I don’t know which debate the folks on PBS watched tonight. After the candidates’ closing comments were made their five experts, including David Brooks, thought Palin more than held her own against Biden.

But this armchair critic thought Biden was the clear winner.

Palin misspoke, displayed a clear lack of knowledge by refusing to answer certain questions, repeated herself countless times and occasionally came out with complete gobbledygook. (I’m sure within a few hours there will be more than enough videos to back me up.) She seemed incapable of firing more than a handful of shots at Obama and, crucially I thought, failed time and again to rebut Biden’s criticisms of McCain’s voting record.

Biden, meanwhile, was confidant, assured and in complete control of the facts. He hammered McCain’s record and policies time and again, and flatly contested a number of Palin’s assertions about Obama.

I don’t think there was any clearer indication of the two Presidential candidates’ judgment than their proxies tonight. And on that performance I thought Obama won hands down.

I’m desperate to get off this Palin tack but I just can’t help it with videos like this one doing the rounds. I’m only sorry I didn’t post it sooner.

How anyone can defend a person like this to be vice-president is beyond me.

(Via Clive Davis)

Slate’s Jack Shafer predicts a dud debate this evening because of the 90-second time limit imposed on Biden and Palin:

We all have estimates about how long Sarah Palin could speak about nuclear proliferation, health care, immigration, the Wall Street bailout, the Iraq war, or the Kyoto Treaty without resorting to homilies and canned phrases. But force Joe Biden to go long on any one of those topics and who knows what sort of trouble his motormouth would get him into? Biden usually requires 90 seconds just to warm up and lubricate his vocal cords, after which he reliably barks some ridiculous gaffe. The 90-second maximum protects both veep candidates from their weaknesses.

The Cheney-Edwards debate from 2004, also moderated by Ifill, provides a preview of how inconsequential these bouts can be. Approaching the transcript, I expected a bloody prizefight between two heavyweights. Instead, I found two bantams on their bicycles, backpedaling. Ifill asked each candidate only 10 questions, with most of the 90-minute session given over to tedious rebuttals and responses. The day after the Cheney-Edwards debate, the Washington Post concluded that “the format was calculated to keep the fireworks subdued” and that the calculation had paid off.

Don’t Blame Gwen Ifill if the Veep Debate Sucks (Via Mediabistro)

As per Michael’s request for more divisive content (sorry, no video this time, Michael) fellow Englishman in NY(State), Tony Fletcher, has an interesting take on the liberal reaction to Sarah Palin’s candidacy:

Rarely – perhaps, never – have I witnessed anything in American politics that has so united my many female leftist friends as their immediate, visceral, intense dislike – make that fearful hatred – of Sarah Palin, the woman who could become, potentially, America’s first ever female President. What started out as a surprise – like, is this the Republicans’ idea of a bad joke? (to which the answer remains, yes it is… but it’s also for real) – has turned into a collective riot of Palin-bashing missives that comes in the form of fake YouTube videos, speech corrections, animal rights petitions, forwarded newspaper articles, Planned Parenthood donation drives, and bad old urban myths (re: lists of books she supposedly tried to ban from the Wasilla library).

The anti-Palin panic comes in every shape and form. The new issue of the Woodstock Times is filled with letters from longstanding female residents listing all the many solid reasons that she’s a political liability for the nation as a whole. The Sep 22 New Yorker contained a Talk of the Town editorial, an investigative piece by Philip Gourevitch, and a comic take on her manner of speech. When I was in Prospect Park this last weekend, enjoying a short stay in my old neighborhood of Brownstone Brooklyn, my reverie was interrupted by a procession of Cavewomen For Palin, all dressed as per Wilma Flintstone (albeit with delightfully exposed tattoos), carrying banners stating “A woman’s place is in the cave,” while chanting “ugga-ugga-ugga.” (And no, I didn’t have my camera with me; you’ll just have to take my word on this one.) And the last 24 hours has brought FOUR different e-mails asking me to take part in a PBS online poll questioning Palin’s experience (or lack thereof) for the Vice-Presidential post, a poll that has apparently been hijacked by “the right wing” and which must therefore be reclaimed by us anti-Palinites as if her (non-) Presidency depends on it. It’s enough to make one reset their spam filter to ban anything with the word “Palin” in the headline – and for that matter, maybe the contents too.

Not that Tony is a fan of Palin. His point is that the vice-presidential nominee is a sideshow.

Look, for the first time since I moved to this country, I thoroughly believe in the Democratic Presidential Candidate. I can not wait to cast my vote for him. Though Obama has showed signs of tiring towards the end of this incredibly (and unnecessarily) long campaign, and though he has played just a little too nice of late, my support for him remains solid. When he speaks on an issue, he’s usually already informed; this gives him the capacity to think on his feet. He demonstrates great intelligence but also deep compassion; he is an agent for much-needed change even as it’s becoming increasingly clear that he’s actually quite cautious. (And caution is not a bad thing, when you think about the speed at which our current President rushed this country to war.) The post-Palin bump in McCain’s polling numbers have had a lot of Democrats worried, but I admire Obama for not panicking; he’s trusting, I believe, that he can ride out the Palin surge by taking the moral high ground – and I just pray that tactic will work in such a cynical country.

So, my friends, let’s take a pause from sharing our disgust with Palin amongst our fellow non-Republicans, and resume the much harder part of the political campaign: getting the vote out for Barack Obama. Perhaps we need to be sending out e-mails listing the ten attributes that make Obama’s running mate, Joe Biden, a better Vice-President than Palin – because, as yet, no-one has listed them for me, and in a nation that’s become enslaved to the 24-hour cable news cycle, “MILF” is certainly not one of them. Maybe those of us who live in areas that are divided between semi-urbanite progressives and rural conservatives need to engage in friendly conversations in the local diners and supermarkets, assuring our suspicious neighbors that having a well-traveled, intelligent, caring, (half)black family man (with a Harvard degree, and experience in the Senate, and yes, experience in the Community too) as President might actually be a good thing for this country. It would ssurely be more beneficial than another round of Palin-bashing e-mails and petitions sent to our close friends whom we already know wouldn’t vote for her if she were the last woman on earth. We have very little time left, and we need to reclaim the message. It’s not about her. It’s not about PBS online push-button polls….It’s not even about Planned Parenthood. It’s about President Obama. Don’t you like the sound of that?

Palin is NOT the Point

According to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency Barack Obama is failing to attract as many Jewish supporters as his Democratic predecessors. He’s currently at just under 60% compared to John Kerry’s 75% in 2004. Maybe this video, that has hit my inbox twice in the last three days, may help in Florida. Happy Jewish New Year!

The Great Schlep

Palin Talks Russia With Katie Couric (HuffPo)

Oh boy did I need cheering up this morning. This video for the latest Mr Scruff single almost did the trick.

Sarah Palin gave her first TV interview since her VP nomination last night. Not everyone was convinced she performed badly. The New York Post described “war mom” Palin (her son is headed to Iraq, don’t you know) as “poised and self-confident” during a “gaffe-free session.”

Others beg to differ. The The New York Times’ Allesandra Stanley compared Palin’s performance to that of “a student trying to bend prepared answers to fit unexpected questions.” While Slate’s Jack Shafer concluded: “Never mind about her not being ready to be president. She wasn’t even ready for this interview.”

I didn’t see the interview. But this excerpt pretty much sums up the criticisms.

Sadly, I doubt it will do much to dint her popularity. Since Palin’s ordinariness is one of her greatest strengths, I can already imagine a swathe of the US electorate watching at home, equally bamboozled by Charles Gibson’s questions and nodding their heads as Palin parrots the War on Terror talking points.