The general consensus for last night's Harry Reid-Sharron Angle debate was that she "won" it by seeming sane. A few thoughts:* Here's my coverage for
Politics Daily.
* The press and public clearly got that Harry Reid was underwhelming, but if you weren't in the studio you may not realize just how badly he performed. He looked half asleep and highly annoyed to even be there. He walked up to Angle for a couple of pre-debate moments, said a few nothings and then condescendingly patted her hand as he ambled rather unsteadily to his podium.
* And That Smile. Not hers, which was weird, too, and buried under makeup quite possibly applied by RuPaul. But Reid's smile. That creepy, odd, bad-toothy smile that came out at all the wrong moments. After Angle accused him of voting to give Social Security to undocumented immigrants, for example, he shot back: "These ideas of my opponent are really extreme. Her facts are absolutely wrong." And then, suddenly after a beat, out came That Smile. Shivers.
* By the way, the nonscientific web polls on the R-J and Sun's sites both assert that Harry Reid won the debate.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/78c0a/78c0af5c0289462ee5d56f052c39ed9774ec3611" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7f9c6/7f9c6126460a0fac394701731ac1e85fee09e021" alt=""
This probably is the result of, I'm guessing, someone from the Reid campaign being assigned to do nothing but vote for him all night long on the R-J's site. The Sun's site, which would naturally attract more Reid supporters, also prevents people at an IP address from casting multiple votes, but the R-J's crack technology staff led by
their Online Guy hasn't yet figured out how to prevent such newfangled shenanigans. (Disclosure: I just voted six times just for shiggles.)
* My favorite wrap-ups came from
Slate's John Dickerson (
"In the casinos in Nevada when this happens, they pump in oxygen. This debate did not do that for this race") and some dude named
@delrayser who Tweeted:
"Man, Harry Reid is the WORST. Except for that crazy lady running against him." -every Democrat on Twitter last night." For an interesting and different view, my Politics Daily editor-in-chief Melinda Henneberger, formerly of The New York Times, wondered why the
media is being so nice to Angle today.
* Bravo to the Las Vegas Sun for having David McGrath Schwartz on hand to
fact-check what was said. Yes, Laura Myers of the R-J did a little of that in her piece, but there needed to be a LOT more and the main newspaper let down the readers by failing to do so. Maybe they could have skipped the dullsville feature
on supporters waving signs outside the VegasPBS mothership.
* The only publication that really gave Reid much credit was, intriguingly, the allegedly diabolically pro-Angle
Review-Journal, which intoned, "Reid gave as good as he got" even though he really, truly didn't. Nonetheless, Jon Ralston mocked their coverage as slanted towards Angle -- for saying essentially the same things he has said about the same event -- because he just can't help himself. Whatever.
* Reid's somnolent, dour performance makes my Daily Beast piece from yesterday even more relevant. The nation has to be wondering how this man got to his height of power.
I explained.
* It's hard not to admire the quick work Reid's folks did in turning around a TV ad within hours of the debate. See it: