2008 VP Debate Thread

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: badkarma1399

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Vote Ron Paul!!

I miss those days... A candidate who actually knew something beyond bullshitting and talking points.

Sure, Paul knows a bit. However, his ideas are so god damn outlandish that the libertarians have no hope of capturing more than the fringe of wacky idea supporters.

 

[Painman]

Didn't watch, but listened to the debate. It was hard to follow Palin's responses because she meandered a lot, and seemed to be stitching a bunch of memorized lines together. But, the expectation set for her was that she just manage to live through it w/o any major screwups, and she did.

Biden is Biden. I think folks knew what to expect of him coming in, and he met those expectations.

No game changer tonight - general trajectory of the race stays on course IMO.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Slate has posted an interesting riff on the Palin non-answer technique from tonight's debate.

 

[seemingly random]

Several have proclaimed biden the winner. I bet he's ready to throw up at the idea that he's even compared to such a light-weight as palin. His claim to fame in this 'debate' is that he was incredibly patient with the idiot so that people won't accuse him of being abusive. What a state of affairs we americans have come to - that there is serious consideration of such an unpresidential candidate as vp. I don't think mccain thinks much of his fellow americans.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Rove on again on Fox, announcing how brilliant Governor Palin's performance was, nit-picking Biden's "numerous gaffes" during the debate.

Still overwhelmingly a Palin win in the Fox poll; I'm shocked that a pay-to-vote poll on Fox would favor a Republican!!

If you loathe Fox so much, why are you watching it?

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: Hafen

Originally posted by: Budmantom
Biden and Obama will listen to the generals.....about Afganistan....and only Afganistan....if they like what they hear.

If the Founding Fathers wanted the generals in charge of the Military, they wouldn't have made the civilian president CIC.

I agree with you, we don't need Biden and Obama.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

okay, quick poll

in your opinion, is palin suitable for the office of president?

please answer only with yes or no.

 

[QED]

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Slate has posted an interesting riff on the Palin non-answer technique from tonight's debate.

I sensed Biden was playing from that same playbook, to be fair.

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: Shortcut

Originally posted by: Budmantom
Bush and Cheney will listen to the generals.....about Iraq....and only Iraq....if they like what they hear.

Fixed.

Thank you for supporting the president and VP.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: The Boston Dangler
okay, quick poll

in your opinion, is palin suitable for the office of president?

please answer only with yes or no.

Unequivocally, no.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Hafen

Originally posted by: Budmantom
Biden and Obama will listen to the generals.....about Afganistan....and only Afganistan....if they like what they hear.

If the Founding Fathers wanted the generals in charge of the Military, they wouldn't have made the civilian president CIC.

I agree with you, we don't need Biden and Obama.

So you're saying bag the election and just put the Joint Chiefs in charge of the country as a military junta?

 

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Rove on again on Fox, announcing how brilliant Governor Palin's performance was, nit-picking Biden's "numerous gaffes" during the debate.

Still overwhelmingly a Palin win in the Fox poll; I'm shocked that a pay-to-vote poll on Fox would favor a Republican!!

If you loathe Fox so much, why are you watching it?

I'm supposed to limit my exposure to only those sources I already agree with? How would I ever learn anything? How would I ever keep from becoming another mindless partisan drone?

edit: I wouldn't say I "loathe" Fox News. I certainly disagree with their "Fair and Balanced" slogan, but (Hannity aside) they're not as bad as most liberals here make them out to be.

another edit: O'Reilly is usually OK these days, but he went ballistic on Barney Frank tonight: a return to the old shout them down then cut off their mic days.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: chess9
Some observations:

Pros for Palin:

1. She did a pretty good job overall mastering the canned lines and understanding the issues at a superficial level;
2. She was very perky and upbeat. America likes salesmen/women;
3. She defined the debate as one about gauzy ideas, not facts, and that's good for Republicans;

Cons for Palin:

1. She constructs arguments out of ideas with an occasional fact sprinkled in;
2. She sounds very gauzy, which is also good as I've noted above, unless you like razor sharp responses, such as the ones given mostly by Biden;
3. She loses focus very quickly and didn't answer the question about her achilles heel for instance. By the time she finishes speaking you have trouble remembering the topic because she wanders in 40 different directions. One gets the idea, a cynical one, that she has been fed a list of canned responses. She feels the need to reach down into the can and grab one way too frequently;
4. She speaks in cliches and trite ideas. "The White Flag of Surrender" brought a guffaw from me, and I'm sure I wasn't alone.

Pros for Biden:

1. He answered and rebutted superbly, and remember, I utter loathe and despise Biden!
2. His command of the facts and history are excellent. His past is prologue comment was stunning for its simplicity and truth.

