The debate conundrum

04May07

For political addicts, last night’s debate was a penultimate 90-minute fix. Ten intelligent men. Less than expected group think. A moderater, while annoying, who kept the event moving fast.

Mitt was articulate and witty (his “Gang of Three” comment is a keeper.)

Rudy remained universally likeable, even if he seemed not quite himself at times.

Ron Paul provided an interesting Libertarian diversion.

And, John McCain was all fire and brimstone, demonstrating yet again that age and vigor need not be exclusive.

Yet, it’s difficult not to feel deeply disappointed by the debate. 30-second sound bites may be easily digestible, but they offer scant insight into a candidate’s ability to think, lead and remain steady in the rough waters of the Executive Office.

It’s worrisome that such a shallow format could figure prominently into selecting our next President — one who’ll face unprecedented and inextricable challenges during his reign.

Certainly, Ronald Reagan bridged the gap between television personality and effective leadership, but he was rare breed (as the candidates reminded us over and over and over again last night.) And, of course, showmanship has been an adjunct part of election politics for all of time. But as our nation matures, might it not bode well for us to choose our next President on his substance rather than his style? The pressing issues of the day require no less. The format of the debate gives us anything but.

John McCain is a candidate of much needed substance. He’s carefully crafted policy positions and solutions that deal directly the difficult problems of today and tomorrow, especially with regards to energy, environment and foreign policy. To read more, check out the speeches on his website.

Advertisements


2 Responses to “The debate conundrum”

  1. I felt the night was won by Romney, but a Survey USA valid poll states that Giuliani one.

    With regard to the format, it was horrible for all, but it may help in that political evolution, and the three who don’t believe in it are likely to suffer the effects of political Darwinism first.

    Anyone who said that McCain lacked vigor got their reply in spades, he was energetic, perhaps too much so, to the point of aggressiveness in tone and body language. He also really had a problem keeping to the time, and wasn’t held to the time limits strictly. He didn’t hurt himself, but I don’t think he helped himself too much. He came out fairly strongly against President Bush, with saying numerous times, “The war was mismanaged”. He seemed passionate and assertive, but perhaps too agressive.


  1. 1 Exploring McCainia » Blog Archive » Musings on McCain: What the McCain New-Media Is Saying About the Campaign… Enthusiastic Reviews Across the Board For McCain’s Performance in the CA Debate

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: