Friday, October 12, 2012

V.P. Debate

Since apparently visitors can't not get on about this in other posts...

1.) Biden won, plain and simple. Not a "knockout" or a "curbstomp," but he wins on points and wins on "TV-friendliness." Down side is that the laughing/grinning/"can-you-BELIEVE-this-kid??" schtick that the base is currently loving and pop-culture will almost-certainly process as "lovable curmudgeon" will be presented as "unbecoming" by FoxNews, Talk Radio, etc which'll keep their base suitably angry and engaged. Also, he didn't make enough of a fool of Ryan to cripple him from future political ambitions, which is what I'd have called a "knockout."

2.) Bigger "winner" than Biden was the moderator, Martha Radatz: much better than Leher. Granted, the "sit down and talk, interuption allowed at moderator's discretion" format is just BETTER for the way public-discourse is expected to be now (everyone speaks in predictable talking points, so interuptions to a certain extent is almost a given) but she held them both in place and made it work.

3.) Amusingly, the "narrative" is basically the same as the previous debate: Younger, slicker, super-smart guy who's mostly about theory (having more-or-less jumped directly from higher education to career-politics) versus older, less "slick" guy who comes in fighting and wins on experience chops. Obama gets at least two more chances to come back prepared for that, Ryan doesn't. I'm not actually nuts about that dynamic still being so effective - I think "intellectual-side" pols are preferable as leadership in our increasingly-mechanized age - but if this is what it takes to keep Republicans' hands off the Supreme Court for another four years, I'll take it.

4.) Does this "mean" anything? Not really, no. All it does is "solidify" where things have been for most of the race so far - Biden did here a micro version of the entire reason he has the V.P. slot in the first place: He makes the Obama ticket "palatable" to white/blue-collar/midwestern "swing" voters (mostly but not overwhelmingly men) who're receptive to Democrats via reliable support for union labor but are "iffy" about the young, foriegn-seeming, possibly "radical" guy at the top of the ticket. He played the role of "tuff grampa" tonight, forcing Ryan into the role of "smug punk new-hire MBA hotshot from the office who thinks he's better than you," and that's mana to that bloc.


Anonymous said...

Really? So this one was better because they allowed one of the debaters to sneer and laugh while the other person talked? People talked about Leher getting walked over, yet now this woman is king of moderators because she let Biden interrupt and control the debate with no substance?

Funny how that was exactly what the last debate seemed like when the shoe was on Romney's foot.

You Democrats are just as idiotic as the Republicans you disagree with so much.

When your own loses, you have no comment save for the winner, "Played unfairly, bullied, and/or our person wouldn't stoop to their level."

Then the exact opposite happens, you win by the same dirty tactics as you'd lost by and suddenly all is right in the world.

Both of these debates have been laughable at best. Good thing Biden laughed for me.

None of these men care about preserving the American dream, or even defending what scraps are left of the middle class. Trying to trick yourself into believing the end result is better with either pair sitting at the head of the dinner table is just naive.

Any system with two parties fighting for control will NEVER work. This is especially true when both sides are unwilling to cooperate, and believe they're infallible.

Have fun being a blind dem or rep though. I'm sure your white guilt vote or biggot-esqe decision will lead you to a nicer way of life.

Anonymous said...

Bob, when are you gonna grow a pair and admit that Obama/Biden is just as bad as Romney/Ryan?

Mads said...

@ anonymous 5:20

It's right there in the post. Bob is willing to accept nearly anything from the democrats in these debates if it keeps republican hands off the surpreme court.

That's it. That's the fundamental reason obama-biden are better than romeny-ryan.

Nixou said...

"So this one was better because they allowed one of the debaters to sneer and laugh while the other person talked?"

Haaaaa: the sight of a bully crying "no fair" when given a bloody nose: it-never-gets-old

Anyway, Bob: regarding your point number three, you should remember that Ryan "intellectual" credentials are mostly meaningless sycophantic praise from pundits who just loooooove to see bullshit told with fancy words themselves delivered in a fake "professoral" tone. Basically, the political equivalent of Techno-babble: it sounds cool, but it hardly qualify as intellectualism.

