Thoughts on Debate II

It was a very repetitious snoozer of a debate. Virtually everything from two weeks ago was rehashed again, with vital and controversial issues like immigration, trade, and judicial appointments completely ignored. Neither candidate was served well by the format, despite it allegedly being McCain's "strong suit". Why? Because the questions were almost ALL stale retreads from 10 days ago, as were the ensuing arguments that unfolded from both candidates. There's so much more new material that has yet to be covered that Americans end up as losers by such a narrow litany of inquiries and talking points. Our only hope is Bob Schieffer next week.

As for the limited number of debate moments worthy of note, McCain came out of the starting gate with what I consider an across-the-spectrum blunder, suggesting that all individual mortgages should be nationalized at a huge cost to taxpayers. I don't have enough knowledge about the merits of this argument to support or criticize it, but I can't see liberals, moderates, or conservatives supporting it. Liberals and moderates were likely thinking to themselves...."didn't we just spend $700 billion doing that already?" And conservatives were likely thinking....."MORE government intervention in the free market?! You Judas!"

I conceded that in the first debate, McCain was a tactical victor but Obama won on style points and thus ended up with a double-digit advantage in opinion polls. Tonight, Obama was at least even with McCain on points if not slightly ahead, but continues to show what a rookie he is by allowing McCain to put him on defense over irrelevancies like earmarks.

McCain continued to look like a frail old man with a cantankerous side. Dismissively chiding Obama as "that one" does not seem to have gone over well with independent voters, while Obama's cool customer stature did go over well. It was a better night for Obama overall, but only because he played it safe and wasn't caught off guard. Kind of amazing that McCain didn't hit Obama with something harder and less predictable.

Also interesting that Obama stuck around to shmooze with the crowd for several minutes after the debate ended while McCain shook hands for about 30 seconds and then took off. Shouldn't McCain be spending MORE time trying to relate to crowds than Obama rather than less?

Brokaw sucked. All parties agreed early on that there would be no follow-up questions, but Brokaw asked several of them anyway. Then he had the nerve to scold the candidates about not agreeing to the rules when they ran long on a few questions. God forbid the candidates spend 10 seconds longer than planned to discuss energy policy.

Dick Morris was on Fox News about a half hour ago jabbering about how McCain should have brought up Obama's loose association with "domestic terrorist" Bill Ayres. Considering McCain loses points with viewers every time he gets snarky and negative, I think it would have been a huge mistake to throw that bomb in this context. Overall though, I do suspect McCain will get some serious mileage out of Ayres in the four weeks ahead. If McCain ends up winning this election, it'll be because he destroys Obama at a character level.

It's no coincidence that the day after the "Obama palling around with terrorists" card was played by the McCain campaign, some random Florida sheriff identifies Obama as "Barack Hussein Obama" at a campaign rally. It's a simple strategy for the GOP. Obama=Muslim=terrorist=bombing the Pentagon. The pundits all think it will fail. I don't. The needle will move McCain's way in the days ahead as Obama's past associations are on center stage with an electorate that it still clearly skeptical about him.