Post-show analysis: The Town Hall Debate

Obama did what he needed to do: looked confident and capable and presidential. John McCain looked like he was attacking the leader. All in all, McCain improved from the last debate performance. It is clear that a town hall debate is his forum. The handshake with the petty officer was nice. But there were no game changers here, and at times it seemed as though McCain was nipping at Obama's heels.

On to debate #3. Poor Bob Schieffer: are there any economy questions left unasked?

SIDE NOTE: Uncle. I, like apparently all other bloggers, am getting addicted to the CNN emote-o-meter. Watching the women is like watching my favorite roller coaster EVER. x)

SIDE SIDE NOTE: Apparently Manhattans go with ALL debates. Who knew?!

Pre-show analysis: The Town Hall Debate

Is there much that needs to be said here?

McCain will try to reinforce this idea of the mysterious, untrustworthy Obama, not by directly bringing up Bill Ayers, but by declaring Obama's positions to be dishonest. And he'll make eye contact this time. He needs to change narrative of the election but dispel this notion that he is avoiding the subject of the economy. He needs to be reassuring.

Obama will continue to talk about the economy and try to talk kitchen-table-ese. He did a good job in the last debate of talking about these shifty economic issues, but he needs to bring back to a personal perspective instead of broad generalities. For Obama, its do no harm. He continues to rise in the polls and doesn't want to change the trajectory. (Also, the demeanor that was once derided by the press as "professorial" is now being called "steady" and "comforting". We'll see more "steady".)

Don't expect any surprises.

"Gender Auditors" in the Battle for Gay Marriage

California voters, after having polled largely against Prop. 8 for the last month or so, appear to be swinging in the other direction, according to a poll from CBS affiliate KPIX.

Time for the opposition to get creative! Check out this great ad from the Courage Campaign"

'Omaba Nation' author a bee in Kenya's bonnet

Following this gem of a story today:

As previously noted in this blog, Obama Nation author and former Swiftboater Jerome Corsi had traveled to Kenya in order to, according to WorldNetDaily, research and expose nefarious ties between Barack Obama, Kenyan PM Raila Odinga, and Muslim forces. However, based on press releases going out to the Kenyan media, Corsi seems to have been there to promote his book.

Ah, but freedom of speech is a valuable and oft under-appreciated American right. As of this morning, the Times of London reported that Kenyan officials were detaining Corsi for lack of work permit in promoting his book.

By this afternoon, NPR is reporting that Corsi has been deported. What do you want to bet that Corsi and the right will be blaming Obama for that by week's end?

Brushing up on the economy

I'm busy today, but I thought you shouldn't miss this opportunity to get some easy to digest info on the economy. So here I go, just reprinting a post from Salon's War Room blog:

The Fed and commercial paper funds

I’m not an economist and have no background in finance. I therefore may be having just as much, if not more trouble, than you comprehending all the finance-related angles of the proposed bailout.

For example, if news that the Federal Reserve is about to take control of the Commercial Paper Fund Facility makes you scratch your head wondering, “what the hell are commercial paper funds?”, you certainly should read our own Andrew Leonard who explains how this part of the financial world works.

But in addition there’s also a great, unofficial Finance-for-Dummies radio program with which, I suspect, many Salon readers are already all too familiar: "This American Life." (Confession: I’m addicted to the show.)

This week’s episode, “Another Frightening Show About the Economy,” explains why the collapse of the mortgage-backed securities market has since been exacerbated by the collapse of the commercial paper fund market.

Actually, if you are not entirely certain why the mortgage-backed securities market crisis collapsed in the first place -- and no, it’s not just that people took out home loans they couldn’t afford to pay, though that’s certainly a big part of it -- before listening to the latest TAL episode you may want to check out the equally fascinating, “Global Pool of Money” episode.

― Thomas Schaller

The missed Palin opportunity

Former McCain strategiest Mike Murphy touched on a real truth today in Time's Swampland blog. According to Murphy, Sarah Palin ought to "start connecting to her cherished hockey moms on the one issue they are actually worried about; a quickly slowing economy..."

When Barack Obama says that McCain doesn't get it, this is a prime example. Sarah Palin is McCain's star quarterback in the fight for working-class Americans. In a time of high disaffection and cynicism, more people in suburban/exurban/rural America believe that Sarah Palin "gets" them and their issues, pocketbook among them, no matter what their feeling about her as a potential Commander-in-Chief. So why is McCain sending her out pitbulling about Bill Ayers?

If McCain wants to make some gains on economic issues he needs to start showing that his campaign understands those issues. Sarah Palin is uniquely qualified to make that connection with voters. I'm about half way through this fantastic article by George Packer at the New Yorker, explaining equisitely what is actually going on out there in the country with those blue-collar white voters who can't get behind Obama, Democrat and Republican alike. Read it.

It seems that the McCain campaign has given up on substance and will charge ahead on character and ideology issues. That won't do the job for them this year - no way, no how.

The takeaway: the falling DOW

OK. For god's sake.

If you thought that the "Bailout/Rescue/Recovery Bill" was going to prevent the STOCK MARKET from falling, you need to school yourself a little bit about what this "economic disaster" we're going through is about.

The recent bill was meant to get credit moving which keeps business from HALTING. It does not "fix" the economic problems we have.

Of course you can't count on the press to report that. According to Andrea Mitchell in front of me, we're all out here saying "HEY! I thought I spent $770 billion to FIX this s%&t" and we don't understand what's going on!

Um, I don't think we're that idiotic. Are we?

Chalk this up to the same electorate that complains that it doesn't know what Barack Obama stands for. Um, are you kidding me? There is NO EXCUSE for lack of understanding in this day and age. Folks, internet. Internet, folks. Get together and figure something out, would ya?

What is fair game in assessing character?

If it is OK to question Barack Obama's association with Bill Ayers, is it OK to question John McCain's association with Charles Keating?

If its OK for McCain to use his years as a POW speak to his character, is it also OK for his military record prior to that POW time to speak for his character?

If I don't think McCain's military record suggesting carelessness has any real meaning in his current endeavors, should I also not consider his time as a POW to have any bearing on his qualifications to be President?

I'm just sayin'.

The gloves come flying off

Well, it was to be expected, but MAN did they exceed expectations!

Since polls late last week showed Barack Obama pulling away is many key swing states, reports abound in the papers and on the Sunday morning shows that the McCain campaign was going to unleash its character attacks on Obama, going to Obama's associations with Bill Ayers and Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Sarah Palin previewed that strategy in a stump speech in Omaha on Saturday, saying Obama "pals around with terrorists".

Then POW! In my inbox on Sunday night: an email from the Obama campaign playing the - you got it! - Keating 5 card. Oh yeah, they went there. The campaign is devoting an entire website to educating you on McCain's role in the Keating 5 scandal, repleat with synopsis, downloads, and "documentary".

So can we finally shake the Democrats-as-Kerry-wallflowers persona now? Here are some of my favorite headlines for today:

I'll see your Ayers, raise you a Keating

McCain, Obama go for jugular

While I think we can all agree that negative campaigning is not what we're interested in, two thoughts:

1. At least we only have 4 weeks left in the election. They could have started this garbage in earnest weeks ago.
2. Hopefully the Obama campaign's response will net out as an equal and oposite reaction to the McCain campaign efforts. If they both come out slinging mud, the story may just die as "Look at all the mud these guys are throwing!" instead of becoming a false storyline for the media to lap up.

Here's hoping.

UPDATE: Sadly, it looks like the continued plunge of worldwide markets and the DOW sinking below 10,000 will be the story. Is it telling that this is what needs to happen for us to focus on real issues in politics?

We must never forget that art is not a form of propaganda; it is a form of truth.

- JFK

See a side-by-side comparison of the arts positions of each of the Presidential candidates. (Thanks be to Allison.)

Who owns small town values?

So I sprained my ankle and am online catching up on all the Daily Show and Colbert Report I've missed in the last week, and I catch this clip I hadn't seen before of the miniseries that apparently was the Couric/Palin interview.

And I hear Sarah Palin saying something to the effect of "I'm not one of those kids whose parents gave them a passport and a plane ticket to Europe after graduation. I had to work two jobs until I had kids and walk uphill both ways..." blah, blah, blah.

And I flash back to her debate performance, talking about being from a small town and how special that makes her so she's not going to answer your questions the way you Media-Types or Washington-Types or Elitist-Liberal-Types want her to.

And that's when my HEAD explodes I say: THAT'S ENOUGH. You don't OWN small town values.

You see, I'm from a small town. Nearest neighbor was a half a quarter mile away. How do you like them apples? And I started my first real job when I was 13 - having cleaned houses and babysat before that - and worked my way through college with one or two jobs, depending on how lucky I was. And I couldn't afford to go to Europe until after I was married.

And I married my sweetheart who I've been with since I was 19. And I never had an abortion. And we have two beautiful children who were conceived WITHIN wedlock. And you know what?

I'm a liberal.

I'm agnostic.

I'm pro-choice.

And I don't care about your Christian values.

Because, you see, to me it doesn't matter a lick if you're a Christian. That really doesn't say anything about what kind of person you are as you walk through this world. And being from a small town and having "small town", "Joe-six-pack" values? That don't mean shit. Pardonnez mon français.

You see, my grandfather was an immigrant. He came from small town Plymouth, England. He was the child of a single mother who worked her butt off to make that existence work for her kids. My grandfather didn't have a college education. He didn't complete a high school education. But you know what his hobby was through his life? Damn sure it wasn't snow machinin'.

My grandfather read. Volumes and volumes. Everything you were supposed to read if you were a worldly, knowledgeable individual. He read Keats and Aristotle and Shakespeare and Huxley and Emerson and Verne and Freud and Dumas. He had books on Van Gough and Monet and Picasso and ancient architecture and mythology.

You see, being from a small town, being unworldly, isn't something to aspire to. It is the circumstance in which you are born. Certainly the small town offers its own set of values, but they are certainly not the ends to which you aspire.

The small town folks we DO admire, people who made this world a better place such as President Lincoln, aspired to something bigger than themselves, which required an intellectual curiosity to look beyond the sphere to which they were born.

So, you see, I'm from a small town and I live back in that same small town, but I've never stopped trying to become a bigger person in awareness and understanding.

(Did I just quote John Cougar Mellancamp?)

Thoughts on the VEEP debate

A draw. I thought Sarah Palin outperformed incredibly low expectations. I don't think she shined to the extent that she changes any undecided minds. But Joe Biden did a wonderful job of thoughtfully engaging and being substantive without offending. All in all, I thought it was an enjoyable debate: not especially challenging, but not especially phoney.

This is not a game changer, but you can bet that the punditry will have less to mock about Sarah Palin. For that, she made me respect her again as a woman .

FYI, the Manhattan was the right drink to accompany this debate: fun and a little substantive. What will be the drink for election night? Comments?

The electoral field begins its tightening

So it begins: Politico's Jonathan Martin reports that the McCain campaign is pulling out of Michigan. Based on recent polls, that means in 2008 the election will likely hinge on... wait for it....

Florida and Ohio.

Joy.

Silverman for Obama

Warning: link to indelicate language follows.
(You're totally going to watch now, right?)

Sarah Silverman's plan for winning a swing state: "The Great Schlepp". Classic Silverman.

More swing state polling

Remember those swing states we looked at yesterday? Let's look at some new swing state polling this one from CNN/Time:

Florida: Obama +4
Minnesota: Obama +11
Missouri: Obama +1
Nevada: Obama +4
Virginia: Obama +9

OK - the polls have consistently shown that Obama has the momentum. If you're following the horse race, I think you can ignore polling for about a week. By next Thursday or Friday, people will have had time to digest both the VP debate and, more importantly, the second Presidential debate, which is scheduled for Tuesday. As I've argued before, people are going to vote the top of the ticket this year. Sarah Palin would have to prove herself to be an utterly disasterous possibility for the Presidency in the eyes of her GOP following in order to have any additional downward drag on McCain.

Also, look for any stories coming out of Kenya for the October surprise that could change the narrative in the way McCain needs.

Patriotism, taxes, and the conventional wisdom

This recent exchange between Joe Biden and ABC News' Kate Snow has been pointed to by the media as an example of a Biden gaffe. Can ANYONE explain to me why this is a gaffe?

Snow: "Anyone making over $250,000..."

Biden: "Is going to pay more. You got it. Its time to be patriotic, Kate. Time to jump in. Time to be part of the deal. Time to help get America out of the rut. And the way to do that is - they're still going to pay less taxes than they paid under Reagan."

I'm with Biden! All the way, man. Why is it that we CANNOT seem to accept sacrifice? Isn't this what got us into our financial crisis? An expectation of entitlement? We deserve to have a bigger house, a better vacation, cheaper goods, and not pay ANY more in taxes during an incredibly expensive war. This notion seems to be a political standard: Americans do not need to give more. Do actual Americans really feel this way?

Do YOU feel that way? And, by the way, are you sure you AREN'T giving more?

Biden is talking about wealthier Americans (do you make over $250,000 year? I actually don't have a single friend who does.) getting fewer tax write-offs, thereby increasing the nation's income. Are you going to tell me that families with McMansions and Escalades can't afford to chip in to the cause? The America I grew up admiring expected its wealthy members to step up during tough times. That's who we were supposed to be.

We can't help the largely middle-class Americans who are in trouble with mortgages and debt. After all, they made uninformed, impulsive decisions, making bad investments, ignoring what the long term consequences would be so that they could get the best deals for right now. We have a moral obligation to let them face the consequences. Now, where did I put that Bailout Bill?

Glittering generalities: ooo, SHINY

One tactic to watch for in tonight's veep debate: folksy tales and "glittering generalities". In yesterday's Christian Science Monitor, Alaska state rep and former gubernatorial candidate Andrew Halcro writes about what we can expect to see from Sarah Palin:

Palin is a master of the nonanswer. She can turn a 60-second response to a query about her specific solutions to healthcare challenges into a folksy story about how she's met people on the campaign trail who face healthcare challenges. All without uttering a word about her public-policy solutions to healthcare challenges.

In one debate, a moderator asked the candidates to name a bill the legislature had recently passed that we didn't like. I named one. Democratic candidate Tony Knowles named one. But Sarah Palin instead used her allotted time to criticize the incumbent governor, Frank Murkowski. Asked to name a bill we did like, the same pattern emerged: Palin didn't name a bill.

And when she does answer the actual question asked, she has a canny ability to connect with the audience on a personal level. For example, asked to name a major issue that had been ignored during the campaign, I discussed the health of local communities, Mr. Knowles talked about affordable healthcare, and Palin talked about ... the need to protect hunting and fishing rights.

So what does that mean for Biden? With shorter question-and-answer times and limited interaction between the two, he should simply ignore Palin in a respectful manner on the stage and answer the questions as though he were alone. Any attempt to flex his public-policy knowledge and show Palin is not ready for prime time will inevitably cast him in the role of the bully.

On the other side of the stage, if Palin is to be successful, she needs to do what she does best: fill the room with her presence and stick to the scripted sound bites.

Become ONE with your candidate

In the Washington Post today, conservative columnist Kathleen Parker wrote about the response she's received since writing her famous "Sarah Palin should bow out" column on Sunday. Apparently the response was vicious and personal:

Allow me to introduce myself. I am a traitor and an idiot. Also, my mother should have aborted me and left me in a dumpster, but since she didn't, I should "off" myself. ...
The emotional pitch of many comments suggests an overinvestment in Palin as "one of us."
Palin's fans say they like her specifically because she's an outsider, not part of the Washington club. When she flubs during interviews, they identify with that, too. "You see the lack of polish, we applaud it," one reader wrote.

This harkens to something that irked me during the Democratic primaries, this personal attachment to the candidates. As a woman who was never particularly jazzed about candidate Clinton, I could never get the rabid devotion displayed by many of her supporters. Furthermore I did and DO find it offensive that so many women think that Hillary was our last hope. What an incredible slap in the face to all of the other brilliant women whose greatest aspiration is public service! (I'm winking at you, Jess!)

Dahlia Lithwick and the smart ladies over at the XX Factor have discussed this phenomenon of over-identification with our candidates. Its one thing to want to be like those we admire. Its a whole different neurosis to want them to be like us. Maybe we could all use a crash course in Hiring Practice 101. Qualifications for this position do not include affability and beer-drinking skills.

Final thoughts from Parker:

The picture is this: Anyone who dares express an opinion that runs counter to the party line will be silenced. That doesn't sound American to me, but Stalin would approve. ...

Our day of reckoning may indeed be upon us. Between war and economic collapse, we have enormous challenges. It will take the best of everyone to solve them. That process begins minimally with a commitment to engage in civil discourse and a cease-fire in the war against unwelcome ideas.

Brava.

Liberal Baby Eaters

This one is so good I just had to copy the post. From Jonathan Stein of Mother Jones' MOJO blog (thanks, Allison!)

Hugh Hewitt and the Department of Caricatures

Folks on the interwebs are making fun of the questions right wing blogger and talk show host Hugh Hewitt recently put to Sarah Palin. They are the softest of softballs — they make Sean Hannity look like Edward R. Murrow. You can check them out here.

I want to highlight this one in particular:

"You're pro-life, and how much of the virulent opposition to you on the left do you attribute to your pro-life position, and maybe even to the birth of, your decision, your and Todd's decision to have Trig?"

That's right. Hugh Hewitt think the left opposes Sarah Palin because she decided to give birth to a child with Down Syndrome. Not because she knows nothing about foreign affairs while we're engaged in two wars. Not because she has nothing coherent to say about the government bailout of Wall Street as we face a dire economic crisis. Not because of her retrograde views on science and books. Not because she undermines every feminist accomplishment Hillary Clinton fought for earlier this election season.

The left opposes Sarah Palin because she gave birth to a baby with Down Syndrome. Just think about the misconceptions about the left that need to be in place for someone to make that claim. The left either hates infants with disabilities, or it hates women who refuse to abort unborn children with disabilities. Or it wants to jack up some kind of karmic abortion counter as high as possible and is disappointed when it misses an opportunity.

Has Hugh Hewitt ever met a Democrat?

"The most anticipated Vice Presidential debate in a long time"

That seems to be the headline today. "In a long time"? OK, maybe I'm unschooled in our nation's electoral history, but I think we can say with some certainty that this is the most anticipated Vice Presidential debate in EXACTLY 24 years.