![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The vice-presidential debate took on a much more serious character compared to the first debate, not just in topic choice but in the manner of the debate. Once again, reading from the transcript of the VP debate, thoughts and ideas.
Ah, right from the get-go, we have substance from the moderator, and a willingness to make accusations. I hope this trend continues.
Mr. Ryan stats with attacks about "weakness" on foreign policy in the Middle East. He has apparently not been reading the pundits that say that topic is closed for this cycle because the President successfully killed Osama bin Laden. Also, coming out as an interventionist in these times, after long and expensive wars that the public is tired of...not a popular position. Mr. Biden adding facts to his argument makes Mr. Ryan's appeal to "standing up for our values" ring fairly hollow.
And the soundbites about Iran, the unwillingness to work with the United Nations, and the swift rush to "we have to be willing to show force" as a way of solving things peacefully betrays you, Mr. Ryan. You want another land war in Asia. Despite Vezzini's advice having been prescient twice now.
Mr. Biden swings for the fences on the 47 percent and the 30 percent remarks. The riposte is...lacking in factual content, and Mr. Ryan stats telling a shaggy dog story after getting through the detail-free talking points of the as-yet-unveiled Romney-Ryan plan. Points to Mr. Biden for calling Mr. Ryan out on the lack of specifics!
Demerits for Mr. Ryan on claiming the Democrats could do anything they wanted when they had control of both houses of government - he knows damn well how many ways there are to sabotage bills or kill them, even if one party has a majority in both houses.
More points for Mr. Biden on calling out the stimulus hypocrisy by Mr. Ryan.
Sigh, death panels? Really? Are you sure this isn't your party's 2008 platform, Mr. Ryan? Also, your dodging on boh Medicare and Social Security is unseemly, especially after you implored us to stand up for our values earlier. You want "premium support" and changes to the Social Acidity program that would atty least partially privatize it. Be willing to say that's what you want and be ready to take the heat for both of those ideas being very unpopular and for studies to tell you what the bad effects of your ideas would be. When you advise your opponent of not having facts and using scare tactics, you need to have facts of your own to go with - just saying that the opposition is using scare tactics does not make it so. In this case, it makes you look weak and unprepared on a major issue.
Also, it seems like throwing softballs to your opposition to not know whether or not the people you're using to claim bipartisanship still actually support your plan, Mr. Ryan.
Taxes: Mr. Ryan, when you parrot a statistic about how many small businesses file as individuals, it is best to explain why so that people can understand precisely what the disincentive is to filling and paying corporate taxes. Mr Biden talks about taxes and references your actual record and actions. He also has numbers.
A big point accumulation to the moderator for not letting Mr. Ryan weasel away from the fact that he does not have specifics or numbers or maths for the plans he claims to have.
And then back to foreign affairs, where Mr. Ryan returns to his position of wanting land wars in Asia, while hiding it behind the idea of "we don't want to tell the enemy when we're leaving, so they can outlast us". Which is also a subtle jab at the Afghan security forces - Mr. Ryan doesn't believe they're up to the task of protecting the country. In talking about Syria, Mr. Ryan's point can be summed up as "more wars, faster, and damn the international support". That's a very expensive position to have. And Mr. Biden points that out.
Then comes the abortion bit, where it is fairly apparent that Biden hews to the Democratic position, and Ryan...has no idea what his running mate has actually said, and is lying about their position in relation to bills he's already sponsored and the official planks of his party. That should warrant the spontaneous combustion of his pants.
The closing statements definitely reflect the messages of the campaigns - the Democrats want you to think of them as the party that will bring up the poor and middle class and make the gap smaller. The Republicans are running on the promise of plans, but mostly on the idea that the Democrats have not fulfilled their own promises and don't deserve another term to try.
I'm hoping that at the next debate, the moderator will be given good, important questions, and will generally not let the candidates bulldoze them or each other. The quality of the questions seems improved here, to, and I hope this trend continues. I'd also like to see more of the numbers and accusations between the two gentlemen, but mostly, I'm going for a more facts and figures debate. That would make me happier.
Ah, right from the get-go, we have substance from the moderator, and a willingness to make accusations. I hope this trend continues.
Mr. Ryan stats with attacks about "weakness" on foreign policy in the Middle East. He has apparently not been reading the pundits that say that topic is closed for this cycle because the President successfully killed Osama bin Laden. Also, coming out as an interventionist in these times, after long and expensive wars that the public is tired of...not a popular position. Mr. Biden adding facts to his argument makes Mr. Ryan's appeal to "standing up for our values" ring fairly hollow.
And the soundbites about Iran, the unwillingness to work with the United Nations, and the swift rush to "we have to be willing to show force" as a way of solving things peacefully betrays you, Mr. Ryan. You want another land war in Asia. Despite Vezzini's advice having been prescient twice now.
Mr. Biden swings for the fences on the 47 percent and the 30 percent remarks. The riposte is...lacking in factual content, and Mr. Ryan stats telling a shaggy dog story after getting through the detail-free talking points of the as-yet-unveiled Romney-Ryan plan. Points to Mr. Biden for calling Mr. Ryan out on the lack of specifics!
Demerits for Mr. Ryan on claiming the Democrats could do anything they wanted when they had control of both houses of government - he knows damn well how many ways there are to sabotage bills or kill them, even if one party has a majority in both houses.
More points for Mr. Biden on calling out the stimulus hypocrisy by Mr. Ryan.
Sigh, death panels? Really? Are you sure this isn't your party's 2008 platform, Mr. Ryan? Also, your dodging on boh Medicare and Social Security is unseemly, especially after you implored us to stand up for our values earlier. You want "premium support" and changes to the Social Acidity program that would atty least partially privatize it. Be willing to say that's what you want and be ready to take the heat for both of those ideas being very unpopular and for studies to tell you what the bad effects of your ideas would be. When you advise your opponent of not having facts and using scare tactics, you need to have facts of your own to go with - just saying that the opposition is using scare tactics does not make it so. In this case, it makes you look weak and unprepared on a major issue.
Also, it seems like throwing softballs to your opposition to not know whether or not the people you're using to claim bipartisanship still actually support your plan, Mr. Ryan.
Taxes: Mr. Ryan, when you parrot a statistic about how many small businesses file as individuals, it is best to explain why so that people can understand precisely what the disincentive is to filling and paying corporate taxes. Mr Biden talks about taxes and references your actual record and actions. He also has numbers.
A big point accumulation to the moderator for not letting Mr. Ryan weasel away from the fact that he does not have specifics or numbers or maths for the plans he claims to have.
And then back to foreign affairs, where Mr. Ryan returns to his position of wanting land wars in Asia, while hiding it behind the idea of "we don't want to tell the enemy when we're leaving, so they can outlast us". Which is also a subtle jab at the Afghan security forces - Mr. Ryan doesn't believe they're up to the task of protecting the country. In talking about Syria, Mr. Ryan's point can be summed up as "more wars, faster, and damn the international support". That's a very expensive position to have. And Mr. Biden points that out.
Then comes the abortion bit, where it is fairly apparent that Biden hews to the Democratic position, and Ryan...has no idea what his running mate has actually said, and is lying about their position in relation to bills he's already sponsored and the official planks of his party. That should warrant the spontaneous combustion of his pants.
The closing statements definitely reflect the messages of the campaigns - the Democrats want you to think of them as the party that will bring up the poor and middle class and make the gap smaller. The Republicans are running on the promise of plans, but mostly on the idea that the Democrats have not fulfilled their own promises and don't deserve another term to try.
I'm hoping that at the next debate, the moderator will be given good, important questions, and will generally not let the candidates bulldoze them or each other. The quality of the questions seems improved here, to, and I hope this trend continues. I'd also like to see more of the numbers and accusations between the two gentlemen, but mostly, I'm going for a more facts and figures debate. That would make me happier.
