babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

Palin VIII

107 replies [Last post]

Comments

ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
josh
Offline
Joined: Aug 5 2002
Yes, it is. Obama's former head of the VP search committee, James Johnson, was far more involved, but he's white. But Obama should not take the bait here. Any tit-for-tat that involves race is bad for him. They're trying to bait him into one. His camp should hold its fire, and appear to be doing so.

DrConway
Offline
Joined: May 6 2001
James Carville wrote in his book back in 1996 that the success of Bill Clinton and his team at the time was, he felt, due to the fact that they "focused like a laser beam" on the US economy's poor performance under Bush Sr and his lack of willingness to do anything about it.

Obama needs a similar focus, and with luck he'll keep it up till Election Day.


ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
I'm starting to think there might be some internal stuff going on within the Republican Party and general supporters or they really don't have their stuff together,they're trying some sort of bizzare strategy or it's just coming apart.
This past week we've seen normally supportive pundits coming out against whats going on.
A couple Rep. Senators speak out.

Today the WSJ Editorial Board blasts him and calls his remarks, 'Un-Presidential'
WSJ is Murdoch right? I know it's less bias the Fox, but then even on Fox there's been some stuff.
They're calling for the campaign to pull an Obama attack ad which has one of their reporters voice in it.
Karl Rove even goes on Fox and says that the Campaign has gone to far with distorting things. (this one I'm still trying to figure out, call me a cynic but I doubt he would do that because he woke up that day feeling a bit honorable)

WSJ

quote:John McCain has made it clear this week he doesn't understand what's happening on Wall Street any better than Barack Obama does. But on Thursday, he took his populist riffing up a notch and found his scapegoat for financial panic -- Christopher Cox, the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

To give readers a flavor of Mr. McCain untethered, we'll quote at length: "Mismanagement and greed became the operating standard while regulators were asleep at the switch. The primary regulator of Wall Street, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) kept in place trading rules that let speculators and hedge funds turn our markets into a casino. They allowed naked short selling -- which simply means that you can sell stock without ever owning it. They eliminated last year the uptick rule that has protected investors for 70 years. Speculators pounded the shares of even good companies into the ground.

"The chairman of the SEC serves at the appointment of the President and has betrayed the public's trust. If I were President today, I would fire him."

Wow. "Betrayed the public's trust." Was Mr. Cox dishonest? No. He merely changed some minor rules, and didn't change others, on short-selling. String him up! Mr. McCain clearly wants to distance himself from the Bush Administration. But this assault on Mr. Cox is both false and deeply unfair. It's also un-Presidential.

And now...

Undermining Campaign Attack

quote:Republicans Back Obama‘s Version of Meeting with Iraqi Leaders

September 19, 2008 1:06 PM

Earlier this week, the campaign of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., seized upon a column in the New York Post that described Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., as having urged Iraqi leaders in a private meeting to delay coming to an agreement with the Bush administration on the status of U.S. troops.

"Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence," Post columnist Amir Tehari wrote, quoting Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari who told the Post that Obama during his meeting with Iraqi leaders in July "asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington."

The charge -- that Obama asked the Iraqis to delay signing off on a "Status of Forces Agreement," thus delaying US troop withdrawal and interfering in U.S. foreign policy -- has been picked up on the internet, talk radio and by Republicans including the McCain campaign, which seized on the story as possible evidence of duplicity.

The Obama campaign said that the Post report consisted of "outright distortions."
--------------------
Attendees of the meeting back Obama's account, including not just Sen. Jack Reed, D-RI, but Hagel, Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffers from both parties. Officials of the Bush administration who were briefed on the meeting by the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad also support Obama's account and dispute the Post story and McCain attack.
---------------
Two officials of the Bush administration say that if Obama had done what the Post story asserted – which they believe to be untrue – U.S. Ambassador Crocker and embassy officials attending the meeting would have ensured that the Bush administration heard about it immediately. If such an incident occurred in front of officials of the Bush administration, it would have constituted a foreign policy breach and would have been front-page huge news; it would not have leaked out two months later in an op-ed column.

Nonetheless, based on nothing more than the Post report, McCain senior foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann issued a statement earlier this week expressing outrage.

And why is Karl Rove writing editorials and giving Obama 'advice'? What's he playing here?

