Biden v. Palin: St. Louis Ribbing?

So who won? (Wait 'til [i]after[/i] the debate to vote, please.)

  • Biden

    Votes: 21 51.2%

  • Palin

    Votes: 10 24.4%

  • Neither

    Votes: 8 19.5%

  • Other (?!)

    Votes: 2 4.9%
  • Total voters
    41
  • Poll closed .
Tiassa

Tiassa

Let us not launch the boat ...
Valued Senior Member
Let's start this off with a prediction. David Horsey suggests,

Though Democrats would love to see Sarah Palin recap some of the more discombobulated moments from her interview with Katie Couric or channel Tina Fey's devastating impersonation from Saturday Night Live, I expect her to perform reasonably well in Thursday's "debate" with Joe Biden.

She's been training for it like an American Idol contestant and, given that she is not dumb, just ignorant of most aspects of national policy, Palin should be able to remember enough of what's been drilled into her brain to fill the two minutes that are being allotted for each answer. Sure, to policy experts and smartypants media types her responses are bound to sound shallow and memorized, but to the common voter she'll seem just fine. Most folks don't demand much -- just look good, show confidence and don't let your mind go blank in front of the TV cameras. I'll be surprised if Palin can't handle that much.

(Horsey)
Click to expand...

In the aftermath of the first presidential debate, commentators noted that all Barack Obama had to do in order to be successful was hold his ground in the foreign policy arena, which is considered McCain's stomping ground. And the general verdict was that the Democratic nominee did that at the very least.

Governor Palin faces a similar standard, albeit according to a slightly lower bar. In the first place, this is a vice-presidential debate. To the other, of course, she is Sarah Palin. If, as Horsey suggests, Palin is able to fill the two minutes for her general responses without any catastrophes, it may well be that her performance will be scored as a resounding success. For his part, Senator Biden must simply keep himself in check and make sure he does not come off as thrashing Palin too hard. American sympathies are a curious thing; as the sad tale of the Bush administration reminds, if you conduct yourself believably according to a standard of unbelievable stupidity, the People will rally around you.

Horsey also asserts that, "Probably the only way the event could have a big impact would be if Palin wanders off script and starts babbling nonsense as she did with Couric". I disagree. The McCain/Palin ticket is suffering in the public arena right now, experiencing declines in trust and prestige ranging from the discouraging to downright harrowing. Indeed, a poor performance by Palin could spin the campaign into freefall, but an adequate showing—here defined as the failure to thoroughly embarrass herself—could do much to stabilize waning confidence among swing voters and conservative faithful alike.

And this is the most likely scenario. Indeed, I agree with Horsey when he asks, "She can't be that bad, can she?

I mean, really, if she is that stupid and incompetent, it only makes us wonder all the more how she ended up as the nominee.
____________________

Notes:

Horsey, David. "Prediction: Palin will do well". Drawing Power. October 1, 2008. http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/davidhorsey/archives/150269.asp
 
Expectations of Palin are so low that if she doesn't say "Well, duh, I don't know" in answer to a question, she will perform better than expected.

Many unremarkable people achieve high office, and my observation is that what they lack in intelligence and knowledge, they make up for in native cunning and an intuitive grasp of what is best to do.

They sometimes do a better job.
Sometimes.

The other, horrible possibility, is that she is actually intelligent and covering it under the "just a silly woman" subterfuge.
They do that you know, then they whack you.

I am really looking forward to this encounter.
 
Last edited:
Those of us who will not be watching this exercise in futility will be the winners. :cool:

That's why I don't need to wait until after the debate to vote. ;)
 
Last edited:
I'm hesitant about this "debate". The moderator has written a book about Obama already and said she will be relesing it next year when Obama is elected. How can there be non bias from her? This is but another "rigged" television set up for Obama.
 
Rehearsal

Many thanks to those of you who made that special effort to vote early. I knew I should have made the poll public.

