Reading Hendrik Hertzberg's attack on John McCain in the New Yorker, I noted his reference to Barack Obama's public statement as Presidential.

In contrast in McCain, Obama lectured the reporters and public calmly. Quoting:

He looks and sounds like a President of the United States. He is preternaturally calm. He explains the chronology of the day: he called McCain at 8:30, the call was returned at 2:30, they discussed the idea of putting out a joint statement about the crisis. He says not a word about postponing the debate.

[End quote]

The issue, then, Is the public more reassured by someone who immediately becomes involved and believes he can be effective at helping to solve the problem(?) or by someone who expatiates well enough to impress his followers?

Context is important. McCain is losing ground as a Republican. He recognizes the deterioration can be met only by being an individual above party. Obama is a Democrat. He can gain by not being associated with the current problems.

Obama's difficulty is that he can reasonably be called upon, both as a Senator and as his party's leader, to participate in finding a solution. So he will be compared with McCain in influencing what happens.

An agreement will be reached. It has to be. McCain will seek leadership credit. Will Obama also take responsibility, or will he argue that he behaved calmly and that the problem had nothing to do with him?

McCain can lose by not escaping being associated with the problem. Obama can lose by not contributing substantially to the solution.

I think that McCain is likely to lose ground because the seriousness of the problem will outweigh "heroic" efforts. But he will have a chance to regain that ground afterwards by portraying Obama as cold and unconcerned.

The race will resume, with McCain having work to accomplish.

If you walked into the bank and the manager was running around with his hair on fire saying "I have to drop everything and run off to a board meeting RIGHT NOW! Crisis! Crisis! Crisis!" would you trust the bank with your money? I know that Obama bashers keep saying that he isn't showing enough passion, not showing "anger," not fighting back hard enough against McCain's ludicrous smears, and so on. But right now he looks like the voice of sanity, while McCain looks not only hysterical but ridiculously grandiose, as though his rushing off to Washington would solve everything. In fact, his interference in the negotiations seems to have set things back, which is pretty typical of McCain's MO.

Making the right accusations...

There are enough people shouting Crisis that McCain doesn't have to persuade anyone the problem is severe. The collapse of the deal came from the Democrats' (appropriate) requirement that Republicans share the responsibility by voting for the legislation, and many House Republicans' refusal to do so. McCain is safe on that score as well.

With the President's ability to chair any meeting with any list of attendees, McCain can be involved. And he does have practice getting legislation passed in the Senate, which can be highlighted with the cooperation of fellow Republicans.

Note that those statements are not meant to imply McCain will solve the economic and legislative problems, but that he can appear effectively involved.

What McCain cannot escape is being a Republican. And the Republicans are - so far - being blamed for a problem which has... caught people's attention. Expect ads including the involvement of Democrats (as in voting for blameworthy legislation) when McCain starts to try to salvage the situation.