James Fallows nails it:
- Ifill, moderator: Terrible. Yes, she was constrained by the agreed debate rules. But she gave not the slightest sign of chafing against them or looking for ways to follow up the many unanswered questions or self-contradictory answers. This was the big news of the evening. Katie Couric, and for that matter Jim Lehrer, have never looked so good.
- Palin: “Beat expectations.” In every single answer, she was obviously trying to fit the talking points she had learned to the air time she had to fill, knowing she could do so with impunity from the moderator. But she did it with spunk and without any of the poleaxed moments she had displayed in previous questions. The worst holes in her answers – above all, about the Vice President’s role, also either mishearing or ignoring the question about her “Achilles heel” – were concealed in ways they haven’t been before.
- Biden: No mistakes. This is a bigger deal than it seems, since Biden could easily have seemed bullying, condescending, chauvinistic, or whatever. He didn’t. And while he was woolly-sounding in the beginning, he was commanding and authoritative – from his side’s perspective – on issues of foreign policy and constitutional balance. And to all appearances sincere in his choking-up near the end when talking about having a child in peril.
There’s a real developing consensus that the moderator was the loser here.
Yallpolitics is reporting that various NBC sources are claiming a straight-up Palin win, citing Peggy Noonan (ooh I’m so impressed) and Brokaw. I’m not seeing anything about this on MSNBC and Yall isn’t linking anything.
From Slate, there’s a post that agrees with the two women who watched with me (my wife and daughter) headed “Step Away From The Blush”:
I’m no cosmetics expert–it’s a high-maintenance day if I bother with mascara and face powder–but whoever did Palin’s makeup should be fired. That contouring along her cheekbones made her look awful. During the debate, one Slate parent said his daughter noted, “Her face looks like a skull.”
The term “mavericky” set Oberman’s teeth on edge. Me too.
Hmm:
CBS:
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: Poll
51% Biden 36% Palin
Update:
As always, John Dickerson on Slate delivers some sort of conventional DC wisdom here, although this time, I think it’s closer to right (perhaps because it’s closer to what I think). Upshot: “But regardless of who won or lost, a vice-presidential debate doesn’t matter unless it produces a major gaffe. This one didn’t.”
On Ifill-I agree. There was a whole lot of pressure on her, and I don’t mean the “in the tank for Obama” thingy, to get this right and to show us Palin-we kinda know Joe already and all eyes were on Palin-and that didn’t happen. She was an “asker of the questions”-only. She did begin by saying “neither of you answered the question” but that was the extent of it. Thank goodness Joe had the good sense to say “may I follow up on that” and Ifill sorta caught on.
I don’t think Brokaw will be any better next week. Who has the third prez debate?
Yeah-I agree with your wife and daughter, NMC-Palin, take it easy with the blush, more is not always better.
Personally, when this is over with, if I never hear the term “my friends” or the word “also” ever again I will be forever grateful. I will say, as well-see didn’t say also-I was very glad to see that Palin didn’t say Joe as she did with Charleee.
Biden showed presidential timbre. Palin proved how bad John McCain’s judgment is. Palin is as hollow as a library globe. Biden blew her away, hands down.
I can’t really agree with much of any of the comments here. But, about that horrible moderator, I do. Quite candidly, she was an idiot.
Not only were many of the questions simply repeats from the 1st presidential debate, other questions were as dumb and shallow as something you might hear in a high school debate for student body president. Toward the end, I half expected her to ask what their favorite color was, and why. And whether they wore boxers, briefs, or panties. I don’t blame either candidate for avoiding answering some of these questions and turning it into an opportunity to talk about something they felt important to communicate.
This moderator also has a financial stake in the outcome of the presidential race. She is writing a book about Obama, and stands to make a lot more money selling her book if he were to win. She should not have been the moderator in the first place.
As I knew, and expected her to demonstrate, Palin is much more intelligent, polished and sharp than what many of you here have painted her out to be over the last couple of weeks. Not sure what that says about many here. Uhhhhh…. clueless …perhaps….tunnel vision comes to mind…..blinders…..koolaid drinking….. LOL.
Palin didn’t stare into space and not answer any questions like in the interviews; all I saw in her performance was she proved she could recite memorized “facts” and smile a lot…..don’t believe she knew what an "Achilles heel" actually is….she did a pretty good job of faking it, but since she didn’t answer many of the actual questions, it was impossible to know for sure if she didn’t answer because she didn’t know or she didn’t answer because she had another – unasked – question memorized.
The winks were over the top….sort of go with McCain’s creepy “my friends”…..I can see the two of them in plaid pants selling used cars….except nobody is buying cars these days.
I call a huge BS to that, afotl.
Ifill will make the same amount of money whether Obama wins or not-he has already set a precedent and he is not the single focus of her book. Her performance, in no way, showed a preference for either candidate. BOTH campaigns signed off on the moderaters for all debates. Ifill did not become an issue with the McCain camp until his numbers began to tank and they felt they might need some cover in case Palin tanked, so give that one a rest. You might also want to let rest your definition of Ifill as an “idiot”. You won’t find one knowledgable person who would agree with that assessment.
You say you “knew” Palin would demonstrate she is intelligent, polished and sharp. I say that you have more insight than even some of McCain’s campaign insiders, as well as people who were polled before & during the debate who disagree with that outcome.
“We” didn’t paint this picture of Palin. She drew it for herself and presented the picture for us to see. And your absence, as the rest of us were looking at and discussing the picture she was painting of herself, was noted. So, one could be led to think that you also were questioning her capabilities because you were not here defending her.
