John McCain and Barack Obama debated Tuesday night and the media is trying to analyze who won and who lost.McCain made points ,but, it is now conventional wisdom he needs to catch up to win.Here is a sampling of what some of the national media outlets are saying.Do you agree?Who do you think won the debate?Tell us below:
“The town hall format is McCain’s favorite, because it allows him to engage in a back and forth with voters. But the strict time constraints in Tuesday’s event prevented any sort of free-wheeling debate. Ultimately, the two candidates went back and forth without any knockout punches or gaffes, and so there appeared to be no obvious winner.
Insta-polls of uncommitted voters by CNN and CBS both gave the duel to Obama. But even without polls to lean on, it was clear that by the end of the evening the trajectory of the campaign had not changed. So for McCain, now the clear underdog after more than three weeks of devastating economic news that has put his party on the defensive, the debate was in effect a loss.”
Christian Science Monitor
McCain will float his idea when he joins his vice presidential running mate Sarah Palin on the campaign trail in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Obama heads Wednesday to the newest toss-up state of Indiana.
McCain's $300 billion proposal at the second presidential debate was seen as a risk for the Republican nominee -- much like his decision two weeks ago to suspend his campaign to deal with economic rescue legislation.
"(It was) an amazing development in the middle of nowhere, obviously an attempt by McCain at a game changer," columnist Charles Krauthammer told FOX News.
Fox News
“Well, so much for the idea that the town hall format helps John McCain.
In the town halls staged by his campaign, where the crowds are composed almost entirely of his supporters, McCain has been relaxed, and has been on the stage by himself. In Nashville tonight, neither of those particulars applied. Instead, as he and Barack Obama wandered around the stage, McCain overwhelmingly conveyed the impression -- not to put too fine a point on it -- that he’s old.
In fact, McCain looks older than he is. He cannot move as easily or fluidly as he could had he not had his limbs broken while a prisoner of war. But he was stiff in a format that rewards fluidness. And that sense of age was accentuated by the contrast with Obama and by a number of McCain’s answers and comments. As I look at my notes from tonight’s debate, I see that I marked McCain’s appearance twice – first, when he answered the question of what to do about entitlements by referring to the deal Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill worked out 25 years ago, and, second, as he moved across the stage following an Obama answer that referenced the need to anticipate 21st-century challenges.”
Washington Post
“There was no indication that the debate did anything to change the course of a campaign that appeared to be moving in Mr. Obama’s direction.
Mr. McCain chose not to use the evening — the second of three scheduled debates — to attack Mr. Obama’s background or character. But in a moment that caught the attention of people in both parties, he appeared agitated in criticizing Mr. Obama for a Senate vote he cast, referring to his opponent only as “that one.”
You are a very astute person there Sid... Value, never forget honest value..... Written by
on 10/8/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
But McCain did say one thing last night that will make me vote for him. He talked to one of the audience members that asked a question about Iran/Israel and told the former Navy man that he learned more about leadership from a Chief Petty Officer than anybody else. This speaks volumes about the man and it speaks very well of his judgement. Written by Sid
on 10/8/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Neither candidate did a good job of actually answering the question, but McCain did a little better in that aspect. After watching this debate I really wish we had a strong third party candidate. Obama is "green behind the ears" and McCain proposes $300 gazillion dollars to buy backor buy down mortgages. Oh my. Written by Sid
on 10/8/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I have always given money to support one party's candidates.. Republican. I also "usually-most-of-the-time" vote Republican. The Republicans do not have the gonads to stand up for their professed principles - either that or they are lying about desiring "smaller government, less taxes" etc. Either way, let them wither and die and be replaced by a party that truly represents the working taxpayers. The Republican Party will no longer get my backing simply because "we're not Democrats" - that s#!t won't fly with me any more. Written by kpf
on 10/8/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Yeah, just burn the house down and give the Democrats the House and the Presidency..... Like that makes a lot of sense..... Oh wait, we can always get the Chinese to help us rebuild it and protect us from those pesky socialistic Russians now can't we? (In other words, it's like putting the fox in charge of guarding the henhouse so that we are assured of a steady supply of eggs). Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!! Wait a minute................. Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall.......... Written by
on 10/8/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I started to dislike McCain with his "incumbent protection bill" (aka "the McCain/Feingold Bill"). He is the Republicans answer as "Democrat Light" to garner the moderate electorate I suppose. He really did look desparate last night. Perhaps the Republican Party - if they lose badly this election - will be transformed inasmuch as what happened to the Democratic Party did after '68. We as a nation are in desparate need of some political evolution, IMHO. Written by kpf
on 10/8/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
A CLEAR difference... Keith Olberman said when John McCain started darting around the stage, he did not look like a "well man." LOL! Written by KjunLady
on 10/8/2008
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE