Once again, I’m going to dip my communications toe into dangerous waters and discuss the final presidential debate.  Just to get the inevitable out of the way from the start (and no doubt infuriate McCain supporters), I’m going to declare a winner along with most of the rest of the viewers:  Obama. 

Here’s why.   As a communications coach, I was looking for alignment between the content and non-verbal ‘conversations’, as I call them.  Senator Obama presented a calm, thoughtful approach to his various subjects.  There were lots of conversational markers indicating organization and precision – lots of ‘there are 3 reasons for that’ and ‘here’s why that won’t work’, and so on. 

He also answered questions in the way that I coach people to when faced with an impromptu speaking situation:  give the headline, give several supporting reasons, repeat the headline.  (Although he didn’t always get to the last step because of time.)  That approach to content makes audiences think you're in control and you're smart. 

His accompanying non-verbal conversation was polite, attentive, and deliberate.  Some said “defensive and dull,” but I would not agree, at least with the first adjective of that pair.  My hunch is that two things are going on.  First, Obama is a thoughtful, cool, low-key guy – a consensus-builder, not a firebrand.  Second, he was coached to stay calm, cool, and low-key, given that the world is in financial meltdown and most of us probably want a steady hand at the presidential tiller.

Obama looked at McCain when he was speaking.  He rarely interrupted him.  He kept his facial reactions limited to occasional wry smiles.  He was playing poker, and he had his game face on.  His was a controlled performance. 

By contrast, McCain was in constant motion.  When Obama was talking, McCain rarely looked at him.  He rolled his eyes, he smirked, he smiled false smiles, he scribbled notes, he sighed like Al Gore back in 2000 – in sum, he looked cranky and untrustworthy, and even rude at times. 

That’s because his content and his non-verbal conversations were not in alignment much of the 90 minutes.  He frequently attacked Obama, but, because he’s apparently anxious not to appear too angry, he swallowed his evident fury and gave us the false smiles.  The result was unnerving.  We deeply distrust people who smile to hide anger underneath.  It’s an unconscious response, for the most part, that we have to all mixed messages like that.  McCain would be much better served by just getting angry, and showing it.   

McCain’s content was disorganized, rambling, and repetitive.  He must have mentioned Joe the Plumber 15 times.  He frequently would start a thought, interrupt himself, and start another line of thought.  This speech pattern is typical of someone who is attempting to conceal a strong emotion. 

McCain was at his best when he turned to Obama and sent him a zinger, like the comment that if he wanted to run against George Bush he should have run in 2004.  There, the non-verbal anger and the anger in the content aligned, and he was effective.  I thought that was the best line of the debate, and I'm a Democrat. 

TV is a cool medium.  It craves emotion; emotion fascinates viewers.  When you dial it back, like Obama did, we watch you more closely to find out what you’re thinking.  When you’re conflicted, as McCain was, you’re also fascinating, but for the wrong reasons.  It’s like a train wreck.  You can’t take your eyes off it, but you know something is going wrong. 

In the end, alignment between your verbal and non-verbal messages is key, because that demonstrates authenticity.  On that level, regardless of politics, Obama succeeded and McCain fell short.