It might have been the most hyped VP debate since 1984, and were it not for the economic issues that have been going on, the speculation and expectation would have been even more extreme. I watched the Vice Presidential debate last night between Sen. Joe Biden and Gov. Sarah Palin, and even though I'm not an expert on anything, here's how each shaped up, in my opinion.
Senator Joe Biden
It was no big surprise to me that Senator Biden had the more calming, steady presence on the stage. He's older and, for better or for worse, has been a politician for more than 30 years, so his discussion of issues comes across as passion mixed with history. For example, when he talked about issues John McCain, Barak Obama, or himself had voted for or against, he did it from the perspective of someone who was there. Where Sarah Palin could say, "Barak Obama voted against funding the troops." Joe Biden could say, "No, it was a procedural vote. . . " and then go on to explain what the heck a procedural vote is!
The highlight of Biden's time on stage, for me, came when he talked about knowing what the average American is going through. He shared a little from his life, and told stories about being a single parent, etc., even getting choked up at one point. I thought his line about just because he's a man he doesn't know about raising kids was pure genius, and whomever came up with that should be named ambassador to a very sunny country if they're elected.
Where Biden faltered was when he talked about Barak Obama. When he's attacking McCain, he's good. When he's talking about his own record, he's golden. But when he talks about the Barak Obama's being ready to be president and that they agree on the substance of every issue, it's sometimes hard to tell who he's trying to convince, us or himself. At times during the debate, he came off sounding a little like, "No, we really do agree. . . honest. I mean, we might disagree on the how of things, but really, I like him, he's gonna be a great president. We agree." And the whole time he's doing this, he's reinforcing what I think is a so far unexposed issue with the Democrats. They want the White House back, and they're excited because they think they have a shot, but the men and women who have been in Washington for a while, are just not sure at all about the young guy from Illinois, and away from the big crowds, it shows.
Sarah Palin
Anyone who was surprised that Sarah Palin did a good job last night, shouldn't have been. She has done this before, after all. Maybe not on this scale, but it's not like she's never debated anyone, and she came out ready to prove that she is learning as she goes. (By the way, if you go back and look at footage of Barak Obama in 2007, when this whole thing got started, you'll see many similarities between him and Palin in terms of growth. She's just having to do it much quicker.) Palin is Everywoman, and that's who came through last night. Her polling data, folks she's talked to on the soccer field, and how about her appealing to working and middle class to make sure that a) they aren't taken advantage of by corporate America again and b) that they learn to live inside their means?! A Republican candidate rallying the middle class?! If they could figure out how to tap into that more, it could be a huge asset.
The highlight of Palin's time on stage, for me, came when she talked about the Democrats' constant pointing back to the policies of the Bush administration, and said this is not looking ahead for change. It wasn't a glib remark, and I think, much like Biden's list of ways John McCain has not been a maverick, really got at the heart of one of the major parts of the Democrats' strategy.
Many might site Palin's lack of depth on certain issues as her biggest weakness last night, but I don't think that was it. I mean, it should be expected that she wouldn't have wide breath and/or depth at this point. For me, her biggest snag was not coming across as serious enough. It seemed very important to her to let America know that she doesn't always do things the way she's expected to, and there's nothing really wrong with that, but it came across as sometimes glib. Almost as if she doesn't get that the White House isn't a place to just "be different." I don't have anything against folks who want to shake things up, but I did come away from the debate with the feeling that I'm just not sure she gets the seriousness of the presidency. I mean, I like catchy phrases and an outside-the-box mentality as much as anyone, but the image of her, in the Oval Office, having to make the decisions in a moment of crisis isn't one I'm totally comfortable with, and last night didn't resolve that for me.
Here's the thing: I was telling my roommate the other night that debates are a little like standardized tests. You don't really have to know the material well to take and pass a standardized test, you just have to be good at taking standardized tests, and that's pretty much how debates work too. Problem is, it's really the only, nationwide evaluation we have for our candidates, and fair or not, you gotta know how to play. And, at the end of the day, no matter how much spin is tried to put on it, we don't vote for the Vice President. Who that person is, might help us make our decision, true enough, but that cannot ultimately be why we vote for a certain candidate.
No comments:
Post a Comment