VP Debate: Audio vs. Video
October 4th, 2008 by Victor Minjares
Last night I worked past midnight, writing a brief, leaving my wife to care for our young children solo. Tonight, the night of the vice-presidential debate, it was time to take my turn watching the kids. My wife was kind enough to allow me to listen online until dinner, then put the debate on the radio. While our kids ate dinner, spilled milk, and laughed, my wife and I traded comments about the debate.
On the radio, Biden and Palin fought it out to an almost draw, with a slight edge to Biden. Palin spoke competently, if too much on the folksy side for my taste. Palin made a few obvious mistakes - saying General McClellan, rather than General McKiernan, in the Afghanistan - but no huge errors. Biden made some very good points, but listening, it didn’t sound as if the debate was likely to change many minds.
After we gave the kids a bath and put them to bed, I turned on CNN and watched a rebroadcast of the debate. The difference was amazing. On television, it was no contest - Biden outclassed Palin easily. Watching, you wanted to vote for Biden for president. Palin did well given the expectations for her performance, but the emotion she evoked was sympathy, rather than political competence. She spoke well, but was clearly out of her league.
Biden’s cadence, facial expressions, verbal effectiveness, hand gestures - polished yet natural. Biden, who sounded like a blustering gaffe machine when I read about him in the paper, exuded an earnestness and affability on television that overwhelmed Palin’s attempts to paint him as an out-of-touch Washington insider (which is at least two-thirds true). Biden would listen to Palin’s vernacular speeches (like the scripted “Say it ain’t so, Joe, you’re looking back”), and with an easy laugh and a smile, totally disarm their impact. Biden is truly outstanding in debate. Obama could learn a lot from watching him.
Onscreen, Palin was nervous. Her voice shook. Her eyes were often glued to her notes (or the Wi-fi Kindle feeding her lines?). She gave the impression of a dinner-improv actor recalling her memorized script, throwing in a few ad libs. Palin often would repeat the same word in the following sentence, not as a rhetorical device, but as a speaking tic. At least twice she smiled at inappropriate moments, and the smile looked forced. Palin also has a tendency to default to acting “cute”, which may or may not be something the American people look for in a potential president, but I doubt it. (And as my wife observed, her eyebrows were overplucked.) To put it mildly, Palin does not exude leadership.
Biden is a much better debater than Obama. Biden made points without being loud, strident, or offensive to his opponent. Tonight, Biden took Obama to school on how to respond to an opponent in a debate. He looks and acts presidential, in a down-to-earth way. The fact that Obama had the self-confidence to chose Biden as a running mate speaks volumes about his judgment under pressure.
October 6th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
Postscript: One thing I have wondered since then is why I haven’t been reading much about how obviously nervous Palin was. Her hands were shaking and voice quavering, for goodness sake. Hard to imagine her facing down Putin, even across the Bering Strait. Since even with a 40M viewer audience, most voters will only read about the debate, that means McCain/Palin won the framing contest following: i.e., that she did well. Well, no she didn’t, but now her “good performance” is part of the conventional wisdom.