OT: Elections/Politics thread, part 4
Moderators: Bill_Abner, ScoopBrady
I haven't watched it yet past the first 30 minutes yetGTHobbes wrote:Wow...I'm just checking in almost an hour and a half after the debate ended, and there's almost no comments here. I'm really surprised.
I opted to watch the Cubs throw up all over themselves...
XBL Gamertag: RobVarak
"Ok I'm an elitist, but I have a healthy respect for people who don't measure up." --Aaron Sorkin
"Ok I'm an elitist, but I have a healthy respect for people who don't measure up." --Aaron Sorkin
just some brief thoughts from the debate (I've got to get some sleep:))
Palin answered maybe 2 or 3 of the 12 or so questions. This wasn't a debate. It was Palin with a well rehearsed set of speeches. She would sometimes give a one sentence answer and then go straight back to her notes and totally avoid answering the question. She appeared to be constantly reading from her notes.
The moderator did a terrible job. She hardly ever kept them on point and get an answer to her questions. She let Palin ramble about whatever she choose and seemed to have no control over the proceedings. If you are grading the debate based on who answered the questions best, than Biden wins in a landslide. Also, the questions were all easily anticipated and there were no surprises.
Palin clearly had an agenda and she stuck to it....play up the "folk-sy" stuff everyone loved in the convention. Throw in a few "gosh darns" and "By Golly's"...wink a lot into the camera...and try be as cute as a button.
I thought Biden did a great job of driving home his point of how McCain is offering no big changes from the Bush Admin on the major issues that are on the table. He did it politely without being brash or cocky. My only complaint is that he didn't point out every time Palin refused to address the moderator's question.
I also thought Palin did what she was coached to do and she avoided those embarrassing moments we saw with Couric. The open nature of these topics and the reluctance of the moderator to intervene really assisted her. I really thought Palin did as well as she could have been expected to and the same could be said of Biden.
In the end, I think this debate won't change much, although the post debate focus groups of swing voters really favored Biden over Palin during the comments on the Iraq War. Palin and McCain's insistence on staying in Iraq until "WE WIN" is hurting them. The American public isn't too excited anymore about "winning", when winning only means a stable democracy in Iraq. That pales in comparison to the problems we now have at home. If we couldn't achieve this in over 5 years, then how much longer? I don't think we are willing to accept an open-ended policy anymore.
Bottom line is each side helped make their case and I don't think either side hurt their ticket. Palin may have benefited the most tonite, because many were expecting more "deer in headlights" moments. Turns out the moderator you all were so worried about ended up being her best friend tonite. Will be interesting to see how or if this debate changes anything in the polls.
p.s. can't wait to see the fact checking on this one
Palin answered maybe 2 or 3 of the 12 or so questions. This wasn't a debate. It was Palin with a well rehearsed set of speeches. She would sometimes give a one sentence answer and then go straight back to her notes and totally avoid answering the question. She appeared to be constantly reading from her notes.
The moderator did a terrible job. She hardly ever kept them on point and get an answer to her questions. She let Palin ramble about whatever she choose and seemed to have no control over the proceedings. If you are grading the debate based on who answered the questions best, than Biden wins in a landslide. Also, the questions were all easily anticipated and there were no surprises.
Palin clearly had an agenda and she stuck to it....play up the "folk-sy" stuff everyone loved in the convention. Throw in a few "gosh darns" and "By Golly's"...wink a lot into the camera...and try be as cute as a button.
I thought Biden did a great job of driving home his point of how McCain is offering no big changes from the Bush Admin on the major issues that are on the table. He did it politely without being brash or cocky. My only complaint is that he didn't point out every time Palin refused to address the moderator's question.
I also thought Palin did what she was coached to do and she avoided those embarrassing moments we saw with Couric. The open nature of these topics and the reluctance of the moderator to intervene really assisted her. I really thought Palin did as well as she could have been expected to and the same could be said of Biden.
In the end, I think this debate won't change much, although the post debate focus groups of swing voters really favored Biden over Palin during the comments on the Iraq War. Palin and McCain's insistence on staying in Iraq until "WE WIN" is hurting them. The American public isn't too excited anymore about "winning", when winning only means a stable democracy in Iraq. That pales in comparison to the problems we now have at home. If we couldn't achieve this in over 5 years, then how much longer? I don't think we are willing to accept an open-ended policy anymore.
Bottom line is each side helped make their case and I don't think either side hurt their ticket. Palin may have benefited the most tonite, because many were expecting more "deer in headlights" moments. Turns out the moderator you all were so worried about ended up being her best friend tonite. Will be interesting to see how or if this debate changes anything in the polls.
p.s. can't wait to see the fact checking on this one
Last edited by JackB1 on Fri Oct 03, 2008 1:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Excellent analysis, JackB1. I completely agree.JackB1 wrote:just some brief thoughts from the debate (I've got to get some sleep:))
Palin answered maybe 2 or 3 of the 12 or so questions. This wasn't a debate. It was Palin with a well rehearsed set of speeches. She would sometimes give a one sentence answer and then go straight back to her notes and totally avoid answering the question. She appeared to be constantly reading from her notes.
The moderator did a terrible job. She hardly ever kept them on point and get an answer to her questions. She let Palin ramble about whatever she choose and seemed to have no control over the proceedings. If you are grading the debate based on who answered the questions best, than Biden wins in a landslide. Also, the questions were all easily anticipated and there were no surprises.
Palin clearly had an agenda and she stuck to it....play up the "folk-sy" stuff everyone loved in the convention. Throw in a few "gosh darns" and "By Golly's"...wink a lot into the camera...and try be as cute as a button.
I thought Biden did a great job of driving home his point of how McCain is offering no big changes from the Bush Admin on the major issues that are on the table. He did it politely without being brash or cocky. My only complaint is that he didn't point out every time Palin refused to address the moderator's question.
I also thought Palin did what she was coached to do and she avoided those embarrassing moments we saw with Couric. The open nature of these topics and the reluctance of the moderator to intervene really assisted her. I really thought Palin did as well as she could have been expected to and the same could be said of Biden.
In the end, I think this debate won't change much, although the post debate focus groups of swing voters really favored Biden over Palin during the comments on the Iraq War. Palin and McCain's insistence on staying in Iraq until "WE WIN" is hurting them. The American public isn't too excited anymore about "winning", when winning only means a stable democracy in Iraq. That pales in comparison to the problems we now have at home. If we couldn't achieve this in over 5 years, then how much longer? I don't think we are willing to accept an open-ended policy anymore.
Bottom line is each side helped make their case and I don't think either side hurt their ticket. Palin may have benefited the most tonite, because many were expecting more "deer in headlights" moments. Turns out the moderator you all were so worried about ended up being her best friend tonite. Will be interesting to see how or if this debate changes anything in the polls.
p.s. can't wait to see the fact checking on this one
As a Cards fan, I was hoping the Cubs were going to give a better showing for the NL central...but getting back on topic, I'll look forward to hearing your thoughts on the debate after you get finished watching.RobVarak wrote:I haven't watched it yet past the first 30 minutes yetGTHobbes wrote:Wow...I'm just checking in almost an hour and a half after the debate ended, and there's almost no comments here. I'm really surprised.
I opted to watch the Cubs throw up all over themselves...
Watching this one, particularly in conjunction with the first McCain-Obama debate, left me with just the opposite reaction of BK. I think these have both been spirited and thorough debates, well delivered. As I said earlier, I think there has been the usual quota of facticide, but on the whole the debates have been doing their job.
My short take is that I think on a micro level, that is just in terms of the way they exchanged views on the discreet issues, it was a draw. I agree with Mr. Hobbes that Biden's intelligence is formidable, but I think Palin was unflappable under attack and often gave back as good as she got. Where Biden sounded odd ("I love John") or downright wacky ("Home Depot, where I spend a lot of time...") when trying to be accessible, Palin was effortless and charming doing so. She was awkward in carrying the discussion away from the question to what she wanted to talk about, which all candidates do, but which requires a bit of verbal finesse that she clearly lacks. But hey, she was upfront about it
In many ways it was exactly what you'd expect when a law professor debates a governor. He was phlegmatic and theoretical, she was direct and practical.
On the macro level, i.e., what does this do to the campaign on the whole, I think it helps McCain convince some who may have been scared by the shakey recent performances by Palin. I'm sure that Biden fired up his base, I don't know if too many undecideds would be persuaded by his scholarly approach. Maybe they will be, but he spent a lot of time name-checking Senators, which I would think wouldn't play well. He was sympathetic near the end for sure, particularly to someone who has los a child, but that's the only time that I felt he really connected on a personal level with the viewers.
My overwhelming impression was that neither campaign re-tooled at all after the first debate though. They both tried scoring all the same points on all the same issues. I know that I posted the other day about how rigid presidential campaigns are, but that was pretty aggravating.
I think that Palin missed a fantastic chance to help turn the election from a Bush referendum to an Obama referendum though. That would have been a game changer and she just barely missed. She had a great chance after her terrific, "Say it ain't so, Joe" moment, but she chose to play small ball by going on to talk about education. She should've said that Biden was talking about Bush and the past again, so let's turn to talk about Obama and McCain and what Obama's "change" really means.
We can quibble about some of the details, policy disagreements and factual problems, but that's my quick take.
Oh, one quick one since we're spending so much time talking about Biden's law prof bona fides. He screwed up the anti-Cheney bile with about 3 different misstatements about the Constitutional role of the VP.
My short take is that I think on a micro level, that is just in terms of the way they exchanged views on the discreet issues, it was a draw. I agree with Mr. Hobbes that Biden's intelligence is formidable, but I think Palin was unflappable under attack and often gave back as good as she got. Where Biden sounded odd ("I love John") or downright wacky ("Home Depot, where I spend a lot of time...") when trying to be accessible, Palin was effortless and charming doing so. She was awkward in carrying the discussion away from the question to what she wanted to talk about, which all candidates do, but which requires a bit of verbal finesse that she clearly lacks. But hey, she was upfront about it
In many ways it was exactly what you'd expect when a law professor debates a governor. He was phlegmatic and theoretical, she was direct and practical.
On the macro level, i.e., what does this do to the campaign on the whole, I think it helps McCain convince some who may have been scared by the shakey recent performances by Palin. I'm sure that Biden fired up his base, I don't know if too many undecideds would be persuaded by his scholarly approach. Maybe they will be, but he spent a lot of time name-checking Senators, which I would think wouldn't play well. He was sympathetic near the end for sure, particularly to someone who has los a child, but that's the only time that I felt he really connected on a personal level with the viewers.
My overwhelming impression was that neither campaign re-tooled at all after the first debate though. They both tried scoring all the same points on all the same issues. I know that I posted the other day about how rigid presidential campaigns are, but that was pretty aggravating.
I think that Palin missed a fantastic chance to help turn the election from a Bush referendum to an Obama referendum though. That would have been a game changer and she just barely missed. She had a great chance after her terrific, "Say it ain't so, Joe" moment, but she chose to play small ball by going on to talk about education. She should've said that Biden was talking about Bush and the past again, so let's turn to talk about Obama and McCain and what Obama's "change" really means.
We can quibble about some of the details, policy disagreements and factual problems, but that's my quick take.
Oh, one quick one since we're spending so much time talking about Biden's law prof bona fides. He screwed up the anti-Cheney bile with about 3 different misstatements about the Constitutional role of the VP.
Last edited by RobVarak on Fri Oct 03, 2008 2:19 am, edited 2 times in total.
XBL Gamertag: RobVarak
"Ok I'm an elitist, but I have a healthy respect for people who don't measure up." --Aaron Sorkin
"Ok I'm an elitist, but I have a healthy respect for people who don't measure up." --Aaron Sorkin
Excellent analysis Jack. Really couldn't have said it any better.JackB1 wrote:just some brief thoughts from the debate (I've got to get some sleep:))
Palin answered maybe 2 or 3 of the 12 or so questions. This wasn't a debate. It was Palin with a well rehearsed set of speeches. She would sometimes give a one sentence answer and then go straight back to her notes and totally avoid answering the question. She appeared to be constantly reading from her notes.
The moderator did a terrible job. She hardly ever kept them on point and get an answer to her questions. She let Palin ramble about whatever she choose and seemed to have no control over the proceedings. If you are grading the debate based on who answered the questions best, than Biden wins in a landslide. Also, the questions were all easily anticipated and there were no surprises.
Palin clearly had an agenda and she stuck to it....play up the "folk-sy" stuff everyone loved in the convention. Throw in a few "gosh darns" and "By Golly's"...wink a lot into the camera...and try be as cute as a button.
I thought Biden did a great job of driving home his point of how McCain is offering no big changes from the Bush Admin on the major issues that are on the table. He did it politely without being brash or cocky. My only complaint is that he didn't point out every time Palin refused to address the moderator's question.
I also thought Palin did what she was coached to do and she avoided those embarrassing moments we saw with Couric. The open nature of these topics and the reluctance of the moderator to intervene really assisted her. I really thought Palin did as well as she could have been expected to and the same could be said of Biden.
In the end, I think this debate won't change much, although the post debate focus groups of swing voters really favored Biden over Palin during the comments on the Iraq War. Palin and McCain's insistence on staying in Iraq until "WE WIN" is hurting them. The American public isn't too excited anymore about "winning", when winning only means a stable democracy in Iraq. That pales in comparison to the problems we now have at home. If we couldn't achieve this in over 5 years, then how much longer? I don't think we are willing to accept an open-ended policy anymore.
Bottom line is each side helped make their case and I don't think either side hurt their ticket. Palin may have benefited the most tonite, because many were expecting more "deer in headlights" moments. Turns out the moderator you all were so worried about ended up being her best friend tonite. Will be interesting to see how or if this debate changes anything in the polls.
p.s. can't wait to see the fact checking on this one
-
FatPitcher
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 1068
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 3:00 am
I think Palin proved a lot of doubters wrong and did as well as anyone could expect. I think her performance will go over better with voters than pundits.
I think Biden did a good job himself, although judging by the reactions of my liberal SF bay area friends watching the debate, the Bush-McCain angle has been overplayed at this point. And I think the moderator fuss turned out to be way overblown.
It didn't change my mind about anything: I still don't think Palin is qualified to be president, and I still wish the Dem ticket had Biden at the top rather than Obama--as Biden clearly wishes, too.
I think Biden did a good job himself, although judging by the reactions of my liberal SF bay area friends watching the debate, the Bush-McCain angle has been overplayed at this point. And I think the moderator fuss turned out to be way overblown.
It didn't change my mind about anything: I still don't think Palin is qualified to be president, and I still wish the Dem ticket had Biden at the top rather than Obama--as Biden clearly wishes, too.
-
MACTEPsporta
- Benchwarmer
- Posts: 319
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:00 am
This is, probably, as well as Palin is able to hold a debate, and it doesn't bode well for the campaign, that Biden will be viewed as a winner on this one.
I think a lot of people who support McCain exhaled with relief when the debate was over. Her main objective was not to f*** up, and she accomplished that. Not knowing the commanding general in Afghanistan, as well as her fumbled response on Pakinstan and Iran will get some ciruclation in the media for a day or two, but nothing disastrous had occured. I think, by this point, public's formed its opinion about Palin, and a certain lack of knowledge is almost assumed.
She has learned a lot in the last few weeks, if only someone could tell her that Iran isn't trying to acquire "nucular" weapons, and the country her son is in right now, is not pronounced "I-wreck".
Biden decided to go the safe route. He didn't attack her, and instead kept hammering on McCain. Smart and safe. Don't attack her directly, don't appear mean or intimidating. In order to defend McCain Palin would have to put away the index cards and improvise, thus increasing a chance of a major gaffe, and if she wouldn't bite he would have a cart blanche in attacking her principal. Win-win.
I do think Biden was a little too careful. I think he needed to ask her some direct qustions, and possibly correct her once or twice. At the end of the debate Palin, unguardedly, said that she would like to have more debates of this nature. I guess she was just happy it was over. I would have loved for Biden to jump on that and offer to have 2 or 3 more. Aside from a few heart attacks in the McCain camp, it would have really made my day. Not to mention everyone in the media.
I think a lot of people who support McCain exhaled with relief when the debate was over. Her main objective was not to f*** up, and she accomplished that. Not knowing the commanding general in Afghanistan, as well as her fumbled response on Pakinstan and Iran will get some ciruclation in the media for a day or two, but nothing disastrous had occured. I think, by this point, public's formed its opinion about Palin, and a certain lack of knowledge is almost assumed.
She has learned a lot in the last few weeks, if only someone could tell her that Iran isn't trying to acquire "nucular" weapons, and the country her son is in right now, is not pronounced "I-wreck".
Biden decided to go the safe route. He didn't attack her, and instead kept hammering on McCain. Smart and safe. Don't attack her directly, don't appear mean or intimidating. In order to defend McCain Palin would have to put away the index cards and improvise, thus increasing a chance of a major gaffe, and if she wouldn't bite he would have a cart blanche in attacking her principal. Win-win.
I do think Biden was a little too careful. I think he needed to ask her some direct qustions, and possibly correct her once or twice. At the end of the debate Palin, unguardedly, said that she would like to have more debates of this nature. I guess she was just happy it was over. I would have loved for Biden to jump on that and offer to have 2 or 3 more. Aside from a few heart attacks in the McCain camp, it would have really made my day. Not to mention everyone in the media.
"Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite."
-- John K. Galbraith
-- John K. Galbraith
Simple or plain spoken should never be accompanied with a simple mind. Palin has a simple mind. After 8 years of someone with that same attitude -- it scares me.RobVarak wrote: In many ways it was exactly what you'd expect when a law professor debates a governor. He was phlegmatic and theoretical, she was direct and practical.
Unless John McCain wins, we won't see Sarah Palin again. She'll probably run for Senate in AK and be the lightening rod for the base but from now to the election, we won't see her.
But like I said, with the bar set in the gutter for Palin. When not being incompetent means you do well in a debate, what does that say about the candidate? We are rewarding mediocrity and simple-mindedness.
[url=http://sensiblecoasters.wordpress.com/][b]Sensible Coasters - A critique of sports games, reviews, gaming sites and news. Questionably Proofread![/b][/url]
-
FatPitcher
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 1068
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 3:00 am
She did well no matter how you frame it, exceptionally well when you consider how long she's been on the national stage.JRod wrote:Simple or plain spoken should never be accompanied with a simple mind. Palin has a simple mind. After 8 years of someone with that same attitude -- it scares me.RobVarak wrote: In many ways it was exactly what you'd expect when a law professor debates a governor. He was phlegmatic and theoretical, she was direct and practical.
Unless John McCain wins, we won't see Sarah Palin again. She'll probably run for Senate in AK and be the lightening rod for the base but from now to the election, we won't see her.
So tempting...JRod wrote:We are rewarding mediocrity and simple-mindedness.
-
pk500
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 33903
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Syracuse, N.Y.
- Contact:
Very interesting debate, with mixed results for Palin.
Palin did an INCREDIBLE job of framing the agenda and tone of the debate since she maybe directly answered two of Ifill's questions. JackB1 is right: It was amazing how many times Palin failed to answer the question and instead veered to another topic with which she could hammer home her basic set of talking points.
I also agree with JackB1 that Ifill was very ineffective as a moderator because she let Palin get away with those duck-and-dodge tactics. Hell, Palin even admitted early in the debate that she wasn't going to answer the questions in a fashion that Ifill wanted and probably would switch to other topics, and Ifill let her get away with it instead of pressing her to answer questions directly.
When telling why she wouldn't answer some questions directly, Palin's claim that she was going to "talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record" was her Ralph Parker-Ovaltine secret decoder ring way of saying "I'm going to safely stick to my preset talking points so I don't fall on my face." Very shrewd move, and surprisingly Biden and Ifill let her get away with it.
Palin also offered few specifics in many of her answers, instead relying on the same slogans -- "mavericks," "change," etc. -- that have worked well for her on the stump.
So in pure debate terms, I thought she was quite weak. But as others have said, this ended up being a duel of interwoven stump speeches instead of a pure debate. So Palin ended up looking solid to "Joe Sixpack" because she never stumbled and pretty much stayed on point with her limited deck of talking point cards.
Biden did himself no favors by being too tame, just as I predicted. He could have turned this into a pure debate by directly challenging Palin more often but chose to back off.
Again, this was a Battle of the Network Stump Speeches and Campaign Talking Points instead of a pure debate. It was a perfect framework for Palin, who came out looking much better than her performance warranted.
Take care,
PK
Palin did an INCREDIBLE job of framing the agenda and tone of the debate since she maybe directly answered two of Ifill's questions. JackB1 is right: It was amazing how many times Palin failed to answer the question and instead veered to another topic with which she could hammer home her basic set of talking points.
