Is this election a remake of Carter vs Reagan

[sknabt]

Of course, we don't have an incumbent president in the mix this election but the basic setting is the same. You've got the Mideast crisis. The energy crisis. Economic problems.

Reagan, the Great Communicator, was trying to sell himself as ready to lead. The debates sealed the deal for Reagan something like 10 days before the election.

Is that what's going on now? Voters remain uncertain about Obama. Can he seal the deal during the debates?

[baldguy]

1. Reagan was an actor playing the role of a leader.

Obama is the real thing.

[deadmessengers]

2. The difference here is...

McCain is part of the party that created the problem, and can be tarred with the "incumbent" brush, and Obama isn't. Also, Ronald Reagan was an incredibly skilled public speaker and debater, and Jimmy Carter wasn't. In your scenario, Obama (the brilliant speaker from the non-incumbent party) wins running away.

[sknabt]

3. How Obama frames the debate the determinant?

Yes, that's broadly the point but closer to the mark is how does Obama close the deal?

The Carter vs Reagan scenario saw a tight race but Ronnie was usually on top, like Obama. Without knocking Carter out in the debates he probably still would have eked out a victory. Personally, I think that Obama's slight nationwide lead, should it hold, will carry him to an Electoral College blowout of McCain.

But to really knock McCain on the chin in the overall vote the scenario suggest Obama needs deliver a message at the debates that leaves McCain's Obama-bashing message he's unprepared to lead completely kicked to the curb. Something akin to the "Are you better off today than you were 4 years ago" quip that blew Carter out of the water.

Somehow Obama needs to glibly drive home the point that McCain's had over 20 years in Congress to make a difference combined with the fact McCain's voted 90-95% for the Bush agenda to point out his status quo-ism will run American off the cliff if it continues for 4 more years.