Thursday, October 11, 2012

Post-pre-debate musings, Veep preview edition

Well, I called that one!

Just chalk it down to my signature brand of Xtreem Punditry (TM) that after I posted a entry saying that nothing much would happen at last week's presidential debate and that it was unlikely to change the race... well, you know what happened.

So basically if Obama loses it's my fault, because I jinxed him.

At the risk of sounding even MORE out of touch, I still don't know why words like "disaster" and "debacle" have been used frequently to describe Obama's performance. I thought he was thoughtful, articulate, and maybe a little too cautious. I thought Romney was energetic, aggressive, and just all over the place with his contradictions, inaccuracies, and reversals. But neither really did anything surprising or, I thought, very memorable.

That's why I get the big bucks, obviously.

So now that I've been historically wrong about the first debate, let me stick my neck out further on the VP clash coming up tonight.

I predict a high viewership, not just because people want to see if Biden can redeem the ticket to some extent, but because conservatives find Biden a kind of catnip, he's the guy they can't get enough of, they hang on his every faux pas (and to be fair there have been a few) and awkward comment. They probably don't like to admit it but they love the guy. He's their George Bush (either one), kind of a doofus, highly likely to embarrass the country in some novel and entertaining way.

Except of course, that's perception and not entirely the reality. Biden is also an experienced statesman who can be quite insightful and inspiring. Don't know which guy will show up tonight, maybe both. But I'm not betting against him.

Ryan could also surprise us. He's a smart guy, he could certainly *sound* convincing in talking about debt and deficits. There's plenty of data out there that he's practiced at spinning in ways that strengthen the GOP's position. Whether Biden can stay with him is a good question. What Ryan has to watch out for is the classic rookie mistakes: talking to fast, letting his voice get too whiney, going off on tangents... I would expect him to be well-prepared but it is a lot of pressure on a guy who has never been on a stage quite like this one. His convention speech was the closest thing and he did... OK. Lots of arguable claims of course--the difference is the fact checker will be on stage with him. How that goes will be very interesting.

The first debate was won by the guy who showed the most energy and personality. It's possible the second one will go the same way. Which of these two candidates is more likely to pass that test?

Everybody, now: TIME WILL TELL...



No comments: