Vice Presidential Debate: My Assessment
After listening to tonight’s Vice Presidential, one thing is clear: both current Vice President Joe Biden (D) and United States Representative Paul Ryan (R), who is the Republican Vice Presidential nominee, are thoughtful and articulate individuals.
However, everything else depends on context, to wit:
1) Did you expect Biden to lay an egg? If so, Biden is your clear winner because he didn’t do this.
2) Did you expect Ryan to lay an egg? If so, Ryan is your clear winner, because he also didn’t do this.
Or to put it another way — if you were expecting a game-changer, you didn’t get it. Instead, you got two impassioned individuals who are well-versed in both domestic and foreign policy (Ryan was surprisingly well-versed; I know Ryan well as he’s my U.S. Rep.) and managed to make most of their points.
Since I wasn’t really expecting much from either candidate, I was pleasantly surprised with both.
Pluses for Biden: he was much more articulate and much more forceful in this debate than he was in 2008 against Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska.
Minus for Biden: he interrupted Ryan. (A lot.)
Bottom line for Biden: he made the points he wanted to make. And of course Biden sounded like he could do the job of President, should it ever fall to him, as Biden sounded much better in this debate than President Obama did last week.
Pluses for Ryan: he sounded like he knew what he was talking about, and sounded like he’d make a good Vice President. That he also sounded like he’d be a loyal lieutenant for Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney was a bonus, especially due to past media coverage that had depicted a strain between Romney and Ryan. Best of all for Ryan, he seemed like he’d be capable and confident if he ever had to step in to the job of President.
Minuses for Ryan: he didn’t have the specifics he needed regarding the new health care plan (“Obamacare”) and he also didn’t have the specifics regarding Romney’s proposed tax plan, which purports to cut most loopholes yet raise more money. This seems like a logical impossibility on its face, and Ryan certainly wasn’t able to make it sound any better. And he, too, interrupted Biden — a lot.
Bottom line for Ryan: he did well, and made the points he wanted to make. But for a policy wonk like Ryan to not be able to make numerical points is a bit troubling, as that’s something Ryan should know in his sleep as he’s on the House Ways and Means Committee (and has been for over ten years).
My view: Biden stayed more on point despite having less time to make his points (as Ryan tended to give lengthy answers). And as I had half-expected Biden to lay a huge egg — as Biden can be scattershot in his approach, which doesn’t always lend itself to either interviews or debates — I have to admit that I found Biden’s poise and confidence to be quite refreshing.
My debate grades:
Joe Biden: A-minus.
Paul Ryan: B.
Which means the advantage goes to Joe Biden . . . who’d have thunk it? (Probably not me, even though on balance I like Biden despite his scattershot approach — or maybe because of it.)
Barb Caffrey's Blog 
I cannot agree with your assessment of the VP debate.
I agree with Matt Taibbi who wrote this column: “Joe Biden Was Right to Laugh”
at: http://tinyurl.com/98tybl6
“The load of balls that both Romney and Ryan have been pushing out there for this whole election season is simply not intellectually serious. Most of their platform isn’t even a real platform, it’s a fourth-rate parlor trick designed to paper over the real agenda – cutting taxes even more for super-rich d__kheads like Mitt Romney, and getting everyone else to pay the bill.”
And I agree with Charles Pierce who wrote: “The Real Paul Ryan Is Bad for America”
at: http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/paul-ryan-debate-joe-biden-13626962
“There is a deeply held Beltway myth of Paul Ryan, Man of Big Ideas, and it dies hard. But, if there is a just god in the universe, on Thursday night, it died a bloody death, was hurled into a pit, doused with quicklime, buried without ceremony, and the ground above it salted and strewn with garlic so that it never rises again.”
Chris
October 12, 2012 at 4:29 pm
Chris, thanks for your comment and for pointing me to these articles. When I wrote my assessment, I’d just heard both men speak. I like Biden a whole lot better and believe he’s far more substantial — and substantive — person than Paul Ryan. (Ryan’s my US Rep. I don’t like his politics and I don’t care for him. I tend to think he’s hypocritical, at best. I’ve said this before in my blog, too . . . perhaps I went too far in the other direction with my assessment as I was trying to see his discussion as someone who doesn’t know him quite so well would.)
I will read those articles and maybe I’ll come up with a new blog. But I can tell you this; much of what Paul Ryan said last night, I didn’t agree with or like very much. My “B” grade was more for how he appeared (or sounded, in this case, as I always listen to debates rather than watch them), and how he was able to maintain his poise.
I’ve heard Ryan debate before, you see, and I know this was probably the best debate performance of Ryan’s adult life. Thus the “B” grade.
Barb Caffrey
October 12, 2012 at 10:05 pm
As for Paul Ryan’s truthfulness or accuracy —
“At the Vice Presidential Debate: Ryan Told 24 Myths in 40 Minutes”
http://truth-out.org/news/item/12076-at-the-vice-presidential-debate-ryan-told-24-myths-in-40-minutes
Chris
October 13, 2012 at 7:40 am
Thanks for the synopsis. I’d missed the debate, and didn’t think Ryan could keep up. I guess he’s smarter than he looks.
likamarie
October 13, 2012 at 11:07 pm
I suppose, Lika, though Chris’s points are well taken, too. Ryan did his best bob-and-weave act and didn’t have hard numbers for the most part; what numbers he did have appear mostly to have been wrong.
My grade, though, was on style rather than substance. I felt Ryan had the right style and gave him credit for that. And some of what Ryan said (such as on the Libyan Embassy issue) was truthful. (Biden did not give an acceptable answer there, really, unless you believe that Biden himself didn’t know that all these folks in the State Department were asking for more money for protection. There were a few in the State Dept. who didn’t want more protection from our side, wanting instead to get our Libyan allies more engaged and focused. But many people seem to have wanted more money — better funding, in short — for more protection, and didn’t get it. I think that was Mrs. Clinton’s perspective, too — she asked for more money for the embassies in general two years ago if I remember right, and of course didn’t get it.
(The Rs try to play both ends against the middle that way, you see. On one hand, they’re afraid of the debt so they don’t want to spend money even to give enough protection to Ambassadors and their assistants in dangerous areas of the world. But then when a problem blows up, they can claim the Ds are soft on defense because the money didn’t get sent to Libya and such places for better protection, even though much of the fault was due to the recalcitrant Rs in the first place.)
BTW, I’m also going to answer Chris here as WordPress has glitched again — here’s my answer to his above post (regarding the Truth Out link):
Why am I unsurprised? But I do appreciate you pointing me to this article . . . as I said before, I really don’t like Paul Ryan, don’t like his politics or his policies, and have been upset with him for well over a year due to his backing of Scott Walker and Act 10 (which has been overturned, for the most part, by a judge). I didn’t like him before that, either, but at least before he backed Walker and Act 10, I didn’t see Ryan as a hypocrite.
Now I do.
Barb Caffrey
October 13, 2012 at 11:37 pm
Maybe Ryan can claim his fame by saying he is a verbal boxer?
likamarie
November 4, 2012 at 1:50 am