Debate watching

[Tarheel Heather]

I must confess, I haven't seen a one! Bad, yes I know!

[1bassoon]

yup, no debate here - although I think dd16 is watching with her friends while she's away in Atlanta.

 

Dh and I have a date with Dave tonight - as in, Ramsey! :tongue_smilie:

[Laura in VA]

Well, fortunately I'm a great multi-tasker! I'm listening and enjoying the WTM boards as well. It's 10:30am where I am, so it feels a little strange to be watching a debate on a Saturday morning!

[GreenKitty]

I am not watching any. I have no interest.

[sunflowerlady]

Yes, I am watching and think I have already had one of my questions answered.

 

I am listening and recording so I can watch again later if I care to.

[Parabola]

I'm watching too, and I love how CNN has that graph on the bottom. The independents are the ones to watch. Wonder how they do that though? Does the audience have buttons to push or something?

[Gretchen in NJ]

Yes, I am watching and think I have already had one of my questions answered.

 

I am listening and recording so I can watch again later if I care to.

Me too. I am going to watch it again with my girls tomorrow.

[*anj*]

I don't feel like watching it.

Why am I like this this year?

I know that I need to study the issues, but I don't even have the stomach for it.

 

Bad-bad-bad, I know.

[1bassoon]

I don't feel like watching it.

Why am I like this this year?

I know that I need to study the issues, but I don't even have the stomach for it.

 

 

I'm right there with ya, anj. For me, I think I just have too much personal "trauma" (read loosely, it's really not all that bad) for me to add any other stuff to my addled brain. Between selling the house, schooling, dh living in another state M-F - well, I'm just saturated. I don't have the emotional energy to get worked up over this.

[Tarheel Heather]

Good to know I'm not the only one.

 

 

And I wasn't bringing up the politics discussed in the debates. Just merely stating that I haven't watched one.

[Tarheel Heather]

I'm right there with ya, anj. For me, I think I just have too much personal "trauma" (read loosely, it's really not all that bad) for me to add any other stuff to my addled brain. Between selling the house, schooling, dh living in another state M-F - well, I'm just saturated. I don't have the emotional energy to get worked up over this.

 

 

Trauma and drama (me)! Not good with trying to understand all the other!

[happygrrl]

Currently watching on BBC.:)

[Colleen]

I'm watching too, and I love how CNN has that graph on the bottom. The independents are the ones to watch. Wonder how they do that though? Does the audience have buttons to push or something?

 

I'm listening (on NPR), not watching. What's the graph?

[Colleen]

I can't watch but I'm listening on NPR while making dinner. Popped in here to see if there were any comments about it thus far. I don't know how it comes across visually, but from to this listener's ear, one person comes across far better than the other. And I'm sorry to say it isn't my preferred candidate.

[Guest Virginia Dawn]

I've been watching off and on. I'm glad I'm going with a third party. It would be very hard for me to choose between the two. When each one is speaking he seems to know what he is talking about.... until the other one speaks. My brains are addled trying to figure out which one would be best.

 

That is not even taking the VP's into consideration.

 

One no-no I keep hearing is too many "uhs" from Obama. I learned that way back in highschool and ever since then it has bothered me whenever a public speaker uses that as a pause filler.

[Jami]

I'm listening (on NPR), not watching. What's the graph?[/color][/font]

 

Want to hear a little-bitty rant? :bigear:

 

Our local NPR is having its fundraising drive THIS week! Grrrr. Like there is not news to be broadcasting these days. Every time I turn it on to try and hear something worthwhile, I have to listen to how many calls they still need. Now I don't mind fundraising, I realize it pays the bills. BUT, can we not reschedule the drive when there isn't major financial news or political events?

 

:rant:

 

That is all. :001_smile:

[Jumping In Puddles]

I can't watch but I'm listening on NPR while making dinner. Popped in here to see if there were any comments about it thus far. I don't know how it comes across visually, but from to this listener's ear, one person comes across far better than the other. And I'm sorry to say it isn't my preferred candidate.

 

I personally don't think that McCain is doing far better than Obama and, really, the tax issue is just plain wrong... no matter how many times McCain wants to repeat it. Since your listening to NPR, here's this link.

 

 

One no-no I keep hearing is too many "uhs" from Obama. I learned that way back in highschool and ever since then it has bothered me whenever a public speaker uses that as a pause filler.

 

I can not stand that about Obama when he speaks. <Drives. Me. Nuts. > Every interview, every time he speaks it's peppered with "uh".

[hsmamainva]

What I found very telling, from actually watching the debate vs just hearing it on NPR, was that Obama looked at McCain when McCain was speaking. He may have glanced at his notes occasionally, but he always looked toward him again.

 

McCain never ONCE looked at Obama when he was speaking. He was either chuckling to himself and staring out at the audience or he was staring at the podium.

 

I don't trust someone who can't look me in the eye when I'm talking to them. Or at least glance in my general direction. I felt the same way about the body language during this debate.

[Chocolate Rose]

What I found very telling, from actually watching the debate vs just hearing it on NPR, was that Obama looked at McCain when McCain was speaking. He may have glanced at his notes occasionally, but he always looked toward him again.

 

McCain never ONCE looked at Obama when he was speaking. He was either chuckling to himself and staring out at the audience or he was staring at the podium.

 

YES! This was huge for me, too. Obama was so gracious and McCain was not. I was also disappointed at how often McCain worked in his Vietnam experience. It was good drama and emotion, but wasn't as relevant to the debate as he seemed to think it was.

[sportymom]

turn his head like most of us can due to war injuries, according to post-debate pundits.

[Parabola]

YES! This was huge for me, too. Obama was so gracious and McCain was not. I was also disappointed at how often McCain worked in his Vietnam experience. It was good drama and emotion, but wasn't as relevant to the debate as he seemed to think it was.

 

Everytime he did that, played the POW card, that green independent line went down. Every time either candidate started getting negative on the other, the green line went down.

I don't think either candidate was a clear winner. But I do believe Obama held his own with McCain who does have more foreign experience then he does, if that matters. I'm tired of hearing about who did what in the past. I want to know who's going to do what NEXT, with we have to work with.

[Laura in VA]

What I found very telling, from actually watching the debate vs just hearing it on NPR, was that Obama looked at McCain when McCain was speaking. He may have glanced at his notes occasionally, but he always looked toward him again.

 

McCain never ONCE looked at Obama when he was speaking. He was either chuckling to himself and staring out at the audience or he was staring at the podium.

 

I don't trust someone who can't look me in the eye when I'm talking to them. Or at least glance in my general direction. I felt the same way about the body language during this debate.

 

Obama appeared to me to be grimacing quite a bit, and there were times when he looked quite ticked. McCain did a much better job than I expected.

[hsmamainva]

turn his head like most of us can due to war injuries, according to post-debate pundits.

 

He could have turned his entire body toward him then, at least occasionally. Obama did that many times as well. The body language from Obama was 'I'm open to compromise and I'm genuinely interested in what you have to say.' The exact opposite appeared to be the case with McCain's body language.

[Parabola]

turn his head like most of us can due to war injuries, according to post-debate pundits.

 

:lol:

 

IF that be true, he could still turn his whole body towards the person who is talking with him. I'm sure in his regular life, he looks at the people around him.

[hsmamainva]

I don't think either candidate was a clear winner. But I do believe Obama held his own with McCain who does have more foreign experience then he does, if that matters. I'm tired of hearing about who did what in the past. I want to know who's going to do what NEXT, with we have to work with.

 

:iagree:

 

That's another time the line went down from the independents (I watched it on CNN). Every time McCain brought up something he did back in the 80s or 90s, the independent voters' opinions dropped dramatically.

 

I was surprised to see that, many times, the republican line went up to join the independent line and democratic line when Obama was speaking, but only occasionally did I see the same thing when McCain was speaking.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

turn his head like most of us can due to war injuries, according to post-debate pundits.

 

Hmm. I wondered about that. But I know that he can turn his body, which if I couldn't turn my head and wanted to look at someone, I would certainly do.

 

He turned to the left ok here. Which pundits were saying this?

[Parabola]

Obama appeared to me to be grimacing quite a bit, and there were times when he looked quite ticked. McCain did a much better job than I expected.

 

Obama did grimace a bit, and McCain made some condescending chuckles. Its hard to keep your cool in a debate.

[sportymom]

:lol:

 

IF that be true, he could still turn his whole body towards the person who is talking with him. I'm sure in his regular life, he looks at the people around him.

 

Just passing on what I heard in response to a comment here about body language, not my personal observation/opinion. Why is that :lol:?

[Parabola]

:iagree:

 

That's another time the line went down from the independents (I watched it on CNN). Every time McCain brought up something he did back in the 80s or 90s, the independent voters' opinions dropped dramatically.

 

I was surprised to see that, many times, the republican line went up to join the independent line and democratic line when Obama was speaking, but only occasionally did I see the same thing when McCain was speaking.

 

It seems to me that green line stayed right around the blue line A LOT. I even got up to look at the tv to prove to my DH that they weren't tracking the blue line at one certain point. Turned out I was very wrong...they were just right on top of each for a long time. :)

[Mama Lynx]

I didn't like either one. Can we re-do the primaries, please?

[Parabola]

I didn't like either one. Can we re-do the primaries, please?

 

No, please no! That was too painful to go through again. :D

[laylamcb]

Anybody interested in an independent's perspective on the debate? :001_smile: I do not identify with either party, though in the interest of full disclosure I have more often (but certainly not always) voted Republican--primarily because I'm pro-life--than Democrat.

 

I thought that Obama was polished, commanding, and eloquent. I liked that he frequently looked at McCain, and I liked that he called McCain "John." I appreciated his applauding McCain for addressing the torture issue. I thought that, at least as expressed, his approach to diplomacy is right on. I thought that he made an excellent point about the fundamental lesson we ought to have learned from Iraq. I think he's exactly right about Afghanistan. I agree with many of his budget priorities, though not all--but I thought that he expressed his priorities very well and clearly. In general, I thought that he more than held his own in this debate.

 

Having said that, I don't know how well he'll score with folks in terms of his manner. Many people say that he's too cold and analytical and unemotional. I'm drawn to that type of presentation, but I know that I'm overly analytical myself. So I've come to understand that the professorial demeanor, which I really prefer, does not appear to play well with other Americans. I know that some folks feel that he doesn't seem to get "excited" enough--that doesn't bother me in the least. In fact, I prefer that style. But again, that's just personal preference.

 

I was surprisingly underwhelmed by McCain. This is the man I wanted to be able to vote for in 2000. I was put off by the things he clung to: earmarks, "Senator Obama," and "Senator Obama doesn't understand." First of all, I get his point on earmarks: It's become the culture on Capitol Hill. Got it. But I also think that the earmarks issue, while important (as Obama acknowledged twice), is not the ONLY THING HAPPENING in DC--and actually, not the most important thing happening. (Obama also got a chance at this point to deliver one of the only memorable lines in the entire debate when he responded to McCain's spending freeze--as if!--by saying that that's "using a hatchet for a job that requires a scalpel."). Second, why could he not say Barak? I mean, they're colleagues--right? And finally, I felt that the whole "Senator Obama just doesn't understand" schtick sounded really condescending. Can we all just agree that, love him or hate him, Barack Obama is a very intelligent man. I think he "understands." What he has, as he himself put it, are some very different idealogical viewpoints from McCain. That's not the same thing as not "understanding" something. It was...sophomoric.

 

Having said THAT, I will not be put off by McCain referring to his own war experiences. He survived that ordeal by sheer force of will, which is tremendous. He is a remarkable man. He has earned every last second that he chooses to discuss his POW trials. I don't ever want to stop my ears to that just because I find it painful to hear or seemingly irrelevant or for any other reason. Please, God, may I never be hardened to that kind of horror.

 

I won't toy with anyone's patience in my assessment of their actual positions on Iraq. Not gonna go there. Suffice it to say that each represented his respective position very well, and I continue to fundamentally agree with one of them and fundamentally disagree with the other on what/where the focus of the war on terror ought to be, the necessity of going into Iraq in the first place, and the way the war has been executed. No game changer there.

 

In sum, I, a confirmed independent, felt that this debate was at best a draw. And since this was supposed to be the debate that McCain would dominate, I've got to give the edge to Obama.

