Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama hammered away at each other’s judgment on the economy, domestic policy and foreign affairs as they faced off in their second presidential debate.
Obama tried to tie McCain to President Bush’s “failed” policies, while McCain pushed his image as a “consistent reformer” at the debate, which took place at Belmont University in Nashville, Tennessee.
The debate was set up as a town hall meeting, and the audience was made up of undecided voters.
Tom Brokow should be fired. Instead of holding a true “Town Hall Debate” he just picked out the same old questions the candidates already answered in prior debates, and allowed them to just reiterate the same old campaign rhetoric we’ve heard over and over already.
The candidates should have said “Tom, we love ya, but we are going to let the people ask the questions they want to ask. Barak will work that side, McCain this side, and you keep time.”
Jim E.
I tend to agree with No. 1. That was about the most stilted “town hall” debate I have ever seen. The questions were sterile and no reposts were allowed. Basically, the content never got much past very broad, level 1 thinking on issues that have been hashed out ad nauseum for months now.
I don’t know if it was entirely Brokaw’s fault though. Both campaigns had agreed to do the debate with several caveats and conditions about every little detail and questions to be submitted in advance, etc., etc. I think the campaigns themselves pretty much tanked the debate before Brokaw got his hands on it.
Yeah, perhaps, but Brokaw did state in the beginning that it was his choice of questions, that he went through the questions of those present and via email, and hand picked THESE questions, and that the candidates had no knowledge of what was going to be asked.
Even under certain perameters, he could have — should have — done much better, given his reputation.
“given his reputation” as what? When Brokaw was in Atlanta we found him to be a screaming liberal Democrat. He has tried to masquerade as objective for years, but I’ve never bought it. He’s no more objective than Gwen Ifel. I can’t understand Republicans agreeing to these mainstream media personalities as the moderators of these debates. One more way McCain seems to have given this election away, as opposed to Obama actually winning it.
Q. What specifically will you do as President to give economic releif to the middle class?
A. Good question, but first let me remind you that my opponent has six toes and chews with his mouth open.
Billy, #4,
I was speaking of his ‘reputation’ as a journalist. Limbaugh had a funny quip about him today: they had to go to Jurassic Park to get Tom Brokaw to moderate this debate.
However:
The Democratic candidates positively REFUSED to debate on FOX News before their Convention, which shows their bias.
Now we have had three debates, two run by PBS/NPR anchors, neither of whom even pretend to be neutral* (Gwen Ifel has written a book in praise of Obama, even. She should have recused herself as moderator of the VP debate) and one by a ‘screaming liberal’ (as you point out)who couldn’t pick questions that were any different from the other two, even given that he had a wider range to pick from.
No, the deck is clearly stacked in Obama’s favor by the ‘mainstream’ media.
The fair thing would be to have the next debate moderated by Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Mark Levin, just to see how Obama fares under the opposite end of the spectrum. But that will NEVER happen. 😉
Peace
Jim E. <>< *PBS is largely funded by liberal and democratic contributors. PBS and NPR goes to them, hat in hand, several times a year saying "give us money so we can stay on the air!" It only makes sense they are not going to do or say anything to jeopardize their contributions.
Does anyone else have a sneakin’ feeling that Senator McCain has made a complete shift in his “private desire” to be President, in the last two weeks or so? I think he has taken a look at his 72 years of age, taken a look at the absolute economic debacle that is occurring in the US and the world, taken yet another look at the “fixes” that our illustrious congress has, so far, come up with, and has decided that he does not wish for his presidential legacy to be, “oh, yeah, he’s the one who presided over the dissolution of the Republic!” I think John McCain has quietly and privatel thrown in the towel. He has decided Obama can have it. And I think that his performance in last night’s “debate” was good evidence for this conclusion. John McCain has decided he doesn’t want to be President of the U.S. in its current mess.
