Analysis: McCain/Obama debate from Ole Miss 9/26

The general consensus seems to be that McCain did very well and Obama did well. That is, McCain took a slight edge but Obama held his own. Video clips and analysis below with the entire, unedited debate video coming soon from

Watch the entire 90 minute debate here.

Below are some short clips:


Report from MyWay:

OXFORD, Miss. (AP) – John McCain accused Barack Obama of compiling “the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate” Friday night as the two rivals clashed over taxes, spending, the war in Iraq and more in an intense first debate of the White House campaign. “Mostly that’s just me opposing George Bush’s wrong-headed policies,” shot back the Democrat.

Obama said his Republican rival has been a loyal supporter of the unpopular president, adding that the current economic crisis is “a final verdict on eight years of failed economic policies promoted by President Bush and supported by Sen. McCain.”

The two men were polite but pointed as they debated at close quarters for 90 minutes on the University of Mississippi campus.

McCain accused his younger rival of an “incredible thing of voting to cut off funds for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan,” a reference to legislation that cleared the Senate more than a year ago.

Obama disputed that, saying he had opposed funding in a bill that presented a “blank check” to the Pentagon while McCain had opposed money in legislation that included a timetable for troop withdrawal.

Obama opposed the invasion of Iraq in 2002, before he was a member of Congress, while McCain voted in the Senate to authorize the war.

“You were wrong” on Iraq, Obama repeated three times in succession. “John, you like to pretend the war began in 2007.”

McCain replied that Obama has refused to acknowledge the success of the troop buildup in Iraq that McCain recommended and Bush announced more than a year ago.

More analysis and video to come soon…


Here is the entire debate video:

Video: Obama/McCain debate from Mississippi 9/26

  • Stephen Clifford

    I must say regardless of my politics that this debate was what we the American people were waiting for. The moderator did a great job and so did both the candidates. I would have to say Obama won on issues of Economy and McCain seemed more educated on history and foreign policy. Regardless of the outcome having two great candidates like these men are a good omen of the things to come and the power of democracy.

    Stephen Clifford

  • Without Nader, it really isn’t much of a debate. Just two corporate parties playing the same game over and over again. The Dems & Repubs are the ultimate dividers of Americans – either way, we lose.

  • Brian

    Knockout for McCain.Obama was flustered and frustrated,while McCaine looked calm and cool.Obama looked coached while McCain was real.And listening to the liberal media say it was eithertied or obama won tells me McCain won handaly

  • EricF

    this was classic student vs teacher, the teacher won and its pretty obvious who that is.

  • Myles

    During the debate, McCain came off as grouchy and obdurate, while Obama come off as dignified and presidential. Obama would look McCain directly in the face when addressing him, whereas McCain would not look Obama in the face. McCain seemed dismissive of Obamas comments, whereas Obama would agree on compatible issues, showing a level of respect of his opponent and confidence in his ability to lead, and truly cross party lines. After the debate, Obama was the first to reach out to shake McCain’s hand and Obama and his wife walked clear across the stage to address McCain and his wife. That is what we should expect from our next president. A level of class.

  • mary

    I thought both candidates were both composed and handled their positions well, but one thing I noticed as I am sure others did to was, that when the candidates were asked to reply to each other on their comments and look at each other, obama looked at maccain but mccain never looked at obama not once. Was there contempt for obama from mccain? My opinion is “yes.” Does mccain think that he is the better man and obama doesn’t deserve even that from him? Does he think that he has earned the presidency because of his POW status and his hundred years of experience in Washington? What is up with him?

  • The general concensus being who exactly Nate?

    I thought both candidates did an OK job but there wasn’t any real knockout blows in my opinion.

    Out of the two though I thought Obama did a better job, for the simple reason this was supposed to be McCains debate to win and they both came out pretty equal.

    I had to laugh though when McCain kept rambling on and wouldn’t let Obama make his point.

  • U.S.A.

    How can we expect McCain to face the idiots of the world when he can not even face Obama? Hands down Obama made McCain look foolish. Obama made his tax plan clear which will help the middle class and not the most wealthy like McCain. Obama made a strong position and proved his past positions on foreign policy were right on.

    McCain is scared to face Obama and Palin thinks living close to Russia gives her the leadership ability she needs. This is simple truth.

  • Todd

    I believe this was a lacking debate, we heard the same thing from both men, It wasn’t anything to watch if you are a “decided” voter, nothing new.

    I believe this was an even fight that was won by McCain. Now with that said It’s b/c I am voting for him. If you are a Dem you believe it was Obama that won. It’s coming down to the independent voters to decide.

    I think McCain won for 2 reason’s ; the expectation of the debate turned from McCain to Obama with the economy turning to the major topic/concern over the last week–I felt Obama would hurt McCain but he didn’t. Obama missed what I believed were chances to hit McCain on a topic that should favor him (Obama) and McCain managed to score some points against Obama on that category. So Obama failed to hit it out of the park on that issue (like most thought he would).

    MaCain won (slightly) on the 2nd half of the debate and proved that Obama is slightly off target with his views on Foreign Policy. Again on this issue McCain and Obama missed big chances to hit each other but both missed.

    If it was a boxing match it was won on points, 9-6

  • Krodis

    Yeah, I think they both pretty much stood their ground. I don’t think anyone really landed a knockout blow either way. I was a bit concerned over the fact that McCain was always looking down, never looking anyone in the eye. He seriously looked like he wanted to punch Obama in the face, and he was also very condescending to Obama at times (“He just doesn’t understand”) Obama was a bit more composed, I think. There was a lot of softball questions and a lot of agreement for most of the debate, and even when there was disagreement it was pretty much what you would expect.

    Overall, I think it goes in Obama’s favor that McCain was unable to get a big win in the foreign policy debate, which is where McCain was hoping to have a big advantage. I also think he made a mistake by focusing too much on Iraq, considering the public opinion of the war on Iraq is pretty low.

    Overall, I score this for Obama in a tight contest. I thought McCain managed to not embarass himself, which is a plus considering his age, but I don’t think he did enough in what is supposed to be a strong suit to really be happy with the results here.

  • BJ

    I voted republican in the past, including the last election when it was very hard to do so. I’m sorry. The past eight years of failed policies and back room deals has given me no other choice but to disregard my loyalty to the party. There is just too too too much evidence to support the need to DUMP THE LOSING TEAM. It is really time for America to wake up and seize this opportunity for change and to move away from this unfortunate legacy that BUSH now leaves us. I have no choice but to recognize that the last time that America was doing well was eight years ago.

  • Todd

    Here we go again, FOX, MSNBC, PBS and ABC characterized this as a split decision with the only problem for McCain being his not looking at Obama and Obama not being aggressive enough on economics.

    Pudding, USA you proved my point if your decided on who you want you think they won.

    Dems have demanded the right to discuss the bailout and the economy during this debate—they did so for 45 mins at least. How was this McCain’s area to win ? and how do you give this to Obama. I thouoght he was flat in his area of the debate and lost the Foreign Policy area of the debate.

    USA–can you explain how Obama simply saying that he will lower taxes for 95% of the public made his tax plan clear. He didn’t talk about his capital gains tax increase and it’s effect on your (or mine) 401k or 457 (stock based retirement plans for about 50% of American’s, his estate tax increase, how he will pay for his medical plan nor how his desire to increase the corporate tax would impact on the price of merchandise. He did acknowledge that the USA has the 2nd highest corporate tax rate in the world but dismissed it by saying they get out of it with the loopholes. He couldn’t identify one area he would cut out of his budget increase to accommodate the bailout. McCain was yelling about cutting spending so I don’t see how he could answer that question but by repeating himself.
    Here is a question, why not just close the loop holes and lower the tax ? You apparently didn’t get the contradiction of Obama’s own plan–he wants raise the corporate tax rate but at the same time he wants to reward companies that stay in the U.S. with tax breaks, how does that work ?

    I am not saying McCain didn’t have his problems but if Obama’s tax plan is so clear to you I was wondering how when he didn’t say anything more than 95% would pay less and didn’t explain how the capital gains tax. Like I said I expected Obama to do better in the economic part of this debate but he fell short, in my view.

  • Cherm

    Obama was well poised and dignified in his responses. He presented nuanced thinking that is required for a president that can lead the US into the 21st century as a global leader, once again. Obama’s perspective incorporated solid geopolical understanding and clear desire for multilateral policies and modern diplomacy, which is essential to face modern challenges. Although respectable within their specific time, calling upon the policies and achievements of the past, which McCain consistently employed in the debate reveals a lack of touch with the complexities of modern global issues. I’ve had 8 years of simple slogans that involved words such as “evil” and “god” and McCain’s “peace” and “prosperity” rhetoric goes along with that line of simplistic thinking.

  • Todd

    Guys I understand you are not happy with Bush, at this point even the Reps & Senators of his own party are tired of him but the reason’s you give for being an Obama supporter are “fluffy” reasons themselves. I want to hear what policy he will employee that is actually different from what the democratic party runs on in every election.

    I do not believe he is anything new (policy wise) but I am willing to listen if you can tell me—-remember it has to be DIFFERENT from what democrats always argue. If it’s not the only change you are voting for is a change in parties based on the fact Obama is well spoken.

    I fear Obama (and conservative republicans) have taken any chance this country had for us to get to a 3 or 4 party system or for REAL change, away from us. Conservatives forced McCain to change his moderate ways in order to get the nomination. While this has taken place it forced him to look like a flip flopper. I really believe he would return to his moderate non-partisan ways if he won. In the meantime Obama (a mainstream democrat by every account) has bluffed millions into thinking he is “new”. Outside the historic factors involving race he is not. However if he wins the only result is that the democrats get the power again and that isn’t anything new folks, democrats will push for just what Obama says he wants–higher taxes, federally mandated medical care and a reluctance to stand up for our selves internationally. And at the end of his 4-8 years Biden will try for it—are you really going to believe he is change also ?

    The fac

  • Dreadsen

    Well I think McCain won with a slight edge. S l i g h t l y.
    Obama i think did waaay better than i expected. Sometimes he does good in debates and sometimes he stammers. He answered things with a lot more confidence so he got a good grade on that one. I think he should have drove harder in some instances where he let McCain get one up. He gave very good rebuttal about negotiating with adversaries. But i felt he should have brought up Kruschev and Eisenhower as well. I mean what better example? A guy slams his shoe and threatens to bury all of us then Eisenhower invites him here to the usa to his HOME. And in return Kruschev invites Eisenhower to russia to his home.

    He also made the point that Ahmadinejad is not the head power of Iran. But he let McCain get away with bringing it back up how dangerous it is to talk to this guy. When he holds the same amount of power as the secretary of state does here. When McCain came back talking about how bad it is to talk with this guy as far as president to president Obama should have came back and made the point which he had already raised that he was talking about lower level diplomacy and asked him why is he still harping on something which is a misrepresentation.

    He screwed up his Russia and Georgia rebuttal. When McCain hit him by saying he was wrong Obama came back pointing out that he brought up in April of this year that Russia was stacking their troops in South Ossetia. ( which is something Colin Powell even said should have brought attention to more action which would have prevented this) This is something McCain didn’t bring up which was a score for him but he hurt himself by saying ” i dont know if that would have prevented it or not”. McCain hit him back again by bringing up that Obama was wrong in saying they were both equally responsible. Obama SHOULD have brought up that Russia was wrong for stacking the troops but Georgia was wrong for attacking them with out trying to get international support

    Another strong point Obama flopped at was on Pakistan. He let McCain get away with the same argument Hilary raised on striking in Pakistan. Which he could have showed how wrong McCain is because THEY HAVE GONE IN PAKISTAN AT LEAST 8 TIMES IN the last MONTH the time before the last time we went in with Troops and apache helicopters. Obama pointed this out almost 19 months ago and now we are acting. This would have proved McCain wrong as hell or out of touch with what is really going on. But Obama probably didn’t want to say this because it would possibly open up an opportunity for McCain to say he disagrees with this BUSH policy. But maybe not because that would be disagreeing with getting Osama Bin Laden. There are a lot of ways it could have gone if that was introduced.

    McCain tore his butt up on the Earmarks But i think Obama pointing out the 600 billion tax breaks vs his 18 million in ear marks was a good rebuttal but i thought he would emphasize how he wants to clean them up and not get rid of them because of all the good things ear marks are also used for. I thought he would point out how McCain has voted on a ton of bills that had pork in them and uses the excuse for not voting for a bill because it has pork in it as he sees fit. Like he says he didnt vote on Katrina bills because pork was in them. He should have made him specify what bills with pork satisfy him enough for him to vote on them since he picks and chooses.

    But i guess who won is in the eyes of the beholder because it was almost dead even. There are people who were under impression that Obama has been avoiding debates because he would get steamrolled due to the experience factor or that he is only good and reading teleprompter or giving good speeches and would be in a Palin/ Biden scenerio. Well this definitely disproved that because he gave a good performance.

  • Dreadsen


    There are a lot of differences with Obama compared to the conventionally politician. I guess you could spin ghandi into a typical politican as well so i guess it is a matter of opinion. The change he is offering is different than the current policy which a lot of people want. This policy is not any policy which we have ever had before. I mean look at Bush. Bush is not your typical politician. Bush represented Change and boy he did give it to us didn’t he? And he was a major CHANGE from Clinton. Sometimes i think people think that you can’t resemble a politican at all in order to represent change. To say that he bluffed millions is kind of arrogant don’t you think?

    “a reluctance to stand up for our selves internationally”

    Yeah that is a change for sure. The military might FIRST or tough talk and saber rattling. Don’t talk to anyone just threaten first, invade, ask questions later and don’t give a flying f**k if you ruin your reputation and create more enemies.

  • Anil Antony

    Mcain should have won this debate by a knock out and he was at best equal – American people have to realise that this is an election that will make or break America as a nation that the world looks up to or the world will pass on…

    Electing Obama over a deeply unpopular and disastrous Republican mess is sending a message to the world that the American Dream and allure is very well alive and kicking.

    MCain has been behaving at best like a headless chicken in times of the economic crisis and making incoherent statements. He is old with a very high probability that his VP might have to take over if they get elected and Palin who would be much better in a beauty contest and watching polar bears across in Russia and terming it as foreign policy experience will be equal or worse then Bush.

    For the sake of the world, America should elect Obama and show the world that even in the 21st century when China and India are emerging superpowers, we can still dream of the land where life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is still the beacon of the world

  • Dreadsen

    Here are analysis strung together from CNN, Msnbc( keith olberman and pat buchanan), Fox( hannity, colmes an guilani)

    Even Olberman gave McCain some credit. But i’ll let you all decide who didn’t give one guy any credit at all what so ever between the three networks. lol

  • Thiefilng

    I agree for the most part McCain won this debate. Neither candidate really put forth a detailed economic plan the laymen could understand and relate too. On foreign policy McCain had a slight edge. However, I do believe the most character revealing discussion of these candidates came about in foreign diplomacy talks.

    By definition, Diplomacy:

    1. The art or practice of conducting international relations, as in negotiating alliances, treaties, and agreements.
    2. Tact and skill in dealing with people.

    McCain’s statement in rebuttal to Obama, McCain suggesting diplomacy a waste of time. I believe this showed his own ignorance of international affairs. And the same cowboy shoot’em up attitude of his predecessor. The saddest point being that so many found humor in his diplomatic inabilities.

  • Lori

    Overall: McCain seemed content to focus on his plans for the USA, while Obama seemed discontent that the focus was not on his eloquent production of rhetoric.

    Economy: McCain’s continuous return to our need to reduce spending gave me hope. Obama wants to increase spending; while his idealism is touching, it may prove to be economically disastrous at present.

    Iraq/Afghanistan: It would be a travesty to replace our current, unqualified CinC with one who has even less military experience, namely ZERO.

    We are in dire straits on many fronts and we need a leader who has an established record and well-known past, not one who is a predominantly unvetted junior Senator.

    I am an Independent who has historically voted third party. The bitter reality this election cycle is that our choice is utterly grim, so I’d rather stay in the frying pan rather than jump into the fire. My vote for McCain is purely pragmatic.

  • BOB


  • Kelly

    Obama talks a lot but he doesn’t say much. McCain has the experience and as for not looking at Obama – who would want to look at such an inferior running mate? Obama agreed with McCain on many points only to try to pursuade McCain voters to vote for him. Obama is a very charasmatic great speaker (he learned this from the nutjob pastor). Doesn’t anyone get it that if taxes are raised on a small business owner that makes over $250,000 that prices on everything will go up even higher? Behind closed doors I don’t think it matters what they say because everyone has their bias: old guy, black guy, beauty queen

  • Skeptic

    First of all, I am an independent. I have been a US citizen since 1996 and a resident in this country since I was One. I traditionally don’t get involved in politics because I think it’s much of the same old rhetoric. I also feel like politicians will say and do anything to get elected.

    This aforementioned theory has been proven time and time again by John McCain. He has flip-flopped on issues to win popular vote, he has chosen a female running mate solely on her ability to attract women voters and make the party look young and fresh. He proved it once again when he “canceled” his campaign to save the American economy. He accomplished nothing, nothing was resolved, and in the interest of getting elected, returned to the campaign trail. I don’t think we’ll see a big difference in policy should he get elected.

    Obama, on the other hand, seems genuine. Although I am reluctant to trust politicians and understand that there is more to a campaign and a party than a candidate, but I do feel that choosing the Democrat will bring change to government. I don’t know if that change will be positive or not, but I feel we have to try something new.

    Regarding the debate, I feel that it was very close. I couldn’t say that it went one way or another. I was expecting more from Obama:

    I was expecting Obama to be a bit more aggressive. I’m not a campaign strategist, so I can’t determine why Obama was so reluctant to blast McCain on the Economy, on his recent stunt to cancel the campaign, on “the fundamentals of our economy are strong” comment, etc. I think much of this had to do with the first (Economy) vs. second (Foreign Policy) part of the debate. Obama wasn’t sure what questions he would get on foreign policy and had reservations about being too aggressive talking about the Economy when the tables could turn on foreign policy issues (McCain’s strongest area) and he would receive the thrashing. That didn’t happen. Obama went toe to toe with McCain and held his own… probably to the surprise of himself and his campaign. Hind sight is always 20/20 and given the opportunity to do it again, I think Obama would have been much more outspoken and aggressive. I’m looking forward to the next debate, where we may see Obama get bolder.

    One thing I did like was Obama talking about the image of the United States abroad. Maybe many of my fellow countrymen (and women)are not in tune with the general discontent the world has towards the US. This has been a product of the last 8 years!!! Before Bush, the US was viewed positively. The tables turned when we invaded Iraq without international support and showed the world that whether you agree with us or not, we’re going to do what we want. That’s not a bastion of democracy, that’s imperialism! We need to restore our good standing abroad because we’re not the world’s superpower any longer and we HAVE to get along with the emerging nations.

    This view of our world is new and different. Our present and future, thanks to technology and communication, is very different from our past. We can’t look at old policies and expect them to work in this new global marketplace. I feel McCain is conditioned to believe in the success of old policies.

    Finally, one last comment: On the analyst commentaries after the debates, Joe Biden made the rounds on the networks and defended his running mate. Where was Sarah Palin? What happens if she gets elected and a dicey political situation requires her to speak on hard topics? She can’t even do an interview! We don’t really know anything about her and where she stands on important issues. The American people should demand more from the potential 2nd in command.

  • Sal

    Russia is reemerging, building new submarines, flying bombers into S. America and teaming with Venezuela; Venezuela is about to make a deal to ship 1M barrels/day of oil to China; Iran is sharing nuclear knowledge with N. Korea and is knowingly or unknowingly supporting Taliban; China is growing at a scary rate and will economically dominate the US very soon.

    Even without mentioning our two front war, that is some scary stuff…

    I believe that McCain would be great to keep a keen eye on the world abroad and protect us from current/potential enemies. HOWEVER, he will be 73 yrs old when he takes office. I’m not trying to poke fun at his age but if you analyze the Mortality Life-Tables ( — see page 9), he has a 15% chance of dieing before reaching the end of his term — this does not take into account the high pressure job of being President.

    Given that, we will have a 15% chance that Palin will be the one to maintain a strong US presence in a world where communist countries are reemerging and challenging the US way of life. I don’t like it… not one bit.


    McCain did better, and all you people talking about well Obama was better on the economy and he got his tax plan out. This was a debate on foreign policy not the economy. Dems are lucky they were able to sleat 45 minutes of the debate on that stuff, and the funny part is Obama didn’t do much better. At one point when asked for the third time what he would cut from the government Obama answered with three new proposals for the government. It was pretty funny to see that.

  • thomas

    This video was better for Obama, in that the split screen run by the major networks, constantly had McCain distracting the attention away from Obama’s answer. When you see just the single response, actually focusing on what’s being said, Obama is the much better of the two.

    But the really odd thing was McCain’s smug, even angry refusal to look Obama in the eye. Along with this and McCain’s overall disrespect of Obama while he was speaking will end up costing McCain I think.

    It’s a high wire act for McCain anyway, defending Iraq while running from Bush is taking it’s toll. “Change” from himself is an extraordinary “tactic”, or is it a “strategy”? Only McCain knows for sure. Maybe.

  • CYR

    For those to claim that MCCAIN knocked out OBAMA in the debate is a clear view of whose side is being taken. As an objective citizen of the USA, I clearly do not respect MCCAIN’s lack of sincerity and honesty. How many times does MCCAIN have to claim that OBAMA “does not know how” when there are little thinngs MCCAIN “cant”.OBAMA addressed every comment that he agreed and disagreed with MCCAIN. MCCAIN simply said OBAMA is wrong and does not know.

