Debate

[McBunz]

You Americans should be proud of both VP candidates.. They did a wonderful job without trying to

cut each others throats..

 

[bingo]

I do think they both did a good job they had their strategies and stuck to them. Both worked well I think accomplishing what they had intended to do. I do not believe either side ended up swaying any one. I think each party will be happy with their VP candidate and neither did or said anything earth shattering. I also can say I feel they both answered more directly then the Presidential candidates. Yes there was skirting of answers and or just ignorning a point and moving on but that is to be expected.

Was it something that will change the mind of voters I personally do not think so it will however further cement those who have already made up their minds.

Neither one had any major mistakes I do think the only thing I can say that I found irritating was the overuse of the word Maverick however that is a small thing and even I can admit perhaps a petty one.

Both sides skewed the facts just a bit but that is to be expected when it comes to politics.

All in all I do not think we got the incredible entertainment that many were expecting from either side.

 

[littlesteppers]

Debate? Was there a debate??

 

[AppyLover2]

I think everyone expected Biden to do well since he's had so many years on the hill. I have to admit that after seeing those edited interviews Palin did earlier that I was concerned.....but IMO she came through like a CHAMP.

 

[Danielle_E.]

It was very interesting and it truly was a breath of fresh air not to have any nasty mud slinging

. Palin redeemed herself from the not so stellar previous interviews and she needed to do that. She did very well with some questions but with others she didn't answer them but skirted the issue all together. She repeated herself alot with regards to questions She did skirt around some of the foreign policy questions and at one point I said what is she answering?. Joe Biden showed his knowledge of foreign policy very well and I found them both engaging. I also do not think it will change those that were going to vote Republican or those that were already going to vote Democrat. I am glad though that Palin has a chance to speak and be more herself. The McCain canpaign should have done that from the start instead of trying to make her something she is not. Now the undecided can decide who they feel will be the better President based on the candidates themselves and what their running mates said about them.

 

[BigDogs & LittleHorses]

I agree!

I had left the first Presidential interview still feeling that I relate to and appreciate Senator Obama's views more than Senator McCains, that McCain is still from the good old boys school, still set in his ways more than a real "Maverick", but it left feeling that if McCain does become president, I'll be able to deal with him, that he is still a sharp man, with wisdom from his experience, that he would be a definite step up from Bush.

I'm glad I saw a different side of Gov Palin then what I saw with the Couric interviews. I still can't figure out why she didn't directly answer simple, neutral non-gotcha questions during the interviews such as where specifically does she get her news from, and why she tried to inflate her limited experience in foreign policy as Alaskan Governor, etc. She had some really bizarre, unclear and off-the-subject answers then, and I had gotten the impression that she either didn't know how to answer or was trying to dodge the questions. It did not look good at all to me. I didn't see that tonight. She seemed to be on the ball.

I think Senator Biden did excellent also in answering questions directly and comparing and contrasting his views with her's, Obama's versus McCain's.

I think the only clear winner of the two debates so far has been the American public for these events helping them to make better voting decisions.

Daryl

 

[garyo]

Daryl,

Thats the best political post i have seen here, to the point and civil. I couldn't agree more.

Gary

 

[Charley]

Yes, I thought they both did good.

 

[tagalong]

I'm glad I saw a different side of Gov Palin then what I saw with the Couric interviews. I still can't figure out why she didn't directly answer simple, neutral non-gotcha questions during the interviews such as where specifically does she get her news from, and why she tried to inflate her limited experience in foreign policy as Alaskan Governor, etc. She had some really bizarre, unclear and off-the-subject answers then, and I had gotten the impression that she either didn't know how to answer or was trying to dodge the questions. It did not look good at all to me. I didn't see that tonight. She seemed to be on the ball.

Palin did a good job - and sort of redeemed herself for being caught out on Katie Couric's questions. I think the difference was that she was actually prepared for this debate. The GOP made sure she was ready for the topics that would come up and she did not have to field topics that came out of nowhere. There is nothing wrong with that... although at times you could tell when she was able to launch into something she had obviously been rehearsing - and would often keep going back to that. She was also able to inject her own personailty in there at times.

She did not know what Achilles' heel meant... and please - the word is NUKE-lee-urr not NU-kew-lurr.

Both sides skewed the facts just a bit but that is to be expected when it comes to politics.

Sad but true.

I think Senator Biden did excellent also in answering questions directly and comparing and contrasting his views with her's, Obama's versus McCain's

Agreed!

IMO it was a tie - well done!

But yeah - we could have made a drinking game out of "maverick", "all of the above" and maybe "Alaska" and "John"......

 

[Brandi*]

I made myself watch the debate because I really want to vote this time around. I even got to draw my own conclusions during the debate since I laid the rules out for my husband before it started. He had to keep his opinion on the "down-low" so that I could form my own opinion.

After watching the debate I felt that Biden is a very very negative man who focuses a lot on the past. I also felt he talked way too much about what Mccain is doing or has done rather than what Obama is doing, has done or is going to do. I bet you he said Mccain more than he said Obama. He seemed a bit threatened and I just didn't like him over all.

I absolutely LOVED Palin. She is addictive! She is well spoken, holds her own and manages to smile through the awkward moments

. She seemed to know her stuff despite what recent media reports have said.

I am going to turn 27 in December and this was my first debate. I wasn't even bored while I watched lol

 

[OhHorsePee]

Loved the debate and actually wanted more. She went toe to toe with Biden and came up on top, in my opinion. Biden wasn't as bad with the slips that he had made before in his campaign speaches but he seemed so rehearsed to just keep coming back and putting down McCain. I felt he really didn't go over what him and Obama stood for and when he was suppose to voice a plan I did not see a plan in his answer at all. It was just more words to fill in the blank.

I feel Sarah Palin did a bang up job. I loved how she stayed positive and wanted to talk about the future not just the past. She was fabulous, in my opinion.

 

[Jill]

I thought they both did extremely well

Palin I thought really hit a home run. Watching her, I was aware of how proud I feel to be an American woman and a Republican. She was very on point, clear and energetic. And so personable (shouldn't matter, but it does!)

It will be interesting to now watch how the media will report on the debate

PS I don't think SNL got any material for this weekend

 

[Jill]

PPS To Mary Lou (love ya): Do you still think Palin will resign from the campaign as you recently predicted

I predict Obama, Biden, McCain and Palin will quit the campaigning in just about one month

 

[Irish Hills Farm]

I thought both candidates did well.

To say that Palin didn't answer some questions and at the same time to act like Biden answered all questions makes me go

. Biden did his fair share of advoidance too.

I think Biden did a good job of trying to make people think that McCain is Bush, which I disagree with. But I guess when you have nothing to tell me, I expect you to try and direct my attention in a different way.

I'm still voting McCain/Palin.

 

[Basketmiss]

I agree- Palin did a great job! She was informed and well spoken. I loved how she would come at Joe-"Now darn it Joe there you go again going back to the Bush administration"

I am so proud of her and for women in general to be taking this big step in our world...

I agree with Brandi- it was a great debate, I watched it all , which is a first, I usually come in and out of the room while a debate is on...

I loved how respectful Biden and Palin were to each other- just made for a nice debate...

Missy

 

[Laura]

It was very interesting and it truly was a breath of fresh air not to have any nasty mud slinging

. Palin redeemed herself from the not so stellar previous interviews and she needed to do that. She did very well with some questions but with others she didn't answer them but skirted the issue all together. She repeated herself alot with regards to questions She did skirt around some of the foreign policy questions and at one point I said what is she answering?. Joe Biden showed his knowledge of foreign policy very well and I found them both engaging. I also do not think it will change those that were going to vote Republican or those that were already going to vote Democrat. I am glad though that Palin has a chance to speak and be more herself. The McCain canpaign should have done that from the start instead of trying to make her something she is not. Now the undecided can decide who they feel will be the better President based on the candidates themselves and what their running mates said about them.

I agree, I was impressed with both candidates. I was left wondering when Palin was going get around actually answering the actual questions several times and her talk of "tolerance" of same sex couples rubbed me WAY the wrong way, but I expected that. I did tell Steve that I was impressed at how well she spoke and I was super impressed that Biden stayed on topic~LOL

 

[Danielle_E.]

Here is an example where she didn't answer the question being asked... she changed the subject quite a few times half way through the debate. The first half of the debate she held her own, not the second half...

IFILL: Next question, Gov. Palin, still on the economy. Last year, Congress passed a bill that would make it more difficult for debt-strapped mortgage-holders to declare bankruptcy, to get out from under that debt. This is something that John McCain supported. Would you have?PALIN: Yes, I would have. But here, again, there have -- there have been so many changes in the conditions of our economy in just even these past weeks that there has been more and more revelation made aware now to Americans about the corruption and the greed on Wall Street.

We need to look back, even two years ago, and we need to be appreciative of John McCain's call for reform with Fannie Mae, with Freddie Mac, with the mortgage-lenders, too, who were starting to really kind of rear that head of abuse.

And the colleagues in the Senate weren't going to go there with him. So we have John McCain to thank for at least warning people. And we also have John McCain to thank for bringing in a bipartisan effort people to the table so that we can start putting politics aside, even putting a campaign aside, and just do what's right to fix this economic problem that we are in.

It is a crisis. It's a toxic mess, really, on Main Street that's affecting Wall Street. And now we have to be ever vigilant and also making sure that credit markets don't seize up. That's where the Main Streeters like me, that's where we would really feel the effects.

IFILL: Sen. Biden, you voted for this bankruptcy bill. Sen. Obama voted against it. Some people have said that mortgage- holders really paid the price.

BIDEN: Well, mortgage-holders didn't pay the price. Only 10 percent of the people who are -- have been affected by this whole switch from Chapter 7 to Chapter 13 -- it gets complicated.

But the point of this -- Barack Obama saw the glass as half- empty. I saw it as half-full. We disagreed on that, and 85 senators voted one way, and 15 voted the other way.

But here's the deal. Barack Obama pointed out two years ago that there was a subprime mortgage crisis and wrote to the secretary of Treasury. And he said, "You'd better get on the stick here. You'd better look at it."

John McCain said as early as last December, quote -- I'm paraphrasing -- "I'm surprised about this subprime mortgage crisis," number one.

Number two, with regard to bankruptcy now, Gwen, what we should be doing now -- and Barack Obama and I support it -- we should be allowing bankruptcy courts to be able to re-adjust not just the interest rate you're paying on your mortgage to be able to stay in your home, but be able to adjust the principal that you owe, the principal that you owe.

That would keep people in their homes, actually help banks by keeping it from going under. But John McCain, as I understand it -- I'm not sure of this, but I believe John McCain and the governor don't support that.

There are ways to help people now. And there -- ways that we're offering are not being supported by -- by the Bush administration nor do I believe by John McCain and Gov. Palin.

IFILL: Gov. Palin, is that so?

PALIN: That is not so, but because that's just a quick answer, I want to talk about, again, my record on energy versus your ticket's energy ticket, also.

I think that this is important to come back to, with that energy policy plan again that was voted for in '05.

When we talk about energy, we have to consider the need to do all that we can to allow this nation to become energy independent.

It's a nonsensical position that we are in when we have domestic supplies of energy all over this great land. And East Coast politicians who don't allow energy-producing states like Alaska to produce these, to tap into them, and instead we're relying on foreign countries to produce for us.

PALIN: We're circulating about $700 billion a year into foreign countries, some who do not like America -- they certainly don't have our best interests at heart -- instead of those dollars circulating here, creating tens of thousands of jobs and allowing domestic supplies of energy to be tapped into and start flowing into these very, very hungry markets.

Energy independence is the key to this nation's future, to our economic future, and to our national security. So when we talk about energy plans, it's not just about who got a tax break and who didn't. And we're not giving oil companies tax breaks, but it's about a heck of a lot more than that.

Energy independence is the key to America's future.

 

[Danielle_E.]

IFILL: The next round of -- pardon me, the next round of questions starts with you, Sen. Biden. Do you support, as they do in Alaska, granting same-sex benefits to couples?BIDEN: Absolutely. Do I support granting same-sex benefits? Absolutely positively. Look, in an Obama-Biden administration, there will be absolutely no distinction from a constitutional standpoint or a legal standpoint between a same-sex and a heterosexual couple.

The fact of the matter is that under the Constitution we should be granted -- same-sex couples should be able to have visitation rights in the hospitals, joint ownership of property, life insurance policies, et cetera. That's only fair.

It's what the Constitution calls for. And so we do support it. We do support making sure that committed couples in a same-sex marriage are guaranteed the same constitutional benefits as it relates to their property rights, their rights of visitation, their rights to insurance, their rights of ownership as heterosexual couples do.

IFILL: Governor, would you support expanding that beyond Alaska to the rest of the nation?

PALIN: Well, not if it goes closer and closer towards redefining the traditional definition of marriage between one man and one woman. And unfortunately that's sometimes where those steps lead.

But I also want to clarify, if there's any kind of suggestion at all from my answer that I would be anything but tolerant of adults in America choosing their partners, choosing relationships that they deem best for themselves, you know, I am tolerant and I have a very diverse family and group of friends and even within that group you would see some who may not agree with me on this issue, some very dear friends who don't agree with me on this issue.

But in that tolerance also, no one would ever propose, not in a McCain-Palin administration, to do anything to prohibit, say, visitations in a hospital or contracts being signed, negotiated between parties.

But I will tell Americans straight up that I don't support defining marriage as anything but between one man and one woman, and I think through nuances we can go round and round about what that actually means.

But I'm being as straight up with Americans as I can in my non- support for anything but a traditional definition of marriage.

IFILL: Let's try to avoid nuance, Senator. Do you support gay marriage?

BIDEN: No. Barack Obama nor I support redefining from a civil side what constitutes marriage. We do not support that. That is basically the decision to be able to be able to be left to faiths and people who practice their faiths the determination what you call it.

The bottom line though is, and I'm glad to hear the governor, I take her at her word, obviously, that she think there should be no civil rights distinction, none whatsoever, between a committed gay couple and a committed heterosexual couple. If that's the case, we really don't have a difference.

IFILL: Is that what your said?

PALIN: Your question to him was whether he supported gay marriage and my answer is the same as his and it is that I do not.

 

[Danielle_E.]

IFILL: What has this administration done right or wrong -- this is the great, lingering, unresolved issue, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict -- what have they done? And is a two-state solution the solution?PALIN: A two-state solution is the solution. And Secretary Rice, having recently met with leaders on one side or the other there, also, still in these waning days of the Bush administration, trying to forge that peace, and that needs to be done, and that will be top of an agenda item, also, under a McCain-Palin administration.

Israel is our strongest and best ally in the Middle East. We have got to assure them that we will never allow a second Holocaust, despite, again, warnings from Iran and any other country that would seek to destroy Israel, that that is what they would like to see.

We will support Israel. A two-state solution, building our embassy, also, in Jerusalem, those things that we look forward to being able to accomplish, with this peace-seeking nation, and they have a track record of being able to forge these peace agreements.

They succeeded with Jordan. They succeeded with Egypt. I'm sure that we're going to see more success there, also.

It's got to be a commitment of the United States of America, though. And I can promise you, in a McCain-Palin administration, that commitment is there to work with our friends in Israel.

IFILL: Senator?

BIDEN: Gwen, no one in the United States Senate has been a better friend to Israel than Joe Biden. I would have never, ever joined this ticket were I not absolutely sure Barack Obama shared my passion.

But you asked a question about whether or not this administration's policy had made sense or something to that effect. It has been an abject failure, this administration's policy.

In fairness to Secretary Rice, she's trying to turn it around now in the seventh or eighth year.

Here's what the president said when we said no. He insisted on elections on the West Bank, when I said, and others said, and Barack Obama said, "Big mistake. Hamas will win. You'll legitimize them." What happened? Hamas won.

When we kicked -- along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, "Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't know -- if you don't, Hezbollah will control it."

Now what's happened? Hezbollah is a legitimate part of the government in the country immediately to the north of Israel.

The fact of the matter is, the policy of this administration has been an abject failure.

And speaking of freedom being on the march, the only thing on the march is Iran. It's closer to a bomb. Its proxies now have a major stake in Lebanon, as well as in the Gaza Strip with Hamas.

We will change this policy with thoughtful, real, live diplomacy that understands that you must back Israel in letting them negotiate, support their negotiation, and stand with them, not insist on policies like this administration has.

IFILL: Has this administration's policy been an abject failure, as the senator says, Governor?

PALIN: No, I do not believe that it has been. But I'm so encouraged to know that we both love Israel, and I think that is a good thing to get to agree on, Sen. Biden. I respect your position on that.

No, in fact, when we talk about the Bush administration, there's a time, too, when Americans are going to say, "Enough is enough with your ticket," on constantly looking backwards, and pointing fingers, and doing the blame game.

There have been huge blunders in the war. There have been huge blunders throughout this administration, as there are with every administration.

But for a ticket that wants to talk about change and looking into the future, there's just too much finger-pointing backwards to ever make us believe that that's where you're going.

Positive change is coming, though. Reform of government is coming. We'll learn from the past mistakes in this administration and other administrations.

And we're going to forge ahead with putting government back on the side of the people and making sure that our country comes first, putting obsessive partisanship aside.

That's what John McCain has been known for in all these years. He has been the maverick. He has ruffled feathers.

But I know, Sen. Biden, you have respected for them that, and I respect you for acknowledging that. But change is coming.

IFILL: Just looking backwards, Senator?

BIDEN: Look, past is prologue, Gwen. The issue is, how different is John McCain's policy going to be than George Bush's? I haven't heard anything yet.

I haven't heard how his policy is going to be different on Iran than George Bush's. I haven't heard how his policy is going to be different with Israel than George Bush's. I haven't heard how his policy in Afghanistan is going to be different than George Bush's. I haven't heard how his policy in Pakistan is going to be different than George Bush's.

It may be. But so far, it is the same as George Bush's. And you know where that policy has taken us.

We will make significant change so, once again, we're the most respected nation in the world. That's what we're going to do.

 

[Danielle_E.]

IFILL: Governor, on another issue, interventionism, nuclear weapons. What should be the trigger, or should there be a trigger, when nuclear weapons use is ever put into play?PALIN: Nuclear weaponry, of course, would be the be all, end all of just too many people in too many parts of our planet, so those dangerous regimes, again, cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, period.

Our nuclear weaponry here in the U.S. is used as a deterrent. And that's a safe, stable way to use nuclear weaponry.

But for those countries -- North Korea, also, under Kim Jong Il -- we have got to make sure that we're putting the economic sanctions on these countries and that we have friends and allies supporting us in this to make sure that leaders like Kim Jong Il and Ahmadinejad are not allowed to acquire, to proliferate, or to use those nuclear weapons. It is that important.

Can we talk about Afghanistan real quick, also, though?

IFILL: Certainly.

PALIN: OK, I'd like to just really quickly mention there, too, that when you look back and you say that the Bush administration's policy on Afghanistan perhaps would be the same as McCain, and that's not accurate.

The surge principles, not the exact strategy, but the surge principles that have worked in Iraq need to be implemented in Afghanistan, also. And that, perhaps, would be a difference with the Bush administration.

Now, Barack Obama had said that all we're doing in Afghanistan is air-raiding villages and killing civilians. And such a reckless, reckless comment and untrue comment, again, hurts our cause.

That's not what we're doing there. We're fighting terrorists, and we're securing democracy, and we're building schools for children there so that there is opportunity in that country, also. There will be a big difference there, and we will win in -- in Afghanistan, also.

This will give you an idea for those that said that they didn't see where she had not answered the question being asked.