Sen. Barack Obama insisted the debate continue as scheduled. McCain said the economy was more important. The drama ensued. Almost as good as "Lost." Will they or won't they? And another question brewing in the mind of some Angelenos was: would Ralph Nader step up?
Then, the show went on despite continuing morning doubts that McCain wouldn't show. Did you see it? It was all over the news!
Objectively covering the news means most media outlets show what Republican, Democrat, Independent and undecided voters think. And though some were still pretty undecided about who won, Time and the Huffington Post bolstered Obama, the Los Angeles Times, New York Times, Washington Post, AOL News, and CNN wrote stories focusing on the lack of winner. But the consensus seems to be that the debate itself fell short.
Were Jim Lehrer's questions too broad? Was the audience's silence eerie? Did the audience reaction line on the CNN super really mean anything? Foreign policy and the economy were the talking points--the huge issues Americans are facing right now. So, why wasn't it more exciting? Neither candidate would take a side on the bailout plan and foreign policy was the only part of national security the two senators substantially discussed. Surprisingly, media coverage of the events leading up to and after the debate was much more engaging.
There was no clear winner, but the debate on who won the first debate rages on. The campaign ads predictably went on air to convince whomever they could that their candidate won. Time.com graded each candidate on substance, style, offense and defense giving McCain a B- and Obama an A- overall. Time's Joe Klein crowned Obama the winner and says:
"But even if my verdict were reversed to grant McCain a slight victory, there was nothing in this debate that was a knockout blow--nothing that should change the current trajectory of the campaign...neither man closed the sale, and I don't think many votes, or opinions, were changed."
Various news outlets have also noted the lack of "zingers" (their word, not mine) during the showdown.
Obviously, CNN and Fox News, being 24-hour news outlets online and on television have offered the most exhaustive coverage yet. They talk about what the candidates said, what they didn't say, people's reaction and more. CNN dedicated lenghty segments before and after the debate and additional programming throughout the weekend with Anderson Cooper, Roland Martin and Lou Dobbs.
Segments that check the candidates facts are my favorite. I noticed a few after Obama's acceptance speech at the DNC and McCain's at the RNC. I think these segments are some of the important tools in deciphering what is said during political proceedings.
The candidates always seem to trip up when they state something their oponent previously said. CNN's "Nothing But the Truth: Checking Campaign Claims," AP's "Fact Checking the Presidential Debate," Los Angeles Times' "Fact-Checking the Debate," and the Washington Post's "Debate Decoder: Step-by-Step Analysis" help viewers and readers formulate an opinion about the happenings during the campaign.
Then, overnight, actor Paul Newman's death and the bailout plan took over the headlines the next day.
Extra, extra!: Here's a hilarious late night comedians political talk gallery from latimes.com.
Credits: Candidates not talking about the bailout? cagiecartoon.com; Sen. McCain, gettyimages.com; Sen. Obama, gettyimages.com; McCain vs. Obama, theimproper.com; Candidates with Lehrer, newyorktimes.com
Leave a comment