Published in the The New York Post on October 8, 2008
John McCain probably won last night’s debate on points - but he needed a knockout, and he didn’t get it.
His proposal to help homeowners by buying their mortgages was well articulated. He also scored well on entitlements and, as always, emerged ahead on foreign policy.
But Obama dodged and weaved his way out of trouble.
McCain failed to rebut patently absurd claims - like Obama’s claim to favor nuclear power, his “plan” to cut taxes on 95 percent of Americans and his charge that McCain would shower CEOs with new tax breaks.
Incredibly, McCain even let Obama get away with lamenting the high deficit. He needed to say: Let me get this straight. You want to raise spending and give everyone a tax cut and you won’t increase the deficit - where does the money come from? He needed to explain that Obama would hike taxes on practically everyone, that the Democrat’s spending plans require a huge tax increase or a major rise in the deficit.
Watching McCain fail to pin Obama down was like watching Sonny Liston try to catch Mohammed Ali.
He pulled his punches - letting Obama off gently with lines like: “You said you would not raise taxes in a bad economy. Well, it is bad.” He should have made the case that Obama’s tax program would transform a crisis into a catastrophe.
He let opportunity after opportunity slip through his fingers.
McCain scored nicely by tying Obama to Fannie Mae, campaign contributions and all. But he failed to identify adequately with the popular anger at Wall Street and did nothing to reduce his own connection in the public mind with the Bush bailout.
On national security, he did a good job of showing how well-prepared he was, and scored well with his remark that there’s no time for on-the-job training. And his explanation of his Afghan and Pakistan policies was excellent, while Obama’s repetition of his old Iraq argument seemed out of date and rote.
But national security won’t win the election. McCain needed to win on the economy - and he didn’t.
Perhaps his biggest failure was not hanging Bill Ayers around Obama’s neck. By not mentioning the terrorist’s name, he undermines the efforts of his own campaign to make Ayers an issue. By avoiding the topic last night, he seemed to be saying it’s not a real issue.
McCain needed to punch through on two issues, taxes and values: how Obama’s policies will crush the economy, and how Obama’s core beliefs are far outside the mainstream. He landed a lot of blows last night - but Obama managed to brush them off.
McCain entered the debate nine points down in the Gallup and Rasmussen polls. His performance won’t even start to close the gap.
 |
Comments
Only subscribers to Dick Morris' '08 Play-By-Play may post comments. You must be logged in to post a comment.
John McCain probably won last night’s debate on points–might have won on points but didn’t reach the “threshold,”–like you said…didn’t deliver the knockout punch. He won’t be elected because he has nothing relevant to offer for an economy in meltdown and a nation in fear. His last resort answer isn’t hope, but more fear — of Obama.
His proposal to help homeowners by buying their mortgages was well articulated…….ugh…that was included in the bailout bill.
Perhaps his biggest failure was not hanging Bill Ayers around Obama’s neck. By not mentioning the terrorist’s name, he undermines the efforts of his own campaign to make Ayers an issue. By avoiding the topic last night, he seemed to be saying it’s not a real issue….and it is not..it might have been a factor, but the constant saturation of the Ayers issue has been overshadowed by the economic meltdown.
Obama was “float like a butterfly…..and sting like a bee.” McCain’s offense in the debate was a no game changer. John McCain and Sarah Palin will return to familiar criticism of Barack Obama’s friends and supporters….and it is something that the American voter has had enough of…..voters want plans and resloutions that are going to correct the economy, not negative crapsandwiches which the McCain campaign has been serving over and over again…..this Karl Rove playbook of distasteful politics might have worked for the Bush Administration…..it didn’t work for Hillary…..and it is surely an anchor around the McCain/Palin ticket..that eventually will cost him the election.
Obama is going to win this election in an historic landslide. The bigger the crisis, the “bigger the picture” in terms of how these candidates are being measured. It’s not about past votes or Bill Ayers or preconditions. These things are pedantic against the backdrop of losing your job. In good economic times, things like flag burning and Willie Horton can make the difference. Americans think we’re headed for a Great Depression and they want to elect an FDR, which means they want someone who can inspire a sense of hope, calm and purpose in the face of gloom and doom.
The electorate has long seen Obama has an inspiring, articulate, intelligent, young, energetic, hopeful leader. They know he is inexperienced, but they are hungry for change. Bigots in the Republican base hate Obama’s middle name, skin color, Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers, but that is a limited audience that were never going to vote for him anyway.
People love McCain for his heroism, bipartisanship and reform image. Howeever they also know that he doesn’t understand the economy. Every time he opens his mouth on the subject he sounds like a doddering old man who never took Econ 101. Obama might not be Warren Buffett, but WB supports him and his advisory team includes Nobel Prize winning economists and former Clinton people who are associated with the last great economic success story.
In short, we’re in an historic economic crisis and the electorate thinks Obama is the one to get us out of it. We’re so far beyond specific policies, past votes and sub-committees that it isn’t even funny. Think 1984-type landslide in which McCain carries his home state of Arizona and a handful of culturally conservative red states.