I cannot believe you found this debate boring!
Anyway, trying to watch three TV stations at the same, I get the consensus is that Biden definitely won and did very well. CNN conducted a poll in which 61% thought Biden won. David Gregen of CNN was full of praise for Biden. It is also the consensus that palin did OK, better than expected given her terrible interviews recently and the low bar set for her.
Anyway, trying to watch three TV stations at the same, I get the consensus is that Biden definitely won and did very well. CNN conducted a poll in which 61% thought Biden won. David Gregen of CNN was full of praise for Biden. It is also the consensus that palin did OK, better than expected given her terrible interviews recently and the low bar set for her.
I am not good at assessing the response of masses on such things but with that said, my opinion is that Biden beat Palin hands down and if anything the McCain/Palin fell even further behind. It was not even close from my perspective. Palin was certainly better than her past week but still poor, extremely nervous, short on substance, not answering questions, and towards the end was running out of material they had taught her so she would just repeat unrelated points. Still though it was not Palin but Biden. He had an excellent debate. He was far better than Obama or McCain.
Iranpaak jan, as soon as the moderator asked them about the current credit crisis, and Palin answered that the solution was to allow drilling in Alaska, I switched the channel!
To me It was like a presidential debate in Iran if the moderator would ask: What should we do about Energy hasteh-ee stand-off wth the west, and (e.g.) Karoubi as a candidate would respond: First we must fix the asphalt problem in Aligoudarz!
At least the Canadian leaders roundtable debate was about specific policies and issues and the party leaders knew what they were talking about.
To me It was like a presidential debate in Iran if the moderator would ask: What should we do about Energy hasteh-ee stand-off wth the west, and (e.g.) Karoubi as a candidate would respond: First we must fix the asphalt problem in Aligoudarz!
At least the Canadian leaders roundtable debate was about specific policies and issues and the party leaders knew what they were talking about.
"Drill, drill, drill baby" is her line. I understand what you are saying deerouz JAn, I was looking forward to the debate, I find her statements were cliche and party line. In fact she admitted at one point that she is not going to respond to questions put forward to her. Excuse me, why are you here Ms Palin, this is not a paid commerical. It was more interesting than the earlier McCain v Obama's debate IMO. I still cannot believe some people believe she is qualified for the second highest post in the US, a heart beat away from the Presidency.
IMO most Americans get lost when it comes to details and facts, just use emotion and speak elementary-grade about good and bad, good guys and bad guys, and you will win the election, forget substance and details.
In last night's debate the opinions of both men and women at the CNN channel showed this when Biden & Palin were speaking, when Biden would respond in details and facts, they would get lost and the graph would stay in the middle, but when both spoke in generalities and simple things, the approval live graph would go up.
A note for Obama for his next debates if he wants to win, speak simple & use simple words and use a lot of patriotic and emotional slogans, that's much more majority-friendly. To most, unfortunately facts don't mean as much to when they are explained in a sophisticated way. In other words, lower yourself to McCain & Bush Jr.s' level.
In last night's debate the opinions of both men and women at the CNN channel showed this when Biden & Palin were speaking, when Biden would respond in details and facts, they would get lost and the graph would stay in the middle, but when both spoke in generalities and simple things, the approval live graph would go up.
A note for Obama for his next debates if he wants to win, speak simple & use simple words and use a lot of patriotic and emotional slogans, that's much more majority-friendly. To most, unfortunately facts don't mean as much to when they are explained in a sophisticated way. In other words, lower yourself to McCain & Bush Jr.s' level.
I think you are being a little unfair in your assessment of most people. Truth be told neither Palin nor Obama are remotely qualified for either jobs. This is not debatable if you merit qualification based on experience. Neither of these two folks have any resume to back their qualification. So the only choice left is to vote for what your gut feeling tells you about a person. There is something to be said about how one feels towards a candidate (in terms of appeal and connection) when all other measures are not that evident. When it comes to personal choices many people like to vote for someone that they feel close and comfortable with. It is not always about charts and analysis. When people are given options, there tends to be no rhyme or reason for the sort of choices people make. It is sometimes purely based on Subjective selection rather than an objective analysis. So to think that charts and graphs are 'factual' proof indicates the level of comfort that you may have in regards to what you consider to be truth. Someone may look at charts and simply consider that to be worthless and would rather base opinions on the frankness and openness of a candidate.
No one is right or wrong mind you. I have seen a lot of charts and analysis (both professionally and in politics) and they have been wrong more times than being right. It is speculation in most cases, just like how one might feel about someone else based on one's intuition. All I am saying is that the 'average' person that you are referring to may not be as clueless as we might feel. They just see the world in a different way
Roger Ebert on Palin:
I think I might be able to explain some of Sarah Palin’s appeal. She’s the “American Idol” candidate. Consider. What defines an “American Idol” finalist? They’re good-looking, work well on television, have a sunny personality, are fierce competitors, and so talented, why, they’re darned near the real thing. There’s a reason “American Idol” gets such high ratings. People identify with the contestants. They think, Hey, that could be me up there on that show!
My problem is, I don’t want to be up there. I don’t want a vice president who is darned near good enough. I want a vice president who is better, wiser, well-traveled, has met world leaders, who three months ago had an opinion on Iraq. Someone who doesn’t repeat bald- faced lies about earmarks and the Bridge to Nowhere. Someone who doesn’t appoint Alaskan politicians to “study” global warming, because, hello! It has been studied. The returns are convincing enough that John McCain and Barack Obama are darned near in agreement.
I would also want someone who didn’t make a teeny little sneer when referring to “people who go to the Ivy League.” When I was a teen I dreamed of going to Harvard, but my dad, an electrician, told me, “Boy, we don’t have the money. Thank your lucky stars you were born in Urbana and can go to the University of Illinois right here in town.” So I did, very happily. Although Palin gets laughs when she mentions the “elite” Ivy League, she sure did attend the heck out of college.
Five different schools in six years. What was that about?
And how can a politician her age have never have gone to Europe? My dad had died, my mom was working as a book-keeper and I had a job at the local newspaper when, at 19, I scraped together $240 for a charter flight to Europe. I had Arthur Frommer’s $5 a Day under my arm, started in London, even rented a Vespa and drove in the traffic of Rome. A few years later, I was able to send my mom, along with the $15 a Day book.
You don’t need to be a pointy-headed elitist to travel abroad. You need curiosity and a hunger to see the world. What kind of a person (who has the money) arrives at the age of 44 and has only been out of the country once, on an official tour to Iraq? Sarah Palin’s travel record is that of a provincial, not someone who is equipped to deal with global issues.
But some people like that. She’s never traveled to Europe, Asia, Africa, South America or Down Under? That makes her like them. She didn’t go to Harvard? Good for her! There a lot of hockey moms who haven’t seen London, but most of them would probably love to, if they had the dough. And they’d be proud if one of their kids won a scholarship to Harvard.
I trust the American people will see through Palin, and save the Republic in November. The most damning indictment against her is that she considered herself a good choice to be a heartbeat away. That shows bad judgment.
I think I might be able to explain some of Sarah Palin’s appeal. She’s the “American Idol” candidate. Consider. What defines an “American Idol” finalist? They’re good-looking, work well on television, have a sunny personality, are fierce competitors, and so talented, why, they’re darned near the real thing. There’s a reason “American Idol” gets such high ratings. People identify with the contestants. They think, Hey, that could be me up there on that show!
My problem is, I don’t want to be up there. I don’t want a vice president who is darned near good enough. I want a vice president who is better, wiser, well-traveled, has met world leaders, who three months ago had an opinion on Iraq. Someone who doesn’t repeat bald- faced lies about earmarks and the Bridge to Nowhere. Someone who doesn’t appoint Alaskan politicians to “study” global warming, because, hello! It has been studied. The returns are convincing enough that John McCain and Barack Obama are darned near in agreement.
I would also want someone who didn’t make a teeny little sneer when referring to “people who go to the Ivy League.” When I was a teen I dreamed of going to Harvard, but my dad, an electrician, told me, “Boy, we don’t have the money. Thank your lucky stars you were born in Urbana and can go to the University of Illinois right here in town.” So I did, very happily. Although Palin gets laughs when she mentions the “elite” Ivy League, she sure did attend the heck out of college.
Five different schools in six years. What was that about?
And how can a politician her age have never have gone to Europe? My dad had died, my mom was working as a book-keeper and I had a job at the local newspaper when, at 19, I scraped together $240 for a charter flight to Europe. I had Arthur Frommer’s $5 a Day under my arm, started in London, even rented a Vespa and drove in the traffic of Rome. A few years later, I was able to send my mom, along with the $15 a Day book.
You don’t need to be a pointy-headed elitist to travel abroad. You need curiosity and a hunger to see the world. What kind of a person (who has the money) arrives at the age of 44 and has only been out of the country once, on an official tour to Iraq? Sarah Palin’s travel record is that of a provincial, not someone who is equipped to deal with global issues.
But some people like that. She’s never traveled to Europe, Asia, Africa, South America or Down Under? That makes her like them. She didn’t go to Harvard? Good for her! There a lot of hockey moms who haven’t seen London, but most of them would probably love to, if they had the dough. And they’d be proud if one of their kids won a scholarship to Harvard.
I trust the American people will see through Palin, and save the Republic in November. The most damning indictment against her is that she considered herself a good choice to be a heartbeat away. That shows bad judgment.
I think you are being a little unfair in your assessment of most people. Truth be told neither Palin nor Obama are remotely qualified for either jobs. This is not debatable if you merit qualification based on experience. Neither of these two folks have any resume to back their qualification. So the only choice left is to vote for what your gut feeling tells you about a person. There is something to be said about how one feels towards a candidate (in terms of appeal and connection) when all other measures are not that evident. When it comes to personal choices many people like to vote for someone that they feel close and comfortable with. It is not always about charts and analysis. When people are given options, there tends to be no rhyme or reason for the sort of choices people make. It is sometimes purely based on Subjective selection rather than an objective analysis. So to think that charts and graphs are 'factual' proof indicates the level of comfort that you may have in regards to what you consider to be truth. Someone may look at charts and simply consider that to be worthless and would rather base opinions on the frankness and openness of a candidate.
No one is right or wrong mind you. I have seen a lot of charts and analysis (both professionally and in politics) and they have been wrong more times than being right. It is speculation in most cases, just like how one might feel about someone else based on one's intuition. All I am saying is that the 'average' person that you are referring to may not be as clueless as we might feel. They just see the world in a different way
No one is right or wrong mind you. I have seen a lot of charts and analysis (both professionally and in politics) and they have been wrong more times than being right. It is speculation in most cases, just like how one might feel about someone else based on one's intuition. All I am saying is that the 'average' person that you are referring to may not be as clueless as we might feel. They just see the world in a different way
Obama is running for president and Palin for VP, Obama has Biden as his VP who is very experienced and Palin has, there will be more of the same with more wars & additional catering to the lobbies McCain as her running president mate.
I agree with you that both camps will cater to the special interest groups more and may not be as different, "we the people" come second at the end of the day, as has been the case. We are currently bailing out those execs. and CEOs to the tune of $810 billion with money that the country doesn't have, those senior execs. & CEOs not only won't lose a dime, but they will make more money out of this.
On what I noted, I didn't speak of the average person, I was speaking of a considerable portion of the population and you may disagree with my observation, but that live graph @ CNN only confirmed what I suspected. Yes there are many astute and aware Americans all over the country. I didn't say those polls of 100 or 2000 people who participated in that live opinion @ CNN are a factual and complete representative of all Americans, but it is a relative barometer.
Related, I read somewhere (or heard on some TV news show) about how much time the average American spends reading articles and the news and I'm sure you can find that study somewhere in the internet, you will be very surprised as to the findings, it's much much less than what one may guess. That's why many may believe McCain when he claims that he stands for change with his rosy speeches.
I forgot to mention this, and that's why in my opinion, and I may be wrong, that the current polls for McCain vs. Obama are so close, whereas they should'nt be.
I do agree with you that these current polls and opinions are not a complete indication of the final vote for the presidential elections and hope that people will see through the smoke and mirrors, and that they will vote for Obama & Biden,the beter of the two candidates who will try to make matters a little better, when compared to McCain & Palin.
I do agree with you that these current polls and opinions are not a complete indication of the final vote for the presidential elections and hope that people will see through the smoke and mirrors, and that they will vote for Obama & Biden,the beter of the two candidates who will try to make matters a little better, when compared to McCain & Palin.
I hate to disagree but your facts are incorrect in reagrds to Kennedy and Clinton. Both had far more experience than Obama and that is a FACT. Obama has no Government experience other than a few years at the Senate. This is undeniable if you consider the actual resume. The fact remains that both Palin and Obama are NOT qualified, but the mere fact is that Obama is running for job #1 and Paline for the #2 spot.
The very fact that you and others constantly put up Palin against Obama goes to show how much Obama has to struggle just to prove himself against the VP slot of his opponent. Where does it leave you even if you win the argument? Just for the record, none of them are qualified but you are too much of a cool-aid drinker to admit it.
Actually it is the GOP that does the comparison. For months McCain was attacking Obama on the experience issue, then in haste he picks up Palin and the spin machine tries to justifies the choice has someone who has experience vis a vie Obama. For me personally, it is the judgement and intellect that counts.