WHY PALIN WILL DO FINE AT THE DEBATE.
It's sort of funny to watch liberals get all excited about the idea that the VP debate will be some kind of train wreck for Sarah Palin. It won't, because VP debates aren't really about finding out which candidate is more qualified, but framing the candidate at the top of the ticket.
For all the fuss about Lloyd Bentsen and Dan Quayle in '88, there's an argument to be made that Quayle "won" the debate. Sure, Bentsen made Quayle look like an idiot, but Quayle spent the whole time slamming Dukakis. Mission Accomplished.
Sarah Palin has been at her most effective delivering scripted attack lines, and the debate won't be an interview. She won't be answering tough questions as much as she will be reheating the slams against Obama she's spent time memorizing all week. All indications are that Palin is actually very good at "the nonanswer." Whether she comes across as knowledgable doesn't matter if she manages to reopen doubts about Obama's ability to be president. Expect her to turn questions about her qualifications into questions about Obama's, and inquiries about her religion into arguments about the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. All she has to do to reignite that conversation is frame herself as a victim of a double standard -- and that's the other thing she seems to be great at. The media will do the rest.
--A. Serwer
Feeds: 


COMMENTS (8)
Well, I don't know any liberals who think that Biden will "win the debate" because everyone I know grasps that the debate and its winner exists in a subjective space determined by what the voter wants to see, how attached they are to their party, how attached they are to their candidate as an exemplar of their party, how open minded they are, what the questions are, what their prior expectations are. All of these mean that Palin will "lose" the debate--and the votes of the same people who already don't like her. Probably she'll "win" the debate, and the votes, of people who already like her and her style, who want her and mcCain to win, and who are predisposed to prefer a line of "joe sixpack" twaddle to actual, you know, knowledge.
Its really not surprising. She's a polarizing candidate and Biden's a known quantity. She can't help but appeal to her base and he can't help but not surprise his own. Plus, they are running for the second tier so if you don't like her that still isn't enough to turn you off McCain, and if you decide you don't like Biden its probably not enough to turn you off Obama.
nu?
aimai
Posted by: aimai | October 1, 2008 1:44 PM
Adam, the woman is not good at anything. She's the product of the most parochial political system among the 50 U.S. states. I don't doubt the debate will unfold along the lines you describe. But no self-respecting media figure, no matter how in the tank he or she may be for the Republicans, is going to rush out and proclaim anything other than "meh, she didn't screw it up."
Posted by: Marti Perez | October 1, 2008 2:02 PM
But no self-respecting media figure, no matter how in the tank he or she may be for the Republicans, is going to rush out and proclaim anything other than "meh, she didn't screw it up."
You mean like Margaret Carlson, Howard Fineman, Russert, Tweety, and the many, many more who proclaimed George Bush, Jr. to be the winner of the first debate with Gore, setting the narrative for the rest of his debates? Or were you thinking of some other media?
Sure, the stakes are much higher now and there's been a bunch of long overdue push-back from the reality-based community, but let's not forget our reality-based history. Thanks in advance.
Posted by: ed | October 1, 2008 2:33 PM
Palin is very good at spewing out conservative talking points dressed up in folksy populism. Plus you can't cram defense into someone nearly so easily as you can fill them with attack lines... So you're right, she'll just be out with gun blazing.
Biden is going to have to be very prepared to have a large store of quick anecdotes and put downs to puncture her generalities. At the same time he is quite free to use McCain as a punching bag, because Palin won't be able to do much to stop him.
Posted by: Ecks | October 1, 2008 2:54 PM
Ed, I actually consider the 2000 campaign coverage far more egregious than what I've seen so far in 2008. Then again, we have 30-odd more days of weirdness left. I do get the feeling that the same media folks who embraced Bush in 2000 don't appear to be drinking the Kool Aid in such large amounts this go-round.
Posted by: Marti Perez | October 1, 2008 3:20 PM
For the record, Margaret Carlson and Chris Matthews both insisted that Gore won the first (10/3/00) debate. Indeed, on 10/4/00, each insisted that their fellow pundits were being untruthful when they said different. Tucker Carlson and Christopher Hitchens joined them in this claim.
On Thursday, 10/5/00, Matthews flipped. Now that he had seen the short, ten-second clips from the debate, he could see that Bush had done much better than he initially thought, he said. This followed two nights in which Matthews aggressively insisted that Gore had "cleaned his clock."
Phone call from Jack Welch? Given the sheer absurdity of the reversal, it's very hard not to wonder. Career liberals, of course, have long agreed to avoid discussing such remarkable matters.
Posted by: bob somerby | October 1, 2008 3:23 PM
Biden better be practicing standing at a podium and giving an excellent come-back to charges of Obama voting against funding troops, voting for sex-ed for kiddies and voting to murder babies. He should know these issues inside and out and not think he is smart enough to wing it. His answers and his presentation should be focus grouped until they have it nailed.
Posted by: Th | October 1, 2008 3:46 PM
Based on recent Biden comments, both VP canidates seem to like speaking with their feet in their mouth. The difference seem to be that Biden's comments are rightly being attributed to the number 2 guy. Paylin's comments are being treated like she is running for the number 1 slot.
Posted by: James | October 1, 2008 4:25 PM