Last night I had a premonition... McCain was going to pick Sarah Palin as his running mate. After watching Obama's speech I kept going over the short list of possible VP candidates and why * I * wouldn't pick them (Romney, somewhat negative against McCain in the primaries and has the wealth issue that voters seem to be against; Huckabee, no, no, no preachers and honestly a bit of a rube; Giuliani, main issue is defense and that is McCain's forte; Ridge, too pro-choice and would alienate "God's Own Party", etc, etc, etc). Then I got to Palin. Young woman, mother (married her high school sweetheart), solidly pro-life, strong conservative credentials, solid blue-collar credentials, former sports journalist, administrator with a background of reform. Only real negatives: some will see her as a "pander pick" and she is a first term governor (before that was a mayor for two terms). The question to me was can she be presented in such a way as to blunt these criticism (which the McCain campaign has leveled in one form or another at Obama)? I think it is possible but they have to be careful.
Yes, she is a woman (and an attractive one at that) but I don't think McCain will be hurt by that as much as some have stated. This isn't Geraldine Ferraro again. Palin is tough with a strong (if limited but longer than Obama's) track record of reform. She seems to be a principled conservative rather than a politically expedient one. My one big issue with her (but will play well with the "God's Own Party" crowd) is on gay rights but right now I think there are bigger fish to fry and I am willing to step back on this at the moment.
The Democrats seem to be salivating at the "experience" issue. Before they do, let's be honest... all three (McCain, Palin, and Biden) have more experience than Obama and of the four only Palin has ever run anything (and from all accounts somewhat successfully at that). Her apparent weakness seems to be foreign policy (as is Obama's) but McCain is at the top of the ticket and it will be his advisors that will be helping shape foreign policy not hers. What she brings to the table that neither Obama nor Biden has is the fact that she has been a governor and a reform-minded governor at that. She has had to deal directly with budgets, hiring and firing people, and being the only target when people are not happy (at least in the Senate you aren't the only pig... you've got 99 other porkers there with you). In fact, again if you're an honest political geek and look at accomplishments and not rhetoric, you will see that when it comes to reform and bucking political establishments that the McCain/Palin ticket is the real reform-oriented ticket.
So is she bullet-proof? No, but in politics no one is (not even the "anointed one"). Do I think she can do the job? Yes, at least as well as the man at the top of the Democrat ticket.
McCain/Palin 2008!
6 comments:
How prescient of you. When you get these premonitions, do you feel like you are enveloped in a loving, but powerful force? Do you feel jolted or is it more subtle? Why do you say premonition instead of insight? I'm not making fun, just trying to understand.
Premonitions aside, I think the republicans are toast, mostly because many people are not voting for candidates as much as against the current administration and the 'war' against Iraq and faltering economy.
Nope, just a sudden moment of awareness.
I don't know if the Republican Party will be "toast", I do think the Democrat party will expand its majority in the house but I am not so sure about the presidency. It will depend on how much the press continues to let Obama slide by.
tHIS IS WHY i THINK THAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WILL BITE IT in this coming election:
Historically, when the economy goes bad, the current administration is voted out, no matter who is running.
Bush is highly unpopular and so is the war (which I see as more of an invasion than a war).
I was impressed with your prediction of Palin as VEEP when almost no one else saw it coming.
Although Palin has a record of reform,there are also questionable actions on her record. (the firing of the Alaska state public safety commissioner, for example, and her involvement with the Alaska Independence party). She corroborates McCain's self-proclaimed maverick reputation which helps make him seem less of a SOB (son of Bush) but also makes him seem like a bit of a loose cannon. According to what I read, she has the lowest approval rating for a vice presidential candidate aside from Dan Quayle.
Obama turned the latest development - the announcement of the pregnancy of her 17 year old daughter- to his advantage by saying that families are off limits as targets.
So, stock up on butter and jam, you're going to need it.
You know, you really ruin your response when you use phrases like "SOB" and then define that at "Son of Bush" (which makes no sense at all). The comment of war/invasion doesn't add anything either other than telegraphing bias (I prefer to hide my punches until the right time * grin *). So now on to the actual substance of the comment. I agree that the fight will be tough. As I have stated in previous posts I think the Republicans will lose more seats in the Senate (maybe even to the level of being filibuster-proof) and probably the house. I don't think that the McCain/Obama match is decided quite yet but it will be a tough fight. Bush is highly unpopular, true, but Obama can't just run against Bush and if what is coming out today is any indication he seems to think he is running against Gov. Palin (an area Obama has to be really careful about since trying to play the experience card against her will only open him up more). I don't quite understand the statement about McCain's pick of Palin enforces his image as a maverick but makes him look like a "bit of a loose canon" since most people don't distinguish the two (and btw I don't think his reputation as a maverick is only "self-proclaimed" as you stated since the press has been calling him that for years and not simply parroting him). As I said before, she is not a perfect pick (I don't think anyone would be). I can say that I already see that the press is forming up on the side of Obama. I'll write more about that lovely little bit in my next blog post.
Sorry about the SOB thing-that was just silly. McCain does have to crawl out from Bush's shadow and he appears to be using his maverick reputation to distance himself from the current administration. Although the press calls him a maverick, he seems to relish using the term to distinguish himself. There is a difference between being called something and adopting the name for yourself. A maverick to me, is someone who thinks independently and does not follow the status quo unless that is deemed the best path. A loose cannon is an accident waiting to happen. To me, the two are related, but not inter-changable.
Not a problem and I probably came off a bit harsh for which I apologize.
I agree that the biggest fight for McCain is to make the case that he is not the Democrat's "McSame" which in his heart I do not think he is but unless he can build the case then he will sink.
Your elaboration on the difference between being a maverick and being a "loose canon" is apt. Again, I don't think McCain's use of the term maverick is "self-described" but I agree that he probably likes it and appropriated it for its "sound bite-ness" when it was more appropriate back in the 2000 race. Let us contrast this though to Obama... in his case he really is a "self-described reformer and agent for change" if for no other reason he has no actual record of being either a reformer or an agent of change. In all honesty I find it difficult to find anything he says that has not been said by Democrats for the last 40 years (though with perhaps the exception of Kennedy he tends to deliver things in speeches better).
Post a Comment