There is more substance to Ms. Palin than most people realize. She really did take on the old-boys network and won the Alaskan governership without any help from the Republican party.
Really? My understanding of the race is that the GOP bench wasn't very deep, and when the Murkowski thing happened, Palin was at the right place at the right time, and said all the right things about honest government and cleaning up corruption. In reality, though, other than not being old and not being a boy, she's definitely part of the network itself. She
ran Ted Stevens' 527 group, and her widely-publicized stance against earmarks and the "bridge to nowhere" itself are
politically expedident fabrications.
Where exactly did she earn this reputation as an honest reformer?
I know people who not only know Sarah Palin, but consider themselves to be good friends. The image that she instills, among both friends and the general public, in a word is integrity, something rarely found in politicians above the village level.
I'm sorry, but this sounds a lot like "he's the kind of President I'd want to have a beer with." The "image she instills" clearly seems to be at odds with her deeds as Governor.
Overall, though, it was probably a good move for McCain. It gave him a huge publicity boost, and then when the excitement dies down (which it shortly will) people will realize that even though Ms. Palin has few qualifications, they are voting for a President in the coming election, and that who is on the ticket for VP is pretty much irrelevant.
It would be irrelevant if McCain were not 72 and didn't have a history of health problems. But he is, and he does, so it's VERY relevant. If Joe Biden (a decade younger than McCain) kicks the bucket, Obama picks another VP. If McCain throws a seven, we've got a hockey mom (soon to be hockey grandmom, I guess) running the show.
In the end, I won't be surprised if the Democrats manage to shoot themselves in the foot once again and give away yet another election.
They've certainly shown a remarkable ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, but this is the closest thing to a "gimmie" I can imagine. Current polling shows Obama in a landslide, and with the very significant anti-Palin response among the electorate, the RNC being scaled back due to Gustav, and the simple fact that McCain is an unexciting pick for the GOP base, I think the planets are aligned for an easy Obama win. In order to lose now, he'd basically have to "get caught with a live boy or a dead girl."
Long term (that is, any time frame more than four years) there will be no winners here. Whichever candidate and associates garner the most electoral votes month after next will be ending their political careers. The ship of state has already struck the iceberg, and now the participants are fighting to see who will be Captain of the Titanic.
Er, uh, what? The country has been through much worse times. Eight years of Bush have definitely set us back, but I see no reason why things can't begin to turn around in the next four years. Reagan earned a second term based on the (in my opinion mistaken) belief that he rescued the country after the Carter years. Why can't Obama do the same in his first term?
Previous Topic
Index
