home

The Humiliating End To McCain's Stunt: He Will Debate Tonight

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 10:49:45 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The first line says it all:

Republican John McCain agreed to attend the first presidential debate Friday night even though Congress doesn't have a bailout deal, reversing an earlier decision to delay the forum until Washington had addressed the financial crisis.

(Emphasis supplied.) It was always a political stunt, putting John McCain first, ahead of the country. It now has proven to be a humiliating failure of a political stunt that proved what most of us already know - John McCain will say or do anything to win an election.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< The Polls - 9/26 | Friday Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    The Humiliating End To McCain's Stunt: He Will Debate Tonight | 79 comments (79 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    I cannot remember (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by andgarden on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 10:59:00 AM EST
    the last time a candidate inflicted so much damage on himself in such a predictable manner.

    Gary Hart. "I'd like to see you (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by tigercourse on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:05:42 AM EST
    catch me!"

    Parent
    What is your opinion of the (none / 0) (#12)
    by oculus on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:03:02 AM EST
    effectiveness of McCain's statement (Wasabi put a link in a comment above)?

    Parent
    Not directed to me, but (none / 0) (#32)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:32:39 AM EST
    Its at odds with the news reports of the event.

    By all accounts McCain had little to say. Obama, questioned Boehner about what he wanted in the plan. Asked Paulson would Boehner's proposals work. Paulson said no.

    Does this sound like McCain was the statesmen and Obama the hack?

    Politicians distort, but McCain is getting into fantasy,

    Parent

    All true. But the GOP is so very (none / 0) (#36)
    by oculus on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:34:47 AM EST
    good at repeating lies, damn lies, and the gullible public either buying their spin or just not concerned enough to vote in their best interests.  Why abandon a succesful pattern?

    Parent
    Yes but do you have any first hand (none / 0) (#54)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 12:13:57 PM EST
    anecdotal evidence that it is working?

    Just curious.

    Parent

    On the debate delay/bail out stuff? (none / 0) (#84)
    by oculus on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:38:51 PM EST
    See front page of NYT.  Not nearly as condemning as here.  

    Parent
    Really amazing (none / 0) (#15)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:04:29 AM EST
    Yesterday on XM someone was pontificating on how McCain likes to make decisions by the seat of his pants.  Then he said "in this case, literally by the seat of his pants"

    I don't know if he was using 'literally' wrong, as many do, or if he meant McCain was really pulling campaign strategy out of his nether regions.  I believe the latter.

    Parent

    Roger Mudd's (none / 0) (#46)
    by oldpro on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:41:59 AM EST
    softball question to Ted Kennedy:  "Why do you want to be president?"

    Bernard Shaw's question to Dukakis...something on the order of "Would you still oppose the death penalty if Kitty Dukakis were raped and killed?"

    The candidates answers to both of these questions esstentially put an end to their candidacies...both were excrutiating to watch...

    Parent

    What was Kennedy's reply? (none / 0) (#51)
    by tigercourse on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:55:21 AM EST


    Parent
    No one knows (none / 0) (#71)
    by oldpro on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    including Teddy.  He wandered around rambling on and on looking for an answer and never did find one...

    Everyone was simply stunned...because if you can't answer that question then you can't be the president.  It was incomprehensible, really, for he had for SOME reason decided to run against his own Democratic president, Carter, split the party and try to take the nomination.  

    There had to be a reason he did that...a simple reason.  But he couldn't explain it.

    Parent

    That was one of the worst ... (none / 0) (#87)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 02:59:25 PM EST
    moments in the history of US Presidential politics.  He sunk his changes in one rambling interview.

    But it wasn't predictable.

    Parent

    What a weak fool. (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by LarryInNYC on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:00:13 AM EST
    He couldn't win a staring contest with Obama?  Why does he think he can go up against Putin?

    I thought any politician would say anything (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by stefystef on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:03:32 AM EST
    to get elected.

    They say the same about every politician.  If they are moving their mouths, no matter how eloquent, they are pandering.

    So basically (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Steve M on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:12:03 AM EST
    the end result of McCain's big foray to Washington is that Roy Blunt will now be participating in negotiations on behalf of the House Republicans?  That's the miracle that only John McCain could work?  Come on, it's like they're not even trying.

