Debate #2 Go......Follow

Meh. Democrats are congratulating Biden on substance, that he responded firmly to every one of Ryan's points.

Republicans are ******** about Biden's body language and whether he laughed too much more than lauding Ryan.

It's not just presidential or VP debates; Biden's been in politics longer than God. Debating on the Senate floor, doing the Sunday morning talk shows, etc. He was first elected to office when Ryan was two years old.

The format was a Sunday morning talk show format with them at a table going over the issues. It was one Biden has been doing for decades and he was completely within his element.

Edited, Oct 12th 2012 3:27pm by Jophiel

You know, that's where I'd seen Ryan most often before he was VP nominee, was on Sunday morning talk shows. I always thought it was kinda creepy and obviously very rehearsed in everything he said, and sometimes you'd see him getting visibly agitated. I was hoping Biden would be able to draw out that a little bit more, but like I said, he was obviously so practiced that he just shut down everything but his lizard brain.

That's a lot of words for you to say you didn't watch it.

Let's all be honest. The bar was set so low for Biden going into this that as long as he didn't make a really bad gaffe, he would be declared the winner.

Let's be honest, no national candidate could have lost a debate with Ryan. Romney was great. Ryan was a mess.

As Joph said, this is an element Biden understands intimately.

For every question, Biden laid the framework for his response, and proceeded to make his argument. After that was done, and he had established credibility, he proceeded to discuss how his plan differed from Romney's and/or why the other side was wrong.

That's exactly how you should behave in a debate. You build yourself up then shut down your opponent. For an audience to care about your critiques, they have to believe you know something about the topic.

Ryan absolutely failed there. He usually began by attacking the Obama administration, and tried to build his argument from there. And it ended up jumbled and incoherent, because half the time you had no clue if he was saying something as a response to what he was trashing, or saying it because it was actually his position. And then you combine that with how little he actually said about his position, it's an absolute joke. The mediator shouldn't have to be telling you that you didn't answer the question. You should have answered the question as quickly and concisely as possible, then used the remaining time to sow distrust for the opponent in your audience.

Stories about personal experiences are well and good in speeches. They don't mean crap in a national debate. Any opponent is just going to step in and tear that down--you are actually creating an opening for him. This isn't the time to set yourself up as Mr. Nice Guy--that's what the years of campaigning were for. This time is for you to prove that you're also going to be able to succeed as one of the nation's most powerful people, by proving that your opponent can't touch you.

And note that I haven't said anything about who was right or wrong on those issues. The only thing I'm saying is that Ryan's performance during the debate was remarkably poor, and Biden's was spot-on for much of it.

Even when it comes down to things like body language. Ryan's compulsive drinking, awkward frame, and frozen expression revealed just how nervous he was. It was like watching Romney acknowledging the comments in the 47% video. And I don't fault him for it--it's natural to be ridiculously nervous, especially when your campaign is inept and you have no clue what stance you're supposed to be taking--but it's very poor debate form. If you're not comfortable making your own argument, an argument you expect to be sufficient to earn you the presidency, no one else is going to be comfortable believing it.

So yeah, whatever you think about how correct Biden's arguments were, Ryan was pathetic in trying to actually debate anything.

The fact that Biden often looked at the camera and talked directly to the audience very firmly was a major plus



That's MY strategy!

I said that he put a lot more on the table than Biden. Which he did.



Yes. The moderator asked for more detail of Ryan, and none of Biden. Think about that. Then think about how an objective moderator would ask a candidate to elaborate on how he's going to pay for a dollar amount of taxes which just happens to be the talking point of the Democrats right now, but which the GOP candidates have steadfastly argued is *not* an accurate number. It would be like if a moderator asked Biden how he's going to convince people to support his socialist agenda (using exactly that language). I'm sure you'd think that was a bit biased, right?



I didn't say Biden had no record. What he (and the president) don't have is a plan. I'm sorry, could you elaborate on the plan that he outlined during that debate? Because I saw him attacking the Romney/Ryan plan a whole lot, while failing to present an alternative at all. Now, to be fair, that often works in a debate since most people don't realize it at the time. But my point that Ryan put substance on the table while Biden didn't is absolutely correct. Ryans failure wasn't a lack of substance but that he failed to defend the substance he presented and failed to point out the lack of same from Biden.



I'll ask again: What substance did Biden present at the debate? I have the thing DVR'd and have watched it a couple times. Biden did a great job distracting from the issues and tossing zingers out there. He did a crappy job telling people what he and Obama would do in a second term which might justify people putting their faith in them again. Saying "trust me" over and over tends to not actually make people want to trust you btw.


His performance was designed to appeal to the left wing. And it did. But as I said earlier, I don't think folks in the middle were that impressed with Biden. He was long on rhetoric and clever quips, but short on ideas and policy. Again though, this is the VP debate, so it's hard to say how much weight anyone puts in that. I do think that Ryan did a lot better job showing that he and Romney have ideas, while the current administration does not. And I think that's far more important than anything else.

But did you *watch* the debate? It's all about context, right?

You're right, all those times pointing out that the military answers to a civilian executive were her tossing Biden points.

Selective memory is selective.

For God's sake, get a girlfriend.

Are we going to have to start making a list of words you don't understand? Maybe you can get together with someone that has a word-a-day calendar and you can catch up to my three year old daughter's vocabulary.

The part where you watch it repeatedly.