Bene mentioned last night a desire for some commentary on the cynically timed announcement of McCain’s running partner as Sarah Palin, so here goes: here’s a short bit from the LA Times, who sums her up as a risky choice due to her inexperience, the very charge that the McCain campaign has been harping on with respect to Obama (others don’t buy that line).
How will she fare in the TV debates against the veteran politicker Biden? Will Palin’s history of running for Miss Alaska back when Obama was applying to Harvard Law School help balance the whole “celebrity” schtick? We’ll have to wait and see over the next two months (which could be a very long two months of infuriating sexism levelled against a different female candidate this time (the concept of vpilf.com is especially obstreperating)). But if the McCain campaign has chosen a woman at least partly to appeal to Hillary supporters, well: anti-abortion advocate Palin is not the woman those disaffected Dems are looking for, that’s for sure. How insulting to left-leaning women generally for the GOP to think that she could be: as if all that matters to Hillary supporters is that Hillary was a woman, so Palin is interchangeable just because she’s a woman too.
What I do find interesting though is that in McCain choosing a woman as VP who’s more socially conservative than he is, he is playing to the potentially disaffected Republican base, those people who won’t vote Obama in a million years but who might very well choose to stay home rather than vote McCain – Palin might just tip enough of them into turning up at the polls. Obama’s choice of Biden, oddly, appears to be also playing particularly to the potentially disaffected Republican base (who, remember, mostly wouldn’t vote Obama in a million years). This is not to say that Biden doesn’t have any strong points on the left side of the balance, but his particular strength for the combined ticket is as a centrist with some hawkish credentials. Why aim to appeal to the right more than to the base of Democrats feeling alienated, Dems who were willing to vote for him earlier this year if he ended up the nominee but who now have doubts because he’s been equivocating on their core issues as part of running after swinging Republicans (a pattern repeated by the last few Dem presidential campaigns – why do they keep running after the right instead of shoring up the left? how many Congress majorities do they have to lose to get the message?).
Of course McCain chose a Veep to appeal to his base on the Right rather than any possible swing from the Left. Most of those people who read carefully are well aware that the PUMA phenomenon is over-hyped, a media narrative picked up and blown out of all proportion. The resentment is there in bucketsful, sure (including a couple of bloggers who’ve been on my feed reader for ages and who regularly rant in fine PUMA style). There’s especially heaps of resentment that traditional pro-forma procedures acknowledging close contenders were banned from happening by the DNC just for this convention: nevertheless that doesn’t mean that a majority of Hillary supporters are going to vote for McCain out of spite (a term with interesting connotations), especially in a swing state – they can count the numbers on the Supreme Court as well as anybody.
But what about the disaffected Dems living in states that are solidly red or blue in presidential elections? Where a small proportion of those not toeing either party line cannot influence the electoral college result, but whose vote can strategically influence other results? Those who perhaps initially supported Edwards as a check against corporatism, then who may have voted for Hillary in the primaries because of her determination regarding healthcare, and who’ve never particularly been convinced that Obama is strong in the areas that matter most to them? The Greens for one are going to pick up plenty of votes, enough to allow them to develop their party funding base and become a more influential party in the next election and the election after that. The perception that the Dem National Committee has simply ignored their concerns could also hurt a lot of Dems running for Congress/Senate at the State and local levels – the Dems could conceivably win a Presidency that has to cope with a hostile Congress and more Republican/Independent Governors than ever before.
At the beginning of this year, there were plenty of Dem voters looking at the candidacies of Edwards, Clinton and Obama and thinking “wow, this is great, I could happily vote for any of them, we’re not only going to sweep the Presidency we’ll sweep both Houses as well”. That general cross-candidate goodwill has largely evaporated amongst many Dems who first supported other contenders because they feel that their vote is being demanded as an entitlement rather than having their issues considered in the way that the issues of disaffected Republicans are being considered.
Even worse, people who are not fully on board with Obama, even those who are just saying “I’ll vote for him, but I’m not that happy about it” are reporting that others both online and in their social/family circles are bullying them for not being evangelically pro-Obama. That sort of bullying is not going to convince hold-their-nose Obama voters to become fervid supporters and evangelists for Obama-Biden, but it may well push them into not voting for other Dems on the ticket for all those other elections in November.
There comes a point when people should just be satisfied (though not complacent) that the numbers are falling their way with the potential to get even better. No need to get true-believer on people’s arses as well.
With a few caveats this is a fairly clever pick by McCain.
What this does is refresh the McCain Maverick brand (it’s a mavericky pick, even if she’s not so mavericky herself) and tap some of the Western US indy/libertarian/conservative vote. Rather than draw off the vast, universe-conquering hordes of disaffected Hillary voters, Palin’s going to have a fair pull on conservative and indy-leaning voters, male and female.
Palin’s lack of experience is an inviting angle of attack, but it has to be handlyed carefully, otherwise it’ll lead to the inevitable counter that Obama isn’t exactly Howard Q. Executive-Experienceson either, etc etc. Countering that she’s one heartbeat from the presidency which, while being a valid concern can also be read as a personal attack on her and playing the age card, with potentially messy results. Obama’s taken the right tack in his public statements but I don’t think his surrogates should go heavily with this angle.
The first rule of VP picks is Do No Harm, and this is where the caveats come into play:
1) Troopergate! It’s fairly small beans by Alaskan corruption/misdemeanor standards but if it has legs McCain just picked Geraldine Ferraro.
2)”Sarah who?” “She’s 44 and he’s 72!?” – it is a fairly long shot by McCain, and a fair amount of desperation was obviously in play. If Obama and crew can run with that and the inexperience angle without getting too personal to either candidate they can end up looking like the more stable pairing.
3) on a related note, the last-minute, left-field nature of the pick may lead to wierd/awkward chemistry between the two on stage and screen, and may mean she wasn’t fully vetted.
This is a gamble, but really, who else should he have picked? Romney? Pawlenty? Jindal? There wasn’t a stable of talent out there and with this pick McCain’s signalled his willingness to think outside the box. It may backfire horribly, but either way he won’t be treading the safe, slow route to electoral death.
And I wouldn’t worry too much about her vs Biden either way – it’s not like anyone watches the VP debates.
Good analysis, tigtog.
I was going to mention the corruption scandals in Alaska too. If McCain feels he needs to shore up his vote in what should be a safe red state, what does that say about his confidence?
Kim: Obama’s chances of grabbing AK’s three electoral college votes have all but vanished, but I don’t think that was a high priority for the McCain team when they made the pick. If they were trying to shore up key states or target Obama’s, Pawlenty (Minnesota) or Crist (Florida) would make more sense.
