Comments:McCain and Obama face off in U.S. presidential candidate debate

=Who won the debate? Did the debate change your opinions on either of the candidates or the issues?=


 * I already made up my mind, but i find this debate good but i notice it was a big "no u" and "i agree". --KDP3 (talk) 04:13, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Thoughts on McCain
Senator McCain seemed hellbent on attacking Senator Obama. While some of what was justified, most of what he said was completely fallacious. I don't know who I support (I'm a moderate who is split on the issues), but so far, Obama seems like more of a serious politician. -- Poe Joe (talk) 05:07, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but he thought the surge was a great idea, AND IT WAS! Therefore, all criticism is invalid. I now refer to him as John "The Surge" McCain. I also liked how he brought up that "Obama has the most liberal voting record of any US senator". He's running under the Liberal ticket, why is this surprising? --Smackdat (talk) 12:21, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

They kicked themselves in the groin
McCain did make at least one serious mistake, and Obama did too by not pointing it out. McCain said he wanted to freeze all spending but defense and veteran benefits. HELLO? Does anyone see how ridiculous that is? Yes, McCain, let's let our schools, communications, and everything else fall apart while YOU as a veteran continue to get benefits with your multiple houses, while we continue to fund our biggest, most expensive, and most pointless project ever--the Iraq War. --Poisonous (talk) 06:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Obama on presentation, McCain on substance. Give me substance over presentation any day of the week. Perception (presentation) is 90% of reality, but I need 100% of reality, as we all live in 100% of reality. Those who don't are either in denial or mentally distressed. So, I need substance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.187.100.148 (talk) 12:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Did you want to start a Flame War poisonous? Anyway being an economist, I don't believe the ENTIRE nation could fall apart while ONLY McCain being the ONLY veteran; thus you are saying McCain was SOLELY responsible for the defense of our nation. Also I don't think the Iraq war is the biggest, most expensive, nor the most pointless project ever. In spite of the Iraq War, welfare is the most expensive. The government also specializes in pointless so qualifying something as MOST pointless seems absurd to being with. Somehow you think that without the government, the USA would fall apart. Fortunately for Americans, you are wrong. McCain is most assuredly not right in thinking that freezing the budget is going to fix spending problems, but there is no reason to assume that doing so is going to create anarchy. 24.252.6.212 20:02, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why you felt the need to target my comment and claim a flame war, as I was simply putting my own opinion. Not sure why you felt the need to misrepresent it, either. You also assume a lot, my friend. But alas, this is the internet, and everyone is looking for a fight. Your comment about him being the only veteran doesn't even make sense. All I was saying that it was funny that he, as a veteran, wanted to keep benefits for himself but not spend on anyone else's troubles. Military spending, btw, takes up the bulk of our budget. It wastes lives and money, seeing as Iraq didn't attack us. Your "the government..." comment doesn't even make sense, so I won't bother. And no, I don't think that government is needed. That's a nice little assumption of yours--I'm fairly anarchist, so yea. It's just ridiculous to spend all of our money on "defense" when more important things that cost less are being ignored. --Poisonous (talk) 20:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

For some reason, when I was done watching the debate, I had an image of McCain wrestling a barrel full of pork. --204.81.230.204 16:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

IT WAS A TIE
I'm an Obama suupporter. I watched the debates just to see if i think that either side could convince somone to vote for them, I did not see that from Mcain on Obama, so i'm calling it a tie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.194.251.3 (talk) 13:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

"That's not true" ... "doesn't understand"
The catch phrases were clear.

Obama often said "That's not true" several times regarding what McCain was saying. That's the polite way of saying "That's a lie". Obama is only defensive when he is caught;

McCain often said "[my opponent] doesn't understand". McCain seems to have been trying to illustrate himself as older and wiser, and this young lying pup standing next to him just doesn't understand.

Based on these two statements, that really carried through the entire presentation, I would say that Obama lost the debate. He was able to point out inaccuracy in the information coming from McCain, while McCain was only able to suggest that his opinion is better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by A thought (talk • contribs) 14:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

both candidates are wrong about the bailout
This bailout does not have to be funded with our money because the chinese will sell all of their treasury bills once the deal is done so our financial system will really collapse. It is time to nationalize all of our foreign debt.```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grate white s (talk • contribs) 20:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Why hasn't there been a bailout of this magnitude proposed for American manufacturing? Over the past 15 years or so a substantial amount of American manufacturers downsized/outsourced, and even more went out of business. I think that the current failed economic sinks should be allowed to go out of business, and we should be focusing on rebuilding our economic sources like we would with a global war. Sparky1 (talk) 20:38, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

$800 billion in new spending?
True or not, there had to be some reason for Senator McCain to to blurt out this figure. I would like to know what his reasoning was, whether or not it was faulty. If there was no reasoning, Senator McCain might as well have blurted out: "This past March Senator Obama went on a nationwide killing spree".

As a side note, new spending is just a part of a financial plan, and in order to see the full picture we would have to also know the following:


 * How much of the old spending would be retained
 * Which of the old programs would be cut/retained
 * How much tax revenue would be obtained
 * How this new tax revenue is different from the old tax revenue both in amount and method of collection
 * What are the overall short term and long term affects of the total spending and tax revenue on the economy Sparky1 (talk) 20:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * From the way they both responded to the question during the debate, I don't think either of them have concrete plans. Yet they're both thoroughly convinced that the other's plan is terrible. --204.81.230.204 16:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

McCain vs. Obama: What's the difference?
I saw the whole debate, and I thought it was pretty predictable. Neither candidate said anything particularly weird and I already had a pretty good idea about their positions on foreign policy. If I hadn't seen it, I wouldn't have missed much.

Both candidates, of course, want to bail out the failing corporations. Obama says he'll get us out of Iraq, but I really don't trust him to do so. (At least on McCain's watch, I know what to expect.)

It was pretty obvious that there's no fundamental difference in how the McCain and Obama would deal with Iran. Both think it would be unacceptable for Iran to have nukes. Both want to impose sanctions on Iran. Both would ultimately be open to going to war with Iran. The only detail where there's any real difference is that Obama would be willing to talk with Ahmadinejad whereas McCain wouldn't.

Later on, Obama admitted that he and McCain had similar opinions about the recent events in the Caucasus. Both of them think this is raw aggression by Russia against Georgia. Neither of them are willing to accept that Abkhazia and South Ossetia are independent countries, plain and simple, and have been so since the beginning of the 1990s. I personally think that Russia was wrong to get involved in Georgia's war against South Ossetia, but I recognize that Russia did so simply because South Ossetia was its ally, and I wish McCain and/or Obama would realize this too.

71.96.128.236 22:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you prefer red ants or black ants? --Brian McNeil / talk 22:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * watching both mccain and obama on tv everyday, i am thoroughly convinced that mccain has the better deal to become the next president of america. i tried to convince myself before that obama might be the answer to america's boring exposure to issues on dying economy, unsuccessful war struggles but at the end i realized that he could only worsen the situation. surely, mccain could better handle the job and has in himself a combination of patriotism and love for country unsurmountable...i had heard and seen enough, mccain will make it!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cookie coy (talk • contribs) 13:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

McCain vs. Obama
McCain is an indignant military man, who still lets his memories control over him. Clearly, Obama does not have as much experience as McCain on this point but hardly any predecessors had prior to their post. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.151.183.67 (talk) 10:53, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

nopers
nope it's ow he debated —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nawman (talk • contribs) 16:16, 5 November 2008 (UTC)