The First Presidential Debate

The much-awaited debate season had a cold and unpromising start. MSNBC believed that Obama "won" the debate and Fox believed the same for McCain. The truth is, both candidates lost.

Debates are a huge opportunity for either side. The 1976 debates illustrated the potential they have to influence a presidential election. Although Jimmy Carter beat Gerald Ford in the elections, polls showed the gap narrowing after the first debate - and swaying almost entirely Ford's way, until the third debate.                                                                                                                   

The purpose of having a presidential debate in such close proximity to the main elections was entirely defeated this year. As an audience, we only heard again what we have been hearing through the race. The undecided voters remained undecided and the voters who were certain will remain unwavering.

Surprising, given the number of Democrats that agreed with McCain, and the number of Republicans that agreed with Obama, as was visible in CNN's "audience reaction" meter. Also surprising, given how close this presidential race is.

The choice of topics didn't help either. Both sides have been very clear about their foreign policy, especially with regards to Iraq, Afghanistan and Georgia. The economic crisis issue had tremendous potential as a debate topic. Both candidates, however, were hesitant to aggressively comment on the issue because it is so new - they haven't had the time to effectively use it to their advantage. Both candidates are well aware that every single thing they say is going to be simultaneously checked by scores of fact checkers, waiting for one to make a mistake. 

In this excerpt, the extent to which the moderator and PBS anchor Jim Leherer tried to illicit a substantial response from the candidates becomes evident: 

"I'm trying to get at, that one of you is going to be the President of the United States come January. In the middle of a huge financial crisis that is yet to be resolved. And what I'm trying to get at is how this is going to affect you not in very specific, small ways but in major ways and the approach to take as to the presidency."

I do find specific fault with Obama. The Democratic nominee should have stepped out, gotten aggressive and taken a few risks. His opponent is a member of the party that has arguably recreated America's 1929 depression. Only this time, the impact is much more global. According to filmmaker and author Bernard Henry Levy, "the left has always been too shy," and especially in the American scenario. At an event to promote his new book "The Left in Dark Times:  A Stand Against New Barbarism," Levy mentioned this fairly global trend. And this has been evident in this debate.

The following is one instance where Obama should have hit back a lot harder than he did. John McCain's vague justification of being cost-conscious:

"Who is the person who has believed that the best thing for America is to have a tax system that is fundamentally fair? And I've fought to simplify it, and I have proposals to simplify it. Let's give every American a choice, two tax brackets, generous dividends, and, ah, and two, and let Americans choose whether they want the, the existing tax code or they want a new tax code. And so, ah, again, look at the record, particularly the energy bill."

We can only hope the debate will get more interesting in the future when topics of abortion and same-sex marriage come up. For now we can just look forward to an entertaining vice president's debate. Especially since we know so little about one of the candidates.