« Lowest Common Denominator | Main | Debate: Reaction »

October 07, 2008

Comments

McCain "Fannie and Freddie, Obama Cronies" - dials flat or negative. Good to see.

No, no, no. McCain is pushing the idea that we need to prop up housing prices. This is utterly wrong. House prices must fall until they're back in line with incomes. More, McCain is also beating up on Fannie and Freddie. That doesn't follow. If you want house prices to go up, you have to loosen the reins on the GSEs. You can not both bash them, and advocate propping up house prices.

(Oddly, doesn't mention Rick Davis.)

Give him a chance. He got to it a moment later.

Give him a chance. He got to it a moment later.

I think that was hilzoy snarking that McCain didn't mention Rick Davis.

I don't know how you guys watch this stuff, btw.

I'm not sure Obama should have gone that far out on the limb with regards to net spending.

Then again, I'm not sure that McCain really wants to say A) the system is broken, but B) I've worked across party lines with said system.

Oops, "Liberal big spending" = dials tanks.

Barack Obama supports pork-barrel earmarks. Pass the word.

Oh man, got to drink now.

Oh, god. The dials are going to kill me.

MC -looks down on a questioner who happens to be African American and says, “you probably never heard of freddie mac…”

Obama name-checks 9/11? Uh-oh...

I don't know how you guys watch this stuff, btw.

The debates come in a pretty terrible format, but they're the only debates we get.

Tangentially, one of my favorite proposals to come out this year's campaign was when McCain suggested he would introduce something like Prime Minister's Questions. Wouldn't it be great if our leaders actually had to tell us what they're doing and what they're plans are?

And Obama mentions clean coal again...*bangs head against desk*

I have to say, Obama's kinda hurting me right now. McCain's clearly winning in my book, even if I know he's lying through his teeth.

Lesson of the dials so far: independents are democrats

Anarch - why you think?

Worst.
Moderator.
Evar.

He's monotonic and stumbly; his charisma is misfiring; and, of course, McCain is lying through his teeth but doing so charismatically. Brokaw's not helping anything, of course, but (as my gf points out) that's why McCain likes the format: he can spew BS without any fear of contradiction.

9:41

Dueling boilerplate - both men have just run thru a talking-point twice now.

And Yeah, Tom Brokaw sucks at this,

I wish Obama tackled the social security question. McCain paid lip service to the idea (yeah! another commission!) still, it's an issue I wish was better explored.

Is the phrase, "My friends," annoying everyone else as much as it's annoying me?

Is it just me or is Tom Brokaw pretty lousy at this?

independents are not democrats when it comes to offshore drilling!

Ah, ok, Obama's warming up a bit. That's better.

Ah, it's not just me.

But in all fairness it's at least as much the format's fault as it is Brokaw's.

Why is Tom Brokaw so bad at this? He keeps complaining at the candidates, and he's pushed that whole "Social security crisis ohnoes!" crap. Seriously, worst moderator ever.

Anarch - oh good. I thought I was going to be forced to do a frequency analysis.

Brokaw is just parroting that warm mushy Washington consensus. Where all things bipartisan are good and noble, and where entitlement funding 30 years down the road is a grave problem but a 3/4 trillion annual defense bill is not to be mentioned. Where the rest of the world is total ungreatful for the bombs we dropon them and the resouces our corporations exploit.

If he didn't believe and say these things he would not be moderating the debate

So, I just rewatched the part where McCain calls Obama "that one" again. The younger black guy who asked the second question is sitting directly behind Obama, and he totally does a double take. Am I the only one caught this?

Obama's response to McCain about health insurance and care is very strong.

sorry... i can't take my eyes off the dials. But why would independents react more negatively to McCain's complaints about mandates?

Heathcare: right, privilege or reposnsibilty?

For once, a clear and differnt response from the candidates.

The answers are clear, the program details less so.

"But did we hear the size of the fine? (chuckle)"

My friends, these are not the changes we've come to the table to address in our revised and extended remarks on the record of bipartisan partisanship in which we believe we can do better to help bring the American United States of the people to serve and protect and defend the things that matter most to those who would assist in the rebuilding of the broken bonds of despair and neglect upon which so much tragedy and that the crestfallenness we can only hope is behind is in the past.

"Did we hear the size of the fine that Obama said didn't exist?"

McCain has the Amazin' Strobe Tie again.

Wait, didn't McCain not oppose Lebanon on the grounds that he wasn't in Congress yet?

woohoo! he's hitting the "he doesn't understand" thing.

you dopes been schooled... Obama style.

Ohio men don't like the idea of having allies.

Geez, Ugh's parody at 10:00 actually reads better (gibberish tho it is) than any of McCain's actual speech. Scary.

If McCain is only talking to his "friends", is anybody listening?

For once, I agree with McCain completely. We DO need a cool hand at the tiller. Of course the cool hand is...not McCain.

Okay - the dial people are morons.

well, at least they react negatively to snark.

thank god Obama finally mentioned mccains impromtu bomb Iran song

The thing about "the dial people", david, is that they have to be *undecided*. So even if they're not naturally stupid, they're low-info voters, people who've been busy with other stuff, who've been putting off thinking about this junk for months and months.

That may make them sane, of course. Sometimes paying too much attention to things you can't control is just buying psychological trouble.

oh yeah.... he forced mccain to defend himself on the bomb iran thing.

The dial people are the same ones from debate to debate, aren't they? They should not be low-information anymore.

Use Petraeus's strategy? The one that led to "peace through ethnic cleansing" or the one that magically produced results after the extra troops had surged back home? Or maybe the one that the commander in Afghanistan has repudiated? Or all three, since The Surge(tm) fits all three descriptions?

Doctor Science - My impromptu hypothesis about undecideds is that they are essentially waiting to see which way the wind is blowing. In the same way that a conservative might wait to see what Limbaugh says before making up his mind, an undecided waits to see what everyone is going to say.

Brokaw's "Evil Empire" question a new low in Teh Stoopid.

Nice little moment there for McCain with the ex-Navy guy.

ARGH MY FRIENDS YOU ARE NOT MY FNKING FRIEND.

"Is Russia still an Evil Empire?" WTF? Tom Brokaw is really freaking embarrassing.

bperk - do you have the dial people's names and addresses? There are a few things I'd like to tell them.

Israel: If Iran attacks Israel, would you be willing to commit troops to support Israel, or would you wait on UN approval?

Can we just admit Israel to the fncking Union and get it over with? Jeebus.

Oh for... you know, I'm actually pretty pro-Israel and even I'm starting to question why this keeps popping up in debates about AMERICA's future. (Argh. Don't answer that.)

Wait, if Israel attacks Iran, don't we have alliances with them that would allow us to help them attack back, if it were a real war? The UN is about preventing aggressive wars (like Iraq) not about preventing countries from defending themselves.

Not that Iran would attack Israel in most any realistic scenario, but if they did, it wouldn't even be a security council matter.

Is it mean for me to say "LOL" when McCain says "our generation"?

Is it over yet?

Gag, why do they (uh, Tom Brokaw that is) ask stupid questions like that. What is your weakest X. And nobody ever answers them straight anyway. Grr.

Just ended, with Tom Brokaw complaining the candidates were in front of his teleprompter?

Weirdest moderator ever.

Note that Drudge put a poll up on "who won" before the debate even ended. McCain's winning, of course.

Ninety minutes of my life I'll never get back. At least I spent part of it cleaning the cat litter box out, so it wasn't a total waste.

Thanks for liveblogging, hilzoy!

F--- Drudge, it's another draw.

I.e., Obama will probably benefit he most, as nothing much will probably change in public opinion. Not from this yawnfest, anyway.

No "personality" question, though: something of a disappointment - nor anything on the level of the campaign itself. Too bad.

Thank you, Hilzoy.

Also, looking over at Washington Monthly, there's over a hundred comments, this was much calmer here.

Anyone want to play "Guess how the pundits will spin this?" My guess is that essentially its a draw. The pundits wil say that McCain didn't stop the bleeding andObama didn't clinch the deal.

My own opinion is that McCAin did good by managing to avoid a psychotic break, that Obama sounded mad a couple of times but that's OK, that the questions were very good, to my sruprise, and that all in all thsi debagte won't mnake much difference. Obama will still be subastantially ahead in the polls afgter the effects of this debatge sink in.

Sullivan:

10.33 pm. This was, I think, a mauling: a devastating and possibly electorally fatal debate for McCain. Even on Russia, he sounded a little out of it. I've watched a lot of debates and participated in many. I love debate and was trained as a boy in the British system to be a debater. I debated dozens of times at Oxofrd. All I can say is that, simply on terms of substance, clarity, empathy, style and authority, this has not just been an Obama victory. It has been a wipe-out.It has been about as big a wipe-out as I can remember in a presidential debate. It reminds me of the 1992 Clinton-Perot-Bush debate. I don't really see how the McCain campaign survives this.

Which makes me worry, of course, that McCain has turned the tide.

Ugh -- I find your topsy-turvy contrarianism... strangely compelling. Instruct me more in the ways of blackwhite cynicism!

i suck at judging how other people will react to debates, but i think Obama had this one, but only by a nose. McCain seemed a little too canned, and his age really showed as he was up walking around. for that matter, having slurry old Brokaw and McCain together made Obama look like a college kid.

Yeah, but John McCain used to debate with North Vietnamese bayonet at the Hanoi Hilton.

