« Revisiting The Grand Bargain | Blog Home Page | Will Reforms Lose Momentum in China? »
October 07, 2008Presidential Debate Live Blog
10:35 p.m. -- Well, that's done. The remarkable thing about the debate on foreign policy was how little either candidate's positions have changed to reflect the emerging reality of the global financial crisis. This, despite the fact that both candidates said, explicitly, that our military might was underwritten by our economic health.
On the crucial issue of whether the U.S. should intervene around the world to prevent genocide, both candidates only stressed the downside of inaction. The costs of action, either in blood, treasure, or unintended consequences, barely merited a mention.
As with any debate, it's interesting to note what issues didn't come up. Nothing on globalization or trade. And no China. Can we really go through three debates without bringing up America's relationship with China? Surely a country of a billion people, with nuclear weapons, billions of dollars of American debt, sitting across a disputed territory that America is obligated to go to war to protect, merits some mention. -- Greg Scoblete
10:28 p.m. -- I really don’t believe that either candidate is very serious about Iran. Talk of a second Holocaust really seems to be a bit hyperbolic to me, and there is a much larger—and more immediate—list of bad Iranian behavior that we must address.
Sanctions can only work when you have leverage. Alternative energy is years away. We need to talk to the Iranians on a very incremental level, start with Iraq security, and see if we can move forward from there in some form of regional cooperation. We can give the Iranians security, and through Iraq and Afghanistan we should leverage that to affect their nuclear program, as well as their exportation of radicalism in Lebanon and Palestine. -- Kevin Sullivan
10:25 p.m. -- McCain has not actually said (yet) whether he'd send American troops into the Middle East on behalf of Israel. -- Greg Scoblete
10:24 p.m. -- There's very little daylight between the two on Russia. -- Greg Scoblete
10:15 p.m. -- McCain knows how to catch bin Laden? That sounds like something he should have told President Bush about that in 2001. -- Greg Scoblete
10:11 p.m. -- McCain seems be tacking a bit over the ideological map. On the one hand, he claims America didn't have the capability to do good in Lebanon, but that he's willing to pay any price to democratize Iraq. -- Greg Scoblete
10:07 p.m. -- McCain's position on Iraq, to me, really reflects the handicap his entire campaign is working with. Attacking Obama for his Iraq policy is sort of like arguing over the appropriate medication for an illness. It's hard to argue these days that Iraq deserved priority in the war on terror over states like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and even Iran.
Obama's "central front" argument is much stronger. -- Kevin Sullivan
10:02 p.m. -- Obama is hitting McCain on Iraq and the costs of war. This strikes me as effective, particularly in light of the economic turmoil. But he also seems to be suggesting that we end the Iraq war ... to start one in Darfur. -- Greg Scoblete
9:59 p.m. -- McCain just said "much" of the criticism about U.S. national security policy is valid. I'd like to hear which criticisms he thinks is valid. -- Greg Scoblete
9:43 p.m. -- Is it "clean up our climate" or "drill baby drill"? -- Greg Scoblete
9:35 p.m. -- Ditto on energy. If I hear "foreign oil" one more time I might lose it. It's called fungibility. -- Kevin Sullivan
9:29 p.m. -- McCain on defense spending is a Nixon-to-China moment. If Obama had said this, he'd be flayed alive as being a feckless liberal. Credit to McCain for taking a look at the DoD budget. -- Greg Scoblete
9:24 p.m. -- Just remember when any politician mentions "energy independence" - they are full of it. -- Greg Scoblete
9:20 p.m. -- Obama says we are 10 trillion dollars in debt. Just let that sink in. How powerful can a super-power be if it's leveraged to the gills to its potential competitors? -- Greg Scoblete
9:15 p.m. -- 15 minutes in, it's all Freddie and Fannie. There's probably a good chance there won't be much of a discussion on global politics - if at all. Let's face it, the townhall format does not portend for vigorous discussions on foreign policy. Ordinary Americans have a hard enough time finding Canada on a map. -- Samuel Chi
8:53 p.m. -- I'm in agreement with Greg on this. I fear we're going to get some Bill Ayers tonight, with a dose of Keating 5 for good measure. For our purposes, I don't know if we're going to get into substantive policy on issues such as Iran, Russia or Pakistan.
I hope we don't go round and round again on the "talk, don't talk" merry-go-round regarding Iran. It would be nice to hear the candidates address some substantive policy on the issue. -- Kevin Sullivan
8:38 p.m. -- Just a few thoughts before we get underway.
Before the last presidential debate, I asked a number of analysts which foreign policy issues they thought were flying under the radar in the campaign but that nonetheless deserved attention. Befitting the theme - those issues continued to fly under the radar in the first debate. Perhaps they'll finally surface tonight.
Second, will the candidates discuss China? I was surprised that we could have an entire debate devoted to foreign policy and not bring up the world's major rising power. Maybe tonight. -- Greg Scoblete
Share