It’s never over til it’s over, Leinad! I wouldn’t underestimate the compound effect in some of these states of having such good organisation on the ground. But I’m only really saying that the AK thing was one of the factors. Overweening cynicism, as tigtog suggests, is most of it.
While Veep picks are potentially earth-shattering ( As LBJ, Gerald Ford and Al ‘ I’m in charge’ Haig, and etc were) they MUST remain second order issues. The main thing is that both lead candidates now remain committed to absolutely terminal last empire decline. And on that score I’m happy to say that they both are.
Kim:
Is it really cynicism given that the sizeable, election-changing, Obama-sinking, disgruntled Hillary bloc of voters a) doesn’t really exist and b) (what little of it there is) wasn’t going to vote for Obama anyway?
I tend to think this was just McCain deciding to go crash or crash through – I don’t think any of the more ‘established’ VP picks were going to be of much use and I think his Maverick glands (or whats left of them) sensed that.
Actually, she sounds more like a maverick than McCain does. Sad to say, but she’s exactly the sort of politician republican voters were told they were getting in 94. Sheesh, could you imagine any establishment polly doing this?:
“Will Palin’s history of running for Miss Alaska back when Obama was applying to Harvard Law School help balance the whole “celebrity” schtick?”
Well, Obama got into Harvard Law School and graduated magna cum laude. Sarah Palin only managed runner-up to Miss Alaska. How hard could it have been? Hardly anyone lives there.
She’s risen from the mayoralty of Wasilla, Alaska, (population 6,750) to the governorship of Alaska in 2006. Alaska has a population slightly larger than Las Vegas, Nevada and most of the state’s land area is under the direct ownership and control of the federal government. It’s like the Northern Territory with snow.
She certainly seems to be very popular in Alaska what with her attacks on vested interests, selling her predecessor’s executive jet on ebay and fighting federal government attempts to declare Polar bears a protected species. But you’d have to wonder how well purely Alaskan governance experience – however laudatory – has placed Palin to operate within the intricate dynamics of the huge, complex nation over which she might be but one heartbeat away from presiding.
She’ll no doubt shore up the conservative base that may well have stayed away from the polls in droves in November given that McCain is a dangerous lib’rul ‘n all, and her husband, Todd, is an authentically blue collar oil production operator and a four time winner of the world’s most gruelling snowmobile race – the Iron Dog. Chuck in their five oddly-named kids and they’ll be a hit in the duck-shooting hides of middle America.
It’s hard to imagine that McCain thought that rusted-on Hillary devotees, enraged at Obama’s nomination, would flock to a happy-clappy, moose-shooter who thinks that teaching creationism is OK as long as intelligent design is taught as well.
I agree that it’s more about his own base and emphasising his maverick credentials.
Kevin Drum makes the case for this being another tactics over strategy pick by McCain.
Um, because it gives them a chance to be elected.
This presidential campaign is going to get very boring very fast if people are constantly whinging about Obama not being progressive enough.
Fact is, almost every successful politician you can name in recent decades has managed to stake out the centre better than their opponent. From Hawke and Keating, to Tony Blair, to Gerhard Schroder (who was energetically cutting back the German welfare state). And Bill Clinton, the most successful Democrat politician in decades. No socialist he.
Seriously, folks, where do you get the notion that there’s some vast unmet demand out there for radical progressive policies? If there were, don’t you think the labour/social democrat parties — with their heavy expenditure on research into community attitudes and voting patterns — would have detected it by now?
And explain one thing to me. John Edwards was the most explicitly progressive of the major Democrat candidates. Yet he was always far behind the two front-runners. Most Democrat registered voters (who you’d expect to be rather more progressive, on average, than the average US voter) didn’t want a bar of him.
Why didn’t we see Edwards up on that stage in Colorado accepting the nomination?
“Sarah Palin only managed runner-up to Miss Alaska. How hard could it have been?”
Well, Geoff, if it’s so easy, why don’t you go and do it?
Only up to a point, Paulus. You not only have to grab that centre, you have to hang on to your base.
Unmet demand for progressive politics, Paulus? Check out any public opinion survey on what the great majority of Americans think about universal healthcare, employee rights, minimum wage, etc.
They don’t get any of this because:
(a) Of the cupidity of their leaders;
(b) Because of how hard voting is made in the US and the stranglehold the two party system has.
I had hopes Obama might pursue a strategy designed to increase turnout without having to tack so far to the right.
But Naomi Wolf is right – we have ourselves to blame for failing to organise progressive coalitions around issues and sticking to putting our faith in pollies.
Ta, Leinad, for the link.
Turns out the next V.P., Sarah, is an avid blogger, as well.
http://sarahpalin.typepad.com/
Kim, your last comment has set my head spinning with visions of how these issues must be playing out behind the scenes.
Scene: Obama’s campaign headquarters.
CHIEF OF STAFF: Sir, we’ve just put the latest public opinion survey data through the mainframe, and matched it with the distribution of electoral college votes.
There’s no question about it. The regressions show that you’d win in a landslide in November, if you constructed your platform around universal healthcare, employee rights, and the minimum wage.
OBAMA: But, Waylon, it would annoy the business community if I did that. And where would that get me?
COS: To the White House, Sir.
OBAMA: Well, you know, I don’t want to be President that badly. Senator McCain seems a decent guy, and it wouldn’t bother me at all if he got up in November.
No, although having a progressive platform is such an obvious route to electoral success, in the interests of a level playing field with the Republicans, I’ll forego it.
“Well, Geoff, if it’s so easy, why don’t you go and do it?”
And spend a year making personal appearances in Barrow, Fairbanks, Nome and Anchorage, Paulus? You’ve got to be kidding.
Then check the polls for government control of healthcare, unions, and government control of wages.
Kim’s got a point though. For once I’d like an unreconstructed socialist run on what they really believe in, rather than tack to the centre after the primaries. Then once they’ve failed with about 10% of the vote they might stop whining about “the system” repressing their message.
In that sense it’s refreshing they’ve picked Barry. He’s as close to what they really want as they’ll ever get. Gore was just an incumbent, and Kerry was a contrived pick (they really wanted Dean but thought Herman Munster was more electable), but this time their ideas will get a run – even if the GOP run them on behalf of Barry.
An “unreconstructed socialist”, Craig? What I’m talking about is very moderate social democracy! The US system – both parties – is very right wing in its centre position compared to anything we have here!
Leinad at 6, there can be dumb cynicism as well as smart cynicism.
Stoopid forgetting to log in thing!
Have hangover…
“Sarah Palin” will be a seldom achieved correct answer to a question in the 2020 edition of Trivial Pursuit.
As Benjamin pointed out on the Obama speech thread, by American standards Obama’s convention speech contained some fairly unapologetic advocacy for something approximating social democracy, even if far more watered-down than one might like.
Longer term, the fundraising techniques used by Obama’s campaign (not that they came out of nowhere by any means) might help reduce the stranglehold corporates have on the Democratic Party. This might improve the chances for social democracy more than anything else he does.
I think
http://www.roadtosurfdom.com/2008/08/29/political-equivalence/
pretty much sums it up. Pauline oh Pauline.
Geoff. Excellent portrait of Alaska and this P. Palin person.
“Northern Territory with snow”.
heh.
Trackback
Will there be a husky in the white house?
Mr Punditson @ [6] would you mind stepping out of the vehicle SIR? We have reason to – would you put both your hands above your head SIR – and don’t reach into your pocket SIR!! We don’t need to see your driving license at this time SIR!! We have reason to believe your middle name is of Middle Eastern origin SIR!! [Back up with Federal please base, now now now!!] Would your companion also step out of the vehicle sir? My deputy will now pass a radiological device over the vehicle SIR!! Look away, sir. My other deputy will now place a hood over your head, sir. You have the right to remain. You have us corpus. Mens sana. Potus.
Joe 2,
“Avid blogger?” It has two days of entries. Spoof bigtime. Pretty cool though.
I think some of you are selling her experience short.
Alaska is the only US state surrounded entirely by foreign countries, Russia has been running Cold-War style strategic bomber missions of the Alaskan coast for the past 6 months, and running that state requires an excellent knowledge of geo-strategic energy supply issues.
Infact I think that is one of the reasons McCain picked her, she knows more than any of the other 3 on the ballot about the issue of drilling for oil and gas, and she can speak on the issue with the kind of credibility Obama and Biden simply cannot.
If you go to YouTube you’ll find a clip of her on CNBC a short while ago attacking Biden and George Bush for favoring unstable oil from the middle east over domestic oil, she used it to draw a connection to national security issues.
I think a lot of people are selling her short, i’ve been watching a few clips of her interviews and she is quite impressive, she handles herself well. I think Biden will get a surprise in the VP debate if he doesn’t do his homework on her.
This is bizarre. I can remember having a conversation almost exactly 16 years ago about the nominee Bill Clinton where my interlocur and I agreed he (Bill) couldn’t be all bad because at least he had Hillary standing behind him – we both agreed she was a class act (little did we know then how good Bill could be on his own).
So 16 years ago, a couple of furrineers pretty much felt that Hills would make a great president, and now McCain gives us the 20 month governor of a 700,000 pop. state with a few years before that as mayor of an 8,000 person hamlet???? These two things don’t look the same to me at all.
McCain pandered. McCain has just lost.
Well I supose we actually have to consider what she’d be like as Pres – the likelihood of McCain dropping off during his term if elected being a possibility.
And that’s something US voters seem to forget, one of the reasons for a competent VP is to replace the Pres if they are unable to continue in office for whatever reason.
Even under Bush/Cheney there were at least 3 or 4 occasions when Bush was out of the action (hospital etc) and Cheney was running the show (at least officially hahahaha).
Palin spun herself as the natural candidte for all those disappointed Dem Hillary supporters.
I’m imagining the rush to GOP lists by those legions of Hillary-supporting fundo, anti-choice voters.
*cue crickets*
BTW, Palin is the one candidate in this election who can sing the Python classic with an absolutely straight face:
I cut down trees. I skip and jump.
I like to press wild flowers.
I put on women’s clothing
And hang around in bars.
As said at Salon, smacks of tokenism.
Also amusingly, she was disparaging of the position of VP only a month ago.
Pretty much it looks like McCain is giving up on the independents and essentially destroying any cred on environment/climate change that he has attempted to conjure up (not that he had much in the first place).
Not only does she not believe in climate change, she’s suing the Federal Government to stop them listing polar bears as an endangered species. Probably wants to hunt a few.
It’s just desparation, trying to lure some Clinton supporters and get the base at the same time.
This should also be on Palin’s recommended reading list so she actually understands what she is running for.
Hey, there’s another resume that fails against Palin’s.
” “Avid blogger?” It has two days of entries. Spoof bigtime. ”
Shoosh RumRebellious.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/29/163234/559/495/579213
The playbook on Palin is that she is under investigation for corruption as Governor of Alaska because she tried to get her ex brother in law a trooper fired because of some bust up with her sister. When the chief of police refused she had him removed. http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5687512&page=1 Also the local council of which w she was mayor is now a financial smoking ruin after a few years of her mismanagement. She thought Bush was wrong on Iraq and thinks Obama’s energy policy is a good thing check out the huffington post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ for commentary from Alaska’s majo newspapers and a few of her colleagues in the statehouse.
And her decor taste leaves a little bit to be desired. Next season polar bear, darling?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/29/sarah-palin-former-beauty_n_122400.html
Biden’s form is such that he’ll glibly assume that he’ll wipe the floor with her, Palin will study up and Biden will patronise her. Hardcore Hillary people will stay at home in November, and will wonder why Obama ignores them in office.
Mind you, Kerry beat Bush and Cheney was wrongfooted by Edwards a few times in 2004 – but in terms of the result, so what? Looks like that first TV debate, in 1960, has been the only one that has proved decisive.
Palin will be set up for a run in 2012, it will be interesting to see how she makes the transition to a serious national figure over the long term. I think this is particularly cruel.
“Alaska is the only US state surrounded entirely by foreign countries, Russia has been running Cold-War style strategic bomber missions of the Alaskan coast for the past 6 months…”
So getting up at 3am to go moose-hunting was just a cover hey? What Gov Palin was really doing was secretly restocking all those all those “abandoned” DEW stations with fuel oil, improving Biblical tracts and moose jerky to prepare our boys for the slavering slavic hordes poised to pour over the Arctic horizon?
“…and running that state requires an excellent knowledge of geo-strategic energy supply issues.”
“Hi, we’re Exxon. We’d like to drill holes in your state and pipe and ship that sweet sweet crude down to the lower 48. In exchange you’ll get an thriving economy based on more than just tourism and doing unpleasant things with the local wildlife. Also your party funds are looking a little frozen there. So can we talk?”
“YES! TAKE ME NOW!”
As Geoff H. has pointed out in a great line, Alaska’s basically the NT with snow. And the NT has traditionally been Australia’s first line of defense against those ravening Asiatic hordes etc, etc. Yet no one would ever advance that fact here with a straight face as a serious credential for Claire Martin moving into Federal politics.
All this talk of experience is also a hoot. Nixon was one highly experienced and professional pollie and boy did he fuck up big time. Herbert Hoover was by most accounts a smart and decent man with much worldly and pragmatic life experience and so, despite the fact he’d never held any elected office, was voted POTUS. Where, as you may recall, he did not exactly cover himself in glory. Or take LBJ, a very smart, tough and highly experienced pollie who abdicated broken and beaten after five years in the Oval Office. And how about Lincoln who’s total elected career consisted of eight unimpressive years in the Illinois State House and two quite forgettable years as a Congressman. And then became POTUS, widely seen as a weak comprise candidate and a front for Bill Seward but could talk a nice line of bullshit. The people of the Republic seem to have remembered his terms as POTUS quite kindly since.
Becoming an Oval One is a unique experience with unique pressures and if history is any guide, the history of those who end up there is no guide to their performance in office.
Also, I’m rather disappointed that the Grand Old Party, which has traditionally stood for meritocracy, has fallen victim to identity politics tokenism. I mean do you really reckon they would have given the Veep nod to a man with Palin’s track record. Even Dan Quayle was better qualified. And prettier.
Sounds somewhat like the NORTHERN BUSH to me…except hubby has most of the oil links…and she’s a cancer bout away from the Presidency…but she is a Governor pretending to be what they’re not as they prepare for the WHITE House.
Another oil, energy-linked individual who has not been vetted properly. Not surprising really…Repugs hate Democracy. They love piling the BS in peoples eyes.
Yep, another CONSTRUCTED “earthy”, “God-loving”, gun-slinging, troop supportin’ character…someone who can kill a large, defenseless animal w/ a gun & scope…and smile about it…like GW Bush could sign the execution papers of those awaiting the death penalty…and smile about it…
seems to me quite simple…
Palin signifies more death, more war…more simplistic, narrow thinking and salivating as the oil-fed war machines roll over & bomb America’s competitors…more promotion of sexism & red, bloody meat is good for you…have mega-kids to become hunters, soldiers & Christian propaganda pushers/educators in the future…
And more armament production (I wonder if she’ll do the HOT, OIL-SLICKED GOVERNOR w/ GUNS on front cover of red-neck mag bit?…mebbe lying on a fur?)…ya find that Christian Fundies can be downright hypocritical at times…but then, it really is all about PROFIT & POWER in the end…RIGHT?
yep, more YEEHAAA…but this time on a snowmobile instead of horse…as McCain works over-time for his MASTERS…the chess players can use this BABE IN ARMS to do the CHEERLEADING…Cheney was far too bald & blimpish to get away w/ holding POM POMS…
So now we get fem Bush w/ a twist of Huckabee…and a slice of Pat & Bay Buchanan (wondered why they were getting so much exposure during the election campaign) who use CHRISTIAN FUNDAMENTALISM & “we work for the little guy…& gal now” FOLKSY PATRIOTISM as a ‘tricky dick’ tool to spread the message of the FOSSIL FOOLS & EAT MEAT MEAT MEAT MANICS & ENCIRCLE CHINA AND RUSSIA ENTHUSIASTS & BOMB BOMB BOMB Iran, Syria, Lebanon…and anyone else who stands in the way of the AMERICAN NIGHTMARE corporate criminals:
Palin, who was chosen Friday as presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain’s running mate, favored increased oil and gas drilling in sensitive lands and waterways, opposed federal action to list the polar bear as a species threatened with extinction and supports a controversial program to allow aerial shooting of wolves and bears as a means of predator control.
(LA Times)
I think anyone considering voting for Nader & The Greens might want to rethink their approach.
And anyone who thinks it shows INDEPENDENCE to take on so called “Big Oil” might want to remember that in the past two years any closing down of pipelines and projects and such caused, conveniently, INCREASES in OIL PRICES…I’m sure that doesn’t hurt the TEXAN boys bottom-line…think profits…even if it temporarily does their competition.
When is a Maverick not a maverick?
When they’re acting out a role during a RIGGED GAME.
A beauty queen…once worked on local TV…gun toting…anti-abortionist…tax cutting…ready to carve up any enemy (perception) just like she does Moose & Caribou…WHITE WARRIOR BLOOD SPORT SURVIVALIST in the WHITE WILDERNESS…prepared for INVASION…by RUSSIANS for energy…or Blacks & Mexicans…ALAMO girl in ALASKA…
Add vast amounts of ATTENTION SEEKING to distract from cool, calm, collected Obama delivering (awesome) FAIR-GO-FOR-ALL, TIME FOR CHANGE style speech…
Sounds like something made up by MR. WALL STREET JOURNAL to me.
But doesn’t he support Obama…?
Didn’t Murdoch promote Maggie Thatcher?
I can still hear the sound of war in The Falklands. And the angst of the coal miners & their unions. And the sound of drilling…& the sucking of gas from the North Sea. And the sobs of the abandoned elderly who froze to death…or near enuff…thanks to penny pinching. And think of the leaking nuclear plants. And the cost to clean up.
Ain’t it a BLAST when strong WARRIOR WOMEN meet media barons & energy dudes & war-mongers…and DANSE MACABRE?
And throwing a little local light on the experience issue, few would argue that Bob Hawke was one of our best Prime Ministers. Yet his elected career before becoming PM was three years in opposition with no executive powers of any kind.
And throwing a little local light on the experience issue, few would argue that Bob Hawke was one of our best Prime Ministers. Yet his elected career before becoming PM was three years in opposition with no executive powers of any kind.
Big sigh
“…few would argue that Bob Hawke wasn’t one of our best Prime Ministers.”
Sunday afternoon. Not coming down easy.
To summarise: Palin is hopelessly unqualified because she’s inexperienced, and Obama is fabulously qualified because he’s much less experienced.
To summarise further: the fact that Obama has received 20 million votes in a hard-fought primary contest proves that Americans don’t trust or understand him, and the fact that an impetuous old man has dragged Palin out of a hat proves that McCain plans to die just after his inauguration.
“To summarise: Palin is hopelessly unqualified because she’s inexperienced, and Obama is fabulously qualified because he’s much less experienced.”
If that was a response to my previous comments Craig Mc, then clearly whenever you vote, your decision is based on purely visual cues.
Just a thought.
Depending on your politics think about your immediate reaction on hearing of the choice. Who? What? Hang on. Wow! No way. Damn.
Then, as a Republican or conservative, you have to sit down and try to turn the negatives, in the context of the McCain campaign spin so far, into positives.
That’s the essence of this selection now. McCain now has around eight weeks to turn this candidate into an asset after running so many of the negatives she now represents on Obama.
His “teams” age and experience is now the issue and that ain’t going away.
Addendum to summary. SP’s selection is all about corralling cracker and fundy votes.
http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoon/display.cfm/58350
I rolled my eyes so far back you could barely see them when I saw McCain’s selection. I just screams of “look at me, look at me, I chose a woman, I’m progressive.” As progressive as a nun’s habit I’d say.