At any rate, 23/6 reminds,

While most people will be watching Thursday's VP debate to find out whether Sarah Palin will start speaking in tongues, there's also the little matter of diarrhea-mouth hothead Joe Biden. The Obama camp is worried about the notoriously unpredictable Biden getting too aggressive (read: red-faced bellowing) while addressing Gov. Palin and losing the coveted "we hate people who aren't nice to the woefully underqualified" vote. To prepare, Joe has been rehearsing with MI Gov. Jennifer Granholm standing in for Sarah Palin.

(Powers)
Click to expand...

Just click the damn link. There's a great slideshow there.
____________________

Notes:

Powers, Bob. "Debate Training - Biden learns what makes girls cry (WITH HOT PICS!)". 23/6. October 1, 2008. http://www.236.com/news/2008/10/01/debate_training_biden_learns_w_1_9211.php
 
cosmictraveler said:
I'm hesitant about this "debate". The moderator has written a book about Obama already and said she will be relesing it next year when Obama is elected. How can there be non bias from her? This is but another "rigged" television set up for Obama.
Click to expand...

Is it a biased book?

Anyway, I am so looking forward to this debate. I don't care how prepared Palin is, you can't hide stupid.
 
spidergoat said:
Is it a biased book?
Click to expand...
Who knows, it' not out yet. But clearly someone planning to release a book on Obama on inauguration day would benefit if the person being inaugurated was Obama. That's called a conflict of interest.
Anyway, I am so looking forward to this debate. I don't care how prepared Palin is, you can't hide stupid.
Click to expand...
As am I.
 
spidergoat said:
Is it a biased book? .
Click to expand...


I really don't know since it hasn't been released as yet but it would seem she has put a positive spin about him from what I hear. Still, she should excue herself if she has financial gains to be made from her book about him.
 
Unless she asks both candidates the same question, I would think she might be biased.
 
Tiassa said:
Many thanks to those of you who made that special effort to vote early. I knew I should have made the poll public.
Click to expand...

I can reset the votes to zero, if you like, but I do believe it would prevent said individuals from voting again.

You like?

madanthonywayne said:
But clearly someone planning to release a book on Obama on inauguration day would benefit if the person being inaugurated was Obama. That's called a conflict of interest.
Click to expand...

Gwen Ifill is obviously a liberal, but being as such doesn't necessarily make her incapable of being an unbiased moderator. I consider her PBS shows to be one of the bellweather's of news & politics (NewsHour & Washington Week) and one of the few solid sources available on TV. Let's be real: she'll be on TV and it would obviously work heavily to the Republican's benefit if she did anything favoring the Democrats on national TV. In fact, I'm betting that's why they allowed her, so that anything she does -- intentional or not -- can be spun as bias, after the fact.

It's a pretty brilliant tactical move and plays far more to the Republican benefit than it does the Democrat, IMHO.

~String
 
string said:
It's a pretty brilliant tactical move and plays far more to the Republican benefit than it does the Democrat, IMHO.
Click to expand...
And oddly enough, having the likes of Gibson or Brokaw moderating the Pres debates doesn't cut the other way, and balance.

Bullshit doesn't balance unless reality does.

Which brings up the benefit of corrupting and employing the media to spread the meme of "liberal media bias", in the first place. Poisoning the oasis doesn't affect the camels and horses equally, muddied water is not as bad for carp as trout.
 
This grizzled veteran v pretty faced newcomer fight was played out before in 2004. Cheney v Edwards. It had mixed results.

story.vp.debate.jpg


Among committed voters, grizzled won.
Among uncommitted voters, pretty won.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/05/debate.main/index.html

There is a slight difference this time, in that male viewers were not fantasising that Edwards would take off his glasses, shake out his tied up hair, spray under his ears with a little scent etc

Or were they?
 
Last edited:
I think Sarah will win: there is just not much more that she could do to fall below the bench mark she has set for her self, I also think Joe's head will explode if Sarah does what she did in that now infamous interview, this will mean sarah would win by default, and this would also make for great ratings being the first time an american politician's head has exploded on TV in ooooh 21 years, 9 months and 8 days.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top