HOME / the chat room: Real-time discussions with Slate writers.

Up for DebateEmily Bazelon and Dahlia Lithwick take readers' questions about tonight's vice-presidential face-off.

Posted Thursday, Oct. 2, 2008, at 4:46 PM ET

(Continued from page 3)

RSS

_______________________

Philadelphia: "The drawback, of course, is that they need the center as well as the Republican base to win, and the center isn't Rush Limbaugh's big draw." Which is funny, because—at least going by the center and moderate Republican people I know—the Palin selection has sent them running to the Obama camp.

Emily Bazelon: Yes that's an aspect of the backlash I mentioned. When I did this chat soon after Palin's selection, a few women wrote in to say that they'd been Hillary supporters, they'd thought about supporting McCain—but they were insulted by his choice of Palin as a ploy to win them to his side. I think if Palin had more moderate and centrist views this could have played out very differently. But not believing in evolution, or allowing for abortion for rape and incest victims—these are positions that put you in a narrow slice of the American pie.

_______________________

Rockville, Md.: Don't forget Geraldine Ferraro—she, Hillary and Palin make an n of 3.

Emily Bazelon: True!

_______________________

Minneapolis: Dahlia, do you think Senator Biden should bring up how he raised his family as a single dad after the tragic death of his wife, especially if Gov. Palin gives him an opening like "the good old boys in Washington don't know what its like to raise a family"?

Dahlia Lithwick: Minneapolis, the truth is I tend to become very uneasy when candidates turn debates into a sort of olympics of personal hardship. Maybe that is just the Vulcan in me but unless Biden is really being clubbed senseless in the touching personal narrative department tonight, I'd probably advise him to tell stories of other peoples hardships, and be rock solid on policy and substance.

_______________________

New York: Isn't a debate on this level like an intensive interview? At some point, the clever vamping has to give way to a command of the subject at hand. If Biden gives substantive answers and Palin provides only bumper stickers, that can't look good. Add to that the fact that the financial world looks to be tanking. Pithiness just isn't going to do it, I'm afraid.

Dahlia Lithwick: New York I am not sure its so much an intensive interview as a series of competing monologues (interrupted in this case by admonitions to "talk to each other" which will be ignored as they were last week). Still you are right that in times of crisis, especially an economic crisis, folks are hungry for real leadership more than bumper stickers. Palin has parlayed a lot of bumper stickers into a lot of debate victories however. I wouldn't underestimate her ability to make a bumper sticker sound like reasoned analysis.

_______________________

Midlothian, Va.: Emily, if you've read any of the history surrounding Roe v. Wade and the work Blackmun did, you'd understand Biden's answer reflects a deep understanding of the many factors at work in that decision. Roe was a consensus decision, in which Blackmun gave a little, took a little and came up with a rather awkward decision designed to create a consensus on the court. Powell did something similar in Bakke. Biden's answer reflects just how smart and intellectually curious the man really is.

Emily Bazelon: Well, sorry, I just don't buy it. At the time, yes, Justice Blackmun put enormous effort into crafting a compromise. And since he won 7 out of 9 of the votes of the justices who were then on the court, in that moment he succeeded. (I wish he'd framed the decision in terms of women's right to equality instead of privacy, a word that appears nowhere in the constitution, but put that aside for now.) My point is that beginning in the late 1970s and early 1980s, Roe became the lightening rod we know it today. Biden could have cited polls showing that the majority of Americans don't want the ruling overturned outright. But I don't think we're anywhere near consensus, as a country, on the question of legalization of abortion, on second trimester abortions, which Roe allows for, on parental notification, etc. Whatever it's merits, I think there's a good historical argument that Roe fueled division by nationalizing a right that parts of the country didn't embrace. To talk now about it in terms of consensus just seems like wishful thinking.

The other thing that bothered me about Biden's answer was that he talked about the trimester framework of Roe as if it were still good law, which it's really not, in light of Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992. The legal standard since Casey is whether a government regulation is an "undue burden" on a woman's right to an abortion.

_______________________

Austin, TX: If the McCain camp was so adamant about choosing a woman for the VP nomination, why pick Palin when there are more experienced, better prepared women within the party? Why not Kay Bailey Hutchison, Olympia Snowe or Elizabeth Dole? They would come with their own individual limitations, but at least they would be familiar with such basic matters as Supreme Court History.

Dahlia Lithwick: Austin that will be the enduring question when all this ends, no matter how it ends. Why pick a mediocre woman (albeit a mediocre woman with real political abilities) when you could have picked an extraordinary one? The answers don't look good for McCain. Either there was something about an accomplished, established, seasoned woman politician that got in the way of his Pygmalion complex, or he truly believed he didn't need any help at all on the ticket beyond a uterus. Either way I think he miscalculated and the more women ask "Why not Condi/Kay/Olympia" et. al. the more that miscalculation seems to have backfired. This has been great fun and I hope we can do the Monday Morning Quarterback sometime soon. Thanks so much for reading and for pushing back at us!

_______________________

Wooster, Ohio: I have to admit that I was a Palin fan ... at first. I identified with her on many levels—I am the same age, have four children, am well-educated and have a great job. That all ended when she started her public interviews. What bothers me more than the fact that she did not know the answers to the questions being asked is how she answered them. I honestly believe I could have answered those interview questions better than she did, despite having absolutely no foreign policy experience (except what I read on sites like this).

I believe she is an intelligent woman, with the ability to learn and catch up on the things she needs to know for the vice presidency. It is much more difficult to teach someone how handle tough questions (whether or not you know the answers)—some individuals are better at handling pressure than others. I think that is more important. It is much easier to learn foreign policy, than it is to take control of a "fight or flight" instinct. She appeared to take flight in those interviews, and we just can't have that.

Emily Bazelon: Here's a great comment that goes to your point, I think:

Thanks, everyone—great questions, and great fun chatting with you!