October 09, 2008

Obama-McCain Round Two

Who won? Well, Obama of course. That's not just my impression. Or yours. It's also the view of the lads* at Election Debates where grizzled debating veterans from Australia, the USA and Scotland each awarded the palm to the Senator from Illinois. This followed Joe Biden's 6-1 obliteration of lovely Sarah Palin.

*Disclosure: yes, some of these chaps are friends and were my contempories back when we swam in these murky debating waters.

9 Oct 2008 15:33:29 | Elections

2 Comments

Ryan

I'm afraid I can place no value on these debate scores. Scoring debates by the World Parliamentary Debate Rules when the debaters are not debating with any intention of conforming to those rules strikes me as somewhat misplaced, like watching two people fight each other into a pool and then judging their falls by formal diving rules.

Although I must admit to being annoyed with Sen. Biden for being a lawyer (my profession as well) and the Chair of the Judiaciary Committee yet making a significant mistake every time he talked about the Constitution. To whom much is given, much should be expected, darn it!

Posted by: Ryan | October 09, 2008 at 04:47 PM

tommyt

hey - I was time barred out of this - I gave it to McCain comfortably

Posted by: tommyt | October 09, 2008 at 05:18 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
Financial Crisis: All Uncle Milton's Fault? Will Wilkinson has some fun with Naomi Klein's latest nonsense. Naomi Klein says [the financial crisis discredits neoliberalism]. Or she wants it to. She thinks it discredits Milton Friedman in particular, because for Klein not a sparrow falls without Friedman’s having somehow strangled it. Hers is a tiny intellectual universe containing, on the one hand, the things she likes and, on the other, the baleful influence of Milton Friedman. Did you know, for instance, that Paul Bremer was a Friedmanite agent of mass destruction in Iraq? Apparently so!
PREVIOUS POST
"Ambition" is the new "Uppity" Sarah Palin on Barack Obama and Bill Ayers today: This pattern raises serious questions about Senator Obama's judgment. It raises serious questions about his truthfulness. But there is no question about his ambition. Ambition explains launching your political career in the living room of an unrepentant terrorist. Indeed. Because you too would start your decades-long conspiracy to steal the Presidency in the home of an "unrepentent terrorist". That's a sensible ambition! Who could possibly fail to see that? Doesn't Obama's association - no more than that - with Ayers undermine the "he's a secret terrorist-sympathiser" narrative? Or have we, I suppose, now reached the point where the GOP skips the "secret" bit and just calls Obama a terrorist who's so cunning he hides his terrorism in plain sight? There's a bigger problem here. Even if this kind of tactic works an McCain pulls off an improbable victory, the manner of his triumph will poison his victory. There will be no goodwill or groundswell of support from the decent, patriotic middle for a President McCain. By contrast, a President Obama is going to enjoy enormous support and will be given the benefit of the doubt by millions of people who didn't...

alex massie

Search

My Online Status

Recent Comments