PeterDavid.net

Let's hope the expectations haven't been lowered quite that far, but you might be right.

I do wish the debate format hadn't been altered; it would have been nice to see them question one another.

The other thing Palin has going for her is that, quite simply, she's a woman. She can attack Biden all she wants with no problem. If he strongly goes on the offensive against her, he flirts with being seen as a brute and a bully.

Don't believe me? In movies, if a woman slaps a man, she's standing up to him. If a man slaps a woman, he's being abusive.

Even Hillary, who is seen as being--for want of a better term--more "mannish" in her bearing and wardrobe, still benefits from that. When she debated Rick Lazio for the Senate seat eight years ago, he marched across the stage and tried to get her to sign a pledge. It was widely decried as being threatening and domineering. And that was with Hillary. Coming across as being threatening in ANY manner to Palin would read like clubbing a baby seal courtesy of her aw-shucks demeanor. So not only does the lowered bar favor Palin, but Biden's Y chromosome is a definite hindrance.

PAD

As long as Gwen Ifill keeps pressing Palin to provide specifics, Biden won't come across as a bully. Biden will need to press as well, after he provides specifics.

Besides, if Palin can't handle a light-weight such as Katie Couric (!), she has no business debating.

How she'll handle Gwen Ifill on specifics:

"Gwen, that's a got'cha question. You guys, you're so into that, those got'chas, trying to trip us up. And we're human, we'll make mistakes. And I could throw got'chas right back at you. Y'know, ask you about your book about Obama that'll sell lots better if he's elected. But are people really interested in got'chas that you media people cook up? Lists of this, that and the other thing? Or are they interested in people who understand their problems and want to make their lives better once we get to Washington? The only specifics that real folks care about are the specifics of their own lives, and we're going to make those lives better, me and Senator McCain, once we're in the White House."

I think that Biden should do the exact opposite of what everybody is telling him.

I think he should hammer Palin with questions, and demand factual answers, not platitudes, really reduce her to tears. Not because she's female, but because she's just criminally un prepared. then when she's blubbering in the background, turn to the camera and say to the audience at home something like "If she can't take this treatment from me, how do you expect her to stand up to..(and then go thru the long list of serious issues that she would have to face) .. if her ticket was to be elected?"

Biden would get ripped for it in the press, but i think a great number of folks would thank him for exposing her before it was truely too late.

The expectations on Palin are definitely kept at a criminally low standard.

Also, can I just say that, as a woman, I find it rather offensive that the bar is set so low for her? Surely we can do better in female politicians than...that. Oh, wait. We do.

Wait: change that to "incredibly offensive."

Meanwhile, Biden seems to be aware of the danger in coming across too aggressively with an opponent. He's spoken of how he low-balled it with an incumbent opponent decades ago by appearing ignorant, and how that was the smart thing to do because no one wanted to see that incumbent embarrassed. However, he also remarked that now, in the same situation he'd probably flatten the guy with facts, and that would not be such a smart thing to do.

Which suggests that Biden is aware of how he should play it with Palin if he doesn't want to be seen as a rude old man steamrolling a "pretty lady," but the question is whether he can rein in his natural disposition long enough to make Palin look inappropriately ignorant rather than bullied.

But that said? I hope he doesn't rein himself in with her. Let her have it with both barrels, Joe! Get her!

To paraphrase Amy Poehler: the media can grow a pair, and, if they can't do that, borrow Hillary's.

The Christian Science Monitor did an article with one of Palin's gubernatorial competitors. His account of how their debates unfolded -- which he portrayed Palin as agreeing with when they compared their experiences -- was that he showed up with no notes, was able to amaze her by rattling off facts and figures, and she simply turned around and talked about how Alaskans want expanded hunting and fishing rights. The newspapers weighed their performances the same.

The McCain/Obama debate split evenly among men, but split 2:1 among women in favor of Obama, because they saw McCain as the kind of guy they would divorce at the first opportunity. And if women want to create an intolerance for that kind of hostility, more power to them. If Biden starts to show off, or gives a reply resembling "You're no Jack Kennedy," then he trades away Obama's advantage for hunting for a kill his debate with Palin. If not going for a kill served Obama so well, Biden should definitely also avoid it.

I don't care if Biden comes across as a Bully, or the Moderator comes off as being one sided, Sarah "Wilma Flintstone" Palin needs to be shown for the vapid Bimbo that she is. I'm so fed up with people feeling the need to hold back, now is the time to show that a possible leader in the fricken United States SHOULD NOT BE JOE 6-PACK!!! We need the best and brightest in these high positions of Goverment, quick decisive thinkers, not a hot but witless contestant on American Idol. Obama is where he is because he had the intelligence and drive to be a President of the United States. Biden has payed his dues and has this Foreign policy experience everyone says Obama lacks. Also, the guy is a smartass. But back to Palin, I do not want some Religious flake who supports Slaughtering endangered species from Airplanes with high powered rifles, does not believe man caused global warming, and best of all believes Humans and Dinosaurs walked together and that the Universe (planets and galaxies included) are under a million years old. Hell no!! And anyone (like the average 20% of "Duuurrr" Americans in these polls) who supports this type of person, even as a "joke", needs to be soundly beaten with a sack of yams.

Peter,

You may well be right that she's memorized that speech for a reply to Ifill. But all Ifill has to do is ask Biden for specifics first, have him fill in any blanks, and Palin comes off like, well, herself.

I think it would be a hoot if Biden cancelled, and Palin had to debate herself. I'm confident she would still blow it.

--Ed

Here is an essay on Palin which I enjoy:

http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/09/30/palin_pity/index.html

He's spoken of how he low-balled it with an incumbent opponent decades ago by appearing ignorant, and how that was the smart thing to do because no one wanted to see that incumbent embarrassed. However, he also remarked that now, in the same situation he'd probably flatten the guy with facts, and that would not be such a smart thing to do.

yeah, that's Joe. He says dumb things. Look at that statement--"I looked like a dope but it was actually a strategy on my part! But now I'd unload the full power of my Doc Savage-like protean intellect on him, if I had another chance!"

Even if that were true, why would you admit to it? It doesn't make you look smarter.

Palin has every advantage tonight. Ifill has a minor conflict of interest, at least enough that it would have been wise to pick someone else. She may feel obligated to take it easy on her. If not Palin may get sympathy votes, even if Ifill is totally fair.

I've always believed that it's dumb to portray your debate opponent as an idiot--you get no points for beating an idiot and if they win, well, you just got beaten by an idiot. What does that make you?

Palin's problem is that the debate is a referendum on her. Making Biden look bad won't be enough. She can't possibly prepare for every possible question. As a senator Biden has had to at least think about positions on everything--there is probably no answer that he will have to say "I don't know to." Palin--and most governors, probably--haven't had to do that. If she keeps saying she's not sure--she's dead. If she tries to bluff her way through a question and it becomes obvious she's doing that--she's deader.

Unless Biden follows Lou's incredibly bad advice--no offense, Lou--and comes off as a bully and a douchbag, I can't see her winning. If he does and she holds her own--she wins. A few weeks ago it might have made sense to go after her but not now. Look how badly Obama got treated for just telling Hillary she was "likable enough". Pad has it right, do NOT underestimate the anger women can get over the perception that a man is treating another woman badly.

Another thing, I find most average women find Palin appalling, especially if they know anything about her personal beliefs. But it makes me so sooo angry to hear men say crap like "I'd vote for cause she Hot". This is not American Idol, this woman who doesn't even seem to have a grasp of her new job and her responsibilities and powers as a state Governor is paired with the oldest possible president. Hence a literal Heartbeat or half eaten Pretzel away from being in the commander in chiefs chair. And she cant even mention a Supreme Court case outside of Rowe vs. Wade, including the recent Exxon case she was "qouted" as saying she disagreed with that lowered the rewards for the Valdeez oil spill. Why would people be willing to promote someone who has that lack of ability. Oh yeah, because 25% of Americans apparently have to fight the urge to handle their stool after they pass it in a toilet or their living room rug. Remember Mike Judges Idiocracy? This is a step toward that kind of reality.

How people are polled on this debate might be the most telling indicator of how the average American voter thinks that we'll ever get (if you buy into polling).

This is with the expectation that Palin will simply repeat her performance with Couric. Except, that wasn't a performance; the real Sarah Palin doesn't appear to know jack from squat, even after having gone through GOP "boot camp" for the last several weeks.

And that's downright sad and disturbing.

When she debated Rick Lazio for the Senate seat eight years ago, he marched across the stage and tried to get her to sign a pledge. It was widely decried as being threatening and domineering. And that was with Hillary. Coming across as being threatening in ANY manner to Palin would read like clubbing a baby seal courtesy of her aw-shucks demeanor.

To be fair to the chicks, that doesn't seem to be how guys treat each other, even if the lawyer in his first political campaign is male. That kind of confrontation does seem kind of patronizing. Challenges to Hillary like that are what political ads are for, not for opportunities to charge her and pressure her to do something. If that kind of hijinx creates a hostile environment for women to run, I'm not sure why they shouldn't vote against it.

Even if that were true, why would you admit to it? It doesn't make you look smarter.

Honest + it_works = Smarter

Joe's free and freaky and having fun -- it makes him look like a ninja next to Palin.

One thing I thought Biden said a week or so ago was a terrific expectation-setter in and of itself. He said something to the effect of "look, I've debated very intelligent women in the Senate for years. I've debated Dianne Feinstein, Hillary Clinton, Susan Collins. For me to treat Gov. Palin any differently would really be doing her a disservice."

Game on, Joe.

And the Supreme Court non-answer alluded to above was terrifying. In the time it took for Palin to give her non-answer, I had at least four cases I disagreed with ready to list -- and no, I hadn't prepped in advance. Even if she didn't know the names of the cases, at least the TOPIC would have worked. But for someone aspiring to executive office and allegedly going after a "liberal" Supreme court to not even know what the heck they've done is just laughably bad.

TWL

Palin won't be reduced to tears. She's done debates before and she knows how to dance around questions she doesn't like.

Here's how Palin answers any question she doesn't know the answer to. It's a three step process.

Question: What magazines do you read?

1) Vagueness: I've read most of them...

2) Generic Patriotic sloganeering: ...with a great appreciation for the press, for the media...

3) Ramble until she can twist the question into an attack on her core values: Alaska isn't a foreign country! It's kinda suggested, it seems like, "Wow, how could you keep in touch with the rest of... Washington DC may be thinking and doing while you live up there in Alaska!" Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America.

She's fallen back on this process of twisting the question on the question about Supreme Court cases and in the Gubernatorial debates. She's a fountain of vagueness and loves to turn things into a subtle insult against the other person.

Stylistically, she'll be much better in the debate tonight than she was in the Couric interviews. Her past debate performances show that she can address the camera directly very well. She can focus a lot better than when she has to talk to a person instead of an audience.

Palin's potential problem is that she'll have to rely on talking points and her three step twist technique much too often. In the Alaskan debates, she actually knew something about a few of the issues. Stalling tactics on questions you don't know work fine when you can actually say something good occasionally. If she has to dance around every single question tonight, that's going to get old over an hour and a half.

My advice to Biden would be to resist his natural urge to talk. Palin gets in trouble when she has time to ramble, that's why the McCain campaign wanted the answer time shortened. If Biden gives her enough time to talk, she'll dig herself into the same holes we saw in her interviews.

Ok, I've dialed it back a bit...

I do agree with the "game On" sentiment, however

It's just that I keep picturing her at the "Bridge of Death"

Bridgekeeper - "What is your quest?"
Palin - "To be Vice President"

Bridgekeeper - "what is your favorite color?"
Palin - "Well, Republican Red, Silly"

Bridgekeeper - "what magazines do you read?"
Palin - "oh, you know, all of them...AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!

Debate over

Let's say Person A debates Person B. Person A is an a**. Person B prepares for the debate, strongly makes good points, clearly shows that Person A doesn't know what s/he is doing, and Person B wins the debate by such a margin that Person A is reduced to a blubbering mess.

In the aftermath, many people thing Person B is a jerk for being so good at debating compared to Person A, so many think this that much sympathy is given to Person A.

Person A in this case might be Sarah Palin. The stmpathy she gets might mean more votes for her.

=====

Btw, the debaters in my scenario were Todd McFarlane as Person A, the esteemed Peter David as Person B. Hulk crush Spawn.

And don't forget that some people accused George Perez, who moderated that debate, of being biased because he did up a drawing of the Hulk putting Spawn through a wall, even though Todd handpicked George and even though no one could find a single instance of George doing anything during the debate that smacked the least little bit of preferential treatment.

If Palin comes across looking like a fool, you can bet the GOP spin will be that Gwen Ifill was motivated by her immense bias to try and make Ifill look foolish.

PAD

PAD

The funny thing is, Palin could have a great night and it still wouldn't help McCain.

The VP debates aren't a big deal. They traditionally have only a little affect on things, especially if something goes wildly wrong and one of the candidates embarrasses the guy who picked him. Anything less than a display of total genius from Palin isn't going to do much to change people's minds about McCain.

Right now the economic problems are killing John McCain. As long as the economy is the number 1 news story, he's going to hurt. So the best they can hope for is that a good, competent showing by Palin gets the media talking about Palin in a good way, distracting the media.

Then tomorrow the House votes on the revised bailout and the story switches back to the economy.

Then a few days later we have the next Presidential debate and that becomes the story.

Unless Jesus comes down in the middle of the debate and personally endorses McCain/Palin, there's no way Palin can swing things far enough in McCain's favor to still be dominating the news a week from now. This won't have any positive long term effects for them.

If Palin comes across looking like a fool, you can bet the GOP spin will be that Gwen Ifill was motivated by her immense bias to try and make Ifill look foolish.

PAD

It looks like McCain's already spinning it:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081002/pl_politico/14207

Everyone knew back in July she was writing the book... but NOW it's a big deal? Sheesh. "Train Wreck" McCain keeps chuggin' along.

Let me throw in my support to the "We Don't Want Another Joe Sixpack" crowd. I have a lot of people that I like to hang around with, have some drinks, some laughs, can really relate to.

I want NONE of them to have any sort of political power. They are friends with me, after all...

Had an interesting thought the other day. Could it be that McCain really doesn't WANT to win?

Also, how long after the debate before some smart aleck comes up with the fact that she's Palin comparison and he's just Biden his time to take office?

If Palin comes across looking like a fool, you can bet the GOP spin will be that Gwen Ifill was motivated by her immense bias to try and make Ifill look foolish.

You mean make Palin look foolish, right?

(feel free to delete this post)

Right, of course, to make Palin look foolish.

PAD

Everyone knew back in July she was writing the book... but NOW it's a big deal? Sheesh. "Train Wreck" McCain keeps chuggin' along.

Oh, that McCain did NOT just pull out the "life isn't fair" line.

Meanwhile, note to Palin: having the "underdog" position and suddenly finding yourself behind in the polls are not the same thing.

Had an interesting thought the other day. Could it be that McCain really doesn't WANT to win?

Unconsciously, sure. If our conscious and unconscious agendas were always in alignment, there'd be no reason to make a distinction between the 2 modes of awareness (which break down further between our reason and our experience).

Underneath the republican Darth Vader armor writhes the translucent, wormlike shadow of the former prisoner who was resolved to maintain his honor.

Peter David: Expectations for her performance are so lowered that all she has to do is defuse her ineptitude with a smile and laugh and viewers will come away charmed by her and say, "Well, she didn't do so badly."
Luigi Novi: I think the only ones who'll come up with that rationalization are the right-wing GOP Kool-Aid drinkers who simply cannot allow any criticism of her to seep into their minds. As for everyone else, and this includes Dems, undecideds, and even Republicans honest enough to have been critical of the McCain campaign (like, amazingly enough, Karl Rove), they won't be fooled by that. There's been too much evidence about Palin, and too much analysis of that evidence, that makes it obvious that ineptitude and ignorance are now firmly entrenched in the public image of her. In fact, I was originally going to write, instead of "public image", what Mark Evanier once referred to as the "one-line, shorthand caricature", but realized that with her, this isn't even a caricature.

As for Bush, well, I don't remember his debates well enough to recall any verdicts on how he and Gore did, but he certainly didn't do anything to dispel the image of him as ignorant, inarticulate or incompetent. He won the election, but I'm not sure it was because anyone other than his True Believers thought he didn't do too bad in the debates.

Oh, that McCain did NOT just pull out the "life isn't fair" line.

I think we've just found the official song for the McCain campaign: The theme song from "Malcolm in the Middle"

Yes, no, maybe, I don't know. Can you repeat the question?

You're not the boss of me now,
you're not the boss of me now
You're not the boss of me now,
and you're not so big

You're not the boss of me now,
you're not the boss of me now
You're not the boss of me now,
and you're not so big

Life is unfair

CutterMike has said the following in the election thread on Gail Simone's CBR forum:

"One thing that has me vaguely worried about the Veep debate is that, at the moment, expectations are so low for Palin that as long as she doesn't actively vomit on her shoes during the thing we'll be seeing the phrase 'a surprisingly strong showing by Palin' featured in every news analysis the next day."

I hope I don't seem like too much of a jerk if I comment on the "actively vomit" part of it. Can one "passively" vomit? Anyway, I hope his worries are unfounded.

politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/1008/McCain_pulling_out_of_Michigan.html?showall

Game. Over.

Barring scandal or ... actually it's hard to imagine HOW McCain pulls it out now. The possible scenarios are dwindling. Assuming the polls are accurate--and McCain has his own pollsters, so it looks like he knows there's no good reason to throw good money in Michigan--the question is rapidly becoming not whether Obama wins but by how much.

Oh, that McCain did NOT just pull out the "life isn't fair" line.

That's the English translation of "my opponent is the biggest celebrity in the world."

That's the English translation of, "The young, inexperienced guy is PWNing me and I don't know what to do about it! HALP!"

Barring scandal or ... actually it's hard to imagine HOW McCain pulls it out now.

Vote tampering. Rigged voting machines. GOP-crafted voting rules aimed at preventing likely Democrats from making it to the polls. All kinds of possibilities exist.

PAD

McCain's going to pull another stunt. He's already done enough of them so they're becoming transparent, but he has no other choice. If things stay the same, he's guaranteed to lose. Given how badly things are going, it would have to be the biggest stunt ever.

I'm imagining something like the movie Wag the Dog. McCain hires a Hollywood director. The director sets up a press conference for Sarah Palin, making it sound like a big deal and getting tons of live press. During the press conference they stage an elaborate kidnapping with the help of a section of the CIA that is still loyal to Bush/Cheney.

This allows McCain to pick another running mate without losing all the people in his base who were fired up over her. Any time something goes badly for him, he can release a new piece of information about the effort to rescue Sarah Palin and things will swing back towards him again.

Things I don't expect to see happen during tonight's debate but would be delighted if they did:

Palin shotguns a can of beer, leans into the microphone and lets out a 45-second belch.

Biden catches a top-hat and cane tossed to him from offstage and does Fred Astaire's tap solo from "Top Hat, White Tie and Tails."

Palin, flustered by one of Ifill's questions, turns around and moons the audience, crying out, "Kiss my white Alaskan ass!"

Biden and Palin give in to the sexual tension between them and kiss each other passionately on camera.

Gwenn Ifill shows up to the debate stoned, and is unable to ask a single question because she's got the giggles.

Palin repeatedly drops the "f-bomb."

Biden explains that Obama would never insinuate that Palin is a pig, because she's a bitch and those are different animals.

Palin botches a question so horribly that John McCain himself leaps on stage and tackles Palin before she can do any more damage to his campaign.

Biden tells an ethnic joke that begins with "two alligators and a rabbi walk into a gay bar..."

Karaoke. Enough said.

Vote tampering. Rigged voting machines. GOP-crafted voting rules aimed at preventing likely Democrats from making it to the polls. All kinds of possibilities exist.

Things looked hopeful in '04, based on the exit polls. So I'm gonna keep on holding my breath until an Obama presidency looks like a REALLY sure thing...

While all of the dirt tricks listed above are possible and even likely, here's something else that could affect the outcome. It's not as sinister, but it could still make a difference: people missing the deadline.

Michael Moore's sent an e-mail out, and here's what the first part of it says:

Our attention has been consumed with Wall Street drama and the comedy event of the season -- tonight's vice-presidential debate -- but many people don't realize that in most states if you're not registered to vote by Monday, you cannot vote for president in November. In some states, the deadline is as early as this Saturday!

Will you do me a favor? Beginning right now, will you start asking everyone you know if they are registered to vote? Before you say hello, will you ask, "Hey, are you registered to vote here in (name of town)? 'Cause the deadline is Monday, and you have to be registered where you live."

I'll be voting by absentee ballot, but if I lived in the States I'd be taking that advice.

Palin repeatedly drops the "f-bomb."

She's allegedly said worse, although not during a debate. Google "Palin + sambo".

Meh.

I expect Palin to be on the attack all night. THAT is something she can handle. And if Iffill tries to clarify points or ask questions, we'll just hear scrams of bias for the next few weeks...

What can she do to “win” tonight?

Sarah Palin shows up at the debate with a beer in one hand, a shotgun in the other and wearing a string bikini. Tomorrow morning no one even remembers what she said in the debate, but the GOP base and 75% of the undecided male vote declare their loyalty to her.

Vote tampering. Rigged voting machines. GOP-crafted voting rules aimed at preventing likely Democrats from making it to the polls. All kinds of possibilities exist.

Yeah, just like the GOP rigged that '06 election! Oh, wait... that didn't actually happen either.

Yeah, just like the GOP rigged that '06 election! Oh, wait... that didn't actually happen either.

Well, they don't control the fate of every ballot cast all over the country, thank God. But they can still do a lot to throw the outcome into doubt. For instance, Alan Coil mentioned the state of things in Indiana already, where people might be denied their right to vote because they happen to have the same name as a convicted felon and also because Indiana's got a voter ID law.

Vote tampering is often feared, but rarely amounts to much. Voting *irregularities* happen all the time, but incompetence isn't very dependable.

For Joe Biden, I think there are two phrases that could win this debate for him. He just needs to come up with a bunch of variations and practice them.

1) Ow! You got me!: After Palin gave her acceptance speech, Biden playfully commented on how good she was at delivering punches. He compared her to that kid who says, "That's a nice jacket, did your Mom make it for you?" He should keep that joking attitude about Palin. Every time she makes a joke at his expense (like the way she offered to make one of her Gubernatorial opponents her chef), Biden should laugh it off. That will draw attention to her insults while making him look like he doesn't mind. After a night of that, she'll come off as snide.

2) What do you mean by that?: Palin generally gave good answers in the Couric interviews. It was the follow ups that destroyed her. She had a pat, slightly insulting comment ready to go about how the country wasn't paying attention to Barack Obama, complete with dismissive hand gesture. Then Couric asked Palin how she came to that conclusion and she couldn't back it up. Joe should not use the discussion portion of the debate at all, he should just ask her where she gets her facts from and watch her ramble incoherently.

McCain's going to pull another stunt.

Considering his gambles so far, I really don't want to see what else he could come up with.

Considering his gambles so far, I really don't want to see what else he could come up with.

I do. He needs to dig himself into a deeper hole. Deeper, I say!

If McCain loses the election, btw? It will prove that sometimes life IS fair. That sometimes there is justice. :D

Sean punned:

"Also, how long after the debate before some smart aleck comes up with the fact that she's Palin comparison and he's just Biden his time to take office?"

Well, if somebody does say that, we'll know where they got it.

Jason M. Bryant said:

"...incompetence isn't very dependable."

Not sure exactly what you were trying to say in your sentence, but that portion of it is absolute truth.
=============
Which leads my twisted mind to say:

"Incontinence is Dependsable."

I was saying that there have been a lot of mistakes made in tallying up votes, but they were from incompetence, not widespread efforts to rig elections. That kind of incompetence isn't something that one side or the other can count on.

Not that people shouldn't pay attention to all the stuff that PAD listed. The main reason we've never had rigged voter machines or significant voter denial (at least not in the last few decades) is because any time one party tries it, they other party moves to stop them.

I think it was Napoleon that said stupidity isn't a crutch when in politics. However, Biden will obliterate Palin... but the catch is that he's gotta throw himself on his sword to do so. For Biden to look bad, the result is Biden will look bad. But for Palin to look bad, she takes down both her and Spaceman McCain. So Biden's gotta do everything in his power to make her look foolish and tied to Bush policies and use her cuteness against her, even at the expense of him looking bad. He's gotta show up in a bathrobe and refer to her as "Donna Pagan" for the entire interview. It'll make him look bad, but it'll take her down for good.

I think it was Napoleon that said stupidity isn't a crutch when in politics. However, Biden will obliterate Palin... but the catch is that he's gotta throw himself on his sword to do so. For Biden to look bad, the result is Biden will look bad. But for Palin to look bad, she takes down both her and Spaceman McCain. So Biden's gotta do everything in his power to make her look foolish and tied to Bush policies and use her cuteness against her, even at the expense of him looking bad. He's gotta show up in a bathrobe and refer to her as "Donna Pagan" for the entire interview. It'll make him look bad, but it'll take her down for good.

Fumetti-slideshow of the MI-Gov Jen Granholm coaching Biden in debating Palin:

www.236.com/news/2008/10/01/debate_training_biden_learns_w_1_9211.php

"Incontinence is Dependsable."

Lulz!

why are you guys SO afraid of her?