Actually, it's a very astute move.

First, it will grab away some of those voters who were going to vote for Hilary just because she was a woman. My wife was one, a middle of the road but leans to the conservative independent voter. She was excited about Clinton, and I honestly believe she would have voted for her. She doesn't care for Obama.

Second, it will help to grab in some of the base that has been lukewarm about McCain. Her being an NRA lifer and a hunter helps big time among the gun rights people and the regular sportsmen and women, and her stance on abortion helps with the social conservatives that didn't agree with McCain.

Then, you have the fact that she's held elected office for about the same time as Obama, so she's inoculated from the "not enough experience" attacks, and in fact she has executive experience, something Obama is lacking.

Also, she has actual experience with "change", being instrumental in getting rid of a corrupt republican governor.

Finally, she's pretty easy on the eyes, which is a pretty stupid reason to vote for one candidate or another, but humans being human we know that image counts (Nixon Kennedy debate, anyone?).

All in all, probably the best pick he could have made, and it certainly helps more than hurts his chances in November.

I don't know how popular she will be with other Republican politicians.

She rose to power by turning in corrupt Republicans.

But I say give her a chance. The debates are coming, lets see how she does.

Social conservatives? Oh I see, religious people outside USA are fanatics/fundamentalists but in USA they are "social conservatives". I get it now.

Whatever floats your boat.

I know plenty of people who aren't religious, nor are they fanatical, but still don't think abortion should be as freely available as it is today.

Do not make the mistake of equating "social conservative" with "religious fanatic". To be sure, there is a considerable overlap, but at best the "religious fanatic" is a subset of the "socially conservative".

Or, more properly, there is an intersection of the two, because there are religious fanatics/fundamentalists who believe in things like liberation theology, etc.

That might not help her with politicians, but it is almost certain to help her with voters, especially ones that want "change".

There's two ways to take that. One way is that fanatics outside of the US are ignored as fruitcakes. This you have an issue with as the fruitcakes have a valid point, with which you agree. The alternative is that the you are saying that these fruitcakes are fanatics and you find it incredible that in the US they are considered conservative, when they should be considered extreme.

I couldn't really grasp your use of sarcasm (sarchasm).

Can you explain it to me?

Thanks!

Going on a gut-hunch here: Considering that there is an ongoing investigation of her in Alaska for misusing her position for personal reasons, I believe that McCain just made the dumbest decision he could have.

One of the McCain campaign's strongest weapons was the "lack of experience" card. They just trounced all over that argument by selecting a veep with a year and half of gubernatorial experience. Prior to that she was a mayor of an Alaskan town of 7000. People are going to ask themselves if they want Sarah Palin and her "qualifications" to be one heart attack away from the presidency. Not an unlikely scenario given McCain's age and health.

And I suspect her anti-abortion stance won't play well with the disenchanted Hillary supporters.

Biden is going to absolutely dismantle her at the VP debate. I doubt he'll be afraid of "picking on a woman" because heck, the GOP has been doing it to Hillary for years.

I guess non-religious people can be fanatics/fundamentalists as well when it comes to issues although I am yet to see the non-religious hordes who are against abortion in USA. Not saying that you wouldn't know the ones who are. Personally I would call anti-abortionism and it's more extreme variations almost uniformly a religious phenomena in USA.

Oh ok, by that rationale it is still ok to label certain groups of people fanatics/fundamentalists and others as social conservatives, right?

Nisgei,

not sure I follow you there. I'm just trying to distingish the line between fanatics/fundamentalists and social conservatives. Where exactly is the line drawn? Or is it, as I presume, more about something else, like for example the nationality of the said people and the access to power they have etc.

She's looking better and better to me, except for trying to fire her sisters ex-husband from his job as a State Trooper, other than that she looks good.

Quote:

Washington, D.C.: I was an apathetic McCain supporter until this. Now, I am energized. She does not have much experience but she is VP not POTUS. She seems smart, tenacious and just what McCain needs to beat the rap of "more of the same." This is definitely not "more of the same."

She does cause a problem with the Obama claim of more of the same.

No, Muslim fundamentalists are dangerous. The US has had Christian fundamentalists in positions of power, well, forever. Nothing bad has happened (I'm an atheist, myself, BTW, no dog in the fight).

tater

From who's point of view "nothing bad has happened"? I could mention the native Americans, I'm sure they weren't too happy about manifest destiny and stuff.

It's a hopeful vote grab. Pure and simple. And it exposes McCain's desperation...

This is what the obama campaign office had to say as soon as the choice was made. In fact his plane was still on the ground.

This is the second message:

What happened?

Someone had a change of mind about going after lady Palin.

Now if McCain and Palin win ... the people that we always call they (whoever they really is) can now taught Obama for not choosing Clinton.

All I can say is... if McCain picked Palin to try to win the "Hillary" votes as I and a lot of others suspect, He couldn't be farther from the mark. The only thing they have in common is that they're weomen. Palin stands pretty much for everything that Hillary is against. Palin is Anti-Abortion, pro-guns, and pro-big oil. :nope:
She is NOT going to appeal to the Hillary people.