By TEDDYE SNELL
Staff Writer
TAHLEQUAH DAILY PRESS
October 06, 2008 10:36 am
—
Despite her promise to “talk straight to the American people,” Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin gained little ground locally in her quest for the vice presidency following Thursday night’s debate against Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.
Anticipation was high in the run-up to the debate, with many pundits and comedians predicting a show of gaffes and blunders from both candidates.
Early poll results from CNN, Politico, CBS and Time dubbed Biden the winner, but also gave Palin a nod for her ability to capture the attention of the populace with her “folksy” charm.
Dr. David Scott, professor of speech communication and former debate coach for Northeastern State University, believes it’s important for all voters to assess the qualities of the candidates for the vice presidency.
“Historically, about 35 percent of vice presidents have become president,” he said. “Plus, in recent years, the VP slot has been seen as a springboard for running for president in the future.”
Scott said it should be noted that 14 vice presidents have become president. Five were eventually elected, but eight took office when a president died of natural causes or after an assassination.
“I believe the evaluation of Gov. Palin is particularly important,” said Scott. “If elected, McCain would be the oldest president to begin a first term in office. It is interesting to note that a life insurance company recently reported that McCain would have a 24.44 percent chance of dying in the next eight years, as compared with 5.76 percent for Obama. However, their estimates are somewhat shaky due to the fact that McCain has refused to fully release his medical records. In that context, I have some serious concerns about a potential ‘President Palin.’”
Like many interviewed for this report, Scott believes Palin’s debate answers seemed “canned.”
“Her ability to think on her feet seemed limited,” said Scott. “She came across as if she’d been stuffed full of ‘one-liners’ and ‘set-piece’ generic answers before the debate even started. Biden, on the other hand, seemed much more thoughtful and spontaneous in his comments. As [for who make a better] a decision-maker, I am much more comfortable with Biden.”
Former District Attorney Dianne Barker-Harrold is no stranger to debate, and found gaps in Palin’s delivery.
“Palin was poised, but well-rehearsed and when the moderator got on a subject where she was not comfortable, she just didn’t answer it,” said Barker-Harrold. “She kept going back to the practiced points and overly tried to be folksy, right down to those winks, for cryin’ out loud. She wasn’t presidential at all, in my opinion. So long as Palin is within her comfort zone and she can just discuss the points she wants, she looks good, but once she gets off track, she stumbles.”
Dr. Robert McQuitty, professor emeritus from NSU, said Palin showed she could be what actors refer to as a “quick study.”
“That is, she had learned a lot in the weeks immediately before the debate,” said McQuitty. “Actors who are quick studies are also quick forgetters. So I have my doubts about Palin’s ability to add much to McCain’s presidency in a substantive way.”
McQuitty said Palin’s “straight talk” may have played well to the Republican base, but came across a little too “average Joe” for some.
“Her folksy approach and colloquial language is surely unprecedented for a national political candidate,” said McQuitty. “And with good reason. I really doubt that American voters want a president or vice president who is like them in knowing no more about the important and complicated issues facing the country than they do. I certainly don’t. I, for one, will be inordinately relieved when we have a president and vice president who are smarter and more knowledgeable than I am.”
John Price, president of the Cherokee County Democratic Party, was also put off by Palin’s verbiage, but acknowledged she performed better than he expected.
“Her handlers obviously prepared her well,” said Price. “But she avoided answering any question that might have revealed a weakness, after telling the moderator that she was going to do exactly that. At the end of the debate, I found myself asking, ‘Now what did she say?’ She used a lot of coded words designed to make us feel warm and fuzzy, tried to sound folksy by dropping the ‘g’ at then end of words ending in ‘ing’ – and even gave a couple of winks to the television audience, but she had very little substance.”
Dr. Fritz Laux, associate professor of economics at NSU, was surprised to hear pundits say they thought Palin performed well during the debate.
“Clearly, she had some very good moments, but her presentation was weaker than I had expected,” said Laux. “Overall, I didn’t think it was so much that Palin was the winner, but that Biden was the loser. This is because the issue is not one of style, but substance. Biden seemed ‘smoother’ to me, but he was advocating socialism – protecting homeowners, socializing medicine, socializing the energy markets. Palin was advocating smaller government. Speaking style aside, anybody who can look at how our world works and still believes in socialism – well, that person, Biden, is just not qualified to be president. Perhaps that’s why public reaction to Palin’s performance seemed so positive.”
But most Press respondents disagreed with Laux’s view on Biden, saying he seemed quite presidential throughout the debate.
“Biden did a better job of responding to the questions put to the candidates, especially when asked to be specific about plans to effect the ‘change’ that both campaigns now claim to want,” said Price. “Palin probably squelched the talk from some Republicans that she ought to drop off the ticket, but she did not make me feel any more positive at the thought of her being voted to be second in line for the presidency.”
McQuitty indicated Biden had the appropriate style and tone for the venue.
“Biden showed his vast knowledge of the subjects under consideration, also showing he knew Obama’s position,” he said. “I was pleased with his debate style. He was considerate of both Palin and the moderator, never being condescending with Palin, but registering the right degree of umbrage when it was necessary. He never lost his cool under Palin’s attacks, some of which were targeted right at him.”
Help-In-Crisis Executive Director Deana Franke watched the debate with five of her family members, and believed Biden could have been tougher on Palin.
“I though he did a good job of staying with the question that was asked,” said Franke. “I thought he handled [Palin] with kid gloves, and I think if she is running for the second-highest office in the land, she should be able to debate as well and hard as anyone else. I don’t think any of the debates with [Sen.] Hillary [Clinton] were as ‘careful’ as this one.”
Barker-Harrold believes Biden was in a tough spot when it came to the public’s perception of his treatment of Palin.
“Biden was in a terrible position, while Palin could easily deliver her ‘zingers’ and then would appear tough and confrontational,” she said. “If Biden did the same thing, he would have been [labeled] condescending or sexist. I think Biden struck exactly the right tone and clearly won the debate.”
Dr. Ron Becker, assistant professor of political science at NSU, believes Biden was adept at navigating tough issues on both domestic and foreign policy.
“He surely appeared presidential in his tone and manner,” said Becker. “More impressive than getting an ‘A’ in style is his knowledge of the issues. He is an authority on nearly every aspect of the federal government.”
Becker said he felt it impossible to imagine a “President Palin” leading the country, and believes the McCain campaign is happy to have the debate behind them and will return to the plan of shielding her from the media.
Becker also has a difficult time understanding the “good ‘ol boy, Joe Sixpack” appeal Palin seems to have, and why so many people seem to reject the idea of electing highly educated candidates.
“Frankly, over the past month, I have been trying hard to understand the 30-40 percent of Americans who believe it is a bad thing to have a Columbia and Harvard University intellectual who taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago law school for a president, while believing that a person with a beauty contestant, sports broadcaster, small-town mayor, ‘hockey mom’ background is a good thing,” he said. “I must conclude it is no coincidence that – according to U.S. Census Bureau data – all of the states with the highest proportion of college-educated people are blue [Democratic] states, and all the states with the lowest proportions of college-educated people are red [Republican] states. Doesn’t this tell us something about the need to better fund higher education in certain areas of the United States?”
Learn more
Those who may have missed the debate can read the transcript in its entirety at www.debates.org.
Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.