Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last

Darn tootin, let me get back to the point of energy again if I might for a minute...

What did you all think?

My take:

Sarah Palin memorized her lines very well.

We're supposed to just assume I guess that she and McCain are for alternative energy despite their voting/governing record. A faith leap.

If I hear "other countries hate us for our freedoms and democracy" one more time I might throw up. This, alone, if this is someone's spoken explanation during a discussion of foreign policy as to why other countries might be irritated with us or opposed to us geopolitically, should disqualify them as incompetent. Because to believe this implies either a) dishonesty-- you know better but it just rings better to the public ear to say foreigners hate us irrationally for noble things about us b) complete lack of assigning any agency to other people/governments or any understanding of American foreign policy and how our policies might have irritated other countries. (One of those things being near-complete support of Israel without qualification or "precondition", as McCain and Palin might like to say.)

Palin apparently disagrees with many of you that the problem with the lending crisis was just irresponsible poor people and liberal pet projects and TOO MUCH regulation. She clearly and emphatically blamed predatory lending. Curious to hear how many of you spin that around the arguments you've made.

Biden repeated himself a few times; not a huge failing or anything but I think sometimes it was unnecessary and he could have squeezed a couple more points in with the time.

If we grade this as a debate, which is a tad questionable in my opinion, Biden won. Biden had far more evidence, while Palin's arguments tended to be rhetoric-based. You don't win debates by stating you fight for Joe Six-Pack and offer nothing to back it.

However, since I'm assuming that we all know that wasn't really a debate, and was more a series of stump speeches, then I'd say Biden was still more impressive, though by a slimmer margin.

I didn't even bother to watch it. I watched the Canadian English Election debate.

Yeah it was style points for Palin only, pretty much. That and the same repeated misrepresentations of Obama's voting record. She did some very rehearsed winks and threw in a lot of "darn right"s meant to revitalize her charm with middle America, but very little substance.

Put it in the election thread.

Well um too late, I already created a separate thread. I thought it would be better to discuss it separately like we did the Presidential debates, because a lot of the points and posters in the Election thread didn't watch the VP debate. Or might not want to read through 13 pages just about the VP debate.

Palin won apparently.

lock this thread before I force you to lock it by talking about minorities, homosexuals and the chinese.

What exactly is your problem?

Get a sense of humor, geez. Most of us backroomers rejoice when Tuffstuff says something humorous

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit:
I'm not saying the FNMA collapse was brought on by too much regulation. I'm saying there was too little.

Moving on - Palin with a net win because she had a good showing, after the latest media lamblastings and those poor interviews.

CR

It was actually Fragony who said there was too much. I didn't name you by name, CR. Much as I adore you.

How exactly does she win? Because she didn't answer 1/3 of the questions, because she changed the topic several times, because her arguments were mostly rhetoric based instead of evidence based, or because people thought she was a moron before hand?

She won because conservatives feel they can hold their head up again that she's not completely mentally defunct. I mean, she still is. She just rose way above the previous bar. Although I think it seemed like she fell back on a lot of rehearsed choruses like energy.

I think Biden won, but Palin didn't blunder as bad as some of her interviews have been. I literally stood up and yelled when Biden brought up the point that Iran is led by the theocracy NOT Ahmadinejad.

I also thought Biden was much more rhetorically rich and appealing. Topics are the most important but "dog nabbit" and "straight up" and all this "maverick" talk started to REALLY piss me off. I tried to stay neutral, but I just can't take Palin's drivvel.

Misrepresenting your opponent's voting record is standard practice in these elections. As is Presidential debate rule #1: never let a question interfer with your "answer".

I was pleased to see that Palin did as well as she did. I was ready to hit the "off" switch if her performance was too painful to watch - I just don't like seeing people embarass themselves. She did alright drawing on what experiences she does have and I liked how she addressed her extreme views when the talk about gay marriage came up. The folksy approach was a bit too much at times, but I guess that's how she connects with people. My impression after the debate is much more positive of her but I think she does have a way to go before she's even remotely ready to take on the job of president if the need arises.

Biden was pretty good but aside from potential gaffes, that was expected. He did seem aggitated once or twice but kept himself under control. His turn at being folksy like Palin sounded silly. I have a hard time envisioning Biden in a Home Depot...unless he was shopping for a domesting policy. <rimshot> Biden's comments about Channey were surprisingly blunt, but I can't say I took issue with them.

The debate seemed much more cordial than the presidential debate last week. The rather length post-debate discussion between Biden and Palin and their families was nice to see - and I'd have loved to hear what they were saying to each other. Anyway, Biden gets the win in my book but Palin did bolster up her image quite a bit.

That's why I put "darn tootin' " in the beginning of this thread. I was just waiting for more Fargo lines to come rolling off.

Just curious — what would have to happen for you not to conclude that?

I will say this, I liked that both of them projected mutual warmth, even if it was fake. And both looked at each other and smiled on occasion. Whereas it was like whacking away at a block of ice with a chisel for Obama to even get a glance from McCain.

She'd have to announce a plan for gun bans, pretty much. For Panzer anyway.

Good question. I think Palin had a great debate. I'll tell you flat out if I think she's embarrassing. Her debate style was disarming, aggressive and she was spot on in her accusations. What more could you wan't? She did very well.

I think Biden did very well, although he was very liberal with his facts. I trust his intentions. He is a net positive for me in this election, but I believe that he started out a bit weak and tired looking. He finished strong, but seemed to get riled up by Palin's more aggressive style.


What could she have done to make you agree with Panzer's point?

I think they both did better than I (feared) they would. I thought Palin would have a blankout moment, but apparently she was trained to bluff through those by changing the subject. And not too many HARD specific questions were asked, many were broad ones and easily answered in abstract, although Biden brought in a lot of specific votes and names in his answers. Biden I was afraid would lose his temper, or make a bad gaffe or say something potentially demeaning like his "clean" remark about Obama way back upon a time.

I think it comes down less to the fact that Biden was clearly more experienced and had a grasp on a lot more history, because that could have just been expected based on how old he is and how long he's served compared to Palin. It comes down to Palin and McCain are out stumping and trying to salesman policies which don't differentiate substantially from the last 8 years, except in some faith promises that go against McCain's voting record. And that Obama and Biden are promising something very different (maybe not GOOD different to a lot of you, but different). So I think Palin or anyone really , McCain too, has an uphill battle trying to repackage the same ideological bents and sell them as truffles of change.

Well, I haven't watched the debate yet, and if it's a snoozer I may not spend two hours on it. The day only has so many hours in it, after all, and a working dad's gotta cut corners somewhere, even if I am a bit of a politics junkie.

I'm at a point where I don't think my opinion means much. I know which way I'm voting, and nothing short of a meltdown/scandal/Scanners-style-public-head-explosion is going to change my mind. I'm much more interested in the polling data on undecideds and indies.

It's hard for me to picture what would make me declare someone a winner or a loser from just watching a debate. I mean, these aren't really debates at all, and you can't view them as such. They're more like weird rituals of talk-talk that form a small part of our ju-ju magic and national popularity contest. I can't pretend to understand how this big, slow likeability trust-off works.

This was more of a debate than Obama-McCain.

Palin said there was never anything she compromised on only things she couldn't push through. I will not vote for someone who thinks they are entitled to a mandate.

Ooh, who you voting for? Or that too personal? :)

I think it felt that way because they looked at each other while talking. But the back and forths were still basically arguments over their boss's voting records.

are you serious?

Does that mean I ought to take the time to watch it? I have this sneaky feeling that it isn't worth giving up any work time or play-with-kids time ...

I'll give you twelve guesses and the first eleven don't count. Hint: My candidate's name rhymes with "yo mama."

Hehe, adorable

I think it was worth it, Lemur. If you could sit through McCain-Obama, this one was worth it.


I went to American public schools so I might have this screwed up but, YOU'RE VOTING FOR YO YO MA? THE VIOLINIST?!

That doesn't rhyme at all. Lemur is writing in 'Nobama', obviously

Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last