John McCain Won Saddleback
Posted by Adam Graham in : Presidential Race 2008I sat down yesterday and watched the Saddleback Civil forum. McCain won the forum going away. It was no contest. In fact, the left is so shellshocked, the groundless allegations that McCain cheated are flowing through the net. I’ll believe McCain cheated when somebody produces a video of him watching Obama’s questioning. Until then, let’s not make poor excuses for why Obama didn’t do as well.
McCain came off as strong and decisive, while Obama sputtered “uhs” like crazy. McCain connected with those watching at home through his use of stories. Some may have been familiar to campaign journalists, but these were “new to the voters” stories.
On abortion, he sounded firm and decisive, as well as re-assuring to pro-lifers. On embryonic stem cell research, he was conciliationry and while not being wishy washy, he didn’t come off as strident in his support of ESCR.
He nailed the issues of spending and energy, speaking with passion. He nailed the issue of evil and came off tough and presidential. He gave voters a reason of why he should be President, rather than simply why Obama shouldn’t be.
One of McCain’s key successes was the use of stories. The stories he told from his decision to stay in Vietnam as a POW rather than jump the line because of rank and the adoption of his daughter painted a great picture of the Senator.
McCain’s greatest risk coming out of here, would be to overplay his hand and assume that he owns the Religious Conservative vote lock, stock, and barrel. If days after talking about the importance of judges, and pledging a pro-life administration, McCain chooses Tom Ridge or Joe Lieberman as VP, it sends exactly the wrong message as if, God forbid something were to happen to a President McCain, the pro-life cause would be undermined. Religious Conservative voters are tired of being lied to, tired of simply being pandered to. McCain cannot take their votes for granted.
For Barack Obama, it was a much more mixed night. Yes, Obama came off as likable. But he added fuel to the suggestion that if you get Obama away from the teleprompter and you have a far less eloquent and capable performer. Obama “uhd” a ton compared to McCain. His answers went long and he really didn’t add a lot in those long answers.
Obama had three defining moments last night. When asked when a child’s human rights should be protected, Obama went off on a long rambling answer that declared the issue theologically and scientifically to be “above his pay grade.” Conservatives in the blogosphere have jumped on this quite rightly. Don Surber calls it a Staff Sergeant’s answer to General’s question and writes:
Now, “above my pay grade” is a military phrase, used by NCOs to communicate with a specialist or private the answer to a policy question.
Usually it means I don’t know or I know but I cannot tell you.
It is not a general’s answer.
Ed Morrisey opines:
First, the entire issue of abortion involves determining when a baby becomes a person. If Obama thinks this is above his pay grade, then he probably shouldn’t be running for political office. If a baby is a person at conception, then abortion is murder. If Obama doesn’t believe that abortion is murder, then he can’t believe in the personhood, the humanity, of an embryo or fetus — not unless he’s some kind of monster.
As President — even as Senator — Obama is expected to have an answer for this. Quite literally, there is no higher pay grade in the US government, and abortion is one of the issues he has to face. If he can’t face it, then he should go back to community organization and leave politics for people who can. John McCain had no trouble answering the same question. Obama dodged it — and for good reason: his answer would have exposed his radical views.
The answer was weak. His statement that he couldn’t argue with anyone who argued that life begins with conception implied that stances on the issue of life and when it began were not subject to rational debate and discussion or even worse than those who disagreed with Obama held an irrattional view that Obama couldn’t and wouldn’t try to talk them out of.
He also came off as weak on the issue of evil, especially compared to McCain pledge to defeat it and hunt Osama Bin-Laden to the gates of Hell.
Then there was his testy exchange with David Brody over the Born Alive Infants Act and made statements that turned out not to be accurate over his Illinois voting record on that issue.
If Obama did anything, by appearing to be personable he may have taken the edge off in terms of the fear factor. By appearing before an Evangelical Church and appearing relaxed, likable, etc., Obama has blunted some of his vulnerability to hard-edged attacks.
A couple provisos here. While this was carried on the cable networks, most Americans didn’t see this forum. A forum conducted on Saturday Night isn’t going to draw as huge an audience as the Presidential Debates will later on this cycle.
Second, it should be clear that the forum is less likely to reach the younger Evangelical votes that Obama hopes to gain among.
Third, it should be noted that Warren is not a universally loved, accepted, or fully known figure within the Evangelical movements.
The overall shape of the race didn’t shift drastically Saturday night, but it should give McCain supporters some hope. If McCain can perform in the Presidential debates with the same level of passion and energy he displayed at Saddleback, McCain does have a shot.
UPDATE
Color David Ripley at Idaho Chooses Life non-plused by McCain’s performance. He mentions that ICL will make its endorsement in September. Given Ripley’s opinion, it seems possible that ICL could sit out the Presidential race or even go third party with Chuck Baldwin. This wouldn’t surprise me as ICL’s endorsement strategy has far more common with Gun Owners of America than with National Right to Life and they have endorsed pro-life State legislative candidates. What would this mean to the Presidential? Not much. If Idaho’s in play, Obama is president by a landslide. Still, an ICL endorsement could give Chuck Baldwin a far more stronger than expected showing in Idaho.









![SaveForMike.com SaveForMike.com [Grassroots]](http://www.christianevents.co.uk/saveformiketicker.png)










Comment by Joan E. Harman
And McCain’s SUPPORTERS will help him lose the election. Talk about some truly ugly talking people on the AOL forum following the Saddleback Q and A. McCain can thank his friends should he lose in November, because they are the most likely to rally the Dems to turn out for Obama, along with any Republican fully disgusted by Bush. Sorry buddy. But it doesn’t matter if Obama came “unprepared” to the Q and A. And McCain was more relaxed and more prepared. Obama had the courage to show up and give his answers as best he could. McCain hasn’t always showed up in places where it wasn’t to his political advantage. So, are we going to mock Obama for “stumbling” and a lot of ers and ums? Then let me remind you of the video of McCain not having much respect for his wife and marriage in front of a bunch of bikers.
Comment by Adam Graham
So, Obama wins just by showing up. In addition, if we want to talk about supporters, the cult of Obama makes normal people wince with their O-Salute and declarations of Messiahhood.
Comment by Howard
I thought the Saddleback debate was a wonderful way to gauge the two candidates and compare them to one another. I also think that Rick Warren did a great job, with balanced and probing questions … questions which any legitimate candidate for President of the United States should have already wrestled with on his own, way before arriving at this debate. Therefore, why did Obama respond to the questions as if it was the first time he has ever considered these points. John McCain’s immediate and decisive answers show that he had already given a great deal of thought to real concerns, as posed in these questions … where as Obama had to take the time to stutter and deliberate over the same questions asked of McCain. This was very revealing, and so were the Obama camp’s accusations of cheating, after Obama lost the debate … just another indication that Obama is a sore loser who is not qualified to lead this country … and, McCain is.
Comment by Steve
1. It was not a contest… it was a forum. One does not win a forum, one wins the following…
a game
a debate
a war
an arugument
an election
Saying that someone won a forum is very close to saying that a person is awarded a paycheck, or that a person earned a gift.
A better question than that of who won or lost is “What did the candidates learn?”
In the first section they learned that Obama regrets being selfish in his consumption of drugs and alchohol when he was young and that McCain is sorry for his marriage failure. They learned that Obama would seek advice from a wide variety of sources, while McCain would seek advice from the “professionals” of the respective fields of interest. We learned that Obama is in favor of restrictions on late term abortion as long as the mother’s life is not in danger, that he favors Roe V. Wade because he wants to leave the ultimate decsion up to the mother. We learned that McCain is a Pro Life candidate, who sees his personal opinion as fact. We learned that Obama doesn’t know when life begins – so he’s more careful about legislating opinnions. etc.
If anyone wins or loses in a forum it is those in attendence. People who do not hear both candidates out, who say “Well I don’t know what HE just said,” Or simply look for pat answers without any substial explainations of what those answers mean, those are the loosers.
The people who put the work and effort into staying attentive enough to understand what the candidates mean by what they say, those are the winners.
Be a winner
Comment by Adam Graham
If one wants to be careful on abortion, it would seem to make sense to err on the side of life.
Secondly, of course there’s a winner and a loser, there’s someone who walks away strong, and someone who walks away weaker by failing to impress.