I’ve often thought that the best way to do this is have two moderators – one chosen from each camp. The way this would work is Moderator A asks the same question of each candidate. Moderator B asks a follow up of that question of each candidate and then asks his/her own question. Back to A for a followup of that question and then his/her own question. Repeat until time is over.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
LibraryJim [#6]: If Lehrer, Ifill, and Brokaw are so biased, why did McCain agree to have them moderate the debate?
The question should be:
Did he have a choice?
“The question should be: Did he have a choice?”
Who or what would compel McCain to accept a biased moderator?
Because it would mean not showing up for a debate, and when you are behind in the polls, and outspent on tv ads, every tv moment counts!
Of course after his showing and performance, he could have just ‘phoned it in!
McCain and Palin are on Hannity and Combes, and giving a great interview. She is the same as she was in the debate and at the Convention. McCain is much more animated and passionate about the issues. Why didn’t he act like this at the debate?
If he loses the election, it is not because Obama is better (he’s not!), it’s McCain’s own fault as NOT coming across as better in the debates.
#13, McCain will lose because Americans don’t want McCain as president. And Obama’s run a much stronger campaign.
I do agree that it is McCain’s fault he didn’t come across better. Its because he’d make a worse president.
As far as NPR and PBS being “beholden” to its contributors, I think you have it wrong. We contribute because we want it to be objective, rather than beholden to the whims of advertisers. If you listen to NPR (I don’t think you do) you’ll find they always find a Republican or a conservative to quote.
Hannity objective? That’s funny.
I wish Brokaw had allowed time, during the debate, for more thorough discussion of the government’s purchase of mortgages and renegotiation of mortgages, I hope someone on this thread can explain what McCain said about renegotiating mortgages.
I think McCain said that if he became President he would appoint a person to be in charge of renegotiating the mortgages purchased with taxpayer money. Maybe I just didn’t listen but I did not hear Obama present any plan.
I would hate to see the U.S. government allow the same companies that caused this panic, to administer the renegotiation of any mortgages that the U.S. government has purchased with taxpayer money.
Tom Brokaw is a good time keeper but he deprived the American People of learning very much of importance about either candidate because discussion of this so-called financial crisis and it’s implications cannot be encapsulated into sound bites.
Brokaw does not seem to realize that these men are running for President of the United States not for the position of News Anchor.
It is a good thing that we don’t have to depend on Tom Brokaw to find out what the candidates plan to do if elected to the Presidency.
This is McCain’s plan for renegotiating mortgages.
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/Read.aspx?guid=b9af0d4c-9c0e-4a97-b27f-19df8cfec83d
I still don’t know what Obama’s plans are.
Betty,
NO ONE knows what Obama’s plans are, except he says we can have HOPE in his call for CHANGE. Unfortunately, after his tax increases and trillions in new spending, that’s all we will HOPE to have in our bank accounts — CHANGE.
Librayjim, The only time Obama SEEMS to say something of substance is after he has been clued in by McCain’s previous answer to the same question, then he is quick to say “I agree with Senator McCain on that and…” It happens so often that I wonder why the News Media doesn’t catch on to the fact that it was McCain who really answered the question.
Or suddenly his long held views on a subject will suddenly change after McCain calls him out on it.
E.g., “I’ve always been for nuclear power and clean coal”. Easy one to fact-check, he hasn’t been for either until McCain started saying “we need an all of the above approach including drilling, nuclear and clean coal, and I support that”.
LibraryJim, Obama has made his tax plan clear. Perhaps you might spend some time at that library you work at and do a little research.
Do you trust him? That’s a different question. You don’t, and that’s a character issue for which you and I disagree.
The word on the street is that he is a centrist (could you name his economic advisers?) and …. being an intellectual (from where almost all conservative ideas came from over the last 1/2 century – Chicago), he would probably try a bunch of things. Hes he’s a lefty, but as Chris Buckley and Wick Allison have learned, his temperament makes him the true conservative in the race.