Update: McCain Selects Gov. Sarah Palin as Running Mate

[hesscl34]

Originally Posted by mheisig

It's a fact? How so?

Do you have quantitative data to backup a massive, sweeping assertion about what the "rest of the world" thinks?

Have you spoken with a sufficient portion of the non-U.S. population of the world to extrapolate that "the rest of the world" holds a certain view of the U.S.?

Simply declaring something a fact doesn't make it so. I can declare that up is down and red is blue as well, but it doesn't make it any more rational.

'

England has had Queens ... Queens they loved and died for. American is young, THAT is a fact.. and I just don't see us being ready to respect and love a woman as it's leader, but I hope I am wrong. I just don't think we are ready.. and it's that simple.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by hesscl34

You are talking about a place far older and wiser than the US. I hate to say it but we haven't grown up yet. We are still adolescents in the eyes of the rest of the world. That's not a knock on America, it's just fact.

I think Thatcher is universally regarded very highly. Not just in the UK and Europe. I understand your points and I agree that it exists here but I just don't agree that her being female actually matters. It sure doesn't matter to me at all. And the fact that she is attractive and could get the "horndog" vote is meaningless to me. There are "horndogs" everywhere. Not just here.

Anyone else think it is ironic that McCain, the painted womanizer, choose a younger attractive female as is his running mate? I wonder if CIndy said "Oh no you di'nt!"

[hesscl34]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Anyone else think it is ironic that McCain, the painted womanizer, choose a younger attractive female as is his running mate? I wonder if CIndy said "Oh no you di'nt!"

Next thing you know they'll be reports about them knocking boots ....

I'm telling ya, we are not ready...

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by hesscl34

Next thing you know they'll be reports about them knocking boots ....

I'm telling ya, we are not ready...

When is anybody REALLY ready for radical change? It always has some fallout....
BUT for trash like Bin Laden, he will understand and respect pretty damn fast when confronted by our first lady VP and a compliment of Delta force?

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by hesscl34

Next thing you know they'll be reports about them knocking boots ....

I'm telling ya, we are not ready...

I hear what you are saying but I don't think the fact that we tend to sexualize relationships between men and woman needlessly in our society presents an issue. To me the poster that Buster ( ithink) made doesn't prove to me in any way that we aren't ready. Maybe it is just that she's good lookin' and people notice. Woamn supposedly swooned over Bill Clinton and we didn't question it.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by hesscl34

You are talking about a place far older and wiser than the US. I hate to say it but we haven't grown up yet. We are still adolescents in the eyes of the rest of the world. That's not a knock on America, it's just fact.

Are you Barack Obama posing as a redhead on here? Wow...

That "America is worse than Europe" theme...I'm sick of it.

[Monkeydad]

She just gave an incredible speech and even gave credit to Ms. Clinton for furthering the progress of women. She told about her accomplishments of holding people accountable in government, her great experience and qualifications, and how her son joined the army.

She is infinitely more qualified than Obama with all of her executive experience and she has a strong set of morals on top of that. She;s a great speaker too and did nothing to trash her opponents.

McCain looks like a genius now.

[BringBackJoeT]

Originally Posted by Buster

She just gave an incredible speech and even gave credit to Ms. Clinton for furthering the progress of women. She told about her accomplishments of holding people accountable in government, her great experience and qualifications, and how her son joined the army.

She is infinitely more qualified than Obama with all of her executive experience and she has a strong set of morals on top of that. She;s a great speaker too and did nothing to trash her opponents.

McCain looks like a genius now.

She did indeed give credit to Senator Clinton, with the reason being obvious, and the irony delicious. Since 1992, continuously topping the conservatives' hate list has been Hillary. Hillary is their undisputed "we hate" champion. And yet, what has become abundantly clear to Republicans is that their success in this year's general election is hinged on their ability to persuade those people who wanted HILLARY TO BE PRESIDENT (!!!) to vote for their ticket. Indeed, this makes McCain's choice of Palin a very smart one, with the "straight talk" philosophy he championed eight years ago being at the heart of this choice--"I'm not making any bones about this; I want Hillary's voters." Yup, for lovers of irony, this is a very good day.

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by BringBackJoeT

She did indeed give credit to Senator Clinton, with the reason being obvious, and the irony delicious. Since 1992, continuously topping the conservatives' hate list has been Hillary. Hillary is their undisputed "we hate" champion. And yet, what has become abundantly clear to Republicans is that their success in this year's general election is hinged on their ability to persuade those people who wanted HILLARY TO BE PRESIDENT (!!!) to vote for their ticket. Indeed, this makes McCain's choice of Palin a very smart one, with the "straight talk" philosophy he championed eight years ago being at the heart of this choice--"I'm not making any bones about this; I want Hillary's voters." Yup, for lovers of irony, this is a very good day.

