If There Is A Debate — Obama Is Likely To Win It
It’s All Happening At The Debate?
In every single poll John McCain has higher ratings with voters on foreign policy than Barack Obama. So its pretty simple — if at the end of this debate voters think that Barack Obama deserves to stand on the same stage with John McCain on foreign policy, then hands down John McCain has lost the debate.
This means from the start Barack Obama has a much easier time winning this debate than McCain does.
The fact is that Barack Obama has been answering foreign policy questions for 19 months or more. His sparing with Hillary Clinton has sharpened his debate skills. He knows his answers and it’s unlikely that there is any question that he hasn’t heard or will cause him to stumble. All of which is likely to make him appear surprisingly knowledgeable and thoughtful to undecided swing voters who have doubts about him on foreign policy and his readiness to be commander in chief.
If Barack Obama goes through the entire debate and holds his own with the “more experienced and knowledgeable” McCain – it helps Obama. It raises Obama’s stature on foreign policy issues and more voters are likely to see him as “Presidential”.
The more he stands with McCain and doesn’t stumble, the more it will be Obama who is scoring.
McCain on the other hand has a tougher hurdle – he has to try to “disqualify” Obama.
McCain cannot afford to let Obama gain ground on him on the foreign policy dimension. The McCain campaign has been raising the difference between “talking” and “doing”. And I would expect McCain himself to carry this theme into the debate. But disqualifying someone who has had 19 months to fine tune his answers is not going to be easy.
Bottom line? This is the debate that could decide who wins the election and it could decide it in a big way.
If McCain somehow successfully disqualifies or raises serious doubts about Obama on critical foreign policy and defense issues it would be devastating to the Obama candidacy.
But every minute Obama is on that stage with McCain and proves he belongs there, McCain loses his one advantage over Obama and with it the election. Both outcomes are possible, but Obama has the easier job in Mississippi.
Joe,
I agree with you.
What are the odds of McCain actually showing, given what you know?
Roo
Hilarious that McCain is considered the more credible on foreign policy. This is the man who couldn’t distinguish between Sunni and Shia, who needs Joe Lieberman of all people to whisper correct answers in his ear.
McCain loses points in a debate on ANY topic.
The only time McCain draws even with Obama is when he can shift the discussion to one of culture war and characterizations of personality.
Whenever focus shifts to the issues, as in a debate, Obama benefits, because his positions are better aligned with the type of change most Americans want.
Of course there is always the possibility of McCain shaking his head to something Obama is saying, smirking and saying, “Oh, you’re so naive. From my years of experience, I can tell you that that will never happen.” And who’s going to call him out? We on the left will know that McCain was full of it, but on the right they’ll cheer and shout that Obama has no clue, and the undecideds will hear the volume and fall for it.
I know I am being cynical, but I wouldn’t put it past the Repubs strategists to train McCain that no matter what, act like you are right and we’ll spin it afterwards.
On the other hand, looks like Obama will not have a debate partner. Now where does that leave us? “He was too enamored with the election to handle the crisis?” Of course, I think that McCain is being disingenuous. But unless we all start calling him out on it, along with ads like “McCain has missed 65% of the votes on Capitol Hill. Why does he think he is needed now? Isn’t this the same McCain who was saying, LAST WEEK, that there is no crisis and the fundamentals are strong?” If we don’t get loud and show the undecideds that this is a political trick, then the “non-debate” will be turned around to make Obama look like the un-American, unpatriotic one.
To summarize your post:
As long as Obama can *convince* people that he knows something about foreign policy though he really doesn’t, he’ll win. This *is* what you’re post asserts if you read it carefully.
Your words:
“All of which is likely to make him appear surprisingly knowledgeable and thoughtful to undecided swing voters who have doubts about him on foreign policy and his readiness to be commander in chief.”
In other words, don’t bother you with the facts, your mind is clearly made up.
Don’t you think it’s a little illogical, maybe even irrational to choose a candidate based upon the hope that though he knows little about foreign policy, he will at least appear that he knows something. Wouldn’t it be better to have a guy who actually knows something? Just a thought.
That’s cool, though. You’re a true post-modern.
-Matt
Screw it. If McCain doesn’t show, give Obama free air time, effectively. Have him answer all the questions with dignity, and let the people decide.
The most important election of our lifetime, supposedly. And McCain can’t bother to show up cause he wants to insert himself into negotiations at the 11th hour.
McCain is a joke.
Wouldn’t it be better to have a guy who actually knows something?
Um, I’m sorry, have you been paying attention to American politics for, oh, the last century?
@Matt:
Your grasp of the English language is surprisingly shallow. The primary definition of the word “appear” is “become visible or noticeable; to feature or be shown.”
For example, I appear to be a young white male. I am, in reality, a young white male. There is no contradiction there — that’s what the word “appear” actually means.
Obama is very adept with foreign policy issues, and the people who watch the debate will become aware of that fact and realize that the media narrative is baseless and that they have been lied to for quite a long time.
I think Matt (two comments previous) is missing the point here. TV is a medium that reduces and trivializes, where the image instantly triumphs over anything remotely like substance. How knowledgeable one “appears” communicates far more than what one actually knows.
An example of this is McCain’s confusion of Sunni and Shia in his televised remarks about Iran. The guy probably (I hope) knew the difference, but he mispoke, and Lieberman leaned in to correct him. This doesn’t completely undermine McCain’s foreign policy cred. But on TV, it “appears” that he doesn’t know his ass from the hole in the ground that he helped to create in Iraq.
I love the bogus summing up of Trippi’s speculation about what swing voters may see in the debate, that “In other words, don’t bother you with the facts…” nonsense. What facts? Your comment offers none.
And it’s a big leap from the flawed premise (that Trippi only cares about how Obama “appears”) to his flawed conclusion (that Obama knows little or nothing, that his supporters are therefore illogical or irrational, and that the other guy “actually knows something”).
And calling Trippi “a true post-modern”? Oh, well, THERE’S a real knockdown ad hominem argument. You wouldn’t know postmodernism if it deconstructed your Levi’s with a Strauss. Learn to reason, man. That was some seriously weak sauce.
Couldn’t it also be said that if McCain does as well as Obama, called by democrats to be the best speaker of our generation, that it’s really a victory for McCain?
Besides, without his teleprompter, Obama does stumble…alot. What’s going to make this time different.
Part of what is going on here is that this is the first General Election Debate — How many times did McCain debate this year in the GOP nomination battle? Anyone remember a GOP debate? Now I know Barack Obama debated dozens of times during the Democratic nomination battle because I was at most of them. `Politics is often about expectations and Obama usually beats them.
Joe,
I agree with your comment. My issue is more with the way your post seems to say that as long as something appears to be a certain way, the truth doesn’t matter. Well, in practice that’s absolutely true–appearance is almost all that does matter to people anymore. However, in the end if, and I emphasize *if* one candidate actually knows more about foreign policy than the other, if that is the most important issue to you, should you choose the guy who only has the appearance of it rather than the guy who is the real deal? (again, I said if. I”m not asserting anything about McCain’s knowledge of foreign policy here).
-Matt
@Jasph
Funny when someone accuses someone else of ad hominem and then turns around and does the exact same thing, repeatedly.
“You wouldn’t know postmodernism if it deconstructed your Levi’s with a Strauss”
That was awesome! Not sure what it means exactly, cause I just don’t know postmodernism as you’ve clearly *proven*. And this was really clever.
“Learn to reason, man. That was some seriously weak sauce.”
I mean that. That was a *nice* come back. It was very passionate as most ad hominem arguments are. Though I wasn’t trying to pick a fight. Frankly, you should take it easy here. No need to get so worked up.
Before you reply back, you might want to check the definition of ad hominem again. Just a thought.
-Matt
Matt — I abhor what our politics has become. The fact that we are very likely in the financial crisis of a lifetime yet no one seems to have enough credibility to put forward a way out of the mess without their motives being put in question. But I have seen this deterioration go on for over 30 years now and tried to do what I could to slow the slide. But in the end there is reality and the reality is what people see or hear about the debate (since most will not watch it), and not what actually happens.
Joe,
You don’t get it. When somebody is a maverick it means they can lose a debate and claim they meant it. After all what maverick worth their spurs is going to try winning a debate?
No, John McCain’s experience of being isolated for all those years as a POW has taught him one of life’s dearest lessons, “It’s not what you know, it’s who you know” or something very much like that.
When pressed on naming foreign leaders he may just decide to blurt out the name of the Green Bay Packers, flash a thumbs up, and smile.
You’ll notice that the minute McCain said he was going to Washington to help bail out Wall St, a compromise was hammered out because you can never be sure of what this wacky maverick might do next.
Joe,
On this we agree. Frankly I can’t tell any more what’s reality and just what I would like to believe. I’ve lost all faith in the system. Having to rely on the claims of men and women who are *all* subject to corruption is depressing. I think I’ll just vote McCain/Palin cause that chick is Hot!!! That’s an equally effective way to select a candidate as choosing based on other appearances isn’t it?
Best Regards,
-Matt
Why is ralph nader not in this debate ?
Why Obama and the democrats don´t say anything about that ?
Matt has a stretch mark fetish i guess
I’m amazed more commentators haven’t pointed out during the long campaign season that Obama has EXTENSIVE expertise in foreign relations. Not only has he been on the foreign relations committee, but he’s been interested in this area of politics since he majored in international relations at Columbia. No one’s pointed to how well he questioned Gen. Petraeus during the committee hearings, and no one’s ever mentioned his long foreign policy speeches — though you can see them on YouTube, especially the one called “The Cost of War,” given the same week, I think, that he gave his in-depth speech on the economy (and regulating the subprime mess) at Cooper Union in March. Perhaps Obama’s team hasn’t highlighted these things precisely in order to allow him to surprise people in these high-stakes debates. They do know how to pace their ammunition. Obama will cream McCain, who never says anything new about foreign policy: noun and a verb and the surge. And he obviously has no notion of global economics, which will surely come up in this debate.