It’ll come as a shock to McCain/Palin that they haven’t swung the rusted-on, Daily Kos/LP/DU demographic with this decision. Why, it’s almost like they care more about some other voters! Perhaps even some of the 45% that stayed home last time. Peh, like 10% of them turning up might swing an election. Preposterous I say!
We’re in for an interesting spring!
Democratic Underground perpetuating smears that her 5th child, the one with Downs Syndrome was not hers, but her teenage daughters and she’s covering it up.
The only evidence offered is that the daughter had time off school with mono, and Palin didn’t “show” until she was 6 months pregnant.
These same people howled at the hills with the Edwards lovechild smear.
If you’re wondering whether Hillary supporters would vote for Palin: check this.
Barry: Those women who supported Hillary because she was female will certainly be supporting the Palin/McCain team.
This is of course, a separate group to “feminists”.
“Palin signifies more death, more war…more simplistic, narrow thinking and salivating as the oil-fed war machines roll over & bomb America’s competitors…more promotion of sexism & red, bloody meat is good for you…”
It’s my experience that conservatives generally eat their meat well done, and only socialist types (like the French) eat their meat rare.
i posted a comment about the crackdown on protesters by FBI and local police in preparation for the RNC, seems to be eaten by spaminator.
If it turns out to be true, the story that ArcXIX at Daily Kos is running suggesting that Palin is actually the grandmother of her most recent child really sends this selection from farce into … uh, what’s more farcical than farce?
We’ll see.
More coverage of the same from Andrew Sullivan at The Atlantic.
Frankly the creepy Kosbot poring over these photos — especially of the teenage daughter — and desperate drooling tinfoil-hatted muckracking is completely appalling, and an embarrassment to progressives.
Palin’s endorsement is another landmark in the decline of neo-conservatism as a force among Republicans.Lieberman has been reduced to singing her praises.
Word, Amanda.
Every time I hear a young idealistic person tell me they don’t know anything or care about politics, it’s ridiculous rubbish like this that you’re expected to “know” about that I blame. A candidate’s questionable pregnancy is not politics. This is the reverse of politics, it’s a curtain being drawn across people’s view of a better society.
Also here’s my edit:
Good God what a disgrace.
Good to see some of the commenters saying as much – “let the tabloids worry about this kind of thing” – but really… is being vaguely principled that hard?
The fact that the Dhimmicrats are in such a flat spin over this selection proves how good it is.
If McCain had selected a Washington insider with sound, traditional RNC credentials there would have been a media yawn and Obiwan and Bidet would have maintained the overwhelming partisan media coverage.
The more I see of the opinions being rolled out aboout this selection the more I agree with the politics of it.
The more I learn about Palin and her family the more I think she is an ideal VP and would make a great POTUS in the future.
I understand all of Obiwan’s bounce has virtually gone and they are neck and neck.
Bob Carr will really be crying in his lemonade now – two weeks ago on the ABC’s Q&A he said Obiwan had lost because he wasn’t leading by more than the margin of error and should be about 10 points ahead.
The Defeatocrats had this election in their hands. The fact that Billary wouldn’t bury the hatchet except in Obiwan’s back has let McCain into the race. Nice work.
“A candidate’s questionable pregnancy is not politics.”
Do ‘head jobs’, in the oval office, get a retrospective pass, as well?
If you stand for VP, you are up for extraordinary scrutiny, regardless.
I feel sorry for her daughter. As Ann Althouse posted, photos of that poor girl are being posted, with thousands of people commenting that her belly fat is distributed in an abnormal way.
I find it abhorrent. Even Andrew Sullivan has the gall to defend it as legitemate questioning, which revokes his status as a serious pundit, in my view.
Was Clinton worse?
It’s the question to answer every question about anything. Here to debate around the mulberry bush tonight are Katz, all the way from moving the goalposts for practice around Melbourne’s Olympic Park, coached inexpertly by Gummo Trotsky via CB radio, and in the red corner, under the bed, we have the Encyclical Kid, Queensland’s own Currency Lad, receiving starting instructions from his pre-John XXIII vintage rosary beads. Refereeing will be Kimberella, who is right now warming up her whistle and red card for those factional infractions. On the sidelines at the card table presiding, Joe Cambria is warming up his commentators’s warbling voice with a few odd monkey noises, and before I forget, spectators are invited to have a bet each way with Ken Parish, bookie to the throng.
As Sepp Herberger said about political threadfighting, the arguments are circular, the game lasts 90 minutes, all the rest is theory.
…
Seriously now, I understand the whole “issue” was a dirty fabrication from the get-go. So there’s no excuse whatsoever for Kos running the “story”, or, let’s face it, for existence.
Better by far as commentary is Jonathan Schwartz.
And further, if there is nothing in this “Kosbot” stuff, so be it.
They will look very, very, bad.
If you stand for, second in office, as a neo-con, family first , value ridden kind of gal, who likes to shoot moose, you are surely open to scrutiny.
Look, it’s a gutsy (or, quite possibly mad) choice. But it certainly seems to have energised the base.
I’m a bit dismayed at the instant conspritorial ‘Birthgate’ crap that has sprung up on US blogs – a direct reflection of the Obama COLB/muslim/terrorist nonsense.
It actually represents a bit of a challenge during the debates. I agree that this is like having Bambi’s mother as potential leader of the free world, but the Dem’s have to handle her with kid-gloves, respect, while slipping in the knife.
Kenneth Starr would get to the bottom of this mess, if only the Republicans let him, again.
For what it’s worth, it turns out that her daughter is currently pregnant.
Immaculate Conception, I presume?
As others have noted, the rumour-post at Kos was a spectacularly appalling effort. The maths on the daughter’s pregnancy and Trig’s birth definitely does not compute, way too many Kossacks displayed an embarrassing level of ignorance about natural variations in pregnancy experiences both physical and emotional (puhlease, “what pregnant woman would talk about guts that way?” bwahahahaha), and the level of glee taken in the purely scandalous aspects of “Birthgate” was revolting.
Candidate’s families are never entirely off limits – how a candidate reacts to family events is always going to be seen as a measure of the person that is not as amenable to stage management as their purely public lives, and this has its value. The problem is making sure that we don’t start judging politicians as if they are also responsible for the choices made by members of their family.
So, the fact that Palin is a supporter of abstinence-only sex education does make her reaction to her daughter’s pregnancy a fair subject for comment. That the daughter is choosing to complete the pregnancy and marry the father of her unborn child will play as a positive for her in many pro-life circles where they fully accept that young people may fall to sexual temptation. The progressives who believe that more comprehensive sex education and subsequent contraceptive knowledge on the daughter’s part would be preferable to her being rushed headlong in parenthood and matrimony at such a young age were most unlikely to ever vote for Palin anyway.
jeremy at Scatterplot:
http://scatter.wordpress.com/2008/09/01/trigedies-of-the-left/
Mind you, AFAIK the story never ran on the Kos front page. It was the work of a diarist.
However, the DKos admins could have squished it entirely (and didn’t).
Obama is having nothing to do with Bristol Palin rumours. Wise of him.
And if I read one more person talking about pre-partum uterine leakage as if it is equivalent to the uterine waters “breaking” in labour I will harumph so loudly that I’ll scare the cat.
I know what you mean Tigtog you would think shes was “crowning”.
Rebecca Traister over at Salon has a nuanced and thoughtful take on the whole schumozzle. She concludes:
Here’s a diary that Kos is running on the front page: PALIN-tology – 45+ Problems for McCain’s VP in just 35 hours.
This is the sort of examination of her political record that’s needed. Some of these 45+ problems are obviously more trivial than others, but at least it’s not just looking at her reproductive capacities.
There is moose gun wedding on the horizon, Levi, and you are involved, son.
The real scandal surrounding Sarah Palin is that she is currently under investigation by the Alaskan legislature for sacking Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan in July 2008 after he refused to sack State Trooper Mike Wooten who was married to her sister. It appears that Palin was using her power to carry out a family vendetta against her sister’s former husband.
Just thinking back to the pasting I got here last year, for suggesting that dailykos was an unreliable resource and prone to nutterism.
I note the diametric reversal exhibited in this thread.
SATP – this is indicative of two things:
1) DailyKos has become much more partisan and shrill, owing to something… umm… what could that be?
2) Many people here are willing to re-examine their opinions, particularly when new evidence comes to light, and even when the (for want of a better word) victims are political opponents.
SATP – it’s also one of the weaknesses of having the site open to thousands of diarists. Generally, the diary articles that get bumped to the front page are not nuttery – that’s not to say that they’re perfect, but they do adhere to certain standards. As Robert said, this Birthgate diary was never bumped to the front page. Compare it to the later diary I linked to in #78 that was bumped to the front page – nothing wrong with the quality of that post.
“PALIN-tology – 45+ Problems for McCain’s VP in just 35 hours.”
I like this one best:
“She’s against sex education – abstinence only”
Hmmm, Granny (times 2) Palin can’t even sell her message to her own daughter. How she’s going to sell it to people who don’t even know her?
It’s going to be a hoot between now and November. Obama’s not only going to win in a canter, he’s going to have a lot of fun doing it.
“…few would argue that Bob Hawke wasn’t one of our best Prime Ministers.”
Indeed, he was our BEST Prime Minister.
“So, the fact that Palin is a supporter of abstinence-only sex education does make her reaction to her daughter’s pregnancy a fair subject for comment.”
Yep.
This “abstinence-only sex education mentality” is dangerous for more than the reason that it does not work and is nutty. Palin seems to have shown absolutely no responsibilty for her own daughters sexual/mental health and still believes she is an appropriate VP.
A continuation of overseas aid by US, with a ‘no contraception veto’, will cause so much more suffering with STD’s and overpopulation.
And a DailyKos diarist seems to have blown it on the detail.
Big deal.
There was clearly an attempt at a cover up…. one baby for another. The phony right wing moral values campaign has been exposed as bullshit, in a slightly indelicate way, via the internet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Palin_family.jpg
There was clearly an attempt at a cover up….
This is not at all clear to me.
In addition, you have no idea what Bristol Palin and her partner did or did not know about sex, whether contraception was used nor indeed anything other details of value. We have no idea what impact the mother’s political views had, if any, on the choices of her daughter. No idea. None. Not a scrap of an idea.
Abstinence-only education and US foreign policy on the issue is wretched as you say, and there is a mountain of empirical evidence to back that up — pruriently sifting through a teenager’s sex life is not needed to make the case and indeed for decent people should be avoided. Just frakking leave it alone entirely.
Well said Amanda.
“pruriently sifting through a teenager’s sex life is not needed to make the case and indeed for decent people should be avoided. Just frakking leave it alone entirely.”
Acting “decently” during an election campaign, especially an American Presidential election campaign, leads inexorably to one outcome – losing.
Does anyone think, that the Republicans, that is, the party of Karl Rove, would think even for a nanosecond, of acting decently?
Decency is for losers. Stuff Sarah Palin’s sensibilities, if she has any. Trawl through Bristol Palin’s sex life as much as possible. If there’s a video of her giving head to her boyfriend, put it on the internet. Right now, I hope, there’s a posse of journalists heading for Alaska to get the dirt on her and indeed the whole Palin family.
What’s the phrase? Not in my name.
Well said Spiros.
“There was clearly an attempt at a cover up….
This is not at all clear to me.”
Amanda, just out of interest, do you believe the press reports, that McCain new about this subject before he chose Palin?
Amanda, just out of interest, do you believe the press reports, that McCain new about this subject before he chose Palin?
I think it looks very likely he didn’t vet properly and this was a last minute decision based on pressure from the fundie wing who also nixed his own preferences. So I really don’t know what he knew. Apparently it was common knowledge around downtown Wasila.
Either way, I’m not seeing “cover-up”? Not announcing something straight away (or at all) and cover-up aren’t the same, to me.
Good to see that neither Spiros nor joe2 want to waste anymore time occupying the moral high ground. We’ve got this poor girl, destined to be used and abused by her mother and her mother’s political masters. That all falls in a heap. The obvious and indeed virtuous response, according to spiros and joe2, is to encourage her mother’s political opponents to use and abuse her instead. That’s fair enough, just don’t expect anyone else to take your further pontifications seriously. Now I’m all for exposing the moral and ethical hypocrisy of the fundies. Not many things give me greater pleasure in fact. It’s difficult to countenance turning children into political footballs though. Oh and, “but the other side’d do it” isn’t an argument. Not for adults anyway. Now where’s my medal for most righteous comment?
BBB
Is she a supporter of abstinence only sex-ed? In this bit on her religious views she is described as:
What her views actually are is a matter of debate especially the ID thing…
Yes I think so. In fact I’ve already brought it up. There should be limits of course. Should be…
Spiros -
.
You old-fashioned sweetheart you.
Does she?
.
this piece from The Washington Post says yes:
I wonder how that squares with her Feminists For life membership? Maybe she’s keen on Anti-Abortion but lukewarm on contraception. Or perhaps she believes that contraception is only to be used in marriage, or maybe she believes that schools have business teaching you anything about sex except for: Now that you know how it’s done, don’t do it.
In those same questionnaire answers she also said the Pledge of Allegiance was written by the founding fathers so I won’t defend her against accusations of being completely confused, at the very least.
I’m taking the day of the Veep debate off to watch though now, pass the popcorn!
Ahem. August 2006:
There’s a difference between voting against condom handouts to school children and being against sex education, or for that matter advocating abstinence only. Boy, it took Bush years to achieve this level of insanity on the left.
But carry on. Break that scoop Kosbots! If only they can yell louder and invent even more lurid fascinations they’re bound to swing public opinion in their favour. You know you want to.
Fucking hell, Spiros and joe2, even Graham Richardson would be ashamed of you. “All it takes” is an in-joke for black-humoured fellow-travellers, not a precept to disciples.
You’re confusing being righteous and right, BBB. Well said.
What Amanda, BBB and Liam said.
Maybe it’s easy for us to be sanguine about playing fair in American politics, since we are not the ones who are going to suffer the consequences when those playing fair lose, and the scum bags come to power once again.
The scumbags, you mean, adrien, who pioneered ratfucking as a term, a campaign strategy, and a norm?
This is *precisely* what I meant when I said this kind of drama is a curtain being drawn across the view of a better world. Politics isn’t about whose bun is in whose oven, or whether so-and-so is a good or bad person. This kind of rubbish about the timing of someone’s child’s pregnancy just obscures the actual political struggle. I’ll be honest here amd declare that my concern isn’t specifically with the feminist argument about the personal and the political, or with the question of what is “in” and what is “out” in a candidate’s debate. I say, as a concerned fan of electoral democracy, that all of this habit of questioning candidates’ morality is a festering cancer on all sides of politics.
How is it, more to the point, that I’m sticking up for fair play and electoral white gloves? I’m a stooge and veteran of the NSW Labor Party. If you’re past my position you’re well, well offside.
“just don’t expect anyone else to take your further pontifications seriously.”
Well, I am not the Pope, so of course my pontifications should not be taken seriously.
What also should not be taken seriously is people who actually say, about a US presidential campaign.
“It’s not whether you win or lose, it’s how you play the game”.
For those with short memories, here’s a brief history of crimes perpetrated by the Republicans
2008 “Obama is a Muslim who was raised in a madrassa”
(In fact just last week a new bag dirt on Obama was published by a Republican attack dog.)
2004 Swift Boat veterans
2000 The great Florida swindle
….
1988 Kitty Dukakis (wife of Democrat candidate Michael Dukakis) was falsely accused by a Republican senator of having burnt an American flag during the Vietnam war. (Flag burning was a big deal in that election. Dukakis himself was accused of having had a mental illness. This dirt campaign was orchestrated by Republican strategist Lee Atwater, a truly evil man, who got his comeuppance a couple of years later when he died of a brain tumour aged just 40.)
….
1972 Watergate
and so on.
And you people want to play by the Marquess of Queensberry rules!
The Democrats either directly or by surrogate have every right, indeed duty, to go after Sarah Palin. If Bristol Palin gets hurt in the process, that’s just tough Bristols.
I am not the Pope but I usually insist on all my pontifications being taken very seriously indeed. But that’s just me.
BBB
Extraordinary! Hasnt been easy to folow in Japan (wifi has killed public acces to internet, unless you have own termnal with you)
Say hi t President Obama! McCain has established beyond doubt that he’s an unelectable dufus with zero judgement.
Almost too easy. I wantedto see an heroic tussle. damn!
Looks like a choice betwen west wing and desperate housewives!
Someone has called the chld-concealment deal “waterbreak” . hoho!
Spiros, your argument is completely repulsive but your ‘tough Bristols’ joke is very funny.
Got to admit, pretty stunned at the Republicans’ amateurism. Isnt extensive vetting the whole point? I saw it on west wing, so it must be true.
Wish I couls follow it more easily, but Ive got that foreign keyboard problemo up the wazoo. LAter!
“Got to admit, pretty stunned at the Republicans’ amateurism.”
You’d almost suspect that McCain wanted to lose.
Talk about breaking onto the national stage in a hurry. Palin could go either way from here. All computer models broken at this stage.
Here’s my take on the Palin/scandal thing:
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/03/the-life-of-palin-or-health-care-and-justice-and-climate-change-or-stuff/
Most entertaining US Presidential Election evah! Have both parties subcontracted the format and narrative arcs out to Endemol?
Not even The West Wing or the Zuckers would dare come up with such a cast of characters and wildy careening story bumps. I’ve gone beyond caring who wins now. The process alone sends a whacky 21st century wired message about the poisoned chalice that’ll either end up in the initially exultant hands but rapidly disillusioned hands of a smooth young hyper ambitious black urban operator who’s risen without trace or a cranky old whitebread fart from the Sunbelt wo thinks he tjust deserves it. And then there’s the second leads – a raucous Senatorial blowhard warhorse and a glamourous but spaced out Governor,
Put that in a film script and the reader’s report would say v. colourful contrast but the conflict is too obviously forced to be believable on screen.
The latest twist that really appeals to me is the revelation the GOP had a standard form with more than 70 questions for vetting Veeps.
Let have a crack at this questionnaire.
So you’d like to be the Republican Nominee for Vice President of the United States of America? Just fill out this simple Q&A and email it to vicepresident@rnc.com. Prompt response guaranteed within 30 days.
1. Are you now, or have you ever been, associated with the oil, defence or financial services industries?
2. If not, why not?
3. Are you a Christian? If so, please tick at least one of the following:
a) Born again
b) Evangelical
c) Baptised in the Blood of The Lamb
d) Practising in public
e) Frantically rehearsing in private
4. Do you believe a woman’s womb is:
a) sacrosanct to my personal beliefs
b) a political playground
c) producing too many campaign distractions at the moment
d) I’ve already had her tubes tied at this very discreet little clinic that also fills my vigara prescriptions. Next question.
5. Do you believe every American:
a) has the right to bear as many arms as they can possibly stockpile
b) should be restricted to automatic weapons only when hunting or attending school
c) should go shooting at least once with those wonderful generous folks from the NRA and Smith and Wesson. You would not believe the fantastic chef and wine cellar at this great little hunting lodge they’ve got up in Wyoming. Pan fried bison steaks, ummh. (Breaking the fourth wall here folks -I’d personally love to shoot and then eat a bison. But not with an automatic weapon. That’s just plain unsporting. Equally I argue the bison should not be armed with one either.)
6. George W, Bush is:
a) a uniter not a divider
b) 43rd President of the USA
c) Who? Is this some knock knock joke?
e) Wait a minute. Wasn’t his daddy a Prez too? It’s starting to come back to me… no sorry, lost it again.
