Post by: xavier fremboe on September 03, 2008, 02:46:58 PM
1. Murphy and Noonan's careers? Especially after Noonan's article today in the WSJ?
2. Chuck set them up? Sure seems like it to me. After Jesse's off-mike comments, I think this will be a common tactic from here on in.
Also heard reports that CBS is citing the National Frigging Enquirer as a source that Sarah had an etra-marital affair with Todd's ex-business partner.
I looked for another thread on this, but couldn't find one. I didn't want to post this as troll-bait, so it's on this side of the wall. Curious as to thoughts.
Post by: Ezekiel on September 03, 2008, 03:02:39 PM
The Enquirer has busted folks out, before. Normally, I would 100% dismiss, but they are good at this...
Palin was a joke to begin with, IMHO, but when folks inside their own strategy see same, you're screwed.
It is, and has been, very obvious that McCain cronies went to bed saying, "if only we could locate a right-wing, radical, FEMALE, nutjob -- dressed as an outsider -- to pacify both the Right and the Clinton-istas..."
They found her and knee-jerked.
Bad news, yo.
Post by: xavier fremboe on September 03, 2008, 04:50:49 PM
Oh, SNAP!
The Enquirer has busted folks out, before. Normally, I would 100% dismiss, but they are good at this...
Palin was a joke to begin with, IMHO, but when folks inside their own strategy see same, you're screwed.
It is, and has been, very obvious that McCain cronies went to bed saying, "if only we could locate a right-wing, radical, FEMALE, nutjob -- dressed as an outsider -- to pacify both the Right and the Clinton-istas..."
They found her and knee-jerked.
Bad news, yo.
I really, really, really hope you're wrong. Less the 'radical' and 'nutjob' appelations, you are correct that she is directly out of central casting, but then again, so is BHO. I also don't really think she's going go pull away any serious Hillbots...
The Enquirer has busted folks out, before. Normally, I would 100% dismiss, but they are good at this...
Palin was a joke to begin with, IMHO, but when folks inside their own strategy see same, you're screwed.
It is, and has been, very obvious that McCain cronies went to bed saying, "if only we could locate a right-wing, radical, FEMALE, nutjob -- dressed as an outsider -- to pacify both the Right and the Clinton-istas..."
They found her and knee-jerked.
Bad news, yo.
Post by: Ezekiel on September 03, 2008, 04:59:50 PM
I do think Palin is a right-wing radical, designed to attract Romney voters, too. Problem? He went NUTS and over-the-top in his speech: likely not what McCain desired.
So, she looks left of a target that moved (Romney) and is not holding up under soccer-mom scrutiny.
End result? A token and massive miss by the McCain camp. Unless they locate compromising photos of Obama in friendly embrace with a donkey, this will be hard to overcome.
Post by: Grandpa Shooter on September 03, 2008, 07:09:00 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 03, 2008, 08:27:31 PM
If McCain could have chosen a better VP, name him.
Post by: De Selby on September 03, 2008, 09:12:37 PM
Palin = voter turnout.
If McCain could have chosen a better VP, name him.
If McCain could have chosen a better VP, name him.
Kay Baily Hutchinson....her, mentioned in the article.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 03, 2008, 09:19:46 PM
Why is Kay Bailey Hutchinson better?
And just to clarify, I'm not talking about performance in office. I'm talking about getting votes.
Post by: De Selby on September 03, 2008, 09:28:40 PM
And I'm focused on votes too-at this point, I could care less about the "experience" the politicians claim to have, which mostly proves nothing about managing the money we send to them, which is the job they're elected to do.
Hutchinson would be better in terms of votes because:
-She is a more professional, polished figure, so she looks and acts more in line with the all-business, professional management theme that McCain is trying to create. He's all about the contrast to Obama's stardom-Hutchinson fits that image.
-She is still energetic and youthful enough to keep the ticket lively, and to attract those who might be turned off by McCain's age.
-She clearly knows how to deliver votes in one of the largest states in the Union, and it is also a southern state. No Republican will ever be elected to national office without a strong understanding of the political networks between Las Cruces and Tallahassee.
-Her experience is relevant insofar as it forecloses mocking McCain's "no experience" attacks on Obama. In the coming weeks, I think the damage done by Palin's perceived lack of experience (not that I think it matters, but certainly the contradiction does) will become more apparent. You can't blast Obama out of one side of your mouth for being experienced, then out the other praise your running mate for being a "washington outsider and soccer mom, plain ol' country gal."
-The campaign wouldn't be tempted to give speeches railing against "Washington insiders", which would be smart, considering that McCain is about as much a Washington insider as can be.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 03, 2008, 09:44:02 PM
Quote
-She is a more professional, polished figure, so she looks and acts more in line with the all-business, professional management theme that McCain is trying to create. He's all about the contrast to Obama's stardom-Hutchinson fits that image.
In other words, she comes off as another boring politician. This would not create the excitement that WILL bring voters to the polls to vote for Palin. At risk of taking myself too seriously, mark my words. I'm not saying McCain will win, but if he does it will be because of Palin. Forgive me, I'm not familiar with Hutchison's record. Unless she's as solidly conservative as Palin seems to be, she'd be lacking a major ingredient of Palin's appeal.To quote myself from another thread:
Palin's "lack of experience" is a POSITIVE for the McCain campaign. By foolishly attacking this perceived flaw, Obama and his media allies have drawn attention to Obama's even more glaring lack of experience or accomplishment, and for a higher office, no less. This has reduced Obama to claiming he has "executive experience" by virtue of running an election campaign.
Quote
You can't blast Obama out of one side of your mouth for being experienced, then out the other praise your running mate for being a "washington outsider and soccer mom, plain ol' country gal."
You can when your veep has already accomplished change, while Obama merely talks about it. You can, when your veep has experience and accomplishments that make Obama look like the mere demagogue that he is. You can, when you keep in mind that Americans (at least in recent history) have preferred gubernatorial to senatorial experience. Think GW Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Carter, Nixon.
Post by: De Selby on September 03, 2008, 10:03:53 PM
Quote
In other words, she comes off as another boring politician. This would not create the excitement that WILL bring voters to the polls to vote for Palin. At risk of taking myself too seriously, mark my words.
The problem is that we're talking VP slot, not the top position. Your whole pizzazz in generating voters cannot be about the VP, or else after the introduction wears off, voters will still notice that they're electing someone boring.
It's best to embrace what you are-I think GW's success owed in large part to creating the impression that he was just plain comfortable with who he was, and that he didn't need to pretend in order to get up on stage and run.
Selecting a personality who is so far in contrast with the Presidential candidate only makes the lack of vigourous energy more apparent.
Quote
By foolishly attacking this perceived flaw, Obama and his media allies have drawn attention to Obama's even more glaring lack of experience or accomplishment, and for a higher office, no less. This has reduced Obama to claiming he has "executive experience" by virtue of running an election campaign.
You call it reduced, but apparently the polls are indicating that most people consider it to be either irrelevant or a plus. He is consistently up in the latest polls...we'll see in the next week how that fares with Palin's introduction and the convention.
I'm predicting, though, that the attacks will benefit Obama-he's managed to deprive McCain of the "no experience" hammer, because McCain picked someone without precisely the kind of experience McCain has spent the last few months emphasizing.
I think you'll see the opposite of Obama being reduced to making silly claims: McCain will be reduced to, in effect, equating his Senate service and military command to being a local politician, in order to explain why he chose Palin to run on the "experience" ticket. Those are the things that qualify him to be president, according to his campaign, and he's going to have a tough time explaining why he doesn't want a number 2 with those same types of credentials.
You are right in identifying a preference for Gubernatorial experience, but the problem is that Palin isn't running for President, so that dynamic isn't going to work. Instead, McCain still has to sell himself...and if he's out there claiming that you need a governor from outside Washington, how is he going to turn around and say "but vote for a veteran Senator from Washington now!"?
In short, everything that is good about Palin undercuts, literally, every argument that McCain has been making in support of his own candidacy. He's now going to be stuck trying to explain why those credentials are suddenly not so important...or he'll have to hope that people elect his VP, and not him, which is folly, imho.
Post by: ilbob on September 04, 2008, 05:02:36 AM
She is young, McCain is older. People that think McCain is too old, will appreciate her.
She has a fair amount of government executive experience. Neither Obama or Biden have any experience except as leeches.
She is a true reformer, and against her own party. Republicans are looking for someone willing to take on those in their own party who need to be dealt with. Democrats don't care if crooks run things. they accept it. Most republicans don't. It is a basic difference between the republican base and the Democratic base that is not appreciated much.
There is a good chance Biden will be made to look either foolish (because he says what he wants) or boring and fake (if he sticks to the script) in the VP debates.
I think she could get 10% of the Hillary voters, and that could turn into a 45 state win for McCain.
Post by: xavier fremboe on September 04, 2008, 05:06:21 AM
Post by: roo_ster on September 04, 2008, 05:53:45 AM
She is two-faced on many core conservative issues and folks in Texas are starting to clue in to her. The only reason she has toed the line is because of massive constituent pressure. If she thinks she can get away with it, she would don the RINO horn in a moment.
She also is an establishment policritter, whereas Palin is not. Palin has shaken the political trees whereas KBH is in the tree.
The choice of KBH would have been truly a safe, "token" pick, differing from most other potential Republican veeps only by her plumbing.
Choosing Palin was a risky move by McCain and was a means to reinforce his strengths, rather than to just dump a token gal on to the ticket.
Post by: De Selby on September 04, 2008, 07:11:37 AM
KBH would not have nearly the impact of Palin.
She is two-faced on many core conservative issues and folks in Texas are starting to clue in to her. The only reason she has toed the line is because of massive constituent pressure. If she thinks she can get away with it, she would don the RINO horn in a moment.
She also is an establishment policritter, whereas Palin is not. Palin has shaken the political trees whereas KBH is in the tree.
The choice of KBH would have been truly a safe, "token" pick, differing from most other potential Republican veeps only by her plumbing.
Choosing Palin was a risky move by McCain and was a means to reinforce his strengths, rather than to just dump a token gal on to the ticket.
She is two-faced on many core conservative issues and folks in Texas are starting to clue in to her. The only reason she has toed the line is because of massive constituent pressure. If she thinks she can get away with it, she would don the RINO horn in a moment.
She also is an establishment policritter, whereas Palin is not. Palin has shaken the political trees whereas KBH is in the tree.
The choice of KBH would have been truly a safe, "token" pick, differing from most other potential Republican veeps only by her plumbing.
Choosing Palin was a risky move by McCain and was a means to reinforce his strengths, rather than to just dump a token gal on to the ticket.
The problem is that Palin doesn't reinforce McCain's strengths-she makes his weaknesses more obvious.
The similarity between Hutchinson and McCain, as you note above, is one of the reasons I think she would've been the smarter choice.
Post by: MechAg94 on September 04, 2008, 07:43:09 AM
I agree with others above, KBH would not energize anything. She is a decent party Senator and I can vote for her, but that's about it. Sure she has some experience as Senator and in some state level positions. To me at least, being a governor means more than most other jobs.
Post by: longeyes on September 04, 2008, 08:19:41 AM
I beg to differ.
If the old warrior needs new legs to take him and us up the hill, I think he's found them. Millions more will agree. Republicans have long been accused of being "stuck;" I think Palin is the fire-snorting truck that pulls this Party out of the ditch and back onto the road. Like all kick-ass trucks she's not afraid of a little mud; she'll eat it up and plough on.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 04, 2008, 08:36:21 AM
I'm reading this thread with fascination. We have two of our most vocal forumites telling us that Sarah Palin cripples the already crippled McCain campaign.
Exactly. More of the same (such as KBH) was not going to help McCain.
Quote
If the old warrior needs new legs to take him and us up the hill, I think he's found them.
Oh, so she's nothing but a pair of legs to you.
he'll have to hope that people elect his VP, and not him, which is folly, imho.
But they will. The conservatives on this forum are not unique in our enthusiasm about this woman. In every conservative venue I have seen, from my personal friends to various radio programs, etc., conservatives are very, very excited about voting for this woman, even if that means putting McCain in office.
McCain's problem was not just that so many Republicans disagree with him about so much, it was that so few of us were ready to go to the polls for him, much less campaign for him. That has changed.
Post by: atomd on September 04, 2008, 08:37:02 AM
The problem is that Palin doesn't reinforce McCain's strengths-she makes his weaknesses more obvious.
The similarity between Hutchinson and McCain, as you note above, is one of the reasons I think she would've been the smarter choice.
The similarity between Hutchinson and McCain, as you note above, is one of the reasons I think she would've been the smarter choice.
They are choosing them for the exact opposite reason.
It looks better with someone like Obama who is young, black, and has no real experience to have an experienced older white man on his ticket. Biden is unlike Obama in just enough superficial ways to make people feel a little more comfortable with Obama. I think it's supposed to make it appear to balance things out a little more.
McCain is going for the same thing obviously. I think he made the right call on this one. We'll see.
Post by: Ezekiel on September 04, 2008, 08:39:43 AM
Post by: Brad Johnson on September 04, 2008, 08:42:57 AM
With this choice McCain now has the upper hand in the Change department. Instead of a long-time Washington insider, like BHO's choice, Palin is a relative non-politician who is a female, mother, and wife. Being literate, one heck of a debater, and very attractive doesn't hurt, either. They need to endlessly hammer BHO's campaign on that one point. If they would go ahead and map out her duties as VP, focusing on her involvement in family- and female-oriented issues, I think they could score a political "coop dee tat".
Brad
Post by: roo_ster on September 04, 2008, 09:36:14 AM
KBH would not have nearly the impact of Palin.
She is two-faced on many core conservative issues and folks in Texas are starting to clue in to her. The only reason she has toed the line is because of massive constituent pressure. If she thinks she can get away with it, she would don the RINO horn in a moment.
She also is an establishment policritter, whereas Palin is not. Palin has shaken the political trees whereas KBH is in the tree.
The choice of KBH would have been truly a safe, "token" pick, differing from most other potential Republican veeps only by her plumbing.
Choosing Palin was a risky move by McCain and was a means to reinforce his strengths, rather than to just dump a token gal on to the ticket.
She is two-faced on many core conservative issues and folks in Texas are starting to clue in to her. The only reason she has toed the line is because of massive constituent pressure. If she thinks she can get away with it, she would don the RINO horn in a moment.
She also is an establishment policritter, whereas Palin is not. Palin has shaken the political trees whereas KBH is in the tree.
The choice of KBH would have been truly a safe, "token" pick, differing from most other potential Republican veeps only by her plumbing.
Choosing Palin was a risky move by McCain and was a means to reinforce his strengths, rather than to just dump a token gal on to the ticket.
The problem is that Palin doesn't reinforce McCain's strengths-she makes his weaknesses more obvious.
The similarity between Hutchinson and McCain, as you note above, is one of the reasons I think she would've been the smarter choice.
Wrong on both counts.
1. McCain's strength* is his his willingness to tell the establishment to eff off, come what may. He found himself a gal who has done that, showing that he has the 'nads to take a risk and think about America's and the Rep Party's future.
I suspect you and I would disagree about his weaknesses.
2. KBH would have been the safe, boring, establishment-approved choice. And a complete turn-about from McCain's image & strengths. She would not have energized the Republican base and she would have had a much harder time connecting with middle-class independents. The McCain camp would have had to expend much energy & $$$ to convince anyone to get excited (to little effect). With Palin, he just had to get her out on stage & talking.
* Both a feature and a bug, IMO.
Post by: Scout26 on September 04, 2008, 09:50:20 AM
I think he loses the independent middle by pandering to the right, backfires on the soccer-mom vote, and does NOT help himself.
As someone who's married to a soccer (well, softball, swimming, football, baseball, and lacrosse) mommy, Mrs. Scout has gone from a tepid BHO voter to a enthusiastic McCain/Palin supporter. She's even called the local Republican committeman to find out about getting a McCain/Palin yard sign.
At cirriculum night at my daughter's high school last night, ALL the moms were talking about Palin and were actively moving things along to get it over with, for their stated purpose to "Go home and watch Sarah's speech."
I repeatedly heard her referred to as Sarah, like she was their neighbor and friend. They readily identified with her; working mom raising kids, trying to balance family, work and life in general. Obama's in big trouble with working/middle class women.
