CNN Debate poll says Biden won (51% to 36%), Palin beat expectations

[DeepModem Mom]

Source: CNN

(CNN) -- A national poll of people who watched the vice presidential debate Thursday night suggests that Democratic Sen. Joe Biden won, but also says Republican Gov. Sarah Palin exceeded expectations.

The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. said 51 percent of those polled thought Biden did the best job, while 36 percent thought Palin did the best job.

But respondents said the folksy Palin was more likable, scoring 54 percent to Biden's 36 percent. Seventy percent said Biden was more of a typical politician.

Both candidates exceeded expectations -- 84 percent of the people polled said Palin did a better job than they expected, while 64 percent said Biden also exceeded expectations. How Palin would perform had been a major issue for the Alaska governor, who had some well-publicized fumbles during interviews with CBS' Katie Couric leading up to the debate.

Respondents thought Biden was better at expressing his views, giving him 52 percent to Palin's 36 percent.

On the question of the candidates' qualifications to assume the presidency, 87 percent of those polled said Biden is qualified and 42 percent said Palin is qualified....


Poll respondents give Sen. Joe Biden the edge over Gov. Sarah Palin in ability to express views.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/03/debate.poll/index.html

[livelongandprosper]

1. Sarin likable????

Yeah just like Bush is likable.

Two of the most annoying creatures I ever had the misfortune to see.

[ixion]

29. and folksy?

that phony "folksy" thing of hers is a charade and they know it.

And I haven't found anything likable about her yet.

[AnneD]

38. I don't know too many middle class folks...

that have a million something in assets, and even fewer middle class folks are hollering to cut the taxes for the wealthy.:eyes:

[GoddessOfGuinness]

43. When I think "folksy" I think Pete Seeger...Joan Baez...Woody Guthrie...

Suggesting Palin is in the same league is insulting to those fine musicians and activists.

[TwilightGardener]

2. How on God's green earth does anyone with a brain like her? She's awful.

[Nihil]

23. Your question contains your answer ...

> How on God's green earth does anyone with a brain like her?

Now that leads to the scary realisation how many *really* stupid
people there are in position to vote ...

[bulloney]

24. The Repubs did it again. They set the bar so low for Palin that if she said anything coherent,

she comes out looking good.

They did it with Bush.

Palin did come across better at the debate than during the Gibson and Couric interviews, but her responses lacked substance and showed how little she really knows about foreign policy and what actually makes the economy work. She just constantly pulled her catch phrases and words, incorporated them into her responses, looked into the camera and winked a lot.

[iamahaingttta]

27. She said something coherent?

I must have missed that part!

[Lasher]

3. So she got thrashed, but not as bad as people expected.

In other words, most people realize what a dumbass she is.

[Starlight]

9. She did a nice job memorizing sound bites. And that's really the best they could expect from her.

:silly:

[Trajan]

4. From a pragmatic perspective

This line says it all : "On the question of the candidates' qualifications to assume the presidency, 87 percent of those polled said Biden is qualified and 42 percent said Palin is qualified...."

Nearly 60 % believe she is unqualified ..... That is damning for both Palin and McCain

[DeepModem Mom]

6. I agree. That's probably by far the most important of the poll findings. nt

[krkaufman]

15. Agreed. Palin still not viewed as qualified for the job

And with Biden so overwhelmingly viewed in a positive light, it's nothing but good for Obama/Biden and bad for McCain/Palin.

[ryanmuegge]

5. Biden did a good job. He missed a couple opportunities, I think, but he did well!

I say that because he responded with specific votes and statistics, plus he focused a lot on the economy. We'll see if the general public feels this way after a week of corporate media punditry, though. That's the real question.

[SemperEadem]

8. Biden did a good job of dodging bullets

with regards to looking like he was beating up on Mooselini or talking down to her or giving the viewer the impression that he was being mean... on the contrary, her being oblivious to his life story and the loss of his first wife and child and her overstepping herself by showing that she wants more power in the VP office is the kind of damage she did where she and the mclame camp don't realize that there is an injury til well after the fact.

The expansive powers of the VP debacle is going to dominate the news cycle tomorrow--Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews have already sounded the tocsin this evening about this gaffe.

[harmonicon]

10. I honestly think they liked one another

I thought he might seem condescending, but I don't think he had to worry about that really in this case. I have no idea why he would like her personally - she seems like someone I would absolutely loathe, but I'm not Biden.

Also, I wouldn't call her agreement with the Cheney-VP philosophy to be a gaffe, but rather a frightening statement of policy.

[AnneD]

39. Biden did well because......

he genuinely likes and respects women. He handled himself the best I have seen yet in a debate with a woman. He didn't play gotcha and he kept nailing McCain to Bush. I think he and McCain are to good a friends to bring up the Keating 5 which is a shame because this is what we have to look forward too. The debate was good and tough. Palin looked good but you shouldn't have to be coached and protected from the press that much. You have to bring experience to the table and she doesn't have that.

[pinniped]

7. I'm checking out the rerun on KRCB 22.

Sarah keeps flapping her gums about some Iran this or Iran that. It's nonstop.

I really liked her rambling about nuclear weaponry. Something about the end all to end all or some shit.

She's using her memorized segments in the wrong places and it's coming out all weird.

Her clips should air on SNL because it's comedy.

[krkaufman]

17. Yeah, that nukular response was one that annoyed me.

The question had to do with what trigger would justify OUR use of nuclear weapons, and Palin didn't answer it and Ifill didn't followup.

As for Palin's response... rambling soundbites from the fear-mongerers' best-of collection. It's almost like her incoherent responses are intentional, for the purpose of confusing the listener and making sure we forget the original question -- and grateful to her, in the end, for finally stopping.

[nomorenomore08]

40. And notice she pronounces "nuclear" as "nuc-u-ler."

As soon as I heard that, I was like "That settles it, she's officially the female Bush!"

[Sherman A1]

11. Well, of course she beat expectations

The only thing expected of her was that she would show up and not trip over her own feet. That she actually get a bit beyond that would exceed expectations. That said, she continues to be in way over her head and will hopefully continue to serve as the Gov of Alaska after January 2009.

[Demeter]

14. I'm Hopeful She Will Serve Several Years in Jail

as an object lesson to the Republicans about the perils of running for national office with dirty hands.

[old mark]

12. MSN has an online poll with nearly the same numbers.

I guess we are making some points, but how can anyone think she is qualified for VP of the USA?
I am amazed by the support she has - I have a pretty low opinion of most people - I guess I'm an East Coast Elitist - but they seem to be even worse than my opinion.

mark

[mikeymeitbual]

13. Disappointed in gay marriage response

I was disappointed in Biden's response about gay marriage.

BIDEN: No. Barack Obama nor I support redefining from a civil side what constitutes marriage. We do not support that. That is basically the decision to be able to be able to be left to faiths and people who practice their faiths the determination what you call it.

The bottom line though is, and I'm glad to hear the governor, I take her at her word, obviously, that she think there should be no civil rights distinction, none whatsoever, between a committed gay couple and a committed heterosexual couple. If that's the case, we really don't have a difference.

------------

Marriage is a legal contract. The only reason faith is ever involved is when you get married in a church and the ceremony is performed by your priest/reverend/minister/bishop/etc. Then it's whatever the hell you want because that's the great thing about faith and religion. Outside of that, it's a legal contract. Recognizing gay marriage at the "civil side" is the most important part of the battle. How does he think these folks are going to get hospital visitation rights and life insurance benefits without a legally recognized marriage?

Palin's response was... well, it's what I expected. Tolerance blah blah traditional marriage blah blah

What do other DU'ers think about this?

[applejuice]

18. I'm not exactly sure what he was meaning

when he said that. I thought he was maybe meaning having something like "civil partnerships" that they have here in the UK.

You asked "How does he think these folks are going to get hospital visitation rights and life insurance benefits without a legally recognized marriage?" Well, a civil partnership here in the UK does that.

And from what I understand anybody can have a civil partnership, even if you are hetero. It is just a legal agreement without the historical name "marriage".

A lot of churchy people got pissed about the civil partnership thing but they didn't get very far because the government was like "This is NOT marriage, it's just a legal agreement." They said "Would you deny these people their life partner at the hospital when they are dying? This is just a dcoument saying they can visit their partner...." etc.

