All things considered, it’s about a draw Matthew Yglesias, Think Progress

US presidential rivals Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama have attacked each other over foreign policy and the economy, in their first debate.

Mr Obama said a $700bn (£380bn) plan to rescue the US economy was the “final verdict” on years of Republican rule.

He said Mr McCain had been “wrong” on Iraq and tried to link him to President Bush. The Republican senator described his rival as too inexperienced to lead.

Neither landed a knockout blow but polls suggested Mr Obama did better.

An immediate telephone poll by CNN and Opinion Research Corp found 51% said Mr Obama had won, to 38% for Mr McCain.

A poll of uncommitted voters by CBS News found that 39% gave Mr Obama victory, 25% thought John McCain had won, and 36% thought it was a draw.

Both campaigns claimed victory, with Mr McCain’s team saying their candidate had shown a “mastery on national security issues” while Mr Obama’s aides said he had passed the commander-in-chief test “with flying colours”.

Tens of millions of Americans were expected to watch the debate on TV, with only about five weeks to go before the 4 November elections.  (Source: BBC NEWS | Americas | US rivals spar in first TV debate)

Editorial:

Yes, the debate was a technical draw.  The thing about that, however, is subjectively the debate will thus be a win for the Obama camp.  Why?  Because this was supposed to be the debate that John McCain won.  It’s his strength.  And there is no doubt he has experience in issues of foreign policy.  The loss is given that Obama held is own and, overall, appeared more Presidential than McCain.

McCain was wise to try and hammer the “naive” point, however he did it to an almost patronizing degree, which came off as him losing his composure.  However, any time he attacked Obama, the Illinois senator corrected him making McCain seem divisive and out to spin the facts.  Unfortunately for McCain, he did not notably correct Obama on any attack against the Arizona senator thus legitimizing the Democrat’s authority on the facts.

McCain was right to focus on “the surge”, but that’s about all he could say in terms of the “War in Iraq”.  As well, Obama was able to one-up McCain pointing out that the decision-makers on the strategy there essentially agree with his plans for future military action in the region (basically that Afghanistan is the real battleground).  McCain was at his best when explaining the fragility of the situation there, but did not follow that by appearing the most prepared to handle the matter.  In fact, Obama nailed him on handling delicate matters citing McCain’s “Bomb Iran” song.  However the junior Senator then gave away that advantage overemphasizing how wrong McCain was in his decision to go to Iraq rather than solidifying points that not only his past but his future judgment regarding the “War on Terror” have been most wise.

In terms of foreign policy overall, McCain was able to parade his experience but Obama matched that with foresight, unveiling that even the Bush administration is starting to enact policies that the Democratic Presidential nominee championed throughout his campaign while McCain leans toward the failed ways of the past.  They also argued different points of the fact that Kissinger did promote talks with Iran without preconditions (Kissinger later said “non-presidential” talks – something the Bush administration is currently pursuing).

In terms of economic policy, the debate kicked off with that, which is inevitable given the situation.  Neither candidate could comment on whether they were going to vote for the bill that was out at that time, however Obama laid out four core principles he thought should be in the bill.  The third debate between them will address the economy more.  Obama will be going into that debate as the stronger candidate given that McCain has previously acknowledged his weakness on economic issues.  And given the fact that the new economic bailout bill is (according to Sen. John Kerry) founded around the principles Obama laid out in the debate and supposedly better for the American taxpayer.

I’ve been reading a lot about people being disappointed with the first debate, but this is how debates always are.  As well, they are MUCH more subtle than people seem to remember every four years.  As they should be, both candidates know better than to shoot off at the mouth and sink their campaign.  In fact, a portion of this election will come down to who can keep the most level head and restore America’s relationships across the world.  Surely we’ve seen what a faux maverick can do in the White House.

So I just finished The Paragon’s post [link] and spent about an hour skimming through the world’s reaction to McCain’s VP nomination on BBC News [link]. Thankfully most of the world sees the choice for what it is, a desperate move to try and draw Hillary zealots and traditional conservatives. Which I assume McCain didn’t expect anyone to pick up on, so now the world is insulted – especially the women.

I laughed at one person who thought the VP choice was some brilliant landmine to help the right-wing harp on Obama’s inexperience if anyone questions Palin’s experience, when in actuality it undermines all the months of attacks on Obama. Essentially it’s a lay up, just start your criticism with “McCain attacked Obama’s inexperience for months and then selects Palin who…” Insert the laundry list of faults she has going against her that make McCain’s selection a seriously disturbing error in judgment. If debate persists, rinse and repeat.

Which yes, just lay’s up the judgment argument against “C. Niles McCane”. When already barely defending his judgment by claiming the surge worked (more so patting himself on the back over how the “surge” brought the situation in Iraq -having gone from terrible to horrendous- back to merely terrible) McCain now has to defend his choice in a VP who doesn’t counter Barack Obama but instead establishes hypocrisy that his campaign has to weasel around before making its arguments.

Then you have the so-called strategy to win Hillary supporters. Which is an insult to women, so much so that I’m insulted. You’re essentially saying that they will vote for Palin simply because she is a woman. Regardless of how she stands for the exact opposite of everything Hillary Clinton did, including Clinton’s sparse attempts at claiming she was not riding her husband’s coattails (which she stopped addressing), in that Palin has already intrinsically admitted riding coattails by claiming she is picking up where Hillary left off and shattering “the highest glass ceiling” – though not, since the highest glass ceiling would not be vice president. Maybe she is alluding to McCain’s likelihood of passing away while in office; a humorously morbid statement to make especially with that man standing by her side. I was insulted however at the commenter who likened it to Black people voting for Obama because he is Black – so dissimilar in that those Black folks probably would have voted for whatever Democrat was selected, Obama being Black is just icing. To clarify, were Condoleeza running she would not have the same support. Which makes you wonder, as in-line as Palin is to the right-wing agenda why didn’t McCain select Rice? He already gave up trying to distance himself from Bush/Cheney and hugged The Decider when he endorsed McCain’s campaign.

That Midas touch of Bush points to what’s possibly the understated truth. McCain’s campaign is kinda like the Titanic. Last week, they were merely headed for the iceberg but had plenty of time to change course and possibly squeak out a convincing victory. However, joining a campaign like that is a risk few politicians are willing to make, especially when up against a savvy campaign like Obama’s (you have to admit, Hillary was the presumptive front runner last year and his campaign systematically dismantled that). Why would a GOP member risk that kind of historic loss when they could just wait for a future run? Who wants to be the candidate that opposed “Hope”? Imagine how long you would have to wait before you could win your party’s nomination again.

That said Palin is likely a concession of the election by the McCain campaign. I’m not sure if it is an intentional concession or not but I’d like to think his campaign does “get it” unlike Obama said and has purposely picked this candidate that could so easily be used to point out the flaws in McCain’s judgment and campaign. Again, if he were to pass away in office, Palin would be President. Let that marinate. I say this as I try to find more on the time during a speech in which she gave away the deployment information of her son’s unit, endangering his and his fellow soldiers’ lives.

So why am I nervous…
Well, I’m sure Palin has her benefits but i’m not sure they outweigh her liabilities which is why most of the think tank was not expecting the choice. (My first thought was “ah, Lassie-choice, somebody that won’t undermine Presidential decisions” – not a jab at gender.) The reason the choice is surprising is that a candidate would have to harbor an extremely brilliant team behind him to spin this VP choice into an overall asset to the campaign. Though McCain is the nominee now, he was almost out of the race because they couldn’t handle their finances. Yet for that reason I would in no way count McCain out, CLEARLY he (though really I mean those behind him) knows how to appeal to his party and stay competitive. Essentially the choice is so crazy it might work.

Whether this is rolling over and playing dead or not -which for some is a strategy and some a concession- I know Obama better not concede if McCain somehow wins in November. There are a lot of people out there and though some truly believe this an “inspired” VP choice, it seems most everyone else sees the iceberg. I’ve read a number of comments about people more likely to vote for Obama now after McCain’s first action as potential President. However, I don’t recall seeing anyone inspired to “abandon Change” and vote GOP now that it is the McCain/Palin ticket. Even still, I am wary of foul play and the most dubious spinning EVER on the horizon.

Recounts… all day.

[In case you care...]
Who is Palin?
Why the fuss?

Let the spin begin…

Most comprehensive yet…