Via kos:
CBS NEWS/KNOWLEDGE NETWORKS POLL
(Uncommitted Voters who watched the debate)46% of uncommitted voters who watched the debate tonight thought Joe Biden was the winner. 21% thought Sarah Palin won, 33% thought it was a draw… 98% after the debate saw [Biden] as knowledgeable (79% before the debate)….
CNN’s poll just came in, of all debate watchers, MoE 4%.
Who did the best job in the debate?
Biden 51
Palin 36Did Biden do better or worse than you expected?
Better 64
Worse 14
Same 20Did Palin do better or worse than you expected?
Better 84
Worse 7
Same 8Is Palin qualified to serve as president?
Yes
Before debate: 42
After debate: 46No
Before debate: 54
After debate: 53
I was busy tonight so had to TiVo the debate. I did hear the last 15 minutes or so in the car, including Biden’s absolutely first rate answers on the vice presidency in general (trashing Cheney and making Palin looking ridiculous for backing Cheney’s insane view that the vice presidency isn’t a purely executive branch office), and on how he understands what it’s like to be a single parent. From the little bit that I heard, he was both authoritatively knowledgeable and deeply human. I was impressed.
Is it worth my watching the rest?
Similar to the first Prez debate, in which Obama needed to show convincingly that he could hold his own on the presidential stage, i.e. he could be Commander-in-Chief, Palin needed to show she was not really a deer-caught-in-the-headlights, way-out-of-her-league candidate as she has seemed. She accomplished that. Therefore, even though Biden showed more depth and understanding, I would say that, in regard to what they both needed to do tonight, Palin actually accomplished more for her ticket.
… shouldn’t be the minimum standard anyway. Accomplishing at least that much is to not accomplish very much at all. Of course accomplishing even that much was a lot for here given where she started earlier in the week.
When she was asked about Cheney’s assertions that the VP has special privileges as a member of both the Executive and Legislative branches, she clearly did not understand the question at all.
Because I clearly didn’t understand her answer to that one. It sounded like she wanted to out-Cheney Cheney.
That’s a stunningly low standard of what she ‘had to do.’ I’m very curious as to how you came up with it. It sounds a lot like what I’d expect a press flackey from McCain’s camp to say.
<
p>I guess, if all she ‘had to do,’ was show that she could hide the fact that she’s completely inept, then she succeeded.
<
p>However, I’m a firm believer of pragmatism. The idea of an election is to win it. So, in an event like this, a candidate ‘has to do’ something that brings them closer to accomplishing that. If I were to define what Sarah Palin “had to do,” I’d do so saying that she had to stop the bleeding – and she didn’t. The polls were very clear on that – Biden thumped her.
<
p>The reality of the matter is that the wide margins of Biden’s debate victory will mean one of two things: he’s either going to expand Obama’s lead or at least he’s going to solidify the wide lead Obama’s starting to already create, making it all the harder that McCain can change the hearts and minds of Americans. Palin ‘had to do’ something to stop that. She failed.
… as the morning news spin about her not drooling all over herself propagates.
when i see it.
<
p>=)
from the first prez debate. In fact, it was the spin which changed the day or two after.
<
p>I’m hopeful, but not counting on it,
She needed to do more than beat expectations. She needed to prove that she is qualified to be VP, and I don’t think she did that.
Here:
he kicked ass.
. . . their folksy appeal is hard to calculate. This is not a run-of-the-mill year with the war, terrorism, the economy, and othe important issues.
<
p>All McCain and Palin need to do is hold their own. It may be clear to us, Democrats, that they would be four more years of George W. Bush. An inconcievable choice for us, but something some might find comfort in.
<
p>Democrats should sshore up support here and reach out to voters in ‘battleground’ states. Keeping the margind here high for Democrats will motivate people to call their friends, relatives, and transplants in New Hampshire, Maine, Florida, and other swing states and ask them to support our ticket because Democrats policy positions are right.
<
p>Let alone, our candidates are outstanding!
<
p> Go Obama-Biden!
<
p> Yes we can!
<
p>
My sister in Minneapolis described Palin as “smug, mean, and a poor listener.”
<
p>Hint: when you’re trying to appeal to “Joe Six Pack” it’s poor form to call him out by name.
<
p>I agree that reaching out is good.
I mean, Joe Six Pack sounds like the guy who comes home and drinks himself to sleep every night, doesn’t show up to the kids soccer games and recitals and expects his wife to have dinner ready.
<
p>Nothing wrong with beer drinkin’, but if I were of labor and of the blue collar constituency, I wouldn’t want the Six Pack to be the marker of my identity over my hump-busting labor, or the product of my labor, or my commitment to putting food on my family’s table.
