It's been pretty crazy for me since learning of Palin being the VP pick: I first heard it as I was packing Friday morning in my Denver hotel, and couldn't go very far without overhearing commentary on it in the hotel lobby, on the shuttle to the airport, and while waiting through security. Upon landing, after a quick suitcase change, I went to the Hyatt Regency downtown to enjoy Dragon*Con for the weekend. TVs scattered throughout would show snippets of this; and of course there were conversations with my mom, and with fellow YDs. Something has held me back though from jumping on the "Oh McCain has just stuck a fork in it" bandwagon, but I couldn't quite put my finger on it.
When I was in the elevator in Denver, a fellow delegate exclaimed "Well, Obama might as well pack his bags..." and I was thinking, yep, that might be true, it may very well be over with him, but then she finished her sentence with "...he might as well fill out his Change of Address forms for the White House" and my mind had to make that shift to realize she meant the opposite of what I thought. My initial reaction to the announcement was worry for the Democrats and our chances in November.
Here's some of the things swirling in my head: Republicans aren't stupid-- unfortunately they are Masters at winning elections; it appears to be a blatent attempt to grab still-disaffected Hillary supporters; Palin couldn't have risen that fast up the ladder without having "something". And then I've been seeing posts that show that the PUMA crowd IS embracing the choice.... Anyway, I couldn't quite make up my mind or coalesce my thoughts on this and then I came across this article just now by George Lakoff "The Palin Choice and the Reality of the Political Mind" which seemed to express my worry. We should approach this more cautiously than we have and not be so quick to deride or it may backfire.
31 Responses to “Reflections on Palin”
Democrats: Always Tepid, Always Losers.
All that I read in that article is more of the same from Dems: "hey, if we say something, it might give us a boo-boo! Don't do anything".
Whatever. This is the most pathetic pick ever that can only backfire. Unleash upon her.
I'm not suggesting we don't unleash on her, just saying we shouldn't underestimate the pick and unleash on her smartly instead of just deriding it.
Republicans have won recent elections by trashing genuine war heroes (Kerry, Cleland, et al) while Democrats sat back and let them attack without response.
I say we trash her and expose her for who she really is. If we don't define her, they will.
IRE, it is certainly pathetic, and I think we can beat them. BUT, we have to be careful not to appear too mean.
We should point out
- her "executive experience" does not include any fiscal problems - Alaska is oil rich and faces few economic difficulties.
-Alaska does not have personal income tax or state sales tax.
-The population of Alaska is less than 700,000.
-The 2006 Alaska median income ($57,071) was 19% higher than the US median ($48,023).
-Alaska has the 6th highest median income (2006 numbers).
While I admire anyone who is elected to serve as Governor of a state, this job is not preparation for serving as Commander in Chief of the United States of America.
Decaturguy, I don't think we're saying different things...
Ok, I promised myself I wouldn't post any more on this, but just one more...
From what I've gathered, a lot of Palin's administration as both mayor and governor has been tainted with charges of cronyism. There have been all sorts of firings and replacement hirings that have been driven by ideology or personal ties. (Trying to fire the Wasilla librarian who wouldn't let her ban books, some scandal involving a state-owned dairy processing company, as well as the troopergate. )That seems to me to be a great angle from which to attack her, as it ties in to some of the worst failings of the Bush administration - FEMA, the Attorney General firings and the Monica Goodling scandal. If she has experience being the kind of executive that Bush is, then that should count against her, not for her.
I still think the campaign should basically ignore her. The blogs are going to do what they are going to do, but for the campaign, she is a gift. She takes the experience issue off the table. Accept it and move on. John McCain has never voted against a judge nominated by a Republican president. Some "maverick".
He wants more tax breaks for big oil.
He thinks the economy is in good shape.
He wants to privatize Social Security Insurance.
Obama will pwn (or however you write that) McCain on all these issues and many more.
Another gift is this: Obama had an obvious hurdle to overcome being the first African American nominee. It was ALWAYS going to be difficult no matter how good he is. But they have mostly taken that away too by volunteering to insert their own hurdle. They have leveled the playing field as much as anyone could possibly have hoped for, and maybe even tilted it a little in our favor. Now we can fight on the issues and win.
Look, I know we're not supposed to talk about choice in Georgia, but I can't help it.
Sarah Palin believes that the government should force women to have their rapists' babies. There, I said it.
It gives me chills for anyone, particularly a woman, to adopt that position.
But, I agree with Angela. We make a mistake if we discount her. I agree with Decatur, too. Think about what Republicans would do with one of our candidates who had similar issues. They would draw and quarter them before dawn. And so should we.
Yep... and this is a direct quote I received when I told a pro-choice woman about Palin's position. This person is not exactly PUMA but is not completely sold on Obama either and is still pissed at the DNC's treatment of Hillary. "I know, I know! I don't care [insert rant against DNC here]" -- this person is not voting for her best interest but from, yep, emotion.
It's the "normal people" factor, perhaps?
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/...to-twin-cities/?hp
However, I've got to hand it to the Dems. This is one of the first times I've seen them go really hardcore in defining the opponent before she can define herself. It's almost like they did the vetting process that McCain failed to. The tabloids have gone a lot overboard with the Palin daughter, but I think all of the Troopergate, cronyism, for-pork-before-I-was-against-it is totally fair game. Just another politician (and not even that good a one at that) is a label I'm perfectly happy with her wearing.
Also, Obama is going after the pro-choice vote, it appears. He's actually posting ads to show where he is.
Sarah Palin: Liar
Keep in mind that HW won in spite of Quayle. He arguably (almost certainly) would have won reelection were it not for Perot, again in spite of Quayle. While I think that Palin was a poor choice on all the issues most McCain voters feel are important (e.g., national security, earmarks), she wasn't selected for them. She was selected to secure the evangelical vote and maybe, just maybe, a few PUMAs. I think attacking her hard is a good idea for Obama, but the attacks need to be carefully focused on raising concerns with Independents and potential Hillary crossover voters.
This Palin woman reminds me of all the horrid operation rescue chicks on Spring street.
Every single thing about her, the fascist book banning, moral superiority complex, the big dumb hair and shoving her beliefs in everyone face but if you point out any of her obvious hypocrisy "it's a family matter!" My Uterus is your business but your daughters isn't mine, oh yeah..
But the very worst of it is her using her children as tools to promote her warped twisted view of her own life.
All with a simper and "oh what poor me" look about her.
I call bullshit on the whole steaming pile that is her, her f'd up bible church, it's pray away the gay teachings, the Jews for Jesus special collections all of it!
Just based on the histrionic "the media is unfair" whining coming from the McCain campaign right now, I can only conclude that they're nervous about Palin right now too.
Agreed Jules. She does manage to embody everything I find distasteful about radical conservatives, all in one package. I predict McCain will spend every penny of the millions he raised from the Palin pick on damage control.
And it won't be enough.
In this awesome clip, Peggy Noonan has a rare moment of honesty and admits (off camera, but on mike) that the Palin pick was bullshit.
http://gawker.com/...-that-sarah-palin-pick-was-bullshit
Ha! There's lot of "political bullshit" going on during this election.
That's a great article. I take it to mean that instead of simply listing Palin's negatives, Dems need an overarching narrative utilizing these negatives to show that Palin's values are way outside the mainstream. Hit hard, but if we do it so it defines her, it's going to stick.
If voters identify with her, they'll still vote for her.
I think that's why the battle has centered on her experience. If inexperience defines Palin, many won't even look at her. However, if voters get past the experience issue and start to like her, they'll overlook all kinds of faults (like us and the Big Dog.)
One interesting frame that I see echoed by a lot of pundits, including some conservatives, is that McCain's decision was reckless, from lack of vetting to the short time in deciding, etc. That's particularly effective with McCain because he has defined himself as a maverick. So instead of seeing McCain as a maverick as in an independent, voters will start looking at him as a maverick as in outlier or loose cannon, which of course he is.
Of course, the Obama camp has been doing a splendid job, so I looking forward to seeing how they continue on this issue.
Well, forget what I said about ignoring her. I should have realized they would use her to attack.
Last nite just confirmed for me that we should not underestimate this person -- this was EXACTLY what McCain needed to get the right-wing masses energized
Yup ... a Know-Nothing among Know-Nothings. Gotta keep an eye out for her, indeed.
It's also so amazing to watch how great champions for women's rights and the battle against the glass ceiling these Republicans have become this election.
Now, if only they believed in anything ... that actually helped women.
plange - i think she also was exactly what mccain needed to get the left-wing masses organized . . .
PaulaG-- True, but she just made this election a bit more difficult.
Plange - Don't kid yourself. It was never gonna be easy. In any event, it's a looong way to November. IIRC, Dukakis was up by 15-17 points at this point in the game.
Our nation is a center-right nation overall, isn't it?
Democrats do NOT need to make it a left vs right battle. Great for purging, but uh, personally I'd like to win the election.
I knew it wasn't going to be easy, and was already worried pre-Palin by some ardent Obama supporters thinking it would be a slam dunk, but what worries me even more, is that these folks seem to be thinking it's even easier now. THAT'S what worries me....
Look, we can debate whether the Palin pick is good or bad for moderates / independents.
But there's no question that Palin has shored up "the base" and yes, I do believe there were people who would have sat this election out if he had chosen Romney.
And so, I think certain states with evangelicals (think Ohio / Iowa) will tighten up.
I'm actually not convinced any more that America tilts any one direction its probably perfectly moderate (if anything).
if it is turned into a left right debate (which Obama won't do) I still think we win because when conservaive ideals are polled, they are rejected just as much as the Republican brand.
Just something to consider.
IF it's about issues. I think they will try as hard as they can to make it about "trust" and "fear" and "greed". Like they always do.
And let's not forget that in Sarah Palin, we have the younger female version of Dick Cheney. She has proven herself to be a perfectly nasty, mocking, sarcarcastic, demeaning pathetic excuse for a human being. McCain will talk all pretty about how we're Americans first, but Sarah Palin proves that talk to be a bunch of bullshit.