Good, but not good enough

JOHN MCCAIN needed to turn this third debate into a second chance.

He needed to persuade undecided voters to look at him in a new, positive way and to look at Barack Obama in a new, negative way. He needed to change the dynamic of the contest because, ever since the economic crisis struck, Obama has had the advantages in message, momentum, money, and media.

This was probably McCain's best debate performance. Maybe he earned a B+ while Obama earned a B-. But it wasn't the dramatic breakthrough he needed, so, in effect, he lost.

McCain was more forceful and articulate than before, but both candidates sounded too political and predictable. They were more animated in talking about campaign spending, ads, and allegations than about the miserable economy.

McCain landed more blows than previously, but Obama didn't seem overly defensive in deflecting them. Even on the much-anticipated issue of Obama's association with former Weatherman terrorist William Ayers, McCain didn't really wound Obama.

Repetition is a useful tool in persuasion, but McCain overdid it. He mentioned "Joe the plumber" way too often. The video of "Joe the plumber" confronting Obama will be a huge draw on YouTube, but a telling anecdote about Obama wanting to "spread the wealth around" will now be a punchline on "Saturday Night Live."

Obama proved the importance of being eloquent - more words per minute - but McCain pointed out instances when Obama used words to obscure positions that could cost votes. Sometimes "eloquent" is a synonym for "slick."

Increasingly Obama seems presidential not by being statesmanlike but by sounding like he assumes he will win. Nonetheless he kept his presidential poise, while McCain's body language suggested that he's the long-shot underdog.

McCain had some good sound bites, but what he really needed was a sound strategy - several months ago.

Todd Domke is a Boston-area Republican political analyst, public relations strategist, and author.