Just to keep things focused.
I find it interesting that whereas Obama picked a running mate who complemented the shortcomings in his slate–someone with a good deal of experience in foreign relations, for instance–McCain chose someone who will appeal to disenfranchised voting bases from both sides: to women who will see an opportunity to put a female a heartbeat from the presidency (and with a president of McCain’s years, that takes on a serious reality) after Hillary’s campaign ended in flames, and to the conservative base who will embrace a bottom half of the ticket who is apparently somewhere to the right of John Wayne.
The easy answer, of course, is that women won’t support her because she’s anti-abortion. Except there happen to be plenty of women who are likewise anti-abortion–yes, even Democrats–and therefore won’t find that a turnoff.
Frankly, I think Palin was a nervy choice that could reap serious benefits. And the timing of the announcement knocked all the post-convention attention away from Obama and onto McCain, which will now build as they roll into the GOP convention.
Personally, I find the notion of an anti-abortion, pro-drilling, pro-creationism, anti-animal protection vice president to be nothing short of terrifying. Then again, anyone that the extreme right embraces is by definition terrifying.
PAD
• 
I think the numbers of Clinton “defectors” are a bit exaggerated by the media. Word I get back from the convention is that the majority of Clinton delegates are having no problem with backing Obama.
And…do you think Clinton is going to stand on the sidelines when Palin steps up?
Bill Myers: roger Tang: “Meh. I don’t think so. The surrounding circumstances are so nasty (brother-ln-law tasering his kid, etc.) that a lot of the public is going to cheer that.”
I think you’re wrong. I think there are a lot of moving parts here. If Palin is deposed in the process of this investigation (which is a possibility), and says something untrue under oath — even if it’s not relevant to the investigation — the Republicans have a real problem. After all, that was their B.S. rationale for going after Bill Clinton: not that he had an affair, but that he lied under oath about it.
It’s not going to work out that way. The matter isn’t scheduled to be settled until after the election, so she isn’t going to be deposed for anything.
Roger is right. Once people hear the story about the guy tasering his kid, they’ll rally to Palin’s side and demand that guy’s head on a pike. It won’t even matter if it’s not true, since the matter won’t be settled before the election is over.
Just like the odd stories about her pregnancy, it’s not a good thing to bring up before any further proof comes out. Chances are, there won’t be any further proof.
I’d rather table both issues for now. There are plenty of things in her record to talk about.
Dammit, I wish I could edit my posts. That last post was supposed to have one more paragraph in italics. The paragraph starting, “I think you’re…” is also part of what Bill said.
Scanning through this forum and some news sites, I’ve noticed something.
Have you guys noticed how much people are suddenly talking about how old McCain is? That was something the news sites have somewhat avoided so far, but now his pick, and her experience, is being used as an angle to say, “You know, this guy is *really* old. He could die in office.”
Perhaps that will have a effect, maybe even a backlash against the media, or perhaps it will not have any effect at all, but it doesn’t seem like something the McCain campaign would want reporters highlighting.
Boy, all this talk of Palin’s “ethics problem” is easily resolved with one name: Tony Rezko.
And to all the obvious Obamazoids here talking of McCain’s “flip-flops”, go do some REAL investigating about all of Obama’s.
Where was he when the Senate voted to condemn MoveOn.org’s ad against Petraeus? The one place he wasn’t was IN the Senate to VOTE. He was there to vote on the easy “let’s not say anything bad about our servicemen and women” measure but when it was time to vote on the censure measure, he was out decrying how big a “waste of time” the vote was.
Where was Obama when it came time to vote against the Bush “FISA compromise”? He was right there SUPPORTING IT. Afterwards, he tried placating his (quite obviously) stunned supporters by swearing that he would work to overturn it AFTER he becomes President. Yeah. Vote FOR a measure you plan to work AGAINST. Not a flip-flop at all.
