I hope she withdraws from the ticket sooner than later. Her novelty has worn off. She's becoming a joke, soon to be a cliche.

You know this is not true. Palin has changed this race. McCain will never drop her as she is the only reason he even has a chance.

You may not like that. You may think it is ludicrous.

I may not agree with her politics but this barely concealed hatred of her, McCain and half of the population that votes Republican may not be so healthy... and it may, just may, be part of the reason why independents are so easily turned off.

No, THAT can't be it... it is probably just because they are "racists", "stupid", or "Rethuglicans".

All of the outrage in the world, whether real or feigned, can't elect Barrack Obama president in November.   I think he needs to tone it down and finally begin to really introduce himself to the American people.  He made a good start on the job in Denver and then got sidetracked.  The problem is that people think that they know John McCain or at least they are sure that he is a known quantity, someone who's been around for long time and with whom they feel comfortable.  

This does not in any way describe Obama, except perhaps to his followers.  But this time, his followers alone won't be enough to bring him victory.  He needs to reach out to the people and explain who he is and what he stands for.  In short, he needs to define himself.  He can only do this by addressing himself to the people and telling them in more specific ways, who he is and what he stands for.

The first thing that he needs to do is to find opportunities to talk about what is important to him in very concrete, issue orientated terms.  He needs to lay out his vision of an American foreign policy, perhaps in response to the recently leaked memo in which the intelligence community outlines challenges/foreign policy environment facing the next president.  Also, he needs to say exactly what he thinks should be done now about the economy and what he will do as soon as he is president.  Very specific things, and he needs to show how these policies are manifestations of his beliefs and core principles.

He should talk about what he wants to accomplish during his first hundred days in office.   He should say what will be his first legislative proposal submitted to Congress and why its going to be first.  He should talk about bringing together the leaders of both parties during the transition period so that he can share his legislative priorities, especially his domestic agenda, with them and then once again talk about his political beliefs (not just "change" and "hope") and the things he wants to do as president.

The second thing he needs to do also concerns his core principles.  Why does he want to be president?  What moves him?  What will he fight for,  what will he sacrifice his ambitions for? (N.B., "change" and "hope" are not really issues, as such).  

He needs to get angry and pick a fight about an issue.  One of the more disturbing things I have noticed about Obama is that the only times we've seen him moved emotionally have been when he has been personally attacked.  He became angry when Rev. Wright called him a "an ordinary politico" but apparently none of the people he has encountered or their stories has made him angry enough to really speak out about a specific injustice and pledge to right a specific wrong.  The MCA didn't really move him.  Likewise, torture, black sites, domestic spying, none of that seemed to arouse anger in him.  When he has addressed these issues, he has done so only reluctantly (in response to pressure from the base) and then only halfheartedly. This is a problem.  Again, "hope" and "change" isn't enough.

I think this perceived lack of emotion about his beliefs, his unwillingness to stands against very grave injustices unless or until its safe to do so or the choice is forced upon him, is clearly resonating with people at a subconscious level.   It makes people uncomfortable with him.  It makes me very uncomfortable with him.

He needs to focus on why he is running for president.  Is he really running for president because McCain has eight houses?  Because of the outrage de jour?  

Obama was Mr. Post-Partisan, blurring the lines between the two ideologies, and turning formerly hard-line Democratic positions into something a whole lot mushier, in an attempt to appeal to voters across the spectrum.  Republicans were feeling depressed and lethargic and ho-hum about the whole election, looking at losing seats in the Congress and seeming to be unable to gain the attenion of the media.

Even so, McCain was hanging in there, with the race pretty much dead-even.

Then he names Palin and suddenly, there is new life in the Republican Party, and they are energized.  Energized voters actually come out to vote.  Her pick united the party in a way that it did not appear would be possible, and all of a sudden, things feel a lot different.

A funny thing has happened to Democrats along the way: they've remembered what they are supposed to stand for and believe in, why they aren't Republicans, and a lot of them are now looking at Obama, and wondering why they ever thought that high-flown rhetoric would translate into actually fighting for those positions and those ideals and those beliefs.  

He's still not fighting; pointing out the outrage is not fighting.  Allowing your VP to languish out of the spotlight is not fighting.

It's Obama fatigue that is partially responsible for Palin being the novelty - novelty that most certainly has not worn off.  If she handles herself well in the interview with Gibson and goes on to handle the debates, she will be seen as a competent novelty and there goes your plan for her to fizzle out - it's not going to happen.

McCain wasn't supposed to pick a VP that was going to unite the parties, or meet with your approval - he did what the opposition party is supposed to do in an effort to win, and your continuing anger that he did is just more negative emotion that will do you no good in the end.

If you want to be angry, be angry at Obama for losing control of the narrative, for not sending Biden out in attack-dog mode, for not picking Hillary as his VP, for failing to show any passion about the things he says he believes in, for not realizing that he can't talk in generalities anymore, for not understanding that he needs to sharpen the line between us and them instead of blurring it.

It's absurd to credit McCain with the "vision" to see how this pick would work out.  I believe the combination of events revolving around Palin over the last few weeks was unknowable by anyone.  So far, It's worked well for McCain.   Without her, this thing isn't close.

Jeralyn has made her viewpoint clear and her approach clear.  She's also made it clear she's sticking with it.  You get to do that when you own a blog :)  But she's not running a campaign who's goal is to win.  There, you often have to make compromises.

I assume both campaigns are doing there secret little daily polls.  I think nobody knew how to handle Palin at first.  The Republicans are pretty happy how it's working out.  I think they'll keep running the same play until someone stops it.

Obama has a different problem.  The campaign undoubtedly has views on what might work.  So they try it, poll it and evaluate it.  If it doesn't work, find another play.  Running a play that doesn't work over and over doesn't work in football.  Or politics.  I don't think they've found the right play yet.  But she's only been around a few weeks.  Sooner or later something will work.  One hopes.

C'mon man.

I recommend reading Friedman's column today.  He gets it right about Palin - most of the country is not terrified of her, and it's quite the opposite, they see themselves in her.  He compares her to "Roseanne" and reminds everyone it was the #1 show for 5 years.  

Given the unpopularity of the Republican Party in general, George Bush's collapsing economy and his unspeakably terrible foreign policy, this should be an overwhelmingly great year for the Democratic candidate.  Unless there is something seriously wrong with our candidate, our guy should a shoo-in.  Yet, Obama still polls behind a "placeholder" Democrat and probably far behind any other specific Democrat. He is in a very tight race.  Clearly, there are doubts about Obama.

If you assume that is indeed the case, then the single critical factor in an Obama victory must Obama's ability to assuage those doubts and make the case for himself as president.  If he can't do that, nothing else matters.  Again, it's a binary choice.   If, at the end of the day, the average voter says "Okay, McCain's not my ideal choice, and I'm not happy that Palin is a heartbeat away from the presidency-----but I don't think Obama's qualified or he has too little experience or I don't know what he stands for", the fact that we can all agree that Biden is both more experienced and better qualified than Palin or McCain is not going to matter.  Obama loses because McCain is probably the lesser evil.  Don't forget:  Unlike with Palin, voters aren't evaluating Obama's qualifications to be a heartbeat away---they're considering whether he himself is experienced enough and qualified enough to be the actual president. On the other hand, if Obama is able to make his case that he is sufficiently experienced and qualified, then he is should win as any other Democrats would win.

So, let's keep our focus on what's worth stressing.    Let's avoid the outrage du jour (and especially the Sarah Palin outrage du jour) unless it is we something can use to complete sentences like these:  "Obama is running for president because..." or "Obama should be president because..."

Consider a couple of applications of this formula:

"Obama is running for president because John McCain has eight houses"

"Obama should be president because McCain's `lipstick on a pig' charge is phony".

"Obama should be president because McCain wasn't really tortured under the Bush administration's ludicrous definition of torture".

"Obama is running for president because Sarah Palin was for the bridge to nowhere before she was against it"

Inserting the outrage du jour doesn't really complete these sentences in a way that makes a positive case for an Obama presidency or which explains what such a presidency would look like on, say, foreign policy or the economy.  It's just silly.  And it makes Obama look silly.

I think Obama needs to finish introducing himself to the American people.  He made a good start in Denver, but all this outrage does nothing to make people more comfortable with Obama.   It's a total distraction.   From now until November, the focus needs to be on Obama (who is he, what does he stand for, his specific plan for the economy, his plans on foreign policy) and on why McCain's plans for the future are wrong for our country.  

Just as an aside, it might be helpful if somebody reminded certain people that the choice facing people in the voting booths in November will be between John McCain and Barrack Obama.   If they aren't comfortable with Obama, Joe Biden's experience and thoughtfulness won't matter and neither will Palin's lack of experience or her whatever.  

Dragging in the experience argument into the debate is not useful, as Obama hardly has more experience handling foreign policy issues or executive government than Palin. And he is on the top of the Democratic ticket.

People will begin to picture Palin as President -- trying to deal with the Pentagon, leaders of foreign countries, our economy. They will be furious with McCain that he would risk the welfare of the country by choosing Gov. Sarah Palin.

I disagree.  Nobody bothered to picture Dan Quayle as President.  It's McCain we have to attack as dangerous.  After Vietnam he wrote some pretty stong stuff about how we needed to stay and finish the war.  This is how he really feels - that we cannot leave Iraq until some undefined "victory" has been achieved.

Which raises the real problem with McCain - he is a hawk who treats Iraq like a war against an enemy who can be defeated.  It is not.  It is an unprovoked war fought unwillingly by American troops on behalf of corporate interests who control our government.  This is not WWII and there can be no V-J day. This is our Army playing the role of Pinkertons breaking up a miners' strike.

Aside from all the reasons Palin is a danger to the country because of her lack of qualifications remotely relevant to any high national office,

And I was also angry at Palin, angry at her for allowing herself to be manipulated and used by McCain, who's ruthlesss ambition to be elected Commander and Chief has warped and overridden his common sense, decency and honor.

Given her temperament, her values, her intellect, her judgment, and given our sad sad experience over the past 8 years, would a Palin presidency be tolerable?

Michigan Republicans plan to foreclose African American voters

The chairman of the Republican Party in Macomb County Michigan, a key swing county in a key swing state, is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes to block people from voting in the upcoming election as part of the state GOP's effort to challenge some voters on Election Day.

Given that many foreclosures are negotiated or extended over time, owners can still legally use their home address to vote.  Will they be purged illegally?

The best part of this story is that it gives our side a chance to reveal this:  

GOP ties to state's largest foreclosure law firm

The Macomb GOP's plans are another indication of how John McCain's campaign stands to benefit from the burgeoning number of foreclosures in the state. McCain's regional headquarters are housed in the office building of foreclosure specialists Trott & Trott. The firm's founder, David A. Trott, has raised between $100,000 and $250,000 for the Republican nominee.

McCain dropped out of the race before Election Day, and

Sarah Palin moved to the "top of the ticket", but was now a man--"John Palin"--a virtual unknown "Hockey Dad" who was once a mayor of a small town, had not been engaged in the debate about the 2003 invasion of Iraq and current war policies or the War on Terror, served as a governor of a state for fewer than 2 years, favored undoing Roe v. Wade, cow-towed to the oil lobby, was a lifetime member of the NRA, didn't believe Darwin's theory of evolution but did advocate the teaching of Creationism in public schools as well as abstinence rather than human sexuality in biology courses, thought that the surest way to get what one wants politically is to pray, and was brought up as an evangelical member of a church whose congregation "speaks in tongues" ....

Would you consider "him" a qualified candidate for the President of the United States?

Would you vote for "him" for U.S. President and Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces?