Guest bloggers debate the debate that might pit McCain vs. Obama

So, right now we don't even know if we'll have a presidential debate tonight between the guy from the Democratic machine that has ruled Cook County since just after the dinosaurs migrated to Wisconsin and the guy who's been in Washington a quarter-century and says, no, he's the one representing change.

Just look at his running mate.

Sounds terrifically exciting. No doubt attendance will be way down at thousands of high school football games across the country tonight as millions stay home to not miss a word.

In preparation for the maybe debate, The Ticket did two things. One, we got a video showing highlights of some past presidential debates. Click on the "read more" line below to see that.

And, two, we asked some of the nation's top bloggers to comment on the debates and their importance. Click on the blog name to link to another sample of their writing.

Here they are in whatever order makes each of them feel the most important:

Crooks&Liars: "I've always felt that in the debates, America will finally see Obama and McCain side by side discussing important issues and for those that are undecided, decisions will be made. I've written that the debates are essential for Obama to pull ahead and stay there all the way to November.

"And the imagery alone will favor Obama. He looks ...

... confident, reassuring and strong while McCain looks tired and haggard. His face visibly shows the wear and tear of the campaign. That's important in our pop culture world."

FeelingElephants: "I think these debates will be a moment of crystallization of the candidate's images. They have each been fighting to define the story arch of this campaign cycle and I believe in this debate we will hear the final versions of their campaign's meta-narrative.

"More importantly, we'll see if Obama had a good reason to avoid debating McCain in his proposed series of town-hall meetings -- popular wisdom is that he can't win a wonkish debate."

Wizbang: "As I write this, the first Presidential debate is up in the air. Lost in the back and forth about McCain suspending his campaign and the debate is that this first debate really should be the one he aces and Obama doesn’t since it’s supposed to be focused on foreign policy.

"The VP debate will be another chance for Sarah Palin to connect with a large audience, in essence reaffirming her selection. The substance of that debate is probably less important than the potential for her to show (or not show) that she’s up to the challenge. If her history is any guide, she’ll impress people as capable, genuine, and likeable."

TheModerateVoice: "The debates are of incredible importance this year. Part of it is due to the McCain campaign's portrayal of Obama and part of it is due to Obama. Obama was remarkably tepid and/or longwinded in some primary debates. And McCain's campaign has painted him as a fancy-speaking empty suit and empty head.

"Obama has to be seen with McCain and come off much as JFK did with Nixon, as on an equal footing or at least conjure up Presidential images.

"The debates are of huge importance to McCain. He's drooping in the polls and is using the 'Maverick' theme in his ads. He needs to come across as more presidential than Obama but also conjure up images of the 2000 McCain who wasn't necessarily a creature of the Republican party but of someone who didn't fit into either party. He needs to cool down.

"All this may be moot if McCain decides not to show up for the debates. Will Obama go for the tired and ineffective response of showing up and answering questions with an empty chair next to him?"

TrapperJohn/DailyKos: "You hear a lot from cable news talking heads about how 'so-and-so needs to show empathy' in a debate, and how 'XYZ needs to prove that he/she can take a punch,' and so on. 

"But the fact of the matter is that debates are an awful lot like NASCAR races: with the exception of the devotees, most people aren't watching to see the skills of the participants. They're watching to see the crashes and explosions.

"It's the gaffes that make debates relevant."

Joan Walsh/Salon.com: "Clearly McCain's gambit is political, but I think it's bad politics. I actually think a foreign-policy debate was the only

hope McCain had for taking back momentum after a week in which his lifelong devotion to corporate deregulation caught up with him, despite his lying about it.

"Now, I trust Obama to be smart enough to tie the current financial crisis to foreign policy -- fairly, not as a stretch, given the global dimensions of the turmoil. But it would have also provided McCain with an opportunity to taunt Obama about his opposition to the so-called surge in Iraq, and to change the subject generally -- and that could potentially be good news for McCain.

"McCain campaign czar Steve Schmidt apparently thinks calling on Obama to cancel the debate is another big game-changing gambit, à la the Palin choice. But I think Americans will see it for what it is, a political stunt. It makes McCain look cowardly, like he's not ready to mix it up with Obama, and like he's hiding from the perilous economic developments of the last few weeks."

