Palin A Calculated Gamble For McCain

As I wrote below, there are good reasons for McCain to pick Sarah Palin, the first term Governor of Alaska. Now, Palin is as experienced as Tim Kaine, who was considered an acceptable VP alternative to many. Which was ridiculous. Tim Kaine was unacceptable.

McCain is also signaling an ideological contest, Palin is very conservative. Perhaps Obama's speech and not choosing Hillary Clinton as his running mate last night spurred this choice.

That said, Palin is a very risky pick and undermines many of McCain's lines of attacks - the experience argument. But the dynamics of this election are such that McCain needed something to shake up the race. This certainly does that. The discussion of Obama's speech have ended for the moment.

Believe it or not, if not taking the Romney path and hoping for some campaign event to change the math, I think Palin is McCain's best bet. It is a gamble, but when you are going to lose if you do not gamble, you might as well take the shot. I think McCain is taking a clear eyed gamble.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< NBC, CNN, FOX: McCain Picks Palin For VP | First Reaction to McCain's Choice of Palin >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    WOOT! As an american woman, I am (5.00 / 11) (#1)
    by masslib on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 09:56:48 AM EST
    totally excited.  I am not pro-McCain, but my God, what a day.  Second woman ever on a national ticket.  This is just extremely exciting!

    I think that comment (5.00 / 4) (#3)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 09:58:55 AM EST
    pretty much says it all.

    I think that comment (5.00 / 6) (#10)
    by chel2551 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:01:42 AM EST
    spells big trouble in River City, America.

    I Live In River City, Iowa (5.00 / 7) (#26)
    by creeper on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:05:14 AM EST
    I can watch the Mississippi from where I sit.

    You bet your @ss this spells trouble.

    What a wonderful day!  How sad that the Democratic party blew it so badly.


    very smart pick by McCain (5.00 / 2) (#194)
    by RedSox04 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:31:52 AM EST
    in addition to what BTD says, I'll also add the following:

    1. This pick has wiped out media coverage of, and public attention to, the awesome Obama speech last night.  That would not have happened with Pawlenty or Romney.

    2. The choice of Palin signals that the McCain campaign is going to fight this election on domestic issues, namely the economy, the environment, and energy.  This highlights again, in my opinion only, what a terrible choice Biden was.  This race was never going to be about foreign policy, it was always going to be about the economy.  Biden adds nothing on that front, and certainly opens the campaign to the charge that it's "inside the Beltway" thinking as opposed to McCain's "maverickiness".

    3. I think Obama will get a huge bounce from last night.  It'll be interesting to see how long that lasts.  I think Palin could have a big impact.

    And, if she gets attacked (5.00 / 2) (#228)
    by Brookhaven on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:46:01 AM EST
    unfairly as HRC was attacked by the Media for by Dems, you will see just how fast the Republican Party itself will come out fast and fierce to her defense unlike the Dem Party who stood by and watched while HRC was bloodied by the Media not only for being a Clinton but sexism has been well-documented.  And, the Dem Party did not a damned thing to stop it.  Not until May 31st when Dumb Dean opened his mouth about it and then only in a very tepid manner.  

    When this happens and the Republican Party comes out to defend Palin against sexist (or not) attacks, the contrast of the do nothing Dem Party when it came to the vicious attacks on HRC will speak very loudly.  That contrast alone will be so loud, the noise will be almost deafening.  I can see the outcries now:  the Republicans don't stand by while the women of their Party are viciously attacked unlike the Democratic Party which sat still and did nothing to stop the vicious sexist attacks on a good, loyal and brilliant Democratic woman, HRC.  Dems don't put their money where their big mouths are.  I can see it now.  


    Here's some news drama that I saw earlier (none / 0) (#8)
    by andrys on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:01:28 AM EST
    I sent this early likely scoop by a local Ohio paper to some friends not long before NBC News broke the story.

    Turned out to be true!


    bloggers.. (none / 0) (#196)
    by daria g on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:31:56 AM EST
    Via a late night thread on TalkLeft yesterday, I dropped by a "Draft Palin for VP" blog in which there was a particular commenter who claimed (in a very credible way) to have very good RNC sources and was giving information long before it was reported elsewhere.  The other commenters tracked down a private plane heading from Anchorage to.. Middletown?  Somewhere near Dayton, late that night. So I actually wasn't surprised a bit this morning, if I were the betting type, I should've bet some serious ca$h money on it while I had the chance.

    Don't know what to think aside from that - someone on MSNBC said all the conservative base was thrilled with her.  There is the experience issue, although it strikes me that one thing that might be negating that line of attack in terms of.. experience qua number of years in elected office.. was Bill Clinton himself unambiguously stating that Obama was qualified and ready.  If Obama is all about life experience and good judgment is what is required, well now, I guess we're even.

    I would also like to point out that every Dem strategist who goes on the air and compliments her for being "feisty" is going to win McCain more women's votes.  :)


    I'll second that (5.00 / 4) (#11)
    by Coral on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:01:49 AM EST
    It's one thing that Hillary managed to achieve -- a GOP VP choice of a woman.

    I'm voting for Obama (the speeches this week convinced me of the necessity), but I'm really happy about the McCain pick.


    Palin should send Hillary (4.60 / 5) (#27)
    by Fabian on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:05:22 AM EST
    a thank you card.  No Hillary, no Palin.

    It's comments like that that will have me saying.. (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by masslib on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:11:07 AM EST
    NO Obama.

    I will bet hard money (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by americanincanada on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:12:59 AM EST
    that Palin will thank Hillary in a speach...possibly this morning and if not in her acceptance speach at the convention. Bet on it.

    McCain is being very gracious (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by Fabian on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:16:20 AM EST
    to his opponents this year.  Having Palin echo that not only plays well, it rubs a little salt in the wound as well.

    I wonder what the morale at the DNC is like today?


    Sarah's Got A Gun (5.00 / 3) (#128)
    by Athena on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:20:35 AM EST
    Fox just showed footage of Palin shooting at a gun range.  This is a brilliant pick.  A lot of scrambling of the gender messages here.

    Obama will now see the kind of excitement he could have had by picking Hillary.  


    exactly (5.00 / 3) (#150)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:24:24 AM EST
    I dont get the idea that this is a necessarily risky pick.
    she seems the perfect republican to me.  NRA, rabidly pro life, former governor.
    whats the problem?

    I think she's wonky also (5.00 / 3) (#166)
    by nycstray on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:26:33 AM EST
    The bit of checking on her I did was interesting. She seems a nice blend. Don't agree with all her views, but she's a good representative for women as far as I can tell.

    Heh, McCain just solidified the "Maverick" image a bit more.


    I assume they are cheering (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by elonepb on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:24:18 AM EST
    They have just been handed the election on a silver platter.

    Women will not be fooled.


    Yep. 18 million and one cracks (5.00 / 4) (#195)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:31:54 AM EST
    in the glass ceiling is good, every crack is good.

    But it's still not broken.  

    However, I never will forget that the Dems attacked the first woman nominated for VP.  Thrown under the bus for saying about Obama what he said about himself.

    So it's a draw, Dems.  And on the issue that is being used here yet again to tell me that I have to vote for Obama:

    I heard nothing, nothing last night in Obama's  speech that anti-choice Palin could not have said about abortion.  And so far, McCain and Palin haven't said that I'm a racist.


    denial (none / 0) (#160)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:25:18 AM EST
    aint just a river in Egypt.

    Actually, that commenter is correct. (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by Fabian on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:27:39 AM EST
    Women will not be fooled.

    Both the Dems and the GOP will be taking a sudden interest in women's issues.

    I wonder if Kos will start another pie fight....


    xanex for everyone I suspect (none / 0) (#109)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:18:02 AM EST
    I hope so (none / 0) (#90)
    by bjorn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:14:41 AM EST
    it would be cool to see such early evidence of the HRC legacy!!

    Definitely bold (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by andrys on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:04:13 AM EST
    She's very anti-abortion, by the way.

     But it'll fire up both the currently passive conservatives (except those who'd rightly worry about the commander-in-chief aspect when McCain's health seems a bit vulnerable) while possibly pulling a lot of the woman vote.

     And Alaska is such a men's place, so this is definitely intriguing.  She's very respected there.


    I don't think the Republican Party (5.00 / 1) (#233)
    by cpa1 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:54:43 AM EST
    is as sexist and as xenophobic as we think.  I think the new Republican Party is held together by arrogance hypocrisy and self preservation.  If they get some right wing ass__ who happens to be black or Indian or a woman, they don't care because as long as they don't have a conscience they are just like them.

    Funny thing is, I always thought McCain had a conscience.

    There were many people McCain could have picked that would have been better running mates, like Kay Bailey Hutchison, Ann Coulter (just kidding) but unlike the Democrats presidential candidate, Sarah Palin is a reformer in reality where Obama is a reformer in the fantasies of 20 year old kids.  I even think that former congressman from Ohio John Kasich would be better.

    I'll to what this choice does do, it opens the door for Michael Bloomberg to enter his name this election, if not too late, and possibly win.  Bloomberg/Hagel, Bloomberg/Clark or Bloomberg/Clinton (Hillary or Bill).


    My Republican co-worker (5.00 / 6) (#31)
    by ruffian on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:05:58 AM EST
    who is my bell-weather for these things thinks it is a good pick too.  Thinks it will get Republicans out to vote who may have been thinking about staying home. He is an elderly guy, a vet, who is happy to have a woman on the ticket.

    Did someone make a speech last night?


    I agree (5.00 / 7) (#34)
    by Brookhaven on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:06:12 AM EST
    And, I feel the same.  And, I'm anti-McCain as well.  But, I congratulate McCain for taking this bold move.  It may be a high risk choice but high risks portend either a huge loss or a huge win.  And, given what happened to HRC with the DNC et al, for many Dem and Independent women and some men, this is more than a 50/50 bet win.  

    Outside of political philosophy, as a woman, I, too am very proud today.  After almost thirty years of being in the damned desert.  


    very exciting! (5.00 / 4) (#35)
    by Josey on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:06:31 AM EST
    Palin will rally Repub and Dem women.

