Is Palin failin' ? or OMG McCain wins with Palin !! pt. 3

[Irvine511]

Well, I would assume her approval rating is probably based on a wide variety of things. I'm sure it does involve whether people think she is intelligent to some degree. Certainly, its a better indicator than some people who are foaming at the mouth waiting to see if they can find any Gaffe or near Gaffe from a couple of interviews. Alaska may have a lot of oil, but has any politician ever in Alaska had the approval ratings that she has had up there?

when has oil ever been this profitable?

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

when has oil ever been this profitable?

For Alaska, I would say the 1970s when they did not have all the restrictions on drilling and the price of oil was relatively high even compared to today.

 

[deep]

when has oil ever been this profitable?

so it is this profitable

why hasn't the Democratically controlled congress got a wind-fall profits tax bill passed?

Can you show me where Obama even offered some legislation?

 

[Irvine511]

so it is this profitable

why hasn't the Democratically controlled congress got a wind-fall profits tax bill passed?

Can you show me where Obama even offered some legislation?

fwiw, Obama has spoken about wind-fall profits as part of his platform.

do you see this passing a 50/50 Senate?

 

[Irvine511]

For Alaska, I would say the 1970s when they did not have all the restrictions on drilling and the price of oil was relatively high even compared to today.

so ... ?

and to further my point, not only does she pay off Alaskans (there are only 600,000 of them and it's one of the least diverse states in the nation), but she's been governor for 18 months.

what was GWB's approval rating 18 months into his presidency?

an 80% approval rating is hardly indication that she's qualified for national office. it's 600,000 people. many, many, many cities in this country have more people and more diverse populations.

 

[U2Fanatic4ever]

thank you irvine.. ^

 

[Strongbow]

so ... ?

and to further my point, not only does she pay off Alaskans (there are only 600,000 of them and it's one of the least diverse states in the nation), but she's been governor for 18 months.

what was GWB's approval rating 18 months into his presidency?

an 80% approval rating is hardly indication that she's qualified for national office. it's 600,000 people. many, many, many cities in this country have more people and more diverse populations.

Since when has the number of people a state had and its level of diversity determined if a candidate was qualified for office? Adjusting for the time period and differences in population, Lincoln represented a smaller number of people in Illinois in the 1830s and 1840s than Sarah Palin has represented over the past two years.

If the Governor of Arkansas can be President, so can the Governor of Alaska.

 

[deep]

fwiw, Obama has spoken about wind-fall profits as part of his platform.

do you see this passing a 50/50 Senate?

for the record

that ad a few weeks back

"Obama to give sex ed to kinderganden"

I have to admit it was a bad ad,
when I first viewed it,
I believed Obama had written or at least co-sponsored the legislation

that was not the case, the ad was misleading


now. Palin's record with the Oil and gas? producers is real

these folks had both parties doing their bidding in Alaska, there was collusion, perhaps corruption, she took it head on, made them renegotiate the fees/ taxes they pay


to try and dismiss this accomplishment or minimize it because one does not want to give her due credit

is as bad as believing Obama wrote legislation that would let teachers tell 5 year olds anything they wanted to about sex,
just because one wants to cast Obama in the poorest light possible.

 

[Irvine511]

^ does this somehow make up for everything else?

would such a thing be possible anywhere other than Alaska?

it's a deeply different state from the lower 48. to think that skills gleaned from 18 months in office north of Canada is somehow adequate preparation for the presidency is deeply weird.

 

[anitram]

You know what, we have had an awful provincial government up there in Alberta which makes Alaska's oil deposits look like a couple of droplets. And they boast about the wonderful work they've done balancing the budget and so on when they are sitting on more oily gold than anywhere else in the free world. Well, gee, what an accomplishment it is to be swimming in profits when commodities skyrocket! If my dog ran that economy, he'd post the same results.

 

[deep]

^ does this somehow make up for everything else?

would such a thing be possible anywhere other than Alaska?

you don't get it

before Palin everyone believed it was impossible to accomplish this in Alaska

It was perceived as much less likely than

wind-fall profits tax

do you see this passing a 50/50 Senate?

 

[Irvine511]

you don't get it

before Palin everyone believed it was impossible to accomplish this in Alaska

If was perceived as much less likely than

diamond? did you steal your brother's laptop?

i see someone's preaching the Politics of Hope.

