Why watch the vice-presidential debate? Entertainment value.

The vice-presidential debate Thursday might not change much in the polls, but it should provide more zingers than the first presidential debate did – and be a warm-up for Obama-Romney Round 2.

Steve Helber/AP/File
Republican vice-presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan (R) of Wisconsin gestures during a rally at a hardware store in Roanoke, Va., in this Aug. 22 file photo.
Nati Harnik/AP
Vice President Joe Biden speaks in Council Bluffs, Iowa, Oct. 4.

Did last Wednesday's presidential debate not have enough fireworks or personal attacks for you? Were you bothered, as some Democrats have been, that President Obama didn't call out Mitt Romney on some of his misleading claims (or vice versa)?

Tune in Thursday night, then, when Vice President Joe Biden faces off against GOP vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan, and sparks are almost certain to fly.

Given the "attack dog" role that most VP candidates assume, it's not surprising that vice-presidential debates are often heavy on aggression, and contain some memorable one-liners. (Think Lloyd Bentsen telling Dan Quayle in 1988, "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy," or Walter Mondale telling Bob Dole in 1976 that he "has richly earned his reputation as a hatchet man.")

Beyond the entertainment value, of course, they may not mean much. In 2008, a record number of viewers tuned in to watch Sarah Palin debate Mr. Biden, wondering, primarily, whether then-Governor Palin would be in over her head.

Palin's "Can I call you Joe?" intro line was richly parodied afterward – and Tina Fey was surely thanking her for it – but in the end, Palin put in a credible performance and Biden reined in his attacks to avoid appearing like a bully, and the debate had zero effect on the polls.

That's likely to be the case again this time, although Democrats are certainly hoping that Biden can lay the groundwork for Mr. Obama to recover from his poor first debate performance – which did, in fact, seem to have made a big difference in the polls, contrary to what most pundits expected beforehand.

For starters, expect Biden to be much more prepared – and willing – to call out Congressman Ryan on any claims he takes issue with.

The debate will cover both domestic and foreign-policy issues. Look for Medicare to loom large in domestic issues; it was a centerpiece of Ryan's budget proposal, and Mr. Romney's proposal to partly privatize Medicare was based largely on Ryan's ideas. It's also a key area where Obama's team is trying to stoke fears about what the plan will mean for seniors' expenses down the road.

Given Biden's extensive foreign-policy experience, international issues should also make up a good chunk of the debate – and some viewers may be interested to see how Ryan, who has far less exposure on foreign policy, measures up.

In the end, the debate may be much more entertaining than the somewhat dry presidential debate from last week, which seemed heavier on dense numbers and dry explanation rather than zingers and one-liners.

But if you're looking for an event that could have a measurable effect on the race, you may need to wait until the following Tuesday, when Obama and Romney face off for a second time, this time taking questions from undecided voters in a town-hall-style event.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.