Diabolical Plot
Former Palin opponent Andrew “Moose in the Gunsights” Halcro talks about what a devious, masterful, and underhandedly charming debater Sarah Palin is, deftly wielding the “nonanswer,” the “glittering generality.” Biden underestimates her at his own peril. Meanwhile, it looks like NYT might be getting wise to the Palin threat. We’ll start with Halcro at CSM:
Anchorage, Alaska - When he faces off against Sarah Palin Thursday night, Joe Biden will have his hands full.
I should know. I’ve debated Governor Palin more than two dozen times. And she’s a master, not of facts, figures, or insightful policy recommendations, but at the fine art of the nonanswer, the glittering generality. Against such charms there is little Senator Biden, or anyone, can do.
Sounds like an argument in support of my theory that the Palin putdowns of the past couple of weeks could all be part of a diabolical McCainist plot, aided by a gullible Palin-bashing press … again … to drive expectations way down.
Halcro’s warning about Palin’s skills have to be weighed against the fact that he is apparently an uberwonk.
On April 17, 2006, Palin and I participated in a debate at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks on agriculture issues. The next day, the Fairbanks Daily News Miner published this excerpt:
“Andrew Halcro, a declared independent candidate from Anchorage, came armed with statistics on agricultural productivity. Sarah Palin, a Republican from Wasilla, said the Matanuska Valley provides a positive example for other communities interested in agriculture to study.”
On April 18, 2006, Palin and I sat together in a hotel coffee shop comparing campaign trail notes. As we talked about the debates, Palin made a comment that highlights the phenomenon that Biden is up against.
“Andrew, I watch you at these debates with no notes, no papers, and yet when asked questions, you spout off facts, figures, and policies, and I’m amazed. But then I look out into the audience and I ask myself, ‘Does any of this really matter?’ ” Palin said.
While policy wonks such as Biden might cringe, it seemed to me that Palin was simply vocalizing her strength without realizing it. During the campaign, Palin’s knowledge on public policy issues never matured – because it didn’t have to. Her ability to fill the debate halls with her presence and her gift of the glittering generality made it possible for her to rely on populism instead of policy.
Sorry, Andrew. “Revenge of the Nerds” is just a movie. It’s not that policy wonks don’t have a place in the halls of power. They do. Supporting leaders. Voters don’t generally want to be lectured with strings of statistics that may or may not add up to anything. They do want to get a sense they can trust a person and can identify with a person. That they like a person. That, under difficult circumstances, that person can stay cool and rise to the occasion.
In one debate, a moderator asked the candidates to name a bill the legislature had recently passed that we didn’t like. I named one. Democratic candidate Tony Knowles named one. But Sarah Palin instead used her allotted time to criticize the incumbent governor, Frank Murkowski. Asked to name a bill we did like, the same pattern emerged: Palin didn’t name a bill.
And when she does answer the actual question asked, she has a canny ability to connect with the audience on a personal level. For example, asked to name a major issue that had been ignored during the campaign, I discussed the health of local communities, Mr. Knowles talked about affordable healthcare, and Palin talked about … the need to protect hunting and fishing rights.
Damn. That woman sounds like a heck of a pol. Moderator throws out some “What is your favorite political color” question,” nerds earnestly take the bait, and Palin talks about what people are actually interested in.
Theoretically Biden and his Obama campaign handlers are well aware of this and will plot a course that takes these hazards into account, perhaps with an assist from the Obamist moderator. But then again, fact-challenged, fumble-prone Biden, with a long Beltway history, could well have his hands full. Here is Halcro’s advice:
So what does that mean for Biden? With shorter question-and-answer times and limited interaction between the two, he should simply ignore Palin in a respectful manner on the stage and answer the questions as though he were alone. Any attempt to flex his public-policy knowledge and show Palin is not ready for prime time will inevitably cast him in the role of the bully.
On the other side of the stage, if Palin is to be successful, she needs to do what she does best: fill the room with her presence and stick to the scripted sound bites.
NYT may be getting wise to te daibolical Palinist stratgem:
Not since Dan Quayle took the stage in 1988 have debate expectations for a major party candidate been as low as they will be on Thursday for Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska.
A newcomer to the national scene, Ms. Palin has given little indication that she has been engaged in a serious way in the pressing national and international issues of the day.
But a review of a handful of her debate performances in the race for governor in 2006 shows a somewhat different persona from the one that has emerged since Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, named Ms. Palin as the vice-presidential nominee a month ago.
Ms. Palin, a former mayor who had become a whistle-blower about ethical misconduct in state government, held her own in those debates. (There were almost two dozen in the general election alone; she skipped some, and not all were recorded.)
She staked out a populist stance against oil companies and projected a fresh, down-to-earth face at a time when voters wanted change.
That sounds a little different than how an injured Halcro, still lovingly cradling his much-abused wonk, portrayed the situation. NYT’s report by the way, includes an account of how Palin stepped on Halcro’s wonk, and closes:
Perhaps her strength in debating was coming across like an average person who understood the average person’s needs and would not be expected to have detailed policy prescriptions.
She also neutralized some of her conservative social views. She said intelligent design should be taught in schools — along with evolution. She said she favored the teaching of abstinence — along with the teaching of sex education. “Let the kids debate both sides,” she said.
She was not a particularly aggressive debater, and she rarely took an opportunity to challenge her opponents. But when pressed, she could be tough. In a roundtable discussion in October on the “Bob and Mark Show,” Mr. Halcro suggested that Ms. Palin had not attended enough debates.
“It’s been a year today that I’ve been on the campaign trail,” Ms. Palin responded, “attending many, many more forums, more debates, than either one of you, Tony and Andrew, because I had a primary opponent. You know, you got to have the balls to take it on in the early part of a campaign, and not just go right to the big show.”
Ouch. There’s a kick in the …
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 9:28 am on Wednesday, October 1, 2008
2 Responses to “Diabolical Plot”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
October 1st, 2008 at 12:38 pm
The Obama campaign and the left in general are so afraid of Sarah Palin that I think all she’d need to do is walk out on stage and shout: “BOO!”
She won’t do that, of course. She’ll clean Biden’s clock, and maybe that’s why McCain’s campaign have kept her “hidden”. The effect is going to be so much greater when she lets loose.
October 2nd, 2008 at 12:11 pm
I dunno, Jules, she hasn’t exactly covered herself with glory this week.
I’m a ’skeered for her
She has a high hurdle to clear in the debate. I am sure Biden, however, will rise to meet the ridiculously low standard the Dems routinely set for him.