By Sean Evans and Nick Ubels (The Cascade) – Email
Print Edition: October 17, 2012
Last week Nick and Sean discussed the ever-changing dynamics of the 2012 presidential election. They noted that Mitt Romney could be launching a comeback through his strong showing the first of three presidential debates. This week, the boys analyze the debate between vice-presidential candidates, Joe Biden and Paul Ryan. Did Biden get the Obama campaign back on track? Did Paul Ryan test positive for steroids? Only two poli-nerds can answer those questions … and more.
Sean: Well, I think one thing is certain. That changed nothing. As entertaining as the VP debate may have been, historically they have not been crucial in deciding the final outcome. Aside from Biden’s apparent sense of humour, what did you see as the highlight of the debate last Thursday night, Nick?
Nick: Biden’s blindingly white smile.
Truthfully, I thought Thursday’s vice-presidential debate itself was a winner because both sides brought some much-needed spark to the table after last week’s snoozefest. It seemed like both second-in-commands were keyed in and came prepared to duke it out over important issues.
Moderator Martha Raddatz of ABC News also did a tremendous job keeping the debate on track, asking follow-up questions, and often demanding specifics when the VP hopefuls equivocated. She managed to fit in 10 primary questions on a wide range of topics—including the economy, national security, abortion and health care to name a few—in only 90 minutes, which made for a spirited and rigorous debate.
How about you, Sean? What struck you as most remarkable about the vice-presidential debate?
Sean: What I found to be notable was that neither side came away the “clear winner.” In the end, both camps will declare their man to be the victor, but I highly doubt that any undecided voters would have been swayed by either man. Biden came across as condescending and perhaps a little “off balance,” as the Romney campaign put it, and Ryan was robotic and ultimately failed to have his voice heard in the midst of Biden’s numerous well-timed interruptions. Nick, let’s talk about how you think the candidates did. Do you think Biden hurt himself with his constant laughing and the plethora of interruptions or was this effective? What about Ryan?
Nick: I actually thought that Biden came across a little better than his opponent in the vice-presidential debate, much in the same way that Romney did in the first debate. Biden’s tactics were exactly what his ticket needed him to do here, to show that the Obama-Biden camp was not going to let the first debate’s lackluster showing set the tone for the remainder of their campaign. By calling Ryan out on each point of his arguments, he prevented Ryan from gaining any momentum, especially where questionable facts were concerned. Ryan often seemed amateurish and out of his depth.
In response to Biden’s questions about Romney’s infamous 47 per cent speech and take on the auto bailout, Ryan awkwardly produced a canned anecdote about Romney providing for a family at his church whose sons were paralyzed in the aftermath of a car accident. It was presumably intended to showcase Romney’s compassion, but was in incredibly poor taste considering the well-known death of Biden’s wife and daughter in a 1972 crash.
As far as catering to the audience, I think most Americans will take Biden’s interruptions and more aggressive performance as a sign of strength and conviction, though I think he would have fared much better if he had been able to keep a straight face. His strategy is a double-edged sword. Lots of Dems will love his performance, while the independents Obama needs to sway seem to be disproportionately put off by the negative tone of the campaign. They won’t take kindly to his apparent rudeness and condescending laughter in the face of Ryan’s arguments, but will that bad taste ultimately determine their vote?
Sean: I would be very surprised to hear of anyone who would change their vote based on their perceptions of a candidates’ VP choice. The only people that will be in a huff about it are those who are committed Republicans who will find themselves more confirmed in their opinion that the Obama/Biden ticket is out of touch. I thought Biden was fairly effective, although sometimes a little too out there.
Nick: Biden was Obama’s bulldog in Thursday’s debate. He was on the attack in a role I think we’ll see him continue as the campaign moves forward. Biden can be the more aggressive part of the ticket without tarnishing Obama’s reputation. Any negative attention will be directed towards the Vice-President, who can afford to take the PR hit.
He did manage to squeeze in quite a few memorable lines along the way, calling out Ryan’s talking points as “a bunch of stuff” and “malarkey” or demanding that Romney’s running mate, “stop talking about how you care about people. Show me something. Show me a policy.”
I think we’ll see a more assertive Obama in the next debate, but he’ll have scaled back from Biden’s approach.
Sean: Exactly, Nick. Exactly. On another note, what about the talk about the terrorist attack at the American embassy. There is some debate among the fact checkers as to whether or not Biden was incorrect in stating that “We weren’t told they wanted more security there. We did not know they wanted more security.” This statement came a day after officials from the State Department testified in Congress that a request for more security the US embassy in Libya was indeed made. Now, was Biden claiming that specifically he and Obama did not know (certainly a possibility), or that the State Department did not know? There is certainly a case to be made either way. In any case, is this an issue that will sway voters in November? The Romney/Ryan ticket seems to think so, and is arguing that it showcases an administration that is incompetent. Romney told a crowd in Virginia that “when the Vice-President directly contradicts the sworn testimony of state department officials … the American people deserve to know what happened.”
Nick: If Romney’s right, then this certainly could be a big factor in people’s decision-making in November. There’s a level of trust and competence required of the executive office. But barring any conclusive evidence that Biden was, in fact, lying, I don’t see these allegations as having much of an impact. If they are proven false, then it reflects poorly on the Romney-Ryan ticket.
Sean: Indeed. In the end, the VP debate will not affect the race. This one will come down to Obama versus Romney – who, by the way, will be back on the debate stage in no time.
Join Sean and Nick next week as they attempt to make sense of the final stretch of the race for the White House.
