Joe Biden proved that he too is telegenic, folksy, has extensive experience in dealing with national and international issues, and has a firm grasp on the issues.
Thanks to a friendly debate format and an absentee moderator Sarah Palin exceeded expectations by not having a complete breakdown on stage and running off like her hair was on fire. But make no mistake, Joe Biden won the debate on the issues. The early polls seem to agree.
But ultimately, Sarah Palin's debate experience is a failure because for most people she still did not prove that she is worthy or capable of being the Vice President of the United States. If they were to win, she would be a heartbeat away from the presidency, behind a man who is in poor health already.
After a debate, it is sad to see the TV pundits give so little critical analysis of the actual words of the candidates. They focus on the fluff and don't look at each answer to see if the candidate is able to clearly articulate an intelligent thought. That was especially true last night. Many of Palin's answers were convoluted, repetitive and simplistic. And that doesn't count the times she wouldn't even answer the question that was posed to her.
But, as John Aravosis and the New York Times note, the issues are too large and the time is too critical for a wildcard like Palin and a wildman like McCain. So, the focus is still on the judgement of John McCain in choosing Sarah Palin.
Sarah Palin revels in being unqualified
Obama has noted this before, as has Jon Stewart - the fact that Republican politicians admire stupidity and ignorance. They wear their lack of education, their incompetence, their failure as a badge of honor. And it's certainly an American tradition, having disdain for intellectuals. But when push comes to shove, do you really want bubba, or bubba with lipstick, in charge of your 401k and your life savings? At some point America has got to get over its love affair with stupid. Or the mistakes of the last eight years, when we elected stupid to an art form, will continue to repeat themselves. Here's tomorrow's editorial in the
New York Times about the debate:"In the end, the debate did not change the essential truth of Ms. Palin’s candidacy: she can learn her talking points and make a good impression under controlled circumstances. But Mr. McCain made a wildly irresponsible choice when he picked someone with far too little experience or evident knowledge for the post. That choice shattered the image that Mr. McCain created for himself as the tempered, seasoned, experienced man of principle and judgment. Picking Ms. Palin was either an act of incredible cynicism or appallingly bad judgment.
The ensuing weeks cemented those images in our minds. Ms. Palin initially injected some energy into the McCain campaign, especially among members of the right-wing Republican base, who never liked or
trusted the Arizona senator — and still do not. Then, she began lurching from one embarrassing public appearance to another, culminating in her shocking performance in interviews with Katie Couric. In those exchanges, Ms. Palin was inarticulate and shockingly unable to answer the most basic questions about government policy and even her own political philosophy.The Republicans have tried to present the negative reaction to Ms. Palin as a matter of liberal elites sneering at someone who does not share their privileged backgrounds. That is a distraction. The problem with Ms. Palin’s candidacy, which she underscored in her appearance at the debate on Thursday night, is not that she didn’t attend a fancy school or go backpacking in Europe after college. It is her disdain for knowledge, education, experience and contemplative leadership."
.
