By Jonathan Danzig | In the VP Debate, distortions, platitudes, and winks.
Those in the media had established the narrative: experienced, gaffe-prone Sen. Biden against charismatic, unseasoned Gov. Palin. Immediately following the debate, conservative news sources were quick to declare victory for Palin, while liberal news sources were quick to do the same for Biden. The liberal news sources were probably right. However, Biden was not victorious on his mastery of the facts or superior eloquence; it was on his ability to sound authoritative on the issues, combined with Palin’s inability to counter each distortion with her own wonkery. Make no mistake: In the 2008 Vice-Presidential Debate, Biden knew more about foreign policy, and he knew more about the nuances of his positions, but lied numerous times. It was Palin’s failure to counter in anything beyond folksy platitudes that handed him victory.
Her inexperience as a debater showed on the issue of the financial meltdown. In this exchange, Palin let Biden get away with the typical talking points of blaming Republican deregulation for the financial crisis. When asked about fault for the crisis, she blamed predatory lenders, and called for both more oversight and more personal responsibility. Biden countered by accusing McCain, untruthfully, of letting deregulation run wild. In fact, it was McCain who, years ago, declared that there were impending problems with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae because of overregulation, forcing them to loan money out that they had a small chance of getting back. Biden then asked how continued this deregulation is change.
Instead of countering by blaming the crisis on excessive government interference and reiterating the need for reform, Palin completely dodged the question and began a populist attack on Barack Obama, accusing him of refusing to take “the people’s side” and voting against tax cuts 94 times, an arbitrary number. Predictably, Biden pointed out that she had not answered his claim.
Palin’s evasiveness and reluctance to answer caused many missed opportunities. She was confident in her own answers, but in the face of Joe Biden’s confident, thorough answers, she was not able to call him out on completely false statements. At one point in the debate, he declared the need for alliances and multilateralism, and used Hezbollah as an example. “When we kicked—along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, ‘Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don’t know—if you don’t, Hezbollah will control it.’ Now what’s happened? Hezbollah is a legitimate part of the government in the country immediately to the north of Israel.” The story was completely untrue, but Biden used it as an example of the Bush’s failed policy in Israel. And all Palin had to say in response was “I’m so encouraged to know that we both love Israel” and “Change and reform are coming.” In the statement of the night that had the most potential to be used against Biden, Palin again sunk into platitudes.
The one aspect in which Sarah Palin shone was the question “Is it class warfare to selectively raise taxes on some groups?” Biden explained that someone had to pay for the debt, and that when the American people do well, America does well. And he made the easily-countered claim that the “rich”—those with more than $250,000—would still be paying less than under President Reagan.
Sarah Palin countered by pointing out taxes are always a burden, not a demonstration of patriotism, and that many small business owners are just above the $250,000 line. She also pointed out that John McCain’s proposed medical tax credit would be budget neutral and reinforce personal freedom, as opposed to Barack Obama’s bureaucrat-run healthcare system. She should have taken a queue from the success of this line and made more of her arguments based on personal responsibility and freedom.
Alas, throughout the debate, Palin preferred to spice up her speech with folksy lingo. While it is flattering to much of Middle America to discuss her affinity for hockey moms and Joe Sixpack, and it attracts the attention of moderates when she reinforces the “maverick” notion of McCain-Palin, she needs to elaborate on her plans and prove that her ticket is the real change. Often, her answers to Biden’s challenges amounted to little more than glib talking-points, responding to his Iraq plan with, “You will fly the white flag of surrender.” Bush has around a 25 percent approval rating, and Biden’s equating of McCain with Bush was especially damaging when Palin failed to effectively respond. When she mocked Biden, “Say it ain’t so, Joe, there you go again pointing backwards again,” it was an effective call to focus on the future, not the past, but she didn’t elaborate with any substantial policy differences. There are many differences between Bush and McCain, and Palin needed to more than a “doggone” wink at America to establish this.
As with nearly all vice-presidential debates, Palin-Biden will probably have little-to-no effect on the final outcome of the race. Neither committed a major gaffe or made any profound statements. Every distortion made by Senator Biden was countered with a platitude by Governor Palin. In the aspect that mattered in a 2008 debate, the ability to effectively pursue change and progress, Biden won by default, letting his experience speak for itself while Palin repeated the “maverick” talking points. If Palin wanted to energize those beyond the conservative base to vote for McCain-Palin, she needed to demonstrate a better command of the issues, a more effective challenge to Joe Biden, and an empathy that extends beyond hockey mom-talk and shout-outs to third graders.
Mr. Danzig is a freshman who has not yet declared a major.
Comments