Palin vs. Biden Prediction: She Will Do Great!

[Pressing-On]

The Politico reported a couple days ago that the strategy is to go easy on Palin so as to avoid sounding condescending:

“If she makes a gaffe, he underplays it,” one of the people prepping Biden for his vice presidential debate told me. “At most, he says, ‘I am not sure what Gov. Palin meant there.’”

There are three reasons for this. First, Biden does not want to look condescending. For the same reason, he plans on referring to Palin as “Gov. Palin” during the debate and never as “Sarah.” (He will sometimes refer to John McCain as “John,” however, because they have been senators together for many years.)

Biden will allow the media to slam Palin for her mistakes and concentrate on going after the top of the ticket.

If an absolutely cloyingly positive 1987 profile of Biden in the Chicago Tribune is to be believed ($), there's a precedent for this strategy in high-stakes Biden debates. He claims he went easy on Sen. Caleb Boggs in his surprising bid to unseat the incumbent Republican in 1972:

Flashback: County council member Joe Biden, husband, father, senatorial candidate, stares across the stage at his debate opponent, incumbent Sen. J. Caleb Boggs. A reporter asks Boggs to explain his position on the genocide treaty. The older man pauses, fumbling, then admits he is unfamiliar with the treaty. Boggs tosses the question to the challenger. Biden hesitates, thinking about the treaty, a document that defines any act to destroy an entire ethnic group as an international crime. Why not go for the jugular?

His response, 'I'm sorry, I don't know what that is, either.'

Quote, years later, on why: "It would have been graceless."

Of course, given Biden's penchant for exaggeration, I wouldn't be surprised if he had no idea what the treaty was about, and somewhat improved the story in the retelling, turning gaffe into grace.

Palin, meanwhile, is set to be "aggressive:"

GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin plans to launch aggressive attacks against her Democratic opponent Joe Biden tomorrow night, her campaign aides said, in order to remind voters of why she became popular in her home state of Alaska.

"Governor Palin is eager for the opportunity to contrast her record of reform to the hollow rhetoric of a politician who has spent the bulk of his adult life inside the confines of Washington, D.C.," said Palin spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt. "Tomorrow night will address a critical question; which is more relevant to the office of the vice-presidency -- real-life results or Washington double-speak?"

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Weblog...PView.asp#8688

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by MikeinAR

After that comment, my YOUNG, sheltered ears are burning. hahah

You're on Ignore now!

[AmericanAngel]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Gov. Palin has had a couple of not so helpful interviews with Gibson and Couric. It was a mistake for the McCain campaign to allow her to be interviewed by individuals who are a part of the New York elitist media. It would've been wiser to have her make the rounds on friendlier turf: Fox News, conservative talk radio, Washington Times, New York Post, Jim Leherer. The Gibson/Couric types are less objective and are more concerned about gotcha journalism and impressing their friends with a disasterous interview for a conservative politician. McCain's campaign allowed the whining of the media establishment to get to them. But one must always remember as noble as journalism once used to be, a vast majority of the big names in network and cable media have an agenda and have lost all sense of fairness.

That being said here's tonights scenario: Gwen Ifill has been the news story for a couple of days. She most certainly had a conflict of interest when she accepted the offer to moderate the debate last summer. The burden was on her to disclose the information about her upcoming book to the debate commission when the offer was made. Ifill would go to jail if it was revealed that she received a $350,000 bribe to speak glowingly of Obama, his life, his politics and his campaign as a journalist. Instead she stands to make a minimum $350,000 if her book makes the NY Times bestseller list which requires a minimum of 100,000 copies sold. There will be much pressure on Ifill to be fair in her questions and there will be as much attention on her tonight as Palin/Biden.

The pressure on Biden is to not be himself. Being himself means several gaffes, bloviating and awkward responses. He must work hard at not seeming to be piling on Ms. Palin. He cannot appear to be a bully or bloodthirsty. He has to be a gentleman, something that wasn't taught in the blue collar neighborhoods of Scranton, PA. It is not natural to him. He is a bareknuckles politician and if he was up against a man he would be in his element. Tonight there will be much pressure and attention on Biden to keep from doing what he does often: open mouth, insert foot.

Gov. Palin's luster has been tarnished to be for sure. After tonight that will change. All she has to do is be herself: folksy, articulate, classy, conservative and everything she was the night of her star performance in Dayton, OH at her announcement and in St. Paul at the convention. She will be in trouble if she tries to be what the campaign has been trying to mold her into: something else.

She cannot try to act like she has lots of foreign policy experience because she doesn't. All she needs to say if challenged on that front? "I have at least as much foreign policy experience as the top of the Democratic ticket". She can easily respond to questions about Supreme Court decisions by citing not only Roe v. Wade but also the recent decisions for granting habeas corpus rights to terrorists, the eminent domain debacle, and some of the affirmative action decisions that have turned into quotas.

She cannot seem to make up answers on the fly. She must simply refer back to the fact that she is not a Washington insider and that she has demonstrated her ability to be an executive overseeing dozens of departments, hundreds of millions of dollars, while taking on corrupt politicians even in her own party and seeing that some went to jail. She needs to emphasize who she is and what she has become and that she will make a fine Vice President to a man who is more qualified to be President than any person left in the race.

She needs to underscore that in Washington she will be the voice of the common man who for too long has been under-represented in the halls of government. She needs to emphasize that she knows what it is like to make minimum wage, to live in small town America, to go to a public school, to compete in a beauty contest to try to win scholarship money to go to college, that she went to a regular college not one of the elitist schools, that she married a man when she was young had kids, injected herself into the local PTA to make a difference, what it is like to have a husband who works in the oil fields and is a member of the Steelworkers Union. She needs to talk about having to live on a family budget, stretching dollars to make ends meet. She needs to remind everyone that she represents the America that majority of Americans live in.

All Sarah needs to do is be herself, not what all the New York socialites and inside the Beltway cocktail clubs expect her to be and she will perform very well in tonight's debate. If she does, she will reignite the base, and inspire many others that she is a good reason to vote for the McCain/Palin ticket.

AMEN! and AMEN!
The demorcatic party is very afraid of her and it is their duty to trip, stab, jab, make fun of, lie, twist truth, and anything else to make their own smell of incompetance less noticable.


2Cor 4:18-
So we fix our eyes NOT on what is seen, but on what IS unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.

2Cor 5:7-
We live by faith not by sight.

Heb 11:1-
Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

Let us continue to put our faith and trust in God throughout all this, and not in the roar of lions and jackels.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by MikeinAR

As I said, she's an intelligent person that has accomplished good things. There is no debating that, up to this point, that has absolutely not translated to her run for VP. It's been atrocious.

Look I have major dislikes of GWB and Dick Cheney. I think they've been bad for the country. That said, I've never once seen in an interview on ANY media outlet, where they didn't appear strong, decisive and able to lead. They gave me that perception. Sarah Palin simply doesn't have that.

I think blaming all of that on the media monster is a bad idea with undecideds.

Fortunately, this election is not about moderate voters or undecideds. Its about who can galvanize their base the best. Republicans can do that better because they are not made up of so many desparate groups. History bears it out if a Republican wins, he wins as a conservative. If a Democrat wins, he wins as a moderate. Liberals never do well.

If the strategy is to woo the middle of the political spectrum it will be a failed strategy for the GOP. It is a winning one for Dems, that is why Obama and Hillary have distianced themselves from their liberal connections b/c the majority of Americans are conservative/conservative leaning moderates versus liberal leaning moderates/liberals.

Clinton won only because Perot ran both in 1992 and 1996 and both GHW Bush and Dole were not strong conservatives. Clinton won also because he ran as a moderate Democrat.

Moderates and undecideds don't usually help Republicans anyway, so what they think is really irrelevant to the McCain campaign, or at least should be. Shoot for the strong conservative base, and they'll win. Worrying about people who can't make up their mind this late in the game is a strategy for failure.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by MikeinAR

Uh oh, I'll pass on that kool-aid partner.

The only fear I've seen so far is Sarah Palin afraid of the news media.

It would have been wise to remain fearful of the biased approach these media types engage with someone they despise. They can do much to sway public opinion through the lens that they create. They are masters at disguising commentary and personal opinion as hard news. Where are the tough questions of obama since the Democratic primaries? Where are the four to five days of unending news reports about the words of Biden that if a conservative would've said them they would be headline news for days on end?

Conservatives would do well to avoid these jerks and allow the news agencies that have proven to be fair to get air time with them. There is a reason why the NY Times, Boston Globe, Washington Post, LA Times, Chicago Tribune and other established liberal newspapers are losing subscription money left and right and a reason the network news agencies are losing viewership and a reason CNN and MSNBC are always also rans against Fox News: people are finding FN and alternative media to be more fair and reliable than these so-called traditional news agencies. They may have the name but they have all abandoned pretty much any sense of objectivity and commitment to the oath they swore to present the news detached from their personal opinions.

[MikeinAR]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Fortunately, this election is not about moderate voters or undecideds. Its about who can galvanize their base the best. Republicans can do that better because they are not made up of so many desparate groups. History bears it out if a Republican wins, he wins as a conservative. If a Democrat wins, he wins as a moderate. Liberals never do well.

If the strategy is to woo the middle of the political spectrum it will be a failed strategy for the GOP. It is a winning one for Dems, that is why Obama and Hillary have distianced themselves from their liberal connections b/c the majority of Americans are conservative/conservative leaning moderates versus liberal leaning moderates/liberals.

Clinton won only because Perot ran both in 1992 and 1996 and both GHW Bush and Dole were not strong conservatives. Clinton won also because he ran as a moderate Democrat.

Moderates and undecideds don't usually help Republicans anyway, so what they think is really irrelevant to the McCain campaign, or at least should be. Shoot for the strong conservative base, and they'll win. Worrying about people who can't make up their mind this late in the game is a strategy for failure.

