Originally posted by utherpendragonI'm not interested in doing that right now. There were dozens of threads that went through her strengths and weaknesses back in 2008. Suffice to say I was unimpressed and - in fact - shocked that a purportedly sophisticated political machine could make such a selection. The possiblity that she was cynically chosen merely in order to lure the Democrats into savaging her and revealing their meanspirited contempt for an 'all American mum' is chilling. On the other hand, you were impressed by her, and that I can accept. I feel no need to dissuade you. McCain lost and the Palin VP'cy never happened. I don't think she will ever be POTUS.
ok. so what are your examples? i am curious.
Originally posted by eljefejesusJust for the record, before you totally sign off and go back to happy fgilf-land, what exactly was Couric supposed to have ambushed her with? What was the trick to the questioning, that any other competent politician couldn't have answered without becoming all coy and secretive? Personally I don't care who the politician is, they all get it wrong at some point, regardless of their real or perceived intelligence. Lets face it they're human, living off adrenalin and little sleep during much of the election cycle. I would suspect a succesful micro-chip implant if they were always 100% on the money. That's not the point. The point is how they recover after a stumble, and whether they quickly unravel when finding themselves a little to the side of their prepared material.
I think Couric demonstrated some capable abilities at ambush-style interviews. Although granted whoever edited/directed the scenes shows clearly had a major role, Couric deserves some respect for her abilities.
Now if anyone thinks that adopting victim speak, will ever win the day for their candidate, then I got news for you. Complaining and whining only further detracts from an already suspect reputation. This is not how you win support in a high stakes winner take all scenario.
At the end of the day, her die hard fans are actually doing her more of a disservice than almost anything she has done. Their constant carping about the unfair media treatment( even though she had a spectacularly bright honeymoon period in the spotlight, where for a while you could have been mistaken for thinking that she and not McCain was running for office) hardly augers well for the gravitas and reputation of a person aspiring to be entrusted with the "football". That's like getting your "guy" to the majors and once there, demand that they be under a special dispensation and whenever its to their advantage, they only be subject to the rules of T ball.
Originally posted by eljefejesuslike I said before, she wasn't very well informed, but that didn't justify the way she was harassed by the media.
Oh well, this news is getting old already, it's just a shame that even after she resigns, she is treated unfairly.
I knew it all along though, she was too hot to be VP...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/2798748/Palinmania-Sarah-Palin-in-pictures.html?image=2
😲
Originally posted by FMFPolitics is politics. I thought it was a good speech. I don't mean that endorse all ideas in it. You have to take into account the context when judging a speech.
Mmmm. I had you down as a 'one nation' type American. So you were not uncomfortable with the calculatedly divisive 'this is real America' and 'they're not the real Americans' type stuff on Palin's part? -- my paraphrasing, but you know exactly what I mean.
1 edit
Originally posted by eljefejesusTrue. Couric ambushed Palin. Also true: many in the media treated Obama with kid gloves.
All this in response to: Couric ambushed Palin?
I'm just saying and maintaining this:
Couric ambushed Palin.
Fact.
Just a part of the discourse, and one that should be obvious to the discerning eye.
But: I don't mind ambushing candidates. If a candidate can't stand up to a reporter out for blood, how is s/he going to stand up to Kim Jung Ill or Mahmoud Ahmidenijad or Vladmir Putin?
Obama did go on with O'Reilly for a long interview.
I'm sure O'Reilly wanted Obama at least as much as Couric wanted Palin. I wish all candidates would agree to be interviewed by reporters who are out to get them. That would be one way of separating the wheat from the chaff.
Originally posted by sh76What questions did Couric give that consisted of an ambush really?
True. Couric ambushed Palin. Also true: many in the media treated Obama with kid gloves.
But: I don't mind ambushing candidates. If a candidate can't stand up to a reporter out for blood, how is s/he going to stand up to Kim Jung Ill or Mahmoud Ahmidenijad or Vladmir Putin?
Obama did go on with O'Reilly for a long interview.
http://www.youtube.com/wat ...[text shortened]... ters who are out to get them. That would be one way of separating the wheat from the chaff.
There were some questions that I think people gave Palin too hard a time for not knowing, but even those I don't think Palin did so great a job in saying that she didn't know.
I didn't see any unfair questions in Couric's interview - and frankly, I didn't see any really hard questions to handle for the average political candidate.
Originally posted by kmax87The response and bounce-back is indeed important.
Just for the record, before you totally sign off and go back to happy fgilf-land, what exactly was Couric supposed to have ambushed her with? What was the trick to the questioning, that any other competent politician couldn't have answered without becoming all coy and secretive? Personally I don't care who the politician is, they all get it wrong at some poin ...[text shortened]... ation and whenever its to their advantage, they only be subject to the rules of T ball.
Pointing out that she was ambushed does not mean that she could not have done better or that she should be protected. In fact, the media glare I would agree does weed out some candidates from national politics (and in this case, perhaps a whole state)...
But I do think victim-speak helped Palin with defenses in her favor.
I agree she did not help herself enough.
As I also said, she gave the impression she was not ready for prime-time.
Originally posted by sh76Then you agree with the substance of my point, that Couric ambushed Palin.
True. Couric ambushed Palin. Also true: many in the media treated Obama with kid gloves.
But: I don't mind ambushing candidates. If a candidate can't stand up to a reporter out for blood, how is s/he going to stand up to Kim Jung Ill or Mahmoud Ahmidenijad or Vladmir Putin?
Obama did go on with O'Reilly for a long interview.
http://www.youtube.com/wat ...[text shortened]... ters who are out to get them. That would be one way of separating the wheat from the chaff.
However, we do not agree that O'Reilley ambushed Obama, Obama was prepared for a very confrontational debate, and a prepared confrontation does not compare equally with an ambush.
In fact, if we could see all candidates equally ambushed, THAT would be very valuable.
If, however, we see only one candidate ambushed and the rest continue their nicely prepared cameo appearances, then that is not a balanced picture.
Besides, there is more to running a national government than debating technique, that is more of the campaigning side of things.
But your idea is a good one. All candidates should be expected by all us voters to jump into the lion's den.
Originally posted by PsychoPawnSame thing as with comedians on sitcoms though, the joke is conveyed through to the audience at home by the reactions of the other actors (part of where the true comedic talent lies) and also by the roar of the crowd... hence where Couric's reaction to Palin's responses come in.
What questions did Couric give that consisted of an ambush really?
There were some questions that I think people gave Palin too hard a time for not knowing, but even those I don't think Palin did so great a job in saying that she didn't know.
I didn't see any unfair questions in Couric's interview - and frankly, I didn't see any really hard questions to handle for the average political candidate.
Anyone who has not seen the interview should see it before denying the ambush.
Originally posted by eljefejesusI did see the interview. Did you somehow assume that I hadn't?
Same thing as with comedians on sitcoms though, the joke is conveyed through to the audience at home by the reactions of the other actors (part of where the true comedic talent lies) and also by the roar of the crowd... hence where Couric's reaction to Palin's responses come in.
Anyone who has not seen the interview should see it before denying the ambush.
Still, I don't remember any unfair questions. There were a couple in one of her interviews that I thought it would be fair if Palin didn't know and I didn't fault her for not knowing, but I did fault her for the way she answered in some cases.
Originally posted by PsychoPawnCouric needled her and pushed her and asked her follow up questions to make her look bad when it was apparent she wouldn't or couldn't give an answer a couple of times. I saw the interview a long time ago so I don't remember exactly. I don't know if she asked unfair questions per se, but she phrased many of her follow ups in a manner what seemed calculated to make Palin look bad.
What questions did Couric give that consisted of an ambush really?
There were some questions that I think people gave Palin too hard a time for not knowing, but even those I don't think Palin did so great a job in saying that she didn't know.
I didn't see any unfair questions in Couric's interview - and frankly, I didn't see any really hard questions to handle for the average political candidate.
Not that there's anything so wrong with that... After all, she'd a journalist and Plain was running for VP, not for Miss America...
Oh wait, scratch that last one. 😉
1 edit
Originally posted by eljefejesusWell, yeah; O'Reilly-Obama was a pitched battle, not an ambush.
Then you agree with the substance of my point, that Couric ambushed Palin.
However, we do not agree that O'Reilley ambushed Obama, Obama was prepared for a very confrontational debate, and a prepared confrontation does not compare equally with an ambush.
In fact, if we could see all candidates equally ambushed, THAT would be very valuable.
I ...[text shortened]... s a good one. All candidates should be expected by all us voters to jump into the lion's den.
Watching Palin and Couric or Palin in general, do you think she could have stood up to a guy like O'Reilly as effectively as Obama did?
I doubt it.
Originally posted by sh76I agree that she needled her and and asked her follow up questions, but do you ask follow up questions or needle someone if they give a great answer?
Couric needled her and pushed her and asked her follow up questions to make her look bad when it was apparent she wouldn't or couldn't give an answer a couple of times. I saw the interview a long time ago so I don't remember exactly. I don't know if she asked unfair questions per se, but she phrased many of her follow ups in a manner what seemed calculated to m ...[text shortened]... Plain was running for VP, not for Miss America...
Oh wait, scratch that last one. 😉
For the most part I thought Couric's interview was pretty soft-ball for any semi-experienced politician who was up to speed on current events. I just found it odd when some people claimed the questions were unfair when I would have thought some politicians would have loved to have gotten that same interview.