The Smirk: Could McCain's Facial Gestures Define Debate?

[Flabbergasted]

There are two videos at the link

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/27/the-smirk-could-mccains-f_n_129831.html

Nico Pitney and Sam Stein
Sept 27th 2008

As the spin of Friday night's debate settled in and both sides staked a claim to victory, one media narrative began to take hold: while Obama may have been over-complimentary of McCain, the GOP nominee was grumpy, mean, and downright contemptuous of Obama, much to his detriment.

A clip circulated by Democrats showed the McCain demonstrating all of those traits: smirking when Obama gave his answers, eyes blinking, unwilling to even look at his opponent.

It was a small visual, but one that seemed to be getting traction among the punditry. Charlie Gibson on ABC and David Brooks on PBS both noted that McCain didn't look at Obama once. The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder wrote that McCain sounded "angry and passionate"; MSNBC's Chris Matthews described the GOP nominee as "troll-like" and "grouchy."

The episode was reminiscent, to some extent, of Al Gore's sighs during the 2000 debate with George W. Bush. But more than that, it seemed to be a counterbalance to the first takeaway from the debate: mainly, that Obama had agreed too much and been too deferential to his opponent.

GOP aides giddily highlighted the several instances where Obama said he agreed with McCain. But Democrats warned that the move would backfire: while Obama appeared like a statesman, noting both when they agreed and disagreed, McCain refused to even look Obama in the eye.

Certainly the immediate, post-debate focus polls suggested that voters had soured on the Republican nominee's performance. And both in private and in public, aides to Obama thought that the tics and smirks could resonate.

"The scowls and the squints and the facial tics of John McCain didn't serve him well here," said advisor Robert Gibbs, in the spin room.

[Eric J in MN]

1. McCain is getting attacked for his facial expression like Al Gore was for sighing...

...in one of the debates.

It's better for democracy if the pundits try to elevate the discussion by talking about the issues.

[gblady]

2. personally....

I think this type of behavior tells a great deal about a person...
the way he scowled and sarcastically snickered whenever he didn't like something Barack said....
is childish and immature, IMHO.

Is he going to have the same attitude toward foreign leaders he disagrees with....
....oh, wait...

sorry, silly question...

[Flabbergasted]

5. Although the smirk is only a cheap trick designed to undermine what Obama is saying nt

[phycomycetes]

8. I thought the same

Personally, I found McCain's attitude disgusting (behaving and talking as if Obama wasn't present), but also if I put aside my personal feelings, I found it inappropriate... and thus, UNPROFESSIONAL.

As the Head of State, you won't be able to just meet with "friends". IMO, you would have to meet with those who are NOT your friends, to win them over or at least deescalate the relationship, if possible prevent escalation and the like... you know "diplomatic stuff"...

Just imagine McCain meeting with Ahmadinejad (though he's not Iran's No.1 as Obama pointed out wonderfully):
Does ANYONE really think that this kind of attitude displayed in this debate would be a good tactic? Or wouldn't it rather alienate his opponent?
The cheek of McCain judging Obama's mindset "dangerous" - look who's talking!

Just thinking.

[MattBaggins]

4. McCain's demeanor is an issue

The man claims to want to work across the aisle with Democrats and on the world stage with foreign leaders. If he can't keep his disdain for those who disagree with him in check; he is not fit to be President. If he is so disrespectful of a colleague and fellow American, what kind of a failure would he be as our Chief Diplomat?

[Snazzy]

3. the smirk

No Sniveling.

(C) Green Parrot Bar, Key West Florida


(My former wateringhole, a very famous Smirk thereabouts, and some eerie similarities I think.)

[Berry Cool]

6. This is an interesting point.

One reason Ronald Reagan did so well in debates was that he never came off as angry or belittling when making a point, but rather as sunny and genial even as he was saying "There you go again." He knew how to always make his opponent come off looking like the grumpy guy, while Reagan came off looking like the cheerful, likable guy. That's what Obama did last night.

His "John is right" moments always came within the context of a "rope-a-dope" statement: "John is right, but..." and "John is right, and that's why..." He didn't really come off as the insecure, humbled neophyte groveling at the feet of the wise elder statesman, as one might think just from looking at the words he spoke.

As for McCain, even though he carried himself off fairly well considering, he still had to go to the well for all his old favorite touchstones: invoking the name of Reagan; emphasizing his (nonexistent) support for "veterans" as if it were one of the biggest issues of the whole campaign--thus providing a not-so-subtle reminder that he himself is one; accusing Obama of not supporting the troops (that backfired big-time with the "John, I have a bracelet too" reply); calling himself and his running mate "mavericks" without supplying any credible proof; and, finally, winding up with a POW reference. It was as if Obama had stood there all night with no facts and figures at his fingertips but simply saying over and over again: "I'm all about change" and "We can't afford four more years of Bush policies" but had nothing to back it up. That would have been just as weak on HIS part, and maybe that's what some people expected--but it's not what they got.

McCain's repeated "Obama just doesn't understand" and "Obama is dangerously naive" statements came off as heavyhanded and arrogant, rather than like "There you go again" or "I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience," which made people laugh at the very same time as they drove home the points Reagan was trying to make. In the meantime, whenever Obama spoke and claimed something McCain had said about him was wrong, you could see McCain's teeth gritting and his jaw stiffening as he tried to maintain the kind of smile on his face that always has "You son of a bitch" lying just underneath.

Reagan, being an ex-actor, knew how to keep his audience amused even as he twisted the knife in his opponent's back. John McCain does not.

John McCain is no Ronald Reagan when it comes to debating. And for that, we can all be thankful.

[FrenchieCat]

7. And Obama is good about keeping his cool and not becoming

exasperated...which could happen with a candidate like...say...Romney.

So Obama was the Reagan you described in this debate......but he uses the "common ground" "he's right, but" approach instead of humor.