Wow, I've never heard or read of a strategy that claims you shouldn't pay attention to undecided voters.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by MikeinAR

I forgot to add my prediction. I predict that no matter how fair Gwen Ifill is tonight, if Sarah Palin does poorly, it will be blamed on that "gotcha" moderator asking those "gotcha" questions. It won't matter if Biden gets the same ones, it'll be an attack against Palin.

Don't worry. Palin will emerge from this debate looking great. Ifill will look the fool if she appears partisan. Biden may steal the show out from Ifill and make a bigger fool of himself than Ifill can. Palin won't do poorly.

[MikeinAR]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Palin won't do poorly.

I tend to agree with you. I expect her to do much better in the debate setting than she did in the interviews. I expect if she doesn't know an answer she'll go on the attack against Obama, as she should, and play offense. I think her only problem comes if Ifill asks her follow-ups and tries to make her actually answer the question.

I expect her to look better in this format, but still not do enough to actually win the debate over Biden. Another draw, wouldn't surprise me.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

The Politico reported a couple days ago that the strategy is to go easy on Palin so as to avoid sounding condescending:

“If she makes a gaffe, he underplays it,” one of the people prepping Biden for his vice presidential debate told me. “At most, he says, ‘I am not sure what Gov. Palin meant there.’”

There are three reasons for this. First, Biden does not want to look condescending. For the same reason, he plans on referring to Palin as “Gov. Palin” during the debate and never as “Sarah.” (He will sometimes refer to John McCain as “John,” however, because they have been senators together for many years.)

Biden will allow the media to slam Palin for her mistakes and concentrate on going after the top of the ticket.

If an absolutely cloyingly positive 1987 profile of Biden in the Chicago Tribune is to be believed ($), there's a precedent for this strategy in high-stakes Biden debates. He claims he went easy on Sen. Caleb Boggs in his surprising bid to unseat the incumbent Republican in 1972:

Flashback: County council member Joe Biden, husband, father, senatorial candidate, stares across the stage at his debate opponent, incumbent Sen. J. Caleb Boggs. A reporter asks Boggs to explain his position on the genocide treaty. The older man pauses, fumbling, then admits he is unfamiliar with the treaty. Boggs tosses the question to the challenger. Biden hesitates, thinking about the treaty, a document that defines any act to destroy an entire ethnic group as an international crime. Why not go for the jugular?

His response, 'I'm sorry, I don't know what that is, either.'

Quote, years later, on why: "It would have been graceless."

Of course, given Biden's penchant for exaggeration, I wouldn't be surprised if he had no idea what the treaty was about, and somewhat improved the story in the retelling, turning gaffe into grace.

Palin, meanwhile, is set to be "aggressive:"

GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin plans to launch aggressive attacks against her Democratic opponent Joe Biden tomorrow night, her campaign aides said, in order to remind voters of why she became popular in her home state of Alaska.

"Governor Palin is eager for the opportunity to contrast her record of reform to the hollow rhetoric of a politician who has spent the bulk of his adult life inside the confines of Washington, D.C.," said Palin spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt. "Tomorrow night will address a critical question; which is more relevant to the office of the vice-presidency -- real-life results or Washington double-speak?"

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Weblog...PView.asp#8688

Exactly what DB was saying!

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by MikeinAR

Wow, I've never heard or read of a strategy that claims you shouldn't pay attention to undecided voters.

Because every presidential election the media is always touting the crucial swing voter. Its a myth. Name one presidential election in the past 50 years where the so-called "swing voter" made a difference for a Republican. It makes a difference for Democrats but not for the GOP.

Nixon defeated liberal Humphrey with a conservative foriegn policy agenda in '68. He soundly defeated very liberal McGovern in '72 with talk of the conservative "Silent Majority".

Ford, a moderate Republican lost to a moderate Democrat Carter in '76.

Carter was soundly defeated by strong conservative Reagan in '80. Liberal Mondale was destroyed by Reagan in '84.

Moderate Bush defeated very liberal Dukakis in '88 much due to the popularity of RR and Dukakis' extreme views.

Bush was defeated in '92 by southern moderate Democrat Clinton. Moderate Dole was defeated by Clinton in '96.

Both liberal Gore and Kerry were defeated by conservative (apparently) Bush in '00 and '04.

The lesson? Republicans win as conservatives. Democrats win when they run as more conservative less liberal. "Swing voters" by and large lean liberal moderate/liberal so naturally they favor Democrats. When Republicans try to reach for the middle they usually get beat or narrowly win.

The "swing voter" myth is based on the fact that most journalists are registered Democrats and they have a vested interest in portraying the "swing voter" "undecided voter" as the key to victory to both sides. The reality is these types of voters are the differnece between a narrow Democratic victory or a Republican landslide. They don't help Republicans like the GOP base does.

Look at how McCain was lagging until he put a strong conservative on the ticket. McCain is supposed to be the champion of middle of the road and swing voters, but they weren't pushing him near being competitive until Palin came along.

You got to get your news beyond NPR, USA Today, New York Times, Associated Press, CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN or MSNBC and you will hear a different line of thought about "swing voters". They are urban legends for conservatives.