2008 U.S. Presidential Election: Vice-Presidential Debate

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Strongbow said:
I think Palin did a good job, especially considering the beating that she has taken the past two weeks. Despite Biden's massive advantage in foreign policy experience she was able to get some good shots in that Biden could not rebut. He either avoided the point or repeated his prior response which so many people criticize Palin for doing.
Click to expand...

And how do you think Palin did at responding to Biden's shots?
 
I found her folksy, cutesy mannerisms quite fake actually.
It worked with Bush but at least he seemed genuinely folksy - or at least he did when debating Gore, appearing on Letterman, etc
 
i thought Joe Biden and Gwen Ifill had an interesting debate.

there was some other lady over in the corner who was talking less sense than the homeless people who talk to buildings or yell at trashcans. she did manage to put together some complete sentences, which is a massive victory for some folks, especially since there was no follow up questions that would make it clear that she has no actual grasp of any national or international issue.
 
I really liked this short article, hit the nail right on the head.

Joe Biden did more for the equality of the sexes with his honest display of paternal emotion during the vice presidential debate than Sarah Palin's presence on the executive ticket has or will ever do.

Biden visibly teared up when he rebutted the idea that "just because I am a man" he didn't understand what it was like to wonder whether or not a child would "make it" in recovering from a life-threatening medical situation. At the time, he was likely recalling the tragic automobile accident that killed his wife and daughter and severely injured his two sons. It was an authentic, moving and powerful moment. It was, in fact, the strongest expression of real paternal love we have seen from a public official in recent memory and maybe ever.

By bringing that reality to a national political stage, Biden demonstrated that -- for all of us, not just feminists -- the personal is political, that women alone do not have the sole responsibility for caring about the future of our children and that the concern of fathers is a largely untapped pool of political energy. In his acceptance speech, Barack Obama paved the way for this when he talked about fighting for equal pay for equal work because he wants "my daughters to have the same opportunities as your sons" -- and said this while looking with protective ferocity straight into the camera. He has continued this message on the campaign trail with great impact.

Political equality for women will not come from the minimization or idealization of motherhood -- but rather from recognizing fatherhood as a significant factor in our culture and politics.

Thank you, Joe, for bringing us to the next level and keeping it real.
Click to expand...

Leah McElrath Renna: Joe's Tears: the Political Power of Paternal Love
 
Irvine511 said:
i thought Joe Biden and Gwen Ifill had an interesting debate.

there was some other lady over in the corner who was talking less sense than the homeless people who talk to buildings or yell at trashcans. she did manage to put together some complete sentences, which is a massive victory for some folks, especially since there was no follow up questions that would make it clear that she has no actual grasp of any national or international issue.
Click to expand...

So many here have claimed that Joe Biden's performance was filled with specifics and substance. Joe Biden placed particular emphasis on one issue, claiming that

Look, we have spent more money -- we spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country.

Let me say that again. Three weeks in Iraq; seven years, seven years or six-and-a-half years in Afghanistan.
Click to expand...


Well, Joey, lets take a look at the facts. The United States roughly spends about $10 Billion dollars a month on Iraq. According to you, that would mean the United States had only spent $7.5 Billion dollars in Afghanistan since 2001.

But just taking a look at the year 2007, the facts show that the United States spent an average of $10.3 Billion dollars a month in Iraq, but also spent $2 Billion dollars per month in Afghanistan. The United States spent $24 Billion dollars just in 2007, almost 4 times what Joe Biden claims the United States has spent in Afghanistan the past 7 years!

When it comes to "substance and specifics" Joey is on another planet.

Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation: U.S. Spending on Iraq and Afghanistan by Month, Week, Day, Hour, Minute, & Second
 
Biden was superb tonight. The VP/Cheney/Legislation thing, the tearing up a little while explaining that his being a man doesn't preclude him from worrying about his children, the multiple times he explained to Palin that when he and McCain both voted against spending bills for the troops, it was a disagreement about a timeline and not spending, his broad knowledge regarding the situations in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq, and his articulation of how he would keep Obama's policies on course in the event that for any reason he would become president, were all huge. He started a little slow, but that was smart. He tested the waters, and adjusted his game as the debate went on. It showed flexibility, the ability to think, adjust, and speak on the fly, something Palin showed none of.

He managed to really sink his teeth into much of what she said without sinking his teeth into her. This is what separates great debaters from good debaters. Joe Biden is a great debater.

I would vote for this man for president. I truly would.

As an aside, I would like to express my appreciation of Rachel Maddow's admirable display of self-restraint when Pat Buchanan, sitting right next to her, explained that (paraphrasing) Biden spent too much time with statistics and facts and that Palin did a better job of relating to small-town America. In a situation that by all accounts warranted a response along the lines of "How can one spend TOO MUCH time on facts in a presidential campaign?! It should be ALL about facts, and not about trying to pander to the bizarre combination of ignorance and cultural narcism that is altogether too common in this country, you foolish, foolish man!", Maddow sat there calmly and let it slide without saying anything. Like I said, an admirable display of self-restraint.
 
namkcuR said:
In a situation that by all accounts warranted a response along the lines of "How can one spend TOO MUCH time on facts in a presidential campaign?! It should be ALL about facts, and not about trying to pander to the bizarre combination of ignorance and cultural narcism that is altogether too common in this country, you foolish, foolish man!", Maddow sat there calmly and let it slide without saying anything. Like I said, an admirable display of self-restraint.
Click to expand...

Well, how does Mr. "facts and substance" explain the following:

To qoute Joe Biden:

Look, we have spent more money -- we spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country.

Let me say that again. Three weeks in Iraq; seven years, seven years or six-and-a-half years in Afghanistan.
Click to expand...


Yet, the facts are that the United States spends $2 Billion dollars every month in Afghanistan compared to the $10 billion dollars that is spent in Iraq. The United States spent $24 Billion dollars in Afghanistan in 2007, 4 TIMES what Biden claimed the United States had spent in Afghanistan since 2001!

If your going to make facts and specifics a key part of your argument, you need to at least be in the ball park on the numbers. Joe Biden was on another planet.

http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/policy/securityspending/articles/gwot_spending_burn_rate/
 
I only caught the highlights of the debate. Seems like Palin did better than expected... or should I say better than democrats expected? lol. She definitely sounded a lot more knowledgeable and confident than during the Couric interviews.
 
coolian2 said:
Does it really count as a win if you're being celebrated only for not fucking up completely?

Naturally, I'm referring to the lunatics handing Palin the outright win.
Click to expand...

Can you really be considered the king of substance and facts when you claim that the United States has only spent $7.5 Billion dollars in Afghanistan in all of the past 7 years, but the facts show that the United States spent nearly 4 times that in Afghanistan just in 2007?
 
Strongbow said:
Can you really be considered the king of substance and facts when you claim that the United States has only spent $7.5 Billion dollars in Afghanistan in all of the past 7 years, but the facts show that the United States spent nearly 4 times that in Afghanistan just in 2007?
Click to expand...


:lol: This is so cool! We're getting to see the debut of a Classic Sting Talking Point. It's like being there the first time he mentioned 1441 or "without preconditions"!

If we just agree with you right now, can we put this one to rest?
 
Count me as one person who wasn't surprised by Palin's performance in the debate. I never thought she was THAT incapable.

Nonetheless, she still remained stuck on talking points whereas Biden seemed to be really answering questions and dealing in substance. He dodged a few. . he refused to discuss at all any times he's disagreed with Obama. But I suppose that's to be expected.

The idea that this debate would sink Palin and by extension McCain was a bit far fetched. However, I don't think she's done much to swing people back McCain's way.
 
I still think it's crazy that a talking-point base cheerleader is considered the next Reagan by conservatives. I don't understand that. I understand excitement at her ability to keep them in the game. I understand the excitement at having a cheerleader for their beliefs and ideals on a national stage.

I don't understand how they could honestly watch that debate and truly believe she kicked arse, when the reality is that while she played a very smart and very well coached game, it was precisely one designed to keep her as far away from her competitors game as possible. The strategy clearly was avoid/deflect/play cute, avoid/deflect/play cute, avoid/deflect/play cute, and it's as obvious as day that the strategy is as such because she can't come close to matching any one of the other three on anything related to requirements for national leadership, let alone international leadership.

So sure, the conservatives have found a great cheerleader and for that they can and should be very excited. She is really brilliant in those terms. A bone fide star for sure. She'd be great opposite Huckabee on his new Fox show or something. But as a leader? As a potential leader of your country? US conservatives really should be insulted that this is what they've been given, and seriously embarrassed.
 
Strongbow said:
So many here have claimed that Joe Biden's performance was filled with specifics and substance. Joe Biden placed particular emphasis on one issue, claiming that

[Biden quote]

Well, Joey, lets take a look at the facts. The United States roughly spends about $10 Billion dollars a month on Iraq. According to you, that would mean the United States had only spent $7.5 Billion dollars in Afghanistan since 2001.

But just taking a look at the year 2007, the facts show that the United States spent an average of $10.3 Billion dollars a month in Iraq, but also spent $2 Billion dollars per month in Afghanistan. The United States spent $24 Billion dollars just in 2007, almost 4 times what Joe Biden claims the United States has spent in Afghanistan the past 7 years!

When it comes to "substance and specifics" Joey is on another planet.

Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation: U.S. Spending on Iraq and Afghanistan by Month, Week, Day, Hour, Minute, & Second
Click to expand...

Is that the best you can do? Throughout the debate, he undeniably demonstrated a broad and deep knowledge and drew on specific details and evidence to support his claims. That's what good debaters do. And all you can do is grab just one particular piece of evidence from the many he presented and rebut it, as if this single rebuttal is somehow a rebuttal of everything else he said and negates his experience! What a ridiculous conflation.

Nobody here is saying that he was perfect or that every single item of evidence he presented to sustain his argumentation was precise and correct. In such a lengthy debate, some kind of error is natural and expected. I would not expect anybody to nail everything.

But at least he consistently and thoroughly drew upon evidence to substantiate his arguments. Sarah Palin, meanwhile, seems completely unfamiliar with such a basic principle of debating and is lucky if she can articulate something that vaguely resembles an argument more than an irrelevant ramble.

Strongbow said:
Well, how does Mr. "facts and substance" explain the following:

To qoute Joe Biden:

[Biden quote]

Yet, the facts are that the United States spends $2 Billion dollars every month in Afghanistan compared to the $10 billion dollars that is spent in Iraq. The United States spent $24 Billion dollars in Afghanistan in 2007, 4 TIMES what Biden claimed the United States had spent in Afghanistan since 2001!

If your going to make facts and specifics a key part of your argument, you need to at least be in the ball park on the numbers. Joe Biden was on another planet.

Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation: U.S. Spending on Iraq and Afghanistan by Month, Week, Day, Hour, Minute, & Second
Click to expand...

Wait, isn't that what you just said?

Strongbow said:
Can you really be considered the king of substance and facts when you claim that the United States has only spent $7.5 Billion dollars in Afghanistan in all of the past 7 years, but the facts show that the United States spent nearly 4 times that in Afghanistan just in 2007?
Click to expand...

We read it the first time, you know. You don't have to repeat the same damn point three times in fourteen minutes. Now, if it had gone ignored for fourteen days, that's another thing entirely. But in this case, you just look like a bit of a broken record, somebody desperately scrambling for a talking point to hammer home in ignorance to all the other points out there that go against you.
 
I'd give Biden a B- and Palin a C+, probably.

These debates have become so over-rehearsed that they hardly warrant the label anymore. Most of Biden's answers and almost all of Palin's sounded totally scripted, her "folksy" flourishes came off rote and programmatic and his demeanor was unnaturally wary and grave. Even the predictable distortions of each other's running mates' stances were recycled, all stuff FactCheck et al. debunked long ago. I give Biden the edge for having generally more substantive answers, fewer meaningless platitudes and for answering a larger number of the questions head-on, but on the whole I found this "debate" boring and tepid and was glad I had other stuff to work on while it was playing (watched it online).
 
Earnie Shavers said:
I still think it's crazy that a talking-point base cheerleader is considered the next Reagan by conservatives.
Click to expand...

You could put an "R" on a toaster, and they'd consider that the next great leader, which is actually one of the things I admire about republicans - their ability to ignore their candidates shortcomings and still support that candidate.

If you took Sarah, and changed absolutely nothing about her, about her positions, or about her history, then stuck a "D" next to her name, the conservatives would hate her. And so would the democrats. :|

We've made our standards so high that we'll never get a candidate that we'll all be happy with, and while we kick and scream at each other, the republicans walk away victorious. How did I end up in such a disorganized party? :doh:
 
coolian2 said:
Does it really count as a win if you're being celebrated only for not fucking up completely?

Naturally, I'm referring to the lunatics handing Palin the outright win.
Click to expand...



all Sarah Palin had to do was not swallow her own tongue,

and she was going to be declared the winner in some circles.

i think this will matter very little. she's been exposed as having no insight, no knowledge, no experience, and as not terribly bright. i'm betting they're going to put her back behind the curtains and she'll do no more interviews after being so embarrassed by Katie Couric (of all people).

still, i think she proved to people that she's a bit better than the Tina Fey version of her, so her rapidly declining approval ratings might taper off a bit. she's still a liability and a weight down on the ticket, but she managed to stop the freefall.

McCain certainly has his work cut out for him.
 
Axver said:
And all you can do is grab just one particular piece of evidence from the many he presented and rebut it, as if this single rebuttal is somehow a rebuttal of everything else he said and negates his experience! What a ridiculous conflation.
Click to expand...




and no matter the subject, this is what a discussion is like with said poster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MrsSpringsteen
Gilead States Of America
Replies
16
Views
872
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen
N
NBA 2023-24 Thread
10 11 12
Replies
333
Views
10K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
  • Sticky
U2 in Vegas - Tips for booking hotels, flights and other Vegasy type things.
20 21 22
Replies
642
Views
32K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
N
  • Locked
NBA 2022-23 Thread
46 47 48
Replies
1K
Views
45K
U2inUtah
U2inUtah
MrsSpringsteen
Police Brutality Against 73 Year Old Woman With Dementia
Replies
4
Views
567
dazzledbylight
dazzledbylight

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom