Comments on: Biden Wins: So What?

By: Jeffrey Goldfarb

Jeffrey Goldfarb — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:13:00 +0000

Gary, I knew that Obama didn’t do well in the first debate, but I too have been surprised by the powerful negative response to his performance. Clearly it wasn’t the argument, but his demeanor and non verbal communications. Romney dominated in the persona of the pitch man that he is. Your, and Andrew’s and Michael’s, response to Biden on the other hand, I think reveals a certain aesthetic preference for cool civility which I personally share, but it doesn’t take into account how non verbal communication helps to define a situation. Of course, as Scott Dodelson points out, this confirms the support of Democrats for the Obama Biden view of the world, and the Republican and some independents (are they really?) opposition. As election campaign proceeds, I think Biden played his role, turning the campaign focus on the coherence and veracity of Romney Ryan. Thus “Scott” argument. I would add that Biden performed in character and therefore was that much stronger. Scott Dodleson’s judging the debate by listening not viewing is classic. Remember JFK defeated Nixon in the first televised Presidential debate in the opinion of viewers, lost for those who listened on the radio. Neither is more real. Michael Schudson has brilliantly highlighted this in THE GOOD CITIZEN. And Gary, I really can’t believe that you are equating the fog of war and the pr of the state department and White House response to Bengazi as equally in importance the killing of Osama bin Laden, especially when Republicans are implicated in the cutting of Embassy security.

By: Gary Alan Fine

Gary Alan Fine — Sun, 14 Oct 2012 19:35:00 +0000

I am in agreement with Andrew and Michael. Now it must be said that when I watched the first Obama-Romney debate, I thought that it was close to a tie. I was surprised by the consensus. I liked the fact that both candidates were respectful and argued their points with seriousness if not (on either side with much precision). I thought that Obama was presidential and calm, and Romney was an intense leader. It is hard to know what either has in store for us over the next four years. We learned that perhaps Romney doesn’t have a five billion dollar tax cut, but we don’t know the cost that will be entailed. It is likely to be less than $5 billion (even Stephanie Cutter recognizes that) and a good deal more than couch change.

However, the Biden-Ryan debate was something different. Ryan, like all politicians, slanted his arguments to make the best case and certainly left ambiguities on the table. But Biden seemed to have real trouble with affect control. Perhaps he was coached to be this way, but I was worried about his stability and who prepared the brownies before the debate.. The posters of Obama as The Joker were crass, but Biden would fit. I came away with deep respect (not agreement) with Ryan as a potentially plausible president and with real concern with Joe Biden in the same role. And on substance Biden made a real hash of the first section of the debate on Libya: We weren’t told to step up security in Libya on 9/11. Isn’t there an office of Western Union in Bengazi. Uh, guys. The Libya debacle – the claims of non-existent rioting crowds – vitiates the Osama success.

By: Scott Dodelson

Scott Dodelson — Sun, 14 Oct 2012 16:08:00 +0000

This post and the comments support what seems to be conventional wisdom: liberals were thrilled, conservatives and — to a lesser extent — independents were repulsed by Biden’s performance. One twist from an unabashed liberal trying to remain open-minded: I thought Biden did great, in particular had much better command of the facts than Obama did. The twist is I was listening on the radio so didn’t get the visual sense that he was being condescending or obnoxious. I wonder if this audio/visual split transcends party lines.

By: Scott

Scott — Sun, 14 Oct 2012 05:20:00 +0000

It seems preposterous that one might be more put off by Biden’s supposed “arrogance” than Ryan’s distortions. For example, as Ryan was criticizing the Obama administration for not bolstering embassy security in Libya, Biden had a huge grin on his face and soon pointed out that Ryan had actually voted to cut embassy spending. In the face of such BS, Biden’s response was understandable, if not civil compared to how one might be tempted to respond.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 14 Oct 2012 04:55:00 +0000

Michael, I think you hit the nail on the head. Many of my Democrat friends loved the debate and felt that Biden was the clear winner. Putting myself in the place of a Democratic supporter, I suppose I can understand. I can only make sense of it in my mind using a sports metaphor. It’s like the coach of my favorite team disrespecting a rival team’s coach – I probably wouldn’t see the problem with it. As Jeffery states, it may have been just what the base wanted to hear. As someone with political distance from both parties, however, I can say that, if that was in fact representative of Biden’s character and not just a poorly chosen response, that’s actually worse. The large number of use who don’t have a Republican or Democrat jersey in our closet (metaphor continued) don’t want to see bickering, arrogance, and condescension. My somewhat biased opinion is that you have to impress the Independents and the undecideds because your base will vote for you, regardless. Either way, I sincerely hope that the President can bring reassure me in the next debate that the party has it’s head on straight.

By: Michael Corey

Michael Corey — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 19:53:00 +0000

Perhaps you are right. Maybe it is just a matter of of definition of situation. My reaction was very different. I have never seen anything like this in my professional experience. I felt that the Vice President’s behaviors and tactics disrespected many viewers (my wife a registered Democrat, for instance, refused to watch more than 20 minutes of the debate). I also felt in the process, he demonstrated a lack of civility and disrespected his opponent, the moderator, the process, viewers, and his office. I watched the whole debate, and understood where he was on solid ground, and where he wasn’t grounded. I had the feeling that the campaign professionals took the Vice President hostage. The result was something that might be very appealing to his core base, but would not sit well with many independents. I’ve had the feeling that the campaign created simulacrum of its opponents, and started to believe their simulacrum was reality. That’s a significant problem because real situations and people don’t respond like the imagined realities and others.

By: Jeffrey Goldfarb

Jeffrey Goldfarb — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 16:46:00 +0000

Andrew yours is certainly one kind of reaction to Biden’s expressions, highlighted by Republicans but others as well. I stand by my sense that Biden was acting in character and that while the laughing was not particularly respectful, it was supportive of his combative message, needed by the Democrats at this time. That said, clearly Obama cannot do the same on Tuesday. It would be out of character and undermine his position. Whether you liked or approved of Biden’s expressive behavior, I think it is quite clear that it helped define the situation of the debate and therefore was powerful, setting the stage for Tuesday’s debate.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 03:44:00 +0000

As an Independent I was really put off by the condescending laughing while Ryan was talking. It reminded me of a Junior High debate tactic. Does it change my vote from Obama to Romney? No. Does it cast additional doubt in my mind into whether the Dems were anywhere near prepared enough to run for reelection? Uh, bigtime.