Sarah Palin's speech tonight exists within a weird middle ground between fairly low expectations and a fairly high degree of difficulty.
Voters have questions about Palin's background, her governing philosophy, her readiness to lead, and her position on a variety of specific issues. It will be impossible to address all of these within the context of a single speech -- particularly for someone who had never spoken to a national audience before last Friday. On the other hand, the pundits, recognizing the rough couple of days that she's had in the press, will most likely be inclined to react sympathetically toward her. So may voters at home, buoyed by what will inevitably be an enthusiastic response in the Xcel Center.
Under these circumstances, it will be imperative for Palin not to overreach. I would avoid any specific claims -- like her arguably false claim in Dayton on Friday that she opposed the Bridge to Nowhere -- that won't hold up to a FactCheck.org vetting. And I wouldn't make any assertion to expertise in foreign policy. A claim, for instance, along the lines of what Cindy McCain said the other day -- that Palin is a foreign policy expert because Alaska is close to Siberia -- will ring hollow even if articulated well, and if articulated poorly, could easily become her Potato-e moment. The debate against Joe Biden, which Palin will have much more time to prepare for, is a better forum than that, an opportunity to demonstrate rather than assert her working knowledge of foreign policy.
I do think she has to convey a certain seriousness of purpose -- one overly cute reference to mooseburgers is probably one too many -- but there are ways to do that without invoking foreign policy, such as talking about "small town values". A throwaway applause line or two critiquing the media is probably worthwhile, so long as it seems good-natured rather than defensive.
But basically, she shouldn't try and do too much. If she pours the media half a glass, they'll most likely be inclined to call it full.
9.03.2008
Palin's Goal Tonight: No Potatoe
@ 8:44 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
435 comments
I think that's Palin's magical trump card. By pointing out that she is remarkably underqualified, we've set the bar extremely low. Contrawise, Biden's bar has been set very high.
If she lasts through this campaign, she'll primarily camp out on the Fox News talk shows (Russert would have pulverized her). She'll focus entirely on energy issues, where she says what America wants to hear. ("We can keep driving and have 5% growth FOREVER if we just drill and believe that God wants us to have oil"). If she can white-knuckle through the one VP debate, that's enough.
What a bunch of gullible saps we are.
Few of the MSM dare to say this out loud, but Palin is a lightweight and a right-wing kook, who was chosen solely for political reasons in a decision that raises serious questions about McCain's judgment.
Yet, here we are, essentially saying that all she has to do is get offstage tonight without making a major gaffe and she'll be in the clear and, apparently, instantly acceptable to be the proverbial "heartbeat away."
This decision should cost McCain the election. Sadly, I can't say with certainty that it will.
I think she has a shot at a home run, her problem is the National Enquirer and the US Weekly attacking, not left wingers such as myslef. Lots of low info voters will get their first impression of Ms. Palin in the checkout line at the supermarket.
Even with a home run, she will be defined poorly in a whole lot of minds.
Obama need to use his Harvard degree and the Law Review and the COn Law teaching in his experience, it just blows her out of the water.
I wonder how much time she needs to fill. There are so many things she "shouldn´t" do. Talking about family values will have to be very careful. Critisizing Obama for his lack of experience won´t really work. She can try to praise Hillary Clinton but then she can´t mention anything about her positions. So I guess we will hear a lot of talking points, like "putting country first", "sacrifice", "service" etc..etc..etc..
jac13 said it all.
I was an early proponent of the idea that McCain should pick Palin. I guess I'd done about as much vetting as his team did, because now she looks like one of the worst veep picks by a major-party candidate since Dan Quayle.
This seems like a situation where Palin should do well. If she really is as good as the conservatives think that she is, I can't imagine her doing poorly tonight. All she has to do is deliver a solid speech, and I'm sure that the speechwriters will have been able to craft something that let's her introduce herself and make a case for why she is ready to be VP. I'd guess that Palin will get mostly positive reviews for the speech. What is less clear is how well she will do in subsequent media appearances, where she may face tough questions from the media. And I don't see the questions about her record fading away anytime soon, especially since the investigative reporters just hit the ground in AK yesterday.
It's always "low expectations" with Republicans. In stark contrast, Hillary had to hit a Home Run, Bill had to give a ringing endorsement, Biden had to avoid being overshadowed by the Clintons "Home Run" speeches, while at the same time attack Bush/McCain. Not to mention OBAMA had to live up to the lofty expectations of previous speeches in front of an audience of 84,000 at Invesco, and a record breaking 38 million viewers.
What does that tell you?
Yes Porridge, but you meet high expectations (which all did) it is worth a heck of alot more than reaching low expectations, even if all sides reach them.
Her speech will be:
Motherhood
Apple Pie
Chevrolet
She'll also emphasize anything that makes her look mavericky, and fighting the good fight.
This whole drama reminds me of the show and movie "Chicago".
Question-
Why is the discourse here at a significantly higher level (even aftr the righties come in) than it is on Morning Joe, the Situation Room, etc. We have more facts and wield them more accurately than these boobs getting millions...
Today's Rasmussen tracker will actually increase to an 8 or 9 point spread as a horrible Saturday polling day where McCain beat Obama 46-45 falls from the tracker. I can't wait.
http://www.bostonpie.com/DailyTracker.htm
brad -
That's why broadcast journalism is dying
But basically, she shouldn't try and do too much.
Who says she will be the one trying to do anything? This speech will have been parsed over by all the party operatives to make sure she says nothing that could get them into trouble, especially with all the revelations that have come out about her over the past few days.
I have little doubt that the speech will be a safe one. Then again, that's usually the case for convention speeches for either party. Whether she will say anything of substance remains to be seen.
The post is spot-on. If she doesn't try for too much, she will get a good reception by all, and then she can begin to address the legitimate questions concerning her credibility as a VP candidate. Of course, this is the worst possible thing for the GOP because it means that it's less likely that she will exercise her Harriet Miers exit within a realistic window. (Those time horizons will kill ya.)
Brad,
It's obvious. We should start our own network! But, then, as soon as we did, we would instantly become cementheads and bubblebrains, just like the current crop -- something about that light on the tv camera! ;-)
She won't bomb, she won't soar, she'll make some people incredibly proud, others worried.
Ultimately, she won't sink the ticket, but on the other hand she won't add anything that wasn't already there, while undercutting McCain's arguments against Obama.
So when the feeding frenzy is over, Obama will be ahead, and McCain will have less to attack him on than before.
We'll see what happens after that.
By all accounts, Sarah Palin is a smart and capable politician. When it comes to her making speeches, there's no reason that we should grant the Republicans the low expectations that they are currently counting on.
Neither the irrelevant nor serious accusations aimed at Palin suggest that she's stupid or politically incapable. Certainly the self-presentation bar shouldn't be lowered one inch for her. I wonder if, in the eyes of the media or public, it has been.
But people should expect her to answer the substantive accusations leveled against her, such as lying about the Bridge to Nowhere, Troopergate, an authoritarian management style, policies in Wasilla that left the town millions of dollars in debt, and connections to an extremist separatist party.
We should not expect answers to these questions in a convention speech (though I think Nate is right that it's fair to expect that we get no more lies about them). But Palin needs to face the media and provide answers to these concerns.
And John McCain needs to explain how a "maverick" who supposedly stands up to his party and has the character and judgment to make a great president is incapable of even naming his own first or second choice for the VP and unwilling to properly vet the person his party forces him to select.
If she can't do well tonight, she's dead in the water.
I'm sure she'll have the crowd in a series of continuous orgasms, but it isn't how you play to the big crowd, its how you play to the little crowd, at home . That skill is learned through experience and practice. She didn't show it last Friday - and if the media continues to air reports like the first 6 minutes of CBS last night - she isn't going to reach above the din.
Also, I think people are tired of seeing the right call the Media out - I think American's want to see the media grow a pair and get the facts out there.
She needs to be careful about how strongly she comes off on the choice/life issue.
That issue hasn't been in play much, and with Colorado 61% pro-choice, Nevada 64% pro-choice and New Hampshire 67% pro-choice .. this could be the issue that seals the election for Obama if she leans into it too much.
Truthfully, I think Palin deals with it all. I do not think it will be safe at all. She will lay out her experience, her mistakes, her family life. The best thing for the GOP is that everyone is comparing Obama to Palin. She says I've been a mayor that fought for my town, to the tune of $27 Million. I have been a Governor that dismantled the old way of doing things, its been rough, I have made mistakes, but I have had a budget surplus and returned tax money to my constituents, the first time in Alaska history.
My husband had a DUI, 22 years ago, right around the time Obama admits he was doing drugs, so what.
My daughter is pregnant, and we love and support her, and do not consider it a "punishment" as Obama would, but a baby to be loved and cherished.
I have a down syndrome child, that has the nurture, love and care of an entire family.
"By pointing out that she is remarkably underqualified, we've set the bar extremely low."
Yes and no.
The right has been saying that the left is making it easy for Palin by setting the bar too low for her speech. But they are doing everything possible to *raise* that bar.
In addition to all her scandals, she's now had 3 days of relentless pressure and now undue focus on a single speech, the likes of which she's never made before. And the Reps expect her to shine and prove herself... and are setting up that expectation for others.
Personally, I think WAY too much is being made about this speech. In the end, she's just a VP, and it's just a speech.
Palin's real problems are the fundamentals -- the issues that McPOW's campaign thinks don't matter. I don't care if she's the best speaker in the world, or if she manages to make everyone forget every scandal. She's still a right-wing extremist who wants to take away women's rights, and who is out of sync with the nation on most of her other positions as well.
"But basically, she shouldn't try and do too much."
Just what we all need in a leader. *sigh*
Not trying to do too much, appearing quiet, yet determined, honest anmd caring. With a cetral theme of what you are about.
Also some Apple pie to make the nasty dems look like nasty men for attacking her.
Maggie did the same here late 70s early 80s and got away with it.
She should also take a long look at Blairs I am parent, its been tough speeches. A little bit of feigned mea culpa wouldnt go amiss.
Overreach, start attacking and shell come across badly.
What's so sad is this whole discussion basically boils down to how Palin can best deceive the American public about who she really is.
That's what politics has become. Especially on the right.
My 86 year old republican mother in law says she is now voting for Obama because this woman is totally incapable of leading this country.
She said the thought of Palin being president is scary enough for her to vote for obama.
Plus she said she never should have taken the job with her family responsibilities.
Outside of the GOp base McCAIN WILL GET VERY FEW VOTES.
After reading these, I think I know what she will do.
She will do the apple pie and chevy deal, AND THEN ATTACK US FOR LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS BY STATING ALL THE QUESTIONS ABOUT HER ARE ILLEGITIMATE AND ABOUT FAMILY.
I bet, this is a perfect repub lie, the perfect obfuscation.
Heres the real question
How does the Obama camp attack McCain for obviously making a political, impulsive, poorly thought out choice without attacking Palin herself?
If they can figure that out then they have this wrapped up.
Today's Rasmussen
Obama 50
McCain 45
Est individual results for Monday
Obama 42
McCain 46
http://www.bostonpie.com/DailyTracker.htm
I think I'm going to give up on this daily number guess thing, as others have. This doesn't make much sense.
If McCain was telling the truth that he knew everything that's come out about Palin since announcing her candidacy, her "Bridge to Nowhere" claim wouldn't have been in the announcement speech in the first place.
Also, the campaign is grossly negligent if it knew about Bristol Palin's pregnancy and Todd Palin's DUI and didn't make sure those became public at least a week before the VP announcement.
Oh, and to the kneee jerk feminists (not the thinkers), it is OK to attack even a female politician over legitimate issues (and she has many), as to treat her differently than a male in the same situation would be sexist.
"How does the Obama camp attack McCain for obviously making a political, impulsive, poorly thought out choice without attacking Palin herself?"
I'm not sure they have to. For once the media is doing its job, and McPOW's recklessness this time is SO obvious that most people are noticing it.
The bouncing effect is there but given the GOP had a hurricane and a hugely negative press re the VP pick taking away from their convention a GOP convention response seems unlikely. So yes it means nothing but if it did.
According to Nate.
Safe +6.1 243 [+15] - 157 [-25]
+MN/NM/IA -ND/MO/IN
Leans 3-6 264 [+21] - 182 [-15]
MI/NH -NC
Swingers 306 [+33] - 232 [-33]
+OH/VA
Swingers leaning BO = CO/VA/OH
Swingers leaning JM = FL/NC/MT/NV
Currently JM needs all 7 of the Swinging states and to hold all of his leaners.
Since NM and IA have been trending Blue through the election and probably gone he has to pull out of MI or MN out of the bag
otherwise as long as BO keeps NH he has 6 one state shots at the election. [Any swinging state]
If he loses NH he has 5 goes at it. [-Nevada]
"Ultimately, she won't sink the ticket, but on the other hand she won't add anything that wasn't already there"
I profoundly disagree with this statement. The choice changes the entire dynamic of the election. With her selection, McCain has gotten down on bended knee to beg for assistance from the Bush/evangelical turnout machine and it worked. They now will work on his behalf. These people do not like McCain going back to "agents of intolerance", and they were requiring McCain, with his veep choice, to put his money where his mouth has been since he gained the nomination against their split vote. He did. The only issue that matters to these folks is abortion. Only Huckabee, Palin or Pawlenty would satisfied them (not Romney because he is Mormon and his opposition to abortion is viewed as recent and politically expedient), so McCain simply chose the one with the most sizzle. He now has 60 days to make her palatable to independents, who are aghast.
Obama only up 5, not so good. Of course, who knows what the repub convention and the National Enquirer are going to do to the numbers of the next week.
The National Enquirer team that ended Edwards career got to AK in the last couple days.
I'm curious why we assign so much weight to the speeches, if we know somebody else probably wrote them anyway. Granted, in some cases we know the speaker is the primary author (Obama), but other times we know for sure they're not because we've heard them talk without teleprompters, and there's no resemblence (McCain) Do we know who's writing for Palin? Even if the candidate approves the script, what can we learn from knowing the speaker isn't capable of organizing their own thoughts and positions into presentable form?
Obama up by 5 in Rasmussen.
Clinton won over Palin 52 to 41 among women.
Anyone else note how the AIP story got picked up by the MSM with only repub talking points? They missed the whole content of her speech and took the repub crap that "it was only a welcome to AK"
It does look like the MSM is finally picking up some anti-Palin stuff this mornong. What took ya' so long?
Mr. Obama's response.
Why did John McCain ruin this nice lady's career and her family's life with a cheap stunt to prop up his fading political career and failing campaign for a few weeks?
I think it'll depend on who her speech is geared towards.
Last night, everything seemed directed at those in the hall, without a view to the country at large. The big tent is shrinking and shrinking, and that's not where you build a workable majority.
Palin's a cultural warrior from the right. It's going to be interesting to see how much of HER really makes it into her speech, or if it's all about generic American Values.
I think her problem could be the exact thing that might help her - the enthusiastic crowd. I think there's a real chance she (or her speechwriters) could overreach and go a bit too much on the attack on the abortion issue or the press. I doubt it'll happen, but there's a chance.
Personally, I think she's most likely to go somewhat bland. Here's who I am, I'm a reformer who reached across the aisle, John McCain is amazing, I hate Barack Obama. It might defuse things if she goes there.
What I can promise she will not do is explain why she tried to get books removed from the library or discuss troopergate or even mention the AIP.
She will go after Obama on experience, McCain just tipped tha hand by saying she is more experienced than him.
Please Obama, please, talk about your education and the U of Chicago Law.
Any Palin tips? The National Enquirer is buying:
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/tip/
Rasmussen´s Dem:Rep relation moved towards the Reps by 1,4% for September. Is this legit? I honestly have no idea, i just want to know the reason for this.
I think that "faily low expectations" could do the trick for Palin. Have you seen her video as a TV sports presenter? She can really read a teleprompter. And those beauty contests don't only consist of showing yourself, but also presenting yourself.
So the presentation of her speech should be pretty clean - and Washington's best speechwiters should do the trick on the content. So "fairly low expectations" are out of place.
"I profoundly disagree with this statement. The choice changes the entire dynamic of the election."
The choice changes the dynamic of the election but it won't change the resulting numbers much.
It'll still be a very close race with Obama slightly ahead at the end of the conventions.
Dominoid;
These daily estimates have been off before. If McCain was up 46-42 in last night's polling, Rasmussen would have remarked on that. It looks like Obama's been between 48 and 52 or so the past three days. You really can't assume any daily number unless the pollster gives you a hint.
BTW, it looks like Obama's solid support is 48 to 49%, based on the Rasmussen non-leaning data and other polls. Sounds good to me at this stage of the game.
Enthusiasm? From that crowd? Are you kidding me?
I've yet to see enthusiasm from that crowd, and I'll venture that Fred Thompson's speech was the highlight of the whole convention.
Seriously... they showed crowd shots and people were yawning. Three times they showed crowd shots and somebody in the picture got up and wandered off. Really. People were getting up and wandering away, probably to find a TV with Matlock on.
I read a commentary yesterday that -- IMO, correctly -- suggested how Obama and the Dems go after Palin: emphasize her far-out, kooky positions. Her "experience" is irrelevant if everybody figures out she's a wingnut -- which she is.
I'll tell you what surprised me about the Palin pick. My wife works with a lady, some form of Pentecostal, and her father is a preacher. Although Palin shares their social views, they said there is no way they would vote for McCain now because of Palin's lack of international and national experience. They understand the office of the Presidency and the VP are not some popularity contest. This is the real deal.
The Rupert Murdoch owned papers are go after the attacks as sexism, and Drudge picked it up. This means this is a talking point, and likely will be in the speech.
Drudge don't do alot of thinkin' for himself...
http://www.nypost.com/seven/09032008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/a_time_warped_sexist_assault_127183.htm
How can Palin's speech be anything other than a media success? It will be 100% scripted (and speechwriters know how to spell potato) and presented to an adoring and enthusiastic audience.
The only question is her skill at reading from a teleprompter. If she handles that, she's going to be a huge success.
She will talk about her background (small town, awaaay from Washington), her family and how much she loves every child, how she's learned to be a mom and a public servant.
The big question will be how she plays on the stump, in unscripted interviews, and so on, in future days and weeks. That's when the potato(e) moments may come out.
You have to hand it to the republicans, they certainly do run a tight ship in terms of talking points and being on message, although their strategy often leaves a lot to be desired. E.g. talking point fro last tow days Sarah has more executive experience than Joe Biden, Barack Obama and John McCain who have all been senators - You would think their strategy is to hoist Palin to the top of the ticket which is laughable, but in any case everyone was on point even Carly Fiorina who must have been pi**ed it was not her that got the nod for VP.
Anyway, it's not as tight a campaign as it was in 2000, 2004, but never the less the RNC still has some chops when it comes to campaigning that is going to keep this race close to the bitter end.
Juris,
Palin left her TV Sports Anchor/Reporter job to focus on her political career so she has plenty of experience reading a teleprompter.
Under these circumstances, it will be imperative for Palin not to overreach. I would avoid any specific claims -- like her arguably false claim in Dayton on Friday that she opposed the Bridge to Nowhere -- that won't hold up to a FactCheck.org vetting.
Why the hell not? Republicans do it every day. Nobody EVER factchecks them at the moment—least of all the talking heads who will be on hand during the speech. Do you think anybody who watches the speech tonite is going to go online and factcheck her?
This is her coming-out party and she will not miss an opportunity to stretch or outright lie if she wants to. They have nothing to lose. The dittoheads will all be watching FOX News, and the undecideds will get to see Chris Matthews get a tingle up his leg, or some stacked panel on CNN. There won't be any timely calling to account from any of them...
The more you people spew your vile against Palin and people like me who support McCain/Palin here on 9/3; the harder will be the reaction when this level of scrutiny is turned on your people and their laundry list of red meat to chew on ...
Palin's Daughter = Obama's half brother living in squalor
Palin's lack of experience = Obama's lack of experience
Palin's decision to fire an employee = Obama never having fired anyone is his life
Palin's religious views = Obama's religious views.
Palin's lack of international affairs experience = Obama's lack of international affairs experience.
I won't even begin about the target rich environment that is Joe Biden.
Bring it on Lefty vile spewing hate people ... you're starting to sound like extremist kooks from some whack job Kansas fringe church talking about how gay rights caused 9/11.
Nate I used to come to this site to read objective analysis by a baseball stat freak ... now its devolved into a hate forum for Leftist to come up with the new pejorative du jour to hurl at people like me.
Glenn
PS - you people need to get a sense of humor and lighten up.
Oh I forgot that, DJ -- you're right. Scratch that concern.
She will be a raging success. She'll point to her name all her family members sitting in the hall, bring them on stage at the end. People will be in tears.
"the harder will be the reaction when this level of scrutiny is turned on your people and their laundry list of red meat to chew on "
Obama has already had that scrutiny. But apparently you hacks can't deal with taking what you dish out.
"now its devolved into a hate forum"
I see a lot more hate in your post than anyone else's in this thread.
"PS - you people need to get a sense of humor and lighten up."
Yeah, a sense of humor. That must have been what McPOW was after last week when he chose Palin. After all, he had met her all of once before choosing her for one of the most important jobs on the planet.
"She will be a raging success. She'll point to her name all her family members sitting in the hall, bring them on stage at the end. People will be in tears."
Yep.
Never forget the inherent advantage Republicans have: their constituency is not very smart and really doesn't care about substance.
Even their campaign manager admits it.
Dominoid:
The number you are posting come from how the independents split, not the overall electorate. Given that the sub-sample sizes are in the 300 range, the daily figures are not all that stable statistically.
To all those talking about "expectations" for the speech:
Where have you seen the MSM talk about how well she needs to do, especially when compared with all the prerequisites set for the Obama/Hillary/Bill speeches?
I think everyone has been far to busy just trying to figure Sarah Palin out to set expectations for her. This speech will be her yardstick for the debates. Remember this is a very forgiving crowd.
I think this is a brilliant pick. The media and voters will legitimately focus on her background and question it's depth. But, that will force them to reevaluate Obama. If Palin is a 3, then he is a 0.
For hard-left and hard-right voters they are in the bag one way or another. But, for the middle, Palin's selection will cast even stronger doubts on Obama.
She already has changed the dynamic of the campaign. Here we are day three of the RNC and all we're talking about is the VP pick. Will she do OK? Will she bomb? Was it the right pick? Was it the wrong pick? McCain had to change the entire branding of August and try to relaunch himself as the real change candidate. It might work, but his task became harder.
As for tonight, while I think that Palin will do well, the problem is that the information did get out there. She'll give some speech about family and apple pie and that's great if it were a first impression, but the impression is already out there. I think the plan was to try to hide her views and just let those who agree know about it, but when the press is talking about book banning and being willing to force raped 16 year olds to have abortions, she'd have to give a much riskier speech than I expect her to to stem the bleeding.
Anyone think she's going to come out and own the issues that she's being attacked on and try to reframe them?
Glenn seriously???
Palin's Daughter = Obama's half brother living in squalor
Obama's brother is idolized where he lives. Yeah that must suck!
Palin's lack of experience = Obama's lack of experience
Exactly! Way to waste 12 months of harping on Obama's alleged lack of experience by naming Palin.
Palin's decision to fire an employee = Obama never having fired anyone is his life
Seriously? Your argument is Obama hasn't been given the opportunity to abuse his power? I suppose he has no one working for him for the last 20 years os so.
Palin's religious views = Obama's religious views.
See my response on experience.
Palin's lack of international affairs experience = Obama's lack of international affairs experience.
Good luck proving that one.
Spew your crap elsewhere.
"Palin's decision to fire an employee = Obama never having fired anyone is his life"
Just as a point of fact, Obama has fired a couple of people from his campaign for conflicts of interest and for making dumb statements.
He actually received compliments from both democratic and republican commentators for the swiftness of the dismissals and thus his ability to run a tight ship without any internal drama or theatrics.
Now, firing an advisor is different than firing an employee, but it should be noted that Obama's firing practices have been brought up a a few times during the campaign so far, and almost universally in a positive light.
Obama's primary campaign constituted far more executive experience of the type relevant to being president than Palin's years of being mayor of East Bumfuck, Alaska.
Rasmussen has Obama with a five point lead including leaners. That could be noise (the one point tick up from yesterday) but it is the 50 percent mark and it is also a largve bounce given the house effect. Interesting stuff. MMcCain must not be getting his convention bounce and the bad media from Palin probably isn't helping either. We'll have to see what the next couple of days will do but I doubt Lieberman or Thompson swayed anybody towards McCain last night...
Rasmussen: Obama 48% - McCain 43%
When "leaners" are included, it’s Obama 50%, McCain 45%
Couldn't Ras's daily tracker be reflecting the fact that as of today he has changed his party ID numbers? He now shows Dems with a 5.7% generic advantage nationally, which certainly sounds low to me.
Watched night one (or was it night two?) yesterday evening.
The GOP really is a Reactionary party -- the entire evening could have been copied out of the 1984 convention. Everybody had to remind america that McCain was a POW, McCain served his country, etc. Very little about his Senate career -- noticeably barren, any talk about the US economy and the hurting middle class.
Was it Schmidt who said this election isn't about the issues but rather a referendum on the candidates? If the GOP plans on using this convetion as a McCain/Palin pep rally and they don't address the needs of common americans then you all know exactly what you'll be getting if they are elected Pres and VP.
The ironic and great thing about all this is -- Obama is running a GOP like campaign now. They are pounding the crap out of Palin, defining her before the GOP can. The GOP now has to spend one full night introducing Palin to america instead of talking about their plans for the nation.
I'd take another 4 years with W anyday over 4 years with McSame. I can deal with corruption and stupidity far easier than a warmonger who wants to 'bomb bomb bomb Iran'.
Yes, it is amazing that the Rasmussen tracker #'s are holding steady around 50% when they have changed the party ID %'s again as of Sept 1.
"For September, the targets are 39.7% Democrat, 32.1% Republican, and 28.2% unaffiliated (see party trends and analysis).
For the month of August, the targets were 40.6% Democrat, 31.6% Republican, and 27.8% unaffiliated."
That alone accounts for a 1.4% swing in the reweighted polling. This is a major component of the RR 'house effect'.
So now the DEM/REP party ID gap has tightened [according to Rasmussen] back to where it was last January.
Still the spread is at @ 5% today which will be the last one overlapping August & September.
glenn-in-colorado: Palin's lack of experience = Obama's lack of experience
...
Palin's lack of international affairs experience = Obama's lack of international affairs experience.
As I recall, it was Republicans who were saying "experience" was so important. If they want to take that issue off the table by choosing Palin, that's fine with me.
As Michael Kinsley pointed out on Slate.com (http://www.slate.com/id/2199029/), the whole "experience" issue is ridiculous. It's brought up in every election. If you come out of the governor's office, you almost certainly have no foreign policy experience. If you come out of the legislative branch, you've never "run" anything. If you happen do have done both, you're attacked as an insider who can't reform the system.
