Second debate liveblog
Some suggested questions for the townhall forum:
1. For Obama: How does your healthcare plan handle the free rider problem? What specific modernization/efficiency improvements do you see saving costs?
2. For McCain: How do you square your claimed support for alternative energy with your consistent failure to vote to fund it?
3. For Obama: What steps will your administration take to minimize foreclosures? Do you think GSEs like Fannie/Freddie are a mistake?
4. For McCain: Do you still support (partial) privatization of social security, and if so what safeguards would you put in place to limit potential losses?
5. For both: do you agree Americans are ill-served by the negative campaigning taking place? What specific steps will you take to limit it going forward?
Edit: liveblog can be reviewed below the fold, thanks to everyone who participated for a fun debate watch. Factcheck here
Comments :
Alright folks, take the squabbles to chat =)
Liveblog should be good to go, discussing the debate or whatever.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
Not watching the debate
not even off work yet :(
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Not missing much so far
Focused on the economy, of course.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
Brendan, are you the one I
Brendan, are you the one I should thank for setting up that chat? It was fun
I like it too.
we should do it more often...
Yes, but only for live stuff
Yes, but only for live stuff like this debate during which folks are multi-tasking. Otherwise, I'd be concerned about one-line, chat-like comments replacing the more substantive comments of regular threads.
Glad to hear it,
and I'm pleased that the module worked this time.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
McCain lost more ground on the debate
in terms of perception, methinks.
I didn't get a chance to watch the first part
However, I thought he did quite well on the second part. He came across knowledgeable, levelheaded, and personable. Probably not enough to turn things around, but I don't think he lost anything on that part of the debate.
I think McCain was stronger
in the second half than he was in the first half.
Perhaps because the topic shifted to foreign policy...
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
Agree. I would note, though,
Agree.
I would note, though, that on those health insurance "fines", Obama failed to respond adequately. A lot of people could be scared off by what they think that policy is or may be.
CNN focus group results
10 say McCain won, 12 say Obama won. Fox group looked about the same. I'm guessing the actual polls will show a modest win for Obama, but anything other than a large win for McCain has to be considered good for Obama given the current state of the race.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
Agreed,
Besides, every bit of bad economic news hurts McCain...regardless of whether he deserves it or not. For the most part, he doesn't (neither does Bush either...but that's real life and we're talking about superficial perception).
I think Obama's points rise with every point the Dow loses.
It's too bad that this is dominating the news. Gas has been dropping a lot lately. Again, not that it's a credit to anyone in the WH.
CNN poll, 54-30 for Obama
That's not as close as I figured. The makeup wasn't skewed disproportionately Dem relative to registered voters, either.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
CBS is much closer: 39-27 Obama (nt)
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
My one-man focus group
My one-man focus group (i.e., myself) of CNN's post-debate roundtable:
Disappointed that I couldn't see Campbell Brown's legs.
But where else am I going to go for post-debate analysis? Fox right wing spin? MSNBC left wing spin?
CNN has partisans there, but balanced (more so than the others, if I'm recalling correctly) and along with non-partisans (at least not obvious partisans).
My thought
is less about the debate, than the 'wingnut' reaction to McCain not going after Obama for being a terrorist.
The wingnutosphere is angry that McCain didn't bring up this 'legitimate' attack of guilt by association, that has been promoted by ragin Palin for the last several days.
As in Bird Dogs rant. Someone is either a terrorist sympathizer or he isn't; someone is either disqualified as a terrorist sympathizer or he's qualified for public office.
But the wingnuts are generally pleased with McCain's disrespectful referance to Obama as 'that one'.
I think this treason (race) baiting is very unhealthy for our country. Very very unhealthy.
If McCain thinks Obama is a traitor, why doesn't he just be a man and say so, and then go get a rope to hang him with it. The right would pee their pants with glee.
It's disgusting.
I'm only half stupid
Wait...I though he was a surrendering tax the life out of you
child sex education pervert. Now he's a terrorist too? How can I fit that all into one line to describe him?
What McCain should have said
What McCain should have said at some point, with a chuckle:
"I have to say, it's hard to debate a guy who says that if he's president, government will pay for just about everything, AND that he'll cut just about everyone's taxes, AND that he'll reduce deficits."
It's a good line, but a bit misleading
in that given the nature of income demographics and a progressive tax system, cutting taxes for "just about" everyone while raising them on the wealthy certainly can increase revenue.
The same quantity/quality comment applies to spending: cutting just one large item, the Iraq war, could save ~$10B/mo.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
I meant it just as good
I meant it just as good rhetoric.
As for your point, though, your general point is valid, although I'm not sure off-hand if it applies to Obama's fiscal plans, and I think actually it does not, but that depends largely on what one uses as a baseline -- current tax rates or what future tax rates would be if the Bush tax cuts were allowed to expire as scheduled. Versus the latter, I think Obama's tax cuts are a large net loser of revenues, although I'd have to check and don't have a chance to look into it right now. Versus the former, I don't know, and again I'd have to check on it.
As for spending, again, I'd have to check, but my recollection/understanding is that Obama's spending plans overall result in net increases of spending, and that's aside from the question of whether or not he'd be less likely than McCain to reduce the growth of spending on current entitlement programs.
If he did say that
it might have added a point or two to Obama's lead. Unless, of course, he'd have disclaimed that it was a sarcastic comment. But then again, he'd have lost points for being a condescending prick. Oh, no, wait, he already lost all the points he could on that one...
Sic semper tyrannis
A condescending smart a**
who thought it was cute to be a maverick at the naval academy by graduating fifth from the bottom. His only regret was that he wasn't 'mavericky' enough to have the distinction of graduating last. Yeah he said that in an interview.
Giving tax breaks to billionaires hasn't worked so far. What has changed that it would work now. It would be different if these companies actually used their profits to invest in their workers and in adding value to America.
I'm only half stupid
Caught the debate in repeat,
and my god was it dull. At least the VP debate was engaging, but this pseudo-town hall is the kind of thing that drives people away from serious discussion of politics. Ugh.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
Agreed
I think it was a mistake for Brokaw to enforce time constraints. Everytime things started to get interested the clock watcher stepped in.
And this has been completely overshadowed by the global stock market crash in spite of the financial brain trust throwing everything but the kitchen sink to save the banks.
I'm only half stupid
That seems to be the unanimous position
(that the debate was dull)
I didn't see it but what I heard about the format sounded retarded. How exactly is it a debate when you have no back and forth discussion or follow up questions?
I suppose a return of the Lincoln Douglas kind of thing is out of the question?
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.