Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

Low Ranking Monkey!

One TPM reader says that John McCain's refusal to look Obama in the eye last night is the "behavior of a low ranking monkey."  Our friend is also a real monkey scientists, so I'm ready to believe.

But, if you're skeptical about comparing monkeys to humans (and I know most of you aren't, but just in case) I'd say that McCain's refusal to look Obama in the eye is quite the same as hoping that the bully who roamed the halls in your middle school couldn't see you if you didn't look at him.  Monkey or bullied midschooler, McCain did reveal his own feelings about his chances last night.

I think that Obama turned the phrase "Let's talk about that..." into a verbal assault.  Every time McCain tried to distort Obama's positions, Obama just calmly said "let's talk about that," and then he explained himself, in pret5ty clear language.  The bit about talking to Ahmadinejad was a good example.  Obama does really seem to think that voting aged Americans can process and explanation and make the right choice.  I sure hope he's right.

So the verdict is that there were no game changing moments last night.  I disagree.  The only thing McCain had going for him, heading into this debate, was his stature as a leader with a long record and I think that's diminished now for anyone who watched the debate.  There's no way an undecided voter turned off the TV thinking that McCain proved he had the greater stature.

No one debate is going to decide the election but last night was not a good night for John McCain.  If, at 847 years old, you're still the low ranking monkey, face it -- you're not climbing higher.


Comments (57)

avatar

I dunno, destor. The guy was tortured. He probably knows more about the power of eye contact than we do.

avatar

Just saw an article on Huffington that explained that the McCain camp had advised him not to look at Obama during the debate so that he would not get angry/lose his cool.

avatar

Oh, my! One can guess that McLame is to-the-bone racist and infuriated to be running behind an "uppity" inferior whippersnapper.

avatar

Wrong. Wasn't "tortured" according to the Bush-McCain policy on "enhanced interrogation techniques".

avatar

Did you know that McLame did jail-time . . . er, failed in his mission and got captured by the "enemy" . . . er, was a POW?

I'm not sure about the low ranking monkey theory in this particular case. Maybe McCain is a little insecure in the debating environment, maybe.

But I feel it is much more likely he was simply dismissing Obama. The worse kind of arrogance. The kind instilled in children of Admirals. You can do know wrong and all the other kids are beneath you. That is what I saw.

McCain feels it is beneath contempt to have to stand up on that stage and treat this Freshman Senator upstart, who never served in the military, challenging him to be Commander in Chief--almost half his age--as an equal. I really think it was disdain.

Dismissing Obama might have been a way of hiding his true feelings, which may have been a combination of resentment and anxiety.

If you look at the opening hand shake, Obama towers over McCain and stares him down.

avatar

The real struggle with McCain, Agrippina, is about the length of schlong. Obama knows his tool is okay. John McWayne is always trying to prove he is carrying big timber.

avatar

Nonsense.

It's guilt about failing in his mission to come back from Vietnam in glory, as an actual hero.

He feels humiliated fifteen ways from Sunday, and pissed at the universe because of that. He's nasty because every waking hour reminds him of his sense that he's a failure.

Well, I agree about the disdain. The hostility felt palpable to me.

It seemed to me that McCain went to the emotional well a few times too often. Obama managed to come off as an adult, McCain as as emo teenager.

avatar

I don't buy the disdain argument. One shows contempt by looking at someone with disgust, not by looking away. I'm not sure I buy the the low ranking monkey argument either, more likely McCain is more comfortable attacking someone indirectly, not out of fear, but a knowledge that his temper might get the best of him if he is more confrontational.

Whatever the reason, his reluctance to look at Obama combined with his trademark grimace in reaction to Obama's criticisms, made the man look uncomfortable on stage, and perhaps undercut
the image of authority he was trying to project. His periodic dismissals of Obama's views as naive were red meat for his faithful followers, but his unwillingness to face Obama when intoning them, combined with no point by point dismantling of any of Obama's statements, made McCain's dismissals seemed canned.

Neither candidate dominated the debate on substance (more of a problem for McCain), but Obama's confidence and occasional point of accord with McCain was probably effective with independent voters (though likely seen as a contradictory mix of arrogance and deference by Republican die-hards, hence their belief that McCain "won" this round)

I don't know if he's behaving like a low ranking monkey or not, but Obama was fab in the way he kept engaging him and turning towards him even and still looking at the camera.

I did see a lot of blinking. But no grimacing. I think it was disdain and also fear. Both. Bad mix.

avatar

My gut response is that the low-ranking monkey take is spot-on.

I have to say, I myself didn't even notice McCain's avoidance-of-eye-contact--though I had to stop watching at the 10 p.m. mark, and most posters seemed to pick up on this in the final 30 minutes.

Anyway, the first guesses I read--contempt, anger at even having to share a stage with this guy--don't ring true with me. I remember that McCain has a history with Obama, has accused him, basically, of not sufficiently respecting McCain in Senate negotiations.

Is there a connection to the Bill Clinton thing--Clinton having such a hard time getting behind Obama, even mentioning his name?

There's a new alpha-male on the block, he's not giving respect (he's not rolling over)--and maybe he's actually a bigger, badder alpha than either of those guys ever was. (I.e., he's a real leader, not just a real good pol).

Is that the problem for both McCain and Clinton?

I do think that's the problem. Obama is smarter, more composed. Clinton fears Obama will completely overshadow him as a president, and a Democratic icon.

Had Hillary won, Bill would still be in the spotlight, still be relevant. With Obama, Bill knows he's being relegated to the Senior Tour.

Weirdly, I DO think it's the monkey thing. The media will never say it, but McCain's said himself that his POW time saw him break. Which - as a human being - must be a pretty f*cking terrible thing to handle afterward. But when I saw McCain have to fold to Bush when he lost... it blew me away. You could see it, feel it, how hard it was for him - but he folded. It was visible. And McCain hates that this happens, rages against it, can't believe this asshole has the upper hand - but at the core, he feels that the other guy DOES have the upper hand. And right now, he's falling in the polls... Palin's a deadweight around his ankle... Wall St dying... and when he decides to "take control" and be the leader and go to Washington, what does he do? He FAILS to take control. After all that build up, he lands in the White House, faces the other Alpha's, and... mumbles... waffles... exits... and reverses his position on debating. NOT an Alpha.

Look at how McCain blusters - he looks away, and talks to the air. Shit, he might as well have been sitting in that cell - that "box." I'm not a big fan of slapping psychology onto politics, but remember that weird "Man In The Box" scene at the end of the McCain tribute film? He APPROVED that shit. As the culmination of his tribute. Because he still IS the man in the box. And I feel bad about that, for him, as a man, to have suffered that. But. He's not the guy that's needed.

I wish I could rec this comment, because I think its true. I feel bad for the guy, because of all he's been through and the level he's dropped down to in pursuit of the White House. But I also feel sad in that if he hadn't decided to make a run this year, he might have gone down in the history books as the "maverick" P.O.W. war hero he always claims to be, but this campaign has brushed away that veneer and exposed the true man. That in and of itself is also a sad thing to have to experience.

avatar

I don't think you or quinn should feel "bad" for McCain: That's exactly what he wants you to feel. Do not underestimate him, he is not a broken man.

McCain's military training taught him to not look. Maybe it's lost on civilians, but McCain exhibited discipline at the debate.

Everything McCain did was meant to depersonalize Obama: no eye contact and never speaking to him directly; always saying "Senator Obama" and dealing with him in a formal, unemotional way; shrugging him off as if he's too insignificant to even perform this charade.

If Dems feel inclined to make non-human associations, then the depersonalization must have succeeded. We are not dogs or monkeys, and unlike Josh Marshall, I don't think we should go there.

