mr. coates:
I am a regular reader of yours and I am surprised and shocked that after your excellent discussion about why "uppity" is a problem and your popularizing the piece about "white privilege" you aren't talking about McCain's unwillingness to look at Obama while they were talking or look at him when they shook hands.
You know full well that McCain's people wanted a free flowing debate, but then when they got it, their candidate essentially froze out Obama by not even acknowledging his presence.
Is this what would have happened at townhalls?
You need to look at this picture and ask yourself how many times you, me and every other colored man has been put in this position, looking to the white man while we shake his hand as he looks away at his girlfriend or wife or his buddies.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/live-blogging-o.html
Its the unwilingness to take a colored man seriously.
Its the unwillingness to address the colored man as an equal.
Its the unwillingness to accept that in some situations, all things being equal, the colored man is as sharp and eloquent and forceful as his white counter part.
Its the unwillingness to accept that after years of shunting smart colored men aside to tertiary corridors - hip hop, movies, sports - they are still finding a way of standing tall and proud in the heart of western academy and western power
Obama might be a post-racial candidate and I have no problem with that but he's showing how racial so many of these whites - particularly McCain - is.
Say something Mr. Coates.
Before I go forward I need to show some respect. I'm a certain age and I bring with that certain assumption. I'm taking from this gentleman's writing style that he is of another generation. McCain is also of another generation. I say that to say that there may be things going that I completely missed.
Having said that, what I saw on stage was a rigid ideologue. I think Eugene Robinson nailed this--McCain (like all ideologues) has to believe that those who oppose him represent some sort of treason, evil, or moral failing. I think this is why conservatives never liked him much. I just saw it as a basic lack of respect for your opponent.
Maybe, it was race, maybe it wasn't. Let's, for the sake of argument, assume the worst--that it was racism. I really am not mad about it because I strongly believe, if that's the case, that McCain will pay the price for his own racism. I keep saying this, it ain't 1968. McCain can be dismissive and underestimate Obama right up to November. If he thinks that the way to garner votes is to lecture Obama, refuse to look him in the eye, and generally wave him off, I say, more power to him. Let his racism take right on back to the Senate. The point of an election is win--it isn't to take offense at the stupidity of your opponents.
But there's a larger point here. You guys probably know this, but I strongly believe that disrespect exacts arguably a higher price on the disrespecter than on the disrespectee. Rest assured that Obama isn't taking McCain lightly. He would not go into a debate and be dismissive of him at all. I keep hearing people complain that Obama can't be angry because he's black. What they're are missing is that the cage is actually the key to set Obama free. He shouldn't be angry. He shouldn't take offense at McCain. Hillary was plenty angry. How'd that work out? Liberals have a bully complex. Having gotten chumped repeatedly, we're confusing strength with arrrogance, toughness with strut. Take it from someone who learned it the hard way. they ain't the same, son. To paraphrase Carolyn Forche, Obama needs to do exactly would he did last night--slice McCain to lace. But he needs to do it so quietly, calmly and efficiently, that even those who are paid to opine on such things, don't even notice the blood all over the floor.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
I agree with your point Ta-Nehisi. But speaking for myself as a fairly young (32) African-American female born in the "dirty south", I had both reactions to McCain "demeanor" as you and the commenter(?)did. As an intellectual, I agree with you, that it seemed more like your basic ideologue stance, particularly since it does seem like McCain lives in Black and White with no shades of gray. But my second incarnation as a African American born an raised in the South. I had the same visceral reaction to McCain that the first commenter did. It's one thing at the end to not look at Obama during the debate, but there was just something about the handshake at the end that just didn't sit well with me.
But in my head, I agree with you, but in my heart, I feel the commenter
i am the commenter whom you quoted.
and i agree with the lady above me.
and i am from the dirty dirty also.
Just as a follow up Mr. Coates.
Here are all the things that McCain did that shook me:
1 - Didn't look at Obama during debate.
2 - McCain didn't look at Obama when they shook hands.
3 - McCain didn't have anything to say to Obama at the end of the debate while Obama said, "Good job, John."
4 - When McCain and his wife Cindy were on one end of the stage, it was Obama and his wife Michelle, who walked from their end of the stage to go and greet the McCains.
5 - Look at the video, Cindy doesn't extend her hand to Obama. Its Obama who has to do it.
You can tell me that this is not racism, and I agree, its not racism, but its definitely privilege. Its entitlement. Its "I'm better than you." It's contempt. It's dismissal.
Isn't there some preexisting animosity between the two from 2005? Some ethics reform business or something like that?
definitely about race and being - not an ideologue! - but a demagogue. there's a difference.
McCain is pure cynicism. Look at how he changed his tune on the financial crisis 89 times in the past week. Look at his whirling on the propiety of holding the debate, and his absurd combination of "Country First" and Sarah Palin.
The man has no consistently thought out ideology. He is not Ron Paul, who is a true ideologue. McCain is a demagogue.
And he is playing race games Lee Atwater style, for demagogue value.
It may well be, but I'm not sure why that's a problem for Obama. That's McCain's issue. If I was going into a boxing match with a dude he kept underestimating my right hook, what am I supposed to do? Keep saying to him, "Dude, watch out for my right." No way. I'm just gonna keep smashing him with it.
@Steve French:
Yes, there is. Too lazy to look out details now. But then, that is a problem McCain has with almost anyone and Obama with just McCain.
TNC writes: "I really am not mad about it because I strongly believe, if that's the case, that McCain will pay the price for his own racism."
Right. He's paying the price with people like your commenter. And many others. We're mad about it, ergo McCain will pay the price, at the polls.
I certainly did not pick up on that. Its a little disturbing .....but you are right Mccain is from that generation too.
Ta-N
can't figure out what your post at 2PM refers to. no one hear said this was Obama's problem, except in the sense of knowing his opponent. it's one of McCain's several achille's heels - guy's got more achille's heels than he's got houses!
Andrew Sullivan has a couple of brilliant posts up about 1) Obama's incredible discipline, focus, strategic brilliance, and inner strength, and 2) how McCain has walked into the same trap Hillary Clinton walked into.
t,
I have a friend who lives in NYC. Clean cut, well educated young black professional, who wears a suit and tie and carries a briefcase on his subway ride to work every day. McCain's behavior reminded him of that white person on the subway who goes out of his or her way not to sit next to him. He believes that even today, some people find the confidence of a self actualized young black man unsettling. He agrees with you, its their problem not his.
Several times during the debate when McCain was saying absurdly stupid things about Obama (naive, not prepared, etc.) The camera showed Obama with bemused look on his face, a slight smile, it was the non verbal equivalent of Reagan's "there he goes again" and as much as I wanted Obama to rip into him, the smile was so much more effective.
According to Ambinder, McCain was very uneasy meeting Obama at the 911 memorial. Honestly I think he's embarrassed by his own campaign.
I tend to agree that McCain's dismissiveness toward Obama isn't really about race. Uppity black folks are just one of many kinds of people McCain doesn't feel he has to acknowledge. But the interesting thing this thread highlights is that regardless of where the attitude comes from, it is being perceived as racist. And I can't help but think that Obama must feel some of that sting himself--and whether he feels he's being dissed for his race or his presumption, he seems to have recognized that graciousness is his best weapon.
John McCain has not in my opinion communicated his economic positions well. Below is my attempt to clarify them.
McCain believes in Jeffersonian Democracy. What does that mean? Thomas Jefferson argued against Federalism, as he felt that it posed a risk and infringement to the liberty of Americans. The Federal government is a necessary evil, which should operate on the common benefit, security, and protection of Citizens, and should be watched closely and its powers should be minimized.
Science recently has determined that there is a scientific reason why this is the best possible configuration. Networks of all types, financial, government, electrical, communicative, all behave under certain laws. These laws have been described well in layman’s terms by Lazlo Barabasi in his book “Linked.” These laws argue against centralized networks as they are prone to cascade failures and that distributed adaptable networks are much more robust and capable of sustaining damage to one part of the network and reconfiguring themselves and continue to function. What this tells you is that democracy and capitalism, is inherently more stable than other types of systems of economic distribution and governance.
Capitalism has been moving towards big business, since the industrial revolution, and this has led to a centralization of Wealth which has placed our economy in the current economic crisis we face today. It is not accurate to place the blame on Wall Street, or on homeowners, for the current financial crisis. The crisis was driven by the centralized wealth and dynamics of the networked global economy.
The solution to the problem is to move toward decentralization of all critical networks such as Government and Financial.
McCain holds that we need to move from Big Business to many competing companies run on Main Street, and incentivize investment in small business over big business.
McCain also holds that regulation much like Big government needs to be circumscribed in its powers, but that it’s a necessary evil. The idea is that centralized standards, and regulation, reduce the cost of compliance and lead to greater efficiency.
McCain understands we need regulation and standards, but regulation and standards must be able to evolve and adapt, while cost of compliance must be the same for individuals as for big business on a basis that places the individual or small business with an equal footing to gig government or big business.
(In my opinion, this needs to be slanted towards small business and individuals. That it’s better to err on the side of smaller concerns.)
McCain is against Obama’s tax plan, because increasing capital gains tax on business, and investment, because it acts as a barrier to deploying monies to generate wealth formation. A simple way to understand this is as friction to the speed at which capital flows through the system. This matters to every American, not just the wealthy, as McCain critics say. This matters to every American because if assets are not deployed, and or leveraged, then entrepreneurial activities are curtailed, and with this comes a reduction in jobs, and a decrease in wealth distribution, and most importantly to wealth concentration which makes the average American a indentured servant to the concentrated wealth.
McCain understands that we need alter wealth distribution in this country such that it benefits the middle class and grows it. He also understands that in a free society you do not accomplish this by confiscating another’s wealth and redistribute it to others on the government’s whim. This was the approach of the old Soviet Union. What we need to do is provide incentives for people to place their wealth into the system so that others can become wealthy in their own right.
For those that think but I just want a job, and this does not matter to you, more business creation, leads to more jobs, and in today’s world with equity participation, greater wealth.
At some point next year there will be an occasion for a meeting in the Oval Office and President Obama can turn to McCain and mention how comfortable his chair is, and how maybe some day he'll let McCain sit in it for just a minute. Just a minute.
And the bolts in McCain's neck will pop out.
Sweet revenge.
Zak..."and whether he feels he's being dissed for his race or his presumption, he seems to have recognized that graciousness is his best weapon."
What he said.
Maybe I'm off on this but I think that McCain is just ashamed. I think on the whole he doesn't believe in his campaigns strategy and is afraid that it will show in his eyes. Having gone through all that he has in life and still hold on to his character only to undermine his beliefs at this critical moment is sad and undistinguished. Perhaps his lack of eye contact with Obama is a way to keep at bay a more damaging and pathetic truth. One that is two painful to let be known or ponder.
This is pretty good I think because it contains several clips of McCain interactions in debates with both White and Black men. When he seems to think he is in the right, he makes eye contact, otherwise he doesn't. I am leaning towards fear and/or shame not racism.
Karl writes: "Maybe I'm off on this but I think that McCain is just ashamed. I think on the whole he doesn't believe in his campaigns strategy and is afraid that it will show in his eyes. Having gone through all that he has in life and still hold on to his character only to undermine his beliefs at this critical moment is sad and undistinguished."
But it's not just the campaign. McCain threw his principles out after Dumbya beat him in 2000. He has been sucking up to the Rovians and the despicable "base" ever since. His halfhearted rebuke of the swiftboating of Kerry and his refusal to vote against torture were significant moments in his self-degradation.
In Kurt Vonnegut's "Mother Night" there's an aphorism that goes something like "we have to be careful about what we pretend to be, because one day we wake up and find that's what we are." It's possible McCain was once an admirable man. He was certainly better than the Bushpigs. But when he wakes up these days he should realize that he's as big a prick as Karl Rove ever was.
White people like McCain condescend and patronize minorities -- they're overly solicitous and try to buddy up. There's something else at work.
I thought McCain's refusal to make eye contact with Obama was because he feared Obama. To stare at someone down is to show fearlessness (think of two boxers staring each other down). Obama looked at McCain and accused him of being wrong on Iraq, directly. McCain tried to tattle to the teacher (Jim Lehrer) that Obama was unprepared etc. Imagine Al Pacino in full lather berating someone: "Look at me when I'm talking to you!" Who's in charge? The guy who's looking or the guy trying to look at anything but?
If you're not scared, you tell it to my face. McCain was scared.
Oops! This is the link I meant in my previous post:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/27/1297/88780/804/612449
Sorry, guys
There was definitely a bad vibe with McCain's body language all night. I am not sure whether the root cause was racism or irritation at the idea of having to face a guy in his 40s, or fear, or what, but I sincerely believe it will bite McCain in the butt. That kind of tense body language and eye contact is not presidential AT ALL. It says "cranky old grandpa" not "Commander in Chief".
Obama's doing it right. I don't think it's race, as much as McCain thinking Obama is an upstart of any race. But if it is race then to paraphrase Colin Powell: let race be McCain's problem.
People:
This isn't a black/white/age thing. It's a McCain thing. He did the same stuff in the Republican debates, I'm not sure if he ever looked Romney or Huckabee in the eye.
McCain, in his mind, operates on a high moral plane that only people who have gone through the exact same experiences as he has may be considered his peers. Read George Will's WaPo column earlier this week for a sense on how many paleo-conservative establishment Republican's view McCain.
It's why, early on in the primaries, some very partisan Republicans were aghast that McCain made a comeback in New Hampshire. He has irritated the Norquist/DeLay/Limbaugh faction for years, they've only come round because of the GOP's formidable intra-party discipline.
It's disrespectufl no matter who's on the other end of it. If I'm not mistaken, though, McCain did the same thing to his very white opponents during the primary debates. But then he was ignoring 5 or 6 guys rather than just 1.
I could be wrong and it was defintiely insulting. Some see it as a sign of fear. I see it as a sign of fear that he'd lose his cool if he allowed himself to connect to Obama. Robinson was right on when he said it's all personal for McCain.
I also think, essentially, McCain respects only a handful of people and Obama is not one of them. And he's incapable of feigning otherwise.
Maybe I'm off on this but I think that McCain is just ashamed.
I think McCain is just an asshole. I don't have the perspective to comment on whether his behavior came off as racist. But it certainly seems in keeping with his inability to respect anyone who doesn't worship him as some kind of elder statesman and foreign policy expert.
I agree with your response, Ta-Nehisi. You reminded me of the way Steven Covey stresses how each person has power through their response to a situation. He uses Victor Frankl's experiences as a Nazi concentration camp prisoner (described in Frankl's book "Man's Search for Meaning") as a graphic example of how Frankl realized he had power over the torturers by how he reacted to them. Through this lens, I can see McCain getting more and more frustrated by not getting a strong, negative reaction from Barack.
Btw, I also agree with Charlie's comment posted at 3:19 PM. Living in Phoenix, I know many people here who share his assessment. One of the reasons that McCain only has a single digit lead in his "home" state.
McCain, in love with the fact he is the most popular Republican these days, forgot a little detail: Obama is the first national-level Democrat since Bill Clinton that Americans just plain like. McCain's base is old people, who already vote at such high levels that firing them up more doesn't help them. Obama's base is younger, thus made up of people who, if they voted more often, would guarantee Democratic victories. McCain just did a lot to fire them up. He was condescending while also being wrong. He sounded stuck in the 80's. Everybody under 50, maybe even 60, can remember times in their past when some out-of-touch over-the-hill fogey disrespected them for disagreeing and didn't take their opinions seriously because of youth. McCain just became that old fogey. His entire world view is fashioned for a time that has passed. He looked small and petty, while Obama showed cool under fire and looked presidential. McCain looked weird and obsessed over hobbyhorses like earmarks and the Surge that don't matter much to most American, while Obama was masterful on the big picture issues. The master condescender of the past eight years has been Bush. McCain did everything last night possible to remind voters of Bush.
Also, when your opponent easily deflects your attacks and makes you look like a petty liar (like on the Senate Sub-Committee jab), going back to it makes you look like a petty jerk. McCain just looked like a jerk. Add in the fact that he was doing this to a popular, charismatic, young black candidate that he has been attacking for being a smartypants elitist at the very time Americans want a smart president and McCain's debate performance was political seppuku. It's easy to beat up on the smarter guy when the smarter guy is acting smug and condescending, but when the dumber guy acts smug and condescending and the smarter guy is respectful and calm, the dumb guy loses.
As I am white, I can't say not looking at Obama was or wasn't a race thing. I just thought, McCain can't even look at Obama, a guy who is ultimately on his side (the side of America). How is McCain ever going to navigate dealing with world leaders who don't share his views? McCain is at once archaic and child like in his dealings with people. Bizarrely my parents commented after the debate that they find McCain hard not to like, so who knows. I guess we all see what we want to see.
On an unrelated note,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkM183H13yw
The video above is the most I have ever heard a woman connected to a powerful politician speak to the struggles of women running a household who also have jobs and supportive husbands. Watching Michelle speak was like reading a mommy blog (a positive thing). To all those who say she is smug and unrelatable I say what planet are you living on?
I found the video after reading the post where TNC talks about the appeal of Michelle. I know it's unrelated to this thread, but for women who are juggling, it's an interesting video.
Okay. You guys are kidding me right? Ta-Nehisi, are you totally ruling out race as a factor here? McCain was born in 1936. He was a military brat reared in a segregated military who spent his "wonder years" in DC's Northern Virginia suburbs. He grew up when Jim Crow was the law in DC, MD, and VA. He's the grandson of a Mississippian, great grandson of a Mississippi plantation owner and slave holder. He spent summers there as a kid. He fought for his adopted state of Arizona's with it's then overwhelming white majority population, in its battle against recognizing the federal Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday. The very last state to do so I might add. He has what is probably the least racially diverse staff in Congress. McCain and his handlers also understand his audience. While liberals spout this post-race BS, McCain's slight of Obama coupled with his "he doesn't get it" insult theme for the 1st debate(which he stole from Obama's Democratic National Convention acceptance speech), played out real well with White "native" Southerners both Dems and Republicans. Get enough undercurrent momemtum amongst this flock along with the flock of "Stupid White Men" and Obama loses the South. If he loses the South, he loses the election. Nobody has won the presidency without winning the South probably 40 years.
As a white guy who's father is from a "different generation" let me observe that older whites, even if they don't regard blacks with any hostility or racial animus, still often have oddly inappropriate responses when interacting face to face with blacks.
McCain may not be a racist, but there's a pretty good chance that Obama' race leaves him feeling a bit out of his depth and distracts him in a way that it wouldn't many from a younger generation.
Whether this has anything to do with McCain's treatment of Obama yesterday, I have no idea.
Sorry for the double post.
But he needs to do it so quietly, calmly and efficiently, that even those who are paid to opine on such things, don't even notice the blood all over the floor.
This is a bit off topic, but I like how you also used this phrase to describe Obama's performance. I watched the debate with my girlfriend who is Taiwanese (as in she is a citizen of the Republic of China).
When it was all done, she felt Obama won the debate precisely because he was able to attack/diminish McCain while still coming off as respectful and high-minded. She said to me that there's an old Chinese saying (and I'm paraphrasing here) to the effect of: The most respected/feared enemies are the ones who can kill you and nobody will ever see the blood on their hands.
I'm biased, but I think her outsider's perspective allows her to see so much shit that would simply fly right over my head. This is one of those times.
"He shouldn't be angry. He shouldn't take offense at McCain."
Exactly! It was amazing last night after the debate. All of these people (Chris Matthews was pissed) lecturing Obama about how he needed to be really tough on McCain. How he had to really stick it to him. How he was too agreeable.
It's as if these people somehow missed the last 22 months in which Obama has regularly shown his opponents respect and deference. Where he allowed himself to agree.
I mean you just want to take them by the hand, and ask them ever so politely if they themselves are the first African American to gain their party's nomination for the highest office on the planet; if they won the nomination by defeating the greatest political machine of a generation; if they are the son of an African man with an African name going up against a bona fide war hero and actually leading in most every important poll; and when they tell you no, you want to tell them to shut the fuck up. The guy who accomplished all of those things probably has a good idea on how he should best proceed.
Here's a quotation from a comment on John Marshell's blog (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/220226.php). Puts a whole new spin on the race aspect of McCain's refusal to look:
I think people really are missing the point about McCain's failure to look at Obama. McCain was afraid of Obama. It was really clear--look at how much McCain blinked in the first half hour. I study monkey behavior--low ranking monkeys don't look at high ranking monkeys. In a physical, instinctive sense, Obama owned McCain tonight and I think the instant polling reflects that.
Apparently, this guy really does study monkeys for a living.
Asian Guy:
Does this mean McCain is going to start throwing poo at people the next time he gets angry?
Guess Obama better wear a protective tarp to the next debate.
@Tyler:
I love the idea that someone could make a political cartoon out of this image, but can anyone draw a black man as a monkey and not seem like a total racist? (even if you draw the white guy with him as one too)
TNC
Amen. Sorry to pimp Fallows again-- but read his stuff on Chuck Spinney. Similar ideas of McCain losing the campaign by losing his raison d'etre.
Was McCain being racist? Was George "minority outreach coordinator" Allen being a racist when he called the Indian-American kid macaca?
Bottom line-- everyone agreed that McCain is an asshole as is George Allen. When George Allen (a guy with some racial problems), the press started reinvestigating times when Allen was a racist (confederate flag love while living in california, nooses at his desk, etc.) or an asshole (dragging his sister by the hair).
I don't know if there are any past stories of McCain being a racist. There are plenty of stories of McCain being an asshole (calling wife the C word; blowing up/cursing at republicans, etc.) Expect more of those stories the next few days.
BTW, I may be going out on a limb here, but I think African-Americans may turn out in high numbers to vote for Obama.
Barack must have read every Jackie Robinson book out there. Remember folks-- don't retaliate immediately to the racist slight, just wait and pick your spot, and slide in spikes high...
Off topic, Mr. Coates, but I hope you brought an umbrella (and canoe) to the book fair today. I was very much looking forward to your appearance, but instead wound up on the roof doing an emergency gutter clean-out in the midst of a torrential downpour.
For you home owners out there, I discovered a new tool that helped immensely:
salad tongs
(You're welcome)
Asian Guy:
A frothing McCain holding a big turd in his hands; could there be any other image which so perfectly sums up his campaign?
Indeed, it really is a shame that any cartoon portraying Obama is way too (and understandably) racially loaded.
Whoops, left off a few words in that last sentence. Reckon everyone know what I meant though...
One more charitable explanation is that McCain has spent his entire adult life in two institutions, the US Navy and the US Senate, that place extraordinary weight on seniority and encourage deference to that seniority.
To me, McCain had the look of a man whose attitude was, "I've paid my dues over the years. I'm up for promotion. Who does this guy think he *is*?" While there may be a racial component to this, I've noticed it in McCain's bearing in other situations, including the Republican debates.
Imagine a lieutenant telling an admiral that he's wrong. I think that's what McCain sees.
I don't think it matters why McCain wouldn't look at Obama. It happened and that's all there is to say about it.
anyone get the feeling that ever so slowly, mccain is starting to seem like a "loser." his body language at the debate was not that of a man who seemed to believe in his core that he was going to win the election.
I don't know what McCain's hang-up was. Fear makes sense to me as a possibility. I also try to remember that what looks like "body language" is caught up in his honorable war injuries.
Nevertheless, handshakes are still a live racial issue.
Given his generation, his education, and his military service, McCain has to have seen that ugly game being played. He's had plenty of chance to make a principled decision that when he shakes hands, there will never be any question about his fundamental respect for the person he's greeting.
Years ago, I started watching for white men who clearly get that point. My dad does, and my brothers, uncles, and husband. The highest-ranking retired Navy man in my church gets it, and so does the only young man I know who's at Annapolis now.
There's an ambiguity about whether women are always expected to shake hands, but I decided a decade ago to always do it, both to make men see me and to make sure every one else knows I see them. When I realized how warmly older African-Americans responded in my small Kentucky town, I was ashamed that I'd let it slide my first few years here.
If McCain didn't know the issue was in play when he walked onto that stage, he's a lesser man than I thought.
If he knew it and still failed, he's even worse.
(I'm now going to go have a conversation with my fourteen-year-old son.)
To paraphrase Carolyn Forche, Obama needs to do exactly would he did last night--slice McCain to lace. But he needs to do it so quietly, calmly and efficiently, that even those who are paid to opine on such things, don't even notice the blood all over the floor.
Obama missed plenty of chances to land hard right crosses last night. I've just accepted that he's not the best at this type of format. He's not a one-liner type of person. He's a lot more thoughtful. Most times it doesn't translate well to debates where short pithy comments can(and usually do) carry the day.
"If Obama loses the South, he loses the election. Nobody has won the presidency without winning the South probably 40 years"
he doesn't need the South. Would be great if he got Virginia and even NC, but all he needs are the Kerry states, Colorado, New Mexico and Iowa. that's it. And he's in good shape to get them. The South can do what it wants--it's about time it achieves what New England typically achieves every four years--insignificance.
Joe Klein's conscience: Has it occurred to you that last night just wasn't the venue for a knockout? Obama delivered a few solid one liners, like the "you think the war started in 2007" line. But he has two more of these things to do, and forty days to go until the election, and he needs to maintain the illusion of congeniality with McCain.
I'm expecting a brutal final debate, unless he's already so far ahead in the polls that defeat is just inconceivable. I'm hoping he'll overtly call out McCain as a liar, using that word.
"...the cage is actually the key to set Obama free."
Love that phrase.
What I'm waiting for is to hear the people who deny racism at all costs to give their excuse for McCain's actions. Because when "It's hard to look someone in the eye when you've been spreading lies about them" is the good excuse...
shine and charlie are right.
this is primarily about mccain being a grade-a asshole.
maybe a tiny portion of the mccain's conduct is informed by racism, but if it is, it's the kind of racism that all americans carry inside of them. something that is just there, like a dormant cancerous gene.
interestingly, i just don't think either of them - the mccain's - would allow their conduct to be motivated by racism. maybe i'm just being naive...
now, i'm never shy about identifying and spouting off about racism when i see it, or really feel it on a personal basis, but it just doesn't fit here.
i don't think.
as others have noted, he basically treated other republicans the same way in the primaries. his treatment of romney, especially, was not that different from what he did last night.
sometimes the most obvious answer is the one right in front of one's face. in this instance, it's pretty clear to see that mccain is just an asshole. and, for a number of reasons, he just couldn't hide it last night.
Obama's debate performance reminds me of Minnesota Fats in THE HUSTLER. The Paul Newman character gets man, takes it personally, takes wild shots, and the whole time Fats is playing the percentages, taking advantage of every misstep and not giving up any points himself. At the end Newman is dazed and furious, and Fats is still immaculate after an all-night game. He packs up his winnings and goes with Newman still trying to pick a fight.
I think that's how the next debates will go, McCain getting red in the face and scowling while Obama makes it look easy. I can't think of a good shorthand way to put this, though -- the term "hustler" means something different than it did in 1961!
It reminded me of that movie with Jack Nicholson and Tom Cruise in which Nicholson's character, the hard-boiled military soldier sneers 'Son, you can't handle the truth'. Just like in that movie, the hero ends up being the new guy who 'acquits' himself with persistence while maintaining a level of humility throughout. The weak character is ultimately the one who loses his self-control and puts his pride above practical concerns. I'm not sure why our psyches seem to be wired to sympathize more with the newcomer rather than the morally indignant soldier in such situations. Maybe it is a bit of the subconcious survival instinct in siding with the obvious alpha-male(Obama).
i guess i'm just a contrarian.
i think that obama's inherent cautiousness - his defensive strategy as a politician - was on full display last night. classic obama.
low risk, low reward.
after the two weeks mccain had, obama should have had him on his heels for the entire evening.
instead, obama was constantly backpedaling, defending his own positions and actions.
i spent the entire night waiting for phil gramm and whiners to come up.
the keating 5...
sarah palin...
bomb, bomb, bomb iran...
(though he did obliquely refer to it.)
and any number of issues that obama could use to skewer mccain and, i think, put this race out of reach for good.
maybe this will work and maybe i'm just dead wrong.
but i see michael dukakis and al gore and john kerry and all of the other democratic losers politely letting their rancid republican opponents off the hook.
i hope we aren't seeing another replay.
it will be interesting to see what the polls say this week. my guess is that they will tighten and that they will stay tight till the end. by design. or, rather, as a result of obama's defensive strategy.
we shall see...
frrankie d: You talk about risk and reward. Would references to the Keating 5, Phil Gramm, etc. have resulted in a reward from low information swing voters? Those are the folks for whom Sen. Obama was performing last night. The polls of debate watchers showed a less positive reaction toward combative comments than toward positive ones. Based on that, doesn't it seem like a more aggressive approach would have resulted in a net negative for Sen. Obama, even if it would have gratified you and me?
Last night was about making low information voters comfortable with Barry. The polls suggest it did that, and I suspect the tracking and state polls will bear that out over the next few days. If there's still a good reason to clock McCain in a few weeks, there will be time for it then.
i think that obama's inherent cautiousness - his defensive strategy as a politician - was on full display last night. classic obama.
low risk, low reward.
Obama is the front-runner, and McCain has spent the past month or so thrashing about like a wounded animal, so I think "low risk, low reward" was the appropriate strategy for Obama in this debate. Obama's cordiality made McCain's weird refusal to treat him with even feigned respect all the more glaring. Why get your hands dirty when your opponent is busy digging his own grave?
McCain has been pursuing a "high risk, high reward" strategy at least since he picked Palin as his running mate. Consider the results, and be glad Obama has continued to proceed with caution. McCain keeps throwing haymakers and hitting himself in the face.
"To paraphrase Carolyn Forche, Obama needs to do exactly would he did last night--slice McCain to lace."
You're paraphrasing Carolyn Forche, TNC? Us poetry-heads need the original quote.
I also wondered about the racial subtext of McCain not looking at Obama, but somehow I'm skeptical it was intentional on McCain's part.
I read it more as McCain feeling insecure, because he kept looking down at Jim Lehrer. It wasn't a good move for him, it didn't make him look confident.
ty,
i guess we'll see just how voters react to that style and approach.
but i've just never, ever seen it succeed.
never.
maybe this will be a different kind of election - as it obviously is in many other ways - but i tend to believe that history is a good predictor of the future.
typically voters always tell pollsters that they don't like negative and attacking politicians, but curiously, the politician who goes negative and attacks is almost always the one who wins. especially in presidential elections.
my personal opinion is that mccain and rove and his buddies are just trying to keep the election close enough so that they can steal it.
by playing such a cautious, defensive game, barack plays right into their strategy.
the election would be a lot harder to steal if he were to open up the kind of huge lead that is there for the taking. fiddling with the vote in 7 or 8 battleground states is a lot harder than concentrating your manipulations in one state, as happened in ohio in 2004.
imho.
btw, keating and phil gramm and such issues are exactly the kind of issues that low information voters are affected by. they can be packaged as essentially emotional appeals - keating corruption and gramm's callousness and corrupt influence - that most voters easily understand. the keating savings and loan scandal - little old ladies losing their life's savings! - and the videos of gramm speaking - denigrating everyday citizens - are pretty powerful and simple. which is exactly why i'm mystified that barack doesn't exploit them.
Read this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/26/AR2008092603957_pf.html
I'm gonna be lazy and forego html formatting.
Here is the relevant graf for why McCain wouldn't look at Obama:
Boehner was blunt. The plan Paulson laid out would not win the support of the vast majority of House Republicans. It had been improved on the edges, with an oversight board and caps on the compensation of participating executives. But it had to be changed at the core. He did not mention the insurance alternative, but Democrats did. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, pressed Boehner hard, asking him if he really intended to scrap the deal and start again.
No, Boehner replied, he just wanted his members to have a voice. Obama then jumped in to turn the question on his rival: "What do you think of the [insurance] plan, John?" he asked repeatedly. McCain did not answer.
He made this huge media stunt and Obama bent him over and fucked him in his geriatric ass. That's why he's mad.
The lens through which to view last nights debate is not Old v. Young, or White v. Black, or Experienced v. New. It's Bugs Bunny v. Daffy Duck.
Obama is Bugs, of course - unflappable, slightly sardonic, always with a plan up his sleeve. McCain/Daffy is impulsive, aggrieved to the point of comtempt for Bugs, always on the verge of a meltdown, really his own worst enemy.
Actually, Jeff Greenfield wrote a wonderful column on this point a while back
http://www.slate.com/id/2185720/
It was about Obama v. Hillary, but the same principal applies... in fact, McCain is even Daffier.
Anyway, after the debate I felt much better about Obama's chances. Because nobody beats Bugs.
If McCain looked his Republican opponents in the eye, I'd say racism. Christ almighty folks, there's video proof that he does this to people he thinks are beneath him. And by people, I mean "everyone."
Get enough undercurrent momemtum amongst this flock along with the flock of "Stupid White Men" and Obama loses the South. If he loses the South, he loses the election. Nobody has won the presidency without winning the South probably 40 years.
Sometimes I feel this year is the reverse of Jesse Jackson's candidacy when he noted that if he walked on water, white folks would say he couldn't swim.
Instead, with Obama, it's black folks saying he'll "never win an overwhelmingly white state" (followed by Iowa, Montana, Wisconsin) at which point black folks said "he won't win the nomination" (buh bye Hillary) followed by "he won't win the election."
And after January 20th?
"Oh sure, but this is a fluke. White folks ain't never gonna give this guy a second term."
frankie d:
Bingo!! Obama has never tried to drive up McCain's negatives. McCain said last night(again!!) that America knows him? That's so much bullshit. They only know of him, since he's Versailles' best friend. They don't know what a Grade A asshole McCain is. They don't know that McCain was an even worse student than GWB. McCain is the frakin' elitist, not Obama. McCain has had government health care his whole life. Low information voters don't know that. I hope that answers TY's questions.
"Having gotten chumped repeatedly, we're confusing strength with arrrogance, toughness with strut. Take it from someone who learned it the hard way. they ain't the same, son. To paraphrase Carolyn Forche, Obama needs to do exactly would he did last night--slice McCain to lace. But he needs to do it so quietly, calmly and efficiently, that even those who are paid to opine on such things, don't even notice the blood all over the floor."
Word.
Mr. Coates: you are *absolutely* right. The best way to deal with a natural-born bully is almost never to have a toe-to-toe screaming match. Instead, it is to douse their red-hot fire with ice-cold water. Stay calm, refuse to budge, and reply to their raging with quiet power. Let them be the hot-headed ass while you're the steel hand in the velvet glove.
Personally, I'd bet gold to grass that McCain really is extremely racist. He's definitely vented his spleen about the "gooks" from time to time. But whether or not that was the underlying reason for his amazing show of disrespect, Obama's reaction to him was by far the best thing he could have done.
Joe Klein's Conscience: With a different candidate, I'd probably agree. Sen. Clinton, certainly, would have had to run that way, and most other dems would probably benefit from running that way. But the entire Obama brand is built around a non-divisive, fundamentally optimistic worldview that doesn't mesh well with overtly negative campaigning.
Furthermore, I'm not sure any of the things you pointed out would sway anyone. Let's picture Joe Swingvoter. Let's posit that voting for Obama is likely to be in his best interest, presuming Obama actually succeeds in implementing his agenda -- that presupposition certainly applies to most Americans. He is still undecided because he hasn't been paying much attention, or because he has lingering positive feelings about McCain, or because he's leery of Obama due to his supposed liberalism, his unusual biography, his "newness," or his race.
Would any of the things you pointed out actually sway Joe? He's gonna avoid voting for McCain (whom he may think he likes) to voting for Obama (about whom he may have unquantifiable doubts) because McCain got bad grades in school? Shit, my undergrad grades were lousy too. Because McCain has enjoyed government healthcare for the last thirty years due to his unbroken record of public service? Good luck.
Joe will vote his intelligent self interest, for Obama, once he's comfortable with Obama. Last night helped with that. The next two debates will help more. As long as Obama enjoys a significant lead in the polls, combined with a favorable political atmosphere and a sympathetic press, why in the GREAT BLUE FUCK would he jeopardize it by turning his back on the fundamental precept of his candidacy: That big elections should be decided based on big issues, not little attacks.
I'm still not sure whether Obama's politeness and graciousness is to his advantage (countering the angry black man stereotype) or his liability (every other democratic nominee). I never thought of it except in terms of Gore and Kerry, who I felt didn't stand up for themselves when necessary and lost because of it...but it didn't occur to me that Obama had to sidestep that ABM stereotype.
When McCain refused to look at Obama, I didn't necessarily think racism, but it was in the back of my mind...I also thought that he was an insecure, panicked individual who had just "blinked" in his will-we-debate?-showdown with Obama, and probably felt humiliated because of it. I think race had to be a factor, but there were probably other issues as well. Ultimately, if McCain employed it as a strategy, to be condescending to Obama because he's black, I don't think it will work because if they're both going after undecided voters...those voters are probably not the outright racists that McCain's condescension would have swayed. If you're that racist, you would have decided on McCain by now. The people left over who are genuinely undecided are open enough to consider both candidates, black or white, and I think would see McCain's refusal to make eye contact more as rudeness, insecurity and a lack of confidence, rather than "Yes, McCain talked down to the black guy! It's about time!". So McCain can be racist all he wants, it won't have the effect he's looking for at this point, and I think that's the most important aspect to consider.
Here's my 2c.
Both the McCains are from the aristocracy. Cindy McCain is from the aristocracy of wealth (some of it ill-gotten) in a very racially unmixed state.
John McCain is from a different aristocracy - the high military aristocracy with a stong tradition of service to his country. Both his father and grandfather were senior admirals - something he talks about often. Young John spent his youth in naval bases (he was born in Panama), went straight to the Naval Academy and then into the service.
How was his attitude to black people formed? Well who were the first black men he saw? In the navy of his father, black men were cooks, mess hall servants, or stokers. Menial jobs, not for the type of people you would accord any importance or special military prowess. No place would he have ever met a black person with a college degree or in a position entitled to special respect.
The services only changed in a major way during the Vietnam War, and then (I think) the Army probably changed in its attitude to black recruits more quickly than the Navy. By then John McCain was already a prisoner of war - he basically missed all that change.
So John McCain may not be a conscious racist (I do not think he is) but he is clearly uneasy with treating a black man as an equal. There is a part of his mind saying "Hey, I'm the son of an Admiral, this guy is only cut out to be a stoker or a cook." I would judge his attitude to blacks is not overtly racist, but more like that of a reasonably liberal Northern white man of the pre-Civil Rights era. He is so awfully conscious of the other person's race, feels superior and guilty at the same time, and that puts a stifling inhibition on his behavior.
In other words, in his attitude to race, he is probably more an Eisenhower Republican than a post-Nixon, post "Southern Strategy" Republican.
I just think that McCain is still really angry that Obama would not go on his townhall tour with him. He mentioned it again this morning on George S's show. I just think that it boils down to McCain being a very, very small, petty man. Period.
"he doesn't need the South. Would be great if he got Virginia and even NC, but all he needs are the Kerry states, Colorado, New Mexico and Iowa. that's it."
TR: True. I don't think losing the South is the odd possibility so much as the possibly he could win while losing both Ohio and Missouri. That is very unusual from what I can tell. A candidate has won losing one or the other, but not in recent times. However to lose both those states, and still win the Presidency, does not seem to have occurred since Zachary Taylor.
I think McCain is feeling dominated by Obama and it's making him angry. That's my read of all the "Obama does it too" comments or the "I'm just like Obama only more so" threads, whether it's bipartisanship or changyness.
One point about anger. I generally agree with TNC about anger is a cage, and disrespect hurts the disrespecter more. But I think that anger can't be ignored, it has a purpose. Anger needs to be used to help you do your job better.
My best example is pitcher Randy Johnson, who I watched a lot, being a Mariners fan. When something made Randy mad, he just got better. Threw harder, more accurately, more break. You could see him getting pissed, and how he used it to get better. Not that you should feed the anger, just ride the emotion instead of repressing it.
doctor jay is right.
a little bit of controlled anger can be a very effective tool.
in fact, i think that barack could start to run away with this race if he did this:
in a very controlled but seething manner, indicate that he is pissed as hell at what is going on with the country's economy.
he'll have the perfect opportunity to do so when - assuming he does - he votes for the bailout package. he should make it appear as though he is being dragged, kicking and screaming, to the yes vote, but that his decision is made necessary by the emergency that exist. he can say then doing so makes him mad as hell.
he should look right into the camera as he announces his vote and let the entire world know how angry and upset he is, how this action is going to hamper the nation for years to come, and that he is mad because of what it will do to the american people. but, he can argue, he has no other choice, if the country is going to move back from the precipice
remember the cover pic on "the autobiography of malcom x"?
the photo showed malcolm, jaw set and tight, pointing, with anger and resolve etched onto his face. when i think about the angry image that obama can show to america, one that would allow him to connect in a positive way to most americans who are mad as hell, this is the image that always comes to mind. righteous anger, expressed in order to convey empathy and compassion, is something that americans like.
ronald reagan was a master at conveying that type of anger.
(here's a link to a photo of the cover, to those who weren't old enough to have come across it back in the day http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0802132138/ref=sib_dp_pop_fc?ie=UTF8&p=S001#reader-link )
What Kurt and others said.
If McCain is unable to look Obama in the eye, the most obvious reason is simple: Shame.
The guy's got at least a self-perception of being especially honorable, and another of seeing things clearly. The collision is what we saw on Friday.
"Having gotten chumped repeatedly, we're confusing strength with arrogance, toughness with strut."
TNC: I've read a few of your posts where you make this point or the related point that conservatives must never be underestimated. Please keep making these points over and over and over, they really need to be drilled home. Thanks.
'Anaconda strategy' has some interesting historical resonances.
"I thought McCain's refusal to make eye contact with Obama was because he feared Obama. To stare at someone down is to show fearlessness (think of two boxers staring each other down)."
I'm not feeling the fear angle. Let us not forget Hegel? When someone or someonesthing (corporations, government, etc.) refuses to "return the glance", refuses to SEE YOU, to acknowledge you, opts to ignore you, they are attempting to gain control by having you focus on them. You end up losing yourself trying to get them (your full attention on them) to pay attention to you....
screw'em and they'll be forced to return your glance
Failure to look an opponent in the eye is a sign of weakness. Even dogs know this.
Maybe McCain was scared, but not of Obama. This is by all accounts a guy with an explosive temper, who knows that an outburst of rage on television would certainly cost him the election. He was scared of looking at Obama because he was scared that he'd explode. He was scared of himself.
Just a guess.
In partial agreement with the theme of the article and many of the commenters.
McCain definitely "shunned" Obama.
The why is harder to define.
My take: Having grown up with parents and their friends who were wealthy, right wing Republicans, (now mostly deceased)McCains conduct at this debate is "normal behavior".
McCain really does feel a sense of entitlement and " patronizing" certain people he does not like, is irked with, or he feels NOT his equal is in his character.
The media has given McCain pretty much a free ride over the years until now, so perhaps people have not noticed his behavior in such detail.
Do NOT feel it was racial, he has displayed this attitude at times to other Republicans on the Hill, in the primary races, and towards his wife.
My concern is how he would handle many world leaders he did not feel were up to his standards.
Yes, my first reaction is Obama should have sliced and diced him quietly. In retrospect, that probably would not have been best.
Obama came across as more controlled and intelligent, and that is why as an independent, I am 90% sure after the debate I am voting for him.
McCain sealed his own funeral for me with his debate conduct, the Palin decision, and quite a lot of things in the last 30 days.