One thing that many networks were wagging about after the first debate was how many times Obama said "John is right" or statements to that effect. The concern was that if he agreed with John too many times then it would appear that he and John McCain agree on almost everything and that John McCain has the right agenda for the election (or whatever was the concern..please feel free to leave a comment about your concerns). They said a debate is to show the differences between the two candidates and how you try to punch holes in the other side's policies and stands.
I think it was another brilliant move by Obama (actually might not have been pre-planned for that matter), and one that I suggested earlier in my original 'master strategy article' it is a big mistake to criticize Bush and McCain for everything under the sun. The democratic campaign strategy and public speeches for the past few years were limited to one line "This problem was caused due to the policies of Bush (and later McCain too)". It had become so repetitive and stale that "the dog ate my homework" became "I did not do my homework due to the wrong policies of Bush and McCain". If you repeat the same lines and the same attack strategy over and over again you tend to lose credibility (which the democrats did as they were perceived not to have any new ideas and all they did was criticize Bush) and the attack rationale tends to wear off and might even boomerang back at you.
The only way you can make your attacks effective is by agreeing with your opponent a few times. After agreeing on a few minor points you gain credibility and the voters' conviction when you disagree strongly on other policies and they will believe you a lot more. Especially when you are smart and agree on statements whic buttress your own policy (like Obama did when he agreed with the torture of prisoners policy of McCain). It will also make you look like an objective, fair and magnanimous person in the voters' eyes and not like typical politician who blindly criticizes everything his opponent says.
For example, going back to the master strategy article I mentioned that one of the things Obama can appreciate Bush and company for is to say they have done a good job of preparing for Gustav and I'm glad they did not repeat the management disaster of Katrina. This makes him look genuine and at the same time reminds people of Katrina. Now, two days later if he turns around and blasts Bush for the economy or for being weak on terrorism (yup, try hitting them from the right) by not catching Bin Laden yet, people will give more credibility to his attacks.
Add this site to Technorati favorites if you like the article(s).