McCain's shown almost no discipline since he got out - he blows up, acts out, gets bitter & enraged, feels his honor is in play 24/7. His whole campaign has been renegade, a pirate.

I agree that we are not solely dogs or monkeys. But the pack animal is still in us, PART of us. I watch it play everyday, in meetings, in the streets, at games, in politics. Maybe it's because I was a shepherd (or to be more precise, "cowherd!") when I was a kid. While we're more than that, we still have it working within us.

But I disagree about him being a broken man. He says he was broken, once. What happened with Bush, well... I never paid much attention to the guy, and when I saw it happen, it was just viscerally striking. We'll see how McCain responds next time. He may TRY and shout/glare Obama down next time. Question will be - how Obama will react. I think he's had many years of NOT directly confronting authority, so it's a weird match-up.

Your comment is interesting, RTB. I don't have military experience nor do I have anyone close who has had, but in thinking about pictures of military situations, inspections, medal ceremonies, etc., it's the rank and file who don't look at anyone. Seems like officers can look at anyone they want. Is this correct and if so how does that speak to your point?

I find this to be an odd rejoinder. Military training is designed to exploit and hone the animal nature of the psyche. Pack mentality. Pecking order. Killer instinct.

As gettex notes below, even in this context McCain was not the CO, but the subordinate.

Yeah, the military's very tapped into that. Think of all the animal slang terms they use for personnel.

Maybe it's lost on civilians, but McCain exhibited discipline at the debate.

Which doesn't strike me as a great debate tactic, using something that's going to be lost on everyone watching it, no?

You're right about what he was trying to do. He was trying to make Obama look small and insignificant. He just didn't execute it well. If he really wanted to make him look small and insignificant, smirking and the palpable disdain aren't the way to go. The way to go to make yourself look large, and presidential, and dwarf your opponent is with confidence and knowledge. That's what power looks like. He made himself look small.

Seconded. Good analysis-one of the best at getting at McCain's psychology and where he is this week and what may have contributed to his "breakdown". It may be that we will look back on this "suspension" as the point where he broke.

I feel for his POW experiences and respect the sacrifice but have NO TOLERANCE for the Palin pick or some of the mean ads he put up-especially the "sex-ed" one. Sad and pathetic and he really isn't doing his *family* any good by becoming such a spectacle.

avatar

I feel for him as a human, perhaps. But I have no respect for the particulars.

avatar

In canine behavior (close enough to monkeys and both close enough to humans), that averted gaze can mean a couple of slightly different things:
-- deference to the higher-rank,
-- attempt to have the higher-ranked one from seeing you and putting you down(as destor says),
-- attempt to avoid confrontation with one who is both more powerful and far more dangerous, perhaps even irrational,
-- attempt to calm the higher-rank, more powerful one,
-- attempt to calm oneself to prevent attacking the higher-rank, more powerful one ... and thereby get whupped!

Any or all of those could have applied (except the one where it's avoidance of one who is dangerous/irrational -- except that *could* be how McCain, in his demonizing way, sees Obama).

But they all lead to the same conclusion: that of the two Obama was the stronger, more effective and toughter one and McCain acknowledged it. That's hardly the impression McCain meant to convey but that's what makes body language so fascinating, and so telling. It's far more bluntly honest, more honest even that the stories you tell yourself much less the explanations you would give others. To self: "I'm not looking at him because he is so very inferior to me." To others: "I'm not looking at him because I'm focused on the issues, concentrating on fighting." But the body says avoidance/submission/feeling threatened - no matter what words you put to it.

Good post!

Agreed. McCain seemed to convey that getting into a direct eye-contact exchange with Obama would do him in. That he'd be overwhelmed.

The only reason he did so well, for him, was by not having an 'exchange' so much as focusing on talking points and avoiding anything extemporaneous.

The chasm between the two of them would've been thrown into much sharper relief.

