Skip to main content

Biden Wins, Hands Down

That "debate"! - that is, between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden. So, who won?

Ari Berman in The Nation sums it up this way:

"Joe Biden was substantive, thoughtful and in command. Sarah Palin ignored virtually every question and stuck to generalities and platitudes.

Yes Palin didn't stumble as she did during the Katie Couric interviews. But she didn't impress, either. It was all boilerplate--like she was giving a scripted pep talk, not proving she could handle the toughest job in the world.

Biden kept his cool, even though he clearly had a much greater mastery of virtually every subject discussed. He kept the heat on John McCain--where it should be--and forcefully defended Obama when Palin made ludicrous claims about transferring the surge to Afghanistan or "waving the white flag of surrender" in Iraq.

I'm a little surprised to see the talking heads on TV talking about what a great job Palin did. Maybe they just want this race to be closer than it currently looks. But most swing voters, in an instant snapshot, thought otherwise.

According to a CBS poll, 46 percent of uncommitted voters who watched the debate tonight thought Joe Biden was the winner. 21 percent thought Sarah Palin won, 33 percent thought it was a draw.

According to a CNN poll, 51 percent of voters though Biden won, compared to 36 percent for Palin.

(Only voters polled by Fox, surprise surprise, gave it to Palin.)

Before the debate, 54 percent of CNN voters said Palin was unqualified to be vice president. After the debate, that number (53 percent) only changed by a point.

Maybe, for once, substance prevailed over style."

Meanwhile, The Independent reports that the British Ambassador to the US has described Obama as "uninspiring":

"The British ambassador to Washington faces calls to resign after he described the US Presidential candidate Barack Obama as "uninspiring" and said his policies are "still evolving".

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reading the Chilcot Inquiry Report more closely

Most commentary on the Chilcot Inquiry Report of and associated with the Iraq War, has been "lifted" from the Executive Summary.   The Intercept has actually gone and dug into the Report, with these revelations : "THE CHILCOT REPORT, the U.K.’s official inquiry into its participation in the Iraq War, has finally been released after seven years of investigation. Its executive summary certainly makes former Prime Minister Tony Blair, who led the British push for war, look terrible. According to the report, Blair made statements about Iraq’s nonexistent chemical, biological, and nuclear programs based on “what Mr. Blair believed” rather than the intelligence he had been given. The U.K. went to war despite the fact that “diplomatic options had not been exhausted.” Blair was warned by British intelligence that terrorism would “increase in the event of war, reflecting intensified anti-US/anti-Western sentiment in the Muslim world, including among Muslim communities in the

Robert Fisk's predictions for the Middle East in 2013

There is no gain-saying that Robert Fisk, fiercely independent and feisty to boot, is the veteran journalist and author covering the Middle East. Who doesn't he know or hasn't he met over the years in reporting from Beirut - where he lives?  In his latest op-ed piece for The Independent he lays out his predictions for the Middle East for 2013. Read the piece in full, here - well worthwhile - but an extract... "Never make predictions in the Middle East. My crystal ball broke long ago. But predicting the region has an honourable pedigree. “An Arab movement, newly-risen, is looming in the distance,” a French traveller to the Gulf and Baghdad wrote in 1883, “and a race hitherto downtrodden will presently claim its due place in the destinies of Islam.” A year earlier, a British diplomat in Jeddah confided that “it is within my knowledge... that the idea of freedom does at present agitate some minds even in Mecca...” So let’s say this for 2013: the “Arab Awakening” (the t

An unpalatable truth!

Quinoa has for the last years been the "new" food on the block for foodies. Known for its health properties, foodies the world over have taken to it. Many restaurants have added it to their menu. But, as this piece " Can vegans stomach the unpalatable truth about quinoa? " from The Guardian so clearly details, the cost to Bolivians and Peruvians - from where quinoa hails - has been substantial. "Not long ago, quinoa was just an obscure Peruvian grain you could only buy in wholefood shops. We struggled to pronounce it (it's keen-wa, not qui-no-a), yet it was feted by food lovers as a novel addition to the familiar ranks of couscous and rice. Dieticians clucked over quinoa approvingly because it ticked the low-fat box and fitted in with government healthy eating advice to "base your meals on starchy foods". Adventurous eaters liked its slightly bitter taste and the little white curls that formed around the grains. Vegans embraced quinoa as