comment #1

Michael says ...

Well, at least Poland's not an elitist.

Do you want the Republicans to be in touch with the common man or not? She's about as close as they've come in...ever, I think. She's qualified enough to be the Dem nominee for president, if you think that two years running a state has equivalence to six years being 1 of 100. It's a very good choice, I think...

Still voting for Obama, though.

comment #2

coxcable says ...

Ain't no denying. She's absolutely adorable. Who would have thought McCain would take Bush's best attribute ... his sweet wife Laura... and put that into play in this candidacy?

Very interesting tactic. And yes, very Maverick-y.

To paraphrase Schwarzenegger, "I like you, Sarah. I'm going to kill you last."

comment #3

Mgmax says ...

Hilarious to read the usual gang of dweebs attacking her as ugly and a stupid choice.

Fact is, McCain just screwed you good. He may or may not win but he sure got a lot closer.

1) He locked up his conservative base. A woman whose commitment to pro-life values meant she kept her Down's baby and is raising him happily. That won't mean anything to you, but it's to evangelicals what his POW status is to military folks.

2) He just stole a chunk of the female independent vote. How much? Remains to be seen. But that tingle that goes up Chris Matthews' leg when he sees a black man running for president? A lot of women are going to feel it when they see her up against The Other Old White Senator in a debate. (Pretty revealing that both candidates basically picked their opponent as a running mate, actually.)

3) Americans like to elect governors. She has two years of executive experience? And between them, all four candidates in the race have... two years of executive experience. She's the only one in the race who's been more than a talker and self-promoter.

4) It's the price of gas, stupid. They must have powerful polling that they can win, or at least were doomed to lose, if they didn't tackle that head-on. And they will. It's going to be an energy election and at the moment that looks like a fairly practical candidate against a pie in the sky one promising that a zillion new technologies will sprout out of nowhere by electing him.

5) "Four more years of the same." Yeah, she really looks like Dick Cheney. Significantly neutralized, if not dead.

6) It's the pork, stupid. Now against Obama's shockingly vague promise to cut taxes and start a bazillion new programs and shrink the budget and grow the economy, we have the woman who actually fought pork in her own state. It will be thrilling to hear Ted Stevens being slammed-- by Republicans, in the same breath as Robert Byrd. (Oh, and thanks a lot, Ron Paul, you phony sack of shit.)

7) "Biden will rip her to pieces." Yeah, like Rick Lazio took Hillary down.

8) And finally, most deliciously, everyone's who's thrown the R-word at any criticism of Obama? Get ready to have the S-word thrown at you for every criticism of Palin. This is going to be fun.

comment #4

Count Thread says ...

Wait a sec-- did Wells just quote Dave Poland approvingly?

Terrible political acumen, bringing bitchy movie bloggers together, film at 11:00.

comment #5

Monument says ...

Maybe I'm just incredibly cynical but it's hard to see this as anything but desperate manipulation. Her main value to the McCain campaign is her gender, it certainly isn't her experience.

comment #6

BurmaShave says ...

I know Poland is special needs himself, but he really didn't need to include that fact in his reasoning. Kind of sickening, maybe even a little fascist, and it killed the rest of it. I'll leave my movie blogger political analyzing to Wells.

comment #7

cjKennedy says ...

She seems like a female Quayle to me. A conservative, attractive empty vessel we all laughed at until his ticket was elected.

comment #8

Count Thread says ...

"Her main value to the McCain campaign is her gender, it certainly isn't her experience."

Unlike his opponent, he doesn't need experience in his Veep, *he* has it.

Instead he just chose a fresh conservative, a fighter against the corrupt Republicans in her own state, and someone who a very large segment of the population can identify with (as long as we're playing identity politics here, two parties can play at that game).

Oh, and yeah: good speaker, too.

comment #9

Count Thread says ...

"She seems like a female Quayle to me. A conservative, attractive empty vessel we all laughed at until his ticket was elected."

FYI, Dan Quayle had been in Congress for *twelve years* before he was tapped to be VP. That's six times the congressional experience Barack Obama had before he chose to run for president.

Who's the empty suit?

comment #10

BurmaShave says ...

Except, by picking her, McCain just agreed this election isn't about experience.

comment #11

Richardson says ...

"He just stole a chunk of the female independent vote. How much? Remains to be seen."

I would say it will float somewhere just above zero percent. Any woman who is pro-life already wouldn't vote Obama, any woman who is strongly pro-choice won't vote for McCain/Palin, so the bump can not exceed the small number of women who are pro-choice but are willing to vote for somebody who is aggressively pro-life.

""Four more years of the same." Yeah, she really looks like Dick Cheney. Significantly neutralized, if not dead."

I notice that conservatives have been trying to kill that one for months now by repeating, "Hey, Bush isn't running again, McCain is running now, stop trying to run against Bush." I suspect that this will fail to stop "four more years" just as much as that argument did.

