McCain talks about reaching across the aisle and reaching a bipartisan consensus but I can't help but wonder about the manner in which McCain has done so.

In McCain I see a “My way or the highway” approach, which may get a bipartisan agreement through (if by bipartisan means getting just enough support from the other side to reach an agreement). But if you don't show respect or build a positive foundation in your approach or encourage the input of others' opinions, then any future agreements you need to reach will seem like uphill battles. I don't think McCain cares about building successful working relationships. I think McCain just bullheads his way into getting “bipartisan” legislation passed.

True bipartisanship requires finding common ground on the issues and making all parties feel that they are being listened to. Obama has these skills (and I've seen Obama exhibit the same skills in previous debates). McCain does not. I've watched for any sign of McCain's ability to foster a positive debate and McCain's behavior towards Obama last night pretty much sums my views on McCain: he is unable to see the common ground he shares with the “other side” (much less acknowledge the other side has a good point), he does not treat Obama with any respect, he wants things his way (whereas Obama has always said that he will compromise, as he did on the offshore drilling), and McCain is grouchy.

I know grouchy is sort of a minor concern, but seriously, would you rather do business with someone who looks you square in the eye, understands what you need and is willing to compromise? Or would you rather do business with someone who openly disdains you, can't even look at you (much less in the eye), does not want to compromise and on top of all that is just in a bad mood? Given that the president of the US has to deal with every world leader from all sorts of cultures, McCain's approach is not conducive to constructive dialogue. No wonder McCain doesn't want to talk to world leaders- he doesn't have a clue on how to do it.

Thanks, Marlowecan…. good points.

I agree with you that Obama has improved his debating skills. But I never would have thought to thank Hillary for them and you are so right on that point, so thanks for pointing that out!

Ditch comments like that next time, and people of both sides will read your entire post.

Nobody was so wretched as Gore with his walking over in a [unintendedly comical] menacing way toward GWB. Plus the sighing and the earth toned wardrobe. The guy was committing seppuku in public.

Even so, he would have won had not Swamp-Thing Reno gone down to Florida and supervised Elian Gonzalez' return to Castro's workers' paradise. That cost Gore at least 100K votes in Florida, miinimum.

Conscious bias leading directly to spin
Subconscious bias leading to tunnel vision
Emotion winning over objectivity
Physiological inability to credit the opponent
Compulsion to cave to PC balance
Fear of antagonizing one party or the other
Whistling in the dark dynamic
Nationalistic paranoia dynamic
Bias toward reason and knowledge
Inability to detect reason and knowledge
Lack of need for reason and knowledge
Admiration of posturing over substance
Admiration of substance over posturing

OK, enough already. All this exercise shows is how difficult it can be to reach any sort of consensus on a debate result, because A.) so many people take their cues from the pundits, and B.) because those cues are not informed primarily by the sort of professional ability and integrity most of us would (presumably) like to see in the media. If nothing else, this points up why it is so important for the citizens in a democracy to be educated and learn how to develop a modicum of critical thinking ability (if they are going to be capable of separating the wheat from the chaff), and therefore successfully perform their duty as citizens. Sorry about diverging from the topic, but that's what kicked off my line of though.

Look at the photos of him in the White House meeting this week. He knew his place, as a junior senator invited as a courtesy by the president, and didn't swan about.

Of course, Obama could be a raging ego-maniac in private . . . but Senator Obama does show good manners and respect in public.

Like T-Steel, I find it odd that people — not only McCain supporters, but also Obama supporters — have been critical of Obama's agreeing with McCain as a sign of weakness.

Is Obama supposed to automatically say the opposite of whatever McCain says? I thought people in America were getting sick of that stupid partisanship.

I was very turned off by McCain's”condescending old man routine. McCain had some good points many times but lost me with constant “you don't understand young grasshopper”. If you take CNN's “live tracking” during the debate at face value, many independents did not like McCain's routine as well.