Where was Obama when the Senate had to vote to authorize Bush’s eventual war against Saddam? Well, the one place he wasn’t was the Senate. Unfortunately, his current VP selection was, and Biden voted to AUTHORIZE Bush’s little plan. The EXACT same matter that Obama chastised Hillary over during the primary campaign was (apparently)ignored when it came time for a VP choice. That may not be a flip-flop to some, but I certainly can’t understand how something that was supposed to be so important to Obama during the primaries became so irrelevant afterwards.
And, speaking of Biden, wasn’t Obama’s big message one of “hope and change”? Exactly how is nominating a man who’s been in the Senate for 30 years some sort of “change”? Obama spent months telling us how much foreign policy experience he has (from all his time growing up in Indonesia and visiting Pakistan as a young man) yet his VP is widely regarded as one of DC’s top foreign policy wonks. Rather oddly, the very media that parroted Obama’s “experience” has spent a great deal of airtime and ink praising the choice of Biden as “bringing needed experience to the ticket”.
And, what of Jeremiah Wright? The man who for TWENTY YEARS was described by Obama as a “close friend” and “mentor” and was even metaphorically described as a “crazy uncle” in that glorious speech on race, where is he now? Well, in that aforementioned speech, Obama swore that he could no more disavow Wright, but when Wright opened his mouth some two months later and described Obama as being a “politician”, Wright was essentially disowned. (I suppose being a “crazy uncle” is okay when all you’re doing is dámņìņg the US, but when you call Obama a “politician”, that’s going too far.)
You folks can keep Obama. I just wish to the deity of your choice that you’d ask yourselves if you’d be willing to accept Obama as a Presidential candidate if he were a white male of the same age and relative experience. If you HONESTLY can say that you would/could, then fine. But all I see when I look at Barack Obama is a man who has twisted the words of Dr King whose famous “I Have a Dream” speech spoke of the day that his children could be judged not on the basis of their skin but on their CHARACTER. I don’t see Obama as unqualified because of his skin color or ethnic heritage (hëll, I’ve voted for more than my fair share of African-American candidates because I honestly believe in their CHARACTER) but because I don’t believe a single word the man says.
Incidentally, PAD, I’m reading “Tigerheart” now and just finished the chapter about Capt Slash, and couldn’t help but note how certain aspects of the tale reminded me of Hillary’s recent run for President–that Capt Slash couldn’t afford to be as good as the LEAST of the men, but had to be better than the best (I don’t have the book on hand so I apologize for not directly quoting the passage). That, to me, summed up Hillary’s run. She had to prove herself as being better than the best, yet the DNC settled for the least of the MEN. Even the way that Capt Slash was forced to flee after Hack’s death started reminding me of how the DNC (and far too many prominent Democratic leaders) were trying to force Hillary out of the race after Super Tuesday. NO OTHER CANDIDATE in the history of the Democratic primaries had ever been harangued to drop out “for the good of the party” (not Ted Kennedy in 1980, not Jesse Jackson in 1988) yet, for some reason, Hillary was chastised for daring to continue her run and even criticized for refusing to drop out until the final primaries. Even now, Hillary gets criticism for “not doing enough” to campaign for Obama (of course, everyone overlooks that Michelle Obama went on record as stating that she believed she couldn’t support Hillary for President and Barack certainly didn’t appear to reach out to Hillary with anything approaching class so I can just imagine how little campaigning he would be doing for Hillary as the nominee). Well, the campaigning is up to Obama and Biden (neither of whom did very well when Obama formally introduced Biden) and it’s THEIR job–no one else’s–to win the election. Yet, if Obama and Biden lose, we all know who’s going to be the scapegoat: Hillary Clinton.
Jason M. Bryant: “The matter isn’t scheduled to be settled until after the election, so she isn’t going to be deposed for anything.”
The investigation is scheduled to wrap up Oct. 31. The election isn’t until Nov. 4.
