McCain vs. Obama in Open Debate: Too Good to Be True?

Submitted by pmcarpenter on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 6:13pm.

P.M. Carpenter

THE FIFTH COLUMNIST by P.M. Carpenter

I don't know which side is feeling more desperate: the McCain camp for having proposed the idea of a series of "unmoderated debates" throughout the summer, or the Obama camp for having seemingly accepted it.

But let's not get ahead of ourselves.

True, it's a vastly appealing idea -- the New York Times calls it "a sign of what could be an extremely unusual fall campaign"; "an idea that is by any measure unconventional" -- especially for anyone who covers politics, because the potential for impromptu, column-filling gaffes is limitless.

And then there's that civics stuff about vigorous democracy and an informed electorate, blah, blah, blah. Truth is, though, voters tune in mainly for the same reason they watch NASCAR; they anticipate a mangling collision or one of the candidates careening off the track in a blaze of smoke, fire and fury.

Yet, unfortunately, the open-debate proposal is only at the idea stage and it's not improbable that it shall remain there. The reporting says it was "floated by Mr. McCain’s advisers," so the former may not even have been aware of what was about to swirl around him, and the only indication of Obama having picked up the gauntlet was his response that it's "a great idea," which was what he said about public financing, too. So there the idea sits, and there it may stay.

Still, it is axiomatic in politics that whichever camp proposes a series of debates is the camp that has taken a good, long look at its internal polling and consequently feels desperate beyond measure -- even to the point of unleashing its candidate before voters without a script. And in this instance that camp is, happily, McCain's.

The dance then proceeds thusly: the opposing camp immediately ripostes that it's "a great idea," and, well, it'll take an even longer look at it only to assure itself that it benefits, above all others, the gaping multitudes. Don't call it; it'll call you. And that's the end of it; it's consigned to obscurity and finally oblivion.

Yet, again, in this instance it is reported only that the Obama camp believes it to be an exceedingly marvelous thing -- there was no reference to the senator needing to weigh its pros and cons, you know, for the voters' benefit. Which would further suggest the opposing camp -- Obama's, that is -- is equally nervous and therefore willing to go out on a limb to bring up some numbers or break a perceived deadlock.

But, perhaps the reporting in this instance just didn't go far enough. Maybe Obama's camp has no intention of staging "unmoderated debates" and that fact just didn't make the papers. We really don't know yet.

What we do know, however, is that somebody at McCain's HQ was nervously unhinged enough to propose such a thing, and that in itself is exceedingly marvelous.

They must be worried in Arizona.

If I were handling a candidate like, oh, let's say, Senator John McCain -- a candidate with a penchant for saying incomparably stupid things off the cuff and losing his famous temper whenever control of the situation is lost -- the last bloody thought I would ever entertain is that of propping him up on a stage for two or three months against a gleaming, handsome young intellectual and letting him rip extemporaneously. There would not be enough scotch, Valium and unfiltered cigarettes to see me through such a season.

Unless, that is, I had just spent the last few days poring over some excruciatingly painful polling results that left me -- and my candidate -- with absolutely no choice. It's either risk it, or watch the numbers go a little farther south with each passing day.

I won't play the age card. As far as I know, John McCain's mental faculties are all in working order. It's just that those faculties have never seemed to work that well -- not that the accumulating years have had any noticeable, unwanted accumulated effect. He's always had a big, uncontrolled mouth that spouts the most curiously unthoughtful things, which only now a lot of people are increasingly taking note of.

He doesn't need John Hagee, for he is, in many ways, his own Jeremiah Wright.

And may God grant us the enticing opportunity to watch him in unmoderated, uncontrolled, unscripted action, all summer long. It is this, I imagine, that Obama was thinking when he responded that it's "a great idea."

Please respond to P.M.'s commentary by leaving comments below and sharing them with the BuzzFlash community. For personal questions or comments you can contact him at fifthcolumnistmail@gmail.com

THE FIFTH COLUMNIST by P.M. Carpenter

Login or register to post comments
Printer-friendly version

john "THE REPUBLICAN" mccain

Submitted by codypup on Tue, 05/13/2008 - 6:05am.

BY THE WAY… THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO REFER TO THE GOP CANDIDATE… WHICH IS PROVEN TO PISS OFF HIS HANDLERS… SO PLEASE JOIN ME….. link the man to the party JOHN “THE REPUBLICAN” MCCAIN JOHN “THE REPUBLICAN” MCCAIN JOHN “THE REPUBLICAN” MCCAIN JOHN “THE REPUBLICAN” MCCAIN JOHN “THE REPUBLICAN” MCCAIN JOHN “THE REPUBLICAN” MCCAIN JOHN “THE REPUBLICAN” MCCAIN JOHN “THE REPUBLICAN” MCCAIN JOHN “THE REPUBLICAN” MCCAIN JOHN “THE REPUBLICAN” MCCAIN JOHN “THE REPUBLICAN” MCCAIN

Obama-McCain Debates

Submitted by republicanSScareme on Tue, 05/13/2008 - 4:48am.

I'm expecting a lot of humor out of these debates. I feel pretty sure that John won't let us down. "My friends, let me start by saying I have no friends. It's the price of being a maverick."

Get Homeland Security

Submitted by bettysdad on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 11:00pm.

McCain will have to submit to a strip search before any debate to make sure he's not wired for brains.

Be cool

Submitted by subhuti on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 10:15pm.

While it is true that a Harvard graduate who finished near the top of his class and was the editor of a campus magazine (Obama) would be in a far better position to trounce a guy who finished near the bottom of his class (McCain)and went on to be a second rate pilot that got shot down, might it be more prudent for Obama to be rather more coy? If Obama heartily agrees, the McCain crew might realize what could happen to their candidate. No --the better way for McCain to win would be to get the backing of a major international banker, who could pull some behind the scenes strings, someone, like, say, a Rothschild. That plus some rigged voting machines would do wonders for McCain's campaign that debates of any kind could not. But wait, didn't McCain have a major fundraising event sponsored by a Rothschild in London, and isn't Diebold still controlled by Republicans?

Excuse me?

Submitted by bettysdad on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 10:57pm.

The Harvard Law Review is not a "campus magazine."

Sorry

Submitted by subhuti on Tue, 05/13/2008 - 1:33am.

I knew it was something prestigious, but forgot the name, and didn't want to overstate the case. Thanks for clarifying that point. Jeesh. If I were McCain, I'd be scared shitless. Did you see how Obama disposed of a recent criticism by McCain. "He has lost his bearings". Ouch.

Amen P.M.

Submitted by hazmaq on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 9:41pm.

The Right is going to find that their boastful days of "Bring it On" bravado will most likely end up with a once respected old war horse being trucked out to a glue factory by his own party.

McCain's sense of the world has come not from free reigning interests and a varied background but through the narrow minded visions of one political party, for close to three decades.
He doesn't have any where near the world visions and educational experiences Obama has. Clinton has little knowledge of them either, for that matter.
A perfect example of McCains minimal abilities came in a speech he just gave at some University in North Carolina -about judges and judicial activism. With him was Theodore Olsen, the previous Solicitor General.
No one should doubt Olsen's brilliance, but Mccain gave such a terrible performance/interpretation of a speech obviously written by one with Olsen's background on a topic he had little inside knowledge of.
Quoting incendiary bits of a few cases, out of thousands, it was easy to spot that had you quizzed him on what he just said -he'd have flunked.

Obama -with that big smile and the class to match, will twist John McCain into a little pony, right before your eyes.

Nationalism is not terrorism. And an adversary is not an enemy.

Yeah, McCain was already as

Submitted by Barry Schwartz on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 3:41pm.

Yeah, McCain was already as stable as a mousetrap. BTW spelling flame: poring over :)

HILLARY VS MCCAIN.... A GOP WET-DREAM...

Submitted by codypup on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 12:48pm.

HILLARY VS MCCAIN IS THE BEST WAY TO ACTIVATE THE GOP BASE... THERE IS NO "REAL" POLL THAT THINKS MCCAIN HAS A CHANCE -----CHECK OUT EVERY ELECTION COMING UP... ................THE GOP IS SINKING IN THE SEA... AND SOMEONE JUST THREW THEM AN ANCHOR... JOHN "THE REPUBLICAN" MCCAIN IT WILL BE OBAMA VS MCCAIN... AND MCCAIN HAS A SLIGHTLY BETTER CHANCE OF BEING THE NEXT PRESIDENT THAN I DO...

McCain his own Wright...

Submitted by Will B on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 12:43pm.

...Brilliant! McCain will become unglued as the press turns its light on him this summer/fall. And then his wife....she's gonna be pestered about that $100,000,000 Bud distribution estate and her taxes...Oh man, someone open a cold one for Johnny-boy!

Please don't insult Wright

Submitted by subhuti on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 10:17pm.

Please don't insult Wright by comparing him with McCain.

ccAdvertising???

Submitted by robgo2 on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 9:32am.

Who are these guys? For whom do they work, and what is their agenda? When paired off in a face-to-face debate, the difference between Obama and McCain will be so stark that it will take divine intervention for the more senior candidate to win. And speaking of age, I have seen instances that make me wonder if McCain has mild cognitive impairment, i.e. early dementia. It is very subtle at this point but something to watch for. It isn't ageism to insist that our president have all his cognitive skills intact.

Obama has a problem in lack

Submitted by Barry Schwartz on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 3:49pm.

Obama has a problem in lack of terseness, so I am not as confident as I would like to be about Obama's debating.

Googled ccAdertising and

Submitted by Juli in Jax on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 9:47am.

Googled ccAdertising and found this about push polling, Grover Norquist and others who play foul: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/15/21858/902

Obama/McCain debates

Submitted by Juli in Jax on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 9:25am.

The spin will be in force, no matter how the debates are set up. Whatever happened to the good old League of Women Voters moderated debates? And why not debates in which each debate is limited to a single topic, such as foreign policy, or energy independence? Too good to be true, but it is what would allow the electorate to really evaluate the candidates. As to the ccAdvertising polls, isn't that part of the Clinton Coalition? Sad to see the denial still running so strongly in these folks. Fear makes for poor judgement, and fear of change is the most common denominator amongst those determined to prove that Obama is "unelectable". Look into your hearts and re-discover your aspirations for this Nation. It might help to counteract the FEAR.

The spin is in the post-debate commentary

Submitted by cagey on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 11:51am.

The TV pundits will be ready with post-debate spin no matter what happens during the actual debate. The "experts" will tell us what happened and what to think about it.

Post-debate spin

Submitted by robgo2 on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 2:25pm.

You are correct regarding the spin applied by various commentators. I remember listening to David Brooks, a supposedly reasonable conservative, comment on one of the presidential debates in 2004. The very first words out of Brook's mouth were: "President Bush clearly won." This, despite the fact that the only thing Bush won that evening was his ongoing battle with total incoherence. It was a temporary triumph, to be sure, but to say that the empty-headed sack of protoplasm that is George W. Bush actually "won" the debate has to be one of the great exagerrations in the history of American politics. The good news is that this time around the American public seem to be awakening to the fact that they have been spun nearly to death by pundits, consultants and PR hacks with the result being the mess that now engulfs the nation. I hope this means that people are now less susceptible to toxic spin and that they will start thinking critically for a change.

League of Women Vovers debates

Submitted by Tahoe Progressive on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 10:19am.

This is the correct venue that is best to meet the nations needs. Let's get back to them. Media run events are more interested in generating revenue for the host network and showcasing personalities. LWV debates would provide an unbiased forum for voters to judge the qualifications of the candidates.

