McCain's Choice?

[genchan]

The only problem with that comparison is that the election in November is Obama vs. McCain. Not Obama vs. Palin.

Not according to Palin

Political Punch

[kork13]

Not according to Palin

Political Punch

oh, come now.... She mis-spoke. This is sensationalizing a minor mistake. There has never been any idea that Palin is shooting for the presidency. Every interview she's done thus-far, and in most of her speeches, she talks about how she wants to help McCain [insert policy here]. She, along with (I dare say) the american people in general, recognize that they are partners and she is the following act to McCain.

I'm not trying to lean terribly in support of McCain (I consider myself somewhat neutral, and while I won't vote for Obama, I don't staunchly support McCain in any way), but stuff like that just isn't factual, fair, or even reasonable.

[cptacek]

So, genchan, you apparantly think it was a mistake that McCain chose her. So, if you were McCain, who would have you picked? Remember, as McCain, you are trying to get elected and you are trying to get your base to vote for you (heck, even to care about you, as most of us were indifferent before he picked her) as well as pull some indepenents your way.

That is why I think it was a brilliant choice. Obviously you would never vote Republican, so this choice wasn't for you. This choice was for me (I haven't missed a presidential election since I turned 18, but I wasn't exactly planning my route to the booth this year), it was for kork13, who hasn't made up his mind yet, it was for bjl584, it was for people who have been watching from afar and are just starting to look into the issues.

[LivingAlmostLarge]

I think it would have done his maverick image more reality if he had picked whom he really wanted Joe Lieberman or the governor of PA. But too liberal.

I also think he could have picked a few different female senators who are conservative and more experienced and knowledgable. I wonder what will happen in the debates?

Palin's gotta answer questions on foriegn policy, I hope she doesn't get mixed up the leaders of middle east countries. Right now she's under a fasttrack learning.

But heck anyone who says they can see Russia and thus is experienced in foriegn policy needs their head examined.

[belic3000]

Clinton

Wasn't President Clinton just a governor when he ran for President?
Pot calling the kettle black, isn't it?
On one hand, the greatest president we ever had was just a governor. On the other, she's not qualified to be a vice president because all she has done is be a governor.

[LivingAlmostLarge]

She's been governor less than 2 years, actually 18 months. He was Governor for 14 years. Kinda a big different huh? And before that mayor of a town of 6000 people.

Also Alaska is a pretty small state population wise.

[My English Castle]

I do think it's wrong to take money that you think is wrong.
I only wish the oil companies thought all their handouts from the government were wrong.

[belic3000]

Being governor for one day is being governor. Notice I never said he wasn't qualified. I said he was only a governor.

[kork13]

I've watched some of her interviews of late and have actually been pleasantly surprised. Palin carries herself very well, confident, and even though some of her answers must almost assuredly scripted, she speaks very naturally as if they're her own thoughts. Overall, I think she's doing quite well as McCain's running mate. McCain... not so great with interviews I think, but he eventually gets the point across that he wants to say.

Obama also interviews fairly well, though he stutters along at first... Once he's rolling he speaks confidently and earnestly, though you might think he's reading cue cards with how his answers almost always come back to a catch phrase or policy tag he uses. Again, I've not seen much coverage (to include interviews) of Biden.....

[cptacek]

I think it would have done his maverick image more reality if he had picked whom he really wanted Joe Lieberman or the governor of PA. But too liberal.

He would have lost if he picked one of these.

[geojen]

He would have lost if he picked one of these.

I thought he would rather "lose a campaign than lose a war." Guess he'd rather cave and pick somebody he doesn't want rather than lose a campaign.

[cptacek]

Why do you think it is such a bad choice for him? Not a bad choice for the country (because you obviously think that, so let's put that aside) but why do you think he SHOULDN'T have picked her? Isn't she doing everything a vp candidate is supposed to do for the presidential candidate?

[geojen]

I guess I think he shouldn't have picked her because A) he obviously didn't want to, and that goes against his whole "maverick" image he's trying to create for himself B) she totally walks the Repub party line on pretty much every topic, so that also goes against his (at least former) credentials of working across party lines. C) She does nothing to help him bolster his credentials in the economy or foreign policy. Most Americans agree that being able to see Russia from your house doesn't mean diddly-squat.

I guess I feel that you should pick a running mate that will help fill in the holes in your expertise, rather than one who will be good only for getting you in the White House. And since he's already said he would rather lose a campaign than see the country worse off, well..........

[kork13]

B) she totally walks the Repub party line on pretty much every topic, so that also goes against his (at least former) credentials of working across party lines.

Don't see this validated or important... Does she believe what she does because she's republican, or is she republican because that's what she believes? I suspect the latter, as is the case with nearly every other American. I don't really consider myself Republican, but I do find I agree more often with their policies than I agree with those of the Democrats, because what I personally believe in aligns more toward republicans than democrats--though not always by any stretch.

I guess I feel that you should pick a running mate that will help fill in the holes in your expertise, rather than one who will be good only for getting you in the White House. And since he's already said he would rather lose a campaign than see the country worse off, well..........

This is the second time you've said this madness, so I'll try to stem it right now. The quote does not say that he'd rather lose the campaign than [insert whatever negative thing of your choosing]. He argued that he'd rather lose a campaign than lose a war, because to do so would a) weaken the US's international standing; b) leave 2 states floundering, insecure, and vulnerable; c) allow a dangerous entity/idealism to claim "we've won, we beat the invincible americans", which would d) lead to a higher risk of further attacks because their organizers would have less fear of the repercussions. To lose a war, whether today's, Vietnam, WWII, or the Crimean War, the losing state is ALWAYS weaker and at greater risk from both internal and external forces than before the war. Obviously, he would (and Obama should, I don't know if he's said something related to it) do anything to prevent such a loss today. Against those consequences, political races are meaningless. People should should rather die than allow that to happen--oh wait... people do, don't they?

[LivingAlmostLarge]

Because he's preaching change but he picked someone whose ideals align with the current administration. How is that change? He didn't buck the system he picked someone to "reenergize" the base. He didn't go with someone whose policies he believed in.

He looks stupid. He didn't believe in drilling in ANWR, but now he says yes because she says yes. She's not the brightest bulb when she says Global Warming is not caused by humans. And he now agrees with her.

He says no abortion but for rape and incest. He's also said that if it happened to his daughters it would be PRIVATE and no one else business. Read into that what you will. But she's NO abortion period. Um, yeah, how wishy-washy can you be?

He WAS against pork barrel spending. BUT as Governor of Alaska, she was pushing for money for the bridge to nowhere. And after getting $27 for the bridge, then cutting the project because it was unpopular, she KEPT the Federal Government money. So whose the dumb one? Him or her? Whose right?

These are just a few examples.