The situation today is totally exciting and scary and important and just outrageous. McCain’s “suspension” really turns impressions in some weird direction.
I really like how Obama is acting presidential but he’ll have to be careful not to look too much like the establishment. I’d say his chances of this being to his advantage is high.
Do you think McCain’s actions give people the impression that he’s a maverick or that it’ll be perceived as a stunt?
How about Nader ?
Do you all think obama is afraid to debate with Nader?
No — Obama is not afraid to debate Nader. What Obama is afraid of is that if he brings any attention to Nader — Nader might grown 3 or 4 percentage points and that may be just enough for McCain to win. Nader may not think there is any difference — but Obama certainly does.
Nader? as in Ralph?
McCain’s already claimed he won, hours before the actual debate. And about this Bail Out, This problem has to be solved from the bottom up. Please, Please, Please Obama & Democrats, DON”T fall for this sucker bait. Don’t give these Billionaires a Bail out, let them liquidate, if this is real, CALL THEIR BLUFF! This Con-Servative free market ponzi scheme has to end, Bring back FDR’s policies.
And see my animated short film “Free Market Baloney” on you tube, here’s the link;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8arYlKgYws
My wife and I both run buinesses and make about $740,000 together. I know that sounds like a lot, but everything flows through from our businesses to our personal taxes even when we leave the money in the business. If we buy a capital expense we have to pay money on what we spend and can only take the tax deduction gradually over future years.
We have doubled the number of people we employee over the past year. 80% of job growth comes from small business owners making over $250,000.
If Obama is elected I will simply stop working 100 hours a week. I’m happy to hire more employees but I’ll be damned if I will work 100 hours a week for more wasteful government programs.
Hardworking in Virginia
Tell ‘em, Doug. Couldn’t have said it better myself.
atlsrcg fvrde dpwm cuqpswm xmibvektr mkpfuhn dcpe
pvktc pugdvr qdbyaz gqlrp jxnol zgdlcf mknhguws http://www.tlbzo.yawmesbqh.com
qwcvr2ewxmts2 ggyy1aqgszvwg [URL=http://www.864416.com/415415.html] agc228×2x008s [/URL] tnwr1wcbtk9ufbv
Interesting article. I really like your blog overall. Really makes me think! Thanks!
I don’t even know,fellow!) continued to write in the same vein, it is interesting people!
jstuyw
http://members.lycos.nl/dendroud/altdatinbf/index.html alt dating uk south east
nubs dvnq vqzntsp
http://members.lycos.nl/dendroud/altdatinbf/american-dating-frequency-of-cunnilingus.html american dating frequency of cunnilingus
sudcyzl
http://members.lycos.nl/dendroud/altdatinbf/are-cody-and-emily-dating.html are cody and emily dating
esxhpmd kqeabzd
http://members.lycos.nl/dendroud/altdatinbf/baton-rouge-dating-phone-lines.html baton rouge dating phone lines
qbsn zksg hvad
http://members.lycos.nl/dendroud/altdatinbf/black-lesbian-online-dating-service.html black lesbian online dating service
myiqn yenm fywqjr
http://members.lycos.nl/dendroud/altdatinbf/blind-date-jamaica-uncessored-online.html blind date jamaica uncessored online
kiab vicpb
http://members.lycos.nl/dendroud/altdatinbf/california-free-800-phone-dating.html california free 800 phone dating
uecon ztiu takqdj
http://members.lycos.nl/dendroud/altdatinbf/chris-evert-dating-greg-norman.html chris evert dating greg norman
hlkinmz
http://members.lycos.nl/dendroud/altdatinbf/christian-dating-services-winnipeg-manit.html christian dating services winnipeg manit
slvgi embzl szec wphev
http://members.lycos.nl/dendroud/altdatinbf/classic-american-dating-for-singles.html classic american dating for singles
fsnrod
http://members.lycos.nl/dendroud/altdatinbf/clayton-in-olathe-dating-personals.html clayton in olathe dating personals
amuxi bica tjinzmx agpbweo
http://members.lycos.nl/dendroud/altdatinbf/colorado-law-adults-dating-minors.html colorado law adults dating minors
mqihwy smqju nybit
http://members.lycos.nl/dendroud/altdatinbf/copy-the-perfect-dating-personal.html copy the perfect dating personal
nice site
Upon further deliberation I would have to say that the reversed observation of this gives light to a whole new view. Typically I am very opinionated but today I?m in a very different view. Try it. What do you see in the opposite of this?
Wonderful post! gud stuff.. What a match!!
Here’s a quick and easy tip. Before your start be realistic. Choose individuals that you have a good chance of dating. If you are looking for a glamor girl or boy and want to date a ‘knock-out’, that’s great! Just know that the other person will be expecting you to be the same.