My Thoughts on The Debate

I lied! This couldn’t wait until Monday. t.k. foster asked for my thoughts on the debate, and I’ve been looking for an excuse to talk politics, so here I go. Correct me, argue with me, agree with me–whatever you want.

I’ll start with a confession. This was my first time watching a presidential debate. I started to get interested in politics as a senior in high school when I took AP Civics. 2004 was my first chance to vote in a presidential election, but by that time it had already become impossible for me to listen to George Bush speak without simultaneously cringing and boiling with rage. I know, very mature.

So, I am not objective. None of us are. If it’s possible, I swear I’m a natural-born Democrat. It’s somewhere in the heart of me. And, in my life now, I’m almost completely surrounded (both fortunately and unfortunately) by people who agree with me politically. I am part of a community of liberal/progressive Christians. Yeah, we do exist.

But, though I sometimes refer to myself as a crazy liberal, I’m really not crazy at all. Under my dad’s influence, I respect the traditional Republican platform of small government and fiscal conservatism, though it’s not usually where I fall myself. The Republican party now, however, or at least the part of it that’s making noise and electing people, I cannot respect. I see mostly hypocrisy and arrogance.

I was really excited to watch the debate, but I am no passive observer. 2004 left me devastated, and though I think we have a much better chance this time around, I am scared of another devastating outcome.

So, while not objective, I am a pretty reasonable person capable of at least trying to be objective. I make that attempt here.

• Let me begin with a second confession: I know nothing about debate. I mean, I have no formal training in debate, though I love to participate in debate, because a) I love to engage ideas, b) I like being right, and c) I like to win. What I do know is how to form an argument in a paper. By this standard, Obama won. He spoke clearly and in an organized fashion. He used examples that illustrated his points. He responded to his opponent’s arguments, even when that meant agreeing with McCain.

• Again by the standard of forming an argument, McCain failed by using small examples (what I would call folk stories) to make his points for him. I think you learn as a freshman in college that you don’t, for instance, let a quote argue for you. No, you use an example for support, and then you make the point yourself. This means clearly and directly stating your claim. Several times, I did not understand the points of John McCain’s stories. It’s important that you’ve been there, but what else can you say? Also, he seemed to ignore opposing arguments for which he had no answer, rather than refuting the argument or acknowledging that he might agree with his opponent. I am thinking specifically about the claim Obama made twice and Jim Lehrer brought up again, about tax cuts for the rich. Instead, he addressed only a small part of this argument: business tax cuts.

• This brings me to another point. What’s with the name dropping, John McCain? I understand on both sides that you do what you can to win. Succeeding at anything (unfortunately) means networking, and using the people you know to get ahead is legit in my book. But, use them effectively. Drop the name, and then make a valid point. John McCain certainly did this a few times, but for the number of names he dropped, he did not justify the half of them. All the unjustified historical references made him seem stuck in the past.

• I was slightly relieved to see more of the John McCain I feel comfortable with. I used to like John McCain, though I didn’t agree with him on many things. By this I mean that I had some trust in him. Then he started to become more and more like the current Republican party, which I cannot respect on nearly any point. Again, I understand that you do what you need to to get elected, but John McCain has become unpredictable to me. In my not unbiased opinion, John McCain has become a person who cares first about being elected and second about everything else. That’s not the McCain I used to trust. Anyway, seeing him disagree with the Bush administration, and call on many of the things he’s fought for over a long period of time, was refreshing.

• I guess on the other side of my point that McCain used examples without directly connecting them to points, he also made points that he left unsubstantiated. By this, I mean that he depended too heavily on “Senator Obama does not understand” and “What Senator Obama doesn’t seem to understand.” These are weak and repetitive claims. And, though Obama has been accused of depending too heavily on the concept of “change,” without clearly defining what changes, I think he–probably very tactically–avoided doing so in this debate.

• When it came to the economy, McCain was one note. Cut government spending. He said he would veto every request that crossed his desk, except for defense, veteran care, and “several other important causes.” Two problems here. First, ridiculously vague language. McCain is going to cut government spending, and clean out “those government programs.” Also, “them” and “those people” spending excessively. Second, is this your only response to the problem with the economy? A one note response doesn’t solve the smallest of problems, let alone the complex problem of our economy. He didn’t acknowledge fundamental problems in economic philosophy, besides government spending.

• Obama was not as sharp on the economy as I would have hoped, but he did recognize that this is not a new problem, and it will not be solved immediately. For me, he succeeded in recognizing both the necessity of immediate response and long term plans. He succeeded easily on the issue of the economy because McCain failed. McCain did not offer any real solutions besides cutting spending (oh yeah, except for defense and this huge bailout), and he did not respond fully to Obama’s criticisms.

• Here’s a difference in style. Obama several times acknowledged when McCain was right or when he agreed with him. He also several times acknowledged when, in his opinion, McCain got things wrong or represented him unfairly. John McCain did neither of these things, though he made several jabs at Obama. What does this mean? Rudy Giuliani, who Brian Williams interviewed afterwards because, as Williams said, the GOP did not provide Sarah Palin for interview, claimed that this was a show of McCain schooling Obama on foreign policy. I thought that was a freaking ridiculous claim, and that’s when I realized again that none of us are capable of objectivity.

• As for likability . . . this one surprised me a bit. McCain came off as his normal arrogant (I mean, confident!) self. I thought he was a few times quite patronizing. The little stories, especially the one about the soldier’s mom, were supposed to tug at the heart strings, but I was insulted that he thought I’d be won over by that and forget the more serious issues he was avoiding (this is a debate, after all, and not a rally speech). Obama was the surprise for me. I know this will sound like a strange criticism, but he seemed almost bogged down by the issues, and especially by correcting McCain. I think he was overcompensating for the claim that he speaks too generically about change, and for that he lost some opportunities to drive home the big consequences, especially of the economy, that are likely to hit home for Americans. He was also trying to prove himself on foreign policy, where McCain has been dominate.

• There’s no question for me that Obama is the better speaker and debater. And, whether they both have well-defined plans or not, Obama was far better at communicating his plans than McCain. I am sure it’s very hard to be both broad and specific under such a time constraint. You can never say all you want to say, you can never respond to every criticism, and you’re always left thinking, “if I just had more time!” Given this, of course neither candidate was perfect, but, in my opinion, Obama made better use of his time, and provided more constructive proposals.

• Though I think that Obama did a better job, and I was more impressed by him, no candidate clearly dominated. Interesting, since foreign policy is McCain’s issue, though, to be fair, this whole economic disaster did throw a stick into the spokes.

But, I’m not the demographic that the campaigns are targeting now. I’m a decided voter. We’ll have to see how the independents and undecideds respond.

ETA: The full debate is available now on hulu.com.