It is neither - the candidates do not use teleprompters in a debate.
I suspect one of the dangers Obama would face in a debate with Sarah Palin is to behave the way the SDMB would like him to. In which case, not only would he lose the debate, he would be taken off the stage in a straitjacket and put on Thorazine.
Regards,
Shodan
Obama actually wasa law professor for 12 years.
Obama looked comfortable in that format during the 2008 race. He would only need to repeat those performances by actually answering questions and explaining his policy views cogently. All we saw from Palin was homey platitudes and recitations. I think even conservatives would agree that she would have to do much better.
Sarah Palin is not a great speaker; she’s just popular. So’s Larry the Cable Guy. Do you want him delivering the State of the Union any time soon?
Obama should pop the Glock.
I think the left dismisses Palin at their peril. I recall thinking the same thing about Bush, & look what happened.
The debates as currently constituted are a joke, nothing more than a glorified press conference. All Palin has to do is wink at the camera & voice the same two or three mindless, know-nothing plaititudes : “Small government”, “Don’t let the govenment come between you and your doctor” “Terrorists are bad”, etc. & the dumbed down electorate will lap it up. “She’s one of us” “Folksy & down home”, etc.
Obama on the other hand can’t win, or really has to walk a tightrope. His message is more complex, & if he cleans her clock he’ll be called an arrogant, elitist, emotionless technocrat. If he lays back he’ll be called spineless, passive, gutless, whatever. (Who wants to take bets on if she tells him to “Man up”?)
Unfortunately, in American politics you don’t have to be an intellectual/rhetorical heavyweight to be successful. Plus, we’ve only seen the beginning of the Citizens United decision’s effects on elections. I’d have to guess the right’s gonna spend like crazy promoting her in the coming years, only making her more formidable. :smack::
Yeah I knows 
His book is also a damn good read - the guy just impresses the hell outta me.
I don’t have a dog in the fight over Palin and Obama so people can take that how they will.
One guy from my own politics that I totally despise is Winston Peters (kiwis and some Australians will know him), but for all that I hate his politics I admire the guys intellect.
I hate Palin’s politics and I see nothing to admire in her intellect, or anything else for that matter…
I am confused. Is the OP maintaining that Obama is smarter than Palin despite his presidency? I don’t imagine Obama could face down the average US working class stiff.
Admitting it is an important first step.
Christine O’Donell, Sharron Angle, and the one that lost the Alaska Senate race are all wondering what the fuck you’re talking about.
He was talking about attacking the 16 years olds facebook posts and slagging Bristol for being on the dancing show. He said in the next sentence that attacks of the mother were fine.
This thread is about the mama grizzly and not the kids so it’s off point.
Palin has never impressed me I have to say. Her stump speech was ok but that’s just reading well. I have never seen her in any free flowing form were she was in any way impressive at all. Can anyone link to anything she’s done that wasn’t reading from a script that was in any way impressive or note wordy?
You know something?
It’s because of people like you that we will never actually see a proper intellectual debate amongst candidates where the respective merits of policies are discussed.
It’s because of people like you that the rest of the world pointed and laughed at George W.
You represent the very worst of partisan politics.
I am biased. I have the self awareness to admit that, and still appreciate someone else’s intellect, skills and I can admit when they score a good point. You? I think you have all the self awareness of a rotten turnip, and have not progressed past “my dad can whup your dad”
Magiver didn’t mention debates, he was talking about speeches. Obama didn’t use teleprompters in the 2006-2008 debates (and neither did anyone else) and he managed to complete a sentence now and then.
Very possible.
Why didn’t that work in 2008? On the stump it worked for people who already liked her, but it seemed to drive other people away and her performance in the debates didn’t win over this “dumbed down electorate.”
This isn’t the right forum for personal comments like this. Please don’t do this again.
Heck, by 2012 she might not even have read her first magazine!
Hey, that’s not fair. She reads all of them.
Leaving aside all the partisan side discussions, I think that Obama should treat her exactly as he would treat a Republican male candidate…no different. By treating her differently (either by dismissing her or attempting to ‘clean her clock’ in some sort of righteous smack down that some posters in this thread feel she ‘deserves’), he would be hurting himself. Instead, he needs to debate the issues and the person, make his own points and defend his own positions to the best of his ability.
If Palin actually becomes the Republican candidate (I shudder to think this will actually happen), then it’s in Obama’s best interest to set aside any animosity or gender bias some of you seem to have and simply debate her as if she were any other Republican male candidate.
-XT
xtisme this is what I think would like to see, what I fear however is that his level of knowledge, the sophistication of his arguments, the way that he will rebut her talking points with well cited, accurate and thought through statements will just make him look elitist and arrogant. That the way that he would totally outclass her in a genuine debate would make him look bad.
Then I wonder what sort of strategy could be used to deal with that. Without making him look like a bully or a wimp
And just to be clear, if he outclassed a male opponent the same way, I would have the same fears
Well, if you want a good idea of what that debate would look like, you just have to turn to the Coons-O’Donnell debate. Exact same stuff.
One intellectual type with some gut feeling he’s the smart alec here, and one dumb chick who is persuaded intelligence is an obstacle on the way to the truth.
Seems like a fearful and unlikely interpretation to me. If you exclude those who are strongly biased toward Palin to begin with, very few people would feel sorry for her if he kicks her butt in the debates as long as he handles himself well and doesn’t come off like a jerk. And the way the debates are done, it’s hard for one candidate to really kick the other one’s butt anyway. So that’s another reason this isn’t likely to be a problem.