Serious question about Sarah Palin

[proud2BlibKansan]

Do you think she is playing us? I talked to someone today who saw a video of a debate she had in Alaska and said she was really good. So we got to wondering if she was just playing with Katie Couric.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. If that were the case,

I'd think video of the Alaska debates would have been out by now on youtube.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. I feel stupid I should have thought of that

Here is what I found:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1-B-OyQ-KI

[RazBerryBeret]

2. the Obama camp

has stated that she is a TERRIFIC debater..
guess we will see.

[ladywnch]

14. I'm sure she's a fine debater on things she knows. Unfortunately

for her, the range of things she knows if fairly narrow and pretty much usless on the national stage.

[SmileyRose]

18. ya beat me to it.

:)

[SmileyRose]

16. She's likely a good debater on things she knows a little about

Like hockeymomming, casting out demons, and stopping the gays.

How to handle Iran is so incredibly far over her head though........

[asdjrocky]

3. They had the debate on the span several times and I caught most of it.

Sarah is not playing us. She is not smart.

[casus belli]

5. If she's smarter than she let's on, she's dumber than we all think

Because only someone who suffered from stupidity in epic proportions would put such an important position at risk by playing dumb.

Nope. I say she's the real deal - dumb as a box of moose chips.

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. They have done so many crazy things

Playing stupid wouldn't shock me at all.

[casus belli]

8. Yeah, I agree.

Though, I have to say, what surprises me more is how little people call them on it.

[Orangepeel]

7. She's not brilliant, but her biggest problem is ignorance, not stupidity

She had time and ability to become versed in issues that directly affect Alaska (besides, she cares more about Alaska than she does about the rest of the US).

She just doesn't know anything about broader issues. She sounded like an idiot in interviews partly because she doesn't have anything to say. For her own sake, she (and/or her handlers) should have been able to come up with a better lie about why she had some credibility in the area of foreign policy. But her biggest problem is that she isn't credible.

It seems plausible to me that she'd be good when debating about Alaska-specific issues but a complete dolt about everything else.

[RichGirl]

9. If it turns out that she's a great debater...

...her interview with Couric will be questioned. If there's any suspicion that the McCain campaign was playing games, dumbing her down to take advantage of low expectations, that will work against them. People are sick and tired of McCain's gimmicks.

If she were a good debater and capable of answering questions intelligently, how could it possibly benefit them to hide that and keep her locked up and out of sight. The republicans thought she was great at the convention. Their poll numbers went up. If she could have gone out there, done press conferences, the Sunday shows....they could have rode that bounce all the way to the debates. They have been trying to sell her as qualified from day one. Why would they dumb her down? She has enough stuff against her.

Watch the Couric video where they talk about the media mocking her. It is very clear that he handlers told her how to connect being neighbors with Russia to foreign policy. She seems very authentically surprised that everybody doesn't get that connection.

Lastly...she changed colleges five times before graduating. She can't be very smart. But, even a person with average intelligence can give a good debate if it's based on something they know very well. She knows Alaska. Expecting her to learn everything she needs to know is like expecting straight A's from a C student. Too much pressure and a loss of confidence.

[dbonds]

10. I doubt it, that would be a dangerous game.

Think of the people that would watch the Couric interview but not watch the debates. Everytime she is on tv she is molding someones opinion of her that she might never get a second chance with - thats the problem of being a new personality.

[WheelWalker]

11. If Sarah's acting dumb, her performance is worthy of an Oscar.

[depakid]

23. You beat me to it!

A performance worthy of Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man.

[The empressof all]

12. She had a few years to hone her talking points

The range and breadth of issues covered in that Alaskan election was certainly not as broad as one would see in the National election. In addition she had the speil down pretty well before the debate so she was able to anticipate with a degree of comfort which talking points went where.

Clearly she has a gift for gab and at least in Alaska, a bravado that served her well. We are now seeing someone who is losing confidence and clearly out of her element. She knows it which is making this more painful and uncomfortable. I don't feel sorry for her. But it is sad. I think she thought she'd be able to get by with faking it like George Bush did.

[mwb970]

13. That was the "real Sarah" in those earlier debates.

She was better then partly because she has more familiarity with Alaska-oriented topics, but mostly because she was able to just "be herself" when speaking and give her own actual opinions.

Now, it's completely different. She has to match McCain's ideas and statements on all issues, most of which she has never thought much about. She has to stay "on message". They've filled her with talking points to draw from when forming answers, with the regrettable results we have seen. She is not speaking for herself, and it shows.

[PeaceNikki]

22. I agree.

Many people can be skilled debaters on topics they know and feel comfortable, but when you're told exactly how you're supposed to respond to specific topics on which you're clueless, it's easy to appear flustered and ignorant. This is what we're seeing. Canned answers that don't even make sense and an inability to think on her own.

[crazy_vanilla]

15. no, can't fake that kind of stupidity n/t

[rufus dog]

17. Did you every play a sport and lose all confidence?

I think she has realized she in over her head and has lost all confidence, thus questions that aren't that hard become problematic. It is more common at the high school level sports, people that can make plays in practice fall apart under pressure. If the baseline skills aren't there it becomes more apparent.

If this is the case she will fall apart on the easy questions and perform O.K. on the difficult ones.

And if she does DO NOT feel sorry for her, remember he meanness during her RNC speech.

[madaboutharry]

19. She was comfortable with the issues that

were debated. Anyone can sound reasonably intelligent if they know what they are talking about. This is a whole different ball game. It is no longer the minor league, its the show.

[TheKentuckian]

20. Alaska simply isn't a microcosm of the nation

Little diversity of people or politics, no major urban areas, low population density, lots of oil, and great distance.

She just has less going on and not as many, not on the same scope, or the same of the same type. That could have been overcome but she, like Bush demonstrates a high degree of self rather than objective righteousness and an equally low level of intellectual curiosity. Her universe is tiny and closed.

It's even possible over time being forced fed data, she might have some form of growth but for now she's a dangerous lightweight that thinks she's on top of the world.

[Cass]

21. I think she did so poorly with Couric because she simply is not

knowledgeable enough about the issues at the Presidential level. She may have done a good job in the Alaska debate because she probably had a good grasp of local/state issues, but she's way out of her league on this level and it shows.