Who Do You Think Won the Debate (9/26)?

23 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
  • |
Hey everyone,

Just want to hear the chatter about the debate from the Warriors. I'm new here, but I enjoy reading the threads. So, I'm starting a new one :-)

If you are also on Squidoo (or not), please visit my debate results page there as well: Who Won the Presidential Debate (9/26) - Obama or McCain?

I personally don't think that it was all that great or dynamic. They both said what I expected them to say for the most part.
#debate #mccain #obama #politics
  • Profile picture of the author Kay King
    I thought it was a draw - but really disliked Obama's smiles, grins to someone off camera, and his tendency to try to interrupt and talk over McCain.

    At the beginning Obama seemed to be communicating with someone - would make motions with his hand and some facial expressions that made him look bored or impatient. Someone must have told him the TV was showing a split screen as the hand motions stopped. Other times he seemed to be reading notes with his head down while McCain was responding.

    It's evident how biased some news media area (MSNBC in particular) as they criticized McCain for not looking straight at Obama when Obama was talking but don't mention at all the facial ticks, rolled eyes, etc of Obama.

    Bush looked at his watch and Gore rolled his eyes once - and they were creamed for it. Obama gets a pass. In fact, much was made on one station about what the Black Caucus thought of Obama's performance. WEll, duh, that's going to be an unbiased opinion, isn't it?

    It's been clear since the primaries were running that the media and some top politicians have chosen "Obama for President'. Remains to be seen if the sheeple will fall in line or not.
    Signature
    Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
    ***
    Live life like someone left the gate open
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[133802].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
      Obama won easily!

      And this was supposed to be McCain's strong part of the debates. :-)
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[133951].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author glchandler
        While I was only able to listen to a minute or two I am unable to say who the winner was. HOWEVER quite easily can state who the loser was-----THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER!!
        Signature

        There is never a BAD time to help those living with lousy kidneys!
        http://funds.gofundme.com/1oh40


        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[133966].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul1234
    Where were the other candidates?
    Signature

    Paul Turner

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134187].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KimW
    "...but really disliked Obama's smiles, grins to someone off camera, and his tendency to try to interrupt and talk over McCain...."
    So, were you ok with McCain doing it? Because he did it as much as Obama did,if not more.

    Paul, the powers that be and the press have chosen these two over the other candidates.
    The person I'm voting for is not allowed on the ballot. Was not allowed to even speak at his partys convention because he wouldn't sell out his convictions.
    Signature

    Read A Post.
    Subscribe to a Newsletter
    KimWinfrey.Com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134337].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul1234
      I realise that there hasn't been anyone who isn't an R or a D in a debate since Perot in '92. It doesn't seem fair to exclude Nader this time since he's accounting for at least 8% in some pre-election polls and is on in 46 States.

      Kim, I guess they were afraid of inviting Ron Paul since he might have (especially in the current economic climate) brought up HR 2755 perhaps

      I did see a total of around 20 minutes of the debate on CNN video this morning but, tbh, between the two there are more similarities than differences.
      Signature

      Paul Turner

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134374].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author jimmymc
        I watched the debate in its entirety two times.

        In my opinion McCain clearly outclassed Obama.

        McCain offered his future solutions and his resume, while Obama continued to offer his tiresome pie in the sky, chicken in every pot rhetoric. Obama operates on placing blame on past deeds and not creating future workable solutions.

        Also, how can you win a debate when you agree with your opponent seven times.


        jimmymc
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134414].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KimW
    In the interest of fair and balanced reporting,I took the liberty of correcting the previous post:

    McCain offered his more of the same , while Obama continued to offer his tiresome pie in the sky, chicken in every pot rhetoric. Obama operates on placing blame on past deeds where it belongs.








    PS: If this bothered anyone, lighten up and get a sense of humour
    Signature

    Read A Post.
    Subscribe to a Newsletter
    KimWinfrey.Com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134427].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jimmymc
      Balanced, hardly...it was my opinion after all. The blame game doesn't fix anything.

      Bother...of course not...small things never bother me.

      jimmymc
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134521].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author HeySal
        Who won? They did.....We lost all the way around.
        Signature

        Sal
        When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
        Beyond the Path

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134605].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kay King
          Paul1234 -

          You must have missed the news a while back. Ron Paul isn't running any more.


          KimW - I saw McCain smile a few times but none of the gestures that I saw from Obama - especially during the first part of the debate. Don't know what the hand gestures were as rebuttal doesn't need repeated signals while the other candidate is speaking.

          I'd like to see a timed debate - don't know if one is scheduled.

          The timed debates force both candidates to state the important part of their answer without the roundabout jabs at the other and extraneous comments. It seems to make them get to the point - and it makes it more obvious when they don't have a point.

          I agree it was good to have an unbiased moderator. I honestly didn't hear anything decisive or new from either one in this debate.

          kay
          Signature
          Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
          ***
          Live life like someone left the gate open
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134644].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rontoski
    Too close to a draw and a draw means Obama probably won it. Too bad, I think he will be an awful choice for our next president. But who really knows? His background--pretty much unexplored by the major news outlets. It almost seems a fix is in for Obama. I think we should know everything we can know about how he became such a rising star from a city known to have questionable characters in high places. What help did he receive from a high placed Saudi financial wizard in getting into Harvard? What about his long time association with a known terrorist. If he is clean we should have it proven to us beyond a reasonable doubt. Is no one too concerned that 20 percent of any profits realized from this current 700 billion dollar bailout is to go to ACORN (the community organizer group that employed Obama in his famous "community organizer" position). That organization has been rife with accusations of voter fraud and other street tactics that border on criminal. Why shouldn't all profits be used to pay down the debt? Obama scares me. Do the math--700 billion dollars divided by 300 million Americans would give every man, woman and child a sizable cash grant. How about doing that and let that money be used to pay off debts and let wall street go the way of all failed enterprises.
    Signature

    Rontoski
    Today is the first day of the rest of your life. Make the most of it.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134722].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author icjackson
    Everyone I've spoken to (with the exception of die-hard Obama "fans") agreed that neither of them did or said anything outside of the realm of expectation.

    They were both predictable.

    Great :-P
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134725].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul1234
    Kay, I never said Ron Paul was running, just that he wasn't invited. He ended his run in June. I thought it would have been more interesting if he were the one posing the questions.
    Signature

    Paul Turner

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134810].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HeySal
      To me - two candidates is not a debate - where's the third party. We should all be offended as hell that they are not including third parties in these fiascos.
      Next debate between two of all of the candidates, I think we should boycott listening to any of them until we are "allowed" to hear from ALL of them. I hate this dictatorship.
      Signature

      Sal
      When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
      Beyond the Path

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134886].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Ellis
    Personally I think McCain had the edge. Obama came off as arrogant to me. BUT, I'm obviously leaning toward McCain, so I can be biased here as well (though I try not to be) and not even realize it... Really, neither impressed me very much.

    Here's a decent blog post on Newsweek about it:

    Stumper : McCain Won. But Will It Matter?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134922].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bendiggs
    I did not get a chance to watch the whole debate but what I did see McCain was less confident, but also came across more directly than Obama. Obama seemed a bit arrogant, but delivered his message more concisely. All in all, I would have to say that the debate was pretty close to a tie, but McCain probably came out ahead.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[134967].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KimW
    Perception is everything.
    Some have said they percieved Obama as arrogant, others McCain.
    I personally do not want either of them.
    My perception tho was that McCain is not the strong leader he wants to come across as. And his record of followiing bush doesn't help any.
    Signature

    Read A Post.
    Subscribe to a Newsletter
    KimWinfrey.Com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[135007].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author derekwong28
    ABC News: Poll: Obama outperformed McCain in debate

    Even if the debate is a draw, Obama wins. All he has to proof is that he can stand up to McCain and thus be considered as presidential material
    Signature

    Do not get between a wombat and a chocolate biscuit; you will regret it dearly!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[138421].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HeySal
      We should be offended, and there are many of us that are - but the truth of the matter is that, at this point in time anyway, a third party candidate does not stand a chance in November.

      It's apparent that things aren't "messed up" enough in this country for us as citizens to do anything about it. This country has a number of people who are comfortable with the status quo because problems that affect 'common folk' do not affect them nearly as much, and we have a lot of people who are upset with how things are and how they have changed over the last several years, but aren't upset enough to gather together and really try to make their voices heard..............................
      That, I am afraid, is the truth. I am so disgusted that so many are still so unaware that these two party candidates are always part of the elitist crowd and are just passing the elections back and forth between them - same crowd in control, just an illusion of a turn over. Until we get them out of power nothing "changes" except the dissolution of our constitution and rights.

      If, people don't "get it" this time around - we are out of time, we've "HAD IT".
      See that pretty bail out coming? LOL -- As I said in another thread -- we are saying "no bail out" and we are saying it so strongly that they have never heard from their constituents in such large force before - we have jammed phone lines, faxes, emails, and are sending "santa clause" amounts of mail saying "NO" - -what are they doing? "Revising the package". Uhhh.....we didn't say "water it down" we said "NO". But as soon as they water it down people will nod and say "HO - they listened to us -- they did a good job" even though any move that requires citizens money is ILLEGAL as hell and FASCIST enough for Hitler to smile over it. This comes from an Admin we never even VOTED into office (either time).

      Of course the average citizen sits and drools at the tv and still expects the Mainstream media (now owned by 5 companies who are very well installed into the elite class) to give them one real stitch of news doesn't see this - but for the educated, there is no excuse to fall for this decent into fascism. Unfortunately, much of the educated class is profiting at the time from this travesty. That will change soon - and by then it's too late.

      While you are completely correct that the third party can't win this election -- it is more of a prophecy than impossibility that this is so. All it would take for them to win is for people to vote third party - plain and simple - vote third party and depose the elitists.

      If people don't get it right this time around, our country is finished. It's written in flashing neon..not hard to figure out any more. If people still want to drool about "conspiracy theory" they are too far gone to count on to help save this Republic. And if the "watering down" of a bail out that over 100 million voters just actually voiced their refusal to accept doesn't turn people's heads enough to do something about, then they won't get it until we have our troops in the streets.

      The most we can hope for at this point is that people will actually examine the voting record of their own congress people and kick anyone and EVERYONE to the curb who voted for the patriot act, amnesty for telecoms, the bailout, and any other fascist, anti-constitutional little trick that been played on us over the last eight years.
      NO UNCONSTITUTIONALLY VOTING INCUMBENTS standing this time -- if that is done, we won't see McCain or Obama leading a decent into fascism or socialism.

      It's a nice dream - but our people, en mass, can't be trusted with the responsibility of voting for their own constitution. We will just have to wait until November to see if they vote fascist or socialist - either way it's gonna raise our forefathers right out of their graves.
      Signature

      Sal
      When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
      Beyond the Path

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[138488].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul1234
    Who becomes U.S. President could come down to what happens in the third-party votes. As the LaTimes speculates:

    "The presidential election could well turn on a factor that has gotten virtually no discussion this year -- the votes drawn by Libertarian Bob Barr, Green Cynthia McKinney and independent Ralph Nader."

    The power of the other candidates - Los Angeles Times
    Signature

    Paul Turner

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[141383].message }}

Trending Topics