3rd McCain-Obama Debate 15 October

Black Swan

The last debate for the 2008 presidential election between McCain and Obama will be held:

• Date: 15 October 2008
• Time: 9.00PM EST (2.00AM 16 October Ireland)
• Venue: Hofstra University
• City: Hempstead, New York
• Moderator: Bob Schieffer, CBS News
• Topic: Domestic and Economic Issues
• Staging: Candidates will be seated at a table; audience will not participate and remain quiet during the proceedings
• Answer Format: The debate will be broken into nine, 9-minute segments. The moderator will introduce a topic and allow each candidate 2 minutes to comment. After these initial answers, the moderator will facilitate an open discussion of the topic for the remaining 5 minutes, ensuring that both candidates receive an equal amount of time to comment
• Closing Statements: At the end of this debate (only) each candidate shall have the opportunity for a 90 second closing statement.

Moderator background: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Schieffer

If you were coaching McCain or Obama, what would you suggest that they need to accomplish during this final debate? What points? How to present themselves to the telly audience?

Sources: http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/10/06/america/debates.php
http://www.youdecide2008.com/2008/08/21/official-2008-obama-mccain-presidential-debate-schedule-vice-palin-biden/

yaynay

I would suggest that McCain needs to loosen up a bit, in the 2nd debate he is too wooden and he needs to be more fluent with his language.

Otacon

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

If you were coaching McCain or Obama, what would you suggest that they need to accomplish during this final debate? What points? How to present themselves to the telly audience?

Obama needs to keep the focus on the economy. I thought he gave a brilliant explanation of what exactly the bail-out plan entailed and how it would/could benefit the taxpayer, better than Bush had ever done.

He may also benefit from attacking McCain's voting record on reducing regulations and tax-breaks.

If McCain can successfully distance himself from Bush, he may still have a chance.

He cannot avoid talking about the economy right now, so perhaps more details on his economic plans, especially his proposed buy-out of mortgage debts, would help clarify his position to the public.

His negative attacks, when looked at at this stage in the election, seem desperate. He needs to focus on the economy, as he appears to be running from it.

Overheal

McCain needs to focus on what he plans to do in office, not why we shouldn't vote for Obama. After all I dont want to vote for someone just because I dont want to vote for the other guy.

Our man in Havana

Vote for Ralph Nader instead so.

BenjAii

Economy, economy, economy - this all plays to Obamas advantages, especially as the current financial collapse is likely to be getting worse through October.

McCains only good idea economically in the last debate was the idea of buying distressed mortgages and selling them to homeowners at current market values of their properties.

He will badly need to pull a few more rabbits out of hats like that; but somehow I doubt it.

Black Swan

BenjAii wrote: »

McCains only good idea economically in the last debate was the idea of buying distressed mortgages and selling them to homeowners at current market values of their properties.

It sounded great, but he provided no details on what it would cost, or how he expected to pay for it during the 2nd debate? Will he pull out the federal credit card and charge it to the historically high federal deficit, which has now passed $10 trillion? Will he borrow it from the Social Security fund, increasing the likelihood that this programme will go bust sooner, impoverishing many people in their retirement years?

I am also getting very tired of the "good guy McCain, bad guy Palin" ploy of this political platform. Are there sufficient numbers of American voters ignorant enough to go for this obvious ploy to justify losing other, more intelligent voters who can see through it?

McCain and Palin need to stop wasting their time (and ours) attacking Obama, and start providing details on how they can help pull America out of this economic meltdown. Strong, informed, positive, and proactive details, details, details, not weak, negative, reactive, character attacking slurs, slurs, slurs.

Ludo

BenjAii wrote: »

McCains only good idea economically in the last debate was the idea of buying distressed mortgages and selling them to homeowners at current market values of their properties.

And that new policy has got him in trouble with quite a few republicans (the base) as "bailing out" individuals is against everything they stand for...some of the are NOT happy about it.

is_that_so

Not being happy doesn't necessarily make it bad. These are extraordinary times and a potential policy like that gives him scope to make a case, although it needs to be a very, very good one. I also think it's an interesting idea and one of the few lately that hasn't involved digging up the past or digging at the opponent. It also shows that he is trying to change his game plan and is at least attempting to come up with solutions for the economy. At this stage it is looking like occupying most of the next Presidency.

Ludo

But isn't helping out individual homeowners who are in trouble exactly what Obama has been saying needs to be done on top of the wall street bail out for the last few weeks?

I know I heard Obama say it numerous times so for McCain to come out with that plan seems to indicate he agrees with Obama...I wonder will McCain admit to agreeing with Obama as Mccain seems to see agreeing with someone as a sign of weakness (ads he ran after the first debate!!!).

is_that_so

Obama has not really come out with anything more than "we need to help Main Street". He has also been disinclined to say what policies he will have to cut or abandon, no more than McCain. A policy like this at least has an actual cost.

BenjAii

Is it not beyond the bounds of reasons that the dopey financial institutions that gave people these loans they could never afford to pay, might be the ones to take the hit ?

Yeah, what am i thinking; like that would happen, it would be the taxpayers.

is_that_so

Taxpayers are being hit anyway. A plan/policy of this type with a price tag is far easier to understand for an average voter than the merits of central bank intervention/Paulson's plan or any other type of plan will do. It's populist but it shows he is not afraid to/was forced to change focus. Whether it flies is another question but for Joe Six Pack it is something they are more likely to understand.

Black Swan

With McCain still lagging behind in the polls, does anyone expect him to "take the gloves off" in the final debate?

bobbyjoe

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

With McCain still lagging behind in the polls, does anyone expect him to "take the gloves off" in the final debate?

I hope so they have been pretty boring so far. Obama should wind him up as much as possible beforehand. McCain has a famous temper make him lose it live on tv.

Black Swan

The bipartisan committee today reported that Palin abused her power as governor when firing Alaska's Commissioner of Public Safety as the result of a family domestic divorce dispute (child custody) and related issues. If McCain in the final debate takes off the gloves and attacks Obama's character, will or should Obama address McCain's judgment regarding the selection of his running mate (Palin), or take the high road and continue to appear presidential? Or what?

Black Swan

Forthcoming 3rd presidential debate moderator Bob Schieffer states:
"By now we've all heard their talking points," he said. "We've heard the general outlines of what they are talking about. The time has come to be a little more specific."

Source: http://www.kansascity.com/402/story/837927.html

"It will not embarrass me, if they go off in a different direction, to say `excuse me, could you focus on the question that I just asked?'" he said.

Source: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gZKyRzfsLRRC55-YFZY0l9-iCKUAD93P2CJ00

Trojan

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

"It will not embarrass me, if they go off in a different direction, to say `excuse me, could you focus on the question that I just asked?'" he said.

Good stuff, we could do with a moderator that manages the debate properly.

GuanYin

ARRRGRGRGRRGRG!!

News outlets here currently discussing McCain's terminology when he said he will "whip Obama's ass" in the third debate.

Apparently using the word "whip" when referencing an african american is racist.

Why can't people just be sensible, no wonder policies and specifics never get discussed when news agencies are more concerned with this kinda sensationalizm over drilling the candidates until they give details on their plans. :mad:

Trojan

GuanYin wrote: »

news agencies are more concerned with this kinda sensationalizm over drilling the candidates until they give details on their plans

Boy, does that tick me off...

GuanYin

Trojan wrote: »

Boy, does that tick me off...

You're telling me.

If I didn't think Nader was a crackpot, I'd vote for him.

Overheal

http://www.cafepress.com/irregulargoods.9985019

Ludo

GuanYin wrote: »

News outlets here currently discussing McCain's terminology when he said he will "whip Obama's ass" in the third debate.

Apparently using the word "whip" when referencing an african american is racist.

LOL...that is mad. I still strongly support Obama after originally supporting McCain (at the start of the primaries) as it is not his fault that any of this crap comes out. Not McCains either of course although again he can be his worst enemy at times. He is running for President FFS...who talks about whipping someones ass in that regard...sounds like a loony teenager.

Hobbes

is_that_so wrote: »

Obama has not really come out with anything more than "we need to help Main Street". He has also been disinclined to say what policies he will have to cut or abandon, no more than McCain. A policy like this at least has an actual cost.

Pretty sure he has very detailed plans on his website.

yaynay

GuanYin wrote: »

ARRRGRGRGRRGRG!!
...
Apparently using the word "whip" when referencing an african american is racist.
...

It's a common turn of phrase, albeit not one that should be used by a Presidential candidate.

Scrutinizing an innocent comment to imply some sort of racist overtone is irresponsible of the media and could potentially incite violence.

Black Swan

"After I whip his you-know-what in this debate, we're going to be going out" and hitting the campaign trail, McCain said.

Source: http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/1008/McCain_promises_respectful_campaign_and_to_whip_his_you_know_what.html

It is a common expression Stateside, and I doubt that racial overtones were implied by McCain when he said it. It is undignified for a presidential candidate to say such things, even before staffers... something more appropriate for a pub night after a few pints and before the big football game airs on the telly?

It does evidence how degenerated this whole US presidential campaign has become in terms of how the media covers events, as well as other statements like this one said by candidates on the campaign trail before mobs that chant rather than think.

Ludo

All this media looking for racial slurs was bound to happen when the first black candidate is involved. Anything and everything said will be examined in these days of 24 hour news cycles and they have to come up with something to talk about.

I do not believe McCain is a racist or has any racism thoughts at all. He just needs to think a bit more before opening his mouth when he is under a spotlight like he is now. He must realise everything he says will be examined. It is not fair or proper but it is the way it is right now and he has to deal with that.

dub_skav

McCain being accused of racism here is very similar to Obama being accused of sexism for his "lipstick on a pig" comments.
Both used common expressions that were perhaps a little base to attempt to articulate a point.
I don't believe there was any malice or anything untoward by either man in those comments.

There will always be people looking to stir the pot and whip up a frenzy, thankfully they are in the minority and are usually ignored by those with more sense.

Love or hate McCain I hope that nobody seriously thinks he was making a reference to slavery.

Tom65

Obama needs to do more of what he did in the second debate - be clear about economics, make McCain look muddled and link him to the Bush administration. He has to make absolutely sure McCain doesn't out-do him on the economy. It's the reason he's winning at the moment and if McCain can show he's as capable (or even almost as capable) as Obama on economic matters, it'll be a big boost.

Obama, in explaining the bail out clearly last time, looked not only like he fully understood the complexities but also came across as presidential. I think at the beginning of the campaign (and the primaries), people had a difficult seeing Obama as president. The last two debates have gone a long way to project that image.

Ludo

dub_skav wrote: »

McCain being accused of racism here is very similar to Obama being accused of sexism for his "lipstick on a pig" comments.
Both used common expressions that were perhaps a little base to attempt to articulate a point.
I don't believe there was any malice or anything untoward by either man in those comments.

You do realise that Obama was repeating a line McCain used about one of Hillary Clintons policies when he mentioned the lipstick on a pig don't you? And then McCain went off and accused Obama of sexism...priceless.

is_that_so

Hobbes wrote: »

Pretty sure he has very detailed plans on his website.

Yep, for all the value they have now. In these last few weeks what is there will come second to what is actually in front of people. I have to say every time I hear yet another plan from Obama, the hapless Baldric and his cunning plans spring to mind. Plans built on quicksand serve no purpose. Neither Obama nor McCain have shown anything that could be remotely perceived as leadership in the current crisis, a crisis that will still be around come Jan 20th and one most likely to dominate the first 100 days of the Presidency and far beyond. If I were American I'd also be swinging towards none of the above.