Any thoughts before?
There's been a lot of focus these last few days on McCain. He has a lot to prove today. The narrative that is evolving is that McCain is reckless/irrational. If he does anything to confirm that in the debate, he loses.
Most debates are remembered by whatever gets a laugh. McCain doesn't have a very good record with jokes--he should avoid them.
A lot is expected of Obama, but he isn't the best debator. Actually, I take that back--he isn't the most effective debator. He debates like he is in lawschool, where the point is to have the best argument. In politics, the best argument doesn't always win; the most likable guy does. The majority of Americans believe he will win the debate, so if he does, he only meets expectations.
It will be interesting to watch.
John McCrazy already won the debate according to his ad cam pain.
quote:
Originally posted by pmcalk
Any thoughts before?
There's been a lot of focus these last few days on McCain. He has a lot to prove today. The narrative that is evolving is that McCain is reckless/irrational. If he does anything to confirm that in the debate, he loses.
Most debates are remembered by whatever gets a laugh. McCain doesn't have a very good record with jokes--he should avoid them.
A lot is expected of Obama, but he isn't the best debator. Actually, I take that back--he isn't the most effective debator. He debates like he is in lawschool, where the point is to have the best argument. In politics, the best argument doesn't always win; the most likable guy does. The majority of Americans believe he will win the debate, so if he does, he only meets expectations.
It will be interesting to watch.
Barack has a considerable advantage, since PBS provided his campaign with the Debate Questions in advance of tonite......
quote:
Originally posted by pmcalk
Any thoughts before?
There's been a lot of focus these last few days on McCain. He has a lot to prove today. The narrative that is evolving is that McCain is reckless/irrational. If he does anything to confirm that in the debate, he loses.
Most debates are remembered by whatever gets a laugh. McCain doesn't have a very good record with jokes--he should avoid them.
A lot is expected of Obama, but he isn't the best debator. Actually, I take that back--he isn't the most effective debator. He debates like he is in lawschool, where the point is to have the best argument. In politics, the best argument doesn't always win; the most likable guy does. The majority of Americans believe he will win the debate, so if he does, he only meets expectations.
It will be interesting to watch.
Obama has to overcome the empty suit image.
It might go desperately bad for McCain if he walks over and clocks Obama at some point. [;)]
What's your poll showing Obama favored going in? Curious by how much. It's interesting, I really don't think there are any surprises. I think people have their minds made up and the Ind's know who they are voting for already.
Big question is, how many rural white Dems have been polled on Obama? I keep saying it, but he might need as much as 10 points to outrun the Bradley Effect.
I'm already having a hard time watching them go back and forth. McCain negotiated hard for this weirdo format of talking directly to each other but all it's doing is enraging him.
Also, I caught him pulling a definite Gore up there. Rolling his eyes, chucklng, shaking his head.
Obama is pretty much repeating his stump speech, far as I can tell.
I will take Obama in a TKO in the eighth round.
It is a good debate so far. McCain has lost some energy, but Obama has lost some focus.
Who is better on foreign policy is lost on most Americans. They just want to know that their guy has a plan.
McCain is very good at pronouncing foreign names. Obama has way better hand signs and body language. Obama has better answers, but McCain has better stories.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by pmcalk
Any thoughts before?
There's been a lot of focus these last few days on McCain. He has a lot to prove today. The narrative that is evolving is that McCain is reckless/irrational. If he does anything to confirm that in the debate, he loses.
Most debates are remembered by whatever gets a laugh. McCain doesn't have a very good record with jokes--he should avoid them.
A lot is expected of Obama, but he isn't the best debator. Actually, I take that back--he isn't the most effective debator. He debates like he is in lawschool, where the point is to have the best argument. In politics, the best argument doesn't always win; the most likable guy does. The majority of Americans believe he will win the debate, so if he does, he only meets expectations.
It will be interesting to watch.
Obama has to overcome the empty suit image.
It might go desperately bad for McCain if he walks over and clocks Obama at some point. [;)]
What's your poll showing Obama favored going in? Curious by how much. It's interesting, I really don't think there are any surprises. I think people have their minds made up and the Ind's know who they are voting for already.
Big question is, how many rural white Dems have been polled on Obama? I keep saying it, but he might need as much as 10 points to outrun the Bradley Effect.
I believe the poll was on CNN--said public believed Obama would win debate by a 2 to 1 margin. I'll try to look it up.
As for the Bradley effect, I saw a interesting opinion that talked about Obama underperfoming
and overperforming depending on the state. During the primaries, Obama consistently beat the polls in states that either had a highly educated population or states with a large African American population. On the other hand, in areas like Pennsylvania & Ohio, he underperformed (probably due to some of the rural/blue collar vote). Based upon that analysis, there could be an assumption that Obama will do better than expected in states like Virginia, NC, and Wisconsin. On the other hand, he probably needs a significant lead in areas like Pennsylvania (or an incredibly high turnout in Philly).
My initial assessment: Tie.
I didn't think McCain did particularly well, but much of that is probably because I don't like his debating style. He seems condescending to me. All in all, no major gaffs by either. Obama held his own in the area that is suppose to be McCain's expertise. McCain demonstrated he knew a lot of facts regarding foreign countries, but didn't necessarily have better judgement.
Personally, I hate all of the personal anecdotes. All the stories about whose wrist band they were wearing just seems to be political gimicks to me.
I don't think it will be any game changer.
Why wasn't McCain wearing a flag lapel pin?
He must hate America.
Obama only called John "Jim" once, McCain never called Obama "Osama".
There was just a flash poll up on CNN that said those surveyed found that Obama won the debate by a substantial margin. Interesting.
Maybe because McCain forgot to wear his flag pin?
quote:
Originally posted by pmcalk
There was just a flash poll up on CNN that said those surveyed found that Obama won the debate by a substantial margin. Interesting.
Maybe because McCain forgot to wear his flag pin?
...did they attempt to survey anyone outside the building?
No. Because flashpolls are notoriously liberal.
And Obama was given the answers beforehand.
CNN = Clinton News Network
Not once did Jim Lehrer or any of the CNN commentators call Obama by his proper name... Barack HUSSEIN Obama...
And John McCain had bad lighting due to liberal union stagehands......
I, for one, am outraged.
/sarcasm.
CBS poll of uncommitted voters:
39% Obama won
37% Draw
24% McCain won
46% said their opinion of Obama got better tonight;
32% said their opinion of McCain got better.
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/26/politics/horserace/entry4482028.shtml
Given that this was suppose to be McCain's strong debate, it doesn't bode well.
09/26/2008 2340 hours
{{{{DRUDGE POLL}}}} WHO WON THE FIRST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE?...
MCCAIN
67% 103,829
OBAMA
31% 47,185
NEITHER
2% 3,503
Total Votes: 154,517
Fox has it a tie...
The devil has it a tie.
Obama's lead widened all over the country this week.
Tie goes to the runner.
I had it as a tie or slight edge McCain. But everything I'm seeing so far says that things have changed since the last couple of presidential elections. People aren't reacting the same. They're looking for something else.
Consensus seems to be that for those who matter, independents, McCain came off as a grumpy old patronizing man, and Obama came off as intelligent and "presidential." I think in 2000 or even 2004, McCain would have won this debate. When things are relatively good, people aren't interested in intelligent. And sometimes being a "prick" comes off as "decisive." This time, it might be coming off as being Cheney.
Still, not sure debates matter that much.
According to the FoxNews.com poll Obama won. I bet the guys upstairs at Fox News are embarrased. I also bet the poll gets taken down before long unless they have some flunkeys skew the results.
General Election: McCain vs. Obama
RCP Average: Obama +4.2
Obama 47.9%
McCain 43.7%
Generic Congressional Vote
RCP Average: Democrats +9.7
Democrats 48.7%
Republicans 39.0%
And this was as of 4:30am at this website
http://elections.foxnews.com/
quote:
Originally posted by Neptune
I had it as a tie or slight edge McCain. But everything I'm seeing so far says that things have changed since the last couple of presidential elections. People aren't reacting the same. They're looking for something else.
Consensus seems to be that for those who matter, independents, McCain came off as a grumpy old patronizing man, and Obama came off as intelligent and "presidential." I think in 2000 or even 2004, McCain would have won this debate. When things are relatively good, people aren't interested in intelligent. And sometimes being a "prick" comes off as "decisive." This time, it might be coming off as being Cheney.
Still, not sure debates matter that much.
Actually, if you're talking about substance, I thought McCain might have had a slight edge.
Problem is, people don't rate these things entirely on substance.
McCain looked like a grumpy old fart. Sneering, smirking, rolling his eyes and the like. He probably lost some undecideds to Obama tonight, whom I thought at times was not confrontational enough, but enough so that I think on performance I'd give the edge to Obama. He especially made his point tonight with the following:
quote:
John, you like to pretend like the war started in 2007. You talk about the surge. The war started in 2003, and at the time when the war started, you said it was going to be quick and easy. You said we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were. You were wrong.
I worried about Obama wandering off topic like he had the propensity to do during the primary debates. It was actually McCain who wandered somewhat.
But, I'm sure this debate's result will be the same for members of each party. Their guy won.
[:D]
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
quote:
Originally posted by Neptune
I had it as a tie or slight edge McCain. But everything I'm seeing so far says that things have changed since the last couple of presidential elections. People aren't reacting the same. They're looking for something else.
Consensus seems to be that for those who matter, independents, McCain came off as a grumpy old patronizing man, and Obama came off as intelligent and "presidential." I think in 2000 or even 2004, McCain would have won this debate. When things are relatively good, people aren't interested in intelligent. And sometimes being a "prick" comes off as "decisive." This time, it might be coming off as being Cheney.
Still, not sure debates matter that much.
Actually, if you're talking about substance, I thought McCain might have had a slight edge.
Problem is, people don't rate these things entirely on substance.
McCain looked like a grumpy old fart. Sneering, smirking, rolling his eyes and the like. He probably lost some undecideds to Obama tonight, whom I thought at times was not confrontational enough, but enough so that I think on performance I'd give the edge to Obama. He especially made his point tonight with the following:
quote:
John, you like to pretend like the war started in 2007. You talk about the surge. The war started in 2003, and at the time when the war started, you said it was going to be quick and easy. You said we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were. You were wrong.
I worried about Obama wandering off topic like he had the propensity to do during the primary debates. It was actually McCain who wandered somewhat.
But, I'm sure this debate's result will be the same for members of each party. Their guy won.
[:D]
McCain mopped the stage with Obama.
McCain poked so many holes in him with mocking references to actually KNOWING some of the people that Obama was referring to, and inferring that Obama has nil experience, I was just waiting for McCain to call Obama "boy".
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
quote:
Originally posted by Neptune
I had it as a tie or slight edge McCain. But everything I'm seeing so far says that things have changed since the last couple of presidential elections. People aren't reacting the same. They're looking for something else.
Consensus seems to be that for those who matter, independents, McCain came off as a grumpy old patronizing man, and Obama came off as intelligent and "presidential." I think in 2000 or even 2004, McCain would have won this debate. When things are relatively good, people aren't interested in intelligent. And sometimes being a "prick" comes off as "decisive." This time, it might be coming off as being Cheney.
Still, not sure debates matter that much.
Actually, if you're talking about substance, I thought McCain might have had a slight edge.
Problem is, people don't rate these things entirely on substance.
McCain looked like a grumpy old fart. Sneering, smirking, rolling his eyes and the like. He probably lost some undecideds to Obama tonight, whom I thought at times was not confrontational enough, but enough so that I think on performance I'd give the edge to Obama. He especially made his point tonight with the following:
quote:
John, you like to pretend like the war started in 2007. You talk about the surge. The war started in 2003, and at the time when the war started, you said it was going to be quick and easy. You said we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were. You were wrong.
I worried about Obama wandering off topic like he had the propensity to do during the primary debates. It was actually McCain who wandered somewhat.
But, I'm sure this debate's result will be the same for members of each party. Their guy won.
[:D]
McCain mopped the stage with Obama.
McCain poked so many holes in him with mocking references to actually KNOWING some of the people that Obama was referring to, and inferring that Obama has nil experience, I was just waiting for McCain to call Obama "boy".
Like that wasn't predictable coming from the resident quadruped.
Have you looked at all the polls regarding the undecideds? Obviously not. If he 'mopped' the floor with him, why are the undecideds giving Obama the win.
Bitter old man showed last night. He better get his act together for the next two.
Despite what statisticians declare, what isn't a clear victory/defeat is a draw, at least from the public's point of view.
Virtually every poll I've seen of late is within the margin of error. A dead tie of 50%-50% could be reported as 54%-46% as the mood determines.
Wanted to add that I very much enjoyed the debate format/style last evening. Smooth transitions, occaisional counter comment mid-stream, etc. without the ticking clock and interruptions by moderator.
More like how a debate should be.
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
quote:
Originally posted by Neptune
I had it as a tie or slight edge McCain. But everything I'm seeing so far says that things have changed since the last couple of presidential elections. People aren't reacting the same. They're looking for something else.
