<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Debate</title>
	<atom:link href="http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 01:18:47 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: cinnamonape</title>
		<link>http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-102077</link>
		<dc:creator>cinnamonape</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 21:28:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/#comment-102077</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I think it’s expecting a bit too much to think that one can use 20 second responses to educate a population steeped in a century of disinformation, misinformation and miseducation to make people see the light. Obama did, in fact, state that Russian troops were in Ossetia before Georgia attacked, that he had discouraged the Georgians from provocative actions, and that he tried to get OECD peacekeepers in the region.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Unlike McCain, who is all bluster and agression, it’s clear that Obama would certainly first be involved in negotiations between parties. That’s perhaps the best time to begin changing peoples perceptions about certain events.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;BTW It sure doesn’t appear that McCain always thought Putin was to be utterly mistrusted. In this 1991 interview after Bush made those “saw the soul” comments McCain comes off sounding more like a Bush lap-dog than a Maverick telling Bush that Putin is a dangerous devil.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/08/21/when-john-met-vlad.aspx&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;When John Met Vlad&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it’s expecting a bit too much to think that one can use 20 second responses to educate a population steeped in a century of disinformation, misinformation and miseducation to make people see the light. Obama did, in fact, state that Russian troops were in Ossetia before Georgia attacked, that he had discouraged the Georgians from provocative actions, and that he tried to get OECD peacekeepers in the region.</p>
<p>Unlike McCain, who is all bluster and agression, it’s clear that Obama would certainly first be involved in negotiations between parties. That’s perhaps the best time to begin changing peoples perceptions about certain events.</p>
<p>BTW It sure doesn’t appear that McCain always thought Putin was to be utterly mistrusted. In this 1991 interview after Bush made those “saw the soul” comments McCain comes off sounding more like a Bush lap-dog than a Maverick telling Bush that Putin is a dangerous devil.</p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/08/21/when-john-met-vlad.aspx" rel="nofollow">When John Met Vlad</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cinnamonape</title>
		<link>http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-102076</link>
		<dc:creator>cinnamonape</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 21:12:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/#comment-102076</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I agree that the game is on for a) Undecideds and b) Uninvolved. Last night was good for swinging the Undecideds toward him.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;First some of the General Public responses. A CNN-Opinion Research Corp poll using telephone interviews with 524 adults who watched the debate and had a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Who “won” the debate- 51% Obama 38% McCain (13% break toward Obama). Some 60% said both did “better than expected”. 7/10 said each seemed capable of being president.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;“Obama was widely considered more intelligent, likable and in touch with peoples’ problems, and by modest margins was seen as the stronger leader and more sincere.” The majority said McCain spent most of the time attacking his opponent.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And here’s some information on the Undecideds. A CBS-Knowledge Networks survey involved online interviews with 483 selected “Uncommitted voters” who saw the debate. CE +/-4 points. From this group of “Uncommitteds” 39% said Obama won the debate, 24% said McCain. 37% called it a tie. Most critically, 2 out of 3 felt Obama understands their needs than McCain.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The only good news for McCain is mixed- that 68% said he is prepared to be president, but this was unchanged from the same percentage as before the debate. 60% now said they felt Obama is ready — and while a lower score than McCain, it’s a strong 16% improvement from what the same sample of uncommitteds responded before the debate (44%). These numbers are pretty close to those in the General Public cited by CNN above. Far more said their image of Obama had improved as a result of the debate than said it had worsened. McCain’s image had also improved, but by a more modest margin.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;All of this suggests that in what appears to be a very close race Obama eliminated a great deal of the issues that have allowed McCain to stay close. Given that the second poll were “undecideds” it could portend an even greater climb in results for Obama over the next weeks. McCain didn’t “bomb”…but it seems that Obama may be bringing on the undecideds.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;One further point….race. Some recent surveys suggested than many individuals still have strong racial biases and this could doom Obama. I would like to make the point that while these are surely populational biases, they don’t necessarily carry over to “known individuals” who are seen as “exceptions” to the stereotype. I call this the “Huck Finn” effect…after Huck’s problematic friendship with Jim, the runaway slave.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that the game is on for a) Undecideds and b) Uninvolved. Last night was good for swinging the Undecideds toward him.</p>
<p>First some of the General Public responses. A CNN-Opinion Research Corp poll using telephone interviews with 524 adults who watched the debate and had a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points. </p>
<p>Who “won” the debate- 51% Obama 38% McCain (13% break toward Obama). Some 60% said both did “better than expected”. 7/10 said each seemed capable of being president.</p>