And regarding your point number four: Biden is one teabagger's bullet away from the Big Red Nuke Button, while Ryan is Romney's defective, overated fiscal brain. The idea that vice-presidential debates do not matter in a country which does not organise special elections when its head of state is killed is simply staggering. Also, it's more than time for everyone to stop pretending that the guy who's prudent to the point of forfeiting his first debate rather than be tarred with the "angry vengeful black guy" meme is some sort of secret "radical": given how much Bush & co had increased the power of the presidency, had this fucking lie been true, all the Republican National Commitee would have spent the last four years sleeping in orange PJs on Cuba's shores.

Megabyte said...

Oh boy... here we go...

1) Sorry, but this time there was no clear winner. Biden was a lot more aggressive the Obama but it came off as an old man interrupting everyone more then anything else. Not that Ryan could do much either though... his best move of the night was one of his last lines basically hitting like a suckerpunch. But in the end, I wasn't really impressed by anyone.

2) The moderator won more then the last debate, Ill agree... but not by much. Where the last, he was basically walked on by everyone, Martha basically let Biden ramble over Ryan, but kept a tight leash on Ryan. At least she restrained topics better though... so... there's that...

3) ...Bob... you make no sense... if this dynamic continues, what you want will FAIL as Obama will get his clock cleaned (assuming the moderator doesn't help him).

That said, if you can be one-issue, so can I. We currently have a president who denied extra security to our ambassador in Lybia and when we all saw the results, lied his ass off about it being a youtube video.... including to the UN weeks later. Sorry, but someone willing to do that NEEDS to be kicked out of office. In short, we have a MUCH more pressing issue then potential judges you are being scare-mongerd with.

4) You are right... it doesn't mean anything. This debate actually kinda bored me, and so I have to wonder how many "undecideds" even stuck around. And that makes it tough to matter... it just does... but I guess we will see if there is a change in momentum like there was from the previous debate to see how right either of us are there.

lemonvampire said...

Bob, when are you gonna grow a pair and finally admit that Batman is just as bad as the Joker?

Bob, when are you gonna grow a pair and finally admit that Mario is just as bad as Wario?

Bob, when are you gonna grow a pair and finally admit that Marvel movies are just as bad as DC?

Bob, when are you gonna grow a pair and finally admit that simply saying that "Obama is just as bad as bad as Romney" counts as a legitimate comment?

webfox100 said...

Will we be seeing a new American Bob in the next month or two?284

Pat said...

Don't agree with you on this one, Bob.

I think Dems are coming away from this feeling like Biden won, but the GOP is coming away feeling like Ryan won.

Since the undecideds are pretty much split down the middle, I'd call this a draw. Both sides invigorated their base, but neither side convinced anybody of anything.

One could potentially call that a "win" for Obama, since it could theoretically upset Romney's momentum, but that's probably pushing it.

@Anonymous James

James, when are you gonna grow a pair, stop hiding behind pointless Anonymity, and keep your fucking promise to leave Bob alone, as well as your OTHER promise to leave him alone after he addressed your inane questions, which he did?

I bet even if Bob DID say "Obama is just as bad as Romney", you'd just follow it up with "See? You're a hypocrite! You make me sick! Now when will you grow a pair and admit that you are the Left Limbaugh?" and then proceed to spam THAT for the next 6 months because apparently you think that if you can convince/destroy Bob, then suddenly Libertarians will be electable.

Please just go the fuck away.

Nixou said...

"I think Dems are coming away from this feeling like Biden won, but the GOP is coming away feeling like Ryan won."

No: what the GOP is thinking is "You know what? unlike those spineless hippies, we'll just pretend that our guy won even though we know better".
After all, if pretending to believe things you know are false work for natural selection, global warming, the inanity of supply-sides, and Obama's religion, there is no reason to keep on using that very same trick.

Pat said...


While I'm sure there are plenty of people who feel that way (I certainly remember people thinking that Sarah Palin won her debate simply because she didn't implode), in this case, Ryan did a number of things right and the GOP has reason to be happy with his performance.

Even though Biden kept running over him (and Biden did speak about 2 minutes more in total than Ryan did) Ryan maintained his composure and didn't throw fits when he was cut off. He came off as more polite and mature without seeming spineless, which Obama failed to pull off last week.

Ryan also sounded more rehearsed (for good or ill) and really only lost his footing around the time when he started talking about abortion (and maybe the brief Jack Kennedy moment).

It might SEEM like he lost when you believe that every sentence that comes out of his mouth is a lie, but for people who agree with his politics, aren't that well-informed, or just implicitly trust him (and he does have a pretty trustworthy face), he came off pretty well.

As for Biden, he DID come off as rude. Yes, it makes the base happy, particularly after Obama didn't really fight back in his debate, but undecided voters actually hate that stuff. The reason a lot of them are undecided is because they don't like divisive polarizing politics and arguments.

It was a calculated risk. Biden's aggressive demeanor fired up his base who felt like they needed to score some dirty punches in the bout, and that will definitely help the overall narrative, but in terms of actually convincing voters, it didn't really help.

Still, this could have gone way worse. I actually thought Biden would get his ass handed to him.

Billy said...

debates are important, but they are fundamentally flawed, because nobody gets held to in-depth analysis of any logical fallacies or even factual inaccuracies. obviously, there wouldn't be time for that because fallacies are effective for convincing the majority of people, so politicians use them a lot. What you're left with is a bunch of debate over who had better style. It's sickening to me that this works.

When I compare the Presidential candidates arguments against my own, I find that Obama's fit more closely. The thing that's important to point out is that doing this- comparing rhetoric with logic and fact- exposes the things Obama does that are misleading. But I'm still going to vote for him, because the underlying conclusions are consistent with my own.

Obama "wins" any debate for me subjectively because the underlying principles are what matter. Romney may have been more engaging, and that may be what matters in national politics, but I'd encourage anybody that considers themselves rational to explore what Mitt Romney is actually saying when he says "growing the economy" is his chief concern.

He wants to cut taxes by 20% (which is where Obama got the 5 trillion number, which is a debatable one) across the board, and that would mean that the highest income tax payers save the most money. The fiscal conservative explanation for this is that the economy will grow faster. While it's true that regulation and many other factors regarding the government effect free market growth, it is undemonstrated that simply cutting taxes on wealthy American will accomplish this. an important example is that Bill Clinton was able to raise taxes, but focused on smart regulation to get the government growing again.

since that's the basis of romney's arguement for being a good candidate, I have to point out that his claims are unfounded. He is simply praying on people's frustrations with a poor economy in order to get elected. This can be demonstrated with the rhetoric his campaign and him use about how things are getting worse. They aren't getting worse, that is demonstratably NOT true.

the debates are more-or-less about how these people SEEM while arguing, not the arguments themselves.

Billy said...

*government* after the bill clinton part should be *economy*

biomechanical923 said...

Re: alienating undecided voters.

It's October. Saying that there are undecided voters is like saying there are unicorn voters.

Anonymous said...

Biden just came across as arrogant to me. I had no inkling the whole time either party was telling the truth. Rather it was, which party could get away with calling the other a liar most.

Due to the moderator, it was Biden. When he was spouting off the lies about Libya attack I couldn't help but roll my eyes.

Ryan came across unprepared though, as if he had no idea he'd be steam rolled or the moderator would cut him off while letting Biden continue the beating.

It just felt unfair and dirty. Like most of the debates in the past did. I still don't think laughing or guffawing during a debate is appropriate, the fact the moderator didn't interrupt Ryan to ask Biden to compose himself was just beyond me.

My highschool debate team had more decency than that jerk.

Ones a smooth liar, the others an arrogant liar.

Pick your poison I guess.

Anonymous said...

So Samuel Jackson is playing a stereotypical "House Negro". Professionally, that's definitely not much of a stretch for him.

Anonymous said...

You know how I know Biden won? Because Fox is calling it a tie.

Zeno said...

A few days ago in the Wall Street Journal, there was an article describing how Goldman Sachs, one of the top five biggest beneficiaries of one of The Fed's $13,000,000,000,000 asset relief programs, pledged their financial support to Romney.

Guess who's going to win the election?

Megabyte said...

Actually, Im calling it a tie because every poll I've looked at seems to have just shy of 50% convinced Ryan won and just shy of 50% convinced Biden won. To me, this sounds like partisan bias.... but it also sounds like neither side convinced enough of the audience that they won to... well... win.

And since that's the goal of a debate... yeah... it was a tie... done.