McCain May Postpone Republican Convention

Politico reports John McCain may postpone the Republican National Convention. Daily Kos says it's a good idea.

Update: Five questions Gov. Sarah Palin needs to get ready to answer, from her financial disclosures to her passport.

Update: Marcy weighs in on Palin. Humorist Mad Kane writes a limmerick, Sarah Who?

< 'Preemptive' Arrests of Protesters in Twin Cities | TrooperGate Dogs Gov. Sarah Palin >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Probably a smart move (5.00 / 0) (#2)
    by flyerhawk on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 08:53:07 PM EST
    the last thing he can afford is to be throwing a party while Louisiana is under water again.

    Yep (3.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 08:54:26 PM EST
    and this was one of the points I was making about our convention. The whole stadium thing sent a very bad message to the voters.

    Is there anything (4.00 / 4) (#7)
    by flyerhawk on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:00:57 PM EST
    that occurs this year that is not bad for Obama and good for McCain, in your eyes? the absolutely worst thing that can happen for McCain would be another hurricane to hit New Orleans. Oh and I have absolutely no idea how this comment is relevant to mine. What does the Democratic Convention have to do with the Republican Convention possibly happening during a hurricane? Yes, I know. You just call them like you see them. They just happen to ALWAYS be negative towards Obama. Always.

    No (3.00 / 2) (#12)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:05:05 PM EST
    I just call them as I see them. Do you think it was a great idea to spent extra millions on a stadium when you are trying to sell the idea that the country is suffering? I don't. I think it's counterproductive.

    It's about the message that it send out not whether there's a hurricane or not.

    And frankly, if the response is better than Katrina how does that hurt McCain? What if everybody is successfully evacuated? They'll take all the credit and say that Katrina was Blanco's fault. Just you watch.


    I'm guessing (5.00 / 0) (#29)
    by flyerhawk on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:21:47 PM EST
    you didn't even bother to read my comment did you? Fine you though the convention was a bad idea and I'm sure you thought Obama's speech was terrible. Are you rooting for a catastrophe to hit just because you think it will hurt Obama?

    Actually (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:38:14 PM EST
    I thought his speech was good. I just think that his campaign has been abysmal. They are completely falling into the trap McCain has set for them with their reaction to Palin. If you don't want to see it then that's your choice.

    The McCain campaign has been clever. (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by Grace on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:44:25 PM EST
    The Obama campaign did better in the primaries.  I think they are over their heads in the GE.  They are falling into a trap but they created the trap themselves.  

    McCain is proving to be much smarter than I thought he was.  


    The Obama (5.00 / 2) (#76)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:47:02 PM EST
    campaign was never that good in the primaries. They targeted enough of a demographic to get them through and get the party elite on board but never really expanded past that.

    Obama campagin was very good (none / 0) (#124)
    by Cream City on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:24:58 PM EST
    for six weeks.  Not so good since February 20.

    That's all there to see on Eddie's fave realclearpolitics.com site, too.  But I don't have the rose-colored glasses that turn the states into different colors that he sees.  Although how anyone can miss the numbers on the EC map that show the narrowest of margins, I dunno.  Maybe it's not the glasses.  Maybe it's what's in the glass.:-)


    Misconceptions (none / 0) (#178)
    by Ellis on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 02:57:49 AM EST
    You write that the Obama campaign was good for six weeks and not good after February 20.

    Try looking at it a different way. After Iowa, and to a lesser extent New Hampshire, how many surprises were there? Who won in a state by coming from behind and pulling ahead?

    The truth is the appearance of strength or weakness (for both candidates) was an artifact of chance. Hillary wasn't weaker when Obama had his long string of victories. Nor was Obama weaker when he lost more than he won at the end.

    Obama was able to make some races closer than they had been, but if the order of primaries had been juggled (after New Hampshire) the outcomes would in all likelihood have been the same.

    The other thing that was notable about the contests was how lopsided so many of them were. However, winning a primary by a huge margin over an opponent says nothing about the outcome in that state in the general election.

    Pundits and HRC supporters went on and on about Hillary winning the "big" states. But beating Obama in California, New York, Texas, or Pennsylvania isn't evidence that Hillary would win Texas in November or that Obama would lose the other states.

    There's been an incredible amount of unsophisticated "analysis" thrown around. The order of victories in this case had virtually nothing to do with momentum or campaign competence. Hillary would have won in West Virginia no matter when the primary had been held. She would have lost in South Carolina on January 26 or March 26 or June 26.

    How did Obama's campaign do? It won. How did Clinton's do? Despite huge advantages starting out, it lost.

    At this point, Obama is ahead of McCain. Since I have no confidence in the wisdom of American voters, I'm fully prepared for McCain to win in November. But the fact that Obama has remained consistently ahead, despite the irresponsibility of the MSM, and the significant element of racism in this country leads me to believe that the Obama campaign is doing a reasonably good job.

    While I think Obama (or HRC) should beat McCain by 25-30 points, I'll be happy if Obama beats McCain by a single electoral vote. The important thing is getting the Republicans out of power before there is nothing left to save.


    Abysmal...? (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by EddieInCA on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:49:27 PM EST
    Considering that in pretty much every poll, he's comfortably ahead in the electoral college...


    ...considering that McCain is being forced to defend states like North Carolina, Virginia, Montana, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico...

    ...and considering that Obama is up 8 points in the latest Gallup tracking poll...

    ...and considering that Obama's speech Thursday night was watched by more Americans than watched the Academy Awards, the American Idol Finale, and the Bejing Olympics...

    ...and considering that Obama's campaign is out fundraising McCain by historic proportions...

    ...and considering that Obama yesterday jumped to his biggest lead since early July in the Rassmussen tracking poll...

    ...and since the early polling suggests that the Palin picks HURTS McCain  http://tinyurl.com/BloombergPoll ...

    ... I really wonder that a good campaign looks like to you.


    Um (4.00 / 2) (#89)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:55:02 PM EST
    he was losing the ec. Do you have new information?

    Obama is not meeting his fundraising goals.

    Really, didn't you expect him to get a convention bump? Most do but we'll have to see where everything is next week.

    The fact that the GOP brand is so tarnished that Obama should have a double digit lead and 8 is the most he's ever gotten? He's had that lead before and lost it.

    40 million people watched the speech? 60 million plus voted for Kerry in 2004. Are those good numbers? What you are saying just sounds like spin.


    You're just wrong... (5.00 / 2) (#101)
    by EddieInCA on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:03:38 PM EST




    There's four.  See for yourself.

    Please point me towards one respected polling company which shows McCain beating Obama in the electoral college.



    Eddie- sorry to rain on your parade (none / 0) (#110)
    by kenosharick on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:12:48 PM EST
    but this thing is a dead heat. National polls mean NOTHING!!! As for the EC,yes Obama is ahead, but in many of these states his lead is either within the MOE or barely out of it. I wouldn't start measuring for drapes in the Oval office yet.

    Um.. These are state polls... (none / 0) (#114)
    by EddieInCA on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:16:28 PM EST
    ...not national polls.

    I can choose to believe you, or every single pollster out there.

    I'll take my chances with facts as they stand now.

    The challenge stands: Find me one reputable pollster that has any poll which shows Obama behind in the Electoral College.


    good luck with that- (none / 0) (#188)
    by kenosharick on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 10:44:22 PM EST
    I am SURE Obama will sweep all those states where he has a 1,2,3,or 4 point lead. Those early leads worked very well for Presidents Dukakis and Kerry.

    BTW- check out Real Clear Politics (none / 0) (#189)
    by kenosharick on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 10:57:58 PM EST
    Today's CNN poll has it 49-48 Obama.The "runaway Obama" states of Colorado&New Hamp. tied, McCain ahead in Nevada and Ohio, and Obama with a 5 pt or less lead in Penn., Mich., and Iowa. They should be worried, not planning the victory parties. Also- the electoral map has 228 for Obama, 185 for McCain, and 125 as toss up. Hardly the walk in the park you seem to be expecting. It will be close- just as I said in my first comment!

    228 (none / 0) (#119)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:23:08 PM EST
    electoral votes for Obama is winning? Yes, he has more than McCain but theres 125 toss up votes in the EC right now. He's losing some of the battleground states like OH and has been losing ground in CO and has lost NV.

    He has ZERO margin of error. If you call the best case scenario is that he has 273 electoral votes great you are living on planet 9 in outer space. He has lost 75 EV's recently hasn't he? His trend has generall been down until the convention right? Remember Dukakis? He had a 17 pt lead going out of the convention.

    It is a very close race right now and will probably continue that way. Whomever wins in Nov. will eke by. If the hubris continues from the Obama campaign he will lose.


    Maybe this is one of the commenters (none / 0) (#128)
    by Cream City on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:26:50 PM EST
    who thought that as long as Obama was ahead in pledged delegates, that's all it took.  I mean, gosh, he's ahead in EC delegates on the pretty map, too.

    Who wants to tell 'em it takes 270?  So 273 is only one state away from. . . .


    What does all this Obama stuff... (none / 0) (#179)
    by Thanin on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 04:59:55 AM EST
    have to do with the OP of the republican convention and the hurricane?

    So you'd rather be.. (none / 0) (#167)
    by EddieInCA on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:28:22 PM EST
    ...in McCain's position?

    Is that your position - that it's better to be McCain and be BEHIND in all the polls?


    The media (none / 0) (#181)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 06:37:47 AM EST
    that the McCain campaign has been getting from the Palin pick? Yeah, I would rather be his campaign right now.

    Maybe (none / 0) (#8)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:00:58 PM EST
    even Bill Clinton said to let the Republicans "have their party" when Bush43 won in 2004 and a big fuss (and rightly so) was made about the extravagant balls and parties for the 2nd Bush inauguration.

    It reminds me of the time that they tried to rush Halle Berry off stage when she became the first AA woman to win an Oscar for Best Actress.

    I don't support Obama but let him have his day.  The AA's have definitely waited for one of their own to go all the way.  The real fireworks will come as the GE season gets underway, anyway.


    Well (none / 0) (#13)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:08:03 PM EST
    I'm mostly talking about how the democratic base was enraged about Bush using the war and the bodies of soldiers coming back from Iraq to win the election and then the Bushies having the bash. The soldiers were sooo important until they weren't was the message the Bush campaign put out. Remember FDR had a chicken salad inaugural during WW II.

    You must admit (2.00 / 0) (#150)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:56:40 PM EST
    that listening to Obama talk about how he understands and knows the plight of the middle class worker and then puts on that over-the-top day at Invesco (this is just the nomination phase, for heaven sake), his decadence and appearance of royalty makes it tough to believe in his sincerity.

    'Over The Top Day' At Invesco (5.00 / 0) (#160)
    by daring grace on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:09:38 PM EST
    Did exactly what it was supposed to do:

    40 million watching on tv, the most for any political convention speech.

    85 thousand in person, including many signed up to work GOTV and registration from now till Election Day in Colorado.

    And Gallup Says:

    "Among all those surveyed, 35% call Obama's speech at Invesco Field at Mile High Stadium Thursday night excellent, 23% good, 15% "just OK," 3% poor and 4% "terrible." Sixteen percent say they didn't see it and 14% have no opinion. That's higher than the ratings for acceptance speeches by President Bush and Democrat John Kerry in 2004, by Bush and Democrat Al Gore in 2000 and by Republican Bob Dole in 1996.

    "Asked about the Democratic convention's impact, 43% say it makes them more likely to vote for Obama, 29% less likely. Nineteen percent say it won't make a difference.


    Nope (1.00 / 0) (#156)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:02:55 PM EST
    I didn't watch the Fiasco @ Invesco.  So if Obama came off as middle-class and understands that I am choking on his vote on the Cheney energy policy well that's for the viewing audience to discern.

    I knows how I am voting Java.


    only to you (none / 0) (#172)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 01:15:30 AM EST
    It was a huge hit in Denver -- exceptional on all levels, from community enthusiasm and spirit to the political. The energy was amazing. Sorry you missed it. And your comment is off topic.

    Sorry (none / 0) (#182)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 06:44:28 AM EST
    I'm glad it was a hit in Denver.

    It's a tough call (none / 0) (#20)
    by Redshoes on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:14:49 PM EST
    Hanna's bring up the rear.  Plus the logistics etc.  I think it would be fine to hold the convention but with sensitivities to the communities affected.

    It's (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 08:53:34 PM EST
    a win/win for mccain i would imagine. he would get to show that he's "not like bush" and also get to avoid having cheney and perhaps bush speak at the convention.

    Why oh why (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:14:13 PM EST
    am I not surprised. I don't know why Dems continue to underestimate McCain.

    wow golly! a telethon! (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by s5 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:16:51 PM EST
    That's the Republican mindset for you. Instead of investing in infrastructure to prevent disasters and help their citizens, they believe in gimmicks and short-term optional charities to duct tape over serious disasters.

    On the flip (5.00 / 0) (#26)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:18:44 PM EST
    it would have behooved him to do that back in 2005 when Katrina hit.

    I thought Dems really blew that (5.00 / 0) (#133)
    by Cream City on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:29:47 PM EST
    as Katrina is the example that still resonates everywhere as the reason for change.  There still is not much hope there.  Even before this awful weather forecast.

    I kept watching and waiting for Dems to say something about the Katrina anniversary.  But the attention was to another anniversary.  And when you think through why one and not the other, it's not a nice answer.  I begin to give up on libruls.


    Clinton didn't blow it (none / 0) (#159)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:09:01 PM EST
    i saved her interview with Matt Lauer from the Today show right after it happened.  She eviscerated the Bush administration for his dismantling of FEMA and how "this is not a game, we are dealing with people's lives and well-being".

    I remember being SO proud of her with her remarks.  


    I meant at the convention (none / 0) (#170)
    by Cream City on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 12:28:22 AM EST
    but yes.  And Gore was great at the Katrina site.

    Now looky here (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:06:57 PM EST
    Katrina happened on BUSH's watch, not Obama.  I didn't see their republican senator down there doing anything either, was probably too busy getting his prostitutes out of the cathouses so they wouldn't drown.

    Landreiu or whatever her name was too busy "thanking politicians everywhere" for their support and blah blah blah.  Luckily Anderson Cooper called her Democratic a55 out and asked her HOW could she be thanking fellow politicians when everything was a colossal clusterf*ck.

    Last time I checked Obama represented ILLINOIS.

    I lay ALL of the Katrina debacle at Bush's feet.  Sure it didn't help that Nagin and Blanco were out of their league but a PRESIDENT should take the lead when the 25th largest city in the USA is under a meteorlogical attack, THAT was on the radar.



    Read: at the Dem convention (none / 0) (#171)
    by Cream City on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 12:30:25 AM EST
    Although that may have been run by Bush, too, for all I know.  We know so little now that the government has so much that it legally can do to us.

    Katrina was on Bush's watch, TX (none / 0) (#152)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:59:03 PM EST
    McCain had no more responsibility to respond than any other Senator at the time, except, of course the Senators from Louisiana and Alabama.

    False (none / 0) (#174)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 01:31:03 AM EST
    please don't spread falsehoods here.

    Obama's acceptance speech highlights Katrina failures by Bruce Alpert, The Times-Picayune
    Thursday August 28, 2008, 10:14 PM

    "We are more compassionate than a government that lets veterans sleep on our streets and families slide into poverty; that sits on its hands while a major American city drowns before our eyes," Obama said.

    I think that would be a great idea! (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Grace on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:26:56 PM EST
    Since I used to work in the convention business, I know a lot of vendors in the Twin Cities area would take a huge hit financially if they called the convention off.  

    Turning it into a "Service Convention" would turn it into a win/win for everybody.  


    What the Obama campaign better hope (5.00 / 2) (#91)
    by Grace on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:55:56 PM EST
    is that Palin doesn't head down there after the hurricane passes.  

    I can see her showing up in jeans and a hardhat and building a house in a day (while she takes care of her infant son).  It'll evoke that old "Pioneer spirit" and she'll look tougher than anyone else running.    


    I just wonder... (none / 0) (#180)
    by Thanin on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 05:06:25 AM EST
    how many cops she would try to get fired while down there.

    McCain (4.50 / 2) (#11)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:03:50 PM EST
    can be NOT like Bush by calling for an immediate withdrawal of troops, rebuking FISA, ending No Child Left Behind, going pro-choice and pitching in when the damage is done wherever the hurricane strikes.

    I thought I would be able to stay away from TL but I can't.  I will not vote for McCain or Obama.  But will make a pointed observation or counter a negative when I see it, without it being insulting.


    Oh (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:11:16 PM EST
    I know but it's all about perception. On the issues, McCain is wrong. But when the heck is the general election going to get to issues? Mostly it seems it's been about everything but. When the issues are mentioned it's only in vaguarities.

    thanks, tx politico (none / 0) (#173)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 01:16:33 AM EST
    I enjoy many of your comments.

    There is no "if" it hits (none / 0) (#148)
    by Amiss on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:49:16 PM EST
    I live in the Florida Panhandle and we are already receiving rogue bands from Gustav, 30 mph wind gusts, we lost power earlier from them and this is just a precourser. Last week we got between 12 and 18 inches of rain in a 12 hr period from Faye, and Hannah is just a few days behind Gustav if the NWS predictions are correct. These storms could, together make Katrina look tame. However everyone seems to be pro-active instead of re-active this time.

    Carma! (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by flashman on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 08:53:36 PM EST
    Never post on a 3-beer night!

    K... (none / 0) (#66)
    by Edger on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:42:25 PM EST
    uh...try again... (none / 0) (#88)
    by kredwyn on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:54:28 PM EST

    Let's hope (5.00 / 4) (#6)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 08:56:42 PM EST
    that ALL partisanship takes a HUGE back seat right now and let's focus on getting our fellow Americans the he11 out of harm's way.

    I say all bloggers, left, right and middle put aside the election and use their forums as clearing houses of information and connecting evacuees with the right type of first responder-type services.  

    We do NOT need to see the citizens of Louisiana suffer as they did with Hurricane Katrina.

    That's what I heard McCain was (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Grace on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:12:03 PM EST
    thinking about doing:  Turning the convention into some sort of a "hurricane support" thing to organize services and support for after the hurricane passes.  

    I remember reading somewhere (none / 0) (#56)
    by zfran on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:38:45 PM EST
    that back during Katrina it was then Obama met Oprah as they were both heading to NO to help. Does anyone else remember hearing that?

    Both Clintons (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:12:06 PM EST
    and Obama were together in Houston at one of the evacuation centers with Bush41 and Barbara.  The news showed everyone flocking to the Clintons asking them to help them out....leaving Bush41 kinda standing on his own.

    Of course Obama was right there with the Clintons showing a united front of Democratic response.

    And as I recall, NO one was really crying.  Not even Obama.  But I digress.


    It would be a pretty amazing idea for (none / 0) (#122)
    by frankly0 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:24:21 PM EST
    McCain to turn his convention into a "Service Convention".

    It would turn so many Republican stereotypes on their head, for beginners. It would emphasize how different he was from Bush.

    And it would also emphasize how different he is from Obama, and his convention.

    Obama's convention and speech presented only too many handy signs of being a coronation and of expressing a basic narcissism.

    McCain's turning the convention into one serving others could not fit better into the most basic message that (as I recollect) he has declared he wants to communicate to the American people: that they should serve something larger than themselves  (as obviously he himself did in his captivity in N. Vietnam).

    It would be a pretty remarkable statement if he does choose to take this route.

    And as cunning as a fox.


    I can't belileve this is happening again. (5.00 / 0) (#14)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:10:28 PM EST

    They should just cancel it (5.00 / 0) (#18)
    by s5 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:14:05 PM EST
    And while they're at it, formally concede the election to Obama, instead of informally conceding it like they've done by picking John McCain and Sarah Palin as their nominees.

    Like Hillary said, "the Republicans should hold a press conference and apologize to the country and say they're just not going to run anyone for president." That can be their convention.

    So uncool (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:17:08 PM EST
    and so not helpful.  

    How insulting to the people of (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by zfran on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:21:01 PM EST
    this country and our constitution. Has what happened in this election so far not brought to light any of the vile insinuations and non-truths that happened. One party will win and one party will lose, whether by fair or unfair participation and/or voter intent. You may feel that it should be this dem do or die, but some aren't as convinced as you. Because you do not like or care for the republican side, let it be a fight to the finish and whoever it is, it is.

    *shrug* (4.00 / 2) (#32)
    by s5 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:24:54 PM EST
    It's McCain's right to drop out, and I agree with Hillary that it's the most ethical option for the Republican party. It would save them and their supporters a whole lot of money, too.

    The Constitution doesn't say a single thing about running a Democrat vs a Republican in every race, or anything about parties at all, for that matter. Who knows, maybe a different conservative party would be more worthy of a chance to compete than the Republican party, which at this point, is little more than an organized crime mob.

    Anyway, I'm sorry my impossible hypothetical offended you! I thought Hillary's quip was quite clever and dead-on at the time, and their cancellation of the convention reminded me of it.


    I didn't hear this quote from her. (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by zfran on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:33:09 PM EST
    Do you have a link? Secondly, the constitution guarantees our right to vote for the candidate of our choice. For a party, the dems, who chose to  not to be inclusive this year, the republican party, long before this announcement, has been. Argue against the beliefs of the party, argue against the stands and positions of the party, argue about things they've said, but to insult them by dismissing them as human beings is insulting. Just my opinion.  

    I quoted her exactly (none / 0) (#126)
    by s5 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:25:48 PM EST
    So you can drop "the Republicans should hold a press conference and apologize to the country and say they're just not going to run anyone for president" directly into Google, and even watch the Youtube video of her saying it.

    It was one of her best debate moments! (none / 0) (#155)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:02:22 PM EST
    Link Please??? (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by michitucky on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:38:19 PM EST
    Can't find this on Google...Please provide a link.

    Here ya go (none / 0) (#127)
    by s5 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:26:47 PM EST
    Because I'm nice!



    The framers of the Constitution (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by janarchy on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:39:28 PM EST
    planned on having an elected official running the country, not a king. Washington turned down the crown. I know that some people would like their candidate to just be given the keys to the White House right now (or better, last week) so everyone can bask in the glow of his Magnificent Presence, but last I checked this was still a Democracy (mostly).

    And considering how close the polls are, I would say at least 45% of the voting public would take umbrage at your suggestion.


    There are plenty of other candidates running (none / 0) (#132)
    by s5 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:29:15 PM EST
    It's not just Republicans vs Democrats. If McCain dropped out, there would be other choices. The Constitution doesn't guarantee a Democrat and a Republican on every ballot. Nor does it even guarantee that your preferred candidate will even be on the ballot, if that candidate chooses not to run.

    Well (none / 0) (#22)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:16:20 PM EST
    too bad it's not going to happen. Besides the polls are close at this point so why would they? Should we just not have run anyone in 2004 since a war was going on?

    Regarding those 5 questiions (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by zfran on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:16:12 PM EST
    you reference from Politico. Would a Kaine be asked if he can handle children and a job (even if it's vp), and would a Kaine be asked what and who's he stepped on to get to where he is? How naive and stupid do some think we, the electorate are?

    I know (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by americanincanada on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:21:04 PM EST
    those questions were insulting.

    But I am sure she will be redy for all the sexist crap. She's heard it before.


    I guess I shouldn't be so (5.00 / 5) (#34)
    by zfran on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:25:25 PM EST
    amazed that the sexist stuff is coming back, but now it's coming not only from mostly men, but from women as well. What is happening?

    Up is down and down is up (5.00 / 3) (#39)
    by americanincanada on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:27:58 PM EST
    Now the dems are the knuckledragging neanderthals.

    If I hadn't changed (none / 0) (#162)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:12:16 PM EST
    my registration I might almost be insulted.

    But since I am in indy now, flail away!


    No. (5.00 / 0) (#31)
    by Brillo on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:23:28 PM EST
    Then again, how many debate questions will she have to field about flag pins and whether she says the pledge of allegiance?  It's an ugly environment we live in sometimes.  

    She wears a flag brooch {grin} (none / 0) (#107)
    by nycstray on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:12:00 PM EST
    Thank You (5.00 / 8) (#36)
    by nell on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:25:52 PM EST
    I was enraged by Politico's incredibly arrogant list. In terms of the passport question, sure, I think we deserve to see her passport. But I remember distinctly during the primary when Obama's foreign policy credentials were being questioned and people wondered just how many stamps his passport showed, people were freaking out about that being such an awful and unfair question. I think she should release her passport, and I think Obama should have been forced to release his travels too. So why did the press never demand that from him? I wouldn't exactly say he was incredibly well known during the primary period. Yes, he was elected to the US Senate and Palin was elected to be the Governor of Alaska.

    As for the question of how she will manage her family, absolutely disgusting and ridiculous. I am not a Palin supporter in the slightest - she will NOT have my vote - but that question had me spitting nails. How DARE the press suggest that she is a bad mother because she dares to dream bigger than that? How DARE they??? Do we ever see anyone questioning whether Barack Obama is neglecting his children by having both he and Michelle on the road while the girls are cared for by their grandmother??? Of course not! He loves his kids and he also aspires to do something greater for this nation. But as soon as you get a woman into the mix, she is expected to stay home and bake cookies with her children.

    I tell you, if they actually start going down this road (which they have, already, on CNN and MSNBC), they will make women like me SPITTING mad. This has nothing to do with political ideology and everything to do with the fact that yet another woman is being belittled and taken less seriously and held to a different standard than her male counterparts. How can we ever have a female President if she is expected to stay at home with her kids all day???


    That's the frame (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:30:37 PM EST
    the GOP wants to trap the Dems with. And they are buying it, hook, line and sinker.  They will defend Palin fiercely and make the Dems look weak with respect to the treatment of Hillary.

    THEN you will have the GOP crowing about how THEY champion rights of women.  And it goes on and on and on.

    I call that nonsense.  They may crow about supporting a woman, but said woman and her party feel that A woman doesn't have the right to control her reproductive choices.

    Perception, perception.


    The passport question is stupid (5.00 / 3) (#63)
    by Cream City on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:42:04 PM EST
    unless AP and other news sources photoshopped the shots I saw of her visiting wounded troops overseas.  And I have read in several sources that she has been to Iraq.

    Since that was the first question of The Big Five, I figured were more wasting of my time.  Honestly, when will the grownups come back onto the blogs?

    I hope soon, or I'm going to have to read about Obama's birth certificate again, I guess.  Jeesh.


    She traveled to Kuwait and Germany... (5.00 / 0) (#92)
    by EddieInCA on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:56:32 PM EST
    ... to visit the Alaska National Guard Troops deployed.

    She had to get a new passport for that trip.

    Previously, she had been out of the country once:

    To Ireland.

    That's it.  Those are the only places in the world she's been.




    Did you even look at the link? (none / 0) (#134)
    by Cream City on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:31:25 PM EST
    See what it says.  Then understand what I said.

    I'd love to see the links... (none / 0) (#145)
    by EddieInCA on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:43:50 PM EST
    ...where it says she visited Iraq.

    Care to supply one?  

    Thanks in advance.


    Do your own homework (none / 0) (#153)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:59:36 PM EST
    Palin has been to Iraq as many times as Obama -- once. The difference is that Palin wasn't running for the vice-presidency at the time.



    No. She hasn't... (none / 0) (#161)
    by EddieInCA on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:10:33 PM EST
    She's been to Kuwait and Germany.

    And Ireland.

    She has not been to Iraq.

    Now it's up to you to back up your statement that she's been to Iraq, or apologize to the members of this board for lying to them.



    Passport (3.50 / 2) (#98)
    by chopper on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:00:04 PM EST
    I hope someone demands to see Obama's passport.  There are a lot of unanswered questions there.

    It's going to be a long two months, Nell. (none / 0) (#44)
    by Southsider on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:31:09 PM EST
    I'm still voting Obama.  My girlfriend is pretty much off the bus, however, and may now vote McCain/Palin (more likely stay home - hey, we live in Chicago so it ain't gonna matter either way).  I'm just praying this doesn't get any uglier on the sexism side of the ledger or else we're all going to be catapulted back into February-April of this year in terms of nasty feelings.  

    GAH! (5.00 / 3) (#83)
    by janarchy on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:49:46 PM EST
    Did anyone ever ask Robert F. Kennedy, father of eleven children a question like that? Was he a bad father because he was campaigning for President while his wife was pregnant with the last one (poor Rory who was born after her father was killed)?

    Has any male politician had his parenting skills questioned for working?


