At the Debate, Obama Does Not Soar
The paradox that is Barack Obama came into sharp, almost painful, focus tonight: He is, at once, one of the best television candidates in political history and one of the more underwhelming.
Obama’s political star was launched when he delivered a dazzling address on national television at his party’s convention in 2004. His oratory was mesmerizing, his message inspiring, and his appearance and manner made him an instantly likable figure to millions of Americans. That Obama—Big Speech Obama—is tailor-made for television.
But then there’s Debate Obama, a hesitant, stuttering, easily rattled and mostly unsmiling public performer who litters his platitudes and “uh’s” and misses countless opportunities to throw his opponents’ taunts back in their faces. Debate Obama unwittingly affirms Hillary Clinton’s suggestion that he lacks the seasoning to withstand the scrutiny of a fall campaign and leaves those who have only seen Big Speech Obama wondering, “Is this really the same guy?”
The shortcomings of Debate Obama were once again on display tonight in Myrtle Beach, S.C. They aren’t easily visible in transcripts and print news summaries, but anyone watching the proceedings on television—and there were several million such people tuning in on CNN—could see them, particularly when Obama’s two rivals directly engaged him.
His extended exchange with Hillary Clinton early on, in which he ridiculed her for sitting on the Wal-Mart corporate board and she labeled him a slumlord coddler, vividly illustrated Obama’s weaknesses in debate settings.
Obama instigated the back-and-forth by arguing—very correctly—that Hillary and Bill Clinton have relied on gross distortions and factually inaccurate assertions to attack him in recent weeks. He made his case haltingly, tripping over some of his words. He mentioned some of the areas where the Clintons have not played fair—for instance, Obama’s record on the Iraq war—but the packaging was sloppy. He jumped around from one thought to the next, seemingly intimidated by either the idea of going on the offensive or the challenge of confronting Hillary, who stood a few feet away staring directly at him, to her face. He wrapped up his indictment with a platitude.
“I think that part of what the people are look for right now is somebody who is going to solve problems and not resort to the same typical politics that we see in Washington,” Obama said.
In fighting back, Hillary was hardly warm, but she was forceful, confident and utterly unflappable, unwilling to cede an inch and ready with a snappy reply to each of Obama‘s charges. Her presentation gave casual viewers the distinct impression that, when it comes to her campaign’s attacks on Obama’s record, there’s a there there—even when there really isn’t.
She rapidly reeled off, for instance, a seemingly thorough accounting of Obama’s history on Iraq, conceding up front that “we are not in any way saying that you didn’t oppose the war. You did. You gave a great speech in 2002 saying you opposed the war in Iraq.” But then, she said, that speech was removed from Obama’s web site in 2003, and that in 2004 he was proclaiming “that he agreed with President Bush in his prosecution of the war” and that over and over as a senator he’s voted to fund the war.
She did the same thing on the subject of Obama’s 130 “present” votes in the Illinois state Senate, suggesting that he was so afraid of taking a position that he refused to take a stand on sex offender legislation.
“Senator Obama,” Hillary said at one point, “it is very difficult to have a debate with you because you never take responsibility for any vote.”
You can imagine Big Speech Obama having a field day in this situation. Was Hillary Clinton, the same woman who has refused to apologize for helping to send the nation into a disastrous war, actually accusing someone else of not being straight about his voting record?
But he squandered opening after opening to defuse her attacks and to turn the tables on her. When the subject of his present votes in the state legislature came up, he could have shamed Hillary for using them in an inflammatory and deceptive mailer to women in New Hampshire that suggested Obama had voted against abortion rights in Illinois—even though Illinois pro-choice leaders in Illinois had asked him to vote present every single time. Instead, he stammered his way through a confused explanation of his rationale on the sex-offender legislation, a response that even prompted John Edwards to join Hillary in piling on Obama.
Edwards began lecturing Obama about the tough votes he himself had to cast as a senator from North Carolina and asked, rhetorically, what would have happened if he’d just decided to stay home as a senator whenever there had been a tough vote.
Obama could have smiled and told Edwards that if he’d done that, we might not be in a war right now, since Edwards—like Hillary—voted for the Iraq war in 2002. Instead: More stammering.
It’s probably unfair to expect Big Speech Obama to show up in debates. Delivering prepared remarks from a podium is much different from fielding questions and charges from a media panel and your reporters. But the incongruity between Big Speech Obama and Debate Obama is nonetheless harmful to Obama’s campaign—especially since the majority of voters from this point forward will learn about the candidates through televised debates, and not by attending speeches.