<
p>Joe Six Pack sounds like that bachelor friend that always shows up at your coockout or for the Sunday football game, six pack in hand. I get that it has been a handle for working people for a long time, but the actual identity of this class of people is much more mature than the Six Pack moniker evokes.
I mean, if you have to keep saying that you appeal to reg’lar folks, have to keep calling yourselves mavericks, rather than letting your views and your actions speak for yourself, it comes across as artificial.
You mean Biden didn’t show what a buffoon he is?
<
p>Somebody’s got some explaining to do.
We expected Biden to be Biden and everyone waited with baited breath to see what Palin would do. Palin aquitted herself well—–very well.
<
p>Odd how some women absolutely despise other women they are jealous of. It is not by accident that the term “catty” was coined!
She can regurgitate talking points, but we knew that already with her RNC speech. But the funny thing was she ran out of TPs half way through the debate and started using the same ones again. Another thing I found particularly interesting is that she had no idea on how to respond to a few questions, even with her prep, so she gave a some one line gibberish then talked about energy policy. They must have told her to do that if she didn’t have a clue. The snap polls showed that people saw the same thing. I don’t think people are very comfortable with Palin as a VP candidate. If your criteria is someone not falling on their face then you have some fairly low expectations.
I kept finding myself wondering what on earth she was talking about. This wasn’t a speech contest, it was a debate. You win by answering the questions in an intelligent fashion, not by failing to fall off the podium.
<
p>Can you imagine her dealing with an actual crisis?
…thinking that you should accept low standards for someone just because they are of your gender.
<
p>I expect her to be held to the SAME standards. If you want to think that woman are being catty for not adhering to the ‘soft bigotry of low expectations’ or not agreeing with her views, than you are a misogynist, no question.
If anything, her “improved” performance last night may have only accentuated her general unpreparedness. It was more a testament to the amazing job her handlers were able to do with her in a short time. She avoided any areas in which she wasn’t trained to respond and retreated into the “we-are-the-mavericks” platitudes. I think the general public realizes a president or VP needs to understand the full implications of these issues.
She was barely part of the debate. She’d give a one sentence answer, then just start regurgitating talking points. She’s not running for “pointy haired boss” she’s running for VP.
The comments on this blog continue to be humorous, at best. Ry, admit it: Joe Biden lost last night. Relax, Obama is still going to win the election.
Or even a line of reasoning?
Joe Biden never had an original thought about this nation’s energy needs. He let the greens tell him that nuclear was not good for us; he opposed drilling for oil; he said stupid things about coal. Like most politicians, democrat and republican, he lets his staff do his writing and thinking on important issues. And what was the Exxon bashing all about, if not that? Another area of weakness is foreign policy: despite his years and years of living off us by being in the senate his ideas on foreign policy border on the absurd at times (cf. dividing Irag into three countries). I’m giving you my point of view here; don’t get bent out of shape–American people want change this year and Obama will win.
You must have missed this part of the “debate.” She totally outclassed him on this discussion.
what part of your comment relates to the debate?
She claims she wants us to achieve “energy independence” and acts as if drilling is going to get us there, when we all know that will only put a small dent in the problem and won’t pay off for another ten years. She made a big deal about this hugely expensive gas pipeline that may never be built.
<
p>Whether or not you like Biden’s record on foreign policy, he did a good job last night, and much better than Palin. At least he has some background in foreign policy other than imaginary trade meetings with Russia. (BTW, I am not so sure that the 3-state solution to Iraq is all that bad idea, the Kurdish region is almost a separate state already.)
<
p>
You don’t want “energy independence”? Oh, I forgot, you are the person who wants us to go back to living in caves and huddling around fires to keep warm. You are probably opposed to all forms of energy which are truly productive. Ten years is not that long a time, especially where speculators who bid up prices based on future events are concerned. Notice how the price of oil futures came down after the topic of offshore drilling became popular. Oh, I forgot, lefties don’t understand basic economics.
Joe Biden never distinguished himself during the Cold War as having much insight into the Evil Empire. And Balkanization (3 Irags, 2 Canadas, Kosovo,) if fine if you understand the long term implications for US foreign policy. Joe is a nice guy, but bright he is not.
Actually, most reputable sources cite declining demand as the impetus for falling oil prices:
<
p>
<
p>International Herald Tribune
I don’t follow. All Palin did last night was not implode, and further lock-in her supporters, who think “Say it ain’t so, Joe” is the kind of zinger that qualifies someone to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency.
<
p>That doesn’t exactly move the needle for McCain-Palin.
<
p>Also, I thought Biden was fantastic. Likeable, human, knowledgeable, Presidential.
