Obama’s unconscionable support for the bailout definitively deprives him of all credibility as being “on the side of the worker,” which has been his main selling point. However one reads the bracelet, McCain owns that issue, at least among swing voters. Obama’s last hope may be that Palin does not pull out and looks like the idiot she is in her debate with Biden. But he has to take care not to insult her, and that’s a tall order for him.

At any rate, the “many eyes” I referred to were scattered among god-knows-how-many comments I read yesterday morning on scads of discussion sites of every political stripe. The conventional wisdom pre-debate was that Obama tends to come across as “professorial” and needed to try harder to show passion and empathy, while McCain comes across as touchy and impulsive (at least lately) and needed to demonstrate that he was grounded. Obama needed to show that he was within the political “mainstream,” not too risky or scary (esp. to older, white voters), while McCain needed to show that he wasn’t entirely conventional, to avoid being just a creature of the Bush administration. By and large, Obama hit these marks… and McCain didn’t.

As for reactions to specific sound bites… well, I guess that’s subjective; I’m sure your reaction was genuine. But I can assure you I’m not the only one who thought Obama owned the bracelet exchange. IMHO it was a sharp and effective retort that undermined McCain’s implicit message that military families side with him, and made the important point that not all of them want us to stay in Iraq. Obama also made his point quickly and clearly, whereas McCain’s anecdote had rambled painfully.

McCain’s in a box now. He no doubt has scads of advisers telling him that in debate #2, he’ll have to take pains to look directly at Obama and be nice to him—IOW, exactly the opposite of what comes naturally to him. And that’s what people will be watching for. Remember how well it worked for Gore in 2000 to try to change his demeanor from one debate to the next?…

FWIW, I cringed when Obama said “I have a bracelet, too, John.” He came off glib about soldiers dying and mothers suffering, and looked as if he thought collecting symbols is equivalent to commanding the respect of those handing them out. That was nearly a disastrous moment; he just barely salvaged it with the explanation of what the bracelet meant.

McCain’s references to all his travels didn’t “kill”; in many eyes they just reminded people how “20th century” and “cold war” he was. (As did references to Brezhnev, SDI, etc.) If you’re looking for attacks that scored points, look to Obama’s reminder of McCain’s perplexing remark about the president of *Spain*, or his cutting “I have a bracelet too, John.”

At any rate, the CNN poll gives the same result as the CBS one. So does Frank Luntz’s focus group (on Fox, yet!) of undecided voters.

And remember, to the “undecided” voter, it’s about character and disposition more than issues. The dominant point I’ve seen everywhere this morning is that McCain refused to look at Obama, for whatever reason — condescending? contemptuous? afraid? — and generally came across as ill-at-ease. Cranky vs. cool, grumpy vs. gracious — that’s the emerging narrative.

As for the instant polls, the numbers can be interpreted in several ways that do not favor Obama. For example, given his unpopularity with “uncommitted” voters (no one is uncommitted who expects to vote), having just 39% on his side likely reflects pre-existing leanings. More importantly, if he continues to argue both sides of every question when they debate the economy, he’ll lose whatever presumption in his favor he currently enjoys. I wish he’d been a litigator rather than a professor.