Consensus seems to be that for those who matter, independents, McCain came off as a grumpy old patronizing man, and Obama came off as intelligent and "presidential." I think in 2000 or even 2004, McCain would have won this debate. When things are relatively good, people aren't interested in intelligent. And sometimes being a "prick" comes off as "decisive." This time, it might be coming off as being Cheney.
Still, not sure debates matter that much.
Actually, if you're talking about substance, I thought McCain might have had a slight edge.
Problem is, people don't rate these things entirely on substance.
McCain looked like a grumpy old fart. Sneering, smirking, rolling his eyes and the like. He probably lost some undecideds to Obama tonight, whom I thought at times was not confrontational enough, but enough so that I think on performance I'd give the edge to Obama. He especially made his point tonight with the following:
quote:
John, you like to pretend like the war started in 2007. You talk about the surge. The war started in 2003, and at the time when the war started, you said it was going to be quick and easy. You said we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were. You were wrong.
I worried about Obama wandering off topic like he had the propensity to do during the primary debates. It was actually McCain who wandered somewhat.
But, I'm sure this debate's result will be the same for members of each party. Their guy won.
[:D]
McCain mopped the stage with Obama.
McCain poked so many holes in him with mocking references to actually KNOWING some of the people that Obama was referring to, and inferring that Obama has nil experience, I was just waiting for McCain to call Obama "boy".
Always with the racist comments.
Can't we put a bear outside and leave him there?
quote:
Originally posted by swake
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
quote:
Originally posted by Neptune
I had it as a tie or slight edge McCain. But everything I'm seeing so far says that things have changed since the last couple of presidential elections. People aren't reacting the same. They're looking for something else.
Consensus seems to be that for those who matter, independents, McCain came off as a grumpy old patronizing man, and Obama came off as intelligent and "presidential." I think in 2000 or even 2004, McCain would have won this debate. When things are relatively good, people aren't interested in intelligent. And sometimes being a "prick" comes off as "decisive." This time, it might be coming off as being Cheney.
Still, not sure debates matter that much.
Actually, if you're talking about substance, I thought McCain might have had a slight edge.
Problem is, people don't rate these things entirely on substance.
McCain looked like a grumpy old fart. Sneering, smirking, rolling his eyes and the like. He probably lost some undecideds to Obama tonight, whom I thought at times was not confrontational enough, but enough so that I think on performance I'd give the edge to Obama. He especially made his point tonight with the following:
quote:
John, you like to pretend like the war started in 2007. You talk about the surge. The war started in 2003, and at the time when the war started, you said it was going to be quick and easy. You said we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were. You were wrong.
I worried about Obama wandering off topic like he had the propensity to do during the primary debates. It was actually McCain who wandered somewhat.
But, I'm sure this debate's result will be the same for members of each party. Their guy won.
[:D]
McCain mopped the stage with Obama.
McCain poked so many holes in him with mocking references to actually KNOWING some of the people that Obama was referring to, and inferring that Obama has nil experience, I was just waiting for McCain to call Obama "boy".
Always with the racist comments.
Can't we put a bear outside and leave him there?
Maybe FB could be McCain's agent after this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jE96K01YO24
Even if it were a draw, in the big picture that is a problem for McCain. Last night was suppose to be McCain's debate, and since Obama is likely to beat him on Economic issues, he needed to shine last night. The momentum is going towards Obama, and McCain needed to change the trajectory. He didn't.
Rasmussen has Obama up by 6 today--tied with his biggest lead. Some of that might be from the debate. It does show that McCain did not get the turn around in polls that he had hoped for by "suspending" his campaign.
No one has referred to the moment when McCain straight face attempted to paint Obama as a Bush policy supporter. It was classic. The camera caught a view with both men and Obama with a big smile and a genuine, deep enjoyment of the moment.
Obama didn't have to win. He had to prove he was at the same level. He did that. After that it becomes a race for whose positions/views have traction. A draw for him was a win.
"Obama Won Because His Job Was to Reassure Undecided, Independents and "Leaners" that He Had What It Takes on National Security. He did That with Aplomb. McCain Came off Knowledgeable (If Disingenuous at Times) on International Affairs, But He's on the Wrong Side of the Issues as Far as Polling. He Might Have Pleased His "Base," But He Didn't Win Any Converts. He Was the Candidate from "Wars Past." And Obama Dunked McCain on the Opening Back and Forth on the Economy. There's Been an Emerging Campaign Narrative: Obama is Even-Keeled, Steady, of Sound Judgment; McCain is Obsessive, Reckless, a Warhawk, Smelling of Yesterday's Failures. This Debate Reinforced that Narrative, and That is Good News for the Obama Campaign.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/26/debate-reviews-go-to-obam_n_129803.html
Landslide coming....better duck!(and cover)
Bwahahahaha!!!!!
Huffington....really?
quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle
Huffington....really?
The devil understands when ole wrinkley folks disrespect a viable news source.
And here is another piece of Journalism out of that NYT paper that you will not see inany Tulsa publications. But he we go with Moe!
Sound, but No Fury By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: September 27, 2008
OXFORD, Miss.
"The first debate seemed like the perfect moment for Barack Obama to re-enact the Code Red courtroom scene from "A Few Good Men," to slide under John McCain's skin and irritate until he goaded McCain into doing exactly what he really wanted to do: tell off the whippersnapper who'd never bled for his country.
It would have been easy for smarty-pants Obama to get in the face of the temperamental older guy, just as Tom Cruise did with Jack Nicholson, to push him into erupting into some version of that climactic speech, like, "Deep down, in places you don't talk about at your fancy faculty club, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall."
The timing was ideal. McCain was so aggressively erratic as he did his free-form break dance around the economy last week that it seemed the only possible explanation was that he was creating a wild diversion to distract people from Sarah Palin's stunningly junior varsity appearance with Katie Couric.
Once Garbo began to speak, and people realized that Palin had a few key lacunae in her understanding of the globe and even of her running mate's record, the myth of the Alaska superwoman continued to unravel.
Between her nonsensical answers and his complicity in the deregulation that led to the financial catastrophe, he felt he needed to take
another crazy gamble.
So he theatrically suspended his campaign and rushed back to get in the way of a bipartisan solution to the economic turmoil.
When the two macho guys of the Republican Party — W. and McCain — took extreme measures not to look emasculated, they ended up emasculating themselves.The president, who is so insecure that he could only choose a vice president he knew would never hold his title, and so insecure that he needs proof of presidency emblazoned everywhere, even riding a Trek bike with the presidential seal affixed, was suddenly faced with his bête noire: sitting at a table in the White House with the two men who want his job, either of whom would do a better job, given that nearly everyone in the country thinks things are going horribly.
McCain lost control of his campaign and then, in a gimmicky attempt to gain back ground, ended up in the Cabinet Room with W. when the bipartisan economic meeting collapsed in a humiliating nondeal, causing President Bush to lose control of his White House.
It was quite a memorable moment in history for the M.B.A. president and the nominee of the party of business.
Who would have dreamed that when socialism finally came to the U.S.A. it would be brought not by Bolsheviks in blue jeans but Wall Street bankers in Gucci loafers?The Republicans had a lot to answer for. The Bush administration had been
warned about Osama bin Laden attacking and did nothing. It had been
warned that there would be a civil war and insurgency if it attacked Iraq. It had been
warned that Katrina was coming. It had been
warned that the country's financial casinos were courting
disaster.
W. biked through all those eves of destruction.Given the past week, the debate should have been a cinch for Obama. But, just as in the primaries, he willfully refuses to accept what debates are about.
It's not a lecture hall; it's a joust. It's not how cerebral you are. It's how visceral you are. You need memorable, sharp, forceful and witty lines.
Even when McCain sneered, "I don't need any on-the-job training, I'm ready to go at it right now," Obama didn't directly respond, but veered off into a story about his father being from Kenya and how he got his name. (Thanks, Barack, we got that from your book. It's great for a memoir, but not a debate.)
McCain kept painting Obama as naïve, and dangerous, insisting that he "doesn't quite understand or doesn't get it."
Obama should have responded "Senator, I understand perfectly, I'm just saying you're wrong."
On the surge, he could have said that McCain was the arsonist who wanted to be praised for the great job he's doing putting out the fire he started.
When Obama took quiet umbrage at McCain's attack about troop-funding, he could have pounded the lectern and said with real anger: "John, I am sick and tired of you suggesting that I would take funds away from our brave soldiers. I no more voted for that than you did when you voted against our funding proposals that would have imposed a timetable. And unlike you, I did not vote against funding increases for the troops that have come home with devastating physical and mental injuries."
And who cares what Henry Kissinger thinks? He was wrong 35 years ago, and it's only gotten worse since then.
Obama did a poor job of getting under McCain's skin. Or maybe McCain did an exceptional job of not letting Obama get under his skin. McCain nattered about earmarks and Obama ran out of gas.We're left waiting for a knockout debate. On to Palin-Biden. "
Kinda what the devil felt watching Obama control himself. Smart move first outing, Barack. Can't do that to McCrazy three times. Public would feel McCain's pain. Obama needs to watch the polls and if he's in the clear, just cool it. If it get's closer, "It's not how cerebral you are. It's how visceral you are. You need memorable, sharp, forceful and witty lines."
But all in all, the repiglicans will be singing "I Need a Miracle" if they aren't already!
Good insight FOTD. The last thing America wanted to see in the first debate was an angry Black man sniping at a dottering old fool. Obama looked cool and in control. Seriously, folks are starting to feel a little sorry for Mac/Palin and that would have fed the misguided emotions.
Mac controlled his rage by not looking directly at Obama. It was pretty obvious though commentators drew a conclusion different than mine. They thought he was condescending and disrespectful. I think he used the technique because he just couldn't look at him without blowing up.
Since this refers to something said during the debate, not thread-hijacking... [:D]
I found this funny:
(http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j154/opihi1/mcainpen.jpg)
quote:
he just couldn't look at him without blowing throwing up.
....there, fixed it for you.
quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle
quote:
he just couldn't look at him without blowing throwing up.
....there, fixed it for you.
I said what I meant.
You diehards have lost all credibility because of your lock step refusal to admit any weakness in your candidates and your campaign. Most everything you've said now must be compared with the reality that you were blowing smoke.
A few examples:
Fantasy-
Palin was vetted well, is competent and will energize the party.Reality-Palin has been a drag on the ticket. Interviews show her to be at least poorly prepared and probably unsuited.
Fantasy-
Polls show McCain can't carry rural whites, white women, small towns, Bush states etc. ad infinitum. Reality-The polls have trended towards Obama since Aug 1st. Internals from legitimate polling shows his strength is multi-faceted and wide spread. Check www.FiveThirtyEight.com and face the facts.
Fantasy-
The economy is basically strong and Dems want to create a bogus downturn to help their cause. Reality-Actually it turns out the economy is stressed in multiple areas and has been for some time due to hidden factors.
Fantasy-
McCain will mop up empty suit Obama in a face to face debate. Reality-The debate showed Obama is not only capable, but that McCain has temperament problems.
Fantasy-
McCains war hero status proves his patriotism and legitimacy. Reality-Truth is McCain will gladly trade our country's interests for his own. Note Palin and bail-out comedy routine.
All this and more as you guys desperately search for links to imaginary controversies, make jokes about empty suits and silly edits.
And, the following link is to a right-wing (yes, right wing) blog where the guy actually states coherent thoughts instead of drowning while carrying the republican water:
http://joshuatrevino.com/?p=675
Even this guy thinks Obama won the debate.
It was a draw.
Depending on what factors one was hoping to glean from their chosen candidate, a victory could be spun either way.
My personal opinion after watching the debate is:
McCain believes he can make a difference.
Obama really wants to be President.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
McCain believes he can make a difference.
Obama really wants to be President.
(http://fochsenhirt.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/993938happy-bunny-throw-up-posters.jpg)
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
It was a draw.
Depending on what factors one was hoping to glean from their chosen candidate, a victory could be spun either way.
My personal opinion after watching the debate is:
McCainObama believes he can make a difference.
ObamaMcCain really wants to be President.
Fixed that for ya! [;)]
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
It was a draw.
Depending on what factors one was hoping to glean from their chosen candidate, a victory could be spun either way.
My personal opinion after watching the debate is:
McCainObama believes he can make a difference.
ObamaMcCain really wants to be President.
Fixed that for ya! [;)]
That'll cost you a Marshall Wheat, Buck!
[;)]
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
It was a draw.
Depending on what factors one was hoping to glean from their chosen candidate, a victory could be spun either way.
My personal opinion after watching the debate is:
McCainObama believes he can make a difference.
ObamaMcCain really wants to be President.
Fixed that for ya! [;)]
That'll cost you a Marshall Wheat, Buck!
[;)]
Wish there were more places in town that served it. Every place I go I ask em. The usual response is 'huh?'.