Forget the real debates--who came off worse on the SNL parody?

[Bicoastal]

For the record, I feel their Obama impersonator sounds nothing like him.

[last_texas_dem]

1. Fauxbama

The impersonation wasn't very good, and the digs they tried to make at him sounded like they were written by an unfunny FReeper. Some of the mocking of McCain was so over-the-top ridiculous that it ended up being funny (like the jokes about suspending the campaign re: pie and debating in the nude), but they weren't really political digs at McCain beyond referencing his "suspension" of his campaign. However, the goofy old man they portrayed McCain as was actually more endearing than the twitchy fake they made Obama out to be. Their 2000 parodies seemed much more accurate and funny than this time around; I didn't even enjoy watching what I saw of this one.

[rebel with a cause]

2. Neither did I.

I found the humor to be a bit missing on this one.

[1corona4u]

3. I thought the whole show sucked. Except for weekend update.

And the interview.

[rebel with a cause]

4. I agree.

I sometimes think it is just me, so I am glad to hear others felt the same.

[calmblueocean]

5. They can't seem to get a handle on anything genuinely worth mocking about Obama

...and so they're stuck writing a character called "Obama" who doesn't really bear any resemblance to the man. I think there's also a sense that, when they do hit Obama, they have to hit him really hard, because they don't want to seem biased and politically partisan.

[Rebellious Republican]

12. You mean Dennis Miller! N/T

:toast:

[Sebastian Doyle]

6. I want to punch Armisen in the face for that shit

Or whatever PUMAtroll piece of shit wrote his lines. What the FUCK was all that Rezko/bribes/Rob Reiner bullshit? :grr:

[JI7]

11. maybe it was Lorne Michaels

isn't he supporting McCain which may account for the sympathetic way they try to portray him.

[quakerboy]

7. Their Obama

makes me think of * more than Obama.

[Kitty Herder]

8. It wasn't funny and they were much harder on Obama than McCain.

They should have been more even-handed. They also should have at least tried to do decent impressions.

[snowbear]

9. Whoever wrote that skit should be shit-canned... it was BOOOoOOoring !!!

.
.

~ And I mean SERIOUSLY BORING !!!!! ~

[mucifer]

10. I had to turn it off in the middle. Freepers will have it go viral. It's bad full of lies.

[Jennicut]

13. The Obama they had just was not very good but McCain was dead on

The whole suspend the campaign thing was funny and I thought McCain came off worse. Obama never seemed enough like him to be funny.

[adamuu]

14. They didn't do ANYTHING to make fun of McCain's irrational anger. n/t

[Larry in KC]

15. McCain was mercilessly ridiculed, Obama was ignored, which is fine

I'm surprised at other comments here... it reminds me of just after a real debate, when pundits start to spin it for the other guy, and our reaction is "what debate were they watching?!"

The whole sketch basically focused on what a cartoon the real McCain is becoming, and made him look like a desperate buffoon. In trying not to seem too one-sided, they had to put in a few half-hearted digs on Obama. Do you really believe that undecided voters would watch that and come out leaning more toward voting for McCain?

It's true that Fred does a pretty weak impression, but part of that is Obama is hard to caricature. The verbal tics such as the stammer may be caricatureable (is that a word? Maybe the word is "carrot"), but the content of what he says almost never is. It's like a cartoonist trying to draw a physical caricature of a flawlessly-beautiful person. The whole sketch wasn't uproarious like Bush-Gore, because BOTH of them had plenty to caricature.

I'll take a drab likeness with a few digs in it, standing beside a ridiculous, desperately-grasping old man. I honestly think that along with the fun, the sketch netted us more than a few votes.