Reader Brian gives his analysis of the latest presidential debate

 Obama strides, McCain blusters

By: Brian Shapiro

The latest debate, like every debate that we’ve had this election season, was a volley of the candidates repeating the points that they’ve repeated countless times before, in many ways and by many means—by hammering away at the stump, by sending surrogates on TV, by paying for advertisements, and by releasing statements to the press. The news cycle is becoming increasingly short, and everything that the candidates have had to say has already been said. The debate format, also short, doesn’t forgive anything except sound bites, so, instead of being about the candidates considering each other’s arguments and criticisms, the debates have increasingly become about taking control of the conversation.

By that measure, a confident, strident Barack Obama came ahead of a blustering, snide John McCain. While Obama had a preparedness for hearing the same old arguments made against him, and tried to project confidence and brush those arguments aside; McCain had trouble wording his answers, responding to questions directly, and failed to take the opportunities he had to make his case.

Honestly, many of McCain’s answers on questions were better than Obama’s, and several points that Obama forcefully hammered were not accurate; but, the fact is, Obama was able to take command of the debate, while McCain failed to. In that sense Obama won the debate and McCain lost. As Obama’s command and presence surely reassured a lot of voters that he could be President, McCain’s blustering and lackluster performance surely gave some people pause.

Much of Obamas’s upper hand had to do with strategies he used in the debate to fluster his opponent and keep him off guard, while he spoke his points in a clear and strong manner.

Those who’ve paid attention to this campaign day in and day out might have noticed that from the start of the evening, Obama began stealing some of McCain’s favorite stump lines. First he mentioned how our regulatory agencies were archaic and outdated, echoing a line McCain has repeated many times before, that we still have the alphabet soup of regulatory agencies that FDR created to deal with the Great Depression. Then Obama criticized how Bush, after 9/11 had told the American public to go out and shop. For those who remember, McCain spoke that same criticism months ago at the Saddleback civil forum. Later in the debate, Obama turned a common criticism he himself normally faces on John McCain—questioning  how McCain will be able to pay for his proposals.

The stuttering that Obama has shown in some past debates was not exhibited too much tonight. One had to also notice that Obama polished some of his responses  to some of McCain’s criticisms, and was able to deliver them forcefully. Obama tried to moot McCain’s criticism of him not understanding foreign policy issues by agreeing with him, in the sense that he didn’t understand why we needed to go into Iraq; he tried to moot McCain’s criticism of Obama’s statements on Pakistan, by repeating inappropriate comments McCain made on Iran and North Korea. These are responses Obama has delivered before, but, again, he was able to deliver them more forcefully.

Even when Obama’s responses were weak, and McCain’s responses were strong, because of the differences in their styles, Obama was able to look strong, while McCain fell into looking weak.

When Senator McCain touted how he’d supported a bill to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2005, Obama tried to put that down by pointing out that McCain didn’t write the bill and it didn’t pass. I don’t think the American people care that McCain didn’t write the bill, since he was a strong supporter and gave a strong speech to the Senate with warning that if the bill wouldn’t pass the country would face financial disaster. I don’t think the American people would blame McCain for it not passing, seeing how it was Obama’s fellow Democrats in the Senate who opposed the bill. However, Obama delivered the line straight enough; and McCain never hit back, never reiterating his strong support or re-emphasizing the Democratic opposition.

Obama came ahead by getting another point in—that he wrote a letter about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the Secretary of Treasury. This was an effective rebuttal to the charge by McCain that he was opposed to regulation, making it look like McCain was using an unfair attack.

When asked whether Russia has again become an evil empire, McCain gave the right answer: maybe—that it depended entirely on what Russia wanted and how they wanted to play. Obama gave a weak answer and one that was more provocative towards Russia. But McCain answered in such a snarky tone, and explained it in such a blunt way—as if it were a matter of playing a diplomatic game—that he sounded muddled instead of strong.

McCain was asked whether we should go to the UN before responding to an attack on Israel, and his response was a bit nonsensical. Of course, like he said, the right answer is that when an ally of ours is attacked, we don’t have to wait in order to respond—and nothing in international law would demand that we do that. However, McCain was claiming that China and Russia would oppose us in the UN—a claim which is a bit ridiculous, since China and Russia don’t want Iran to exercise its military force more than we do. Nor do they want to look like they’re siding with an aggressor, throwing themselves into a possible world war. If Israel, indeed, was ever attacked, we’d in fact want to get their support as soon as possible, and isolate Iran as soon as possible. McCain was obviously trying to draw back on comments Obama made before on trying to a UN vote, that Russia and China would oppose, except it didn’t make sense for him to do that as an answer to this question.

Obama was effective in reiterating the talking point which says that McCain is against funding alternative energy; pointing out the number of times McCain voted against alternative energy. McCain mentioned one of the bills that he voted against, and Obama voted for; a bill crafted by Bush and Cheney. McCain states he voted against that bill because of the huge favors and tax cuts for the oil industry. But he wasn’t able to effectively make that a retort to Obama’s argument, since he never mentioned that Obama was counting that as a vote against alternative energy. He also sometime in the debate made a mention of his work with Senator Lieberman on environmental issues; but never made the point that the legislation he worked on with him, the McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act, had subsidies and incentives for alternative energy development.

One point McCain came out strong on was assuring the audience that he didn’t want to increase tax cuts for the rich, but he was never able to shine a light on any of the questionable numbers Obama has been using. Neither was he able to effectively question Obama’s claim to have both a net decrease in spending and net tax cuts to the middle class, without placing exorbitant taxes on everyone else. However, Obama was able to remind people that there was a balanced budget before Bush’s presidency.

He also was able to present himself as a fighter of waste and earmarks, but wanting to point to an example of an earmark Obama supported, he pointed to funds that would replace projector at a planetarium—something that I doubt would rile anybody against him.

Obama continued to hammer his points, and McCain continued to be ineffective in making his. At the end of the night, people will remember that McCain voted against alternative energy, that he supported Bush’s policies getting into Iraq, that Obama wants to cut spending and give tax cuts, and that McCain and Obama both were concerned about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but that McCain was throughout his career a deregulator.

The only other notable thing was when Obama mentioned that people in the banking industry go to Delaware because of looser laws on credit cards. He potentially opened a discussion on Biden having as a Senator sided with credit card companies in Delaware in return for funding for his Senate campaigns, and allegations against illicit ties between Biden’s son and the Delaware-based credit card company MBNA. But again, no comment from McCain.

Watching the debate, I have no doubt Obama was able to convince some people, while McCain was not. It remains to be seen whether after his performance, McCain can once again take control of the conversation—to convince some of the people Obama won over that they can’t trust Obama’s answers, or to convince some of the people he lost, that he’s also on top of his game.

Brian Shapiro is a regular reader of Poligazette, where he goes by the name Redfis. He is a resident of Encino California and a former philosophy student at UC Berkele. He was also involved, as a young man, with the Reform Party.