Fresh from the debate

The second presidential debate took place this evening at Belmont University in Nashville, Tennesee. The town-hall style debate seemed to work better for McCain, although there were good points and jabs towards the opponent made by both sides. The most talked about issue during this debate was the economy, followed by healthcare, and foreign policy towards the end.

There was a lot of underlying cynicism within the questions that were asked by the people. Many were upset by the economy and confused as to what would be done in the next administration. The town-hall meeting format made the debate more interesting, however I feel that it was poorly moderated and both candidates should have followed the rules and time-guidelines. As I watched the debate at the Debate Watch at West Virginia Wesleyan College, there were varying reactions to both candidates.

Key points that might arise in the analysis of the debate in the following days:
- Obama : "I am confident in the economy"
---- Isn't this the same as the "fundamentals of the economy are strong"?

- McCain: Nailing down Obama's policies is like nailing jello to a wall

- McCain: I'll answer the question
---- Yes, please, no one seemed to understand how to answer a question.

- Obama: Senator McCain mentions that for the past 30 years Congress hasn't done anything on environmental issues... but he's been there for 26 years.
---- I have to admit that this was a good jab towards McCain.

- McCain: hair plugs
----I mean, really?

- The Last Question: What don't you know and how would you learn it?
---- This could have potentially been a very good question but apparently, neither have anything to learn.

Let's call it a week

The news topics on New York Times this week seemed to revolve around the Palin and Biden Debate that took place this past Thursday. Although most of the articles touched on this debate, here's my take on the top five objects.

The vice presidential debate was the main object this week. Everything from the days that led up to it, to the analysis afterward, the news dictated that this was the debate to watch. Overall, I felt that the debate seemed very guarded from both sides. Both the Democrats and the Republicans were playing it safe but they were not afraid to throw some tough hits towards their opponents. I don't think that this will be an issue in the coming week(s).

The second presidential debate is big news at Wesleyan and at the New York Times. There are already those anticipating the debate. Wesleyan prepares for it through the Debate Watch, and there are already articles talking about the debate. My guess is that on Monday and Tuesday mornings, NY Times articles will be saying something like this: although McCain's ratings are going down, expect him to come back strong. They will be lowering expectations for Obama and raising expectations for McCain.

Among other issues that have been and will continue to be discussed will be the economy and other issues that might be debated on. Today another issue that was brought back to the front, that being the Iraq War and what would happen if each was elected. Another topic that will probably be discussed more is the potential nominations of a new member of the Supreme Court by the new president.

So as a recap: 1) Vice-Presidential Debate 2) Second Presidential Debate 3) Economy 4) Iraq War and 5) Supreme Court nominations

Palin/Biden debate Assessment

Accessed October 3 at 9:00pm

On the politics home page of the New York Times this evening, the three top stories were all about the vice-presidential debate last night. Their analysis of the debate was exactly as expected; according to them, Biden won the debate.

The language of the article frames the analysis in a way that is not completely partisan, but it portrays Biden as a sharp speaker even though he tends to be mistake-prone. Although Palin did not make any mistakes as remarkable as her interview with Katie Couric... it was still evident that she was avoiding direct answers to some questions. But she should be the least of the McCain's campaign's problems, according the New York Times. Obama has a five to six point lead in many of the toss-up states. The next debate is on this coming Tuesday. My hope is that McCain can start to turn it around after his warm-up last week.

Palin's great challenge

On Thursday Palin will face the biggest test of her vice-presidential candidacy with the vice-presidential debate, and I am scared. Through her interviews in the past weeks, it has become obvious that Palin does not do well under that type of pressure. She will absolutely have to perform well in this debate in order to still be considered a viable candidate.