Karl Rove


ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
*drip drip drip* I think this is a good example of what happens when you don't vet your candidates as well as they happen to be involved in state ethics inquiry. The info here has been around for weeks and has been talked about on the net by people from Alaska. When the Republicans started interfering and laying down the hammer on the inquiry some of the speculation changed that this may be the big reason why the Repubs came in so hard and stopped it. That it wasn't the inquiry or the firing itself that would be so damning, but the revelations on this matter.
Anyways it's finally making it to the lower 48. I think Cooper and CNN are going to get a lot of flack for this. Durn liberal media!

"First Dude" or Shadow Governer

quote: ANCHORAGE, Alaska (CNN) -- He's the man Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin affectionately calls her "first dude."

Todd Palin was introduced to the nation at the Republican National Convention as a blue-collar oil worker, a laid-back father of five and a world-record-holding snowmobile racer.
------------------------
He's worked in Alaska's oil industry and as a fisherman. But in recent times, he's had another role. Some call him the "Shadow Governor."

In government circles and among the family's acquaintances, Todd Palin is known as his wife's greatest adviser and most loyal protector. One family friend said, "Todd is incredibly supportive and is willing to do whatever it takes to help Sarah."

Todd may appear quiet, almost shy, but he's made quite an impression on his wife's running mate, Sen. John McCain. On the campaign trail this month in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, McCain said, "He's not afraid of Washington, D.C.! He can take them on!"

Alaskans interviewed by CNN say Todd Palin has plenty of influence.

He's not on the state payroll, but lawmakers say he is a central figure in his wife's policy agenda. -----------------
CNN has seen thousands of e-mails released this year from the governor's office that show that Todd Palin was copied on hundreds of them. The topics of the e-mails ranged from public criticism of Sarah Palin to her meetings with corporate leaders.

Andrew Halcro, who ran as an independent against Sarah Palin for governor in 2006 and is a critic of the Palins, wants to know why Todd Palin was being copied on state correspondence.

Halcro wrote a blog post about Todd Palin called "Shadow Governor" and says, "Todd plays the role as kind of the fixer."

Even Halcro found himself the subject of e-mails that Todd Palin was copied on. He wants to know why.

"This whole process, and the whole string of e-mails, to me really raise some red flags," Halcro said.

But campaign spokeswoman Meg Stapleton explained, "There is spousal privilege in that the governor is asking him to print them off or take care of business."

Alaska lawmakers say Todd Palin is a fixture at the state Legislature. So much so, some say they've joked about getting buttons that read, "What would Todd do?"

One of those lawmakers is Lyda Green, a Republican and state Senate president who is not friends with the Palins.

"I had a meeting I requested with the governor. ... I was particularly surprised that Todd was there. I had never seen a spouse stay in the room through the meeting."

The campaign said, "Todd's role has not been inappropriate."

The campaign also confirms that Todd Palin has taken two trips with state commissioners to survey Alaskan mines and one to survey part of the proposed route for a natural gas pipeline, his wife's top goal. The state paid for those trips, according to the campaign, because they were considered "state business" since Todd Palin is trying to expand Alaska's work force.

CNN Video Story


josh
Offline
Joined: Aug 5 2002
quote:

The Alaska lawmaker directing an abuse-of-power investigation of Gov. Sarah Palin promised Friday the probe will be finished before the election, despite refusals by key witnesses to testify, including the governor's husband.

After waiting 35 minutes for Todd Palin and two state administrative employees to appear under subpoena before the state Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Hollis French condemned their refusal to testify and the attorney general's broken promise that seven other witnesses would testify who were not subpoenaed.

French said the retired prosecutor hired by the Alaska Legislature to investigate Palin, Stephen Branchflower, will conclude his investigation by Oct. 10. Still, that report will not include testimony from the Republican vice presidential nominee, her husband or most of the top aides Branchflower hoped to interview.

Sarah Palin's allies hoped the investigation would be delayed past the election to spare her any troublesome revelations — or at least the distraction — before voters have made their choice.


http://tinyurl.com/3orfcw


Michelle
Offline
Joined: May 10 2001
How is it possible to refuse a subpoena? If you refuse, doesn't that mean contempt and jail?

ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
quote:Originally posted by Michelle:
How is it possible to refuse a subpoena? If you refuse, doesn't that mean contempt and jail?

