Democrats versus Republicans

[PBzeer]

I get the feeling when Obama looks at military action, he sees it more like a Risk gameboard, flat and even. He seems unaware of the tactical differences between fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. (As a side note, Biden on Fox shows he doesn't know the difference between tactics and startegy also). All Obama really said was throw more troops at it, without any hint of how he would use them.

The more I think about it, the more I feel that if people were paying attention, by Monday, McCain will be seen more as "winning" than he does tonight.

If you like your debates scored boxing style, here's an interesting take on it. Fight Night!

[Giulietta]

John, I think MCain is losing ground to Obama, from what I was able to see this week.

And the fact the debate I saw today was pretty neurtal, (if one won was by such a small margin that to me its a real draw), doesn't help McCain..he really needed to win today..

So all remains as was.

Good night

[wind_magic]

Originally Posted by Giulietta

Ah the debate is over.

I know who I'd vote for....if I were American

Giu, I have a question for you.

In Portugal, how do your campaigners do debates, do you just have them sit down at the table and fight it out with a few questions, back and forth, or is it more structured like the one you just watched ? I agree with you, and I think most American do to, that this debate format is horrible. They never really get into the issues, they just gloss over it, it's such a high level thing you never get past their campaign speeches. I'm curious how they structure debates in the land of Fado.

[sailaway21]

And now for a bit of humour; the New York Timers perspective on the debate.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/27/op...27sat1.html?hp
The newspaper of record is befuddled by falling sales and declining influence. That they do not connect reportage such as this with those facts explains a great deal. One would think that they were describing the George Bush-Barack Obama debate. Apparently things look different high above Manhattan.

The concluding paragraphs are the most telling. Apparently the NYT feels that it is a mistake for McCain not to apologize for our going mistakenly into Iraq having believed the same thing that every government and every intelligence agency in the world believed at the time the decision was made. And poor old Johnny Mac, he doesn't realize that it is more important to declare an exit strategy than it is to win.

McCain "seems to have learned nothing from the disastrous war in Iraq". Uh, Mr. Sulzberger, wars are generally considered disastrous when one does not win them acknowledging that all wars are disastrous by nature. Note to Pinch; we're winning, and you want us to quit now? You should look into developing some type of sports page because you're clearly not cut out for the hard news business anymore.

[Giulietta]

Originally Posted by wind_magic

Giu, I have a question for you.

In Portugal, how do your campaigners do debates, do you just have them sit down at the table and fight it out with a few questions, back and forth, or is it more structured like the one you just watched ? I agree with you, and I think most American do to, that this debate format is horrible. They never really get into the issues, they just gloss over it, it's such a high level thing you never get past their campaign speeches. I'm curious how they structure debates in the land of Fado.

We normally have 4 to 6 candidates either for President or Prime minister.

The candidates get to talk to each other in groups of 2 during the campaign, that only lasts 2 weeks.

The debates are less formal..they sit in a table, front to fron, and fight like dogs...

It's not so formal...and the intervier asks a lot more questions.

In the end they all talk for 3 or 4 minutes.

[sailaway21]

Now compare the above linked NYT reporting with what Dan Balz produced in the Washington Post. washingtonpost.com

Which paper would you buy?

[wind_magic]

Originally Posted by Giulietta

We normally have 4 to 6 candidates either for President or Prime minister.

The candidates get to talk to each other in groups of 2 during the campaign, that only lasts 2 weeks.

The debates are less formal..they sit in a table, front to fron, and fight like dogs...

It's not so formal...and the intervier asks a lot more questions.

In the end they all talk for 3 or 4 minutes.

I like your way better.

It would be much more informative to just hear them actually talk about what they are going to do, and really get into an actual debate about the various points of difference and unity.

[Giulietta]

Kissinger just confirmed he never would approve a meeting with Iran on a Presidential level...

[Giulietta]

Originally Posted by wind_magic

I like your way better.

It would be much more informative to just hear them actually talk about what they are going to do, and really get into an actual debate about the various points of difference and unity.

Different Worlds..mine is the size of Indiana, 10.5 Million people, all same religion, colour and credo...the only thing we disagree is Soccer teams (yukk)...

We are a political joke compared to you guys (well up to Clinton)..

[artbyjody]

I wasn't impressed with either in the debate. Lets get Biden and Palin in a debate and get some fireworks. My thought it was just a well rehearsed rebuttal, cold and inanimate responses, and none of the answers were at all indicative of any change proposed by all the ads of either candidate..I would of drather watched episodes of "Sanford and Son"....