Biden v. Palin (II)
Posted on October 2nd, 2008
by Daniel Larison |
|
Just over one-third of voters (34%) say tonight’s vice presidential debate is Very Important to how they will vote, and over half (54%) view Joseph Biden as the more skilled debater, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. ~Rasmussen
Good grief. 34%? Looking at the crosstabs, I see that 28% of independents and 22% of McCain supporters say that the debate tonight will be very important for how they vote. I take this to mean that all these people could change their minds based on what happens tonight. If tonight goes as badly for Palin as I think many of us expect it will, does that really mean that up to a fifth of McCain’s supporters could be at least temporarily lost? That seems impossible. I know there are people, including opponents, who say that she is effective in debates, but I have seen her performances in the gubernatorial debates in ‘06 and I’m not sure that the “glittering generality” will wear well when she is asked questions on national policy. The Senate just passed the bailout last night, so you can be sure that both candidates will get a question about that and the financial crisis more generally. We know what she said in her last answer about the bailout. How much aw-shucksing and talking about her 401K can she do before she has to touch on larger policy matters? 38% of McCain supporters believe that Palin is the more skilled debater. Is that just reflexive loyalty to one’s own candidate that guarantees that these people are going to think that Palin wins the debate no matter what happens, or is that a serious expectation that Palin is supposed to win that will result in disappointment?
The L.A. Times has a story on the debate:
“The picture that we’ve been given thus far is something of a caricature,” said Whit Ayres, a Republican consultant. He said that Palin should accent her rationale for being on the ticket.
“She doesn’t have to be an expert in the politics of Kosovo or Georgia to be viewed as a competent vice presidential choice [bold mine-DL],” Ayres said. “What they are going to be looking for is her set of values, her sympathies, her orientation to the world, who she connects with.”
I guess she’s fortunate that no one is expecting her to demonstrate expert knowledge of that kind. It strikes me that the VP nominee has to demonstrate some measure of preparedness to assume the Presidency. Values and sympathies are all very well, but if the audience cannot imagine her as a plausible President they might think she is a saint and still not be reassured.
Filed under: politics
Honestly Daniel I think the bar has been lowered to such a degree that she can’t help but be seen as having held her own at least.
I take this to mean that all these people could change their minds based on what happens tonight.
I have an alternative explanation. It might mean that many of those people already know which way they’re going to vote and expect the debate to confirm they’re the wisdom of their plans. After all, I know exactly how I’m going to vote and I expect the debate tonight will illustrate why my choices are correct, but I don’t plan on changing my vote no matter what happens tonight.
But what does holding her own even mean at this point? That she speaks English in more or less complete sentences? No way. She has to put a stop to the talk that she doesn’t know what she’s talking about; she has to make at least most of the conservatives who have dubbed her unfit eat their words. That’s not going to happen, and she will continue to be a distraction and a drag on the ticket.
Turbulence, you’re probably right that this is what the poll result means. That’s why I don’t quite understand why the debate would be cosidered very important. When I look at that, it makes it sound as if the debate is critical or decisive in determining a voter’s preference.
What I don’t understand is why polling organizations ask such ambiguous questions. Do they really fail to think through the implications? Is it really so hard to first ask people how certain they are of their vote and then break out the numbers for people who haven’t yet made up their minds? Or are they smart enough to do all that but feel compelled to fit the whole thing into a media narrative that the debates are super important and must be watched?
“But what does holding her own even mean at this point? That she speaks English in more or less complete sentences? No way.”
Yes way, I think. Your TAS colleague Matt Feeney has a thread up asking how people think the debate will play out. Let me just repeat what I said there:
I think the bar for Palin is now set so low that any performance above the level of “drooling and gibbering†will be scored as exceeding expectations. That will probably be enough to stop the negative impact she’s had on the ticket’s numbers the last week or two, but not reverse it. Still, stanching the bleeding will be something, after which Palin can be conveniently hustled off to controlled, friendly venues, never to take a question or interview from the media again.
If that’s so, that is a far more devastating indictment of our entire political system than the problems of “gotcha” journalism. For years I have heard people complain that debates are too trivial, and now we have an entire party desperately hoping for triviality. You can almost hear them saying, “Thank goodness our system rewards empty soundbites and vapid answers!”
I think Palin will be viewed favorably coming out of the debate, but I agree with Mr. Larison that a good performance means she has just stopped digging. Given her high profile follies, no one is going to come out of this thing saying, “My gosh she really is brilliant,” except maybe in the most sarcastic sense possible.
I’m starting to think that the whole debate expectations game is more a reflection of how the media looks at these things, as opposed to how the man on the street looks at them. I have little doubt that, given the format, which is more favorable to Palin than the interview format, Palin will exceed the pitifully low expectations that exist. And the media will, initially at least, indeed spin her performance as “exceeding expectations.”
But how will the public at large view the debate? I’m lousy at predicting that, but I think that there is a chance that the “clueless” meme has (rightfully) taken such strong hold that anything short of a shockingly well informed performance by Palin will merely reinforce the impression that she can’t cut it. Even sans serious gaffes.
At the beginning of the campaign, people were willing to cut her some slack. Aside from her remaining admirers, who are already firm McCain voters, that is no longer true. If she tries to pull the same kind of “the voters don’t care about policy details” crap that she (apparently successfully) deployed in the Alaska debates is not goign to cut it with persuadable voters at this point. (I mean, they DON’T care about policy details, and they don’t necessarily like to hear the same from their politicians. But they DO like to think that their politicians are knowledgeable about those issues.
Or so I hope. Not even so much because I want McCain to lose, but even moreso because I agree with Daniel’s 12:12 post. It would indeed be a devastating indictment of our system if voters were favorably impressed by the kind of minimally coherent performance that appears to be the best that she is capable of.