Curiouser and curiouser. This was the Palin of earlier in the campaign--if not quite the Palin of the convention speech, at least the adequate though unspectacular Palin of the Gibson interview.
Weirdly, she seems to do better under pressure. From the vast heights of St Paul, she sank to the subterranean lows of the Couric interviews of recent days. Facing soft questions in an unintimidating setting, her performance in those clips was not just poor but pitiful. She looked terrified; she was faking it, and in a painfully obvious way. I literally cringed to listen to her talk about her foreign policy experience (Russia is just next door), her views on the Supreme Court (none that she knew of), and much else besides. Not merely unprepared for the vice-presidency, she seemed unprepared for conversation with anyone who picks up a newspaper now and then.
Tuning in this evening, every Republican I know was dismayed, and every Democrat jubilant, thinking the election would be as good as decided by 10.30 EST. But no. Back in the pressure cooker, with tens of millions watching, she again seemed relaxed and confident. She lost, by the way--Biden gave better answers, I thought--but she was not crushed by any means. It almost felt like victory, and McCain-Palin lives to fight on.
I long to read the inside story of preparing Palin for prime-time. What on earth did the campaign do to her between St Paul and Couric, to drain her confidence so and leave her looking like a gibbering idiot? Somebody must have decided that she had to turn herself into Biden within the space of a few days--a tall order, even supposing that the campaign needed a Biden rather than an anti-Biden, which she was ready, out of the box, to be.
She needed to cram, of course, but not in order to spew it out by rote in answer to any random question. The main thing--and perhaps, by tonight, this lesson had been learned--was not to pretend to be something she isn't, and not to claim knowledge or experience she plainly does not have. Living near an international border is not a grounding in geopolitics. Imperfectly memorising the names of a few foreign leaders does not cut it. The crucial thing was to seem steady, a quick learner, modest about her current breadth of knowledge, but of sound judgment and firm on certain basic principles. In striving to do well in the pop-quiz style of interview so beloved of the US media--any winner of Jeopardy, by this standard, would make a fine president--she surrendered her greatest advantage: authenticity. She had to refuse to play by those rules.
Whatever the reason--her sense of occasion, a change of coaching staff, who knows?--she did well enough tonight to lift the campaign's head back above water. She defaulted frequently to rehearsed talking points, and to topics she feels most comfortable with--notably energy. But what mattered most was that she never really floundered, and above all she never looked scared. She was herself. Some, certainly not all, of the damage of the past week is erased.
No light whatever was shed on policy issues. There were the obligatory pointless tussles about what Obama and McCain have or have not said about taxes, funding troops, and so forth. Biden pressed the linkage between Bush and McCain, and quite effectively--challenging Palin to point to differences. But her main riposte--this election must look forward not back, enough with the finger-pointing--will have struck many viewers as fair.
There was one real breakthrough. Did you notice? Asked which of their campaign promises might need to be delayed because of the financial crisis--a question put three times to Obama and McCain in their debate, without effect--Biden came up with an answer: "Well, the one thing we might have to slow down is a commitment we made to double foreign assistance. We'll probably have to slow that down." There's brave! That laughing you could hear was me.
Could Biden have been more effective? Maybe. I'm sure many Democrats will criticise him for failing to go for the kill. But I think he judged it just right. He was friendly and courteous, laughed at himself once or twice, and displayed a superior mastery of the issues without ever seeming overbearing. He was much more critical of McCain than of her. Altogether he seemed as likeable as Palin, and much more qualified. Perhaps he could have destroyed her by being more aggressive, but it would have been a risk. Palin in this confident mood would be no pushover. More aggression might have backfired, and could have aroused sympathy for his opponent. A clear win on points was all he needed, and that is what he got. Settling for this was wise. Obama and McCain go into the last round with the Democrat comfortably ahead.
I too expected her to crash and burn.
Having seen her present herself so badly on the Couric interviews who could really expect otherwise?
During the debate, I kept seeing that "deer in the headlights" look that I might not have noticed if it hadn't been for the earlier interviews. It was easier to see the transparency. She was proud and pleased with herself and her party and her world view because she got her lines right.
What could be better than two Mavericks? Well, is James Garner still around - maybe we could cram three in there? I'm not in a Maverick mood myself.
W has been a disaster on every front. Sarah could not offer a single distinction between her ticket and the current administration. I'm sorry, but given that, we had better look, and examine, where we've been and not just dismiss it as "too backward looking" That is an argument for the weak minded. Cheerfully delivered by Ms Palin.
In the end Sarah did not end the race tonight. The McCain campaign, republicans running against being republicans, is gonna live to die another day.
I knew she would be more like the night of the convention and less like in the TV interviews. She's a former broadcaster, let's not forget.
But it's still pathetic that a candidate for vice president can mouth memorized talking points it's not completely clear she understands fully and be seen as having done well merely because she didn't look scared. My how low the bar has been set.
Palin scares me precisely because she rarely looks scared, even when she should. She spouts gibberish with supreme confidence instead of humbly admitting "I don't know the answer to that" or "I don't have an answer for you."
In her debate with Biden, she answered very few questions directly. Read the transcript when it's published. She mesmerized us simply by speaking in sentences (mostly pre-scripted answers) without too much stumbling. Again, how low the bar has been set for her. It's actually a kind of sexism. And it's bad for the GOP and the nation in the long run.
John McCain scares me for a lot of reasons. But one of the reasons he scares me the most is that he had several terrific options as running mate but chose Sarah Palin. To be next in line for the presidency should he be elected then die in office.
Palin is a former sportscaster (and hence knows how to handle a TV camera), was on the debate team in high school, and did very well in debates while running for governor. All of this served her well at the RNC convention.
Clearly she does well in circumstances when she's had time to prepare or to be coached, and not so well when forced to be spontaneous.
None of this is surprising, deeply hidden stuff. It's right out there for anyone who's paying attention.
Yet people were expecting her to do poorly last night.
Amazing.
I thought they were both great until they shoved their collective noses up the Aipac ass. You're doomed if you don't and you're damned if you do.
That's just the way it is.
Can any of you college boys tell me how we're supposed to get out of an endless war while the Israelis are grinding their heel on the Palestinians? It's never gonna end.
She didn't blow it like I thought she would. But she had no real answers - just carousel rhetoric - and I would hate to see her as Vice President of the USA. She just doesn't bring the proper tools to the trade.
Yes, she did not win but how was she really going to lose in that skin tight and not to mention short 'little black dress' anyway? All of the old men are nuts about her. LOL.
A vote for McCain/Palin would be 'downright dangerous'!
You know those faux testicles that country boys hang on the back of their pick-ups? Well somebody found a set for Palin ! Only problem....like her they are fake ....think W .
No real surprises. Palin performed as I expected by reverting to energy policies whenever she didn't want to answer the real question. I can understand why she and McCain are so fond of each other -- they're both snide and snarky and make me want to slap them. Biden was steadfast and knowledgeable and, of course, won the debate. So what will we talk about next week?
Biden did something else, something wonderful: he showed McCain to be the Maverick he really is, which is not much of one.
I hope I never hear that word again outside the context of western TV shows and horses.
Palin held up alright and I thought Biden disappointed. I've heard him speak more clearly and persuasively, and he seems to do well in precisely the setting where Palin does poorly -- speaking off-the-cuff in an informal setting, gaffes included. Palin does well reciting a script into a camera, while Biden is less convincing in that mode.
The "debate" format and the moderator were also disappointing.
I agree with some of Clive's points. However, he uses that word again: adequate.
Adequate is the kind of word you use when you don't have quite enough guts to say something is bad, or enough evidence to say it was good. Either way, adequate demonstrates just how low the bar was for Sarah Palin.
Clive's benchmark I suppose is this: "The crucial thing was to seem steady, a quick learner, modest about her current breadth of knowledge, but of sound judgment and firm on certain basic principles."
I can't remember any other politician on the national stage being evaluated by these standards. This is outstanding. Moreover, I think Palin fails on the latter two points. I didn't find her judgment sound, and I can't identify any steady principles that are significant, relevant or meaningful.
With all due respect, has mediocre become the new good? Palin doesn't have the tools and anybody could see clearly that she wasn't answering any of the questions. The Republicans misogynist move to use her as a tool in an attempt to steal an election that they have no right to win (Based on the last 8 years alone) saddens me.
It's okay to like her. But if you vote for the McCain/Palin ticket thinking that she really has anything in common with you and your daily life you aren't paying attention. Obama, despite his expensive education, has much more in common with a working person.
Clive writes about Joe Biden's linking Bush and McCain: "But [Palin's] main riposte--this election must look forward not back, enough with the finger-pointing--will have struck many viewers as fair."
I give the viewers more credit than that. Palin criticized over and over the voting record of her opponents. Is that not finger-pointing looking back?
On a more general note, I think many are dismayed by the "let's not look back" argument. How are we supposed to decide what works and what does not if we do not look back? The failure to look back is precisely one of the most disastrous shortcomings of the current administration. The rhetoric of "let's look forward, not back" strikes me (and many others, I suppose) as downright scary.
She performed about how I expected.
There was one key difference between the Couric interview and the debate: follow-up questions. During the Couric interview her first answer to questions wasn't too horrible. It was only when she was pressed to answer the actual question asked.
If she had been forced to answer the questions asked of her, she would not have performed as well as she did because she never really answered any of the questions Ifill asked. If I hadn't seen the Couric interview I might not have noticed, but it was glaringly obvious because of it.
Palin perfectly mirrored the collapse of the GOP; "regulate wall street" and "get government off our backs.
Which is it, conservatives? Do we need regulation or don't we? Do we need to get government off our backs or don't we?
If you want to know why McCain will loose this election despite the scary black man who might be a muslim, it's because of the total lack of message and values Palin displayed with those contradictory statements; an ideological oxymoron that's brought our nation to the brink of financial collapse.
This is why the dial groups sent the meters pinging when she spoke about personal responsibility.
If you really want be Conservatives again, then it's time to reclaim responsibility. I'd suggest starting with the president and vice president, criminals who've violated the constitution numerous times. I'd also suggest reigning in the unitary executive before Democrats assume office and it becomes precedence.
I know, there's not much time. But I don't think that you've got much alternative. Responsibility includes accountability. That's what's got folks so peeved about the Wall Street bailout. And it will continue to peeve historians, muddying the name of conservatism for years to come.
Clearly every one thinks there side won. That's because those that believe the Government can solve all our problems and all we need to do is hand over the reigns want someone promising to take care of us and not make us work too hard. After all it worked in Stalin's Italy and Hitler's Germany, when indoctrinating the children about mother earth, healthy lifestyle and no God was the rage. Corporatizing of America (high regulation barring entry and lobbyists scratching the backs of congress) are exactly how Germany shut down Jewish business and it is exactly how Woodrow Wilson and FDR kept the Black man out of the market place. Why doesn't anyone read a history book, by history I don't mean the hack rewriters that think Fascism was a conservative movement. The Nazi movement and Italy’s fascism were both predicated on almost the exact premise of today’s liberal. Population control regulated eating habits, environmentalism and class war fare.
Most do not get or believe the danger of a society that strays away from personal freedom and personal responsibility, but keep it up and there will be no one left with either the incentive to work hard or the desire to keep their money in an economy that wants to steal it and give to welfare mothers and illegal aliens.
America wake up be responsible and do not be afraid to make it on your own. Ask not what your country can do for you and get off the couch and get a job.
Too Bad, none of the candidates have any Real Answers, or real solutions. I have Tried to read any plan about the real issues, FEW exist.
and both candidates have positions out there that are opposed to their Current Positions.
Everyone blames each other for causing the problems, and they are all the cause. I think that everyone that plays the Blame Game, should resign!!
Anyone that is not prepared to face the issues and put forth a plan of where we should go from here, regardless of who is to blame, is not qualified to do the JOB!!!
I have my own opinions as to where the country should be going, but that is a decision that I chose, and I would prefer to choose a candidate for the issues, not whether the candidate is more or less of a whiny B**ch
What on earth did the campaign do to her between St Paul and Couric, to drain her confidence so and leave her looking like a gibbering idiot?
This isn't some great mystery. She was reading from prepared remarks written by people other than herself on a teleprompter at St. Paul. Similarly last night she was showing a minimally adequate ability to regurgitate canned lines and talking points. In contrast during her Gibson and Couric interviews she was without a net and crashed to the ground in a big mess.
"Weirdly, she seems to do better under pressure."
No. She did better because follow up questions weren't permitted at the debate.
One moment I'm shocked isn't getting more traction is Palin's complete non-reaction to Joe Biden visibly choking up when mentioning the deaths of his first wife and daughter. For a lot of people I've talked to, that is The Moment that stayed with them - both Biden's poignance and Palin's heartless reaction.
She was also reading last night, sometimes whole passsages. Index cards it looked like. That's probably why she missed Biden's genuinely emotional moment to which most anyone would have responded at least with a look or gesture: she was reading and re-memorizing her next talking point (she could decide what it would be since, under Palin Rules, the answer doesn't have to have any connection or relation to the question asked.)
Biden - nothing to say but superlatives! The man genuinely cares - and thinks - and even listens. Obama did indeed hit it 'out of the park' with that selection.
I don't understand why commentators keep saying things along the lines of "this is the Palin from St. Paul," "this is the Palin we saw with all that confidence at the RNC," etc.
As far as I have observed the Palin of St. Paul, the Palin of Gibson, and the Palin of Couric, even the Palin of the Alaska gubernatorial debates--all those are the same person.
People seem to be missing the important element of *context* in explaining the apparent difference in her performance.