This article does not forget to mention her helpless interview with Katie Couric and the Saturday Night Live parody that went along with it. Although I am terribly worried as a Republican, the New York Times could potentially be helping the Republican ticket, if not intentionally. Just as I stated before the first presidential debate, they were lowering expectations for Obama. Could it be that they are trying to criticize Palin, but at the same time unintentionally lowering her expectations? I think so, yes. At the same time, NY Times states that Palin has presented a "question mark" that she will have to entirely erase at the debate and that could prove a very lofty expectation. Not only that but she will have to present herself in a way that does not seem too over rehearsed or scripted.

This week's wrap-up

The news topics on the New York Times this week focused on this past Friday's debate. The Debate was at the University of Mississippi between McCain and Obama. The news revolved on everything surrounding the debate: who was or wasn't coming, what would be discussed (the designated foreign policy, or the economy), and who would win. Directly after the main debate, there was news titled "the debate" on who won the debate. I believe that the issue is going to shift in the next coming week to the next upcoming debate.

I haven't heard anyone talk about the debate, other than within my Election class. A few friends have mentioned it, but other than that, there was no discussion about it. This could reflect on the perception of importance of the debate. If people do not think that the debates are important, it could change the entire campaign strategies. However, I think that there will be more discussion on how well each candidate did rather than the anticipation of each debate. Overall the top issues being discussed by the NY Times this week were: 1)The Debate 2)McCain's presence at the debate 3)Economy 4)Bush's speech 5)Controversial Ads.

The Debate is on...

Debate or no debate? That was the question all week. The New York Times top story this morning was that Senator John McCain stated that he will participate in the first presidential debate tonight, instead of postponing it to participate in the negotiations of the $700 billion bailout plan. After a flurry of phone calls and rearranging schedules, both senators are expected to arrive at the University of Mississippi this afternoon. There is the continuation of constantly trying to lower viewer expectations. The reason for doing this is: when viewers watch, their satisfaction with that particular candidate can only raise, not disappoint.

The main coverage of the article , however, turned into Senator Obama's talk on how he is "optimistic" at the way the Congressional negotiations are going for the bailout of financial institutions. He stated that there has been a lot of real progress that has been made in the recent hours, and it is important to remain calm and just move forward. The McCain statement this morning also stated that he was "optimistic" and stated that there was "significant progress" being made.



However, the NYTimes was quick to point out that this statement was also critical of Obama, portraying him as partisan and not as concerned as McCain. The direct quote:
"The difference between Barack Obama and John McCain was apparent durinig the White House meeting yesterday where Barack Obama's priority was political posturing in his opening monologue defending the package as it stands...McCain listened to all sides so he could help focus the debate on finding a bipartisan resolution that is in the interest of taxpayers and homeowners."
The NY Times was spinning the issue to portray Senator John McCain as a player on the offense. Many times in politics, if a candidate is putting out ads and statements that are critical of his/her opponent it means that they are losing in the polls. The more that the NY Times portrays Obama as the victim in this case, the better chance he has at winning. However, the Obama campaign has to be very careful because if he doesn't do anything, it could look like he is a weak candidate or that he has something to hide.





*Picture was taken by Win McNamee/Getty Images and can be found at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/27/us/politics/27debatecnd.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Three Days Left

Accessed 9:15pm on September 23

There are three days left until the first debate between Senator Barack Obama and Senator John McCain and the battle is already heated. With the biggest economic crisis since the 1930s, economy is undoubtedly the top topic; however, this Friday's debate will talk about foreign policy, not the economy.

Not surprisingly, the topic being discussed was the upcoming debate. At first glance, the article was giving a lot of credit to McCain. The article noted him as very comfortable when talking about foreign policy. He is considered to be a great speaker and totally in his element when he speaks on this issue particularly. So this is good news for the conservatives, right? Wrong. This is a technique that is used during all presidential debate times. They are setting the expectations so high for McCain, that he can only fall below those expectations, causing his ratings to drop. All credit that was given to McCain is slyly being used against him. There is no doubt that there will be a similar article to this one somewhere in a conservative news source talking about Obama.