Debate Two Has a Clear Winner

The second presidential debate is over, and I’m happy to say that it had a clear winner – Tom Brokaw!  He spent a good portion of the evening point out that the candidates weren’t following the ridiculous rules their campaigns set up for the evening.  I hope the candidates were embarrassed enough to tell their handlers that micro-managing the debate formats is a waste of everyone’s time.

I doubt it’ll happen though.  Anyway, congratulations Mr. Brokaw – are you looking for a new job?

6 Thoughts

  1. McCain wasn’t being pleasant and friendly last night. He did everything to draw attention away from Obama to himself. He was trying to pull another Al Gore by getting up and walking around while Obama was speaking. What he hopes the public will perceive is the exact opposite of what they do perceive. He’s a man laughing on the outside;crying on the in.

  2. I’m not sure this has much to do with the actual post, but thanks for leaving a comment. Just to be clear for all my readers (all 6 of you), I’m not a “true believer” in any political party or candidate because no human political system can possibly embody the Kingdom of Heaven to which I’m bound.

    Having said that, I do agree that when the candidates actually managed to answer the questions put to them last night (which was rare), Sen. McCain didn’t look all the impressive. Though, lets be fair there, did anyone else catch the Palin-style, “I don’t want to answer that question” on the part of Sen. Obama last night? I half expected Tina Fey to jump out of the audience and shout, “Live from New York, it’s Saturday Night!”

  3. Senator McCain is in the hospital today after shooting himself in the foot. When you challenge your opponent to 10 debates in this format, you sure as heck better be on your best game. Obama was smart and didn’t respond to Mr. Brokaw. McCain started apologizing and saying “Please wave at me and I’ll pay attention.”

    Besides the fact that these debates are not meant to truly get anyone’s actual point across, but only to say, “like me best”. The idea that someone’s foreign or domestic policy can be spoken in 2 minutes is beyond laughable.

    For the third and final debate, I think they should both be in glass boxes where the moderator can turn off their mic. (Kinda like that gameshow 21) But they should each get 15 minutes to talk on a given subject and not be limited by anything. Then, whomever the audiance judges to be the winner, the winner gets to murder and eat one of the losers children, cause thats what politicans do anyhow.

  4. I dunno, I was kinda happy with CNN as I ate lunch because one of the debate reviewers slammed both guys for completely ignoring the question (about how the current economic crisis is going to effect our ability to be peacemakers in the world). I actually saw a news pundit show some backbone – he refused to give marks and said that the question needs to keep being asked until they actually answer.

  5. I’d have to disagree with Matt. I think that the candidates did nothing but get their views across. It was little more than a talking-point-fest. I felt like I was watching an hour-an-a-half of political commercials.

    What you didn’t see was true debate, true interaction between their ideas. Not that it matters much: the real debate won’t be between Obama and McCain, but between either of them and the new Congress. That’s where the real debate will lie.

    However, I do like Matt’s idea for the third debate. But perhaps we could just leave both the mics off the whole time? It would be fun to see what their reactions would be when they realize that no one can hear what they’re saying. It might finally give us some insight into how they would react under pressure.

  6. Did anyone stick around long enough afterward to hear the muffled mic remarks from Tom (at least I think it was him)? He was complaining (to someone) about the candidates’ inability to stick to the time limits. Calvin and I were rolling.

Comments are closed.