Town Square

Post a New Topic

Obama's Win Tonight : Well Done!

Original post made by samuel, Stanford, on Aug 16, 2008

I certainly do disagree with John McCain on some big issues, but tonight he was outstanding in ways Barack Obama is not and cannot be. McCain was substantive, clear, concise, and relaxed.
Obama seemed a bit nervous, some of his answers seemed contrived, and most of all it was clear that he is simply out of McCain's league when it comes to substance and experience.
Score it a big McCain night.

He should hope many, many voters were watching - more than the usual
CNN Saturday night crowd.

Without a doubt, the lowest moment of the night was Obama's smear of Clarence Thomas.
He, like Harry Reid, can't simply disagree with Thomas, he has to try to degrade him. On Obama's best day he can't hold a candle to Thomas's intelligence.
Obama can barely make it through a press conference and ducks town hall debates with McCain because of his inability to speak in complete sentences when pressed to show his much noted but usually absent brilliance.

That must have been some stressful vacation for Obama. Because he appears to have returned with lots of gray hair.

Comments (13)

Like this comment
Posted by meg
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Aug 16, 2008 at 7:41 pm

A fascinating night that gave us a peek at the fundamental contrast between these candidates.
They both were very good, but in entirely different ways. Obama was relaxed, reflective, polished, and conversational—truer to the spirit of the event.
McCain was energetic and forceful, but relied more on his favorite lines—treating it more like one of his townhall meetings (he had the advantage of an overwhelmingly friendly crowd).
Obama was every bit the impressive, likable young man.
McCain was the elder statesman telling his best stories.
Obama was fluid and comfortable talking about his faith.

McCain said the bare minimum about it.

But the starkest contrast came as soon as McCain started his half of the forum.
Asked the three people he would listen to as president, McCain said right off the bat Gen. Petraeus (Obama had led with his wife and grandmother).
It was an immediate signal that this is a man who is concerned first and foremost with matters of war and peace—just as you expect from someone who wants to be president of the United States.
Asked when he had bucked his party at risk to his self-interest, McCain rolled off his greatest hits, and went all the back to differing with Reagan on Lebanon (a reminder of how long he has been immersed in national-security issues).
It made Obama's answer about promoting an ethics law with McCain seem incredibly weak in comparison.
Then, McCain's answer about the toughest decision he had ever made—refusing early release in Vietnam—was riveting and moving.

In the first fifteen minutes, McCain had established a moral seriousness stemming from his conduct in Vietnam as a POW and his long-time as a national leader that Obama can't match.
Throughout the rest of the night, he brought up Iraq, al Qaeda, and the Georgia crisis, when Obama was more inward-looking.
McCain sounded like a potential commander-in-chief, Obama more like a potential friend.
This is not to say, again, that Obama was not impressive.
But the skills he showed tonight—the thoughtfulness and verbal dexterity—were those of a very talented memoirist, which, of course, he is.

As for the social issues, tonight should throw a damper on the notion that Obama is going to make major inroads among evangelicals voters.
Why would they vote for his social liberalism couched in exquisite equivocations, when they can vote for someone who agrees with them on most everything like John McCain?

Like this comment
Posted by Elect McCain????
a resident of another community
on Aug 16, 2008 at 8:22 pm

The question is do we want to elect a suicidal adulterer, whose wife has a drug problem and also plagiarizes other's writings (In case you do not know, I am referring to McCain) as president of the US???

Like this comment
Posted by kelly
a resident of Barron Park
on Aug 16, 2008 at 9:23 pm

I support Obama but his performance was not the best this evening, I do not know why exactly, he was his usual charming self but did not come across as commander in chief, I hope he can remedy this, but it he was not good coming out of the gate. I think the situation with Russia puts him at a disadvantage as he was AWOL and then pushing the UN debating approach , hopefully this will blow over but he comes across rather like Carter. He needs better handlers and PR. Clinton may still sink him in Denver, I am worried.

Like this comment
Posted by sue
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Aug 16, 2008 at 10:52 pm

both candidates did well, McClain gave a command performance, but as Obama's supporters are not traditional Christians and as he supports killing babies after birth he was at a disadvantage, he will do well in Palo Alto, Oakland SF etc so our voice for choice will be heard.

Like this comment
Posted by pam
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Aug 16, 2008 at 11:11 pm

bye bye barack,, and maybe a final goodbye to the effete progressive left wing of the democratic party - the ones that brought us a feckless dukakis, a crippled gore, a wussy kerry, and the flip-flopping pretender named obama

Like this comment
Posted by bike
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 16, 2008 at 11:35 pm

Obama initially sounded like the therapeutic high-school principal and his 'zero-tolerance' doctrine of moral equivalence as he expels both the victim and the bully; but his calls for UN solutions, talks with equally at fault parties, and apparent trust in the wisdom of the EU and the power of NATO may not just scare Eastern Europeans but even those 200,000 who deified him at Berlin.

That is a bit unfair, I mean despite his lack of support for Israel he has left his racist church after 20 years, that takes courage, McCain seems weak in comparison, torture and combat wounds do not compare to a battle with cocaine at Harvard, give the man a break.

Like this comment
Posted by an observer
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Aug 17, 2008 at 12:37 am

One of the most sad and confusing things going on is So Called Christians supporting wars, killing of vast numbers of innocent people and children that is going on. These Christians (??) we saw support McCain because he loves war, solving all world problems by going to war.

The Military Industrial Complex is his biggest supporter.

The current majority of News Media also loves war as they sell more newspapers, etc with wars going on.

If you love killing, war and can make millions of $$ off of it support McCain.

Like this comment
Posted by paul
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Aug 17, 2008 at 9:09 am

After listening to that forum - I’m not sure Obama knows what he believed. We weaved an wondered all around those questions.

McCain was direct and succinct in his answers. You might not agree with him - but at least you know where he stands. Obama remains an enigma.

Obama recalled a conversation he had with another senator who was giving him grief about working for the meal ban. The other Senator questioned to Obama, “What do you expect me to just start eating at McDonalds all the time?”

Obama recalled his response, “You get paid $160,000 a year, you can even afford Applebee's, you don’t even have to stoop so low as to eat at McDonalds.”

Some in the crowd were seen raising their eyebrows as Obama, the man who touts himself from the South Side of Chicago, critiqued the popular fast food chain.

Like this comment
Posted by sharon
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 17, 2008 at 1:51 pm

Mr. Obama said Justice Clarence Thomas "was not a strong enough jurist or legal thinker" to have been nominated to the Supreme Court

The followup question should have been:
"How would you know?"

After his evasive answer then ask:
"When you were the head member of the Harvard Law Review, you produced nothing. You also failed to get any job offers after you graduated, why?"

Like this comment
Posted by Elect McCain????
a resident of another community
on Aug 17, 2008 at 2:37 pm

Love how one person is posting basically the same comments under different names.
The question is do we want someone who attempted suicide when the pressure got to be too much to be in control of our nuclear arsenal ina time of crisis.

Like this comment
Posted by Samuel
a resident of Stanford
on Aug 17, 2008 at 3:38 pm

Senator Obama's statement came out and essentially implied that we were going to equally blame our friend Georgia and Russia, and then he revised the statement two or three times. this shows a lack of sure-footedness by Senator Obama.
Senator McCain, not just in this crisis, but also previously said "I saw Vladimir Putin and I saw in his eyes a K, a G and a B and he's a bully."
Who do you want sitting across the table from somebody like Putin? You want Barack Obama or John McCain? I know the answer for me and a lot of Americans, most Americans, is going to be John McCain.

No doubt many loyal Democrats will pretend that their answer to that question is Barack Obama, but I doubt that many of them mean it.

Like this comment
Posted by pam
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Aug 17, 2008 at 3:53 pm

this is what makes democrats so useful to obama- you actually believe that garbage obama spews. this is classic bama- "i voted for it but i wanted to change.....strip out...remove..." something. it's the same crap over and over and over. he voted for 'fisa' but wanted to strip out telecom immunity (which he knew was impossible). he voted for the cheney energy bill but wanted to remove tax breaks for oil companies (again, impossible after the fact). pbama never issued a position on the kyl-lieberman resolution but as soon as hIllary clinton announced her support for it, he slammed her. this is not different from obama voting "present" 129 in the illinois state senate. come on, people. obama is a charlatan. he is an unaccomplished, two-faced liar. please catch on. please.

Like this comment
Posted by Meg
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Aug 17, 2008 at 4:26 pm

Obama made a big mistake with his "above my pay grade" quip and it will come back to haunt him. He came across as cold and mendacious because when it comes to “pay grades,” no one’s is higher than the President’s.

Now, let's also look at Rick Warren's rhetoric. He asked, after a preface about abortion, "when does a baby get human rights in your view?"
But look at what else Warren is doing. He is not asking when does life begin?, a question that is much more susceptible to Obama's answer that only God knows.
Warren is asking when do rights begin? That makes it a legal question.
And Warren even appends the phrase "in your view."

So Obama's answer — that it's not for him to say — is inapt.
Obama answered the question he expected to hear. But Warren had the wit to frame the question in terms of a legal opinion that Obama was fully equipped to give.
When does the baby have legal rights?

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Mademoiselle Colette opens second location in Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 8 comments | 5,081 views

By Laura Stec | 15 comments | 1,174 views

Couples: Initiators and Implementors
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 642 views

Don't be a ghost
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 419 views

Joe Simitian talk: Listening to Trump's America: Bridging the Divide
By Douglas Moran | 5 comments | 352 views