Exactly the Right Choice
mccain 3:27 PM
Surely you've seen by now that John McCain has chosen and announced his choice for Vice President.
It isn't Romney, nor Crist, not Pawlenty nor even Lieberman.
Nay, in Dayton today McCain announced his choice of Sarah Palin as his runningmate.
WHO?!
I'd never even heard of the woman. But after learning about her even a little, it's hard not to admit that she is an extremely compelling choice:
She haults - in its tracks - the Obama Bounce post convention, and immediately steals back the news cycle for the Republicans.
She puts Alaska firmly back in the Red. There was a fear for a while there that Alaska might be in play, or even turn blue. Net 3 electoral votes for the Republicans.
She brings back some of the women who felt extremely angry and abandoned by the Democratic Party, but who had resigned themselves to an Obama presidency over the past few days of the convention.
She helps calm the fears about those who fear McCain is too old school or too beholden to the special interests of his party. Her 'maverick' persona jives perfectly with the image he wants to rekindle in his campaign.
She invigorates social conservatives who have been frustrated with McCain and who worried he might pick a pro-choice VP. At the same time, she helps him on the left by being a historical choice and having a history of being just as tough on corruption in her own party as in the other.
This is an excellent choice. Bravo, John McCain.
It isn't Romney, nor Crist, not Pawlenty nor even Lieberman.
Nay, in Dayton today McCain announced his choice of Sarah Palin as his runningmate.
WHO?!
I'd never even heard of the woman. But after learning about her even a little, it's hard not to admit that she is an extremely compelling choice:
She haults - in its tracks - the Obama Bounce post convention, and immediately steals back the news cycle for the Republicans.
She puts Alaska firmly back in the Red. There was a fear for a while there that Alaska might be in play, or even turn blue. Net 3 electoral votes for the Republicans.
She brings back some of the women who felt extremely angry and abandoned by the Democratic Party, but who had resigned themselves to an Obama presidency over the past few days of the convention.
She helps calm the fears about those who fear McCain is too old school or too beholden to the special interests of his party. Her 'maverick' persona jives perfectly with the image he wants to rekindle in his campaign.
She invigorates social conservatives who have been frustrated with McCain and who worried he might pick a pro-choice VP. At the same time, she helps him on the left by being a historical choice and having a history of being just as tough on corruption in her own party as in the other.
This is an excellent choice. Bravo, John McCain.
Posted by Nick Stone
on 3:27 PM.
Filed under
Posts
She has been the mayor of a town of 6,000 for a few years, after being part of the local PTA. Then has been Governor for 600+ days. That qualifies her to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency?
At least Obama has been in national politics for six years, is an ivy-educated constitutional law scholar and served in a state senate.
Plus, there is no way that Sarah Palin is going to woo Hillary supporters, she's staunchly pro-choice, anti-environment and kind of dumb.
Correction: staunchly pro-life, anti-choice. My apologies.
I have to agree with Mr. Anonymous. The Republican party would be wise to treat Gov. Palin as the gamble that she is.
She is a great future leader of her party. She has good credentials as a reformer of the party... she just doesn't have the depth of experience to back up her philosophy.
If Republicans wanted to continue the "he's not ready" attack on Senator Obama, then they definitely chose the wrong person.
Picture it, Washington, January 2009: An old decrepit President Elect stands on the steps of the Capitol Building before a fascist man in a black robe with yellow stripes. Suddenly the decrepit man stumbles and collapses face first into a bible. Where is the country now? Don't worry if you cant answer the question... John McCain can't either.
I would really like to pick Gov. Palin's brain on a few things and debate her on a few others... But the fact that I even consider these things tells me that she is more in my league and completely out matched by Sens. Obama and Biden with their combined 62 years of national policy experience.
As an avid, fanatical even, supporter of Senator Clinton; I am tempted by this woman... but not quite stupid enough to fall for it. I am willing to bet that I am not alone.
A risky choice?!
To tell you the truth, I'm appalled - APPALLED I SAY - that so many people keep mentioning her lack of experience. These people, keep in mind, are supporters of Barack (freaking) Obama for crying out loud.
So, it's ok to have no experience at the top of the ticket, but God forbid at the bottom of the ticket?! Put it this way: You don't mind the guy taking the oath to have no experience, but the guy (girl) that is "only a heartbeat away" sure better have a fat resume?! APPALLED, I SAY at that argument.
Let's compare their experience. Obama was in the Senate two years before he started running for president. That's 1/3 of one term in the Senate. Before that, he served in the Illinois legislature, where his best examples of strong leadership include a relationship with the head of the Chicago old-style political machine Richard Daley, Ayers the terrorist, and Rezko the slumlord that was convicted recently. Previous to that, he got high and was a community organizer. Is any of that whatsoever an example of executive experience? NO!
Sarah Palin was the mayor of a small town, and now serves as governor of the largest state in the union. Ok, largest by landmass only. During her tenure, she's appointed a bipartisan cabinet, conquered corruption and halted pork barrel spending in her state. Yet, you hear none of that when Obamaniacs talk about her. How interesting! All you hear about is her lack of experience and how she's some sort of magic trick to confuse Hillary Clinton's fans. I, personally, am outraged by this treatment, and yes it does remind me of the treatment that Senator Clinton got during the primaries. It's unfair, completely bias, contrary to fact, and frankly it has a scent of sexism about it.
Let me also say that neither one of you bothered to take me on point by point. I laid out 5 areas in which I think she helps, and yet you both chose to completely bypass my arguments and take me on by characterising her in other ways. I can hear the crickets chirping. Bring it on.
If you want point by point...
Firstly, When I was outlining how Gov. Palin was a gamble for Sen. McCain, I intended to concede that she was, in fact, also dangerous to the Democratic Party's bid for the presidency. If I did not do so effectively before, please allow this statement to make up for it now. The governor does have many redeeming qualities for both sides of the blogoshperical isle. I don't intend to enumerate them at this time; but sufficed to say, they exist.
On to your points:
"She halts - in its tracks - the Obama Bounce post convention, and immediately steals back the news cycle for the Republicans."
I'll take the second part first. The news cycle in a major campaign is like table tennis. The ball must go away and come back again for the game to work. After four very generous days of press coverage for the Democrats, the announcement of even Dan Quayle as a running mate on Friday would have taken the news cycle away... It'll come back.
As for Sen. Obama's media bounce expected after his historic nomination speech on Thursday... I'll say it was postponed until Sen. McCain, Gov. Palin, or one of their representatives trips over one of Sen. Obama's major points. The best parts of the speech will be rerun for days. Same goes for the first time that Gov. Palin fumbles. The ping pong ball will come back that day... so will Barack's big bounce.
Point two. Alaska's back in play...
Okay, WOO HOO! THREE WHOLE VOTES THAT MCCAIN WAS COUNTING ON ANYWAY!! YAY!!!! is that better? We all need to hide and watch what effect Gov. Palin will have over some of the more influential, up for grabs, states. She's not going to have much sway with labor in Michigan; she will need some of that Clinton magic that you discredited to help with Pennsylvania and Ohio; She may actually have hope of playing well in Virginia (and that is troublesome to me) but she can't come close to tripping on her tongue. especially in the VP debate. She will actually hurt Sen. McCain in Florida (I know that you are yelling at the screen right now). Allow me to explain: I had already written off Florida's propensity to turn blue in November. This is primarily because of Sen. Obama's not doing as well in South Florida as John Kerry did in o4 when he actually lost Miami-Dade County. Gov. Palin's waspy outlook combined with her militancy for some of the conservative views she holds will put off Florida's Jewish population. Plus, McCain still isn't playing well with the Latin population; even though he's backed off his xenophobic rhetoric. She registers as neutral with the Latin Population... making them lean slightly toward Obama.
On to your third point. Wait. You already took care of that one with some mystical Clintonian magic. The women that supported Sen. Clinton wanted a real woman. Not one that would strip other women of their rights to their own bodies. Women know the difference.
Your fourth point is your best. I've got nothing. So I will reiterate that as wonderful (no sarcasm) as Sarah Palin is, she will not be afforded any stay by the public for any mistakes she makes. NOT because she is a woman, but because she never had the privilege of "meeting the press" with Mr. Tim Russert. She has had no public right of passage. we don't know her. Any mistake will make people edgy about who she is and what she'll do.
Point five: Her pro-life stance does soothe those old, fat, white, male, conservative views that represent the Nazi-right 9% of the electorate that insist on single issue voting. (btw, that same 9% overall makes up a good 20% of the Republican party... which is the party of inclusion again?)
And, on your point from your response:
"So, it's ok to have no experience at the top of the ticket, but God forbid at the bottom of the ticket?! Put it this way: You don't mind the guy taking the oath to have no experience, but the guy (girl) that is "only a heartbeat away" sure better have a fat resume?! APPALLED, I SAY at that argument."
In short, yes with a but. Senator Obama is not without experience. In fact, he has about the same resume that Abraham Lincoln did when he represented the state of Illinois while running for president. and now he's got his face on the side of a mountain. Gov. Palin would, in all likelihood, have to actually fill in for Sen. McCain at some point. He is all of 146 years old with a history of health issues. She really would be only a heartbeat (any heartbeat really) away from the presidency. The public deserves to scrutinize her first.
Let me know what you think ;-)
I don't know how you can compare a woman who has a couple years being the mayor of a bumblefu*k town of 6,000 people, a governor of a state with a population the size of Fort Lauderdale and who holds a Bachelor's Degree in Journalism to a candidate who was in the state senate for years, drafting legislation, who holds a JD and is a proven constitutional law scholar and has been in the US Senate for six years. It's an absurdist argument.
I agree Obama's experience is not the lengthiest, but at least he knows what he is doing, has read the constitution, unlike Sarah "What exactly does the VP do?" Palin (yes, she said that).
Seriously, in comparison, he's the captain, she's the flight attendent.
Oh, and she's a Jesus-y moron, too:
The volatile issue of teaching creation science in public schools popped up in the Alaska governor's race this week when Republican Sarah Palin said she thinks creationism should be taught alongside evolution in the state's public classrooms.
Palin was answering a question from the moderator near the conclusion of Wednesday night's televised debate on KAKM Channel 7 when she said, 'Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both.'
hey 1/2 voter, i am voting mccain/palin 08 hillary '12... i am done with these obama democrats. they are frauds and so full of themselves. i can't figure out why i followed so blindly in voting for them all the time for the last 15 years... i mean my first vote was castly proudly for bill clinton, but after that now that i look back they all turned out to be traitors to someone who would be an fdr very strong president and that was and probably will be hillary. i need to do what i can to get these undemocratic rulers out of the party that i used to love and now am ashamed of because they don't listen to even their own constituencies (they gave the fraud my full vote anyway right in front of me on national tv) how can they be counted on to listen to all americans. they ignore us to stoke the one's ego and that makes me sick... anyhoo, i am intrigued by the sara palin pick, mostly because she has a pioneering spirit that i think as a westerner a lot of folks i know will appreciate and love to vote for. i thought vp pick wouldn't matter, but it has sweetened my vote for mccain and now i am excited to buy a shirt and stickers and see him win huge in november :)
I thought we were on topic... point for sober point.... please continue. I like your view point... I need elaboration.
Apparently you are in the minority:
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/08/focusedthe_sequel.html
wow. you have clearly investigated Palin's background even less than the McCain camp did.
(which was googling, one questionnaire, and one face-to-face meeting, by the way).
The choice of Palin is an insult to women everywhere. It is McCain thinking female voters are so irrational and feminist, that they will simply throw support behind some, any, woman. Palin consistently votes against women's interests. Any educated Hillary-supporter will never support Palin.
And now with the unplanned pregnancy of her 17 year old daughter, even Palin's family life has been exposed as fraudulent. She says Bristol "decided" to keep the baby and marry the father. well, do you really think she had a decision? i bet not.
Moreover, Palin has proven herself to place her own ambitions even above her own family's needs. With a 4 month old child, a pregnant daughter, and a grandkid on the way, she instead chose to drag all of them into the national spotlight. The republicans rail against bringing private matters into. But that's exactly what Palin is doing.
You can say what you want about Obama's experience (and he has plenty more than Palin), but he has proven, over a 2 YEAR fight to the nomination, that he can rise above the storm. Palin has been in the race a mere 2 DAYS and she's already embattled.
As more details of her background emerge, and the American public realizes McCain chose Palin for the shallowest of reasons, she will be exposed for the inexperienced, hateful person that she is.
She will be nothing more than an embarassing blip on the cultural radar. A punchline that will be repeated through youtube clips.
glad you support her as the VP candidate. I do too-- she's going to make the Obama/Biden 2008/2012 presidency that much easier to achieve.
"
She haults - in its tracks - the Obama Bounce post convention, and immediately steals back the news cycle for the Republicans."
Obama just broke 50% in national polls. Other than total right wingers, people are beginning to question McCain's judgement. He met this lady once, she's been out of the country ONCE and yet she is qualified to be President? Granted, she's on the bottom of the ticket, but McCain is old. God forbid something happen on Day 1, you can really argue that she's ready to lead on that day?
I can't help but notice that many of the criticisms against Sarah Palin are wildly off topic and based in frustration without regard to fact.
Anonymous, while unsurprisingly unwilling to divulge his or her identity, said: "Moreover, Palin has proven herself to place her own ambitions even above her own family's needs. With a 4 month old child, a pregnant daughter, and a grandkid on the way, she instead chose to drag all of them into the national spotlight. The republicans rail against bringing private matters into. But that's exactly what Palin is doing."
Would we ever stand for these questions being asked of a man? JFK had a son barely born when he and Jackie moved into the White House. Many presidents had families, and the first ladies were primary parents. Are we so chauvinist that we can't support an inverse relationship?
I was also struck by anonymous, again with incognito cloak and dagger commentary, with this doosey: "I don't know how you can compare a woman who has a couple years being the mayor of a bumblefu*k town of 6,000 people, a governor of a state with a population the size of Fort Lauderdale..."
Let's be clear about something. Say what you want to about Alaska or Palin's rise to the top of Alaskan politics. But whether you like it or not, she has as many constituents as Joe Biden. And she has a lot more land and resources under her watch. And again, she is in an EXECUTIVE job, he sits on our nation's most pompous committee, the Senate. That should also answer any questions relevant to her qualifying experience.
It's no surprise that so many people have so many questions about Sarah Palin. She came out of nowhere to many of us who were expecting Romney or Pawlenty to be named runningmate.
But don't underestimate the power of her presence on the ticket, and don't think of women as mindless or out of touch if they consider casting a ballot for her. That's not only obnoxious, it is also unfair.
Finally, let's tackle this one: "Obama just broke 50% in national polls. Other than total right wingers, people are beginning to question McCain's judgement."
First, he achieved exactly 50% in those polls. Let's not act like he shattered some ceiling. Let's also keep in mind that 50% is only a few points better than he had been doing, so in terms of bounce, it's not a huge achievement. Also, both polls in which he 'shattered' this completely made up threshold included leaners, which are basically undecideds which the pollsters press into picking a candidate. One of those two polls also sampled registered voters instead of likely voters. That's a problem to use as a source.
And the piece de resistance for me is this morning's CBS poll, which tells you all just how much you can bite it. 42/42 dead heat, baby.
What was that about people questioning McCain's judgement? About only far right-wingers supporting him? About how only ignorant women would support Palin?
no, these questions would not be asked of a man. These questions were, however, asked of Hillary Clinton. All the republicans did during the democratic primaries was play the "gender card." They talked about Hillary's "shrill voice," her "menopause," her "brass balls." Whether she could "stand up to Putin." Did you think that was fair? And If Hillary was able to rise above it, then Palin should, too. Welcome to politics, lady.
And then Palin has the nerve to ask the press to stay out of her family, all the while PARADING her family around like a side show. Look everyone, I have a baby with down's syndrome! I'm a mother. Here, hold my child. Pass him around and hoist him up for the cameras! I'm just like you!"
By bringing her family on stage, and making her family values a cornerstone of her "real woman image," she is inviting a media response.
(no one commented on McCain's children because they NEVER appeared with him, either on stage or on the trail (and also, his older children don't speak to him, as he left their mother after her devastating car accident to take up with Cindy). In addition, Palin voted to reduce funds for both teenage mothers AND special needs children. When that kind of hypocrisy stretches to her own children, yes, is becomes a point for public debate.
I did not write the "bumblefu*k town of 6,000 people" comment. But I will respond to it. I'm not disputing her job running Wasilla, Alaska (the meth capital of the state, btw). But the south side of chicago, where Obama was a community organizer, has more residents than all of Alaska. Also, she is not a fiscal conservative, as Wasilla had a surplus before her tenure, and a huge deficit after she left. She is all about earmarks (which McCain wants to end). Overseeing more land does not make more experience. Palin has only left the US once, she only received her passport last year. I'm not negating her experience as a governor (which is mired in scandal, and the investigation has been fast-tracked after an attempted block by McCain...), I'm negating her experience BEYOND a small town in Alaska. She simply has none. Unlike Biden, who meets regularly with world leaders and runs foreign affairs measures. Even you can't argue with that.
re: polls. any polls must take a week for the convention bump to settle. Of course McCain jumped following his speech. It happens with every candidate, including Obama. What was unexpected, however, was the fact that Obama made $10 million from 130,000 donors in campaign donations after Palin's speech. Did McCain see that kind of surge after Biden spoke? No. In fact, McCain got $10 million total the week of Palin's announcement. It only took one speech by the woman for Obama to match it. And you can bet a lot of those donors were undecideds who had made up their minds.
And after McCain's lackluster speech (derided by Bush's speechwriters, even), the dust will settle.
Oh, and Palin isn't answering any reporters' questions. McCain trots her out for the novelty, then stuffs her back in the closet and hurries to educate her on the way of politics.
Looking forward to her debate with Biden. Maybe instead of discussing their respective plans to deal with Russia (Palin's neighbor, hi soviets!), they can argue over the best way to skin a moose. At least she has that experience down.
Anonymous,
Obviously we're going to have to agree to disagree on the matter of Sarah Palin's experience. I can live with that, and obviously voters will choose for themselves.
But on the matter of her family, here's the real deal: She's not complaining about the way she's being treated. Whether or not you like her, you MUST give her credit that she herself is not complaining, she is not claiming to be a victim, and she's not looking for sympathy. She's going the strong woman route, and yes of course that automatically allows us to feel more comfortable being critical of her. That's fair.
But her family? Barack Obama himself said to lay off her family, including her daughter. The age of her children (or McCain's for that matter) is not fair game. Nor is their relationship with their children. Is it? If families are fair game, I'd better see a lot of questions about Malia and Sasha Obama... and I haven't. Where's the 'How is he going to be a dad and a president?' question?!
It's me complaining about the way she's being treated, not her. And it's not just you. Unsurprisingly, it's Chris Mathews and the left wing crowd.
On a final note: I get the emails from Barack Obama, and I understand why he got money after Sarah Palin spoke. After each day of the Republican Convention, someone from his campaign has sent out an email crying foul for the 'attacks' from the Republicans. The emails claim that the Republicans are trying to attack ordinary Americans, and trying to undermine the movement, yadda yadda. And they appeal directly for money to help "fight back". It's actually quite hilarious to me, but then, I didn't drink the kool-aid. Maybe Santa Clause does exist, maybe he doesn't - but one day Obamaniacs are going to realize that presents don't mysteriously appear underneath the tree after all. At any rate, like her or hate her, everybody realizes Sarah Palin is a clear and present danger to the Democratic agenda.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/in-the-end-its.html