** Los Angeles, 8:33 PM **
Closing thoughts on the debate:
1.) The format sucked. No one could challenge. It was totally safe for the candidates, and it short-changed the American public. We deserve better. We deserve to see these people taken out of their comfort zones and put on the spot. We deserve to see them interact. We deserve to see them confronted. And tonight, they really weren't. They were asked a predictable set of questions, and they delivered, for the most part, a predictable set of answers. In that context, it's difficult for the citizenry to know if what we're seeing onscreen is true competence or simply good memorization.
2.) Palin exceeded the remarkably low expectations that she set for herself. She gave a good performance. Better than dismal. Eye contact with the camera. Television-savvy. No spectacular implosions. No crashing and burning. It was clear that she had her responses memorized, more or less. And she did a genial job of delivering very few specifics, dodging questions with a smile and doing what she could to keep the conversation on familiar ground. Her advisers did a nice job of prepping her. Considering the remarkable incompetence she has demonstrated in recent interviews, there was really nowhere to go but up. And yes: she went up a bit.
But again: This format played to her strengths. Little in the way of real rebuttal. And almost zero interplay. Clearly Palin is at her best with a script, staring straight into a camera lens. A week of intensive coaching doesn't hurt, either.
My guess is that Sarah Palin probably didn't change a lot of minds tonight. She remains a polarizing figure. Her supporters---particularly those in the Evangelical Republican base---are still going to support her like they always have. And those who oppose her---including those who jumped off the bandwagon over the past couple of weeks---will likely still oppose her.
3.) Biden was very, very good, demonstrating a thorough command of the issues and a much looser style of delivery. Less scripted. Far more authentic in his mastery. He was better than I thought he'd be, frankly, and he improved greatly as the debate went on after a bit of a slow start. I enjoyed listening to him---particularly on foreign policy. He was forceful in his arguments when talking about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the logic he employed was both simple and bracing.
Furthermore, he made no major mistakes. No gaffes. No "Joe moments." In that regard, he was a big success. Strategically, he played it safe with his opponent. There wasn't much direct engagement with Palin. He didn't look at her much. He didn't call her by name a lot, and when he did call her by name, he was always sure to call her "Governor." He gave the Republicans almost nothing in the way of red meat, and he stuck to the issues with discipline, directing his most forceful rhetorical barbs at Senator McCain.
Agree or disagree with Biden's politics, it's hard to argue with the man's qualifications to be a heartbeat away from the presidency. He passed the basic smell test of any vice presidential candidate with flying colors. He exudes competence. A reassuring character trait in troubled times like these.
Okay then, folks. I think that pretty much does it for tonight.
I need a drink.
I give Biden the clear victory on substance, and a smaller victory on style. Palin was better than she has been lately, but let's be honest: That's really not saying much.
Your thoughts, as always, are welcome on the comment board below.
My thanks to everyone for tuning in and participating.
Off to open a bottle of wine....
-BL
PS. Please feel free to visit me at www.bradlisti.com. I post there daily. And please check out TheNervousBreakdown.com, an online publication I founded in 2006.
** Los Angeles, 7:34 PM **
A line from Sarah Palin's closing statement:
"I like being able to answer these tough questions without the filter of the mainstream media..."
The filter of the mainstream media? You were having a one-on-one conversation with Katie Couric, and she asked you what newspapers you read, and you couldn't come up with one, Governor Palin.
If only I could ask follow-up questions.
** Los Angeles, 7:25 PM **
I think Sarah Palin actually suggested that she would want to exercise and possibly increase the expanded role of the vice presidency that Dick Cheney has assumed for himself over the past eight years. She said it, and it was one of the few things all night that sounded a little off the cuff. And then I found myself thinking: Did she really just say that?
Sweet Jesus.
And now a friend emails in:
Was that coached? Or is that her own idea? And which would be worse?
Discuss....
** Los Angeles, 7:11 PM **
Programmed. Or mostly programmed. That's my take on Palin. She seems to be regurgitating pre-rehearsed answers and rarely working off the script. It feels largely phony to me. It's the whole folksy-charming-hockey-mom thing, wrapped around lines she was fed by policy wonks on Team McCain. A good performance, yes. But a performance nevertheless. Here and there I might feel a dash of genuine conviction, but most of the time it feels like pure theater.
Biden, on the other hand, sounds convicted. Better put: He seems to really understand why he believes what he believes. Palin, on the other hand....
