 |
Tuesday, October 05, 2004 |
Final Thoughts
I'm going to have to sign off right after the debate is done, and will probably miss the first hour of spin. As is evident from the real-time posts here, I am seeing a very good performance by Cheney and a subpar effort by Edwards. I don't think it's quite the wipeout proportions of Thursday night, but it's a clear win for Cheney. He was clear, coherent, authoritative and consistent - as was expected. He also had moments of genuineness and humanity, which was not (at least by me). Edwards was well-briefed. He didn't sound like a stammering idiot, and I don't think he made any significant blunders, but he was clearly unable to make his strongest points stick. If he had to overcome his reputation as a lightweight, he was not successful, to the point that he makes me question my brief flirtation with his candidacy for the top job (although in fairness, he would likely stand up better against Bush than against Cheney). One hopes his value to the ticket in terms of working the crowds and firing up rural and suburban voters is not diminished by this performance. So, in the EA verdict, a solid win for the R's on this one. Only good spin by the Dems will prevent it from doing damage. That, and the fact that it's the Veeps and not the main contenders.
7:39:05 PM 
|
|
Final Thoughts
I'm going to have to sign off right after the debate is done, and will probably miss the first hour of spin. As is evident from the real-time posts here, I am seeing a very good performance by Cheney and a subpar effort by Edwards. I don't think it's quite the wipeout proportions of Thursday night, but it's a clear win for Cheney. He was clear, coherent, authoritative and consistent - as was expected. He also had moments of genuineness and humanity, which was not (at least by me). Edwards was well-briefed. He didn't sound like a stammering idiot, and I don't think he made any significant blunders, but he was clearly unable to make his strongest points stick. If he had to overcome his reputation as a lightweight, he was not successful, to the point that he makes me question my brief flirtation with his candidacy for the top job (although in fairness, he would likely stand up better against Bush than against Cheney). One hopes his value to the ticket in terms of working the crowds and firing up rural and suburban voters is not diminished by this performance. So, in the EA verdict, a solid win for the R's on this one. Only good spin by the Dems will prevent it from doing damage. That, and the fact that it's the Veeps and not the main contenders.
7:33:56 PM
|
|
Trial by Fire
Edwards has obviously prepped hard for this trial lawyer question. His policy proposal is quite good - I hadn't heard this before. Now he tees up one of his best anecdotes. And. a followup. This is good - home turf for Edwards, and Cheney sounds like he's reading from the briefing book. Edwards is utterly authoritative here, and win or lose, Dems should push this idea. Health care inflation, etc. A key issue, and one that Bush has done nothing about. As this health care debate continues, it's clear that the momentum has turned somewhat. It's not that Edwards has gotten much better, but Cheney is flailing and his monochromatic authority is not wearing as well. He looks like an uncomfortable tough papa talking to his teen daughter about the facts of life. His AIDS response was genuine, but stiff. Edwards is clearly in his element. Talking about people, talking about human problems. Now - ka-pow! Edwards gets a monsterously hostile question about his inexperience. Regrettably, he's made it an issue by his performance. In the split-screen, Cheney is winding up for a home run swing. It occurs to me that the split screen is not serving Edwards as well as it did Kerry. Edwards wants to command the full frame. He's talking to the camera, gesturing toward the camera, making eye contact with the moderator. But when he's on half the picture, it looks like he's talking to the edge of the screen, while Cheney is looking down or otherwise doing something distracting. Cheney also commands more of his frame than Edwards does - the camera isn't as tight on Edwards, and so he looks a bit smaller when you see them side by side. I wonder if this is the same on the other channels? Cheney, by the way, was quite good on the qualification question, and he looks like he is poised to deliver a good response to the "what's the difference between you and him?" one as well.
7:22:15 PM
|
|
Home Truths
Edwards is significantly more convincing on economics. He's still running down talking points, but he is personally invested in the subject matter. Every time he talks about struggling families, he comes alive. Cheney has little to say on this. Taxes, taxes, taxes. But again, as one of the authors of the Republican agenda of the past 20 years, he knows the party line as well as anyone. The problem here is that the foreign policy segment gave Cheney confidence that he hasn't lost, and it put Edwards in a hole that he is having trouble getting out of. He's still got that back-on-his-heels quality, and it hurts. Cheney is all over the place on gay marriage. But Edwards opts to go back and keep hammering on economics, with a very crisp and well-said point. Now he's coming after Cheney on his daughter, in a backhanded way. This can only backfire. I can see Cheney sneering and loading up on the split screen. Fortunately, no rebuttal. But. now there's a second question on this subject. That's an odd choice. Tell me again why we are subjecting the rights of our fellow Americans to a vote? Rights are rights. Edwards sounds ok when he's talking about how it's wrong to divide America. And. Cheney punts the response. Classy and human - how unexpected!
