Watching this video reminds me why Obama won.

First, McCain comes across really poorly. He announces a “spending freeze,” then immediately qualifies his call by exempting the military (good idea), veterans (good idea), and other “critical programs” (whatever the heck that means). He appears tentative, halting, and feeble-minded.

Second, Obama’s retort – hatchet vs. scalpel – is an attractive metaphor that communicates sophistication and nuance.

Third, despite being schooled in the first debate with this metaphor, McCain is unprepared for it when it re-appears in subsequent debates. He should have had a response ready (“I agree with Sen. Obama that the scalpel is what we need. But the difference between us is that he thinks the government needs a tummy tuck. I think it needs lap-band surgery.”)

Finally, he allows Obama to take his proposal (if you want to call an apparently half-baked idea thrown out during a Presidential debate a “proposal”) and twist it into something he didn’t support (an “across-the-board spending freeze”).

So, as a candidate, Obama demonstrated a remarkable ability to outmaneuver his opponent. Enough people took this ability as a proxy for leadership that he was able to beat McCain. Which is all he needed to do.

Now he has to be an effective leader. That’s not working out quite as well.

For all of us.

L3