We are all entitled to our opinion and if you had stated, in your post, “in my opinion”, I could readily accept that. But when you infer that your opinion is the only one to be had and, even worse, that it is fact , I would recommend you open up that mind a little and truly *hear* and digest what the rest of the world is saying. I’m not in any way suggesting you change your opinion-just suggesting that it is only *your* opinion, that it is healthy to allow it to be challenged and doesn’t make those of us who disagree clueless and certainly doesn’t qualify it as fact.
GG @ 1: Bob Schieffer will moderate the third debate.
“I can see the two of them in plaid pants selling used cars”
Yay-men, liliruby.
GG 7, save your breath. No matter how frequently in error, some are never in doubt. Ya know?
The debate reaffirmed my earlier judgment re Palin: she’s Hattiesburg High School PTA president material.
GG and others, I am not going to participate in what I view to be a daily smear campaign of people in which many of you disagree politically. Once it becomes obsessive (and it has long been so), then its not something I want to read or argue with anyone about. So, I don’t. Its not out of apathy. Just a sense that what I say will only inflame and not change anyone’s mind here — as those minds are obviously already made up and the comments here are just to preach to the choir. And I don’t have the time to defend or counter every thing posted here that I disagree with. So, I have chimed in here more in a general sense.
Despite what you say, this was the worst moderated debate that I have watched in a long time. And my comment about the moderator’s financial interest in the outcome of the election was not to suggest that the moderator did anything deliberately last night toward that end. But, had the shoe been on the other foot, and the moderator been writing a book about McCain to be released right after the election/inauguration, then there would have been much howling from this crowd here. I did not find this out until the day before the debate. And I cannot believe that the moderator did not step down on her own under these circumstances. I would not mediate a legal case with a mediator who had a financial interest in the matter. Nor would a Judge ethically be able to hear a case if he/she had a financial stake in the outcome of the case (unless of course, Dickie Scruggs and company were involved and spreading sweet potatoes —eg Bobby Delaughter). This was a vice presidential debate —the only such debate scheduled — on a global stage. The situation demanded, IMO, absolute impartiality. And the perception of bias, whether it actually occurred or not, was the thing that should have caused the moderator to step down and be replaced.
Some of the questions asked sounded like they were taken from the script of a cheesy job interviewer. Have you ever changed your mind on something? What are your weaknesses? Has anyone ever heard a political candidate truthfully answer any such question? — yeah, they cite some “weakness” that they spin into a strength. That’s about it. And of course, all of us have changed our minds on things —- as we get older, we get a little wiser and we tend to make better decisions. What a complete waste of debate time.
The format used at the first presidential debate, allowing the candidates time after questions to speak directly to each other, would have been much better, IMO, would have made an even livelier debate, and would have somewhat masked the poor performance of that moderator. Oh well. What’s done is done.
Anyone who has watched Palin on stage in front on an audience, at a speech where she has often not had notes or a telepromptor, in previous debates when she ran for Gov. of Alaska, knew that she would perform well in this debate — it is her element where she is most comfortable and can directly speak to people. But, some were deliberately attempting to create doubt. And with respect to the koolaid drinkers who drank up that koolaid, there were indeed some doubters. No more. What a hoot. LOL.
*The format used at the first presidential debate, allowing the candidates time after questions to speak directly to each other, would have been much better,* Afotl, the format for last night was what the McCain camp asked for (to lessen the risk for Palin) and received. In return, the Obama campaign asked (and received) that the candidates to be standing at a lecturn rather than seated, as has been the case in the last several vp debates.
AFOTL, I can’t understand how Palin has been “smeared” on this site.
Did anyone else hear her say “Talibany”? Or was I hearing things again? The winking was the final gag for me, I had to leave the room.
Oh yea, the chanting of USA at her little rally after the debate sent chills up my spine for some reason. There was just something goulish about that whole scene. It scared me.
I find the winking hard to take (along with “you betcha”, which slipped out at least once).
Looking at the transcript, the folks out there who are saying she doesn’t know what an Achilles heel is are probably correct; the only other possibility is she didn’t hear the question.
I missed the post-debate rally. I guess “U.S.A.! U.S.A.!” would be easier to take than “Drill, baby drill!”
I’m with you pam-the after-rally chants of USA! were a little scary to me as well.
You know, I have been imagining a McCain/Palin White House (scary, I know) and I’m not sure that McCain has a true grasp of just how ambitious Palin is. She will not be a “little woman doing his bidding”, as he most likely demands of the women in his life. I have absolutely no problem imagining her going behind his back to get whatever she wants. She would be loyal to McCain as long as she agreed with him and not beyond.
Point in fact-her response to Katie’s question, on CBS before the debate, regarding the former VP she admires the most and why-GHW Bush *because* he went on to be President.
pam 15, I think she was namedropping Jalal Talibani, the president of Iraq.
I’m no fan, but you have to marvel at the nerve to give the U.S. its first Vice-Presidential debate “shout out.”
Don’t blame Ifill for the questions. I think both parties wanted to change the format. Had Biden been allowed to talk directly to Palin he would have come off as attacking her. McCain knew about the book before he signed off on her to moderate and had time to change his mind but it only became an issue a few days before. Ifill is a brilliant woman and highly respected to blame her for the limitations she had to adhere to is insane. If I was however Ifill I would have stepped down because knowing that I am a skilled experienced moderator I would not have wanted to water my questions down for either parties benefit. Considering Palin didn’t answer some of the questions she should have just kept the ones she would have asked.