 

[anitram]

And here is a nice summation from a Palin apologist:

But Sarah Palin's performance in the tiny vignettes of unscripted dialogue in which we've been allowed to see her has been nothing short of frightening -- really, as I said, pity-inducing. And I say that as someone who has thought from the start that the criticisms of her abilities -- as opposed to her ideology -- were much too extreme. One of two things is absolutely clear at this point: she is either (a) completely ignorant about the most basic political issues -- a vacant, ill-informed, incurious know-nothing, or (b) aggressively concealing her actual beliefs about these matters because she's petrified of deviating from the simple-minded campaign talking points she's been fed and/or because her actual beliefs are so politically unpalatable, even when taking into account the right-wing extremism that is permitted, even rewarded, in our mainstream. I'm not really sure which is worse, but it doesn't really matter, because with 40 days left before the election, both options are heinous.

 

[VintagePunk]

Well, I would assume her approval rating is probably based on a wide variety of things. I'm sure it does involve whether people think she is intelligent to some degree. Certainly, its a better indicator than some people who are foaming at the mouth waiting to see if they can find any Gaffe or near Gaffe from a couple of interviews. Alaska may have a lot of oil, but has any politician ever in Alaska had the approval ratings that she has had up there?

I've done extensive reading of the blog that Irvine just posted. The blog was created earlier this year to discuss Alaskan politics, so it was around well before the Palin VP nomination, it wasn't created expressly to bash her. The blogger is from Anchorage, and quite a few of the commentors are Alaskan (although the longer this campaign goes on, the more 'outsiders' go to it for information, and to post).

From what I gather, Alaskan politics have long been corrupt, and Palin ran on a platform of cleaning up matters, and breaking up the ol' boys club. She took over from a corrupt administration, and people held out great hope, so of course she was popular. Add in the government payouts to citizens, and she was able to maintain that popularity for quite a while. Then, her numbers started to drop. Only into the 60's, but still, it was a drop. They apparently rose again after McCain selected her, due mostly to the fact that one of their own was on the national stage, poised for big things.

People engaged in politics up there recognize that she didn't so much take out the old boys network, as much as she created a new one, where she would hire people she knows for cushy positions, in exchange for crazy degrees of loyalty. Anyone left over from the old administration was put through certain loyalty tests, and if they didn't measure up to her standards, they were fired.

The huge news up there at this time, and, what I suspect will drop her numbers down even lower now is Troopergate. In mainland US, Republicans seem to poo-poo the trooper thing as not a big deal, but Alaskan residents seem extremely pissed off about it, especially in light of the way she promised transparency in her administration, but now, has gone to extreme lengths to block the investigation. And that's only one problem with her, there are many more.

Many people who know her personally post there, and while I've not heard her described as unintelligent, I have heard the words ambitious, vindictive, secretive, private, lacking common sense and insular bandied about, among others. She's also said to politically drift in whichever way the popular winds blow. She's not nearly as principled as she lets on. As well, a week or so ago, there was a pro-Palin rally held where she spoke. It had less than 1,000 attendees. The same day, and anti-Palin rally was also held. It was the biggest political rally in Alaska's history, with well over two thousand in attendance.

So yeah, is she popular up there? No doubt. But, the state is heavily Republican in the first place, and the residents are handed oil money. And, as she's becoming mired in controversy and scandal, her numbers are dropping, and more and more people are becoming disillusioned, and speaking out against her.

I urge you to check out that blog. It's eye-opening.

 

[phillyfan26]

Since when has the number of people a state had and its level of diversity determined if a candidate was qualified for office? Adjusting for the time period and differences in population, Lincoln represented a smaller number of people in Illinois in the 1830s and 1840s than Sarah Palin has represented over the past two years.

If the Governor of Arkansas can be President, so can the Governor of Alaska.

Really? You're going to defend Sarah Palin by referring to something that happened 170 years ago?

 

[Irvine511]

OMFG.

SARAH SPEAKS!

(and says very, very little)

In a first, Palin takes press questions
By: Kenneth P. Vogel
September 25, 2008 03:21 PM EST

NEW YORK — Sarah Palin fielded four questions from a small group of reporters Thursday after touring several Sept. 11-related sites, articulating a forceful approach to the war on terror but offering mostly evasive answers to specific questions.

She also wouldn’t say whether she supports the reelection bids of embattled Alaska Republicans Sen. Ted Stevens and Rep. Don Young.

“Ted Stevens' trial started a couple days ago. We’ll see where that goes,” she told reporters in what amounted to her first press conference since accepting the Republican vice presidential nomination.

She ignored a follow-up question on whether she would vote for Stevens and Young and wouldn’t say whether she would have done anything differently than the Bush administration in its war on terror.

“I agree with the Bush administration that we take the fight to them,” she said. “We never again let them come onto our soil and try to destroy not only our democracy but communities like the community of New York. Never again. So yes, I do agree with taking the fight to the terrorists and stopping them over there.”

She deflected a follow-up question about whether she felt the continued U.S. military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan has inflamed Islamic extremists.

“I think our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan will lead to further security of our nation, again, because the mission is to take the fight over there. Do not let them come over here and attempt again what they accomplished here, and that was some destruction, terrible destruction on that day. But since Sept. 11, Americans are uniting and rebuilding and committing to never letting that happen again.

 

[anitram]

So she:

ignored a follow-up question

wouldn’t say whether she would have done anything differently

and

She deflected a follow-up question

in the process of answering 4 questions?

Great.

 

[VintagePunk]

Damn, she doesn't answer questions well at all. Any politician at all knows that if you're trying to deflect a follow up, you at least reword or reframe what you've already said to make it sound as though you're saying something different. She simply repeats the exact same words over and over and over, making herself sound dumb. I could do a better job that she does, and I'm fairly ineloquent.

 

[Irvine511]

So she:





and



in the process of answering 4 questions?

Great.

saying that Sarah Palin is unqualified to be president because she dodged several questions is the same thing as saying that Gov. Bill Clinton in 1992 is unqualified to be president because he has dodged questions, too.

still, Sarah's showing better chops for evasion since she got bulldozed by Katie freaking Couric.

 

[Strongbow]

Really? You're going to defend Sarah Palin by referring to something that happened 170 years ago?

Same country, same system of government. If you take a little time to study the two things, you'll see that the analogy actually does fit. The simple passage of time is irrelevant.

 

[Vincent Vega]

So she:





and



in the process of answering 4 questions?

Great.

She is "learning by doing". Today's lecture: How to avoid answering questions. Result: Still no progress.

Same country, same system of government. If you take a little time to study the two things, you'll see that the analogy actually does fit. The simple passage of time is irrelevant.

Reminds me of Scalia's session yesterday.

 

[Strongbow]

I've done extensive reading of the blog that Irvine just posted. The blog was created earlier this year to discuss Alaskan politics, so it was around well before the Palin VP nomination, it wasn't created expressly to bash her. The blogger is from Anchorage, and quite a few of the commentors are Alaskan (although the longer this campaign goes on, the more 'outsiders' go to it for information, and to post).

From what I gather, Alaskan politics have long been corrupt, and Palin ran on a platform of cleaning up matters, and breaking up the ol' boys club. She took over from a corrupt administration, and people held out great hope, so of course she was popular. Add in the government payouts to citizens, and she was able to maintain that popularity for quite a while. Then, her numbers started to drop. Only into the 60's, but still, it was a drop. They apparently rose again after McCain selected her, due mostly to the fact that one of their own was on the national stage, poised for big things.

People engaged in politics up there recognize that she didn't so much take out the old boys network, as much as she created a new one, where she would hire people she knows for cushy positions, in exchange for crazy degrees of loyalty. Anyone left over from the old administration was put through certain loyalty tests, and if they didn't measure up to her standards, they were fired.

The huge news up there at this time, and, what I suspect will drop her numbers down even lower now is Troopergate. In mainland US, Republicans seem to poo-poo the trooper thing as not a big deal, but Alaskan residents seem extremely pissed off about it, especially in light of the way she promised transparency in her administration, but now, has gone to extreme lengths to block the investigation. And that's only one problem with her, there are many more.

Many people who know her personally post there, and while I've not heard her described as unintelligent, I have heard the words ambitious, vindictive, secretive, private, lacking common sense and insular bandied about, among others. She's also said to politically drift in whichever way the popular winds blow. She's not nearly as principled as she lets on. As well, a week or so ago, there was a pro-Palin rally held where she spoke. It had less than 1,000 attendees. The same day, and anti-Palin rally was also held. It was the biggest political rally in Alaska's history, with well over two thousand in attendance.

So yeah, is she popular up there? No doubt. But, the state is heavily Republican in the first place, and the residents are handed oil money. And, as she's becoming mired in controversy and scandal, her numbers are dropping, and more and more people are becoming disillusioned, and speaking out against her.

I urge you to check out that blog. It's eye-opening.

Can you name a single Governor out there that does NOT have someone that does not like them in their home town or state?

Yes, Sarah Palin has political opponents in her home state, what politician does not?

 

[Vincent Vega]

Most of them have opponents on political issues, not corruptional issues.

 

[BVS]

Same country, same system of government. If you take a little time to study the two things, you'll see that the analogy actually does fit. The simple passage of time is irrelevant.

Wow

 

[VintagePunk]

Can you name a single Governor out there that does NOT have someone that does not like them in their home town or state?

Yes, Sarah Palin has political opponents in her home state, what politician does not?

That wasn't the point, was it? I was responding to the person's post re: why she has/had such strong support, and why that has changed over time.

Context is your friend.

 

[phillyfan26]

Same country, same system of government. If you take a little time to study the two things, you'll see that the analogy actually does fit. The simple passage of time is irrelevant.

That's like saying the score doesn't matter in a baseball game. The passage of time (which is the opposite of simple) is the whole point. Completely different time period with totally different circumstances on pretty much every issue imaginable.

 

[phillyfan26]

Can you name a single Governor out there that does NOT have someone that does not like them in their home town or state?

Yes, Sarah Palin has political opponents in her home state, what politician does not?

She was responding to the insinuation that Palin's poll numbers are extremely high by stating that they're falling and that there are reasons for them being high outside of her job performance. You apparently ignored this.

Context is lost on you, isn't it?

 

[phillyfan26]

Speaking of Abraham Lincoln:

Dick Polman's American Debate: Multi-tasking in American history
Philadelphia Inquirer
Thursday, September 25, 2008

Barack Obama, while assessing John McCain's attempt to cut and run from the Friday night presidential debate, contended yesterday that both candidates have ample time to shuttle between the Washington crisis and the Mississippi showdown. Indeed, he said, "It is going to be part of the (next) president's job to deal with more than one thing at once."

Perhaps this is the kind of multi-tasking that Obama was talking about:

While Abraham Lincoln was prosecuting the Civil War during his first winter in office, he was also trying to create a federal department of agriculture; to win diplomatic recognition for the black republics of Haiti and Liberia; to negotiate with Congress on proposals for a land-grand college system, a Pacific railroad charter, a tariff increase, and a tax on consumers. Over a period of two months that winter, he was also trying to avoid plunging the Union into a war with Great Britain (a two-month crisis precipitated by a Union captain's decision to board a British ship and remove two Confederate envoys), and success didn't come until the eleventh hour.

Eighty years later, Franklin D. Roosevelt was into all kinds of multi-tasking, even before Pearl Harbor; as one Washington magazine reported in April 1941, "A more discouraging agenda could not have been imagined." FDR had to deal that month with (among other things) urgent British appeals for more aid; the fallout of Allied setbacks in the Middle East; the delicate issue of Axis ships berthing in American ports;, the sluggish buildup of the newly-conscripted military; and a rash of labor strikes, fought over workloads, working conditions and wages, that ultimately affected one of every 12 American workers, and seriously slowed production of the war materials earmarked for Britain.

Twenty years after that, John F. Kennedy in the spring of 1961 had to juggle nearly simultaenous crises in Cuba, Laos, Vietnam - and the American South, where the racist attacks on the Freedom Riders brought the civil-rights crisis to the fore. In the autumn of 1962, even during the Cuban Missile crisis, Kennedy broke away for politics, flying to Chicago where he delivered speeches and pep talks to the Cook County Democrats in advance of the impending congressional elections.

But McCain himself knows a little about juggling simultaneous duties. Back in October 1999, for instance, he and his Senate Republican colleagues - led by his '08 campaign sidekick, Texas Sen. Phil Gramm - were busy putting the finishing touches on a landmark piece of deregulation legislation that would unshackle the financial industry from federal oversight. The work was completed in the wee hours - but wait, McCain wasn't there. He was multi-tasking up in New Hampshire...at a Republican presidential primary debate.

His debate message: Our "almost unprecedented prosperity" requires, among other things, "a lack of regulation."

Multi-tasking in American history | Philadelphia Inquirer | 09/25/2008

 

[Lila64]

 

[Earnie Shavers]

Wow. I just saw the Russia/foreign policy part of the Couric interview. I actually feel quite sorry for her.