We're in for an interesting ride
Friday, August 29, 2008
Today John McCain picked his vice-presidential running mate. Sarah Palin is the 44-year old governor of Alaska, who has strong conservative credentials and has been particularly noted in Alaska for trying to clean up the wasteful spending of her predecessor. A couple of interesting facts: Palin is a former runner-up in the Miss Alaska pageant and her main experience in government prior to her 2006 election as governor was serving as the mayor of tiny Wasilla, AK (pop. 5,470). I've speculated on this blog about whether we should consider Barack Obama to be the first Gen-X presidential candidate; needless to say, if he is, then Palin is certainly the first Gen-X'er to run for veep!
I know nothing about Gov. Palin, but on the surface at least it seems like a brilliant pick. Obama's own relative inexperience in government will keep his campaign from attacking Palin on her scant two years in statewide politics. Her youth and freshness will balance McCain's age (much like Biden's age and gravitas balances Obama's youth). And of course, she gives all those disgruntled Hillary Clinton supporters a reason not to vote for Obama/Biden.
Of all the interesting wrinkles that this promises for the campaign, I think the most interesting might be the vice-presidential debate. Whoever would have thought Joe Biden against Sarah Palin??
My, my, we are in for an interesting election season.
Labels: John McCain, Politics, Sarah Palin
posted by Andrew C. Thompson at 1:14 PM
10 Comments:
Let's look at this from a logical perspective.
So McCain is proposing that a two-year governor - whose only other political experience is as the mayor of Evening Shade - should be a 72-year old heartbeat away from becoming the President of the United States of America? Especially when one of his primary complaints against his opponent has been a lack of experience?
If this is primarily an effort to sway Hillary supporters, I think he missed his window of opportunity on that one. Before Denver, maybe. Now, not so much.
With all due respect, I'm not so sure I'd call it "brilliant." I'll go with "baffling."
I totally disagree with Matthew. I have been hoping that McCain would choose Palin ever since I read an article about her online as a possible dark horse pick for VP. I think her appeal is not going to be disgruntled Hillary voters I think she cements the GOP base, she appeals to independent women, especially in middle America, and I think if given the right vehicle she can appeal to younger voters as well, which is something that McCain has not done nearly as well as Obama. Plus I like the fact that one of the reasons she was elected in Alaska was to reform her own party and she not only did it, but still has remained the most popular governor in America. Besides the last two presidents of the United States major experience was being governor of states.
Whatever happens, we'll have either an African American President or a woman VP, and that says change is in the wind, no matter what. Does anybody out there besides me believe this is an historic election for real, and the choices are stark? I'm an Obama supporter, and I don't decide based on single issues like pro life or pro choice. The last 7 1/2 years have, if nothing else, say that we "Christians" need to wise up and quit looking only at the label. John, i-universe.net
I'm not sure what I think yet because Palin just came out of left field. But, my intuition tells me that she will win any debate, even if she comes away with fewer points. In the court of public opinion, she is already a fast-rising darling.
Yeah, the Palin pick undermines the argument that Obama is too inexperienced to be President. If she had another term under her belt, she could be immune from such critiques, but she doesn't.
Anyway, I've never given much credence to experience in electing Presidents. Ideology matters more. Being experienced at going in the wrong direction doesn't impress me.
wow, Andrew, i actually had a very similar reaction www.gloria-deo.blogspot.com
And I thought your article about who is/isn't Gen-X was really interesting. I was born in 82 and have a pretty vivid recollection of much of my early childhood, which I suppose puts me right on the border between Gen-X and Millenial.
Thanks to all for the great comments on this post. It seems like the readers of this blog are as divided on Gov' Palin's selection as the national media. I personally feel very divided in this election, and I have no idea who I'll vote for.
I will say that I think it's a little disingenuous for so many media figures (e.g., columnists in newspapers like the New York Times and Washington Post) to so harshly criticize Palin's inexperience when Sen. Obama is lacking in the experience department himself. Plus, the repeated, morbid references to John McCain's age ("Palin would be one 72-year old heartbeat away from the presidency) is just out-and-out ageism. That's the kind of thing that Democrats would cry foul at if it were happening to one of their candidates.
I'm late, but...
1. Choosing Palin undermines McCain's critiques of Obama's "inexperience". While it makes it difficult for the Dem's to go after her, it likewise short-circuits a line of critique that the Repub's have been pursuing in earnest. Seems an odd pick for that reason--take out your most prominent and consistent line of attack by picking a VP candidate with less experience.
2. Agree with someone John above about not placing a lot of weight on experience. Obama made this point himself on The Daily Show many months ago. The answer is two-fold: first, that (as mentioned above) experience screwing up doesn't get us anywhere. Exhibit A is the amount of experience in foreign affairs on Bush's team--loads of it and a colossal failure. Second, Obama brilliantly stated that when we bring up "experience," what we're really getting at is whether or not someone has good judgment. On this, see Exhibit A above.
3. Palin seems very sharp, I'm suspect she'll perform well in debates. But that's b/c the impression I get is that she'd have that skill (debate) and not because she understands the broad set of issues.
4. This is someone who, unless she was playing dumb, had no idea what a VP "does all day." Not inspiring...
From a policy standpoint, Palin and Clinton couldn't really be more different. And you'll never catch me voting for someone just because she has ovaries (did you see Samantha Bee's take on this issue on The Daily Show?).
I'm with Matthew. Baffling.
This does not give we disgruntled Hilary voters a reason to vote for the Republican ticket. That is rather sexist for you to allude that the only reason we were voting for Hilary was because she is a woman. That's like saying all Black people are going to vote for Obama and all Vietnam vets are going to vote for McCain. Hilary and Sarah are both women but they have completely different platforms, values, and governing styles. We should encourage people to vote for whom they believe will do the best job according to one's personal political values and important issues.
Post a Comment
<< Home