{{{{DRUDGE POLL}}}} WHO WON THE VICE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE?...

BIDEN 28% 154,668
PALIN 70% 382,694
NEITHER 2% 10,203
Total Votes: 547,565

http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/dsp/polls_results/20081003_palin_biden_debate.htm

By the way, I find Joyner's article above to be a typical biased report of the debate, meaning whether intentional or not, he shows clear political leanings.

If you are truly able to look neutrally at the two candidates, when you read his article your notice that he is leaning a certain way when he says:

(a) he refers to Brit Hume, as "obviously pro-McCain" - rather than just as a news anchor for Fox News - he wants the reader to interpet what Mr. Hume says with that frame of reference - imagine if you heard someone speak of Matt Lauer as obviously pro-Obama, or Katie Couric as obviously anti-Palin.

(b)he refers POSITIVELY to the most poignant moment of the debate as Biden's reference to a personal tragic accident in his life and then immediately he NEGATIVELY refers to Palin's missing an opportunity to "share a human moment after that." Options for Mr. Joyner could have been:

(i) to mention positively that Palin shared that many members of her family are teachers like Biden's wife;
(ii) mention a separate point raised by Palin positively;
(iii) or how about, just not mention Palin negatively at all?!

(c) the author attempts to degrade a poll by Frank Luntz that said that most undecided viewers thought Palin won the debate, by prefacing this fact by saying "for what it's worth" rather than stating it without bias as a fact or by leading his article with that poll.

These are just a FEW of the indicators that show the biased direction that Joyner writes. IF YOU ARE ATTEMPTING TO READ UNBIASED REPORTS(and this goes for whether republican or democrat) you should be able to see that, to use his own word "obviously" that he writes with a bias.

I think I'd have more respect for the article if he started it off by saying something like "For what it's worth, I think Biden won the debate, however, I must admit that I really like Biden."

One last point, almost everyone has some view on the Biden-Palin debate, BUT a reporter or blogger or whatever(especially a writer!) knows how to remove his or her own views from an article. When you see such views, it's because they don't care or they're so staunchly of the view that they can't see the other side.

(Stumbled across your blog the other day and was really pleased to find a conservative viewpoint that didn't sound like it was written by a conspiracy theorist with a persecution complex.)

Why mention Brit Hume is for John McCain? Is there evidence of that?

He puts on his pundit hat on Sunday mornings and he makes it clear that he's for the Republican. He doesn't hide that. I think he's a solid, well respected journalist but he doesn't pretend to be neutral.

Why mention Brit Hume is for John McCain? Is there evidence of that? Do you mention that other journalists are for Barak Obama?

Instant polls are problematic, of course, but so far showing clear Biden wins. Both CNN and CBS polls showing that.

It depends on which polls you look at I suppose.

{{{{DRUDGE POLL}}}} WHO WON THE VICE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE?...

BIDEN

29% 83,505
PALIN

69% 196,634
NEITHER

2% 4,786

Total Votes: 284,925

Gosh darndet! I just feel safer with a female Opey in the White House.

Hadn't you heard? Hillary's out of the race.

James time to change the name of the blog, you are totally an inside the beltway person.

I had the very same thought.

There was no knock out punch, on either side, but after all, experience wise, Palin was up against the person that should be at the top of the Democrat ticket.

I think we expect her to have a knowledge base that she may not have. I don't expect her to talk like a policy wonk. She talked well about the things she did know and has experience with.

Her answer to the VP and the consitutional role was pretty bad, but Biden's was worse and he is a lawyer and should make sense. And his answer about his position on the judicial committee and helping to coin the word Bork is something he is proud of? How do you use that as your "proud" moment when running on the promise to be bipartisan? Although I don't think anyone except maybe those in the mushy middle really think Obama will be Mr. Bipartisan.

I'm sorry, but use some common sense. There is a certain baseline of information that you need in order to do any job. For example, you most likely would prefer for your doctor to have some familiarity with human anatomy.

Posted by Andrea

Nope, I dont want my doctor to have a basic knowledge of anatomy, I want a doctor I can have a beer with, a 'guy like me'.

"Doctor, I'm coughing blood"

"Ah, well, y'know, I was talkin' to this guy, just lost his job, 3 kids, y'know, regular guy, if you talk to soccer moms, they'd tell ya, you're prob'ly sick."

"Yes. What specifically is wrong with me?"

"We gotta, we gotta cure you, get you back on track, and all you need is belief! There's nothing wrong with you that can't be cured by what's right with you!"

"Oh god."

Both Palin and Biden were doing it, deliberately talking monosyllabically and going with populist generalisations. I know all presidential and vice-presidential candidates do it to some extent, but this was schmaltzier than anything I've ever seen, schmaltzier than Bill Clinton.