|
By contrast Joe Biden’s measured, nuanced messages were filled with detail and yet clear in argument, and his depth of policy experience enabled him to put across the image of a genuine statesman – as did the fact that he didn’t overplay his obvious intellectual superiority.
Palin’s stream of consciousness style of speech was in marked contrast to the measured, structured delivery of Biden, who was able to score deliberative victories on all the significant issues. Palin’s attempt at ‘folksy’ charm only further emphasised the gulf between her and Senator Biden.
That this has been reported as a draw, or at least a limited success for Palin, shows how managing expectations ahead of debates has become a staple tactic of presidential campaigns – notably George Bush’s campaign referring to John Kerry as ‘the best debater since Cicero’.
Yet, despite this being known, victories and losses are still assessed on these expectations, rather than the performance of each candidate relative to the other.
To judge a presidential debate based on expectations is to miss the point entirely – the ability to debate and win is an important skill in the President’s armoury, and the battle of ideas between the candidates is important for the voting public to form their own opinions.
The focus should be on the quality of arguments and ideas, not on expectations and process. If Americans are not to sell themselves short in their choice of future leaders, they will need to stop judging candidates against expectations, and start judging them against each other.
See also: Less sexy please, we’re British
|
|
3 October, 2008 Palin to insignificance
Last night saw the first and, thankfully for the Republicans, only vice presidential debate of this year’s US Presidential Election. Joe Biden reined in all of his obvious superiority and yet won this debate by a clear margin.
Sarah Palin was clearly better trained for this debate than previous interviews, but it was not a success for the Republican ticket - least, it shouldn’t be. That Sarah Palin managed to avoid the dithering and incomprehensible performance of her interviews with CBS’s Katie Couric is a success for her handlers. |
|
Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine Opine Opine opine Opine |