|
Edited on Fri Oct-03-08 12:46 PM by Juche
As a caveat, I am a pretty strong progressive and the democrat party represents my interests most of the time. When it comes to debates people view them partisanly, dems generally think the dem won, repubs think the repub won. So naturally like alot of dems I think Biden did better.
Partisanship aside, how can people believe Palin won? I really cannot wrap my head around that logic. She evaded most questions and recited a laundry list of cliches, flirty behavior and folksly behavior. She didn't seem to understand the issues on more than a superficial level. Alot of her attacks on Obama were directly counterpointed by Biden very effectively (McCain raised taxes 400x by Palins standards, McCain voted against funding the military, etc).
Maybe my definition of 'win' is what this comes to. My definition of win is who is qualified to run the country should the situation call for it and who understands the issues and the solutions the best. By that standard Biden won by a mile. If the definition of win is something else like who can you have a beer with then I can see some people saying Palin won by that standard.
I remember when I was about 16 and Bob Dole was on Suddenly Susan after losing in 1996. He made some jokes and I thought 'heck I would've voted for him had I known he had a sense of humor'. I was 16 at the time so I wasn't too mature and can be forgiven for thinking about voting for Dole because he made a few jokes on TV, but I suppose I forget that alot of people never grow out of that phase of picking or voting on personality characteristics rather than the issues. I didn't know anything about Dole's positions, his views or Clinton's either. I was going on superficial personality issues.
Am I just assuming wrongly that people are picking the winner based on who is most qualified? I don't see how, using that standard, anyone can think Palin is more qualified or competent than Biden. So how can people say she won?
|