McCain's VP:

@Lash,

awww, you know. had a work buddy that used to say; " some days it comes easier than others."

that's what we all get.

but bono says; "don't let the bastards get ya down"

that's harder. but what else can ya do?

you just hang tuff. Idea

0 Replies

Two commenters on Shakesville (a feminist blog, but thats really neither here nor there) had clashing takes on Palin's appointment that I thought were both spot on, so instead of going on about it myself I'll just post those two.

One poster posits that Palin will have little luck in attracting the embittered Hillary voters the McCain campaign is obviously courting with this choice, because the trick is as transparent and superficial as the one back when they picked Keyes to run against Obama. "Oh, I've got it! We just run another black man / woman against theirs, that'll work!" As if the overwhelming majority of those Hillary voters aren't smart enough to realise that woman or not, Palin stands against everything Hillary was for -- just like Keyes, black man or not, stood against everything Obama was for:

Quote:

Here's a pretty good summation: "The pick of Palin is dripping with transparent condescension, the notion that the enthusiasm behind Hillary was simply the result of her being a woman, that it had nothing to do with what she actually stood for, and in that sense it's equally sexist. Palin is essentially a hard-right ideologue, and therefore nothing like Hillary as far as substance is concerned. It's not very different from running Alan Keyes against Barack Obama in 2004. [..]

It's fitting that the party positing affirmative action as a program that picks people exclusively based on race or gender rather than qualification should do something similar given an opportunity for political advancement. While Obama is promising change through policy, not simply through the circumstances of his birth, the McCain campaign thinks his appeal is simply visual and demographic, and therefore something they can exploit."

The other poster had already interjected, however, that her vagina isnt entirely all that Palin had to bring. The other advantages she brings to the McCain ticket may be just as void of substance and entirely reliant on image, but they most certainly are there:

Quote:

I think this underestimates McCain. Sure, part of the rationale behind the pick is probably a misguided attempt to win over Clinton voters, but I think it could potentially go much further than that. Palin's presence on the ticket could go a long way toward rehabilitating McCain's outsider, maverick image; her staunch social conservatism solidifies the evangelical base, which had been lukewarm on him; she has personal charisma that McCain lacks; her life story is the kind of thing social conservatives love (five kids, one of whom is in Iraq, etc.) [..]

I'm glad a lot of commenters here don't think it will matter, but I'm feeling pretty pessimistic right now.

1 Reply

@nimh,

Nobody with any sense thinks McC was trying to get Hillary's women. More egocentric groupthink from Dems. He was pacifying his own base.

2 Replies

@Lash,

Why does she keep talking about Hillary, then?

You don't think the last part of this (from her speech in Dayton) is a direct appeal to Hillary's women?:

Quote:

I think as well today of two other women who came before me in national elections. I can't begin this great effort without honoring the achievements of Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, and, of course, Sen. Hillary Clinton, who showed such determination and grace in her presidential campaign.

It was rightly noted in Denver this week that Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America. But it turns out the women of America aren't finished yet, and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94118910

edit: her other public appearance thus far (I think it was just those two, but I'm not sure):

Quote:

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.

As she did at in her debut speech in Ohio yesterday, Palin appealed to the women in the crowd here in Pennsylvania with a political shout-out to Geraldine Ferraro, who preceded Palin as the first women to be tapped as a vice presidential candidate.

But in contrast with the mild reception that greeted her comments at the Ohio event, when Palin praised Clinton here for showing “determination and grace in her presidential campaign,” the Alaska governor was met with a noisy mix of boos, groans and grumbles around the minor league ballpark where the “Road to the Convention Rally” was held.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/30/palin-booed-for-mentioning-hillary-clinton/#comment-1585475

2 Replies

@sozobe,

More general thoughts:

- It's already been widely noted that the pick brings McCain's age in to relief on two fronts; contrast with Palin's youth, and the fact that her readiness to step in is particularly pertinent given his age and medical history. This is going to make McCain's age a story in a way it hasn't been so far. But also:

- McCain's language about her calls forth some other uncomfortable allusions; he's talking about her today as a "partner" and "soul mate." (A soul mate he met once before offering her the VP position, but I digress...)

- Ego involved in saying, basically, "I don't need a VP." Nobody's saying she's going to offer useful counsel, she's just there as a way to get TO the White House, and as a placeholder. There was a statement from the McCain campaign about her "learning at his feet." Yeah, feminists will LOVE that. Laughing

2 Replies

@sozobe,

Once again, John McCain has made a decision to promote his own personal goals and not what is best for America.

Some have compared Palin to Dan Quayle. I don't agree. Palin is more like Bush's candidate for the supreme court, Harriet Miers -- chosen for all the wrong reasons, and glaringly not up to the task.

McCain's choice demostrates another example of his lack of good judgment and putting himself first before his country.

BBB

0 Replies

@sozobe,

The same reason McCain had positive comments about Obama's historic run... We are all women.

1 Reply

@Lash,

Mmm.

Conservative pundits are split on the wisdom of choosing Palin. One reading of the last two days of The Corner shows infighting, which is never a good sign.

I wonder, with the hurricane acomin' - are the Republicans going to get to have a convention?

Cycloptichorn

3 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Do you really care?
If they do have the convention, you will accuse them of not caring.

If they dont have the convention, you will accuse them of posturing and pandering.

Either way, you will blame them for whatever damage the hurricane causes.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

The word this morning is that the convention will go on, but if Gustav is as bad as it looks, the event may be scaled back and toned down. Pres Bush is scheduled to speak Monday night. That looks like it will be cancelled.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Pundits shmundits. The base is hot and sending money hand over fist....and volunteering to work for the canidate... They LOVE her.

0 Replies

One name keeps popping up in my mind; Dan Quayle. Maybe it's the kool ade i had with brekkies.

1 Reply

@dyslexia,

you are not the only one who has Palin=Quayle

Quote:

...Enthusiastic Republicans don’t see the choice of Palin as affirmative action, despite her thin résumé and gaping absence of foreign policy knowledge, because they expect Republicans to put an underqualified “babe,” as Rush Limbaugh calls her, on the ticket. They have a tradition of nominating fun, bantamweight cheerleaders from the West, like the previous Miss Congeniality types Dan Quayle and W., and then letting them learn on the job. So they crash into the globe a few times while they’re learning to drive, what’s the big deal?
...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/opinion/31dowd.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Dowd today

0 Replies

@sozobe,

Quote:

Yeah, feminists will LOVE that

Indeed.

But....well, I am having terrible trouble "getting" this product placement for McCain.

Perhaps you, or others, can help, Soz?

So...she's supposed to appeal to the female vote, right?

But...it's being said she will pull in Hillary voters..

I don't get how anyone who wanted to vote for Hillary would vote for this woman's ticket, since Hillary is moderately Progressive in a number of areas, and this woman's policies are not so at all, the absolute reverse, I would have thought.

Surely she'll not get any Progressive women's votes??????

Is it thought that she will pull in voters who want a woman at any price? The sort of person who, for instance, said of Thatcher "I'd rather have the country buggered by a woman than a man" (there was actually talk of that ilk at the time....similar to the kind of people who thought progressives should be overcome with joy at the rise of a woman like Rice...simply because she was black and a woman)?

I gather that the US is less influenced by broad party politics, where the party platform is the most important thing, than I am familiar with....but surely there's not a large bloc of folk who will move from Hillary to this woman???

And the constituency she is supposed to represent...surely many of them think women should stick to "Kinder, Küche, Kirche" and or be silent and such?

She certainly isn't gonna appeal to any woman who has any hint of feminism, even without knowing it, unless they are dumb enough to ignore broader political considerations and focus on the gonads.

Who exactly is she going to appeal to? I can tell that she IS appealing to people, I am just kind of lost as to who.