Matt Welch/Reason.com: "John McCain's one real shot in this election is to portray Barack Obama as an inexperienced, even unknown foreign policy naif in a dangerous, dangerous world. Given his deficit in the polls, the focus this week on Wall Street, and the annus horribilus it is for the GOP, McCain -- by far -- has the most at stake tonight.

"If he makes Obama look like a tongue-tied graduate student, he could make real gains, but I wouldn't bet money on that.

"The vice presidential debate, on the other hand, will probably be the politico-cultural event of the year, and I for one can't wait.

"The man born with a silver foot in his mouth vs. the most divisive hockey mom in U.S. history ... regardless of who loses (probably both), American television wins.

"If Palin holds her own while Biden goes gaffetastic, you may see a rallying of the conservative base, such as it still exists. Conversely, if Palin melts under the hot lights, you can probably kiss most Hillary-supporting independents good-bye."

Lucianne.com: "The debates are crucial. Voters who have never seen the two candidates together will be able to compare and contrast for the first time. As voting, when it comes right down to it, is more emotional than intellectual, the voters' comfort level is a vital part of their choice."

The Ticket will have its own take on tonight's maybe-or-not debate later today. Please check back.

What's your take on the debate kerfuffle?

-- Andrew Malcolm

Meanwhile, don't forget you can have alerts for every Ticket item sent directly and instantly to your cell. Just go here to Twitter and register for free.

Photo credit: Associated Press

Comments

[True Debates]

The 1992 Presidential Debates with Ross Perot were not dull. His warnings have now come true. Replace John McCain with Ron Paul. Add Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney. Barack Obama must earn his victory, not win by default.

[moeursalen]

What's so important about a staged debate? The real debate is at the Joint Economic Committee meetings. People need to look at the nuts and bolts of the real economy. Speaking of nuts, PA Rep. Paul Kanjorski announced on CNBC yesterday a.m. that the econ plan was resoved and congress was in full agreement. Hello!

moeursalen.blogspot.com

[Jason]

McCain is playing the expectations game. Of course he's going to show up, and when he does, if he does well, his spinners will be all "Look at how well he did when he didn't even prepare. That’s leadership."
Meanwhile, if he does badly it'll be "Of course Obama was more polished he's spent the past week preparing."
It's all just a cheap ploy.

[Clear choices]

McCain has definitely given the Obama campaign the fodder to tear him down in a debate...

Fire Chris cox. Don't Fire Chris Cox.

American is economically sound. We'll have a great depression by Monday.

Rick Davis stopped receiving money from Freddie mac in 2005. Rick Davis was receiving $15,000 monthly up until a month ago.

As for the VP debate, if an of you happened to be on the fence about Palin (for whatever bad reasons), all you need to see is her Evangelical witchraft video. It reminds me of a scary tel-eveanglist show.

[David Warfield]

Shame on John McCain for letting Steve Schmidt goad him into this Rovian "suspend my campaign" gambit. It's a classic case of double speak -- no aspect of the McCain campaign has been suspended, except for the debate, and that tells us a lot about Steve Schmidt's confidence in his candidate, and how far McCain has devolved from his "straight talk" days.

[Emile Tubiana]

If there will be a debate, that means that McCain succeeded to finalize Bush’s deal of “700 billions”.
This also means that McCain will appear as a victorious candidate who saved the situation without the taxpayers’ money. He will be received at the debate with applauds. If the deal is off, it is not sure that the debate will go on.

[Marie Stewart]

From:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/mccain-and-bushs-kabuki-theatre-mccain.html

Thursday, September 25, 2008
Credit Where Credit Isn't Due: McCain and Bush's Kabuki Theatre

Now we know why McCain hired the Bush contingent.

It emerged in the White House briefing today that McCain called Bush and asked him to initiate a meeting today at 4 pm at the White House, putatively for him to "deal with" the crisis.

That is, McCain asked Bush to help him create an trifecta: To try to lend some credence to McCain's desperate assertion that a suspension of his campaign is necessary, in effect either avoiding a debate in which he would face critical questions about his stance on the economy or marching in claiming "victory"; attempting to co opt the financial crisis thereby trying to put an end to his plummeting in the polls created by his flailing positions on the economy--perhaps best reflected by his statement days ago that the "fundamentals of the economy are strong"; and perhaps buying more time for Sarah Palin after her embarrassing photo op at the UN yesterday, by moving her debate forward as well.

Here's how it happened, according to Q and A at the WHB:

McCain emailed Bush asking for the 4 P.M. meeting. Now, one reasonably might ask, why is today such a necessity for McCain, if his interest is solely the national good?

Because it is before the debate. McCain hopes to stage a meeting at the White House, thereby, with Bush's cooperation, lending plausibility to his claim to need to suspend his campaign. Then, if Republicans, in their own electoral interest, can be persuaded to come to agreement, before the debate, he would claim--in an act of utter stage management--to have "resolved" the crisis. Thereby hoping to take the heat off on his past careening stances and sliding polls and staunch the bleeding on the polls--before the debate.

This is Kabuki Theatre masquerading as substance--no different than what we saw at the U.N. yesterday.

It is utterly stage managed, utterly cynical, and utterly unrelated to the substantive deliberation necessary to actually resolve these matters on the merits and for our nation's future, rather than for short-term and desperate political advantage.

These occurrences are equally important for what they indicate about McCain's governing style as they are for their impact upon democratic process: impulsive acts that rely on drama and theatrical posture rather than substantive reasoning and long-term deliberation; a strong willingness to sacrifice substantive reasoning, deliberative process, and even prior structures and agreements to immediate political need; an attempt to reach outcomes through last minute stage management rather than substantive argument.

These should create deep concern for anyone who wishes for a change in governmental process from the past eight years.

We have an economy, rather than a campaign, to rescue. Putting nation before politics means putting all attempts to resolve it before political attempts to co opt it--and to move towards one's commitments, rather than towards a more immediate and short-term salvation.

Cite:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/mccain-and-bushs-kabuki-theatre-mccain.html

[Some Dork]

I'm just a rank amateur, but here are my thoughts on some narratives to look for in tonight's debate:

http://www.somedork.com/daily-ramblings/five-things-obama-and-mccain-will-try-to-do-in-the-debate/
Five Things Obama And McCain Will Try To Do In The Debate

I still expect McCain to try and swing for the fences here, I don't think his "ride to the rescue" ploy worked.

[ap]

If McCain is not going to show up, let's have Dr. Ron Paul step up and debate Obama. This will at least inject some useful discussion on the economy and monetary policy, or even foreign policy if that is still going to be the center of the debate.

[George]

Seperating all the hype and setting aside the military past, what needs to be looked at is how similar McCain is to President Bush. Lately, to me, he's looking like four more years of the same. Is that something this country can afford?

[jubei]

I agree, McCain is posturing big time.
This is staged, they are more apart on the issues than they were before.

Obama challenged the republican leaders in that last meeting just to provide "details" on thier proposals and then have paulson confirm their reports, and when paulson said he didnt agree, the republican leader gets so upset he walks out during the negotiations. And what was McCain doing??
NOT A DARN THING, just sat there with that grin on his face. didnt say a word, didnt provide assistance, no mavericking, no trying to quell his counterpart, why? because he agreed with the ranking member hand and foot or he didnt know what the heck was going on.

All Obama asked for were specifics, "gimme me more information on your proposal", didnt get it, ran what he did get out of him by the professional, and nogo. Now the Republican loyals will try to say "even in the face of foolishness" that McCain is a hero on this?? excuse me?

The main person that fought tooth and nail to get us into this situation with deregulation and no reporting regulation, is now posturing to get us out? and people are eating it up because they have no other choice but to, since they threw their hat in with him.
Sad commentary

[dragonfly777]

Perhaps Obama will talk about his own words at the debate?? I would like to know what he means.

From Dreams of My Father: 'I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.'

From Dreams of My Father : 'I found a solace in
nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'There was something
about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'It remained necessary
to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'I never emulate white
men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa ,( he lies here he has no African root he is Arab! ) that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself , the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, Du Bois and Mandela.'

This is the change Obama plans!

[lisa o.]

you do realize that those quotes from Obama's book have been extremely misinterpreted, right? One of the quotes is not even in the book, and the others are taken out of context, without including the entire dialogue. Try reading the entire book before you take quotes you've read on the internet to hold against him.

[steve rodriguez]

How do you misinterpret Rev. Wrights, sermon quote
"God D__m America," or " US of KKK" those are the direct quotes from out of Obama's mentors mouth. I guess Obama's " change" means a change to a Black America! that will go over well!

[ThinkSolution]

What is the Definition of Victory! ?
We do not want to come back from Iraq without Victory!
But how do you define that "Moment" which will relieve us
from Iraq! ?

Any ideas?

[Mandy]

Watching the debate right now, I can say Sen Obama is just clueless about Iran and perhaps foreign policy.

I am Iranian-American and for me the position of the candidate on a country that executes 29 people in one day is very important. Se. Obama urges direct talk with the Mullahs in Iran and brings N. Korea as an example. Here is the news: N. Korea is different to Iran. They do not sponsor terrorism and don't want to build an Islamic Empire like the Iranian government does. They do not train the terrorists in Iraq and don't kill American soldiers. How can anyone use the same recipe for both countries?
This is the big mistake in US policy towards Iran. But at least Sen. McCain does not urge direct talks with Iran. The Europeans talked for 10 years. It only gave the Iranians time to build their nuclear weapn and kill our soldiers in Iraq. Talk to say what? what is the proof that they would listen or change?What has Sen. Obama learnt from the past experince? unfortunately nothing!

He seems to be tougher on Russia than Iran. Does he have any clue about the repression in Iran? The stoning to death sentecnes? About mutilation of fingers in public and about whipping people who do not fast? About girls who get arrested because of the color of their dress? The juvenile executions? and I am not even talking about Iran's sponsoring of terrorism , roadside bombs in Iraq, kidnapping and execution of Iraqis, ....and those hateful comments about Israel.

There is a "wall of Shame" prepared by the Iranians in New York for Ahmadinejad. It displays some examples of the atrocities of the Iranian government. I suggest Sen. Obama and Sen.Baiden visit that wall before being so kind to these monsters.

[Joanne Carr]

Who was Tom in the debates?

[Chris Barth]

What was the real objective in Iraq. Remove Saddam Hussein? Mission accomplished! Remove the weapons of mass destruction? Mission accomplished. Why are we still there? Mission unknown. A real leader set defined goals. When accomplished they move on to the next objective. McCain does not know what success is, Bush does not know his own objectives, we will never be successful behind blind mice.(period)

[SUsieQ]

Obama displayed a very diplomatic demeanor and showed his high level skill at diplomacy. Like a true Christian he let the negative comments thrown at him by McCain roll off his back never attacking McCain the way McCain attacked him. His ability to restrain himself and remain calm under stress maintaining his composure and poise is exactly what we need in a president. When the US has to negotiate with problematic foreign countries like Russia or China
Obama has shown he has what it takes to negotiate like a president and not a bulldog like McCain. McCain will make people feel uncomfortable and will have great difficulty ever persuading people while Obama has a natural gift of persuasion. We don't need any more endless wars, we can't afford them ...we need a good smart negotiator. Obama is our guy.McCain is just going to upset people even more than Bush.
When McCain accuses Obama of being naive what he really means is that Obama isn't corrupt. The Bush administration along with McCain have ransacked our country and sent all our money and prosperity overseas. We need a real honest and uncorrupted leader not one of the good ol' boys who is proud of voting 95% with Bush. Obama has the right idea of keeping our country strong from within , keeping jobs here in the US, helping middle class America and not lining the pockets of his wealthy friends the way Bush did.We need Obama now more than ever.

[joyce]

My question for both candidates:
1) Why does this bailout have to be on the backs of the American Taxpayer where everything you do wrong is dumped? Why not reduce foreign aid to make up this difference? Politicians should quit looking for the American Taxpayers to bail out their mistakes as well. This is a political & Wall Street mistake from two administrations, both Democratic & Republican.

We take away from Americans to give to everyone else in the world, most of whom hate us regardless. This needs to stop and this bailout needs to be paid for from this source, not the American Taxpayer.