The consolation for Democrats is that not many people watch vice presidential debates and even fewer are influenced by what happens in them. They hope. Then again, this is an unusual election year in which more than the usual number of people are thinking the vice-presidential nominees might offer a more appealing choice than those at the top of the ticket, so maybe some people tuned in last night to see the choice they wish they were making next month.
Regardless, if you're a Trump-Pence supporter who watched, you know what you're thinking: Boy, Pence sure seemed like the winner, but I bet the media will somehow to make the case that Kaine came out on top. You know it! They always do.
Well. They always do if they can pull it off without looking like total fools. Tim Kaine was so obnoxiously terrible last night, even Hillary shill Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post knew he couldn't sell the idea of a Kaine win:
Winners
Mike Pence: From the very beginning, Pence was the more comfortable of the two men on the debate stage. Pence repeatedly turned to the camera when he answered questions, making clear he understood that the real audience wasn't in the room but watching on TV. The Indiana governor was calm, cool and collected throughout — a stark contrast to the fast-talking (and seemingly nervous) Kaine. Did Pence respond to Kaine's dozens of attacks on Donald Trump? Only sort of. What Pence seemed to be doing was making the case for Pence-ism, a, dare I say it, compassionate conservatism — a case for Pence 2020 or 2024. Regardless, Trump will very much take it, as Pence's performance will offer a reset of sorts for a campaign that is scrambling badly due to self-inflicted wounds from the nominee. Win or lose next month, Pence did himself real good in the eyes of the Republican world on Tuesday night.
Losers
Tim Kaine: Someone must have told the Virginia senator he needed to always be on his front foot in the debate, always be the aggressor. It didn't work. Kaine started the debate talking so quickly and trying to load so many Trump attacks into every answer that it made it virtually impossible to grasp any one attack. In the middle of the debate, Kaine seemed to relax into it — delivering an effective attack on Trump's comments on women. But that Kaine was the exception, not the rule. When he wasn't trying to stuff 10 pounds of attack in a five-pound bag in his answers, he was relentlessly interrupting Pence. Every single time Pence started to level an attack against Hillary Clinton, Kaine immediately began to talk over him. I'm not sure if that was on purpose or not, but it didn't come across well — at all. One glaring example: As Pence was recounting his personal experience on Sept. 11, 2001, Kaine interrupted to say, "I was in Virginia." Um, okay. Not a good look.
I wonder if Kaine's approach was one that seemed like a good idea when they planned it out, but just came off horribly when he actually tried it. I know Joe Biden was widely seen to have dominated the 2012 debate with Paul Ryan by acting in much the exact same rude, obnoxious manner. But thinking back to that night, the real problem was that Ryan let Biden fluster him and knock him back on his heels. Ryan seemed to think he was going to have a serious policy discussion on national TV, and when he found himself dealing with Crazy Uncle Bully Joe, he had no idea what to do.
Pence made no such mistake. He was calm, cool and collected no matter how many times Kaine did the buttinski act. He not only won on substance but he clearly came off as the more reasonable and likeable person.
If I had to guess, I'd say that Hillary's campaign managers dictated that Kaine follow the Biden 2012 strategy, and especially instructed him to butt in and talk over Pence any time he was making a compelling case against Hillary's honesty or competency - which he did often, as you might expect since that's not hard to do. At times it seemed like a boxer who was hopelessly outclassed, but would tie up his opponent in a clench in order to get the referee to at least momentarily separate them so he could get out of trouble. That seemed like Kaine's only play most of the night.
Well, that and constantly repeating the talky-pointy attacks on Trump that have already been established by the media and the Hillary campaign. And here's why I think that didn't work last night: Those storylines are designed to distract people from the issues. When they're the only thing people are talking about, they seem to move the needle because you make people forget about the issues. But when you've got a guy up there trying to have a serious conversation about the debt, national security and taxes, while another guy just keeps interrupting with peripheral nonsense, the viewers aren't going to like that. They really would like a serious discussion of the issues.
Clearly, last night only one running mate showed up prepared to have that discussion. And even the Washington Post can't deny which one it was.
The consolation for Democrats is that not many people watch vice presidential debates and even fewer are influenced by what happens in them. They hope. Then again, this is an unusual election year in which more than the usual number of people are thinking the vice-presidential nominees might offer a more appealing choice than those at the top of the ticket, so maybe some people tuned in last night to see the choice they wish they were making next month.
Regardless, if you're a Trump-Pence supporter who watched, you know what you're thinking: Boy, Pence sure seemed like the winner, but I bet the media will somehow to make the case that Kaine came out on top. You know it! They always do.
Well. They always do if they can pull it off without looking like total fools. Tim Kaine was so obnoxiously terrible last night, even Hillary shill Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post knew he couldn't sell the idea of a Kaine win:
