So, as expected, I didn't get the gaffe-fest I was rooting for in last night's VP debate. I never thought that the VP debate would alter the outcome of the election, but I was hoping for a bit more of a needle-mover. Instead, we watched a pretty boring exchange that had nary a memorable moment that will live on in sound bite infamy. That said, I do have a few thoughts:
Sarah Palin did just fine, however, it's fairly easy to hit your mark when your mandate is "Do No Harm". Like her convention speech, there is still something in her tone that rubs me wrong; I still can't put my finger on it. It is a mix of condescension, earnestness and "See what I can do?" that when combined with her folksy familiarity irritates the heck out of me.
I've heard multiple people say this morning that Palin did a great job getting up to speed in five weeks. Granted. But is that the starting point we deserve? Wouldn't we better served by someone who doesn't have to be brought up to speed to begin with?
She was obviously well coached and as prepared as could be expected in five weeks. That's not a criticism; every candidate spends hours game-planning for these things. However, there were moments when it was obvious that she was not able (or certainly not willing) to speak off the cuff about certain subjects. She stayed tethered to her strengths and her talking points, veering back to them when she seemingly had no better answer. (Of course, I spend every debate yelling at the television for someone, anyone to please answer the question you were asked.) She used the word maverick so much I expected Dirk Nowitzki and Mark Cuban to come out dribbling a basketball across the stage. Her deft public speaking skills escaped her on meandering answers on education and climate change. Also, on more than one occasion (Healthcare and some other topic I can't recall) she had no comeback for a strong Biden point. Overall, I was less than impressed. Exactly as I expected.
I also thought Joe Biden was underwhelming. Whether it was worrying about looking too aggressive or just playing the statesman, Biden looked bored early on. He eventually hit his stride showing his experience. He was able to back up his points with numbers (though I'm not sure the numbers were always accurate) and historical reference. I also thought he was genuine when his throat caught with emotion when speaking about raising his sons. I thought his strongest moment was when he called Palin out after she claimed that McCain has an exit strategy for Iraq. As soon as she said that I thought to myself that it must be a secret plan because I've never heard McCain explain it.
Bottom line: This debate was not expected to, and will not, have a great effect on the outcome of the election. Each VP candidate was a fairly effective surrogate for the top of his or her ticket. Maybe Tuesday will bring a little more drama.
4 comments:
Yes, yes, and yes. "Conoco Phillips, bless their hearts..." Huh? Their hearts are black [crude]!!!!! When a candidate flat out says that she's not going to answer the moderator's questions, can you still call it a debate? And when you're responding to your opponent's point, you can't just say that you're going to go back to energy policy (especially when I wanted to hear about her stance on the financial crisis). I swear I heard Joe say something about helping homeowners in trouble adjust not just their interest rates, but their principal. Wha?? I swear, it sucks to be a responsible mortgagee. I'd like someone to adjust my principal!! And yeah, maverick maverick maverick. Enough already.
From some things I've read online, it sounds like Sarah will stab anyone in the back that she needs to to get where she wants. With that in the back of my mind, it's hard to swallow all of her "gosh darn it" folksy crap. I'm not a big fan.
I forgot about him talking about adjusting the prinicpal. Why bother being a responsible homeowner? It's ridiculous that people that pay their bills, read the fine print and protect themselves get to watch as those who don't are rescued. There is no doubt that lenders used predatory practices, but if you pay attention and educate yourself you can not be taken advantage of. A couple of years ago Amanda and I were exploring buying a new house. The banker started telling us how much they would loan us and I had to stop her because she had far exceeded a number we knew we could actually afford. The point being they were willing to loan us an amount that could have gotten us in trouble. I don't feel sorry for those that didn't think about the ramifications of eating up too much of their budget with a mortgage.
I completely agree with you (it's fun to have a discussion with someone and not argue)! We had the exact same situation. We knew what we could afford, and meanwhile they give you a number that says that you can afford to buy in Potomac or something. Reality check, people! Maybe to a degree it's predatory lending, but like you said, people have to be responsible, too. The one good thing about this "financial crisis" is that maybe people will learn that they have to live within their means and not on credit. Oh wait, no they won't--the government will bail them out. Makes you kind of wish you did go ahead and buy that nice house in Pemberton, no?
doesn't matter. she's hot; reminds me of my wife and Tina Fey.
no, I haven't been drinking. it's just how I feel.
whoa, just read your comments honey... we know you're not a fan.
something tells me this is going to get awkward...
and for the record, I'd rather be living in Potomac than a few more miles up 270 (but ultimately I'd rather have you home with J, so it's a wash).
Post a Comment