I’ll echo JRoosh; I had a blast at Trocadero for the debate party last night. There’s nothing like watching a debate with 400-odd of your closest friends.
I didn’t live-blog the debate because I’ve figured after all these years that I’m just no good at it. But I’ll echo Roosh; both of the candidates did well. Palin was able to stay on the offensive - I think it’s fair to say she won the first half by keeping Biden back on his heels for the most part. She could have done more; at one point, Roosh, Ed and I all noticed that Biden had dodged an answer; “C’mon, Sarah - jump on it!”. She had a few answers where I’d have liked her to have gotten on-point faster.
But on balance? Given that she owned the first half, and the expectations that the media and left (pardon the redundancy) had set - Palin was supposed to run crying from the room, remember? - Palin would have to have been the more impressive performance. Whether it matters for next month or for 2012 matters not. The left will have to unleash a lot more bald-faced hypocritical sexism to try to negate her than they’ve even attemped so far.
(Che knockoff courtesy my daughter Bun)
I’ll also go along with Roosh on Gwen Ifill. Perhaps the controversy about her upcoming book put her on notice; the conservative alt-media would not tolerate any hijinx. Whatever - Ifill did a good job.
Which isn’t to say that she had much to work with. In contrast with the first Presidential debate with Jim Lehrer, which allowed the candidates to seriously cross-examine each other and spend some time developing (or, in Obama’s case, not developing) positions, the format only allowed for the most shallow, trival, sound-bite based approach to any given question. That, of course, was to Joe Biden’s advantage; it enjoined him from babbling on endlessly, like at the Alito and Roberts hearings.
Cross-posted at Shot in the Dark. Comments welcome.