Oh, and they’re working on scheduling her deposition now, according to the Anchorage Daily News.
Jason M. Bryant: “I’d rather table both issues for now.”
While I have said all I intend to say about “troopergate,” I can’t promise that I won’t revisit the issue if I see fit. If that makes you uncomfortable, you have the option of steering clear of the topic while still participating in the thread.
No, it isn’t.
Given how Republicans have twisted Dr. King’s words (remember, King’s positions at his death are much further left than where the Democrats are today), I find that rather insulting.
JosephW: “And to all the obvious Obamazoids…”
I stopped right there and didn’t continue reading your post. If the best you can offer is regurgitated talking points and name-calling, I can’t be bothered to read what you have to say.
By the way, as many people who are familiar with my posts in this blog can attest, I am a liberal who sees value in many conservative ideas. I read and enjoy columns by George Will and David Brooks, and had great respect for William F. Buckley Jr. The problem isn’t your politics — it’s your behavior.
I hope that he shot himself in the foot as badly as everybody seems to think.
I also look forward to seeing the Vice Presidential debate between her and Biden. Of course, Biden sometimes makes gaffes, but as Ezra Klein wrote:
She’s going to get questioned on issues she doesn’t fully know or understand, and grilled in ways she’s completely unused to, and she’s not going to commit a gaffe. A gaffe is when you misspeak. She simply won’t know the answer. And that will be much more damaging.
Another thing: as has been pointed out here before, there are a lot of people who just aren’t ready for certain kinds of people to become President. Some of them aren’t ready for a black man to become President, and they won’t vote for Obama. Some of them aren’t ready for a woman to become President, or even Vice President, and so they won’t vote for McCain. Something tells me that when comparing Democratic and Republican voters, a greater percentage of registered Republicans are going to have reservations about electing a woman to high office. The fact that nobody really knows much about Palin doesn’t help.
Sorry, screwed up the link again. One of these days I’ll get it right. Anyway, Klein’s post is at:
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein_archive?month=08&year=2008&base_name=more_experience
Ha ha, Michael. Me, I just can’t wait to see McCain’s responses to questions about Palin’s level of experience, vis a vis McCain’s criticism of Obama’s.
[mouthpiece]”The Vice-President has the luxury of on-the-job training. In this post-9/11 reality, the President does not. John McCain is ready from Day One — Obama is not.”[/mouthpiece]
Rob Brown: “I hope that he shot himself in the foot as badly as everybody seems to think.”
Can’t speak for anyone else but I don’t think he shot himself in the foot. Palin is a wildcard, a gamble. We won’t know for some time whether she helps him or hurts him… or neither.
And let’s not overestimate the significance of the VP pick. George H.W. Bush chose the abysmal Dan Quayle as his veep, and Dukakis running make Lloyd Bentsen slaughtered him in the debates. Didn’t make a difference. Bush beat Dukakis handily in the election.
JosephW, I’m not reading that giant mass of unbroken text. But I will say that Rezco isn’t going to be a factor.
New scandels are worth a lot. Stuff that a candidate admitted to and apoligized for years ago doesn’t get much traction in the media. Obama got his house with the help of Rezco, but he still got it at market value. There’s very little scandal there and Obama has already admitted that it was a mistake on his part to deal with Rezco at all.
Don’t believe me about old, admitted scandals not getting much traction? McCain cheated on his wife and was part of the Keating Five. Both of those things are much bigger scandals than Rezco or the rumors about Palin, but they’re not getting mentioned in the news. That’s just the way things work, a few people might get worked up over McCain and Obama’s past scandals, but scandals start aging the moment they are apologized for.
Not that I want to focus on the scandals. I just think the talk about them shows how risky it was for McCain to pick someone he barely vetted.
