Live Blogging the Second Presidential Debate

The Sun live blogged last night's town hall debate between Barack Obama and John McCain. The debate was held at Belmont University in Nashville, Tenn. Also check out our previous live blogs of the vice presidential debate [4] and the first presidential debate [5].

One more rel="nofollow">MAVERICK! [7] clip.

Thanks for watching! Check out cornellsun.com next Wednesday for the third and final debate!

I think you make a good point Katie about the Republican agenda and the economy. This deal was hard for conservatives to stomach and it killed McCain in the polls.

That being said, I think McCain could have mounted a conservative defense of the deal pundits such as Bill Kristol and Larry Kudlow have outlined some good talking points for Republicans. What it comes down to is that the economy is simply not McCain's strong suit and it showed tonight.

It's a shame because McCain would be a fantastic commander in chief. But it looks like the circumstances of this electoral environment won't allow that to happen. McCain needed a knockout here and he didn't get it.

I'm going to go emotionally prepare myself for an Obama presidency by listening to some ocean sounds and studying Buddhist mediation techniques.

Have a great night everyone.

Maybe you're right... but I did see it a lot more than in the VP debate. The showdown on the economy was particularly interesting in the McCain really didn't step up. But I think that was less his fault than a simple matter of political philosophy. It's harder for Republicans to reconcile bailing out financial institutions/hard hit Americans with the rest of their fiscal and social policies... even if it is George W. that signed off on the bailout. For Obama, aid to American families is kind of an extension of the rest of his platform. It's easier for people to connect the dots.

Once again, though, a fine conversation. Thanks to both of you. I look forward to chatting again during the next debate.

Good night, everyone.

Thank God I have DVR:

Final count on the Situation Room: 11 pundits, 2 anchors.

The candidates stayed pretty civil in this one in relation to the huge salvos fired by the campaigns this week.

A lot of media types used the "gloves off" cliche to describe the tenor of the candidates leading up to the debates. I didn't see it.

I'm going to disagree with you, Katie, on the foreign policy line.

But again, the economy is the big issue in this election. And McCain did not perform well enough on the economic-ish issues that were presented earlier in the debate.

I agree, Jordan. But I can't seem to figure out what the public is more scared about: the economy crashing or the big bad al Quaeda people. And McCain is nailing his foreign policy stance down right now... Obama's "dire consequences" seems a lot less reassuring than McCain's I'll-send-in-my-boys-the-U.S-Army line.

On another note, the continued reference to 'another holocaust' is getting ridiculous. Yugoslavia, Darfur... we can name a whole lot of humanitarian crises that have happened between 1945 and today.

You can tell that McCain is much more comfortable with these issues than the domestic stuff. This might score him points here, but he needed to be stronger on domestic policy issues to gain the trust of the electorate.

I agree. Brokaw's a wimp. The press is not supposed to be so deferent. Next debate, two moderators: Jon Stewart and Tucker Carlson. Now THAT would be good television.

Yes, the "I'm just hired help here" line was very telling.

And I think that Brokaw is confused about his own role.

The problem with this format is that these candidates can spew lies about each other without the moderator calling him out.

This is what I said would happen at the beginning. Where is the People's Elbow when you need it?

PS maybe one of these fine gents should call attention to the fact that the Pakistanis [10] aren't doing so well right now either.

I thought Mac would "follow Osama to the gates of hell" so why not PAkistan?

I don't think Obama is calling for Detente circa the Nixon years at all, Jordan. His emphasis is on unilateralism. His plea is to the "international community."

We can't afford Nixonian detente when we are facing as serious an enemy as serious as Obama says we are.

I agree with you, Dave. There is something very old-school about McCain's approach - linking the United States military with calls for honor... with appeals to patriotism. It's interesting because that connection is no longer an obvious one. I'm not sure his Veteren rhetoric will relate to people.

Obama as Dirty Harry: We will kill them. We will take them out.

Here comes Vietnam again: by painting Pakistan as the Afghan Cambodia, this questioner's turned Obama into Nixon. A good question, and a revealing one.

McCain makes a more honest point than Obama about peacekeeping interventions. A very good answer.

McCain's approach to this is very rooted in Vietnam. If you listen beyond what he's saying about security, he's talking a lot about our "reputation," and "prestige," and "victory with honor" — all arguments made by Johnson, McNamara, Nixon for staying in Vietnam — that leaving will endanger us in a large part by making us appear weak.

And the McCain doctrine rests on a profound belief in the power of the United States military.

Thank you, Dave.

By the way, here it is: The Measure of a President [11]

"Peace with honor" is a Nixon line.

Readers will note that Katie has been pretty reliably centrist. Score one for 'intellectual diversity.'

OK so I think that Obama is defining the 'Obama Doctrine' by an emphasis on multilateralism.

Wow. You know you have lost your momentum when you have to force an analogy with the Holocaust.

I think that this is where Obama is really going to reach people. He needs to keep hitting home the effect that the war has had on the economy. And his continued reference to the capital building up in Iraq won't hurt either.

But I also think this shows a kind of shift in Obama's rhetoric. He went from a preoccupation with humanitarian/ethical analysis of the war to a strict focus on the economic cost of it.

True though. Also, lanky as hell, and from Illinois.

Did you guys also see that thing in the Times comparing the electoral fortunes of candidates based on their heights/weights?

Whoa there Dave...

Other nifty politicians with short careers who led us in war:

Abraham Lincoln.

The marines were in Lebanon before we were born.

He's going to wipe the floor with Obama in this one. He came out really strong.

Mac really believes in shedding American blood. Heavy stuff.

I know you loved that one Katie...

Right now McCain has been solid but unspectacular with his answers. This effort has not been strong enough to win it. McCain is going to have to step it up to have a chance.

Yeah but nothing can beat the Biden tear-jerker from last week.

True, Jordan. That was the Obama equivalent of McCain's "Well when I was in prison, I didn't have a kitchen table." Ace in the hole.

Right Katie, and all these things, health care especially, are about economics

Obama just did a great job connecting with the audience with the anecdote about his mother.

That has to be one of the first personal anecdotes in this debate.

Going back to Jordan's earlier point... Looking at 'healthcare' or 'the environment' or 'energy policy' as isolated issues is completely impractical. We are in the midst of a historically unprecedented government intervention. Where is this money coming from?

"Don't we go across state lines when we purchase other things in America?" Mac asks. Yes, yes we do.

Here is a list of our own:

Fireworks

Tax free liquor

...

DId Mac just cop to needing hair transplants?

Mac is just giving these Palin-esque laundry lists. "All of 'em!"

Where is the debate on the economy??? Has there been more than two questions about it?

This is what happens when you let rookies ask the questions.

Thank you! Taxing health care! *applause*

The liberals in the newsroom agree with you for once, Jordan: giving a bunch of grants to MIT kids would be so much more effective than a Manhattan Project.

Shows that he is very old-economy.

It's really disconcerting to see McCain wandering around aimlessly in the background as Obama speaks.

We just paid for a $700 bailout, how could we pay for a Manhattan project right now?? McCain should have nailed that home and talked about incentivizing private sector development.

This is a really good question and Easy Mac is ignoring it.

Low blow.

Yes Katie, but you cannot cut taxes raise taxes during a recession, it would destroy the economy even further.

No followup questions allowed: democracy at work.

There is something ironic about the fact that Obama is profiting from George Bush's devastating 'No Child Left Behind' education policy fiasco. How?

Point 1: Obama wants to give a tax cut to 95% of the country.

Point 2: The United States is out of $$$$$.

Lucky for our candidates that George Bush screwed up the education system in much of this country so badly that people can no longer do simple arithmetic.

Good Brokaw smackdown on Obama.

Social Security: The third rail of politics.

Oh wow, Obama. Asking to have the rules changes for you?

McCain's said Americans with incomes under $5 million aren't rich. So, middle class tax cuts, eh?

Editors' further note: I strongly agree with the point Katie made. This isn't about taking shorter showers.

"Nailing jello to the wall."

Editors' note: Katie has herself demonstrated a penchant for bottled water from Fiji and Iceland.

A huge national security risk is the unstable Iraq that we created.

This is a problem, incidentally, that George Kennan brought up at Sen. Fulbright's Vietnam hearings in 1965: even if you believe getting into the war was a bad idea, how do you get out without making things worse? As much as I want out, Obama needs to make a solid case for how he'd do this.

No. No. No.

The average American making miniscule changes in his/her home will have a negligible effect on this whole crisis. We need systemic change. We need people living near where they work. We need to be drinking water that isn’t transported from Fiji. We need to… OK my sermon ends here.

But people failing to turn off their bathroom light is not the issue here.

Obama and 9/11...

RUDY RUDY RUDY!!!!

9/11 makes its first appearance: Heeeeeeere's Johnny!

Surprise: Obama brings it up.

You know what's a huge national security risk, an unstable Iraq?

"We're not rifle shots?" What the eff?

Sun editor Sammy Perlmutter points out: Know what is a really big earmark (expense)? The Iraq War.

That's what Begala said he should do before the debate. It's smart, why get risky when you have a huge advantage?

Discuss: the fact that Obama hasn't brought up the Keating Five yet indicates that his strategy is to keep the campaign in a holding pattern, thus not risking his advantage.

Also, what does McCain need to say beyond the usual in order to break through tonight?

My mere fact of his answering the question, Obama just kicked McCain's ass.

For those of you wondering what the Keating Five is all about, check out the documentary here [12] about McCain's involvement.

Good question by Brokaw, prioritizing in a time of economic crisis.

P.S. Thanks Katie, my buddy Mike O'Brien edits it now, he's a stud.

Jordan, by the way, The Hill newspaper's blog briefing room [13] is very good.

That was the worst answer I've ever heard. Come on McCain!

Here comes ... rel="nofollow">the Maverick! [14]

Obama goes populist...

those damned Chinese and Saudis (i.e. damn free trade)

Obama takes on lobbyist and special interests.... borrowing a page from McCain's book?

And here comes the ol' I'm-a-maverick line from McCain. His record for bipartisanship? I think he threw that one out the door the day he uttered the words 'Sarah Palin.'

Know what else was bipartisan? The Keating Five.

She should have just stopped at "How can we trust either of you?"

"I understand your cynicism"

A professorial version of "I feel your pain."

This is exactly what I was talking about before. This Town Hall thing is appealing to the lowest possible denomenator... and letting the candidates give the easy answers. Right now we have a slow talking southerner ask why she should trust the big bad politicians with her money. Please...

This woman is going to pull a gun out of her purse.

Ahem, the link: rel="nofollow">is here [14]

McCain was acquitted of any wrongdoing in that one and he admitted his mistake in getting remotely close to Charles Keating.

It's as specious as you think the Obama-Ayers connection is.

Rambling like a madman? That is a funny thing to say when your candidate talks like this guy:

Silly McCain. American workers are soo not the best in the world. Highest labor productivity? We can look to India and China on that one.

McCain: "get rid of cronyism in Washington."

PLEASE Keating five.

NO?

Does Obama really want to go on record right now saying that the economy won't get worse if we have leadership from Washington?

Obama is not connecting with the audience right now, he is rambling like a madman...

It was a rhetorical question, guys. But thank you for the recommendations and/or references to Enlightenment philosophers.

Ezzackly, Jordan.

It goes back to John Locke and property-as-liberty/citizenship.

Take Kramnick's class on American Political thought for an answer to that question.

Yes, we should all live in pup-tents, or cardboard boxes.

Riddle me this, batman:

WHY do we continue to equate the American dream with home ownership? I think we need a reassessment...

McCain is setting Obama up for the Keating Five alley-oop right now.

Yeah, Obama just ignored Brokaw's question, even though its stupid. Brokaw doesn't ask him to answer.

On a lighter note, anyone think Tom Brokaw's had botox?

McCain fails to note that Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina were massive failures as CEOs who were fired by their boards of directors.

It's all too convenient, Katie and Jordan, to ignore the fact that McCain-Palin has, out sheer electoral desperation, adopted a strategy of fear-mongering and know-nothingism that plays to the darkest parts of the American political consciousness. But they have.

Nice crack by McCain there...

Laura Temel (Daily Sun Columnist) would like to express her surprise (and disgust?) that the debate has begun with a return to New Deal rhetoric.

Interesting to point out (once more) is this old Washington Poast article which implicates [15] Lady Clinton in bringing attention to the Ayers-Obama link.

It begins...

When the McCain-Palin campaign orchestrates a concerted campaign to portray this man as un-American, even going so far as to say "he is not one of us," and stands idly by while others take that ball and run with it, you can bet it is nativist, and racist, and the first step towards an American brand of fascism as espoused by Father Coughlin, Charles Lindbergh, etc.

And yes David,

rel="nofollow">dictatorships [14] can happen.

Relax with the Republicans as racists angle, I think it's old news, although Milbank's story is a little disturbing.

Dave, we have been talking about this during the week, I do think that Obama's relationship with Ayers is a very serious issue.

However, I agree with what Ross Douthat said today, that it is not a winning issue [16].

It doesn't resonate with the issues happening right now.

WOW. Dave racist Obama supporter are not the same thing as the McCain-Palin campaign. Yes, a lot of right-wing pundits have proved that they aren't afraid to employ disturbingly racist language. But I would hesitate before drawing a direct link between an angry mob listening to McCain and... well, McCain himself.

In seriousness, what I will be monitoring most this debate is McCain's attention to Obama's relationship with Bill Ayers.

The McCain-Palin campaign has unleashed an ugly beast indeed, and even if the campaign claims its branding of Obama as un-American is not racially motivated, its supporters certainly perceive it that way.

Take this [17] disturbing Dana Milbank story in the Washington Post, which describes a rabid crowd at a Palin rally responding to her charges that Obama "pals around with terrorists" with cries of "Kill him!" and, as Milbank writes:

One Palin supporter shouted a racial epithet at an African American sound man for a network and told him, "Sit down, boy."

In another example, McCain asked "Who is the real Barack Obama?" at a recent rally and looked visibly taken aback when the crowd responded with cries of "Terrorist!"

The McCain-Palin campaign is getting scarier and scarier. And as Sinclair Lewis reminds us, it in fact can [18] happen here.

On Fox News, Bill Kristol just said his question was not accepted by Brokaw...

"Participants are drawn from a pool of undecided voters in the Nashville area."

Rightttt...

Do you think Obama will be able to pull an off all out "I feel your pain" performance a la Bill Clinton?

Hopefully the candidates surpass low expectations of the debate format.

Awkward silence on CSpan.

Let's not get the readers to tune out Katie...

But I do agree. The best thing that can happen is for the candidates to convince the audience of their trustworthiness and leadership in a time of crisis.

Gosh I love Tom Brokaw.

Touche.

Going back to Jordan's earlier point though, I really think this night is a kind of cop-out. We're running out of time and there is a lot that the candidates still need to be pressed on. Are questions from the 'average American' really going to do the trick?

The President of Belmont University is talking about a sculpture of a life-size grizzly bear on CSPAN.

Getting caught on celebrity candid camera ain't tough.

Either the Rock or Katie Couric, who is tougher than she looks. [19] The link is to a video TMZ has of her ragging on Sarah Palin outside a midtown Manhattan department store this weekend [TMZ via Wonkette]

CNN has the magic screen and the pretty anchors.

CSPAN is reminding people to turn off their cellphones during the debate.

Typical.

Jeez, CNN brought back the Situation Room gangbang; there are two tables with 5-6 people each. panels this large just don't work, all these egomaniacs want to get their two cents in!

Good point Katie.

Gwen Ifill's spineless performance in the second debate helped Palin win, and for that I'm grateful. But right now, I'd like to see a tough but fair moderator ask questions and call out the candidates for avoiding questions.

Not sure such a person exists. They should have The Rock moderate one of these things.

Hello all.

I'm interested in seeing whether this 'Town Hall' format actually shakes things up. Let's think back to the Facebook debates during the primary season.

Real people? Real questions?

With the big powers still responsible for picking who asks questions, the Town Hall style will probably fail to make much of a difference. Huffingtonpost has a good analysis [20] of what this whole Town Hall will mean for the candidates.

Hey everyone,

After a solid performance by Sarah Palin during the veep debates, McCain needs to follow up with a near-knock out punch to keep his chances alive.

Larry Kudlow gives a good pep talk for McCain along these lines here [21]

Another post-debate story to watch: Can the presidential nominees capture the nation's attention like Biden and Palin did? Their debate shattered a record, over 70 million people tuned [22] to watch them square off.

As Mike Tyson said, "iths a fight."

Hey folks and welcome to The Sun's live blog of tonight's presidential debate. For those of you who are new to this, I'm David Wittenberg, The Sun's associate editor (I run the opinion section). I'll be joined tonight by Katie Engelhart, the opinion section's senior editor, and Jordan Fabian, editor at large for The Cornell Review.

We'll be providing live commentary from the left, right and center all night — from the pre-debate coverage right now and through the debate itself, which begins at 9 p.m.

Thanks for reading, and enjoy the show!