Gut reactions to the Palin speech
Sep. 3rd, 2008 11:23 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jducoeurOverall: not a great speech, but not a terrible one either. Rather disjointed at times -- the first several minutes felt more like an Oscar acceptance speech than a presidential one -- but once she got down to business she generally stayed on-message. She jabbed *very* hard at the Democrats, indeed to the point of coming across as rather nasty at times: she manages to make Biden look like a nice guy by comparison. That's likely necessary in her positon (she can't afford to look weak); we'll see how it plays with the general electorate.
I listened to most of the speech in the car, so I was surprised when I got home that my reaction to seeing her on TV was quite different from hearing her. She's oddly weaker visually than audibly: her body language comes across as much more hectoring to me than her tone alone does.
As for the content -- no real surprises. I'm irritated by the sheer volume of lying and exaggeration it contained about the Democrats, but by now I should expect that of the Republicans. (Mind, I expect some of it from any political campaign: it's just the quantity that annoys me.) It was very much a speech of battle lines, defining a lot of bad guys who she is against: the political establishment, the media, city folk, democrats, etc. I'd love to hear how that plays among the independents: it was an intensely partisan speech in a political environment that has otherwise been focusing on unity.
Her consistent use of "our opponent", never actually naming Obama, feels weirdly smarmy to me, and oddly out of place in a campaign that has often been on a first-name basis otherwise on both sides. I suppose that was done because she's the one person involved who *doesn't* actually know any of the players personally, but it was quite noticeable.
I can't say I *liked* the speech, but it would have been surprising if I did. I'd say that she hit the necessary points, but left plenty of holes that the Democrats have presumably already begun poking into. I don't know if it will win a lot of people over from the center, but it ought to at least help shore up the right wing...
I listened to most of the speech in the car, so I was surprised when I got home that my reaction to seeing her on TV was quite different from hearing her. She's oddly weaker visually than audibly: her body language comes across as much more hectoring to me than her tone alone does.
As for the content -- no real surprises. I'm irritated by the sheer volume of lying and exaggeration it contained about the Democrats, but by now I should expect that of the Republicans. (Mind, I expect some of it from any political campaign: it's just the quantity that annoys me.) It was very much a speech of battle lines, defining a lot of bad guys who she is against: the political establishment, the media, city folk, democrats, etc. I'd love to hear how that plays among the independents: it was an intensely partisan speech in a political environment that has otherwise been focusing on unity.
Her consistent use of "our opponent", never actually naming Obama, feels weirdly smarmy to me, and oddly out of place in a campaign that has often been on a first-name basis otherwise on both sides. I suppose that was done because she's the one person involved who *doesn't* actually know any of the players personally, but it was quite noticeable.
I can't say I *liked* the speech, but it would have been surprising if I did. I'd say that she hit the necessary points, but left plenty of holes that the Democrats have presumably already begun poking into. I don't know if it will win a lot of people over from the center, but it ought to at least help shore up the right wing...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-04 04:05 am (UTC)ERRY
If I could just reframe the point that Cal was making.
BARTLET
I understand the point that Cal was making. I was sitting next to him when he made it,
my ears are connected to my brain just like every body else. And I'm saying what's next?
CAL
Sir, not to put my head in the lion's mouth but by saying the name of your opponent in
public you're essentially giving him free advertising.
JERRY
Cal thinks you should start referring to him as "my opponent" or "the other guy"?
CAL
Sir.
BARTLET
You're not afraid he's gonna make me look like I can't remember his name?
JERRY
No.
BARTLET
I am. I think it's going to make me look like I can't remember his name. I think it's
going to make me look addled. I think it's going to make me look dotty. And even if it
didn't make me look like those things it would remain a stupid idea. What's next? Nothing?
Excellent. [leaves]