Last night Obama dominated McCain in their final debate. Part of the reason he did so was that he stayed remarkably cool and collected while McCain lost him temper, made faces and got angry. The other reason though, wasn't as easy to see.
Obama was also a master strategist last night. He laid traps for McCain that McCain fell into while deftly avoiding the traps laid for him by the Arizona senator. The most noticeable one being the Ayers issue. The following quotes are all from the first chapter of Sun Tzu's Art of War
All warfare is based on deception.
Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.
McCain wanted to use the Ayers attack, thinking it was a weak point in Obama's armor. Bob Schieffer all but teed it up for him, but it happened on a question when Obama went first. Obama then went on to mention Ayers himself.
Now, McCain had a choice: dismiss it or attack. He should have known that if Obama brought it up, he was ready for it. But McCain went ahead anyways with Ayers and ACORN. Obama then deftly turned on the issue and rendered it null and void. There was also the added benefit (if you watched on CNN) of watching McCain's approval ratings plummet as he launched that attack.
If he is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him.
Some people were upset that Obama didn't get more aggressive on Palin or show more anger. But that was the right move. Giving in on those moments would have benefited McCain more by driving the debate into picayune issues that McCain could use to cloud the debate. By letting those moments go, Obama gave up the short-term loss for the long-term win.
If your opponent is of choleric temper, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant.
Most announcers thought that Obama looked off his game early. I disagree; I think it was a deliberate attempt to drawn McCain out into a sense of overconfidence. And it worked. McCain thought he was rolling on the health-care issue until Obama nailed him with the "$0 fine" moment. It left McCain flat-footed. From that moment on, he got more and more aggressive and Obama refused to rise to the bait, which just made McCain even angrier. By the end McCain was making faces, launching attacks on anything and everything and becoming visibly agitated. Obama, meanwhile, looked presidential.
Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.
Did anyone expect Obama to mention labor leaders getting assassinated in Colombia? Or to parry McCain's CAFTA attack with his support of the Peruvian FTA? Did anyone expect Obama to completely dominate the abortion question or the SCOTUS issue? Those are supposed to be McCain's strong areas and Obama dominated in them.
The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations beforehand. Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all! It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose.
Obama has always been two steps ahead of McCain, and that was clear to everyone last night. McCain's attacks looked petty or were turned against him. Obama complimented McCain at times, and then his attacks were considered more acceptable by the audience because he had shown his willingness to compliment McCain. Again, it was a calculation of short-term loss leading to a long-term win. And Obama pulled it off brilliantly.
In the years to come, Obama's candidacy will be looked at as a masterpiece.