Joe Biden's Challenge on Thursday's VP Debate

In this interview, Andrew Halcro, former Alaska state representative and gubenatorial candidate, has the following to say of what it's like to debate with Sarah Palin.

On April 18, 2006, Palin and I sat together in a hotel coffee shop comparing campaign trail notes. As we talked about the debates, Palin made a comment that highlights the phenomenon that Biden is up against.

"Andrew, I watch you at these debates with no notes, no papers, and yet when asked questions, you spout off facts, figures, and policies, and I'm amazed. But then I look out into the audience and I ask myself, 'Does any of this really matter?' " Palin said.

While policy wonks such as Biden might cringe, it seemed to me that Palin was simply vocalizing her strength without realizing it. During the campaign, Palin's knowledge on public policy issues never matured – because it didn't have to. Her ability to fill the debate halls with her presence and her gift of the glittering generality made it possible for her to rely on populism instead of policy.

Palin is a master of the nonanswer. She can turn a 60-second response to a query about her specific solutions to healthcare challenges into a folksy story about how she's met people on the campaign trail who face healthcare challenges. All without uttering a word about her public-policy solutions to healthcare challenges.

In one debate, a moderator asked the candidates to name a bill the legislature had recently passed that we didn't like. I named one. Democratic candidate Tony Knowles named one. But Sarah Palin instead used her allotted time to criticize the incumbent governor, Frank Murkowski. Asked to name a bill we did like, the same pattern emerged: Palin didn't name a bill.

And when she does answer the actual question asked, she has a canny ability to connect with the audience on a personal level. For example, asked to name a major issue that had been ignored during the campaign, I discussed the health of local communities, Mr. Knowles talked about affordable healthcare, and Palin talked about ... the need to protect hunting and fishing rights.

This is exactly what McCain was counting on when he picked Palin as his running mate. He was counting on her ability to connect with the general American public. He was counting on us to feel that she is somehow just like us.

Below is another example of how Andrew Halcro's analysis is evident in her response to Couric's question.

Palin on Supreme Court Decisions

In yet another interview with Katie Couric, Palin demonstrates her lack of familiarity with Supreme Court decisions and the basis for those decisions. Many critics have focused on her inability to name a Supreme Court decision she disagreed with other than Roe v. Wade but I'd like to highlight two other observations I made from the interview.

1) She either doesn't understand the Roe v. Wade decision or else she doesn't understand the possible implications of a Constitutional right to privacy.

She indicated that she believes in an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution but insists that she disagrees with Roe v. Wade. The decision in Roe v. Wade was based on the right to privacy as interpreted from the 14th amendment. The fact that she fails to offer an explanation of why a right to privacy should not be applicable in the Roe v. Wade decision indicates that either she does not understand the underlying arguments of Roe v. Wade or she has not thought about the far-reaching implications of an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution.

2) She does not believe that she would have influence to overturn Roe v. Wade if she were to become Vice President.

In making the following statement to Couric regarding Supreme Court decisions with she disagrees, Palin's position on her ability to overturn such cases is clear.

She says, "But, you know, as a mayor, and then as a governor and even as a vice president, if I’m so privileged to serve, wouldn’t be in a position of changing those things but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today."

Biden's Response to First Presidential Debate

Palin's staff did not agree to an interview regarding her response to the debate so her reactions are not currently available for comparison.

Analysis of First Presidential Debates

On Saturday, Time Magazine had the following to say about John McCain and Barack Obama's performances in the first presidential debate of the 2008 election.

Letter grading aside, I agree with Mark Halperin's analysis (and brief summary) of each candidate's substance, style, and overall performance.

I don't think either candidate particularly outshone the other but the intended topic of the debate, foreign policy, is widely heralded as McCain's strength, and an area in which his experience far exceeds that of Obama's. I don't think that McCain effectively demonstrated superior command of foreign policy issues while Obama's preparation and grasp of the issues was clear. I don't think the debate altered much in public opinion regarding McCain but it gave Obama the opportunity to prove to the public that he does understand foreign policy issues, and that he is not as inexperienced or incapable of leading as Republicans have been attempting to depict him.

McCain's VP Pick was Irresponsible

CNN's foreign affairs analyst, Fareed Zakaria, writes of McCain's decision to pick Palin as his running mate, "...I say this with sadness because I greatly admire John McCain, a man of intelligence, honor and enormous personal and political courage. However, for him to choose Sara Palin to be his running mate is fundamentally irresponsible. He did not put the country first with this decision. Whether it is appropriate or not, considering Sen. McCain's age most people expected to have a vice presidential candidate who would be ready to step in at a moment's notice. The actuarial odds of that happening are significant, something like a one-in-five chance."

Read the rest of his interview with CNN regarding his commentary in Newsweek here.

Out of Her League

In this article from The Caucus, Kate Phillips summarizes what I think many have been thinking about Palin this past week.

She writes, 'So, does Governor Palin have it? Mr. Brooks wrote: “Sarah Palin has many virtues. If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she’d be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness.”'

The Real Question About Palin

Many of the opinions I've heard about Palin seem to focus on how she's very likable, very down to earth, easy to identify with, and takes a stand on her beliefs. These are all wonderful things but they're not sufficient in determining the real question at stake: Is she an appropriate candidate for Vice President of the United States?

Lawrence Lessig does a great job of respectfully and thoughtfully comparing Palin's experience to that of former vice presidents of the US, and detailing why we should care about her experience in this video.