I'm sure he thought it would look dismissive, and probably wanted to convey disdain...But it just like he was afraid, in the end.

avatar

i dunno.

my take on it is that mccain is like an abused dog. after enough time and beating, a dog is psychologically damaged enough to not be able to look at people, let alone make eye contact, which is an action that implies dominance. i'd be willing to bet, that after his years in his pow camp, maccain has a few scars of his own, which he obviously hasn't dealt with; and like that abused dog, he has a hard time looking at those he perceives as being superior or antagonistic to him.

you can take your pick as to which he sees obama as being, but i'd say BO is seen as some sort of threat.

McCain has actually always been the underachiever. And you can sense a bitterness, a smallness in him, that reflects the fact he never has measured up. He's ridden his "identity", which he's managed to milk for the resolute, courageous endurance angle.

But it's not a mantle of achievement, so much as a matter of endurance.

And you could see in him last night the beaten dog that knows what it is. He'll turn, snarl, snap and bite...he can be mean and unpredictable.

But he knew who was the real deal up there last night.

avatar

Exactly. It was a struggle for him to control himself -- to not overtly show his submissiveness.

And he hates himself for that humiliating character in himself.

avatar

The simian comparisons work for me, and I'd add another.

There's a steady call for Obama to hit back harder.

Myself, I consider the calm a great asset. I'm confident that Obama is capable of whatever kind of fight is needed. He's steadily demonstrating that he doesn't jump to bigger weapons than a given fight requires.

However, I've been watching Obama for a long time. Plus, I'm tuned to what tough looks like in lawyers and professors, which is subtler than what you might see on the football field or a street corner, but quite clear once you recognize the clues.

This close to the election, I think a bunch of the folks who are holding back can't tell if Obama's hard enough. Obama is, but he could make it easier for them to see.

I don't imagine monkey-stuff as much as a troop of gorillas. To become the silver-back recognized as the head guy, you don't have to pound many of the other males, but you probably do have to pound at least one. After that, it's reassuring that you don't bother with pounding any of the others or pounding that one over again.

My choice last night would have been when McCain sneered about sitting with Ahmadinejad saying he wants to wipe out Israel. Blunt, direct anger there would have been a two-fer: the guy on stage better back off, and the wild man in Teheran better not try that grap either.

The closest Obama came to getting it done was the three rounds of "You were wrong" about Iraq. On the third "wrong," he could have raised his voice so McCain had to look at him and turned his whole body so that when McCain looked up, he saw a guy who could be in his space in one second. But instead, Obama's voice went down, and he looked at his notes.

If Obama thinks he doesn't need to cream the guy to win, I agree.

Only, I think he could win bigger and surer with just ten seconds of being as hard as he'll be with Putin.

Just one hands-on demonstration of who's ready to be silver-back-in-chief and who needs to quiet down and show some respect. Just one.

avatar

Interesting analysis.

For whatever reason, McCain is incapable of being gracious and combative in the same mix. He did seem threatened to the outside eye, although I suspect he subjectively experienced it as feeling righteous. Control dynamics in one to ones are like this monkey thing, and Obama owned that stage in the nonverbals. I also think from professional experience that female audiences more preponderantly don't favor alpha dog end zone dances like what McCain tried to do at the end of the night. Rec'd.

Rec'd.

If, at 847 years old, you're still the low ranking monkey, face it -- you're not climbing higher.

Hah!

I think McCain was flummoxed by Obama. The amount of blinking that he did, and the failure to even look Obama in the eyes when they shook hands was due to McCain feeling like that low ranking monkey, or, McCain just hating Obama. I like the low ranking monkey theme, to be sure, but after thinking about his behavior, and the sheer contempt in McCain's voice, I'd have to lean towards the hate theme. I think he hates Obama, and hates having to debate him.

This is the key subtext. Even if you don't like the monkey comparison, that Obama, after a few years in the Senate, can stand toe-to-toe with this guy and keep up, even best him perhaps, creates the same difficulty for McCain. McCain is supposed to have all of this experience on his side, but if, after 26 years in the Senate, he can do no better than the freshman, well.. it certainly begs the question, doesn't it?

McCain is as good as he's gonna get. He's maybe not even as good as he once was. Obama just keeps getting better. It becomes a visual argument, even visceral.

I think it was a typical mammalian alpha/omega demonstration of social behavior. I have spoken before about Obama being a true alpha. In any social species, true alphas are exceedingly rare.

Aggressive behavior accompanied by averted eyes is acknowledgment of being lower in stature to the other. McCain rolled over and offered his neck.

avatar

And true alphas -- absolutely true ones, from the moment of birth -- can very often go through life without ever having to have that "stomp them in the ground silver-back" moment posited by Sporcupine. The other animals just *know* and choose never to test it. .............

And when enforcement is needed, it's calibrated so that the alpha applies the minimum amount needed to accomplish the task: a look, a yawn even, an over-the-back head move. They never go for the 'killer crush' unless that's all that will accomplish the job, and often it's never needed. Allowing the defeated one to save face, if that's at all possible, is also a very important part of wise leadership. Those "you are right, John" moments balanced nicely the several subtle but effective 'alpha rolls' that Obama executed last night. The foundation is there for the two of them to continue working together (which is the goal in pack dynamics even if it isn't in elections).

We humans, however, aren't a wise or intuitive as most animals -- we may have to, or at least want to, *see* the alpha carry out a killer-crush in order to believe the capacity is there. BUT that isn't something that can be ordered-up as needed. Obama is frankly lousy at being meaner and nastier than he has to be. All this 'alphaness' isn't something that is learned, after all, or necessarily controllable.

His inability to 'summon it up when it isn't needed' was shown in, I believe, the So. Carolina debate with HRC when (probably acting on the advise of well-meaning coaches) he deliberately struck out with an almost below the belt blow ("While you were sitting on the board of WalMart" line). He looked petty, and out of his depth, and flailing. So .... I think we'll see that moment in the future debates only if the occasion honestly calls for it (but of course we can all hope that McCain gives him one of those occasions).

avatar

Elizabeth2,

Did you catch the Senate floor incident months ago? Senator Allard filed a proposal to enact all the spending measures in Obama's campaign papers, aiming to make Obama look reckless. When Obama walked onto the Senate floor, he called across the Senate floor, "Hey Allard, you working this hard?"

Complete violation of the Senate rules. Complete success in making Allard stammer. Complete success in making folks happy to be on his team.

Allard's motion went down 97-0, by the way--meaning even Allard didn't vote for it after that.

Yes, I think "true alpha from birth" accounts for a lot of how he makes things happen.

avatar

No, I didn't -- fascinating and a perfect example! It's a mild response and one that, on the surface, makes Obama look a little bad, because he broke the "rules" - but a fine power play and very effective.

In a pack (dogs, wolves, monkeys for all I know), the alpha will sometimes cut through things, kill a growing conflict, or redirect everyone's attention by doing something totally unrelated ..... standing up, yawning big, and lying down at a different location. For all the world like it was paying no attention but very, very gently reminding everyone that he is there and he IS the leader (message: "don't pay attention to the combatants; they're just blowing hot air") --- I've even seen an alpha dog totally cut a would-be aggressive dog this way: aggressor charges up, snarling and barking, and the alpha glances over his shoulder, turns slightly toward the aggressor, and executes a half-hearted play bow. (Message: "you're all bluster, I don't take you seriously for a moment, and to let you save place I'll pretend you're just trying to play").

Fascinating - and there's nothing really "thought through" about it: it's sheer, bone-deep instinct. Obama's got it. ........... And sometimes I suspect it feels like a burden. But a grand, grand thing for a country to have in its leader.

Another intersting thing is watching two true alphas interact. You'd think there would be a challenge or massive fight, but that's so rarely the case. They both know the rules, down to their bones, and simply go along. If they are in Alpha A's home, B defers; if they are on neutral territory, the 'lead' may switch from one to the other depending on what is going on. It's beautiful to see. I think Biden is a pretty good alpha himself (listen to the stories from his family and life-long friends, look at the independent stances he takes that others follow along with). The combination of Obama and Biden is a very exciting, reassuring one to me.

avatar

Lovely!

I'll bet there was a lot of the same kind of feeling about Kennedy when he hit the Senate. You can't fake that alpha-dog thing any more than you can create it.

It doesn't have to be politics, though, for the same psychology to come into play. Any time you have a younger generation that has true talent come in, even those with real talent can feel threatened. It's only those who themselves have been the kind of alphas that have taken the non-aggressive approach rather than the challenging one (as described above with the animal examples) that can accept that a new generation is taking over while keeping their self-esteem. A new alpha group doesn't take away from the truly confident older generation. Chances are, they did it themselves, and they know that it's just someone else's time to shine.

Someone like McCain is not going to be that way. I don't think it's in his nature. Someone with the self-confidence to know his value, no matter what, doesn't have a trophy wife*; he marries an equal or better.

*Cindy McCain may have a lot of money, but only a trophy would put up with the shit John's given to her. Can you imagine Obama or Bill Clinton saying stuff like McCain said at that Harley Davidson rally? And can you imagine either Michelle or Hillary taking it for a nanosecond?

avatar

I read a comment on a wingnut blog today that McCain didn't look at Obama because he is unable to turn his head to the left and look up due to his injuries as a POW. Really.

If that was so, then having McCain on the other side of Obama would have been easily negotiated.

It's a lame excuse for McCains rude behavior

I can't bring myself to even speculate as to what his injuries were or what they are now. But, yes, right wing types do tend to make up the effects of his captivity as they go along. Like, if John McCain is late for a meeting, they say that it's because the wrist he used to wear his watch on was injured.

avatar

OK...alpha or no alpha. What distinguishes us from other primates and other mammals is our higher-level communication and acculturation. John McCain showed a level of contempt that is completely antethetical to his background (Navy man, son/grandson of admirals, elite upbringin). He was uncivil. His tenor, body language, refusal to make eye contact or acknowledge spoke volumes. He said, "Barack Obama, you're not fit to wipe my boots." Such posturing -- whether from extreme hubris or from deep insecurities -- is not lost on the viewing public. I have said time and again, McCain, the black sheep, playboy in his family, has something to prove. He proved it all right. No way. No how. No McCain.

avatar

The thing is that he KNOWS he is all bluff -- and he hates himself because of that reality.

I wonder if McCain was trying partially at least to repeat Bush's sighs and seeming boredom at his debate with Gore.

avatar

While on the subject of body language and social signals, a day later I find that I keep remembering the very end, after the wives came on stage. The two couples were at opposite ends of the stage and, in my memory at least, McCain and Cindy were all but looking at their watches (and not at the Obamas), wondering how many seconds before they could depart. It was the Obamas who went the full way across the stage, initiated contact, and carried out the polite greetings.

That bothered me a little at the time ... and more and more in retrospect. I keep thinking about a couple of moments at the *end* of Kerry/Bush debates when, despite the acrimony, the two men would shake hands and even have a word to say to one another. -- And it's made me think about the basic-level courtesy and politeness that GWB and Laura Bush have always shown to others. It's quite clear that Barack and Michelle Obama would maintain that level of evility ..... but one really has to wonder about John and Cindy McCain. I think **she** is very polite by nature but it's clear she doesn't (doesn't dare?) cross her husband, and he's just plain mean or at least rude sometimes.

I know it's superficial but this bothers me - quite a bit, apparently, since it's being sort of a toothache I can't keep probing.

Did anyone else notice that or make anything of it?

Yes, E2. I saw that too. The McCains - people with no grace.

Obama also said, "Good job, John." But he didn't say it condescendingly. He said it like a good sport from one competitor to another. I don't know if the mikes were cut off by then (I was watching on PBS, with no commentary or graphics, and they waited to start their discussion until everyone started off the stage), but I didn't hear McCain respond.

No grace from the McCains. Whether McCain thought he lost or not, he came off like a sore loser.

Yes I also noticed that Barack and Michelle Obama had to walk over to greet the McCains and it bothered me a lot. However, after listening and seeing how condescending John McCain was toward Obama, I thought John McCain was a petty and angry has-been who believed all along that he's entittled to the presidency, hence his attitude toward his opponents. He did not learn that it's the same attitude that was Hillary's undoing.

avatar

well said. this "he's inexperienced" condescension was tried before, and failed!

Wow. I really enjoyed reading the thoughtful analyses on this thread, but I agree with the simple explanation from a poster higher up. McCain resents Obama (for many reasons, the most important being, hey, he's trying to keep him from a long held dream). And he's incapable of masking his feelings. Jon Stewart pointed out this aspect of McCain's personality when he was making fun of McCain's visit with Dalai Lama. He said McCain looked like a six-year-old visiting an old folks home. It's really a symptom of immaturity. Not something you want in a leader.

I know that McCain and his people decided on the "my many years in Congress, public service, what-have-you" to counter the age question and point up the elder statesman stuff. But after awhile and many uses of it, it seemed to be more of a reminder of how old McCain is.

And, okay, Ahmadinajhad isn't the easiest name to pronounce, but it went from painful to "yikes! he really can't pronounce it!" when McCain kept stumbling over the name. I'll betcha his handlers have him warm up with some name tongue twisters before the next debate.

I got a lot of different feelings from McCain's demeanor towards Obama. I got the controlling-anger-by-not-looking thing at times, and also the disdain. And I don't agree that the disdainful always look, albeit with contempt, at the disdained. Often the most disdainful thing is to behave as if the object of disdain is like the air: there, but unnecessary to acknowledge.

I also got the low-ranking animal feeling, as well. And those times came after Obama "agreed" with McCain, but showed how incomplete or misdirected McCain's positions were. Because Obama did it with great calm, great grace, and, really, some respect. Yet he didn't let McCain off without making sure that everyone knew that McCain's views are out of date. McCain was faced. Not with arrogance, but with assurance.

Losing to Bush probably resulted in a lot of sympathy for McCain because Bush is such a weasel. That can't happen now. McCain has been truly outclassed.

avatar

I'd say it was shame... McCain likes to think of himself as honorable, but how can you look at a decent man you've smeared with racist lies - whom you've publicly accused of being a paedophile - and retain any sense of decency?

So McCain can't look at him or he'd have to face what he's done, and the consequent abandonment of all honor.

avatar

The best explanation I've seen of McCain's attitude's in this Kos diary. He/she has video evidence of McCain in debates with Alan Keyes (discounts race factor), Romney (eliminates contempt factor), Ron Paul (cancels dislike). In any case, the visual evidence was persuasive to me.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/27/1297/88780/804/612449

How about embarrassment? He has lied so much and is finding out that Palin is not what he needed (or wanted) that he is ashamed of the choice. He is the embarrassment (not Palin) to a lot of people. He knows how intelligent and eloquent Obama is and knows Palin will be gutted by Biden in the upcoming VP debate. He simply embarrassed?

Post a Comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Book Club Calendar

This Week

Blood and Politics: The History of the White Nationalist Movement from the Margins to the Mainstream, Leonard Zeskind

Next Week

Henry Waxman, The Waxman Report: How Congress Really Works

July 13-17

Justin Fox, The Myth of the Rational Market: A History of Risk, Reward, and Delusion on Wall Street

July 27-31

Plenty Enough Suck To Go Around, Cheryl Wagner

« Book Club ArchiveFull calendar »

Recent Reader Posts

All Reader Posts »





Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall

Site Editor
Lila Shapiro

Intern
Versha Sharma



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address