Cons for Biden:

1. That fake smile is very annoying;
2. Off camera he looked bored/annoyed a few times;
3. He was too deferential to Palin. Should have hammered her more, but I guess he was afraid to be the Biden I loathe.

Overall, a pretty good debate. I don't think Palin hurt McCain, and I think she isn't such a bimbo after all. She's not dumb, she's just very inexperienced and raw. She's no rocket scientist mind you, but we are only talking President of the United States, so anything over 100 IQ is adequate as we know. Palin is so naive, she will appeal to a lot of people, so I think McCain might get a small bump out of this debate. It will ease some people's mind as well.

-Robert

great summary.

I would add that I think Biden came away from the debate actually and surprisingly (to himself) impressed by Palin. It was neat to see him at the end there give her props.

With all those long sighs I can't say that was genuine. I can't imagine he respects her as a world leader.

As a Republican, I'll say this. If I were Biden I would think to myself "Ok I stomped her on the issues. She's not that bad of a debater but I feel like I need to bend down to her level." I'll walk away knowing I killed her in facts, but her personality might keep her alive. I'll think that if anyone has a decent intelligence level that they should pick me over her, but somehow I KNOW that her surprising performance will mean trouble for me in polls. Tough luck.

I was in pain for a good amount of the debate listening to Palin talk, but I felt that Biden could've cornered her and slammed her in a lot of places. She got lucky, and too many stupid people will buy in to keep McCain/Palin alive. I haven't lost all hope yet in this election.

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: The Boston Dangler
okay, quick poll

in your opinion, is palin suitable for the office of president?

please answer only with yes.

yes




Lets all vote for her in 4 years, unless we can make a quick change on the ticket.

McCain/Palin or Palin/Biden we can't lose.

 

[Vic]

No.

 

[Balt]

Originally posted by: Balt
Probably a good indication of what we will see tomorrow:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1001/p09s01-coop.html

What it's like to debate Sarah Palin - I know firsthand: She's a master of the nonanswer.

By Andrew Halcro
from the October 1, 2008 edition

Anchorage, Alaska - When he faces off against Sarah Palin Thursday night, Joe Biden will have his hands full.

I should know. I've debated Governor Palin more than two dozen times. And she's a master, not of facts, figures, or insightful policy recommendations, but at the fine art of the nonanswer, the glittering generality. Against such charms there is little Senator Biden, or anyone, can do.

On paper, of course, the debate appears to be a mismatch.

In 2000, Palin was the mayor of an Alaskan town of 5,500 people, while Biden was serving his 28th year as a United States senator. Her major public policy concern was building a local ice rink and sports center. His major public policy concern was the State Department's decision to grant an export license to allow sales of heavy-lift helicopters to Turkey, during tense UN-sponsored Cyprus peace talks.

On paper, the difference in experience on both domestic and foreign policy is like the difference between shooting a bullet and throwing a bullet. Unfortunately for Biden, if recent history is an indicator, experience or a grasp of the issues won't matter when it comes to debating Palin.

On April 17, 2006, Palin and I participated in a debate at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks on agriculture issues. The next day, the Fairbanks Daily News Miner published this excerpt:

"Andrew Halcro, a declared independent candidate from Anchorage, came armed with statistics on agricultural productivity. Sarah Palin, a Republican from Wasilla, said the Matanuska Valley provides a positive example for other communities interested in agriculture to study."

On April 18, 2006, Palin and I sat together in a hotel coffee shop comparing campaign trail notes. As we talked about the debates, Palin made a comment that highlights the phenomenon that Biden is up against.

"Andrew, I watch you at these debates with no notes, no papers, and yet when asked questions, you spout off facts, figures, and policies, and I'm amazed. But then I look out into the audience and I ask myself, 'Does any of this really matter?' " Palin said.

While policy wonks such as Biden might cringe, it seemed to me that Palin was simply vocalizing her strength without realizing it. During the campaign, Palin's knowledge on public policy issues never matured ? because it didn't have to. Her ability to fill the debate halls with her presence and her gift of the glittering generality made it possible for her to rely on populism instead of policy.

Palin is a master of the nonanswer. She can turn a 60-second response to a query about her specific solutions to healthcare challenges into a folksy story about how she's met people on the campaign trail who face healthcare challenges. All without uttering a word about her public-policy solutions to healthcare challenges.

In one debate, a moderator asked the candidates to name a bill the legislature had recently passed that we didn't like. I named one. Democratic candidate Tony Knowles named one. But Sarah Palin instead used her allotted time to criticize the incumbent governor, Frank Murkowski. Asked to name a bill we did like, the same pattern emerged: Palin didn't name a bill.