Like it or not, political arguments have less to do with facts than impressions, and a huge majority of people in the country feel, for loosely connected reasons certainly fueled by Democrats, that McCain will continue to govern as Bush did. McCain hasn't done much to distance himself from Bush, but I don't see how nominating Palin helps him distance himself from Bush any more, just because she doesn't look like Dick Cheney.

comment #12

Gus Petch says ...

It's a good pick. The experience argument against Obama was never going to have much traction anyway -- Obama has rightly countered that many great Presidents assumed office with little experience. The main case against Obama McCain needs to make is (a) he's an extremist, (b) he's surrounded himself with angry, kooky people, and (c) he's repeatedly demonstrated contempt for ordinary Americans. Obama has no good counter to those arguments.

From what little I know about Palin, she's sharp enough and charismatic enough that she won't do Quayle-style harm to the ticket. She's a bold pick -- a great counter to Obama's selection of the ultimate Washington insider. She's a staunch conservative, so she helps cement the Republican base. She'll help McCain enormously with energy issues, and, by extension, economic issues in general. And of course there's the potential that she'll help close the gender gap in the Republicans' favor; I don't know how much difference Palin will make to women voters, but this year it seems like a smart gamble to try to exploit the excitement about Hillary's run and the disappointment/bitterness about her loss.

p.s. Now that I typed that in, I see that I'm repeating much of Mgmax's post. So... What Mgmax said.

comment #13

FeydAway says ...

She's a really good pick. MGM hits most of the points. Obama went after her experience in his press release this morning. That's a bad move for him, and I think an expected move from the McCain campaign. She's more experienced than him, and she's not the candidate for Prez. If he hits her on inexperience he's crapping all over himself.

comment #14

Richardson says ...

"FYI, Dan Quayle had been in Congress for *twelve years* before he was tapped to be VP. That's six times the congressional experience Barack Obama had before he chose to run for president.

"Who's the empty suit?"

You guys are the ones who are trying to argue that experience is the only thing that matters. People don't criticize Dan Quayle because of inexperience, they criticize him because he frequently said stupid things and was, in general, a poor speaker and a bad arguer. He could've been in the Senate for 100 years, but he'd still be an "empty suit".

And, if experience is so important, then how is a woman with less than one term as the governor of Alaska ready to be president?

comment #15

FeydAway says ...

To Burma:
No he didn't. Because she has EXECUTIVE experience. She also ran her own business.

To Richardson:
How can you say political arguments have less to do with facts than impressions (a truth I agree with), and then dismiss the clear IMPRESSION a young female VP gives to the ticket? I'd point out that you're wrong, but since you so obviously contradict yourself, I don't need to.

comment #16

George Prager says ...

The arrogance of power. Once again, it's all about him. You'd have to go back to Nixon's choice of Agnew to find a lamer pick (their experience level is about the same). Seems like a nice lady, though. Her speaking voice kind of reminds me of Mira Sorvino's in MIGHTY APRHODITE.

comment #17

Richardson says ...

"Obama went after her experience in his press release this morning. That's a bad move for him, and I think an expected move from the McCain campaign."

That's pretty misleading; the actual quote is "Experience is being taken off the table considering you're putting someone within a heartbeat of the presidency with the thinnest foreign policy experience in history."

The point is that continuing to attack Obama on experience becomes hypocritical, the point was very clearly not attacking her on experience.

comment #18

George Prager says ...

My New York Reagan Democrat parents were hoping for Joe Lieberman. They like McCain, but I think this woman reminds them too much of their youngest son's ex-mother-in-law. They hated her.

comment #19

BurmaShave says ...

FeydAway, remind me of McCain's executive experience?

comment #20

Richardson says ...

"and then dismiss the clear IMPRESSION a young female VP gives to the ticket?"

I know you're used to spinning facts into whatever straw men you want them to be, so they're easier to criticize, but it comes off as kind of stupid to make things up that I didn't say when people can easily read what I did say.

All I said was, the number of pro-choice women in the country who are willing to vote for a pro-life candidate but haven't already decided to do so is a pretty small number. So I don't think that nominating a pro-life woman is going to be a huge draw among independent female voters, the way Max thinks it will.

If Max was talking about the " IMPRESSION a young female VP gives to the ticket", I didn't see it; can you point that out to me? Or point out where I dismissed that impression?

comment #21

corey3rd says ...

it is funny that after our last 2 VPs, we're supposed to believe that the position has zero power. Really? Al and Dick just sat in their offices making sure the big guy was breathing? we can't treat the VP position as merely a window dressing.

Plus the revenge on her ex-brother-in-law won't be pleasing to many guys who fear a woman with power going after their balls and jobs.

comment #22

buster says ...

Am I the only Obama supporter that thinks this a genius move?? Call it transparent, desperate, whatever, it'll bring votes. This isn't a meritocracy for christ's sake, it's not about who's most qualified, it's about who can muster up the most votes across the right combination of states. Game over? That might be right. McCain may have just sealed the deal. I'll tell you what sounds desperate--the false bravado of these quick dismissals of the McCain-Palin ticket.

And as pro-life as I am, I'd be careful questioning anyone's judgment in deciding to rear a child with down's syndrome ... you guys sound like you're one step away from condoning infanticide.

comment #23

FeydAway says ...

Richardson: "but I don't see how nominating Palin helps him distance himself from Bush any more, just because she doesn't look like Dick Cheney."

That's an argument that the impression she gives does not separate McCain from the 'like Bush' impression. Your words, not mine.

Max said she would gain the ticket a chunk of the female INDEPENDENT vote. YOU brought in the pro-life/pro-choice thing. They are two separate debates. There are pro-life Democrats and pro-choice Republicans and there are both in the middle. It's not about that. It's about her being a woman and how that helps McCain distance himself from Bush.

comment #24

Mr. Buckles says ...

Mgmax,

You need to check your head. No one can contest the character it takes to raise a special needs child whether it be autism or Down's Syndrome. However, McCain already had that base locked up. What are you talking about? Perhaps this is about how much it might energize them.

If this is a play to get Hillary supporters who were disaffected, well, this is pretty thin. I guess it's this equation then, if you show them tits, they (pumas) will come?

To me, this choice just neutralizes one of your weapons of attack - experience, being fit to lead. How serious as a septegenerian can you be about experience as a prerequisitte if you name someone with such scant experience?

She's against pork yet she comes from a notoriously corrupt state with corruption running under her nose (Stevens was indicted at a federal level). I just don't think there's a lot of there there.

McCain's campaign is about going negative and using fear as a cudgel. He's been on the lowroad all summer and by ceding experience, he's signaled he will stay there.

We'll see how this plays (she might be a great presence and speaker), but on the surface, this calls into question McCain's judgment once again.

comment #25

corey3rd says ...

the big problem is that she's Catholic and McCain is trying to appease the mega-church snakehandlers. I can assure you that these folks still don't trust Catholics and that Pope.

comment #26

Teacher's Pets says ...

Can I post now? Oh, goody....

comment #27

George Prager says ...

I feel like I'm watching a mid80s Goldie Hawn movie.

comment #28

buster says ...

errr, that should say "as pro-choice as I am..." kinda flips the whole thing around, doesn't it...

comment #29

Teacher's Pets says ...

Mgmax, you really think the fact the she doesn't resemble the bald, sneering, hunchbacked old codger currently in office negates by itself the "four more years of Bush" argument?

Uh, hate to break it to you, but McCain doesn't look like Bush either, but somehow typically shallow Americans have managed to look past that glaring, important difference....

comment #30

Mgmax says ...

Go read National Review Online's The Corner over the last few days and tell me McCain had movement conservatives and evangelicals sewn up, especially when pro-choicers like Tom Ridge were being thrown about.

Granted, a lot of that is probably blowing off steam, much like KossersMove Onanists on the other side, but you can't know much about that side and not know that McCain is widely suspected and disliked.

Which is why McCain was the best GOP candidate for the center under the circumstances, of course-- and a nod back to that base in his VP pick was the logical extension of that.

And Richardson, really, all the polls show a lot of undecideds out there, more than usual. And at least half are women. Again, I'm not saying he won the election with this move, but I'm saying he made a brilliant play toward doing so.

comment #31

FeydAway says ...

Burma:
Don't get me wrong...I agree. That's why I always wondered why Obama never responded to the experience attacks with, "I have as much executive experience as you." Maybe the military experience trumps it, or maybe it's all about impression again.

comment #32

Mgmax says ...

"the big problem is that she's Catholic and McCain is trying to appease the mega-church snakehandlers. I can assure you that these folks still don't trust Catholics and that Pope."

On other hand, Catholic union workers in the Great Lakes, who are exactly who Biden is supposed to appeal to, might look on the choice fairly favorably, dontcha think?

comment #33

Richardson says ...

"That's an argument that the impression she gives does not separate McCain from the 'like Bush' impression."

No, it's an argument that the impression that she gives is not enough to overcome the more-defined, more-ingrained impression that McCain is like Bush. that impression has been around all year, and reinforced with numerous statements from both McCain and Bush, and, of course, that great hug picture.

And here's the other thing -- you're basically saying she has to make up for the gap in any recognizable difference between McCain and Bush. So they're going to use her to go after people who want "change". Problem is, that's *another* impression that they have to overcome -- the impression that Obama is the candidate for change. And that's a pretty ingrained impression.

the thing is, "impression"s are not inherently equal; one impression does not automatically topple another. They're trying to over-write one strongly-defined, deeper ingrained impression with a much looser, not-yet-defined one. I'm merely saying, I don't think that will work.

