...shows a small but real tilt to Obama, especially among the independents and undecideds. (Despite the fact that almost all the debate experts called it a drawn or small victory for McCain.) The big reason: Obama came off as a plausible president. So did McCain. But people want change, as long as it’s safe. One important difference between this election and 1980, of course, is that McCain isn’t the incumbent. Not only that, he’s the self-proclaimed maverick who, at this point, contends (as Saturday Night Live mocked last night) that he was a relentlessly severe critic and never a reliable ally of the President Bush. My own view, to repeat, is that that maverick stuff plays pretty well in foreign policy, but doesn’t work very well on the economy etc.
I disagree.
Poll results presently are meaningless, {not because all poll results are such} but because the McCain campaign is going to be able to present contrast ads from the Obama of today, and the Obama who ran for, then won, the Dem primary.
It's not so much the actual debate that counts, {absent some Ford like meltdown} it's the ads that will be able to more accurately portray a candidate thereafter. The Obama of the debate was quite different than the one who defeated Hillary. AND THAT falsity, that consistent flipping of positions, is going to be used by the McCain campaign, and if they've some savvy, to telling effect.
Of course this is contingent upon a campaign actually running sharp contrast ads. AND doing so in a witty manner. It's not a surprise to me that McCain was gaining easily when using humour, and that ever since he's gotten away from it, he's lost ground.
Sacred cows are made for skewering; at least in politics.
Obama is not "safe." He must be revealed as a fraud. Giving voters the real Obama -- the Obama of the primaries and previously -- might help.
Peter: I haven't read a single expert - someone with expert knowledge about debates and no reason to push a candidate - who said that McCain "won," even slightly. I did see some Republicans and McCain supporters - like Brit Hume, Sean Hannity and Bill Kristol - who said that McCain "won," but it's a stretch to call them "debate experts" without qualification. Who are you reading?
brett, click, for example, on the guy for the wash post below.