Wednesday, October 06, 2004

Talking to a friend today about the debate, we agreed that Edwards could have done better. But the polls are giving him a clear win, and as I was going over what I remembered as the debate highlights, I thought of something else. Edwards wasn't playing to an audience of people like me, he was playing to a jury, and I've been dismissed from every jury pool I've been part of. Of course the SCLM are going to say it was a tie until proven otherwise (and even after) but Edwards made the points he wanted to make, and if I wasn't charmed, I can see how others were.
From a reader at TPM:
As a trial lawyer, Edwards learned not to allow a witness to explain. Had he challenged Cheney on each lie, Cheney could have explained them away. A better trial tactic, I am not sure about a debate, is to let the falsehood sit there but point it out later to the jury or the judge. By not letting Cheney explain away the lies, he is stuck with them and the public will act as the jury.
Of course on policv, as opposed to theater I'll go with Max. But even he thought it was a close call, and maybe, after all, it's wasn't.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comment moderation is enabled.