McCain calling Obama "that one"

[pigpenz]

just curious

[kenberg]

"That one" = You would probably guess that I voted for that bill but no, it's not this candidate, it is the that other candidate.

[gwnn]

I can see three possible explanations:

 

1) McCain despises Obama, so the finger-pointing was just an honest manifestation. His handshake and sporadic praise of his opponent were all a facade.

 

2) McCain honestly respects Obama and meant "that one" as a familiar adressing formula. Note that in this Obama didn't quite get it, his smile that seemed to be subtle but constant until then just disappeared.

 

3) McCain is not quite sure what he feels about Obama, but is ever so sure that it will take a world of swingy behavior to turn this one around. He understood that the paternal smiley face and "of course Barack Obama is an intelligent young man but he still needs to learn, maybe in 8 years, 12 years, who knows?" doesn't quite suffice.

 

Of course there would be explanation no. 4, namely that there is no need for an explanation, and not attribute the incident to anything, but then I should delete the whole post.

[Aberlour10]

I read an editorial about in one of the most important german newspaper,

we europeans dont know much about the details of the US political culture but the commentator meant, these two words may cost McCain more than many slips he made earlier this year.

 

Robert

[jdonn]

This didn't bother me nearly as much as when he said something to someone in the audience like "blah blah blah Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who you probably hadn't even heard of before all this happened."

 

Showing disdain toward Obama just makes him a typical politician. But showing it toward a random voter (and by implication, any random voter) is really pitiful. Obama is able to explain things in easily understandable terms without having to dumb it down, and people appreciate that!

[barmar]

I hate the way the media likes to treat every verbal nuance as if it were a political or strategic action. I have a hard time believing that something like this was planned by McCain.

 

And it's not just the media that does it, the candidates do it themselves. Like when Obama brought up McCain singing "Bomb, bomb Iran", which everyone knows was not a serious military plan, but just a song parody used in jest. But politics seems to be all about making mountains out of mole hills.

 

If these were carefully written platform documents, it would make sense to pick them apart looking for subtleties like this. But extemporaneous comments don't allow for such care in choosing words, and gaffes like this are normal, and mostly meaningless.

[kenberg]

I'm stunned. There is a big furor over this? I guess I need to develop a thinner skin. Johnny called me "That one". I feel violated.

Sorry, it just doesn't do anything for me or to me. It's another of these things that I don't even remotely understand.

[Lobowolf]

This didn't bother me nearly as much as when he said something to someone in the audience like "blah blah blah Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who you probably hadn't even heard of before all this happened."

 

Showing disdain toward Obama just makes him a typical politician. But showing it toward a random voter (and by implication, any random voter) is really pitiful. Obama is able to explain things in easily understandable terms without having to dumb it down, and people appreciate that!

Given the percentage of people who can't do things like find Canada on a map, I think it's a really good chance that a random person hadn't heard of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac before this year, and I'd give 20-1 against a random person's having been able to explain them.

[kenberg]

This didn't bother me nearly as much as when he said something to someone in the audience like "blah blah blah Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who you probably hadn't even heard of before all this happened."

 

Showing disdain toward Obama just makes him a typical politician. But showing it toward a random voter (and by implication, any random voter) is really pitiful. Obama is able to explain things in easily understandable terms without having to dumb it down, and people appreciate that!

Now this one I got. I expected the guy to say something like "Yeah, sure, I'm just your basic idiot, that's why I'm here."♠

[hrothgar]

I think that it was a fairly innocuous mistake.

 

Earlier during the campaign cycle, McCain launched a set of negative ads directed at Obama titled "The One". The ads attempted to portray Obama as a celebrity who was enjoying enormous popularity but didn't have the experience necessary to lead the country. (As I recall, these ads were conceived back when Obama was using sports arenas to handle the crowds he was attracting)

 

My own suspicion is that McCain botched a line. He meant to refer to Obama as "The One", referencing those earlier attacks ads. He actually said "That One".

 

I don't find it surprising that candidates occasionally screw up a pre-prepared line. For example, today McCain issued the following gem

 

You and I together will confront the $10 trillion debt that the federal government has run up, and balance the federal budget by the end of my term in office. Across this country this is the agenda I've set before my fellow prisoners, and the same standards of clarity and candor must now be applied to my opponent.

 

Do I believe that McCain thought that he was addressing a group of Prisoners? Of course not. Its much more likely that McCain used his standard "A noun, a verb, I was a POW" shtick one too many times and the word prisoner got stuck in his head....

[barmar]

This didn't bother me nearly as much as when he said something to someone in the audience like "blah blah blah Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who you probably hadn't even heard of before all this happened."

 

Showing disdain toward Obama just makes him a typical politician. But showing it toward a random voter (and by implication, any random voter) is really pitiful. Obama is able to explain things in easily understandable terms without having to dumb it down, and people appreciate that!

Given the percentage of people who can't do things like find Canada on a map, I think it's a really good chance that a random person hadn't heard of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac before this year, and I'd give 20-1 against a random person's having been able to explain them.

While I doubt that most people can explain what they do (I'm not even sure I understand the details), I expect that most people (especially among the ones that bother to watch the debates) have at least heard of them and know they have something to do with mortgage financing. They're mentioned in the news on a regular basis, and not just since the recent financial crises. And if you've ever taken out a mortgage, they were probably mentioned when you were closing.

 

So I agree that this remark was a bit disingenuous. But I would take it as hyperbole, just poor choice of words. Whether or not you've heard of them, you generally didn't have to think much about them. They're just part of the system that we all took for granted. Kind of like the levees in New Orleans -- everyone assumes that they'll always be there to protect us, until a disaster strikes and it turns out they're not indestructible.

[Lobowolf]

While I doubt that most people can explain what they do (I'm not even sure I understand the details), I expect that most people (especially among the ones that bother to watch the debates) have at least heard of them and know they have something to do with mortgage financing.

Yes, but McCain said probably hadn't heard of "before all this happened." Certainly not the wisest thing he could have said, but he's probably right.

[jdonn]

While I doubt that most people can explain what they do (I'm not even sure I understand the details), I expect that most people (especially among the ones that bother to watch the debates) have at least heard of them and know they have something to do with mortgage financing.

Yes, but McCain said probably hadn't heard of "before all this happened." Certainly not the wisest thing he could have said, but he's probably right.

Is he trying to win votes, or say something that is (maybe) techinically correct? He wouldn't walk up to a fat person when talking about health care and call him fat, so why would he essentially call this guy dumb/ignorant/uninformed/whatever? (And that's even worse than the analogy, since he has no idea if it's true or not.) If he said that to me in the audience he would have received a very dirty look in return, even if I hadn't heard of them. A much dirtier look if I had.

[jdonn]

My own suspicion is that McCain botched a line. He meant to refer to Obama as "The One", referencing those earlier attacks ads. He actually said "The One".

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I think you are giving McCain way too much credit. "The One" would have made no sense in the context of his remark.

[kenberg]

My favorite inadvertent truth goes back to Richard Nixon saying "This nation can not stand pat"

[barmar]

While I doubt that most people can explain what they do (I'm not even sure I understand the details), I expect that most people (especially among the ones that bother to watch the debates) have at least heard of them and know they have something to do with mortgage financing.

Yes, but McCain said probably hadn't heard of "before all this happened." Certainly not the wisest thing he could have said, but he's probably right.

Maybe, but I've been hearing about them on the news at least once a week for years. Certainly they've come to the forefront in the latest financial crises, but they weren't invisible before.

[cherdano]

There is little doubt that McCain despises Obama.

[awm]

This didn't bother me nearly as much as when he said something to someone in the audience like "blah blah blah Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who you probably hadn't even heard of before all this happened."

 

Showing disdain toward Obama just makes him a typical politician. But showing it toward a random voter (and by implication, any random voter) is really pitiful. Obama is able to explain things in easily understandable terms without having to dumb it down, and people appreciate that!

Agree with Josh here. I didn't even really notice the "That One" remark when I watched the debate live.

 

However, McCain's response to this particular question bothered me a lot. It was one of the earliest questions, asked by a young African-American man named Oliver Clark. The question was:

 

Through this economic crisis, most of the people that I know have had a difficult time. And through this bailout package, I was wondering what it is that's going to actually help those people out.

 

McCain didn't really answer the question, but that wasn't what bothered me. Here's some interesting parts of what McCain said:

 

... But you know, one of the real catalysts, really the match that lit this fire was Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I'll bet you, you may never even have heard of them before this crisis...

 

This seems rather condescending to Mr. Clark, who, like most Americans, probably had heard of Fannie and Freddie before this crisis.

 

And later in the same response:

 

... we're going to have to go out into the housing market and we're going to have to buy up these bad loans and we're going to have to stabilize home values, and that way, Americans, like Alan, can realize the American dream and stay in their home.

 

This is particularly interesting, because the question was asked by Mr. Clark. Why is McCain now using Alan Shaffer, who asked the previous question, as his example? Why not "Americans like Oliver" or "Americans like you"? Any chance that this has something to do with the fact that Alan Shaffer was middle-aged and white, while Oliver Clark is young and black?

 

There are lots of reasons (other than race) why John McCain might dislike Barack Obama. But this seeming disdain for a young voter who presumably McCain hadn't met before last night is much less excusable.

[Lobowolf]

I'd still take the "under" on an even money bet on whether most Americans had heard of F & F.

 

As for Alan & Oliver, maybe he just remembered Alan's name and not Oliver's. If he'd said Oliver, I'm sure you'd see the assertion on various blogs that he was suggesting that African Americans, in particular, needed the government to intervene, or they wouldn't be able to keep their homes.

[cherdano]

I'd still take the "under" on an even money bet on whether most Americans had heard of F & F.

 

As for Alan & Oliver, maybe he just remembered Alan's name and not Oliver's. If he'd said Oliver, I'm sure you'd see the assertion on various blogs that he was suggesting that African Americans, in particular, needed the government to intervene, or they wouldn't be able to keep their homes.

"Most" Americans aren't interested in asking a question at a presidential debate either. And even if I would bet more than even money that X doesn't know Y, then saying "I am sure you don't know Y" directly to X is still patronizing.

 

Anyway, I am sure attributing lack of knowledge is part of what psychologist call implicit racial stereotypes. I would put more than even money that McCain does have implicit racial stereotypes. Well, that's a rather easy bet as almost everyone has implicit racial stereotypes, but I would also think that it showed in this conversation.

[jdonn]

I'd still take the "under" on an even money bet on whether most Americans had heard of F & F.

 

As for Alan & Oliver, maybe he just remembered Alan's name and not Oliver's.  If he'd said Oliver, I'm sure you'd see the assertion on various blogs that he was suggesting that African Americans, in particular, needed the government to intervene, or they wouldn't be able to keep their homes.

OH COME ON! No you wouldn't see anything like that. No one would have written diddly if he had replied to the person who asked the question. You are reaaaaally grasping at straws.

 

You really have this habit of, when pointed out that a Republican did or said something bad, assuming that either doing or saying the opposite would have been perceived as bad, or assuming that a Democrat in his place would have done the same thing.

[Lobowolf]

You really have this habit of, when pointed out that a Republican did or said something bad, assuming that either doing or saying the opposite would have been perceived as bad, or assuming that a Democrat in his place would have done the same thing.

That's true. It's borne of experience.

 

 

I also have the habit of, when pointed out that a Democrat did or said something bad, assuming that either doing or saying the opposite would have been perceived as bad, or assuming that a Republican in his place would have done the same thing. This habit doesn't show up as much on the BBO forums as the one you mentioned, because anti-Republican posts are much more prevalent than anti-Democrat posts.

[y66]

You don't hear people use the expression "that one" very often.

 

Most people would say "that guy" or "that asshole" or worse.

 

The only time I've heard "that one" before also involved a man of about the same age as McCain whose anger had also gotten the best of him. Which is how I took it. Not that offensive. Not cool under fire either.

 

p.s. I see that Obama's odds in Las Vegas are now 2-9 (win 2 on a bet of 9). Yesterday they were 1-4. Glad I got my bet in early. Thanks mickyb.

[Lobowolf]

You don't hear people use the expression "that one" very often.

 

Most people would say "that guy" or "that asshole" or worse.

 

The only time I've heard "that one" before also involved a man of about the same age as McCain whose anger had also gotten the best of him. Which is how I took it. Not that offensive. Not cool under fire either.

 

p.s. I see that Obama's odds in Las Vegas are now 2-9 (win 2 on a bet of 9). Yesterday they were 1-4. Glad I got my bet in early. Thanks mickyb.

Yeah, I've been rating McCain's chances a bit higher than the oddsmakers posted lines, but I'd put him at under 30% now and running short of time for a comeback. Maybe 7-2 now on my internal scorecard. He's losing ground (came off worse in the debate IMO, and the market ain't improving) AND running low on time.

[blackshoe]

This habit doesn't show up as much on the BBO forums as the one you mentioned, because anti-Republican posts are much more prevalent than anti-Democrat posts.

I suspect that's because the Democrats have not been the highly-visible "bad guys" for all the ills Americans perceive in their government lately. If we get a Democratic President for the next eight years, and a Democratic Congress, I suspect the trend will reverse.