So I just thought it was him being like that. It is a way to give people their civil rights and get around the arguments of the churches - because hey! It's got nought to do with them!

Worked here anyway. (And people with civil partnerships still have ceremonies and say they are "married" if they want to.) It's all sematics I guess.

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. No, UK civil partnerships are for homosexual couples only

Couples who become partnered will have the right to exactly the same legal treatment across a range of matters as a married couple would expect.

Such as what?

All the key elements that come with marriage. The law accords civil partners equitable treatment for important financial matters, such as inheritance, pensions provision, life assurance and maintenance where children are involved.

It provides next of kin rights for couples, such as in their dealings with hospitals. Immigration and nationality rules take account of marriage when assessing someone's right to stay in the UK - that rule is extended to civil partners.

Why is it not called gay marriage?
...

But beyond that are there any practical differences?

The government says that it wanted civil partnerships to provide as far as possible the same rights and responsibilities as for a married couple. Campaigners who advocated the change said they were more interested in getting parity for same-sex couples, which they achieved, than the terminology.

Clearly it's going to be a matter of personal taste. Among the first couples planning a partnership, some are referring it to "gay weddings" while others are not.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4497348.stm

It does seem to be semantics, as you say - and there's no significant push in the UK for the term 'marriage' to become official. I think it may be roughly what Biden (and Obama) advocates - and it's possible they might do well to use the approach that the British government did - in the end, the opposition from die-hard Tories really didn't get much traction.

And welcome to DU. :hi:

[BumRushDaShow]

20. Sounds like

Biden was saying that they believe that the actual term "marriage" is more a religious designation and not a civil/legal one and thus they do not believe they ("the state") should be able to "legally" redefine "marriage" to only be between spouses of a certain sexual orientation (defering that to the religious community for their members). But they support equal rights for couples to enter into a legal contract with one another (obtaining a "license").

I think the fumbling is looking for a "civil" term (partnership, etc) that is basically the same thing as what has traditionally been deemed a (religious) "marriage".

[customerserviceguy]

32. I have to say

that it was difficult to find much daylight between the positions of McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden on equal marriage. All seem to be in favor of "live and let live" (even Ifill's question made Alaska look progressive on the subject) but nobody's willing to stand up for true equality. That's not leadership.

[radfringe]

16. best zingerof the night

from debate transcript: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript/index.html

IFILL: Governor, are you interested in defending Sen. McCain's health care plan?

PALIN: I am because he's got a good health care plan that is detailed. And I want to give you a couple details on that. He's proposing a $5,000 tax credit for families so that they can get out there and they can purchase their own health care coverage. That's a smart thing to do. That's budget neutral. That doesn't cost the government anything as opposed to Barack Obama's plan to mandate health care coverage and have universal government run program and unless you're pleased with the way the federal government has been running anything lately, I don't think that it's going to be real pleasing for Americans to consider health care being taken over by the feds. But a $5,000 health care credit through our income tax that's budget neutral. That's going to help. And he also wants to erase those artificial lines between states so that through competition, we can cross state lines and if there's a better plan offered somewhere else, we would be able to purchase that. So affordability and accessibility will be the keys there with that $5,000 tax credit also being offered.

IFILL: Thank you, governor. Senator?

BIDEN: Gwen, I don't know where to start. We don't call a redistribution in my neighborhood Scranton, Claymont, Wilmington, the places I grew up, to give the fair to say that not giving Exxon Mobil another $4 billion tax cut this year as John calls for and giving it to middle class people to be able to pay to get their kids to college, we don't call that redistribution. We call that fairness number one. Number two fact, 95 percent of the small businesses in America, their owners make less than $250,000 a year. They would not get one single solitary penny increase in taxes, those small businesses.

BIDEN: Now, with regard to the -- to the health care plan, you know, it's with one hand you giveth, the other you take it. You know how Barack Obama -- excuse me, do you know how John McCain pays for his $5,000 tax credit you're going to get, a family will get?

He taxes as income every one of you out there, every one of you listening who has a health care plan through your employer. That's how he raises $3.6 trillion, on your -- taxing your health care benefit to give you a $5,000 plan, which his Web site points out will go straight to the insurance company.

And then you're going to have to replace a $12,000 -- that's the average cost of the plan you get through your employer -- it costs $12,000. You're going to have to pay -- replace a $12,000 plan, because 20 million of you are going to be dropped. Twenty million of you will be dropped.

So you're going to have to place -- replace a $12,000 plan with a $5,000 check you just give to the insurance company. I call that the "Ultimate Bridge to Nowhere."

-----

Obama and Biden should work the bridge to nowhere into their speeches - i.e. people are stuck on a bridge to nowhere and all a mccain-palin administration would do is to make the bridge longer

[ixion]

30. "those artificial lines between states"

I get a big kick out of "small government", "state's rights" rethugs talking like a big government schmo and those "artificial" lines that are the states.

I doubt the states see them as "artificial". Sure, there is no physical boundary, in general, but the lines are clearly drawn. TN and GA just had a tussle about those artificial lines.

In practice, there's really nothing "artificial" about them.

[obiwan]

19. Palin couldn't find her own ass with two hands and a road map...

...although McCain needs neither, just his eyes.

[GOPBasher]

21. "Palin beat expectations." I think *I* could have beaten *THOSE* expectations.

[Ganja Ninja]

25. I think Palin was doomed to lose no matter how well she came across.

She's handicapped right from the start being a Republican. She has to defend the record of the last 8 years out of one side of her mouth. Then she has to turn around and try to convince people that the McCain/Palin ticket represents change. There was no way she was going to win unless Joe Biden completely self destructed.

[ShortnFiery]

26. Ole Joey the Scar and his trained Bimbo, Mika, are spinning this as a tie.

:silly: I can't listen to even a minute of "Morning Joe" anymore. Scarborough is pompously patriarchal and Mika plays along like an abused spouse. It's disgusting to watch. Mika's father and brothers must be profoundly ashamed at her recent "performances." :thumbsdown:

[Maeve]

28. Just because she found her feet, it doesn't mean she's not way over her head eom

[seasat]

31. I think the McSame campaign overplayed the lowering expectations game.

It appeared that they realized this at the last moment and tried raising them. What they did was make it so that if she didn't make a huge gaffe, then she beat expectations. However, what they also did was make her less effective. She had much less credibility going in and the general public viewed her through that filter. The only way she could have pulled off a win or tie is to come across as more empathetic real person. Since that is not her true character and she threw out a lot of attacks she wasn't able to appeal to the public in that way. When Biden pointed out that the General in charge of Afghanistan said that the surge tactics wouldn't work there, she lost her temper in her response and that really hurt their created image of her with the general public audience. So basically they played her down to a 5 out of 100 going into the debate and she was only able to win back to about the high 30's while Biden came in already ranked high and maintained his lead.

[apnu]

33. Good news, Obama-Biden's momentum will continue (nt)

[rocktivity]

34. She beat expectations? As Rachel Maddow put it, her expectations were so low

"she'd have to fall down to lose!"

P.S. Beating expectations only matters when you WIN, CNN--this is your idea of being fair and balanced.

:eyes:
rocknation

[Coventina]

35. Because she didn't lose bladder control, she exceeded expectations.

*sigh*

She "won" by not completely imploding...

Why doesn't anyone (in the media) point out that she rarely answered the questions? She just spouted talking points all night.

[yellowcanine]

36. But she is just so adorable and doggone cute, gosh darn.

:puke: :puke: :puke:

[AnneD]

37. The bar was set so low for Palin...

she could have walked over it. I use to think she was a total idiot that was in over her head. Now she is just an idiot in over her head-so yes I do have a more favourable opinion of her.

[pleah]

41. Wow, they really did lower the bar for Satan Sara.

:rofl:

[GoddessOfGuinness]

42. I didn't think I could be more impressed with Joe Biden...

...but after last night, I am. He could have had her in tears with embarrassment, but he's too decent a guy for that. Instead, he just let her slip in her own pool of mindless drivel.

He spoke eloquently and with passion and conviction. There's nothing affected in the way he speaks. You know that when he opens his mouth, it's the real Joe Biden...not someone pretending to be VP material.