7:08:23 PM
|
|
Ugly and Getting Worse
OK, Halliburton is in play now. This is possibly a tough one for Cheney, because there's nothing he can say that won't sound defensive and self-serving. On to Israel - a strange question to ask Edwards, since he is utterly invisible on this issue. Personal anecdote is interesting. And all of a sudden, we're watching a live human being. Clearly, this is where Edwards needs to be to be effective. Talk about people, not abstract issues. If the debate takes a turn in that direction, Cheney will suddenly be charging uphill. It occurs to me that what we're seeing is the Nixon-Kennedy debate if Nixon had won. Edwards really should have studied those tapes, because Cheney is the most Nixonian figure in American politics these days. Now, finally, we're on to domestic issues. Edwards has 45 minutes to show what he brings to the table. If he doesn't talk directly to people's concerns and sticks to this sterile discussion of the issues, he's either being very badly advised or has terrible instincts.
6:49:45 PM
|
|
An Echo, Not an Alternative
Now we're getting a rehash of Thursday night, in the hopes that the spin points will sound better coming from Cheney than they did from Bush. And, sure enough, they do. Cheney's also effective in expressing passion, especially around the issue of the allies and the role of Iraqis. He's making a dumb point, but he's making it very well. I'm sure they will replay that shot, with Cheney on the attack and Edwards frankly cringing and offering a very weak defense. This looks like the R's are getting everything they want so far: a debate between the Vice President of the United States and a very bright student council president. Edwards knows the lines, but they don't sound credible.
6:36:55 PM
|
|
Spinning and Unspinning
Edwards is trying to get tough by bringing in facts, which is always a chancey proposition in these things. So far, it's been all terror war, all Iraq and Afghanistan. This is Cheney's turf, and it shows. Edwards is game, but not sharp. His light weight is becoming fairly apparent in this area (same as Bush looked lightweight on foreign affairs compared to Gore.) Luckily, Kerry is not in need of a strong VP the way that Bush is. Cheney is now talking numbers, challenging Edwards on the facts. If Cheney says it's raining outside, best go out and check. But the rap is good. Edwards' response is walking through a minefield. Cheney is not going to miss the chance. And sure enough, there he goes - 90 minutes doesn't erase a 30 year record. This reflects a distorted view of Kerry's record, but it makes sense as a rhetorical point. Maybe this is good that Edwards is taking his lumps early on the foreign affairs and security stuff. Eventually, this discussion will turn to bread-and-butter issues, and if Edwards can't turn that conversation to his advantage, I really have to wonder what he's doing on the ticket. Watching the split screen, it's clear in Cheney's reaction shots that he knows he's winning and he's starting to smirk and preen. It won't hurt him as long as Edwards looks like he deserves pity. But it's very possible that the dynamic will change and Cheney will continue to show his overconfidence, to ill-effect.
6:26:54 PM
|
|
And They're Off!
Just made a last minute change from CNN to C-Span. Wolf Blitzer hit a new low, filling time talking about the candidates' suits! Please. At least both suits seem to have people in them this time, unlike Thursday night. Cheney starts out solid, with a well-spoken explanation of why he told Bush to go to Iraq. I
t's encouraging to know that, since it was his idea, he can actually talk about it. Edwards is speaking off the talking points. He looks only marginally better than Bush when he does it. I am hopeful he will warm up. Edwards gets an interesting second question, regarding how Kerry would have dealt with Saddam. He turns it into what's obviously a focus-group tested response about Afghanistan and Al Qaeda.
Now he's going hard after Cheney, and it's forced Cheney into his first straight-up lie ("I have never suggested a connection between Saddam and 9/11" or some such thing.) This is all sounding very produced and well-spun. Waiting to see if this goes off the tracks.
6:13:45 PM
|
|
Pre-Debate Test
Almost time for the (little) Big Show. Just testing out the equipment here, making sure EA is ready for real-time blogging!
5:50:04 PM
|
|
 |
© Copyright 2004 Rob Salkowitz.
Last update: 11/3/2004; 10:10:10 AM.
Emphasis Added Theme designed by Andrew Lueck and Rob Salkowitz. |
|
