How I Misjudged the Debate in Real Time

As the debate commenced Paul Ryan appeared to be nervous and he appeared nervous to a diminishing degree throughout the entire debate until the end when he recovered well, as witnessed by his frequent reaching for the water glass. As a result of his nervousness I thought he was tentative. Ironically, Biden might have sensed this nervousness or tentativeness in Ryan and overstepped.

When Biden made his first "buffoonish" intrusion I said to myself, "thank God!" I felt that Biden had made a signal error but I misjudged its impact by regarding it as a distraction. Evidently, it has become the very essence of the debate in the public mind.

Why I saw the debate so differently from how the world saw the debate is an object lesson in how far we political junkies can be isolated from the bulk of the electorate who do not live and breathe politics but who live normal lives. Perhaps it explains why the rest of the world does not vote as I would have them do. As a junkie, I felt increasingly frustrated over Ryan's performance for his failure to counterpunch effectively and, ultimately, because he could not shape the debate and so was predominantly on the defensive.

For example, Biden made the indefensible claim that the administration did not know about the requests for additional security in Benghazi. Ryan should have pointed out that that very day under oath the security people had stated that they begged for security. Worse, security was not furnished but was stripped away. Ryan should have pointed out that both State Department and the intelligence branches have disputed the administration's story. But most important, Ryan should have said "maybe that was because Obama went back to bed when he got his 3 AM phone call and only got up to go to Las Vegas. Maybe he the president would had known what was going on in Benghazi if he had attended his national security briefings. He did not take one briefing in the previous six days." Told in the correct tone of voice so as not to offend, I believe that would have destroyed the Obama administration for foreign affairs. As it was, Biden fought it to a draw or nearly so, a remarkable achievement considering the appalling facts.

But these are only illustrations of the general pattern which struck me at the time, which is to say in real time, in which Ryan permitted Biden to dominate and to kick up enough dust to obscure the grotesque failures of the Obama administration in foreign affairs and in domestic economic affairs. And that leads me to my larger point.

I believe that Benghazi should have been used as a metaphor for the failure of the Obama administration in foreign policy and even in domestic policy. Ryan said, but did not set as the predicate of the debate, that the Obama foreign policy is in flames, literally, as the Arab world breaches our embassies and murders our ambassadors and security chiefs throughout Islam. The important principle is that Ryan should have established at the very beginning the principle that Obama's policy of apology and appeasement has failed. It has not just failed with the Arab world, it has failed with China and Russia. To support that portion of the argument he should have cited Obama's on microphone remarks to Russian President Medvedev. Let Biden defend that episode for the rest of the debate. How many people even know or recall that episode? Oh, what an opportunity lost!

This would, I believe, have thrown Biden on the defense and caused the moderator to open the question of the competency of Obama's foreign policy. It would have changed the entire course of the debate.

Just as Hurricane Katrina became a metaphor for the failure of the Bush administration, representing the perceived incompetence of the Bush administration in Iraq, so should the Republicans make Benghazi a metaphor for the failures of the Obama administration. That metaphor applies to the failure to recover from the great recession. It is worse than a metaphor of incompetence, it is a metaphor for epic fail.

It is essential in these debates to set the predicate. The predicate for the tragic failure of the economic recovery is that Obama has squandered trillions of dollars without effecting a recovery and he is driving us us toward a fiscal cliff which will destroy those very programs like Medicare and Social Security that Biden kept insisting Romney/Ryan would themselves destroy if elected. If the country goes over the cliff there will be no Social Security, no Medicare, no jobs. The context is, how do we save the country; the proper context is not whether Ryan's reforms are palatable. Because we did not set the predicate we lost control.

Again, the idea is to put Biden on the defensive. If we do not accept the imperative of fiscal crisis compelling reform of Medicare and taxes etc., then we are put to defending our reforms and Biden gets to point out that his ostrich policy of lack of reform is less painful than our reforms. Because the predicate was not set, Ryan was on the defensive in the course of much of the debate until the very end when he began to make these larger points. But for most of the debate, it seemed to the uninformed that Ryan somehow failed in a duty which he somehow owed to the listeners to provide specifics for his plan. Think about it, the Democrats govern without a budget for three years and the debate is about whether or not the Romney/Ryan plan has adequate specifics.

So I was as relieved as I was surprised when I saw the results of the CNN poll favoring Ryan 48% to Biden's 44%. In my opinion, as a technical matter only, Biden delivered the better performance apart from the smirking. He was more self-assured. His voice was brilliantly modulated. He expressed himself far more clearly than did Ryan. He had more passion. He was credible even though he was saying incredible things and defending the indefensible. If it were not for the buffoonery, I believe the poll results might have been reversed.

I underestimated the visual impact of Biden's buffoonery. I thought it was a 60-40 victory for Biden before one adjusted for the buffoonery. That should show how dangerous it is to rely on one's own perceptions in these affairs. As a white male who loves the thrust and parry of politics, I was not personally disturbed by Biden's smirking, although I of course acknowledged that his conduct would have an impact on the rest of the public. I simply misjudged the power of that impact, especially among women. I put it down to nervousness for which Biden was overcompensating. When he heard a phrase from Ryan which triggered a Pavlovian response in which he had been trained over the last six days of debate preparation, Biden was happy and relieved because his internal computer told him to relax, it had the canned reply readily available in random access memory.

Obviously, the rest of the public saw Biden's behavior as offensive and inappropriate. I simply saw it as a unaccountable breach of good debating tactics in an old campaigner which was generated by insecurity. Biden has not disappointed his reputation as the gaffe that keeps on gaffing. Biden even as an old pro must carry somewhere within him the uneasy knowledge that he is defending the indefensible, that he is covering for a record of failure, that every single issue that comes up might potentially expose him as an exponent of failure before millions of people. When his inner computer told him that he had the proper canned response to Ryan ready to go, he was relieved and so it came out involuntarily as a smirk or a derisive laugh.

On the other hand, it might just be that Biden an insufferable Lib who goes through life smug in his conviction that he is superior to conservatives and that he actually has the better side of the argument.

All of this is mildly interesting I guess, but the real question is, does this debate alter the trajectory of the campaign? I tend to agree with the conventional wisdom that it does not. We shall see in the coming days if the Romney surge dissipates or not. The big question is whether Romney's momentum generated in the first debate will gain critical mass and sweep the election before it like an avalanche or whether it will dissipate as, in Churchill's metaphor, a bucket full of water splashed onto the floor which begins as a powerful flood and slowly loses speed and power as spreads. I am inclined to believe that the Obama slide will lose speed but not its direction and will not bottom out until it finds its demographic base level of dependency and race.

If the Romney surge continues at its current pace, I do not think Obama will have enough opportunity in the next debate to derail Romney trajectory short of 270. Biden's buffoonery will not have affected Obama's base but this election has now focused on the undecideds and Republican intensity. Having seen the reaction in the polls, the focus groups, the television pundits, and the reports from Tweeter world, I now believe Biden's buffoonery aborted any possible movement of the undecideds towards Obama while it only intensified Romney's base. Biden might, at best, have slowed the pace of disintegration in the Obama base but the Democrats need more.

I think it is important that women, a demographic key to Obama's victory but where Obama has been losing strength lately, will have found Biden's performance offputting.

So far, Republicans have produced one brilliant debate and the Democrats have produced one pathetic and one ineffectual performance.

I understand your complaints but Ryan was not trying to engage Biden, he was trying to engage with the moderator and the audience.

I feel asleep listening to debate on radio. Biden was clearly trying to dominate the younger Ryan and push him off message.

Yes Ryan was a little anxious, expected on this stage for the first time, but he didn't stray far in what I heard. He didn't take the bait from Biden and he handed the 47% line well by gently poking fun at Biden.

Biden wasted his time trying to talk over Ryan and instead of talking Obama policy going forward would complain about Romney and Bush.

Ryan was smart to point out Obama had a unified government when he was elected and bring up the old Obama quote about failing candidates talking now about their policies but trying to make you afraid of their opponents. That was devastating.

Too many here complain about "missed opportunities;" I saw the same said about Romney's first performance which, frankly, was a masterclass. He probably could not have done better. Forgotten in all this is the audience. This isn't about scoring in a debate class. It's about SALESMANSHIP. You don't pile on, you don't oversell, you don't appear desperate.

I should add the podcast mentions Rusty is changing time slots live so I will have to check out when he will be on. As you know jerry Doyle took over for savage. Should have been Rusty, but I like that rusty is on so late he is on during debates and convention coverage and other primetime breaking news so he is usually the first show to comment on issues of the day the other shows have to catchup with the next day.

The good news is that, according to CNN, most people felt Ryan won the debate.

That said, I think he missed too many opportunities. He should have pointed out during Biden's rant about Iraq that Biden voted for the war. He should have pointed out that GM did go bankrupt, and all Obama did was take control of the process to pay off the UAW at the expense of the bond holders.

And he should have brought up this: How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis: Kevin Hassett

Maybe R&R are holding back, but I wish he had been more aggressive with some of this.

Good Post!

This so reminds me of the Bush-Gore debate when Gore acted so much like a jerk:

Question? Who won the debate?

Gore

Question? Who are you going to vote for?

Bush

Did you notice that Biden beat up on Ryan over Part D Medicare and then turned around later and touted Part D? What an idiot.

In order for this to be a game changer, Biden needed to absolutely put Ryan away. Because of Biden’s rude and condescending attitude, that didn't happen.

Rusty mentioned it at start of hour three. He is moving to 3pm eastern. But some stations have no room for him since they have a set schedule with other shows so they will still run Rusty at 9pm eastern. But this also means his podcast will be on earlier. So Rusty did not replace savage but will be on during Hannity. That should be fun. Gives conservatives a better option than Hannity.

Yes. I tried to look at this debate as a truly undecided voter...there are so few of them this time around. If I were an undecided voter, I would have been a bit irritated at the rudeness of Biden. On the other side, I would say Ryan was at times a wee bit too "technical" with his explanations. But if I was judging them as men, I think Ryan came across as more grown up.

I think Ryan's biggest problem tonight was that he is an honest, narrowly-focused, detail-oriented person. He was acting as though he needed to refute, in minute factual detail, each of Biden's statements. When he would begin to refute one, Biden would interrupt his train of thought with another, and Ryan would stop to begin to address the latest; constantly having to restart, never finishing what he started. In essence, he ended up not really refuting any of them effectively.

That was the point of the Democrat strategy, and I believe that had Biden not been cheesing so much acting as though everything Ryan said was ludicrous, he would have been viewed as having soundly beaten the Republican VP nominee.

Fortunately for us, it appears that Biden went too far and came across as the a-hole he really is. It also helps that while the casual observer's eyes glaze over when Ryan gets into the details, Biden jarred their attention with his buffoonery.

Ryan came prepared to carry on a serious discussion. Biden came to try to cast him as Dan Quayle. The Kennedy reference couldn’t even be delivered with precision. It flopped miserably.

Ryan refused to stoop to his level. WOMEN weren’t having any of Biden’s juvenile behavior. After debate responses reveal he even lost them.

Yes, you and I would have loved to see Ryan deliver some of the retorts you mentioned. Frankly, those would only have served to detract from Biden’s distracting behavior in the eyes of the glazed over Leftist sect.

I think Ryan played it about right. When your enemy is destroying himself, don’t interrupt. More factual information would merely have been laughed at by Biden.

Biden seriously hurt his own ticket last night. Obama didn’t care to engage. Biden now takes his debate as one big joke.

That’s some tag team there, and they’re being laughed off the national stage.

Think of all the serious issues Biden laughed through last night. Think anyone is taking him serious this morning?

No.

Romney was brilliant in his closing to refer to the Declaration and Constitution, quoting them, although , of course, he did have the prompt of the set wall paper. I was disappointed Ryan didn’t pick up that theme in his closing. Also, the number they need to have people remember isn’t “47%, “ or even 23,000,000 but 4,000, the decline of household income during Obama-Biden. As another poster pointed out in a discussion weeks ago, that’s a middle class family that does without a vacation this year, or indeed, has no discretionary income to do anything.

There's an older guy I play softball with who uses the laughing antic as he tries to talk over me and shout me down when we discuss anything. Time and time again I have to tell him to shut up until I have made my point then he can have his say.....

I'm getting tired of it and one day I'm just going to knock him on his ass.......(Im surprised I haven't already)

I agree as I watched the debate, I thought Biden won. I was irritated by the interruptions and antics, but more bothered by Ryan not staying on the points he was trying to refute. The moderator piling onto those interruptions did not help. Romney, in the first debate, did not let the moderator get away it. Ryan attempted the same tactic, to manage the moderator, he was then spoken over by Biden.

But I did have a fleeting thought as the debate started out with Biden’s lie about Libya...America DOES know differently, America is engaged with regards to what happened there. I think we under-estimate those undecided voters. Right about now they are coming online to get information. Biden telling a lie right out in the first 2 minutes of the debate and then people seeing his buffoonery...I think it was a deadly wrong tactic for the voters who just might actually save this nation by their vote.

So they saw 0bama and his epic failure in the first debate.

Now, they saw Biden lie, actually lie in the course of a debate about the death of dignitaries representing America overseas.

Biden did not win any trust because he started out telling the Libya lie, to a national audience, that is waking up to learn they were lied to all through September. BAAAAd move by Biden. I view the undecideds as people who were tuning in to here Ryan and wanted information and points about Romney/Ryan, they already had a picture in their minds about gaffe prone Biden. Biden reinforced that picture last night. That said, I think the debate left folks more frustrated. But, as any parent knows when dealing with children, the loudest one has the most to hide.

Arthurio: Biden is a real shark though, and has been debating and arguing before Ryan was even in diapers. There would have been a real danger to attempt a toe to toe exchange, with little upside other than our visceral pleasure.

Too true, Art. In stark contrast to our common hope, expressed so many times after the first debate that "Super smart tea party Ryan will mop the floor with statist buffoon Biden."

Mastery of the finest Martial Arts helps little in mud wrestling.

This is why I'm so dour on the whole election.

We keep trying to sew silk purses out of the sow's ear reality that roughly half of the people in this country want people like Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Reid, Axelrod, Rahm, Brown, SEIU etc "fighting" (people like us) "for them."

I saw a CNN comments section which was mostly "tax them till they bleed" comments, products of our gubbmint schools no doubt.

Even if we fixed the schools today, we wouldn't see those voters until after 2030.

If indeed the cause is lost (and I pray the Lord saves us in spite of ourselves), then the historical corollary might be that Reagan was our Fort Sumpter, Bush/Gore 2000 was Gettysburg, and we're now in the wilderness campaign.

Nathan, thank you for your observations and analyses.

I too noticed the waterglass and each time was concerned for the constriction of Ryan's throat. From my observations of public speakers this is the first symptom of increasing stress and several times I felt Ryan's voice was losing its projection. It would not surprise me to find that Biden also noted the frequency of Ryan's waterglass and seized on this chink in the armor. Perhaps Paul had read Sun Tzu and gave this head-fake to goad Joe into a overly-aggressive posture. If so, I believe it worked and the post-debate discussion is as much about Joe's demeanor than the content of the discussions.

My enduring concern throughout this election season is the temperament of women - most are driven by superficial issues and often go for the Slick-talker. Here is where I feel this debate may be most significant: the women I know are confrontation-averse mostly due to their fear being bullied and demeaned in the manner of Joe Biden. Surely Paul had numerous opportunities to strike at Obama/Biden's carotids but maintaining a civil discourse may well be realized as the most effective weapon brought to bare at this moment.

Paul Ryan is an honorable man and I am gratified that he did not lower himself to the tone and demeanor that Joe Biden exemplified last night.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.