No comments on the debate?
 

I missed it driving to STL to visit family.

It was interesting, but pretty much as expected. Factcheck.org had a nice summary of the "slips" (and sometimes outright lies) by both sides.

Obama had some good things to say, but as stupid as it sounds, I found his herky jerky delivery, really grating.
Yeah yeah, content over style, but it really got on my nerves. Maybe because I'm hearing impaired, but I found it hard to follow, with his points running together some times.

On the other hand, McCain was smooth as silk, and easy for me to determine, I didn't like what he was saying. :haha:

McCain didn't address Obama directly, or even look at him much. He was passionate and stressed his experience and Maverick Sheriffness. He was more personal and personable. He hit direct blows to Obama with "he just doesn't get it". Obama was very cool, perhaps too much so, trying not to be the angry black guy, or maybe the idea is to build a bit. He stayed even. I think he could have scored a punch highlighting McCain's impulsiveness and tying that stylistically to Bush's "gut". Both avoided the hardest questions, primarily how will you fund Medicare and Social security and the military?

The thing that always strikes me is when McCain talks about tax cuts for us commoners, he talks about loading even more money onto those with children.

As far as I can tell, Obama has not made us a subset of the middle class; perhaps for once someone will include those of us not fortunate enough to have children. We'd like a break from time to time, as well.

I didn't think much of it. McCain is way over there and Obama is way over on the other side. I'm standing in the middle and they are both outta reach to me.

Neither one said or did anything to appeal to me. McCain looked like McCain and Obama did the same ole too. I do think that all the pundits believe that Obama won the debates - for what thats worth.
Of course that is probably because his expectations are about on par with Palins..... very low. :shrug:

One funny thing is that I was getting the feeling that McCain was filibustering at just about exactly the time that Jim Lehrer said they were almost equal on time. I guess (for me, at least) McCain was better at seeming to dominate the discussion. Usually a good thing in a debate, but as Bruce said, not if you don't like what he's saying.

I listened to it on the radio. It was very civilized! They were both extremely courteous.

That sort of thing would never fly over here :P Can't have a political debate without blood on the carpet, for goodness' sake :P

We prefer internal bleeding. Believe me, there is plenty of stabbing going on!

Yeah, we leave the nasty remarks to "campaign representatives," so the politician can always claim a moral high ground.

It would be better if as in the old days we were limited to audio anyway.


haha so true!

Here's a link to an article describing Palin's debating style. It's written by a fellow who debated her several times. I think it's a pretty reasonable description of what I've seen so far and what may well happen tonight.

I have to keep in mind that many of the people watching will be persuaded more easily by the pathos and ethos presentation of the debaters than by the logos presentation. They're all valid, but I don't think they're all equally good indicators of a person's ability to govern.

He says she's the