Palin and the Drinking Game
The good news is that Sarah Palin lost the debate to Joe Biden. The bad news is that she didn't self-destruct in the way she had in the Katie Couric interviews. It was observed by many of the post-debate analysts that she basically repeated the same talking points regardless of the question at hand -- but of course if we got rid of every politician who did that we wouldn't be able to muster up enough folks to fill the House and Senate.
What I wished I had done to make the debate more entertaining--although I'm not really drinking these days--is to have played a drinking game during last night's debate, in which everyone would have to take a drink whenever one of the candidates said a key word like "Main Street" or "Wall Street" or "middle class."
A few colleagues and I kicked around a few ideas for key words, and I came up with the following sentence that uses all of them:
"We're a couple of mavericks who will fight greed and corruption on Wall Street and help the real American people on Main Street --hard working middle class people like Joe Six Pack and the Hockey Moms -- guys and gals who believe in God and health care and know that marriage is between one man and one woman and understand that Barack Obama will raise the white flag of surrender in Iraq and kill jobs in this great land of ours by raising your taxes."
Of course, that would require Ms. Palin to speak in a long, complicated sentence, as opposed to saying something like "right back atcha" or "drill baby drill." And how about those winks?
To paraphrase Richard Nixon -- in sentiments that have been eloquently expressed by Tina Fey -- let's hope that after November 4th we don't have Sarah Palin to kick around any more.
A buddy and I played such a game, and went through a 12 pack in so doing.
We drank every time Palin said: Governor, Mayor, Wasilla, Alaska, Greed and Corruption on Wall Street, Main Street or Maverick.
We drank every time Biden said: Change, Main Street, George Bush.
Palin kept us awfully busy (Biden not as much, thought the George Bush's litany was fun), and yes, I feel like crap this morning!
October 3, 2008 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Also to finish your drink every time she both started and ended a sentence with also.
October 3, 2008 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
We would've been comatose.
October 3, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
The word "Maverick" was used fifteen times during the debate.
Palin was thick in the Maverick talk until Biden riffed on all the ways in which McCain is the anti-Maverick. The final tally is:
Palin, 6 Mavericks
Biden, 9 Mavericks....
Biden used up most of the Mavericks in denunciations like this:
McCain “has not been a MAVERICK in providing health care for people…. He's not been a MAVERICK when it comes to education…. He's not been a MAVERICK on the war. He's not been a MAVERICK on virtually anything that genuinely affects the things that people really talk about around their kitchen table."
Maybe after this debate, we can all agree on a Maverick-Talk Moratorium.
Other interesting word stuff. Palin did not mention Osama bin Laden even once. The word terror or terrorism was used only eight times, more by Biden than Palin. In fact, Palin talked more about "tolerance" (5 mentions of that or "tolerant" in response to the question about the rights of same sex couples and gay mariagge) than she did about terrorism.
And Biden only said "Main Street" once, to Palin's three time invocation of that trope.
October 3, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Our debate-watching group had divided up the keywords and the lucky individual had to take a drink were their word was called. I got Maverick.
I was a little late for work this morning.
October 3, 2008 11:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Joe Biden certainly won the debate in states where Barack Obama has already won, i,e, California, New York, Illinois, Minnesota, Wisconsin, etc.
But how certain are you that Biden won in red states? It's unclear what effect, if any, this debate had on independent or undecided voters. Palin clearly lacked a broad scope of knowledge on foreign policy, but probably out-dueled Biden on energy issues.
Also, I'm surprised nobody is talking about Joe Biden's crying episode. Such a mistake clearly cost George McGovern the presidency (even if it was a snowflake and not a tear). If it had been Sarah Palin that had cried, this election would be over.
October 3, 2008 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, it was embarrassing to sit and watch Biden sobbing for 5 minutes, mopping up the tears as snot ran down his face. Unfortunately, I blinked when that happened, because I sure missed it.
October 3, 2008 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Joe Biden certainly won the debate in states where Barack Obama has already won, i,e, California, New York, Illinois, Minnesota, Wisconsin, etc."
The election is on November 4th. I don't think any of those states has had an opportunity to weigh in yet. It's Ocober 3rd.
"But how certain are you that Biden won in red states? It's unclear what effect, if any, this debate had on independent or undecided voters. Palin clearly lacked a broad scope of knowledge on foreign policy, but probably out-dueled Biden on energy issues."
Energy isn't the only issue on the table. And the only quantifiable way in which she "out-dueled" him was in her brazen willingness to answer any and all questions by pretending to answer for 30 seconds and then talking about something else for a minute. I don't think people in "Red" states are stupid. I don't think Sarah Palin was so clever that people anywhere didn't see through that.
"Also, I'm surprised nobody is talking about Joe Biden's crying episode. Such a mistake clearly cost George McGovern the presidency (even if it was a snowflake and not a tear). If it had been Sarah Palin that had cried, this election would be over."
Joe Biden didn't cry. He didn't have an episode. His voice cracked and he paused in responding to a question. Governor Palin clearly didn't even understand what he was talking about. Her demeanor didn't change one bit. She kept right on rootin' and tootin', golly gee willikers!
Something a lot of people in "red" and "blue" states can agree on: The last two Presidential elections have gone a long way toward exhausting most people's desire to elect a President they want to "have a beer with". Pick up a newspaper. Turn on CNN. Eight years of sending the folksy facade of a drinking buddy to lead our country hasn't put us in a very good place. My bet is that, when the day is done and the votes are counted, Americans will have overwhelming expressed their desire for a President and Vice President that is intelligent, thoughtful, resourceful, and ready to lead. If they're thirsty next January, Putin and Medvedev can pop their heads up and have a beer with Sarah in Wasilla or Juneau or Anchorage. When they come to Washington, they'll be drinking ice water with Barack and Joe.
October 3, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
The next president is walking into a power vacuum. The private sector has been slowly and methodically increasing its power throughout Bush's eight years in office. With the passage of the bailout today, it becomes glaringly obvious that the government is now at the mercy of the private sector.
You tell me who has more power?
October 3, 2008 9:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why didn't Ifill ask Biden about his vote against the Alaska pipeline? Ann Coulter made an excellent observation, when she noted:
"The Senate passed the 1973 Alaskan pipeline bill by an overwhelming 80-5 vote. Only five senators voted against the pipeline on final passage.
Sen. Biden is the only one who is still in the Senate -- the other four having been confined to mental institutions long ago.
The stakes were clear: This was in the midst of the first Arab oil embargo. Liberal Democrats, such as senators Robert Byrd, Mike Mansfield, Frank Church and Hubert Humphrey, all voted for the pipeline.
But Biden cast one of only five votes against the pipeline that has produced more than 15 billion barrels of oil, supplied nearly 20 percent of this nation's oil, created tens of thousands of jobs, added hundreds of billions of dollars to the U.S. economy and reduced money transfers to the nation's enemies by about the same amount."
She's snarky but relevant...
October 3, 2008 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
You really don't know why she didn't ask about a vote that took place in 1973? You and Ann Coulter are probably the only two people in the freaking country scratching your heads about that. What would Palin have possibly said in rebuttal to that?
"Doggone it, Joe. I was in middle school when you did that. Jeepers Creepers! I'll tell ya what, if that bill hadna passed, the American people would be hurtin' even more than they're hurtin' right now. Fiddlesticks!"
October 3, 2008 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Also, I'm surprised nobody is talking about Joe Biden's crying episode. Such a mistake clearly cost George McGovern the presidency (even if it was a snowflake and not a tear)."
Uh-uh. It cost Ed Muskie the presidency.
Peace,
Paul
October 3, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
William Hartung drinking games, now I've seen everything.
Great post!
October 3, 2008 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also you forgot "nucular" also.
October 3, 2008 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good Gawd! Another term with someone who can't pronounce nuclear?!!
October 3, 2008 11:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I tend to agree that people in both red states and blue states shouuld not be dumb enough to be taken in by Ms. Palin's lies and glib, empty talking points. At least that is my fervent hope. However, I was positive George W. would lose in 2000 because most people were too smart to vote for such an empty suit airhead, but he won, and then did it again. Inability to pronounce 'nuclear' may be part of the charm, and an indication of stubborness. It is quite possible enough people will be taken in by her folksy, gossipy demeanor, and then heaven help us.
October 5, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink