In the big show last night Palin did much better than anticipated -- but that was mainly because the moderator let her get away with flatly disregarding some questions and speaking off-subject numerous times. Biden did not comment about this, except a couple times, missing some golden opportunities, probably because of the strategy to avoid the risk of looking overbearing (he did on several occasions, anyway). Unlike the recent McCain-Obama gunfight, there was no vindictiveness or personal animosity.
Gwen Ifill was like a deer in the headlight beam because of criticism of her role due to her new book that involves Obama and has his name in the title. She did nothing to harm Palin's presentation or play up Biden.
Those who watched this debate as an alternative entertainment or who are more affected by style than substance will feel Palin won by a fairly large margin (say, 55-45), but the margin and win will be just the opposite among those who watched it to evaluate them as a potential president. Biden answered the questions much more comprehensively, sometimes with too much detail for the time alloted, but with less bluster than normal. Palin often gave little or no pointed response, resorting instead to a repetitive rah-rah-sis-boom-bah that became obvious toward the end as her gaff-avoidance tactic.
For what may be the biggest event in her political career Palin will be remembered for her blatant folksiness, pleasant grin and bear it approach and for dropping the letter "g" in words endin' in "ing"; Biden for his flat, narrow eyes, dry and academic manner and for not asking "Chuck" to stand up if he was there or informing us about FDR's use of television. Both will be remembered as being polite and even complimentary of the other on certain matters.
Overall, it was probably a draw, and certainly not a "game-changer" in terms of the outcome of the election.
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
23 comments:
Palin definitely side-stepped a few questions that Biden could have drilled her on but didn't. I guess you can chalk that up to her inexperience. As far as the undecided voters watching this, Palin came across as very likeable and eager to take the job and run with it, experienced or not. I'm a Palin supporter and think the debate was close to a draw. I think it was Biden's to lose and he didn't really shoot himself in the foot. Palin is charming and has the gusto to do this job well.
Say no to JoBama!!!
I know how hard that was for you, rabid republican that you are. Thanks for trying to maintain a somewhat level playing field here on your blog.
She didn't convince anyone who was watching the debate with me that she's ready to be president.
If McCain were younger, healthier, this might not be SUCH an issue. She exceeded most people's expectations (which were VERY LOW), but still fell short of being ready for the White House.
Please comment on her constant winking at the camera. Was he flirting or was she indicating that she had an inside joke? It was distracting, fersure, don't cha know?
Think, for a moment, if you will (can) what Palin had to overcome with all the msm's bias and undeserved criticism over the last few weeks. I daresay, no one among us could have done so well as she. What GUTS! And she appeared with a supreme confidence to be envied.
I was against McCain before I was for him!
Joe, I gotta say I really respect your willingness to show both sides! Most blogs don't do that. With that said, I think both sides did well for themselves last night, but I really think Biden showed a passion and a depth that Palin did not have. I think she can be a real player on the national scene eventually, but it scares me to think that she could very easily become president not 10 years from now, when she may be ready, but in February, should something happen to McCain! It is too tough a time to gamble with our future. I think McCain may get a slight bounce here just because she didn't do as terribly as she did in the Couric interviews, but it will be the last 2 presidential debates that matter.
I know it is petty, but her voice and all the "you betchas" and "tryin'" and "gettin'" and all that drove me nuts. Can you imagine a conversation with Putin:
"President Palin,could you please just ignore Georgia for a minute?"
"Oh, you betcha, Vlad! I'm kinda focused on Alabama right now anyways."
I think Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker summed it up best:
"I had the uneasy feeling throughout that I was witnessing a data dump from a very appealing droid."
If anyone found her to be Presidential, not answering direct questions, and regurgitating talking points all night, then I weep for my countrymen.
I would rather listen to her that Bush.
The debate was a CLEAR indication of qualifications. The expectations for Palin were so low that because she showed up and didn't freeze up was percieved as a positive. I assume most supporters of McCain/Palin had to be holding their collective breaths through the entire 90 minutes. Biden was Biden like him or not he knows the issues.
I Tivo'd it and probably would have watched the entire thing before bed last night except that I was very irritated by the first 20 minutes. I hope the rest gets better. The way I see it, you disrespect the moderator, your opponent and audience when you don't answer the questions. I really wanted to hear the answers to every question asked. I also wanted to hear a response to the claims each candidate made that seemed like they might not be accurate. I'm still undecided in this election, and was hoping to be dazzled by Sarah. She really disappointed me. Her mannerisms were a little irritating, especially the winking thing, as if by winking she was indicating that the opposing opinion was simply a joke to her. Very frustrating to watch. I enjoy her go get 'em attitude, but last night was a disappointment. (The first 20-30 minutes anyway.) If it strikes me, I'll come back here after I watch the rest and decide to eat my words. By the comments on here, I'm thinking I might not.
She's demanded to be grilled with questions but yet last night, and also with Katie Couric, she sidestepped them.
She just can't crack jokes or wink or sidestep REAL issues if she got VP.
As for last night... she made plenty of mistakes when she actually tried to answer the questions.
Examples -
PALIN: Said of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama: "94 times he voted to increase taxes or not support a tax reduction."
THE FACTS: The dubious count includes repetitive votes as well as votes to cut taxes for the middle class while raising them on the rich. An analysis by factcheck.org found that 23 of the votes were for measures that would have produced no tax increase at all, seven were in favor of measures that would have lowered taxes for many, 11 would have increased taxes on only those making more than $1 million a year.
PALIN: "Two years ago, remember, it was John McCain who pushed so hard with the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reform measures. He sounded that warning bell."
THE FACTS: Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska led an effort in 2005 to tighten regulation on the mortgage underwriters — McCain joined as a co-sponsor a year later. The legislation was never taken up by the full Senate, then under Republican control.
PALIN: Claimed she has taken on the oil industry as Alaska governor.
THE FACTS: Palin pushed to impose a windfall profits tax on oil companies and distributed the proceeds to the state's citizens to offset rising energy costs. However, she has also sided with the industry on a number of issues. She sued the Interior Department over its designation of polar bears as an endangered species. That puts her on the same side as the American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry's chief trade association. She also supports the industry's desire to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge — a position at odds with McCain.
PALIN: Said the United States has reduced its troop level in Iraq to a number below where it was when the troop increase began in early 2007.
THE FACTS: Not correct. The Pentagon says there are currently 152,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, about 17,000 more than there were before the 2007 military buildup began.
PALIN: Said Alaska is "building a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline, which is North America's largest and most expensive infrastructure project ever to flow those sources of energy into hungry markets."
THE FACTS: Not quite. Construction is at least six years away. So far the state has only awarded a license to Trans Canada Corp., that comes with $500 million in seed money in exchange for commitments toward a lengthy and costly process to getting a federal certificate. At an August news conference after the state Legislature approved the license, Palin said, "It's not a done deal."
Joe:
This post is timely and significant -- please move it to the top!
If we are lucky this November, a year from now Palin will once again be the Annie Oakley of Alaska.
Someone else (James Fallows) saw it much the same as this post. Here's his quick read, posted at:
jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/
*******************************
# Ifill, moderator: Terrible. Yes, she was constrained by the agreed debate rules. But she gave not the slightest sign of chafing against them or looking for ways to follow up the many unanswered questions or self-contradictory answers. This was the big news of the evening. Katie Couric, and for that matter Jim Lehrer, have never looked so good.
# Palin: "Beat expectations." In every single answer, she was obviously trying to fit the talking points she had learned to the air time she had to fill, knowing she could do so with impunity from the moderator. But she did it with spunk and without any of the poleaxed moments she had displayed in previous questions. The worst holes in her answers - above all, about the Vice President's role, also either mishearing or ignoring the question about her "Achilles heel" - were concealed in ways they haven't been before.
# Biden: No mistakes. This is a bigger deal than it seems, since Biden could easily have seemed bullying, condescending, chauvinistic, or whatever. He didn't. And while he was woolly-sounding in the beginning, he was commanding and authoritative - from his side's perspective - on issues of foreign policy and constitutional balance. And to all appearances sincere in his choking-up near the end when talking about having a child in peril. Overall, don't see how he could have balanced all the conflicting pressures on him much better.
# The race: No fundamental change. Which is better news for Obama than McCain.
Please see my opinion on my l;ast blog entry..... WOW
Here's another perceptive post by Fallows that accords with this post:
***************************
Update: How was it, considered strictly as a debate? Of course Biden did a far better job -- he answered the questions rather than moving straight to talking points, he drew on a vastly broader range of factual references, he attacked his opponents in ways that were relevant to the subject under discussion. But this is not how the event was being watched or scored.
***************************
Joe:
That debate may yet prove to be significant if McCain can turn things around in the next few weeks. If Palin had bombed last night, that would be impossible, and now it is just improbable but still possible. If the Dems win, don't put the blame on Palin, because she has done better than could be expected under the circumstances, notwithstanding how the pundits are abusing her.
I agree with this post by Mr. Fallows during the debate last night:
"The loser 38 minutes in is Gwen Ifill, who is doing nothing at all to keep the discussion on track or having the candidates engage."
OMG -
this is the New York Times take: "Palin Recaptures Her Image"
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/us/politics/03watch.html?em
Here's an extract:
“Oh, man, it’s so obvious I’m a Washington outsider, and someone just not used to the way you guys operate,” she said after her opponent explained, somewhat awkwardly, why he had voted in favor of the Iraq war.
***
And Ms. Palin was the one who set the tone, making Mr. Biden sound stuffy before he had a chance to make her look unsteady. She bounded onto the stage, shook hands with her opponent and said brightly, “Hey, can I call you Joe?”
He said yes, then addressed her as “Governor Palin.”
She twinkled, cocked her head, and spoke as plainly as she could. “Darn right it was predator lenders,” she told the moderator, Gwen Ifill of PBS, when asked who was to blame for the mortgage meltdown. Her sentences had lots of pep and patriotism, and few g’s at the end of her words — “You betcha” and “Get down to gettin’ business done” and “doggone it.”
Expectations for both candidates were low, but the expectations for the debate were almost absurdly high — cable news commentators led up to the event like children on a Halloween sugar bender, deliriously excited by what The Washington Times described as a “Thrilla in Manila” showdown.
Mr. Biden made few mistakes; he appeared more measured and thoughtful on substance, and made forceful points that contrasted with Ms. Palin’s slogans. But she provided the more vivacious, visceral television performance: it was a 90-minute sprint to reclaim her identity as a feisty, folksy frontierswoman ready to storm Washington. And she did it like a reality show contestant — broadly, with stagey asides to the camera, including an assurance to some third-grade students, in what she called a “shout-out,” that they would get extra credit for tuning in.
***
Ms. Palin attacked her opponent’s positions on taxes and on the war with gusto, at one point accusing Mr. Biden of “waving the white flag of surrender” in Iraq. But mostly, she tried to recoup from past blunders on foreign policy. She twice dropped the name of Kim Jong Il of North Korea, made a point of referring to Iran’s president and described the Cuban leadership as “the Castro brothers.” She also recast her television interviews as traps set by liberals, not unforced errors of her own.
At the end of the debate, before she was surrounded by her husband and children, and burped her newborn, she thanked the moderator for the chance to talk to the American people “without the filter, even of the mainstream media, kind of telling viewers what they’ve just heard.”
It was a pre-emptive strike against commentators poised to critique her performance and a retroactive strike against the other Sarah Palin.
Once again Palin has done EMS on McCain; let's hope that he recovers ASAP.
The McCain/Palin ticket has taken a real beating today on Intrade. His shares have quickly dropped to about 30.
Also, the whole map of the US is turning blue (nearly all of the swing states).
It looks like the gamblers/investors have voted on who won the debate...
We can argue all we want about these things, Sarah & Joe were quite pleasant,yes...but it's all noise - the die has nearly been cast.
Obama's going to win.
:)
Joe, I know you could not have written this. It doesn't sound even remotely like you.
While there are some good points in this, the "undecideds" indicator showed that the folksy routine did not go over well with both men and women. The graph plunged down with each use of the word maverick.
Biden was, by virtually all accounts, stronger in many ways. Palin came off as vapid with a couple of exceptions. Refusal to answer questions shows she is not #1 or #2 position material.
The debate won't make much difference, except that Biden's strong performance will keep Obama's momentum going and Palin's failure to demonstrate a real grasp of most issues meant no train wreck, but no gain for McCain, just a continuation of a downward trend.
that Palin may not have answered ?'s absolutely qualifies her to # 2 position, which is what she's runnIN' for.
AND Mr. Biden DID give misinformation on !$ (FOURTEEN) different talking points. AND ifell gave him the first and last words on almost every question. in a word couint his were probably 7 or more to 1
Post a Comment