Welcome, Guest!
Second presidential debate: Here we go again
Published: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 - 8:13pm
Democratic candidate Barack Obama and Republican candidate John McCain met tonight at Belmont University in Nashville, Tenn., in the second presidential debate of the 2008 campaign. Several OG staffers blogged their responses to the debate. Here is senior Joy Shapley's reaction to the showdown.
8:09 p.m.
Barack Obama comes out swinging in his very first answer, blaming George Bush for the current economic crisis and outlining a rescue plan of his own. John McCain seems somehow even older than he did in the first debate, but here it gives his words more gravitas than Obama's … at least for now. He mentions energy independence, but doesn't go into any great detail about it.
Second question: "Who would you want for treasury secretary?" McCain tries a weak joke that doesn't even get a chuckle from the crowd, and then lists a number of promising-sounding people for treasury secretary (eBay, though? really?). Obama repeats his lines about the middle class, but doesn't answer the question.
Not too impressed so far. McCain is sounding tired and not at all inspiring, and Obama has inspiration out the wazoo but isn't answering questions.
8:24 p.m.
I don't think I like this format as much as the other ones. It seems less like a real debate, but at least the moderator (Tom Brokaw of NBC) seems pretty cool.
Tired of hearing about ordinary families, but I suppose it's working, or else they both wouldn't be using that. John McCain repeats Obama's line about cronyism almost word for word.
There's a guy behind Teresa Finch (whose question didn't make much sense) with a really great mustache. History lesson is good. McCain goes on about earmarks again, but he's making decent points about spending (assuming, of course, that you ignore the money being spent on the war).
Energy independence = drilling offshore? Yeah, I don't think so.
No one's really done anything interesting yet. Rehash of old questions and older answers.
8:36 p.m.
Where did the "terrorist organizations" thing come from?
Ouch, Obama hurt himself with the line about investment. No one wants to hear about large amounts of money being spent right now. At least he's confident, I guess.
First question from teh intarwebz? Hooray!
McCain dodged it completely. "Spending freeze"? Including defense spending, in this "age of terrorism"? Never mind, apparently defense is an exception. I'm curious to see how that will work out. McCain's gaining more energy, looking more animated and more interesting.
I like Obama's answer on the sacrifice question. He answered satisfactorily and said some new things.
Can we hear about some new issues, please? Something we haven't heard about 10 million times already?
8:45 p.m.
McCain attacks Obama's tax plan, and the moderator runs over Obama's attempt to respond. Nice to see a moderator with backbone, although it means that the next question will definitely be derailed.
Here's a graphical analysis of McCain and Obama's tax plan.
"Wonderful Ronald Reagan." McCain hasn't said "maverick" yet, but he keeps repeating the line about challenging his party leaders. I wish both candidates would stop trying to pin down their opponent's voting records, as those statistics can be pushed and pulled any way they want.
Ingrid Jackson has the first question from someone below middle age.
I give John McCain props for using the correct term to describe "climate change," although he raves about nuclear power and doesn't describe how to deal with the waste.
8:56 p.m.
Moderator treats both McCain and Obama on the timing rules. McCain refers to Obama as "that one."
Health care question! Finally.
Obama talks a long time about it. Not surprising, it's his pet issue.
"Fundamentally sound." "Fundamental differences." "Fundamentally wrong." Can we find the candidates a thesaurus?
McCain focuses on "choice," describing health care as a "responsibility" and talking about big government. It's a good line for him. Obama, on the other hand, describes health care as a right, pulls out an anecdote about his mother that made a big impact. Tells the moderator that he can go stuff his time constraints. Poor moderator.
9:10 p.m.
Debate shifts gears to foreign policy.
"America is a nation of good." "America is the best country, a force of good, etc." General interventionist rhetoric … ick.
Sorry, John, but I'm not your friend. It's getting irritating.
Someone used the word "exacerbate" in a sentence!! Even though it wasn't a correct usage. Oh well.
9:21 p.m.
"I will be very brief." Yeahhh.
My attention is wandering.
McCain: We agree on some things, but basically you're wrong. Surge surge Petraeus troops surge honor and victory. Hey John, Russia is a democracy, too.
Barack Obama still pronouncing Pakistan like people from Pakistan pronounce it, despite Fox News (proof he's a Muslim OMG). "Let's provide moral support to everyone! Yippee!"
Where are we going to get the money for this moral support?
"This question requires only a yes or a no." Moderator getting snippy. Neither McCain nor Obama follows directions.
9:31 p.m.
The last question is quite weird. It translates to "Please provide anecdotes from your past."
Final thoughts:
No clear winner. Apparently the first debate was one of the least-watched debates in recent history; I doubt many more people watched this one. "November fatigue," I think. I'm glad that neither played the dirty politics game tonight. The pundits will probably give Obama the edge, since McCain didn't seem very aggressive.
Comments
Nuclear energy should be explored
Just to highlight on one of your points, it is worth noting that a large amount of space has already been allocated, and an underground storage facility built, at Yucca mountain. The problem is that, after billions of dollars of development and construction, Congress wishes scientists to be able to prove definitively that in a million years, someone living on Yucca mountain will receive less radiation than someone living in the Pacific Northwest does today due to minerals in the earth. This (at least to me) seems impossible to prove by any means of science and excessively strict. Another possibility, at least for that waste which is currently just sitting around, is reprocessing, which is actually done in many European countries. That which is currently considered waste in temporary storage would then be useable fuel! (data from GQ: March 08)
Rant aside, I do like your summary of the debate, despite being neither a McCain nor Obama supporter at the moment. I didn't find it particularly interesting and mostly just one more chance for each candidate to restate the things we have heard so many times already!
Although nuclear energy is
Although nuclear energy is clean and will likely be necessary to eliminate dependence on fossil fuels, there is something to be said about limiting somewhat the amount of nuclear energy we use. Nuclear power is safe when done responsibly, but has a huge potential to cause disaster.
I'd be a lot more comfortable knowing our energy came solely or primarily from hydro (dams and oceanic tides), solar, and wind.
Disaster Potential
Of course, Chernobyl is an example of a worst case scenario. Another example that seems noteworthy to me is Three Mile Island, where a disaster was averted. On that occasion, not only did the safety valve to contain the first problem break, but the bypass valve to control that broke as well, and still no radiation escaped and nobody received any level of radiation above that which they normally would have. Chernobyl, as your article explains, was the result of an ill-advised experiment being performed after a long delay and in clearly unsafe circumstances. Not only this, but the emergency shutdown methods (which have since been improved) actually made the reaction stronger before they could have began to shut it down.
This is not to say that modern safety systems are "perfect" which of course we can't really say about any safety systems. Nuclear power will always carry a high risk, but keep in mind that the TMI plant has been in operation for almost 30 years since the accident. Not only this, but nuclear reactors put out no radiation, while coal plants do (not that you are advocating for those either!). Nuclear also has environmental benefits. Three Mile Island is an environmental haven for many animals, some endangered, and plants like the one in Clinton that use coolant lakes provide warm water habitats for many freshwater animals as well!
Post new comment