"Max said she would gain the ticket a chunk of the female INDEPENDENT vote. YOU brought in the pro-life/pro-choice thing. They are two separate debates."

How so? "Female independent" means a woman who is not tied to either party. Therefore, female independents include women who are pro-life and women who are pro-choice. Those are the only two options to be, so it's reasonable to break down "female independent" into those two categories and think logically about them for a moment. pro-life independents are the people who think Republicans don't go far enough -- maybe she'd attract some of them, but they wouldn't be "stolen" from Obama, so max's statement wouldn't apply to them. so that leaves pro-choice. Any woman who is strongly pro-choice won't switch over just because it's a woman who's espousing pro-life arguments. So, again, nobody stolen from Obama there.

So the only female independent vote left is women who are pro-choice, but not aggressively so. They're the only people who might go to Obama but might go to McCain. And I don't believe that a pro-life woman is the way to "steal" most of those votes from Obama.

So, yes, I brought pro-life/pro-choice into it -- because on any list of issues which are important to women, that's generally in the top two or three.

comment #34

Richardson says ...

"And Richardson, really, all the polls show a lot of undecideds out there, more than usual. And at least half are women."

I agree. but the flaw in your logic is that you are assuming that these women will blindly vote for her simply because she is a woman, and I haven't seen any evidence (even anecdotal) to suggest such a thing.

On the other hand, I have seen quite a few polls which list 'abortion rights' as an important issue for all women [both ways -- pro-life or pro-choice]. And I'm not sure an aggressively pro-life woman is the way to appeal to moderate independents.

it's funny that, if Obama moves left, you say "Oh, he's going to lose the centrist votes". But if McCain moves right -- far-right, really -- you don't see that as any sort of problem with appealing to centrists. Funny in that "Max has absolutely no perspective on his own party" sort of way.

comment #35

dangovich says ...

She's adorable, hot, cute?

I guess, if you're into that whole Stepford Wives thing.

comment #36

George Prager says ...

Does anybody remember the electrifying Gore/Kemp debate? Get ready for the sequel.

comment #37

Mgmax says ...

I no longer respond to direct attacks on my character or vision here, Richardson, as I decided that they too rarely bear even the slightest resemblance to reality.

Substantively, I will say that I think you are mistaken on how the electorate feels about abortion. The electorate basically holds contradictory views-- they think abortion should be legal, and they support almost any restriction that tends to come up.

My guess is, you're about to hear a whole lot about a certain 2003 bill Obama played a significant role in, and about "aborted" delivered babies being left to die in hospital closets. Without getting into the merits of that issue (which I'm sure will quickly sink into demagoguery), I wouldn't be so sure that one's a clear winner for your side, and settled.

comment #38

cjKennedy says ...

Count Thread, are you really going to ignore my broader point just to defend Dan Quayle?

comment #39

ketut says ...

Boys make passes at girls who wear glasses.

McCain - Keeping the O in GOP.

comment #40

Richardson says ...

"I no longer respond to direct attacks on my character or vision here, Richardson, as I decided that they too rarely bear even the slightest resemblance to reality."

It's nice when you feign moral superiority for taking the high road, but it's directly contradicted by all the times you have made posts solely for the purpose of insulting people based on their political beliefs.

"The electorate basically holds contradictory views-- they think abortion should be legal, and they support almost any restriction that tends to come up."

That would be debatable, and could lead to a long tangent, but it's easier to just point out that that's completely immaterial and hiding the issue, since she is no-bones hardcore pro-life.

"I wouldn't be so sure that one's a clear winner for your side, and settled."

I don't want to say you're wrong, but the thing about that is that, in order to really drive that issue, somebody in McCain's campaign is going to have to use language that paints them as aggressively pro-life. And I'm confident in Obama's ability to counter attacks with facts -- once you bring in "protecting the mother's health", the public opinion pendulum swings back to the left.

comment #41

VictorLazlo says ...

Do you Republicans really think the only reason women love Hillary is because of her gender? DO they think the only reason black people love Obama is because of his race?

THis choice answers that question. It's a replay of the GOP running Alan Keyes agaisnt Obama.

comment #42

George Prager says ...

"the big problem is that she's Catholic and McCain is trying to appease the mega-church snakehandlers. I can assure you that these folks still don't trust Catholics and that Pope."

Dudesters: She's not Catholic. She's a Pentecostal. (i.e. snake-handler).

comment #43

Richardson says ...

"DO they think the only reason black people love Obama is because of his race?"

Obviously you haven't been here long; every conservative poster, to a man, has made that argument and stood by it. we've even had it break down multiple times where they refused to acknowledge that it was even possible that such a belief could be even a little bit racist on the face of it.

So, short answer: yes. Yes they do.

comment #44

Stephe96 says ...

My 2 cents: she's a great pick for McCain. The GOP now has more experience at the bottom of their ticket than the Democrats have at the top. I would've figured Romney for VP but the more I learn about Palin the more I like her.

I really think the election will come down to Obama's:

a) woeful lack of experience

b) zero accomplishments

c) his appalling lack of judgment in choosing friends and/or associates - Rezko, Wright, Ayers.

Oh well...either way, this election sure just got a lot more interesting!

comment #45

Mgmax says ...

"every conservative poster, to a man, has made that argument and stood by it."

Res ipso loquitur.

comment #46

Aladdin Sane says ...

Ketut, awesome.

I was thinking that this may fuel a whole lot of Young Republican wet dreams in the foreseeable future. As some have pointed out, she is an attractive woman.

It's a very shrewd and clever move that could either pay off big time or totally backfire.

Of course, as a foreigner, I don't get a say in the end. It still wouldn't switch me to McCain from Obama. II gotta respect McCain for actually being a maverick during this campaign for the first time it seems.

comment #47

Geoff says ...

Where is Shelly Runyon when you need him?

comment #48

VictorLazlo says ...

Richardson: Very sad

My Dad voted for Eisenhower, JFK, Lyndon Johnson, McGovern, Carter and Clinton.

I voted for Clinton, Gore, Kerry.

Black folks have been voting for white people since we were freed!

And why didn't Chisolm, Sharpton, Jackson or Keyes take off if the only requirement was a bronze complexion?

The media at large GREATLY underestimates the intelligence of black voters.

comment #49

VictorLazlo says ...

Steph96, without going wikipedia or google explain the "REZKO" scandal.

ANd then explain to me how its as bad as the Keating 5 debacle.

comment #50

corey3rd says ...

The original pundit who talked about her being Catholic had to correct himself. A snakehandling-breeder will appeal to the base that was slipping away from McCain.

The firing of the brother-in-law will be an issue. However McCain knows how to snowblind the press as seen with his twisting the truths about how he hid his wife's drug bust from public knowledge.

But what is getting me is how many people are downplaying the power of the VP position. Nobody wants to talk how she matches up with Dick Cheney.

Palin's nomination has secured Hillary Clinton that Supreme Court position if Obama wins. She's going to be begged to hardcore stump for him and that is the prize at the end for her.

And Vietnam declared that it did not torture POWs in the Hanoi Hilton. Do you think Osama's driver is going to go far in politics when he's released from Gitmo? How many years was he tortured?

comment #51

Richardson says ...

"And why didn't Chisolm, Sharpton, Jackson or Keyes take off if the only requirement was a bronze complexion?"

The only argument I've seen to counter this -- and, being fair, it wasn't anybody here -- is that they were too black to appeal to white people.

it's one of those things which is completely absurd on the face of it, but how, exactly, can you argue with "black people are only voting for him because he's black". There's no argument or logic there to counter.

comment #52

Richardson says ...

"Res ipso loquitur."

Yay! We agree! The statements, including your own, speak for themselves. What a nice way to end this argument.

comment #53

buster says ...

Obviously you haven't been here long; every conservative poster, to a man, has made that argument and stood by it. we've even had it break down multiple times where they refused to acknowledge that it was even possible that such a belief could be even a little bit racist on the face of it.

Victor, I don't recall everyone "to a man" saying the only reason blacks are voting for Obama is because of his race. In fact, Richardson is deliberately twisting and transposing the argument against the idea that those not voting for Obama are racist (as Wells asserts). It's an outright LIE.

comment #54

JHRussell says ...

Palin is a brilliant pick with more executive experience than the 3 men on the 2 tickets combined.

If Obama thinks this takes the experience issue off the table, he should go for it, because it will be slapped back into his face with the fact that she has more relevant exec/admin experience than HE has...the Obama attacks on Palin today are ludicrously thin - they are knocking the fact that she was mayor of a "small" town under 10k population (tell me again which city BO was mayor of?) and that she has less than 2 years in the governors office (again, remind me which state BO was governor of?)...well, I am waiting...

Not only will she be the first female VP, she has the inside track to be the first female Pres in 2016...

comment #55

Joel says ...

http://flickr.com/photos/7326750@N03/2808535801/

comment #56

Geoff says ...

This whole "executive" argument for Sarah Palin is cute.

comment #57

Richardson says ...

"In fact, Richardson is deliberately twisting and transposing the argument against the idea that those not voting for Obama are racist (as Wells asserts)"

No, I'm not. Here's one quick example of the sort of thing I'm talking about:
"George Will... pointed out that he truly believes for every person who doesn't vote for Obama simply because he's black three or four people WILL vote for Obama simply because he's black."

That's a post from three days ago.

I think the lengthier arguments I'm talking about pre-date you as a poster.

But, hey, if you're willing to stand up and say that black people are voting for Obama for a variety of reasons, congratulations. You will become the first conservative poster here to do so.

comment #58

spoiled says ...

So do the conservatives here trust Sarah Palin to immediately lead the free world if McCain were to bow out of the job for health reasons?

comment #59

JHRussell says ...

"This whole "executive" argument for Sarah Palin is cute."

Not an argument - an undeniable fact.

Also undeniable fact - Barack Obama has never held an executive or administrative position in business or government in his life. If elected, he will be the most inexperienced Presdent in our lifetimes if not in 200+ years.

comment #60

JHRussell says ...

"So do the conservatives here trust Sarah Palin to immediately lead the free world if McCain were to bow out of the job for health reasons?"

Yes, a hell of a lot more than I trust Barry Obama in the job...

comment #61

George Prager says ...

"With all due respect again to Governor Kaine, he's been a governor for three years, he's been able but undistinguished. I don't think people could really name a big, important thing that he's done. He was mayor of the 105th largest city in America. And again, with all due respect to Richmond, Virginia, it's smaller than Chula Vista, California; Aurora, Colorado; Mesa or Gilbert, Arizona; north Las Vegas or Henderson, Nevada. It's not a big town." --Karl Rove, August 10, "Face the Nation"

comment #62

Ghost072 says ...

Wow. This has to be the most ridiculous VP nomination I have ever seen. Let's break it down, shall we?

McCain's camp says that Barack Obama is not ready to lead, because he only had 7 years in the Illinois legislature and 3 years in the Senate. So, McCain picks a nominee who 18 months ago was the mayor of a town with the population of 9,000. McCain's age was already an issue in the backs of the minds of a lot of Americans - and just got a lot bigger.

This is not to mention the fact that the choice reeks of desperation and pure and simple identity politics. McCain could have chosen so many other women with far greater qualifications, but instead he picks one who gleefully cites her PTA experience as a qualification. Her husband works for BP and she has simmering scandal brewing that she improperly used her political power to settle a personal matter. Gee, who does that remind you of (besides the Keating Five-era John McCain, that is)?

I cannot wait to see this decision blow up in the cynical faces of those running McCain's campaign. The idea that some 18 month governor is going to satisfy Clinton supporters is ludicrous and insulting and it will not work.

Say hello to President Barack Obama.

comment #63

George Prager says ...

BizarroWorldJHRussell says ...

Deval Patrick is a brilliant pick with more executive experience than the 3 men on the 2 tickets combined.

If Bob Dole picked George W. Bush to be his VP in 1996, would JHRussel have gushed about his "experience?" It's amazing how obtuse some people can get while spinning for their guy.

comment #64

JHRussell says ...

Prager, what the hell are you talking about? What do your examples have to do with anything I have said?

Face facts, libs: Obama blew it by skipping over Clinton, and he is now going to pay for it with defections of Hillary supporters for the GOP ticket...it won't take very many of those defections to break what is otherwise a deadlocked election...

comment #65

Ghost072 says ...

18 months ago, Sarah Palin was the mayor of Wasilla, Alaska. In the four years before that, she served two terms on the Wasilla City Council. A TOWN OF 9,000 PEOPLE. Oh and she also served simultaneously on the Wasilla PTA. I almost forgot that. But hey - at least she'll deliver Alaska's 13 electoral votes! LOL...

And to think that some dimbulb rightie was on CNN today saying that "Barack Obama cannot match up to Sarah Palin's wealth of experience."

This almost feels like a bad Hollywood script; Hard-scrabbling POW grandpa chooses a woman young enough to be his daughter (or sunset affair, she isn't much younger than Cindy) and she fixes the government with lessons learned working for the PTA. A wholesome family film, I'm sure.

Are you righties kidding here, or what? This choice is absolutely the stupidest thing McCain could have done and you're actually trying to convince us that you think it is a good idea? Good luck with that...

comment #66

FeydAway says ...

We can debate all we want about how much of the female independent vote Palin will pull.

But, the bottom line is the electoral line. The states truly in question are: Colorado, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Virginia.

I would argue that Palin locks down Ohio (which was already being slightly projected Rep). I don't think she is enough to pull Penn or NH. Virginia could be close, as will Minnesota. It may come down to both of those.

comment #67

Josh Massey says ...

So in a matter of a couple of hours, both Poland and Wells have listed her having a Down's Syndrome child as among her negatives.

And I thought conservatives were supposed to be the ruthless, back-stabbing, heartless ones...

comment #68

George Prager says ...

The key word is obtuse. Look up Deval Patrick on wikipedia. I doubt you would say "This guy is experienced!"
HIllary supporters won't go for Palin because she is anti-abortion and they don't want their hopes for a woman president to be realized by a conservative Republican. Did Margaret Thatcher open doors for women in Britain? They probably won't elect another woman prime minister for another 100 years. You're also going to have defections on the GOP side for Obama (or Barr) because of this pick.

comment #69

Richardson says ...