<
p>Further, I thought Palin’s endorsement of the expanded role of the VP under Cheney was a bizarre answer that will hurt a bit. Why, when Biden spent most of the evening saying McCain = Bush, would you sign on to Cheney’s power grab? It’s not like undecideds lean strongly toward this crap. This point confirmed several things to me about Palin, not the least is that she’s ambitious and power-hungry.
<
p>Cheney, though evil, is at least learned. I’m willing to grant that Palin is less evil, but much less learned and much more wacky.
Why is that most people but you think that Biden won?
The “the heck with Ifill and this stiff standing over there, talk to the camera” was far more well done than effective. Biden, thankfully, didn’t act like a know-it-all or a bully for the most part, which makes it a draw, at best.
<
p>While the draw might help Palin over the longer term, I don’t think it helps McCain all that much over the next few weeks.
But her answers were abysmal, if you’re an undecided voter really trying to discern a candidate’s viewpoints, you didn’t get much outta her, except that she doth protest too much a maverick.
Watching the Senator from Capital One complaint about financial deregulation and blame everything on Bush was watching a guy lie through his ever-glistening teeth.
I wouldn’t have read him without a Daily Kos tip, but wow!
<
p>On John McCain’s desperation:
On Obama’s temperament and intellect:
Up is down, black is white, the lion sleeps with the lamb, and so forth.
<
p>Krautheimer is a total hack; I can’t think of any article over the past 20 years or so (I remember thinking Krautheimer was a tool when I was in high school) that he’s written that was very good.
<
p>But this article, save the occasional digs at Democrats, was pretty good. Especially:
<
p>
<
p>Many of us (myself included) have been at times dismayed at Obama’s disinterest and/or inability to land a knockout blow, either to Clinton or now to McCain.
<
p>But I think that Obama understands that elections are not boxing matches; attempting a KO is risky and doesn’t really work; elections are always decided on points. If you like boxing, Obama is playing masterful rope-a-dope. If you like running, he’s a marathon runner who makes his move fairly late in the race, establishes a lead, and sits on it. No world-record attempts. Football: 6 point lead, 4th quarter, has the ball, and is running down the clock with a 1st-class running game.
<
p>And so forth.
<
p>This deal isn’t sealed, but I have new appreciation for no-drama-Obama. He has a clear objective (270+ EVs) and is focusing only on that. All else is noise. It looks to be working; let’s close this deal!
<
p>
When I was like, “WHY didn’t he call McGoo on ___ lie???” the independent voter was like, “I saw what I needed to see, a calm smart candidate I can imagine handling a crisis.” Hence the polls on who really won, which surprised me!
<
p>I had a new respect for his campaign stratagery then.
99.99% of of what I hear from him is lunacy, but once in blue moon, he makes sense. I hated the fact that I liked his June piece on gas taxes (I have zero fluency in economics, but on first read this sounds like a great, albeit politically unachievable idea).
<
p>The guy is obviously bright – he’s a Harvard Med School physician and was chief psychiatric resident at MGH where he published important research on a previously unidentified symptom of bi-polar disorder. It scares me that someone so intelligent can hold the intellectually bankrupt positions Krauthammer has been spouting has spouted the last 8 years. We could use that brain here in reality land, you know?
<
p>
My mother is bipolar (plus a few other things), so I have spent a lot of time interacting with mental health professionals.
<
p>It is my opinion that the percentage of this population (mental health professionals) with mental health issues (or just plain weirdness) is higher than that of the general population.
<
p>This is not intended as a flame of the field; many of the people I’ve dealt with have been fantastic. My mother is a tough case but has benefited, on balance, from their help; I also have a very good friend who suffers from serious depression but who has made a spectacular rebound thanks to medication and therapy.
<
p>But I’ve also run into some real (smart, well-educated, many letters after their name) loonies along the way.
Who goes through eight years of medical training at immense cost and stops practicing medicine as soon as his training is done? Probably someone who really hates patients.
…to learn about the man before posting something so breathtakingly stupid.
My one comment about the nitwit Palin is that she took a line from John Winthrop (made when he was sailing to Massachusetts in 1630) — the same line that John Kennedy repeated (it’s inscribed on the dais of the House chamber at the State house) — and attributed it to Ronald Reagan. That “shining city on the hill” is pure Bay State, which is part of the “East Coast” that Palin derided last night.
from John Winthrop’s sermon, delivered aboard the Arbella, in 1630 (emphasis mine):
<
p>
<
p>Governor Palin apparently thought Reagan came up with it, even though Reagan expressly credited John Winthrop in his farewell address. How hilarious that she apparently unwittingly invoked New England, perhaps the most reliably blue region of the country, as a “shining” example for not only the country but the entire world.