Post by: HankB on September 04, 2008, 10:58:04 AM
. . . The problem is that Palin doesn't reinforce McCain's strengths-she makes his weaknesses more obvious . . .
Have you noticed that most of the comparisons involve comparisons of Palin and Obama?When one party's nominee for President is being compared with the other party's nominee for vice President - and being found wanting in things from the first line in their respective resumes (small town mayor vs. "community organizer") to executive experience (couple of years as Governor with a record of reform, vs, well, nothing) it's not good for the first guy.
Post by: MicroBalrog on September 04, 2008, 10:59:23 AM
Quote
1. McCain's strength* is his his willingness to tell the establishment to eff off, come what may
McCain *is* the establishment.
Post by: Scout26 on September 04, 2008, 11:02:48 AM
. . . The problem is that Palin doesn't reinforce McCain's strengths-she makes his weaknesses more obvious . . .
Have you noticed that most of the comparisons involve comparisons of Palin and Obama?Yep, they don't want to compare Obama to McCain on experience, etc. Hence the democrats pick of Biden as a
Post by: Sergeant Bob on September 04, 2008, 11:24:55 AM
I was going stay home this election and adding KBH to the ticket sure as h*** wouldn't have changed my mind. Now, I will definitely be hitting the polls on super Tuesday. I know quite a few people (Conservatives) who feel the same way.
Post by: Brad Johnson on September 04, 2008, 12:11:40 PM
I was going stay home this election
WTF?!?!?!?
Not voting just because you don't like the candidates is a lame, lazy, wussified, loser copout of the highest order.
If you can't vote for who you like then vote for who you dislike least. Not voting is for whiney do-nothings who want to bitch about the problem without contributing to the solution.
Brad
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 04, 2008, 12:34:31 PM
I was going stay home this election
WTF?!?!?!?
Not voting just because you don't like the candidates is a lame, lazy, wussified, loser copout of the highest order.
If you can't vote for who you like then vote for who you dislike least. Not voting is for whiney do-nothings who want to bitch about the problem without contributing to the solution.
Brad
Post by: Sergeant Bob on September 04, 2008, 02:53:03 PM
I was going stay home this election
WTF?!?!?!?
Not voting just because you don't like the candidates is a lame, lazy, wussified, loser copout of the highest order.
If you can't vote for who you like then vote for who you dislike least. Not voting is for whiney do-nothings who want to bitch about the problem without contributing to the solution.
Brad
Bite me.
Post by: De Selby on September 04, 2008, 04:57:48 PM
At the end of the day, McCain is going to be President on this ticket, not Palin.
So if being a Washington outsider, young, energetic, consistently libertarian, and otherwise everything that McCain is not are vital qualities...then why on earth are you going to vote McCain?
Picking someone who has all the strengths that you lack does not give people a reason to vote for you. It gives them more of a reason to ask "So why aren't I electing someone like this to the Presidency? Why am I electing this other guy instead?"
Post by: De Selby on September 04, 2008, 04:59:24 PM
. . . The problem is that Palin doesn't reinforce McCain's strengths-she makes his weaknesses more obvious . . .
Have you noticed that most of the comparisons involve comparisons of Palin and Obama?When one party's nominee for President is being compared with the other party's nominee for vice President - and being found wanting in things from the first line in their respective resumes (small town mayor vs. "community organizer") to executive experience (couple of years as Governor with a record of reform, vs, well, nothing) it's not good for the first guy.
Again, that's not the issue you think it is, because the natural conclusion of the argument is to point out that Palin isn't running for President.
McCain still needs to make his own case-how does having someone for VP who is likeable do that?
Post by: Ezekiel on September 04, 2008, 05:29:10 PM
McCain still needs to make his own case-how does having someone for VP who is likeable do that?
Who said she's likable?
She's an anchor that undercuts McCain's personal base.
Post by: mtnbkr on September 04, 2008, 06:48:45 PM
Who said she's likable?
She's an anchor that undercuts McCain's personal base.
She's an anchor that undercuts McCain's personal base.
Who says she isn't? Seems she's getting a lot of folks excited, folks who may or may not have cared about politics before.
