General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy Joe Biden’s Laugh is the Most Devastating Political Weapon of the 2012 Election
From Juli Weiner at Vanity Fair:
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2012/10/Why-Joe-Bidens-Laugh-is-the-Most-Devastating-Political-Weapon-of-the-2012-Election
Joe Biden is earning rave reviews for his electricfying performance in last nights vice-presidential debate. Vanity Fairs own Todd Purdum wrote that Biden was priest to Paul Ryans flummoxed altar boy, Scoutmaster to Ryans nervous, tongue-tied knot-tier. His smile veeredyesbetween amused and condescending, depending on the honey or vinegar with which he referred to Ryan as my friend. But can you blame Ryan for being so off his game? Self-satisfied smirking was sort of his Thing!
But the smirking was but a prelude to the snickering. Basically every time that Ryan said something, about anything, Biden looked down and giggled to himself, sometimes simultaneously scribbling down notes (<-- hate u paul), sometimes not. New York magazine has a fine summary of the controversy surrounding the chuckle: On Twitter Piers Morgan deemed Biden's laugh infectious, and after weathering the last week many liberals seemed happy to have something to smile about. Unsurprisingly, right-leaning Tweeters werent amused by Bidens suggestion that everything Paul Ryan said in the debate was absurd.
But this particular style of laughingi.e., its specific aesthetic qualitieswas what made it so universally, perhaps even subconsciously, persuasive. We think New York is correct that it is an implicit suggestion that everything Paul Ryan said in the debate was absurd, but the laugh was equal parts bemusement as it was conspiratorial. It was a laugh that also implicitly suggested that the audiencethe intelligent, informed, rational, beautiful, amazing-taste-in-music-having, weight-losing audiencewas in on the joke. It was not an arrogant laugh; at no point did Biden seem condescending to anyone but Paul Ryan. It makes sense that Morgan called it infectious. Every laugh was an audience-participation question: Can you believe this guy?
-snip-
nc4bo
(17,651 posts)Joe is a master and all one needs to do is read the comments from those who are calling it disrespectful and bullyish
Joe stung the Romney/Ryan ticket, stung the entire Republican Party and there's no amount of spinning that will fix that
Joe made them squeal!
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)and his caring about people isn't FAKE
nc4bo
(17,651 posts)He's a good guy, so glad he's on our team!
nolabear
(41,990 posts)It was a fine line and Joe rode it like a surfer rides a curl. He was having a ball. And so was I.
highplainsdem
(49,015 posts)Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)even if he got his facts right, which I don't know,
he came across SO condescending, SO smug, SO superior,
(maintaining that expression on his face throughout
so much of Biden's speaking time).
The idea that this little congressional version of
Michael Scott is an expert on the middle east, on
the way it all needs to happen, was so blatantly
foolish, absurd, and frankly offensive. I would love
to hear some military reviews of the foreign policy
part of the debate.
Edit to add that I am sorry to insult the wonderful
character of Michael Scott. But Ryan reminds me
of him, a lot, often. Except without the heart.
ginnyinWI
(17,276 posts)So knowledgeable, so informed--you get the idea that there isn't one detail about Middle Eastern affairs that he doesn't know all about, and indeed hasn't been a part of in some way. He had all the facts and used them so well.
The way he referred to Benjamin Netanyahu as "Bebee" was so off-hand and so telling. Saying, "I'm on a first name basis with these guys."
DinahMoeHum
(21,801 posts). . .and is prepared to tell him out on it.