In Communication Advice For Joe Biden by DemFromCT, Peter Sandman and Jody Lanard lay out how they think Biden should handle the "dilemma" of Palin revealing her unpreparedness. Some worry that he will appear "vicious if he attacks and patronizing if he doesn’t". They then go on to advise that he "share" his dilemma with the audience.
I think they are dead wrong on this.
I don't like it and I don't think it will fly with the American people. No matter how you put it, it sounds condescending for Biden to make the presumption that she isn't qualified.
He needs to come into this with the attitude that he has not seen or heard anything yet that would suggest she has what it takes to be President. That's the minimum qualification for being VP. But he should not bring it up or mention it. If it comes up, he needs to make it explicit that this isn't his decision, but rather it is the decision of the American people. The debate is the opportunity to show people, first, that the candidates are capable of being President, should it come to that, and second, which is better able to be VP, which includes stepping into the President’s role.
So, he shouldn't be concerned with Palin's qualifications, he should only be concerned with showing the American people that he is qualified and that he is better qualified than Palin to be President. And that, beyond that, the VP has jobs to do other than waiting to be President. He should lay out what that job is, so that it is clear that he knows it. (This, BTW, is in contrast to Palin who said she didn't know what the VP does.)
Biden's first task is to define what it means to be VP. By shaping that, he sets the criteria for judging the candidates. He then needs to convincing the American people that he is the better qualified candidate for the job. If she's weak, she will fail on her own. He doesn't have to interfere in any way with that process. If he does, he risks rescuing her from that fall.
Look, the VP is president of the Senate. Therefore, he should be a liaison to Congress and be able to represent the administration's position with them. He is one of if not the chief adviser to the President. He is a representative of the U.S. at the level of the Secretary of State. These are things that Biden should lay out as the job of the VP.
So, Biden should bypass the controversy over how to treat her and just set the parameters of how each of them will be judged. Those should be on the office itself and experience pertinent to the office. He should do this in a sex-neutral way, based strictly on what is needed and the qualifications to do that, and he should ask the people to judge them based on this. Then he should confine his answers to positive statements about Obama and himself, with the occasional jab at McCain.
The onus should be on Palin to show that she is up to the level needed for the job and that she's a better candidate for it than Biden. She has no hope of doing that based on anything that I've seen. This will not come across as condescending and it will be somewhat gracious toward her. He can afford to be gracious because there is so much running room. Being less than that would diminish him, and should be avoided.
And then, as to pertinent experience, he needs to make the argument that being in Congress is a huge qualification for being VP. In the normal case, the VP's primary job as president of the Senate puts him in touch with Congress. A VP's best use in the administration is as the administration's voice in Congress, helping to get critical legislation passed. Because of his long tenure in the Senate, Biden is much more qualified to fulfill that role than Palin, who never served in the legislature. This argument will put them at a disadvantage. It hits at their major argument that her experience as a governor is the best qualification to be VP. No, there's something to be said for it in terms of being President, but that isn't the expected job. That's only about the qualification. It might be enough to qualify her to be President (if she had done a great job at it and had other qualifications), but it doesn't support a claim to be VP. That's a totally different skill set.
Biden, please lay out what the office does and tell people that you want them to see that you know what needs to be done and are the best qualified to do it. That's all you need to do to neutralize Palin's position as "the woman candidate". Your experience pertinent to the job far outweighs her experience, so calmly lay out that argument and don't get off track.
And note, when your opponent is weak you don't have to attack them. The weaker they are, the less it's necessary. All you have to do is shine and the public will elect you. Studiously avoiding attacking Palin is a way to get the message across that she isn't up to your level. A friendly, fair jab on occasion on any area where she may be your equal--such as general life experience--might be warranted. Anything else is a waste of opportunity to shape the office and people's opinion of what you can do for them.
I already put this advice into a comment on the article, but I think it is worth a separate diary. I would like to make sure that this opinion at least bubbles up to the Obama campaign, so that they have the option of using it. It would be totally lost in 600+ comments. Of course, it will probably be lost in the 600+ diary entries today, but I’m willing to give it one more go.
What do you think? Should Biden succumb to addressing Palin’s lack of experience or take the argument elsewhere?