My basic impression of the debate is that Obama won on style and McCain on substance. The time that Obama spent preparing was well invested (and explains why he was so loathe to fly back to Washington to deal with something as insignificant as the current economic meltdown). He was smooth and, compared to the primary-season debates, his answers were to the point and on message. There was none of the hemming and hawing that he has previously exhibited when stripped of his teleprompter. So, on style, he did very well. McCain, to my eyes, seemed tired at the start of the debate, and it took awhile for him to get into the groove of the debate’s format. This was unfortunate for him, because the beginning of the debate was on the crucial subject of the meltdown and the bailout. He did OK in that segment, on the substance, but he could have done a lot better.

And speaking of substance: Jim Lehrer attempted to pin both candidates down on what they would cut from their campaign promises, given the collapsing economic situation. Herein was a vast distinction that ought have told swing voters a whole lot about the two candidates. Obama tried mightily to avoid naming any specific item that he would cut; finally he conceded that he might “phase in” some of his alternate energy proposals. And throughout the debate, Obama kept mentioning areas in which he would increase federal spending, as if things were perfectly normal. “When I’m president, we’ll put more into blah blah blah …”. Really? McCain also avoided naming a specific area he would cut, but instead said he would consider a complete freeze on all spending — other than defense and veterans care. Obama responded that to do this would be to use a hatchet, when he would prefer to use a scalpel. Voters with any degree of savvy would have been able to read between the lines and see that Obama has a philosophy based entirely on increasing government spending. He can’t talk about freezing spending, because then he’d simply have nothing to do as president. All of his plans are wrapped up in boosting spending on this, increasing “investment” in that — in this he is just a typical liberal Democrat, of-course.

On foreign policy, McCain pretty much cleaned Obama’s clock, although Obama did not lose his composure and so continued doing well on style. McCain succeeded in pinning Obama down on instances where he has been totally and dangerously wrong, i.e. on opposing the surge, and on having face to face discussions, without preconditions, with people like Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong-il.

McCain, as is his wont on the campaign trail, mentioned the bracelet given to him by the mother of a fallen soldier, which he wears as a sign of his commitment that the sacrifices of U.S. troops in Iraq shall not have been in vain. Obama — perhaps in an attempt to rattle McCain — then produced his own bracelet, given to him by the mother of a fallen soldier who asked him to wear it in order to remember that no other mother should have to go through what she has gone through. Think about that a minute. With all due sympathy to the bereaved mother, what exactly is Obama feigning to commit himself to by wearing this bracelet? The only way to read it coherently is that he is apparently promising that on his watch no other American mother will ever lose her son on the battlefield. That would demand never using the U.S. military again in any situation; in a word, pacifism. Yet Obama does not portray himself as a pacifist — and indeed he would stand no chance of being elected if he did. So, what does his commitment to this bereaved mother and his wearing of this bracelet really mean, when you boil it down?

That’s right: nothing.

McCain’s commitment, as signified by wearing the bracelet, is real and specific: to winning the war in Iraq and to bringing the troops home with their mission truly accomplished. Obama’s commitment is entirely insubstantial, merely a rhetorical flourish designed to convey that he is dead-set against war, except of-course in cases where he might deign to decide that it’s necessary after all.

And that sums up the difference in the character of the two candidates quite well. It remains to be seen, of-course, whether the crucial swing voters will be swayed more by style or by substance.

...................
Share this!

Posts which might be related to this one based on a mysterious algorithm:

• The challenge that John McCain should make today to Barack Obama
• McCain on “The View”
• Campaign note