 

Just my take.

[hsmamainva]

Thanks for the post, Leila!!!

 

I really enjoyed reading your take on it --- and I agree with you on just about everything! :)

 

NOW I'm really missing having the access to rep points! ;)

[Parabola]

I agree with a lot of what you said laylamcb, even though I believe we differ in some fundamental opinions. Nice to hear an independent's voice.

 

I, and probably the others who brought it up, didn't mean to sound calloused about McCain's war experience. It does speak to the strength of his character. Not intending to take anything away from that, and I don't intend to stop my ears because its painful. Thats not it. I think the frustration lies in that people, all of us regardless of party affiliation, would like some forward-looking dialogue. From BOTH candidates.

 

And I also prefer the sort of matter of fact, analytical persona. But its not an election-decider for me. :)

[kokotg]

I've got to say, it was refreshing to see two smart, informed people debating actual policy differences (mostly) instead of going for cheap shots and dumbing things down into one liners. This debate was how I had hoped this whole campaign would go with these two guys in it.

[Slartibartfast]

I appreciated hearing your view on this laylamcb. :)

 

I liked 2000 McCain as well. Honestly if it was 2000 McCain up there I would be torn.

[5kidsforME]

What I found very telling, from actually watching the debate vs just hearing it on NPR, was that Obama looked at McCain when McCain was speaking. He may have glanced at his notes occasionally, but he always looked toward him again.

 

McCain never ONCE looked at Obama when he was speaking. He was either chuckling to himself and staring out at the audience or he was staring at the podium.

 

I don't trust someone who can't look me in the eye when I'm talking to them. Or at least glance in my general direction. I felt the same way about the body language during this debate.

 

Actually he was looking at Jim not the audience.

[Colleen]

Want to hear a little-bitty rant? :bigear:

 

Our local NPR is having its fundraising drive THIS week! Grrrr. Like there is not news to be broadcasting these days. Every time I turn it on to try and hear something worthwhile, I have to listen to how many calls they still need. Now I don't mind fundraising, I realize it pays the bills. BUT, can we not reschedule the drive when there isn't major financial news or political events?:rant:

 

How thoroughly aggravating! One of my NPR stations crammed their week-long spring fundraising drive into two days and I appreciated that.

[Colleen]

I'm tired of hearing about who did what in the past. I want to know who's going to do what NEXT, with we have to work with.

 

Exactly ~ and McCain made that point well, imo. When talk turned to the war in Iraq, Obama immediately brought up the fact that he originally opposed our involvement there. Now, I happen to agree with him, but the reality is, what's done is done. The focal point now is how to respond to the current situation. And that's exactly how McCain responded to Obama; he emphasized the fact that the next President needs to deal the hand given.

[Parabola]

 

Exactly ~ and McCain made that point well, imo. When talk turned to the war in Iraq, Obama immediately brought up the fact that he originally opposed our involvement there. Now, I happen to agree with him, but the reality is, what's done is done. The focal point now is how to respond to the current situation. And that's exactly how McCain responded to Obama; he emphasized the fact that the next President needs to deal the hand given.

 

Well, Obama had just as many points of what he wanted to do with Iraq/Afganistan/Iran. And for both of them, they didn't say anything new about that particular issue.

[Colleen]

Anybody interested in an independent's perspective on the debate?

 

Umm, well, I posted earlier, and I'm an independent. I never have and never will align myself with a party. I imagine the same is true of many here.

 

I thought that Obama was polished, commanding, and eloquent. I liked that he frequently looked at McCain, and I liked that he called McCain "John."

 

Boy, I couldn't disagree more. I already shared more thoughts in response to Kate CA's poll, but suffice it to say I thought Obama's performance was solidly underwhelming. As for referring to McCain as "John", I considered that poor debate etiquette.

 

Many people say that he's too cold and analytical and unemotional. I'm drawn to that type of presentation, but I know that I'm overly analytical myself. So I've come to understand that the professorial demeanor, which I really prefer, does not appear to play well with other Americans. I know that some folks feel that he doesn't seem to get "excited" enough--that doesn't bother me in the least. In fact, I prefer that style. But again, that's just personal preference.

 

Yes, I prefer that presentation, too, and imo McCain came across as the more passive this time around, which was interesting and unexpected. He was far calmer and more collected than I'd anticipated, whereas Obama seemed somewhat nervous.

 

Second, why could he not say Barak?

 

Because it's not appropriate debate etiquette.

 

I felt that the whole "Senator Obama just doesn't understand" schtick sounded really condescending. Can we all just agree that, love him or hate him, Barack Obama is a very intelligent man. I think he "understands." What he has, as he himself put it, are some very different idealogical viewpoints from McCain. That's not the same thing as not "understanding" something. It was...sophomoric.

 

I disagree ~ and I share Obama's view. McCain is more experienced and he sounded that way. He needed to speak from a position of "btdt" and he did so. Obama sounded wet behind the ears by comparison. I was quite disappointed by Obama's performance. All other things aside, he needs to work diligently to overcome his dependence on the filler "uh". That alone makes him sound unreliable.

[Parabola]

Its also not appropriate debate etiquette to interrupt the other speaker, but both did it.

Personally, I don't care what they call each other. It has absolutely no bearing on their politics. As for "uh", yes its annoying, but I can't see how it implies unreliability. Again, non-issue for me.

 

McCain trotted out the phrase "Senator Obama doesn't understand" or some variation thereof, at least three times. He's playing a card here, it was intentional. I happen to think though that Obama does understand. He knows whats going on in the world theatre. McCain even accused him of not understanding a couple war-related terms. Please. Lets not have a vocabulary war.

 

I'd rather have a president with clear vision of who the US needs to be in the world, yet little experience... then a president whom I don't trust to be our face to the world, but has a lot of experience.

 

And Biden, at the least, evens up the odds when it comes to foreign relations experience.

[Colleen]

Its also not appropriate debate etiquette to interrupt the other speaker, but both did it.

 

Yep.

 

Personally, I don't care what they call each other. It has absolutely no bearing on their politics.

 

I don't necessarily care either, but was responding to others who mentioned that.

 

As for "uh", yes its annoying, but I can't see how it implies unreliability.

 

An educated speaker who relies on the "uh" filler does sound less reliable to me. Doesn't mean I think he's in actuality unreliable, but it doesn't make him sound particularly confident, let's put it that way.

 

McCain trotted out the phrase "Senator Obama doesn't understand" or some variation thereof, at least three times. He's playing a card here, it was intentional.

 

Oh, you bet it was intentional ~ and I think it served him to good effect.

 

I'd rather have a president with clear vision of who the US needs to be in the world, yet little experience... then a president whom I don't trust to be our face to the world, but has a lot of experience. And Biden, at the least, evens up the odds when it comes to foreign relations experience.

 

Since we're both voting for Obama, you're preaching to the choir. But regardless of my own political preferences, I perceived McCain to have the upper hand in tonight's debate.

[laylamcb]

I agree with a lot of what you said laylamcb, even though I believe we differ in some fundamental opinions. Nice to hear an independent's voice.

 

I, and probably the others who brought it up, didn't mean to sound calloused about McCain's war experience. It does speak to the strength of his character. Not intending to take anything away from that, and I don't intend to stop my ears because its painful. Thats not it. I think the frustration lies in that people, all of us regardless of party affiliation, would like some forward-looking dialogue. From BOTH candidates.

 

And I also prefer the sort of matter of fact, analytical persona. But its not an election-decider for me. :)

 

Hey, Parabola--Just got back to this thread this AM. I honestly wasn't directing that comment about McCain at you. Just my thoughts--just me thinking out loud. Really. I knew what you meant, girl. :001_smile:

[laylamcb]

 

Umm, well, I posted earlier, and I'm an independent. I never have and never will align myself with a party. I imagine the same is true of many here.

 

Sorry, Colleen--I didn't mean to suggest in any way that I was THE independent. :blush: I know that many folks here have chosen their camp already, and I had the sense that they wanted to know what independents thought about the debate. I added my voice as one of, I'm sure, many--and I certainly don't speak for everyone. Never have, and I'm sure that I never will.

 

Clearly you can please some of the people some of the time, but these guys will never please us all. So the question remains, who will please the most people at the right time?

 

We shall see! :001_smile: