Post-debate Impressions

Plainbellied beat me to it again, but I still have to post my thoughts on Friday's presidential debate. We don't have cable, so we watched the debate on the computer through the NY Times webcast. I think next time we'll do CBS, which we could expand to full-screen. So here's what I think: If John McCain wants to paint Barack Obama as inexperienced and naive, he'll have to try much harder. I agree whole-heartedly with Plainbellied's assessment of the debate so I won't belabor the point, but even on foreign policy, I felt that Obama came across as more informed and especially more reasonable. He wants to change our approach to foreign policy to include more room for diplomacy, without resorting so quickly to military action.

While McCain tried to wow the audience with a travelogue of all the trouble spots he has visited, he did nothing to convince me that he actually understood the realities of our world. By refusing to speak with our enemies until they meet vaguely defined "preconditions," I believe that McCain's approach might actually induce them to work harder to obtain nuclear weapons. And what the heck was he talking about when he was saying that "The average South Korean is 3 inches taller than the average North Korean, a huge gulag." This hardly seemed relevant to the issue of American responses to North Korean sabre-rattling.

McCain was even more out of his depth when discussing the economy. His much touted plan to "freeze spending" on everything but defense, veterans benefits (which he has opposed in the past), and entitlements is entirely wrongheaded. The worst thing for the government to do in the event of a recession is to stop spending. In fact, it was spending that brought the country out of the Great Depression. Obama, while recognizing that he won't be able to do everything he wants right away, has a well-conceived notion of how our economy works, and his argument that trimming the budget requires a scalpel rather than a hachet rings true. John McCain's ranting about earmarks will only resolve so much, and a spending freeze would have disastrous consequences. Who do you trust on the economy?

In addition to the substantive differences between the candidates, their style was markedly difference. I am admittedly basing my vote in this election partly on personality, and I will take the guy with an even temper over the guy who seems to be trying to teach some whippersnapper a lesson. He needs to understand that being a "maverick" can only take him so far. Obama, on the other hand, was much more poised and calm throughout the debate. He certainly came off as more "presidential" and less "crotchety."

For a factcheck on some of the claims bandied about at the debate, Factcheck.org has a pretty good summary.