<p>“Obama was widely considered more intelligent, likable and in touch with peoples’ problems, and by modest margins was seen as the stronger leader and more sincere.” The majority said McCain spent most of the time attacking his opponent.</p>
<p>And here’s some information on the Undecideds. A CBS-Knowledge Networks survey involved online interviews with 483 selected “Uncommitted voters” who saw the debate. CE +/-4 points. From this group of “Uncommitteds” 39% said Obama won the debate, 24% said McCain. 37% called it a tie. Most critically, 2 out of 3 felt Obama understands their needs than McCain.</p>
<p>The only good news for McCain is mixed- that 68% said he is prepared to be president, but this was unchanged from the same percentage as before the debate. 60% now said they felt Obama is ready — and while a lower score than McCain, it’s a strong 16% improvement from what the same sample of uncommitteds responded before the debate (44%). These numbers are pretty close to those in the General Public cited by CNN above. Far more said their image of Obama had improved as a result of the debate than said it had worsened. McCain’s image had also improved, but by a more modest margin.</p>
<p>All of this suggests that in what appears to be a very close race Obama eliminated a great deal of the issues that have allowed McCain to stay close. Given that the second poll were “undecideds” it could portend an even greater climb in results for Obama over the next weeks. McCain didn’t “bomb”…but it seems that Obama may be bringing on the undecideds.</p>
<p>One further point….race. Some recent surveys suggested than many individuals still have strong racial biases and this could doom Obama. I would like to make the point that while these are surely populational biases, they don’t necessarily carry over to “known individuals” who are seen as “exceptions” to the stereotype. I call this the “Huck Finn” effect…after Huck’s problematic friendship with Jim, the runaway slave.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dismayed</title>
		<link>http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-102055</link>
		<dc:creator>Dismayed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 18:56:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/#comment-102055</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I noticed that as well, and hated that that got let lie — But, it’s an issue that has been muddied in the media, the main narrative has not been challanged and for him to try to swim upstream on that at this time would be to open a fight where he’d be at a trememdous disadvantage.  &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The issue is on level deeper than is dealt with in our soundbite news, and to take it on would be to make a Kerry type mistake.  He’d be right, but he’d waste way too much energy on the issue.  One has to pick battles carefully here, and that is one you can easily be right on, and lose big time.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I noticed that as well, and hated that that got let lie — But, it’s an issue that has been muddied in the media, the main narrative has not been challanged and for him to try to swim upstream on that at this time would be to open a fight where he’d be at a trememdous disadvantage.  </p>
<p>The issue is on level deeper than is dealt with in our soundbite news, and to take it on would be to make a Kerry type mistake.  He’d be right, but he’d waste way too much energy on the issue.  One has to pick battles carefully here, and that is one you can easily be right on, and lose big time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kspena</title>
		<link>http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-102054</link>
		<dc:creator>kspena</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 18:47:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/#comment-102054</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;mccain’s hypocrisy in gushing over how he’ll ‘care’ for veterans was particularly heinous… What a creep…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>mccain’s hypocrisy in gushing over how he’ll ‘care’ for veterans was particularly heinous… What a creep…</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kspena</title>
		<link>http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-102053</link>
		<dc:creator>kspena</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 18:36:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/#comment-102053</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I agree that Barak is walking a tight rope…stinging like a bee. Also I think he is being very careful not to appear black…..That requires identifying with the ‘middle class’, the ‘us’, and not ‘them’… The policies and programs are the same, but the verbal arguments have to steer clear of bringing racism and racial divisions into view….I think he’s doing very well at focusing on issues that trouble people and keeping racism in the background…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that Barak is walking a tight rope…stinging like a bee. Also I think he is being very careful not to appear black…..That requires identifying with the ‘middle class’, the ‘us’, and not ‘them’… The policies and programs are the same, but the verbal arguments have to steer clear of bringing racism and racial divisions into view….I think he’s doing very well at focusing on issues that trouble people and keeping racism in the background…</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Oval12345678akaJamesKSayre</title>
		<link>http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-102051</link>
		<dc:creator>Oval12345678akaJamesKSayre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 18:27:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/#comment-102051</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Why did Obama have go along with McCain and lie about the Georgian aggression against the people of South Ossetia? The war criminal and sometimes tyrant Saakashvili ordered the slaughter of and genocide against South Ossetia that started late one night with bombs and artillary shells dropped on the sleeping residents of Tskhinvali, the capital of the Republic of South Ossetia. The next morning Georgian tanks rolled into Tskhinvali and started destroying the buildings and murdering as many South Ossetians as they could. Finally, the Russians responded with military force and drove out the Georgian forces.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So why do most American politicians have to be automatically knee-jerk against anything Russia does? The old Soviet Union and its communist system collapsed in 1991. Russia is probably about as democratic as the US under Bush. I watch Russia Today news on a daily basis. They told me a bout hearings being held in the US Senate and House about the Georgian aggression against South Ossetia (only US politicians mostly prefer to call it “Russian aggression”). See &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.russiatoday.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;www.russiatoday.com&lt;/a&gt; for useful information every day.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why did Obama have go along with McCain and lie about the Georgian aggression against the people of South Ossetia? The war criminal and sometimes tyrant Saakashvili ordered the slaughter of and genocide against South Ossetia that started late one night with bombs and artillary shells dropped on the sleeping residents of Tskhinvali, the capital of the Republic of South Ossetia. The next morning Georgian tanks rolled into Tskhinvali and started destroying the buildings and murdering as many South Ossetians as they could. Finally, the Russians responded with military force and drove out the Georgian forces.</p>
<p>So why do most American politicians have to be automatically knee-jerk against anything Russia does? The old Soviet Union and its communist system collapsed in 1991. Russia is probably about as democratic as the US under Bush. I watch Russia Today news on a daily basis. They told me a bout hearings being held in the US Senate and House about the Georgian aggression against South Ossetia (only US politicians mostly prefer to call it “Russian aggression”). See <a href="http://www.russiatoday.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.russiatoday.com</a> for useful information every day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dismayed</title>
		<link>http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-102050</link>
		<dc:creator>Dismayed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 18:21:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/#comment-102050</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Obama punches back just right.  He’s in the lead, and he’s very disciplined.  He’s standing there with an elder statesman and a american war hero type guy.  The risk of seeming disrespectful, outweighs the potential benefit.  He doesn’t need it.  He hands his punches like A great fighter named Cassius Clay.  Pop,pop,pop, wears them down, ropes the dope, dances and pop, pop, pop - ding, ding, ding.  Knockout.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;No need to push the man.  He knows exactly what he’s doing.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama punches back just right.  He’s in the lead, and he’s very disciplined.  He’s standing there with an elder statesman and a american war hero type guy.  The risk of seeming disrespectful, outweighs the potential benefit.  He doesn’t need it.  He hands his punches like A great fighter named Cassius Clay.  Pop,pop,pop, wears them down, ropes the dope, dances and pop, pop, pop &#8211; ding, ding, ding.  Knockout.</p>
<p>No need to push the man.  He knows exactly what he’s doing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: readerOfTeaLeaves</title>
		<link>http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-102049</link>
		<dc:creator>readerOfTeaLeaves</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 18:21:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/#comment-102049</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Insightful to read.&lt;br /&gt;
Admire what you do; I sure don’t have that skill set, but I certainly respect it.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Insightful to read.<br />
Admire what you do; I sure don’t have that skill set, but I certainly respect it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: readerOfTeaLeaves</title>
		<link>http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-102048</link>
		<dc:creator>readerOfTeaLeaves</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 18:20:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/#comment-102048</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Oh, I agree that it’s pseudo-science, and very much in short-term memory.&lt;br /&gt;
Also agree with your take on Luntz.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;What I thought might interest you was to &lt;em&gt;match the comments up with the demographics&lt;/em&gt; of WHO was making them ;-))&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That was interesting IMHO, if not altogether surprising.&lt;br /&gt;
Kind of ‘can you match this statement to the voter’?  It seemed like a reasonably straight forward correlation, and in my view that underscores the kind of things that George Lakoff is writing about.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, I agree that it’s pseudo-science, and very much in short-term memory.<br />
Also agree with your take on Luntz.</p>
<p>What I thought might interest you was to <em>match the comments up with the demographics</em> of WHO was making them ;-))</p>
<p>That was interesting IMHO, if not altogether surprising.<br />
Kind of ‘can you match this statement to the voter’?  It seemed like a reasonably straight forward correlation, and in my view that underscores the kind of things that George Lakoff is writing about.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WilliamOckham</title>
		<link>http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-102047</link>
		<dc:creator>WilliamOckham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 18:16:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/26/the-debate/#comment-102047</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I’m unimpressed. I think Luntz is a charlatan, much like Penn. Focus groups can be useful, but not the way Luntz uses them. His ‘patented dial’ is psuedo-science at its worst.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I’m unimpressed. I think Luntz is a charlatan, much like Penn. Focus groups can be useful, but not the way Luntz uses them. His ‘patented dial’ is psuedo-science at its worst.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
