Just finished watching the Webb/Allen “debate” on Meet the Press. I put “debate” in quotation marks because it was less of a debate and more of a question and answer session, with Tim Russert asking mostly “gotcha” questions and both Jim Webb and George Allen answering defensively. Nothing new came out in this exchange and I doubt if anyone changed their mind because of it.
In my opinion, way too much time was spent on the war in Iraq. The first half of this joint appearance was devoted to this topic. Allen’s basic answers revolved around his (and Bush’s) mantra of “stay the course.” Webb’s answers were more complete, demonstrating his in-depth knowledge of this and other military actions.
The second half of the session dealt with the “gotchas:”
- Webb’s writings on women in the military
- Allen’s VMI statements on women
- Allen’s “m-word” moment, the noose and the Confederate flag
- Webb’s stand on affirmative action
Finishing up, Allen was asked to commit to serving out his full term, which he wouldn’t do. And then there was the question about both men chewing tobacco.
Given the opportunity to present these men in a national setting, I was disappointed in this “debate.” While I fully appreciate the impact of the Iraqi war, I would have liked to have heard more on the domestic policies of the two. I don’t think this debate hurt or helped either one. After watching it again, I don’t see a winner here. But I do see a loser: the Virginia public.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
The Iraq was is the defining issue of our time, and it’s the reason why Webb switched parties and joined this race. I think it deserved 1/2 of the debate.
I just wish the second half revolved around domestic policies instead of gotcha quotes.
But the question is did you learn anything new about either man’s stance on Iraq? The fact that it has been extensively covered was enough of a reason to NOT include it so much in this debate.
Absolutely agree that the debate was sorely lacking on the issues the local issues. But it was, after all, a national show. And the thing is that just because you know everything you know about each man’s stance on the war doesn’t mean everyone does. I learned a lot about Webb and I’m glad I saw it and felt everything discussed was worth my time.
Vivian, I agree with your analysis.
Well done.
anon – Everything that was said has been in the on the web and in the papers, so I’m really curious – what did you learn about Webb? Did it change your vote?
So far the women whose reaction I’ve seen has been pretty much the same, regardless of party affiliation (if any).
Perhaps us guys can learn something from this, but I’ll be damned if I know what it is. You can be sure I will be listening the next time Badrose and I talk.
Perhaps we women are simply calling it as we see it as opposed to being so vested in a candidate like you guys are. Yep, y’all can learn something 😉
Vivian, I accept that you say that everything said on MTP this morning has been said elsewhere. However, I’m a well-read, well-educated voter who didn’t know what you might think are some very simple facts about both men and, as I said, it was well worth my time.
May I suggest to you that you are not the “average” person in terms of keeping up with all things political; you scour the media for every scintilla of information you can find about any and everything that interests you – and I greatly admire you for that; that’s why I’m here.
But IMHO you need to understand that not everyone does that and I don’t think you should dismiss as irrelevant (my interpretation of your remarks, not your word) any media exposure of this magnitude.
Regardless of Jim Webb’s deplorable previous statements about women in the military academy – and his disturbing inability to apologize for same – he and Tim Russert both showed George Allen to be the rubber-stamp lap-dog to W. that he is. As someone who very badly wants this offensive redneck defeated in November, I will never be critical of any media exposure that exposes him in that manner whether they bring up things I knew previously or not.
Given that this was a national show, what did you expect? Tim Russert asking them about Craney Island?
There was nothing they could have said or done to change my mind and I’m sure the same is true of you. I don’t care who is running against George Allen (well, I do care and Jim Webb would not have been my choice, but it’s out of my control at this point), I want that person to win. But that doesn’t mean that the points made on MTP didn’t change anyone’s mind. I can’t see how anyone leaning toward Webb would have ended up believing in Allen instead, but I most assuredly can see that anyone leaning toward Allen could have ended up thinking very seriously about Webb. And that’s a very big plus in my book.
Peace…
anon – I’m sorry you took my remarks to mean that I thought you were irrevelant because I did not intend that. My frustration with the debate was its focus on Iraq. I’m glad that some of the positions were new to you.
The Allen critics have said over and over that Webb is a one-trick pony, only talking about Iraq. No, I didn’t expect a Craney Island question. But I did expect some domestic side questions: Social Security, energy, taxes – take your pick. (Even when Russert did ask a domestic question – one about the cost of Webb’s proposal to give a 5% tax break to military people – he let Webb get by without making him answer.) Asking something about domestic issues would have proven whether or not Webb has a position on these issues.
None of the remaining debates (as of now) will have the audience that MTP had. I am disappointed at the lost opportunity.
Jim Webb was clearly the winner in this debate. George Allen dodged every question asked him, while Webb answered most of his directly. Webb layed out a plan for leaving Iraq. I’m sure there will be some debate about this, but at lest it is an exit strategy.Oh! Benny Lambert’s strategy worked.He got his name mentioned on national tv.
My wife thought George Allen had more stage presence than Jim Webb. Webb seemed nervous. Is it just me or is Allen’s nose getting bigger? However, we both agreed that Webb did a better job answering the questions. Allen gave typical politician answers. Webb seemed believable, even on his answers on affirmative action and women in the military. I still can’t believe that Allen says he didn’t know what m-word meant. First it was mohawk, then he didn’t know. What an idiot. VJP- Are you happy, I participated in your blog!
“Is it just me or is Allen’s nose getting bigger?”
It’s what happens when you lie.
Unfortunately, with gas diving toward $2/gallon, the NFL in high gear, and the extra low prices at Wal-Mart, the Iraq War is THE national issue that MTP and other national MSM would probe on. $300 billion, nearly 3,000 dead troops, and nearly 2,000 Iraqis killed each month will do that. The state-level debates will cover more expansive issues….I hope.
Iraq casualties surpassed 9/11 this week. I think Webb CREAMED Allen. Look, the time for electing people because they look like they’d be fun to get drunk with is over. Let’s opt for smart this time around and it’s definitely NOT republicant.