« I Agree with Joe (Not the Plumber): McCain Aiming for 46%
A Lighter Side of the Last Debate »



Quick Takes on McCain-Obama Debate 3 (’Turn Out the Lights, the Party’s Over’ Edition)

October 16th, 2008
By MARK DANIELS

Print Print

Okay, I admit it: Part of my indifference to tonight’s debate stems from the fact that I voted yesterday. Ohio, like twenty-nine other states, allows for early voting. It began here on October 6. I like voting early. No line. Walk up, show your identification, fill out two forms, vote, and walk home. So, in a way, for me the election campaign ended yesterday afternoon.

But there’s another reason I was indifferent to this evening’s debate. The fact is, this thing is over.

Back in 1972, Jack Newfield and Jeff Greenfield, two former aides to Robert Kennedy, wrote a whistling-in-the-dark tome called The Populist Manifesto. They looked at a Democratic Party torn asunder by civil rights and the war in Vietnam, two issues that destroyed the old coalition of working class whites and the nation’s African-Americans, and argued that people didn’t have to like each other to vote as a bloc. Economic self-interest, they said, should trump race to bring election to populist Democrats. If those groups came together, they argued, the Democratic Party would be unbeatable.

Barack Obama is not a populist. But thirty-six years after Greenfield and Newfield tried to revivify the traditional Democratic coalition, major voter fears about the economy under a Republican president are doing the job. Working class whites appear to be joining antiwar activists, African-Americans, Hispanics, and, in overwhelming numbers, women, in supporting Obama.

Exit polling among early voters indicate that Obama is winning big. With today’s grim reports on major economic indicators and the third quarter statements about to go to those who hold 401Ks and 403Bs, Obama’s victory margin is only going to grow. Although the financial crisis is nowhere nearly as severe as the economic calamity that confronted the country in 1932, Obama is likely to roll up a Rooseveltian Democratic victory this year.

So, tonight’s debate was anticlimactic, bordering on the unnecessary. Naturally enough, being a political junkie, I watched it.

Going into the debate, you knew that unless Obama committed a major misstep, there was no way he was going to “lose” this debate. He didn’t commit a major misstep.

Neither candidate covered any new ground tonight, something they both desperately needed to do. The two of them continue blithely mouthing their talking points, telling us about their respective spending and taxation priorities, each apparently unaware that, as a result of the recent economic rescue package, when they take office on January 20, they will have an additional $750-billion bill to pay. The bailout plan, like the war in Iraq, is apt to soak up any hint of discretionary revenue in a federal budget already awash in oceans of red ink.

The best line of the night, I thought, was McCain’s insistence that he was not President Bush and if Senator Obama wanted to run against the President, he should have done so four years ago. The problem, of course, is that McCain has spent so much of the past four-plus years ingratiating himself to the supporters of President Bush, it becomes difficult for him now to separate himself effectively from the President. John McCain was the only member of this year’s Republican field who had the ability to outperform the Republican brand and redefine the Republican identity in 2008, possibly winning in an election year even when all the conditions pointed to a Democratic victory, but an unknown entity, Obama, was his party’s nominee. Nobody seriously believes that John McCain would be the same sort of president as George W. Bush. But in a year of economic uncertainty and weariness with war, McCain’s shifts toward President Bush’s positions on a number of issues give plausibility to Obama’s claim that a vote for McCain is a vote for four more years of Bush.

[My personal blog is here.]



This entry was posted on Thursday, October 16th, 2008 at 12:02 am and is filed under Debates, Newsweek Blogitics, John McCain, Barack Obama, 2008 Elections, Politics. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 4 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Mark-

    I agree with you about McCain's line about Bush--- only he should have said it in the first debate- it might have helped him more. But ,altho he has been a leader in the Senate and has stood up to his party when he disagreed-- he also voted with the president 90% of the time. These days -- Bush is radioactive-- so 90% is close enough.

    I'm not sure any Republican could have won after 8 years of an unpopular and disasterous administration. Its hurting McCain that Palin only connects with conservatives and is turning off every one else. Most Americans have had enough of failed conservative theories and get that they seem to help the top 10% amass and retain wealth at the expense of the average American. The money never really trickles down-- does it?

    Obama is rich enough in campaign funds that he can afford to sit there calmly while attacked. He knows that he can run negative and positive ads that will cripple the more restricted McCain.

    All in all, I have been disappointed in McCain. Disappointed that the maverick turned out just to be another Republican who would smear his opponent just to win.Disappointed that he seemed to kowtow to the conservative wing of his party-- even to the point of picking his VP. Obama was extremely charitable in his assessment of her tonight.
    • ^
    • v
    I'm not so sure that McCain was the Repubs' best shot at it. Given the economic situation I really wonder how an Obama vs Romney election would have gone. Granted, I've got plenty of issues with Romney, but economics are his bread and butter. Plus he wouldn't have picked Palin as a running mate--he'd already have the conservative base. He just came off as a plastic Ken doll. Perhaps we'll see him go for it again in 4 years, especially if the economy is the issue of the day.

    As far as McCain goes, he certainly tarnished whatever kind of reputation he had. I'm not sure what his popularity back in AZ is like, but it wouldn't surprise me if a Democratic challenger knocks him out of the senate without much difficulty.
    • ^
    • v
    Obama won, clearly. McCain did okay, and scoring would go 60-40 to 70-30, Obama. Obama was on top of his game, while McCain was nervous, not just on the defensive. McCain was clumsy, often repeating sound bite phrases. (e.g., "The American people are angry, and ..., and they're angry") He squirmed, was not fully coherent -- whereas Obama was smooth. (I suspect many people actually believe him when he has inconvenient facts put before him and he says "not true," which nobody intelligent believes.)

    Football analogy, McCain was the last guy in the backfield, laid a hand on Obama for a second but missed the tackle, and Obama has nothing but green (an open field) between himself and the goal line now. Just run, run, run as fast as you can.
    • ^
    • v
    "Football analogy, McCain was the last guy in the backfield, laid a hand on Obama for a second but missed the tackle, and Obama has nothing but green (an open field) between himself and the goal line now. Just run, run, run as fast as you can."

    When you're in the home stretch, and its 14-0, 4th quarter, with 10 seconds left on the clock , you can just calmly stroll across (just making sure that you dont' fumble the ball on the 5 yard line!
 
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

« I Agree with Joe (Not the Plumber): McCain Aiming for 46%
A Lighter Side of the Last Debate »


By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.