And when she does answer the actual question asked, she has a canny ability to connect with the audience on a personal level. For example, asked to name a major issue that had been ignored during the campaign, I discussed the health of local communities, Mr. Knowles talked about affordable healthcare, and Palin talked about ... the need to protect hunting and fishing rights.

So what does that mean for Biden? With shorter question-and-answer times and limited interaction between the two, he should simply ignore Palin in a respectful manner on the stage and answer the questions as though he were alone. Any attempt to flex his public-policy knowledge and show Palin is not ready for prime time will inevitably cast him in the role of the bully.

On the other side of the stage, if Palin is to be successful, she needs to do what she does best: fill the room with her presence and stick to the scripted sound bites.

? Andrew Halcro served two terms as a Republican member of the Alaska State House of Representatives. He ran for governor as an Independent in 2006, debating Sarah Palin more than two dozen times. He blogs at www.andrewhalcro.com .

Just gonna quote myself from earlier yesterday in this thread. Turns out to be pretty accurate I think.

 

[fleshconsumed]

Originally posted by: deftron
WTf is this answer she's giving to "whats your weaknesses"?



Its like a complete rundown of her talking points

I don't think she knows what "Achilles' heel" means, so she had to revert to general talking points not to appear ignorant/illiterate.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: seemingly random
Several have proclaimed biden the winner. I bet he's ready to throw up at the idea that he's even compared to such a light-weight as palin. His claim to fame in this 'debate' is that he was incredibly patient with the idiot so that people won't accuse him of being abusive. What a state of affairs we americans have come to - that there is serious consideration of such an unpresidential candidate as vp. I don't think mccain thinks much of his fellow americans.

the fact that someone had to pull punches in a debate to not hurt peoples feelings is disgusting.

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Hafen

Originally posted by: Budmantom
Biden and Obama will listen to the generals.....about Afganistan....and only Afganistan....if they like what they hear.

If the Founding Fathers wanted the generals in charge of the Military, they wouldn't have made the civilian president CIC.

I agree with you, we don't need Biden and Obama.

So you're saying bag the election and just put the Joint Chiefs in charge of the country as a military junta?

No I'm saying we don't need Biden and Obama.... I know math is tough for you but I thought you had reading comprehension down.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: The Boston Dangler
okay, quick poll

in your opinion, is palin suitable for the office of president?

please answer only with yes.

yes




Lets all vote for her in 4 years, unless we can make a quick change on the ticket.

McCain/Palin or Palin/Biden we can't lose.

apparently, my saying "please" gives you the go-ahead to act like a douche. and so ends my 1 night engagement with P&N

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Hafen

Originally posted by: Budmantom
Biden and Obama will listen to the generals.....about Afganistan....and only Afganistan....if they like what they hear.

If the Founding Fathers wanted the generals in charge of the Military, they wouldn't have made the civilian president CIC.

I agree with you, we don't need Biden and Obama.

So you're saying bag the election and just put the Joint Chiefs in charge of the country as a military junta?

No I'm saying we don't need Biden and Obama.... I know math is tough for you but I thought you had reading comprehension down.

I'm just responding to you the way you respond to everyone else.

 

[QED]

Originally posted by: Vic
No.

What happened to that link to that article on The Atlantic website?

I about shat myself when I read it and found myself agreeing with the whole damn thing.

:shocked:

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Hafen

Originally posted by: Budmantom
Biden and Obama will listen to the generals.....about Afganistan....and only Afganistan....if they like what they hear.

If the Founding Fathers wanted the generals in charge of the Military, they wouldn't have made the civilian president CIC.

I agree with you, we don't need Biden and Obama.

So you're saying bag the election and just put the Joint Chiefs in charge of the country as a military junta?

No I'm saying we don't need Biden and Obama.... I know math is tough for you but I thought you had reading comprehension down.

I'm just responding to you the way you respond to everyone else.

Troll, partisan hack!!.... see now I'm acting like you.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: BrownTown

Originally posted by: homercles337
Those poor school children trying to get extra credit by watching this. I think they all just got a little bit dumber by listening to Palin.

MAn if I were a teacher I'd give my students extra credit NOT to watch these debates. I mean honestly, do you really want your kids growing up to be a lying dirtbag politician? Watching these debates just teaches that if you want to succeed in life all you have to do is learn how to make bull shit sound like intelligence.

Most times, they call that a "Law degree"...

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: QED

Originally posted by: Vic
No.

What happened to that link to that article on The Atlantic website?

I about shat myself when I read it and found myself agreeing with the whole damn thing.

:shocked:

Meh. I dug deeper and found out the author is just an RNC shill. It's quite telling though when even someone like that thinks that Palin isn't ready for the national stage (with exactly the reason why), but he had links to his book sales on that page and I didn't feel like helping out his advertising.