Sarah Palin!

[snoop_doxie]

I may be stupid for asking, but what does this mean?

UW,
not stupid for asking. i thought it was perfect, "McCain blinked."
i was thinking about comparing the presidential race to a staring contest. the first guy who "gives" or blinks loses.
by picking palin for a running mate, it could look like a "give" (pandering to women). McCain is just playing catch-up now. can't take it back now.

 

[Puppycow]

If Ms. Palin was chosen on the basis of "experience running a government," then I humbly submit that there must have been better choices available. Any other ideas?

Obviously because she's quite the MILF.

 

[GregHouseMD]

If Ms. Palin was chosen on the basis of "experience running a government," then I humbly submit that there must have been better choices available. Any other ideas?

Bill Clinton's experience was two years as Governor of the State of Arkansas.

He was not re-elected.

How do you think he did?

 

[Policenaut]

You seem to forget Al Gore's "reinvention of government."

DR

You know I try to block out anything related to Al Gore. Every time I picture him I think of the South Park episode with Bono: Every time he enters a room he has to say "Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! Yeah!" while making finger guns.

 

[R.Mackey]

Obviously because she's quite the MILF.

That had actually occurred to me, and "because she looks good on camera" I would even consider a valid Presidential attribute. But, c'mon! Surely there's something more..?

 

[R.Mackey]

Bill Clinton's experience was two years as Governor of the State of Arkansas.

He was not re-elected.

How do you think he did?

This isn't a fair comparison. Bill Clinton had little practical experience (as has Obama), but he nonetheless campaigned. He presented himself and his ideas. This is no different than giving a job to a wet-behind-the-ears kid out of college solely because of a dynamite job interview -- sometimes, it's worth going for it.

But the VP is selected, and didn't lobby for the job. She's withstood no interview. Her only recommendation, so far, is that of McCain's.

I'm still trying to understand why I should accept his recommendation, and I'm not getting much. Mostly that her interests are consistent with McCain's (agreed), and a scatter of snide comments. It's a serious question.

 

[Policenaut]

Also I don't see why people are harping on her experience (or lack thereof). She isn't running for president. And I don't think she'll be directing foreign policy a la Cheney (which I would think people would see as a positive). So what exactly is so bad about choosing a VP that doesn't have a lot of washington experience (besides the morbid though of her taking over if McCain should die)?

 

[332nd]

Also I don't see why people are harping on her experience (or lack thereof). She isn't running for president. And I don't think she'll be directing foreign policy a la Cheney (which I would think people would see as a positive). So what exactly is so bad about choosing a VP that doesn't have a lot of washington experience (besides the morbid though of her taking over if McCain should die)?

Well there's also the somewhat more likely "she'll have to take over if McCain take ill to the point that he can't perform his duties for a bit." (knock on wood). That said I'll wait to see her in action some more before I make a decision on her fitness.

 

[boloboffin]

Also I don't see why people are harping on her experience (or lack thereof). She isn't running for president. And I don't think she'll be directing foreign policy a la Cheney (which I would think people would see as a positive). So what exactly is so bad about choosing a VP that doesn't have a lot of washington experience (besides the morbid though of her taking over if McCain should die)?

Well, McCain is 72 years old and they keep cutting melanomas off of him. He might just die, you know? McCain was already a risk there, and Palin doesn't seem to be alleviating that risk right now.

The McCain campaign looks like it's operating in a Bush Bubble 3.0. Romney had money and organization. McCain just flipped him the bird. There's Maverick and then there's Does Not Play Well With Others.

You know what would be a real maverick move? McCain releasing his delegates at the convention as a vote of confidence. Now tell the truth, my Republican friends -- did your heart just leap?

 

[truethat]

I knew he was going to do this. This is a salve candidate in my opinion. There's a lot of people out there who are feeling guilty about not wanting to vote for Obama because they don't want to be perceived as racist. This gives them an easy out. Instead of voting for a minority man, they vote for a woman, also a minority. Their vote will be for something that will also be historic.

I do think it was the only move McCain could really make.

But I think he's in check. Taking the wind out of Obama's sails is right. Republicans outnumber Democrats in this country I think by the sheer number of those who actually show up to vote. So if this pulls a few Hilary Fans over (by Hilary fans I mean those who hate Obama,) this could really help him.

 

[Brainster]

If Ms. Palin was chosen on the basis of "experience running a government," then I humbly submit that there must have been better choices available. Any other ideas?

Well, of course. But there are also political considerations as well, which has always been the case. JFK picked Johnson even though he despised him, because he knew he needed Texas to win. Why did Kerry pick John Edwards? It certainly wasn't because he needed Edwards' trial lawyer experience. Did Reagan require Bush's experience at the CIA?

You are holding Palin to a standard that hasn't applied historically.

 

[gdnp]

Bill Clinton's experience was two years as Governor of the State of Arkansas.

He was not re-elected.

How do you think he did?

What planet are you from? Bill clinton served two terms as governor of Arkansas. He served from 1979-1981, was voted out, but was then reelected and served a second term from 1983-1992, a total of 12 years.

Overall I think he did pretty well. Would have done better if he could keep his pants on.

 

[gdnp]

Well, of course. But there are also political considerations as well, which has always been the case. JFK picked Johnson even though he despised him, because he knew he needed Texas to win. Why did Kerry pick John Edwards? It certainly wasn't because he needed Edwards' trial lawyer experience. Did Reagan require Bush's experience at the CIA?

You are holding Palin to a standard that hasn't applied historically.

Well, we have ruled out experience. I don't think Alaska is going to flip the election one way or the other. So what does Palin bring other than two X chromosomes and a pretty face? Or is that enough?

 

[R.Mackey]

Well, of course. But there are also political considerations as well, which has always been the case. JFK picked Johnson even though he despised him, because he knew he needed Texas to win. Why did Kerry pick John Edwards? It certainly wasn't because he needed Edwards' trial lawyer experience. Did Reagan require Bush's experience at the CIA?

You are holding Palin to a standard that hasn't applied historically.

Maybe I'm just not making myself clear. I understand the advantage during the election, but supposing I'm not just playing the odds and want to know what the candidate really offers, what is there? Forget party lines for a moment -- is there anyone who really thinks she has some special quality that makes her a good fit for the job, or is she just window dressing for the election? Does she have any fans? Even if your background doesn't agree with mine, I'd at least like to know that someone is in favor of the decision.

There are (were, anyway) plenty of people who gushed over Edwards -- I never saw it, but some would at least make the argument that he would make a positive impact on important legal decisions like eminent domain and tort reform. He had his fans.

George HW Bush was eminently qualified and liked working in the background. Maybe not as popular, but one could argue that he was a good fit for the job of VP, and some did.

What argument, besides "she'll help him win," can you make for Palin? She's an unknown to me. So far I've gotten virtually nothing. I don't expect to agree with it, but at least convince me there's some deeper reasoning at work.

I also acknowledge this isn't a historically applied standard. Call me an idealist.

 

[Brainster]

Well, we have ruled out experience. I don't think Alaska is going to flip the election one way or the other. So what does Palin bring other than two X chromosomes and a pretty face? Or is that enough?

Errr, and what did Obama bring to the table? Extra melanin, nice speaker, pretty face? Didn't vote for the war?

What did John Edwards bring to the table in 2004? Southern drawl, pretty face?

Of course McCain chose her because she's a woman. So what? If he'd chosen Mitt Romney it would be because he's got all that dough and could help in Michigan and Colorado. If he'd picked Portman it was an attempt to keep Ohio red.

She is every bit as qualified as Obama. We can argue whether she's as qualified as Biden, but I'm astounded that Obama supporters don't see the downside of that argument.

 

[applecorped]

Maybe I'm just not making myself clear. I understand the advantage during the election, but supposing I'm not just playing the odds and want to know what the candidate really offers, what is there?

Call me an idealist.

There is a white conservative female on one side and an white liberal male on the other. Who's got he advantage? You understand it. Don't you?

 

[gdnp]

Errr, and what did Obama bring to the table? Extra melanin, nice speaker, pretty face? Didn't vote for the war?

BA from Columbia, Law degree Magna cum laude from Harvard. Harvard law review. Harvard law review's first black president. Author. Law professor. Community organizer. Keynote speaker at 2004 Democratic convention. 18 million primary and caucus voters. Unprecedented fundraising ability. Several million new registered voters. Judgment. Leadership.

She is every bit as qualified as Obama. We can argue whether she's as qualified as Biden, but I'm astounded that Obama supporters don't see the downside of that argument.

Bah. 4 years in the Senate and 8 years in the Illinois legislature trumps 10 years of small town government and less than 2 running the 47th most populous state. Plus, Obama was vetted through an arduous primary process.

Palin has two X chromosomes, a pretty face, popularity in her home state, and acceptable conservative credentials. If she has anything else, I haven't heard it.

 

[Whiplash]

What does that have to do with anything?!! You are the one who tried to compare my kids to hers (BTW, you don't know how well adjusted her kids are either). Keep up with your own argument, please.

Umm, WHAT?

You have been sitting in negative judgment of this woman based on her decision in caring for and rasing her child. SEVERAL times, and clearly without knowing her, or her children.

When someone else sat in judgement of you, in a simliar manner, you protest that they don't know you or know your children, and are therefore unable to make those judgements.

With all due respect, I think you are the one who needs to "keep up".

Well, McCain is 72 years old and they keep cutting melanomas off of him. He might just die, you know?

Sigh.. again, I can't understand this at all.

People keep saying her experience matters because McCain is old, and may die. All the while /handwaving away similar concerns about the experience of the guy who would actually be Presiden RIGHT FROM DAY ONE, not in some hypothetical scenario later.

If you want to insist that Obama's inexperience is not a problem to be PRESIDENT, you can't argue that Palin's inexperience is a problem to be VICE PRESIDENT. Especially as part of hypotheticals.

This is ridiculous. Your side has been poopooing the experience arugment for months. Now, you want to make it, loudly, about the number TWO person on the ticket. This is outrageous and ridiculous.

 

[truethat]

Umm, WHAT?

You have been sitting in negative judgment of this woman based on her decision in caring for and rasing her child. SEVERAL times, and clearly without knowing her, or her children.

When someone else sat in judgement of you, in a simliar manner, you protest that they don't know you or know your children, and are therefore unable to make those judgements.

With all due respect, I think you are the one who needs to "keep up".




Sigh.. again, I can't understand this at all.

People keep saying her experience matters because McCain is old, and may die. All the while /handwaving away similar concerns about the experience of the guy who would actually be Presiden RIGHT FROM DAY ONE, not in some hypothetical scenario later.

If you want to insist that Obama's inexperience is not a problem to be PRESIDENT, you can't argue that Palin's inexperience is a problem to be VICE PRESIDENT. Especially as part of hypotheticals.

This is ridiculous. Your side has been poopooing the experience arugment for months. Now, you want to make it, loudly, about the number TWO person on the ticket. This is outrageous and ridiculous.

This is a very very very good point. You ought to send that to McCains blog or something so they read it. I agree with the logic in it completely.

 

[gdnp]

If you want to insist that Obama's inexperience is not a problem to be PRESIDENT, you can't argue that Palin's inexperience is a problem to be VICE PRESIDENT.

Yes I can. Obama has more experience than Palin.

This is ridiculous. Your side has been poopooing the experience arugment for months. Now, you want to make it, loudly, about the number TWO person on the ticket. This is outrageous and ridiculous.

Even if I were to concede this point, it goes both ways. McCain can no longer make claims that Obama does not have sufficient experience to be president without appearing hypocritical.