Originally Posted By DyGDisney >>Then she said that she hated the fake, folksy stuff. My mom is really snobby that way and has gotten a bit racist in her old age. She really hates Obama and really has no idea about politics. She thinks Fox News really is Fair and Balanced and it's the only place she gets her news. And she really thinks there's a culture war and an attack on Xmas.<< My mom and your mom are twins, except my mom liked the folksy stuff. My mom became very addicted to Fox after the terrorist attacks. Before that she wasn't very political.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney See, I need a new word for very. We have a family friend who was a huge Clinton supporter. She now says she will not vote for Obama, she is 79. My mom used her as an example of Democrats who will not vote for Obama. I tried to tell my mom that the generation coming up today was less prejudice than the generation in their 70's (my moms not in her 70's, she's in her 50's), but she disagreed.
Originally Posted By chickendumpling I would really like to tease out some of the themes from last night in separate "name calling free" threads for discussion but don't have time to make any. I haven't had time to read the transcript yet but did she really say she wanted expanded vice-presidential powers? Where are conservatives on this?!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Okay... would have loved to have been "in the room" last night, but I can't play "MST3K" with both you guys and my spouse at the same time... My impressions: I think the potential for doing harm was rife for both last night, and neither did any harm. That's number one. Palin did what she had to do. About a quarter of her answers were... if not Couric-interview disastrous, nonetheless almost completely vacuous and just stringing together pre-packaged sentences she had drilled into her that may or may not have related to the question, and may not have even made much sense together (#510 is a good example). But a lot of people won't care, because she delivered them pretty well. I agree with ecdc's take that no other candidate could have said what she said and have it deemed anything but a drubbing, but that's not the world we live in - it's not fair, but I don't think she did herself any real harm last night. Biden on the other hand was solid throughout. The choke-up moment was good for him, and he smartly kept any attack squarely on McCain. Every time it seemed like Palin might have scored a point, Biden came right back and usually bested her, and often did so by responding to WHAT SHE SAID. She couldn't do the same, usually responding to his points with a non-sequitur point that she obviously had pre-digested and was going to say regardless of context. I think people (i.e. moderates who aren't totally for one camp or the other) notice this when it happens often enough. I think Palin may have "connected" with her base, but then again, she had them at "hello." She needed to connect with undecideds, and according to the polls I saw, she didn't do so well with that. They showed that more people thought Biden won the debate, so maybe the "if she doesn't set the stage on fire, she wins" expectations game didn't work with the average voter. She did pretty well at points, though, to be fair (and trying to keep in mind not how I view things, but how my MO relatives do); she may have stopped the bleeding on her image. Or maybe not. Like Quayle, once her image got set as "not the sharpest tool," it may be set there, unaffected by one performance (which not everyone will have watched). Strangely, it may depend on what Tina Fey does this Saturday. That's how the zeitgeist works sometimes. Still, she probably stopped the slide she partly caused McCain to be having. But I don't think she did enough to turn it around. So even if Biden did better, does her not looking like an idiot make it a tie? And does the tie go to the person with lower expectations (i.e. Palin?) I still think in this case, even if it was a tie, it's a net plus for Obama, since he's leading. McCain/Palin can't just trade baskets at this point. Oh, and she totally overdid the folksy crap. Not because it "doesn't work" with people. In small doses, it sounds just like my midwest relatives, and it works. But in larger doses like last night, it stopped sounding remotely spontaneous and started sounding like just more rehearsed lines she was remembering to bring up. THAT's why it was a net minus with anyone not already planning to vote for her.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <did she really say she wanted expanded vice-presidential powers? Where are conservatives on this?!> Chris Matthews was ALL over that; he seemed to think it was the most important moment of the debate. I think she just said something that came out wrong. I THINK that's the case... she was trying to say "I can handle that duty too, don't think I can't," but it came out as saying she thought the VP should have a larger role in the senate than just the (very rare) case of breaking ties.
Originally Posted By chickendumpling So it's just me and Chris Matthews on this then? No one else noticed that? Granted it was largely inarticulate but has anyone seen the transcript? I can't imagine conservatives and libertarians aren't on this issue. That's a big deal.
Originally Posted By hopemax <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITI...dex.html</a> Of course, we know what a vice president does. And that's not only to preside over the Senate and will take that position very seriously also. I'm thankful the Constitution would allow a bit more authority given to the vice president if that vice president so chose to exert it in working with the Senate and making sure that we are supportive of the president's policies and making sure too that our president understands what our strengths are. John McCain and I have had good conversations about where I would lead with his agenda. That is energy independence in America and reform of government over all, and then working with families of children with special needs. That's near and dear to my heart also. In those arenas, John McCain has already tapped me and said, that's where I want you, I want you to lead. I said, I can't wait to get and there go to work with you. IFILL: Governor, you mentioned a moment ago the constitution might give the vice president more power than it has in the past. Do you believe as Vice President Cheney does, that the Executive Branch does not hold complete sway over the office of the vice presidency, that it it is also a member of the Legislative Branch? PALIN: Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president's agenda in that position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there, and we'll do what we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans that are needed for this nation. And it is my executive experience that is partly to be attributed to my pick as V.P. with McCain, not only as a governor, but earlier on as a mayor, as an oil and gas regulator, as a business owner. It is those years of experience on an executive level that will be put to good use in the White House also.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Thought you might be interested in this link to factcheck.org. BOTH Palin and Biden mangled the facts pretty well last night. <a href="http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_biden-palin_debate.html" target="_blank">http://www.factcheck.org/elect...ate.html</a>
Originally Posted By mawnck >>So it's just me and Chris Matthews on this then? No one else noticed that?<< Silly rabbit, the issues are for kids.
Originally Posted By chickendumpling RT? Factcheck? Why would I look at them after you've taught me about their liberal leanings? Without even looking at that I bet it is totally unfair to Palin and only criticizes Biden so their bias won't be so obvious. ;-)
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<RT? Factcheck? Why would I look at them after you've taught me about their liberal leanings? Without even looking at that I bet it is totally unfair to Palin and only criticizes Biden so their bias won't be so obvious. ;-)>> I think you pretty much nailed it there... ;-)
Originally Posted By chickendumpling Thanks for posting that, hopemax. My friends, after 8 years of Dick Cheney isn't it important to think about and discuss this issue? My friends, when combined with all the other expanded powers given the Executive Branch during the Bush years, expanding the power of the vice presidency is the transcendental issue of our time. Are conservatives and Libertarians really gonna let this slide?
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Are conservatives and Libertarians really gonna let this slide?<< You betcha!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Are conservatives and Libertarians really gonna let this slide?>> Of course we are. We all know she had absolutely no idea what she was talking about.
Originally Posted By mele Thanks for saving me the time to check out Factcheck, RT. My mom is convinced that Biden is a complete liar and Palin has a halo. I really (and I do mean REALLY) wanna show my mom that that isn't true. LOL
Originally Posted By chickendumpling Yeah, I was channeling McCain there with the whole 'my friends' thing. ;-) But, sadly, no one got my 'transcendental' vs 'transcendent' joke either. Hey! I winked a'cha & made a lame little ol' joke no one got! Maybe I could be VP!!!
