I said many times on here and elsewhere, what the McCain camp was doing was intentionally setting the bar below zero, so that when they put her up on the stage, she wouldn’t fall flat on her face and that would be considered “good enough”. I knew she had come in 2nd runner up in Miss Alaska, had experience on TV as a sportscaster, and had done well in her gubernatorial debates. Plus, I knew they were prepping her night and day…she essentially spent the majority of as she said, “what has it been, five weeks?” prepping for this one debate where the McCain camp essentially insisted that the two candidates were expected to address the moderator and not each other. As one pundit put it this week, a “puke free” night for Palin would be considered a win. And to her credit, even though she had a permanent rictus slapped on her face, kept referring to notes, looked like a deer in the headlights, avoided answering most of the questions, and pretty much stuck to her script for what can only be described as pitifully predictable questions, she did not barf.
She also did one other thing I expected her to do…go on the attack…repeatedly. This is exactly what McCain did, so it was no surprise. By pretending he was suspending his campaign and then reneging at the last moment, he set the expectations for himself very low, and made it seem like he was running scared. But then when he was articulate and coherent (though generally stuck to a script and didn’t really say anything, except to try to attack Obama over and over), it came off that he was in command of the situation. So, the same thing happened here…they set the bar as low as they possibly could (I wouldn’t even be surprised if some of her Couric interview flubs were intentional), and she came out, she was articulate, she didn’t stumble over her words, she didn’t have a Miss South Carolina moment, and she took every chance to try to attack Obama and/or Biden (damn the truth).
But Biden was adept at calling her out when she lied, as was Obama. Biden answered the questions and pointed out where she did not (as did Gwen Ifil). Essentially, she set the expectations so that all she had to do was avoid looking stupid. And since she had memorized and/or read off a script everything she had to say, whether it answered the question or not, it probably wasn’t that hard.
Now really, any politician needs to know a few things these days about the electorate, and Palin HAS to know this. The Dems and Republicans are decided…the Republicans will defend any gaffe, and the Dems will jump all over any gaffe. But those who haven’t committed, by and large, if you haven’t committed by this point, you’re probably a low info voter, and you pretty much just want to see who you “like” more. But given the nature of VP debates, they really don’t move the numbers, historically EVER. But if someone messes up big time, it can and will affect the opinions of the middle…if you give these low info voters a reason to dislike you, they will turn against you. But unless the other guy gives undecideds a reason to dislike him, it’s not a game you can pick up points on….it’s one where you can only lose, and therefore, your two goals need to be 1) not hurting yourself and 2) trying to do anything to make your opponent put his foot in his mouth. She succeeded on the first point, but not the second…she kept from doing anything that would make people dislike her, but she failed on the second point…she did nothing to make independents dislike Biden (Republicans, yes…but they already did dislike Biden).
Now look at it form Biden’s perspective, which should be the same. He had the same two goals…don’t make himself look unlikeable in any way (he succeeded, he was very affable), and try to make your opponent look unlikeable. I think he didn’t succeed in spades, BUT, by constantly calling her when she twisted the truth, it did make it obvious to even the most uncritical voter what she was TRYING to do.
Long and short, if it has ANY effect on poll numbers, it will be a slight increase for Obama, but considering that he’s got very little room left to climb and that Biden didn’t exactly land any “knockout” blows, it shouldn’t be significant…maybe a point in national numbers…and probably a temporary bounce if anything…because there was nothing that people are going to remember from this debate in 32 days.
And Biden couldn’t attack Palin…he’d look like he was beating up on her. Remember, the ONLY place he could make points (or more likely LOSE them), would be if he came off as unlikeable, and hey, if you look like the asshole that made the pretty lady cry, the low info voter will think he’s the mean old man, and it WILL lose him points. He did the right thing by not attacking her….by letting her be the only one who went on the attack, and by calmly explaining where she was not being truthful and/or accurate, he was just being likable, and not bitter, partisan, or mean. And if he’d corrected her pronunciation he would have a) come off as nitpicky, and b) would have destroyed an opportunity…think about it…she can only dig a hole by mispronouncing words…peole know how they’re pronounced, and if they don’t, BIDEN pronounced the correctly showing the unwashed masses how it SHOULD be said. Either you care about this or you don’t, if you care, you already know she’s saying it wrong, if you don’t, you probably just care about who comes off as more “civil” about it. So, it would have been self-defeating, let her dig her own hole and avoid looking mean, that HAD to be his goal. After all, the cliche with VP nominees is “do no harm.”
And I don’t think either will regret mentioning anything to be completely honest. They both did what they had to do, neither screwed it up too much. Maybe, and this is a big maybe, when Palin pretty much said she agreed with Biden about the civil rights issues surrounding same sex couples, what she was TRYING to do was to avoid the question, but what she ACTUALLY did was allowed it to come off like she was for equal rights for same sex partners, and that COULD be problematic to the religious right wing she calls her base. But that in and of itself is like anything else…if you’re partisan to the right ALL is forgivable (and that’s true in reverse as well, perhaps to a lesser degree, but maybe I’m too biased to see it). But the danger here is that she may be called upon to backpedal, and when anyone backpedals, the independents have another reason to dislike her.
I think I hit all your questions. If I didn’t, let me know.