Does Sarah Palin debate like a girl? What to expect from Sarah Palin in Thursday's Vice Presidential Debate...

I have no worries that Sarah Palin will be able to hold her own in the debate tomorrow night against Joe Biden. Sarah Palin is no lightweight. She's a seasoned politician who is the head of the nation's largest (albeit one of the least populated) state. She's debated before, many times. She connects well with people---especially in audiences---and has a great deal of experience with public speaking and Q&A formats like Thursday's debate will be. She's perfectly capable of "going up against" older, more experienced men, especially ones with broader and greater knowledge.

In fact, I'm actually worried that, sort of like the SATs, she'll get enough credit to pass just for showing up and stating her name. I'm even more worried she'll get bonus points for '"sounding good" and remaining "poised."

I fully expect her to be able to accomplish all of that, with aplomb.

I also expect her performance to start and end there, and that simply is not enough.

Her past debate opponents have quite a bit to say about how she succeeds in debates. And, although it has less to do with her knowledge and debate style and more to do with her ability to goad and evade, it scores points with voters.

Her pitiful performances also score points with too many voters, as is evidenced by the Sarah Palin Pity Party. But I'm with Rebecca Traister when she wrote

I guess I'm one cold dame, because while Palin provokes many unpleasant emotions in me, I just can't seem to summon pity, affection or remorse.

Don't get me wrong, I'm just like all of the rest of you, part of the bipartisan jumble of viewers that keeps one hand poised above the mute button and the other over my eyes during Palin's disastrous interviews. Like everyone else, I can barely take the waves of embarrassment that come with watching someone do something so badly. Roseanne Barr singing the national anthem, Sofia Coppola acting in "The Godfather: Part III," Sarah Palin talking about Russia -- they all create the same level of eyeball-squinching discomfort.

But just because I'm human, just because I can feel, just because I did say this weekend that I "almost feel sorry for her" doesn't mean, when I consider the situation rationally, that I do. Yes, as a feminist, it sucks -- hard -- to watch a woman, no matter how much I hate her politics, unable to answer questions about her running mate during a television interview. And perhaps it's because this experience pains me so much that I feel not sympathy but biting anger. At her, at John McCain, at the misogynistic political mash that has been made of what was otherwise a groundbreaking year for women in presidential politics.

I disagree with Traister in one area: I don't think it's sad, I think it's unprofessional that Palin clearly doesn't care enough about major issues to be knowledgeable about them as she needs to be in both her current position and the position she aspires to.

In other words, I don't think it's a matter of can't; I think it's a matter of won't.

So after a few weeks of preparation by the McCain handlers, what can we expect from Palin in the debate?

From Politico:

"Anyone who watches any of her previous debates would be impressed by her debating skills," Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said Saturday, in an attempt to raise expectations for Palin's performance. "She has performed very, very well."

Perhaps the best illustration of her style came on August 8, 2006, during a primary election debate featuring the unpopular incumbent Murkowski, himself a veteran of more than two decades in the U.S. Senate, and Binkley. Palin, by then the GOP frontrunner, kept a wary distance from her rivals, who bickered bitterly.

When Murkowski, taking a caustic tone against his much younger opponents, charged that Binkley did not understand an issue related to fuel company taxation, Binkley replied, "I understand it perfectly." Murkowski shot back angrily: "No, you don't."

Palin, rather than join in the exchange, sat back until her opponents' anger reached a boiling point, and then, with a voice just slightly raised, chimed in: "You know, you guys, we owe Alaskans a better discourse than this."

"Respect to our listeners and our viewers," she continued, "I think we need to speak respectfully and orderly here."

In a single deft blow, Palin made the older men look childish. And she did it calmly, with an upbeat tone of voice.

Palin used a similar rhetorical method earlier in the debate, responding to Binkley's attacks on her brief career in government by telling the veteran legislator: "I'm sure you did a good job back there in the '80s, early '90s."

From her cheerful tone, a listener might have thought Palin was complimenting her opponent - if not for the slightly dismissive edge that crept into her voice as she mentioned Binkley's past experience, as if she were describing an episode in ancient history.

From Andrew Halcro, who has experience debating Palin:

When he faces off against Sarah Palin Thursday night, Joe Biden will have his hands full.       

I should know. I've debated Governor Palin more than two dozen times. And she's a master, not of facts, figures, or insightful policy recommendations, but at the fine art of the nonanswer, the glittering generality. Against such charms there is little Senator Biden, or anyone, can do.

Jed Lewison, in his article "Why Sarah Palin Is A Better Debater Than You Think," wrote:

Given the debate's format on Thursday night, I expect Palin will do just fine. I will be quite surprised if she gets caught off guard or has a moose-in-headlights moment.

I don't think she'll display much in the way of specifics, but she will get the values-oriented language right, and that should be good enough at least for a draw, and that will mean she beats expectations.

Note: Definitely follow the Lewison link to see the video he put together.

 

That's the bottom line right there: Americans and their need to feel like they'd enjoy "hanging" with the leaders of the US.

You know what they say about letting someone have enough rope and what happens next.

We need to let go of this "emotional connection" factor and consider the substantive issues.

Is a leader knowledgeable about the issues? Is the leader competent to manage the position and its expectations? Can the leader draw upon adequate knowledge and experience to make important decisions, especially in a time of crisis?

Palin seems to have a great difficulty specifically and knowledgeably answering foreign policy questions, and also misunderstands the essential boundaries for security. Then she cries foul when she goofs and quickly blames journalists or others around her, for her gaffe.

She doesn't seem to understand how the US economic policies work, an essential skill in this time a economic catastophe. Even conservatives are concerned about her ability to fulfill job expectations:

“I think she has pretty thoroughly — and probably irretrievably — proven that she is not up to the job of being president of the United States,” David Frum, a former speechwriter for President Bush who is now a conservative columnist, said in an interview. “If she doesn’t perform well, then people see it.

And also:

Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker, an early Palin supporter, on Friday bluntly called on Palin to step down to "save McCain, her party, and the country she loves".

"Quick study or not, she doesn't know enough about economics and foreign policy to make Americans comfortable with a President Palin, should conditions warrant her promotion," Parker wrote in the conservative National Review.

Palin's got charisma, and she's tough. I think women make excellent debaters, because they can be skillful at emotional and intellectual reads and address both. Debating like a girl ought to be a compliment---a huge one.

Unfortunately, I think Palin is more likely to debate like a mean girl, with subtle digs and skillful emotional manipulation.

Set aside the emotional response that might cause you to like her and ask whether she is truly answering the question, with knowledge and expertise, at the level one would expect from the person who is running for Vice-President of the United States of America---and who potentially could have to do the job of President.

We do need to like leaders. Charisma inspires trust. However, we need to intellectually take the next step and ask whether the person is worthy of trust and can do the job.

Sarah Palin, likeable as she is, as good as she might sound in the debate---especially since so many (only 36% expect a better showing than predicted and think Palin will win) have such low expectations of her debate performance---simply is not ready for this position.

Don't let her have credit for responding to the question. A response? Is not necessarily an answer--much less one at the level required for the Vice President of the United States of America.

Comments

[Mauigirl]

Well said. I am really afraid that any halfway decent performance will be considered a "win" and that suddenly McCain-Palin's poll numbers will pop up again.

[Christine]

Yes, more than anything, it's upsetting to think we could get stuck with a person who is grossly uneducated about what it takes to lead one of the largest countries in the world.

There are bloggers who have been doing their thing for a matter of months, who are more well versed in matters of politics and foreign affairs than Palin. She's been a politician for years. That says quite a lot.

[Jamie]

If Gwen Ifill is a good moderator and Joe Biden is smart, they will demand that she give real, precise answers and let her know, and pinpoint for the public, when she has spewed out a non-answer. The stakes are too high and this is too important for Biden to be polite and for Ifill to acknowledge simply that the 90 second time has been filled.

We all know that whatever is said against Palin post-debate, whether discussing her performance, her stand or command of the issues, the Republicans will scream sexism, so the Obama camp can not be afraid to tell Americans the truth and call attention to every misstatement, dangerous ideology, lack of precise knowledge or non-answer she gives.

[Michael]

I'm looking forward to the debate. I am concerned about the way McCain's camp is coaching Gov. Palin. She has to be allowed to be herself and not worry about foreign affairs, that's where McCain's an expert. Obama has no experience, that is one of the reasons he picked Joe Biden. Most governors that I know of are not experts in foreign affairs anyway.

Joe Biden voting record on foreign policy is weak, the only war he voted for was intervention in Sudan to stop a civil war. That's a failed policy vote right there, trying to stop a civil war, the US shouldn't be considered as a "police state." He did nothing in 1994 when a tribe was killing off another tribe in Africa. I would hammer him on this issue and so should Gov. Palin.

My advice to the McCain camp, let Sarah be Sarah which is her strong point, and not overprotect her. Do be afraid if she makes a mistake, people are human, just be there for her, she is smart she will learn.

If she is allowed to be herself, she will hold her own against Biden who likes to put his foot in his mouth.

[Lawyer Mama]

Michael - Did you miss the part where our blog says "Rage Against the McCain?" We want Palin to be herself b/c that's the surest way to get her to respond with nonsensical non-answers, wherein the .05% of the population that hasn't noticed that the "Empress has no clothes" will finally get a clue.

[zumpie]

Lawyer Mama, thanks for beating me to it. I don't go to obviously right wing blogs and then wonder why I'm being shot down, so why do we always have these fundie morons coming over here and assuming we'll agree with their Repug claptrap?

And let me add: Michael voting in favor a war does not make you a foreign policy expert. Our painfully failed quagmire in Iraq more than illustrates that.

As for Palin, "being herself" apparently THAT consists of talking gibberish (hey, maybe she was speaking tongues with Katie Couric!) or giving juvenile answers that my 8 year old would be embarassed by. Her 15 minutes are up---except for the Rethug base (hint, it's not enough to win)---and she needs to have her "family emergency" and go away. Or better, yet, not and make Nov 4th a landslide.

ANYWAY. For those of you ladies still worrying about "losing the debate", please chill out. Bible Spice supposedly handled the Alaska press masterfully, as well. Just because she was effective in what is more and more proving to be a bizarre bubble in which she acted as some sort of Queen/Boss Hogg doesn't mean it will work on the national stage. We already know this.

Yes she delivered a good speech after 4 days of intensive preparation, using material written by someone else, read from a teleprompter. And yes, she's well received (still) at by invitation only, Repig rallies. Again, all in a bubble context. The second she's let out of that she can't even control her own bodily functions.

The rest of the country isn't digging snide as policy these days--look at how poorly received Krusty's little digs were.

And even if she were to miraculously prevail??? So what? Bentsen eviscerated Quayle and Dukakis still lost, abysmally. It's the VICE-presidential debates. And 8 days later Troopergate will be out, so any of the limited good she'll probably fail to do will promptly be undone.

[kim]

After Kathleen Parker published her thoughts on Palin, I thought "OK people are starting to see that she really does not have the knowledge necessary to be V.P. let alone President." But, sadly I'm still hearing regular people dismiss her embarrassingly bad interviews. I don't get it. I could kick her behind in a debate and I've never held political office or a real job. Sadly I don't think that the average person knows enough about the issues to recognize Palin's answers for the emotional drivel they are.

[Jo-Ann]

Expectations for her are so low at this point, I'm afraid that if she speaks in somewhat coherent phrases (not even complete sentences) it will be seen as a great victory. Similar to past debates involving our current moron-in-chief.

[zumpie]

Ladies, PLEASE!!!! Do not worry. NO matter how "well" Caribou Barbie is seen as going in the debate (and I predict falling flat on her face, literally and figuratively)---she'll be back in Alaska, making Bristol's maternity wedding dress from moose hides, shaking down her constituents, scamming money from earmarks and running the place like her own personality fifedom, soon enough.

Just as we thought she'd be handled all the way to Nov 4th, the flubbed Gibson interview (remember, we all thought he'd throw softballs and everyone would love her?) immediately proved otherwise. Now she and McCain humiliate themselves on a near daily basis (note, his pissy interview with the "Des Moines Register" indicates today is Krusty's day).

She may very well get a bounce of a point or 2 in the polls. And yes, it's painfully distressing that currently 43% of the voting population really IS that stupid. But Obama will win, and we need to focus our energy on getting him elected---not worrying about Bible Spice's questionable charm.

[mom101]

Nicely done Julie. I think we have to remember this isn't a popularity contest - it's choosing leaders to represent us in the world. So basically if I am not the one out there with world leaders and heads of state and diplomats, it will be Sarah Palin?

Um, no.

"Unprofessional" is absolutely right.

I don't care how well she memorizes some answers Thursday night. She is wholly unqualified to have any sort of national leadership role.

[Amy@UWM]

Julie, as always, you so eloquently described what I've been thinking this week. I'd love it if Jamie and Zumpie (great name) were right. But I think it's more likely that she'll utter a complete sentence or two and the Republicans will declare it a triumph. And as much as I disagree with Michael, his last point is valid. Biden has the potential to be a loose wheel. Let's hope someone has coached him to be a SEASONED STATESMAN instead of a crabby, condescending congressman.

[Julie Pippert]

Thanks Amy and Liz. Liz, I hope your wisdom prevails, and JoAnn and Amy let's hope our concerns are unfounded.

Zumpie, I think it remains to be seen whether she's crazy or crazy like a Bush. ;)

Kim, we're both in the red, and I think it's an ignored place, which is, IMO, underestimating. And foolish.

Michael, the fly in your ointment (and trust, me I'm well aware of the fly in mine) is that McCain himself has stated that he consults Palin on essential issues, including (and I do quote) foreign policy.

Jamie, I hope Ifill does that, however she's being set up to have to softshoe it to avoid accusations of bias due to her book. it's ridiculous and shouldn't matter but people forget to ask, "and so the heck what?"

Christine and Maui-girl, I hear ya, you know I do.

[zumpie]

Hey, thanks, Amy!

Keith Olbermann had some of her "sparkling" debate clips on tonight (and pretended to think they were passable---I don't know how he kept a straigth face). Frankly, I've seen more polished high school students. And yes, she got in her little digs on the VERY sophomoric questions they asked ("would you hire your opponent and for what job?" REALLY??? Alaska truly IS Hazard County!).She also made a somewhat snide comment about Juneau (which is apparently, BLUE, not RED). Another clip showed her patented non-sequitor run on babbling. Now somehow this may well have mesmerized Alaska, but in the lower 48 and the enlightened folk of Hawaii, it's merely reason #996 to laugh at the woman.

A final clip was one of her "folksy anecdotes" in which she droned inanely about visiting Wasilla, how excited she was, blah, blah, blah. Not only was it (yet again) a bit indecipherable, it was also really, really boring.

And remember, Alsakans have never seen her bitch side (funny, that's all she shows us) or the painful stupid (how she hid it, I have no idea...but I don't live there). Had they seen some of what we've sen, she might never have even gotten elected!

It does not matter. The woman will return to Alaska and her many pissed off constituents--who will doubtlessly return poor Tony Knowles to the Governor's mansion (which HE'LL actually live in!)when her term is up.

[cynematic]

So glad you featured and took issue with Traister's piece, Jules.

The part of Traister's post I thought was most interesting was this section: "Yes, as a feminist, it sucks -- hard -- to watch a woman, no matter how much I hate her politics, unable to answer questions about her running mate during a television interview."

I'm a feminist and I feel ZERO when an anti-feminist like Palin flails on camera. I look at her and think, "You made Alaskan women who've been raped pay $1,000 for rape testing kits?" and any shred of identification, sympathy or connection evaporates. I watch Palin and think, "Lady, puppet of the McCain campaign, you deserve to go down in flames."

I likewise felt zero when Phyllis Schlafly spiked the Equal Rights Amendment using the bogeyman of "unisex bathrooms." Mostly I just wished Schlafly would go back to whatever Barbie Dream House she was always trying to stuff other women into.

The fact that Phyllis, Sarah, and I share a gender is "Palin' in comparison" to the fact that these particular political women are completely opposed to the policies I value.

So I'd say to Traister, didn't we all learn this lesson after Clarence Thomas? It's a waste of time for progressives to feel some imagined connection (i.e., identity politics, yet again) to political opponents with whom they have nothing in common than a demographic tic. Because those right-wing tokens will sell you out in a hot minute.

And why waste time feeling sorry for someone, as Jules points out, lacks the basic professionalism to be knowledgeable in the field they seek to advance in?

[mark]

I'm a republican. Conservative. I'm watching the debate now. I'm embarrassed. Palin is tanking. Bad.

[mark]

I'm a republican. Conservative. I'm watching the debate now. I'm embarrassed. Palin is tanking. Bad.

[Bill]

Losercrats is a better name for your site. Palin is a fresh change to American politics.

[Peggy Trobee]

Sad that the United States thinks women are not smart enough to go to a debate with a man....Truthly I give Palin a lot of support for her debate...but everything you read says Biden then Palin and I have never heard of Biden either....