1 Reply

@dlowan,

Hi dlowan,

dlowan wrote:

Who exactly is she going to appeal to? I can tell that she IS appealing to people, I am just kind of lost as to who.

Yeah, I haven't completely figured that out myself. Laughing

A fair amount (I don't know yet how much) of "the base" likes her. As far as I can tell that is evangelicals, far-righties, the ones who have been nervous about McCain.

There is another group that has liked McCain's maverick, shoot-from-the-hip side. This is NOT a safe, establishment pick. It's way out there, and injects some much-needed excitement into the campaign.

As far as I can tell, there is another group that just wants McCain to win and so is poised to praise whomever McCain chooses. Bill Kristol, for example, was pooh-poohing Palin very recently (days, I think) but now that she's the pick is all for her.

(But there is another group of conservatives who are Very Unhappy. Charles Krauthammer, David Frum, well-known conservative voices saying things like "near suicidal" and "the wires are showing.")

Meanwhile, it really does seem like the intent was to get white women on board who aren't yet McCain supporters, and that seems to not be going well. (So far, women are LESS likely to be impressed by her than men.) And generally, she's tanking with undecideds so far.

It seems (just now -- this is before the ethics investigation heats up and while the incredibly-unlikely-but-just-possibly-true thing about whether baby Trig is her son or her grandson Shocked

simmers in the background) like the main benefit would be with evangelicals who planned to stay home otherwise. The problem is, there seems to be as much of a loss with people who thought McCain was a moderate as a gain of evangelicals.

AND, this whole thing is shoving McCain's pro-life credentials front and center, and a shocking number (can look it up) of female McCain supporter thought he was pro-choice.

So while I see what they were TRYING to do, I don't think it's gonna happen. I think Palin will end up as a net loss.

1 Reply

@sozobe,

Thank you.....yes, I assumed what we call the "rusted-on" Republican support base would not be unhappy (except the more progressive ones, perhaps???..or would that be balanced by being glad to be able to vote for a woman?)

I was less sure re the religious fundies....as I said, I wondered if they would think women shouldn't be out there.

Re the daughter thing (which I only found about a moment ago when I finally put my foot in the cess-pool that is not-a-single-reasonable-thought's thread about her)...er....ok, leaving aside my usual personal life recoil, if she HAS taken on her daughter's kid as her own (is that the accusation?)...isn't that. like, a nurturing thing to do?

1 Reply

@dlowan,

I don't know how that would play if it were true. It'd be just so incredibly bizarre.

I think there has to be an honesty thing -- in tandem with the ethics investigation especially -- that would hurt her. Why not just openly adopt/ take care of the baby? If it's so noble, why did she go to such lengths to cover it up? Etc. (I think the answer would be that she was trying to protect her daughter, but I still don't think the whole thing would play well. Especially, I think it would open her up to accusations of just not wanting to deal with the scandal of it as a sitting governor.)

I can't tell about religious fundies either. Some of what I've read and people I've talked to who are more traditional religious types are NOT happy. They seem to mostly focus on the mommy aspect. (Not the mom-or-grandma part, but the "she has a 4-month old baby and she's going at vice president?! That poor child!" part.)

Then others are happy of course.

Just can't tell how it'll all shake out, in that one segment (evangelicals).

1 Reply

@sozobe,

if it turns out that this kid is hers, the very next step I guarantee you is questions about who the father is. In many cases the reasons the grandmother goes to such lengths to keep this secret is because the grandfather is the father...

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

that could account for the downs syndrome.

but that prospect is a little too grizzley for me to bear.

1 Reply

@DontTreadOnMe,

are you sure about that??? I don't know enough about downs to know, but had thought that it was the age of the mother that mattered, not the age of the father. If the age of the father does matter then it is the best reason she had to keep the secret, and also would indicate that the reason she would agree to be VP nominee is that she is so deep in denial that it never registered with her that agreeing to be the running mate would put the secret at risk.

2 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know