I also agree with JackB1 that Ifill was very ineffective as a moderator because she let Palin get away with those duck-and-dodge tactics. Hell, Palin even admitted early in the debate that she wasn't going to answer the questions in a fashion that Ifill wanted and probably would switch to other topics, and Ifill let her get away with it instead of pressing her to answer questions directly.
When telling why she wouldn't answer some questions directly, Palin's claim that she was going to "talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record" was her Ralph Parker-Ovaltine secret decoder ring way of saying "I'm going to safely stick to my preset talking points so I don't fall on my face." Very shrewd move, and surprisingly Biden and Ifill let her get away with it.
Palin also offered few specifics in many of her answers, instead relying on the same slogans -- "mavericks," "change," etc. -- that have worked well for her on the stump.
So in pure debate terms, I thought she was quite weak. But as others have said, this ended up being a duel of interwoven stump speeches instead of a pure debate. So Palin ended up looking solid to "Joe Sixpack" because she never stumbled and pretty much stayed on point with her limited deck of talking point cards.
Biden did himself no favors by being too tame, just as I predicted. He could have turned this into a pure debate by directly challenging Palin more often but chose to back off.
Again, this was a Battle of the Network Stump Speeches and Campaign Talking Points instead of a pure debate. It was a perfect framework for Palin, who came out looking much better than her performance warranted.
Take care,
PK
Last edited by pk500 on Fri Oct 03, 2008 4:11 am, edited 3 times in total.
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
XBL Gamertag: pk4425
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
XBL Gamertag: pk4425
-
pk500
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 33903
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Syracuse, N.Y.
- Contact:
As usual, I thought Chuck Todd's analysis was spot-on:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/ ... 84464.aspx
Take care,
PK
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/ ... 84464.aspx
Take care,
PK
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
XBL Gamertag: pk4425
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
XBL Gamertag: pk4425
They need to follow Sweden and teach kids that condoms go on penises, not cucumbers.Rodster wrote:It's idiocy to me. Our educational system is more keen on teaching our kids how to put a condom on a cucumber and why Timmy has two daddy's.
Then the American teen pregnancy rate might come down a little. NZ's not too far behind though.http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articl ... id=1123322
It's the actual term for Bosnian Muslims (although I thought the same thing when I heard it as well).RobVarak wrote:Bosniacs?
That's not even a gaffe, just a slip of the tongue...but it's funny as hell. I think that should be the new moniker!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosniaks
Forum moderation: DEFCON 2
-
matthewk
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 3324
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 3:00 am
- Location: Wisconsin
- Contact:
I think they both did a fine job, but I just don't believe a lot of what Biden says. The "Home Depot, where I spend a lot of time" was a lame attempt to sound middle class, and I don't buy it. He comes off as a typical politican to me. He'll say anything you want to hear to your face, but you can't rely on him once he's out of your sight.
Both had factual errors or made stretches, but with Biden's 30+ years in Washington you'd think he would have been better at it. As it stood, I think it was a draw as far as factual accuracy goes.
I did get tired of Palin's constant "McCain is maverick, blah, blah ,blah" lines. She repeated that similar line too many times. I was impressed that she gave Biden as good as she got. She missed a few openings Biden gave her, like on the $4 billion break to oil companies comment and the windfall profits tax issue. Take out the canned cheerleading lines and she still had a lot of good things to say.
How many times did Biden say "George Bush's..." in that one response? I am so sick of the McCain = Bush attack. Palin did ok knocking those down, but she could have done more.
After last night I am comfortable with Palin as VP. In it's simplist terms, I like her more than either Obama or Biden and I trust her more than either one as well.
Both had factual errors or made stretches, but with Biden's 30+ years in Washington you'd think he would have been better at it. As it stood, I think it was a draw as far as factual accuracy goes.
I did get tired of Palin's constant "McCain is maverick, blah, blah ,blah" lines. She repeated that similar line too many times. I was impressed that she gave Biden as good as she got. She missed a few openings Biden gave her, like on the $4 billion break to oil companies comment and the windfall profits tax issue. Take out the canned cheerleading lines and she still had a lot of good things to say.
How many times did Biden say "George Bush's..." in that one response? I am so sick of the McCain = Bush attack. Palin did ok knocking those down, but she could have done more.
After last night I am comfortable with Palin as VP. In it's simplist terms, I like her more than either Obama or Biden and I trust her more than either one as well.
-Matt
I very much agree with all of this. As someone who likes politicians who answer the questions that are posed to them,(yes, I know...) I was quite annoyed at Palin early and often.pk500 wrote:Very interesting debate, with mixed results for Palin.
Palin did an INCREDIBLE job of framing the agenda and tone of the debate since she maybe directly answered two of Ifill's questions. JackB1 is right: It was amazing how many times Palin failed to answer the question and instead veered to another topic with which she could hammer home her basic set of talking points.
I also agree with JackB1 that Ifill was very ineffective as a moderator because she let Palin get away with those duck-and-dodge tactics. Hell, Palin even admitted early in the debate that she wasn't going to answer the questions in a fashion that Ifill wanted and probably would switch to other topics, and Ifill let her get away with it instead of pressing her to answer questions directly.
When telling why she wouldn't answer some questions directly, Palin's claim that she was going to "talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record" was her Ralph Parker-Ovaltine secret decoder ring way of saying "I'm going to safely stick to my preset talking points so I don't fall on my face." Very shrewd move, and surprisingly Biden and Ifill let her get away with it.
Palin also offered few specifics in many of her answers, instead relying on the same slogans -- "mavericks," "change," etc. -- that have worked well for her on the stump.
So in pure debate terms, I thought she was quite weak.
Again, I thought Lehrer and his fellow heads on PBS had the best post-coverage, with many people making salient observations. But I disagree with many of them there, and some of you here, that think this was even close to being a 'tie.' I think Biden won quite handily.
But I also think that in the grand scheme of things, despite the build-up, this debate will pretty much mean nothing.
Good analysis Paul. I can't argue with anything you said. Palin appealed to "Joe Six Pack", but how she fairs with the swing voters remains to be seen. If all that is required of a VP is folksy-charm and the ability to look like a news anchor, than why don't we put Kelly Ripa (spel?) in there? She did a good job "cramming for her exam", but will that be good enough to be #2 in the oval office?pk500 wrote:Very interesting debate, with mixed results for Palin.
Palin did an INCREDIBLE job of framing the agenda and tone of the debate since she maybe directly answered two of Ifill's questions. JackB1 is right: It was amazing how many times Palin failed to answer the question and instead veered to another topic with which she could hammer home her basic set of talking points.
-
pk500
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 33903
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Syracuse, N.Y.
- Contact:
Exactly. That was about as sincere as John Kerry, NASCAR fan.matthewk wrote:I think they both did a fine job, but I just don't believe a lot of what Biden says. The "Home Depot, where I spend a lot of time" was a lame attempt to sound middle class, and I don't buy it. He comes off as a typical politican to me. He'll say anything you want to hear to your face, but you can't rely on him once he's out of your sight.
Take care,
PK
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
XBL Gamertag: pk4425
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
XBL Gamertag: pk4425
-
pk500
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 33903
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Syracuse, N.Y.
- Contact:
I'm with BK. I've never voted Republican, but I was leaning McCain earlier this year. Now I'm not sure.Teal wrote:Where are you getting the impression that there's some theocracy at work in the McCain/Palin ticket, bk? I certainly don't see it.
There probably isn't an overt theocracy at work in the McCain camp. But McCain definitely has moved to the right -- the selection of Palin is an obvious example -- to pander to the far right wing of the party, which is comprised mainly of evangelicals.
Johnny Mac is nowhere near the "maverick" he was eight years ago, so I'm really tiring of that moniker being tossed about like Hershey bars to children during the French liberation in 1944.
Take care,
PK
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
XBL Gamertag: pk4425
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
XBL Gamertag: pk4425
Agree there. Biden just looked swarmy last night. Just the aura Palin puts off seems like she has more integrity and truthfulness than Obama, McCain, and Biden combined.matthewk wrote:After last night I am comfortable with Palin as VP. In it's simplist terms, I like her more than either Obama or Biden and I trust her more than either one as well.
Last night could have been an interesting debate if the bailout plan was dug into more. I was waiting for the issue of earmarks to come up. It would have been interesting for Palin to try to defend McCain's vote in the context of the debate with Obama where he claimed he would "go line by line with my pen and strike out wasteful earmarks."