So that makes the Palin choice important not for what it says about experience as an issue, but what it says about McCain and his former reputation for telling the truth. He said experience was important. Republican attacks and websites (such as www.notready08) said experience was important. Now they're saying that it's not important. So I guess that means that he and they were, well, lying.
The Straight Talk Express left the station some time ago. I find it sad; I used to respect the guy.
"McCain must not be getting his convention bounce and the bad media from Palin probably isn't helping either."
Woah .. hold your horses .. there are still two days left.
We didn't really see Obama start to move until after day 2 of his convention. The Republicans are only on day 2 right now.
To Will Walker: The MSM are talking about it now (e.g., on "Morning Joe"). But the less they continue to talk about it and the more they focus on her alleged limitations and political debilities, the more effective tonight's speech is going to be. And there will be the inevitable tendency to attribute whatever she says to her.
This speech will be watched tonight. Maybe not with as large an audience as the 38 million in Obama's audience last week, but pretty damn big, I would guess.
So it will have some substance as well as all the basic biographical stuff (which no doubt somebody else will introduce). To me, the question is really how softly she peddles her ultraconservative credentials, as opposed to pushing her "reformist" image or any specific policy item (all of which would be McCain's agenda anyway).
Palin's speech will be very simple.
On herself:
"I'm a mom, I love my kids, I like apple pie. Did I mention I'm a mom? Did I mention that I've just fabricated a tear in the corner of my eye to prove how much I love being a mom?"
On her record:
"I have a record of standing up to the establishment. I am a maverick just like John McCain. I'm not going to get into specifics because you might actually go and check to see whether what I say is true"
On policy:
"Nothing not even abortion. We don't want to scare anyone now do we?"
On Obama:
"I'm not going to mention his lack of experience because the howls of derision from the media gallery would make it hard for you to hear the rest of my speech. However I will make snide references to his un Americanism."
Conclusion:
"I'm a mom. I'm going to cry again"
The GOP collective will then masturbate themselves into a frenzy and it will be framed as a success despite the fact that my four year old daughter could read off a teleprompter.
The real question is when are they going to stop shielding her from proper scrutiny and allow her to be interviewed by anyone (even Fox News) on policy specifics without having McCain or Lieberman beside her to jump in with the answers. When is that going to happen?
The Palin selection is essentially a big "fuck you" to anyone with a brain.
please note new ND poll:
http://www.americablog.com/2008/09/obama-up-three-in-north-dakota.html
Obama 43
McCain 40
Josh Kalish, you're a moron. Indies are breaking for Obama.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/109975/Obama-Gains-Overall-McCain-Among-GOP-Women.aspx
Very interesting site. The numbers look good, but I won't beleive anything until the morning after election day.
My wife and I are both Independents. She leans towards feminist ideals and is pretty progressive, I am a fiscal conservative and social moderate.
I discussed Governor Palin with my wife last night. She believes that no one should say that Palin should stay home with her kids in lieu of any career or aspirations, on the other hand she said that Palin obviously showed really bad judgement by allowing this circus to fall on her daughter's head. She also beleives that McCain was doing nothing more than pandering to women and the extremist conservative right in picking Palin, and it is quite clear that they did not do a complete vetting of the Governor.
I really dont care about this family business at all, my issues are with the fact that no one in the GOP seems to understand what a balanced checkbook looks like. This Palin has a history of grabbing every earmark she can whether it is actually needed or not. Additionally I just read that she and her husbamnd were members of the Alaska Independence Party (AIP), before some Alaska GOP politicians brought her into their fold. The AIP promotes independence for Alaska....from the UNITED STATES....in other words..seccession, are you kidding me...Vetted yeah right!!!
The facts speak for themselves, I am tired of the Republicans trying to obfuscate the truth at every turn. I think that all she can do tonight is save the base from revolting and try and shake the media sensing blood in the water. She will not be able to convince anyone to change sides, she is almost entirely discredited amongst any group other than the Zealot neo-con type.
I am beginning to beleive that the party of my father is completely and totally self-deluding. I think it is time for the free thinking fiscal conservatives to dump the zealots and ultra conservative neo-cons and start building the GOP around responsibility in government spending and protecting the constitution again.
"I am beginning to beleive that the party of my father is completely and totally self-deluding. I think it is time for the free thinking fiscal conservatives to dump the zealots and ultra conservative neo-cons and start building the GOP around responsibility in government spending and protecting the constitution again."
Amen. And I say this as someone who was fooled by Bush in 2000 and really, really wanted him to win.
"I am beginning to beleive that the party of my father is completely and totally self-deluding. I think it is time for the free thinking fiscal conservatives to dump the zealots and ultra conservative neo-cons and start building the GOP around responsibility in government spending and protecting the constitution again."
The kind of Republican you describe sounds awfully appealing to me.
Probably to a lot of people.
I think that people are missing the real danger of the Palin pick - overshadowing the convention. The irony being that it was supposed to overshadow Obama's speech.
If McCain loses his four days of pure propaganda time (which is what a convention essentially is), it will be very hard for him to get back up again, especially as he's the underdog in this election anyway.
Btw: look at this
http://www.google.com/trends?q=McCain%2C+Palin&ctab=0&geo=all&date=mtd&sort=0
Notice the huge spike on 29th when she was selected, compared to not even registering the week before. Millions of Americans desperately trying to find out exactly who she was.
And this...
http://www.google.com/trends?q=McCain%2C+Palin&ctab=0&geo=all&date=mtd&sort=0
She also must avoid a Marie Antoinette moment: Let them eat potatoe!
Palin's "reformist" credentials have at least one major hole in them, as this LATimes story implies. This will make for interesting fodder after her speech.
I hate posts like this . . . wait for it . . . BUT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KjsEs46C70
A different take on the POW angle. Well done video. I smell some 527 ads coming.
Low expectations? Bullshit. Michelle Obama was excoriated for an awkwardly-phrased sentence in a speech, and she's not on the ticket. Sarah Palin has ties to an organization that wants to secede from the United States. Where are the demands that she prove her patriotism and loyalty?
swiftboating McCain?
That pisses me off. I hope that Obama comes out strongly against any "swiftboat" style ads.
Palin has been in hiding the last couple of days. The real reason is that she needs to be taught some very, very, very basic lessons, like informing her that the three branches of the federal government are the executive, the legislative, and the judicial.
Seriously, if she had been forced to answer that question last weekend, I would have bet money that she couldn't have stated the correct answer. Unfortunately, only People magazine has had an opportunity to interview Palin, and even if they did ask something like that, it wasn't answered. This chick screams bimbette.
See the front of the ny times. Lieberman is giving a black power salute in picture 3, I swear!
Striatic, I hope that was tongue in cheek. But if it wasn't, he will continue to say this kind of politics is below us and should not be practiced - but really what can he do about it? Now McCain, who has hardly ever (and never strongly) stood up for Obama's swiftboating attempts, would simply day "You gotta have a sense of humor."
So I say - "You gotta have a sense of humor."
pah, striatic. swiftboat him to hell.
I don't think every politician is a potential 'strikeout or homerun' speaker, aka Hillary Clinton. Sometimes you get someone who will do neither. Rather, they tend to put the ball in play. I don't see an outstanding speech nor a major gaffe. I predict she'll give a reasonably effective speech that some in the media will interpret as a triple, while others see it as a single.
Bush looks so happy in pic 2.
Glenn-in-Colorado, the employee Palin fired was not HER employee, but an employee of the people of the state of Alaska. It's not as though, say, her nanny didn't get along with her sister, so she let the nanny go. She is accused of having misused her position as governor. She fired someone who refused to fire a state trooper who was involved in a messy divorce from her sister.
In fact, there's a pattern of these accusations of abuse of power and mixing business with personal life. As mayor of Wasilla, she was thought to have tried to get the librarian fired for refusing to take some books off the shelves -- some friends of Palin's having complained about the language.
@dominoid
I've been meaning to say this for a while - I don't like your Rasmussen numbers here
http://www.bostonpie.com/DailyTracker.htm
The reaon is the show too much variability on each 3rd day.
Obama goes like this 48 48 48 48 47 47 46 47
Your individual dailies go
48 48 48 48 45 48 45.
I think it's much more likely to be
48 48 48 47 47 46 46 48 etc.
By the end you have really wild swings in place of 6 points a day....that's why it's quite risky what you're doing, personally I'd say you need to go through and manually alter them to make the line smoother (it can be programmer, but we're not talking a bit job here). With a prediction that the smallest possible difference on each day is the correct one.
The ND poll was commissioned by a union. Don't know about the polling firm, but it could seem biased. Anyone have any further input. With the lack of state polling we are actually talking about a ND poll!
"North Dakota United Transportation Union (UTU) commissioned DFM Research to conduct a statewide survey"
http://senator-tom-seymour.blogspot.com/2008/09/north-dakota-poltical-poll.html
look, even if swiftboating McCain was ethical and elevated the discourse, which it isn't and doesn't... The video has one guy.
All McCain has to do is trot out two guys, and the video looks cheap.
This is the problem with 527s .. they throw things out there without really considering the potential repercussions.
@striatic
"Colorado 61% pro-choice, Nevada 64% pro-choice and New Hampshire 67% pro-choice"
where did you get those numbers from please?
Remember the Republican Convention when they talk about renaming everything after Ronald Reagan- The St Paul Minneapolis Airport to Ronald Reagan The St Paul Minneapolis Ronald Reagan Airport. Then a Republican says Thanks to Magic of Disney Animatronics- Strom Thurmond Lives Another 100 years.
-- "where did you get those numbers from please?"
2005 Survey USA data
admittedly, the data is 3 years old, but the margins are also quite high.
"I am beginning to beleive that the party of my father is completely and totally self-deluding. I think it is time for the free thinking fiscal conservatives to dump the zealots and ultra conservative neo-cons and start building the GOP around responsibility in government spending and protecting the constitution again."
That party would have my vote and my dollars.
As for the 527s, Obama denounces them and has instructed them not to run anything. Anything negative he has to say comes straight from his mouth. It'd be nice if it went both ways.
I'd like to see a 527 claiming that McCain ate lots of potatoe in the Hanoi Hilton. That would wreck his chances.
McCain wanted to choose his friends, who were qualified (Lieberman, Ridge, Fiorina). When his party vetoed it, he made a ridiculous choice. Now he will not address it. He has a hot temper attitude problem about it. Won't discuss it with CNN, won't discuss it with Time Magazine. This week's Time is dedicated to the Republicans. I've never seen a print interview that bad. It's because he wouldn't answer any questions from the interviewer. LAst night supposed to be on CNN, cancelled because he didn't feel like answering their questions. He either can't answer questions about Palin or doesn't feel he should have to. Please consider this as it relates to being President. Is he going to start a War with Iran or tell Russia to shove it and then feel like he doesn't have to answer for his decision-making for our country because after all he is the President. This would be a terrible road for our country to go down.
The North Dakota poll is the same as the Zogby polls.
Funny.
What's wrong with the road to freedom, eric?
dominoid73 said...
Today's Rasmussen
Obama 50
McCain 45
Est individual results for Monday
Obama 42
McCain 46
http://www.bostonpie.com/DailyTracker.htm
I think I'm going to give up on this daily number guess thing, as others have. This doesn't make much sense.
When 'guessing' you need to allow for the rounding to help you smooth out the bumps in the road. A 3 day avg that Rasmussen states as 51 could be 50.51. Use this to your advantage to help smooth out the wild swings.
Here is one set of 'guesses' that I came up with to match Rasmussen's #s...
7-Aug 48
8-Aug 48
9-Aug 48
10-Aug 49
11-Aug 47
12-Aug 47
13-Aug 47
14-Aug 46
15-Aug 46
16-Aug 48
17-Aug 47
18-Aug 47
19-Aug 48
20-Aug 48
21-Aug 46
22-Aug 49
23-Aug 48
24-Aug 46
25-Aug 45
26-Aug 46
27-Aug 49
28-Aug 51
29-Aug 48
30-Aug 49
31-Aug 51
1-Sep 52
2-Sep 48
It's probably has *too* little volatility for a poll that others have pointed out doesn't really have a very large daily sample, but ya never know.
Anyone doesn´t sleep with the Lieberman speech?.
This palin thing is going to work out. call me a pessimist, but I really think that GOP tactics are going to win here. Sorry....
-- Would love... as in " total forbidden love " to be proven wrong here....
How do you explain that Jonathan?.
Dawolf,
I agree about the ridiculousness of my attempts. When dealing with whole numbers on a three-day average, a one point swing REQUIRES a three point up/down tick. I will stop my feeble attempts. Maybe I'll look at a more statistical approach, but not real soon.
Thanks
dario fancies Lieberman.
p smith said... "The Palin selection is essentially a big "fuck you" to anyone with a brain."
So as an Ultra Lib you are saying that this is the PERFECT pick then. Libs make up about 20% of the population and around 45% of the Democrat party. Libs have said for years that everyone but them is brainless. So as a Lib you have to agree 55% of the Democrat party is brainless. Thus McCain has introduced the perfect candidate for them. Smart move John!
I've seen Palin compared (reasonably enough) to Dan Quayle, Clarence Thomas, George W. Bush, and Harriet Miers. But I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Thomas Eagleton. Surely I'm not the only person old enough to remember him...
I can't explain it. I'd love to know what the Obama campaign strategy is to close this. Cause the GOP are playing from the " supreme GOP playbook" right now...
striatic said...
"I am beginning to beleive that the party of my father is completely and totally self-deluding. I think it is time for the free thinking fiscal conservatives to dump the zealots and ultra conservative neo-cons and start building the GOP around responsibility in government spending and protecting the constitution again."
The kind of Republican you describe sounds awfully appealing to me.
Probably to a lot of people.
I am too socially progressive to ever lean Republican unless things *really* change, but I'd at least have *respect* for that kind of Republican. I have friends that fall into that category of Republican - and they're about as fed up as you (:
"So as an Ultra Lib you are saying that this is the PERFECT pick then. Libs make up about 20% of the population and around 45% of the Democrat party. Libs have said for years that everyone but them is brainless. So as a Lib you have to agree 55% of the Democrat party is brainless. Thus McCain has introduced the perfect candidate for them. Smart move John!"
I can see nothing wrong with that indisputably perfect chain of logic.
jon: when's the powell endorsement coming out?
Jonathan-
I agree, the MSM is already using the repub talking points on the AIP, and Drudge is running the US Weekly cover against Obama's like it is a story on bias and not on Palin. Truly pathetic, but the repubs own the MSM, proven yet again.
She needs to do big pushback on the media and play the class card.
Talk about how the media just doesn't like her because she isn't from the northeast or west coast, that shes not one of the elites.
Personally, I'm a big fan of Michael Bloomberg.
If I had the chance, I'd pick him over Obama on policy.
I understand that he's a Republican and I understand why he is one.. but really, that's the kind of Republican I'd like.
It is all about attention to detail and a relative lack of theatrics and drama.
If she pours the media half a glass, they'll most likely be inclined to call it full.
Ha! What media have you been watching the last couple days? They have been engaged in an unadulterated effort to destroy her, and any woman who would dare take on The Machine.
Vetus machina delenda est. The old machine must be destroyed.
@striatic - thanks
@dominoid
"agree about the ridiculousness of my attempts. When dealing with whole numbers on a three-day average, a one point swing REQUIRES a three point up/down tick. I will stop my feeble attempts. Maybe I'll look at a more statistical approach, but not real soon."
no, it REQUIRES a 2 point uptick over the course of the 3 days. You're loading everything onto the last number and ignoring rounding.
I wouldn't give up though, just refine to take account of this.
the class card only works if you have some.
VC,
Are you *sure* going to war with the media is really the best strategy at this point? Given how firmly they control the narratives outside of this week and all. If they turn on McCain it's going to be brutal (think Obama in March).
Here is whats going to happen tonight.. Shes got even less to say about the issues than McCain. She cant talk about experience (talking about being mayor of 7000 people is just going to emphasize her nobodyness), she cant talk about foreign policy (like everybody else has said, being across the straight from Russia doesnt make her an expert), she cant talk about family values (what does it say that your about her values that her 17 year old daughter is pregnant), she cant talk about Hillary (that will just remind all of Hillaries supporters how much of an insult it would be if she were to become the VP after Hillary did all the work), and finally she cant talk about being a maverick or whatever they are calling it these days because shes got a paper trail a mile long begging for earmarks. So all were going to here is talking points. Service this, country that, McCain is great, Bush is awesome, and Republicans rule! It should be very boring and very intersting at the same time.
Not against the media per se, but against coastal elites. The culture war card is the only one they have left, and it works.
slothdog,
u r highly optimistic about the intelligence of the american electorate...
bjb1968 said...
Lets move on to the only speech that really matters this week. All John needs to do is pull out this from 1988. "In 1988, he gleefully joined the GOP chorus that was savaging Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis for being clueless when it came to national defense. Dukakis, McCain thundered, “seems to believe that the Trident is a chewing gum, that the B-1 is a vitamin pill and the Midgetman is anyone shorter than he is.”" It will still ring true today with some minor changes:
In 2008, he gleefully joined the GOP chorus that was savaging Democratic nominee Obama for being clueless when it came to national defense. Obama, McCain thundered, “seems to believe that the Trident is a chewing gum, that the B-1 is a vitamin pill, that an Army Hospital should be a photo op and that a Patriot is his good friend Bill Ayers.”
Nuff said
While I expect that she will do fine today, there is another problem with this pick developing. It looks like they not going to let her talk to the press. That seriously reduces her ability to perform as an attack dog.
I think tonight will help their ticket but McCain is sacrificing having an active VP in the next few months and 2/3 of his convention (not to mention the month of branding) in exchange for a fired up base. Not even that comes without a cost because Palin will make sure that the Democrats stay unified with the specter of a pro-life book banner on the other ticket.
Will it be worth the sacrifice? Well it worked in 2000 and 2004 so I'm not going to say that it can't in 2008.
"Obama, McCain thundered"
this reminds me of the comparion I saw on youtube between 2000 McCain and 2008 McCain, with the 2000 McCain being WAY sharper. Is McCain even capable of really thundering in a speech anymore?
dominoid73 said...