And now:
"John McCain, who knows how to win a war...."
Sarah Palin just said that. And immediately I thought: Um, Sarah. We sort of, um, lost Vietnam.
Might be politically incorrect and "unpatriotic" to admit such things, but it's what I thought.
To put a finer, more logical point on it: Iraq isn't really going all that well under the policies voted for by John McCain, is it? And neither is Afghanistan?
And John McCain knows how to win a war?
I remain unconvinced, Madame Governor.
** Los Angeles, 6:55 PM **
Biden talking about foreign policy is impressive.
It's a shame this debate format is so Palin-friendly, because it's clear Joe Biden would be able to make inroads if she were taken off-script and they could talk back and forth at length. Plus it would make the debate more interesting.
Furthermore, there hasn't been enough room for rebuttal, which disappoints me. Each candidate pretty much gets a short bit of time to answer a question, and maybe a follow-up, and that's that.
I want combat.
That said, Palin's performance so far is living up to my predictions. Generally speaking, this will be viewed positively in the press. At the very least, it won't be viewed as a terrible failure. Respectable poise. Fairly fluid delivery. Her team of advisers has done a nice job prepping her in a short amount of time. I imagine they're hugging each other in a sleep-deprived fit backstage.
By the same token, Biden has exceeded my expectations. He's been very impressive and hasn't given the Republicans any real daylight.
He just inhaled very loudly, audibly, while Palin was speaking.
Maybe he's as annoyed as I am that she pronounces nuclear wrong.
One moment please....
** Los Angeles, 6:38 PM **
I want to hear Gwenn Ifill ask some unexpected questions. I want to see her throw Biden and Palin off of their talking points a bit. So far things have gone according to script.
Also: I would give anything to see Sarah Palin's cheat sheet. I wonder what she has in front of her on her podium. Colored note cards, like the ones she used in her gubernatorial debates? A typed list? Several pages? One page? Little notes to self?
Sarah Palin is talking about energy policy a lot. She likes to draw her point back to energy, which makes sense, as it's something she's got some familiarity with.
"Drill baby drill," she says. "We've been hearing that chant all across America."
Or something to that effect.
Is this really a popular chant among Republicans? A rallying cry? Seriously?
I mean, I want cheaper gas as much as the next guy, and I love a good chant as much as the next guy. But drill baby drill?
That one leaves me seriously wanting. Gotta say.
And now Sarah Palin is accusing Joe Biden of using the term "raping the outer-continental shelf" when referring to plans to "safely drill off the coast in America."
Clearly this quip was taken from her cheat sheet. A devilish inclusion. A lame attempt to subtly tie Biden to the word "raping." Always possible that I'm just paranoid, but I doubt it. My cynical political antenna picked it up.
Back in a moment....
** Los Angeles, 6:12 PM **
Biden is low-key. He's playing it safe in the early going. He's looking right at Gwen Ifill as he responds.
Palin is looking right into the camera lens. Televisual training. A sportscaster's training. Turning on the folksy charm.
"Team of mavericks...the mavericks..."
I'm really tired of the word maverick.
The early take: Palin is better than she's been on Couric. Already.
"Darn right," she just said.
"Joe six-pack," she just said.
"Hockey moms," she just said.
Always dropping the "g" on her gerunds.
Biden is sharp though, and he's sounding a lot of populist domestic tones. Plenty of mentions of the middle class.
Back in a moment....
** Los Angeles, 5:52 PM **
Okay, folks. The live-blog begins. Biden vs. Palin. The great (?) vice presidential debate. Easily one of the most anticipated political events of the year.
At this point, the spin and preamble has become static. Talk radio has been running at full tilt all day long. The print media. Television. Everything has been said, essentially, in anticipation of the event. Every angle. Every line.
Will Sarah Palin implode? Will Joe Biden stick his foot in his mouth? Sexism? A surprisingly effective performance easing Republican concern? Democrats playing it safe? Biden going on offense? Ifill a good moderator? Ifill being used as a wedge issue to distract and pre-rationalize Palin's (expected) poor performance?
And so on.
My feeling is: Let's the get the show on the road.
Eager to see these two square off. Eager to see Sarah Palin answer questions---and hopefully good ones---in real time, on a national stage. And likewise for Biden.
Back in a few minutes once the combat is underway.
As always, please feel free to leave your thoughts on the comment board below....
** Los Angeles, 9:30 AM **
The vice presidential debate is now imminent. Biden vs. Palin at St. Louis. Sure to be a moment of high political theater and nauseating gripping intrigue. At the very least, a boon to comedians nationwide. The hype is large. The spin will be larger. And the expectations game, as always, has been an exercise in rank absurdity.
Obama campaign manager David Plouffe:
"We've looked at tapes of Governor Palin's debates, and she's a terrific debater. She has performed very, very well. She's obviously a skilled speaker. We expect she'll give a great performance [on] Thursday."
A McCain campaign staffer, speaking off the record:
"We're very much aware that Senator Biden has thirty-five years of experience debating on the Senate floor. It's something he's known for. She's going up against one of the best and most experienced debaters in the Democratic Party."
Personally, my prediction goes as follows: Sarah Palin will exceed the record-low expectations that she has created for herself. Joe Biden is locked in what is essentially a no-win situation. Barring disaster, Governor Palin will enjoy a marginal triumph by, um, not self-destructing entirely. She maintains bladder control, she gets the 'W.'
The media will likely be complicit in the outcome.
One can already hear the stultifying drone:
Well, she didn't completely fall on her face, Larry. The McCain campaign has gotta be pleased about that. For the time being, it appears as though she may have stopped the hemorrhaging....
One hopes, of course, that the media will hold itself to a much higher standard than that, but one doesn't dare hold his breath.
The fact of the matter is, Governor Palin enters the debate with lower expectations than any vice presidential candidate in history---and this includes the estimable Danforth Quayle.
The McCain campaign---increasingly skittish and discombobulated over the past few weeks---has got to feel somewhat positive about this development. With the Katie Couric debacle still fresh on voters' minds and Tina Fey's relentless skewering of Palin a phenomenon on YouTube, there's really nowhere left to go but up. (Or is there?)
At any rate, this is the party line being propagated at McCain's high-desert compound in Sedona.
"I seriously hope that people continue to underestimate the most popular governor in America and a woman who speaks to the heart of America's economic angst," said Nicolle Wallace, one of the campaign's senior advisers.
Seriously:
And speaking of angst, it should be noted that plenty of high-ranking conservatives are feeling some considerable angst of their own.
"[Sarah Palin] has pretty thoroughly---and probably irretrievably---proven that she is not up to the job of being president of the United States," says David Frum, a former speechwriter for President Bush who is now a conservative columnist. "If she doesn't perform well, then people see it. And this is a moment of real high anxiety, a little bit like 9/11, when people look to Washington for comfort and leadership and want to know that people in charge know what they are doing."
From a recent edition of the New York Times:
Polling suggests that the number of Americans who think she is not fit to be president has increased since her introduction to the country last month. A number of conservative columnists and thinkers have publicly turned against her, or criticized Mr. McCain for choosing her, including George Will, David Brooks and Kathleen Parker, who wrote a column entitled "She's Out of Her League" for the National Review Online.
[David] Frum noted the difficulty that Dan Quayle, who was elected vice president in 1988, had in recovering from an early set of mistakes that led him to be ridiculed as an intellectual lightweight. "The story of Dan Quayle is he did probably 1,000 smart things as vice president, but his image was locked in and it was very difficult to turn around," he said. "And Dan Quayle never in his life has performed as badly as Sarah Palin in the last month."
Ouch.
Then again, there's always the chance that this is simply a matter of political gamesmanship. Maybe this right-wing dismay is strictly artificial. Maybe the Republicans are simply trying to lower the Palin bar ever further as a matter of strategy and damage control.
I think there's some truth to this notion. Surely a lot of what we're hearing is hot air.
Then again, I also believe that a lot of Republican consternation is entirely authentic. It's hard to figure, for example, that Kathleen Parker is only spinning in the National Review. And David Frum doesn't strike me as a man who is full of it, either. On the contrary, these people sound like conservatives in genuine distress.
Still, there is evidence that Palin might be a better debater than many people think.
Jed Lewison, writing for The Huffington Post, has this to say:
Sarah Palin might not give a good interview, and John McCain's advisers might not trust her to give a press conference, but in a highly structured debate like the one we are going to see on Thursday night, she has the ability to be dominant.
Because the format allows for very little give-and-take between Palin and Joe Biden, her "values"-oriented debating style stands a good chance of succeeding...Rather than getting bogged down in facts and specifics, she instead says what she is for and what she is against using terms like "healthier," "stronger," "more prosperous," and "fairer."
From the Wall Street Journal:
There are two things [Alaskans] remember about Sarah Palin's debating style during her race for governor two years ago.
One is the stack of color-coded cue cards she took to the podium for help whenever she was asked a policy question. The other is how quickly she was able to shuck those props, master the thrust-and-parry of jousting with her opponents and inquisitors, and project confidence to an audience of television viewers watching from home.
"That's the Sarah Palin I remember from the 2006 debates: positive, confident and upbeat," recalls Libby Casey, an Alaska public-radio reporter who served as a debate moderator on two occasions that year....
In most encounters, her metier was projecting winsomeness---making a virtue of not knowing as much about the minutiae of state government because, for most of her adulthood, she was immersed in small-town life and raising a family.
And Andrew Halcro, one of Palin's opponents in Alaska's 2006 gubernatorial race, has this to say in a recent edition of the Christian Science Monitor:
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 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.
Some more spin from key players:
John McCain, talking to Katie Couric:
"I've seen underestimation before. I'm very proud of the excitement that Governor Palin has ignited with our party and around this country. It is a level of excitement and enthusiasm, frankly, that I haven't seen before."
Saul Anuzis, the Republican chairman of Michigan:
"This debate will probably determine [Sarah Palin's] political persona for the rest of the campaign. I expect [her] to show the country she is capable, articulate and has the leadership skills necessary to serve."
Robert T. Bennet, the Ohio Republican chairman:
"I think she has to be careful not to be overprogrammed for the debate. I think she's a lot brighter than people are giving her credit for."
She's so bright, in fact, that the McCain campaign has kept her sequestered in Sedona all week for a massive cramming session. Her coaches include McCain's top campaign strategist, Steve Schmidt, as well as advisers Tucker Eskew, Nicolle Wallace, and Mark Wallace---all veterans of George W. Bush's political machine.
A normal slate of events if it wasn't a continuation of such a deeply alarming trend.
Since being selected as John McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin has been shielded from the media to an unprecedented degree. During her first thirty days on the ticket, she held a grand total of seventeen events that were open to the general public, many of which were joint appearances with McCain. The record shows that she has only conducted five rallies by herself---well below the standard pace for a modern vice presidential candidate. And the pattern is likely to continue through November.
By contrast, Joe Biden has held more than forty events open to the general public, and only eight of them have been with Barack Obama. And his media availability for press conferences and interviews has outdistanced Palin by a long shot---behavior befitting a person running for the country's number two job.
And what about Joe Biden?
Well, he's been prepping at home in Wilmington with strategists David Axelrod, Anita Dunn, and Ron Klain at his side. His job, it seems, is to strike a delicate balance: Be forceful in getting your points across without seeming condescending. Defeat Sarah Palin soundly, but don't give anyone the opportunity to call you a bully. And oh by the way: Don't say anything even remotely dumb.
When asked about the dangers of debating a woman, Biden spokesman David Wade expressed confidence earlier this week:
"Joe Biden debated Senator Clinton twelve times in the presidential race and those debates were substantive and hard hitting, and he debates strong women in the United States Senate."
The big question with Biden, of course, has less to do with competence or gender and more to do with whether or not he sticks his foot in his mouth. This is a man famous for his verbal gaffes and persistent off-the-cuffness.
The Democrats are no doubt keeping their fingers crossed, hoping that he simply stands up there, makes his points forcefully and clearly, and escapes without doing any major damage. No red meat for the mainstream press. No unfortunate slips of the tongue. Simply state the facts. Project strength. Make a clear case for Obama and the Democrats, and reassure voters that you could take over and lead the country in the event of an emergency.
If I'm Joe Biden, I pretty much ignore Sarah Palin and stick to the issues alone. He makes a mistake if he makes it personal. That's my feeling. The downside to that line of attack is way bigger than the upside. I imagine she'll come after him with a few scripted one-liners. She'll get a couple of laughs from the crowd. No need to shoot back with anything other than policy critique. Be gentlemanly and controlled, and give Palin the rope she needs to hang herself. One suspects there's at least a decent chance that she will.
Or maybe I've just been brainwashed by the mainstream media.
Says Ron Carey, the chairman of Minnesota's Republican party:
"Thanks to the mainstream media, quite a low expectation has been created for [Sarah Palin's] performance. The style of Sarah Palin is going to amaze people. She is going to be able to amaze people with the substance she is going to deliver."
Now that would truly be amazing.
Back with more as we get closer to the start of the debate....