Chris
Post by: Ezekiel on September 04, 2008, 06:50:43 PM
Who said she's likable?
She's an anchor that undercuts McCain's personal base.
She's an anchor that undercuts McCain's personal base.
Who says she isn't? Seems she's getting a lot of folks excited, folks who may or may not have cared about politics before.
Chris
She gave a right-wing speech and McCain appears to be pushing as more moderate: tonight.
On the trail may be different.
Post by: De Selby on September 04, 2008, 06:56:40 PM
Who said she's likable?
She's an anchor that undercuts McCain's personal base.
She's an anchor that undercuts McCain's personal base.
Who says she isn't? Seems she's getting a lot of folks excited, folks who may or may not have cared about politics before.
Chris
While that is true, they are uniformly folks who were going to vote against Obama anyway.
To win the election she has to deliver voters who might still vote for Obama, and that doesn't appear to be something she's capable of doing, regardless of what you or I believe about her qualifications or beliefs.
Post by: Ezekiel on September 04, 2008, 06:58:30 PM
To win the election she has to deliver voters who might still vote for Obama, and that doesn't appear to be something she's capable of doing, regardless of what you or I believe about her qualifications or beliefs.
Concur. Hence, she's no help.
No help = hurt.
Anchor. Token. Failed strategy.
Post by: De Selby on September 04, 2008, 06:59:43 PM
To win the election she has to deliver voters who might still vote for Obama, and that doesn't appear to be something she's capable of doing, regardless of what you or I believe about her qualifications or beliefs.
Concur. Hence, she's no help.
No help = hurt.
Anchor. Token. Failed strategy.
Agreed-this will go down more comparable to a "Kerry" move than a "Rove" move, viewed in terms of the last election.
Post by: Balog on September 04, 2008, 07:35:15 PM
Who said she's likable?
She's an anchor that undercuts McCain's personal base.
She's an anchor that undercuts McCain's personal base.
Who says she isn't? Seems she's getting a lot of folks excited, folks who may or may not have cared about politics before.
Chris
While that is true, they are uniformly folks who were going to vote against Obama anyway.
To win the election she has to deliver voters who might still vote for Obama, and that doesn't appear to be something she's capable of doing, regardless of what you or I believe about her qualifications or beliefs.
Nope. The fabled "swing vote" is much less important than making your own party get out and vote. Very few R's like MacDaddy, and if he'd chosen some RINO-*expletive deleted*bag like Romney the only selling point would've been "Well, he's not Obama."
Granted, I still loathe McCain and find the idea of voting for him nauseating, but Palin is the very best we can hope for from the massive cluster this election is. Here's a bumper sticker idea for Bogie (if he's still on here, haven't seen him lately): "Voting for McCain; praying for a heart attack."
Post by: De Selby on September 04, 2008, 07:40:25 PM
Who said she's likable?
She's an anchor that undercuts McCain's personal base.
She's an anchor that undercuts McCain's personal base.
Who says she isn't? Seems she's getting a lot of folks excited, folks who may or may not have cared about politics before.
Chris
While that is true, they are uniformly folks who were going to vote against Obama anyway.
To win the election she has to deliver voters who might still vote for Obama, and that doesn't appear to be something she's capable of doing, regardless of what you or I believe about her qualifications or beliefs.
Nope. The fabled "swing vote" is much less important than making your own party get out and vote. Very few R's like MacDaddy, and if he'd chosen some RINO-*expletive deleted*bag like Romney the only selling point would've been "Well, he's not Obama."
Granted, I still loathe McCain and find the idea of voting for him nauseating, but Palin is the very best we can hope for from the massive cluster this election is. Here's a bumper sticker idea for Bogie (if he's still on here, haven't seen him lately): "Voting for McCain; praying for a heart attack."
What is Palin going to do, honestly? It's not like she's going to be secretly running the show for McCain, so I don't see the logic in voting for Palin if you oppose McCain.
But anyway, getting his own party out was going to have to happen anyway, and he has a much smaller party. It's the independents that have been making the Republican elections, and at this point, in order to defeat the consistent polling edge of the democrats, he'll have to do more than just get his smaller base out.
Post by: Balog on September 04, 2008, 07:54:43 PM
Quote
What is Palin going to do, honestly? It's not like she's going to be secretly running the show for McCain, so I don't see the logic in voting for Palin if you oppose McCain.
Like I said, I'm mostly hoping he'll die quickly. And I think the VP can have a strong influence on the PotUS, especially when she is as outspoken as Palin is. A president is largely defined by the advisers he surrounds himself with.
Quote
But anyway, getting his own party out was going to have to happen anyway, and he has a much smaller party. It's the independents that have been making the Republican elections, and at this point, in order to defeat the consistent polling edge of the democrats, he'll have to do more than just get his smaller base out.
1. The consistently biased pollsters get consistently liberal biased results? What a shock.... 2. I think the issue is the definition of independent here. A lot of people lean right pretty hard, but may have no official affiliation with the R's per se. Someone like Palin has a lot of appeal to those type of "independents" who I think are the majority. And again, if your own party hates you, how are you going to get anywhere?
Post by: Scout26 on September 04, 2008, 08:24:24 PM
Post by: De Selby on September 04, 2008, 08:26:17 PM
McCain/Palin 2008 is the springboard for Palin/Jindal 2012.
That's great, but it isn't an election winning formula. John Kerry learned the hard way that you can't win an election by any means other than selling yourself, no matter how unpopular the sitting president happens to be.
Nothing is going to win this election for McCain except convincing people that McCain should be president. Anything else is a gimmick, and will fail due to the obvious gimmicky quality of the move.
Post by: MrRezister on September 05, 2008, 08:01:17 AM
1) He might not appoint horrible, HORRIBLE judges to SCOTUS, and
2) He's pretty friggin' old and might die soon.
Post by: MechAg94 on September 05, 2008, 08:50:15 AM
Sure, McCain is the candidate, but people and the conservative base vote for a lot of reasons. It is not always because they are a cheerleader for the main candidate.
I keep hearing dozens of people here and elsewhere, on the radio, and all over who say that the Palin choice has either gotten them fired up or has made them change the way they look at things or else they know of people like that. I don't think that is just an anecdotal fluke to be dismissed. I think some of y'all are misreading this.
Personally, I wouldn't stay home anyway. I would at least vote for the Congressional and State elections.
Post by: Jamisjockey on September 05, 2008, 12:09:43 PM
McCain/Palin 2008 is the springboard for Palin/Jindal 2012.
That's great, but it isn't an election winning formula. John Kerry learned the hard way that you can't win an election by any means other than selling yourself, no matter how unpopular the sitting president happens to be.
Nothing is going to win this election for McCain except convincing people that McCain should be president. Anything else is a gimmick, and will fail due to the obvious gimmicky quality of the move.
You put too much faith in the average Joe or Jane Sixpack. We live in a country that is obsessesd with the cult of personality. There are a substansial number of people who will vote BHO because he is black, and there will be a substansial number that vote McCain/Palin because she is a woman. The one-issue voters will vote for M/P because she is a real pro-lifer and gives credence to MCains recent switch to pro-life.
Post by: De Selby on September 06, 2008, 12:24:05 AM
McCain/Palin 2008 is the springboard for Palin/Jindal 2012.
That's great, but it isn't an election winning formula. John Kerry learned the hard way that you can't win an election by any means other than selling yourself, no matter how unpopular the sitting president happens to be.
Nothing is going to win this election for McCain except convincing people that McCain should be president. Anything else is a gimmick, and will fail due to the obvious gimmicky quality of the move.
You put too much faith in the average Joe or Jane Sixpack. We live in a country that is obsessesd with the cult of personality. There are a substansial number of people who will vote BHO because he is black, and there will be a substansial number that vote McCain/Palin because she is a woman. The one-issue voters will vote for M/P because she is a real pro-lifer and gives credence to MCains recent switch to pro-life.
Is this the same reason that the "real" Americans voted for Bill Clinton over Bob Dole pr GH Bush? I think Joe or Jane sixpack have other concerns that aren't accounted for by either veteran status or "experience."
Post by: Lennyjoe on September 06, 2008, 05:32:07 AM
Post by: Monkeyleg on September 06, 2008, 05:46:12 AM
Quote
I think Joe or Jane sixpack have other concerns that aren't accounted for by either veteran status or "experience."
On this we agree. In 2000, Gore had more White House experience than Bush. Bush Sr. had more White House experience than Clinton. Bush Sr. also had more experience than Dukakis, but Dukakis really fumbled. Carter had more experience than Reagan, and Ford had more experience than Carter in '76.
I hope McCain doesn't continue to rely on his POW story. It was a good introduction to him for those watching the convention who don't know every detail about him (who are these undecideds?).
McCain has to start addressing economic issues, as Obama already has a head start (by offering free money to everyone). McCain could use the advantage he has now in the drilling issue to explain how oil prices don't just affect gas prices, but affect just about every aspect of our economy, and how the people are paying more for just about everything, including food, because of the Democrats refusal to drill or use nuclear. Despite his recent conversion to being open to drilling and maybe even nuclear, Obama is still vulnerable on that.
The problem for McCain in addressing economic issues is that he can't promise handouts. Doing so would alienate his base. Besides, Republicans never win by promising free money because the Democrats are so much better at that game. McCain could gain some traction by attacking congress on the bailouts in the mortgage industry, but he'll have a tough time talking about the people who were hurt because they bought more home than they could afford.
Obama should have closed the sale with the American people by now, but he hasn't. McCain has an opportunity to sell his ticket, but the window of opportunity wont' be open for long.
It's also time for McCain surrogates to start swift-boating Obama on his extremism. The media won't report on Ayers and Dohrn, or infanticide, or Rezko, but they'll sure criticize the ads. And, in doing so, the skeletons Obama's been trying to hide will be exposed.
Post by: Balog on September 06, 2008, 05:52:23 AM
Quote from: Monkeyleg
It's also time for McCain surrogates to start swift-boating Obama on his extremism. The media won't report on Ayers and Dohrn, or infanticide, or Rezko, but they'll sure criticize the ads. And, in doing so, the skeletons Obama's been trying to hide will be exposed.
Even I haven't heard of this. What're you referring to?
Post by: longeyes on September 06, 2008, 05:57:27 AM
For example, how many adolescents under the age of 80 do we actually have? Enquiring minds need to know. License is for kids; liberty is for adults.
Obama is the flake candidate. He is the choice of those whose drug of choice is a syllabub of guilt + unction. People vote their wallets but they also vote peace of mind. When the curtain closes Americans are going to notice that pushing the pin for BHO gives them an uncomfortable twitch along their left leg--"Who is this guy and what kind of crazy **** is he going to pull?" And they are going to go with McCain, because all things considered he's safer. Politics is not about grand visions, it's about taking care of business.
If McCain's smart he'll hammer on two things before November. Not I'm more of a change agent than that other guy. No, I'm the safe pick, I'm the rock. And I won't double your taxes, I'm not another government bandit. If he does that he wins easily.
Post by: Monkeyleg on September 06, 2008, 07:29:44 AM
As for the infanticide, while in the Illinois state legislature, Obama voted for a bill that would have required a doctor to examine a baby that had survived an abortion. He claims that it would have overturned Roe v Wade, but it was an identical bill to one passed at the federal level. Here's a link to one of thousands of articles on the internet about this vote. I have to believe that this issue has already been covered on APS.
Post by: The Annoyed Man on September 06, 2008, 05:04:21 PM
If the intellectual masturbationist and the fascist apologist thought she was such a light weight why so much vitriol? She hits their buttons squarely. It would be completely out of her purview as Vice President to effect any change in abortion law. If Roe v Wade was overturned then the outcome of that would be to place the question in the hands of the individual states. Some like California would stay the same. Maybe Utah would vote to make almost all abortions illegal. That would not stop someone from going to Oregon to get one. Or purchasing the day after pill through the internet.. A red herring argument.
I personally believe Gov. Palin would do just like she did with the creationism debate in AK. She stated that she was not in favor of making creationism the only theory taught in the classroom. But she did favor teaching both theories.
And my personal reason for switching from R.Paul to Palin is she is a chance to return the Republican party to fiscal conservatism and constitutional reform of the Federal gov't.
Jim