I say, Andrew - pass us another snifter of cognac. Did anyone call Rich Lowry to see if he thought McCain winked at him?

what wonkie said at 10:43 pm.

A boring debate, no real drama, no game changers.

Obama is ahead in the polls, McCain is running out of time. Whatever small advantage (if any) McCain might have gotten with some undecided viewers out of the debate will be far less than what he needed.


No, no, no. McCain is pushing the idea that we need to prop up housing prices.

JMN,

I interpreted McCain's remarks to mean that he is in favor of mortgage cramdowns - reducing the amount owed on the loan. That is a 180 degree reversal from McCain's previous policy and the only big news that came out of tonight.

Am I getting that totally wrong? I thought I heard McCain say at least twice that we need to reduce the size of existing mortgages. How can that mean anything other than cramdowns?

LeftTurn - I agree for the most part, especially since McCain set up the expectation that he was going to attack ferociously. But there were two strong moments - Obama's response to the "speak softly" thing, and his response to the "you don't understand" thing.

BTW, I owe Tom Brokaw an apology.

He could have done a better job of moderating, but he was not conspicously biased in favor of McCain, as I expected.

Also, I thought the audience questions were noticeably more serious than the ones we normally get from the press. Less gotcha journalism and more "stick to the issues that matter to many Americans". Good job by the people who submitted questions. Can we replace the WH press corps with them?

TLTIA, I couldn't be sure (because McCain is woefully thin on specifics) but I'm fairly sure he completely reversed himself on a couple of issues, and completely invented a few others. As far as the mortgages are concerned... I've gotta be honest, I don't think he has a plan, just a bunch of soundbites tossed together in desperation. It's certainly nothing I've heard him say before, that's for damn sure.

david kilmer, did anyone else notice that McCain bungled the TR quote? He said "Talk softly" instead of "Speak softly"...

david kilmer,

Agreed.

I just can't judge how these things go over with undecided voters any more. I'm too decided myself to be running an effective "undecided voter" simulation in my head.

In other words, I love when Obama has moments like that, but no idea if it is just me or not.

I also liked when he (Obama) took on the "Freddie and Fannie caused the mortgage crisis" lie rather than just deflecting on that topic. The GOP is trying to peddle some outrageous horse manure on this topic and it is royally pissing me off - nice to see that Obama didn't cave on that subject.

Anarch - I could be wrong, but I think McCain started with "walk softly" and corrected to "talk softly".


As far as the mortgages are concerned... I've gotta be honest, I don't think he has a plan, just a bunch of soundbites tossed together in desperation. It's certainly nothing I've heard him say before

Me too - I did a double take when he first said it - a whuzzzzzat? moment. As far as I know this is the very first time that he has said explicitly that mortgages should be crammed down.

Time will tell if there is an actual plan here, or if it is just another another tactical media cycle oriented Hail Mary pass.

"Time will tell if there is an actual plan here, or if it is just another another tactical media cycle oriented Hail Mary pass."

Perhaps McCain will suspend his campaign, to begin personally buying up mortgages, thus putting country first.

CBS snap poll has it 39%-27% Obama. It's weird that in the debates the people leaning towards Obama always see him as doing worse than the polls say. Nerves?

Here's the post-debate handshake that didn't happen.

And what the hell with the "that one" remark. That what? People have tried to come up with complicated reasons explaining why McCain couldn't look Obama in the eye in the first debate. McCain is just a racist, it's that simple. Where's his dark skinned kid? Any campaign commercials with "that one" in it? Why not?

LeftTurn - I noticed you were a little peeved about that. I never saw anyone spank Von on a thread like that before.

thus putting country Countrywide first.

hmmmm, no not quite a winner. Needs more pep.

I've got it, how about:

"Bomb, bomb, bomb, Wall St."

Am I getting that totally wrong? I thought I heard McCain say at least twice that we need to reduce the size of existing mortgages. How can that mean anything other than cramdowns?

He explicitly said, several times, that the goal was to put a floor under housing prices. Now, we could both be right, and the answer is that McCain has no idea what he is talking about.

I never saw anyone spank Von on a thread like that before.

Which thread? I must've missed it...

About McCain's mortgage cram-down "plan": does anybody know what fraction of delinquent or defaulted mortgages have been owner-occupied primary residences, and how many have been "investment properties" that ended up underwater? Bailing out "homeowners" by renegotiating interest terms would be one thing. Rescuing "flip-this-house" investors by cramming down principal would be another.

--TP

dk,

Actually I really didn't go after von - I have a lot of respect for him and I deliberately left some room for him to clarify his statement. mckinneytexas was the one I unloaded on with both barrels.

Anarch - it was the "Another Reason Government Can Be Good" thread, my comments at Oct 6 3:52 pm and 4:36 pm are probably what dk is referring to.

Ugh--

As they say: all news is good news for John McCain.

I'm pro-Israel (though no fan of Likudniks), but that Iran question was weird: if Iran attacks Israel would we defend it? Attacks how? Amphibiously out of the Persian Gulf, round the Arabian Peninsula and to Eilat? By conquering Iraq and either Jordan or Syria first? By digging a really long tunnel? What kind of freaking attack is this? Israel doesn't need American forces to defend its borders from Hezbollah or to secure its airspace, and if the attack is ballistic WMDs there won't be an issue of defending Israel or of attacking Iran, it will be too late for either. Just a dumb question, as phrased.

A lot of recycled material from the previous debate -- Petraeus worship, "bomb, bomb Iran", striking in Pakistan, tax-raising accusations, etc. And then various things that I was wondering whether McCain was just making up on the spot -- some sort of stats he made up about Obama's taxes on small businesses, the mortgage-buying plan (was that announced before?), and maybe even the doubled tax deduction for children (though I've probably just missed that).

I thought the "cool hand on the tiller" was a really bad line for hothead McCain to be using, and then he brought it back at the end as "steady hand on the tiller" -- not much of an improvement. Of course if undecided voters don't know what a tiller is they may just think he's talking about someone having their hand in the till.


Bailing out "homeowners" by renegotiating interest terms would be one thing. Rescuing "flip-this-house" investors by cramming down principal would be another.

It is going to be a huge task figuring this out on a case by case basis if we go down this road. You'll probably need to at least double the number of bankruptcy judges (and staff) for a short time, and provide them with expert assistance from loss mitigation specialists. Go read some of Tanta's articles at calculatedrisk to get a feel for how this process works.

Also, my understanding of cramdowns it that they would involve renegotiating the principle on the loan, not just twiddling the interest rate. The idea is to put the current homeowner into a loan for what the home is actually worth in terms of long term trends for that market and property rather than using principle values determined at the height of the bubble.

This means the lender (or whoever got stuck holding the MBS when the music stopped) is going to take a loss, perhaps as much as 50% in some cases, but at least you keep the property occupied and under maintenance, which is in the best interests of the community and the most economically rational thing to do as far as preserving the long term value of the home.

Not only do foreclosures cost money in administrative costs, but there is also the likelihood that an unoccupied property will lose real value due to vandalism and theft (for example in the spring of this year there was a rash of stories about homes being ripped apart for the copper piping bacl when metals prices were booming). Even just leaving a house exposed to the weather without an occupant can result in damage and loss of value.

McCain keeps talking about how he takes on everyone. He never mentions if he ever wins, though. Then again, maybe he's from La Mancha.

and maybe even the doubled tax deduction for children (though I've probably just missed that)

That was it! Where the frell did that come from? I've never heard McCain or any of his surrogates mention that before.

Yeah, it was particularly bizarre hearing McCain pop out with random new proposals in the same debate in which he was criticizing Obama for frequently changing his tax proposals (when the changes seem to be a figment of McCain's imagination).


Yeah, it was particularly bizarre hearing McCain pop out with random new proposals

What was even more weird is that he didn't bother to tell anybody that these proposals are new.

If they wanted to dominate the news cycle and make McCain look more responsive to the economic crisis, they should have been making a huge deal out of this - "New! Improved! Even better than before! McCain is listening to YOUR concerns! He's not afraid to change!"

Instead they buried the lead.

It reminded me of the scene in Dr. Strangelove where they are discussing the new Russian Doomsday machine and Dr. S. points out that the whole point of having one is lost if you don't tell anybody about it.

I wonder if these new proposals are trial balloons that they were waiting to see how they score with the audience during the debate, and then they will run with them or not depending on the reaction.

Well, McCain's two for two on introducing policy proposals at the debates that he's never talked about before: the spending freeze at the first debate, and the mortgage buyback this time. Could be three for two; I don't know if his "fixing Social Security is easy, all it takes is this Magic Commission" plan (using the term "plan" loosely) was introduced outside of the debates.

Yeah, it was particularly bizarre hearing McCain pop out with random new proposals in the same debate in which he was criticizing Obama for frequently changing his tax proposals

as always: any attack from McCain should be assumed to be a reflection of how McCain thinks Obama would attack him. McCain is merely preempting Obama.

"I'll act responsibly, as I've acted throughout my career" (10:14) -- what I heard was actually worse: he said "throughout my military career" and then half-corrected himself a second later. So, take your pick: either McCain thinks his behavior as a pilot was something to be proud of, or he wants you to believe that his whole political career was a military career.

I don't know if his "fixing Social Security is easy, all it takes is this Magic Commission" plan (using the term "plan" loosely) was introduced outside of the debates.

If you use "plan" any more loosely, it's gonna fall to your ankles.

The comments to this entry are closed.