Views expressed in guest columns do not necessarily reflect the views of Accuracy in Media.
Visit the complete Guest Column archives.
Presidential Debates Not Yet Definitive
Guest Column | By Paul M. Weyrich | September 29, 2008
I was among the
estimated 80 million who watched the entire debate last Friday evening. Who won?
There was no knock-out blow as some debates have produced in the past. I watch
these debates with a distinct disadvantage. I once coached debate. So I tend to
look for different things than the ordinary viewer. David Yepsen, the celebrated
political reporter of the Des
Moines Register, declared
Senator John Sidney McCain, III the winner. I would be hard-pressed to do
so.
At best this
debate was a draw. Senator Barack Hussein Obama reassured the public that he is
cool and collected and has a basic command of the issues. On the other hand,
Senator McCain succeeded in portraying Senator Obama as naïve on foreign policy.
NBC watched the debate with seven undecided voters. One voter who had leaned
toward Obama prior to the debate said he now leaned toward McCain. Likewise, a
woman voter who had leaned toward McCain now leaned toward Obama. But all of
them said they had not made up their minds and would require the next two
debates before doing so. That says it all. The debate resolved nothing. There
were few memorable lines.
Some observers
said McCain looked angry and criticized him for not looking at Obama. I didn’t
see it that way. I thought McCain was forceful. Other observers suggested that
Obama frequently was on the defensive. Again, I didn’t see it that way. He was
on offense as frequently as he was on defense, especially when he recited all of
the instances where McCain was supposedly wrong. It should be noted, however,
that Obama had to state that McCain was correct about an issue at least seven
times, whereas McCain never conceded any ground to
Obama.
Post-election
surveys indicate great interest in the debate. Frank Luntz, a pollster, surveyed
a group of 27 undecided voters. He said most voters leaned toward Obama at the
end of the debate because they felt Obama had greater passion than did McCain.
These voters felt that McCain looked tired. Again, I didn’t see it that way. I
thought McCain demonstrated a lot of
energy.
This debate
resolved almost nothing. It was supposed to be about foreign policy, but the
first 40 minutes pertained to the economy and the proposed bailout of Wall
Street. Since the bailout was not resolved at the time of the debate, what the
candidates said about it was not
definitive.
In the past,
the vast majority of Americans watched the first debate and far fewer watched
subsequent debates. I am not sure that will be the case this time. I think it is
likely that as many voters will watch the second and third debates as watched
this one precisely because so little was resolved by this debate. The
Vice-Presidential debate also will be watched widely because of the great
interest in Governor Sarah Heath Palin, of Alaska. People want to see how she does
against the experienced Senator Joseph R. (Joe) Biden, Jr., of Delaware. However, the
remaining two Presidential debates may well be decisive. Let us hope so. It is
likely to be a very close election. The final debates may well clarify things.
Paul Weyrich is Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.
© This column is the property of the Free Congress Foundation and may not be reproduced without their permission. For comments and inquiries, contact Phyllis E. Hughes at . Visit our website at http://www.FreeCongress.org.
Guest columns do not necessarily reflect the views of Accuracy in Media or its staff.
1 Comment | Post a Comment
September 30 at 6:38 pm | #1 | Link
Mr Weyrich, I agree - it was a draw at best. I also agree that the other two debates will be equally watched by the same numbers as the first. But I especially agree, that the Palin-Biden debate will really be watched - and may actually outdraw in watchers the Presidential debates.
It is interesting the conclusion of David Yepsen. Being from the old Democrat Party may be part of that. A left leaning paper, the Register, would normally stand in lock step with the party, and that Yepsen saw McCain as the winner, may signal that things in the Democrat party are irreversably damaged after their primaries, and the far left took control over the more moderate Clinton group. Yepsen has far more in common with liberal McCain, and the Clintons than he can ever have with Obama.