- Poll
- Obama (D)
- McCain(R)
- Spread
- RCP Average
- 46.6
- 44.2
- Obama +2.4
- Candidate
- Favorable
- Unfavorable
- Spread
- Obama
- 55.8
- 35.8
- +20.0
- McCain
- 54.8
- 36.6
- +18.2
You are wrong. From this suburban Chicago republican...Hillary showed that she is still the power hungry kniving witch from days of yore. I really think she over played herself tonight.
Barack did a good job; he knew he would have a target on his back and fought a good fight.
Clearly, he is the more likable, more comfortable person.
Why can't those Clinton's leave the country they broke alone? How much ego do you have to have to be president for a third time? Enough of these people.
Obama convinced me tonight that if the democrats win the White House, he will "move the conversation forward".
Mr Obama we love you.
America's blacks love you dearly. We are not trying to take anything from you but we have to let you know that the time is not ripe for your presidency. I, for one, am sure you are going to make a great president someday, but not now. Not in this crisis that the country is facing. We need someone who has a semblance of being there before and who the world already knows somewhat. Leave the Clintons to do their thing this time around. Allow them to deal with the diplomatic mess that is world politics at the moment. The world recognizes them and are more likely to respond to them to get this ship which is America back on track. Your day is coming and I hope very soon, but it is not right now. We need to get the "two for one" combination right now because the task at hand is a very daunting one for any one person, congress aside. Step aside graciously now. The country will remember and love you more for it. And even better, your greatest following will finally be of age to vote at that time. You could create history as not only the first black president (If we push the reality of John Hanson The Moor aside. That farmer who served as the first president of America for one year and seems to be forgotten except for his portrait on the retracted two dollar bill,) but you'll be remembered as one who the american people voted for unanimously. We will remember. We always do.
I am glad Barack Obama is finally exposing the Clintons for the lies and distortions they are trying to put out there. This kind of behavior is unethical and unprincipaled and should be unacceptable by the American populace. After all, we teach our children to play fair -- not to lie, steal and cheat! The leaders we elect to office should be held to a higher standard and should be people of high principal and moral character, honest and forthright. I do not see this kind of behavior in the Clintons. It is hard for Obama to hit back because it is not in his nature to be confrontational. However, he must if he wants to have a chance to become President!
Everything you said is dead-on. I've noticed the disparity between big speech Obama and debate Obama since the first debate. Debates are tough, and sorry dear, you need to win them on points. Hillary wins yet again. Thanks for another excellent article.
Im sick of the New York Observer trashing Obama. You guys are real biased. Obama is seen as this character that you guys want to hear be amazing everytime he opens his mouth and yo ustill trash him. He goes on the attack and now he doesn't soar? This Clinton machine has to be stopped, and Obama has to go after her to beat her period. The nice talk only helps her.
Steve:
You're the "Unity '08" Kumbaya guy! Don't you want "peace and reconciliation" and "getting beyond partisan bickering"?
And yet here you are urging Obama to go after Hillary more.
Upper West
Hillary is what this country needs in these critical times facing our nation. She's as tough as nails. Finally, a president that speaks in full sentences and knows all subjects inside and out. We already had an empty suit and all we got is blood in our hands, a country in financial ruins and a world that disrespects us. Bush made us feel good, made reporters laugh even when his comments were devastating and shameful, and read his teleprompter pretty good. I don't care about Obama's color or Hillary's gender. Obama comes short on experience and toughness. His whinning makes me scream and his preaching style is not acceptable.
Hillary is what this country needs in these critical times facing our nation. She's as tough as nails. Finally, a president that speaks in full sentences and knows all subjects inside and out. We already had an empty suit and all we got is blood in our hands, a country in financial ruins and a world that disrespects us. Bush made us feel good, made reporters laugh even when his comments were devastating and shameful, and read his teleprompter pretty good. I don't care about Obama's color or Hillary's gender. Obama comes short on experience and toughness. His whinning makes me scream and his preaching style is not acceptable.
The truth is coming out about Obama,
He can give a good speech, that his speech writers feed him, but when it comes to him having to discuss his own thoughts,it is apparent that he is an inexperienced neophyte without any clear thoughts of his own.
Compared to Hillary he is a "babe" in the woods, and if every nominated the Republicans would tear him up and thus win the General Election.
Obama has no experience what-so-ever in the grown-up world, and while in the STATE senate did not have the courage to take a position when he was required to vote, since no one was feeding him any information on the subject, thus voting 'present' 100 times.
America does not need a street social worker as Commander-In-Chief, he might do O.K. in the back seat of the Senate.
He has proven that he is politically ignorant by running against Bill Clinton, rather then Hillary and John Edwards.
What would he do, if he had to deal with World Leaders?
Say he was present?
Hillary Clinton is not what this country needs right now because she is too partisan. I fear if she won the Democratic nomination her political base would not be enough to get the majority of the popular vote in a general election, and if she did get more popular votes than her Republican opponent she would not be able to get electoral college wins in states that sometimes go Democrat or Republican. Also, I am not in favor of mandated health care.
Seriously, drop the attacks against Obama voting present. It's too easy and ignorant of you. Read the rules on Illinois' State Senate voting procedures, and you'll realize that many senators vote present to delay passage of bills that have problematic clauses. It is not a cop out. Seriously, people, stop listening to the media and do your own research! Obviously the Illinois State Senate has different voting procedures than federal.
The manner in which HinesSight highlights their headlines and news stories makes it obvious that they have become nothing more than a shill for Hillary Clinton. That's too bad, because your credibilty has really taken a slide in the past couple of months. Having watched the debate, the Obama headline really struck me as out of touch with reality.
The manner in which HinesSight highlights their headlines and news stories makes it obvious that they have become nothing more than a shill for Hillary Clinton. That's too bad, because your credibilty has really taken a slide in the past couple of months. Having watched the debate, the Obama headline really struck me as out of touch with reality.
Obama came off as cerebral and academic, more the professor than the professional politican. Overall, pretty classy. But will it play? We're not accustomed to hearing politicians speaking in complete paragraphs with sub clauses anymore -- let along presidents! As an electorate, we've been dumb downed. That, more than Obama's particulars, may get in his way. Too bad.
The way the Obama campaign is trying to bate Senator Clinton into a race (black & white) debate is shameless. Even black reporters phrase their questions and opinions based on race. The most shameless question came from Suzanne Malbou(?) CNN mulato commentator, who asked John Edwards how black people should vote etc. Edwards didn't take her racist bate. Obama is a uniter like Bush. No wonder our country is so deeply divided.
Commentators are all over President Clinton for supporting his wife as if Mrs.Obama was sitting quietly in the back room. Or Elizabeth Edwards who has been upfront taking cheap shots at Senator Clinton knowing that they have compassion for her illness.
If President Clinton dozed off during the MLK celebrations, then what condemnation do you have for Obama who was chewing like a cow in the background. Give me a brake!
I am so angry at Obama.... Someday I could have voted for him for President. He is talented but too green and the fact that he thinks he can be president after one year in the senate reinforces that fact.
By the why his present votes in Illinois remind me of his missed votes in the senate. Even when he is in the senate building he has simply chosen to not make a hard vote. The boy is not ready for prime time.
HinesSight has dared to not constantly worship Obama and you are offended.
Get use to it, Big O has had it too easy. Crunch time is here.
If the Observer is trashing Obama and the Clinton's are trashing Obama...do you want cheese with that whine?
It's a debate and there's no attacking and no trashing, just pointing out the facts. Obama is better off as an evangelical preacher than president of the United States. The Hispanic community was not whinning when Richardson was being confronted by his mistakes. Hispancs were not yelling racists, racists, racists. Yet, Richardson is 300% more qualified than Obama.
Senator Clinton will take that little nasty old man McCain and tie his shorts into a knot. Poor guy needs his wife to hold him up. Romney is a joke. So which other weak gladiators will face Hillary?
Excellent, well-reasoned article.
Be careful. You might be accused of insulting someone or, even worse, being branded a racist.
You are right. Obama is full of great talk but short on actions. He doesn't deserve to win.
wow, the only witch (bitch) is you.
I watched most of the debate. My issue with Senator Clinton is that all the great rejoinders and 5 point plans are not leadership. The question is will you be able to convince enough of the electorate and legislators to make you plan a reality, and if that doesn't work, what next? Senator Clinton may have a higher IQ in her pinky than W in his whole body, but that what bring about positive change, because like W and his minions, she's all about trying to intimidate people into line, instead of persuading them.
I think the reason for her missing reality check is that in fact she has about 8 years elected official experience, period. Her claiming 35, or even 16 years experience is like my wife saying she has 17 years experience doing my job, it's just not true. Being supportinve and discussing important issues with your spouse is not the same as making those decisions, and being held accountable for it. I live/work ina an area that is about 75% republican, and no one will unite the republican Party and turn off the independents like Hillary Clinton. If she runs against McCain, be prepared for 4 to 8 more years of a republican presidency, and don't say you weren't warned.
I'm not a democrat but if a democrat is meant to win the upcoming elections, I'd rather see Sen Clinton as the new president. We know her shortcomings, her hypocresy, her meanness, her dryness, but I do think she can do the job. I don't know if Obama can do the job. We don't know anything about Obama other than he is likeable. I think the media and the celebrities are elevating him to his level of incompetency.
What debate were you watching?
From what I saw, Obama made the other two look like idiotic demagogues. He refused to participate in rabble rousing, and concentrated on the points at hand when the other candidates tried to dance around them or cover them with meaningless answers. Though Hillary might have swayed the crowd with her clearly scripted hollow monologues, Obama's "hesitation" demonstrated that he was actually listening to his opponents, that there was some thought involved in his responses. Though he may have stuttered, or tripped over a word or two, the man soundly defeated his opponents, not via scripted catch phrases, or blatant demagoguery, but by with thoughtful, thorough responses. This was clearly not lost on the audience, nor the state of South Carolina.
GOOOOBAMA!!!
-max
I AM GLAD TO SEE THE MEDIAS LOVE AFFAIR WITH OBAMA FINALLY BEGIN TO DIMINISH SOMEWHAT. THERE HAS BEEN SO MUCH HATE DIRECTED AT THE CLINTONS, THAT OBAMA HAS GOTTEN A FREE RIDE. HE IS NOT THE REAL DEAL, HE WILL COLLAPSE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY EVEN AS A VICE PRESIDENT CANDIDATE. ONCE THE TRUTH IS KNOWN ABOUT HIS CHURCHES LOVE AFFAIR WITH LOUIS FARRAHKAN, HIS CHURCHES BELIEF THAT GODS PROMISES TOWARD ISRAEL ARE INVALID TODAY. EVER HEARD OF A CHRISTAIN CHURCH WITH THAT BELIEF? HIS DEALING WITH TONY REZKE, A MUSLIM SLUM LORD FROM A TERRORIST STATE OF SYRIA IN CHICAGO WHO HAS BEEN RAISING FUNDS FOR OBAMA AND GIVING HIM SWEETHEART DEALS ON REAL ESTATE, MAKES WHITEWATER LOOK LIKE A CAKE WALK. THIS GUY IS BAD NEWS, HE IS SMOKE AND MIRRORS. THE ARROGANTS IT TAKES FOR A SENATOR WITH ONLY ONE YEAR UNDER HIS BELT TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT. HIS CHARM AND CHARISMA ONLY CAN GO SO FAR. THE MEDIA IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS LIE BEING ALIVE TODAY.
Senator Obama strikes me as a kind, gentle, thoughtful and intelligent man. There seems to be little or no instinctive aggressiveness. He is trying to win this nomination using his other talents and I believe they will improve over time. But, how much time will he need and how much time does he have?
Obama is a good, solid candidate for president whose time has not yet come. He's honest, forth-right, and is smart enough to implement his ideals in the political universe. However, Hillary Clinton has been eyeing this presidency since her husband left office, and what she lacks in likability she makes up for with experience and confidence. Either of them would make a good president, but this is probably Hillary's time, not Obama's.
By the way, the "present" vote fiasco is a complete non-issue. As some have said, "present" votes often times are simply a way to delay a bill so that some kinks can get worked out. Obama even stated that he sponsored the one bill that he voted present on. Clinton is still more ready to be president, but not because of that.
I wish Obama would agree to be Hillary's VP for eight years. Get all that experience then come back and take America by storm. He'll have my vote then. His VP could be Condi Rice. Imagine that....
Your analysis is dead wrong. He did what he was doing before Iowa, and this is standing up to to Hillary and her (and Bill's) seeming inability to tell the truth. You can almost see Bill saying once again. "I did not have sexual relations with that woman..."
Before Iowa, Barack was making strong contrasts with both Hillary and Edwards. Then, thinking he had a big lead, played prevent defense for 2 full weeks, right up until the day before NV. I dont think he can engage in a dogfight for weeks at a time (which is what Hillary wants), but doing it for a few days here and there will make him look strong: ie. electable.
He's back to speaking the truth and drawing contrasts. That's how we won in Iowa. That's how he will win in SC. And that's how he will win the majority of Feb 5th states...
As usual, another trash job on the Clintons. Obama is not the sterling example of goddom that the press is constantly striving for. There are legitimate concerns about his maturity to handle the presidency. He in some ways is worse than George Bush in 2000, I don't at all see how he'll ever be able to grapple with genuine problems that afflict real people. Oh, I guess he'll give a soaring speech, inspire people to do the job for him, and eat popcorn while he watches a Redskin football game.