Filed under: Author - ACG,Politics,Talking Points | Tags: Barack Obama, Debates, John McCain, Religious politics, Spin
At Saturday night’s Saddleback Civil Forum on the Presidency, McCain and Obama appeared on stage together… for less than a minute, before entering interview-style discussions with Reverend Rick Warren, of the Saddleback Church.
Commenters here have claimed victory for McCain, joining a distinguished chorus of the McCain camp (shocker!), Republican boosters (amazing!), and PUMAs, those dregs of the internet. I dispute both this victory, and the significance of any alleged victory.
Slanted Playing Field; Poor Predictor
I concede that Obama did not do as well as I had hoped. He was rambling and replete with “umms.” If I expected that Obama in a debate would be just a repeat performance of the same, I’d suggest that he call up the coach that made Iain Duncan Smith & Bill Clinton presentable. But performance in a conversational interview is not the same as performance in an adversarial process.
First, there’s every reason to believe Obama was on slanted ground: while McCain did not participate in the last debate touching on faith – a laughable farce where the crazier you acted, the more love you received – in a sign of how far he’s fallen into the pocket of the religious right, he talked up his faith repeatedly, and took the first strong pro-life stance of his career:
As Christina rightly points out, to expect Obama to look sterling at a religious event next to the newly crowned prince of the religious right is foolish. Fault lies with the Obama campaign, though, for not lowering expectations and hitting that talking point before the debate. That Obama held ground is enough for me, and if Obama’s team had made that point earlier, it could’ve been enough for America, and a stunning coup.
Second, Obama’s law professor chops will shine through best when he’s challenged, rather than when he’s asked to speak introspectively.
Obama Speaks Substance; McCain Embraces “Hope”
Further, Obama took the chance to talk policy, and it went over well. Apparently McCain’s answer to the current economic crisis is the kind of empty hope that Republicans accuse Obama supporters of foolishly embracing. “Everyone can be rich! How? Unclear… let’s segue into a joke!”
Kudos to McCain for joking with the *ahem* already favorable moderator, and coming across as human, but while he was having fun, the opposition took the chance to speak substantively and clear up misunderstandings of tax policy, and give the kind of short, ten-word explanation of the economy that voters have been asking him for:
Had Obama delivered that brief talk in response to McCain’s, the winner would be clear. If McCain “won” on issues like this, it was only spin and empty words – no substance. Talk about a role reversal.
Granted moments like this were in short supply at Saddleback, and are generally few and far between in Obama’s performance overall. But they bode well.
The Shape of Things to Come
Most importantly, the “loss” alleged only by the opposition should not dismay Democrats: our ideas are winning in fair debates between Obama/McCain stand-ins, and we can expect to do stellarly at face-to-face debates. Consider yesterday’s matchup between likely Obama VP Evan Bayh (Sen., D-In) and likely McCain running mate Tim Pawlenty (Gov., R-Mn):
It was a massacre. Obama needs to study Bayh, and Bayh needs to be vice-president: he brings experience, he brings a respectable level of “fight,” and his… ah… error in supporting the Iraq War can be explained away by a legitimate chance of heart, the kind that Saturday night’s moderator recognized as a legitimate reason for that deadliest of political events, the “flip-flop.” Democrats can and will win these debates, with good speakers and intelligent, keenly trained minds. There’s no reason to expect Obama to not perform as well as Bayh, and I’d expect McCain to perform significantly worse than Pawlenty (who was good – just not good enough).
For McCain, Criticism Cut with Praise
I’ll give this to the Loyal Opposition: he spoke of his affair responsibly, and ended his discussion with a call for charitable politics. While I still can’t understand how this affair isn’t a candidate-killer – I don’t deny that good men can sometimes have urges, but a real man ends one relationship before acting on those urges – he ‘fessed up and moved on in a dignified manner. This bodes well for America no matter the results in November. But let’s not count Obama down, when the future continues to look bright.
Cross-posted at “Yes to Democracy.”
Leave a Comment so far
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Two things I would like to point out:
1) While this audience may have been somewhat baised towards McCain, Obama received far more applause for good answers than McCain received in front of the NAACP or would in front of any other Obama-leaning crowd.
2) While this audience may have been somewhat baised towards McCain, the questions being asked were the questions that America wants answers to. They were fair, covered a wide range of topics and the same-question for each method was very enjoyable to watch.
Comment by Progressive Conservative August 18, 2008 @ 10:32 amOne thing I noticed: Michael Phelps won his eighth gold medal one hour after the debate, which may have overshadowed the event.
Comment by Shangrala August 18, 2008 @ 11:45 amTotally. It seems like thsi event was only of interest to political junkies; maybe the fall-out on the McCain cheating thing will help make it al ittle more mainstream, and in our favor ;)
Comment by Ames August 18, 2008 @ 12:01 pmI have a hard time caring about McCain having the questions in advance, mostly because I’m pretty sure that Obama would have done the same thing had he gone second. How is anyone supposed to make sure that a staff member in the audience (or just watching the live coverage) isn’t getting the questions to the waiting candidate while the first one speaks? It does make me feel good about saying earlier that McCain’s answers came too quickly, as if he were reading off of a script.
I also have a hard time giving him much credit for talking about his affair. If he didn’t say anything, continuing coverage of the Edwards thing would have segued into “hey, didn’t John McCain do something like this?” on the news. This strikes me as admitting to fault in anticipation of more scrutiny.
Comment by Gotchaye August 18, 2008 @ 1:01 pm@Gotchya: While I haven’t really seen the videos or know too much detail or the validity of the situation…the defense, “Obama would have done it too” is a bit too hypothetical for me.
Comment by Oneiroi August 18, 2008 @ 2:24 pmI couldn’t watch it. I can’t believe Obama would go on stage with Warren. If this kind of stuff keeps up voting for Obama is going to require metaphorically “holding my nose.”
Comment by Tmtoulouse August 18, 2008 @ 3:49 pmSorry, as an Englishman, I had to laugh at:
“I’d suggest that he call upthe coach that made Iain Duncan Smith presentable.”
I really wouldn’t… ;)
Comment by Martin August 19, 2008 @ 7:33 am