    Does Kaine (1.33 / 3) (#33)
    by flyerhawk on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:25:18 PM EST
    have a 4 month baby with down's syndrome?

    Obama (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:32:03 PM EST
    has 2 young children. Did anyone ask him about that? I'm willing to be it's a big NO.

    You know what (5.00 / 0) (#176)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 01:47:41 AM EST
    there are times that some of you really are pathetic. Barack Obama has a 6 year old and 10 year old child. Neither one of them is a new born child with Down's Syndrome. But who cares about honest comparisons when you want to find some sort of outrage.

    A True Comparison (none / 0) (#186)
    by daring grace on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 12:21:51 PM EST
    would be if Palin's husband does some significant duty as at home dad as Michelle Obama sometimes does now--she's not campaigning 24/7.

    And/or does Palin have family support from grandparents or aunts and uncles the way the Obamas have her mom as prominent caregiver most of the time.

    I understand what a loaded minefield this question takes us into, but isn't it a reasonable and relevant one when--as I understand it--Governor Palin still has 4 children at home(I gather her elder son is in Iraq.) and that is a front and center part of her bio appeal?


    An angel gets it's wings (5.00 / 2) (#125)
    by waldenpond on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:25:05 PM EST
    Every time an Obama supporter opens their mouth, a Republican gets a vote.

    one, two,.... one-thousand seventy three...eighteen million...


    ::smile:: (none / 0) (#143)
    by Redshoes on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:42:39 PM EST

    I recall someone saying that every MoDo column creates a new HRC supporter.


    I believe it was (none / 0) (#168)
    by echinopsia on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 12:08:37 AM EST
    "Every vote for Hillary Clinton is a knife through the heart of Maureen Dowd."

    Right (none / 0) (#177)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 01:48:39 AM EST
    Of course having a new born child with Down's Syndrome is really no big deal. Enjoy your outrage.

    Apparently (none / 0) (#42)
    by RalphB on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:30:03 PM EST
    awfully damn stupid.  Almost as stupid as the guy who wrote the story.

    "She's a bad mother" (none / 0) (#52)
    by s5 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:36:54 PM EST
    As sexist as this is, I hear this accusation come from women just as often (if not more often) than I hear it from men. My feeling is that the type of woman who would be Palin's target demographic would also be more likely to fling the "bad mother" curse. Call it sexist and insulting to career women (and it is), but I see that as the most likely response. She won't gain a single vote from backlash.

    Gov. Palin (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by chopper on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:42:24 PM EST
    Did Gov. Palin subject her children to years of racist anti-American rhetoric.

    I'm a Bad Mother...... (5.00 / 5) (#80)
    by michitucky on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:48:31 PM EST
    I must be a BAD MOTHER...I have 5 children, one with Autism.  I work full-time in a highly demanding and stressful job......At the same time, we're getting ready for our 4th deployment (this one to Afghanistan).  Funny......No one has ever indicated my husband is a BAD FATHER because he puts his life at risk flying in war zones.  No sir, he's a hero because he's serving his country!!!

    I agree (none / 0) (#142)
    by s5 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:39:23 PM EST
    I was raised by a single mother who owned her own business, and constantly had to fight the "bad mother" line. Especially in divorce court. I understand how hurtful and insulting it can be. But, the original argument was that she was going to win backlash points among women voters, and I don't see it happening. Our culture is still soaking in sexism, and not quite ready to let go of judging a woman's entire value on her perceived worth as a mother.

    You are soooo wrong... (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by Dawn Davenport on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:14:44 PM EST
    ...and haven't the slightest clue of how offensive something like this paragraph, from the Politico story, comes off to working moms:

    [quote]4. What's her family life like?

    This is an especially sensitive one. But based on conversations with journalists, operatives and average voters, it is one that is on a lot of people's minds: How does a mother of five children who are still at home, one of whom is an infant born with Down syndrome, plan to manage the demands of a national candidacy or the White House?[/quote]

    Of all the questions raised by "progressives" over the past couple days, this one may just end up being the dealbreaker for me in this election. And I'm not even a working mom--just someone who's gobsmacked at the tonedeafness coming from the "left" on this issue, and aghast that it's somehow acceptable to even pose this question.


    It's offensive, agreed (none / 0) (#138)
    by s5 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:35:29 PM EST
    My point is that many people will come to the "bad mother" conclusion on their own, as wrong-headed as it may be. And many of those people will be women. Unfortunately, the "bad mother" line is a common attack to hurl at women, and plenty of women throw it at each other.

    I would invite all of you to read the comment section of celebrity gossip blogs, and get a glimpse of exactly the kinds of horrible sexist comments that both men and women use to attack women with families.

    I'm not saying it's right ... I'm just saying that Palin isn't going to win any backlash points. I wish people wouldn't think this way, but they do, and there's a political reality that goes along with that.


    Not a bad mother - a bad parent... (1.25 / 4) (#95)
    by fiver5 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:57:09 PM EST
    A four month old Down's baby and the child's parent, mother or father, decides to travel thousands of miles away to work 120 hours a week?  Away from the imaginary world of ideology and in the real world:  a "Democratic father" who does this is the same thing as she - selfish.

    Are your comments the new (none / 0) (#62)
    by zfran on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:40:50 PM EST
    Obama talking points?

    Did anyone ask (none / 0) (#58)
    by ding7777 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:39:14 PM EST
    Edwards how he could be President and raise two small children with a wife who has cancer?

    How about, how could Biden (5.00 / 6) (#70)
    by Cream City on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:44:37 PM EST
    take his oath of office in the hospital where his wife and child died -- so I heard him say the other day -- and start a job in D.C. with the children still at home in Delaware to be raised by a single dad who would be on the road hours every day?

    How could Biden be such a horrible dad?  Why didn't he just put them in an orphanage, as in the good old days?


    Gyrfalcon (5.00 / 2) (#136)
    by Cream City on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:34:26 PM EST
    I really didn't think that anyone who read my last sentence, to the end, would need this.  But for you:



    Sorry, Cream! (none / 0) (#185)
    by gyrfalcon on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 09:33:18 AM EST
    Totally unintentional, a faulty twice of the finger that meant to hit the 5 button and somehow missed.  Probably one of the darn cats in my lap.

    Edwards received criticism (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by byteb on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:56:34 PM EST
    for running for President after learning Elizabeth's cancer had returned. Elizabeth was instrumental in quieting it but I remember the MSM bringing it up.

    Remember Katie Couric on 60 MInutes? (5.00 / 0) (#117)
    by daring grace on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:18:34 PM EST
    "Katie Couric:
    Some people watching this would say, "I would put my family first always, and my job second." And you're doing the exact opposite. You're putting your work first, and your family second."

    Yes (n/t) (3.00 / 4) (#78)
    by sher on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:47:48 PM EST
    Should we break out the champagne? (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:20:21 PM EST
    You finally posted a comment on this blog instead of just downrating every comment you don't agree with.

    Will wonders never cease?


    Good one shoe, and I gotta say, funny rejoinder (5.00 / 0) (#183)
    by DFLer on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 07:08:47 AM EST
    by Sher to one rate you!

    sorry ot/


    Don't forget that Biden (none / 0) (#106)
    by MichaelGale on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:10:58 PM EST
    took care of two kids when his family suffered a terrible tragedy. He went home every night and to the hospital everyday. He continued to care for his children, going home every night even though he was a new US Senator.

    So if Biden can do it, why do you think Palin cannot?


    5 questions (none / 0) (#147)
    by AlSmith on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:48:47 PM EST
    4 of the questions are asinine. Financial disclosure is the only one that makes any sense.

    I did have to laugh at this one
    "whether she has espoused views that many journalists would consider exotic, such as a belief in creationism or prophecies of an eventual apocalypse."

    Good thing Obama didnt mention Global Warming in his acceptance speech.

    And Creationism is nowhere on the list of top voter concerns.


    I just got a call (5.00 / 0) (#30)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:23:27 PM EST
    from someone who works for the local Dem party here.  The Dem party is asking for volunteers here in our area.  They are expecting 4500 evacuees from the NO area here in our city between now and Monday.

    It might be good PR but I think that the politicizing the displacement and suffering of people is not a good way to get votes.  It's too reactionary.  It would be better if politicians were PROactive and built the levee system post-Katrina to withstand the likes of Gustav.

    On the (none / 0) (#41)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:29:57 PM EST
    news tonight they were talking about the levees. They are pretty sure that they'll hold but of course aren't 100% sure. I thought that was somewhat of a positive from all the bad news.

    It showed that there's a huge evacuation plan in place that seems to be working so far. I hope it does, that the levies hold and that everyone is able to go back to their homes shortly after the hurricane. The people on the news were so utterly despondent about the situation it made me very sad. I can only imagine.


    Kos's post is utterly sarcastic, obviously. (5.00 / 4) (#35)
    by Southsider on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:25:43 PM EST
    As he pretty much admits, he only thinks it's a good idea because it will deny McCain/Palin any publicity.  What a surprise!

    I dunno, I guess I've come a long long way during this campaign season, but Kos' snark no longer appeals to me the way it once did.  Now it just sort of pisses me off.  Maybe I'll get back into it with time.  Right now it just makes me grimace.

    I think I'll call my buddy who just evacuated from Tulane a couple days after moving in.  Send my best wishes.  

    Please God, don't let this happen all over again.

    Disgusting (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:36:17 PM EST
    ANYone who would even remotely think that a storm that displaces sick, old, the poor...puts thousands of families and pets in panic mode, should be down there driving buses so they can see what firsthand the horror is.  I know.  During the Katrina debacle, I was driving buses out of New Iberia, LA.

    And for that DKos guy to want Obama to benefit from it, just speaks volumes about his historic republican leanings...I don't care HOW progressive he claims to be. REAL liberals would denounce that crap.

    Any takers?!?


    You've got to be kidding (none / 0) (#60)
    by Grace on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:39:39 PM EST
    I don't even visit the website.  

    Some websites try too hard to make the other guy look bad -- to the point where it is offensive to ordinary people.  


    Even (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:26:57 PM EST
    Marcy is doing it now. Pointing out that Palin is going to have a hard time campaigning because she has 5 children. Um, I seem to recall that she has a husband. And some of her children are practically grown too and can help out.

    I wonder what women like Marcy will say.... (5.00 / 5) (#45)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:31:51 PM EST
    ....when stuff like this comes back and bites them in the ass? Michelle Obama has found time to campaign and her husband is campaigning too. But I guess 2 kids will become the limit. I guess we should feel lucky. That's one more than you get in China.

    Marcy should stick to the legal stuff (5.00 / 1) (#166)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:23:28 PM EST
    and leave the sexist cr*p to the Hannitys of the world.

    The Polling... (5.00 / 0) (#50)
    by Brillo on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:36:13 PM EST
    That's been done so far seems to suggest that women are having the greatest problems with her, not men.  And yes, part of it is this question.  And not just Dems, but undecided women and older women especially.  She's actually driving McCain's numbers down (at least in the semi-theoretical, "Does Palin make you more or less likely to vote for McCain?" questions.) amongst this group.

    Do you have a link to some of (none / 0) (#67)
    by zfran on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:42:59 PM EST
    this polling? BTD's post today shows a good first impression.

    Good Summary... (none / 0) (#96)
    by Brillo on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:59:03 PM EST
    From a not so good guy.

    The summary is correct though, based on my own digging through the polls and their cross tabs.  BTD is wrong about the inexperience charge- it (along with the perception of tokenism) is killing her with undecideds.  Even many of the conservative editorials today are taking McCain to task for the same thing.  

    And for whatever reason, guys seem to like the pick more.  I'll let someone else speculate on that one...


    Last Rasmussen points the other way (none / 0) (#113)
    by tree on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:16:21 PM EST

    Palin Makes Good First Impression: Is Viewed More Favorably than Biden

    Sarah Palin has made a good first impression. Before being named as John McCain's running mate, 67% of voters didn't know enough about the Alaska governor to have an opinion. After her debut in Dayton and a rush of media coverage, a new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 53% now have a favorable opinion of Palin while just 26% offer a less flattering assessment.

    Palin earns positive reviews from 78% of Republicans, 26% of Democrats and 63% of unaffiliated voters. Obviously, these numbers will be subject to change as voters learn more about her in the coming weeks. Among all voters, 29% have a Very Favorable opinion of Palin while 9% hold a Very Unfavorable view.

    By way of comparison, on the day he was selected as Barack Obama's running mate, Delaware Senator Joseph Biden was viewed favorably by 43% of voter



    In the new survey, 35% of voters say the selection of Palin makes them more likely to vote for McCain while 33% say they are less likely to do so. Most Republicans say they are more likely to vote for Palin and most Democrats say the opposite. As for voters not affiliated with either major party, 37% are more likely to vote for McCain and 28% less likely to do so. Those numbers are a bit more positive than initial reaction to Biden.

    More at the link.


    Actually, Rasmussen and Gallop Confirm (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by daring grace on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:34:32 PM EST
    that the initial reaction among women voters to Palin is weaker/less impressed than that of male voters.

    "Palin Polls

    "Gallup is now out with its own initial poll. It also shows women with a slightly less favorable view of Palin. An excerpt from USA Today:

    "There is wide uncertainty about whether she's qualified to be president. In the poll, taken Friday, 39% say she is ready to serve as president if needed, 33% say she isn't and 29% have no opinion.

    "That's the lowest vote of confidence in a running mate since the elder George Bush chose then-Indiana senator Dan Quayle to join his ticket in 1988. In comparison, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden was seen as qualified by 57%-18% after Democrat Barack Obama chose him as a running mate last week.....

    "Here's a finding from Gallup: Among Democratic women -- including those who may be disappointed that Hillary Clinton did not win the Democratic nomination -- 9% say Palin makes them more likely to support McCain, 15% less likely.

    "From Rasmussen: Some 38% of men said they were more likely to vote for McCain now, but only 32% of women. By a narrow 41% to 35% margin, men said she was not ready to be president -- but women soundly rejected her, 48% to 25%."


    Unaffiliate voters... (none / 0) (#144)
    by Oje on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:43:39 PM EST
    As for voters not affiliated with either major party, 37% are more likely to vote for McCain and 28% less likely to do so. Those numbers are a bit more positive than initial reaction to Biden.


    After McCain's announcement, Clinton issued a statement saying, "We should all be proud of Governor Sarah Palin's historic nomination, and I congratulate her and Senator McCain. While their policies would take America in the wrong direction, Governor Palin will add an important new voice to the debate." Palin is now viewed favorably by 48% of women. That figure includes 80% of Republican women, 23% of Democratic women, and 61% of women not affiliated with either major party.


    When Biden was selected, just over half (52%) of Democrats believed he was the right choice. Sixty-three percent (63%) of Republicans say McCain picked the right running mate in Palin, and 40% of unaffiliated voters agree. A week ago, 31% of unaffiliateds said the same about Obama's selection.


    It is pretty clear in the Gallup and the Rasmussen polls that Governor Palin had a solid introduction.


    Women tend on average to be (none / 0) (#154)
    by tree on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:01:55 PM EST
    more Democratic and more liberal. That a conservative would be viewed more negatively by women than men is to be expected.

     I suspect that the next week will be a clearer indicator of overall opinion, once the public gets to know her better.


    Undecided Voters... (none / 0) (#120)
    by Brillo on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:23:56 PM EST
    Aren't the same as Unaffiliated  voters.  You shouldn't confuse the two.

    I followed your links, (none / 0) (#151)
    by tree on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:58:44 PM EST
    from Andrew Sullivan to Bloomberg to Gallup and Rasmussen. I couldn't find any information breakdown on undecideds. Its not there, at least not for the general public.

    What is  very apparent from the polls is that she is little known by the American public. What happens this week at the convention will probably have a big impact on how she is viewed.


    Brillo (none / 0) (#187)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 02:01:54 PM EST
    You need to come back another day. New commenters are limited to ten comments in a 24 hour period.

    link (none / 0) (#75)
    by ccpup on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:46:36 PM EST
    because what little I've seen has been the exact opposite.

    pretty sure (none / 0) (#97)
    by Faust on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:59:36 PM EST
    he's refering to the breakdown of the poll on fivethirtyeight.

    Where does it say that? (none / 0) (#123)
    by MichaelGale on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:24:52 PM EST
    that women are being driven away?

    I have a feeling that many who are raising (5.00 / 4) (#68)
    by Anne on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:44:08 PM EST
    this issue don't have children themselves, or they would know how insulting it is to question the quality of Palin's mothering.  

    I heard today that when Palin became governor, she refused to have a car and driver, continued to pick her kids up from school herself, and set them straight pretty quick that they would not be having a chef/cook - they would still be eating mac 'n' cheese just like always.

    It just makes me crazy that "she's a bad mother because..." are the kinds of low blows being delivered.


    I don't have kids... (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by Dawn Davenport on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:23:57 PM EST
    ...and I still find this line of questioning utterly abhorrent, as I said upthread.

    I was all ready to saddle up that unity pony after watching the convention last week, but the Dems seem hell-bent on getting my foot caught in the stirrup.


    I'm kind of surprised at Marcy. (5.00 / 5) (#40)
    by Teresa on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:29:13 PM EST
    I guess only ugly childless women can run for office. I'm not voting for the woman, but some of this stuff shows me that some people still don't get it.

    Oh they get it Teresa.... (5.00 / 4) (#49)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:33:36 PM EST
    ...don't you believe otherwise.

    And then (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by janarchy on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:45:49 PM EST
    they get insulted and called ugly old hags and get passed over for younger, 'hotter' models.

    You can't win.


    Like Kay Bailey Hutchinson? (1.00 / 1) (#85)
    by sher on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:49:59 PM EST
    Sen Hutchison (none / 0) (#94)
    by kredwyn on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:56:50 PM EST
    said she didn't want it...back in Feb. There are links around here somewhere to a Hill article saying she had other plans for the future and being VP wasn't part of them.

    I think she wants the gov house in TX.


    Kay Bay (none / 0) (#99)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:02:09 PM EST
    is going after Governor Good Hair's job.  

    I think Palin is right to sue re Polar Bears (none / 0) (#81)
    by ding7777 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:49:03 PM EST
    because 1) the ban on sport hunting the Polars has increased the Polar population; 2) there is no exemption for Native American subsistence hunting and 32) there is no immediate threat to the Polars from Global Warming - just a predicted threat that 30 years into the future there may be GW and that GW will endanger the Polars

    Jesus Christ, people, say a prayer for NOLA... (5.00 / 2) (#104)
    by Southsider on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:08:43 PM EST
    "Mother of all storms" bearing down on New Orleans.

    New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin ordered a mandatory evacuation of the city beginning 8 a.m. Sunday but urged residents to consider escaping "the mother of all storms" before then.

    "You need to be scared," Nagin said of the Category 4 hurricane tearing along Cuba's western coast. "You need to be concerned, and you need to get your butts moving out of New Orleans right now. This is the storm of the century."

    What is in (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by Andy08 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:12:24 PM EST
    her passport??? How about what is in Obama's passport ?? And not just his "Senate one" but the one he used when he travled to Pakistan in  the 80's.  He is after all candidate for POTUS.

    Politico's piece is so preposterous that's hilarious...

    I thought it was (none / 0) (#131)
    by MichaelGale on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:28:30 PM EST
    a good answer myself; Germany to see the troops; Afghanistan to see the troops.

    Do the comparisons if you want.


    comparisons? (none / 0) (#157)
    by Andy08 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:04:13 PM EST
    with what?

    But what about all the hotel rooms (4.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Grace on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:01:05 PM EST
    and everything else?  It's awful late to postpone the whole thing -- unless they just plan to cram most of it into the last day or something.  

    You can't cancel a lot of these things this close to the date of the event.  Caterers will have already ordered food, etc.      

    Leadership (5.00 / 0) (#61)
    by waldenpond on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:39:46 PM EST
    This is McCain's first opportunity to show leadership.  What is his priority... didn't he accuse Obama of putting 'getting elected' first?  Now McCain has to put up or shut up.

    Would a President reschedule an event in the hopes that a storm wouldn't do severe damage, or would he cancel?

    Would a President honor his financial obligations and pay all the contracts in full?  Would a President donate all of the food?

    Would a President do everything they could to alleviate the economic impact of cancelling the event?

    Start juggling John... the voters are watching.


    Yes they are (none / 0) (#102)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:05:18 PM EST
    and if Obama doesn't step up to the plate he's going to look JUST LIKE BUSH43 when he did his flyover and looked like the clueless dumba55 that he is.

    Tread lightly Obama...you better get some boots on and head on to the Gulf coast.

    THIS American voter is watching...LIKE a hawk!


    What's Obama doing? (none / 0) (#116)
    by echinopsia on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:17:00 PM EST
    Obama has no choice to make (5.00 / 0) (#139)
    by waldenpond on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:35:39 PM EST
    McCain does.  He has a balancing act of different issues to manage... keeping his party focused and motivated with no convention, managing his campaign at a crucial juncture, how to support the storm impacted states etc....  He's actually got a situation.

    Obama can just go.  (oops, I can't find anything on Obama/gustav, that's not good)


    How's that foot (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:16:41 PM EST
    taste there Mr Thoreau?

    Maybe they will use the telethon money (none / 0) (#175)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 01:33:33 AM EST
    to pay the hotels and caterers for the cancellations under the "overhead" category and then donate any left to Gustav victims.

    Jeralyn (none / 0) (#10)
    by fiver5 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:02:02 PM EST
    Please take a look at my comment on TChris' thread immediately before this one.  I need some info, because I'm buying plane tickets.  

    Maybe Bush (none / 0) (#25)
    by mmc9431 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:18:25 PM EST
    I'm not sure that McCain should get any credit on this. CNN reported 2 or 3 days ago that Bush was concerned about attending the convention with Gustav on the way. After Katrina which really turned public opinion against him, he didn't want to be at another party.

    Postponing it would be a good PR move. Palin accomplished drowning out the Dem convention. Though I read today that Obama's speech drew 40 Mil viewers.

    Not Saying It's Right Or Wrong... (none / 0) (#64)
    by Brillo on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:42:19 PM EST
    Just that that's the way it is.  Men like the pick more than women.  Undecideds don't like it at all.   Dems don't care.  Republicans were already on board with McCain.  This is backfiring on McCain, anecdotes aside.  

    Too many (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by chopper on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:48:27 PM EST
    If your going to run for office make sure you don't have too many houses or too many kids.

    So what is it then.... (none / 0) (#71)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:45:06 PM EST
    ...right or wrong? Because I care. I like to know who I'm talking to.

    It's Wrong. (none / 0) (#77)
    by Brillo on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:47:42 PM EST
    Minorities often suffer from the same exact sort of bigoted attitudes towards themselves as is directed at them.  

    Backfiring? (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by janarchy on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:52:28 PM EST
    Endorsements from Dobson and Club for Growth? $7M in new donations from evangelical voters in the past 36 hours? Energized crowds at stump speeches?

    Yeah, keep telling yourself that this is the worst mistake McCain made, har har. I hope you'll find it just as funny on Nov 5th.


    Backfiring. (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Brillo on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:07:17 PM EST
    The Republicans were always going to come home.  She's actively driving away the undecideds and not appealing to Dems at all.

    And by the way, those energized crowds are booing either Palin, Clinton, or the McCain's pandering.  


    Disinformation.... (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by Oje on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:16:42 PM EST
    Puh-leaze, booing Palin? They booed Clinton's name this morning in Pennsylvania. Why not rely on data rather than misinform people. Here is gallup:

    Even among Republicans, the reaction is muted. Thirty percent of Republicans say that Palin's selection makes them more likely to vote for McCain, while just 5% say they are less likely to vote for McCain, leaving the rest saying that her selection, at least so far, has no impact on their vote. Still, this is a slightly stronger partisan reaction than Democrats had to Biden, as just 21% of Democrats said they were more likely to vote for Obama because Biden was his running mate.

    Gov. Palin is almost totally unknown and has had a greater impact than Biden in her own party. Her first impression has been pretty solid. How it plays out over the next week is not known, but why subject high information, left-leaning blog readers to your agitprop? Take it elsewhere.


    Data? (none / 0) (#130)
    by Brillo on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:27:14 PM EST
    You're ignoring what I posted and linked to.  It's talking about undecided voters.  Those who haven't made up their minds and can be swayed by these things.  Reread what I posted, and what I linked to before attacking me.

    Give us a link to your poll data... (none / 0) (#135)
    by Oje on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:34:19 PM EST
    In your sudden spat of posts today to tell us what the polls say, I do not see your reference...

    Link? (none / 0) (#141)
    by Brillo on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:38:12 PM EST
    You replied to my post where I linked it.  And now you're asking me for it again?  Maybe you should read what you're replying to before you go accusing people of things...

    Oh believe me I know that..... (none / 0) (#86)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:50:02 PM EST
    ...as I am Puerto Rican AND a female.

    I'll raise that (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by txpolitico67 on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:15:33 PM EST
    to being Chicano and gay...in TEXAS.   <eg>

    o/t (none / 0) (#140)
    by Cream City on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:35:40 PM EST
    Maybe Gov. Palin's minions (none / 0) (#73)
    by zfran on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 09:46:06 PM EST
    and McCain's will have to scour and remove negative sounding things about her from the internet as Obama has done. Various articles I have linked to and tried to re-find have magically disappeared.

    Listening to The Boss (none / 0) (#146)
    by Cream City on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:45:02 PM EST
    while sitting outside in almost 80 degrees, late at night, not far from the lakefront where Springsteen's concert is rocking.  Amazing speakers, as I saw earlier.  No way to get anywhere near now, with 75,000 Harley hogs and their honeys and their bikes everywhere in my town.  Just strolled our freek street (Brady Street) an hour ago, but the clothes were still on, so it's actually tame compared to the 100th Harley anniversary five years ago.  

    Caught a bit of the three-hour parade earlier, as the Harleye from all over the world always come into town in style.  (Although some have been here for days, so they just circle out and head back in.:-)

    Now, how many lucky people get to take their laptops outdoors and listen to The Boss?!  It does decide me to be sure to get tickets the next time he's in town to see him, too.  The sound is great, but seeing him and the E-Streeters interact on stage is the most fun this side of nirvana.

    Btw, talked to some Louisiana bikers today.  They're worried but keeping the faith.  And if they can't head home on Monday, they have lots of offers of places to stay here.  Plus, we promised that to get them through watching it on tv, there might just be some beer left for them in Milwaukee on Monday.  Some.

    More Loser ideas, (none / 0) (#149)
    by SueBonnetSue on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 10:49:31 PM EST
    Question her passport?  Most Americans don't give a rat's butt how many countries Palin has been in.  Attacking on that point makes democrats sound like elitist snobs who think that world travel makes someone, well, worldly, and somehow better.   Many democrat  voters can't afford to leave their state, much less visit foreign countries.  Fussing about Palin's lack of world travel, when her husband is a union steel worker, and they have 5 children, is a loser issue for us.

    Parenting and Motherhood.  More loser issues.  Do NOT question how she parents.  No one has questioned male candidates about their parenting.  No one mentions that a man has 5 children, or 8, or any other number.  Questioning her choices reeks of sexism and will turn off women, since most mothers question their own parenting at some point or other.  To question Palin's parenting makes them feel defensive.  If they defend her that means they are identifying with her, and that's not good for us.

    Do NOT question her choice to continue the pregnancy of a Down syndrome child.  That is a VERY personal decision.  It will also upset the handicapped community, BIG TIME.  

    I have no clue why we would question her family income, which is rather modest when compared to the amount of money Barack and Michelle earn.  

    I seem to remember... (none / 0) (#163)
    by EddieInCA on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 11:15:15 PM EST
    ...McCain hammering Obama for not having been to Iraq.

    Or did that only matter because it was Obama?

    Just askin'.


    Obama has (none / 0) (#169)
    by JThomas on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 12:20:33 AM EST
    tread lightly on Governor Palin. McCain is who you have to beat in November.

    Politico is not the dems. The media is going to do their own thing which is to cover whatever makes the most money...they always do.

    re GOP convention (none / 0) (#184)
    by DFLer on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 07:19:02 AM EST
    The irony of a NO hurricane screwing up their plans is, as oft noted here, incredible ... and karmic.

    However, when they say they will "postpone" events....how will that work? It would be a major mess for St. Paul and Mpls., all the support events...etc. etc. Will the venues even be available to them?

    And on the periphery, near-by schools and colleges postponed opening classes that week to avoid traffic gridlock, for example. Businesses (non-service industry) have changed things around for the same reasons.

    However, re TChris' post, the cops aren't waiting to bring the hammer down.