Seems odd to be trumpeting a Poll taken so early in the process as some kind of proof that Americans are concerned with her inexperience.  

Perhaps because it's only been one speech in the last years worth of mush?

Perhaps the holdouts are waiting for something more consistent?

I put quotation marks around the word progressive when I refer to those blogs.

And while Obama's speech was viewed favorably, it doesn't seem to have resulted in gaining him a lot of new voters.

It is not about if Palin is experienced or not.  This is a woman Conservatives can fall in love with -to  half quote: Brains, Babies, Guns and Jesus.

I think we need Hillary Clinton out there to talk about the rare, legal and safe and other choices we have, foreign policy and women, owning guns and responsibility, the economy and families, separation of church and G-D, and health care, health care, health care. In essence, make her the VP for 60 days.

In my book that is not such a bad poll for Palin. I feel the poll will close in her favor from here to November unless she falls flat on her face.  

Conservatives - they were wishy-washy with McCain but are now fully behind him with money AND votes.

Media - the shock value is clear.  Palin has dominated the news cycle since she was announced.  Since the Democrats stupidly advanced the "experience" argument, there will continue to be a lot of focus on her through at least the VP debate and if she does even modestly well, she's going to hit expectations out of the park.  Thanks to Paul Begala and the like, all she has to do at this point is speak in complete sentances and not say her number one wish is for "world peace."

Reform/Maverick - McCain doubled down on this.  The Republican brand is in the dirt - people don't trust and don't like 'em.  McCain is promising that he'll take on his own party and move it in a new and exciting direction.  With Palin, a supposed "GOP slayer" in AK, at his side, they just might believe him.

All the energy and buzz was on the Dem side. If McCain had picked Romney or Pawlenty, that would have continued.  There would have been a few hours of coverage of the new ticket and then back to the Dem Convention.  Now that's clearly not the case.

What should Dems do?  Belatedly start ignoring her.  Don't play the game.  If they'd done that from the start, it would have diminished the pick much more than any stupid arguments over a "former small town mayor".  But they didn't and I'm thinking that moment may have passed.

And the continued focus on whether this was an appeal to Hillary voters is just stupid:

1. It re-emphasizes the split that we supposedly put to bed last week.

2. Palin may appeal to some moderate to conservative working class democrats who voted for Hillary.  But that's not the group of Hillary voters pundits care about - they focus on long-time democratic women.  They are missing the bigger picture.  And inevitably, they can't help themselves from saying something disparaging about this latter group - usually by proclaiming that if they don't vote for Obama it will be because of an "emotional" response.  Because these voters are "bitter" or "hurt" and "can't get over it".

3. As has been said again and again, saying he just picked her because she's a woman is insulting to many - at least as many, I'd guess as are insulted by the pick itself.

4. It has encouraged the blogger boyz to act like idiots - again - and could depress turnout among women who are sick of the sexism in the Democratic party.  Someone posted a CNN transcript yesterday of Larry King and in a back and forth with Carville and some Republican woman (can't remember who), she got in a great hit by criticizing the Obama campaign for being "dismissive".  Why oh why would we want to continue to allow republicans to score easy points off of us?

Since I'm from Illinois... I would not have to worry about my vote.

McCain choosing Palin...no way, no how!

It has nothing to do with experience. Now it is about issues I just can't stomach. Soooo conservative.

Again, if the new voters that "justified" the Dem dismissal of a substantial chunk of their loyal support are out there in such force, why are Obama and his team fixating backwardly -- in every sense of the phrase -- on Quayle and Eagleton?

Are they really searching that far back in time to look for derision to smack onto New Bad Monster Lady?

Or is this more about the text messaging squadrons mindlessly inundading a feckin' eedjit like Jack Cafferty with 11,000 negative emails about Palin -- and him buying that they were equally from Dems and Pugs.

Maybe this crankiness slash clarity is residual hormonal zing from tethering to the vast, all-encompasing Giant Chick Brain that directs women to be a pain in Dems' collective do-nothing @ss for equal rights for my entire life.

Maybe I'm still cranky cause I didn't get a lot for Fitzmas.

Regardless of the reasons behind ME being an uncooperative b!tch, I just don't see stuff like this resonating with voters.

The only Quayle that matters in this household will be how many cranberry-cornbread stuffed ones are among the birds on the Fall Harvest table. (That's the table formerly known as the groaning Thanksgiving one.)