Truly, this was a case of saving the best for last. Whether it was because McCain desperately needed to come out swinging or because Bob Schieffer was far and away the best moderator of any of this election cycle’s debates, the final presidential debate of the 2008 election proved much more interesting and informative than the previous two. After the downright clusterfuck that was last week’s town hall debate, this debate’s more confrontational format finally gave us what we’ve been asking for: a chance for these guys to go toe to toe and see how they react under fire in a constantly changing setting. So, did John McCain do what he needed to get back into this election, at a time when many polls show him at a double digit disadvantage and losing ground in numerous traditionally Republican states? In the end, no. Here are some of my thoughts:

• As numerous pundits have said, John McCain got off to his best start in this debate, while Barack Obama came out looking flat. McCain was on the attack from the start, hammering Obama on his economic plan and on repeated charges that he’ll raise taxes (he won’t for 95% of America). He also got in a few great jabs early on, particularly his line about not being President Bush and how Obama should have run four years ago if he wanted to run against him. McCain’s other good zinger (in my opinion) was when he responded to Obama’s claim that nobody likes taxes with “then why raise anybody’s?” I don’t agree with McCain, but for the first time in basically this entire election, he was dishing out the comebacks and one-liners like I would expect a Republican to. That was the thing about his start to the debate – he came out like a typical conservative, and I mean that as a compliment. He was very effective early on in showing a clear contrast with Obama in such a way that would appeal not just to the base, but independent voters. His refrain of “taxes, taxes taxes” and accusations that Obama is an irresponsible spender are things his campaign should be stressing right now, and really should have been the entire time. 

• Then came what seemed like an hour of Joe the Plumber, which led to the above clip and McCain’s first stumble. McCain started the whole exchange by referring to Obama’s interaction with the guy, in which Joe the Plumber said that he couldn’t buy the plumbing business he wanted to under Obama’s tax plan (since he’d be taxed for making over $250,000 a year as a small business). This led to a bunch of back and forth about Obama’s tax plan, an exchange which CNN Money brilliantly fact-checked here. In a nutshell, McCain loves to use an overly broad definition of “small business” when he makes the claim that small businesses will have their taxes raised, and even the ones that will see it raised (less than 2% of them, mind you) won’t have them raised nearly as much as McCain claims. The big Joe the Plumber moment, though, was during the debate over health care, in which McCain claimed Joe would be fined by Obama for not offering health coverage to employees, even if he couldn’t afford it. And…cue the deer in headlights. Obama revealed that actually, small businesses were exempted from these fines. The look of utter shock on McCain’s face served as a precursor to what unfolded over the rest of the debate. On a more humorous note, all the attention Joe the Plumber received ended up being a bad thing, as it was revealed that the guy apparently hates paying taxes so much that he’s got some tax evasion issues. Gee, wonder who he’s voting for?

• The real trouble started for McCain, unsurprisingly, when the conversation turned to Bill Ayers, ACORN, and the negative campaigning issue. People outside the Republican base already aren’t taking well to Ayers and ACORN, according to polls, but McCain managed to take the Obama campaign’s bait on the negative campaigning question. McCain made the attack everyone waited for him to make, demanding Obama come clean about Ayers and Acorn. He did, though his answer was probably a little too political for some. But, more or less, he answered McCain’s question. Where McCain dug his own hole, however, was when he brought up comments Rep. John Lewis, a democrat, had made comparing the McCain-Palin rallies to the racism of the George Wallace era.  It wasn’t that he brought it up, but that he started demanding an apology from Obama, saying that his feeling were hurt. I’m sorry, but this part was downright laughable. McCain’s campaign is running around calling Obama a terrorist, indirectly fanning racial and xenophobic flames of intolerance, causing people to yell things like “kill him” at rallies, and he’s playing the victim because somebody called him out on it? Give me a break. It was at this point that “angry McCain” surfaced and seemed barely able to mask his contempt for Obama, making faces, sighing, and so on and so forth. The Republican commentators on CNN afterwards made a lot of Obama being too “professorial” and not connecting with people. I don’t know about any of you, but I’d rather have someone professorial sitting next to the red phone and negotiating with world leaders rather than someone who’s liable to fly off the handle at a personal slight. Before you say how despicable what Lewis said about McCain was, did you see Obama flip out about any of this “terrorist” nonsense? Put McCain in Obama’s shoes and he probably would’ve gotten into a fistfight with someone. Sure, Obama didn’t directly engage McCain on any of this, but he didn’t shy away either, and this only served to paint McCain exactly the way Obama wanted: as off-the-handle and erratic. Which is how he remained for the rest of the debate.

• Another moment from the negative campaigning portion of the debate that caught my eye (and ear): when McCain started talking about Ayers and ACORN and then, without hesitation, said that his campaign has always been about the economy. It was a 180 degree turn that was reminiscent of one of his schizophrenic campaign commercial. It was almost as though he was reading off cue cards, not paying attention to what he was saying or how his tone just changed within seconds. Very bizarre and, dare I say, “erratic.”

• I got a real kick out of the exchange over the appointment of supreme court justices. The question was whether each candidate could nominate a justice who disagreed with their personal views on the Roe v. Wade decision. McCain’s response to this was some bizarre combination of misstatement and subterfuge. After spending a few moments talking about that he had never and would never apply a “litmus test” to any nominee, he went on to say that he considers himself strongly pro-life and would consider a nominee’s “qualifications.” He then went on to say that he “[does] not believe that someone who has supported Roe v. Wade that would be part of those qualifications.” Uh, John, I’ve got news for you – that’s what we call a litmus test! Of course, he could have framed this in a way that Rick Davis mentioned after the debate. That, since McCain considers himself a federalist concerned with states’ rights, as well as someone who strictly interprets the constitution, he would note that the Bill of Rights does not guarantee a right to privacy…something the choice of abortion would fall under. That, while being something I would fundamentally agree with, would be something that would at least be grounded in something. Instead, McCain appeared to rather comically contradict himself.

• Within that same question may have been the final nail in McCain’s coffin with any pro-choice women still leaning his way (PUMAs, I’m looking at you). When Obama defended his vote against a partial-birth abortion ban by explaining that he did so because the bill lacked an exception for a mother’s health being in danger (i.e. if a pregnancy would kill her, a third trimester abortion was allowed), McCain went on the attack. However, he went on the attack in “angry McCain” fashion, in such a way that probably pissed off a good majority of women. McCain railed against pro-choicers using “a mother’s health” to mean a bunch of different things, essentially being a blank check to legalize abortion. The problem wasn’t in what he said so much (even if it was stupid), but how he said it. He was unbelievably condescending, actually using finger quotes when saying the term “a mother’s health,” as if to suggest that he thinks the issue of a woman’s well-being is total bullshit. Nice job, Johnny. You just pissed off any reasonable woman out there still considering voting for you.

• I loved the education question, not just because it showed a clear contrast between both men, but because Obama highlighted something that has a personal significance for me. First, he spoke of early childhood education needing more funding, if only because it pays for itself in the long run by helping close the achievement gap. This is something that doesn’t get near enough attention in America these days, and the fact that it’s one of Obama’s main policy points has been lost in the economic crisis. More than that, however, he brought up unfunded mandates, particularly with respect to special education. This resonated with me because, while in high school, I took part in spearheading a letter writing campaign to congress and the department of education to encourage them to fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), one of these unfunded mandates Obama spoke of. I’ll tell the full story some other time (including my chance meeting with former California Governor Gray Davis at a Rolling Stones concert), but in a nutshell, IDEA is supposed to pay for 40% of special education costs to public schools, but since its passage in 1975 has funded less than 15%. Yet since schools cannot legally cut special education funding, and they aren’t getting the money the government has said it would give, they’re forced to dip into their own pockets to fully fund special education. It’s been one of the most under-publicized government failures of the last 30 years, but then again, education always seems to get the shaft. It’s no surprise our country is experiencing such turmoil, in part because we’ve utterly failed so many students over the past 30-40 years, especially those who need the most help. Hats off to Obama for bringing this up. And McCain? More Republican garbage about school vouchers. While Obama does support charter schools (something I don’t), school vouchers are a whole other stupid solution. The idea of giving money to send kids to better schools isn’t bad; I’m all for giving kids more opportunities. But to do it in lieu of funding public education and essentially abandoning what Horace Mann called “the great equalizer” is reprehensible. Public education should be one of the best-funded, proudest programs in the entire United States. Instead, schools are routinely underfunded and have to cut corners in outrageous ways. The only solution over the past 8 years has been No Child Left Behind, a ridiculously flawed program that does nothing but guarantee that students know how to fill in bubbles on a standardized test, plus makes the outrageous assertion that all students will be proficient at a national level by 2014. A friend of mine once referred to this as a “long-term voucher program,” suggesting that if a Republican were in office in 2014, he or she would point to the failure to meet this benchmark as a reason to further punish public education. I sincerely hope that isn’t the case. McCain’s support for school vouchers in lieu of fixing public education is just the latest example of the Republican philosophy of putting a band-aid on a gaping, gushing wound. And using HeadStart as an example of early childhood education being fine? Give me a fucking break.

In short, McCain’s hot start ended up being just that: heated. He just got hotter and hotter until he just lost it and turned into angry, frothing-at-the mouth John McCain. All he did was reinforce his image as an erratic, angry guy – playing right into the Obama campaign’s hands. Plus, his far-right ideology and dismissal of “women’s health” only further damaged him with independents. We’ve still got 19 days to the election, but this was John McCain’s last chance to connect with voters on a large scale and, more importantly, change a whole lot of minds. And he failed on both counts.