Good Point: Noam Scheiber suggests grading Obama’s performance on a curve to allow for the fact that the audience was primarily evangelical. In that respect, I think Obama’s persistent Christianity, and preternatural moderation, may have convinced younger and more moderate evangelicals that he is not the AntiChrist.
Bad Point Commentary’s Jennifer Rubin, who never, ever, ever finds anything commendable about Obama–and indeed, seems convinced that his campaign is collapsing–somehow thinks that Obama’s calling out of Clarence Thomas, his strongest moment in the debate, was his weakest. This was a splendid bit of politics and substance on Obama’s part, in fact: Clarence Thomas was an affirmative action hire–as I argued, in New York Magazine, back in the day–and has proved to be a stone ideologue on the court, without the suppleness of intellect that the other way-right Justices evince. But this was also a message from Obama to white middle class America: If you think I’m one of those black guys who’s going to fill my Administration with affirmative action hires, you’ve got the wrong fellow. I’ll call out those who don’t meet my standards regardless of race.
But again, my bottom line–despite Noam’s point–is that it was a very good evening for McCain and not so good for Obama.
Another Good point from Taegan Goddard
Sorry Ana: You’ve misrepresented my position in your post above (ADD: And thanks for correcting it.)…I think it’s fairly likely that McCain got a heads-up from his staffers about the nature of the questions he’d be getting from Rick Warren. I just think it’s irrelevant: he would’ve answered those questions the same way even if he hadn’t been given the preview.