    Change, People (5.00 / 4) (#82)
    by Athena on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:13:18 AM EST
    Change we actually can see.  Don't tell me that putting even a conservative woman on a major party ticket is not change.  It is.

    Palin will draw many women despite policy disagreements - just as Obama draws black conservatives.


    GOP GOTV just went up (5.00 / 3) (#86)
    by Fabian on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:13:46 AM EST
    a few percentage points.

    The thing to remember about the Democratic primary is that it is likely that Indies and Republicans turned out just to support their fellow AA or woman.

    There's no way to be sure they vote the same way in the GE.

    The post GE analysis should be fascinating.


    Gays and Lesbians too (5.00 / 1) (#205)
    by Desired User Name on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:33:55 AM EST
    judging from her first VETO that stopped the barring of benefits to same sex couples. It looks like the DEM homosexual contingent could be rather pleased by this choice(?) However they'd be misled to steer away from their own party at a time when the supreme court is so up for grabs. OF COURSE!

    The ANTI-CHOICE thing is supremely disturbing though and for the ever-loving-life of me I will never understand how anyone could think that THEY have a RIGHT to tell ME what I can do with my own body or what any woman can do with their own bodies. And when it is a woman who advocates turning me into a Barn Yard Animal or slave to my reproductive organs I am twice as mortified. This is a question of equality...And Palin answers that question badly. [rant rant rant]

    She's got youth on her side and also her resume is not so bad, not so bad at all. The part about the MISS ALASKA CONTEST is amusing...and wow, she sure is pretty. It will be interesting to see GRUMPY GEEZER McCain standing next to her :=}

    And she better hide that CLEAVAGE, if she's learned anything about Hillary's run, she'd better hid the Chest Lumps!

    Hmmmmm...the plot thickens!


    I think the only Democratic women it (none / 0) (#185)
    by Anne on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:30:26 AM EST
    rallies are those who are anti-choice; identity politics only takes you so far, and the fact that she is a woman will matter to some, but her actual positions will make the difference - one way or the other - for most.

    Yeah awesome (5.00 / 3) (#41)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:07:37 AM EST
    a woman who wants to tell me that I have to give birth against my will.

    Just great.

    Just f**** great.

    A woman to lead us back into the past century. Is she anti birth-control too?


    And McCain just became alot more (5.00 / 3) (#75)
    by PssttCmere08 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:12:10 AM EST
    appealing to many...

    but after we get past gender (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by A DC Wonk on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:12:42 AM EST
    we see somebody who is even younger than Obama, and has tons less experience (mayor of a tiny town, and gov for just 1-1/2 years?).  One hearbeat away from a presidency of a 72-year old with a history of skin cancer?

    As RW Joe Scarborough sputtered: "I can't imagine a woman that's been a governor for a year and a half, but to debate Joe Biden on GEorgia, a remerging Russia, an emerging China and India, on the Middle East, my God, how does she do that?"

    OTOH, I agree with BTD that McCain had to make a gamble like this, given his poor situation


    We (5.00 / 2) (#114)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:18:52 AM EST
    really don't want to make that experience argument with Obama do we? It especially looks foolish when Obama spent literally months saying that experience doesn't matter.

    but Obama *did* have experience (5.00 / 1) (#219)
    by A DC Wonk on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:39:02 AM EST
    not as much as HRC, but he had experience -- and a lot more than Palin has.

    She's younger than Obama, has zero Washington experience, and zero foreign policy expertise whatsoever.

    If you to the "on the issues" website, her entire entry for foreign policy is:

    "No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org."

    The bottom line is this: the most important qualification for VP is that you have to be ready to be Prez on a moment's notice -- even more so during wartime.


    But if she does well against (none / 0) (#137)
    by BernieO on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:23:02 AM EST
    Lieberman, watch out!

    She has fought corruption in her own party, which certainly should have cross over appeal. Very interesting choice.

    As for the experience, she is the only one with any executive experience, which really does matter to a president. If she is a smart as she is portrayed they could bring her up to speed in just a few months by having her meet with foreign leaders, travel, etc. She could get as much experience as Obama has very quickly (except of course for living abroad as a child. Snark!)


    Hook line and sinker (2.66 / 3) (#104)
    by elonepb on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:16:40 AM EST
    Just what McCain was hoping your response would be.

    Margaret Thatcher was a woman (1.00 / 2) (#173)
    by DCDemocrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:27:40 AM EST
    Were you a big supporter of hers?

    Are you directing that at me??? (5.00 / 5) (#199)
    by masslib on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:32:18 AM EST
    I said I am NOT pro-McCain, but this is a very big day for women, I am sorry you can't see how this opens doors.  You really ought to get off your high horse sometime and walk down here with real people.

    So it looks like this election will be.... (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by EL seattle on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 09:58:50 AM EST
    ... Hope-y Change-y versus Maverick-y Craz-y. Interesting.

    On the positive side, when it's all done in November, America will either have an African-American president, or a female vice-president.  Good for us!!!

    On the hopeful side, maybe this selection will force both camps to respect a something like a MAD policy towards the really heavy negative smears.  Both sides should have zero tolerance for sexist, mysoginistic smears, and racist whisperings.  Each side has seemed at least a little casual about keeping their supporters in line about things like that, but now that there's a bit of balance between the republicans and democrats in this realm, they might act a bit more like grownups.

    good point. (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by rise hillary rise on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:05:48 AM EST
    do you think that this will shut up any of the sexist spew from Tweety and Olbermann?

    actually, it probably will, since they reserve their own special brand of hatred for all things Clinton.


    I said all during the primary (5.00 / 4) (#73)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:11:57 AM EST
    that the hate and bile directed at Hillary was not mostly about the fact that she was a woman but the fact that she was Hillary Clinton.
    I suspect will now be proven correct.

    And she's a democrat (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Redshoes on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:14:37 AM EST
    and an unapologetic feminist.

    I agree. (none / 0) (#210)
    by indy in sc on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:35:29 AM EST
    A lot of what we saw was more attributable to CDS than misogyny.  That said, I think we will see misogeny with Pallin.  She was a former "Miss Alaska"--I can only imagine what will be said about that.  The media has no pre-established reason to "hate" pallin--it will be interesting to see how she is treated.

    Media is important in this (5.00 / 5) (#91)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:14:46 AM EST
    Palin will give the Olbermanns and the rest a chance to prove they are so not anti-woman.

    I'm not voting for McCain (although probably not for Obama, either), but I am really, really thrilled at this.  Hillary and the 18 million have actually put a huge, eventually fatal crack in the glass ceiling, and McCain just slammed another wedge into the widening crack.


    If they do, the GOP will defend her. (5.00 / 4) (#112)
    by lucky leftie on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:18:35 AM EST
    The first time a wisecrack is made, they will hit the airwaves with the moral indignation they do so well.  

    I don't know how big a factor disgruntled women will be in this election but I suspect this choice will be appealing to some who would not otherwise consider voting for McCain.  


    Yes, they will. (5.00 / 3) (#154)
    by Fabian on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:24:46 AM EST
    I am now really looking forward to this election because I'm sure while Obama ignored everything Hillary supporters said during the primary, the GOP was paying very close attention.

    We'll see who is the fastest on the uptake.


    AND she is an ex beauty queen (none / 0) (#149)
    by BernieO on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:24:24 AM EST
    which those sleaze balls will love.

    Great idea. (5.00 / 3) (#40)
    by Fabian on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:07:34 AM EST
    I'm all for a politically correct, brutal political fist fight.

    No sexism.
    No racism.
    No ageism.

    Gonna be FUN!


    Maybe they can talk about the issues (5.00 / 3) (#132)
    by ruffian on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:21:50 AM EST
    with all the other stuff off the table.  Looking forward to it.

    OMG. (5.00 / 7) (#4)
    by chel2551 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:00:25 AM EST
    I am stunned at the prospect that he might pick her.  I never in a million years thought the republicans would choose a woman as their VP candidate, one who could very well succeed him as president.

    How sad is that.  Nice going, dems.


    Not stunning. McCain really wanted Condi (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by rottodamn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:05:02 AM EST
    in my estimation. But she has always maintained she would not seek office and plenty of people have been trying to twist her arm

    Condi needs to (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by chel2551 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:07:52 AM EST
    fade into the background.  She's been horrible.

    This is good for America politics, and he'll get some support for that - may do them some good downticket too.

    Pretty smart move and more additive to the ticket than Biden was to Obama.


    Saw her recently talking about (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by BernieO on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:26:11 AM EST
    Georgia. She looked really worn down and was very snippy.
    I doubt that McCain wanted her. He really does not like Bush so why would he want his lackey Condi on his team?

    Condi (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:13:57 AM EST
    would have been a disaster.
    Bushes third term indeed.

    Disagree (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:16:46 AM EST
    Condi would have ensured a Dem. landslide.  She was an almost comically incompetent Nat. Security Adviser, and has been a week SoS., and McCain knows that very well.

    Agreed. Condi has been godawful in her roles. (5.00 / 1) (#155)
    by Southsider on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:24:50 AM EST
    Even my GOP friends agree.  Photogenic and demographically appealing, but man you could run a 3 minute mile against that record of hers.

    We can take credit. (5.00 / 6) (#28)
    by eustiscg on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:05:37 AM EST
    Do you think a woman would have crossed McCain's mind if it weren't for Hillary Clinton?  I doubt it.  This is what we mean when we say Hillary's campaign was a bedrock, fundamental game-changer!

    A "game" changer... (5.00 / 1) (#209)
    by inclusiveheart on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:35:19 AM EST
    This woman is being used.

    She doesn't have an impressive career history like someone like Hutchinson or Liddy Dole or any number of highly accomplished women who are Republicans.  Personally, I am really surprised that so many people think this is a real advancement for women's rights and stature in this country.  She's a pawn picked out of the wilderness of Alaska with little history of achievement in a year when a serious female candidate affirmed our potential to win support from those 18 million people.  As a woman, I think it is a cynical and insulting pick actually.


