VP debate odds.......Follow

"Agreeing is bad debating!!" or not, Obama's only gone up in the polls since the first debate, especially now that the rolling dailies include entirely post-debate numbers. His battleground state numbers are even better.

Kinda like:



Looks pretty much to be the same thing to me. Again, I see a lot of ignoring the context going on for the sole purpose of aggrandizing a particular statement.

lmao man gbaji, you're really grasping at straws.

It's fun to watch.

Man, that Couric interview was just a goldmine of despair.Palin reads the Winford Penny Gazette? Who knew?

And, according to Politico...

Well, as you said, the ability to cope with pressure and still come up with an answer is pretty much a core ability of any politician.

Plus, unlike the current lowball expectations her handlers have been setting, we were told at first that she CAN think on her feet, and that her capacity to do so was a great asset.

Sooooooo, let's see it.

Here's the thing: if you want to run with the big dogs, you need to have some of their savvy and some of their basic knowledge. I'm not talking about beltway insider stuff, but come ON, if you want to help run the country you should at least know a little bit about how it works and how we got to this point. A few Supreme Court decisions off the top of your head is not some unreasonable out-of-the-blue "gotcha".

Hell, I'm not running for office and I can name a dozen and tell you their significance. Anybody who is a citizen of the United States should be able to come up with Marbury v. Madison, Miranda v. Arizona and Brown v. The Board of Education at the very least. And if you shorthanded those to Marbury, Miranda and Brown I'm pretty sure those answers would be accepted.

Okay, I admit I had to look up Nix, although I did recognize it when I read it.

Heaven forbid we actually spend three cents a day per child on vegetables.

I think it shows a lack of intellectual curiousity on Palin's part, especially in regards to federal and global politics. Does she read the paper? I have no idea. But the fact that she defaulted to non-answers ("All of 'em!") rather than saying "Well, naturally I read the Fairbanks News-Miner and Anchorage Daily News. I also read the Wall Street Journal & Washington Post..." (note the exclusion of the NYT) is a bit off-putting. She's the governor of Alaska and couldn't just rattle off the two major dailies? I doubt she's illiterate; was she just afraid to answer and name papers because they might not be "good enough"?

The SCotUS thing is about the same. As Samira notes, most people at least reasonably conversant in politics or history could rattle off a few major cases. I don't think it's unreasonable to want high ranking elected officials to show some interest in how our nation works and has worked. They don't explicitly mention the question so maybe Couric asked how many cases Palin could name whose titles can be rearranged to spell "Elephant Vacuum Monster" or something. I kind of doubt it though.

She doesn't have a ton of experience. Ok, fine. But she's also coming across as someone who just never gave a shit about the federal government on anything but a superficial level until late August.

As a total aside, this ad from the front page of the News-Miner site summed up why I'd like to feel that Palin shows some interest in exploring our government and history.

Yeah, I've read something similar about those debates - that she turned it into a beauty contest, basically, giving sweet but nonresponsive "answers".

That was the early word, certainly.

She is not qualify for the VP job...period! Way over her head. I blame McCain to put her in this position. She needs to go back home and save this country of a worldwide embarrassment...Can you imagine her President of the United States?

I believe the question about the SCOTUS was "What's your opinion about supereme court cases other than Roe v Wade?"

The cop-out answer is that she doesn't have any opinions on them, duh, hence the silence. However, the appropriate "glittering generality" response had she been able to name even one was would have been, "Well, you know, the supreme court has had to make some landmark decisions over the ages. I think that Marbury vs Madison was incredibly important to the foundation of our government, and of course the Miranda case -- all jokes about reading the rights to terrorists aside! -- was very important. I agree with the court's decisions in almost all other cases, except cases like Roe v Wade where the sanctity of life is endangered."

Oops, put too much substance in that for a Palin answer.

Seriously, if she HAD any opinions other than Roe v Wade, she should have said something. The fact that she was silent and had no opinions on any other cases indicates to me that she simply doesn't give a **** what the SCOTUS does as long as it overturns Roe v Wade.