  • I, as a single thinking somewhat intelligent American think this.
    Wouldn’t it be uniquely fantastic, if all Americans checked both blocks for President in this election and for the First time in history, We the Voters, forced the political system to work together for the betterment of our precious society?

    For the next eight years we would send two capable Presidents and two capable Vice Presidents to Congress and the House, to form a second to none think tank of unlimited possibilities.
    Just think of the good that the money spent on the election four years from now, could better serve, if we just once, put that huge sum of future money spent towards solving America’s problems and then, We’d all truly mean it when we say, Country First.

    God Bless Our America.

  • Eric

    Big deal, McCain is a conservative and it comes natural to him to cut funding for everything, including medial and school. Obama has a tougher job of being a liberal who wants the government to take care of the people, and having to find the funds for that. Obama has the advantage of not caring about government imposing itself on the free market, and therefore can DO THE RIGHT THING and tax people earning outrageous amounts of money higher taxes, and using that to fund his plans. McCain won’t do that as it’s against conservative ideals, and that’s why McCain keeps spinning the truth about Obama’s proposals for new spending.

  • Jim819

    It went better for McCain than Obama.

    Imho, it was off-base for Lehrer to tell them to look at each other. This is a debate – not a social gathering! McCain also made a strong point of not letting the Press tell him how to interact.

    And now Kissinger has come out and verified he does NOT support the Pres. meeting with Ahmadinejad without preconditions. I was surprised that Obama stood his ground that HE would personally meet with him!

    That and he has to stop saying how much he agrees with John. He makes himself look stupid while McCain won’t concede him a single point. Apparently, he hasn`t learned his lesson from doing this in debates with Hillary. so the McCain camp already has an ad out about how often BO said McCain`s right!

    McCain came across as the much more experienced candidate. He constantly provided exs. from his travels to other parts of the world, his history of crossing the aisle, in Congress, etc., to make his points. It seem to give a dimension to his points which BO`s points lacked. It was also clear McCain was on the offensive throughout, keeping Obama on the defensive!

    Obama projected a well-prepared, book-smart student but doesn`t have all the necessary experience McCain has. McCain kept going back to his great experience and scored points with it – and, in the process, exposed Obama`s major weakness quite nicely.

    I felt McCain was grounded more in reality and would much better be able to accomplish things in a bipartisan manner as he has so often in the past.

    I thought Obama looked like a dork when he tried to explain his weak response to the Georgia invasion – proposing a solution the Russians can simply veto. It was also measured, weak and delayed to see which way the political winds were blowing.

    Overall, McCain showed that he has a good command of facts, figures, world leaders, and foreign policy nuances which only come with experience.

    Overall, Obama didn’t make showstopping mistakes, but didn’t win many points either. Obama also had several brain cramps like calling McCain Tom twice and calling Iran Iraq once. While Obama made his point that earmarks may be a drop in the budget, McCain successfully made his larger point that he has a long record of watching government spending and waste. When Lehrer pressed them to say what would change due to the bailout, it made sense that McCain wouldn’t change much because he wasn’t proposing a lot of new spending anyway. Obama on the other hand refused to say what he would defer.

    In the final analysis, I give this round to McCain!

  • Joshua

    Issues that were brought up during the debate gave the American public much needed insight on our two presidential candidates. It would be an awesome America if people could make their judgement on the issues at hand. Being the candidates answers instead of their political affiliation. I would also enjoy informative information by our media. I am talking about the rebuttal of the candidates answers. For instance why is attacking Afghanistan a bad idea?? Well, it is becaose of thier nuclear capabilities. Media, plese stop play politics with the politicians. We pay your salaries, give us the information we want. Not the shit you are pushing for your own personal intersets.

  • Todd


    Your response to how is Obama different proves my point. I acknowledge that people are tired of Bush, you responded that :

    “The change he is offering is different than the current policy which a lot of people want”

    HOW IS THAT DIFFERENT ? ANY DEM WOULD ACCOMPLISH THAT and assuming your argument is true any person would be change?

    “Bush is not your typical politician. Bush represented Change and boy he did give it to us didn’t he? And he was a major CHANGE from Clinton”

    WHAT DO YOU WANT TO GO BACK TO ? (WHAT DOES OBAMA DO DIFFERENT THAN REPUBLICAN’S AND HIS OWN DEMOCRATIC PARTY ? as it applies to politics in whole not just compared to republican’s)

    “To say that he bluffed millions is kind of arrogant don’t you think”


    YOUR RESPONSE TO ME INDICATES HE HAS NO DIFFERENCES THAT YOU CAN SEE, B/C LIKE HIM YOU GO BACK TO BUSH, TELL ME ABOUT OBAMA, PLEASE. I gave you the fact that Bush is unpopular and has done some stupid stuff but your response is that Bush is the one that is different, Are you saying Obama will go back to the way it was before Bush ?

    What’s new about that ? Wasn’t Europe already becoming a counter weight to American policy and money ? Didn’t they create the European Union to influence the world markets with one currency ? Didn’t most in Europe already prefer a softer U.S. ? Didn’t our old foreign policy dictate that Israel was a no questioned ally (which I disagree with) ? Didn’t our policy dictate that we had to have a presence in the middle east ? Didn’t Iran and Syria fund Hamas and Hezbollah ? Didn’t the U.S., Russia & China always play politics with the U.N. I mean where does Obama represent change ? When I hear change used as an adjective for him or his policies I think it means no more politics as usual or something is going to be fundamentally different with politics in this country and maybe the world. Are you telling me that to apply democratic values is change ?

    By the way the biggest spin in this election has been by Obama and the Democrats with this “change” B.S.—–Real change ain’t Howard Dean, the chair of his party, Frank Reich, Dennis Cusinich, Jessie Jackson, Al Sharpton, The Clinton’s, Bill Richardson, Christopher Dodd, Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid supporting you. Real change is not repeating the democratic line every speech you make, Real change would be calling out Reid & Pelosi for the Bush like stupidity they show on a continual basis.

    You know Dreadsen the best example of what I am saying is probably this.

    The congress is struggling to come up with a bailout plan to get us out from under the constant threat of Wall Street’s collapse. Part of the problem that caused it was the Community Reinvestment Act that Clinton signed into law and Bush adjusted (worsened). During these negotiations the democrats actually initially demanded that when and if the paper is sold by the government in an attempt to recoup the “investiment” a % would be placed into an account to fund the purchase of homes by the poor and less privileged. They haven’t learned one thing–nothing.

    If Obama or McCain wanted real change they would both suspend their campaigns and support Barr, Paul or talk Ross Perot back into it—-they may be the truth behind the slogan of “change”—it’s not Obama.

    But I’m still waiting on the Obama policy that represents change from the same old politics as he likes to call it.

    New to me would be a president that called congress together until the budget was balanced by law. New to me would be a president that called for a law banning emergency supplemental’s New for me would be a president who talks straight on all issues instead of telling us he is new a then complaining on a partisan basis, New to me would be a president who appoints have of his cabinet with independents and the losing party. New to me would be a president that demands the 3rd party candidates have equal time in the presidential debates. New to me would be hoping a on a plane at the last minute and going to the Appalachians just to check on the poor families (without the camera’s).

    Obama is nothing new he is just different from Bush while being the same as every other democrat ever elected.

    He has no NEW policies

  • It’s hilarious how the right think McCain won and the left are happy thinking they both did equal, yet the ‘general concensus’ in the opinion polls say Obama won ever so slightly.

    McCain’s really going to have to pull a rabbit out of the hat in the next debate and Palin is going to have to pull two rabbits from wherever she stores hers to beat Biden in the VP debate.

  • Todd

    Read over this site Pudding you are pushing it by saying the left is happy thinking both did equal, looks like a lot of people forgot this was a 90 min. foreign policy debate with 45 mins of it on economics. Several comments on this site have pointed out Obama’s “won”

    but then again what should I expect it’s right in front of you and you say it’s not.

    Guess at the end of the “Economic debate” some of you will claim he won the Economic debate and the “Foreign Policy Debate” although Mac won’t get 45 mins in the economic debate to talk about Foreign Policy will he ?

    Oh well just forget it all ya’ll are right Mac sucks Obama’s God——you win

    have a nice life

  • I got to admit Todd I don’t read every post as I do have a life to live, and only really read posts from regulars who’s been on here for some time.

    So lets have it your way. Lets say ALL the left thought Obama won and ALL the right thought McCain won, well that leaves the independents, who seem to me for the most part to be going for Obama.

    McCain should have trounced Obama in this debate and he didn’t. It was for me a draw, which is a win for Obama because Obama was expected to get given a lesson by McCain and that didn’t happen.

    I think you need to lay off the KoolAid a little Todd 😉

  • Ben Dover

    McCain clearly won the debate. This debate shouldn’t even be considered in favor of Obama, his stuttering non topic answers helped prove nothing. He wants to get us out of Iraq asap for what? To get the troops home, or to put them into Pakistan? Yes Palin will have work to do, but McCain is above Obama by a huge margin.

    The real thing learned from this debate is that McCain can outdo Obama even without an elaborate speech prepared.

    McCain ’08

  • Vincent

    Both candidates represented themselves fairly well. By McCain not giving Obama any eye contact throughout the debate was a tactic that clearly unnerved Obama. Obama appeared to be constantly trying to get McCain’s attention and thus looking like a puppy dog scrambling after his handler trying to get a pat on the head. McCain clearly had the upper hand throughout most of the debate primarily because of the obvious: hands on experience and “being there”. Obama, however was no slouch in that he appeared to have at least an intellectual command of the subject matter, and expressed himself very clearly. As an Independent, I at first considered voting for Obama. As both presidential campaigns progressed however, my allegiance shifted to McCain. I can see how younger people with minimal life experiences would vote for someone having Obama’s profile. With 61 years of age under my belt, I demand more substance and experience from a person who will be leading the most lethal military in the world. It looks like the McCain/Palin ticket appears to be the more intelligent choice. Unless Obama pulls a “rabbit out of the hat” prior to election day, my vote goes to McCain!

  • Jim819

    Truth-be-known, McCain did trounce BO in this debate as I, and many others, described above! It`s just too bad many on the left have been over-taken by Speech-Man!

    McCain used his experience to strengthen his points – something BO very seldom did because he`s got no experience by comparison!

    If only because of this major, glaring point, McCain trounced BO!

    However, let`s also not forget how, at what was the closest thing to a knock-out, McCain was the one who was right about Kissinger and turned that back on BO, who thought he had a ‘Gotcha’ moment…McCain even had the audence laughing at BO at one point, when he asked what the reply would be to someone who just stated that they would wipe Isreal off the map, etc.,

    “…[B]No you`re not![/B]…”

    which drew laughter at BO from the audience!

    Let`s also remember that BO`s the one who kept saying over and over that McCain was right!

    It`s obvious to the objective Ind. like myself, (who`s never been polled in his life, btw), that McCain won this and it wasn`t even close!

  • Steve

    I am a nineteen year old college student and I dedicated my Friday night to the 2008 Presidential Debate. I was familiar with both candidates prior to the election, and I must say that this Presidential Debate further strengthened my belief that John McCain is the stronger candidate. Below are a few reasons why I believe John McCain is a stronger candidate than Barack Hussein Obama.

    John McCain was a Prisoner of War for five years. The man is fully equipped with the experience and knowledge that is vital and completely necessary to run this immaculate country. John McCain has visited Iraq several times and knows first hand what is going on in the Middle East right now. Barack Hussein Obama has never visited Iraq and does not have an eyewitness account of what is presently occurring in the Middle East.

    John McCain gives factual information about the current situations that the United States is faced with. McCain also sets a basic foundation about how he plans to attack these vicious problems that haunt our great nation. Barack Hussein Obama preaches about reform and change, but never provides us with any solid plans of improvement in regards to the correction of the United States of America.

  • livelifelovegivelove


    You are asking for the change Obama represents aside from the views of his party. Considering where the last democratic president left our country eight years ago and where it is now, does he really need to offer any new change??? Think about it. If his presidency can remotely resemble that of the Clinton Administration, our country can be back on track, cleaning up the sh** of these republicans.

    You sound to be as frustrated with this process as McCain was Friday night. Relax.

  • as a britain i thought that the thing that ob.has dead right is america’s reputation in the world has been seriously tarnished in the last eight years, to be honest as a well travelled person who has lived in many countries (incl.the middle east where even if they didn’t love america the admired the american dream)i think that mccian is too much like bush in his ideals about war to ever appeal to the world at large and it is time that america welcomed a more gentler approach,politics is after all about talking and negotiation, bush was the schoolground bully maybe barac can get back some of the respect america used to have by his willingness to talk ,even with the some of the the other bullies in the playground!!the world liked the woodstock america not this shoot first as questions later america ,maybe this smooth talking man (barac )can do what kennedy helped to do create an america ,americans and the world can be proud of!!