Wednesday, October 8, 2008

The Not-So-Great Debate

Last night's "Townhall" debate seemed anything but. McCain was flat and repetitive. Obama was less flat but pretty much repeated what he said in the first debate. All the questions were so scripted and all the answers so rehearsed that they seemed robotic.

There was no spontaneity. The lack of it was summed up at the very end when moderator Tom Brokaw had to ask both candidates to move so he could read his final comments off his teleprompter.

In all, it was a win for Obama. Being ahead in the polls he was the one who had the most to lose. But he was his cool, smooth usual self.

There were no major gaffes. Obama had one amusing malapropism. Rhetorically responding to the McCain charge that he was inexperienced, he called himself "green behind the ears."

His job was to make fence-sitting voters more comfortable with the prospect of an Obama presidency. That it wouldn't be the risk the McCain campaign has suggested. Once again, Obama succeeded on that score. He manages to sound quite moderate despite his very liberal voting record.

It's hard to believe either candidate is equipped to handle what they're going to face when one of them takes office in January. If the markets don't settle down by then, they certain won't react well to the billions in new taxes and spending proposed by an Obama Administration and a Democratic Congress. The likelihood that the "party of government" will make economic matters worse is very real.

Both candidates are proposing "change" and the American people say that's what they want. Change is coming, and the American people are about to get it, good and hard.


Blogger steve mcdonald said...

I didn't watch the debate last night and I make no apologies for doing so. I have become sick of everything presidential campaign-related since 2006 and I'm disappointed that in this "biggest election in a generation" the race boils down to two candidates totally unqualified for the position and - let's be honest, not ready to attack these financial woes. Take your pick, roll the dice, vote for me (Hell, I got 6 votes from Fraternity Brothers in 2000), do whatever you want - nothing can convince me that the right man/woman will enter the office in January.

In fact, going back to last year's primary debates and knowing the recession burdens - the only candidate I can think of who would have been qualified and possibly competent in tackling our financial woes would have been Mitt Romney. (Honest Disclaimer - I didn't support him nor did I have any interest in his campaign).

I'm giving my honest prediction of the outcome and next few years in the political world - I'm not using any kind of bias here - I'm basing it strictly on history and what I see in this country's make-up of politicsl tastes:

1) Obama wins the election in November - I have no idea how many EV's but he takes it.

2) Obama's first term will include replacement of two supreme court justices - John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Stevens will retire in 1Q or 2Q 2009, Ginsburg towards 2011 or 2012. Obama will appoint two left leaning justices to replace two presently left-leaning justices (And give him credit, he won't take a Harriet Miers approach)

3)2009 and at least half of 2010 becomes a 'government shock' to our system as an extreme liberal takes over for an extreme conservative. All wheels turning fast to the right are quickly halted in order to start turning fast to the left.

4)Red-State/Blue-State continues for another four years as unrest in red states grows from blue's control over the executive and legislative branches. Laugh at me if you will - but Fox New Channel viewership grows again (And they finally go HD despite Bill O'Reilly's arguement not to - his acne scarred face is exposed to all)

5) Mid-term elections in 2010 garner major interest, similar to 2006 as the GOP makes gains over the growing unrest. I don't know if two years is enough time, but there's a potential for taking either the house or Senate - I'm gaging that the house is more likely. GOP leaders attempt "contract with america 2"

6) Obama faces no primary challengers in 2012, although a second "draft hillary" movement gets attention. Republicans nominate Governor ? of the great state of ??.

7) I'm not going to give my prediction of what happens economically because we're in trouble no matter who takes the oath of office. My first suggestion is that we stop paying foreigners to produce our energy - which we should have done 10-15 years ago. Drill now to become self-sufficient so we can bridge the technology gap. However, this alone won't do it for us.

Gil, here's hoping this blog makes its way back to local news soon. I miss complaining about issues in Media.


October 8, 2008 at 9:07 AM 
Anonymous Bob said...

Gil - You said "Change is coming, and the American people are about to get it, good and hard. Thats a rather general statement. You want to be more specific?

October 8, 2008 at 9:19 AM 
Blogger Spencerblog said...

No. Maybe later

October 8, 2008 at 9:23 AM 
Anonymous realclear said...

InTrade Market has the odds around 75% Obama, 25% McCain. More specific numbers will be available Nov 5th.

October 8, 2008 at 11:24 AM 
Anonymous r said...

Clearly not all "change" is good.
And change for change's sake rarely is.
Sometimes change ends up making you long for the past.

October 8, 2008 at 12:11 PM 
Anonymous Jonas said...

I gotta say I agree with Steve on this one... I'll only add I think there will be a huge GOP shift in 2010 as we will still be in Iraq (told we'd be out in 2006 election) and 95% of American's won't see a tax cut (a la Bill Clinton - only difference is the stock market isn't showing 20% returns to make people forget about the lack of a tax cut).

Then in 2012, Obama will not win re-election as his healthcare plan starts causing deficits, he doesn't "cut" spending, invades Pakistan (which turns them to rely on Russia) and doesn't get Bin Ladin, and his radical thesis regarding Russian WMDs comes out disgusting most Americans.

Americans finally get smart in the next 4 years and see many points about Obama:

1. he had very average grades at Columbia (never should have been accepted if he wasn't a minority)
2. he really did nothing at Harvard Law other than get in by using his billionaire Saudi friend (isn't W the oil tycoon?)
3. his (and Biden's) causes to invade a foreign nation (genocide) are documented with Iraq and make any notion that the Iraqi war was insane mute
4. Israel is attacked and Obama sits idly by and we lose trust with one of our greatest allies

And at some point someone will realize that Archmere is one of the most prestigous ($$$ wise) high schools in the east coast. Joe Biden attended Archmere with no financial aid. He'll be shown for the scam artist (I see Joe at Katie's restaurant every Sunday morning eating a bunch of cr*p for breakfast) that he is.

October 8, 2008 at 6:21 PM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home