Oh My God...McCain could win if he picks Palin!!!

[deep]

clearly, Biden.

i know where you are going.

now, now
just simmer down and drink a couple more beers

 

[namkcuR]

Everyone that disagrees with you, kind of simple terminology, no? And, to me, you are coming off like a lunatic. Lunatics usually do not recognize such behavior in themselves. You also spew a lot of nonsense, which makes me sad, since we lean the same way.

That is all, I will remove myself and go back where I belong.

I've never been called a lunatic by anyone before, nor have I been accused of spewing a lot of nonsense. I've been disagreed with by the conservatives[and some independents too sometimes] here to be sure, but never have such accusations been made against me. I don't appreciate it, because I really try not to be too attack-ish in here - in fact, outside of election season, I don't really post that much in here at all. There are people here who are a good deal more aggressive towards those they disagree with than I am, but I don't see anyone calling them lunatics - not that they should be called such, they're not lunatics anymore than I am, just people who feel passionate about their politics. I am sorry you feel this way. It's not the way I ever want to come off and frankly I'm a little taken aback by these accusations.

 

[deep]

Maybe you're right, maybe those words turned a true statement into a false one. However, like others have said, just because one supports abortion in the cases of rape and incest only does not mean one is pro-choice.

Did I say he was pro-choice?

or did I say:

1. consistently pro-life for his whole political career,


was 1/2 wrong

 

[Irvine511]

now, now
just simmer down and drink a couple more beers

i had a cocktail and some white wine.

beer is for burpy, farty, straight boys.



my favorite kind!

 

[namkcuR]

Did I say he was pro-choice?

or did I say:

1. consistently pro-life for his whole political career,


was 1/2 wrong

Ok, good enough for me. I see no point in arguing further.

 

[U2DMfan]

I guess I'll put my political hack hat on.

I tend to think it was a clever pick that might very well backfire, remains to be seen.
If I were a betting man, I'd say it's not going to matter. This election is a referendum on Obama. If people deem him fit to lead, he'll win going away. If not, then McCain always was a safe, default alternative choice. In many respects, I don't even believe that issues make a big difference in this particular election. The wings and the hardcore camps are set and always were, many swing voters are still scratching their heads.

All a VP pick really needs to be is
1. a non-embarassment.
2. ready to be President yesterday

8 of 43 (18%) Presidents didn't finish their terms.
So, deep, you are looking for a pecentage, how about 15-20%?

The argument that Palin is not ready to President from the hardcore Obama base is humorous at best. While it's probably true, it's seen as a two faced stance in light of Obama's biggest glaring problem. I think the best 'response' to this pick is to say "well, I guess the Republicans have finally admitted that you don't need to be in DC for decades to be President" STICK with that message, repeat it ad nauseum and leave it alone otherwise. It neutralizes the experience argument and it makes the pick itself look even more Quayle-esque.

The problem with DC over the recent years has nothing to do with liberal or conservative politics specifically IMO, there are enough balances in place that one should not be able to extert that much influence. The problem has been with this President and the competency of his cabinet, himself and the unilateral extension of executive power.

I firmly believe the undecided voters think this is essentially issue #1.
As in "Give me fairly moderate but competent leadership willing to work out compromises"
McCain and Obama both have their downsides in this light, as would anyone else. The best thing McCain did with the Palin pick was try and create a little distance from the staunch Bushism that he has become plagued with while Obama, as much as he likes to portray himself as a change agent, has addressed an admitted problem with Biden.

In the end, I think it's a wash. The VP whole ordeal.
However, there is one interesting thing I'd like to last touch on.
Obama's biggest problem, aside from the experience argument (and perhaps somewhat hand in hand with that issue) is his national persona. He was always going to be succeptable to the attack machine molding him or painting him into a charicature.
And so is Palin. So again, that is a bit of a neutralizer, although I still believe that only the top of the ticket is going to matter.

In 2004, John Edwards didn't help John Kerry and in 2000 Joe Lieberman didn't help Al Gore. As much as I truly like Joe Biden, I doubt he helps Obama all that much (maybe in NE PA, where Obama lost 3-1 to Hills, if anywhere).

Now to come full circle, all the VP pick really needs to be is a non-embarassment and ready to be President. If Obama is arguing that he is ready, then why can't Palin be ready? So that, IMO, is a neutralized argument to the swing voters . So that leaves the embarassment factor. Obama is getting put through the ringer (as he always was going to be) and mostly, what damage there was going to be, is done. So in sum, I think that even though I believe I can make a pretty objective argument than Palin was a clever but non-important pick, she still could serve to embarass McCain. Which, if you wanted to argue, makes it a questionable choice aside from all the rest. It is a risk if because of this alone. Sometimes risks can pay off. Why did he take the risk? I don't even have my head wrapped around it yet.

 

[Irvine511]

i still think that everyone who thought Obama was too risky, was too inexperience, and should have waited until '12 and/or '16 and was leaning McCain, needs to stop and think about what McCain's VP pick says about him, and about what he, McCain, thinks about you.

 

[U2DMfan]

again, this is a media stunt. a super-cynical media stunt.

Do you think it's going to work though?
I tend to agree but any VP choice is a stunt of sorts.

I just can't see THE reason he chose her.
Right now I am thinking his 'pool' of choices was so thin, she may have in fact been the best choice for him.

He couldn't pick a pro-choice candidate, period.
I don't know that there were many better choices in that light.

Romney, as much as conservatives are loathe to admit, has the mormonism and the flip floppery hanging around his neck. As silly as the Kerry "flip-flopper" charge was (silly nuance, eh?) I think they believed it.

I am still trying to wrap my head around this choice.
I think there is something else here, honestly.
I almost think the fact she has a son going to Iraq might have been the #1 factor, although, I don't even know if I'm prepared to make that argument.

 

[deep]

I guess I'll put my political hack hat on.

I tend to think it was a clever pick that might very well backfire, remains to be seen.
If I were a betting man, I'd say it's not going to matter. This election is a referendum on Obama. If people deem him fit to lead, he'll win going away. If not, then McCain always was a safe, default alternative choice. In many respects, I don't even believe that issues make a big difference in this particular election. The wings and the hardcore camps are set and always were, many swing voters are still scratching their heads.

All a VP pick really needs to be is
1. a non-embarassment.
2. ready to be President yesterday

8 of 43 (18%) Presidents didn't finish their terms.
So, deep, you are looking for a pecentage, how about 15-20%?

The argument that Palin is not ready to President from the hardcore Obama base is humorous at best. While it's probably true, it's seen as a two faced stance in light of Obama's biggest glaring problem. I think the best 'response' to this pick is to say "well, I guess the Republicans have finally admitted that you don't need to be in DC for decades to be President" STICK with that message, repeat it ad nauseum and leave it alone otherwise. It neutralizes the experience argument and it makes the pick itself look even more Quayle-esque.

The problem with DC over the recent years has nothing to do with liberal or conservative politics specifically IMO, there are enough balances in place that one should not be able to extert that much influence. The problem has been with this President and the competency of his cabinet, himself and the unilateral extension of executive power.

I firmly believe the undecided voters think this is essentially issue #1.
As in "Give me fairly moderate but competent leadership willing to work out compromises"
McCain and Obama both have their downsides in this light, as would anyone else. The best thing McCain did with the Palin pick was try and create a little distance from the staunch Bushism that he has become plagued with while Obama, as much as he likes to portray himself as a change agent, has addressed an admitted problem with Biden.

In the end, I think it's a wash. The VP whole ordeal.
However, there is one interesting thing I'd like to last touch on.
Obama's biggest problem, aside from the experience argument (and perhaps somewhat hand in hand with that issue) is his national persona. He was always going to be succeptable to the attack machine molding him or painting him into a charicature.
And so is Palin. So again, that is a bit of a neutralizer, although I still believe that only the top of the ticket is going to matter.

In 2004, John Edwards didn't help John Kerry and in 2000 Joe Lieberman didn't help Al Gore. As much as I truly like Joe Biden, I doubt he helps Obama all that much (maybe in NE PA, where Obama lost 3-1 to Hills, if anywhere).

Now to come full circle, all the VP pick really needs to be is a non-embarassment and ready to be President. If Obama is arguing that he is ready, then why can't Palin be ready? So that, IMO, is a neutralized argument to the swing voters . So that leaves the embarassment factor. Obama is getting put through the ringer (as he always was going to be) and mostly, what damage there was going to be, is done. So in sum, I think that even though I believe I can make a pretty objective argument than Palin was a clever but non-important pick, she still could serve to embarass McCain. Which, if you wanted to argue, makes it a questionable choice aside from all the rest. It is a risk if because of this alone. Sometimes risks can pay off. Why did he take the risk? I don't even have my head wrapped around it yet.

this seems like a pretty good assessment.

 

[deep]

i still think that everyone who thought Obama was too risky, was too inexperience, and should have waited until '12 and/or '16 and was leaning McCain, needs to stop and think about what McCain's VP pick says about him, and about what he, McCain, thinks about you.

my turn

to say I have no idea what you are trying to say here

 

[Irvine511]

Do you think it's going to work though?

i doubt it.

but then, i doubted GWB would be elected to a first, let alone a second, term.

it smells of desperation to me. and i think once the weirdness of the whole thing wears off, and once we learn more about her, it's going to look foolish.

but, as i've said, i've misunderestimated before.

but this pick is just ... what's painful about it is watching people fall for the abject cynicism of the whole thing.

 

[Irvine511]

my turn

to say I have no idea what you are trying to say here

it says that McCain is desperate

it says that he doesn't believe the main charge he's using against Obama (inexperience)

it says that he has a lower opinion of women than we thought

it says that he doesn't think he needs a VP

and it says that he thinks you're an idiot if you fall for all this.

 

[deep]

Do you think it's going to work though?
I tend to agree but any VP choice is a stunt of sorts.

I just can't see THE reason he chose her.
Right now I am thinking his 'pool' of choices was so thin, she may have in fact been the best choice for him.

He couldn't pick a pro-choice candidate, period.
I don't know that there were many better choices in that light.

Romney, as much as conservatives are loathe to admit, has the mormonism and the flip floppery hanging around his neck. As silly as the Kerry "flip-flopper" charge was (silly nuance, eh?) I think they believed it.

I am still trying to wrap my head around this choice.
I think there is something else here, honestly.
I almost think the fact she has a son going to Iraq might have been the #1 factor, although, I don't even know if I'm prepared to make that argument.

McCain is a strong enough force on his own

he is the happy warrior, the lone wolf
he has even said, if he was elected, he would go to congress once a week
and take questions from the well
much like the Brittish P M.

he is not like W or Obama,
the is no readiness perception problem

the polls all said the majority of the people believe he is ready to be President.

Ridge, aside from being pro-choice was a Bush Cabinet appointee
Romney wrapped himself around the Bush people in the primaries

McCain does not need to confirm Bush 3 label


Palmanety? is a weak suck, and only got into office because Minn has two Dem parties to split the ticket

Palin, is far removed from Bush, has a 80% approval rating, and yes she is a woman. I think she is smart enough not to do any major blunders. We will see.

 

[U2DMfan]

Deep, did you support McCain in 2000, like I did?

And if so, are you as disgusted with his 'turn' as I am?

 

[deep]

it says that McCain is desperate

1. it says that he doesn't believe the main charge he's using against Obama (inexperience)

2. it says that he has a lower opinion of women than we thought

3. it says that he doesn't think he needs a VP

4. and it says that he thinks you're an idiot if you fall for all this.

all that writing
and you still didn't explain

and should have waited until '12 and/or '16 and was leaning McCain

wtf is a '12 and/or '16 ?








edit to add

3. is a good thing.

I prefer the President to be competent and not need a co-President like Bush-Cheney.

FDR changed them like he changed his socks.

 

[deep]

Deep, did you support McCain in 2000, like I did?

And if so, are you as disgusted with his 'turn' as I am?

In 2000 I hoped he would blow apart the extreme GOP and re-invent it.

I am too pragmatic to be that disgusted.




that is why I have tried not to hammer too much on Obama for his modifications/ refinements?

Obama called McCains, and Hills gas tax holiday fraudulent
and now he is proposing the same thing but more so
and him wanting and approving full seating and voting privileges for Michigan and Florida, after saying no, no, no


anyways, I digress

I do believe if McCain wins
it will be a game-changer for the GOP
moderates will rise, and the hard core conservatives will fade.


If Obama wins, we will have a similar situation as a young idealistic Clinton elected (1992) with Dems controlling congress and a similar right wing back lash in 2010.

odd as it sounds, Obama is better for the hard core conservatives

 

[U2DMfan]

McCain is a strong enough force on his own

he is the happy warrior, the lone wolf
he has even said, if he was elected, he would go to congress once a week
and take questions from the well
much like the Brittish P M.
.

yeah, you know, I am unsure how much I beleive in McCain as the lone wolf tough guy, straight talker anymore. As much as I just think he's playing the part of the a-typical Rep Nominee to get elected, he made me a fan of his with his principle. I never agreed with some of his stances but I admire principle highly.

Can you still call someone principled who becomes a monster to get elected?
It's an interesting dilemma for me. I 'get' what he's doing and I am not sure he is as appealing because of this.

I never admired the Clintons (either of them) for principle, I admired them for effectiveness. So it's a dilemma for me to balance sticking up for consistency and principle and 'getting the job done'.

You know what I mean? What good is that idealism and principle if it's not being ushered into action? How can I support Hillary Clinton because I think she can win, because I believe she can affectuate policy change and then have distaste for McCain for doing the same thing?

I guess you could argue that Slick Willie never claimed to be a 'straight talker' and Hillary never claimed to be a highly principled politician. They were intellectually honest in their apparent 'sleaze'. So maybe that's something else I sort of admire about it. It's rather transparent.

It's just with so few heroes of principle, those really wanting to do what's right, to see McCain become a monster in an election, he'll likely lose anyways, wow. It's disappointing to say the least.

No wonder people sit at home in droves on election day.
Who's left to believe in?
Maybe Obama, as naive as the whole idea seems, can actually change something if only by virtue of getting elected for not being a complete loathesome character.

 

[deep]

yeah, you know, I am unsure how much I beleive in McCain as the lone wolf tough guy, straight talker anymore. As much as I just think he's playing the part of the a-typical Rep Nominee to get elected, he made me a fan of his with his principle. I never agreed with some of his stances but I admire principle highly.

Can you still call someone principled who becomes a monster to get elected?
It's an interesting dilemma for me. I 'get' what he's doing and I am not sure he is as appealing because of this.

I never admired the Clintons (either of them) for principle, I admired them for effectiveness. So it's a dilemma for me to balance sticking up for consistency and principle and 'getting the job done'.

You know what I mean? What good is that idealism and principle if it's not being ushered into action? How can I support Hillary Clinton because I think she can win, because I believe she can affectuate policy change and then have distaste for McCain for doing the same thing?

I guess you could argue that Slick Willie never claimed to be a 'straight talker' and Hillary never claimed to be a highly principled politician. They were intellectually honest in their apparent 'sleaze'. So maybe that's something else I sort of admire about it. It's rather transparent.

It's just with so few heroes of principle, those really wanting to do what's right, to see McCain become a monster in an election, he'll likely lose anyways, wow. It's disappointing to say the least.

No wonder people sit at home in droves on election day.
Who's left to believe in?
Maybe Obama, as naive as the whole idea seems, can actually change something if only by virtue of getting elected for not being a complete loathesome character.

I would not go so far to call McCain a monster.

And I don't think a truly 'principled' candidate can win.

And politics is an ugly business where one can not really stand on principle and be truly effective.

Bill Clinton, in my opinion was an excellent President, he did the best he could to get things accomplished for the American people. He was effective.

Carter and Bush 2, may have stayed more true to their principles.
Carter was not very effective,
and Bush, if he was more flexible on his principles he would not have been wrong all of the time.

 

[U2DMfan]

I would not go so far to call McCain a monster.

And I don't think a truly 'principled' candidate can win.

And politics is an ugly business where one can not really stand on pricipal and be truely effective.

Bill Clinton, in my opinion was an excellent President, he did the best he could to get things accomplished for the American people.

Carter and Bush 2, may have stayed more true to their principles.

So what.

A monster meaning: a typical political animal. I don't think he is a scumbag. I actually think he would be a good president, so I am not completely torn about the election like most. I just find it interesting that most of what he built his 'rep' on, is crumbling daily. Just disappointed in him, that's all.

I'm speaking largely from your same cynical view, only trying to see some kind of optimism. I am not yet 100% jaded, maybe only 95%.

 

[intedomine]

that Palin woman is kinda hot.....

 

[anitram]

This might not be the best way to reach out to those disillusioned Hillary Clinton supporters.

In just her second appearance on the campaign trail with John McCain, newly-minted GOP running mate Sarah Palin was showered with boos on Saturday for attempting to praise Clinton’s trail-blazing bid to become the first female president.

Sorry PUMAs.

 

[deep]

I have a pair of shoes like that

win votes ?
or
lose votes ?