-In the Alaska debates there were THREE contenders, and she played the "rise above the bickering" role among the other two candidates. Her discussion of Alaska issues a little more specific, but her performance even THEN was based primarily on generalities and empty platitudes. "Oh I'm just here to make sure my opponents don't hurt each other" guffaw guffaw.
-In St. Paul and on the stump she has been reading talking points and speech text GIVEN TO HER. She used to be a newscaster for God's sake... she has lots of experience in reading teleprompters.
-In Gibson & Couric--her performance was horrible in both. Worse in Couric because Couric had the gumption to ask follow-ups that maybe Gibson couldn't (or didn't want to) without looking sexist.
-And last night... Whether it was the debate format or the manufactured controversy around Gwen Ifill's upcoming book, Ifill's role as moderator was neglible, allowing Palin to run all over the page with her talking points, sometimes seemingly read right OFF THE PAGE at times.
Sift through her answers and you get the same thing: tastes great, less filling. Except this time, the taste is that fake saccharine kind that leaves a bitter aftertaste like so many fake sweeteners do.
If Palin were to do another sit down with a serious journalist, or have to face a press conference with follow-up questions that force her to go beyond her first-line-of-defense non-answers, she'd still be a moose-caught-in-the-headlights. Absolutely CLUELESS.
Palin does better giving speeches from prepared notes than she does answering questions. When asked a question last night she simply ignored the question, went to her notes, and read her speech.
It was very lucky for her that the Republicans were successful "working the ref" Ifil and so she didn't ask Palin any tough gotcha questions like Waht newspapers does she read.
Clive Crook, you really are a Republican Hack. I'm now reading you for the same reason I read Bill Kristol-entertainment value.
I actually thought Biden's response to the "what do we have to cut form government spending," to have been particularly clever. McCain and Obama floundered on the question, but that simple response, and then focusing on the future I found to be very effective.
An additional point, for the past 30 years or so, the issue of tax cuts, starve the beast, outsider has been extremely effective at rallying the Republican core (note I did not state conservative base). Watching the debate, Palin represents a folksy caricature of what the Republican talking points have been describing for this period of time. There were no solutions, just animosity to the government. Well fine, but Republicans have controlled the presidency, congress, or both for 26 of the past 28 years. Yet they are somehow still the outsiders, fighting for their lives, pledging their future to the people; it's all kind of ridiculous.
I'm a Canadian who has been following the election since the primaries and I really hope America makes the right choice and votes for Barack Obama.
I think that Biden was the clear winner in last night's debate. I loved that comment he gave about the ultimate bridge to nowhere! Palin did better than I expected. But that is by no means a compliment. The bar was set so low for her, the only way to go was up. It's easy to do well when you completely avoid the questions you are asked to answer, and use rehearsed talking points or her supposed strength "energy". My opinion of Palin has not changed. I still believe that she is not ready for the vice-presidency and certainly not ready to be president.
The best part of the entire debate was when Biden spoke so affectionately of being the father of young children and showing that emotion. He scored super points there.
Clive, you really think Palin's "we should look forward, not backward" line works? With real people? Wow. I am surprised at that. I cannot believe that the American people are really expected to put on blinders about how we got into this mess and just hope the next guy is better.
As Biden said re:global warming- If you don't know the cause, you can't find a solution.
The two moments that defined the debate for me:
1)Biden expresses raw emotion over his tragic family losses, then Palin, without a moment of acknowledgment, chillingly blathering about some campaign talking point. In that moment it erased any pretense of warmth on her part. She can connect to a camera, but not to a human being standing right next to her.
2)Palin announcers her desire to "exert power" over the Senate and to continue the Cheney Doctrine interpretation of the VP office. Be afraid. Very afraid. This woman, with no real grasp of any of the subject matters surrounding national governance, doesn't just want to be VP, she wants to be a secretive, power-wielding, non-accountable VP. She's just McCain as a tool to her own ascendancy. This revelation alone makes her a non-starter. We all know how appreciative we are of the role Cheney has played in the last 8 years.
the VP debate was stunning. Palin did a decent job faking about 20% of the questions and didn't even bother answering the other 80%.
