Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News VP debate just got over

  1. Oct 2, 2008 #1
    I gotta say both candidates did a pretty good job. I'm giving the win to Palin though. She did much much better than I was expecting. There's more than looks there. I just have one comment and one question.
    1. I wish politicians could answer a question when they are asked one. Nothing against these two, but if I tried answering a question on a test the way they do I wouldn't expect a single correct answer.
    2. Biden said that Afghanistan has nuclear weapons and had deployed nuclear weapons. Did I miss Afghanistan nuking someone? Or was he talking about a test?
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 2, 2008 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    :surprised Check out the "mark your diary" thread.
  4. Oct 2, 2008 #3
    I'm pretty sure biden was talking about Pakistan, as the question was about Iran and Pakistan, which one was more dangerous.
  5. Oct 2, 2008 #4
    LOL. Keith Olbermann is just going over all the things Palin did wrong.

    Keith is so biased, but at least he uses facts to make his case unlike fox noise.

    She one of the generals names wrong, the number of troops deployed, etc.

    I love how MSNBC talks to me like a human being that can understand big words and complete sentences, instead of the soundbite nonsense on the other cable networks (and the outright propaganda on fox noise).
  6. Oct 2, 2008 #5
    You gave the win to Palin? Wow............................................... errrr, no. Sorry there. You're wrong.

    I gave the first debate win to McCain. But this one, she clearly lost. By miles. All she said was sound bites over and over and over again. Most of them the same just rephrased differently.

    "We're mavericks."

    The question was about the economy.....

    Yeah but were mavericks!!!................MAVERICK!
  7. Oct 2, 2008 #6
    I think they both did pretty well but I wouldn't say Palin won.

    And OrbitalPower was right, Biden was talking about Pakistan having deployed nuclear weapons.
  8. Oct 2, 2008 #7
    You are right, I meant Pakistan.

    I gave the first debate to Obama. I give the second to Palin.
    Now, because I'm scientific I have to ask myself why. Could I be biased against old people? Yes, that is a definite possibility. so is the possibility that I prefer the better looking candidate. I think I judge the way I do based on the feeling I get about how much I "like" the person. I don't really care as much about the facts because I know lots of dumb people who know a lot of facts and decisions at the upper level are never a one person affair.
  9. Oct 2, 2008 #8
    WHat did you expect from someone who has been a Senator since they were 29 years old? Biden absolutely mopped the floor with Palin, especially when it came to foreign policy issues.
  10. Oct 2, 2008 #9
    I only heard the begining. It sounded like Palin was tripping up from the get go and Biden was giving her a little push.

    From clips of her debates in the AK governors race she seems pretty sharp so long as she actually knows what she's talking about.
  11. Oct 2, 2008 #10
    Palin did better than I had expected. I hate when she answers a question with pep rally talk though. Biden won, but it was close.
  12. Oct 2, 2008 #11
    Biden schooled her on the Constitution, but what do you expect from someone who has a JD and who still teaches Constitutional Law at Widener University every year?

    Biden schooled her on the politics of the Middle East, but what did you expect coming from someone who has been on the foreign relations committee?

    Biden won this show hands down.
  13. Oct 2, 2008 #12


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    No that was definitely Pakistan. That was the predicate of the question discussing which was more of a threat - an unstable Pakistan or a nuclear Iran.
  14. Oct 2, 2008 #13

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    My favorite Palin answer was: I may not answer the questions the way that you and the moderator would like.

    Now that was funny! What she meant was that when she can't answer the question, she will say whatever she wants. I'm sure that the core thought it was spunky, but I suspect that the Inds saw it as the dodge that it was.
  15. Oct 2, 2008 #14


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    I'm sure that was her practiced failsafe line. If cornered say ...
  16. Oct 2, 2008 #15
    I loved this one!


    Most of her answers were scary. Like relying on army for foreign relations ... or not negotiating with dictators. And above one, asking general public for economic health.
  17. Oct 3, 2008 #16
    Anyone see Bill O'fool right before the debate? He started SHOUTING at the senator of Mass. and the senator was calling him stupid, O'fool told him he's saying a load of BS - literally.

    And before this they had on Carl Rove, and O'fool treated him soooooo kind and nice. This network is so full of s*** its amazing.

    Adding insult to injury, he started with his talking point about how FOX is rated number one, and MSNBC is way down at 26.

    Anyone also notice how high tech and nice CNN has become? Even their website is really nice.
  18. Oct 3, 2008 #17
    I had to roll my eyes at that. Of course Biden pulled out a similar response, I think something to do with talking to his mechanic or something.
  19. Oct 3, 2008 #18
    The radio station I listen to, KFI am640, is owned by clear channel and a fox news affiliate. They read the news twice an hour just like regular news, no spin I can detect. The only affiliated reporter that is a staple on any of the shows is a Liberal and big supporter of Obama, he covered the DNC for them. Most of their local political talk show hosts are conservative but tend to be rather even handed. They're all tearing apart Palin and McCain. They don't like Obama either but they are fair about it at least.
  20. Oct 3, 2008 #19


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    what really bugs me about the neo-cons is the way they throw around buzz words and spend all their time appealing to the average joe with pathos.

    Both Obama and Biden both appeal to me with logos moreso than pathos. They're arguments seemed valid (if not sound... that is, I don't know if their premises are true). The neo-cons hardly ever make valid arguments. They throw a flattering buzz phrase in and attach their conclusion.

    I miss the Republican party.
  21. Oct 3, 2008 #20


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Palin was excellent for about the first 20 minutes. Considering how people absorb these things, that was pretty huge - it affects their attitude for the rest of the debate. Most of the debate, I felt she was spinning her tires until she finally found some traction. When she did find traction, her responses were pretty strong. Combined with a strong initial impression, Palin had a good debate, politically.

    On the other hand, Biden was outstanding. A lot of his responses made the listener think vs. just tossing out sound bites. In a way, maybe they made the listener think too much. In some of his responses about McCain's record, that thought would remind listeners why they like McCain in the first place. These were always in responses where Biden balanced McCain's positives with his blemishes. Obviously, Biden only mentioned the blemishes, but you couldn't go to those places without the unmentioned positives of McCain sitting just out of sight. I think, in a serious debate, a candidate has to go there and confront those kind of things head on and Biden did a very good job of it, but most Presidential/Vice-Presidential debates aren't serious debates. Everyone's scared of those kind of debates.

    From a debate perspective, Biden just mopped the floor with Palin. From a political perspective, only getting beaten soundly without embarrassing herself was a success for Palin. At least her incompetence isn't the big story anymore.

    That doesn't mean it's disappeared. After the debate, Soledad O'Brien noted something interesting about the response chart CNN ran. Meaningless folksy BS to fill in empty space didn't cut it. Listeners could see she was just spinning her tires when she was at her worst.

    She's a pretty weak candidate at this point in her career. So much so that, if the McCain/Palin ticket loses, she'll probably fade back into obscurity as soon as this campaign is over. She's a case history on the perils of bringing someone too inexperienced into the race.

    Edwards was weak in 2004. That "Two Americas" speech would have worn pretty thin if that's the only tool he had in his bag. Four years later, he was a stronger candidate with more depth. Not enough that he should have beaten the likes of Richardson, Biden, and Dodds, but he did.

    I felt Clinton and Obama would show even weaker than Edwards in 2004. Both turned out to be very strong candidates. I think the campaign starting so early (beginning of 2007) was a big plus for Obama. He grew a lot over the campaign, plus we've seen him so much for so long that he doesn't seem like the new kid lacking experience anymore.

    Just in recent history, you have two "inexperienced" candidates that did very well. A rookie that survived his first campaign and came back stronger. Palin could wind up demonstrating the risk that goes along with that inexperience.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook