What we saw on Thursday night in the American vice-presidential debate wasn’t only an argument about policy, it was a look at two different eras in American family life.
Joe Biden, of course, could stand on Neptune and distract attention away from the Sun. He entered the Senate in 1973, back when the old Democratic giants from the New Deal era still roamed the earth. Every sentimental tone of voice, every ebullient and condescending grin brought you back to the old kitchen tables in working class Catholic neighborhoods of places like Chicago, San Francisco, Providence and Philadelphia.
That was a time, much more so than now, when there were still regional manners, regional accents and greater distance from the homogenising influence of mass culture. That was a culture in which emotion was put out there on display — screaming matches between family members who could erupt in chest poking fury one second and then loyalty until death affection the next.
Biden gave America the full opera on Thursday, and I suspect there will be as many reactions as there are partisan flavours. Democrats will obviously be cheered by his aggressive impassioned and offensive performance.
It will be the crowning irony of the No Drama Obama campaign that it took a man who exudes more drama than a decade of Latin American soap operas to get Democrats out of their funk.
Biden clearly ended the psychic slide. He took it to Paul Ryan on the inexplicability of the Republican tax plan. He had his best moments on those subjects Ryan is strongest, like budgets.
At the same time, my inbox was filled with a certain number of people who would be happy if they could spend the next few weeks punching Biden in the face, and not just Republicans. What do independents want most? They want people who will practice a more respectful brand of politics, who will behave the way most Americans try to behave in their dealings — respectfully, maybe pausing to listen for a second. To them will seem like an off-putting caricature of the worst of old-style politics.
This is not just an issue of manners. It’s: How are we going to practise the kind of politics that will help us avert the fiscal cliff? How are we going to balance the cross-cutting challenges, like increasing growth while reducing long-term debt?
A lot of people will look at Biden’s performance and see a style of politics that makes complex tradeoffs impossible. The people who think this way swing general elections.
Ryan hails from a different era: the era of the workout gym. By Ryan’s time, the national media culture was pervasive. The tone was cool, not hot. Meritocracy had kicked in and ambitious young people had learned to adopt a low-friction manner. Ryan emerges from this culture in the same way Barack Obama does.
This is a generation armed with self-awareness. In this generation you roll your eyes at anyone who is quite so flamboyantly demonstrative as the VP.
In addition, Ryan was nurtured by the conservative policy apparatus and had a tendency on Thursday night to talk about policy even when he was asked about character. I would not say he defined a personality as firmly as he might have, but he did an excellent job of demonstrating policy professionalism. This debate was excessive in its attention to foreign policy — an arena that is a voting issue for very few. Ryan demonstrated amazing fluency, given how little time he has spent working in these areas.
He was strong on Obama’s economic failures, strong on the Libya debacle, and he did have a few chances to highlight the Obama campaigns crucial weakness — the relative absence of any positive agenda, the relative absence of any large plans for the next four years.
By the end, voters will have noticed one large irony. Emotionally, Biden dominated the night. Democrats were wondering if the Obama administration was a spent force. But not anymore. But substantively, it is the Romney-Ryan proposals that were the centre of attention. Some of those proposals are unpopular (medicare, which was woefully under-covered). Some are popular (taxes). But most of the discussion was on Romney plans because the other side just doesn’t have many.
This was a battle of generations. The age difference was the undercurrent of every exchange. The older man had the virility, but in a way that will seem antique to many.
New York Times