[quote]tedro wrote:
<<< I can also see people holding this against her. Being a mom and still holding such a high position may equate to people not believing that she gives her children the attention they deserve >>>[/quote]
That came to my mind when her name was floated a few weeks ago.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
His whole strategy seems to be based on the thought that if he looks like the lesser of two evils he will get elected.[/quote]
This is different than the last four or five elections because…?
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
His whole strategy seems to be based on the thought that if he looks like the lesser of two evils he will get elected.
This is different than the last four or five elections because…?[/quote]
This will be the first election since 1984 that I have voted “against” someone for President instead of voting “for” the candidate of my choice.
But with that said, the more I read about Palin, the more she gives me a reason to vote for McCain instead of against Barry.
As to pookie and the other guy’s claim that she is inexperienced - she is the governor of a state, which is far more executive experience than Obama has.
Opie married his fucking boss. He’s never been in charge of shit in his life - including his marriage.
Why pick someone who comes with a scandal, even if it is a minor abuse of power? The VP debates won’t fare well for McCain’s ticket either. 3 years ago she was mayor of a town of 5400 people, fewer than Obama’s state senate district. This pick destroys their experience argument and smells like an attempt to get the crazed Hillary supporters still pissed at the DNC, nothing else.
Edit: Shes going after Rs in her own state for ethic violations, there’s a plus.
[quote]Magnate wrote:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/08/ak_gov_says_staffer_pressed_for_troopers_firing.php
Why pick someone who comes with a scandal, even if it is a minor abuse of power? The VP debates won’t fare well for McCain’s ticket either. 3 years ago she was mayor of a town of 5400 people, fewer than Obama’s state senate district. This pick destroys their experience argument and smells like an attempt to get the crazed Hillary supporters still pissed at the DNC, nothing else. [/quote]
What the hell does Mondale have to do with this?
Why is getting a bro-in-law fired a scandal? If I were governor, I would have my fucking brother-in-law put in jail. If that’s the best the muckrakers can find they are going to be a very frustrated crew come November.
Just based upon what she has said in public, I’d vote for Palin before I’d vote for McCain. Everyone hurling the “experience” argument doesn’t seem to get that we’d all expect the Pres to have more experience than the VP. In that sense the Obama ticket is upside down, and nobody who calls “token” on Palin can do so without levelling the same attack at Obama.
Once it is clear where Palin stands on Guns, Oil, Abortion, and Gov’t Spending, the conservatives will FLOCK to her, and no amount of “boring old white guys” rhetoric from the left will stop them. I say this is a GREAT pick.
Nope. Still not feeling the urge to vote McCain.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
This will be the first election since 1984 that I have voted “against” someone for President instead of voting “for” the candidate of my choice.[/quote]
Lucky bastard. I hope I will vote for someone once in my life.
[quote]But with that said, the more I read about Palin, the more she gives me a reason to vote for McCain instead of against Barry.
As to pookie and the other guy’s claim that she is inexperienced - she is the governor of a state, which is far more executive experience than Obama has.[/quote]
Two years in Alaska? Maybe if it was CA, TX or NY… even a whole bunch of other states, but - and correct my if I’m wrong - Alaska doesn’t sound too hard to govern…
Opie would be Obama?
For an unknown with no track record, he’s been running an okay campaign, no? About a year ago, most everyone was predicting that the Clinton juggernaut would be unstoppable. Gotta give him credit for that, at least.
[quote]MrRezister wrote:
Just based upon what she has said in public, I’d vote for Palin before I’d vote for McCain. Everyone hurling the “experience” argument doesn’t seem to get that we’d all expect the Pres to have more experience than the VP. In that sense the Obama ticket is upside down, and nobody who calls “token” on Palin can do so without levelling the same attack at Obama.
Once it is clear where Palin stands on Guns, Oil, Abortion, and Gov’t Spending, the conservatives will FLOCK to her, and no amount of “boring old white guys” rhetoric from the left will stop them. I say this is a GREAT pick.[/quote]
I did call token on both and anybody who thinks this would be happening if it weren’t for Hillary is deluded which should please her to no end. The liberal media will report (count on it) and the history books will record how Hillary Rodham Clinton, a woman in the other party picked the VP candidate for the GOP in 2008. MARK MY WORDS.
Again, sharing my ideals doesn’t make somebody a federal executive. I can find plenty of people I agree with who are also not presidents.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Two years in Alaska? Maybe if it was CA, TX or NY… even a whole bunch of other states, but - and correct my if I’m wrong - Alaska doesn’t sound too hard to govern…[/quote]
It may not be - but it’s still 2 years more executive experience than Obama has.
Plus - she has the balls to sue the Federal government to get the fuck out of her state and allow Alaska to drill and mine the North Slope. When was the last time Barry went to bat against the Federal Gov’t?
Yes.
[quote]For an unknown with no track record, he’s been running an okay campaign, no? About a year ago, most everyone was predicting that the Clinton juggernaut would be unstoppable. Gotta give him credit for that, at least.
[/quote]
The argument could be made that Obama is where he is, in part, by Rush Limbaugh. You know - the vast right-wing conspiracy, and all that shit?
It’s a good pick. She’s a fiscal conservative, Lifetime NRA member and pro life. That makes he a good pick to the base. She is also a female appealing to single issue female voters. Finally that was a hell of a good speech she gave. Makes me think she has more T flowing through her body then Obama and Biden combined. Also has more executive experience then Obama and Biden.
McCain is rattling Obama big time. Obama gave a big speech last night didn’t he? MCain rattled him before and stole the spotlight after. He’s getting little or no bounce after his own convention. That’s excellent strategy on the RNC side.
[quote]pookie wrote:
<<< - Alaska doesn’t sound too hard to govern… >>>
[/quote]
You baffle me pal.
First I see you spout a bunch of senseless drivel which leads me to one opinion, then I see you make a very insightful and accurate post about, of all things, military strategy which makes me think you may be sharper than just having killer computer skills. Then you make a ridiculous statement like the above betraying the unmistakable symptoms of accute “I don’t know WTF I’m talking about” syndrome. Can you possibly believe that there is such a thing as an easily governed state?
That’s number one. Next, Alaska has a whole host of issues confronted, if at all, to the same degree by no other state. Not to mention the sheer geographical vastness and proximity to Russia. Come on man, Id like to think you’re a little brighter than this.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
The argument could be made that Obama is where he is, in part, by Rush Limbaugh. You know - the vast right-wing conspiracy, and all that shit?[/quote]
Operation Chaos or something…? weren’t they trying to get Clinton nominated?
[quote]pookie wrote:
rainjack wrote:
The argument could be made that Obama is where he is, in part, by Rush Limbaugh. You know - the vast right-wing conspiracy, and all that shit?
Operation Chaos or something…? weren’t they trying to get Clinton nominated?
[/quote]
They were trying to keep her candidacy alive as long as possible after Obama pulled ahead for the purpose of fomenting discord in the party by having Republicans vote for her in their state primaries.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
First I see you spout a bunch of senseless drivel which leads me to one opinion, then I see you make a very insightful and accurate post about, of all things, military strategy which makes me think you may be sharper than just having killer computer skills. Then you make a ridiculous statement like the above betraying the unmistakable symptoms of accute “I don’t know WTF I’m talking about” syndrome. Can you possibly believe that there is such a thing as an easily governed state?[/quote]
As opposed to running the federal govt?
Two years ago, Palin was mayor of a small town.
Then she governed one of the least populated states. Alaska might be big, but it’s not the empty square miles that are being governed, it’s the half-million population.
McCain seems in ok shape; but a lot can happen in four years; Palin might end up president.
What I find odd, is that a big stink was being made of Obama’s lack of experience; but when looking at the possibility that Palin could end up in office, suddenly experience is not that important a criteria.
You can think of me as being as dumb as a rock if it makes you happy.
Alaska is big, but so what? Is governing Canada harder than the US because it’s larger? I don’t think so.
Being close to Russia has been a non-issue ever since long range bombers and ICBMs were invented. Do you expect Russia to swim across the Arctic sea and try a land invasion?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Nope. Still not feeling the urge to vote McCain.[/quote]
Likewise. You going Constitution, Libertarian, or none of the above?
From what little I know of Palin though I like her a lot. A walk the walk Christian, party maverick, and a beauty queen runner-up to boot. Read her wikipedia page if you haven’t, great stuff on her bio. I’m really looking forward to the vice presidential debate(s), should beat the main event handily.
Interesting that three out of four of the nominees have sons who either served or are about to serve in Iraq.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
I guess I might need to back track a little bit. I just got off the phone with a friend of mine who said that she was a spitfire.
I started doing a little searching on her, and she has more political nuts than McCain.
In actuality, she is the only true conservative on the ticket. [/quote]
Absolutely. Any woman who gets up at 3 AM to go hunt moose with her dad deserves a look as a leader. Seriously.
She has ‘balls’. I like women like this, who speak up and get things done.
If senile Mcain wins and dies in two years, the world will have a creationist, ex beauty pageant winner queen.
Seems like a worthy heir to Bush.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
First I see you spout a bunch of senseless drivel which leads me to one opinion, then I see you make a very insightful and accurate post about, of all things, military strategy which makes me think you may be sharper than just having killer computer skills. Then you make a ridiculous statement like the above betraying the unmistakable symptoms of accute “I don’t know WTF I’m talking about” syndrome. Can you possibly believe that there is such a thing as an easily governed state?
As opposed to running the federal govt?
Two years ago, Palin was mayor of a small town.
Then she governed one of the least populated states. Alaska might be big, but it’s not the empty square miles that are being governed, it’s the half-million population.
McCain seems in ok shape; but a lot can happen in four years; Palin might end up president.
What I find odd, is that a big stink was being made of Obama’s lack of experience; but when looking at the possibility that Palin could end up in office, suddenly experience is not that important a criteria.
That’s number one. Next, Alaska has a whole host of issues confronted, if at all, to the same degree by no other state. Not to mention the sheer geographical vastness and proximity to Russia. Come on man, Id like to think you’re a little brighter than this.
You can think of me as being as dumb as a rock if it makes you happy.
Alaska is big, but so what? Is governing Canada harder than the US because it’s larger? I don’t think so.
Being close to Russia has been a non-issue ever since long range bombers and ICBMs were invented. Do you expect Russia to swim across the Arctic sea and try a land invasion?
[/quote]
You are missing the point that I actually like you and it would not make me happy to think of you as dumb as a rock.
I already said, a few times, that she is not immune to the same criticisms that have been leveled at Obama. Have you seen my posts, she is no potential president in my view. My only point was that no state is “easy” to govern and Alaska presents some unique challenges, hence, while lacking essential experience let’s not take from the experience she does in fact have.
[quote]hedo wrote:
McCain is rattling Obama big time. Obama gave a big speech last night didn’t he? MCain rattled him before and stole the spotlight after. He’s getting little or no bounce after his own convention. That’s excellent strategy on the RNC side.[/quote]
Number one reason I thought this was a goodtactic.