Tuesday, October 5, 2004

The Vice-Presidential Debate

I watched the debate, tonight, in its entirety. I must admit that both candidates comported themselves well, laying out their respective cases eloquently and effectively. Edwards is a better, more dynamic speaker than Kerry; and it goes without saying that Cheney runs rings around Bush in the public speaking arena.

I believe Cheney won overall. He did an excellent job describing Kerry's inconsistencies, his lousy voting record, and his poor judgment. Edwards also brought up some legitimate points about the Bush Administration's prosecuting of the Iraq war; but Cheney's concise rebuttals of facts about improvements that have taken place in Iraq trumped Edwards' valid points, in my opinion.

Some observations: I found Gwen Ifill's performance interesting. Though she deserves credit for challenging both candidates on various issues, and for coming across as more even-handed than Jim Lehrer in the last debate (but that's not saying much), she made one egregious lapse, revealing her bias. During one segment, she asked Cheney a loaded question, then immediately tossed Edwards a softball. I don't remember the specifics of her question for Cheney, but her inquiry of Edwards went something like this:"When the present administration mentions that Kerry has a trial lawyer on his ticket, do you feel like that is a personal attack?" Ooh, deep, probing stuff, huh? I don't remember any such opportunity given to Cheney for portraying himself as a victim. Additionally, she introduced Cheney's personal family life in a way that Edwards never had to contend with.

So all in all, a diverting debate, though I doubt it changed any minds. We can't all be John "Flapjack" Kerry.

No comments: