Friday, October 03, 2008

Sarah Palin's performance

I listened to the vice-presidential debate on my two and a half hour commute across Los Angeles last night. I listened half expecting Sarah Palin to break down in tears and run off the stage. I've got to be honest here, instead of a breakdown, I think she did well. 

Without getting into an issues debate, I would like to get the perspective of my fellow Atheist bloggers. How well do you think Sarah Palin performed last night?

Comments (8)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Personally, I thought that the only reason she seemed to do well was that she ignored the fact that she was at a debate and simply recited her talking points as if it were a campaign stop.
She didn't stammer and pause a lot, she used her folksy verbal crutches, and she didn't get called out for going off topic which allowed her to say what she had memorized. People that were expecting her to get roasted or to look incompetent see that she was merely mediocre and thus performed above expectations.
She did a lot better than I was expecting. (So did Biden, actually)

I had read an article somebody had written before the debate that called her a "master of the non-answer" -- and after seeing the debate I agree with that 100%. She barely answered a single question. If you weren't paying attention, it sounded great. She was a little nervous but spoke in complete sentences and gave off a sense of confidence.

But if you were paying attention, it all sounded scripted. Like she had memorized talking points on a dozen subjects, and started talking about the one nearest to what the question was about.

Ultimately, at the end of the debate we didn't learn anything from her, it was just a personality experience. In short, it felt like she was trying to get the position of class president, not vice president.
If you were listening to it, you must have missed Palin wink at the camera several times. Pushing the folksy a little too far. She spoke well, but refused to answer any questions which really annoyed me.

On personality, she did ok, I suppose. She did better than most people expected, but those expectations were so low, its not a huge compliment.

Although, she did look at Biden (unlike McCain who didn't once look at Obama), she wouldn't look at Biden when she attacked him. She claimed she was speaking to the American public. But, in a debate, you're supposed to debate the opponent and speak to the public during the closing statement. Even so, I felt like she was talking at me, not to me. When Biden spoke to the public during the closing statement, I actually felt like he was talking to me.

However, I'm surely biased. I still can't over the fact that Palin made rape victims pay for their own investigation. So anything she says just sounds like elephant sh!t.
Did well?? Compared to what? Compared to her Katie Couric interview? Sure, ok.
.
Compared to any politician who understands the depth and bredth of economic , domestic, and foreign issues and how they effect our country's stability and furture viability? Then she failed miserably.

Yep..great smile, wonderful winks at the camera, cutsie homespun phrases designed to disarm. I'd happliy do her. But this woman exposed herself as being so shallow I doubt I could float a cork in her pool of knowledge.

What I am heartend over is that all of the polls and interviews among "nondecided" (people who I perceive at this late date to be utter morons), saw thru her trained dog routine, saw her avoidance, and recognised that should the president die, only one of those two candidates is prepared to run this nation. Thank Moloch for small favors.
1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago
Did well compared to my expectations. Did you read what I posted? I expected her to run off the stage in tears, or to be a babbling idiot.
How well Sarah Palin "performed" last night, especially in relation to the very low bar that represents your expectations, is really beside the point.

Let's say you were seeking to recruit a java developer for a critical, very visible IT project. A woman applies whose only experience is working as a clerk at Best Buy. Your expectations going in to the interview are low due to her resume, which shows little relevant background, a slew of typographical errors which betray an inattention to detail, and an objectives statement that refers to her desire to fulfill God's wish to seek career advancement. When she arrives for the interview she is polished, professional, and stunningly beautiful, and greets you with a smile, a wink and a firm handshake. Clearly she is much more impressive than you expected; however, whenever you tried to probe her understanding of java, or computer programming generally, she would refuse to answer and return to her ability to work under stressful conditions, as evidenced by the fact that she could see the competing Circuit City across the street if she craned her neck just so when having a cigarette by the dumpster behind her store. She shows you a picture of her 5 children, and assures you she is ready and willing to work 24/7 on this project. Maybe she even plays a flute solo to show you how well-rounded she is, or speaks a few phrases in Klingon to let you know she can kick it with the techno-geeks.

Do you hire her? Does her stellar performance somehow bridge the yawning gap between your need and her ability? This debate is as close as we come to an interview of our candidates, and she failed miserably on that count. The expectations game is a distraction, as is the constant emphasis on style over substance.
I remember the first season of "The Apprentice." Just before they chose the winner, they asked each candidate to sit down and do an interview. One of the finalists who didn't win (don't remember her name but she was blonde, purely by coincidence I am sure) was asked a very specific technical question that called for a specific answer. She launched immediately into a why-you've-just-gotta-hire-me canned-type monologue that was right out of a coaching session. The interviewer (I think it was either George Ross or Carolyn Kepcher) was not one to suffer fools or to be baffled by bullshit. They immediately stopped the candidate in mid-sentence and said "Excuse me -- I am not interested in hearing your sales pitch. You've had several weeks to sell yourself. I am looking for your qualifications and you now have one remaining chance to answer my question as it was asked." The woman looked like a deer in the headlights and had to humbly admit that she had not even listened to the question, she was so busy gearing up to make her spiel. That's exactly what Sarah Palin reminded me of. Unfortunately, aside from one or two mild remarks from both Biden and the moderator about how she hadn't even attempted to answer the question, no one called her on this.

Can we get Donald Trump to moderate the next debate, hmmmmm?

Post a new comment

Comments by