I think Palin held her own, she definitely did better as the debate went on. I, too, was annoyed by her dodging questions on the economy rather than goint after Obama and the Democrats and their role in this current mess. I'm going to call it a draw, but McCain/Palin absolutely must stop ceding economic issues to the Democrats. There is no reason for them to do so and it's the number one issue right now. I also agree she said maverick too much.
I wasn't sure what to expect from Sarah Palin, and to be honest, I was a bit worried about how she would perform in the debate. But she actually came off really well, it seems to me. She knew what she was talking about, she sounded intelligent, she sounded real. I think she did a great job. And so did Biden. I called it a draw and voted Neither.
And the winking. What the hell was with the winking at the camera? And plugging her family. At one point, I was expecting her to give a shout out to all her family members.. which she kind of did anyway. Only thing she left out was the family pets. She would have done much better if she'd answered the questions and not avoided the important economic issues... She did well, but she could have done so much better. She just looked as if she was given a list of soundbites to use and keep hammering certain points, even if they had little to do with the question put before her, told to not go into any details about anything (especially the bailout and the economy) and to just smile at the camera. It looked like someone was patronising to her in how she should approach this debate. Hence why it looked so fake. She's a good public speaker and she knows how to play to the camera.. (nodding, smiling and grinning and the winking) but she seemed to lack substance. I felt like reaching into the TV and saying 'No Sarah, we know what your campaign is advocating.. just answer the question already'.. Biden did well in not attacking her though. I guess they realised that if he went after her in the debate, he'd come off looking like a bully and a bad guy... imagine the guy who picks in the mentally disabled kid at school.. So he went after McCain. Was a smart move for him. I think he won it. She did well.. I guess if one were to compare her performance with her recent interviews, she did well. But she needed to answer the questions and address the issues.. something she failed to do on many occasions, instead resorting to campaign soundbites.
I dislike, personally, both Biden and Palin - never met either, just their apparent personalities as seen on TV. That said, Palin scares me more than before. I don't think she understands she's being used. I think she actually believes that memorizing all those little scripts to get through a mock "debate" bequeaths actual knowledge, or as much as she needs to govern. The gap between making a speech saying you support the troops, and actually doing the spadework of what's best for real soldiers, for example, is I think completely invisible to her. She can deliver platitudes about lowering taxes and platitudes about building up infrastructure in consecutive sentences without even a hint of mental discord - because she believes, sequentially, that both those things are good ideas. She's a true believer in whatever she is saying at the moment. She believes whatever has come out of her mouth exists in reality, and is an adequate response to whatever situation brought speech about. That's fairly dangerous. McCain is old, with several serious medical uncertainties due to have their effects. If Palin were running a scam here, we would at least have the reassurance that she isn't a sucker - that she has street smarts. But the way she dodged the questions and took refuge in a set of scripts - she did not actually answer more than one or two - gave no hint that she thought her inability to handle them reflected on her ability to govern. It's like watching someone cheat on a medical school exam, without appearing to even consider that eventually they are going to be faced with an actual patient.
I was laughing at her "Lt. Cdr. Data-esque" millisecond long moments where she mentally accessed the appropriate talking point and recited them on queue... even if she may have recited a slightly off-topic talking point. I mean, sure, she had enough smarts and "common speak" to fit them into the debate, but she just didn't get into too many details, did she? That said, I'm not the type of person to worry about mountains of experience. I'm more concerned about political ideology and character. She has the character, but her ideology is one that I don't really gravitate towards. There are plenty of talking heads, advisers and executive heads to make sure she (or Obama) doesn't accidentally blow up Kreblakistan. ~String
It's as if she had queue words and a list of things she had to recite if those words came up... I had the impression she was thinking to herself, "doesn't answer the questions but hey.. no problems.. just keep pounding that same message.. stick to that and I'll be fine". It was quite repetitive after a while. Which kind of goes against the whole "maverick" image she was trying to convey. The "talking heads" and advisers are the same one's who are currently or have been advising the current administration.
I'm sick of them both acting like Israel is the 51st state. In any case, both brought up valid points on most issues. Palin was stronger in energy, Biden in economy, tied in foreign affairs, neither on health care. But it seems to me, 1/2 of all candidates must be unaware of reality. Because how can they look at the same event and have such disagreements? "You supported McCain" "I never supported McCain" "You disagreed with Obama" "I completely agreed with Obama" One has to be clinically insane, misconstruing facts, or blatantly lying.
Ha! That taught those premature voters. Let's face it, that was a very disappointing debate. Palin hardly said anything stupid at all.
Biden won. Palin pissed me off by sometimes deciding not to answer questions and to address Biden's points. Instead deciding to answer questions that weren't even being asked. She also likes giving 3 second answers with no explanation. Also; what is with this preconditioned talks? The police don't tell and wait for robbers to stop robbing before arresting them.
