Politirazzi

Our friend, speaking consultant TJ Walker, breaks down expectations at tonight's town hall meeting in Nashville:

More at The Speaking Channel.

— Emily

Dear John and Barack,

You had a good thing going there for a while. We were all talking about things that mattered, such as health care and the meltdown on Wall Street but apparently it was too good to last. Shall I paraphrase the turn the conversation has taken since yesterday?

McCain: Hi, America. You guys don’t seem to like me when we talk about the economy, so I’m going to talk about something else: Barack Obama can’t be trusted.

Obama: Oh yeah, John? Well, America loves me when we talk about the economy (Keating Five) so I’m going to keep talking about the economy (seriously, America, look up the Keating Five). See? I can fight! How do you like me now?

Really, guys? Do we have to do this? John, this reeks of desperation. Your timing, as usual, sucks. Barack, if you take the bait and descend into the mud with John and Sarah, you will look like a tool.

In short, boys, get your damn acts together. Preferably before 9 p.m. this evening.

Kisses,
Meg

By Meg

Demerit: Lies, All Lies!
It’s not like we need the VP candidates to be concerned with telling the truth or anything. Whoppers and exaggerations included “budget-neutral” vs. "government run" health care; records on taxes; Spain; funding the troops; sounding the bell on Fannie and Freddie; the surplus in Iraq; shall I go on?

Gold Star: “Hey, Can I Call You Joe?”
Whoever told her to ask that is a genius. Palin knew that Biden would not risk being labeled sexist by returning the favor and calling her Sarah. It was a power play, and it was brilliant.

Demerit: Screwing Gays (Not Literally)
Both candidates showed about as much warmth towards our homosexual brethren as Cardinal Egan would at a drag show. Same-sex benefits fall stunningly short, period. I was so pleasantly surprised to hear that Sarah Palin “tolerates” homosexuals, though. That’s really, really big of her. I think we found the next Grand Marshall of the Pride Parade!

Gold Star: Gwen Ifill
Any question of partiality left my mind after she uttered the words that every viewer wanted to hear: “Neither of you really answered that last question.”

Demerit: Doggone It, You Betcha, Darn Right, Golly Gee, Aw Heck, Say-It-Ain’t-So, God Love Ya!

(AP)

By Adrian

She wins by default! Sarah Palin did not win last night’s debate, let’s be clear about that. What she did was speak to the core base of the Republican party. She looked like “a good ol' girl” as we’d say back in Texas.

She was “one of us” and a true “red, white and blue American” like our beloved Ronnie. Still, I think most people will view her rambling, obviously rehearsed answers, and her complete lack of skill in handling issues on an in depth level as a death knell to the idea of her being the president of the United States.

Let’s be realistic, John McCain is as old as Methuselah! If he has a heart attack guess who would be in charge? Who would you trust more with nuclear weapons, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Sarah Palin? Back on issue, the expectations of Gov. Palin were so low that she did remarkably well.

For my part, I think the highest political position she should hold is president of the PTA. Oh, I forgot, she likes to ban books. Never mind ...

By Lynne

Let’s face it: One of the main reasons everyone is stressing about Sarah Palin is the fear that she would become president if something happened to McCain. By “something,” we mainly mean death by natural causes.

And we’re more worried about McCain dying than Obama because he’s 72, and the average life expectancy of an American male is just over 75 years. In fact, McCain would be the oldest man ever inaugurated as a first-term president.

But is old age the most significant factor? Of the eight presidents who died in office, four of them were assassinated (and Nixon resigned). The last presidential assassination was John F. Kennedy on Friday, Nov. 22, 1963. Malcolm X was killed two years later, Martin Luther King Jr. three years after that.

I don’t mean to suggest that Obama is more at risk (although American history is riddled with violence against black men) it just means that there are several reasons why presidential succession might be called into play.

Which is why the vice presidential debate is so important. Not just to see how Palin does, but also because of Biden.

Remember him? Joe Biden has been missing in action the last few weeks, enough so that amNY has been printing rumors that he might drop out to allow Hillary Clinton to replace him on the ticket.

By Dontre

While most polls have reported that Obama won last week’s presidential debate, I felt that he actually lost the debate, and threw away an opportunity to not only call McCain on the carpet for his voting record, which has been largely in favor of Bush policies, but he forfeited an opportunity to show McCain as a relic of the past, out of touch with the workings of world politics, where diplomacy is valued over misguided cowboy bravado.

It is speculated that Michael Dukakis’ loss to George H.W. Bush was a result of his stoicism. Bush Sr. reached a new low in presidential campaigning (isn’t it ironic that his son also reached a new low in this arena, too? But, I digress) when he ran the now-infamous Willie Horton ad. Horton was a criminal in the Massachusetts Correctional system, under Dukakis as governor of the state. Granted leave, under a furlough program that Dukakis had supported, Horton kidnapped, raped and murdered a white couple. While the ad played on racial fears, the devastating blow to Dukakis came when CNN’s Bernard Shaw asked him, in a presidential debate, whether he would support the death penalty should his wife, Kitty, were raped and murdered. While many argued that the question was unfair, voters thought Dukakis’ response was stoic and dispassionate.

Obama may gain points for being “cool, calm and collected,” but he seemed almost despondent last week, especially in light of McCain’s attacks on him as “naive.” Television ads are one thing, but when your opponent stands in your face and sullies your name, it shouldn’t take the moderator to tell you to address him directly. Even in the one instance where Obama did seem to enliven, his “You were wrong!” segment, his reading from a list (with his head down) of McCain’s past votes was not as passionate as when John McCain, unscripted, delineated Obama’s supposed naiveté, while looking directly at Jim Lehrer and the camera.

(AP)

By Jeff

I am bustling with excitement about the debate tonight. Typically the VP debate is an afterthought, but how can I miss the debacle that everyone expects? Clips of Katie Couric’s interview with Sarah Palin have trickled out like water torture, and Palin’s answers have been increasingly embarrassing with every clip. Most recently, we’ve discovered that she can’t name any newspaper she frequents (as a former journalism major!) or Supreme Court decision. Even the most fervent Republican supporters I know are dreading tonight’s debate. In two weeks, they’ve gone from being 80 percent sure McCain would win to 80 percent sure Obama would win. The financial sector has had lower volatility than Palin’s approval ratings in the past two weeks.

Expectations for tonight are universally ranging between Admiral Stockdale and Miss Teen South Carolina 2007. Plus, there’s that the rumor that Biden is going to drop out after tonight so that Hillary can be named VP. This leaves a nonzero chance that Biden’s last task as nominee will be to fall on the grenade and completely tear into Palin tonight.

There’s no question that Gwen Ifill (if she still moderates) will continue the pop quizzes on Palin to expose her inexperience, but here are a couple other questions I’d like to ask. There aren’t many here. Because to be honest, I really want to see the Palin fail the pop quizzes. Sure, the little quizzes prove absolutely nothing in terms of decision-making ability, but watching Palin stammer and doublespeak through her answers is trainwreck TV that I won’t want to miss.

For Both
* How much more money do you think Gwen Ifill will make from her book (titled: “Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama”) if Barack Obama becomes president as opposed to if John McCain wins?

* With a $10T debt, an ongoing expensive war in the Middle East, and a potential $1T banking bailout do you think that your running mate should commit passing a balanced budget amendment within your first term? If not, why shouldn’t the government be forced to spend no more than they receive — isn’t being overleveraged what got consumers into trouble during this current liquidity crisis?

Consultants I interviewed this week were hoping Thursday night's debate between Biden and Palin wouldn't be comical enough to provide fodder for "Saturday Night Live." So. Many. SNL. References.

"She's still in danger of saying something so stupid that Saturday Night Live goes into overdrive doing Friday night primetime specials," said speaking expert TJ Walker.

"They need to play it safe. They need to play it grown up. ... Just stay on script. Stay disciplined. Stay short. ... It will be boring, but that's so much better than them waking up to another 'Saturday Night Live' skit," said communications coach LeeAundra Temescu.

Here's hoping:

Join us here Thursday evening for live blog coverage.

— Emily

Our friend TJ Walker, a speech consultant with Media Training Worldwide, mulls over what to watch in tomorrow's vice presidential debate:

— Emily

By Meg

In anticipation of tomorrow's vice presidential debate, we look at how last week's presidential debate went:

Sorry to make you wait, Politirazzi — I know you crave my “grading ” pieces like a sugar addict craves candy. Although you wouldn’t know it from my red-pen-heavy assessment below, I actually enjoyed this debate.

Demerit:
Debating Whether or Not There Should Be a Debate

Gold Star: McCain on the Economy
Let me be clear: Neither candidate gave a stellar performance on this issue. Also, I was surprised by McCain’s slip on earmarks. However, I really thought, given the awful week he had leading up to the debate, that McCain was going to stumble, and he did not.

Gold Star: Obama on Foreign Policy
Again, neither candidate blew me away or even said anything that surprised me, but Obama was tougher than I expected. Stick to your guns on diplomacy, Barry.

Demerit: Jim Lehrer as Moderator
Are you comfortable, Jim? Would you like anything? A beverage, perhaps? How are the wife and kids? That’s good. What? There’s a debate going on? Oh.

Demerit: Shut it Down, Boys
I will never understand why, when thrown false or exaggerated accusations during a debate, politicians let them stand. An example of missed opportunity on both sides is the lies traded on health care: Obama stated that, under McCain’s health plan, employers would be taxed for health benefits offered. McCain stated that Obama’s plan hands the health care system over to the federal government. Both statements are false, yet both candidates missed the opportunity to deny those falsehoods.

By Lynne

Just a few months ago, John McCain challenged Barack Obama to an entire series of town-hall-style debates.

Now, he wants to delay the first debate at the University of Mississippi.

Fine. There are several qualified candidates -- Cynthia McKinney and Bob Barr have more experience in Congress than Obama -- who are ready to take the national stage and provide tens of millions of Americans with different solutions and different visions for our country.

The Green party’s Cynthia McKinney, Libertarian Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution party and independent candidate Ralph Nader are more than willing to debate.

A recent Zogby poll showed the majority of Americans want to hear from third party candidates, such as Bob Barr, with the percentage jumping to 69 percent among independent voters.

(continued)

By Dontre

Yesterday, McCain attempted to convince us that is presence in Washington was so needed that he was immediately suspending his campaign, calling for a postponement to the presidential debates (and subsequently, the vice presidential debates ... like we didn't see that coming, and returning to Washington. The state of the country rested solely on him!

So, I'm a little confused as to why McCain bypassed Washington and came to New York to speak at the Clinton Global Initiative. By doing so, did he not lose valuable, precious time for him to work his magic in the halls of Congress? Or does he plan to walk onto the floor and maneuver the vote at the 11th hour?

Whereas the Republicans may try to paint their candidate as the candidate more concerned with the economy, the rest of us are blindingly aware of his ploy. Clearly, he knows how to prioritize, and a sidestop to the Clinton Global Initiative is not only a political move, it also puts him in the same town as his vice presidential candidate, only hours after requests were made for her debate to be postponed.

But, he better hurry down to Washington, he only has 24 hours to save the world!

By Meg

Hey, Barry, remember that time when you called John McCain up and asked him to join forces with you to issue a bipartisan statement on the economic crisis? Remember how John then turned around and made an announcement intimating that this renewed bipartisan spirit was his idea (and invoked 9/11 just for kicks)?

Then remember how John used the opportunity to pull the fire alarm right before the midterm — er, debate? All right after you called John up and offered to reach across the aisle to show Americans that both candidates have our best interest at heart? Remember that?

Well, that was stupid, Barry. Don’t do it again. Just as there is no crying in baseball, there is no true bipartisanship in an election. I hope you’ve learned your lesson.

By Jeff

While everyone is talking about Lehman, AIG, Paulson and Chris Dodd (by the way, two of the best blogs for keeping up on the Fed bailout are Megan McArdle at The Atlantic and Barry L. Ritholtz’s “The Big Picture”), it’s largely being ignored that there is a Presidential debate (scheduled!) on Friday.

Assuming it goes forth, it will be interesting to see what will be the topic of discussion — initially set to be foreign policy. Call me crazy, but I have a hunch that a large chunk of it will revolve around the economy instead....

Here are some (mostly foreign policy) questions I’d like to see asked of the candidates:

To Both:
— Prior to the recent banking bailouts, the country had a $9.5 trillion debt. The government has now spent an additional $800B on bailouts and taken on an additional $4B in mortgage debt. How much will you reduce your campaign proposals with either increases in spending and/or cuts in taxes? How much more debt will your administration add over your first four years?

— What are the potential risks of the fact that 25 percent - 30 percent of our country’s national debt is owned by foreign countries, and how significant is your concern?

— The U.S. dollar has lost over one-third of its value since 2002. What do you think were the major causes of this, do you think it’s a major concern, and if so what would your administration do to remedy the situation?

— If Iraq, Israel, Egypt and Saudi Arabia all asked you to allow them to build military bases on U.S. soil, how would you respond?

(continued)

Debate-dodging is political ploy on the part of McCain, Dontre writes. More voters say Obama can better handle the economy, according to one poll. (AP)

By Dontre

If there is nothing that SCREAMS political maneuvering, it is this ridiculous ploy by McCain's camp. In a week where his poll numbers fell, and many Americans saw the real McCain — someone who was largely out of touch with the financial woes of everyday Americans — this political posturing is hardly surprising.

A poll conducted by CNN and the Opinion Research Corporation found that 50 percent of registered voters believe Obama, the Illinois senator, would better handle the economy, while 44 percent prefer McCain. I'm pretty sure that facing those numbers is what led the Arizona senator to suspend his campaign, attempting to give the idea that he is truly concerned about our bottom line.

However, I don't buy it. I don't need McCain to inject gravitas into the current financial situation of this country, as if we've all been asleep this week. What he should do is focus on a more sound plan for the economy and abandon the one he currently espouses, which has led to several economists to say is bad for the economy.

(continued)

And the debate moderators have been tapped!

Presidential: Friday, Sept. 26
University of Mississippi, Oxford
Moderated by: Jim Lehrer

Vice-presidential: Thursday, Oct. 2
Washington University in St. Louis
Moderated by: Gwen Ifill

Presidential (town hall): Tuesday, Oct. 7
Belmont University, Nashville
Moderated by: Tom Brokaw

Presidential: Wednesday, Oct. 15
Hofstra University, Hempstead
Moderated by: Bob Schieffer

By LaShawnda

I’ve always been puzzled by anti-affirmative action people. Affirmative action has never been about taking away from people who already have. It’s about providing opportunities for those who don’t have. Whether people want to admit it or not, American society is biased. It is biased, primarily, in favor of white males with black women primarily seen as non-competitors, with everyone else in between. So speaking from the bottom of the socio-economic totem pole, “Why is the man trying to keep me and others down?”

Honestly, I didn’t think this was something Barack Obama should’ve addressed outside of his actual presidency. The affirmative action debate is fraught with so many racial over- and undertones, I thought any position he took would be held against him. That surprisingly he covered it well during the April 16 debate against Hillary Clinton. I didn’t think Hillary would have any problems addressing affirmative action, but I was even more pleased with her reply.

I started writing this piece in response to Ward Connerly launching an initiative to block race, sex or ethnicity from playing a role in college admissions and hiring procedures by placing the issue on ballots. Connerly is founder and chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute, a national NPO opposed to racial and gender preferences. Ward Connerly’s unwillingness to acknowledge the fact that legal recourse is still necessary in American society is offensive and ignorant. Or perhaps he is truly idealistic. Perhaps in his mind we have reached a level in society where gender and race are not visible to the naked eye. Where powerful people look down on the masses at their feet seeking education, employment, shelter, food and opportunities and see only, skill, ability, experience, initiative and performance. Perhaps that’s the scenario in Connerly’s mind and I shouldn’t judge him too harshly because I’m not able to see what he sees from my vantage point at the bottom of the totem pole. Or maybe he should come back to where he started, reacquaint himself with the obstacles minorities and women face daily in pursuit of basic things like education, good jobs with benefits, and homes in nice neighborhoods. Perhaps he should think about where he was before he was inducted into the Old Boys Country Club rubbing elbows and strings with other political puppets.

(continued)

By Dan

Via Andrew Sullivan:

"No questions on the environment, none on terror, none on interrogation, none on torture, none on education, none on spending, none on healthcare, none on Iran ... but four separate questions in the first hour about a lapel-pin, Bitter-gate, Wright-gate and Ayers. I'm all for keeping candidates on their toes. But this was ridiculous. And now we have affirmative action? Again, it's not illegitimate as such - but the only reason it is asked is to try and trip these people up and make Gibson and Stephanopoulos look smart."

Via Al Giodano:

Philadelphia Channel 6 Focus Group:
(Out of 22 respondents):
11 thought Clinton won.
5 thought Obama won.
6 thought it a tie.
“I think it’s impossible to gauge the impact of this debate tonight. We will wait and see how it plays out over the next six days. ... There’s no big anti-Obama “talking point” or gaffe that comes out of the debate that the public or even the media will be obsessing upon. He in fact moved closer to presumptive nominee status, because the debate was so clearly focused on him and not Senator Clinton. ... I think the one group that will be upset with Obama tonight - and I’ve seen this here and elsewhere on the Internet - are those Obama supporters who wanted him to deliver the coup de grace and put this thing away. ... In sum: the debate doesn’t change the trajectory of either Pennsylvania or of the other 9 primaries and caucuses to come. The states will vote pretty much as expected. Obama will lead in pledged delegates and more likely than not “popular vote” on June 3. In that sense, smarter Clinton supporters saw their fears confirmed tonight… the clock continued to tick down… the dynamics didn’t change at all… if anything, the “bitter” and “Ayers” things aren’t working… and the “pastor” thing continues to have mosquito-like irritant effect on Obama but not in a game-changing way. Who would you rather be coming out of tonight’s debate? Senator Clinton? I don’t think so.

Via Matt Yglesias:

“I had thought the Clinton campaign couldn't sink any lower, but thus far she's really just been giving us the full GOP. Listening to her talk about Barack Obama is like reading a Weekly Standard blog post. The lame excuse that she's making this and that outrageous smear because the Republicans will do it later is pathetic. Maybe they will. But she's the one doing it now.”

(continued)

(AFP)

The only impression I'm left with after Slugfest XXI is that HRC has no intention of bowing out of this anytime soon. How this race ends for the Dems is going to be crucial to their chance in the fall, i.e they have to make a show of kissing and making up, the better to woo the loser's supporters. I kinda for a while have expected Clinton to start toning things down, a la Huckabee circa February.
Apparently not though...
— David

I considered the Democratic debate (possibly the very last one this season between Obama and Clinton) a tie between the two, as Adrian said.

My favorite discussion: Affirmative action.
Loved Obama's comments on race as a diminishing factor in school admissions and the job sector. He doesn't want quotas. My high school in Chicago (some school as Michelle Obama) was rigidly apportioned: 40 percent black, 20 percent white, 20 percent Hispanic, 20 percent Asian. Socio-economical status should have played a factor. There was black students living right down the block from my inner-city school who weren't able to attend because the other race quotas had to be filled.

Clinton made sure to talk about "disadvantaged backgrounds" rather than race. Good. Lower-income families may be more disadvantage than minority race ones.

Least favorite discussion: Tax cuts
Both Obama and Clinton are looking pretty bad if they consider middle-class to be that making less than $250,000. For all his pricey haircuts, at least, Sen. John Edwards had a poverty. I live in New York City and have a full-time job, but I'm definitely no where near $250,000. To steal Meg's words: According to the elitist candidates, I live "in abject, hopeless poverty."
— Emily

Hell-to-the-NAW!

Hillary admitted to the need for careful thought on how she would possibly use GW Bush during her administration.

And Obama gave a thoughtful reply. He would prefer to use Bush Sr because he implemented wise foreign policy during his administration.

They both answered better than I would’ve, i.e., Hell-to-the-NAW! I would send him on a foreign mission to a disserted island for a four-year assignment. Psst! It’s Top Secret Mr. Bush. You can’t tell anyone!” He would buy it.
— LaShawnda

Clinton is a fighter, not uniter. Hillary — after 16 years and 20 debates, all we know is that you favor universal health care and you’ve been attacked by the Republicans for almost two decades.

Notice issues that were not mentioned this debate. Not a word on immigration. No word on the defense budget. Very little said about religion, other than Obama’s comment.

No clear winner. Each had good points. Another draw.

Why can’t these two debate ala the Lincoln/Douglas debates? They should be able to ask each other questions, challenge each other’s positions. I don’t particularly love this format.
— Adrian

Hillary should play up her experience, her command of foreign and domestic policy, and her well-established cache of service.

She can point to tangible results in a way that Obama cannot; she has allies on both side of the aisles; and her ideas are shaped within the confines of the political system that operates not on idealism and pretty language, but on commonsensical resolve to uphold the Constitution and to work with all, regardless of political identity. Hillary is best prepared to do that!
— Dontre

These closing statements are as bad as the questions have been throughout this debate. I hope it really is the last one. Obama at least mentions "change from the bottom up" and that is honestly the difference between the two. Theories of change abound, but Obama's squares most with mine, and in my experience, with most young people's view of their government and how it should respond to its citizens.
— Dan

So what did we learn tonight? I learned that, if someone who makes $199,000 per year is part of the middle class, I am apparently living in abject, hopeless poverty.
— Meg

Hillary is for affirmative action. In one of the few very straight answers she said we should “create conditions to allow people to live up to their God-given potential. Let’s affirmatively invest in our young people.” Great answer, Hillary! I think I just heard a snippet from the Hillary I used to love and support.
— LaShawnda

Having a husband as a former president is not a detriment. Arguably the best of the last five presidents, Bill was a huge asset to this country and his counsel is still sought by the Party; there's nothing to say that his political advice would hurt our country with Hillary in the White House.
— Dontre

The best way to "use" President Bush after he's out of office? Get him to get all his rangers and pioneers and other bundlers to raise money for national priorities, like infrastructure repair.

I mean, they weren't just donating for the access to power, were they?
— Dan

Obama suggests a “common sense approach to handling guns on the streets. Get beyond politics, figure out what is working.” Why is this such a difficult concept to grasp? Because, common sense isn’t so common.

Clinton agrees with sensible regulation consistent with constitutional right to bear arms. She does not support a federal blanket on gun regulation. I agree with the statement she spoke during the debate, not sure how it’s going to translate in a couple of months.
— LaShawnda

"What are you gonna do about gas prices?" Well, there is probably some truth to the market manipulation argument, but the rest of HRC's answer is beyond lame. She mentions her plan to move to energy independence but doesn't say how.
— Dan

I think he's handled this extremely well. I worry, though, that if Obama is the nominee, I think the Republicans are going to really go for the jugular over this and Obama will be forced to condemn Wright's language more vociferously and with specific examples of what offended him, why it offended him and what kind of discourse he's had with Wright about it. I think it would be a good idea to start taking that harder line now.
— Meg

I really like Obama’s answer on affirmative action. It is so true. It is fair. It blunts a lot of Republican arguments.
— Adrian