"Today's Rasmussen
Obama 50
McCain 45
Est individual results for Monday
Obama 42
McCain 46"
The probelm with this is that Rasmussen also changed his party identification to more republican, which moved the number. Rasmussen is a huge repub, is he lying to make McCan't look better or is dem party ident dropping?
VC,
You're right, it has worked in the past. Bush's popularity rating though was in the 50s then and the right-track number I believe was similar. Now both are much lower. I really can't imagine people are so inane as to vote on such priorities again with the economy and gas prices as they are...but I've been wrong before certainly. It's certainly not the approach I would take if I were McCain. Fighting to win the last war is not usually a very strong strategy.
Jonathan,
I know the general electorate is dumb as dirt, but Im going to go out on a limb here and hope that just this once they are going to be able to put 1 and 1 together and not get 3.
--"Not against the media per se, but against coastal elites. The culture war card is the only one they have left, and it works."
it worked, past tense, four years ago, when abortion wasn't nearly as front and center and Palin will make it if they go down that road.
"that road" leads to colorado, nevada and new hampshire which are all strongly pro-choice and are all Obama needs to win the election.
he can lose ohio, florida AND virginia [which are also pro-choice, though significantly less so] and still win.
I suspect the MSM will start to feel guilty for *doing their job* and finding out more about a woman that is virtually unknown outside of a small, fanatical group of christian conservatives, and bestow lots of positive reviews on her speech, regardless of how good/bad it truly is. It's the Bush syndrome, where any speech that doesn't contain a bumble or fumble is considered great *for him*.
Is it too late to buy ad time tonight with this picture prominently featured?
http://www.andrewhalcro.com/files/FH000020.jpg
Opposed to the Bridge to Nowhere, huh? It's hard to imagine there is actually photographic evidence to the contrary, but here it is.
It's so sexist to point out when a woman lies.
Well, the Republican Party Platform is now online, and it's an interesting little document.
Among other positions, it:
* bypasses Congress to give the President full authority in all decisions related to war
* supports the right of every health-care provider, from pharmacist to surgeon, to refuse any service or funtion that violates his/her personal morality or conscience
*upholds party opposition to all abortion without exception
(and for some comic relief..)
* declares that inflation should not be a factor in determining federal budget projections (take THAT, numbers guys!)
Now... the awesome beauty of Palin is that it will drag all this stuff into the open. Until now Republicans have pretty much flown under the radar on their most extreme positions.
Now it's all going to be right out there... snake handlers, faith healers, voodoo economists, baby farmers, the whole medieval mess.
Let the country decide.
Thank you Obama Peeps:
Your vile and Palen attacks is energizing and uniting the Right like it hasn't been so since Reagan. Two weeks ago I was comparing McCain 08 to Dole 96, now that's out the window.
The first points coming back to McCain will come out of Barr/Keyes. I was worried they might hit 4%. With Palen and your smear, I think they'll have trouble breaching 2%.
Your vile hatred and name calling is fueling more money into McCain and the RW 527s then I've seen in decades.
So now your sleazy LW Blogs have outed Palins Social Security Number ... so we're going to play rough ... bring it on.
Want to know the difference between Alaskan Hockey Mom Palin and a pitbull ... she wears lipstick (no offense to Barney Frank's suicidal gay prostitute lover/roommate).
Want to Take on Palen's Kids? - What did your man Biden do when his wife and kid were killed in a car wreck leaving him a single dad of two? He got sworn into the Senate from his kids hospitol bed.
Gloves are off ...
With Obaman now pushing how much he loves abortion (not the smartest strategy in the world) he can kiss any chance he has in Virginia, North Dakota, or Montana good-bye and probably let go of Colorado (BIG evangelical vote), too.
Getting back to Palin's speech tonight:
Republican strategists are baiting the left by making comments like Dan Bartlett did: "She is either going to be a wild success or a spectacular failure." Democrats are eating this up and the media are chasing it.
But the GOP is setting up a Thursday talking point. It's either/or. Either she'll bomb (which she won't) or she'll be a 'wild success' as a result of a decent speech.
It's more than just setting the expectations. It's predetermining just two results after the speech..one of which is so unlikely (the true bomb) that the GOP can only paint it as a win.
Brilliant.
"This chick screams bimbette."
Just wanted to enter Larry's statement into the record of an example of actual sexism we should completely avoid, not just because sexism is bad but because every voter we alienate and offend is a voter we might lose.
Glenn-in-Colorado:
If you're going to defend Palin so vociferously (and dishonestly, but that's another story), I would suggest learning to spell her name.
"this reminds me of the comparion I saw on youtube between 2000 McCain and 2008 McCain, with the 2000 McCain being WAY sharper. Is McCain even capable of really thundering in a speech anymore?"
It's getting obvious that McCain is pre-Alzheimer's or similar. Nobody wants to talk about it, but in a couple of years when it can no longer be denied, you heard it here first.
Just a thought, throwing it out there (I hope no one's already brought this up here, didn't have time to read all comments):
What if Palin ends up being a bait-and-switch? A couple weeks down the road, after the Democrats have revved up their voices against her and put all their time into prepping to fight a McCain-Palin ticket, she suddenly says, "This scrutiny is too much for my family. As a mother of a special needs child, I can't afford what this election will do to my family. Thank you, vote McCain."
Republicans have a rallying cry against the media for destroying the "first woman on the GOP ticket", they can attack the Dems, McCain looks good for having nominated a woman and can now switch to someone less inspiring but in a better position, and the Dems are left holding the bag of oppo research and have to re-tool everything to deal with a McCain-Pawlenty (for example) ticket.
I mean, in many ways, Palin could be such a horrendous choice (depending on who you ask), so maybe she was designed for it.
Thoughts?
"Want to know the difference between Alaskan Hockey Mom Palin and a pitbull ..."
Yeah, the pitbull would make a better president.
The daily trackers aren't important right now. Too volatile.
The picture won't become clear until the state by state data starts to come in.
If CO, NH and NV firm up for Obama, McCain is in serious trouble.
FL will also be interesting to watch. I can see FL not liking Palin and the shift from Experience to Maverick .. but it is a weird, weird, big, unpredictable state so who knows.
A few things, firstly on the Palin speech, I would predict a pretty good initial response to the speech. I think the question might be if it stands up on days 2 and 3. I think an interesting comparrison is this Palin speech to Obama's 2004 speech. That might be a bit unfair, but in the end she is playing with the big boys now and has to show she can land it properly.
The second thing is a general one on the polling. If Obama ends the week with a lead, I think that is pretty good. The polls are going to be pretty fluctuating for the next few weeks, but to end up with the a lead out of the convention season would be pretty good.
Finally, and I have pointed this out in another thread, but bjb1968, I think that the best thing the GOP could do is to underestimate Obama. He stood up last week and said he is happy to have a debate on Foreign Policy with McCain, and I think actually FP is one thing he can talk about fairly well. He is no Dukakis. That being said a great speech from McCain would change the election.
Sloth Dog-
You also forgot to say She can't talk about how she and McCain despises Ted Stevens because she did initial support the Bridge to Nowhere.
She will say "MY SON IS DEPLOYING IS DEPLOYING TO IRAQ and AS A MOTHER I TRUST JOHN MCCAIN - A Prisoner of War as My Commander in Chief.
She will talk about How good of a Hunter she is and she will not shot her friend in a face.
She will talk about how neither of her Children are not GAY.
Glenn-
What planet do you people live on? Is it one where the world view is so warped that legitimate political attack is not allowed? You guys have attacked over lies for years, we attack over fact and somehow we have lost our minds? Come on, get over yourself...
@domineydesign
I'm not sure. The MSM are people too, normally they're all biased etc but in this case I wonder just how biased many of them will be....it's just so incredibly obvious that Palin is undervetted and underqualified.
Agree that she'll probably get an ok rating for her speech though, she has a very low hurdle.
Gelnn-
I loved the gay hating reference to! Classy....
WWJD!
Not sure a great speech tonight or even one from McCain can do more than pull the race even. Glann and his righties might be all energized, but they most red states redder except for CO.
Bronxx:
I think someone on this site commented yesterday that McCain would have to replace Palin with James Dobson to maintain his base support. There is no way McCain can change his pick now. Yes, a change would have the Dems scrambling to refocus, but the price of such a switch would be too high for McCain.
"I would predict a pretty good initial response to the speech. I think the question might be if it stands up on days 2 and 3."
Agreed. It's going to come down to the issues she brings up. If she avoids them completely, the lightweight charge will come out after the first day. If she doesn't, they're going to be investigated and since her main issue is being pro-life to an extreme that scares people, that's going to be covered.
I can promise you that the media will give her all A's and B's tonight.
One other thing. Everyone seems to have forgotten this, but John McCain is also supposed to give a speech on Thursday. Is anyone going to watch that one? This might effectively be a one day convention.
Can anyone explain how or why Rasmussen's numbers crater down for Obama every third day since the 21st? There have been 13 independent polls since then, and Obama's number breaks out like this
57 - once
51 - six
45 - three
42 - three
The mode is 51, the median is 51, and the mean is 48.
Am I missing something?
Obama's never fired anyone? In addition to his campaign, you don't think he had people working for him as a US Senator, as a State Senator, or as a U. of Chicago law professor? Even going back to his community organizer days, he had people reporting to him in that organization. If he never fired anyone in any of those capacities, it was because all his hires were so outstanding he never needed to.
VC regarding abortion: I believe the majority of Americans are pro-choice, so I wouldn't be so sure that emphasizing the difference between McCain and Obama on abortion is bad for Obama.
"McCain would have to replace Palin with James Dobson to maintain his base support. There is no way McCain can change his pick now"
Huckabee would do it...
Everyone in Alaska is gay....
Last time I bothered to check, about 50% of totally right wing religious dudes will drop their pants for another dude if given proper amount of beer....
The majority of Americans may be "pro choice" but most pro choicers don't vote on that issue alone. Pro lifers do. That's the difference.
Obama is well on his way to alienating working class Catholic voters in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan by pushing the abort line.
And just to lower the level of discourse a bit.... ;-)
We all know by now that women don't like Sarah Palin at all... (except for those insane right-wing women who think it's WONDERFUL that a 17-year-old is pregnant)
And now I bet she's losing a lot of the guys who were smitten by thoughts of MILF's and naughty librarians.
Because... let's face it... there's nothing like a lot of stories about "leaking amniotic fluid" to make REAL MEN feel uneasy and begin sidling toward the exits.
LOL... this election is just so entertaining, isn't it?
this election is totally spooky....
@VaCon:
With Obaman now pushing how much he loves abortion (not the smartest strategy in the world) he can kiss any chance he has in Virginia, North Dakota, or Montana good-bye and probably let go of Colorado (BIG evangelical vote), too.
Yeah, being pro-choice really killed Sebelius in Kansas, didn't it?
"The majority of Americans may be "pro choice" but most pro choicers don't vote on that issue alone. Pro lifers do. That's the difference.
Obama is well on his way to alienating working class Catholic voters in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan by pushing the abort line."
But his ad buy isn't in any of those states. That's not to say it won't raise the profile there as well - it will - but much less so than in the other states. And he's betting that in THOSE states the majority of people belief in the right to choose.
Sebelius doesn't appoint Supreme Court justices, and I doubt she made her pro-abort line a selling point when she was running for Governor.
"The majority of Americans may be "pro choice" but most pro choicers don't vote on that issue alone. Pro lifers do. That's the difference."
Yes, but with Palin, they're all going to vote for McCain now. The question is if Obama can strike back to scare the pro-choicers to rally behind him.
Remember though - number one issue right now is the economy. How much did we hear about that last night?
Where the hell were you last night?
Thomspon said a lot about taxes and the economy ("we don't make people more prosperous by making Washington richer").
@striatic:
FL will also be interesting to watch. I can see FL not liking Palin and the shift from Experience to Maverick .. but it is a weird, weird, big, unpredictable state so who knows.
I think Palin's latest controversy with the "Jews for Jesus" founder will definitely help Obama there. I had pretty much written off Obama's chances there, but now, not so much.
Laura in WA said...
Obama's never fired anyone? In addition to his campaign, you don't think he had people working for him as a US Senator, as a State Senator, or as a U. of Chicago law professor? Even going back to his community organizer days, he had people reporting to him in that organization. If he never fired anyone in any of those capacities, it was because all his hires were so outstanding he never needed to.
Laura-
am a lawyer, it is not that you fire people, it is how you fire them and the reason. There are legal reasons and illegal reasons. The eraly reports do not look good for Ms. Palin firing people for legally allowed reasons (she worked for governemnt remember...)
"Obama is well on his way to alienating working class Catholic voters in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan by pushing the abort line."
You're completely delusional. I mean that not as a simple jab, but your posts reflect a continued pattern of ignoring evidence in favor of what you want to be true, then pretending that it is.
Being pro-choice doesn't mean being pro-abortion. But being anti-abortion DOES mean being anti-choice.
You will have a VERY hard time finding more than a tiny percentage of the populace of ANY class that agrees with Sarah Palin's view that a raped 13-year-old girl should be forced to bear to term.
Palin will do a bang up job tonight, and she should, its her speech in front of her supporters. Every day the conversation is about McCain/Palin, is a good day for Obama. Nobody votes for VP. McCain is no longer the story of his own Presidential run, its the Sarah Palin show. She'll have good moments and bad moments but the conversation has shifted. It's no longer about Obama.
Again, McCain can only win if the election is a referendum about Obama, McCain won't be a credible change candidate. All this country first and social issues crap won't fly this year. Its the economy, and the republicans have no answeres besides cutting taxes.
Rhys you really aren't familiar with the U of Ohio or the T of Pennsylvania. Plenty of working class Catholics in swing states are STRONGLY pro life and will be energized by Sarah Palin.
VC
Abortion isn't on the map of issues in Pa. The tired minority of one issue fundies has it, but there is no movement on it. I encourage the McCain ticket to pivot onto an extreme fringe social agenda. Makes my job much easier.
Yeah Moondancer abortion isn't an issue, thats why in order to beat Santorum you had to run a pro-lifer like Casey.
@VaCon:
If you're talking about SCOTUS, then I have no doubt that pro-choice voters will be out in just as much full force as pro-life voters.
Reform my A--, McCain did not even know her name until the day before he anounced she was his runningmate, this is the voicemail he left her.
http://www.236.com/blog/w/lee_camp/mccains_voice_mail_to_palin_le_8644.php
VC -- As I said, believe your fantasies if you wish. They won't convince any thinkers here, and they don't change reality.
"The majority of Americans may be "pro choice" but most pro choicers don't vote on that issue alone."
Bill Clinton once said something very smart on the subject - that in most elections, the pro-life forces are more energised than the pro-choice forces, despite being less numerous. However, in 1992, the pro-choice forces realised that they were only one or two Supreme Court justices away from the reversal of Roe v. Wade, and so that issue became more important to them. 2008 is another year like that.
Glenn-
Regarding Joe Biden getting sworn in the US Senate in at his young sons bed side after his wife and infant daughters tragic death.
First of all You can't say that a teenage daughter get knocked up and married at age 17 is same as losing a wife and young infant driver in a car accident caused by some reckless or drunk driver. It is an insult.
Second of all- Joe Biden wanted to resign but Senate Leaders like Mike Mansfield convinced him not to. Biden commutes every day from Wilmington DE to Washington DC by Amtrack- It is a two hour commute- each way.
"Biden commutes every day from Wilmington DE to Washington DC by Amtrack- It is a two hour commute- each way."
So he takes a tax payer subsidized boondoggle to work everyday? Oh WOW, he has my vote now!
Trains are less polluting than cars, you moronic twat.
Wolf says: "The majority of Americans may be "pro choice" but most pro choicers don't vote on that issue alone. Pro lifers do. That's the difference.
My major argument, Wolf, is that your point is true most years... but not this year. Now that the Reps have put it right out there on the table by nominating a ticket that visibly, openly, loudly opposes abortion even in cases of rape, incest and mother's health, it has become huge.
Speaking only for myself... "choice" has never been a big, defining issue for me in the past but this year I would crawl two miles over broken glass to vote against this ticket.
VC-
...and how many of those pro-life voters vote dem anyway? Almos tnone, if you are arguing turnout I disagree, I don't think this drives turnout in any large category of voters. Right wings are everywhere, but there are not enough of them an simply an increase in turnout will matter outside a true red state like OK.
ABOUT SARAH PALIN
I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992.
Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a
first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her
father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a
first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more
City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the
residents of the city.
She is enormously popular; in every way she's like the most popular
girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and
won't vote for her can't quit smiling when talking about her because
she is a "babe".
It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She
kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents
for seven months.
She is "pro-life". She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby.
There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby.
She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym.
She is savvy. She doesn't take positions; she just "puts things out
there" and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit.
Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a
champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin's kind of job is highly
sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his
work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or
so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their
major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything
like that of native Alaskans.
Sarah and her whole family are avid hunters.
She's smart.
Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000
(at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about
670,000 residents.
During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running
this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been
pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had
gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had
given rise to a recall campaign.
Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a "fiscal conservative". During her 6
years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over
33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the
City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation
(1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a
regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she
promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they
benefited residents.
The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration
weren't enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed
money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it
with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage
the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said
she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a
new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a
multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece
of property that the City didn't even have clear title to, that was
still in litigation 7 yrs later--to the delight of the lawyers
involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the
community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it
would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that
could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing.
While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office
redecorated more than once.
These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.
As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus
in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will
make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she
proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state.
In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she
recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while
she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today's
surplus, borrow for needs.
She's not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas
or compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren't generated by
her or her staff. Ideas weren't evaluated on their merits, but on the
basis of who proposed them.
While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected
City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from
the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents
rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's
attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew
her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the
Librarian are on her enemies list to this day.
Sarah complained about the "old boy's club" when she first ran for
Mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of "old boys". Palin
fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the City and as
Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people,
creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally
grateful and fiercely loyal--loyal to the point of abusing their power
to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the
case of pressuring the State's top cop (see below).
As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla's Police Chief because he "intimidated"
her, she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska's top
cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure
and she had every legal right to fire him, but it's pretty clear that
an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn't
fire her sister's ex-husband, a State Trooper. Under investigation
for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than 2 dozen
contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she
later fired, pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to
replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded
for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew
her support.
She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in
help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town
introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council
became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. She
abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who didn't
like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness.
Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything
publicly about her.
When then-Governor Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got
the best, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: one
of the few jobs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no
background in oil & gas issues. Within months of scoring this great
job which paid $122,400/yr, she was complaining in the press about the
high salary. I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the
structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this
Commission (who was also the State Chair of the Republican Party)
engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some
undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all
her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and
garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as a
gutsy fighter against the "old boys' club" when she dramatically quit,
exposing this man's ethics violations (for which he was fined).
As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from
Senator Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel
politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the "bridge to
nowhere" after it became clear that it would be unwise not to.
As Governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget
guidelines, then made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing
projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative
action restored most of these projects--which had been vetoed simply
because she was not aware of their importance--but with the unobservant
she had gained a reputation as "anti-pork".
She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The State party
leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated
them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a
fiscal conservative.
Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah.
They call her "Sarah Barracuda" because of her unbridled ambition and
predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly
stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made
point guard on the high school basketball team. When Sarah's
mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and
experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her.
As Governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package
of legislation known as "AGIA" that forced the oil companies to march
to the beat of her drum.
Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge. She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to
global warming. She campaigned "as a private citizen" against a state
initiaitive that would have either a) protected salmon streams from
pollution from mines, or b) tied up in the courts all mining in the
state (depending on who you listen to). She has pushed the State's
lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior's decision to list polar
bears as threatened species.
McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be a
heartbeat away from being President.
There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more
knowledgeable and experienced than she.
However, there's a lot of people who have underestimated her and are
regretting it.
CLAIM VS FACT
*"Hockey mom": true for a few years
*"PTA mom": true years ago when her first-born was in elementary
school, not since
*"NRA supporter": absolutely true
*social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill
that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships
(said she did this because it was unconsitutional).
*pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to
promote it.
*"Pro-life": mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby
BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life
legislation
*"Experienced": Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has
residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska.
No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on
supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city
administrator to run town of about 5,000.
*political maverick: not at all
*gutsy: absolutely!
*open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at
explaining actions.
*has a developed philosophy of public policy: no
*"a Greenie": no. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores
and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.
*fiscal conservative: not by my definition!
*pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city
without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built
streets to early 20th century standards.
*pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on
residents
*pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city
government in Wasilla's history.
*pro-labor/pro-union. No. Just because her husband works union
doesn't make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim
that she is pro-labor/pro-union.
WHY AM I WRITING THIS?
First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed
voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting
programs in the schools. If you google my name (Anne, last name redacted
Alaska), you will find references to my participation in local
government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.
Secondly, I've always operated in the belief that "Bad things happen
when good people stay silent". Few people know as much as I do because
few have gone to as many City Council meetings.
Third, I am just a housewife. I don't have a job she can bump me out
of. I don't belong to any organization that she can hurt. But, I am no
fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will
cost me somehow in the future: that's life.
Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100
or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah's
attempt at censorship.
Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to
say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.
CAVEATS
I am not a statistician. I developed the numbers for the increase in
spending & taxation 2 years ago (when Palin was running for Governor)
from information supplied to me by the Finance Director of the City of
Wasilla, and I can't recall exactly what I adjusted for: did I adjust
for inflation? for population increases? Right now, it is impossible
for a private person to get any info out of City Hall--they are
swamped. So I can't verify my numbers.
You may have noticed that there are various numbers circulating for the
population of Wasilla, ranging from my "about 5,000", up to 9,000. The
day Palin's selection was announced a city official told me that the
current population is about 7,000. The official 2000 census count was
5,460. I have used about 5,000 because Palin was Mayor from 1996 to
2002, and the city was growing rapidly in the mid-90's.
Filistro-
Dead right. My wife just went from arguing that the Supreme Court will never overturn abortion and not voting, to energized, watching political shows, and telling her friends about all of Palin's wekanesees ( and voting absentee). Palin has not just energized the right, she has energized PUMA's.
VC
They are a significant number. But when is the last time Pa voted red?
I am privy to internals that tell me it will take the proverbial "photo of .." to get McCain into the picture here. This state is now safely Dem.
glenn-in-colorado: Your vile hatred and name calling is fueling more money into McCain and the RW 527s then I've seen in decades.
....
Want to Take on Palen's Kids? - What did your man Biden do when his wife and kid were killed in a car wreck leaving him a single dad of two? He got sworn into the Senate from his kids hospitol bed.
glenn, I defy you to point out anything in my post that was "vile" or implied "hatred." Why don't you read my post and respond to it if you disagree with it? Then maybe we could actually have a discussion.
Also, I saw very few posts that "took on" Palin's kids, much less ones that were vile or hateful. You seem to be the one intent on bringing up the issue of kids.
Biden suffered a terrible personal loss but to his credit refused to make it an issue during his campaign. You should hear him talk about it before passing judgment on him--at least if you're interested in learning some facts before making up your mind. He almost quit the Senate but was talked into staying. He was sworn in at the hospital so that he could stay with the surviving members of his family instead of going to DC, and he commuted four hours on the train every day--still does. To question his commitment to his family is to defy reality. Not that I think one's family relations are anything more than marginally relevant to one's ability to govern.
But if your mind isn't going to change no matter what, and if you're not going to bring some facts to our discussion, why bother posting? Spewing venom won't get anyone to think differently.
So I'll repeat the essence of my prior post. If McCain's campaign touted his experience, and if the Republicans attack Obama for his alleged lack of experience, how can he and they now justify Palin as the V.P. pick? Are they serious that Palin is experienced (whatever that means)? Or were they kidding us about that issue?
Again, Michael Kinsley's Slate piece is at http://www.slate.com/id/2199029/. Read it and let me know what you think.
Kerry and Gore both won PA narrowly. If McCain can turn out the Santorum/Casey voters in the T he can still win it.
"Wolf says: "The majority of Americans may be "pro choice" but most pro choicers don't vote on that issue alone. Pro lifers do. That's the difference."
I didn't say that, I was quoting someone else.
"If McCain can turn out the Santorum/Casey voters in the T he can still win it."
Santorum lost, Casey is a democrat .. I see the point you're trying to make but the dynamics are clearly more complicated than what you're proposing.
VC
LOL You are relentless in your denial. Narrow counts, ask Cheneys' pet monkey. McPOW has spent millions here already and not budged the numbers an inch.
Virginia Conservative: So he takes a tax payer subsidized boondoggle to work everyday? Oh WOW, he has my vote now!
There's not a mass transit system in the world that breaks even. But they're really good for growth. Just look at Europe, which has made different transportation choices than we have. NYC is an economic engine, but it would die if mass transit had to pay for itself (though it does cover its own costs far more than most systems). I'd guess that what people get back in economic growth far exceeds the cost of the subsidy. And if it were more available, fewer people would be complaining about high gas prices.
If Congress actually funded Amtrak so that it could get its infrastructure in shape, maybe it wouldn't need so many subsidies in the long run. It's the completely unrealistic call for it to be self-sufficient that's helping to kill it.
By the way, I think the Northeast Corridor part of the service does pretty well financially.
Bill Nash"... you lifted the Sarah Palin comments verbatim from another blog. The author of the orignal post has never been named, but you still should mention that these words are not your own.
OOPS, another PUMA just stopped by - she is all Palin hate right now too.
Poor McCain, I guess he didn't learn much about the fairer sex during all his adultery(s).
VAC - talking points about the economy might have been made, but what are we talking about? Palin.
The entire convention is being spent on Palin. If Pawlenty had been chosen, the Democrats would have had some planned attacks, but we'd be talking about the effectiveness of the charges against Obama, not whether Palin was effectively defended.
Amtrak makes money on the NE corridor and could be privatized there, it is all those routes through red states that republicans insist on that makes Amtrak lose money.
VC -- I would venture to guess Obama never had the votes of single-issue pro-life voters, so the ads can't hurt him with that demographic.
Most Hillary supporters are pro-choice, so at least until the Dem. convention happened, I'd have highly encouraged Obama to strongly remind voters that McCain is pro-life and will appoint Supreme Court justices that would overturn Roe V. Wade. (There were reports that a surprising number actually believed McCain was pro-choice, including the Hillary-supporting woman who filmed TV commercials for McCain.)
Now it looks like he may have solidified a lot of Hillary supporters behind him, so that line of argument may not be quite as important as it was. But since there are probably still a fair number of pro-choice independents who are on the fence, carefully targeted ads are probably still a good strategy.
Sorry Wolf, you're right. And IMO it's deeply annoying to be misquoted, so I apolgize.
Rasmussen recalibrated on September 1 - 1 % each way. So a 5 point spread today would have been a 7 point a couple days ago, basically.
Post a Comment