Kausfiles -- the only blog I read with any regularity (sorry Craig in the Philippines) -- makes a good point about tonight's VP debate:
"In the debate, if it's close Palin won. It was close. In the overall campaign, if it's close, Obama won. It was close."
That said, I think "close" is a relative term -- so I'm not sure how close it was.
If it's measured against expectations, I think it was close. Both Palin and Biden exceeded my expectations. Palin did not have any long, rambling answers. She scored some good points, and only went off topic to avoid a subject a few times. This was the most time I'd ever spent watching/listening to Biden, and I came away much more impressed than I expected to be. I now feel like I relate to him a lot more than I would have expected.
But if the debate is measured against actual performance, hands-down it was a Biden victory. He clearly had an understanding and a well formed position on every issue that was discussed. He was also able to clearly differentiate his ticket from McCain on many key issues. He seemed confident, and ready to lead. Palin had short, unspecific answers, poorly framed attacks which Biden could easily refute, and tried too hard to make her experience in Alaska politics seem relevant to leading the country.
So, here's my point -- it will be interesting to see in the next couple days what the polls say about who "won" the debate, because I think it will show whether voters are judging the candidates performance based on their expecations or on the candidates' actual performance. If people say the debate was a tie (or a Palin win), that suggests expectations. If they favor Biden, it's actual performance.
If it turns out it's expectations, what does that mean for the actual election? Will undecided voters make their picks based on how the candidates stack up against their expecations (rather than the candidates' actual abilities)? What are the implications of this, given the makeup of the two tickets (each has an experienced senator and a relatively newbie)? I don't know, so I'm putting that question out their for the other contributors and (if we have any) non-contributing readers.
-fk
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
It's interesting to think that one could set the bar so low that it can basically be stumbled over, then claimed as a success. Winning debates doesn't necessarily translate to winning elections (i.e., Kerry) so maybe the expectations question isn't as transferable to the election. When people vote for President, do they vote based on their expectations of a certain candidate, or their expectations of how a good President will perform? I feel like it's usually the latter, for anybody who isn't already blindly inclined to vote for a certain candidate. If you're a hardcore supporter of a non-performer Palin, you're more likely to judge on expectations as a way of rationalizing your vote.
PPS, Craig in the Philippines is an awful blog.
here's an interesting article that explores some similar topics:
http://www.theroot.com/id/48326?from=rss
Post a Comment