Thread: McCain: Palin needs a debate highchair

The Obama and McCain campaigns have agreed to an unusual free-flowing format for the three televised presidential debates, which begin on Friday, but the McCain camp fought for and won a much more structured approach for the questioning at the vice-presidential debate, advisers to both campaigns said Saturday.


At the insistence of the McCain campaign, the Oct. 2 debate between the Republican nominee for vice president, Gov. Sarah Palin, and her Democratic rival, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., will have shorter question-and-answer segments than those for the presidential nominees, the advisers said. There will also be much less opportunity for free-wheeling, direct exchanges between the running mates. McCain advisers said they had been concerned that a loose format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a disadvantage and largely on the defensive.

Crooks and Liars » McCain Camp argues that a loose debate format could leave Sarah Palin vulnerable as a relatively inexperienced debater

What. The. Fuck.

They are restructuring the debate because they feel she isn't ready for it? Tough goddamn titty. This is amazingly bad. I can't wait to see what all you apologists are gonna come up with to excuse this whopper.

Originally Posted by Ronin Tetsuro

Crooks and Liars � McCain Camp argues that a loose debate format could leave Sarah Palin vulnerable as a relatively inexperienced debater

What. The. Fuck.

They are restructuring the debate because they feel she isn't ready for it? Tough goddamn titty. This is amazingly bad. I can't wait to see what all you apologists are gonna come up with to excuse this whopper.

If this is true, how does anyone take her seriously as a candidate and potential president?

Originally Posted by Davocrat

If this is true, how does anyone take her seriously as a candidate and potential president?

Rampant partisan idiocy has definitely reached crisis levels in America.

Originally Posted by Ronin Tetsuro

Rampant partisan idiocy has definitely reached crisis levels in America.

On both sides.

Ronin, you know how I hate less-than-reputable sources, which this one is. I usually question your sources at this point, point to differing opinions and provide facts to support my case.

This time, I got nothing. Sometimes the truth hurts, but I'll accept it and reinterate that Obama and McCain are both turds floating in the same bowl.

Here's a better link for you:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/us...=1&oref=slogin

Think I have to green you for this one.

I want to look into it further to see if the debate rules were actually changed or simply not changed in the way the POTUS debates were. Also, I want to make sure it was only the McCain camp pushing for this format or if it was a mutually agreed upon rule set.

I'll be back....

I agree that "Crooks and Liars" isn't a fair point of proof. I enjoy it and read it, but it's definitely biased and as second-hand as most blogs and quasi news sites like Newsmax.

But in a round up of what I have read, there does seem to be some indication that Palin is being insulated from having to think on her feet with reporters. My personal take on her is that she is a huge accident waiting to happen for McCain. These days it only takes one dumb response to sink a campaign ("I voted for it, before I voted against it"--Kerry) and in this respect Palin is like a cannon on the deck with very well greased wheels and no ropes.

I DO see this as a travesty and a potential dumbing down (again) of our presidential selection process. In this sense, I suppose I'm actually conservative. I think we need to return to a higher degree of decorum in our political discourse, a level that doesn't accept a speech full of one-liners and demands some poly-sci academic and practical rigor.

In this light, yes, Obama could improve, too. But Palin is way out of her depth. Until I hear her articulate an independent position or philosophical vision, I will continue to assume she's not ready to a vp or a president.

Akkaid, have you read this column by David Brooks?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/16/opinion/16brooks.html

Sarah Palin has many virtues. If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she’d be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness.

The bold part is the most unnerving to me.

Originally Posted by Ronin Tetsuro

Crooks and Liars � McCain Camp argues that a loose debate format could leave Sarah Palin vulnerable as a relatively inexperienced debater

What. The. Fuck.

They are restructuring the debate because they feel she isn't ready for it? Tough goddamn titty. This is amazingly bad. I can't wait to see what all you apologists are gonna come up with to excuse this whopper.

Not surprising at all. You know women have to be treated differently because they are so frail. My guess is this is how the soccer mom with lipstick is going to change things in washington. Does not matter though because Biden, which will end up being president, will wipe that lipstick right off her face. Then she will know she is playing with the big boys.

Originally Posted by anonnymous

Not surprising at all. You know women have to be treated differently because they are so frail. My guess is this is how the soccer mom with lipstick is going to change things in washington. Does not matter though because Biden, which will end up being president, will wipe that lipstick right off her face. Then she will know she is playing with the big boys.

Personally, I think women are more interesting WITHOUT lipstick. I like 'em kind of wild.

Palinites try to turn the tables on feminists by saying their opposition is actually sexist, but Mrs. Palin evokes one of the oldest male expectations for women—make-up—in her most famous political statement to date, a joke about feminine stereotypes.

Originally Posted by Davocrat

Personally, I think women are more interesting WITHOUT lipstick. I like 'em kind of wild.

Palinites try to turn the tables on feminists by saying their opposition is actually sexist, but Mrs. Palin evokes one of the oldest male expectations for women—make-up—in her most famous political statement to date, a joke about feminine stereotypes.

Once Biden is through with her she will pile it on like that other women who has enough on to paint a chorus line. Whats her name? You know the one who looks like Frankenstein' s creation that is a democrap.

Originally Posted by Davocrat

But Palin is way out of her depth. Until I hear her articulate an independent position or philosophical vision, I will continue to assume she's not ready to a vp or a president.

When she did the ABC interview, It sounded like she was just answering with pre-scripted blurbs and they didn't always match the question.

I do agree that she seems in more than just a little over her head. When you combine that with her George W Bush style Ideology, It becomes a scary thought that she could end up as President.

If she didn't understand something, she could always fall back on an religous or Ideological viewpoint.

A few examples would be:

* Considering the war on Terror to be a Christian war against Islam

* Wanting to interject religion into science class in public schools

* prohibit teenagers from being taught about birth control in public schools

* Having the typical religious right viewpoint and attack scientists because only God is big enough to change the climate.

Another thing I noticed in the ABC interview was that she was hedging on some of her previously stated viewpoints so that she would fit in a little better with John McCain.

I think the strategy is to keep her as isolated as possible and keep the focus off the issues.

Originally Posted by Akkaid

On both sides.

Ronin, you know how I hate less-than-reputable sources, which this one is. I usually question your sources at this point, point to differing opinions and provide facts to support my case.

Yeah, sorry about that. I know CNL is on some people's shit lists, and the NYT link was in the OP. I just have this thing about registering to read news articles. Trips my paranoia trigger. So I linked to CNL instead.