wrong. when McCain first chose her, I thought it was a very smart move. she seemed like an accomplished woman. modern, intelligent, etc etc. i thought Obama had a real run for his money.
....until Palin opened her mouth.
So, all of things you had read about what she actually accomplished and her actual policy positions went out the window when "Palin opened her mouth". And you think this argument
undermines my assertion?
she is not politically sophisticated. she is not an intellectual. she does not know about or understand, or find interest in studying complicated foreign issues and domestic political dynamics.
Emphasis mine. Do you think that it is a requirement that some be an "intellectual" to become President? If so, you've just proven my point. There are millions of Americans who would find that notion deeply abhorrent, a large percentage of whom really, really like Palin.
and she can't remember Joe Biden's damn name. she kept calling him "O'Biden". what is she...retarded????
We remember and hilight the quirks and foibles of those we don't like, we ignore and minimise the quirks and foibles of those do. Is Obama retarded for referring to the "57" states that he had visited? Is he retarded for pronouncing "corpsman" as "corpseman", for a recent example? No, he isn't.
but then more serious and sophisticated candidates will start making themselves know, and Sarah will drown in a sea of knowledge, IQs, and vocabulary.
So, apparently you think being a sophisticated intellectual is a requirement to be President. And yet, clearly, my assertion is wrong.
I'm assuming that you are not aware that the founder of the Democratic Party faced almost exactly the same reception as you are giving to Palin. Andrew Jackson wasn't
sophisticated, he wasn't one of the great
intellectuals. He was the first president who was not a member of the gentry, a Scotch-Irish
hick who served in the Revolutionary War as a young enlisted courier, not an officer, and who came to power making almost the exact same
cultural arguments that Sarah Palin has been making over the past year.
http://statelibrary.ncdcr.gov/nc/bio/public/jackson.htm#Politics
Jackson's opponents were Henry Clay of Kentucky, John Quincy Adams of Massachusetts, and William H. Crawford of Georgia who were respectively speaker of the house, secretary of state, and secretary of the treasury. Adams was horrified at the thought of Jackson becoming president. The patrician New Englander thought this parvenu from the west was a badly educated bumpkin with little preparation for high office. Because Clay's opinion of Jackson was similar, the Kentuckian threw his support to Adams on the first ballot and Adams was elected. Jackson never forgave either one of them, especially after Adams named Clay his secretary of state in what seemed to be a payoff for Clay's votes.
In the years leading up to the 1828 election Jackson and his followers continually criticized the Adams administration. Jackson took the position he was the people's candidate and never lost an opportunity to point out that the people's choice in 1824 had been disregarded by the elite. This tactic proved successful and Jackson defeated Adams in the 1828 election and four years later defeated Clay in the election of 1832.
...
Andrew Jackson may have been our seventh president, but he was first in many ways. He was the first populist president who did not come from the aristocracy
...
Another major issue during Jackson's presidency was his refusal to sanction the recharter of the Bank of the United States. Jackson thought Congress had not had the authority to create the Bank in the first place, but he also viewed the Bank as operating for the primary benefit of the upper classes at the expense of working people.