7. The principal duties of the Office of Vice President of the United States of America are:
a) waiting for POTUS to fall below room temparture
b) attending the funeral of the President of Siam
c) running a shadow government that’s so paranoid it starts at its own shadow
d) not worth a pail of warm piss
8. During Veep debates, the key objective of the Vice Presidential candidate is to:
a) win one for the Gipper
b) please oh Lord don’t let me fuck up
c) please oh Lord don’t let me fuck up
d) remember the difference between Irack and Iram
9. In the very unlikely event the GOP doesn’t win, what level of campaign debt are you prepared to be responsible for?
a) I though we were getting paid for this, win, lose or draw. Look, this is what I printed out from the RNC website. Read the small print.
b) Define rich
c) Losing is not an option*
d) Debt!!?! Those fucking bastards owe us for this clown circus we’ve been through
10. In the unlikely event you don’t turn out to be as pure as the driven snow, will you:
a) graciously ignore all accusations
b) accuse your opponents of ungraciously exploiting your flaws that make you unfit for the office
c) I have been tested by the Lord! And I have sinned! But I am repenting now like fury right in front of your very eyes! Praise
IrackJesus!d) Resign with a short yet dignified statement and then appear on American Idol. Or Survivor: DC. Or Cops.
* Not losing is not defined as winning according to legislation in most mainland States. However ‘Losing Is Not An Option TM’ is valid in Ohio, Florida, Alaska and Illinois.
Feel free to make up the other 60 questions yourselves folks. The Good Lord knows any potential GOP or Demo Veep would make up the answers.
Even from a purely Rovian tactics point of view Spiros, that dog won’t hunt.
The Bristol pregnancy barely rates on the yawn scale as a “scandal” so just dealing with the supposed pregnancy cover up (which also, BTW, is not guaranteed to damage her much. It’s a very traditional way of dealing with the “problem”, it looks sort of quaint more than anything to me) — even if Dems are assembling a crack squad of alternate midwives and obgyns to cast doubt on her story it is a rumour which can be instantly and totally squashed. I don’t know if Veeps have the same medical history disclosure as president candidates but, hey, rumour over as soon as she does. Lots of energy expended for … what, exactly? The incidents you mention are mostly hard to disprove and go to “core public values” — this is neither.
And that’s only if it ever reached a national exposure level, which it didn’t because it was just some common or garden internet stupidity-mongering. With added offensiveness by super ignorant choads, sure, but it was never going to damage Palin where it counts.
“Playing hardball” and swiftboating aren’t the same thing.
BTW on the Florida thing, try to find the “Recount” miniseries that was on in the US this year. Yeah the Dems should have had some more backbone then, but not.the.same.thing.
Liem, I know it’s confusing, but the name’s adrian, like it says above. Your touching concern for the future of democracy would be all the more poignant had that particularly horse not already well and truly bolted. If you are under the impression that the American election has anything much do do with democracy, let alone morality, I’ve got a lovely used bridge to sell you.
Sorry about the a/e thing, adrian. In my defence for last night’s typing errors, I was on the outside of a nice longneck of pilsner. Not Czech unfortunately—Resch’s.
You know, I do happen to agree with your *very* basic premise, that it’s preferable to have your Party in power to not having your Party in power. I also agree that the “morality” of candidates shouldn’t be an issue; bad people often make the best policy. This is how you do an attack ad, though: note in particular the presence of a political message.
Amanda, I like the idea of a crack squad of Democratic ob/gyns. Pap Force Five?
“a crack squad of Democratic ob/gyns. Pap Force Five?”
Whose mission would be to smear Sarah Palin.
“Lots of energy expended for … what, exactly?”
To win the election.
Speaking of which, it’s time to start talking about … the betting markets! As of right now, on Betfair, Obama is $1.56 and McCain is $2.90.
To win the election.
Rovian tactics, u r doin it rong. Nothing even slightly associated with these issues will make one single jot of difference to Dem chances of winning the election. Underage sex tapes, while you might enjoy them, aren’t gonna do it either. Sorry bro, there’s always x – tube.
If you want dirt at least come up with something worthwhile and which will actually negate her appeal to the people she is there to appeal to and can’t be disproven in five seconds flat. You see how it works?
I’ve got one to start with: her own stated policies and inexperience.
Liam, my apologies for being excessively snarky above. Only excuse was I was just about to leave for work. Great ad, by the way, but don’t you think it will only appeal to voters with a brain?
Amanda, is there some sort of law of US politics that states that gutter tactics only work for the Republicans and not for the Democratics, that I am unaware of?
It’s that old staple of political bullshit the world over – the ‘character’ of the candidate who is standing for high office blah blah blah. Hell you should have learnt the script from the Libs and their media lackeys at the last election.
The Americans play the same game, just a little harder. Well actually, a lot harder.
When part of a candidate’s key message is appealing to hard right christian sensibilities on sex and reproduction and her personal life hardly mirrors this image, then in America she is fair game. You might not like it, I might not like it, but unless you want McCain as President and all that implies, dismount thy high horse!
I have a cartoon for all and still reckon fundamentalist right wing moral crusaders who now stand for VP are open to special scrutiny, family matters included. Especially when they parade, their team, like animal trophy, for advertising a very ugly pro war cause.
Maybe we could go without the Bristol vid that G.R. is already hogging on a private loveboat.
http://blogs.laweekly.com/fish/2008/09/the_mother_the_daughter_and_th.php#comments
No worries adrian.
Amanda is right—there’s nasty tactics, and there’s nasty tactics that are not likely to win votes of anyone likely to vote Democratic. Making the uteruses of candidates and candidates’ families a voting issue is a right-wing ploy, and it’s a fundamentally non-political one.
Why would candidates personal lives only be attacked from the right-wing. It’s effective or not effective. Immoral or moral. It’s not a matter of left or right.
But as Obama won’t be touching this stuff with a 40′ pole – the argument is moot.
Media and internet scandal will do this thing to death. For better or worse.
Anticipation of the VP candidates’ debate on Oct 2 is running hot.
Adrian,the Christian bloc is NOT going to drop her because her daughter is pregnant. If anything her response to it makes her a better candidate for them. She has known challenges hallelujah and by the lords grace has overcome!
Like I already said, in purely strategic terms there is no benefit for the dems here. To the degree it highlights McCain’s reckless rush for symbol points, that helps. But you don’t need a drooling mob of randoms pontificating on the appropiate distribution of a girl’s belly fat to make that point.
Amanda, I think you are discounting the general air of crisis surrounding the ticket and the fact that it is forcing the Republicans off message. We all know how the media, particularly in America works, and it is full of this at the moment, to the detriment of the Republicans.
And the Christian bloc isn’t the only group voters that the Democrats need to appeal to if they are going to win.
Off-message for the Republicans, adrian? Is that why we seem to be obsessing over a woman’s role in or out of the house, the out-of-wedlock pregnancy of a teenager, and that teenager’s body fat? Doesn’t sound too off-message to me.
I think it might work better if we were having this conversation on just one thread at a time. So please go here to continue it:
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/03/the-life-of-palin-or-health-care-and-justice-and-climate-change-or-stuff/