Yeah it does and can mean jail. I can't remember exactly but there is some reason that calling them all in contempt can't be done until the legislature sits in January. So basically it's a stall tactic, they all know, or in this case have been told by the Repub lawyers that they can not show up and won't be dinged legally for it for months. It's pretty slimy.

Never thought I'd be learning this much about Alaskan politics. I think the Repubs really failed from their perspective in keeping this under raps because they didn't take some of it's uniqueness into consideration. For one it's small and it's not as easy to cover-up with all sorts of distraction because people know everyone. One of the first thing they did was try to say that Obama sent a team of 30 people and lawyers to interfere. That was debunked almost immediately on the ground and through the internet because as people said, 'We know who the outsiders are and they ain't here, we'd know.' Two and this is the thing I keep reading over and over is that Alaskans, except for the most diehard of partisans don't like being interfered with by all those 'East Coasters'. So people are speaking out and are PO'd about that part. Some people feel like their government has been taken over, like an invasion. Not all of the Republican reps have fallen into line but as some people are saying at least we now know where people's loyalties lie and what their true colors are. The last big one is that the police commissioner in question is really well respected and loved across partisan lines and people have been appalled at the smearing of his character that's been going on.

Anyhow it's good to see that at least some people aren't caving in, though I expect that whatever comes out will be characterized as just a partisan smear job if it's negative. That it will come out against Palin isn't even a given, it was never a certainty in the first place. In the beginning it was a big deal, but not necessarally a career breaking deal sort of thing. Palin never fought it, heck she even filed a complaint against herself. It's the interference that's made it worse because now it's more about, "What the heck is being hidden?"


ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
And then it appears that somehow reporters keeping getting there hands on internal documents that keep contradicting the latest official version of what happen. I've lost track of the number of versions.

quote:An internal government document obtained by ABC News appears to contradict Sarah Palin's most recent explanation for why she fired her public safety chief, the move which prompted the now-contested state probe into "Troopergate."
alaska travel

An internal government document obtained by ABC News appears to contradict Sarah Palin's most recent explanation for why she fired her public safety chief Walt Monegan, the move which prompted the now-contested state probe into "Troopergate."

Fighting back against allegations she may have fired her then-Public Safety Commissioner, Walt Monegan, for refusing to go along with a personal vendetta, Palin on Monday argued in a legal filing that she fired Monegan because he had a "rogue mentality" and was bucking her.
..................
The McCain-Palin campaign echoed the charge in a press release it distributed Monday, concurrent with Palin's legal filing. "Mr. Monegan persisted in planning to make the unauthorized lobbying trip to D.C.," the release stated.

But the governor's staff authorized the trip, according to an internal travel document from the Department of Public Safety, released Friday in response to an open records request.

The document, a state travel authorization form, shows that Palin's chief of staff, Mike Nizich, approved Monegan's trip to Washington, D.C., "to attend meeting with Senator Murkowski." The date next to Nizich's signature reads June 18.

In response to inquiries about the document Friday, the McCain-Palin campaign provided a statement from Randy Ruaro, another aide to Palin.

According to Ruaro, Monegan asked for -- and received -- approval for the travel without telling Palin's staff his reason for going. "As a matter of routine, the travel was approved by Mike Nizich ... weeks before the actual purpose was made clear by former Commissioner Monegan," Ruaro wrote.

Also apparently state workers have been told not to talk to reporters at work and direct all calls to campaign people AND been told they can't talk to anyone outside of work reporter or not.
That last part isn't going over so well with all of them.


Polunatic2
Offline
Joined: Mar 12 2006
quote: How is it possible to refuse a subpoena? If you refuse, doesn't that mean contempt and jail?
That rule only applies to Democrats now. Starting with Dickhead Cheney who sent out the message two years ago that the executive branch was not accountable to Congress, to Harriet Miers to Christine Whitman to Karl Rove to Alberto Gonzalez to aides.

It goes on and on. The Democrats however, to my knowledge, have not charged anyone with contempt so why would these republicans comply? There is also a view that if anyone is charged, Bush will pardon them anyway.

[ 20 September 2008: Message edited by: Polunatic2 ]


ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
Anchorage Daily News - Abdication by Palin

quote:Abdication by Palin

When did the McCain campaign take over the governor's office?

Gov. Sarah Palin has surrendered important gubernatorial duties to the Republican presidential campaign. McCain staff are handling public and press questions about actions she has taken as governor. The governor who said, "Hold me accountable," is hiding behind the hired guns of the McCain campaign to avoid accountability

Is it too much to ask that Alaska's governor speak for herself, directly to Alaskans, about her actions as Alaska's governor?
---------------------
s the McCain campaign telling Alaskans that Alaska's governor can't handle her own defense in front of her own Alaska constituents?

Way back when, before John McCain chose Palin as his vice presidential running mate, Palin promised to cooperate with the investigation.

Now she won't utter a peep about it to Alaskans. Nor will her husband, Todd, who definitely needs to explain his role in Troopergate.

Instead, Alaskans have to sit back and listen to John McCain's campaign operatives handling inquiries about what Alaska's governor did while governing Alaska. Residents of any state would be offended to see their governor cede such a fundamental, day-to-day governmental responsibility to a partisan politician from another state. It's especially offensive to Alaskans.


al-Qa'bong
Offline
Joined: Feb 27 2003
quote: The Alaskan Governor is the quintessential dominatrix, the Queen of Cold with a warm smile and a wicked style. This is a key to her appeal.

Americans, who reelected (overlooking, for the moment, the possibility of voting machine fraud) the Bush Crime Family Torture Masters in 2004, apparently have a strong masochistic streak. An attractive, powerful, moralizing domme makes us weak in the knees.

Americans are bowing down before this woman like lovestruck submissives, giving up their rights to peace, pleasure, freedom, a clean environment and any sense of respect from the world. Like Austrian novelist Leopold Von Sacher-Masoch's 19th century classic Venus in Furs, Sarah Palin looks stunning in fur, wields a mean leather whip and has utter disdain for your pain. And this Venus also wields a cross as a sword.

Sarah Palin: Venus in Furs


ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
GOP Race-Baiting in N. Mexico
(that title is my own assessment)

quote:A BBC reporter tooling through the state fair Thursday -- the same day that Democrat Barack Obama was in New Mexico -- was asking Hispanics their views on Barack Obama's presidential bid. Reporter Jon Kelly talked first to a young graduate student who said he was going to vote for Obama.

Then Kelly stumbled upon Fernando C de Baca, chairman of the Bernalillo County Republicans. According to Kelly, C de Baca said Hispanics were a naturally conservative group.

Then C de Baca offered Kelly a blunt assessment on why Hispanics wouldn't vote for Obama.

The reporter, John Kelly, quotes C de Baca as saying:

"The truth is that Hispanics came here as conquerors," he said. "African-Americans came here as slaves.

"Hispanics consider themselves above blacks. They won't vote for a black president."

Mmm, I guess I don't have to say that this is a crock of bull. I think the problem is, for the GOP anyways is that the numbers AREN'T going there way.
So whadda yah do? Try to start a fight.


ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
Unreal...
Palin to Meet With Karzai in New York

quote:ORLANDO, Florida (CNN) — CNN confirms that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will meet with Afghan President Hamid Karzai next week in New York during the opening meeting of the United Nations General Assembly.

The meeting is part of a larger effort by the McCain campaign to bolster Palin's foreign policy credentials in the face of criticism from Democrats questioning her preparedness for the Vice Presidency. Though her running mate is considered a leading voice on military issues and foreign affairs, Palin herself has only traveled abroad to Kuwait, Germany, Canada and, briefly, to an Iraqi border crossing.

According to the Washington Post, which first reported the story, the Karzai meeting was initiated by McCain campaign officials.

At a town-hall meeting in Michigan on Wednesday, Palin expressed confidence in her foreign policy acumen.

"But as for foreign policy, you know, I think that I am prepared, and I know that on January 20th, if we are so blessed as to be sworn into office as your president and vice president, certainly we'll be ready," she told a questioner. "I'll be ready."


ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
Another potential reason for the crazy coverup and stall tactics. This one is scary.
Hiring Was to prove Fundementalist Street Cred

quote:
So far Gov. Palin's handling of Alaska's Troopergate has focused on why Commissioner of Public Safety Walt Monegan was fired. An equally important question is why Chuck Kopp was hired to replace him.

On June 30, 2008, David Brody of CBS News reported John McCain met in North Carolina with Rev. Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham, director of the multimillion- dollar Samaritan's Place faith-based charitable organization. McCain was courting the religious right who, at the time, were skeptical of his social conservatism and his Christian qualifications. After the meeting Graham issued a statement praising McCain's "personal faith" and added, "We had an opportunity to pray ... for God's will to be done in this upcoming election."

Subsequent events suggest that the price of support for McCain by the fundamentalist Christian leadership would be a vice presidential candidate of their liking. Gov. Palin was a logical choice for Franklin Graham, whose ties to Alaska include a palatial, by Bush Alaska standards, second home in Port Alsworth: a community that has often served as a retreat for Christian fundamentalist leaders.

But Gov. Palin did not promote a socially conservative agenda during her first two years as governor and some Alaska right-wing commentators called her an economic liberal. Send us a sign, national fundamentalist Christian leaders seemingly said, that proves your credentials. In firing Monegan and hiring Kopp, Palin would have gained a controversial measure of revenge in a family dispute and established her standing as a Christian conservative politician.
---------------------------------------

Palin's connection to what Jeff Sharlett has called "elite fundamentalism" is of interest now that she is an election and a heartbeat away from the presidency. Franklin Graham has been the keynote speaker for the Alaska Governor's Prayer Breakfast the past two years. According to their Web site, the organizers believe, "God directs the affairs of Man and is the ultimate authority over human events." The Alaska Governor's Prayer Breakfast is connected to the National Prayer Breakfast sponsored by The Fellowship Foundation, also known as "The Family," which espouses similar beliefs. The Family is headed by Doug Coe, one of the most influential evangelicals in Washington, D.C. Coe's group tends to operate behind the scenes organizing small cells attended by the power elite, mostly Republicans. George Bush was saved in such a cell while in Texas.

Elite fundamentalists believe, according to Sharlett, not only in religious determinism but that they are personally chosen by God to be in positions of power. By claiming divine legitimacy of their political power, elite fundamentalists relegate the opposition to being the devil's tool. They are making a frighteningly close return to the pre-enlightenment concept of rule by divine right, which our founding fathers rejected as anathema to democracy and established, instead, the separation of church and state lest decisions be made on the basis of good versus evil rather than wise versus unwise.

[ 20 September 2008: Message edited by: ElizaQ ]


bagkitty
Online
Joined: Aug 27 2008
I really haven't been following these threads, but when I ran across the attached link about Palin's charging rape victims for the rape kits used in their examinations, I thought it might be of some interest. I have gone through the Palin threads from the 17th through today (the 20th) and only noticed one related link, this story from Daily Kos is much more extensive.

In depth explanation of Palin charging victims for cost or examination rape kits


ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
quote:Originally posted by bagkitty:
I really haven't been following these threads, but when I ran across the attached link about Palin's charging rape victims for the rape kits used in their examinations, I thought it might be of some interest. I have gone through the Palin threads from the 17th through today (the 20th) and only noticed one related link, this story from Daily Kos is much more extensive.

In depth explanation of Palin charging victims for cost or examination rape kits

Yeah thats a good one. This is the full article that's quoted in that diary.


Life Begins at Rape...Just ask Mayor Palin


For me this issue is probably the worst thing I've found out so far and I just don't want to believe that this person could get elected and be that close to the Presidency. The thing is with the people that are there right now, they do a lot of pandering and talking and manipulating of this thought realm (the Christian Right) if it's politically expedient but they aren't them. I wish I could find the link to an article I read about what goes on behind the scenes, in how they make fun of them. I really think that with Palin though it's equivalent of putting someone like Dobson or Pat Buchanan in the Presidency. Something that those folks have been trying to do for years and have finally found a way to do it.


ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
VP Debate Rules Changed to Accommodate Palin's Inexperience

quote:The Obama and McCain campaigns have agreed to an unusual free-flowing format for the three televised presidential debates, which begin Friday, but the McCain camp fought for and won a much more structured approach for the questioning at the vice-presidential debate, advisers to both campaigns said Saturday.


At the insistence of the McCain campaign, the Oct. 2 debate between the Republican nominee for vice president, Gov. Sarah Palin, and her Democratic rival, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., will have shorter question-and-answer segments than those for the presidential nominees, the advisers said. There will also be much less opportunity for free-wheeling, direct exchanges between the running mates.

McCain advisers said they had been concerned that a loose format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a disadvantage and largely on the defensive.


DrConway
Offline
Joined: May 6 2001
Since when have Republicans ever been concerned with the disadvantaged? Every time Dems try to do this for black people they get sneered at for committing affirmative action. [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]

But I guess when it's a rich white woman who wants for nothing except more power and visibility... eh, affirmative action all the way!

This is an interestingly illuminating look at just how committed Republicans are to rigging the system in favor of the already wealthy and powerful.


Sven
Offline
Joined: Jul 22 2005
My money says that McCain-Palin loses in 2008. But, I suspect that Palin will not then return to Alaska never to be heard from again. Instead, she will, over the next four years, be preparing to be the standard-bearer of the Republicans in the 2012 election against Obama. She represents a danger to the Democrats: Of being a female reincarnation of Ronald Reagan (very conservative but with a lot of popular support).

pookie
Online
Joined: Dec 13 2005
quote:Originally posted by Sven:
My money says that McCain-Palin loses in 2008. But, I suspect that Palin will not then return to Alaska never to be heard from again. Instead, she will, over the next four years, be preparing to be the standard-bearer of the Republicans in the 2012 election against Obama. She represents a danger to the Democrats: Of being a female reincarnation of Ronald Reagan (very conservative but with a lot of popular support).

I agree that she's possibly a future agent, but I think her status as a frontrunner will depend on how much she is perceived to have added to the ticket beyond the base and her ability to demonstate credibility on national issues. One point that some cons made when the pick was first announced was that McCain was forcing her into a national spotlight before she was ready and, ultimately, eroding her future capital.

I do think that she would return to Alaska - or would you see another more prominent role for her in the RNC? Of course, even in Alaska she could remain in the spotlight.

In any event, the beauty of politics is that today's frontrunners are tomorrow's "whatever happened to?"s. I think her lustre is already starting to fade a bit (ok, maybe a bit of wishful thinking.)

[ 22 September 2008: Message edited by: pookie ]


Joel_Goldenberg
Offline
Joined: May 5 2004
Here's the speech Palin was supposed to give at the anti-Ahmadinejad rally at the UN, before she was disinvited by the organizers.

www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1023408.html

[ 22 September 2008: Message edited by: Joel_Goldenberg ]


Sven
Offline
Joined: Jul 22 2005
quote:Originally posted by pookie:
I do think that she would return to Alaska - or would you see another more prominent role for her in the RNC? Of course, even in Alaska she could remain in the spotlight.

Oh, I think she will definitely go back to Alaska to continue as governor. But, I suspect she will be spending a significant amount of time over the next four years building her new national stage presence. She’s going to spend a considerable amount of time immersed in learning about matters of foreign affairs (something that state governors have nothing to do with).

She drew a crowd of over 60,000 people in Florida this weekend (almost as many people as those who filled the stadium in Denver to listen to Obama’s DNC acceptance speech). No one in the Republican ranks can rival that.

If she’s in Iowa talking with people throughout the state in the primary lead-up to the 2012 election, I would be surprised if she’s not the front-runner. Putting aside her politics, I think she rates very high on the personal likeability scale with people who listen to her...very much like Reagan (but I think she has a more common touch than even Reagan had in informal settings — and can probably give an “aw shucks” speech as well as Reagan could).


ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
I'm not so sure I'd write off McCain and Palin yet.
The current economic mess is really affecting the 'politics' of the election. The Repubs and their voices are coming out hard right now with spin placing sole blame on on the Democrats. McCain may be flipflopping all over the place, being against regulations for a couple of days and talking about the success of deregulation last night. He's changed his tune on the whole bailout thing several times, yet I'm not sure that's going to matter once they get their talking points in order.

With whats happening in congress right now if the Dems fight the bailout..then they're bad or if they managed to get the bill changed...they bad for holding up the process that will save the American main street and playing 'politics' with the crisis that they are at fault for. There's some pretty damning spin available no matter what happens.
Of course all based on the fact that most people don't know what in the heck is going on.

The Democrats of course will spin things their way. I'm just not so sure that they have as good spin (relevant to election) as the Republicans have right now. I think Obama has a pretty tough go here. If anyone could pull it off in the political sense he would be able to though. He's playing calm and steady, which people are noticing especially in comparison to McCain.

There's still a ways to go with this thing I think and it's pretty volatile atm.

edited to add: Just came across this which explains way better then I did of why all of this can play into the Republicans favour:

GOP' Bottomless Crack Pipe

[ 22 September 2008: Message edited by: ElizaQ ]


ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
Oh and although it's difficult to say whether the numbers would be significant but if the Democrats in Congress cave on the bailout bill and don't at least deal with the issue of oversight in Section 8 and basically hand all the power over to the SEC they will most likely lose some votes. People on that side of the spectrum and diehard Obama supporters are freaking mad. That could bleed votes from the Obama camp. In any significant numbers? Have no idea, but the talk is out there.

pookie
Online
Joined: Dec 13 2005
Hmm - I dunno Eliza Q. - I think you may be underestimating the anger and skepticism among the general public about the need for and optics of the bail out. There has been enough bipartisan doubt sown over the last 24 hours that I'm not sure voters would punish Dems alone for balking at the administration's particular package.

Besides which, Palin herself is perhaps the most vocal opponent among the four of bail-outs like these .


ElizaQ
Offline
Joined: May 27 2005
quote:Originally posted by pookie:
[QB]Hmm - I dunno Eliza Q. - I think you may be underestimating the anger and skepticism among the general public about the need for and optics of the bail out. There has been enough bipartisan doubt sown over the last 24 hours that I'm not sure voters would punish Dems alone for balking at the administration's particular package.

The 'talking points' are already out there that the Dems are holding it up. I've read it at least a dozen times just on the comment sections of various news articles. The question is whether those stick or not. As well as the talking point that this whole mess is Fannie Maes fault and Obamas connections with Fannie Mae. It's BS but that one is everywhere right now.

What may change that though is that since I wrote that many Republicans are now coming out against the bill as well as McCain has yet again said something different then two days ago. He's now okay with it generally as long as there are oversights and almost mimicing the principles that Obama laid out yesterday for it.

I guess I'm just not ready to say nope they've lost it for sure because the politics and optics of how the negotiations for the bailout go this week are still up in the air. Right now it appears to be pretty soundly in Obamas favor as in poll after poll states that people favor him as being stronger with economic issues and CNN just did a poll that stated 2 to 1 people think the Republicans are responsible for this mess.

As for Palin, I wouldn't say she herself is for or against anything. She's just for or against it if the speech she's reading says so. Yeah thats a snark....


pookie
Online
Joined: Dec 13 2005
BTW I am definitely not saying repubs have lost it for sure. There are too many variables, in particular racism, that could still come into play in must-win counties/states.

al-Qa'bong
Offline
Joined: Feb 27 2003
When one considers all the disasters; economic, military and otherwise, that have happened over the last eight years, it's amazing that the Republicans are even in the race for President.

Polunatic2
Offline
Joined: Mar 12 2006
The Evolution of John McCain
Why He Picked Sarah Palin, Carbon Queen
Chip Ward
quote:....her willingness to put Creationism up against the teaching of evolutionary science in the classroom on a he-says-she-says basis, that's far more revealing of just who our new Republican vice presidential candidate is than we generally assume....

Whether we know it or not, we should now be duly warned: The Palin nomination is the equivalent of launching a "surge strategy" in the Republican war on the environment...

If you believe that a look-alike God made the world for you to dominate and use, that you are among God's chosen few, and that He will provide for you no matter what you do to your surroundings, then you are likely to see yourself as above the natural order. If you believe that the world will be ending soon anyway, that you will be "raptured" while non-believers are "left behind" (as fundamentalist Tim LeHay so vividly describes the process in his bestselling novels), then precaution and restraint are moot...

Evolutionary theory shapes and informs the ecological sciences that are the very basis for our environmental laws and policies...

We need environmental science in our schools more than ever. An ecologically illiterate generation of students will be ill-prepared to meet our real, less than rapturous future...

The Evolution vs. Creationism debate appears to be an argument over the distant past. But it's actually about the future. It's about, in fact, who will define the cultural mindset that will generate that future. Let us pray it is not defined by a pit bull with lipstick who thinks she is "tasked by God" to drill for oil.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments