From: littlefield@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: VP Debate
Date: 14 Oct 92 19:08:45 GMT
Reply-To: littlefield@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Distribution: ne
Organization: Brandeis University

In article <7227@transfer.stratus.com>, kvk@questor.sw.stratus.com (Ken Koellner) writes:
>I watched the debate last night.  Here's my scoring:
>
>	Quayle	  - 1.0
>	Gore	  - 3.0
>	Stockdale - 9.5
>
>I thought Quayle was his usual dorky self.  Gore was an excellent
>speaker but he bickered with Quayle.  This cut his score in half in my
>book.  If one of this guys had the #%@# to ignore the barbs and
>continue talking about the issues, they'd double their score in my
>book.  Stockdale came off as a little insecure but that didn't bother
>me.  He seemed like a really good, behind-the-desk-getting-things-done
>kind of guy.  I probably would have scored him a little lower but the
>other two bickered so much, they may Stockdale look good in my
>opinion.

	I thought that Quayle put on a very good showing. He was articulate
and seemed to extricate himself well from barbs from the past. Gore, on the
other hand seemed to be the typical "smarmy" politician that turns general
voters off. It's hard to argue that Gore is an articulate man. His points were
weak, in my view, but at least his speaking voice was solid and flowing, unlike
Stockdale. Gore's concern, it seems, was to diminish Quayle, who managed to
represent the President's platform well. Quayle's "Pulling a Clinton" zinger
edged his pressence considerably.

	Stockdale's performance affirmed the American two-party system. "Who am
I and what am I doing here" are  excellent questions for Stockdale. He was
unprepared and painful to watch. On one hand, an average voter may identify
with this seeming by-stander who is not a politician by nature, but I doubt
that this clumsy "charm" affirms the Perot position. My scoring would be as
follows:

	Quayle   : 7
	Gore     : 4
	Stockdale: 1

	I'm baffled by how Stockdale's lack of speaking ability scores
incredibly high on your debate scorecard. Also, I'm a bit confused on how Gore
could be viewed as a winner in this one. While his performance was a *lot*
better than Stockdale's inability, he devoted his time at ineffective attacks
and feeble defenses. Quayle was on the offensive in this one and defended
himself in very good manner. The abortion issue did trip him up, however, but
Gore beat it to death.
 
[stuff about NPR report deleted]

	You did mention something about Andre Marrou. I think that having the
Libertarians present would have been just as much, if not more, proper as
having the Perot platform represented. At least the Libertarians are a 
semblance of a political party. The Perot movement seems to be anti-
establishment. Rather than working from within a set "democratic" system, Perot
strikes me as the kind of guy who would work around it. Capitol Hill gridlock
is not neccessarily bad. Snap decisions without debate are the stuff of
totalitarian regimes.

>-- 
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Four more years?  Just say "noe".
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--Kevin

littlefield@binah.cc.brandeis.edu

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
more "potatoe" jokes, PLEASE!! I don't think the old grey mare is dead yet.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: ne.politics,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot