Friday, September 26, 2008
A Tie
I'd call the debate a tie, which, considering foreign affairs is supposed to be McCain's strong suit, is fine.
McCain sounded very knowledgeable, but his references to Kissinger in China and such did sort of emphasize the fact that, well, this guy has been around a long time, hasn't he? That's a two-edged sword. And it was McCain, not Obama, who apparently doesn't know the difference between strategic thinking and tactical thinking. Nobody will pick up on that, but it does explain why he's so focused on Iraq.
Anybody think one or the other of them won?
Update: I was wrong. Biden picked up the strategic/tactical thing, too.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I fear that when Obama backers, such you and as myself, call it a tie, then the other side won. But you've identified the important points: McCain cited facts and associations that go a long way back. Good or bad? I dunno. I'm anxious to see what "America" thinks, which we won't know for a couple of days or so. -Dawg in Virginia
I think the average swing voter will walk away remembering McCain saying something like, "If you have a face-to-face meeting with Ahmadinejad and he says Iran is going to blow Israel to smithereens, you can't just say No you're not." Also, "it's not just naive, it's dangerous."
Also, that bit about looking Putin in the eye and seeing three letters: K G B.
I hope that Obama can come back with something like: High Noon-style diplomacy hasn't really been working all that well for us in the last 8 years. Maybe there is another way.
I also liked Obama's line about McCain wanting to use a hatchet on the budget when what is really needed is a scalpel.
So, it's a tie in the sense that Obama did the domestic questions better, but McCain conveyed his seasoned overview of foreign policy. Also, after the wooden convention speech and all this stupid posturing about postponing the debate, McCain exceeded my expectations. It's the pool-playing hustler strategy!
Kris
Post a Comment