Who gained what in the VP Debate

Regardless of what anyone says, the vice presidential debate last Thursday night was about Sarah Palin. Palin and certainly John McCain did not want this to be the case, but it was and it's all Sarah Palin's fault.

Vice presidential debates are never supposed to be centered on the VP candidates themselves. They should be battling the opposing Presidential candidate as nothing more than a champion surrogate. The purpose of the running mate is simple; 1)pull in a certain demographic or region that your respective presidential candidate needs and 2)be a good wing man (or woman). That really doesn't entail much work or responsibility. Usually, your home state and your voting record account for job number "1". And being a good wing-person requires only that you speak highly of your candidate and poorly of the opponent.

Sadly, Sarah Palin failed miserably at one of the easiest jobs in all of American politics. How you ask? By looking and acting inept to the point that voters were forced to focus on her competence rather than what she had to say. As Adam Nagourney posed in his NY Times article yesterday (link at bottom), people tuned into the Thursday debate not to hear what Sarah Palin had to say about Barack Obama, but to see how badly she could possibly mess up her "cake" job.

As it turns out, she performed adequately enough to get people to take her somewhat seriously, but not enough to give McCain any sort of help in the polls. Her only hope at doing that hinged on Joe Biden making a catastrophic error, which never happened. He put on a nearly flawless performance that showcased not only his vice presidential competence, but his comprehensive knowledge of the issues, his commitment to the middle class, and his undying support for his running mate.
This debate further solidified Obama's lead in the polls, and with only 4 weeks left until election day there is little time or chance for McCain to unravel the tightly woven lead that Obama's campaign is knitting.

Link to the NY Times article mentioned: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/us/politics/03assess.html?_r=1&nl=pol&emc=pola1&oref=slogin