As politically brilliant as I think the selection is, I'm not buying the whole "it will sway Hillary voters" bit.

Anyone who was a Hillary supporter is going to have so many problems with Palin that the only thing Hillary and Palin will have in common is that they're both women.

If that fact alone is enough to completely ignore differences with respect to EVERY other area of policy and approach, then those voters could have been swayed with the promise of cupcakes and the Palin selection was unnecessary.

What I find funny is the reaction to this. Does anyone really expect die-hard Obama fans to suddenly change their position with the Palin selection? Please.

The selection really just fortifies his voting base and is a really good grab at a lot of the independent swing voters. Anyone expecting massive upheaval or for lifetime Democrats to suddenly vote Republican are sorely mistaken.

[BringBackJoeT]

Originally Posted by mheisig

As politically brilliant as I think the selection is, I'm not buying the whole "it will sway Hillary voters" bit.

Anyone who was a Hillary supporter is going to have so many problems with Palin that the only thing Hillary and Palin will have in common is that they're both women.

If that fact alone is enough to completely ignore differences with respect to EVERY other area of policy and approach, then those voters could have been swayed with the promise of cupcakes and the Palin selection was unnecessary.

What I find funny is the reaction to this. Does anyone really expect die-hard Obama fans to suddenly change their position with the Palin selection? Please.

The selection really just fortifies his voting base and is a really good grab at a lot of the independent swing voters. Anyone expecting massive upheaval or for lifetime Democrats to suddenly vote Republican are sorely mistaken.

I didn't say anything about a "massive upheaval" of Dem voters going Republican by virtue of this pick. What seems clear (certainly at this point) is that we're in store for another very close election. Independent voters, to a cliche-like extent, have been identified as key. But from the moment Obama was declared the winner of the D primary, the McCain campaign has identified pissed off Hillary voters as a potential source of some key swing votes, and they have not made any secret of that. Have they banked on getting all 18 million? Of course not. The vast, vast majority of those were cast by dyed-in-the-wool Dems who wouldn't be swayed by a Republican female VP candidate who shares, politically, almost nothing in common with them. But again, given the potentially very small margin of victory that the winner may have, McCain's camp has obviously considered that even a small percentage of Hillary primary voters could, in this election, make a huge difference.

Sure, Gov. Palin, as you say, may "solidify" McCain's base, but she was hardly the only VP candidate who could have. And given her very obvious lack of experience (putting aside for purposes of this point how that experience measures up to Obama's), she can't be said to have been the most experienced VP candidate either. She is also from a traditionally red state (Alaska went to Bush both times), so it's not like this pick was geared toward potentially picking off blue one. So, unless I'm being extremely unfair here, it appears that what the McCain camp liked most about the independently-but-not-comparatively talented Gov. Palin is that she is a woman. What's important about that, for purposes of this campaign? The pissed off Hillary, voters, that's what. The McCain camp is very aware of the very large turnout in the Dem primaries, and understands (as does everyone) that a lot of Hillary fans thought she got screwed, which is why such a big deal was made this past week about how much enthusiasm Hillary would exhibit for Obama in Denver.

Will Gov. Palin appeal to, along with the conservative base, some soccer moms, independents, and possibly a few "greens"? No doubt. But, my point is that what McCain is really after here is just a sliver of those disaffected Hillary voters, who, given their sheer numbers, would possibly make more of a numerical difference in yet another election that will probably be decided by a 1-2% margin.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by BringBackJoeT

I didn't say anything about a "massive upheaval" of Dem voters going Republican by virtue of this pick. What seems clear (certainly at this point) is that we're in store for another very close election. Independent voters, to a cliche-like extent, have been identified as key. But from the moment Obama was declared the winner of the D primary, the McCain campaign has identified pissed off Hillary voters as a potential source of some key swing votes, and they have not made any secret of that. Have they banked on getting all 18 million? Of course not. The vast, vast majority of those were cast by dyed-in-the-wool Dems who wouldn't be swayed by a Republican female VP candidate who shares, politically, almost nothing in common with them. But again, given the potentially very small margin of victory that the winner may have, McCain's camp has obviously considered that even a small percentage of Hillary primary voters could, in this election, make a huge difference.

Sure, Gov. Palin, as you say, may "solidify" McCain's base, but she was hardly the only VP candidate who could have. And given her very obvious lack of experience (putting aside for purposes of this point how that experience measures up to Obama's), she can't be said to have been the most experienced VP candidate either. She is also from a traditionally red state (Alaska went to Bush both times), so it's not like this pick was geared toward potentially picking off blue one. So, unless I'm being extremely unfair here, it appears that what the McCain camp liked most about the independently-but-not-comparatively talented Gov. Palin is that she is a woman. What's important about that, for purposes of this campaign? The pissed off Hillary, voters, that's what. The McCain camp is very aware of the very large turnout in the Dem primaries, and understands (as does everyone) that a lot of Hillary fans thought she got screwed, which is why such a big deal was made this past week about how much enthusiasm Hillary would exhibit for Obama in Denver.

Will Gov. Palin appeal to, along with the conservative base, some soccer moms, independents, and possibly a few "greens"? No doubt. But, my point is that what McCain is really after here is just a sliver of those disaffected Hillary voters, who, given their sheer numbers, would possibly make more of a numerical difference in yet another election that will probably be decided by a 1-2% margin.

Very sensible post. I think the big risk McCain assumes with this pick is that the remaining disaffected Hillary supporters, that are still out there, will remain upset for another two months. In my opinion, he is pre-supposing that their collective anger won't wear off and that they will hold that posture all the way until Novemeber 4th. That's one helluva gamble if you ask me. But the one question that Palan will have to unequicvocably answer is, are you ready to be Commander in Chief if put in that situation. Joe Biden, by virtue of his own bid for POTUS, has been vetted in that regard.

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by BringBackJoeT

I didn't say anything about a "massive upheaval" of Dem voters going Republican by virtue of this pick. What seems clear (certainly at this point) is that we're in store for another very close election. Independent voters, to a cliche-like extent, have been identified as key. But from the moment Obama was declared the winner of the D primary, the McCain campaign has identified pissed off Hillary voters as a potential source of some key swing votes, and they have not made any secret of that. Have they banked on getting all 18 million? Of course not. The vast, vast majority of those were cast by dyed-in-the-wool Dems who wouldn't be swayed by a Republican female VP candidate who shares, politically, almost nothing in common with them. But again, given the potentially very small margin of victory that the winner may have, McCain's camp has obviously considered that even a small percentage of Hillary primary voters could, in this election, make a huge difference.

Sure, Gov. Palin, as you say, may "solidify" McCain's base, but she was hardly the only VP candidate who could have. And given her very obvious lack of experience (putting aside for purposes of this point how that experience measures up to Obama's), she can't be said to have been the most experienced VP candidate either. She is also from a traditionally red state (Alaska went to Bush both times), so it's not like this pick was geared toward potentially picking off blue one. So, unless I'm being extremely unfair here, it appears that what the McCain camp liked most about the independently-but-not-comparatively talented Gov. Palin is that she is a woman. What's important about that, for purposes of this campaign? The pissed off Hillary, voters, that's what. The McCain camp is very aware of the very large turnout in the Dem primaries, and understands (as does everyone) that a lot of Hillary fans thought she got screwed, which is why such a big deal was made this past week about how much enthusiasm Hillary would exhibit for Obama in Denver.

Will Gov. Palin appeal to, along with the conservative base, some soccer moms, independents, and possibly a few "greens"? No doubt. But, my point is that what McCain is really after here is just a sliver of those disaffected Hillary voters, who, given their sheer numbers, would possibly make more of a numerical difference in yet another election that will probably be decided by a 1-2% margin.

I think I agree with you in principle, I may just not agree as to the margin.

I simply can't fathom of an individual who would have voted for Hillary who would now vote for Palin. Again, the only "issue" they remotely have in common is that they're both women.

Again, I'm sure their may be a small number of people who would go from Hillary to Palin solely on that basis, but my gut feeling is the number is so infintesimally small that even in a close race (which I agree it will be) it wouldn't matter. I can't imagine that number being in the tens of thousands, let alone millions.

I suppose if the race gets down to one candidate winning by a margin of a few thousand votes than maybe it will be important, but even when elections are close they're not THAT close.

You never know though - we'll only know when the whole thing is said and done come November.

[NM Redskin]

Originally Posted by Buster

She just gave an incredible speech and even gave credit to Ms. Clinton for furthering the progress of women. She told about her accomplishments of holding people accountable in government, her great experience and qualifications, and how her son joined the army.

She is infinitely more qualified than Obama with all of her executive experience and she has a strong set of morals on top of that. She;s a great speaker too and did nothing to trash her opponents.

McCain looks like a genius now.

[Monkeydad]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Obama released this statement, "She is not the change we need."


This man can not put a rational thought together.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by Buster

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Obama released this statement, "She is not the change we need."


This man can not put a rational thought together.

I am the way, the truth, and the life
-Barrack 14:6 ??
Or was that Jesus? I get the two confused...........