JHRussell - can you elaborate a little bit about what makes Sarah Palin an attractive candidate to all of the Hillary supporters who will defect for the GOP? Such as, which policies does she support which are important to Hillary supporters?

Because I certainly don't want to leap to the conclusion that you're saying they're switch their vote solely because Palin is a woman, but you're not giving me much to go with.

comment #70

George Prager says ...

"So in a matter of a couple of hours, both Poland and Wells have listed her having a Down's Syndrome child as among her negatives."

Did they really list that as one of her negatives? If so, it is because she should be home taking care of him, not gallivanting around Dayton with William Frawley.

comment #71

Chapman Carruthers says ...

Stylish rims. Fantastic manicure. Love the fur coats she wears to her speaking engagements. And the pist pump. Oh my. The first pump. Carrie Bradshaw, come on down. The white house is waiting, and the staff is well prepared to handle your special needs child. They have eight years of experience dealig with two others.

comment #72

Richardson says ...

"So in a matter of a couple of hours, both Poland and Wells have listed her having a Down's Syndrome child as among her negatives."

Personally, I'm just wondering how a person with a newborn baby with Down's Syndrome has the time to be running for / acting as Vice President. Any newborn's parent is going to be stretched thing as it is, but a special needs child takes up even more of your time.

It's amazing to me that she will, essentially, be handing off a baby with Down's Syndrome to full-time employees and still be running on "family values", and NOBODY will ever call her on it publicly.

God bless America. No writer could write stuff that funny.

comment #73

corey3rd says ...

John McCain is no William Frawley. St. Fred Mertz is sacred!

And Alaska only has 3 Electoral votes.

Also doesn't help that she considered hunting with helicopters and semi-automatic rifles as a fun activity.

comment #74

JHRussell says ...

"JHRussell - can you elaborate a little bit about what makes Sarah Palin an attractive candidate to all of the Hillary supporters who will defect for the GOP? Such as, which policies does she support which are important to Hillary supporters? Because I certainly don't want to leap to the conclusion that you're saying they're switch their vote solely because Palin is a woman, but you're not giving me much to go with."

First, Obama already has a huge problem with the Hillary supporters, particularly the women - there is a large gender gap for him in the polls that was there before Palin was picked, and I think that there will continue to be a gap through election day for female Hillary supporters who feel they wuz robbed by Obama not once but twice - he could have picked her as a running mate and nothing that McCain could have done today would have mattered, but he did not, and I think Palin will attract some Hillary voters...it won't take many to put McCain over the top...

This is not rocket science, folks.

comment #75

Richardson says ...

So, they're going to switch their vote solely because she's a woman? got it, thanks.

comment #76

Ghost072 says ...

"First, Obama already has a huge problem with the Hillary supporters, particularly the women - there is a large gender gap for him in the polls that was there before Palin was picked"

I'm still waiting for the second part of your point, because the first one is weak. Obama has lead McCain by between 10 and 20 percentage points since the campaign started. He lead 52% to 36% as recently as August 10, 2008. Of course, he is bound to get a sizeable bounce in Clinton supporters based on the DNC Convention and both Hillary and Bill's speeches, too.

But besides those inconvenient facts, do you honestly think Clinton women are so stupid that they vote for a woman who stands in direct contrast to everything they believe in November? If so, you might want to do a little research on past presidential elections, particularly the final voting results of spurned primary candidate supporters (here is a hint, without fail, they come back in full when it is time to vote, and there have been larger deficits than what Obama is experiencing right now). This is GOP wishful thinking, nothing more.

"This is not rocket science, folks."

Indeed. I have yet to see anything scientific about your postulations.

comment #77

Nick Rogers says ...

I see more Nia Vardalos in that picture of Palin.

comment #78

Mgmax says ...

My God, the sexism toward working women in this thread is breathtaking. It's especially appalling that every liberal poster, to a man, has made that argument and stood by it.

"So do the conservatives here trust Sarah Palin to immediately lead the free world if McCain were to bow out of the job for health reasons?"

Every bit as much as anyone else in the race besides McCain, yes.

For the record, I would not say that either black people would vote for Obama purely because of race-- though how could you really tell if they were or weren't?-- or that women would vote for McCain-Palin because of her alone. But would I be surprised if they'd give the ticket another look because of her, versus if he'd picked another white senator? Not in the least. Richardson claims everyone has already decided this election and in fact they've decided it on abortion; I would very much like to see a link to the poll that supports this rather curious interpretation of the race.

"But besides those inconvenient facts, do you honestly think Clinton women are so stupid that they vote for a woman who stands in direct contrast to everything they believe in November?"

No, Clinton women who have beliefs in direct contrast surely won't. Ones who have beliefs that overlap in places with Palin's beliefs, however, are another matter. That's who's in play, and as I noted before, polls indicate there are more than usual of them out there. And, of course, if the ranks of both independents and Democrats have increased in the last few years, where does that mean they came from? And could conceivably go back to?

"Also doesn't help that she considered hunting with helicopters and semi-automatic rifles as a fun activity."

Really? Which states that McCain thinks he could win do you think it hurts in? Pennsylvania? Minnesota?

"Personally, I'm just wondering how a person with a newborn baby with Down's Syndrome has the time to be running for / acting as Vice President. Any newborn's parent is going to be stretched thing as it is, but a special needs child takes up even more of your time."

Compared to what, two black pre-teens on the south side of Chicago? God knows there's a group that's never at risk. But you go right ahead and make an argument about how Republican women shouldn't be working or running for office. That'll go over big with Hillary voters.

comment #79

George Prager says ...

Mgmax's transformation into a concern troll is complete. He should've kept to his word and quit the site.

comment #80

Mgmax says ...

I never said I was quitting. I said I was disgusted.

The day when comments didn't work, though, was the best day on here in a long time.

comment #81

Ghost072 says ...

"No, Clinton women who have beliefs in direct contrast surely won't. Ones who have beliefs that overlap in places with Palin's beliefs, however, are another matter."

Yes, but how many Clinton voters do you think overlap with the idea that abortion should never be legal, not even in cases of rape or incest? How about equal pay for equal work, do you think they overlap on that issue? What about healthcare for children? What about SCHIP? I think when these women hear who Palin really is, they will run for the hills.

That is, of course, in addition to the fact that McCain has given up his one and only advantage in this election: experience. Now, his supporters are actually saying things like "Palin has more executive experience than Barack Obama." I have news for those people: she has more executive experience than John McCain, too - all 18 months worth.

comment #82

George Prager says ...

Just hoping this GILF doesn't become the VPILF.

comment #83

spoiled says ...

Mgmax is just posting his thoughts like yours Prager.
Deal.

comment #84

Richardson says ...

"Richardson claims everyone has already decided this election"

That's just a lie.

"and in fact they've decided it on abortion"

That's a lie too.

"But you go right ahead and make an argument about how Republican women shouldn't be working or running for office."

You're either deliberately lying (when you spin that far, it's just a lie) or you're so stupid you can't read.

But let me say all the same things again, just for the hell of it, because expressing my own facts simply and then watching you lie about what I actually said amuses me.

1) After you said this move would "steal" (your word) all the undecided women from Obama, I pointed out that pro-life women wouldn't vote for Obama (not stolen) and pro-choice women wouldn't vote for this woman (not stolen), so the only possible undecided women this could steal would be women who are pro-choice, but not strongly so.

To which I would only add, you're *still* arguing that her sole appeal is that she's a woman; you haven't offered any policies or anything else that would attract or sway any voters to her. Just "she's a woman -- that gives Republicans a big chunk of the undecided women!"

2) I don't understand how any parent of either party has enough time to run for Vice President while raising a newborn with Down's Syndrome.

But, yeah, that's *exactly* the same thing as "Republican women shouldn't be working".

comment #85

Chapman Carruthers says ...

>>>the sexism toward working women

Max, you KNOW I read your posts while I'm jerking off in the bathroom. It really bothers me -- and takes me out of my zen prefontaine-like trance -- when you make statements that even I can't support. Like the above. Sexism towards working women? Really? Seems like they were comments directed at a (singular) working woman (singular) and her (singular) individual (singular) circumstance.

Because of her, I hope McCain wins. She looks like the sort that would blog in her free time. And give us, the people, updates on Angelina's babies. And where Ted Nugent vacay's on weekends. And how to make table decorations out of spent machine gun casings. And decor tips for the inside of our ice fishing houses. I imagine there'd be a red, white, and blue motif with lots of little crosses mixed in, and a fuzzy, pink doormat.

comment #86

SpinDozer says ...

'Am I the only Obama supporter that thinks this a genius move?? '

Probably. We'll see how she performs in the next week. From what I can tell her biggest accomplishment/character-defining issue has been selling the former Guv's plane on ebay. Aside from weakening the experience "advantage" arguement, her nomination will bring more focus on McCain's age. As an unknown quantity, she still has the opportunity to impress, but at this point, I'd say ...Ferarro.

comment #87

JHRussell says ...

"I'm still waiting for the second part of your point, because the first one is weak. Obama has lead McCain by between 10 and 20 percentage points since the campaign started. He lead 52% to 36% as recently as August 10, 2008. Of course, he is bound to get a sizeable bounce in Clinton supporters based on the DNC Convention and both Hillary and Bill's speeches, too."

You are not very well informed.

Read the polls of Hillary voters - I don't have it in front of me, but something like 27 percent of them said they will vote for McCain or not vote at all...Obama has only gotten about half of them to say they will vote for him....this represents a huge oppo