    Exactly, because (5.00 / 7) (#30)
    by andrys on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:05:57 AM EST
    even Obama supporters, after Hillary's convention speech, have been regretting that Obama didn't choose her for the VP slot.

    They will really miss her now.


    Yep. (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by chel2551 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:09:01 AM EST
    And imagine the vice-presidential debate now!

    Oh my.


    Shades of Mondale (5.00 / 0) (#5)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:00:31 AM EST
    It is a gamble, but when you are going to lose if you do not gamble, you might as well take the shot. I think McCain is taking a clear eyed gamble.

    Shades of Mondale choosing Ferraro.

    No, it's different this time (5.00 / 4) (#21)
    by stefystef on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:04:31 AM EST
    Ferraro had too much baggage.
    This woman is a solid conservative, pro-life, the face of the New Republican Party... I see that's going to happen when they promote her.

    And Palin has governed in a men's state (5.00 / 5) (#44)
    by andrys on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:07:55 AM EST
    and wound up very respected there.

    This is bad for the Dems.


    If she were pro-choice... (5.00 / 2) (#83)
    by kredwyn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:13:19 AM EST
    this contest would be over.

    I think it bears repeating, a least for (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by zfran on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:19:36 AM EST
    now. Women have instant rapore with other women. At least most do. Her story seems to be a very americana-type one and with 5 children as well. She seems strong and independent. She is pro-life, and I don't know what other negatives she may have as yet, but do you agree with all of Obama's points/positions, or do you disagree with some of them. Or Biden's positions for that matter. Can't have it all. Can't wait to hear her speak.

    Exactly (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by Brookhaven on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:09:07 AM EST
    And, we didn't have the disaffected women and men that we have now because of what happened to HRC with the DNC.  This is a horse of a very different color.  

    In many quarters, this will be seen as a confirmation or rather a re-confirmation of McCain's Maverick status whether that's true or not.  Perception is everything.  


    Palin is not without baggage (5.00 / 0) (#53)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:09:27 AM EST
    whether or not it is too much remains to be seen.

    Of course that would require journalists actually doing some reporting to find out and they may stick to their stenography day jobs....


    Oh, there's so much luggage on the (5.00 / 1) (#202)
    by JavaCityPal on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:33:32 AM EST
    belt this time, it's hard to keep it straight.

    The attitude that got us to the candidate we have was a great big "who cares" one, so they sure better be careful not to get too defensive.


    Quick. (5.00 / 0) (#57)
    by Fabian on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:10:02 AM EST
    Call Katherine Harris for her reaction!

    (I'm evil.  You can delete this.)


    Unless there's a lot more (5.00 / 7) (#6)
    by RalphB on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:00:32 AM EST
    than the piddly BS I've read about here on Sarah Palin, this election may have been won today by McCain's gamble.  In fact, I think this is a great choice.

    McCain doesn't need to make up for a lack of experience with his VP pick.  He already has that in spades.

    Yeah, I don't (5.00 / 3) (#47)
    by frankly0 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:08:20 AM EST
    see the inexperience in the VP argument getting much traction against McCain.

    Look, the basic fact is that no one expects the VP to have to take over just months after the President is elected. Everyone expects that there will likely be some number of years before the VP takes over, and that during those years the VP will, or should, get some pretty directly relevant understudy experience. It's a calculated risk, of course, as to how long that might be, but most people get that relevant experience will very likely be accumulated.

    And of course the larger calculation is that it's very unlikely the VP will become President in any case.


    He's also 72 ... (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by eustiscg on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:10:25 AM EST
    ..., has had every possible kind of skin melanoma, and won't do an open and thorough dump of his health records.  "A heartbeat away" has never sounded more ominous.

    And besides, picture this: Sarah Palin (gov. 1.5 years, and mayor of a small town for 4 years) sits down to debate Joe Biden on Georgia, Iraq and Afghanistan.


    Obama/Biden cannot talk to (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by zfran on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:13:46 AM EST
    Palin's inexperience (as you have indicated) considering Obama's inexperience.

    not a fair comparison re experience (none / 0) (#175)
    by DFLer on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:27:52 AM EST
    Obama may not have "on-the-job" experience, but until I see different, I doubt Palin would have the depth of study and knowledge etc., about the foreign policy issues cited above that Obama has.

    That (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:24:40 AM EST
    would be a good argument against voting for Palin if she was the GOP nominee and Biden was our nominee.

    Really, all these anti Palin arguments are making a case NOT to vote for Obama.


    My parents are amost 72... (5.00 / 2) (#153)
    by kredwyn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:24:42 AM EST
    and puttering along at a nice even keel in spite of my mom's fight with breast cancer a couple years ago. Indeed, my dad's out there right now...teaching at university as part of his second life.

    My dad's aunt is 95 and going strong.
    My mom's father died at 94.

    McCain's mom is 95 and speeding along.

    Kindly roll back the "he's an antique and is going to die soon" spiel.

    It will lose you more votes than you know.


    Well no one is talking about (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by bjorn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:00:47 AM EST
    Obama this morning and that is good going into the Repub convention.  But I think after their convention the race will focus on Obama vs McCain, and at the end of the day it will be Obama.

    If you think the focus will be Obama vs. McCain (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by daryl herbert on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:30:35 AM EST
    then how can you possibly believe Obama wins?

    McCain, as a person, is tremendously more attractive to voters than Obama as a person.

    The only way Obama wins is if he turns this election into a referendum of Bush and Generic Dem vs. Generic Republican.  (That is to say, the "politics of contrast" often promoted by BTD.)

    As long as Palin can show a little substance, and show that she's not a token pick, it will be very hard for Dems to portray the "maverick" McCain and corruption-fighting woman Palin as generic Republicans.  They don't fit the stereotype(s).


    BTD (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by cpa1 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:01:37 AM EST
    Do you think Barack Obama would have been a reasonably sound pick for VP, with his lack of experience?

    Alaska government is or at least was pretty slimey with Frank Murkowsky and Ted Stevens leaving us with the appearance of putting out for the money.  I think it is a ridiculous choice but what can the Democrats say when we have Obama?

    You mentioned something that needs investigating-- (none / 0) (#42)
    by magster on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:07:51 AM EST
    whether she has links to Young and Stevens and Murkowski.  If she has anything, all their baggage just got thrown on her.

    she has fought (5.00 / 3) (#63)
    by bjorn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:10:43 AM EST
    that kind of corruption...there has been resistance toward her from the old boys in AK.  She doesn't seem afraid to take them on.  I can't see dem women voting for this ticket, but I think it was a brilliant choice, the best he could have made to help himself.

    Which is a large part of her appeal (5.00 / 1) (#198)
    by BernieO on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:32:10 AM EST
    She is very popular in Alaska where Republicans in general are in disgrace. I think it also sends a message about McCain's position on Republican corruption. I really want to hear him address this head on, particulary the cronyism and the polticization of the Justice Department. I think he could do this without alienating his base by talking about the party's traditional stance as the law and order party. It would be tricky but could be done if framed that way. I would also like to hear him talk about appointing highly qualified people to run the government agencies. He could do that without even mentioning Bush but the message would be clear. How do you argue against that?

    Baloney (5.00 / 1) (#207)
    by Pol C on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:34:58 AM EST
    She has a history of standing up to the corrupt GOP establishment in Alaska. As I wrote on my own blog, she has very strong public-integrity credentials. My initial guess is that John McCain is positing himself as a step away from the flagrant corruption of the GOP during the Dubya years. That's his notion of change we can believe in. It's not a bad one.



    I don't Palin as VP undermines McCain's (5.00 / 9) (#12)
    by rottodamn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:02:30 AM EST
    Experience argument at all. In fact it shows a glaring weakness on Obama's side. IMHO, Obama should be VP on his ticket. Palin and Obama have virtually the same amount of experience except Palin has executive experience as a governor.

    I have to agree (5.00 / 6) (#23)
    by bjorn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:04:44 AM EST
    even dems in Alaska like this woman.  She has fought corruption and cronyism in her state.

    Very good point... (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by andrys on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:06:34 AM EST
    I keep saying (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:15:10 AM EST
    she a governor.  voters love governors.  and most will think she has more experience than the top of the dem ticket.
    the experience thing is not where the Dems want to go if they are smart.

    Exactly (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by ruffian on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:23:32 AM EST
    Governor trumps Senator any day of the week.

    Dems need to stick to the issues and they will win.


    Interesting choice... (5.00 / 5) (#14)
    by kredwyn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:02:59 AM EST
    From wiki:
    Palin served two terms on the Wasilla City Council from 1992 to 1996. In 1996, she challenged the incumbent mayor, criticizing wasteful spending and high taxes.[3] The ex-mayor and sheriff tried to organize a recall campaign, but failed.[3] Palin kept her campaign promises, reducing her own salary, as well as reducing property taxes 60%.[3] She ran for reelection against the former mayor in 1999, winning by an even larger margin.[3][12] Palin was also elected president of the Alaska Conference of Mayors.[6]

    Palin: Lifelong member of NRA (5.00 / 8) (#38)
    by befuddledvoter on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:06:49 AM EST

    And she was captain of her (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by theybannedmeinboston on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:18:20 AM EST
    high school basketball team which won the state championship. Maybe she can challenge Obama to a game of HORSE.

    Wasilla, Alaska (none / 0) (#236)
    by KeysDan on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:04:39 AM EST
    has a population of 7000. After being its mayor, Ms. Palin went on to become governor a year and a half ago.

    The media will love her (5.00 / 6) (#15)
    by mmc9431 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:03:04 AM EST
    Biden will have to change attack strategy in debates. An old time politician picking on a wholesome mother of 5 will go over like a lead balloon. I would hope he keeps it focused on Republican policy and not her.

    I have no way of knowing... (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Jerrymcl89 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:03:52 AM EST
    ... whether Sarah Palin can come off as credible in a foreign policy debate with Joe Biden. If she can, I'd say it's an excellent choice by McCain. She is considered conservative enough for conservatives, and will also have some appeal to the undecided middle. I'm sure most disgruntled Hillaryites will be resistant to voting for an entirely pro-life ticket, but Palin is likely to appeal more to those voters than anyone else McCain could have chosen. And obviously putting a young and (secondarily, but it can't hurt) attractive woman on the ticket does counter McCain's fundamental grumpy old man status.