    The comments (none / 0) (#60)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 12:41:50 PM EST
    you described of your Republican colleague saying that McCain is "fun" have stuck with me.....That is really how many Republicans view this whole election process and government--as a game, or a joke.....

    So, lying and stunts don't really offend--it's like watching the Super Bowl and betting on your favorite team....

    Parent

    Giving a drunk more booze is not a good idea (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:02:13 PM EST
    less regulation indeed!

    This should be interesting.... (4.50 / 6) (#7)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 10:58:29 AM EST
    watching two bozos pontificate how they will spend billions on this, billions on that, billions on this, occupy this place and that place, wave our missiles at this tyrant or that....all while cutting taxes for the middle class.

    Don't believe a word folks...

    right on, kdog! (none / 0) (#23)
    by dutchfox on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:16:02 AM EST
    But unfortunately, the Republican entertainment media circuit (O'Reilly and his ilk) will spin it to their savior candidate's benefit.

    Parent
    I meant McCain's switcheroo n/t (none / 0) (#25)
    by dutchfox on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:16:47 AM EST


    Parent
    Well, he did manage to deny (none / 0) (#1)
    by vj on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 10:54:15 AM EST
    Obama two days of debate prep.

    Not to mention media coverage of (none / 0) (#14)
    by oculus on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:04:19 AM EST
    the purported media darling.

    Parent
    Yup, it sure did that (none / 0) (#62)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 12:48:13 PM EST
    Obama nevertheless has to step it up tonight....Be assertive and concise....

    A draw probably seals the election for Obama....

    Parent

    ya (none / 0) (#64)
    by connecticut yankee on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 12:56:55 PM EST
    Yeah, I thought it was the WH conspiring with McCain to deny Obama debate prep time.

    Parent
    Ah, I see, (none / 0) (#2)
    by Finis Terrae on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 10:54:54 AM EST
    I thought so. McCain cannot afford not to debate tonight.

    McCain's statement (none / 0) (#3)
    by wasabi on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 10:56:33 AM EST
    His statement.

    Roy Blunt, who is not on the Banking Committee will now be in charge of the House Republican's negotiations.  Another wrench thrown in the works.

    Brinksmanship rarely works. (none / 0) (#4)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 10:56:39 AM EST
    McCain looks weaker and weaker. I don't think the two days missed by Obama will make much of a difference.

    But, but, but, (none / 0) (#5)
    by Faust on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 10:57:38 AM EST
    I heard it was a Gambit not a stunt. A clever ploy. A bold risk. A game changing strategem. A sly ruse. He's a maverick, a cowboy, a straight shooter.

    Will someone please pull a Cheney and shoot me in the face?

    What channel will you guys (none / 0) (#6)
    by votermom on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 10:57:50 AM EST
    be watching the debate on?

    PBS (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by TheRizzo on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:48:31 AM EST
    For me.  I find them to be the most neutral.

    Parent
    I had no intention of watching any of the (none / 0) (#10)
    by tigercourse on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:01:16 AM EST
    debates (I can't stand to listen to politicians, even politicians I like, sling around bull). But given the current precipice we are standing on, I think I will. I need to hear what these people have to say about the economy.

    Grit your teeth... (none / 0) (#73)
    by oldpro on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:08:12 PM EST
    reality television is all the rage.  Take a good look at what you're buying.

    Parent
    What The Hell Was That All About? (none / 0) (#17)
    by MTSINAIMAMA on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:07:25 AM EST
    He was for suspending his campaign before he was against it...this is not running for President. It's running for the Keystone Kops.

    OMG. (none / 0) (#18)
    by TruthMatters on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:08:01 AM EST
    he is claiming victory, listen to their surrogates, they are actually claiming victory.

    there was nothing before, but McCain swooped in and saved it, now all sides are talking and now we are moving towards a bill, and its all thanks to McCain coming in and helping with the house republicans.

    Where (none / 0) (#22)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:14:37 AM EST
    is this happening?

    Parent
    CNN, MSNBC (none / 0) (#24)
    by TruthMatters on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:16:07 AM EST
    listen to their talking points for today. and their justification for why McCain can now go to the debate.

