Live from the St. Louis Athletic Complex at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, the one and only vice presidential debate between Sen. Joe Biden from Delaware and Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska. The debate tips off at 9:00 pm (EST) and will be moderated by Gwen Ifill of PBS.
This will be the fifth consecutive presidential election cycle that Washington University will play host to the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). With such a commitment to debate, one wonders why they don't have an intercollegiate policy debate team!
Below the fold, join me for a few thoughts on what to look for.
Gaffes in political debates are no longer local, can go viral when picked up by national outlets. TPM Election Central's mention of a NM House debate this morning is an example. Eric Kleefeld observes:
Wow, talk about taking right-wing attacks against Dems on Iraq to the next level. At a debate in New Mexico for the open GOP-held Second District late last week, Republican nominee Ed Tinsley accused his Dem opponent Harry Teague of wanting to cut the throats of American troops in Iraq.
Gaffes have legs when they fit with some external narrative (see earlier post analyzing gaffes). This is a gaffe for Mr. Kleefeld , I assume, because the "right wing" is mean spirited, willing to stoop ever so low.
Listening to the video I struck that in the debate context the "mistake" is less obvious than "reported," more in keeping with the heat of elections and debates. I don't expect this debate excerpt will gain traction, yet it highlights that in a world without gatekeepers, YouTube, and local media sponsors of debates (who make video available), most all political debates become fair game: Any debate, Anywhere, Anytime.
Las Vegas Review Journal Despite candidate and campaign handlers best efforts most every political debate contain many potential gaffes. Most "slips of the tongue" never become egregious--the folklore of a given campaign--rather they simply disappear into the background.
Everyone remembers President Ford's failure to acknowledge Russian influence in Poland, VP candidate Benson reminding Dan Quayle that he was "not Jack Kennedy" and Al Gore's Boston sighs. In this election cycle, George Allen's (Sen-VA) reticence regarding his maternal linage (Jewish Grandparents) qualifies as a gaff that alters the course of a campaign. For every gaff that has post-debate-media-legs there are dozens that do not draw even a mention. Why is it that some gaffes resonate and others evaporate?
My answer has little to do with the actual mistake and everything to do with how the "blunder" fits within the prevailing narratives that define an election. What candidate's say and do have meaning in a context and that context is often defined by media coverage or explicit or implicit standards of the candidates own making.
