Man Palin is going to CRASH and burn come Thursday. How likely do you think it is that....

[ElFenix]

biden needs to watch that he doesn't become pedantic and lecturing.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Poor choice on the network's part to pick someone publishing a book on the subject. Even if there isn't bias in the debate, there's an appearance of possible bias which undercuts it no matter what actually happens.

Best answer to that comes from Skitzer's post on the subject:

Originally posted by: Skitzer

This is a non issue ...... McCain was on this afternoon stating they didn't have a problem with it ........ Ok, move on, nothing to see here.

Yeah, McCain says that NOW, but AFTER the debate it'll be all "I can't believe she asked those questions, clearly they were designed to give advantage to Biden. I gave Ifill the benefit of the doubt, unfortunately she failed to live up to the standard required for a moderator, my friends, country first, I was a PoW."

 

[buck]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: Juddog
Her latest interview is even worse than usual:
She reads everything

Look at the expression on Katie's face at 0:35

Watching that really pisses me off. How the hell can anyone vote for her and McCain? I can understand if McCain had a different VP but are people really that fucking stupid to look past Palin?

 

[RapidSnail]

^Whatever political swagger McCain had is lost with Palin. I couldn't be satisfied with her in office. Although, a miracle may happen.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: Mermaidman
Biden cannot win. Here's an interesting article from someone who debated Palin a few times when he ran against her for governor. The question is whether the average Joe/Jane will see past her obfuscations.

By Andrew Halcro, Wed Oct 1, 4:00 AM ET

When he faces off against Sarah Palin Thursday night, Joe Biden will have his hands full.

I should know. I've debated Governor Palin more than two dozen times. And she's a master, not of facts, figures, or insightful policy recommendations, but at the fine art of the nonanswer, the glittering generality. Against such charms there is little Senator Biden, or anyone, can do.
<snip>
On April 17, 2006, Palin and I participated in a debate at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks on agriculture issues. The next day, the Fairbanks Daily News Miner published this excerpt:

"Andrew Halcro, a declared independent candidate from Anchorage, came armed with statistics on agricultural productivity. Sarah Palin, a Republican from Wasilla, said the Matanuska Valley provides a positive example for other communities interested in agriculture to study."

On April 18, 2006, Palin and I sat together in a hotel coffee shop comparing campaign trail notes. As we talked about the debates, Palin made a comment that highlights the phenomenon that Biden is up against.

"Andrew, I watch you at these debates with no notes, no papers, and yet when asked questions, you spout off facts, figures, and policies, and I'm amazed. But then I look out into the audience and I ask myself, 'Does any of this really matter?' " Palin said.

While policy wonks such as Biden might cringe, it seemed to me that Palin was simply vocalizing her strength without realizing it. During the campaign, Palin's knowledge on public policy issues never matured ? because it didn't have to. Her ability to fill the debate halls with her presence and her gift of the glittering generality made it possible for her to rely on populism instead of policy.

Palin is a master of the nonanswer. She can turn a 60-second response to a query about her specific solutions to healthcare challenges into a folksy story about how she's met people on the campaign trail who face healthcare challenges. All without uttering a word about her public-policy solutions to healthcare challenges.

In one debate, a moderator asked the candidates to name a bill the legislature had recently passed that we didn't like. I named one. Democratic candidate Tony Knowles named one. But Sarah Palin instead used her allotted time to criticize the incumbent governor, Frank Murkowski. Asked to name a bill we did like, the same pattern emerged: Palin didn't name a bill.

And when she does answer the actual question asked, she has a canny ability to connect with the audience on a personal level. For example, asked to name a major issue that had been ignored during the campaign, I discussed the health of local communities, Mr. Knowles talked about affordable healthcare, and Palin talked about ... the need to protect hunting and fishing rights. <snip>

You may be able to fool some rural fcktards in Alaska, but this is a nationally televised broadcast and the political pundits will eat her for breakfast if she dodges questions like she does during the Couric interview. There is much less room for error, let alone BS answers on a national stage.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
Debates in general rarely change minds. They might appeal to the small portion of voters who are genuinely undecided, but I think a lot of "undecided" voters have actually already chosen who they'll probably vote for and just aren't happy with their available choices. As for solid supporters, they tend to see their own candidate as being the winner in every debate, regardless of the circumstances.

It's estimated that they change elections by 2%, which by all means is extremely significant considering what the current polls are reporting.

 

[Juddog]

Originally posted by: buck

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: Juddog
Her latest interview is even worse than usual:
She reads everything

Look at the expression on Katie's face at 0:35

Watching that really pisses me off. How the hell can anyone vote for her and McCain? I can understand if McCain had a different VP but are people really that fucking stupid to look past Palin?

People like this will still vote for Palin / McCain anyways.