Polls showing Clinton better than Obama against McCain

Submitted by jeffreycslade on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 8:23am.

What is the ccAdvertising data base? What reason is there to believe that it replicates the actual voting public?

Wire him up

Submitted by GOPHater on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 8:07am.

The McCain handlers had better borrow the wire Bush used in the debates with Kerry: http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/10/29/bulge/index.html

MANY POLLS SHOW McCAIN DEFEATING OBAMA

Submitted by BBF on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 7:41am.

From May 1, 2008 through May 5, 2008, ccAdvertising completed a survey to a combined total of 90,000 homes in California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania (10,000 homes from each state) extracted from the ccAdvertising database.

This survey compared John McCain, the presumptive Republican Nominee for President against Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, the final contestants in the race for the Democrat nomination for President. Combined results from respondents to this survey show:

John McCain Versus Hillary Clinton:

John McCain = 40.98%
Hillary Clinton = 42.04%
No Preference = 16.98%

John McCain Versus Barack Obama:

John McCain = 45.90%
Barack Obama = 40.42%
No Preference = 13.68%

In Summary:

John McCain is winning the popular vote against Barack Obama in the states targeted in this survey by 5.48%. Hillary Clinton is winning the popular vote against John McCain in the states targeted in this survey by 1.06%.

When it is John McCain versus Hillary Clinton, John McCain wins 4 states (CO, FL, IL, and NH), with Hillary Clinton winning 5 states (CA, MO, NY, OH and PA). When it is John McCain versus Barack Obama, John McCain wins 6 states (CO, FL, MO, NH, OH and PA) with Barack Obama winning 3 states (CA, IL, and NY).

If Barack Obama is the Democrat Nominee the following changes occur in the State by State results:

California changes from a Hillary Clinton victory over John McCain by 15.82% to a Barack Obama victory over McCain by 12.88%. This is a 2.94% move to McCain.

Colorado changes from a John McCain victory over Hillary Clinton by 5.44% to a John McCain victory by 1.98%. This is a 3.46% move to Obama.

Florida changes from an 11.46% margin of victory for John McCain to a 25.52% margin for John McCain. This is a 14.06% move to McCain.

Illinois changes from a John McCain victory over Hillary Clinton by 2.29% to a Barack Obama victory over John McCain by 9.23%. This is an 11.52% move to Obama.

Missouri changes from a Hillary Clinton victory over John McCain by 3.97% to a John McCain victory over Barack Obama by 10.61%. This is a 14.58% move to McCain.

New Hampshire changes from a John McCain victory over Hillary Clinton by 5.90% to a John McCain victory over Barack Obama by 6.67%. This is a 0.77% move to McCain.

New York changes from a Hillary Clinton victory over John McCain by 7.88% to a Barack Obama victory over John McCain by 1.31%. This is a 6.57% move to McCain.

Ohio changes from a Hillary Clinton victory over John McCain by 1.02% to a John McCain victory over Barack Obama by 18.18%. This is a 19.20% move to McCain.

Pennsylvania changes from a Hillary Clinton victory over John McCain by 7.51% to a John McCain victory over Barack Obama by 5.95%. This is a 13.46% move to McCain.
Posted by Bruce E. Hawkins at 1:21 PM
Labels: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain

Seems like the Democrats might stand a much better chance of winning the Presidency with Hillary Clinton as the nominee. Evidently, most recent polls show a selection of Obama will mean another defeat. But then, the Democrats have not been known lately for pursuing winning strategies since the last Clinton won the White House!

blah blah blah

Submitted by Fnygy on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 10:12am.

I'm so sick of reading polls about a hypothetical election. The early polls for the Democratic (NOT Democrat!) Primary were so far in Mrs. Clinton's favor as to make it seem silly for anybody else to run. Then Mr. Obama campaigned against her and everything was different. I believe Mr. Obama will take on McCain in like fashion. However, by all means continue to underestimate Obama. Perhaps it will do for Democrats what underestimating Reagan did for Republicans.

yup...

Submitted by Will B on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 12:54pm.

...if polls conducted in early December 2007 were correct, it would be a Hillary / Rudolf contest today. So give it a break already. Besides, there are many polls saying the opposite and putting Barack in front of McCain. Are you kidding, Barack shows up and there are 20,000 cheering supporters, McCain shows up and the boisterous rally can't fill a Dennys. One thing is for certain, there is 15 years worth of conservative animosity built up over Hillary and that cannot be matched by anyone else in American politics (except Bill). Add to that a new crop of former Hillary sympathizers and you've got a certain looser.

Gigantic problem with using current polling

Submitted by kivals on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 8:34am.

There is one glaring problem with using current polling. The right wing attack machine has done all it can to bring down Obama's numbers but has not laid a glove on Hillary. Why? Because they want her to win the nomination because they have a decade's worth of material they are salivating over. Republican propagandists fantasize over a Hillary nomination and are waiting for it with bated breath. She could expect the greatest political shitstorm in US history. There would be a rehashing of Whitewater, Rose law firm, "elitist" claim that she is above "baking cookies," failed health care, travelgate firings, Foster suicide, MONICA, Paula Jones, Bill's other women problems and allegations of rape and sexual harassment, "vast right-wing conspiracy" claims, and what the meaning of "IS" is. Then we would see more in-depth right-wing probing into the radical Wellesley Hillary, the Hillary who took a summer job at a communist law firm, and the Hillary who at first wouldn't change her name to Clinton. Then we get to the real meat of the attacks, including allegations regarding Bill's donors for his library and Hillary's campaign donors and improprieties, Hillary's inconsistent statements regarding NAFTA and her trade positions being inconsistent with her allies at the DLC (including her husband),Bill's affairs in the last few years, allegations and innuendo regarding Hillary lesbian affairs, past and present, and of course endless replay of the Bosnia sniper story. If the Democrats were somehow foolish enough to let Hillary have the nomination, they would soon come to regret it. As it is highly unlikely she could keep her poll numbers above 40 percent, and very probable that large numbers of African American voters would stay home, not only would she be defeated in one of the greatest landslides in US presidential election history, but it is possible the Republicans could retake Congress, even though the public detests the Republican Congress. In that way, Hillary is a potential miracle worker, and that is about the only nice thing I can say about her.

Spot on

Submitted by Will B on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 1:03pm.

Add to your list all us dis-affected white 'egghead's Obama backers - a major part of the progressive base. I suspect there would be a party revolt if Hillary won since the only way for her to do it would be by reversing the popular election, total pledged delegates, and party rules in a convention back room. Against Hillary, McCain could vacation in Barbados for 6 months and still win!

These "polls"

Submitted by jeffreycslade on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 8:25am.

What is the "ccAdvertising database"? Is it statistically comparable to the universe of likely votes in the general election?

Rewind and Replay

Submitted by vtjozef on Mon, 05/12/2008 - 6:59am.

Ahuh. Then there was the intellect of Al Gore versus the "intelligence" of G.W. Bush. A couple incidences of hidden mikes on G.W. and presto, Al comes off as a pompous, arrogant prof type suppressing the "common sense" wisdom and folkiness of the "average voter". This time around we will have the empty suit, inexperienced, non-vet, Obama, with no great experience up against a career politician with again, a facade of every man. McCain won't be saying things off the cuff. Off the ear piece maybe, but not off the cuff. As for "god" granting "us the enticing opportunity to watch him in unmoderated, uncontrolled, unscripted action", well now such fairy tales don't exist. Then again, Obama did say that we always wanted to be "an instrument of God's will". Great huh!? I'd prefer he be an instrument of the U.S. Constitution.

Get FREE BuzzFlash News Alerts

User login