I hadn't intended to stay up last night to watch John McCain's speech, but you know what it's like. It gets to 1am and you get seduced by the O'Reilly Factor on Fox, and before you know it it's nearly time for McCain.At first I thought his speech was quietly impressive, but as it went on ... and on ... I am afraid it became quietly unimpressive. It reminded me of Bob Dole's Convention speech in 1996. And look what happened to him.
It was choppy, disjointed, too impersonal (apart from the Vietnam bits), there was little connection and he made the fatal mistake of linking himself to Bush almost at the start. I didn't feel that he painted a vision for the country and failed to distinguish himself from Obama in any meaningful way. He showed no executive instinct beyond the usual platitudes of promising to reform Washington - which all candidates promise and then never do.
Thirty seven million American households watched Sarah Palin on Tuesday, more than for the final of Pop Idol. I doubt whether McCain will have matched that, and if he did, I doubt whether they were still watching at the end. I have to admit I fell asleep by the end.
Of course, he was never going to match Sarah Palin's stellar performance, and it was unrealistic to expect him to. But many people will have felt a sense of anti climax watching McCain last night. He will need to do much better in the presidential debates.
The Spectator Americano blog dissects the speech in detail, and comes to similar conclusions.
46 comments:
These speeches are not relevant. They are forgotten very quickly. What matters is the campaign and the debates. Moreover, whether Pulin comes unstuck, which is likely as she has no experience. The election is for BO to lose.
Sarah Palin is no Jack Kemp. The comparison with Dole '96 is hopelessly inaccurate. Yes McCain didn't hit the heights of Palin or Obama but that's not what McCain is about. We all knew he wouldn't be inspiring as an orator. So what?
This week has shown the Obama bounce to have been short-lived. Palin has energised the GOP - and particularly conservatives within the party, who now feel motivated to campaign for a party they were prepared to watch lose. That is the story of these last two weeks.
I've just caught a mercifully brief few seconds of McCain speaking, letterbox-slot mouth, mechanical jaw movement, carping voice, wolfish grin - Homer Simpson to a T!
Can't help thinking Obama will win, although it'll be a near thing after the Palin bounce.
Found this:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=W1lCMH8rlHE
I apologise that it is not strictly relevant to your post, but it does continue the theme of Sarah Palin's coverage in the media and also features Bill O'Reilly, who you mentioned in the your post - so, you know...
Of course, there is going to be hypocrisy in both parties, and the Daily Show will nearly always support the Democrats, but to see how hand-in-hand Fox News, a major news source for many Americans, and the Republican Party are makes me sick. Thank god we have (comparatively) unbiased media in the UK.
He sounded old to me
Does this mean that it will be Sarah Palin trying to 'do a Thatcher' in 2012 ??
Unfortunately, McCain's very inspiring life story has never translated into him being a very inspiring speaker. I remember watching his speech to the Conservative Party conference two years ago which went on for ever and was very worthy but dull. He's in severe danger of being overshadowed by his running mate when it comes to making good speeches.
A second problem is that all of McCain's political experience has been in Washington. He was Senate liaison for the US Navy before becoming a Representative and then a Senator. He can't really issue a passionate denunciation of Washington's ways, because that's his political powerbase, not Arizona.
McCain was really poor. He wasn’t helped by the crowd who started out by chanting like maniacs at every verse end. Far too much stuff on Vietnam. Best to let others talk about that, and it’s not as if that war was a great success. He has been totally eclipsed by Palin who looks more like she is going to be President rather than remain a “heartbeat” away from it. When you think that he must have given a thousand speeches before and this was the best he could manage. Maybe experience isn’t everything after all.
Unbiased Media in the UK !
Try a Google on Biased BBC.......
If they swapped Palin and McCain around the Republicans would win by a country mile.
Obama v Palin would see Obama out for the count.
padougy - you think we have arelatively unbiased media in this country.
Obviously, either you have never watched the BBC then?
OR
maybe you work for them or the Guardian....
Padougy
Yes it's shocking that there is one and only one channel in favour of the Republicans isn't it, especially when you have CNN, MSNBC, CBS, New York Times, Washington Post etc all in the pocket for Obama. If you want to trade clips we can, I can find a lot more than you with a very distinct Democrat flavour. I think the GOP should be allowed one.
Iain
I agree it wasn't the most dynamic speech ever, it never was going to be, McCain's not that kinda guy. Where he did well I thought was the section about his time in Hanoi. Yes we've heard about it all week, but it was so much more personalised last night, really effective. McCain also gives over the aura of someone you can believe in, he's very authentic I think.
If McCain loses in 2008 Palin has propelled herself up the Republican Party's awareness league and is well-placed to be the candidate in 2012.
McCain wins- ditto - but she may have to defer to 2016(when she'll be 52 but with more executive experience)unless McCain, who'll be 77 in 2012 decides to run for only on term in office. Either way the whole thing's a win/win for Palin
Howard is right. The speeches are not relevant.
Only one thing is relevant, and it will decide the election: McCain loves his country. Obama hates it.
McCain has never been a good set speech oritor. So what? McCain is far better in the smaller off the cuff Town Hall style events.
People need to rmemeber that the American people have already given the Republican party a kicking in the elections for te Senate and Congress.
Although McCain is a Republican he's not George Bush. The very idea that people will link him to Bush (a man McCain has little time for) is nonsense.
There is a lot more dirt to come out on Obama. He's had a soft ride for the last 12 months or so from the left wing media. That will change now. If the lefties think they can beat up on Palin, they are mistaken. I'd put monry on her in a verbal knife fight with any Washington blow hard or lefty journalist.
Just wait until McCain and Obama go head to head.
Then people will see the stuttering back tracking nonsense of Obama.
What do you mean? He didn't do the usuall fanatical cult like speech that we have come to expect from these hollywood style elections!
I dont know why the American elections aren't just made into a song & dance & have done with it!
I cant wait for the American elections to be over I'm sick to death of how pretencious they are, it makes me glad we do it the way we do it in Britain.
I have to say I completely disagree with the majority here. I think Mcain appeals to his base, security moms and dads and the Vietnam stuff plays really well over there. He's not a great speaker so this was an improvement the comments he made will have touched a nerve amongst many Americans. Obviously it didn't do much for me but I'd say it will probably have had the desired effect.
Howard said...
These speeches are not relevant...
Have to agree. What matters is the effect the speeches have in motivating the party activists.
McCain might not have been great, but George W Bush is hardly Demosthenes either and it didn't stop him getting elected twice.
Seems to be that some miss the point - the speech by the President is what gives you the bounce, or rather deletes the bounce of the one beofre if you go 2nd.
Palin had a stormer, but really she showed that she would be a good partner for someone, a wife who would back you up.
However, a fierce alpha women in the White House was something that turned off over half the Dems, which means to say it is a hard sell for the stay at home Mom brigade.
Add in the fact there seems to be no discipline in her own home and red necks (his words) are getting with teenage girls to ignore the core principles she is spouting.
In summary, if he had naile dit, it was game on, he didn't, and as such there are back on the back foot.
Lots of Clinton women are realsing that gender is not as important as choice.
Padougy - can I add my voice of astonishment at your claim we have an unbiased media? The combined forces of BBC news and C4 news are Labour supporting to their core. Clearly you are only sensitive to bias when it veers to the right rather than the left.
Donal, what's the evidence that the Obama bounce has been short lived? The CBS poll looks odd and
Obama looks pretty solid right now in the battleground states.
I think that (i) choice of running mate is largely irrelevant; and (ii) conference speeches are irrelevent, and when we look back at this week, neither Palin's incredible five days nor McCain's disappointment will have had much impact on the result, whatever that is.
McCain is too old and feeble to be President. As for his VP choice - she is a nutter. I wouldn't be surprised if she has to step down in the next few weeks.
It's perfectly clear that Barack Obama will win this election. Over the past week John McCain has managed to show the entire world the truly ugly nature of the Republican Party.
If McCain wants 'change' then he only has to wait until November 4th. It's Obama all the way.
McCain will be 76 in 2012 - just celebrated his 72nd birthday.
McCain is Grampa Simpson - of course his speech was going to be longwinded and dull.
Palin will be eviscerated in the debate (depending on how biased the questioning is - Saddleback didn't inspire confidence) by Biden (D-MBNA), and if Obama was half the person he pretends to be so would McCain - but I doubt we'll see actual fireworks, and I doubt it matters that much. Did you watch the Bush/Kerry debates? Leaving aside the fact that Bush looked like he was mic'd up he still got butchered and the Guns, God and War 'christians' still turned out to ensure the libruls' dint win.
Got to say I agree with Padougy.
Yes some sections of the media can occasionally be said to report one group better than another- this is a simple fact, the moment you choose an angle for a story it becomes bias in one direction.
However, certainly the TV channels in the UK at least make an attempt to report both sides, as in the US do at a minimum CNN and I would argue NBC. The BBC, for all the right complain, doesn’t indorse any candidate and neither do any other TV channels in the UK.
Papers are more difficult- they do slant towards their readership- but this happens both ways- the Guardian ahs the Telegraph and the Mirror has the Mail. I would argue that the balance is tipped towards the right due to the Sun (may support Labour but only when they learn to right as well).
The point about FOX is that it is whole-heartedly partisan, it attacks the left constantly and consistently distorts positions in favour of the right. Furthermore, look at their reporters- Rove, O' Reilly, Morris- self avowed supporters of the right.
As for the Daily Show- it is a comedy programme and have never claimed to be 'fair and balanced' (as Fox does). It will look for jokes where ever and isn't afraid to attack Obama, Biden, Reid or anyone else to get a laugh. Problem is the Republicans for 8 years have been serving up too many laughs a second in the form of Bush to overlook!
"... there was little connection and he made the fatal mistake of linking himself to Bush almost at the start."
Why fatal?
Heaven forefend Republican Presidential Candidate McCain should associates himself with Republican President Bush, a man who comes across as a genuine, no-nonsense bloke, who is positive about America's present and future standing and who still garners a lot of adoration and respect on his travels. He has done plenty of good, he is far more astute then the media usually portray him, he is still the President and there is no good reason for McCain to keep Bush at arm's length.
Hell, Bush can't be that bad if Bob Gandalf can change his tune about him.
For me too, McCain sounded old and sounded as if he had his good days a decade ago. If he couldn't beat Bush in 2000 with his war record, senate record etc.. he has no chance now if he does not convince he is for change, having voted with Republicans most of the time. He too has no executive experience despite his years in the Senate.
I thought it was an epic speech of a honest man. So what if he didn't hit all the marks, he showed what kind of person he is...and he is 100 times better than Barack Obama.
I think knowadays its the politics of personality, and McCains character was transmitted very well last night.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JM0fmUuYjVM&feature=related
Obama has visited 57 states, 1 more to visit and Alaska and Hawaii which he won't visit.......60 states in America
but - OBAMA ON O'REILLY???!!!!!
Wow. Papa Bear got a coup there.
John Redwood writes -
I heard McCain speak at the Conservative Conference when he joined us there. His speech made me appreciate how good David Cameron is as a public speaker! Last night he performed so much more effectively. His quiet lack of oratory was persuasive, followed by a crescendo in his credo which stirred the audience to enthusiaism.
Conservative Cabbie -
Actually, having watched both the conventions on a combination of MSNBC, CNN and the other American broadcasters, it's become pretty clear how pro-Republican they are. The reason they can't fault the Democrats is because they are all better orators than most of the Republicans (and no, I don't share Iain's enthusiasm for Sarah Palin or her ridiculous views), but people like Wolf Blitzer and his pals are not-so-secretly praying for another four years of (disastrous) Republican rule.
Marius, you said:
"The reason they can't fault the Democrats is because they are all better orators than most of the Republicans"
Really, oratory is the reason why people like the Democrats, that's all they need to decide the value of someone?
I suppose that would explain a lot, Obama is certainly style over substance. He is a man who likes to paint broad themes, but his lack of legislative achievment only serves to demonstrate his unwillingness to absorb himself in the minutiae of governance. Not what I would want from a president.
In other words, all talk, no action!
mechanical jaw movement,
You are aware, I hope, of the reason why some of his movements seem jerky ? If not read up on it.
Were you aware he can't even comb his own hair too ?
He set out quite plainly the policy directions he'd take, he had the manners to acknowledge the current President, a member of his party after all, and provided a sharp contrast to Obama who basically gave the same list of issues as Kerry, Gore, Clinton, Mondale etc did at a similar time before him i.e. nothing new at all.
donal blaney has it right tho' it'll be a hard slog as the media, with very few exceptions, has abandoned all pretence at impartiality, example the NY Times has sent a team of dirt diggers to Alaska - we're waiting with baited breath to see another team going to Chicago, fat chance.
Two positives for the McCain camp:
1. Early reports say that more people watched McCain's speech than watched Obama's. I find that remarkable and it can only be a result of the Palin affect.
http://www.tvweek.com/news/2008/09/mccain_tv_ratings_beat_obama_i.php
2. According to Rasmussen, Sarah Palin is more popular than Obama or McCain. Not bad for a flat-earth redneck.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/palin_power_fresh_face_now_more_popular_than_obama_mccain
McCain is a remarkable man. He was down and out in the primaries and yet came back to win in a canter. By rights, with Republicans so unpopular, Obama should be miles ahead and yet McCain has kept him close, and he was also able to completely deflate Obama's bounce following his O-cropolis speech with that inspired VP selection.
The polls early next week should be really interesting, McCain ahead anyone?
The speech was undenialy flat although for the thinking types, some parts were interesting particularly the end which focused on his time as a POW. The problem he has is that his message is contradictory. For months he said that experience was important and then he picked a woman with little experience. This week he has changed his meme to reform and change but if people want that, they are hardly going to reward the party that has been responsible for the current state of affairs. His signature call for a new politics without partisan rancour was frankly risible given that highly partisan and personal attacks of Romney, Rudy, Bungle and Zippy yesterday.
The Palin factor is a double edged sword. Great in the short term but a killer for the GOP in the long term. Her refusal to do a media interview (even with Fox News) is going to get more and more difficult to defend. As a potential president (let's be honest here about McCain's age), it is wholly unacceptable that she is being shielded from proper scrutiny. For now the media will be happy to let her make platform speeches but eventually they will demand that she allow herself to be vetted. Maybe she will do just fine but the GOP are clearly terrified that one gaffe on a foreign policy question and McCain's judgment is undercut.
Interesting times. Good honest blogging though Dale. You certainly cannot be criticised for taking kneejerk positions in favour of conservatives. That is why your site is such a success if I may say so and why those not on the right frequent it.
Richard Gizbert says:
"I'm going to break a self imposed rule, the one that says always allow breaking news to settle before deciding what it actually means.
Allow me to predict that, within the next week or so, Sarah Palin will withdraw from the Republican ticket.
She will become the new Thomas Eagleton.
Eagleton was the former US senator from Missouri who was briefly part of George McGovern's ticket in 1972, before it was revealed that he had undergone electro-shock therapy treatments to deal with "physical and nervous" exhaustion. After that news broke, Eagleton quit the ticket and was replaced by Sargent Shriver. Nixon won in a walk.
When she pulls out, Ms. Palin will say that she was wrong to accept John McCain's offer. She will tell Alaskans and the rest of America that her 17 year old daughter, Bristol, five months pregnant, needs her mother right now.
None of that will be untrue. But there are other factors that will undoubtedly affect Palin's decision."
I think he has a point.
I know, but I'll bet Cindy goes like a train.
Jay Cost thinks Mr McCain's speech was very effective.
"his message got across"
Saw his speech two more times and he definately got it done. He reached the Americans he wanted to reach now all he has to do is pound his superior policys home. Its already clear the public aren't buying the four more years of Bush line but they are buying the Obama inexperienced and elitist line and Mcain will continue to have a field day with I love America and I'm the salt of the earth talk thus undermining Obama. It will be an epic battle.
Wrong on the McCain speech Iain. We KNOW McCain is not in the 'Bliar speeches mode'(ie) a speech full of vacuous pseudo religious guff which means f'k all but sounds good) and it sure as heck was not aimed at 'convincing the media'. It was aimed at the 'ordinary Joe' voters in the US. Do the US voters want a President who spiels 'rhetoric delivered well who has achieved f'k all' or a President with proven credentials and a consistent track record? In essence, the McCain message was successful. Btw, the opening montage before McCain delivered his speech was excellent.
Hate to spoil the "Palin bounce" celebrations but latest electoral college projections show Obama actually extended his lead this week. He's even gone ahead in North Dakota - traditionally Republican, sparsely populated, very cold...
Stephen Rouse
If you're referencing the DFM research poll (the latest on the Real Clear Politics site), it was taken during the Democratic Convention, pre-Palin, and therefore hardly relevant to the "Palin bounce".
Cabbie, seems you're quite right. Apologise for the misleading info. However, what's it doing in play in the first place?
Stephen
You're right, it's a lot closer than it should be. Just had a look at 2004 results, Bush won it 63% to 35%, it's probably been particularly hard hit by the econonmy.
I wonder about the so-called Palin bounce. I'm clearly a Palin fan, but I suspect (although I'm no expert) that any Palin bounce will be relatively short lived. The story, as all stories do, will die down in the next week or so and we will return to Obama v McCain.
My only hope is that Palin will shore up the base and bring in smalltown America voters which will help in swing states like Ohio, New Hampshire, Colorado and Nevada. If McCain wins those off the back of Palin, he'll win outright.
Latest Rasmussen daily tracking poll is in: Obama 46%, McCain 45%.
Bear in mind that this is a 3 day tracking poll so some of this figure is still pre-Palin and McCain speeches. Very encouraging for McCain.
What is even more encouraging for him is that McCain has halved his female gap with Obama. Obama leads among women by 51-44% but the previous poll showed McCain trailing by 14%.
Cabbie - agree with your analysis of the battleground, even if I am hoping for the exact opposite to happen!
Post a Comment