theme of his campaign, especially in recent weeks, and he has not actively repudiated every single hateful remark made by his supporters. He spent the majority of the debate--not to mention the previous two debates, and the past few weeks--pointlessly attacking Obama and ducking issues like bullets.
McCain may have excited his base in this debate, but he certainly didn't excite very many others. The polls this week will reflect that.
Was I the only one who nt only missed the debate but the livebloggging too while it was live? (what happens when assmole thinks elections are over). Still fun to read all that. (Tonguejut) Can you 'liveblog' a pretend fourth debate?
I think there were two aspects of this debate that will finish the McCain Campaign.
One is that throughout the debate, women were consistently reacting more positively to Obama and more negatively to McCain. Throw in the comment about "health" of the mother, and you have just ceded the election by significantly losing the women's vote (especially the suburban women that obth campaigns are going after).
Second, Eugene Robinson noted that McCain offered the boilerplate Republican solutions to our economic problems. We have heard that if the election becomes Democrat versus Republican, McCain would lose. He can continue to say he is not Bush, but he is embracing discredited Republican dogma makes him into a generic Republican.
Just keep on going to www.barackobama.com and donating $$ and making phone calls to swing states.
Then on election day make calls to get out the vote.
then sit back around 6pm eastern time, grab a brew and turn on FOX to savor the mass depression of the creeps.
You will feel sooooooooo good.
Work now, rest later.
P.
OnWiththeShow...
I think it deleted my last comment affirming that this is WilliamMarinovic from that site and asking who you are.
He lost me at Hello.
What channel to watch the election results come in on? (Not that I have much choice in the UK!) Would love to watch Fox News for a bit, just to watch them squirm as a liberal, AA Democrat is elected President. But at the same time, nice to see some more intelligent analysis of the results over at NBC or CBS maybe? Or see Nate on HD.net alongside Dan Rather.
At this point, I think it's a matter of how to prevent voter suppression/discrimination ala 2000 and 2004. I have a really bad feeling about the measures being taken in Ohio and Florida... Is there anything the dems are doing to fight back?
That was the real motivation of Obama for baiting McCain to talk about Ayers. It wasn't that Obama had a killer response. It's that Obama wanted McCain to spend his time attacking him, making McCain hurt himself in the process.
I think Obama was exactly as effective as he needed to be concerning Ayers. I don't think anybody deserves a positive response when rebutting a spurious claim. Simply rebutting no, John, 2+2=4, not 5, no matter how accurate doesn't merit a positive dial response. I think Obama did it well, and giving it anymore legs than it already has would only be counter-productive unless he was willing to go all the way and actually manage to say something that would force it to bite McCain harder than it was already going to.
In this case, John McCain was standing on the gallows with the noose and invited Obama to join him and bring more rope. Obama replied by declining to join him, but did offer him more rope. McCain proceeded to hang himself.
There is work being done on the ground to combat dirty tricks.
However, Obama can lose both those states and still easily win.
I would like to see him run up the score so the republiklans have nowhere to hide so they can start imploding.
What's funny about McCain's dragging up ACORN over and over again is that he also has ties to the group and has publicly praised it. Obama might have mentioned that :) Acorn does seem to have some internal issues, but clearly Obama is not in its pocket or vice-versa. Informative story here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95696267
The fat lady broke the glass, and not by sitting on it (or throwing it).
McCain sounded like the old moderate and likeable McCain up to the exchange about negative campaigning and went south from there. Wow, could the Republican strategists be more out of touch with the electorate -- not only does this dwell on a topic that indepedents do not think is relevant but it also emphasizes McCain's weaknesses (the happy McCain comes across positively, the negative McCain's id jumps into a fight-or-flight response that he seems to find impossible to hide.)
Disagree with one of your points about the debate being when McCain went into the Ayers comments even after Barack had basically blocked him from any chance at a solid response just prior w/ "And, now, I think the American people are less interested in our hurt feelings during the course of the campaign than addressing the issues that matter to them so deeply." And McCain then goes back to a personal issue. As George Will said - Obama executed the debate equivilant of Ali's Rope-a-Dope! What a Dope he has roped!
As is my custom, I analyzed and compared the separate parts of the participants to this debate: bubble graphs of no. and length of words and sentences, word clouds. I added a study of the number of speaking turns of each candidate too. You can find this and more at my Word Face-Off blog. Similar analyses of the previous debates are hyperlinked from there.
In my humble opinion, McCain lost it the moment of his first eye twitch (about 5 seconds in).
The End Of Conservatism As We Know It?
I like when McCain equated pro-choice supporters with people who were "pro-abortion" (whomever those people are)...not once, not twice, but thrice!
It really disgusts me that right wingers keep misleading people about ACORN.
The whole thing is a sham.
ACORN: registration fraud is NOT vote fraud.
The entire premise of the attacks on ACORN are BS. Completely dishonest.
I'm surprised that Obama won - he seemed to go back to his Uhs and Uhms during the debate.
I'm surprised you can make it through the day with so little in your head.
A friend of mine had a wonderful comeback line that would have been sweet:
McCain: "Senator Obama, I am not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago. I'm going to give a new direction to this economy in this country."
My friend's reply ...
Obama: "If you wanted to give a new direction, Senator McCain, why didn't you run against him four years ago?"
SKADOOSH!!!!
I broke up laughing. That would have been a total debate bitch-slap. =)
@Gerard Jones
You are right. That column should read "Obama wins election when losing Ohio". This is significantly different from "Obama loses Ohio, wins election". The former is a conditional probability.
More technically, the former is the number of simulations Obama loses Ohio and wins election divided by the number of simulations Obama wins election.
Nate, you should fix this, it is confusing.
"What is really sad that even though McCain has displayed a frightening lack of stability and intelligent discourse, and at the very least implicitly approved of violence against Obama, is that some states will stay blood red."
the frightening lack of stability and intelligent discourse is accurate representation of the red electorate. they are thrilled with the mccain/palin response, sadly.
MY favorite part of the entire night:
Obama: "And I'm happy to talk to you, Joe, too, if you're out there. Here's your fine: Zero."
McCain: "ZERO??" ::Oh shit!::
Obama still hasn't answered the questions voters care about. Who is he? Where is he REALLY from? He hasn't explained his associations with known terrorists, felons and anti-American preachers. His wife isn't proud of America, and his drug-use is a major issue.
America wants real leadership and a real patriot to run their country! McCain and Palin are true reformers who will kick out the good old boys of Washington and make sure America is safe. They are real fighters, Obama is not. McCain is the only man in this election that really has fought for his country, while Obama (whose citizenship is questionable at best) will never, ever fight for this nation.
Choose American. Choose freedom. McCain/Palin 2008! COUNTRY FIRST!
"..and wins election divided by the number of simulations Obama wins election."
should read
"..and wins election divided by the number of simulations Obama loses Ohio."
I think it is insane that an even bigger deal is not being made about the fact that it took McCain a week to either realize or speak up to say that people yelling "kill him," etc., is not ok.
In the debate, McCain said he was proud of them. And his attack on John Lewis for calling him out was outrageous. John McCain is an utter asshole.
I assume McCain's going to lose his senate seat as a result of all this... or do I have too much faith in Arizona voters?
McCain is up for re-election in 2010. He'll be 74 or 75 I believe and may decide to call it quits. If he does run, the only Dem who would stand a chance to beat him is the current governor, but it would probably be an uphill battle even for her.
The most awkward moment, for me, came when McCain gave his obligatory speech about opposing litmus tests for justices. Most of his answer was quite good, but then he blew it when Schieffer (unquestionably the best moderator in this series) pressed him on it and he suggested that opposing Roe was a qualification. Now, Obama may have the same problem in reverse (let's face it, almost no Democratic president is going to nominate a pro-lifer for the Supreme Court), but he was much smoother. McCain ended up sounding like a parody of a two-faced politician.
I'm surprised you can make it through the day with so little in your head.
Don't be an idiot. Obama was completely unprepared for certain things he should have been prepared for, McCain's early thrust on the economy for example.
We're lucky that McCain was even less prepared, but this was far from a strong performance by Obama.
Obama and Biden brilliantly trapped McCain into bringing up all the negatives right in front of millions of independents. Palin fell right into said trap by publicly 'advising' McCain to go there; along with McCain even cornering himself. And now they pay the price. Its clear the republican party still thinks that partisan assaults on character is the way to win elections. And longterm, maybe they're right...but not in 2008.
The reason I may do one more post on this is that I think McCain's refusal to commit to anti-abortion judges explicitly
He didn't refuse to commit; he said that someone who favored Roe v. Wade wouldn't pass muster in re his criteria for judicial qualifications. His contradictory claim that he didn't have a litmus test was just another lie.
LOL Big :)
Obama's answered plenty of questions. Those who keep raising them are people who refuse to believe his answers. He's been a lot more forthcoming than Palin has about her assoications with secessionists and her conviction for ethics violations as governor... which she denies happened, even though it's there for anybody to read :)
As for McCain kicking out the good old boys in Washington, McCain IS a good old boy. He has a truly remarkable spectrum of close friends, all of whom have been entrenched in power for decades. You think he's gonna kick em out? He owes them big.
As for McCain's "leadership", his political history is a never-ending series of about-faces -- for transparently political reasons -- on every important issue.
I'd agree absolutely with "America wants real leadership and a real patriot to run their country!" YES! Choose Obama/Biden!
Obama still hasn't answered the questions right-wingers care about. Who is he? Where is he REALLY from? He hasn't explained his associations with known terrorists, felons and anti-American preachers. His wife isn't proud of America, and his drug-use is a major issue.
Fixed.
Following the debate, two days from now, we will see Obama hit 55% mark and McCain drop below 40 %. Sad to say this will be fueled by economy - in the sense that bad economy is bad for all.
Real October surprise was supposed to be J.Corsi's "Obama Nation". This is the same guy behind SBVFT 4yrs ago.
Obama wins because he's black ? In some ways yes; he knew he needed the best campaign ever. He delivered perfectly with organization, debates, fundraising, issues, strategy, early voting, registrations + a good help from a bad economy. It's over.
goose said...
I like when McCain equated pro-choice supporters with people who were "pro-abortion" (whomever those people are)...not once, not twice, but thrice!
Thrice? That's treble damages.
Alamala,
get over it !
he did answer all those questions. Only you didn't like the answers.
If McCain's comment about "health" of the mother was a mistake, as the commentators on TV and some here also argue, was there any evidence of that with CNN's annoying real time line graph? Did the women's line drop?
Joey said...
MY favorite part of the entire night:
Obama: "And I'm happy to talk to you, Joe, too, if you're out there. Here's your fine: Zero."
McCain: "ZERO??" ::Oh shit!::
ROFL
Yes!
That was sweet. Then Senator McBlinky just stares at him in utter disbelief. "Huh???"
And hilarity ensues as Senator McLOL strikes again:
"o hai! iz POW ... i can haz prezidensie?"
... or, perhaps:
"im in ur debayt, wiffin ur talkin poynts"
... or, maybe:
"i made a gud debayt for u ... but i eated it"
Joe the Plumber - I was surprised McCain brought him up because I had just discovered that dialogue on youtube yesterday and had talked to my wife about it. My sense was that anyone watching it would end up impressed with Obama's sincerity, his ability to give clear and honest answers, but also with the details: Obama made clear that only his earnings above 250K would be taxed higher, with higher meaning at 39 instead of 34%. Plus, various deductions would possibly bring him below the treshhold in the first place. How can small tax hikes prevent hiring more people?
Tomorrow millions will watch that clip and make up their own mind (if available). And perhaps we'll even meet Joe the plumber again when he's campaigning for Obama.
It was an odd strategem.
@Big: No way, I'm voting for the Muslim Arab anti-American terrorist. Too bad I'm going to have to write one in; there doesn't seem to be anyone who fits my criteria on this ballot.
john, write my name in please!
Don't be an idiot. Obama was completely unprepared for certain things he should have been prepared for, McCain's early thrust on the economy for example.
You're the idiot. Obama's "uh" speech pattern has nothing to do with being unprepared, and only a shallow cretin would expect him to lose the debate because he says "uh" -- which has nothing to do with the content of his statements, which is what Americans without empty heads care about. If you were referring to Obama being unprepared, you should have said that, asshole.
Cora, Alamala was quoting 'Big.'
And perhaps we'll even meet Joe the plumber again when he's campaigning for Obama.
Not likely. He was interviewed on CNN and got all pissy about his wealth being redistributed.
jUUggernaut said...
"It was an odd strategem."
Welcome to the McCain Campaign. If you think that things have been interesting so far, hold onto your hats. There is a story brewing (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/11/111018/34/47/627460) that the same contractors that remodeled Senator Steven's home in Alaska may have also contributed to building then Mayor Palin's new half a million dollar home in Wasilla. The one which the "first dude" says he essentially built himself with the aid of a few "contractor buddies" right about the same time that the sports complex was being finished up not too far away.
As this comes to light in conjunction with the Branchflower report that concludes that there were ethical violations the increased scrutiny upon Palin's many actions will, I predict, continue to conspire with the still faltering economy to drive even more people towards Senator Obama or at least running scared from the McCain/Palin ticket.
Forget the white christmas, I'm dreaming of a Blue Ohio.
You expressed much of what I was thinking very well, Nate. I really think Obama could have come back at McCain's allegation a lot more stridently without looking heavy-handed. At the same time, McCain didn't help himself one bit, and he really took a downturn after that. It really felt like the last two debates in that respect, to me.
McCain was doing well for the first 20 minutes or so and then, one way or another, he seemed to lose his cool or lose control of the discussions and the tide turned in Obama's favor. Not a game changer, this one.
If McCain's comment about "health" of the mother was a mistake
If? Focus groups have shown that McCain's support among women, even independent and Republican women, drops significantly when they are informed of his positions on reproductive rights.
I really wanted Obama to point out that even if Joe the plumber was making $300,000 a year runnning a whole bunch of plumbers with his small business, that he would still net more money for the fact that he would have more customers who could afford to hire him on account of Obama getting our economy back into gear.
Valpey said...
"I really wanted Obama to point out that even if Joe the plumber was making $300,000 a year runnning a whole bunch of plumbers with his small business, that he would still net more money for the fact that he would have more customers who could afford to hire him on account of Obama getting our economy back into gear."
Actually, he says almost exactly that in the video of his talk with Joe which I'm betting quite a few folks are going to be looking up and finding easily linked.
Forget a white christmas, I'm dreaming of a Blue Ohio!
assmole, have you blown anything up? If not, better luck in 2012.
And now I'd like to show off my handy work on my favorite debate moment mentioned before:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hn-R2HcxkeA
Who is he?
He's the junior Senator from Illinois and Democratic candidate for President, moron.
Where is he REALLY from?
Uh, Illinois. Previously, Hawaii.
He hasn't explained his associations with known terrorists, felons
You're a liar.
and anti-American preachers
Rev. Wright isn't "anti-American", and if you don't know Obama's association with him you're an ignoramus.
His wife isn't proud of America
You're a lying piece of shit.
and his drug-use is a major issue
What the fuck are you smoking?
john, I have exploded many stupid arguments here for a good 57 months.
Now the same dimwits who claimed a 'mandate' for Bush after a disputed 537-vote Florida win in 2000 are already whining that Obama won't have a mandate even if he wins over 50% of the vote. Where do you have to check your shame before they let you join the Republic party?
Reality has a liberal bias.
I think it is insane that an even bigger deal is not being made about the fact that it took McCain a week to either realize or speak up to say that people yelling "kill him," etc., is not ok.
...
In the debate, McCain said he was proud of them. And his attack on John Lewis for calling him out was outrageous. John McCain is an utter asshole.
jqb, I'm glad someone else picked up on this. I was stunned at McNasty's faux umbrage fit over Obama's supposed attack on... what was it? Some group of women that support veterans (?) as well as the veterans themselves (or something like this; need to check transcript) ? It was like, "How dare you insult my batshit crazy lynchmob!" Truly a WTF?! moment.
BTW, I thought the split screen on CNN was absolutely devastating to McCrank -- eye-rolling, tongue-jutting, smirks 'n' giggles, manic blinking -- sheesh, what a freaking LOON!
mccain's just trying to solidify his loony base so as not to get blown out
dunno if that will even work tho
Didn't see any comments elaborating on my thoughts, so I figured I could jump in the fun too.
I loved this debate format. As Nate & Sean poetically titled it, this was the "Say It to My Face" debate. So should they all be. McCain was put on the spot for his negative advertising & incomplete plans for health care. Obama was forced to give some candid details + examples of his own health care & tax relief plans, as well as (of all things!) his voting record as an Illinois state senator. This debate was not only informative & decisive, but entertaining. Perfect CNN material.
I liked McCain more tonight. He showed flashes of his old self (knowledge of policy details, certain independent views, calling out opponents). But Obama was clearly the better debater, the better politician, the better-prepared presidential candidate.
I cast my early vote in Indiana for Obama already. We are reportedly getting some abysmal early-voter turnout numbers, however (around 300 after a week?!). With the recent court order to re-open satellite voting centers (interesting story in Lake County, check it out!), + the unraveling of Acorn silly sh!t, + the final debate going down, hopefully these numbers will change.
I love this website. I am a statistics nerd through and through. Keep it real Nate & Sean! & same to you, fellow commenters!
PS- @ Gerard Jones: "Obama loses OH, wins election" is an event that is isolated in statistical analysis, for the sake of perspective. Out of 10,000 simulations, 1986 results showed Obama losing Ohio (meaning, Obama won Ohio in the other 8014 results). In 1492 of those 1986, Obama won the election despite losing Ohio. Even more incredibly, Obama loses both Ohio and Florida only 895 times out of 10,000 (8.95%)!
If McCain's comment about "health" of the mother was a mistake
McCain made a major gaffe. This extremist right-wing ticket keeps alienating more mainstream voters every day.
Assmole,
Seeing your name somewhere in an election report as a write in, would just cap the night perfectly!
Obama: 1,000,000+
McCain: 5
Assmole: 1
The first part of the debate I really thought we might be looking at a McCain win. There were even a few softball remarks by McCain that I thought "boy Obama is going to nail that one" that he missed the opportunity or seriously flubbed.
When McCain was making his argument that Obama wanted to take plumber Joe's money and "spread the wealth around" while McCain wanted plumber Jow to spread the wealth around I seriously couldn't believe McCain had just setup an attack on trickle-down economics but Obama just missed the chance.
It was amazing that all you had to do with McCain tonight was mention "negative campaigning" and McCain thought "oh yeah, I'm supposed to be doing some of that". I think Obama literally dared him to go that road during the debate and McCain took the bait.
3 things
1. McCain's "I'm not Bush" was forced in, most of his attacks were, to me, McCain seemed to be struggling to get his talking points in and got too nervous about them as soon as he realized that Schieffer was going to be strict - Obama struggled with the moderator as well, but not as poorly.
2. McCain reacting to the $0 fine - he seemed genuinely shocked. When I first saw it I must have just been concentrating on Obama, but watching that clip again, he was gasping for a good ten seconds or more.
3. One difference between this debate and the last were their reactions. McCain stopped rolling his eyes but kept interrupting, and Obama started smiling non-stop. During the debate I didn't mind his smiles, taking them to at least not be rude... but looking agian, they seem like his crutch instead of McCain's anger.
I wish more people would wake up to just how profoundly undemocratic and unfair these debates have been, in that they have not included all of the presidential candidates who are eligible to win the election.
Of course, this is just one aspect of the systematic discrimination that is shown toward all candidates from a party other than the two major parties. The commercial television and print media routinely under-report non-major-party candidates, which then sets these candidates up for low recognition and approval numbers, which then leads to their being excluded from the polls, which then perpetuates their lack of national name recognition and also allows the bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates to cite the candidates' low polling results as justification for preventing the electorate from having the full spectrum of political thought presented to them in the debates.
Fortunately, there will be a debate this Sunday that invites all eligible candidates to participate: www.thirdpartyticket.com
Also see this video clip for an example of how the Commission explicitly excludes third party candidates.
stuartwildcat said...
"The first part of the debate I really thought we might be looking at a McCain win. There were even a few softball remarks by McCain that I thought "boy Obama is going to nail that one" that he missed the opportunity or seriously flubbed. "
Senator Obama was in a prevent defense mode. He let alot of softballs go by, I can only imagine, to make sure as to avoid any serious gaffes that might damage him more than passing up the opportunities presented. He took a calculated risk that Senator McCain would do more damage to himself and that his own lead was large enough at this point that there was no overwhelming need to knock it out of the park here and now. Keep in mind that unlike Senator McCain, Senator Obama has the unprecedented ad buy coming up just before the election and it is there that he can attempt to seal the deal with the public at large.
Forget a white christmas, I'm dreaming of a Blue Ohio!
Third party candidates aren't going to win. They don't lose because they're excluded from debates; they lose because they're usually batshit crazy.
Give the 90 minutes to the two candidates most likely to win, whether that's D&R or G&L or any other two candidates.
I agree, the equal time laws need to make a comeback.
Even though the third parry candidates have no chance to win, it would be a good opportunity to inject ignored, but important issues into the national debate.
@interstices -
Yes there was a drop in the women's response on the "health" of the mother line. This video goes just to where the drop started. I wish they would have cut a slightly longer clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFmxm_jjgSs
Also, note McCain's tonguejut right after he rolls his eyes when Obama says "If it sounds incredible ... that's because it's not true". McCain knows he got caught in a lie.
I just know there's going to be a poll coming out soon that gives fav/unfav numbers for Joe the Plumber. And then Joe the Plumber will get a weekend show on Fox News...
I totally hate Joe the Plumber.
You guys do realize that Joe the Plumber is a Republican plant, right?
Getting back to Nate's original post, about how McCain dealt with the question of negativity...
I'm surprised that he didn't take the opportunity to say something like this:
And speaking of negativity, I'd like to take a moment to address some of my supporters who seem to be confused about Senator Obama. They've called him a terrorist, a communist, a Muslim, an Arab... This is nonsense, and I want to put a stop to it, right here and right now.
Senator Obama and I disagree on many issues, but I know him personally and I can assure you that he is a good man, a man of honor, a loving father and husband. And not that it makes any difference, but he is a man of deep Christian faith. His patriotism is just as strong as mine is. And he is a personal friend of mine.
So I don't want to see anyone attack his Christian faith or his American patriotism... I don't want to hear anyone shouting "terrorist" or "kill him"... And if you think Senator Obama is a Muslim, then please consider me a Muslim too.
If Senator Obama is elected president, I guarantee you he would serve with patriotism and honor. I would be proud to work with him to make this country a better place, and I hope all my supporters would join me in doing so. So please stop spreading the nonsense attacks on his patriotism, his faith, his honor... Senator Obama is a good Christian, a proud American, and an honorable man.
Period. Case closed. End of story.
If McCain had said something like that, he could have regained a great deal of my former respect for him...
Too bad he didn't...
Francis, I really like your Word Face-off blog. It's funny that McCain's words end up with America Need Obama, and Obama's were: McCain Now Going. ;-) Did you make that up??
J said...
I totally hate Joe the Plumber.
2nded.
On third party candidates...
They are not working hard. They are not going to change anything. They are doing something incredibly easy - collecting a few signatures to make it onto a ballot for an election they know that they will not win, & therefore will not make good on any changes they promises or any policies they advocate.
If third party candidates want to make a change, start locally. We have independents in the Senate, but 2 out of 100 ain't gonna do it. How about some mayors, in influential cities? Hell, maybe a few governors? State legislators could make huge waves as king makers in the balance of power, happens all the time in every other democracy!
But by running for President, third party candidates effectively castrate their influence towards any real change, the change that they so desperately whimper that America needs. Naders & Barrs (& many of their supporters) are cowards, knowing full well that they will never be put to task for the promises that third party "independent" politics might bring to our country. If they run for something smaller however, they suddenly become much more viable, but also accountable for their ideas. Good luck to them.
David: Assmole will be happy to come within four votes of the Republican't. Job well done - (slightly disappointed not to get more than one vote after all my hard effort campaigning).
I feel sorry for Joe Sixpack -it's like he's yesterday's man already.
Two things in response to the original post.
1. I think Obama seemed a little weak on this answer initially because he was vamping. He was waiting for (and goading) McCain to directly bring up the Ayers stuff... which McCain finally (and ultimately unwisely, I think) did.
Once McCain stepped into the semi-trap, then Obama segued into his "Since this keeps coming up, let's get this Ayers thing straight..."
2. THAT answer, I thought, was actually pretty perfect.
The dials didn't go up during it as much because there was nothing to applaud, you know? It was a factual dismissal of a smear. You see what I'm saying? Neutral reactions to him talking about Ayers is exactly what he gets if he is winning that discussion. Ayers wasn't going to be a POSITIVE for Obama, it was only important to keep it from being a negative.
I thought his answers in that section ultimately killed the possible effectiveness of the whole smear campaign.
When McCain said that ACORN was in the process of destroying our democracy I tought are the american people this stupid to believe this crap? FNC's Sean Hannity blames ACORN for the mortgage crisis. Its not working Sean! Say good-night McCain, thanks for coming.
Geoff wins the thread.
Had Nader actually cared about his positions instead of his incredible ego, he would have gone to Gore right before the 2000 election and said "Look. We both know this election is going to be close, and I'm going to take votes from you. Offer me a position as Secretary of the Interior, and make it clear I'm a Green Party member in your Cabinet, and I'll drop out of the race."
That would have legitimized third party candidates, and even given a voice to the Green movement which Gore would have clearly listened to. Instead Nader stayed in a race he had no chance to win, helped throw the election to Bush (not that Gore ran a good campaign, granted), and set back third parties in this country by decades. I know many Democrats who will never, NEVER vote for a third party again after Nader's stunt. Yet he continues to think that he did nothing wrong, and that Gore would have been exactly like Bush. Uh-huh. Because Gore would have pulled out of Kyoto, and clearly would have invaded Iraq for no sane reason. Totally the same as W..
The guy is an egotistical jackass.
I agree with Geoff's comment above regarding third party candidates. Here in the UK, our third party (the Liberal Democrats) get about 20% of the vote at General Elections, so they are not going to form a government but they have a big influence in UK politics as they control many influential town councils, in big cities such as Liverpool. In fact, it's been shown that showing good stewardship of local political affairs has increased their share of the vote at general elections. It's not at all unlikely that they will split the vote equally with Labour and the Tories in ten to twenty years time. In the US, Nader and the libertarians would be better off building grassroots support and concentrate on getting significant local influence, so that members of their parties in generations to come will have a true shot at the presidency. Running as third party presidential candidates in the current climate is nothing but an ego-trip.
@ Phoeflame,
Too nice of you! I accept. ;)
Great point about cabinet appointments. We have enough of them, there is plenty of room for even fringe voices... as long as they're pragmatic, intelligent, & constructive fringe voices. When it comes to forming a government, Sarkozy's appointments upon his election in the summer of 2007 will forever come to my mind (esp. Kouchner).
It was more of a debate and better for it. The CBS News moderator was an improvement and the questions (e.g. on abortion/judges and running mates) superior. They had to think on the spot.
Arguably, yes, McCain did have some good, forceful points to make, especially if you don't believe in big government interference. But McCain's trouble seems to be his body language: he looks shifty. It is the body language of someone who is telling lies. (Working, as I do, in law enforcement you get a feel for body language and when people aren't telling the full story.)
I don't think Obama did anything special except sound cool and calm. Perhaps a bit too cool? But this was more than outweighed by the perception McCain gives on the screen: angry, untruthful, and there's something about either the TV makeup or the lights: he looks very old.
At one point he criticised Obama for his eloquence. Well, eloquence is actually a good thing - it is how you communicate effectively with voters - and it is something McCain does not have.
By the way, could this be the October surprise......
@ unfriendlyghost,
LibDems were on my mind as I wrote about third party politics. But 20%, holy shit! America is going to need a bit of time to let that possibility marinate. Although we have shown that if you are an obscenely wealthy businessman, you can get elected to run our most important city, as long as you keep it as clean as the last guy did. We'll have to see if that can happen in, say, Chicago, or perhaps Wasilla.
An obscenely wealthy guy to run Wasilla, eh? Hmm....
:)
I just went through the first 30 minutes of the debate on MSNBC.com video ... to count tongue juts. I know, sad - do I have a life???
However ... interesting to note, though McCain loves to lick his lips, and blink his eyes profusely (and other quirks) ... He doesn't start the tongue juts until 15 minutes in (note - most everyone says the first 20 minutes or so was his best segment ... funny how his juts start around that same time).
15:15 after "During the Depression era, we had a thing called the home ownership loan corporation. And they went out and bought up these mortgages. And people were able to stay in their homes, and eventually the values of those homes went up, and they actually made money."
15:28 after "So, obviously, if we can start increasing home values, then there will be creation of wealth."
16:51 after "I would eliminate the tariff on imported sugarcane-based ethanol from Brazil."
19:26 after "Senator Obama talks about voting for budgets. He voted twice for a budget resolution that increases the taxes on individuals making $42,000 a year."
23:01 after "Whether it be [me] fighting for an HMO patient's bill of rights."
24:30 Strokes tip of nose after "the way Barry Goldwater and Jack Kennedy agreed to do, before the intervention of the tragedy at Dallas."
25:47 (? - camera angle changed just as it was occuring so I don't know) after "And it's a matter of fact that Senator Obama has spent more money on negative ads than any political campaign in history. And I can prove it."
28:49 after "Every other [Obama] ad -- ever other ad was an attack ad on my health care plan. And any objective observer has said it's not true."
29:07 2 during "So the fact is that Senator Obama is spending unprecedented -- unprecedented in the history of American politics, going back to the beginning, amounts of money in negative attack ads on me."
29:37 after "And of course, we're talking about positive plan of action to restore this economy and restore jobs in America. That's what my campaign is all about and that's what it'll continue to be all about."
Another "Tell" is noted above ... he touched the tip of his nose when talking about the (false) Goldwater/Kennedy agreement to town halls.
He does mini juts twice as often as the obvious ones ... they aren't "licking his lips" ... but they aren't full juts, either.
So here's my question. What happens when Obama gets elected, he has a filibuster proof majority in congress, and gets to pass a whole lot of new policies. If they succeed,, the economy recovers, people have health care, and we get out of iraq, what is going to keep Fox news on the air and keep the right ring AM radio stations going?
Obama may create new jobs for the middle class but he might put a bunch of right wingers out of work.
"In the US, Nader and the libertarians would be better off building grassroots support and concentrate on getting significant local influence, so that members of their parties in generations to come will have a true shot at the presidency. Running as third party presidential candidates in the current climate is nothing but an ego-trip."
I've said the same thing time and time again.
Third parties need to first win local races, then state races, then try to win seats in the congress before even attempting to win the presidency.
It will take a generation or two to build up a major party, but that takes too long for the egomaniac in charge.
@UnfriendlyGhost, C.S.Strowbridge -
I third that ... been full believing that for years, as well.
The days of creating a new party by getting someone the Presidency has gone the way of Abraham Lincoln.
McCain's campaign messages thwarted by DMCA, a controversial copyright law that McCain voted to approve :P
Serves him right IMO
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/youtube-to-mcca.html
Nate,Sean,
Because I was sleeping during the debate (3 AM in my country in Europe) , I just swallowed all those debate’s update of yours.
Good job as usual.
May I cherry pick just one single line from both of you ????
I choose these ones:
10:24 EDT: [Sean] John, Obama’s wife is named “Michelle”.
10:31 EDT: [Nate] Congratulations, “President”* Obama.
*You Sir Nate didn’t put the word “President” in brackets as Sir Sean did with the word “Michelle”…but I got it that way…anyway…
Greetings.
p.s.
Extra bonus quote of the day:
11:23 EDT:[Sean] Holy macherel…
I just didn’t get at all the meaning of the word ”macherel” because probably it is slang and I am not American (if someone here would kindly debunk the word for me, I’ll appreciate…) …but… I just enjoyed its sound.
:P
oh…and BTW, question for random guests:
what does it means the abbreviation RFTLMAO ..or something like that ??????
Hola.
:)
A mackerel is a fish... and yes, it is spelt with a k
matador said...
"oh…and BTW, question for random guests:
what does it means the abbreviation RFTLMAO ..or something like that ??????
"
ROTFLMAO: Roll On The Floor Laughing My Ass Off.
Forget a white christmas, I'm dreaming of a Blue Ohio!
I can't see a way out for McCain now. No more debates, and not enough money for advertising even if he could cobble together a message.
RNC money is useless as it can only atack the Democrate brand, it can't praise McCain's policies.
And it ain't just me. Nobody can see a way out for McCain - hence intrade giving Obama 84%
Isn't it time Obama concentrated on down ticket votes?
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20081016/i/r1772410910.jpg?x=400&y=303&q=85&sig=14VeZ1i8CUsxeyG4fnGe4A--
Not a shoop. That's a real picture from when McCain went a little nutty at the end of the debate.
Good God.
First poll of the day.
Zogby tracker: Obama 49 McCain 44. Obama +1 on yesterday
As for last night, sure McCain had his best debate but he still lost. I have no doubt that Repubtards will think he won purely on the basis that they got the personal attacks and nastiness that they crave. Unfortunately most normal people find it repugnant and despite a strong start, McCain lost the debate and the presidency the minute he decided to launch into his Ayers spiel. Obama's response was both measured and presidential. He could have nailed McCain to the cross but chose not to humiliate him and lower the tone further.
This thing is over.
Thatcher said...
"The days of creating a new party by getting someone the Presidency has gone the way of Abraham Lincoln."
The Republican Party was NOT a brand new party. It was formed from the remnants of the Whig Party, then making the party friendly to the abolitionists in the North, and making the Northern Democrats look at what the Southern Democrats and anti-abolitionists were doing to the nation.
That political party only lasted about 10 years, as the post-Civil War Republican Party philosophy was vastly different from the original party philosophy.
T.R. Roosevelt tried to change the party, but was thwarted by the party bosses after he left office. The party was finally changed by Nixon in the 1960s, but in doing so, the party philosophy more or less reverted to the old, pre-Civil War Democratic Party in it's outlook on human rights and other party philosophy.
Joe Scarbaroe was talking to Harold Ford Jr. and was saying that because Exon Mobile CEO's have lawyers they will never pay a higher tax rate and that the middle class will be the one's who suffer.
So basically the president shouldn't make the people who have "gone on a money party" pay taxes? Then they were saying that we should use taxes as a penalty so we can have less of something like smoking or what not. Well maybe we, the American people want less unfairness and less unjustice and less of a money party?
Republican's economic priorities are trickle down economics and they don't WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
Obama should have hit back harder over Acorn.
The Rovians are already trying to delegitimize a likely Democratic victory.
Here's the true story:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/oct/13/election-acorn-voter-fraud
After watching these three debates, the verdict is in about Saddleback. McCain definitely knew those questions prior to being interviewed.
Joe Scarborough is unwatchable and lacks basic facts, your average repub?
WilliamMarinovic said...
At this point, I think it's a matter of how to prevent voter suppression/discrimination ala 2000 and 2004. I have a really bad feeling about the measures being taken in Ohio and Florida... Is there anything the dems are doing to fight back?
With Obama doing so well in the polls, this is my main concern now as well. I certainly hope they're on top of the issue, and that they would challenge a loss if they felt that the vote was compromised.
Morning Joe is the only MSNBC I do NOT watch. Jow is just a blowhard and dominates conversation far too much.
We may have already lost Ohio due to voter suppression from republican judges (onew whose WIFE is running as a repub in Ohio).
Keep up the ground game, we will need every vote!
Undecideds laughing at John McCain!
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/10/undecideds_laughing_at_not_wit.html
"In politics it is generally not considered a good sign when voters are laughing at you, not with you. And by the end of the third and last presidential debate, the undecided voters who had gathered in Denver for Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg’s focus group were “audibly snickering” at John McCain’s grimaces, eye-bulging, and repeated references to “Joe the Plumber.”"
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/16/us/16vote.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin
Should we be concerned/worried over this????
10/16 Daily Kos R2K Tracking Poll: Obama 52, McCain 41
Yes, we should be very worried about voter suppression in Ohio.
Lenin's Tomb has a post up about racist billboards about Obama around the country. One purports to be offering a reward to the person who kills Obama.
Where the fuck is the Secret Service?!?
http://leninology.blogspot.com/
John McCain is Bush.
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it must be a duck!
I'll bet John McCain wishes Obama had run four years ago!
Say t ain't so JOE!!
JOE IS ALEGEDLY tied into the Keating 5 owns several business
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/16/02217/845/591/632001
NOT REGISTERED TO VOTE!!
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/16/04943/642/556/632036
The part that disturbed and confused me the most from one of McCain's ramblings was when he equated Plastic Surgery with Organ Transplants.
"So hey, doc, I'm here for my Nose Job. Oh, and while you're at it, can I get that Kidney Transplant now? This one makes my Liver look fat!"
I rather thought that McCain's demeanor was what sealed the deal. The facial ticks and snorts and the overall seething he displayed spoke a lot about what McCain was really thinking. It looked as if he had a little of that entitlement thing going on. Sort of like {who is this punk kid to school ME on being president?}. I recall this being a factor for Gore, too.
While Obama just smiled every time McCain resorted to a desperation play or distortion. Yes, our man is a leader.
Zonis- I think the transplant comment was a McCain gaffe--He was trying to make a zinger about Biden's hair transplants, and left out the hair part.......
Foregone Conclusion said...
A mackerel is a fish... and yes, it is spelt with a k
October 16, 2008 5:10 AM
Rick said...
matador said...
"oh…and BTW, question for random guests:
what does it means the abbreviation RFTLMAO ..or something like that ??????
"
ROTFLMAO: Roll On The Floor Laughing My Ass Off.
Forget a white christmas, I'm dreaming of a Blue Ohio!
October 16, 2008 5:30 AM
**********
thanks a lot Hermanos,both of you !!!
goObamaGo!!!!!!!!!!!
:)
@ fred and others
Morning Schmoe is a chump. I can't watch it either. I've been waiting to hear that Mika has jumped across the desk and scratched his eyes out.
What I can't figure out is how he got elected to office. And this is presumably why MSNBC keeps him otherwise they would have jettisoned him along with Tucker. Maybe we should petition FOX to make him an offer.
When McCain acts condescendingly towards Obama, he also appears to be condescending to those voters who aren't decided between Obama and McCain. These voters would rather dismiss McCain's attacks than to be convinced by his condescending tone.
@ Foregon conclusion and Rick.
the word "macherel" does not exist in my dictionary
but the word "mackerel" it does exist:
now it's clear the meaning of
Holy mackerel !!!
what can I say...ROTFLMAO !!!!
:D:D:D
Keep on canvassing buddyes.
;)
McCain just came off an asshole during the debate. He did well until the Ayers question and then it was all downhill and now he has taken that off the table.
Obama just is so much more likeable that is why he will win, people elect people they like, not nasty yellow toothed cranky old men.
Listening to talk radio this morning they are deluding themselves into thinking McCain changed the race. I bet Obama is up by 10-15 by the weekend.I also noted the woman loved obama while the men seemed more pro Mccain but more woman vote than men.
Morning Joe is fun to watch only because of the guests. And plus it gives me some background noise while I'm on here and other websites.
I wish there were a stronger personality than Mika, she is really smart but she doesn't exhert herself.
I'd love to give Joe a piece of my mind, lol
Also, men are typically republican and women are the swing voters. And any Hillary fan who can support McCain now is deluding themselves and is really just racist. I mean, he trivialized the health of a woman. JHC!
The court orders in Ohio will hurt, but I doubt they will be fatal.
Most of that 200,000 faulty registrations will just be spelling mistakes ect.
There is some small chance that Ohio will hang on provisional ballots, and the final outcome on Ohio, but if so Obama has the manpower to get every ballot verified if they have to go through the papers for each voter personaly.
Maybe, say, 5% of the registations are truly invalid but it just isn't going to be that close.
The lasting impresion will be that the Republican Party is the one that doesn't believe in Democracy.
Has there been a post on Dick Morris' projections? He was putting Tennessee, Louisiana into the toss-up category. Have there been internal polls of those states to suggest that to him?
You want to talk about associations? Palin's husband was a member of a political party that wants Alaska to secede from the United States. How is breaking up the country, "Country First"? Which country?
I guess here is the one possible positive for McCain:
If white working class voters who work 12 hours/day in the eastern time zone (i.e. ohio, florida, virginia, north carolina) turned off their tvs a half hour in as I know many people do (and who don't listen to political commentary) ... McCain absolutely wiped the floor with Obama in that first half an hour. I just think it might be interesting to see a state by state breakdown on how this effects things.
Nate is showing his bias with his analysis. Clearly, Obama was rattled last night and was not one his game. The tax issue is one that is going to have legs and OBama did not counter it well so expect that to be McCain's last rallying point going forward.
By no objective measure was this McCain's worst debate (the 2nd was a clear loss). By the polls going forward, it will show a narrow but clear McCain win but not enough to stem the tide unless another shoe drops.
Holy crap, lenin has been on fire since the capitalist meltdown began a few weeks back. U. Mass Professor Richard Wolff on the crisis:
http://leninology.blogspot.com/
Obama's add using McCains I'm not Bush line is brilliant, brilliant I say.
This whole campaign is a ruse, Mccain should have never attempted to cross Bush (and Rove) in 2000. It reminds me of something Mr Burns said in the Simpsons, "Revenge is a dish best served luke-warm".
Not only is McCain finished, his legacy is gone, people will remember him as a bitter, hateful and inept, out of ideas, politician.
A great debate poll stat from CNN"
"McCain won in two categories. Eighty percent of debate watchers polled said McCain spent more time attacking his opponent, with seven percent saying Obama was more on the attack. Fifty-four percent said McCain seemed more like a typical politician during the debate, with 35 percent saying Obama acted more like a typical politician."
Great news...FOR JOHN McCAIN!
ok, I haven't watched it, only had a look through the transcript. But what jumped out at me is how often McCain had the last word.
Q1: McCain
Q2: McCain
Q3: McCain
Q4: McCain
Q5: McCain
Q6: Obama
Q7: McCain
Q8: Both, kind of.
(I might be missing a question, or were there only 8).
Was this bad moderating, or McCain pushing forwards to keep replying, or what?
Chucky T was just setting Joe right on the Bradley Effect. Obama's numbers didn't change in the exit polls but the undecideds went for Hillary so I guess we can assume McCain will get quite a few of the undecideds. Obama needs to be at 50 percent in the sates he wants to win.
Several times McCain interuppted Obama and he also got 2 or so 30 second continues. I guess Obama's team saw that not following the moderator's rules was offensive to American's in the second debate.
No Mark.
Attacking isn't winning it's losing. Voters don't like it and it hasn't worked for McCain.
And being a 'typical' politician is also a negative.
Get it?
Chucky T was just setting Joe right on the Bradley Effect. Obama's numbers didn't change in the exit polls but the undecideds went for Hillary so I guess we can assume McCain will get quite a few of the undecideds. Obama needs to be at 50 percent in the sates he wants to win.
that's not true. Obama overall OUTPERFORMED his polls. So how can you argue that the undecideds broke to Hillary?
Obama overperformed due to turnout. That is diferent than the undecideds who are polled
All of the networks want to give this to McCain, all of the polls break for Obama. Fuck the mainstream media, they just want a fight.
@geoff - yep, the Lib Dems are doing ok but have been squeezed by the resurgence of the Conservative party under David Cameron. They have recently moved towards more of a tax-cutting platform from their previous tax-and-spend position to try and counter that erosion of support among middle-class voters in the south. Latest UK polling is CON 43%(-2), LAB 33%(+2), LDEM 14%(-1).
Ok, again with the tax issue.
We hav eto tax somebody so who are we going to tzx?
The working poor?
The middle class?
The upper middle class?
Big corporations?
Everyone must pay to keep America great. Why doesn't Obama frame it this way?
"that's not true. Obama overall OUTPERFORMED his polls. So how can you argue that the undecideds broke to Hillary?"
This isn't even what happened. The polls didn't pick up the fact that both Chris Dodd and Joe Biden dropped out of the New Hampshire primary just a couple days before the results. Obama's results didn't move, Hillary gained a lot. Most of the Biden/Dodd voters moved to Hillary instead of Obama.
Funniest find of the morning, on a focus group of dumb racist people who are voting Obama.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/Voting_for_Obama_anyway.html
"The two most unreal moments of my professional life of watching focus groups:
54 year-old white male, voted Kerry '04, Bush '00, Dole '96, hunter, NASCAR fan...hard for Obama said: "I'm gonna hate him the minute I vote for him. He's gonna be a bad president. But I won't ever vote for another god-damn Republican. I want the government to take over all of Wall Street and bankers and the car companies and Wal-Mart run this county like we used to when Reagan was President."
The next was a woman, late 50s, Democrat but strongly pro-life. Loved B. and H. Clinton, loved Bush in 2000. "Well, I don't know much about this terrorist group Barack used to be in with that Weather guy but I'm sick of paying for health insurance at work and that's why I'm supporting Barack.""
I respect senator McCain, but he´s too old for president.
He was very nervous yesterday night.
He´s not prepared to be president.
Dario, it isn't that he isn't prepared, he can never be prepared. He doesn't have the right temperment. I mean, if he's 71 he's not going to get more experienced.
watching the vids of last night's debate again, I'm reminded of one aspect of Obama's style that really impressed me.
At the end of a long answer, he would invariably stop when his time was almost up and say:
"One more thing, on the subject of [insert topic here]..."
So brilliantly done - after a couple of minutes of a detailed answer including stats and voting records etc, my mind did tend to wander a bit, but the second he took that time to change tone, clearly introduce a new, sound bite summation of the answer I snapped back to attention. It also made it appear that he closed the debate on each question, even if McCain actually had the last word.
Fantastically done. A perfect combination of detail (which gets boring) and clearly signposted feel good sound bites. McCain had both detail and sound bites too, but he scattered them seemingly at random and shoe-horned them in via erratic tangents.
I realize putting this comment at the end of a debate thread is probably pointless, but can someone explain what is going on with Arkansas on Nate's map? It's showing as a lighter red than ND and GA, yet there's been no new polling there since 9/22. What gives?
@54cermak
Essentially, regression analysis. Nate's model says that white, working class dems are heavily trending Obama, and Arkansas has a lot of white, working class dems.
54cermak-
Nate's model is based ont he demographic's of a state. Arkansas is like MO and has some percentage of african-americans, etc. Nate's model analyzes states as they move and predicts which demopgraphics in states are moving and tries to predict the next poll of a state.
Make sense? His model has been amazing...
54, AR has a dem gov, 2 dem senators and 3-4 dem congressman. It is in the same media market as MO and Chuck Todd says AR is closing and it also has similar demographics as WV
If McCain win this election, it will be a miracle.
No "umms" from Obama last night, it was very nice and made him seem even smarter.
So brilliantly done - after a couple of minutes of a detailed answer including stats and voting records etc, my mind did tend to wander a bit, but the second he took that time to change tone, clearly introduce a new, sound bite summation of the answer I snapped back to attention. It also made it appear that he closed the debate on each question, even if McCain actually had the last word.
I hadn't noticed that but you are absolutely correct. I also had thought that Obama had had the last word because of that tactic.
I also realized this am, that McCain's affected pushing attempted persuasive tone (that's the only way I can describe it) was replaced by his more aggressive tone in this debate. Neither worked.
Finally, one our neighbors commented that everytime McCain was patronizing she found it to be very very offensive. I concur.
Paddypower.com (a UK bookie site) has decided to pay out on all Obama bets early!!!! www.paddypower.com
This is great news for...Oh wait
BTW Thanks Bill Frist and other jackass GOP members that made it illegal for me to place my $5/week soccer accumulator card. They hate us for our freedoms, pfffttt
paddypower is Irish, not uk.
Incredible!
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=aA1klUanHDII&refer=uk
Oct. 16 (Bloomberg) -- Paddy Power Plc, Ireland's largest bookmaker, is paying out $1.3 million on bets that Barack Obama will be the next U.S. president, three weeks before the election is held.
The odds on an Obama victory were narrowed to 1-9, meaning a $9 bet would return $1. In June, the odds on an Obama victory were 1-2. A Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll on Oct. 14 shows Obama leads Senator McCain 50 percent to 41 percent among likely voters.
``It has been one-way Obama traffic since the start of the summer and punters seemed to have called it 100 percent correct,'' the company said in a statement.
JOE THE PLIMMER HAS SOME EXPLAING TO DO:
"According to Lucas County, Ohio court records Samuel J. Wurzelbacher lives at 355 Shrewsbury Street. The state of Ohio took out a judgment against him for $1,182.98 in unpaid income taxes on 2007. Samuel J. Wurzelbacher also was involved in divorce proceedings in 2006 (with the Holland address) and previously in 1997, when he had an Arizona address."
Documents:
http://apps.co.lucas.oh.us/onlinedockets/DocketDR.aspx?STYPE=1&PAR=DM20065458&STARTDATE=01/01/1900&ENDDATE=01/01/2100&PARTY=0
http://apps.co.lucas.oh.us/onlinedockets/DocketDR.aspx?STYPE=1&PAR=DR19970476&STARTDATE=01/01/1900&ENDDATE=01/01/2100&PARTY=0
http://apps.co.lucas.oh.us/onlinedockets/Docket.aspx?STYPE=1&PAR=LN200701803-000&STARTDATE=01/01/1900&ENDDATE=01/01/2100&PARTY=0
JOE IS ALEGEDLY tied into the Keating 5 owns several business
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/16/02217/845/591/632001
NOT REGISTERED TO VOTE!!
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/16/04943/642/556/632036
'paddypower is Irish, not uk....'
Ooops. I knew they were Irish owned but I thought they based operations in the UK. I should have known better and I apologize to my fellow paddys
Li said...
I'm surprised that Obama won - he seemed to go back to his Uhs and Uhms during the debate.
Bollocks. I counted about 5 during the whole thing. Obama won easily, on style and subtstance. The post-debate polls reflect that. Even Frank Luntz/FOX gave it to Obama. McCain was huffing and puffing, breathing heavily, looked cranky, had Dubya-like contortions, etc, etc, etc...
The YouTube clips do McCain no favors, also. SNL and The Daily Show have enought comedy materla for the next week. Forget the fact that he went nuclear with women voters on the health issue.
Two angles tell the story of the stark differences between these candidates.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=YrNdFWvSPCs
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=EASpPlcVbdI
No advance Ras/Diageo numbers yet?
Hi Nate,
I'm a finance/economics student in Australia, so I both really appreciate your applying a statistical analysis to political data (which surprisingly hasn't been significantly done in a publicly available form before), and am a resonably passionate obama supporter (a recent poll [with a sample of 3400]in Australia showed that 72% of Australians would vote for Obama if they had American francise).
Still though, I occasionally find it odd that you are willing to give credence to snap polls such as those shown on networks after tonights debate.
I agreed pretty closely with your analysis of the debate, i.e. mccain won the first 20 mins followed by a pretty even section, with Obama winning the end of the debate.
However, anyone who thinks that this is how the debate played out has to look at the polls and say that they're going to overstate Obama's advantage, because he was the strongest at the end. More importantly though, if you look at the start of the debate, which most commentators (including yourself) think McCain won, this was the section which specifically related to the economic crisis - this issue which voters are concerned about more than any other.
In this light, while snap polls may show that Obama convincingly won this debate, if my analysis, and yours (that McCain won the 1st 20 mins) is accurate, surely given more than a few minutes to consider their reactions to the debate, people will moderate their opinions.
Personally, I believe that the debate was pretty much a tie, but even if it did represent a McCain victory, it didn't to nearly the extent that it needed to be to put him back into the race. Still, I take umbridge with those commentators who are willing to accept these snap polls as representative of the reasoned reactions of voters to the debate, as opposed to just the knee jerk response to how their emotions guided their feelings when they were called after just turning off their TVs.
Looks like Diageo/Hotline is still 49-41 Obama.
WATCH: McCain Frowns, Rolls Eyes, Blinks More Than 3,000 Times
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/16/mccain-frowns-roll-eyes-a_n_135085.html
Who Won The Last Debate? Obama Dominates By Largest Margins Yet
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/15/who-won-the-last-debate-o_n_135066.html
Conservatives Pan McCain's Performance
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/16/conservative-voices-pan-m_n_135088.html
Jeremy, who won for you?
I actually think Obama did exactly what he needed to when handling this question. He did not need to have a response to Ayers, ACORN, infanticide, that would hit it out of the park.. all he had to do was try to show that he wanted to focus on issues and McCain seems to be obsessed with these types of things, which is exactly what he did. Independent voters that Obama can sway, do not care at all about these attacks. They want to hear about issues. The only people that really think that Ayers is an issue are conservatives who are already voting for McCain anyway.
In the Rasmussen page is 50-45, but it´s yesterday tracking.
New Ras Numbers:
Obama 50 Mcsame 46
McCain lost the debate with the stupid thing of Ayers and Acorn.
Obama won in the REAL issues. Obama won.
Dario,
Let's put it this way - the closest McCain is getting to the White House is if he puts on a toolbelt and tags along with Joe the Plumber to fix a broken toilet ;-)
Rasmussen tracking is before the debate.
Hmmm...McCain at 46% sounds odd, especially in light of the built-in Dem ID advantage.
Still, I expect tomorrow's numbers to go up again for Obama.
Post a Comment