Presidential Candidates and Body Language

Actions Speak Volumes

Peter Stone
I watched the second presidential debate. I reverted to truly watching the candidates. I found the body language far more interesting. Body language is the non-verbal body movements used as part of our communication, from the waving hands to involuntary twitching of facial muscles. It's just that nonverbal communication is between 60 to 75% of the impact of a message. Senator McCain was the more fascinating and animated, than Senator Obama.

There's a lot out on the internet about body language, the candidates, and the debates. I was looking at the subject as a voter. There was a remarkable display of twitches, smirks and jaw-clenches that raced across John McCain's face throughout the debate. He had a real lack of eye contact, particularly his unwillingness to look Obama in the eye. He just looked plain angry, annoyed and/or craggy. The Senator looked like he wanted to be someplace other than at the debate. He looked really uncomfortable with the format, even though McCain requested the town hall meetings. His movements were awkward, but I could tell if he was in pain or the result of his prior injuries. McCain did do a lot of smirking and jaw-clenching especially when Obama spoke. The only real moment of connection with the audience was when he patted the prior service member on the back. I saw the jabbing finger across his chest motion toward Obama, and learned later of the "That one" comment. That action was very powerful to watch. When Obama looked Mc Cain in the eye, McCain turned away. When Obama approached McCain for a handshake, McCain shunted him aside, having him shake hands with Cindy. Cindy had walked around the hall with her hands behind her back. The McCains left the debate hall very quickly.

Senator Obama seemed to relax when he realized how uncomfortable McCain was. There was no love loss between the two at the first handshake. Obama had his hand extended first. There were no hugs or back pats. Obama looked attentive and ready to respond more than the first debate. Obama seemed to engage the crowd easily and more. He seemed to be in his element as the debates went on. Obama seemed to stay cool and collected. Obama engaged in his share of digs. If you watched C-Span, the Obamas were relaxed at the end of the debate enough to stay, talk and take pictures.

Published by Peter Stone

I grew up in Brooklyn, NY. I was happy doing clinical work. I've been studying and practicing for over twenty years. Married with children.  View profile

  • Do I want a angry President?
  • Do I want one that can't relate to everyone?
  • Should a President's feelings be so obvious?
Though McCain's demeanor was more aggressive, Obama engaged in his share of digs -
this was not the "I agree with John" Obama of the previous debate.

4 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Christine Bruness11/7/2008

    Yes! I noticed this, too. I deliberately watched their body language to gain a different perspective on the candidates. I also looked up their astrological signs, even though I do not really put much stock in such things -- just did it out of sheer curiosity. John McCain is a Virgo and Barack Obama is a Leo. Leos are believed to be more comfortable in the spotlight. Astrological signs and body language aside, I chose the person that I felt would be best for our country based on their plans and previous voting records. I am pleased to say that I chose Obama!

  • Peter Stone10/10/2008

    Thank you John for your comment. I would have sent this to you, but you terminated communications. I do hope you get to read my response: Actually it's more than "We all see what we want to see" to borrow your quote. The faculty of seeing all the relevant data in a meaningful relationship is more where I am: perspective. All candidates don't like or dislike each other. Those who don't like their opponent can usually keep their feelings in check. For example, President Clinton doesn't particularly like Obama, but he's not as overt as McCain. Look back at video when Clinton had to speak Obama's name. Clinton can hardly get the name pass his teeth. Even a look at your own non-verbal language......I seemit as tolerance of others opinion. Thanks again.

  • John10/9/2008

    And you would be voting for ... ? We all see what we want to see.

  • kelly m.10/9/2008

    Interesting analysis. I actually watched the first debate without sound and had similar perceptions. I turned on the volume for the second debate (I did 'listen' to the first one later on the evening it was held) but think I was more acutely aware of body language due to the earlier experience. The anger and discomfort comes through loud and clear in body language.

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.