I thought both men looked upset when they couldn't get a word in on the other. And I thought Obama looked more adult, looking at McCain when he was speaking to him and admitting that he agreed with him while McCain just snickered and giggled all night long. Also note to John: stop making bad jokes!
What facts do you have to support your feeling that Obama will cause "damage" and McCain will provide stability? Cause there are a few HUGE glaring weaknesses in your position that Obama's past positions would have been harmful for America. (ahem...Iraq)
I'm sorry . . let me introduce you . .. That is T_J he does not deal in 'facts' Only in lies, deceipt, partisan ship and an absolute hatred of all things ethn. . . .er. . . . urban. Rocket River
Obama definitely came off as the kid, he interupted within 45 seconds each time Mccain talked, as Mccain atleast let Obama answer all of his questions even though you know he had things he wanted to say.
I agree with this. I am still undecided who I want to vote for, but Obama clearly interrupted McCain in the middle of his points much more than McCain did to Obama. Not very "presidential" as a lot of the left seems to give Obama that nod.
He only did that when McCain was lying about him. If Obama had told as many lies as McCain did, you can bet he would have been interrupted.
You are such a broken record, RR. The only response you ever have to criticism of your candidate is 'that's racist!' Have you considered attempting to form an argument in response? Are you capable of such? I personally don't think you are, for what that's worth. My brain is simply on a much higher level than yours.
It's like playing Operation and hitting the buzzer when you're trying to take out the spare ribs. BZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
yea, the perfect counter....... "I have a braclet too......uhhh, bluuuhhh, huhhh SGT. uhh" total disrespect, and felt cheap. now feel free to call me an elitist.
iroc it seems to be the only interested in an honest discussion. I agree the other 3 are clowns, but hardly representative of the republican base as a whole.
I think this may show an interesting divide between the two candidates, but it may be that I'm reading too much into it. McCain says we should stay in Iraq to make sure that those that have already been lost didn't die in vain- a very understandable emotional argument. Obama says we should make sure that as few Americans as possible are killed from here on out- a much more logical approach.
After Obama's nightmare policy statement about Pakistan, which I'm apparrantly too biased to have a good judgment on, I thought this was the low point of the debate for Obama. A huge part of his appeal has been he ability to "appear above fray". His playing "gotcha" (and not well) on this issue, didn't just bring him down to the level of typical Washington politics, it brought him below what is expected.
They have virtually the same plan for the Iraq from this point forward except some bizarre distinction between 30000 troops in "permanent bases" or "long-term temporary" bases. Anyone who bases a vote on Iraq at this point should look to a third-party to cast a symbolic vote.
I don't see how Obama also having a bracelet and showing that the veterans voters aren't a monolithic vote for McCain somehow tarnishes his "above the fray" stance. I don't think him making that point in a very succinct way was typical Washington politics. Or even if it is part of Washington politics it certainly isn't the part of Washington politics that turns most people off. To counter McCain's point, or to bring up McCain's incorrect judgments against him seems like part of what the debate is about, and not just "gotcha".
