|
The only people who matter are persuadable voters.
Among persuadable voters Obama is more unknown and had much more room for increased positives.
So in terms of moving actual votes in play, a clear win for Obama. I will not be surprised if there is some poll movement in Obama's favor.
As a TV debate... kind of a tie. (I have seldom seen a Dem lose a debate to a pug on policy or facts, but that's not the central TV contest)
Obama was over-cautious in a way that was smart, disciplined and won more votes, and that's the name of the game. (Versus taking clearer bolder stands, which is more fun to watch, but probably politically thankless.)
Obama and McCain were both over-coached and gave a lot of fragmentary 'inside baseball' snippets that persuadable voters don't recognize. For instance, McCain's crack about not having a seal... nobody in America who knows about the seal controversy is undecided. And Obama did not do a good job of identifying who and what he was talking about. Words like "it" and "there" are a problem in debates. Always make the sentence clear to avoid confusion and so it functions as a sound-byte. (I'm sure a lot of slower viewers had trouble telling when Barack was talking about Afghanistan and when he was talking about Iraq.)
Also, Obama's stammering at the beginning of replies is indicative of thinking, rather than reciting, but is a habit that should have been addressed during the primary debates. It really is okay to pause before answering (good theater, even), and preferable to beginning in a halting fashion.
|