In case you missed it, last night's Vice Presidential debate pitted a calm, genuine Mike Pence against an overly aggressive, rude Tim Kaine. Donald Trump's running mate, Mike Pence, channeled his inner Paul Harvey and, with a classic Hoosier accent (half Southern, half Midwestern), he proceeded to gently but firmly expose the Clinton campaign strategy for what it is.
By contrast, Tim Kaine did little more than bark insults at Trump and his supporters in more that 65, yes 65, interruptions. To be fair to Senator Kaine, the format of the debate lended itself to verbal clutter. Two minutes is simply not enough time to answer a complex question about Syria, much less answer the question, rebut the opponent's last statement and then ad lib as necessary. Also to be fair to Senator Kaine, it seems clear that Clinton's strategy was to relitigate as many Trump misstatements as possible with an eye towards solidifying her position with her voting base. Clinton's singular focus has been and continues to be to label Trump and all of his supporters as bigots. This, of course, is nothing new. Democrats have avoided responsibility for their own failures in minority communities for decades by labeling the other party a cabal of Klan members just waiting around for an opportunity to bring back Jim Crow. The strategy has been very effective. Republicans receive almost no African American or Latino votes. But in the context of a debate, it is my guess that this strategy will prove to be largely ineffective. Governor Pence likely capitalized on that and won over some undecided voters.
Hilary Clinton already has almost all of the Hispanic, African American and single woman vote. There is an old saying in debate, when you've won your argument, stop arguing. Clinton has won the argument for these voters. Dedicating 90 minutes to solidifying her position with these groups, while at the same time alienating undecided white voters of both genders is a mistake. Kaine's tone alone, with his constant interruptions of both the moderator and Governor Pence, represents the debate style that viewers hate the most. If a voter is going to take 90 minutes out of his or her life to listen to a couple of politicians speak, he or she wants to actually hear what each candidate is saying. That is particularly true if that voter is still undecided. Ad hominem attacks are universally unpersuasive in debate. Any judge, debate coach, or expert debater will tell you that. Kaine's style likely alienated those voters.
Worse, it probably served to solidify Trump supporters. No one likes being called a bigot. Spending 90 minutes shaming Donald Trump as a bigot is 90 minutes spent labeling his supporters as bigots as well. Americans are not stupid. The natural response to being called a bigot is to resist the charge and double down on the candidate being attacked. In other words, labeling people as racists is counterproductive and unpersuasive.
Governor Pence went into the debate with a different agenda. His was to show that he has the temperament to be President and the influence to moderate his running mate's temperament as needed. Mike Pence is an Establishment favorite and it's easy to see why. He is plain spoken, smart, informed, and quick on his feet. His demeanor was his strongest weapon in the debate. With each attack, Pence dismissed his opponent like a gentle, rural grandfather dismissing an obstinate teenage boy. He didn't take Kaine to the woodshed, but he did make Kaine look petty and off message.
On substance, both sides acquitted themselves well. There is no question that Kaine is competent and can execute the duties of the office. By Democrat standards, Kaine is more to the center than, say, Elizabeth Warren. It really is too bad that he spent his time on ad hominem attacks rather than demonstrating his obvious command of the issues.
Pence should have run for President. Whether he could have changed the outcome of the primary in such a clear anti-establishment environment is uncertain. To my Establishment friends who loathe Trump, I would refer you back to one of my earlier posts on the primary. Jeb Bush and a potential Romney revamp sucked the life out of all of the other potential Establishment candidates like Pence. Pence didn't run because he didn't want to compete against these perennial Establishment behemoths. It seems clear to at least this Republican that Pence would have been a good choice, and the Party needs to do a better job managing the behemoths out of the process in anti-incumbent years.
A few thoughts on the moderator. Like the last debate, it is difficult to watch these moderators. Elaine Quijano was no better than Lester Holt. Between Kaine and the moderator, Mike Pence was statically interrupted far more than he was not, including during key moments in the debate. For example, Kaine was able to repeat his "Trump is a bigot" line of attack at least five times without interruption, much less without any challenge from Quijano. Mike Pence, on the other hand, only tried twice to attack Clinton on her emails or the Clinton Foundation. Both times Quijano interrupted Pence with a dismissive tone and then deferred to Kaine to continue the interruption. Whether by accident or by design, Quijano appeared biased. At best Quijano appeared to have totally lost control of the debate and Tim Kaine. Something tells me that didn't bother her one bit.
The next Presidential debate is Sunday. It is a townhall format, which should favor a candidate like Trump, who tends to be more comfortable with extemporaneous speech - that is, when he doesn't get too far off message. The stakes are extremely high for both parties. The polls are essentially tied, with Clinton holding a slight lead overall and a very slight lead in the battleground states. One classic Hillary flub, like "basket of deplorables" would sink her. Likewise, one personal attack on some private citizen from Trump will sink him. Message discipline will be the key, and for that reason you have to bet on Clinton.
If nothing else, these debates have served the public by illustrating the stark contrast between these candidates. Whatever the outcome of this election, no voter will be able to say that he or she didn't know what they were voting for. Neither candidate is being deceptive about their agenda. In that sense, we will get exactly the government for which we vote. Quite frankly, I'm not sure, having nominated these two candidates, what that says about us as a nation.
No comments:
Post a Comment