« The Task For These Candidates | Main | Sarah Palin - Redux »

August 29, 2008

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341ea83053ef00e554ad92818833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Who?:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Linda from Bentley Spring, Maryland

You are not patronizing. Turns out the Republican VP candidate was a Miss Alaska runner-up. Now that should make the RNC really proud--a gun totin' beauty queen for VP. There is nothing more to say about this. It's very sad indeed. This is what we get if the American people don't wise up.

Marty Lynch

I thought Romney would have been the best choice, in fact, I was rooting for him. So, I must admit, I don’t know the reasons why Palin was selected; and it’s obvious you don’t either. What I do know is this; John McCain is taking his last shot at becoming president, and he didn’t pick her because he wants to lose.

So, like many others, I immediately thought he has just given up the experience vs. inexperience advantage. Then it dawned on me that Hillary had that advantage, Biden had that advantage, Dodd had that advantage, and that didn’t get any of them the nomination. Apparently, experience doesn’t matter; otherwise Obama would not be at the top of the ticket, or on a ticket at all. I have this odd feeling that the McCain camp is almost daring Obama to try and go after Palin on the inexperience issue because it will continue to highlight his.

I also thought, does McCain actually believe that this pick is going to get him the Hillary vote? If so, he’s out of his mind. He knows he not getting that vote, he knows those voters are hardcore liberals. So, when you think about it, there wasn’t anyone that McCain could have selected that would have had the Hillary voters flocking to him. Maybe, just maybe, he’s smarter than you’d like to think. What about all of those independent women voters? Is it patronizing to believe that those women will vote for McCain solely because of this pick? Aren’t women smarter than that? Could they really not care about credentials? Could they simply vote for Palin because she’s one of their own? Before you answer those questions, think about the black vote. Could you ever imagine Hillary getting only 10% of the black vote in any election? Me neither. But what happened is the African-American community said we can make history. Do 90% of blacks really believe that Obama will make a better Commander-in-Chief than Clinton? The answer has to be no. The answer has to be, they voted for him simply because he’s black, he’s one of their own. So, be careful about saying women are too smart to just vote for Palin simply because she’s a woman, simply because she’s one of their own. Because that might just be the same as saying women are smart, but blacks aren’t. Hey, history is history, and people want to be part of it.

So as bloggers and pundits go back and forth, saying why this is good, and this is bad, and this strategy will work, and this one won’t, just remember, most people don’t blog and most don’t listen to pundits. Perhaps McCain figured it out; perhaps he realized that in a close election, getting those last needed votes really is simple. Maybe he just needed to give women a simple reason to vote for him. And that simple reason could be Sarah Palin.

Joe Intili

That is absolutely correct. That is simply the best analysis of the Palin pick I have heard or read. I did not see any sense to the pick when it was announced. But that analysis of the pick is spot on, particularly the analog to Clinton's lack of African-American support when but for Obama they would be supporting her in droves.

I read Bill Kristol's and Fred Barnes' assessment of the pick in the Weekly Standard and Wall Street Journal and found them both lame and little more than a high school cheer for things Republican. They should read your post.

Joe Arsenault

I agree with Marty, I think McCain saw that none of the likely, vetted candidates could help him win and picking a conservative woman was his only hope. But, why this woman? Why not Kay Bailey Hutchison, Elizabeth Dole, or - wait for it - Condoleeza Rice? Someone conservative, female, and much more qualified?

In my opinion, this just further calls into question McCain's judgment. At this point, it looks like he will do whatever he thinks will help him win. And I'm okay with that. That's what Bush did and Gore and Kerry didn't. That's what I want Obama to do. Because I think this election is too important for Democrats to take the high road and walk away with another moral victory for their trophy case.

Joe Intili

"...wait for it", you make me laugh. :)

Well, it's a heckuva good question. And I think he went there because he looked at the Dems - that out of experienced candidates like Clinton and Dodd and Biden and Richardson, the candidate who emerged, and folks both voted for and donated to in record numbers, was Obama.

And, of course, it was McCain "The Maverick" on the Republican side, instead of more status quo Republicans like Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, or even Rudy.

McCain figured, for his VP pick, since he already represents the "experience" component, and with Obama leading in many of the swing-state polls, that he had to double-down on change, that, compounded with the issue Marty spoke to about appealing to independent women.

Honestly, I thought Condi might be a great sort of "surprise" pick for him (no one had really been talking about her in the context of the "short-list"). But her change would have been limited almost exclusively to her gender. Gender and, again, her race, I suppose.

I think McCain watched the Dems reveal their strategy during the Democratic Convention - to tie McCain as closely as possible to an extraordinarily unpopular President - and figured Condi would not help him fight that.

He probably figured Kay Bailey and Liz (personally, I'm so glad he didn't choose Elizabeth Dole; can't stand her. Her husband at least is a war hero, has a good sense of humor, and does some really cool commercials) didn't represent "change" to the electorate, and, based on primary results, he probably would have been right.

So, Sarah Palin it is. His best choice. Wow. In the "change" arena, Republicans have a very limited bench at the moment. Does leave you wondering, though. Was there no one else?

Well, I'm going to hear her out. Maybe she is a phenomenal talent. Was it Ross Perot who said, "I'm all ears"? I said in one of my 27 previous posts on this topic that she ought to be studying her foreign-policy text book non-stop between now and election day. For me, it's going to be Sarah Palin 101.

The comments to this entry are closed.