Some people say that the first presidential act is choosing a VP. Obama made a choice that doesn’t have a lot of drama, but responsible choices rarely do. McCain took a risky choice of someone he’d barely met. Obama’s choice will clearly help him in the election, but Biden is a respected politician who even his opponents admit is hghly qualified. McCain obviously picked Palin for no other reason than to get votes. The choices reflect better on Obama than on McCain.
Bill Myers, I think you’ve summed it up well. She’s a risk.
Personally, I think the fact that McCain took a politically motivated risk with such an important decision is a bad thing in itself. But all the stuff we’re talking about is stuff that *might* go wrong. The PUMA’s *might* notice that Palin called Hillary a whiner, or they might rush to Palin’s side.
The nation might decide that Palin is Dan Quayle. Or they might hear pundits call her ‘Danielle Quayle’ so many times that all she has to do is speak in complete sentences to come off as incredibly impressive.
I’d like to say that the nation isn’t dumb enough to be fooled by this obvious ploy. However, I also thought there was no way Bush could win in 2004.
This does change things. Before this, I thought the election would be close, with Obama probably winning but McCain still having a small chance to eek over the line. Now I think that McCain has a slightly better chance of eeking over the line, but if he doesn’t it will be Obama in a landslide. I think the possibility of middle ground is completely gone.
As critical as I am of Obama for being ultra-liberal, I have to be just as critical of Palin here for being ultra-conservative. The fact is I hate extremes, Hence why I consider myself a moderate and agree with each side on different issues.
The main issue for me with Palin (and my girlfriend and my entire family) is that we are all animal lovers, and cannot support anyone who supports the NRA and hunting.
In fact, all of my close relatives now are seemingly not going to vote at all, because we just don’t support any candidate.
IMO, and this is a stark turnaround for me, Hillary Clinton no longer seems like such a bad option comparatively. This is the 3rd election in a row now where (if i do vote) I wont be voting for a good candidate, just the lesser of 2 evils. And that really sucks.
“Don’t believe me about old, admitted scandals not getting much traction? McCain cheated on his wife and was part of the Keating Five. Both of those things are much bigger scandals than Rezco or the rumors about Palin, but they’re not getting mentioned in the news.”
True, the corporate news media usually prefers new dirt to old, yet that doesn’t mean that these scandals might not be brought back to light as an overall reflection of the man at the top of the ticket.
Nearly everyone knows that McCain is clumsier on womens’ issues than he is on foreign policy. Now he’s got an ex-beauty pageant contestant as his spokesmodel, and that tactic’s only going to play well with the Republicans’ religious wacko contingient. Just notice how quickly Dobson got on board with this pick! Hillary supporters are already insulted by the choice.
So, Palin’s daughter is really her granddaughter? How nice. Covering for the sexually precocious daughter. It is a plot right out of “Desperate Housewives” or something.
Obviously, I’m of the oppinion that the sex lives of politicians and their families have no bearing on how good a leader they are, but since Palin strikes me as the sort of person that would try to tell other people what they should do with their bodies, she is fair game to be critized as hypocritical.
And I think creationism is rather harmless as far as Christian ideas go, but still should be kept out of the classroom. What separates the West from theocracies is that religion should be a private matter, right? Right?
Well Rene, we don’t actually know that. There are rumors. There are some very odd details to the pregnancy.
But there’s no proof. I’d like this investigated more, but I don’t think we should give it too much weight without that.
This is actually more of a scandal for her daughter than it is for her, and she’s just a 17 year old kid. If the daughter didn’t get pregnant, hordes of reporters decending on her high school could really damage her life. Heck, even if the rumor is true she doesn’t deserve that. Let’s be careful about this one.
JosephW: “And to all the obvious Obamazoids…”
I stopped right there and didn’t continue reading your post. If the best you can offer is regurgitated talking points and name-calling, I can’t be bothered to read what you have to say.
Ditto on that. Life is too short. This also goes for anyone who starts out with “A vote for John McSame” r any other “Clever” bon mot they didn’t even come up with on their own. Borrrrrrrrring.
I hope that he shot himself in the foot as badly as everybody seems to think.
I don’t think that’s the consensus here at all. More of a “let’s wait and see.”
Another thing: as has been pointed out here before, there are a lot of people who just aren’t ready for certain kinds of people to become President. Some of them aren’t ready for a black man to become President, and they won’t vote for Obama. Some of them aren’t ready for a woman to become President, or even Vice President, and so they won’t vote for McCain. Something tells me that when comparing Democratic and Republican voters, a greater percentage of registered Republicans are going to have reservations about electing a woman to high office. The fact that nobody really knows much about Palin doesn’t help.
I’m not so sure. A higher percentage of republican have supported McCain than the percentage of Democrats have supported Obama. Now–several caveats here. 1- Obama had a bruising battle with Clinton while McCain wrapped up the nomination earlier. and 2- We haven’t seen how the Palin pick will affect the base. But I’d make a wager that it will not weaken McCain among republicans. I say this only because the mood on many of the republican/conservative blogs has been positive for the first time, lots of people saying they were actually writing checks for the first time this cycle.
Of course, it’s the independents who will make the final determination of who wins.
I know it might be a tough pill to swallow but it’s quite possible that there are as many or even more die hard “never gonna vote for a black man” types in the Democratic party as in the Republican party. They are not typical of party members. But they are there. Such attitudes are more likely found among the poorly educated and that group is more likely to vote Democratic. Some of the quotes we saw recently from the blue collar voters in West Virginia made it pretty clear that some Democratic primary voters were far more willing to vote for a woman than a black man.
I don’t think a sexists vs racists match up will prove a wash. While it’s more socially acceptable to display sexist attitudes, it’s the racist ones that seem deeper and uglier. In other words, even those guys who make rude comments about Palin’s gender may end up voting for her but any one who dislikes Obama for his ethnicity is probably just not going to vote for him period.
McCain cheated on his wife and was part of the Keating Five. Both of those things are much bigger scandals than Rezco or the rumors about Palin, but they’re not getting mentioned in the news.
McCain cheating on his wife is a bigger scandal than possible abuses of power or dealings with criminals? Really?
The main issue for me with Palin (and my girlfriend and my entire family) is that we are all animal lovers, and cannot support anyone who supports the NRA and hunting.
It occurs to me that Obama is the first candidate I can recall who has not had a photo op where he is in a duck blind pretending to know how to shoot a duck. I respect that. I just hope he doesn’t feel like he has to do that because wouldn’t it be awful if someone took him snipe hunting? And by awful I mean really great.
Bill Mulligan: McCain cheating on his wife is a bigger scandal than possible abuses of power or dealings with criminals? Really?
In the court of public opinion, hëll yeah. Sex scandals trump all.
Oh, and the accusation that the trooper tasered his own kid defuses any outrage people are likely to have about Palin. It doesn’t even matter if it is true or not. If she does even the meagerest job of making people *think* she believed it, they’ll forgive anything.
Jason, I don’t think Palin’s daughter deserves any grief for what she did or didn’t do in bed. It’s strictly her business.
It’s only that her Mom is part of a group of people that thrives on demonizing sex and making of it this big taboo thing that can only be done in very specific circunstances, and perpetuates the very social forces that make it so her own daughter must hide a child out of wedlock behind a lie (if the rumours are true).
McCain cheating on his wife is a bigger scandal than possible abuses of power or dealings with criminals? Really?
I don’t think that’s the part he meant — I think the Keating Five scandal was probably the idea.
TWL
Bill Mulligan: “McCain cheating on his wife is a bigger scandal than possible abuses of power or dealings with criminals? Really?”
It’s the only reason why the Lewinsky scandal was so damaging to Clinton. Sex sells.
Whoops, I didn’t notice the “both of those” part. My bad.
TWL
Given that the Veep is also the President of the Senate, and is the Prez’s eyes, ears and mouth there, Palin will have to make a lot of contacts very fast. McCain won’t have the time to lead her around.
Her lack of experience on the national level is of more concern than Obama’s, given McCain’s medical history and age.
Rene, I get what you’re saying. I just think we should be careful about treating this rumor like it is true.
If a reporter finds a birth certificate with the wrong name on it or a nurse comes forward with a story, that’s one thing. I just don’t want to assume guilt on something that could have consequences outside the politician.
In the court of public opinion, hëll yeah. Sex scandals trump all.
Apparently not. McCain IS the nominee after all and it isn’t like he’s kept his infidelity a secret.
It’s only that her Mom is part of a group of people that thrives on demonizing sex and making of it this big taboo thing that can only be done in very specific circunstances, and perpetuates the very social forces that make it so her own daughter must hide a child out of wedlock behind a lie (if the rumours are true).
Given the lack of any evidence to this rumor I’d say giving it even the credence of a serious discussion is right up there with the various slanders that have been leveled at Obama. I think it will reflect poorly on anyone who tries to use it and the fact that we are even talking about it seems to me to indicate a certain level of panic on the part of those who don’t like McCain. So on that basis it looks like a good choice, so far.
Small stuff. It’s all small stuff.
The larger picture is moving the nation further into the 21st Century. Is Palin prepared to do this? Are her policies going to be able to do this well?
Her experience is of lesser import compared to the top spot, but they aren’t unimportant, either, as she may be called upon to step in at any moment.
Bill Mulligan: Apparently not. McCain IS the nominee after all and it isn’t like he’s kept his infidelity a secret.
Go back and read what I originally wrote. There is a reason why he’s not catching hëll for it, and it’s not because Americans don’t love sex scandals.
The McCain affair isn’t hot news because he admitted to it a long time ago. He even brought it up again at Saddleback, looking very contrite and sorry as he blamed himself for the failure of his first marriage. If he’d looked any sorrier Angels would have appeared over his head singing about the power of redemption.
Come on, Bill. Do you really want to say that cheating on your wife isn’t going to be considered a bigger scandal than getting someone fired for flimsy reasons? Think about it, how many TV shows are based on who is sleeping with who, and how many shows are based on inter-office personnel management?
Yes, sex scandal is bigger than firing scandal. Nothing trumps bodily fluid exchange.
Bill Mulligan: “…the fact that we are even talking about it seems to me to indicate a certain level of panic on the part of those who don’t like McCain. So on that basis it looks like a good choice, so far.”
I wouldn’t judge Palin’s merit based on the reactions of extremists. Extremists aren’t the ones who will decide this election. Moderate independents will.
It’s far, far too early to know what impact, if any, Palin will have. Remember last year when I told you it was too early to predict a primary victory for Hillary Clinton? There are two lessons in that: a.) politics is full of surprises, and b.) I was right and you were wrong. 😛
(Before anyone chastises me for that last remark, please note that Mulligan is a personal friend. And he’s always wrong.)
The McCain affair isn’t hot news because he admitted to it a long time ago.
That’s true. The newness of a scandal does make a difference.
Come on, Bill. Do you really want to say that cheating on your wife isn’t going to be considered a bigger scandal than getting someone fired for flimsy reasons? Think about it, how many TV shows are based on who is sleeping with who, and how many shows are based on inter-office personnel management?
Depends. If Palin or Obama’s supposed problems reach the level of illegality–unlikely but bear with me on this–it could lead to criminal charges, which is usually poison for a politician unless you’re a Democrat in Louisiana or Washington DC. Don’t see any scenario where McCain’s infidelity leads to any charges.
But it’s no doubt true that sex will sell more papers. John Edward’s idiocy is far more compelling than any kickbacks for land deals could ever be (hasn’t hurt his speaking fees though–he now charges $65,000 a pop, which is a fair price for a potential train wreck.)
It’s far, far too early to know what impact, if any, Palin will have. Remember last year when I told you it was too early to predict a primary victory for Hillary Clinton? There are two lessons in that: a.) politics is full of surprises, and b.) I was right and you were wrong. 😛
Oh yeah? Well, you, uh…oh yeah???
Rene, you can’t have it both ways. If there’s nothing to substantiate the rumor, then it’s unfair to cast aspersions on Palin based on that rumor.
Besides, why are we dwelling on a whisper campaign when there are plenty of GOOD reasons to dislike Palin, and to question McCain’s decision to choose a veep he knew for what, all of a day? It casts serious doubt (at best) on McCain’s judgment.
Another thing to consider is how she works as a governor within Alaska. From what I can tell, she’s made plenty of enemies both in the Democratic AND Republican party.
Some of that no doubt is that she ran on an anti-corruption platform, which would indeed anger a lot of Republican officials. But it strikes me as curious that she wouldn’t ally with more conservative members of the Democratic party to get things done. It may be that she doesn’t play well with others (i.e., isn’t good at building coalitions and compromising).
(And it occurs to me that being bad at building coalitions and compromising is a feature, not a flaw, to many in the Republican base).
Aren’t the odds of a teen giving birth to a down syndrome baby dwarfed by the odds of something like her spontaneously growing horns and carrying the right hand of doom?
I heard she stuffs her bra with used tissue and its her daughters tissue.
Come on folks can we not come up with anything better to question then these lame rumors.
Posted by Will Raboin Not to mention the rumours that her youngest son is actually her grandchild via her sixteen-year-old daughter…
Dude.. seriously. Where did you find this piece of info?
Another thing to consider is how she works as a governor within Alaska. From what I can tell, she’s made plenty of enemies both in the Democratic AND Republican party.
Is that a bad thing? Guess it depends on who the enemies are. Given the corruption that has existed in the republican party in Alaska no decent person could help but make enemies there.
She has something like an 80% approval rating among voters there, not all of whom are republicans. SOMEBODY likes her.
I mean, Obama has plenty of enemies in both parties as well but look at who they are 🙂
Aren’t the odds of a teen giving birth to a down syndrome baby dwarfed by the odds of something like her spontaneously growing horns and carrying the right hand of doom?
Only if those odds are around 1/1599.
http://jms.rsmjournals.com/cgi/reprint/12/4/202.pdf
BTW, the story about her daughter Willow being named after the character in Buffy seems to be bogus. Bummer. That was a rumor I rather liked.
I think a number of people who have posted on this subject are looking at it the wrong way. Yes, you’re absolutely right, if Obama and Co. pile in poor Mrs. Palin about her lack of experience, scandals or whatever, it will absolutely backfire because the Republicans will scream bloody murder that the Democrats are piling on this wonderful defenseless woman. McCain being the old fashioned gentleman he is will instantly leap to her defense and talk about politics as usual. I wouldn’t be surprised if they let Mr. Palin go on television and challenge somebody to a good old-fashioned fist fight for saying terrible things about his wife. All good street theater to be sure.
On the other hand, if the Obama people just go about their business as usual and attack McCain, all they have to do is wait until the McCain camp brings up the inexperience, youth, lack of foreign experience and so forth, they can then simply point out that the Rebulican nominee for VP has even less. It immunizes them against that attack, but only as a counter-move. The only exception to that would be if Hillary Clinton makes those charges. She’s pretty much the only Democrat who can get away with it.
That being said, if the Democrats really want to play dirty, they can do a variation on Clinton’s 3 a.m. phone commercial, by showing a scary succession of photos- Putin, Arab terrorists, the respective rulers of North Korea and Iran- and then say, ‘Is this who you want to dealing head to head with these people?’ and dig up an old shot of Palin as beauty queen. As Karl Rove has proved with some great measure of success, you have to turn your opponents assets into liabilities; something the Democrats have been astonishingly poor at.
Incidentally, if folks are saying that Palin is such a wonderful mom for having a disabled child, just who is taking care of this infant son while she’s stumping around America for the next three months?
The father.
Don’t even go there.
Joe Nazzaro: “Incidentally, if folks are saying that Palin is such a wonderful mom for having a disabled child, just who is taking care of this infant son while she’s stumping around America for the next three months?”
You’re joking, right?
To the person who indicated many would vote for Palin because she’s “hot”…that would only be likely if she were, in fact, hot…which she’s not.
A relevant point, but it seems that’s contextural. Will she be that successful outside of Alaska, in a Republican party that elevated her, yet is just as rife with corruption? Without the cachet of being the victim of corruption as she was in Alaska, will she be able to make that kind of splash, in a party that itself has as much corruption (K Street and all)?
There’s odd note about Palin’s beauty pageant experience. Not something meaningful in regards to her abilities as a leader, but interesting.
She came in second. The winner was the first Miss Alaska to be African American.
I suppose this is as good a place as any to say that I really enjoyed Election Day, Peter.
The father.
Don’t even go there.
Roger shoots, scores, does a victory dance, takes out a cell phone to call his agent, dances some more, signs the ball for a young child in the front row, takes a bow, signs a book deal…
Sorry, but I hate kids….
(I’d like to know more about her terms as mayor…odds and ends around the blogs mentions she left her town mired in debt and that she fired her city police chief and library director for supporting her opponent in a past election…That doesn’t seem presidential on the face of it….)
The “maverick” and the MILF… what a joke.
I’ll be glad when qualified adults (Obama/Biden) are running the country again.
“Come on, Bill. Do you really want to say that cheating on your wife isn’t going to be considered a bigger scandal than getting someone fired for flimsy reasons? Think about it, how many TV shows are based on who is sleeping with who, and how many shows are based on inter-office personnel management?”
What about the magazine Getting Someone Fired for Flimsy Reasons-boy? The one with the person getting fired for flimsy reasons of the month centerfolds?
————
“To the person who indicated many would vote for Palin because she’s “hot”…that would only be likely if she were, in fact, hot…which she’s not.”
You have to take into consideration the climate differences between Alaska and the rest of the US.
Seriously, being attractive can be a political asset. It is for Obama too. Ordinarily this would be a minor thing. But the elections are probably going to be very close, so whoever wins, the pundits are going to wonder afterwards: was it the race, was it the age, the lack of experience, Bush, Hilary, the evangelicals who showed up or didn’t show up in force, the good looks, etc.
—————–
” Roger shoots, scores, does a victory dance, takes out a cell phone to call his agent, dances some more, signs the ball for a young child in the front row, takes a bow, signs a book deal…
Sorry, but I hate kids….”
That’s a shame, Bill was working on a deal to put your picture on a cereal box. There was also talk of an action figure.
—————
Regardless of whether the rumors about Palin are right or wrong, the story should be dropped to spare her daughter, even if it gives her a free pass on a little hypocrisy.
————-
“This is the 3rd election in a row now where (if i do vote) I wont be voting for a good candidate, just the lesser of 2 evils.”
Are there any elections in recent memory that you would consider at least one of the candidates as good?
I think you ate using the term evil too loosely.
———-
I don’t know how good Obama is as a candidate, but the thing I like about him is that he seems to be a thinking man who tries to understand issues in all their complexity. That’s refreshing in any politician.
Posted by Pat Nolan at August 30, 2008 02:22 AM
“I dont find her inexperiance to be a problem at all. To me there is a big difference between Commander-In-Chief and Vice President”
As I understand it, the difference is just a heartbeat…
Cheers.
BTW, the story about her daughter Willow being named after the character in Buffy seems to be bogus.
It’s not just bogus, it’s impossible. Look at the birthdate vs. the start of Buffy the series; it’s years off.
TWL