i couldn't help thinking of the end of the movie Billy Madison, when the Principal says to Adam Sandler, "Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
movie fan: good one (clap clap)
The Bozo Factor: Talk about a learning curve, five weeks in and the hopes of the RNC rest on Sarah Palin at the VP debate, no thanks to Katie Couric. Sarah knocks it out of the ballpark; again. There is however something I'd like to point out about Democratic politicians. Something they do with increasing regularity. I'm sure you've noticed. Now if you don't like Bozo the clown, if you feel that he is a particularly bad clown and bad for the country, why then don a Bozo wig, a pair of size 14 shoes, and a rubber nose whenever denouncing Bozo? If there is an official uniform of the president, it's the pastel blue tie, white shirt, and dark suit first popularized by George W. Bush. The color scheme comes from the presidential flag, and no other American president made those colors his distinctive style before George W. Bush. In 2004, Bill Clinton even had his presidential portrait painted wearing George W's signature garb. Although the 1960 Kennedy vs. Nixon debate was televised in black & white, people still talk about the significance of color. But, there’s no confusion to this day about who wore what. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. And, the fashion police have long memories. Ms. Palin dressed for and aced the debate. Note: before railing against Bozo, please try not to emulate Bozo. It makes one look like a Bozo: http://theseedsof9-11.com
I agree 98% with the observation of the debate, but I still don't see Palin's strength on energy issues. This seems to be a common misconception. Here area of knowledge lie in oil/natural gas. Not energy. I wish someone would call her on this.
I'll give Mr. Crook credit for writng about this. His conservative colleague Ross has thrown in the towel and is now covering TV shows. After his characterization of the question Mrs. Palin what newspapers do you read as a GOTCHA question, he should stick to TV shows.
By the way. I live near a gas station. Does that make me an expert on energy in Mr. Crook's world. As I watched her I really felt that I could display as much knowledge on the issues brought up as she did without any coaching at all.
We've had eight years of folksy and mediocre.
Let's go for competent and exceptional, shall we?
She's still faking it. She just got better at faking it.
Watching that debate I saw Palin act like a junior high school student using her cute little nose to tease and wink at the audience while avoiding treating this as a real job. Her little "shout out" was like something out of American Idol. She never promoted McCain, even suggested she had her own agenda, what ever that was it was also vague and she didn't even outline any plans, I mean she completely ignored the questions and continued this little junior high school girl tease. WTF? Biden however, connected with me. He was on the mark with the issues, the solutions, the direction of a prosperious America and as for personal connection, I didn't know him before but he's got my vote, caring father, a respected stateman, someone who talks to me instead of down at me like McCain or Palin who treats me like I'm some Joe Sixpack frat boy in love with her. He knows. McCain you picked pure Cotton Candy for the VP position and what ever respect I once had for you is gone now.
In the spirit of full disclosure, I would like to inform readers that I sent off my postal ballot for John McCain this week.
I may be in a swing state on the election day, hence the early vote.
responses below rather than to my email, please.
Clive,
I thought the speach was anti-climactic. The bar was set so low it was on the ground. I could have written the analyisis you heard on Fox News a month ago. "Biden gave better answers." That's how you typically determine who won the speach. Here its how you determine that Palin deidn't make a complete ass out of herself, and thus 'won.' Anyone who can look at this John McCain-Sarah Palin act and say, "that's what I want running the country for the next four years", has their head up their @$$. I think John McCain and Sarah Palin should stop campaigning all together and stick to the Bill Ayers/Jeremiah Wright crap if they want to win the election because, themselves in person simply won't be enought to carry Ohio and Florida.
It's now Sunday afternoon here in California. I didn't see Palin on any of the public affairs shows? I don't think she has the ability to think intellectually. I guess she doesn't need to, since McCain has all the answers and will know right off the top of his head what to do about anything that might come up. It's called hubris on his part, and I'm so amazed by her I can't come up with a word. She reminds me of a high school prom queen running for student council.
McCAIN on NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNING:
"Sooner or later people are going to figure out that if all you run is negative attack ads you don't have much of a vision for the future, or you're not ready to articulate it."
John McCain (February 21, 2000 interview)
Too bad the old John McCain is long gone!
***************************
PALIN’S UNFITNESS:
Regardless of political stripe, we all must conclude that Gov. Palin is seriously unfit to lead the country. I respected John McCain before he picked Palin (I voted for him in the 2000 primary), and I would not fear for the safety of the country with a McCain-Pawlenty or a McCain-Portman or a McCain-Cantor ticket.
But Palin is a wacked-out nutjob looking for the “end of days”. Apart from the fact that she is clearly incompetent to run a country with 500 times the population of her state, I fear that given the wrong day with the wrong presidential adviser, she might just push that red button to bring about that Armageddon she expects to happen any day now.
***************************
If McCain-Palin win, at BEST we will have a former-straight-talker with no vision for the government, and no plan for the economic mess we’re in. And that’s only if he stays healthy… At WORST, a President Palin (shudder)… Heaven help us all if that were to happen, the Bush years will seem like the good old days.
Vote Obama in 2008, even if only to prevent Palin from having a chance to ascend to a post she is clearly unfit to take.