What could Paul Ryan possibly be winning, seriously?

I had lots of fun last night, thanks to the vice presidential debate. Instead of wine, I had some scotch, as if there wasn't enough fire in the debate. After the debate, talking heads called it a draw, and various news polling had Ryan leading.

I checked the amount of alcohol I consumed, and was sure that I wasn't drunk and not even 微醺. Then I was seriously baffled and deeply troubled. What could Paul Ryan possibly be winning, at all? All the focus was on Biden's smirks or condescending tone. Was Joe extremely rude or violent? Did he call Ryan names? Did he lie about Ryan's position? The answers are no, but then why is his smirk more important than everything else?

This is supposed to be a political debate, and it should be about facts, logic, and debaters' ability to deliver the message, while maintaining a civil manner. This is NOT a contest of "can you stand my stupidity?". Then, how in the world, would you "win" a debate because your opponent smirked?

Frankly, 4 years ago, I didn't think Obama was up to the job, because he wasn't experienced of anything at all, not because of McCain's facial expression. 4 years later, Obama didn't deliver great result in economy and job market, although he was constrained by 2 wars and the blew up of financial crisis. I can totally understand the notion that people want some change, to see whether others can do the job better. But we are talking about "winning" the debate here. When I see comments like "this guy is nice enough for me to hang out with, or have a beer with", my blood is boiling. Bush junior won because "he's good to have a beer with", and the whole world saw what that criteria turned out to be.

Libya was not a pretty picture for sure, and Biden couldn't talk the administration out of it. But Romney/Ryan didn't know what to do either. Iran's nuclear ambition is certainly a concern, but the "we shouldn't wait for Putin to give us green light" line was just laughable. Tax cut, job creation, and deficit reduction, wouldn't be achieved at the same time, miraculously, just because Romney/Ryan "promised" to close loopholes, while they are sitting on the most gigantic one!

When pressed by both Biden and the moderator on how and what to cut, Ryan kept repeating himself, but he was basically saying, I don't know, but I will, please look at my ugly face and trust me.

Politics is about winning more people, or simply put, hijacking people, for lacking of better term. Whenever Ryan started about "small businesses", Biden cut him off by differentiating 97% of the small businesses weren't the ones Ryan was actually referring to. He sounded rude, I agree. But I think he did the right thing. Obama was too passive and allowed Romney to dictate the debate flow, and allowed him to let false information or perception to set into people's mind. Biden did the right thing by not allowing that hijack. His message was clear, we have already hijacked those people with real money, you can't do it by blurring the definition with empty words.

Attacking or disagreeing with Obama's policies all you want, but ask yourself, what has Ryan offered last night? Let me recap for you:

Ryan - "You did it all wrong!"
Bidne - "What would you do differently?"
Ryan - "I don't know what and how, but I will achieve that rosy picture. There will be no pain, all gain for you!"
Biden smirks
Ryan - "I win!".
Media - he wins!

People, please wake up! Put down whatever you are smoking, it ain't healthy. Everyone should have some kind of ambition or belief that you want to improve and you can improve yourself and your situation. You shouldn't hope that the whole nation dumb down so that you can feel good about yourself.

In a debate, when your opponent doesn't have any clue about what's he's talking about, and still poses as a proud ignorant person, you might want to control yourself NOT to punch his ugly face, but you are certainly entitled to dismiss him with a CONDESCENDING TONE!