 

[Irvine511]

wtf is a '12 and/or '16 ?

2012, 2016.

I prefer the President to be competent and not need a co-President like Bush-Cheney.

does this pick not manifestly demonstrate McCain's incompetence? his inability to actually not be a maverick -- that she's little more than moose meat for the rabid anti-choice base? that this is as sell-out-y as if he had picked Romney?

she's pulled in over $7m in donations since she was announced. guess where all that money came from? the same forces that turned out in Ohio to punish gay people, precisely the same people who were unenthusiastic about McCain.

the true "maverick" pick, the true pick that would have affirmed what you (and, to be honest, even i) would like to believe about McCain, in that he does put the country first, that he does go with what is right rather than what is expedient, would have been to pick Lieberman or Ridge.

but they're pro-choice. and the base told McCain that there would have been a riot in Minneapolis were Lieberman the nominee.

there are other female Republicans. Sen. Snow, Sen. Hutchinson, Gov. Jody Rell. but guess what disqualifies all of them?

they support a woman's right to choose.

 

[Strongbow]

Sorry PUMAs.

I know all those disillisioned Clinton voters were thinking they might vote for McCain if he would just pick Mitt Romney.

 

[Irvine511]

win votes ?
or
lose votes ?

i'm sure the Pope thinks they're fabulous.

 

[financeguy]

Or is it that they are a larger bloc than voting indicates, but with a completely disorganized ground game?

The thing is the Paul supporters were/are as rabid and organized on the Internet as the Obama people. They were able to compete financially with Obama who is the best fundraiser out there and they certainly outcompeted McCain & Co.

Interestingly this did not convert into votes. The question that Paulites have to ask themselves is what did the Obama campaign do right to be able to mobilize the young voters on the campuses of Iowa that the Paulites failed to do in basically every state. If anything, they could learn a lot here.

I agree with your analysis. I think that the Paul campaignwas too focussed on the internet.

 

[Strongbow]

higher than they were for JFK.



and this totally, totally misses the point. the absolute first requirement of a VP is that they should be, in their judgment, ready to assume the Presidency.

so this kind of undercuts the anti-Obama Biden ads the McCain people trotted out immediately after the Biden pick where he said that he didn't think Obama was "yet" ready to be president.

again, this is a media stunt. a super-cynical media stunt.

A lot of people view McCain's experience as a huge plus, but that does not mean they think Obama is not qualified to be President. Its also absurd for Obama supporters to charge that Sarah Palin is not qualifed to be President given the level of experience Obama had when he declared he was going to run for President in January 2007, just two years after becoming a US Senator.

 

[deep]

I keep saying Obama will win.

but these polls could make one take pause



2004

USATODAY.com



2008

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109903/Gallup-Daily-ObamaBiden-Ticket-Leads-Points.aspx

 

[Irvine511]

A lot of people view McCain's experience as a huge plus, but that does not mean they think Obama is not qualified to be President. Its also absurd for Obama supporters to charge that Sarah Palin is not qualifed to be President given the level of experience Obama had when he declared he was going to run for President in January 2007, just two years after becoming a US Senator.

it's absurd for Republicans to charge Obama with inexperience when Palin is manifestly less experienced than Obama.

and for someone so obsessed with foreign policy, it's strange to have a VP who has no actual record of ever saying anything at all about foreign policy.

so as McCain has show us, experience doesn't matter at all. he's said, "you know all my years in Washington? you know all the foreign leaders i've met with? you know all the secret briefings i've attended? you see, folks, none of that matters. not even a bit. what matters is that you're authentic and spunky and you help me with the political math and enable me to win a news cycle and keep the pundits talking for days about how mistifying my pick was and at the same time, i've stroked the Know-Nothing creationist base of the Republican party who would have bitten my head off had i gone with people who actually are qualified, like Lieberman or Ridge. the only thing that matters in this race is personal story -- did i mention i was a POW? -- and being anti-choice. you know all my achievements that i've been talking about since 2006? they don't matter! i'm a POW, and Palin is a PTA mom. we're in it to win it!"

 

[deep]

it's absurd for Republicans to charge Obama with inexperience when Palin is manifestly less experienced than Obama.

and for someone so obsessed with foreign policy, it's strange to have a VP who has no actual record of ever saying anything at all about foreign policy.

She has been to Kuwait.

and that is more than could be said of Obama.