No contest Palin fared well insofar as she didn't utterly choke. Then again, that's not much of a standard, even if we are somewhat accustomed to it after nearly eight years of Bushisms. However, I don't think her performance was strong enough to cause a turnaround in the polls. The first part of the debate was agonizing as she kept abandoning the question at hand and falling back to her experience with energy issues. And the rest, as she became more comfortable, was something I'd heard about only briefly, and I can't recall exactly where. Apparently, one of her former primary opponents in Alaska said she's tough to debate because she is very good at reciting all the talking points. Indeed, that seemed to be the gear she shifted to once she got her sea legs under her. Attack Obama, attack "government", try to play the folksy role. There wasn't much for substance in the part she played. It's clear Biden recognized this mode, and not only from the occasional smile that might have been patronizing amusement or maybe expressed disgust. He's probably done a bit of that sort of politicking himself, and knows through years of experience how empty it is despite there being a time when it was effective. Palin's attempt to include herself with the people didn't play as well as it should have, in part because of her delivery. But then there is the point that Bill Maher has repeatedly made since her nomination. While Americans are influenced in their electoral decisions by the notion of "who's more like me" and such, it's something of an uncomfortable thought that Palin is "like me". Many Americans would not find that notion complimentary. To put it more bluntly, many will think, "Okay, I'm not the smartest person around, but I'm not that stupid." And while the lack of a Couric episode helped her to a certain degree, she did not fully overcome the sense that she doesn't really know what she's doing. By any normal, equal standard, Biden won this debate. If we handicap the players, though, there is a strong argument for Palin. While she didn't win, the simple fact that she didn't dissolve into a complete, blithering mess is enough to say she didn't lose, either. And I don't think her gregarious approach—"Can I call you Joe?"—helped much. I don't know if she's actually that loud in general, or if some tech had the levels wrong, but at the beginning and end of the debate, when they shook hands, Palin was loud like a stereotypical drunken cheerleader. I know Biden said something in those exchanges; I could hear a murmur of his voice. But Palin came through loud and clear. ("But this one goes to eleven.") The thing is that there is a point at which omni syndrome fails a politician. We expect our elected officials to conduct themselves in something of a statesmanlike manner. Where Reagan was capable of pulling that off despite his mean spirit, Palin doesn't seem to have an ounce of statesmanship about her. This goes back to the idea that people like politicians who are like us. If that notion was pure, we wouldn't complain so much about negative campaigning, or spurious accusations flung back and forth, or even Bill Clinton's blowjob. Even the mean and petty generally find something distasteful about undignified politics; whether it's fair or not, we expect more of politicians than we expect of ourselves. Of course, even when they fail to deliver, we either send them back or call in relief in the form of a clone. Substantially, Biden clearly had a clue about the issues; that isn't so obvious with Palin. To the other, though, perhaps it was the format, or maybe it was something about Biden's style after so many years in politics, but he seemed to miss obvious opportunities to definitively outshine her. One of those, and I fault Barack Obama for failing to make the point as well, had to do with diplomacy. All either of them had to say in response to this ridiculous complaint by the Republicans is, "Look, you don't get anywhere when you say, 'Give us everything we want, and then we'll sit down and talk with you about what we want'." It was a major obstacle in Northern Ireland—"Disarm and surrender your cause, and then we'll sit down and talk about your cause"—and plagues the Israeli conflict. It won't get anywhere with Iran. And we certainly wouldn't accept such an offer from anyone else. It's the political equivalent of a cheap religious argument: "Before we discuss whether or not God exists, just admit that God exists." So, yes, Biden should have made the point that the question of Obama sitting down with Iranian leaders has more to do with rendering the whole point of talking moot before we're willing to sit down and talk. And he, like Obama, failed to make this point. If they're baiting the GOP into wasting rhetoric on the point they ought to know better. Subtlety is often dangerous in electoral politics. My daughter was here tonight, so I didn't take off to my brother's and watch the debate over a couple glasses of bourbon. In the end, though, I sent two text messages. Thirty minutes or so into the debate, as she fell back to energy issues for about the fourth time, I asked, "Is she a one trick pony?" The response was, "More or less". And at one-seventeen—I can't recall the issue—I wondered, "What the hell is she talking about?" I'll have to go back and look at that part again, because all I can remember is that she wasn't making a whole lot of sense. And did anyone catch that she got the whole climate thing backwards again? A few days ago, she said, "I'm not going to blame all of man's activities on changes of climate." And tonight she repeated that formulation, which suggests she's running by rote. Obviously, this doesn't help. It wasn't a complete disaster for Palin, but it's hard to see how her debate performance will bring the Republican ticket's numbers up. At best, she staunched some of the bleeding. McCain informally conceded Michigan today, a notable point because of its electoral college value (17 votes, and a 7-10% lead for Obama). RealClearPolitics presently marks the tally at 260-163 in favor of Obama with 115 toss-up votes. The more striking aspect of that number, though, is that of electoral votes rated as "solid", the score is 171-158 Obama; of the votes from states rated as "leaning", the tally is 89-5 in favor of Obama. Only one state supporting McCain, according to RCP, is not "solid", and that is West Virginia. Recent trends, according to RCP show momentum for Obama; Oregon (7 votes) from "leaning" to "solid" in support of Obama, at a 9% margin. Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania (41 votes total) have all changed from "toss-up" to "leaning" in favor of Obama, with leads ranging from 5-7.9%. Meanwhile, Colorado (9 votes) has slipped from "leaning" in favor of Obama to "toss-up", although the Democratic ticket still has a 4.4% lead. Of RCP's "toss-up" states in general, McCain leads only two of them, Indiana (11 votes, 2.2%) and Missouri (11 votes, 1.7%). Obama has an edge in Ohio (20, 2.0%), Florida (27, 3.0%), Nevada (5, <1%), New Hampshire (4, 1.3%), Virginia (13, 2.4%), North Carolina (15, <1%), Colorado, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Washington (11, 6%), New Mexico (5, 7.8%), New Jersey (15, 8.6%), Oregon, Iowa (7, 9.5%), and Maine (4, 7.6%). McCain has an excellent chance at taking North Carolina and Nevada; the former Michigan resources can help him, especially if Palin performed well enough in those voters' minds to counteract the collapse of confidence taking place within her own party—both states voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004. Still, though, the Republican ticket is only "solid" by RCP's measure in most of the South, Arizona, and Montana. McCain and Palin have a lot of work to do over the next month, and tonight's debate simply wasn't enough to turn the tide. At best, it seems, Palin will have slowed or stopped the decline. I admit that, when we look back at this election, two points of analysis will intrigue me. One was McCain's appearance on Leno, when he officially beat the POW dead horse into the ground. The other, of course, is this debate. Things have seemed to go poorly for McCain of late, and as near as I can tell, it started with the Leno episode. Perhaps Palin at least helped get the rubber back on the road for the "Straight Talk Express". We'll have to see what comes, though, and then we can take some time figuring out what happened. ____________________ Notes: "RealClearPolitics Electoral College". RealClearPoliticss.com. Accessed October 3, 2008. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/
Nice report, it sums it up pretty well. Biden certainly should have explained why they should talk to leaders before conditions are met. I honestly don't see how it could help to do it the other way around.
I think you overestimate the capacity to think of the kind of "Joe Sixpack" and "Hockey Mum" that she is targeting
It's truly sad to see that so many have done precisely as they were instructed to do via propaganda from the media. Media: "Repeat after me: "Sarah Palin doesn't know anything and she's pretty stupid" Gullible people: "Uh, ermm, "Palin is so stupid. Not as bad as usual, but pretty stupid" "Uh...or was it "Palin is pretty but so stupid". "I don't know anything specific about her, but the media is right, so she must be stupid". Media: "Governor Palin doesn't have any foreign relations experience" Gullible people: "Yeah, right, Palin is so stupid. She doesn't even know anything about other countries" Media: "Repeat after me: "Sarah Palin doesn't know anything and she's pretty stupid" "Repeat after me: "Sarah Palin doesn't know anything and she's pretty stupid" "Repeat after me: "Sarah Palin doesn't know anything and she's pretty stupid" "Repeat after me: "Sarah Palin doesn't know anything and she's pretty stupid"... Gullible people: "Damn but that women is stupid. Everyone knows it! Just listen to the TV!" Me: Hopefully enough informed adults will show up to vote and keep Barrack Hussein Obama AND his Kookran out of the Oval office. The White House is not the place to start learning how to lead the country. Barrack Hussein Obama has no practical experience. NONE. He doesn't know how to even start doing the job he's applying for. His platform is an empty, meaningless jumble of bullshit that he knows the gullible, naive, pie-in-the-sky youngsters with no experience of their own, will suck up like starving idiots. If Barrack Hussein Obama is elected to the office of POTUS, the country will be run by his advisers while they jerk his strings around and make him dance for four, very long years of lotteries where every ticket wins money. The USA is made of strong stuff. If Barrack Hussein Obama is elected POTUS, we'll even survive that. If he is, get ready to work half your work hours for the Government. You'll be paying that much. The debate as a whole was shallow. Anyone who makes any decisions about who should run the USA based on that mirage of meaning is a fool. The pap that's being blindly repeated by the very ignorant, glazed eyed parrots is nothing more than an air sandwich for starving morons. Vote for Barrack and get change! EXACTLY WHAT CHANGE? It's odd that that question has yet to be answered by anyone in his circus of clowns and rote babbling zombies.
It should be noted that Gwen Ifill did a superlative job as moderator. Anybody who ranted about her inability to be fair-minded on the subject was dead wrong. ~String
Hopefully enough informed adults will show up to vote and keep Sarah Palin AND her Kooky diplomacy out of the Oval office. The White House is not the place to start learning how to lead the country (which she has a significant chance of doing). Sarah Palin has no practical experience. She doesn't know how to begin doing the job she's applying for. Her platform is an empty, meaningless collection of homilies, that she knows the gullible and naive will suck up like the Republican idiots they are. ..etc
Yes. Watched, recorded, re-watched. Explain in detail why you asked. Did you understand what it was you were watching?
