VP Debate

Dirtie_Frank

mammasan wrote:

I would love to hear a candidate just say that the government, no matter if it's federal, state or local, has no business getting involved in marriage. If a hetro or same sex couple walks into their local town or city hall they should be issues a civil union. Marriages should be left to religious institutions.

I agree with you there, but I beleive there will be scam artist that are "domestic partners" scamming for the tax benefits. That right there is an insult to the gay community and you know it will happen.

slightofjeff

mammasan wrote:

I will just repost what I stated in the other thread.

I think she did pretty good. I don't think the expectations for either candidate where extremely high. They basically just had to go into the debate and not loose it for their tickets. She definitely performed a lot better last night than she did in her interviews with Gibson and Couric. She dodged a few questions, but so did Biden, that she probably couldn't answer without sounding bad. Biden definitely did far better when it came to foreign policy, that is his strong suit, but he didn't mop the floor with her. While he definitely elaborated more, she stuck to talking points but from what I have heard she played her strongest asset and that is coming across as your average person and being able to connect with the public. All in all they both did better than expected. Neither performance won over large masses of independent voters but I don't believe that that was their aim. Their aim was not to screw up and just secure the base, especially for Palin, that they where the right choice for their party.

On a side note, as a neutral observer, the one area that really stuck out to me was the question on a VP's role. I was a little unsettled by Palin's insinuation that a VP's role is not strictly regulated to the Executive branch. It is clearly stated, in my opinion, in the Constitution that a VP duties lay firmly in the Executive Branch and not in some limbo realm in between the Legislative and Executive. Her answer came off a bit to Dick Cheney for my liking. As for Biden I was a disappointed that when his disagreements and criticism of Obama in the past was sort of brushed aside by him. I would have preferred that he just stated that yes him and Senator Obama have disagreed in the past and will probably disagree in the future. Honesty would have been a better policy that just beating around the bush.

I would also like to add the Gwen Ifill did a good job last night. All the excitement of her being unbaised where definitely unwarrented. She was able to but her personal beliefs aside and handled her job professionally.

I have to say, I think this is a fair post.

One point I'd like to make: I agree Ifill did a respectable job, but I still think she shouldn't have been there in the first place.

She basically is writing a book that will be worthless if Obama loses.

It wasn't just as if she were refereeing a basketball game in which you kinda like one of the teams more than the other. It was as if she were refereeing a basketball game in which she's bet on one of the teams.

I'm glad she seemed to be able hide her bias during the debate, but I wish she had gone out of her way to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. I think it's important that everyone believe these debates are on the up and up. Having a moderator who is in the tank for one of the candidates just opens up too many doors.

I'm glad it worked out, but it never should have happened in the first place.

Commy

slightofjeff wrote:

I have to say, I think this is a fair post.

One point I'd like to make: I agree Ifill did a respectable job, but I still think she shouldn't have been there in the first place.

She basically is writing a book that will be worthless if Obama loses.

It wasn't just as if she were refereeing a basketball game in which you kinda like one of the teams more than the other. It was as if she were refereeing a basketball game in which she's bet on one of the teams.

I'm glad she seemed to be able hide her bias during the debate, but I wish she had gone out of her way to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. I think it's important that everyone believe these debates are on the up and up. Having a moderator who is in the tank for one of the candidates just opens up too many doors.

I'm glad it worked out, but it never should have happened in the first place.

a fucking book? who gives a shit about a goddamn book or how well it sells.