    Obama's Pro-Life Scare Tactics (5.00 / 3) (#77)
    by creeper on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:12:28 AM EST
    don't scare me.  Republicans rake in millions of dollars from anti-choicers.  If they eliminate Roe vs Wade that source of money (and votes) could easily dry up.

    Republicans, unlike Democrats, are not stupid enough to kill the goose that laid the golden egg.


    you seem to fail to take into account (none / 0) (#116)
    by A DC Wonk on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:19:01 AM EST
    that McCain genuinely doesn't like Roe v Wade, and will, happily, and with conviction, appoint a justice who feels the same way

    McCain's been against it for a quarter-century, you think he's going to change his mind after he's elected?


    Speaking as one 'o those (5.00 / 2) (#156)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:25:03 AM EST
    "disgruntled Hillaryites," I think most remaining will either end up voting for Obama -- if he keeps up the kind of campaigning he did last night -- or abstain/3rd party/write-in the top of the ticket.  I doubt Palin makes a lot of difference to that group.

    Those who have already decided to vote for McCain-- who I suspect are largely Republican or Republican-leaning women only won over to the Dems temporarily by Hillary-- will do so.

    But you can bet your bippy that "disgruntled Hillaryites" are cheering the Palin choice today as a big, big step for women in Hillary's wake.


    It's definitely a move... (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by Jerrymcl89 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:30:58 AM EST
    ... that anyone who wants to see progress for women should applaud, even though they are likely to applaud and then vote for Obama.

    CNN is already calling Palin ... (5.00 / 6) (#18)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:04:02 AM EST
    a younger, female version of McCain.

    It's a gamble and it could backfire.  But it already achieved the first goal. Knocked Obama off the news.

    And, at least over the next few days, the MSM will be playing catch-up to present a cohesive picture of who Palin is.

    CNN was caught so flat-footed, they didn't even have a video bio package prepared.

    That clear-eyed gamble (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Lahdee on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:05:12 AM EST
    says a couple of interesting things about McCain: he's not afraid the experience meme will bite him; and he's not concerned that a first term governor with no national experience and international experience limited to migrating moose will pose problems for American voters.

    No nternational experience? See a map (5.00 / 2) (#231)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:51:23 AM EST
    and you may notice that the governor of Alaska deals daily with bordering no states but bordering a foreign country, Canada (heard of the pipeline?) and with Russia only miles away (heard of offshore fishing rights controversies?).

    An Illinois senator deals with border controversies with, let's see, Iowa, Indiana, Wisconsin. . . .


    We already knew McCain was a crapshooter.... (none / 0) (#70)
    by Jerrymcl89 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:11:38 AM EST
    ... it's not surprising he went with the higher risk/higher reward pick.

    It's a long shot for sure (none / 0) (#115)
    by Lahdee on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:18:58 AM EST
    The rewards are apparent in the short term; conservatives will be energized to turn out, assuming they know who she is, and possible pickups from disgruntled HRC supporters. The risks are enormous IMO. We are dealing with the successor to a 72 year old man with a history of cancer. I know it may sound ghoulish, but can we really afford Sarah Palin should McCain be unable to complete his term?

    As much as we can afford a presidential candidate (4.66 / 3) (#147)
    by masslib on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:23:53 AM EST
    without a record of fulltime job experience.  Yes, we can.

    Tacky (none / 0) (#216)
    by cmugirl on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:38:03 AM EST
    We are dealing with the successor to a 72 year old man with a history of cancer. I know it may sound ghoulish, but can we really afford Sarah Palin should McCain be unable to complete his term?

    And Biden could have another aneurysm because he's almost as old as McCain.  And Obama could choke on his $90 ham.  So what?  

    This is just tacky to keep bringing it up.  McCain's mother is 95 and still gets speeding tickets.  


    She's a good contrast (5.00 / 4) (#32)
    by waldenpond on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:06:08 AM EST
    to Biden.  I am picturing the debate.  I just saw a couple of clips of Palin.  She's very calm and measured.  Apologies, but I agree with the opinion that Biden is a blowhard.

    Are you listening to the spin...the addition of 'diversity' in adding a woman's voice, a 'real' outsider.  This may be very interesting... again, apologies, but the Dems looked pretty bad with the accusations of racism and sexism.

    OK, now CNN is the first to attack after her for the state trooper phone call.  They are saying she fired the staffer who made the call.

    MSNBC: odd, they are selling this...plus suburban women, secures base, a woman is the holy grail, keeping focus on Clinton and McCain refuses to pass over a qualified woman, conservatives are thrilled, great speaker... blunt, authentic, getting Obama's weak spot 35-50, will increase fundraising and McCain may get some money before nom where he can't get any.  Biden may not be able to be tough on a woman (I thought of this) she'll have a low bar to qualify.

    negative: firing of state trooper, Todd explaining that she defended her sister who was being beaten if true, may get a pass, she can't defend McCain from attacks by Biden as she has no FP, small window to define her... does she fight her party, is she a reformer or is she fringe who supported Pat Buchanan (I thought Buchanan wasn't as hated on MSNBC this year)

    Media tries to find negative in everything (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by stefystef on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:08:56 AM EST
    They would find negative in Jesus Christ.

    The MSM in America is a joke.  I don't know this woman, but she's McCain choice.  Not CNN's.

    I'm still not voting for McCain (or Obama), but damn, this is a smart move on McCain's party.  I told ya, do not underestimate McCain.  Do so at your own peril.


    Watching CSPAN (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by stefystef on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:06:43 AM EST
    for the announcement.  What I found interesting, the people have American flags, not signs of McCain or Palin, very very patriotic.

    As the kids say, now this gets interesting.

    Best pick available for McCain (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by BrianJ on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:10:16 AM EST
    The first woman on a ticket with a realistic chance of victory.  (Sorry, but Mondale knew he was going to get crushed when he selected Ferraro.)  And yes, this is designed to win the votes of Hillary supporters, and will probably get another 10% of them or so.  Reform-minded governor.  Independent woman, but conservative in all the places that could cause a revolt.  Executive experience otherwise missing from both tickets.  Young and good-looking, of course.

    Romney wouldn't have worked because, well, we saw him  in action during the primaries.  Pawlenty's not very popular even in his home state.

    And the timing and manner of the rollout wortked a lot better than Obama's HISTORIC! 3am text message.  (I like to think that Obama's finally learned his lesson about trying to be HISTORIC! with every action, judging by last night's speech.  We'll find out soon enough.)

    Sorry. but ...this comment is ridiculous (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:16:27 AM EST
    The first woman on a ticket with a realistic chance of victory.  (Sorry, but Mondale knew he was going to get crushed when he selected Ferraro.)  

    No one selects a candidate knowing it's a losing ticket.

    You are merely trying to make this more important than it is. DONT get me wrong, Ferraro was decades ago and this is a long time coming, but she was the first. Palin is merely the first GOP VP candidate.


    Are you going to tell me (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by BrianJ on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:23:41 AM EST
    With a strraight face that you know ANYONE who thought Mondale could win by July of 1984?  He was clearly going to lose bad-  maybe not Jubliation T. Cornpone bad (which would have taken the reversal of 1000 MN ballots), but bad.

    Ferraro was the first VP candidate Brian. (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:27:26 AM EST
    Not Palin.

    Stop trying to re-write history. The GOP took 24 YEARS to do what the Dems did.

    24 years.

    and when they finally got around to it, they did it ONLY in response to the success of Hillary Clinton AND they chose a woman who wants to control her sisters' bodies.

    Credit is not due McCain in this. It was a political Hail Mary, nothing more. Credit, in contrast, is due to America - we are FINALLY ready for this.


    Paulin as Gov has executive experience (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by rottodamn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:16:31 AM EST
    be it only for a year or so. She is managing a state. That is considered exec exp.

    One year more (none / 0) (#133)
    by BrianJ on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:22:19 AM EST
    Than Obama, Biden, or McCain.  None of them have actually run anything larger than their current campaign staffs.  It's nice, for instance, that Biden's been talking about foreign policy or that McCain's been discussing campaign finance.  It's another thing to actually go out there and DO things.

    Few things (5.00 / 3) (#60)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:10:19 AM EST
    1. This is obviously not the choice of a campaign that believes a "safe" pick would be good enough to win, or even a campaign that believes they would be favored if they made a "safe" pick.  So it tells you a lot about where the McCain campaign sees the race right now.

    2. This clearly sets up a situation where if Obama loses, the decision not to pick Hillary is framed as the key mistake.  It just does.

    3. Although it's obvious that the GOP never would have picked the first-term MALE governor of a tiny red state as the VP, I think the Democrats are pretty clearly foreclosed from making the so-called "affirmative action" argument.  That doesn't mean I believe Obama is an affirmative action candidate, only that I believe making the argument against Palin would open the door to the return argument in a way that would be ugly.  Hopefully the big mouths on the Democratic side will keep themselves reined in so we don't have to go there.

    4. For similar reasons, while there is an obvious question whether Palin really has the experience to run the country if something happens to McCain, the Obama campaign has to be very, very careful about how they approach that issue.  They don't want to offend people whose reaction would be "oh, NOW you deem experience to be a relevant criterion?"  The way to handle it is to use a positive rather than a negative frame - emphasize just how ready Joe Biden is to run the country if required, and let the implication about Palin go unsaid.

    On 2 (5.00 / 5) (#69)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:11:34 AM EST
    the Clinton's work for Obama in the Convention becomes very important.

    And she becomes an even more important surrogate for the campaign now.


    Good. (5.00 / 2) (#121)
    by Fabian on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:19:48 AM EST
    I shall enjoy seeing Obama suck up to Hillary Clinton at every opportunity.

    And he'd better if he knows what is good for him and his campaign.  Gonna have to stomp on all that CDS rhetoric too.  That's not going to play well now.

    Oh, I'm just a-rolling in the schadenfreude this morning.


    But that assumes that the conventions (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by dk on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:20:00 AM EST
    really leave an imprint in the minds of the average voter.  I guess I don't think they do, but that's just my opinion.

    As for Hillary being an important surrogate, I just don't know either.  I think you were right in previous posts where you've said it's now Obama's race to win or lose.  


    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:20:06 AM EST
    And some of the more piggish individuals on the Democratic side need to step back and take their cues from Hillary about how to handle this matter with class and respect.

    If Democrats are openly derisive regarding Palin's experience, it becomes chapter 2 of the "fairytale."  Women will not like seeing her mocked any more than blacks liked seeing Obama get knocked around for his lack of experience.


    Plus (none / 0) (#214)
    by Redshoes on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:37:15 AM EST
    by diminishing her dems help lower expectations so that when Palin does debate Biden so long as she doesn't have a meltdown folks will say, "she's okay."

    Plus (none / 0) (#221)
    by Redshoes on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:41:37 AM EST
    by diminishing her dems help lower expectations so that when Palin does debate Biden so long as she doesn't have a meltdown folks will say, "she's okay."

    That's a lot to hang on her (5.00 / 2) (#215)
    by goldberry on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:37:36 AM EST
    Seems to me if Obama needs this much help from Clinton, the DNC should have made her the nominee.  They can't have it both ways.  She can't do his debates for him.  

    That's a lot to hang on her (5.00 / 1) (#220)
    by goldberry on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:40:29 AM EST
    Seems to me if Obama needs this much help from Clinton, the DNC should have made her the nominee.  They can't have it both ways.  She can't do his debates for him.  

    Once (5.00 / 2) (#226)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:44:27 AM EST
    again it becomes Hillary's responsiblity to push Obama over the finish line? BTD, I'm so over this argument I just can't tell you. Obama is going to have to deal with the situation at hand.

    This kind of stuff just makes that SNL skit more real. I guess Obama will have to call Hillary from the WH in the middle of the night?


    Hil can attack Palin's (none / 0) (#108)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:17:41 AM EST
    pro-life credentials quite effectively, I'd say.

    Yes (none / 0) (#222)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:41:54 AM EST
    but it gets a little trickier to make some of the pro-choice arguments that we progressives are used to framing in women's rights terms.

    I mean, for example, you and I might agree that anti-abortion legislation is about trying to control women's bodies and tell them they're not competent to make their own decisions, but it gets trickier to make that argument when it's a woman on the other side of the debate.  I'm not saying that the argument is any less valid, of course.


    But, please... (none / 0) (#176)
    by Dadler on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:28:09 AM EST
    ...Palin is in NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM fit to run the country in McCain's absense.  Alaska is as unrepresentative of the nation as a whole as you get, and she would be so out of her league it would be off the charts. And I am assuming, of course, that we really are capable of calling her out and not being afraid to because of her gender.  I also read she is anti-choice and anti gay marriage (stating she has gay friends and is sensitive to their concerns which, I must be honest, I find highly unlikely.  If I hear another conservative against gay marriage talk about their gay friends I'm going to roll on the floor laughing.  To me, this is one of the biggest flat-out lies conservatives tell.)

    But again, as usual, I could be wrong.  Maybe enough Hillary supporters think beauty paegant runners-up where it's at, maybe they really do see a man choosing her (rather than the 28 primaries won) makes here selection momentous.  I don't.  What Hillary accomplished far outdistances Palin, and to consider her SELECTION by a man as somehow an achievment is, to me, dishonest and utterly denial-ridden.

    It is a cynical day indeed.


    For a lot of people, it may come down to (5.00 / 1) (#230)
    by Anne on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:50:58 AM EST
    choosing between the young and healthy nominee for president whom they feel is not experienced enough to run the country, who is not likely to suffer a medical crisis that would require his older, more experienced VP to step in, versus the older nominee who appears pretty vigorous and with plenty of stamina, who has chosen a younger, more inexperienced VP.

    Some might point out that it is usually the natural order of things to have the older person at the top of the ticket and the younger one in the #2 slot.

    Biden as the VP does not position the Dems for an extension of an Obama presidency - does Biden bow out after the first term to be replaced by a younger running mate who can take over in 2016, or does he go the distance, and then we're looking for a brand-new candidate for 2016?

    Palin gives the GOP a shot at 12 years.


    I'd ad a fifth ... (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:16:00 AM EST
    it shows McCain is thinking about the future of the GOP.  Even if McCain loses he will have turned an attractive, young Republican into a national figure.

    The Biden choice didn't do that for the Dems.


    This is why I'm pissed with Dems (5.00 / 4) (#129)
    by rottodamn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:20:46 AM EST
    Hill could have been the top of the ticket and Obama the bottom. Possibly 16 years of Democratic governance in the executive branch.

    I'm still a Dem. But you have to give it to McCain. Last summer he ran out of money, but still kept going. They were asking him if he was dropping out of the race and he laughed.

    He's thinking. He or his people are more clever than we think.


    I disagree with one (5.00 / 2) (#125)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:20:17 AM EST
    I dont see that she is not a safe pick.
    tell me whats risky.  she seems the perfect republican candidate to me.

    She is risky (none / 0) (#213)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:37:12 AM EST
    because she is very unknown and inexperienced.  She is not from GOP Casting Central.  If McCain figured to coast to an easy victory with some safe and boring Republican pick, there is no way he would go with Palin at this stage.

    Pat Buchanan apparently said he sees it as the biggest gamble in American political history.


    Actually, this is so brilliant (5.00 / 5) (#169)
    by JavaCityPal on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:26:53 AM EST
    Let's see if the Obama camp dares to do to Palin what they did to Hillary. Is the sexism going to continue?

    And, on the topic of experience, Obama has no credibility there. Though, I see his camp is pushing it.

    Two years as a dedicated governor vs. months as a half-hearted Senator getting ready to run for POTUS, not VEEP, POTUS.


    If you think a cynical pick is a good pick (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Dadler on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:11:50 AM EST
    Then I guess you're right, Tent.  But, come on, the ONLY reason he makes this pick is the notion that it will somehow attact a chunk of disgruntled Hillary voters in additon to appeasing hyperconservatives (the latter not being as important, since none of them, unlike disgruntled Hillary supporters, would even think of crossing over to vote for Obama).

    And that would assume that those disgruntled Hillary supporters would support a woman even more conservative than McCain, one who represents their views and concerns even less.

    I think it's a empty, cynical and largely a losing pick for him, personally.  Makes Obama's selection of boring and change-bereft Joe Biden seem genuinely inspired.

    Or a less cynical observer (5.00 / 4) (#113)
    by Redshoes on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:18:50 AM EST
    might note that he brought the Republican party into the 21st century.

    Horrors! (5.00 / 1) (#206)
    by Democratic Cat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:34:34 AM EST
    A politician makes a choice to try to appeal to voters. In other news, the sun rose today.

    Seriously, why should the candidates not try to appeal to voters? I like being pandered to on the things I think are important.

    Still not voting for McCain, but I admire his choice.


    How soon until far-right fundies start screaming.. (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by Southsider on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:12:21 AM EST
    ...about how Palin is too liberal on gay rights?  Because that's going to come out soon enough.  

    Palin's got as wide a libertarian streak as any recent candidate on either ticket.  I can't say it sways me but it does...ooh, shiny. Glittery.  [imitates easily distracted cat].

    I guess we'll have to wait and see (none / 0) (#238)
    by daryl herbert on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:19:20 AM EST
    McCain was preparing them in advance by pretending like he was going to pick Lieberman, or a pro-choice Republican.  In fact, McCain even said he would consider picking someone pro-choice, but not someone in favor of gay rights.

    Since Palin is straight down the line pro-life, they can't complain.  She's a very effective advocate against abortion, because she's a woman, who has a family and an executive career, and because she chose not to abort her Down's syndrome son.

    The fact that she's not hung up on what gay men do with their penises (which is the biggest and stupidest distraction, in general, for the GOP) just means she will connect more with young people and be a better advocate for taking away abortion rights.

    Yup, the far right is going to go wild for her.


    I knew this would happen (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by Dave B on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:13:27 AM EST
    The instant I got the news that Obama passed over Hillary and picked Biden.  I would have been shocked if it turned out to be a white male.

    Indeed (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by santina on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:15:08 AM EST
    The inauguration of President John McCain and Vice President Sarah Palin will be a great day for women everywhere. Finally, a seat at the table.

    BTD (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:15:27 AM EST
    I really think the experience point you are making is weak. Palin is at the bottom of the ticket not the top. Unless you are going to constantly talk about how McCain is going to pass away any day now that won't really wash.

    I see this as something that could be good for the Obama campaign. This "it's in the bag" attitude is a real loser. And if he continues along that track he will lose. Hopefully, the Obama campaign is now sweating bullets and realizing that they could lose in Nov. Maybe it will fire them up and cause them to light a fire under Obama to get the job done. Maybe NOW he'll start talking to the voters, quit having rallies and get to work.

    Of course it undermines it (5.00 / 2) (#126)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:20:24 AM EST
    It's not that McCain is on the brink of dying - it is that any President might not be there the next day.

    I'll say this - it is hardly to Obama's advantage to focus on this argument, but now it weakens McCain;s argument on it.


    I think Biden (none / 0) (#182)
    by DCDemocrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:29:32 AM EST
    will bury her in the vice presidential debate.

    No doubt about it, its a game changer (5.00 / 5) (#103)
    by Exeter on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:16:40 AM EST
    The perception of McCain has instantaneously changed.  

    1) Let's be honest, no longer is the choice of voting for or against the first black candidate, but now its also voting for or against the first female vice president. It offers huge cover for people that don't want the guilt of voting against Obama.

    2)It changes the overall perception of McCain from an old white guy to a ticket of an old guy and a young female. She's doing in reverse of what Cheney did for Bush.

    1. McCain top struggle is with women. If he can cut into Obama's draw with women, even a little bit, it changes the dynamics of the race.

    2. It appeals to undecided moderates, independents, and the wishy-washy 10-20% of voters that decide elections. Yes, the hardcore liberals will view her as conservative, but they aren't voting for McCain anyway, and it will energize the conservative base that will more likely vote for McCain now.  

    People don't vote (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:19:29 AM EST
    for the VP.

    This is probably a good move for McCain.  

    But Palin doesn't suddenly make McCain more coherent.  She doesn't make him less frightening as a Commander in Chief.  

    No one knows anything about her right now so of course its all hugs and kisses.  We'll see how things shake out in a few weeks.  

    This is a good day for (5.00 / 3) (#131)
    by Lena on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:21:15 AM EST
    Democratic women (and just departed Democratic women like me).

    It forces Obama to take on women's issues and prove that he supports them. Again and again.

    The decision also is probably weirding out all the Republican neanderthals who are going to have to change or slightly adjust their sexist worldviews.

    (the only downside is that it does nothing to accost the idiotic Obama sexist supporters.)


    Just because (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by befuddledvoter on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:26:51 AM EST
    someone is prolife does not mean they are necessarily sexist.  These are two distinct issues.  Just saying

    I think Obama is in trouble with a capital T (5.00 / 3) (#135)
    by Saul on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:22:23 AM EST

    This Hillary Democrat is voting for her (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by kmw0382 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:23:13 AM EST
    Hi All,

    I have been lurking on this site for some time and have really enjoyed the discussions.

    I have been a democrat for 34 years and supported Hillary in my state primary.  Since learning about Sarah Palin last May, I have switched my support to the McCain/Palin ticket.  Sarah is the real deal.  She just completed her successful steering of the natural gas pipeline through the Alaska state legislature--something the state has been attempting to do for 30 years.   This will be the largest infrastructure project in US history and will quintuple the amount of natural gas available to Midwest markets.

    To those who denigrate her foreign relations experience, you must remember that she governs the only state bordered by two foreign nations:  Canada and Russia.

    She has fought corruption in her own party and stood on principle (cancelling the bridge to nowhere, etc.)

    She has executive experience at the municipal and state level.

    While I am pro-choice myself, I honor her decision to carry her fifth child, a downs syndrome baby, to term.  I hope she will engender a discussion between the pro-choice/pro-life folks on how we can support pregnant women and honor the choices they make regardless of that choice.

    I hope all of you will examine her record closely, without prejudice before the November election.

    Best to all


    Is the Russia/Canada Thing (none / 0) (#191)
    by BDB on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:31:23 AM EST
    similar to the GOP talking point about Bush and how he'd be great on the foreign stage because he had dealt with Mexico?  

    Lurking my backside. You're a McCain Shill (none / 0) (#212)
    by rottodamn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:36:43 AM EST
    How much do they pay you? No way you could be a Hillary supported lurking on TL and not post once. Ha! Good one!

    She'll impress a lot of people (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by mmc9431 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:25:05 AM EST
    I just read wikipedia on Palin. Her story line drips apple pie! Sports, hunting, beauty pagent, scholarship, working mom, what else could you throw in! Dem's better get their act in full gear. This election just turned back into a race.

    The Downsides Are Obvious (5.00 / 2) (#163)
    by BDB on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:25:53 AM EST
    we'll see how she plays on the national stage, but I want to mention a couple of things about her potential upsides that I don't think have been mentioned here:

    1. She at least portrays herself as a more moderate voice on the environment and energy and that's where I think McCain is going to try to polish his maverick creds - he's going to try to portray himself as being to the left of Obama on energy using the Cheney Energy bill vote (which has the added benefit of interrupting the McSame narrative);

    2. It remains to be seen whether the Democrats and their fauxgressive supporters can restrain their sexism and misogyny.  For some of them, it's simply who they are.  You can bet the GOP won't sit on its hands like the DNC did during the primary.  Which even if it doesn't drive women to McCain, could suppress the women's vote (racism from the right, sexism from the left - this election sure is fun for us non-white male Americans!).

    Let the sexism begin. (Again) (5.00 / 2) (#174)
    by janarchy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:27:51 AM EST
    Amazing how many Obama supporters I know who are still recovering from the Best Acceptance Speech Of All Time are already making disgusting sexist comments about Palin.

    I think she's a great choice -- and a big gamble. How Republican voters will react to her is a big unknown but it certainly wasn't the safe or easy choice for McCain. It fits in the Maverick image (not saying I believe it, just that he's shoring it up), she will appeal to conservatives etc. It doesn't make me want to vote for him, but then again, I am not voting for anyone.

    What I am hoping for is that when the Left wing echo chamber starts their sexist tripe (as they clearly already are), the Republicans -- unlike the Democrats -- shut them down and call them on it. If nothing else, that will be a boon.

    I think Hillary Clinton's 18 million votes clearly (5.00 / 2) (#178)
    by esmense on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:28:29 AM EST
    demonstrated that women have political power that the Republican party can no longer afford to dismiss or overlook.

    Whether or not this aids McCain in the short term, it benefits his party in the long term (just as Condoleeza Rice's cabinet appointment did).

    Bush was greatly aided by the fact that women, who, starting with Reagan, had been favoring Democrats, instead split their vote in 2000 and 2004.

    If this step encourages such a split for McCain (who is not popular with women) it will be very helpful for him.

    But beyond that, this is a step that distances the Republicans (which was the party of sufferage once upon a time) from its less and less useful appeal as the party of the reactionary, angry, white man. It also I think signals that those issues that have been defined as "women's issues" for most of the last 30 years; abortion, social security, health care, etc, are, on the one hand, no longer so exclusively of interest to women and, on the other hand, no longer of such great importance to significant numbers of women.  

    Absolutely spot on. (5.00 / 2) (#201)
    by chel2551 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:33:20 AM EST
    I think Hillary Clinton's 18 million votes clearly demonstrated that women have political power that the Republican party can no longer afford to dismiss or overlook.

    But the dems are going to learn that the hard way.

    Stupid.  Stupid.  Stupid.


    Hmm (5.00 / 2) (#186)
    by Lowtideppm on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:30:26 AM EST
      It actually (for this hour at least) makes McCain look like that old "Maverick."  If Palin comes off as a strong fighter with her executive experience in a state perceived as practially frontier?  Pro-life but defending her sister from (spousal abuse)?  
      There are real possibilities here.  Compare this choice to Obama's "safe" but cowardly choice of Biden.
      How is she on soundbites?  This could be fun.

    This choice is not a shout out for women's rights (5.00 / 2) (#188)
    by DFLer on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:30:46 AM EST
    etc., it is a totally politically calculated decision to take the media and the country's attention off the Dem convention, the Dem ticket.....and the issues outlined.

    And it is working well so far.

    My husband wants to put a McCain ... (5.00 / 1) (#203)
    by dianem on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:33:42 AM EST
    ...bumper sticker on his truck. He's Canadian. Liberal. He wants to put it right next to the Charlie Brown sticker. I have never, ever been tempted to vote for a Republican, but I'm so mad right now at the DNC that I'm considering it. Don't worry - I'm not going to turn this into an anti-Dem rant. I won't be posting much here unless my feelings change. And I'm pretty sure I won't end up voting for McCain. My rational side will win out - it always does when I have enough time to think things out. But my emotional side right now is thrilled that this fall we will have either the first black president or the first female VP. On a strictly symbolic level, this nation will win no matter which party wins.

    Three thoughts (5.00 / 2) (#223)
    by santarita on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:41:57 AM EST
    McCain must think that the female part of the electorate is in play and matters to the election.

    If she is a libertarian, this will appeal to the Ron Paul fans.

    And now Obama will have to pander to women as much as he has been pandering to evangelicals.  

    Ugh. I've been IM'ing/emailing my GOP friends... (5.00 / 2) (#225)
    by Southsider on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:43:45 AM EST
    Crap, they're over the moon.  The biggest fear I'm getting from them is the experience issue being taken off the table.  Other than that they're champing at the bit for Palin to take on Biden (just like I said earlier, they were all hitting on the "I'd love to see Biden treat her like a bimbo and see how far that gets him with voters" line), and a lot of them were chuffed about having an anti-corruption, pro-gay rights, pro-drilling 'outsider' governor on the ticket.  (My GOP friends, unsurprisingly, are of the more moderate/libertarian variety.)

    And as a (semi-depressing) data point, I just spoke to my girlfriend.  We've been together for 2.5 years now, and I know her politics really well.  She's generally Democratic, but definitely not a partisan or super-informed ideologue the way all of us here are.  She followed the path that a lot of women seem to have: Hillary supporter, enraged at her axe-murdering by the media and Obama, uncomfortable with Barack but likely to end up pulling the lever for him.  

    The first ripple for her the other way was when she heard that McCain might pick Lieberman - say what you will about what Lieberman means to the netroots, for the vast majority of non-partisans he has a different image.  She said she was impressed by his "willingness to consider a guy from the other side."  I tried to explain to her why this wasn't really what it seemed to be, but she still insisted that it was a pretty neat moment.  Anyway, she's really excited about this.  Palin's biography really excites her too - the whole "gun-shootin' moose-huntin' hockey mom" thing does it for her.  I told her that Palin was anti-choice, and that gave her pause, but definitely didn't quell her enthusiasm.

    Anecdotes / data, so let's not call this a trend.  But she's your archetypical disaffected HRC voter (i.e. not a PUMA, not an ideologue, but your average woman who thought Hillary got a raw deal), and I didn't actually think that Palin would be able to draw these types.

    It's fricking brilliant. The election is over. (4.71 / 7) (#19)
    by goldberry on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:04:03 AM EST
    McCain just won back all of the older conservative women who voted for Hillary,  He's won back a lot of women who were PO'd over the overt sexism displayed by the media and the DNC itself.  That was only part of the reason I oppose Obama.  I object to the way the process has been run this year so I;m not necessarily jumping onboard the McCain/Palin express but it is very tempting.  
    Sure, she's pro-life but she also walks the walk.  She's also in favor of benefits for gay couples.  She's considered a reformer.  She's young, attractive and smart.  Now, all she needs is plenty of debate training.  
    Game, set, match.  Say hello to President McCain.  The DNC is so screwed.  

    Bold (5.00 / 3) (#54)
    by Athena on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:09:33 AM EST
    DNC screwed itself.  What did it not understand about ignoring the largest demographic in the U.S. - women?

    Bold.  A real wild card that breaks through the Obama-worship in the media.

    Disagreement over abortion will not keep many Hillary voters from rewarding the GOP for this pick.

    Brilliant move.


    wrong (5.00 / 0) (#71)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:11:50 AM EST
    the pro-life thing is a deal-breaker

    I'm not sure of that at all. (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by Landulph on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:20:04 AM EST
    There was plenty of anecdotal and polling evidence in the primaries that Republican (and presumably pro-life) women were crossing over to support Clinton. There is no logical reason why it could not work the other way round.

    Just one vote per person (5.00 / 2) (#136)
    by JavaCityPal on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:22:42 AM EST
    and yours was already being cast for Obama. Not a deal breaker for those who are still looking for a ticket they can support. We're OLD, remember.

    For you and some others (5.00 / 2) (#145)
    by Brookhaven on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:23:35 AM EST
    But, it's not a deal breaker for many disaffected Clinton women and men because it's a red herring scare tactic used to scare people into not voting for McCain and we all know the deal here.

    I'm not voting for McCain but that argument is weak tea because abortion rights have been weakened in the past decade and are one vote (Kennedy's) from being overturned but abortion will not be outlawed as each state will override that.  But, imo, Roe will not be overturned.  


    erm. red herring? (none / 0) (#217)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:38:38 AM EST
    how so? I think you lack understanding of the issue.

    The other thing is that the "maverick" label is out the window.

    McCain belongs to his GOP masters. Mccain was NOT the one creating the party platform. One of those who was creating the platform actually said that he was sure that McCain would "come around" on drilling in AnWR.


    LOL! Totally clueless (4.50 / 6) (#119)
    by goldberry on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:19:41 AM EST
    So sorry, coigue.  The election is already over with the selection of Palin today.  McCain had to pay his dues to his party but he's never been a neo-con Bushie Republican.  Palin represents a fresh start for the party. Her pro-life stance is not my cup of tea but if they play this right, McCain and Palin can show that pro-life can coexist with those of us who want to make abortion safe, legal and rare.  
    She's been tough on the oil industry as well.  She's a brilliant choice.  This ticket is all but unbeatable.  Save your breath for Obama.  He is so 10 minutes ago.  His campaign is already old.  The DNC walked right into this with its eyes open.  I'm not rewarding stupidity. I'm sticking to downticket Dems.  Leave Obama/Biden to the history books.  McCain/Palin is the winning ticket.  

    Did someone just poke Nancy (5.00 / 3) (#139)
    by Grace on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:23:06 AM EST
    and Howard with a stick?  

    This is a very bold choice.  


    a sharp stick (5.00 / 3) (#167)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:26:40 AM EST
    Game, Set, Match (5.00 / 1) (#204)
    by RalphB on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:33:53 AM EST
    we are in agreement.  Seems to be an inspired and inspiring choice.

    On top of that..... (5.00 / 1) (#229)
    by Jeannie on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:50:45 AM EST
    when Obama loses, in 2012 it sets up two women as the national candidates for the parties - someone who could perhaps beat Hillary - younger, VP experience, etc.

    Absolutely mistaken (2.00 / 1) (#138)
    by elonepb on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:23:04 AM EST
    McCain just waved the white flag and handed the entire election to Obama.

    McSame has been trying to sleeze the Hillary vote for weeks now. This was a totally stupid move by him.

    Smart women are NOT going to be fooled by this obvious pander to their vote.


    Republican women will be happy with this (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by ruffian on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:25:41 AM EST
    and may vote instead of staying home. That is the danger.  I'm not worried about McCain getting many Hillary voters with this.

    I think the comments in this thread (5.00 / 0) (#190)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:31:17 AM EST
    say that you possibly should be worried about Dem women.

    yep (none / 0) (#96)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:16:00 AM EST
    I said in another thread.  it gets my vote for Obama  and loses the election.

    I had really thought he'd talk (none / 0) (#13)
    by andgarden on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:02:33 AM EST
    Kay Bailey Hutchison into it.

    Better choice in my opinion. (5.00 / 0) (#55)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:09:55 AM EST
    Fresheness (5.00 / 2) (#66)
    by mmc9431 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:11:13 AM EST
    I don't think KBH would add the freshness or spark that Palin can add. Her story will help him with evangelicals, fiscal conservatives and independants that see this as a break from the stranglehold the neocon's and fundamentalists have had on the party.

    I can't wait until a couple of weeks to see where this all shakes out in the polls.


    Saw Hutchison on TV (none / 0) (#127)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:20:25 AM EST
    last night and she did not look well to me-- face was pale, tired, a little puffy, and it looked like she was wearing a bad wig.  I know NOTHING about it, but she may possibly have health issues.

    I thought she would have been a great choice for McCain, too, but the younger, more vital Palin, and especially as a governor rather than another senator, is a brilliant pick, IMHO.


    Brilliant? I'm not so sure. (none / 0) (#151)
    by andgarden on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:24:26 AM EST
    We'll see how she comes off to the world.

    She wants to be gov. of Tx. (none / 0) (#179)
    by zfran on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:28:59 AM EST
    and, she is a throw-back to Bush. Personally, I can't stand her, but that's relatively unimportant.

    The two tickets are the reversal of each other (none / 0) (#16)
    by Saul on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:03:05 AM EST
    Obama with very little experience picks washington insider with 35 years of experience

    McCain with 25 years experience picks governor with very little experience

    It a roll of a dice that will work or fail

    Its all on how she presents herself.

    The fact that there is very litle time to really get to know her is in her favor.  

    this woman's interesting... (5.00 / 4) (#62)
    by kredwyn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:10:30 AM EST
    from what I'm reading, she's taken on some shady incumbent types and come out on top. And it looks like she's thumbed her nose at the Murkowski admin quite a few times.

    she's a fighter...


    One consequence of the (5.00 / 3) (#105)
    by frankly0 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:16:41 AM EST
    inexperience/experience issue is that it's going to be virtually impossible for the Democrats to get any traction out of any failure Palin might have on the experience question when compared to Biden.

    How can they make any kind of deal out of her inexperience when they have the exact same issue with regard to Obama himself? All such criticism comes right back to bite them.

    McCain can at least buffer himself from her inexperience issue by casting her as an understudy.


    because she has tons *less* (none / 0) (#159)
    by A DC Wonk on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:25:08 AM EST
    experience than Obama.  Two years ago she was mayor of a small town -- which was, at that point, her highest office.

    She don't know blip about foreign policy.

    I can see HRC as commander in chief, going toe-to-toe with generals in the Pentagon.  It's quite a bit harder to see that with Palin.


    I wouldn't go there. (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by chel2551 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:29:09 AM EST
    She don't know blip about foreign policy.

    People question how much Obama knows.


    Not good at (5.00 / 3) (#193)
    by frankly0 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:31:32 AM EST
    being objective are you?

    Look, what level of experience does Obama have in foreign policy? He was in the Senate for only two years before he started running for President. And Palin was at least a Governor -- and a very popular one at that -- with executive experience.

    And of course the most basic issue is that Obama is the Presidential candidate, not an understudy. There is absolutely no question but that we will be relying on Obama and his inexperience immediately as he takes office. No one expects that that will be true of the VP.

    All I can say is that Democrats will find it impossible to make a big deal out of Palin's inexperience without it biting them right back.


    And here's another way to think about it (5.00 / 1) (#227)
    by frankly0 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:44:42 AM EST
    if Palin had to take over the Presidency after, say, two years, she would already have those years as VP under her belt -- likely the most directly relevant experience she could have for the Presidency.

    Obama had only two years in the Senate before he ran for President.

    How would Palin be less well prepared at that stage than Obama was when he started the full time job of running for President?

    And of course the problem is again that we are certainly going to be relying on Obama from Day One if he is elected. It's highly unlikely we will be relying on Palin at all in the first four years.


    I don't think Romney would have (none / 0) (#22)
    by dk on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:04:31 AM EST
    worked.  Though they disagree on issues, the media would have treated Romney the same way they treated Kerry...i.e. elitist flip-flopper.

    With the difference (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Landulph on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:06:59 AM EST
    that Romney really IS an elitist flip-flopper, so they wouldn't even have to lie! </snark>

    True that. (none / 0) (#52)
    by dk on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:09:17 AM EST
    Well, about Romney at least.  Kerry...well, I do think he is kind of elitist (most recent example is the "vote Obama because he's black" comment), but the flip-flopper stuff was definitely not fair.

    Romney would have been failure for McCain (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by stefystef on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:12:54 AM EST
    The Mormon thing turned off many Republicans.  His elitist attitude and that New England snobbery would have turned off  the rest.

    I don't know this Palin woman, but she is the governor of Alaska and I have to give respect to her.

    This tells you one thing- the Republicans aren't giving up with out a fight.  The surrogates at the announcement rally are already going after Obama and Biden.

    The gloves come off.


    The Christian Cons told McCain No Romney (none / 0) (#74)
    by rottodamn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:12:05 AM EST
    They were adamant about it that is how I knew it would not be Romney. The CCs are tepidly backing McCain and they need to feel they still have a say. No way he pisses off that base.

    The Christian Cons are going to be pissed... (none / 0) (#92)
    by Southsider on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:14:53 AM EST
    ...when they find out where Palin stands on gay rights.  Not where they want their candidates to be.  I guess it'll come down to what they care about more: abortions or homosexuals.  

    abortion will win the day (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by bjorn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:17:40 AM EST
    I would not count on that. (none / 0) (#130)
    by masslib on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:21:12 AM EST
    CCs still have the courts and referendums (none / 0) (#158)
    by rottodamn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:25:05 AM EST
    to deal with gay issues. Abortion is their bread and butter just judge by the world's largest sign linking the DNC to abortion. It is what they are known for. heh!

    I would have thought the investigation (none / 0) (#33)
    by musicsleuth on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:06:08 AM EST
    would have hurt her chances. http://community.adn.com/adn/node/127456

    I heard they were struggling to get enough (none / 0) (#56)
    by JoeA on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:09:59 AM EST
    people to fill the venue (what around 12,000 capacity,  vs 3,000 being the largest crowd McCain has had so far).

    What are the optics like?  I take it they have managed to avoid another Lime Green Jello disaster?


    Media covering for her (none / 0) (#58)
    by waldenpond on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:10:10 AM EST
    CNN and MSNBC covering for her right now.  Who knows if it will continue... but CNN and MSNBC are saying, that she fired the person who made the phone calls to fire the trooper, but it won't matter if true as she was protecting her sister that was being beaten.

    So far, CNN, MSNBC and Fox very positive.


    But if they go hard on that story (5.00 / 3) (#67)
    by dk on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:11:22 AM EST
    won't they also have to go hard on the Joe Biden son lobbyist influence angle?  I mean, those in glass houses and all.  I see it as a wash.

    not the same (none / 0) (#170)
    by A DC Wonk on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:27:02 AM EST
    Biden's son is an adult, he does his own stuff.  Biden didn't do it.

    Palin, otoh, is herself involved.


    The VP Debate will be interesting. (none / 0) (#45)
    by JoeA on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:08:14 AM EST
    GOP reactions from MSNBC,  not sure these guys got their talking points through in time.

    Joe Scarborough

        I can't imagine a woman that's been a governor for a year and a half, but to debate Joe Biden on GEorgia, a remerging Russia, an emerging China and India, on the Middle East, my God, how does she do that?

    Pat Buchanan


    Biggest political gamble I believe just about in American political history...that is not hyberbole.  I can think of no choice of VP that approaches this.

    Joe's comment is totally insulting to (5.00 / 2) (#84)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:13:26 AM EST
    women, frankly.

    I agree. (5.00 / 3) (#211)
    by Joan in VA on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:36:21 AM EST
    Sounds like he thinks she can't possibly comprehend such complex topics.

    I'll assume you meant Scarborough. (none / 0) (#110)
    by JoeA on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:18:13 AM EST
    I guess it depends on the tone of the remark.  I could read that back equally with man inserted for woman and it would make sense.  I don't see it as an emphasis on woman,  but the idea that she will be debating an old Foreign Policy hand such as Biden on issues like Georgia, Russia, Iraq etc from a perspective of being someone who has zero foreign policy or national experience, and has been governer of Alaska for 18 months.

    I'm just not sure I see the sexism there.


    Yep. Scarbourough. (none / 0) (#134)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:22:20 AM EST
    Obama is running very effectively against McCain and is able to counter his foreign policy experience just fine.

    If this Palin person is actually a smart intellectually curious, educated  and dynamic person she should be quite effective at debating Biden.


    Actually Dan Quayle comes to mind. (none / 0) (#68)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:11:22 AM EST
    Um, yah, but Obama (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by dk on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:16:08 AM EST
    was a "community organizer" and part-time state legislator who was given an international relations subcommittee to chair but never bother chairing it, and he is debating McCain.

    I'm not saying that doesn't mean that Obama can't still win such a debate, but I am saying I'd be careful about making those kinds of arguments in connection with Palin.  


    Obama's ideas are correct (none / 0) (#141)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:23:11 AM EST
    McCains are not. That gives him an edge.

    That was really (none / 0) (#177)
    by Landulph on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:28:10 AM EST
    more a shot-in-the-foot than a crapshoot, tho! If Dukakis hadn't been so lame, Mr. Potatoe Head might have cost Poppy the election.

    He's not chasing the loss (none / 0) (#46)
    by Redshoes on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:08:14 AM EST
    unless she seriously missteps between now and November she's a very attractive VP selection.  

    The talking heads are raising the "ethics" abuse of power issue but I think they'll be able to get past that.  Seems the bad brother-in-law was "beating" her sister.  

    The challenge for this life-long Democrat has been that I just haven't warmed to our candidate.  Still voting for the Dems but unlike virtually all prior elections don't have the heart or energy to debate those on the fence, if they want to vote for this ticket part of me understands.  

    And as I have said a long, long time ago call the voters all kinds of names but they want someone they like in the White House, she seems very approachable and like you or me.  Just checked the wikipedia (I know absolutely nothing about her) and her bio has lots of really nice soccer mom touches.

    But isn't she a vandal who lived in Moscow? (none / 0) (#48)
    by EL seattle on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:08:41 AM EST
    Oh... she went to the University of Idaho.  I guess that explains everything.

    Obama NEEDS HIllary more than ever (none / 0) (#64)
    by befuddledvoter on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:11:03 AM EST
    to explain that women are not fungibles.  Voting for Palin is not like voting for Hillary.  Only Hillary Clinton can do this. Obama needs to shut his mouth on the issue.

    Obama needs to learn to speak for himself. (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by masslib on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:13:07 AM EST
    ON this issue (none / 0) (#120)
    by befuddledvoter on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:19:45 AM EST
    he cannot.

    On THIS issue, he (none / 0) (#234)
    by JavaCityPal on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:56:11 AM EST
    had better find a way to speak for himself. He caused it.

    If Hillary allows herself (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by theybannedmeinboston on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:26:00 AM EST
    to be used to tank another woman after what was done to Hillary herself, Hillary will never get my vote again. I don't think I'm alone.

    All about gender for you, eh? (none / 0) (#181)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:29:18 AM EST
    Personally, I prefer policies that HELP my gender.

    Go Hillary, kick Palin's ass!


    Overall, (none / 0) (#98)
    by Lil on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:16:00 AM EST
    McCain has done a great job considering he is wrong on just about everything, and he is running against a phenomenon.  

    I've often worried that the Republican party would be the first to get a woman or black in there first, but only because the Democratic party did all the heavy lifting. That would piss me off to no end.

    Having said that, I'm feeling pretty good about Dems today. The wind may be at our backs; I mean come on, the press continues to fall over itself in love with Obama, and I believe if you watch the media, you can tell who is winning.

    I'd be willing to bet that the press will (5.00 / 1) (#224)
    by Grace on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:42:35 AM EST
    fall out of love with Obama now that Palin is on the scene.  

    She's fresh, she's new.  They haven't written a zillion stories about her yet.  

    Next week it will be "Obama who?"  


    Game changer (none / 0) (#143)
    by zvs888 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:23:25 AM EST
    I'm just wondering how it changes the situation in the swing states.

    Yes it broadly changes the national game (which affects state trends) in terms of conservatives being excited.

    But I think its somewhat of a wash in terms of her impact in the key swing states compared to Mitt Romney.  She's probably not as good a pick as him in Michigan and Colorado while being a better pick for Ohio and Pennsylvania.

    So we'll have to see where this goes.  The biggest advantage is that he gets all the media coverage as well as the Hillary supporters who were just voting for her not really caring what Palin's policies are.

    Desperate? (none / 0) (#162)
    by CoralGables on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:25:52 AM EST
    Two years ago she was Mayor of tiny Wasilla, Alaska...population 6715.

    I would call this a Hail Mary.

    Same thing with Obama (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by Saul on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:30:07 AM EST
    Barely 2 years as U.S. Senator then shot for the presidency

    4 years ago Obama was a part time state senator. (5.00 / 2) (#192)
    by tigercourse on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:31:31 AM EST
    So much barely concealed glee here (none / 0) (#197)
    by Jim J on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:31:59 AM EST

    180 degress from Clinton (none / 0) (#208)
    by darryl on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:35:14 AM EST
    in ideology and everything Clinton stands for from a policy perspective.  I'm disappointed to see that so much of the support for Clinton seems to have been from gender identity politics and that all the talk of experience and "true progressives" takes a back seat to "look! a woman!"

    I'm happy for her and the country that the Republicans have a woman on the ticket, but how on earth could any one who every identified with the Democratic agenda support her?

    (First comment here.  Hi!)

    Resentment by Hilary supporters Salt in a wound (none / 0) (#218)
    by Saul on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:39:02 AM EST
    if anything.  This will just help keep many of Hilary supporters maybe not to vote for McCain but to stay home.  

    I really don't understand you guys (none / 0) (#232)
    by TomStewart on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 10:51:34 AM EST
    I'm voting for Obama simply because i don't want John McCain picking the next SCOTUS. Perspnally, IO think he'll do a decent job, a heck of a lot better than McCain will do. And don't tell me that fig leaf crap 'I'm not voting for president, I'll just leave it blank'. sorry, that's a vote for McCain, that's a vote for George Bush and his policies of the last eight years. Hillary and Bill are voting for Obama because they have enough vision to see the horror of the alternative.

    As to McCain's for VP. Palin? Weak. Mayor of a tiny town, Gov of Alaska for less than two years? And a fairly serious scandal dogging her to boot (check out TPM for details, it's one that has legs).

    This woman doesn't have the chops to be President, but she will look nice next to the aging and increasingly irritable McCain. It's a blatant move to attract angry Hilliary voters, and it's an insult! 'So ya like women do ya? Here ya go, here's a woman, now vote for me!' Anti-Choice, no real experience, hard right wing...she the Dan Quail of 2008. Wait until Joe Biden gets ahold of her. Brrrr.

    This is a serious time, this is a serious election. Time to stand up and vote your country, not your anger.

    Biden debate (none / 0) (#235)
    by pixpixpix on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:00:40 AM EST
    It's easy to see Biden way out-debating Sarah Palin on foreign policy issues, but when the debate turns to conservative cause issues, evangelical litmus tests, so-called family values, it'll be different. She might make a good impression on the fundamentalist crowd just by repeating standard dog whistles.

    Biden needs to think carefully how to make headway against that, even though he's a lifelong Catholic.

    Just a thought! (none / 0) (#237)
    by mmc9431 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 11:08:24 AM EST
    Just to throw a little gas on the fire! Now that it's apparent they're going to need Hilary to counter Palin (I don't really think McCaskill or Sebeleus(?) can do it) maybe they'll find a way of clearing up her campaign debt! She could charge them a fee for each shot she takes. (snark)