Building up and tearing down
On the eve of Thursday night's vice presidential debate, Democrats are trying to raise expectations for Republican Sarah Palin, who might have succeeded in lowering the bar with her spotty performances during a series of interviews with Katie Couric of CBS.
Republicans, meanwhile, are trying to tear down Democrat Joe Biden by questioning statements he has made.
Thursday night in St. Louis will be only the second vice presidential debate involving a woman, after the 1984 face-off between George H.W. Bush and Geraldine Ferraro. The debate is expected to vie for the most-watched vice-presidential face-off ever. The existing record is for the 1984 debate between Bush and Ferraro, with an estimated 56.7 million viewers. About 43.6 million watched the 2004 debate between Dick Cheney and John Edwards, according to Nielsen Media Research.
Also, a new national poll out today suggests that there are growing misgivings about Palin.
A majority -- 51 percent -- say she is not qualified to be president, a reversal from just after the Republican convention a month ago when 52 percent said she was qualified, the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press reported. Palin has lost ground among independents, and that is hurting John McCain, who made her his surprise running mate.
The growing doubts about Palin -- along with Barack Obama's debate performance and more confidence in his ability to deal with the deteriorating economy -- have helped the Democrat to a 49 percent to 42 percent lead among registered voters in the poll. The race was virtually even in recent Pew polls, and Obama had not held a significant lead since June.
Another poll released this afternoon also found more skepticism about Palin.
In the AP-Gfk survey, 25 percent of likely voters believe Palin has the right experience to be president, down from 41 percent just after the GOP convention.
The Democratic National Committee today sent out several stories that suggest that Palin more than held her own during debates while she ran for Alaska governor in 2006. One example: a Wall Street Journal report that begins, "There are two things people here remember about Sarah Palin's debating style during her race for governor two years ago. One is the stack of color-coded cue cards she took to the podium for help whenever she was asked a policy question. The other is how quickly she was able to shuck those props, master the thrust-and-parry of jousting with her opponents and inquisitors, and project confidence to an audience of television viewers watching from home."
Palin, who has been the subject of reams of unflattering coverage in recent weeks, said today on "The Early Show" on CBS that there has been a double standard. But she blamed it not on sexism, but because she is not "part of the Washington herd" and the media elite does not know who she is.
Palin told Katie Couric that it would be sexist if the media didn't question her about her experience, vision, principles and values.
Meanwhile, the Republican National Committee sent out a story in today's Globe, highlighting Biden's support for trial lawyers, among the least popular groups with the public. The story reports, "At an intimate, $2 million fund-raiser put on by a group of trial lawyers in a private home in Washington, D.C. last week, he boasted that he had 'done more than any other senator' for trial lawyers. There are 'two groups that stand between us and the barbarians at the gate,' he professed. 'It's you and organized labor.'"
Republicans are also trying to flog a statement that Biden made during a Democratic debate last year when he was talking about the difficulties of withdrawing from Iraq. "Let’s start telling the truth,” he said. “Number one, you take all the troops out — you better have helicopters ready to take those 3,000 civilians inside the Green Zone, where I have been seven times and shot at. You better make sure you have protection for them, or let them die, number one.”
He later told The Hill newspaper that a more accurate comment would have been, "I was near where a shot landed."
This morning, John McCain's campaign sent out a statement from Michael J. Durant, the Army helicopter pilot shot down and held captive in Somalia in 1993.
"Senator Biden claimed at a debate last year that he'd been 'shot at' while visiting Iraq. And he has claimed repeatedly, most recently last week, that his helicopter was 'forced down' in Afghanistan -- leaving his audience with the impression that it was fire from the Taliban which had grounded the aircraft. Neither of these stories appears to be true, and Senator Biden has never accounted for the discrepancies," Durant says in the statement.
"I've been on a helicopter that was 'forced down' by enemy fire, and I've been 'shot at.' Neither is easily confused with being caught in a snow storm or awakened by a loud bang in the night. Senator Biden has a responsibility to come clean on what actually happened, and explain why he would ever say such things to the American people. And with the Vice Presidential Debate coming up on Thursday, it is incumbent on the news media to ask Senator Biden the tough questions -- as they have so far failed to do -- and examine his responses closely for inconsistencies of the kind we've witnessed in recent months."
Republicans are comparing Biden's claims to Hillary Clinton falsely claiming that she landed under sniper fire during a humanitarian visit to Bosnia as first lady. Confronted with video footage contradicting her account, she acknowledged she misspoke, but the episode hurt her credibility.
This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.
Send your comments to masspolitics@globe.com
I'm sorry how is that a "reversal?"
51% thought she was qualified = 49% thought she was not.
Now 52% think she is not qualified = 48% think she is.
With the typical margin of error of +/- 3%, this is actually NO CHANGE WHATSOEVER!!!!
Stupid deputy national political editor.
Reminds me of the Letterman joke:
"Ladies and Gentleman, a new study has come out...it found out that 3/4 of the people make up 75% of the population!@
So is there footage discounting Biden's claims?
Bob -
The way I read the poll, the options were qualified, unqualified or don't know. On September 5-8 the results were 52% qualified, 39% unqualified, 9% don't know. Now the results are 37% qualified, 51% unqualified, 12% don't know. My read is that this represents a 15% drop in the qualified rating and a 14% rise in the unqualified rating, well outside the margin of error. Does your comment account for the undecided option?
No video, just eye witness acounts from everyone else who was there.
Why has the Globe not mentioned the obvious bias that the VP Debate Moderator has, given that she has written a 'pro-Obama' book, on which she has royalties and advances, and which is scheduled to be released on Inauguration Day? How can this in any way be seen as impartial?
Bob,
You need to look at the original source, not just a summary in an article. Before 52% thought she was qualified, 39% thought she was not, and 9% were not sure. Now 37% think she is qualifed, 51% think she is not, and 12% are not sure. So 15% have changed their minds from thinking she is qualified to thinking she is not or they are no longer sure.
I am more interested to see what people think after the debate.
Bob, the story did not account for those who had "no opinion"
Just because 51% of respondents say they feel the candidate is qualified does not automatically mean the other 49% say that they aren't. A significant portion will have no opinion.
"I'm sorry how is that a "reversal?"
51% thought she was qualified = 49% thought she was not.
Now 52% think she is not qualified = 48% think she is.
With the typical margin of error of +/- 3%, this is actually NO CHANGE WHATSOEVER!!!!
Stupid deputy national political editor."
Sorry to break it to you Bob, but the polls don't say "49% thought she was not". And usually there is a third category for those undecided. If you take that into account, then most likely MORE people now think she IS unqualified.
Is that ridiculous outdoor practice setting to remind her that she can go to her "happy place" while she's debating tomorrow night?
Hey genius
Just because an earlier poll said 51 percent thought she was qualified, that doesn't mean that all of the other 49 percent thought she wasn't..
Most polls have more than two options, like "I don't know" or "not sure" or "no opinion" or "undecided." I'm sure quite a few voters fell into this later category, as Palin was largely unknown outside of Alaska before her nomination..
Why are they splitting hairs over Biden's claims whereas Palin makes dumb remarks like she has foreign policy experience because Russia is near Alaska. I suppose you can't get to the nitty gritty with Palin because there simply is nothing there.
I also totally agree with the first post, from Bob. Please define a reversal. Honestly, the media thinks we're all really really really stupid.
Is the debate outside by a pond?
The actual poll shows how the public has lost confidence in Sarah Palin; but you'd never know it from reading what is written here. This is what is on the Pew website:
The question was: "Is Sarah Palin qualified to serve as president?
On the previous poll the response was: Yes 52%; No 39%; Don't Know 9%
On the current poll: Yes 37%; No 51%; Don't Know 12%
About half the public used to think Palin was qualified; now only 37% do, while 63% think she isn't qualified, or have doubts. This is a significant loss of confidence. As Bob pointed out, this post does a poor job presenting the poll's result.
Click the link in the article and check for yourself.
I am looking forward to the VP Debate on Thursday.
I want to see how they handle each situation. I am still not
sure which way I will vote. I am no fan of Obama, but Palin
is too unknown for me to have confidence in her as "a heartbeat
way". I will watch with great interest.
Joe Biden left the presidential race 20 years ago for lying to the public. He either lies a lot or is just ignorant. How about FDR Joe?
Bob, not everyone has made up their mind about Palin. In fact, more people (12%) are unsure about her now than they were 3 weeks ago (9%).
If you actually bothered to look at the poll (merely a click away as the link is in the article), you'd see that the poll numbers have indeed reversed, from 52%-39% to 37%-51%.
The 52% qualified -> 51% not qualified could reflect a larger swing if there was a significant population that had no opinion on either or both polls.
Bob - They didn't mention the "undecided" or "unsure" percentage. It's likely not 51/49. (For example, the breakdown might hypothetically be: 51% qualified, 40% unqualified, 9% unsure)
Can anybody explain why this newspaper doesn't even have one single mention of the "Ifill-gate" scandal that is being reported everywhere else? How can Gwen Ifill, who is coming out with a book about Obama on innauguration day, be allowed to be the moderator of the single VP debate?
I hope America wakes up in time!
Bob,
You should read the results which are linked in the article. People can answer "Don't know", so the initial poll resulted in 52% saying she was qualified and 39% saying she wasn't. The latest poll has 37% saying she is qualified and 51% saying she isn't. "Reversal" is an accurate description.
Actually, if you clicked on the link, you would have found the numbers that show the remarkable shift. In the beginning of September, 52% of those polled thought she was qualified, 39% thought not, and 9% were undecided. In the more recent poll, 37% thought she was qualified, 51% thought not, and 12% were undecided.
So in three weeks, 15% fewer people think she is qualified Of those, 12% think she is unqualified and 3% have become unsure.
That's a reversal.
51% thinking she was qualified does NOT automatically mean 49% thought she wasn't. It could be, for example, 35% thought she wasn't, 14% had no opinion. In a case like this, going from 35% who thought she wasn't qualified to 52% would be a big change.
Bob, here's some basic math. It wasn't a boolean question.
from the actual report: (linked in the Article)
Is palin qualified?
Sept 5 th Yes 52% No 39% I dont know 9%
Sept 27th Yes 37% No 51% I dont know 12%
That looks likes an absolute reversal to me.
Not to be too much an apologist, but do Biden's claims have ANY bearing on the debate, or his qualifications as a VP?
Bob,
You are not considering the "undecided" voters. If 52% believe that Palin is not qualified, it does not mean that 48% do.
Bob -
You forgot to take into account the undecided vote. 52% of people thinking someone is qualified doesn't mean 48% don't. If you click on the link the article provided, you will see it broke down as 52% Yes, 39% No, 9% Don't know = 100%.
The fact that her current disapproval rating is so much higher means that voters are now informed and have decided they don't approve, which is very damaging.
Stupid stats. So what you are saying is that her percentage numbers really haven`t changed since the RNC?? So what is your point?
As an independent, I always find it funny that partisan opinion tends to overlook weaknesses it doesn't want to see. Personally, I am just as concerned about Biden's FDR/depression comment as I am about Palin's Alaska/Russian argument. Just start with the assumption that any politician who reaches this level exaggerates, obfuscates and probably outright lies. Party lines are of no relevance. Listen to what they say, what they believe and go from there. They are really just opposite sides of the same coin. So take your pick... heads or tails.
I wonder if the fishing is good in that pond?
Any thoughts Bob, I bet 51% of the fisherman polled agree.
I wouldn't believe anything the McCain campaign said about Joe unless I had heard it or seen it written, verbatim, by a reliable source. As far as I know his helicopter was forced down in Afghanistan due to the weather and there was a shot or shots fired when he was in the green zone - a far cry from out & out fabrication or ignorance of issues. They all stretch the thruth as far as they can get away with. That is the nature of politics.
Obama is scary. He is a marketing stick figure and nothing more. He doesn't offer any "change" just more of the same old tired left wing liberal looniness we have seen for decades. It's the same ideolgy that puts violent criminals back out on our streets, calls for the redistribution of wealth, gets us into a financial fiasco by making Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac give politically correct loans to people who they knew would eventually not be able to pay them back.
But all of the above goes over well in the People's Republic of Massachusetts.
I wish John McCain would take off the gloves and lay blame for this financial crisis right where it belongs. The proof is right there. From audio sound bites of Democrats in 2004 at a hearing about Fanny and Freddie saying that it was a political lynching and there was no crisis, to actual video of them saying the same things on videos from C-Span. They wouldn't dare admit that Fanny and Freddie, and that scumbag Franklin Raines, were corrupt, and by doing so, cut off giving loans to minorities and low income people who would wind up defaulting on those loans.
Let's face it, Obama and his marketing machine will win this election. But I really don't mind. It will be fun watching his administration look like re-runs of The 3 Stooges.
What is with the Bob-bashing? Why does Bob need to look at the stats?? The article is poorly written, someone should look at that...I had the same take Bob had.
God help me through this election in this pro-Obama town.
Having just returned from Sedona after a first-time visit, I can only say that Sarah is going to need all the good vibes from those red rocks that she can get! I doubt any amount of prepping can provide her with the basic level of knowledge on domestic and foreign affairs she so obviously doesn't possess after watching her debacle with Katie Couric.
39% of polls are wrong ...just ask anyone
JustSayNobama, I couldn't have said it better myself!! Although you left out the 4th Stooge, Barney Frank....we're in this Financial mess because of exactly what you said, politically correct loans and all of these
And I love all those that say Palin couldn't be President, we're not electing her President....you'd be ELECTING a President (Obama) with No Experience.
Enough with the poll numbers! The polls are not written in stone kind of numbers, thats why they use percentages. In order to really say the numbers have changed you have to talk to the same people you did on the previous poll. The numbers are averages - expectations. Now for Gwen beign the moderator: she will NOT be judging a constest, or selecting the VP, she is merely there to read questions and keep the order when Palin talks giberish or Biden goes off on his own little rampage. Who cares if she is writing a book on Obama, Bush, Mc Cain ro MIckey Mouse! SHe is there to moderate!
In all honesty ~ Who does have the background on foreign affairs to be the next Vice President, and if needed, take over as the President of the United States?
Generally my concern would be placed in knowledge and understanding of the job.
I would not want to see anymore cocksure decisions made, we are in a mess due to some pretty damn self righteous choices that have been made in this country's behalf, and the next President and VP will need to regain a solid foot hold on foreign affairs.
Can anyone really imagine Palin with nuclear codes in her hands? She would mix them up with her cue cards and/or her private email account. Somebody tell me why it took her FIVE colleges in SIX years to get her BA? She doesn't read or study anything beyond her horizon out to Russia. Don't confuse "perkiness" with being presidential. We don't need another "no brains and all braun" in the White House or anywhere near it. I never read anyone defending Bush's performance these days. Why not?
Palin was a gimmick from the get-go. McCain was desperate and his Rovian advisors (Davis and Schmidt) operate the same way Bush hammered McCain in 2000. McCain feels like he's entitled to be president. And now he's grouchy and soooo out-of-touch. A change will do us good!
I can see the SNL skit this week . . . Plain (Fey) sitting on McCain's lap as the dummy and ventriloquist as per their interview with Curic. "Aren't I cute?" "Isn't she cute?"
Now lets see what happens
Google Al gore Jeff Fisher HBO RECOUNT
I'm sure Palin will do well among mouthbreathers who think Fannie and Freddie caused the financial meltdown. They couldn't tell a fact from a Chick-a-Fila sandwich, plus they'll all be staring at her chest.
Biden's gaffes in the Globe slideshow were seriously overblown. Saying you were shot at, when you "should" have said that a bullet landed near where you were standing, isn't a gaffe. But the press wants to play even-handed.
Even so, there's a big difference between making gaffes (Biden) and proving yourself a complete and utter idiot with every single unscripted word that comes out of your mouth (Caribou Barbie).