Hunting The Muse

VP Debate Thread

Okay, this isn't exactly live, but I'm PRETENDING it is, thanks to the magic of TiVo!

My friend Tamara and I listened to most of the debate on the radio tonight while driving to Seattle. Our impressions so far were that we found Cheney infuriating because he would pepper the debate with facts that were so esoteric that they were hard to attack on their own terms, and would use so many of them that it would be impossible to attack every single one of them anyway. We also thought that early on, Edwards wasn't answering many questions directly and that he should answer more of them. Tamara was especially angry at Gwen Ifill because many of her questions came across as slanted against Edwards, like asking him if he was naive. But, it was an audio format and I'm curious how much the visual changes things. I also haven't yet checked any press about the debate.

So, on we go... to John and Dick.

Big smile, John!

They both look pretty good while writing at their desks.

Wow, Dick is pasty.

Dick is connecting Iraq to terrorism again... Iraq's terrorist links were weak at best.

Cool, John is talking straight to Dick. I think that came across well... better than the radio.

I don't like that Edwards and Kerry both say that they've basically got to just improve the same process that Cheney and Bush have already put in place. They need to draw more of a distinction. Like "increasing the speed" of training.

Edwards bringing out a prepared line about the connection between 9/11 and Iraq.

"Wrong War at Wrong Time" - it frustrates me that Kerry and Edwards still haven't smacked this down like it could be. More on this later.

I really dislike the "Saddam would still be in power?" question - it's not a question, it's a slanted frame, slanted against the Democrats. The truth, of course, is that an ineffectual Hussein in power probably is preferable to all the death and destruction that has happened in the last two years, but the Democrats and Gwen know damn well that they can't say that out loud.

Cheney is flat out lying that he hasn't suggested there being a link between 9/11 and Hussein. Edwards can smack this down again by saying that Iraq having WMD was a question, not a certainty to react to.

This state sponsors of terrorism thing is stupid, because how many countries are we going to invade? It's not a sufficient condition.

This was something that Edwards deserved 30 seconds for a response, but Gwen didn't give him it.

However, Gwen let a great bit sneak in - the number of people who are replacing Osamas. The problem with the administration's approach is that their incompetence has led to probably hundreds of future Osamas.

Cheney continues his accusations of incompetence - distortions. What a pessimist! When he says things like, "He just got it wrong." it sounds effective, though, even if it isn't true.

So far, Edwards is coming across very well visually. It's very different than the radio. It's amazing how much of a difference it is.

Cheney comparing things to El Salvador. I don't think this was a good thread by Cheney, just because most voters won't know enough about it to judge it on their own terms.

Edwards is given a good chance to smack down the global test attack, and he does so. Good. That was well-handled. It was a stupid attack by the GOP, because it was clearly a misrepresentation, and they had to have known that the Dems would have a chance to set it straight. Misrepresentations aren't good tactics unless there isn't an opportunity for the victim to defend themselves. But the GOP can't help themselves.

Another fact battle here. Cheney's trying to take the price down lower and lower. I had a car salesman that tried to do that to me once.

Cheney's being a bully here. I think he's over-reaching. It'll be interesting to see how he comes across to everyone else... "your rhetoric would be more convincing if you had the record to back it up. You don't." Hrmmmm.

Cheney is continuing to try and distort Kerry's record. Aww, Cheney got applause at the convention. That's nice, Dick.

I think Cheney is underplaying Kerry's Gulf War I vote. I'd like to hear more of an explanation on that one. See, at the time, the first Gulf War was actually a really bad idea. It doesn't matter that it was "well-fought". There were very good reasons to oppose the war. The problem is that the Democrats have abdicated it since then, and several have bragged about supporting the first Gulf War - ever since Gore did. So Kerry would probably have trouble explaining it. But so far, they haven't really taken him to task for it. Weird that they would let that one slip.

Dick insults Howard Dean and every other Democrat in the world. Wow, he's got my vote.

Oh, very good point by Edwards. The thing about Cheney criticizing Kerry voting against the same weapons that Cheney agreed with him on needed to be pointed out. (Sorry for the tortured sentence there, but it's less insane than Cheney's line of thought...)

Cheney mishandles the Haliburton point. He comes across worse here visually than he did on the radio. He looks stumped.

Honestly at this point, I think Edwards has the edge - on the radio, I thought it was a draw at this point.

Okay, Gwen has a good question about the prospects for internationalization here, but she asks Edwards if he and Kerry are being naive. That's just uncalled for. It's another slanted frame against them.

The suspense is killing me now, so I'm going to go check the press. TiVo paused...

Hrm, some reports show it as a victory for Cheney, but close. Yet, they show the presidential race tightening at the same time. Of course, the one poll that showed the Cheney victory also had a stuffed ballot box - many more Republican participants than Democrat participants. And a CBS "undecided" poll has Edwards winning.

Oh... Cheney mumbles through a promising line of attack ("They don't have a plan, they have an echo.") with a delightfully stupid insistence that our Iraq coalition in Gulf War II is virtually identical to the coalition in Gulf War I, because, you know, it's about the same number of countries! That's laughable.

He's getting desperate - "demeaning". But, again coming to the point of how to inspire coalitions by saying "Wrong War..." - that STILL needs to be handled.

About Allawi's speech - wasn't it written by a Bush campaign official?

Okay, about Cheney wanting to count the lives of the Iraqi army, and how Edwards is demeaning them by not counting their deaths. What about honoring their lives, by giving them a better policy so we aren't just throwing Iraqi bodies at a problem that isn't being solved? Who's really demeaning the Iraqi soldiers?

Hahahaha... during the split screen, the feed of Cheney just went black. Hooray symbolism!

Edwards has some really good statements here, but I'm unsure if he's actually answering the question...? Something about today's intelligence report...? Gwen wasn't clear about this at the beginning of the debate, either. I have to go check headlines.... okay, it's a weapons inspector report that undercuts the rationale for the Iraq war... why is she asking it like it's something that reflects positively on Cheney?

Cheney talking about Zarqawi... didn't they have an opportunity to get him, and they passed it up? What was it I heard about that?

Didn't Libya say they would have surrendered their nuclear material sooner if not for this administration's response to 9/11 or Iraq or something?

Great point by Edwards of there being 60 countries with Al Q'ueda members.

Cheney mentions factcheck.com - it's actually factcheck.org - I've actually delisted that site in the past because they came across as too right-wing.

hahahaha... I heard that factcheck.com is actually a George Soros site. That's hilarious.

Cheney ignores Israel/Palestine to bring up Haliburton and attack Edward's record. This is Cheney's big attack. I said "Oof" when listening on the radio. Edwards had a great counterattack, though. AND, I heard later that Cheney lied. They met before.

Edwards' response about not talking about Israel came across as whiny on the radio, but funny on the television.

I don't like Edwards' snark about Cheney talking about education.

Oh gawd. Edwards talking about them losing jobs, and Gwen's hand comes up in the frame as if to motion, "So??" What the hey was that all about? I don't like her.

A commenter on dailykos says that she's pro-GOP and a friend of Condi Rice's.

111 million citizens benefitting from tax cuts... that's not all the taxpayers. Guess which ones didn't benefit, the richer or the poorer? And, what about payroll taxes? It's regressive, and huge burden on the non-rich.

More Cheney misrepresentations on Kerry's record (98 tax raises). Good responses by Edwards (600 tax cuts).

One thing I like about the split screen view is that it makes it look like Cheney and Edwards are drinking out of the same mug. Ewwwww!

Another crappy Gwen question about gay marriage: "Are you trying to have it both ways?" Another bad frame.

I don't understand Edwards' contention that a state doesn't have to recognize another state's marriage. I thought they did. A dailykos commenter said there's precedent to requiring states to recognize other states' marriages, because of the miscegenation battles from years past (which has a lot of parallels to this battle).

Okay, regarding medical malpractice. The problem - they both agree - is too many frivolous lawsuits. Edwards' solution is to limit the number of frivolous lawsuits. Cheney's solution is to limit the penalty against bad doctors. Which makes more sense?

It occurs to me that when there's a market for something that turns into a problem, the GOP's instinct is to limit supply, while the Dem's instinct is to identify and then limit the demand. In most cases, aiming for demand is better towards addressing the root of the problem. However, I haven't thought of many counterexamples, so I'm sure that could be torn apart easily.

Edwards is kicking ass on the medical issues.

Hey, Cheney's attacking the S-Corp, calling it a loophole! Cheney's the enemy of small businesses that are S-Corporations! Good move, Dick!

Hey, didn't Bush promise a whole bunch of funding for AIDS, and then play allocation games with the funds so it turned out to be a lie? Oh good, Edwards mentioned it.

A governmental experience question. This is a classic question, they knew it was coming. Prepared answer, etc.

The last few questions are things I didn't hear on the radio.

Cheney admits he doesn't want to run for President in the future. No big surprise.

"He is ready to be commander in chief." Good line. Cheney mirrors the approach.

"Without mentioning them by name." Don't say your running mate's name? What a stupid question. What's the point?

"What's wrong with flip-flopping?" It's a great question.

Hmm, a question that slants against the GOP, that's good. Wasn't able to bridge the partisan gap, etc. Why can't you do it in the House anymore, Dick? Because it was the Democrats who used to be in power! That's why it was easier! God, a horrible answer by Dick.

Dick is running out of gas.

I think Edwards got stronger as time went on. It seemed like a football game that way - the powerful runner playing smashmouth against the heavy and wheezing defensive line.

Oof. Light flickering. Pres don't see it but you do. That was a great closing statement. I felt time stretch out. I will remember that.

Cheney is phoning his in. And god, more doom and gloom. "A chemical or biological agent into one of our own cities!" Gawd, what a contrast from Edwards.

Hell, I'm biased - that's obvious - but I think this is a clear win for Edwards.

Posted by Curt at October 6, 2004 12:32 AM