Countdown to Implosion

The McCain campaign is starting to cannibalize itself in the face of a failed campaign. Already spokespeople are beginning to criticize Sarah Palin for being a diva and ruining the campaign. Top advisors have complained about her refusal to listen to what anyone says. She’s such a maverick, she doesn’t even listen to other mavericks.

With impending doom looming for the GOP on Tuesday, the finger has to be pointed at somebody. It is unfortunate, but mostly expected, that the party would turn on what they thought would be their saving grace. However, it is no surprise, or at least shouldn’t be to anyone with a baseline level of common sense, that a vice presidential candidate should be equally or more qualified for the presidency as the top of the ticket. Especially when that top is 72 years old and not getting any younger. Instead, the GOP wanted a star to steal attention from Obama. They wanted someone to become to new face of their party. They wanted someone they could turn into a maverick, who played by a new set of rules. And they created their own monster.

Palin Causing More Harm Than Good

Sarah Palin has been in the headlines this week, and not for anything good. Coming off of her forgettable Saturday Night Live appearance, Palin's wardrobe and ethics have been called into question. Proving that she truely understands Joe the Plumber's way of life, Palin has racked up a wardrobe bill of over $150,000 since her VP nod. With the economy failing, Joe and his plumber buddies can fully relate to the need to have designer clothes and a new makeover.

With a brand new scandal in the limelight, Palin's old scandals are getting jealous and want more attention. In that vein, a legislative board has found Palin guilty of unethical behavior in troopergate. While she was within her legal limits, the board reported that Palin indeed abused her power. Palin could not be reached for comment, but it can be assumed her response was 'Aw shoot.'

Facts are Secondary

During the general election stage of a political campaign, candidates are given the opportunity to provide information to the public. But what does the public do when both candidates operate on different realities?

During the vice presidential debate, there were several instances of each candidate, in one way or another, saying, "that's not true," in rebuttal. So who are we supposed to believe? Immediately after watching the debates, I took Joe Biden's word over Palin's on several disagreements simply due to the thorough responses that Senator Biden had to Palin's accusations. But then I looked at factcheck.org.

It is a shame that this service is not widely used by the general public. It is deeply informative and well researched. Not only that, but entirely non-partisan. The factcheck page for the vice presidential debate is an interesting one. The candidates were both incredibly inaccurate and downright false on several of their comments. So how does the general election stage of a campaign legitimize the political system at all if our main source of information is false over 50% of the time? How can we claim the political system works if people vote using the trust built from false information?

To give a few examples, during the veep debates, Palin said outright that millions of small businesses would be affected by tax increases from Obama's administration. That number is only a few hundred thousand. Biden claimed that a comment from Palin about how he would sell clean coal to China was taken out of context. However, the context was fairly close to his actual comment, and there is still some disagreement as to what Biden originally meant. The misinformation available during the debate is startling.

When we think about challenger strategies in regards to offering misinformation, I can see no real correlation. The only one that comes close is attacking the record, but if the attacks are based on falsehood, then what strategies are you really using?

Sorry, are they strategies or tactics?

Palin Not a “Moose in the Headlights” during Vice Presidential Debate

In the aftermath of the Katie Couric interviews, many expected Vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin to flounder in the debate. Prior to the interview Palin had been kept away from speaking in public. It appeared as though the interview seemed to exemplify what critics have been saying all along, that Palin lacked experience and knowledge regarding foreign affairs and even domestic policies. She cited that her foreign policy credentials came from Alaska bordering Canada and Russia. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nokTjEdaUGg Her inability to even answer basic questions regarding very crucial issues did not uphold the campaign slogan, “A Proven Maverick” that McCain and Palin are trying to create. It only demonstrated further that she may not have been the most experienced choice.

However, in Thursday night’s debate Palin seemed to have changed her image and improved her knowledge of foreign issues. Throughout the debate she demonstrated confidence in her answers, specifically when asked about Afghanistan. Anyone who had seen the Couric interview was cringing as to what her response might have been when asked to discuss the Middle East. Palin proved them, including myself, wrong. She was able to effectively communicate why McCain’s “counterinsurgency strategy” would be successful. Palin was even able to out answer Democratic nominee Joe Biden who has thirty five years experience. With the election a month away, Sarah Palin’s new media image may prove too much for Obama and Biden to overcome.

McCain campaign: strategic communication for VP debate

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/09/20/palin_wins_concessions_for_veep_debate.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/us/politics/21debate.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

The presidential and VP debates are quickly approaching. McCain and Obama have worked out the details of the presidential debates, and the result is a fairly free-flowing format that you can look at in more detail through the nytimes link.

For the VP debate (Oct 2), the McCain campaign has succeeded in reducing the opportunity for free debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden. The more structured format that has been agreed upon will likely benefit Palin because she is an inexperienced debater, and it will help her to reduce being on the defensive. The McCain camp wants her to spend time talking about McCain's positions rather than play defense. When we watch this debate, we should pay attention to the communication styles they use and see how offensive or defensive each VP candidate is.