Big ones: - Obama is adamant that Iraq was a failed policy to begin with but doesn't say much about his exit strategy. McCain emphasizes the successes of the surge under Gen. Petraeus and how we must remain there to stabilize the region. - Obama and McCain both admit that their budgets will be affected by the financial bailout plan but Obama does not seem willing to give details on how his will be affected. Obama continues to emphasize social programs and taxing the wealthy and "business don't need tax breaks because of loopholes". Clear pandering to his voter base. McCain goes as far as to mention "spending freeze" and emphasizes his record on cutting spending.
Not surprisingly, I feel that McCain clearly came out ahead here. He made Obama look like a Freshman trying to argue with a tenured professor. One thing that stood out to me. Obama wants to increase taxes and eliminate loopholes for big corporations, yet he promises that hybrid auto technology should be developed and manufactured in "Ohio and Michigan" instead of Japan and South Korea. Newsflash. You cannot have both.
Obama probably won on the economic debate and McCain won on the foreign policy debate. McCain could have won on the economic debate, but I feel he let some key issues slip by him. For example, he should have hammered Obama on his support of the $700 billion bailout plan. McCain should have emphasized that Obama wants the taxpayers to pay for it while he wants the corporations to pay for it. But McCain let the opportunity slide by. McCain could have scored points by pointing out that for all Obama's talk about McCain being Bush's third term, the bailout is an area where Obama agrees with Bush and McCain disagrees with Bush. But he let the opportunity slide by. When Obama said he wanted to protect the taxpayers later in the debate, McCain should have asked, "How can you protect the taxpayers by hitting them with a $700 billion debt?" But McCain let the opportunity slide by. One big plus for McCain was a couple of fresh, new ideas not heard before in the campaign. One was the idea of a spending freeze in order to get spending under control. Of course, there is nothing new about a spending freeze, but it has not been mentioned before by either of the candidates. The second new idea offered by McCain is really new. It was the idea of establishing an informal league of democracies as a means of negating Russia's and China's veto power in the U.N. Security Council. Neither really had much to say about the current economic crisis. McCain kept going back to getting spending under control and Obama kept going back to the economic policies of the Bush program, but neither spoke in any kind of detail about what has transpired the last couple of days. Obama had no really new ideas. He talked about universal health care and a variety of social programs, but did not indicate how much they would cost or how he was going to pay for them. He has spoken a lot about change, but it seems that his ideas are all based on the liberal policy of tax and spend. But Obama seemed calm and self-assured and he did not make any mistakes. I would say he held his own and with a 4 point lead in the polls, that was all he had to do. In regards to foreign policy, McCain clearly won the day. Again, Obama never got rattled and remained calm and self-assured. But where Obama could only talk about principles, McCain talked about meeting world leaders eyeball to eyeball. It was very clear that McCain had more experience and often referred to Obama as not understanding a situation or even being naive and inflexible. Obama responded well enough, but the image seemed to stick. McCain really nailed Obama hard on negotiating without preconditions, and tied in very nicely the fact that if we lose in Iraq, Afghanistan becomes much tougher. McCain seems to understand much more than Obama how the two areas are interconnected. In addition, McCain historical perspective of troubled areas, particularly Russia, was very evident.
Don't kid yourself. Obama understands the connection. It just doesn't fit the "wrong war" narrative. And that makes his stance all the more ridiculous. If the Liberals lose they will blame it on race but in reality it will fall on the shoulders of the looney left that still controls the Dem party. Obama is yet another far left candidate that is in danger of losing an otherwise "in the bag" election. Sad for our country, really. We need two viable, parties, not two really stupid options for otherwise sane Americans to choose from... Only the GOP has figured this out, as evidenced by McCain. Palin is another story...
clearly mccain has more intimate knowledge on foreign issues but i disagree with him on several and he ticks me off when he wont answer a question (i know, they all do it) mccain jabs obama about some reckless or naive comment about bombing pakistan, but it is a mischaracterization and what obama actually said was reasonable, right?-----then, obama calls out mccain for saying bomb iran and one other example and mccain replies with some list about wars he's supported. what was that? mccain really scares me with the bulldog attitude of wanting to win all wars at any cost. that anecdote crap about him promising a mom of a dead soldier that his death wont be in vain is scary. he sounds like a sergeant not a general. the whole "precondition" thing. ok, perhaps obama's comment shows inexperience (although i dont get how meeting face to face with Akmakdinegeinveievneijad will legitimize him to anyone), but the overall point is that obama more diplomacy than what bush was doing. it does seem like even the administration has realized that their "precondition" approach wasnt working. mccain is blasting him for it and kissinger says preconditions should be dropped (but perhaps not for heads of state) mccain says something about the $18 mil earmarks (obama agrees) then obama says big deal what about the $300 mil lost tax revenue from breaks to big corporations?---mccain says nothing really, something about $18 billion being a big deal. overall, mccain is brushing broad strokes and is often misleading, incomplete, irrelevant or inaccurate. obama is nuanced (like with refusal of spending freeze---although mccain did say something like-"freeze spending on everything, except entitlements and defense and other important programs). mccain's approach is probably more politically advisable, but broad strokes in politics are for the stupid the young and the fairer sex.
enough said... Let's hope the rest of our country doesn't share your delusion. Wow. Uh. It's basic foreign policy. I bet Obama understands what he meant. Where have I heard that weak ass BS before? Anyone? :lol: I sincerely hope the Obama campaign reads your stuff and follows your advice.
mccain never explained how preconditions were bad. just said they were. i needed more. mccain certainly has more knowledge of the area and all the vilis he knows, but obama had to be the one to point out that the only reason russia is relevant is because of oil. so, drill more oil and keep demand high and keep russia relevant, or focus hard on decreasing demand and minimize russia. (i am all for nucular power though. even a broken clock..., huh? way to go mccain.:thumb
