The "Veep debate"

It was an interesting "debate" between Palin and Biden, assuming that you can call two individuals standing on the same stage and responding to the same moderator a debate. The "responses" from Palin were pure filibustering. Biden one the event, of course. But that's on debate terms. Biden came off as being an intelligent and experienced man quite ready to become President on January 20th if he has to. Biden knew what he was talking about. Palin didn't. She did a very good job of presenting memorized talking points.

Palin didn't even try to compete with Biden. She came off as being an intelligent child showing off for the grown-ups. Her folksy effort to demonstrate "everyman" credits simply didn't work, but with her inexperience she had no other position she could take. She also didn't bother to try to answer the questions. The format both sides had agreed on permitted no follow-ups, so Palin simply spent her time spouting preprepared talking points. But Palin did not have a "moose-in-the-headlights" moment like she did during the Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric interviews. Since the problems Palin had in those interviews occurred when the interviewers asked follow-up questions, the reason the Palin camp could not accept follow-up questions was quite clear.

The other thing about Palin's demeanor that was that she came off looking like a chipmunk on either speed or ten cups of coffee. Besides looking very young and trying very hard to look like a grown-up, she was so wound up that she was in a different world from the one inhabited by moderator Gwen Ifill or her debate competitor Joe Biden.

In one way I think that Palin is very much like McCain. Neither have a coherent overall philosophy they are operating from. Present them with a situation (Iraq - Afghanistan - the economy - the federal budget - etc.) and each retreats to a list of talking points. Change the situation and the talking points change. Neither seems to have any overall coherent philosophy that guides what they believe.

Biden clearly demonstrated that he has a coherent philosophy. His reaction to Iran is intellectually connected to his reaction to both the federal budget and to military actions in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and probably to nuclear nonproliferation in North Korea. Obama similarly has a coherent philosophy and world view.

As to the points both Biden and Palin made, I'll let the experts dissect those items. They aren't going to change the minds of independents.

James Fallows presented an analysis that I very much agree with. Briefly here is what he said:

1. Gwen Ifill as moderator: Terrible.
2. Sarah Palin's overall performance: Beat expectations. Considering how low the expectations had been set, how could she not?
3. Joe Biden's overall performance: No mistakes. That was a major accomplishment.
4. The impact of the debate on the overall race: No fundamental change.

[Click the link for his reasons.]

Since the credit crisis has shifted the Presidential race away from the McCain agenda of character and military affairs to economics and the failure of the Bush administration, the fact that this "debate" was not a game-changers is bad news for McCain.