    Parent
    I knew it. (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:22:20 AM EST
    I knew it. I knew it would turn out this way. That's why I have been adamantly against this whole bipartisan, let's hold hands with the GOP crap that's been running through the party for months now. How many times do the Dems have to be played by these guys before they get it? Once again, it's Lucy and Charlie Brown and the football. I'm so disgusted.

    I'm sure that they'll be saying McCain won the debate tonight too. Just you wait and see.

    Parent

    I don't get it (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Steve M on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:24:22 AM EST
    because McCain's surrogates are claiming he won, that means he won?  What else did you expect them to say?

    Parent
    What they (none / 0) (#29)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:30:05 AM EST
    do is convince the voters that they are right. They all go on shows and talk confidently about how McCain did the right thing or whatever while Dems completely get blindsided by this stuff. They constantly go on the offensive and are disciplined.

    Parent
    Hmm (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by CST on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:31:43 AM EST
    I don't think they have done a great job of convincing voters so far.  Judging from the polls at least.  Sure they are trying, but that doesn't mean the American people are buying it.

    Parent
    Maybe (none / 0) (#39)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:35:58 AM EST
    but Obama isn't far enough ahead right now where an offensive wouldn't work.

    Parent
    Sure (none / 0) (#44)
    by CST on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:39:50 AM EST
    but there is also no indication that it is working, or would work.

    Also, the fact that McCain already said today he would debate, before there is any deal made today, does not make it seem like he is saving the day.  If he wanted this to work, he should've saved this announcement for after a deal was made.

    Parent

    The wheels have fallen off their economic system (none / 0) (#34)
    by Salo on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:33:35 AM EST
    They can't recover. All they can now do is sobtage the next presidency.

    Parent
    I agree. (none / 0) (#45)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:40:40 AM EST
    However, they way they are framing this may work for them. Heck, I'm so cynical about these guys that nothing they do surprises me. Of course, people continue to buy what they are selling.

    Parent
    Oh (none / 0) (#35)
    by Steve M on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:33:59 AM EST
    Well, I'm not sure what the Democratic strategy is that would stop them from doing that.

    Parent
    Well, (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:39:16 AM EST
    I don't think Dems could stop them but they could certainly have better responses than they have. Blaming the GOP in one breath and then talking about the need for "bipartisanship" in the next makes for a confusing message.

    Parent
    And? (none / 0) (#38)
    by wasabi on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:35:39 AM EST
    And this is new shocking behavior exhibited by Republicans?


    Parent
    No (none / 0) (#41)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:37:24 AM EST
    not new behavior the same old behavior that always seems to work for them. Frankly, I'm tired of it but it seems to work or has worked lots of times in the past.

    Parent
    True, but this stunt is in the open, (none / 0) (#75)
    by KeysDan on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:11:35 PM EST
    meddling in statecraft at critical points in a campaign is stock-in-trade for the Republicans. For example, in 1968 insinuation into the Vietnam Paris peace talks; 1972, undermining the constitution (but they got caught, albeit after the election); 1976, nothing helped, after President Ford, in a debate, insisted that Poland was not under Soviet influence; 1980, Casey's alleged involvement in sensitive Iranian hostage negotiations, with release on the day of Reagan's inauguration.  All done, at the time, with plausible deniability. Someone in the McCain campaign forgot this part.

    Parent
    otoh (none / 0) (#66)
    by connecticut yankee on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 12:59:27 PM EST
    The problem for McCain is that the democrats have the big microphone in congress and theyve been insulting his contribution mercilessly for 24 hours.

    Harry Reid seem to hold hourly press conferences to imply that McCain is an unhelpful idiot with no plan.  And the media gather around each time.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#72)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:05:07 PM EST
    that only works if they actually show some spine and do something. They've done a lot of yelling before at the microphones only to cave when push comes to shove.

    Parent
    It's all about the spin n/t (none / 0) (#78)
    by stefystef on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:17:22 PM EST


    Parent
    Look for the name Paul Ryan (none / 0) (#26)
    by Cream City on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:19:34 AM EST
    in the House Republicans' rebellion.  He's from my state and the one least visible until now in the threesome of House Repubs with the alternative plan.  We're hearing some local feedback now on how it came down to freek Paulson to call McCain to come to D.C., etc. -- and Ryan is so conservative that he doesn't care how this hurt McCain, as long as it helped the far right wingers in the House.

    Bottom line in the larger picture in all this is that the Repub party is, as we have said, as divided as the Dems.  There is no Rove to keep the ranks in line now.  And this is the result.

    Parent

    More likely no Tom DeLay (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by oldpro on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:46:47 AM EST
    no Gingrich to keep the House troops in line.

    Parent
    You're probably more on the mark (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Cream City on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 12:20:24 PM EST
    with that.  I tend to use "Rove" as an umbrella term meaning more than just one guy.  It's the impact on my brain of the movie "Bush's Brain.":-)

    Parent
    Of course he's claiming victory.... (none / 0) (#55)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 12:18:25 PM EST
    ...I think that was his plan all along, but then I'm an old cynic.

    Parent
    Why weren't the House Republicans (none / 0) (#67)
    by Christy1947 on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:01:14 PM EST
    talking before this, included in the conversation,  or was it they were talking out of one side of their collective mouth. There was a report in the NYT today that Boehner was suggesting to the Frank team that the House Repubs were sort of on board, sort of, but at the same time and earlier in the week he had asked his caucus to come up with an alternative plan, which is this insurance mess. That's not not being included, that's double dealing.

    Parent
    Yeah (none / 0) (#74)
    by Steve M on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:10:29 PM EST
    It's a standard negotiating trick.  Go along with everything, then at the last minute claim that you were never in agreement and you want additional concessions.

    It's not as though the talks went on for days with no one even thinking to ask the House Republicans for their opinion.

    Parent

    Humiliating End? (none / 0) (#19)
    by WS on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:10:11 AM EST
    McCain is already saying he won the debate!

    url=Debate[/url].

    This is so bizarre.  

    Fixed the Link (none / 0) (#20)
    by WS on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:10:53 AM EST
    Debate

    Parent
    Maybe McCain wants to debate (none / 0) (#33)
    by mg7505 on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:32:40 AM EST
    because he thinks he has an upper hand in foreign policy (which was supposed to be the topic tonight). But my biggest question now is: what will be the debate topic(s)? And who's going to bring up the economy first? The moderator? I don't see how McCain can talk about that subject without looking stupid.

    The moderator (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by CST on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 11:34:51 AM EST
    Has already said he is open to asking questions about the economy and doesn't feel constrained by the topic of the debate.  I guarantee there will be economic questions.

    Parent
    A weird stunt (none / 0) (#58)
    by Montague on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 12:31:10 PM EST
    It was indeed a stunt, and one that probably will hurt him because it just seemed incredibly dumb.  "Suspend" the campaign?  Why bother?  It's not like anyone suspended their primary campaign to return to the Senate for a vote.

    I think the Palin Hail-Mary pass worked, on the other hand.  It really shook things up, plus it got the media excited because the media loves something new and bizarre.  At this point it's a matter of running down the clock and hoping Palin won't blow up first.  Hence the need to shelter her from scrutiny.

    but (none / 0) (#70)
    by connecticut yankee on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:03:52 PM EST
    Her interviews have not gone well.

    NRO has a column calling for her to bow out.
    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiMDhjYTU1NmI5Y2MwZjg2MWNiMWMyYTUxZDkwNTE=

    Parent

    Oh, I agree (none / 0) (#81)
    by Montague on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:23:20 PM EST
    about the interviews.  The campaign needs to keep her away from national focus and just going around the country and talking to Rethug base.  Like Dumbya, they apparently love her.  Also, as long as the leftist blogs rag on her, Middle America will come to her defense.  So it's kind of a win-win situation from the Rethug POV.  But again... running down the clock.  McCain can't afford to let her bow out - it would be an Eagleton moment.

    Although... it could provide yet another hail-mary pass that shakes things up yet again.  Frankly I feel this election cannot be called early, no matter what.  I believe McCain will win (because too many people underestimate the leftover goodwill that many voters still have for him - whether or not it is deserved), yet the mood in the country is as favorable for Democrats as it has been in many years.

    Parent

    US presidential politics are a laughing stock (none / 0) (#61)
    by HenryFTP on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 12:42:27 PM EST
    over here in Europe, with McCain leaping ahead of Bush in the buffoonery pack.

    The disarray of the top American political leadership is frightening -- Paulson and Bernanke have damaged their credibility as well with their "blank-check" proposal.

    Obama has an opportunity to cut through the clutter tonight -- I hope he uses it.

    True (none / 0) (#82)
    by Montague on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:25:38 PM EST
    They've gotta be laughing at us.  And yet I have British friends who absolutely long to be able to vote directly for their prime minister.  I try to tell them that their system is better because at least it takes a lot of the someone-I'd-like-to-have-a-beer-with mentality out of the election.  If they had direct elections for the top job, they'd be in for some humiliation themselves.

    Parent
    As Ed Rollins said on CNN (none / 0) (#63)
    by Steve M on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 12:55:53 PM EST
    McCain has absolutely no currency with the conservative wing of the party.  His reputation for bipartisanship derives solely from his ability to work with Democrats like Kennedy and Feingold.

    That's the problem. (none / 0) (#76)
    by Cream City on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:15:51 PM EST
    One of the rebellious threesome in the House Repubs at the core of the revolt is from my state, and he would see McCain as a leftie.

    Btw, Schieffer's report on CBS about Paulson's call to McCain that brought him to D.C. makes a lot more sense than the thinking that McCain would listen to Paulson more than to Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, Frank, et al.  Far more worrisome is that Paulson seems at sea in this, incapable of working with Congress.  Does he have no cred because of his background with the big banks?

    Parent

    cx (none / 0) (#77)
    by Cream City on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:17:16 PM EST
    that got garbled in the editing.  It ought to be: Btw, Schieffer's report on CBS about Paulson's call to McCain that brought him to D.C. makes a lot more sense than the thinking that McCain would listen to Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, Frank, et al.  Far more worrisome is that Paulson seems at sea in this, incapable of working with Congress.  Does he have no cred because of his background with the big banks?


    Parent
    Hm (none / 0) (#80)
    by Steve M on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:22:16 PM EST
    Paulson is an autocratic CEO type who doesn't have a lot of experience in playing well with others, but he did fairly well in his dealings with the Senate.  To the extent he has difficulties communicating with the recalcitrant House Republicans, I suspect it has more to do with them than with him.  In any event, I say again: send Sarah Palin!

    Parent
    Ah. (none / 0) (#83)
    by Cream City on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:29:49 PM EST
    An autocratic CEO type definitely would not do well with the congressman from my state, and from a fairly rural part of the state still, who was one of the three coauthors of the alternative plan that Boehner wants, the plan that made the bailout agreement a bust-up.  That is, if there ever was agreement, and I think that was a bad report by AP (and its scoop mentality has made for a lot of that in this campaign season).

    Parent
    Shrug (none / 0) (#65)
    by Steve M on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 12:58:55 PM EST
    the thing is, it's not like his ostensible purpose was to go to Washington and slow things down on a bad bill.  His stated purpose was to show up and magically make people work out their differences.  So I don't know how many of the people who oppose the bailout see John McCain as their hero just because he got in the way, since he spent the whole time claiming that he wasn't getting in the way.  We shall see.

    hmmm (none / 0) (#69)
    by connecticut yankee on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:02:57 PM EST
    "Mission accomplished", Ive heard that before somewhere...

    Tonight I hope Obama is ready....... (none / 0) (#79)
    by Kefa on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 01:21:28 PM EST
    I have the feeling McCain is gonna be on the attack.
    Already he is claiming he is the winner by just showing up. BO needs to go for the kill from the start...no Mr. Nice Guy.

    Liars are banned from my threads (none / 0) (#85)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 02:32:52 PM EST
    Ergo, you are banned from my threads for lying about me.

    Do not post any more and your comments will be deleted from all of my threads.

    Emma is banned from my threads (none / 0) (#86)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 02:35:21 PM EST


    Parent
    I hope the public's response ... (none / 0) (#88)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 03:13:51 PM EST
    to McCain's actions this week matches BTD's.

    I think it will.

    But a tiny part of me worries that they'll see it differently.

    You can hardly blame me, given the last eight years.

    So does this mean (none / 0) (#90)
    by shoulin4 on Fri Sep 26, 2008 at 05:17:32 PM EST
    that our Lord and Savior John McCain has single-handedly saved our economy and that we can believe in unregulated capitalism again?

    The Humiliating End To McCain's Stunt: He Will Debate Tonight | 79 comments (79 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment