# Biden v. Palin Debate Oct 2. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 24, 2008, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965 "2008-09-24T12:02:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/161 "2008-09-30T03:48:08Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I also don’t particularly trust political analysis from Variety. Yes, but I don’t believe it was linked as political analysis. It was linked in response to your statement “There’s not going to be that much attention paid to this and very few people will watch.” I agree that _Variety_ isn’t known for its political insight, but it \*is \*known for its insight into the media. This experience gives their intuition as to whether or not this will be a heavily watched debate significant weight. Granted, it may be based on unquantified predictions, but being the leader in their field, I think it’s a better cite than you gave credit for. There is, though, the possibility that you didn’t intend to focus on raw numbers, but rather the impact the debate will have. Let a record-breaking number of people watch, but they’re tuning in for the sideshow, not to make up their minds. I’m not sure if that (or something close) is what you meant, I’m just trying to understand … ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/162 "2008-09-30T03:58:09Z")
> [@leander](#): > > Sounds like you’ve dug in your heels and are refusing to admit you may be wrong. I’m stating my opinion. There’s always a possibility that I may be wrong, I just don’t find these arguments convincing evidence that I’m wrong. > [@](#): > > Here’s a fact you may have overlooked: > > _“Still, we have had a woman running for the vice presidency – Geraldine Ferraro on the 1984 Democratic ticket – and her sparring with then-incumbent V.P. George H.W. Bush holds the record for Nielsen ratings of vice presidential debates: 56.7 million viewers.”_ In TV terms, 1984 might as well be 1984 B.C. There were far fewer networks and political coverage was entirely different. So was the handling of candidates. For perspective, CNN was four years old in 1984 and hadn’t been boosted to major prominence by the Gulf War, and Fox didn’t exist at all. For practical purposes there was no 24 hour news coverage, and obviously no internet coverage. Back then, you didn’t get nearly as many chances to actually see the candidates do their thing. Now, you practically have to try to avoid them. > [@](#): > > The argument(s) that follows – that Palin has been shielded by the media, thus interest in her is quite high; that the race is extremely close; that her lack of experience is a huge question for voters – seem compelling to me. It’s not unreasonable, I just don’t buy it. > [@](#): > > But then I’m not an expert at these things like you appear to be. It’d be really ironic if you followed this up by criticizing me for attacking the messenger and not the message. > [@](#): > > PS – Attacking the messenger instead of the message? I would think a moderator on these boards could do better than that. Huh. Like I said, you linked to Variety in a political conversation. But I did attack the message when I called it “weasel wording.” This is a speculative form of journalism that should generally be disregarded. You see this kind of writing when a theory sounds compelling and the facts aren’t really there. “People _may_ tune into the debate because of X Y and Z.” Then again, the author never seems to mention, they _may not_ tune in because there will be playoff baseball and college football that night and who knows what else on TV, and meanwhile interest in Biden is null while interest in Palin is waning, and they are both running for Vice President. The Friday debate drew 52.4 million people, which Reuters dubbed “mediocre” historically.[http://www.canada.com/topics/entertainment/television/story.html?id=af2d0175-c970-4467-bedb-9b5a6df0f917](http://www.canada.com/topics/entertainment/television/story.html?id=af2d0175-c970-4467-bedb-9b5a6df0f917) So I’m going to go out on a limb and say 56 million people aren’t watching Palin and Biden. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/163 "2008-09-30T04:02:07Z")
> [@Rhythmdvl](#): > > There is, though, the possibility that you didn’t intend to focus on raw numbers, but rather the impact the debate will have. Let a record-breaking number of people watch, but they’re tuning in for the sideshow, not to make up their minds. I’m not sure if that (or something close) is what you meant, I’m just trying to understand … This debate won’t move the needle much, and I disagree with some of the posters here that this is a major event for either campaign. The Reuters piece I just linked to gives the 2004 debate viewership numbers. I don’t have a broader historical perspective than that, but I don’t think this is going to draw a ton of viewers. ---
**Author:** ![leander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bcef8e/32.png) [@leander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leander)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 7:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/164 "2008-09-30T07:42:59Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > It’d be really ironic if you followed this up by criticizing me for attacking the messenger and not the message. It appears that you are still trying to be “clever” here instead of actually arguing the points. Oh well. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 11:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/165 "2008-09-30T11:06:31Z")
> [@leander](#): > > It appears that you are still trying to be “clever” here instead of actually arguing the points. :rolleyes: That’s twice in a row you’ve ignored everything I said except one offhand remark. The arguments you’re looking for were cleverly hidden in the entire remainder of the post, which you failed to quote or answer. I explained why I think interest in the debate won’t be that high, I explained my issues with the speculation in the article, and I said why I don’t think the comparison to the Bush-Ferraro debate works. Please tell me why those aren’t arguments. ---
**Author:** ![Burton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Burton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Burton)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/166 "2008-09-30T15:27:52Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > I feel bad for Biden in this debate. Given his personality, I don’t see how he can win this thing. If he tries to be nice, he will come across as condescending. If he attacks, he will look like a mean, cranky old bastard who is picking on this nice, attractive mother of five. > > Plus, Biden will probably have a “Democrat Wars” type of gaffe moment (just my opinion) > > What strategy could he possibly use to “win” the debate? Who gives a shit who’s mother she is? This is not about nice. Hopefully she’ll be fully exposed as the lightweight opportunist she is. ---
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/167 "2008-09-30T16:39:57Z")
[Here’s one way to get Palin out of this debate.](http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/366390/mccain_may_suspend_campaign_again) ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/168 "2008-09-30T17:13:26Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > [Here’s one way to get Palin out of this debate.](http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/366390/mccain_may_suspend_campaign_again) Holy cow. Allow me to state, for the record, that I have no idea what is going on. Thank you. ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/169 "2008-09-30T17:21:25Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Holy cow. > > Allow me to state, for the record, that I have no idea what is going on. Thank you. have we entered some kind of Twilight Zone? Is there a candid camera rolling somewhere? I can’t keep up. I’ve been off the past 2 days and online for most of them and I can’t keep up… :eek: ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/170 "2008-09-30T21:06:03Z")
> [@eleanorigby](#): > > have we entered some kind of Twilight Zone? I was thinking _Groundhog Day._ ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/171 "2008-09-30T21:11:25Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I was thinking _Groundhog Day._ _From Hell_, maybe… ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/172 "2008-09-30T21:19:07Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > [Here’s one way to get Palin out of this debate.](http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/366390/mccain_may_suspend_campaign_again) What possible excuse could McCain for keeping Palin out of the debate?:dubious: He can suspend his campaign and pretend he’s needed in Congress all he wants, but Palin isn’t a Congresswoman. There is no plausible role for her to play. It’s like we’ve wandered into an SNL sketch. ---
**Author:** ![Onomatopoeia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/onomatopoeia/32/4145_2.png) [@Onomatopoeia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Onomatopoeia)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/173 "2008-09-30T22:08:03Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > [Here’s one way to get Palin out of this debate.](http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/366390/mccain_may_suspend_campaign_again) Before we all get into a lather, McCain didn’t say he was contemplating suspending his campaign. He said he’d do “Whatever it takes” after being goaded by one of the FOX News sycophantic weasels. I think it’s irresponsible for The Nation to run a headline like this considering McCain never said it, and probably wouldn’t even have brought it up. McCain’s not as stupid or senile as some would like to believe. He knows that gambit didn’t work last week. What possible benefit could he possibly derive from pulling it again? As to the OP, I think many here are going to be surprised come Friday morning. I don’t believe Palin will do nearly as horribly in the debate as predicted. Right now the bar is set so low for her I don’t see how she can possibly fail. Biden definitely has the tougher job here, IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![leander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bcef8e/32.png) [@leander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leander)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2008, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/174 "2008-09-30T23:45:41Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > :rolleyes: That’s twice in a row you’ve ignored everything I said except one offhand remark. The arguments you’re looking for were cleverly hidden in the entire remainder of the post, which you failed to quote or answer. I explained why I think interest in the debate won’t be that high, I explained my issues with the speculation in the article, and I said why I don’t think the comparison to the Bush-Ferraro debate works. Please tell me why those aren’t arguments. No problem, let’s start at the beginning. You said: > [@Marley23](#): > > There’s not going to be that much attention paid to this and very few people will watch. That is an opinion, not an argument. You provided nothing to support your opinion, except this gem: > [@Marley23](#): > > Because it’s the Vice Presidential debate, that’s why. I think we can all agree there’s not much to your “argument” so far. Then you added this: > [@Marley23](#): > > I think that’s very unlikely. As it is, the public seems to have zero interest in one of the VP candidates, and is paying less and less attention to the other one. Again, nothing to actually support your assertion, no cites, nothing (though you did manage to get a little snark in prior to that). I then suggested that you read this article to see why you’re probably wrong. > [@leander](#): > > This is a very good article about why you’re probably off base here. > > [http://www.variety.com/VR1117992965.html](http://www.variety.com/VR1117992965.html) Your response: > [@Marley23](#): > > Maybe, then again, maybe not. I know weasel-word writing when I see it: > Quote: > The veepstakes has all the action, and this week’s match between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin could make ratings history. > > Quote: > “The vice presidential debate usually draws the lowest ratings, but this could be the year that changes all that,” > > Quote: > And when those candidates are a moose-hunting hockey mom and a wonky D.C. insider squaring off in primetime over the most pressing issues of the day, showrunners and scriptwriters can only dream of the ratings likely to come. > > This is how you write when you have no facts to support your thesis. You cook up a news peg by saying something could happen and get quotes from someone who thinks it might. That doesn’t mean it actually will, of course. > I also don’t particularly trust political analysis from Variety. So instead of disputing the arguments put forth by the article you attack the messenger and call it all “weasel word(s)”. My response included the “facts” you say do not exist and a brief summary of the arguments: > [@leander](#): > > Sounds like you’ve dug in your heels and are refusing to admit you may be wrong. > > Here’s a fact you may have overlooked: > > _“Still, we have had a woman running for the vice presidency – Geraldine Ferraro on the 1984 Democratic ticket – and her sparring with then-incumbent V.P. George H.W. Bush holds the record for Nielsen ratings of vice presidential debates: 56.7 million viewers.”_ > > The argument(s) that follows – that Palin has been shielded by the media, thus interest in her is quite high; that the race is extremely close; that her lack of experience is a huge question for voters – seem compelling to me. But then I’m not an expert at these things like you appear to be. > > PS – Attacking the messenger instead of the message? I would think a moderator on these boards could do better than that. So let’s be clear: the _fact_ is that the highest rated VP debate in history was between a man and a woman. The arguments are: 1. Palin has been shielded from the media, thus the public may have a higher interest in hearing her positions; 2. The race is extremely close, so people may pay more attention; 3. Her lack of experience is a big question Looking at other posts in this thread (which you’ve ignored), one could probably add: 1. McCain is 72, so there is a higher likelyhood (or at least _perceived_ likelyhood) that he will croak and she will take over; 2. She’s a trainwreck when unscripted, and people generally like to watch trainwrecks; 3. She’s a woman, and people are interested in seeing if foot-in-mouth Joe will be able to control himself and not look like he’s beating up a woman. So there are your arguments. Your reply was: > [@Marley23](#): > > I’m stating my opinion. There’s always a possibility that I may be wrong, I just don’t find these arguments convincing evidence that I’m wrong. Again, nothing here actually rebuts any of the arguments. You have your opinion and you’re going to stick to it! > [@Marley23](#): > > In TV terms, 1984 might as well be 1984 B.C. There were far fewer networks and political coverage was entirely different. So was the handling of candidates. For perspective, CNN was four years old in 1984 and hadn’t been boosted to major prominence by the Gulf War, and Fox didn’t exist at all. For practical purposes there was no 24 hour news coverage, and obviously no internet coverage. Back then, you didn’t get nearly as many chances to actually see the candidates do their thing. Now, you practically have to try to avoid them. > > It’s not unreasonable, I just don’t buy it. Here, in response to the quote about Ferraro, you bring up the lack of 24hr media, Internet, etc. You may have a point there, but you are not addressing the issue, which is _that compared to all other VP debates (before and after, regardless of the state of 24hr news), this one had the highest ratings_. > [@Marley23](#): > > Quote: > But then I’m not an expert at these things like you appear to be. > > It’d be really ironic if you followed this up by criticizing me for attacking the messenger and not the message. > > Huh. Here you are apparently trying to be “clever”, but either you missed the point or you don’t know what the word “ironic” means. Let me explain: I was mocking you for putting forth opinions without backing them up; for being a “know-it-all” without any substance; and for dismissing nearly every argument without actually refuting the points. You, on the other hand, were doing a classic case of “shoot the messenger”: You attacked _Variety_ (clearly without knowing what sort of rag it is) and you attacked their experts without actually countering their arguments. All in all poor debating form, not dissimilar to what we can likely expect this Thursday. And finally this gem: > [@Marley23](#): > > Like I said, you linked to Variety in a political conversation. But I did attack the message when I called it “weasel wording.” This is a speculative form of journalism that should generally be disregarded. You see this kind of writing when a theory sounds compelling and the facts aren’t really there. “People _may_ tune into the debate because of X Y and Z.” Then again, the author never seems to mention, they _may not_ tune in because there will be playoff baseball and college football that night and who knows what else on TV, and meanwhile interest in Biden is null while interest in Palin is waning, and they are both running for Vice President. > > The Friday debate drew 52.4 million people, which Reuters dubbed “mediocre” historically.[http://www.canada.com/topics/entertainment/television/story.html?id=af2d0175-c970-4467-bedb-9b5a6df0f917](http://www.canada.com/topics/entertainment/television/story.html?id=af2d0175-c970-4467-bedb-9b5a6df0f917) So I’m going to go out on a limb and say 56 million people aren’t watching Palin and Biden. See, this is _ironic_. You have stated that “People _will not_ tune in because of X Y and Z”; you provide your opinion, no supporting evidence, no “other side of the argument” – and then you call the Variety article “weasel words”, even though it has at least provided some evidence and a sound argument for its case. Now, since you don’t like Variety, let’s look at other media: The AP: [http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jKLz7PW9AGelXQRIVxIeA0-kSB9AD93HA27G1](http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jKLz7PW9AGelXQRIVxIeA0-kSB9AD93HA27G1) "NEW YORK (AP) — For an audition to be second fiddle, Thursday’s debate between often ill-informed newcomer Sarah Palin and often gaffe-prone veteran Joe Biden offers unusually large pitfalls — and promise. For once, the whole world may be watching. Already, 3,100 media credentials have been issued, the most the Commission on Presidential Debates ever needed in seven vice presidential debates it’s hosted. The attention is driven by the public’s fascination with Palin, the first-term Alaska governor that Republican presidential candidate John McCain plucked from relative political obscurity to be his running mate." Reuters: [http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE48T5BK20080930?sp=true](http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE48T5BK20080930?sp=true) "WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Vice presidential debates rarely play a role in White House races, but the showdown between Republican Gov. Sarah Palin and Democratic Sen. Joe Biden will be different – it could matter. The highly anticipated encounter on Thursday between the verbose Biden and the sheltered Palin will likely draw a larger television audience than last week’s first debate between their bosses, presidential rivals Barack Obama and John McCain. The spotlight will be on Palin, the unknown moose-hunting mom from Alaska whose surprise choice shook up the White House race, made her a political celebrity and raised concerns about her readiness to step into the top job – the prime function of the vice president." CNN: [Next up: Biden and Palin debate in St. Louis - CNN.com](http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/27/campaign.wrap/?iref=hpmostpop) “There’s a lot of anticipation surrounding the VP debate because Palin has remained largely on script in her first month on the campaign trail.” Voice of America: [http://voanews.com/english/2008-09-30-voa53.cfm](http://voanews.com/english/2008-09-30-voa53.cfm) "Perhaps the most eagerly anticipated debate of the U.S. presidential campaign season takes place Thursday in St. Louis, Missouri. The two candidates for vice president, Republican Sarah Palin and Democrat Joe Biden, will take part in their one and only debate. The political stakes are high for both candidates, but especially for Alaska Governor Palin, a newcomer to the national political stage. VOA National correspondent Jim Malone has a preview from Washington. " And I’m guessing if you wait one more day you’ll see about a million more articles just like these. Try not to dismiss them all as the media trying to whip up excitement for this event – you know, you may actually be wrong here, friend. PS - sorry for the extra long post. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2008, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/175 "2008-10-01T13:23:47Z")
The righties are lining up their talking points. Apparently, they are uncomfortable that Gwen Ifill [is literate](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=485820). ---
**Author:** ![Defensive\_Indifference](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/defensive_indifference/32/6502_2.png) [@Defensive\_Indifference](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Defensive_Indifference)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2008, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/176 "2008-10-01T13:55:10Z")
The _NY Times_ today [describes](http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/us/politics/01palin.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) Palin as a “confident”, if “often vague” debater. The article describes how she excelled in her Alaskan gubernatorial debates. Those debates were very different in that several candiates appeared at the same time, so Palin could take the high road while letting the other candidates attack each other. That, of course, won’t be an option tomorrow when she’s facing only Biden. But the \*Times \*article should temper expectations that she’s going to come out looking like a drooling fool. The _St. Louis Post-Dispatch_ has a [piece](http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/politics/story/5A4729A61AE0FE68862574D5000CB2B7?OpenDocument) on Gwen Ifill today. The article opens: > [@St. Louis Post-Dispatch](#): > > Toward the end of the 2004 vice presidential debate in Cleveland, PBS’s Gwen Ifill asked a question that neither Dick Cheney nor John Edwards expected. > > It showed. > > Ifill described an AIDS epidemic in the United States, where black women were 13 times more likely to die of the disease than other women. > > “What should the government’s role be in helping to end the growth of this epidemic?” Ifill asked. > > For Ifill, it was a memorable moment, one that lived on when viewers wrote to express their frustration with the weak answers the candidates had for her question. If Ifill catches Palin off-guard like this, we could be looking at another squirm-inducing moment. Ifill said of her preparation, “I just read everything out there. I try to be the best informed person on the stage and read everything that has been written about people and go as far back as possible.” Ifill is bound to get Biden and Palin off their talking points a few times. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2008, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/177 "2008-10-01T14:13:04Z")
> [@Bayard](#): > > If Ifill catches Palin off-guard like this, we could be looking at another squirm-inducing moment. Ifill said of her preparation, “I just read everything out there. I try to be the best informed person on the stage and read everything that has been written about people and go as far back as possible.” Ifill is bound to get Biden and Palin off their talking points a few times. I hope she does simply because to me that’s her job–to challenge the candidates into something other than competing stump speeches. Gwen Ifill is an enormously talented journalist and sharp as the proverbial tack. I look forward to her questions. ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2008, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/178 "2008-10-01T14:26:27Z")
And she’s doing the debate, injured. [GwenIfilHurt](http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/09/gwen-ifill-to-p.html) I admire her as well. I just never knew her name! (I don’t watch a lot of TV). ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2008, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/179 "2008-10-01T14:29:46Z")
> [@eleanorigby](#): > > And she’s doing the debate, injured. > [GwenIfilHurt](http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/09/gwen-ifill-to-p.html) > I admire her as well. I just never knew her name! (I don’t watch a lot of TV). Well, she’s just a moderator. She doesn’t have to walk the walk. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2008, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965/180 "2008-10-01T14:34:54Z")
> [@eleanorigby](#): > > And she’s doing the debate, injured. Maybe pain will make her cranky and she’ll lay the smackdown on both of them if they weasel. “My Vicodin is wearing off, so you answer the question motherfucker or I’ll cut you!” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biden-v-palin-debate-oct-2/464965.md?page=10)