Scoring the Presidential Debate #1: Winners, Kill Blows & Major Subjects

  • News
  • Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation revolved around the scoring and winner of the 2008 presidential debate between Barack Obama and John McCain. The general consensus was that Obama came off as more presidential and engaged in the discussion better, while McCain often avoided answering questions and told numerous lies. Obama was able to effectively refute these lies and clarify his stance on important issues such as tax breaks for oil companies and the surge in Iraq. However, McCain did have some strong moments, particularly regarding his experience and the surge. The debate also touched on the difference between strategy and tactics, with some confusion and differing opinions on the matter. Overall, many felt that Obama won the debate due to his ability to address the questions and engage with his opponent, while McCain seemed more

What was the score?

  • McCain won by a large margin

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • McCain won but it was close

    Votes: 9 23.7%
  • Obama won by a large margin

    Votes: 10 26.3%
  • Obama won but it was close

    Votes: 12 31.6%
  • It was a tie

    Votes: 7 18.4%

  • Total voters
    38
  • #141
Whowee, I will share my opinion regarding Obama's rise. As far as background goes, I didn't understand the Obama hype up until a month ago. I only cared about Ron Paul during the primaries. When the election came down to Obama, Clinton, and McCain, I figured either one of them would be fine to run the country, so I became disengaged from politics until a month ago.

What I came to realize is that Obama is in fact very similar to Paul, in the sense that they are truly grass-root phenomenons. Paul had been around for decades and he didn't become an internet-darling until this election. The reason is some people are truly sick of the incestuous marriage between lawmakers and lobbyist, and the out-of-touch, divorced from reality that we call our political system. Just look at the current financial crisis and some The Daily Show clips to see the absurdity.

So when these people see a combination of intelligence, voice of reason, and most importantly, honesty, they latch onto it. Obama is not perfect, but he is well on his way to become a once in a generation historical political figure. I think some old-boys in Washington recognized his potential, and basically try not to obstruct his path by staying out his way. Obama is the one who took the initiative to seize this opening to the best of his ability.

Obama had a very humble background where his mother used to live on food stamp. He work his way up the social food chain to become what he is today. He contributed back to the community post law school by working as a community organizer. That is essentially how he "stole" the primary away from Clinton, because his bottom-up work-with-the-people approach gave him that slight edge over the traditional top-down political-savvy, media-dictated strategy. His ground game ensured that his supporters would squeeze out those crucial caucuses votes that Clinton supporters seem to ignored. And it didn't take that many votes to earn him enough momentum for a win. What we ended up with now is a candidate that is endorsed by the public as well as those who are empowered, at the same time no less. In contrast, the Republican camp has McCain dealing with the old-boys, and Palin drawing the commoner crowd.

Now that the McCain campaign become such a joke, I'm even more glad Obama was chosen. Rest assure, his ground game will once again come into play on Nov 4th. It is quite funny the way McCain steals Obama's message on being out of touch with the middle class. Guess which one of these candidates has 7 houses and 13 cars, and the other has 1 house and 1 car. The VP picks sealed the election for me. It becomes more clear by the day that the VP decisions are the epitome of both candidates' ability to make sound judgment.

People who question Obama's experience failed to see his un-tap potential. The way I see it, Obama is like Google just before its IPO. Biden is a solid blue chipper. McCain is one of the current financial stock that is suffering a melt-down. Palin is just penny stock that was hot, but is now shorted to the bottom.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #142
  • #143
The biggest concern I have about Obama is his reluctance to just say...something like this:

"America...I'd like to do all of the things I've proposed...it's what's in my heart...but we can't. Forget about the $1,000 giveaway,,,I wanted to do it for you...but let's face it...Bush already proved that's a mistake...and now we need those funds for this bailout.

However, I give you my promise right now America...if you elect me President, I will make sure make the mortgage mess is investigated back to it's origins, thieves will be prosicuted and safeguards will be enacted to prevent future repeats.

Also, in response to the SEC request, I promise to fully investigate the $100 TRILLION per year increases in unregulated derivatives trading and promise to install a watchdog unit that truly understands the complexities of that industry. I will not allow unregulated derivatives trading to become our next financial disaster.

My opponent, John McCain, MIGHT be right about ONE thing...we do need to open the books in EVERY department, find waste...and correct the problems moving forward...we still have some $600 toilet seats out there...and I'll find them.

Then, once WE THE PEOPLE have OUR house in tight financial order, restore accountability (and we find money without increasing debt) we can focus on a phased in plan of positive change in the areas I've outlined.

We can't possibly increase spending and we can't implement any of my new programs without fixing the entire mess. We didn't get into this mess overnight...change will take time. Please support me and I'll get us through this difficult time...(even if it takes 8 years)."

That would be honesty...and I would be the first to support him!

Obama has the lead...the polls are obvious...the next big issue will be cabinet choices...Reagan had a super-cabinet...current Bush...not so good...and Clinton...all I can seem to remember is C. Rice joined Bush(?)...what happened there (another topic altogether).

If Obama wants to be productive in office...and prevent Nancy Pelosi from calling the shots...he needs to be brutally honest right now...plant the seeds for REAL change, and get EVERYONE behind him and on the same page.

This is my honest opinion.
 
  • #144
One of my favorite Obama answers was his response to the charge that he has the most liberal voting record of any Senator. His response was that he was just voting against Bush's wrong-headed policies.

DUH! Why didn't that occur to me... :rolleyes: Anyone determined to preserve the Constitution would appear far to the left by Bush standards.
 
Last edited:
  • #145
WhoWee said:
The biggest concern I have about Obama is his reluctance to just say...something like this:

"America...I'd like to do all of the things I've proposed...it's what's in my heart...but we can't. Forget about the $1,000 giveaway,,,I wanted to do it for you...but let's face it...Bush already proved that's a mistake...and now we need those funds for this bailout.

However, I give you my promise right now America...if you elect me President, I will make sure make the mortgage mess is investigated back to it's origins, thieves will be prosicuted and safeguards will be enacted to prevent future repeats.

Also, in response to the SEC request, I promise to fully investigate the $100 TRILLION per year increases in unregulated derivatives trading and promise to install a watchdog unit that truly understands the complexities of that industry. I will not allow unregulated derivatives trading to become our next financial disaster.

My opponent, John McCain, MIGHT be right about ONE thing...we do need to open the books in EVERY department, find waste...and correct the problems moving forward...we still have some $600 toilet seats out there...and I'll find them.

Then, once WE THE PEOPLE have OUR house in tight financial order, restore accountability (and we find money without increasing debt) we can focus on a phased in plan of positive change in the areas I've outlined.

We can't possibly increase spending and we can't implement any of my new programs without fixing the entire mess. We didn't get into this mess overnight...change will take time. Please support me and I'll get us through this difficult time...(even if it takes 8 years)."

That would be honesty...and I would be the first to support him!

Obama has the lead...the polls are obvious...the next big issue will be cabinet choices...Reagan had a super-cabinet...current Bush...not so good...and Clinton...all I can seem to remember is C. Rice joined Bush(?)...what happened there (another topic altogether).

If Obama wants to be productive in office...and prevent Nancy Pelosi from calling the shots...he needs to be brutally honest right now...plant the seeds for REAL change, and get EVERYONE behind him and on the same page.

This is my honest opinion.
I agree with this. Both candidates have to be frank about the fact that they cannot reduce taxes, either have to keep them as they are or increase (by letting Bush tax cuts expire), while reducing spending, including withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan ASAP.

The US has to now live within its means!
 
  • #146
Who Wee - good one. sounds damn closer to the truth than I've read so far.

Now, translate that into politico-speak so it doesn't offend 50% of the population and maybe, just maybe, it won't cost an entire election.
 
  • #147
Astronuc said:
The US has to now live within its means!

With nods from the likes of Newt Gingrich [former Speaker of the House, R], Robert Reich [former Sec of Labor, D] makes the point that we have no choice: We have to spend money to rebuld the nation. He makes the distinction between investing, and spending. For example, money that is invested in infrastructure will yield dividends for decades to come.

Money invested in alternative energy will help to keep the $700 Billion sent to foreign suppliers, here, in the US economy. That is one bailout every year! At that rate we could even afford to elect Republicans again.
 
Last edited:
  • #148
Ivan Seeking said:
Money invested in alternative energy will help to keep the $700 Billion sent to foreign suppliers, here, in the US economy. That is one bailout every year! At that rate we could even afford to elect Republicans again.
It doesn't change the gist of your point but as it is widely quoted it is worth pointing out that the much bandied about $700 billion figure is actually $536 billion with a 1/3 spent with Canada, Mexico and the UK. http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_debate_no_1.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #149
Uh, the number changes daily with the price of oil. And whether we send our money to Canada, Mexico, or Saudi Arabia, it is still money lost to the economy.

By the time we can reverse the tide, it will probably be more like a trillion a year.
 
  • #150
Ivan Seeking said:
Uh, the number changes daily with the price of oil.
Not money already spent doesn't so unless oil suddenly goes to $400 barrel from now to the EOY then the $700 billion figure is an exaggeration. As I said I am not refuting your central theme merely pointing out the oft quoted figure used by McCain is wrong.
 
  • #151
I'm not quoting McCain. I was actually pulling from T. Boone Pickens.

We use about 19.6 million barrels per day, and produce about 5.8 million barrels per day. So with a net requirement of 13.8 million barrels per day, and at $140 per barrel, that is $700 Billion per year, so that was the peak value seen this year. Right now oil is about $100 per barrel, so we should be at about $500 Billion per year, based on the daily demand.
http://maps.unomaha.edu/Peterson/funda/Sidebar/OilConsumption.html

What McCain doesn't understand, or perhaps what he doesn't want anyone else to understand is that we can't drill our way out of this problem.
 
Last edited:
  • #152
Ivan Seeking said:
What McCain doesn't understand is that we can't drill our way out of this problem.
The oil industry is running ads every night with an attractive woman explaining how our country's energy needs are not being met because too much of the US and offshore is off-limits for development. Oil companies (and their surrogates, like McCain) think we're stupid enough that we don't know that they have millions of acres of off-shore leases that have never been touched because the oil companies find that they can make a lot more money throttling existing production than they can by drilling on the land they have under lease and increasing supply.
 
  • #153
turbo-1 said:
The oil industry is running ads every night with an attractive woman explaining how our country's energy needs are not being met because too much of the US and offshore is off-limits for development. Oil companies (and their surrogates, like McCain) think we're stupid enough that we don't know that they have millions of acres of off-shore leases that have never been touched because the oil companies find that they can make a lot more money throttling existing production than they can by developing existing leases and increasing supply.

Yes, and in that same commercial, they conveniently use numbers for oil and gas - natural gas. Being that we are the Saudi Arabia of natural gas, that is more than a bit misleading!

Note also why the oil companies don't go after all of the oil to which they have access - the cost of drilling. I would have to look for it, but I previously posted a link showing that the coastal reserves cost about $60 a barrel just to drill. So it made no sense to go after these until two years ago.
 
  • #154
WhoWee said:
Doesn't it bother you that a first term Senator is named to 5 or 6 (?) major committees (chair on 1)...and in only his 3rd year he's selected to run for President?

This appears to me that he was fast-tracked without a chance to make mistakes.
You know there's been a previous President that was an Illinois lawyer, who served a few years in the Illinois State Legislature and then one unremarkable term in the US House of Reps before running for President.

WhoWee said:
First, look at his activity and leadership in the Illinois Senate...mediocre at best.

Now look at how long he's served in the US Senate...2 1/2 years approx...(prior to the primaries) and from out of nowhere he's on 5 major committees and a chair...then he's chosen to lead the Democratic party and the free world...tell me I'm wrong to think he had help.
Here's an alternative to your "fast track" theory.

In 2002, when Reps and Dems alike fell for the Bush Admin hogwash about the Iraq war, Obama was something of a lone voice of dissent that predicted most of the troubles that would follow with remarkable insight. That act first propelled him into the national stage and led to a thumping Senate victory for him. In 2004, when the Iraq war was starting to lose popularity and the Democratic Party was wishing they had been more like him, they gave Obama the keynote address at the Convention - and he blew the audience (including television viewers) away with his speech. That made him a national sensation. He then played big roles in the Ethics Reform bill, and created something of a name for bipartisanship when he worked with Lugar on the WMD Non-proliferation Bill and with Coburn on the Federal Transparency Act. He has been an inspirational voice for millions across the country and for many more outside it. He ran an exceptionally strong primary campaign and rallied millions to his message.

It should not come as even the slightest surprise that he could be nominated from his party for the Presidency.

PS: Obama is currently on 4 committees and does not chair any of them (he chairs a sub-committee). Before this, he was on 3 committees. Other junior senators also have anywhere from 3 to 5 committee appointments each.
 
  • #155
Although I voted Obama won the debate by a large margin, I think it was a definitive win rather than overwhelming. Whowee, doesn't like Obama's pattern of speach when he was giving his THOUGHTFUL answers. I did and I think many more people besides myself did also. I distinguished him from the choppy, Palinlike speach pattern of McCain; who must have had a little difficulty remembering his pre-rehearsed quips. On the other hand I believe Obama prepared so well for the debate he had to remind himself not to give very detailed answers lest McCain plagerize them.
 
  • #156
During the debate, McCain made a comment about Russia being run by a KGB functionary. And that would be different from the US HOW? The former director of the CIA was vice-president, then president, and now his son is finishing up his second term. The US government is suffused with spooks and the people who make and implement foreign policy behind the scenes.
 
  • #157
Ivan Seeking said:
...many people here didn't even know that soldiers swear - agree to give their life if needed - to protect the Constitution, not to protect the President!

One more thing that I meant to add: It is the difference between a nation of laws, and a nation of Kings. That is one hell of a distinction to not understand.
 
Last edited:
  • #158
Too bad we can't see any results from voting in (my state) Ohio today...I heard Obama was quite organanized on the college campuses...isn't our system wonderful...hurry up and vote...before something happens to change your mind.
 
  • #159
WhoWee said:
Too bad we can't see any results from voting in (my state) Ohio today...I heard Obama was quite organanized on the college campuses...isn't our system wonderful...hurry up and vote...before something happens to change your mind.

That is a good idea. Go ahead and bank the votes they have. Heck maybe if they get enough people to vote now, there won't be such big crowds at the polls when you go to vote.

Obama is merely taking a page from the Republican playbook. They are very active at getting absentee ballots to their voters like in Florida.

Your complaint sounds more like envy to me.
 
  • #160
WhoWee said:
Too bad we can't see any results from voting in (my state) Ohio today...I heard Obama was quite organanized on the college campuses...isn't our system wonderful...hurry up and vote...before something happens to change your mind.
You didn't hear about over a million absentee ballots the McCain campaign sent out in Ohio?
 
  • #161
We celebrate the 4th of July on the July 4th, Christmas is December 25th, New Years Eve December 31, etc. We should ALL vote ON election day.
 
  • #162
WhoWee said:
We celebrate the 4th of July on the July 4th, Christmas is December 25th, New Years Eve December 31, etc. We should ALL vote ON election day.
What happened to Vote earlier, Vote often? :smile:
 
  • #163
The votes have to be counted on November 4th. Early voting helps to insure that everyone gets a chance to vote. For example, some of our elderly, and people with disabilities, may need to make special arrangements for transportation. And they are often in no condition to stand in long lines. This also helps to insure that intimidation can't be used; or that polling stations relocated at the last minute, or that confusion due to false information [that was sent out intentionally], or sudden problems with the registration system, or other problems such as the requirement for two, not just one photo ID, won't prevent people from voting, as has often happened in black communities, for example.
 
Last edited:
  • #165
Yeah, let's vote on a Tuesday, that's the best idea ever. I'm not tired after work or anything.
 

Similar threads

Replies
51
Views
5K
Replies
22
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
32
Views
4K
Replies
12
Views
4K
Replies
29
Views
10K
Replies
21
Views
4K
Back
Top