Well--I just had a rather interesting conversation on my morning walk to get donuts (donuts off-set the weight-loss from the walk :hmm:)

I live in a Very Republican area. (I'm Independant myself and have worked for candidates on either side--whoever I thought was best for the job). This morning I had a chat with 3 Republican Ladies who are outraged by McCain's pick for VP. One of them is in her early 90's and plans to vote Dem for the 1st time in her life. Why?

They believe that McCain's choice is based on the shallow thought that women will vote for him solely because he put a woman on the ticket. All of them said that may have helped him IF he had picked a qualified woman (their words--not mine). They don't think McCain is giving women credit for not thinking about who they vote for but will vote solely on an emotiional basis. Having looked around the web and by talking to people it appears to me that the group of people most upset by McCain's choice is the same group he hoped to gain...

But it's early. It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out.

This is interesting Peto. To me, picking a woman looked to have been a ploy to get the womens vote. Could possibly be. But as Von Tonner pointed out, this womans view on abortion will certainly turn a lot of women away but, McCain had to pick someone with the same view as his. Somehow in my thinking, if I were a woman, I would feel like my intelligence was discredited just because you put a woman on the ballot and I'm supposed to be led like the lamb as a result. A lot of women who support Hillary see Hillary as a woman of substance. A women who weathered her husbands infidelities, not just once, but several times. Sure, Hillary has a few skeletons in the closet rattling around. Bill has an army of skeletons(IMO, Bill ruined her chances. He should have shut up, his time is over) . Yet, she puts on the smiling face, pulls up the boot straps and attempts to carry on life despite the curveballs thrown. Women respect that in Hillary. Women are bright, no one can argue that point. The Hillary supporters really feel they have been let down by their own party. They feel Obama is not ready and is an empty suit. At this point and 18 months of watching Obama.... IMO these women are right. Clearly, Hillary has the experience. Obama, not so much. Well, not at all IMO. I watched his acceptance speech. Full of flower, color, bright lights and inspirational. So are a lot of sermons I have heard over the years. Obama has not even remotely stated how he plans on financing these grandious ideas he throws out. I'm beginning to think he is telling me what I want to hear. Not the reality of it. Von Tonner thinks Palin is the sheep being thrown into Bidens den. From what I read, Palin is just as much an attack dog as Biden ever was. I think she is intelligent also. At this point, all of this is talk. Debates are needed forthwith and a lot of them!!!! All 4 of them need to go head to head. This will dispell, with any luck, who has a grasp and who is handing out smoke and mirrors. Point blank questions need to be asked. Point blank answers need to be heard. I don't need to hear about growing up in the south side of Chicago anymore. We got the point of disadvantaged right up to the magnate schools and a top college in the country attended. Enough of talking about "ME". That part is over. Time for tough questions and clear answers. Put the smoke and mirrors away. Do not give answers as if you are running for the high school class president. Give us some real substance! The next two months are going to be very interesting.

Oh, and give me a donut. :D

This is right on the money. If I was a woman, I'd be insulted.

Then again, there are alot of morons out there, from what I hear, who want to vote for McCain because they didn't get Hillary, even though they have opposite views on almost everything.

Another day in America....:damn:

These must be good points because I agree with all of them ;).

I hope you're wrong as he's going to win (IMO). At the same time, I agree with you that so far it's all talk.

I think Palin may surprise a lot of paople. Me included. In fact--if she does well in the run-up to this election, look for her in 4-8 years. Palin vs Hillary? Nothing is out of the question or the realm of possibility. US politics are on the edge of desperation. The deeper in trouble the country gets, the more insanity we can expect to see from all parties.

No arguement. Anything less from either party will be a disservice to the whole country (again--my opinion).

Amen!

Donut is in the mail sent C/O Torsk :up:

EDIT: I saw 2 more Obama signs in my neighborhood this PM that definitely weren't there before. (Repeating myself) This is a traditionally Very Republican area.

@Peto,
I too believe Obama is going to win as well. A lot of factors play in Obama's favor and have been for quite sometime. The media has driven his campaign and supported it much more then any other candidate. He really is the media darling. When he went to Berlin I was looking to see what news entity would broadcast his first bowel movement in Europe. Obama speaks well. If he does not win, he should apply for a inspirational orating job. Unfortunate that he speaks of all the country ills but does not speak on how he plans on fixing it(herein is the problem). He could say the sun will be green tomorrow and the stary-eyed would believe it(hand me the Jim Jones juice). Although I stated we need the debates with hard questions and good answers. Obama speaks well enough to waltz around answers. He will appear confident and composed. McCain, not so much if at all. Public speaking is not McCains bag. So, Obama could say he will just ask the Federal Reserve to crank out more dollar bills and disperse it to the people as a way to fix those who are struggling. Sounds insane but Obama will say it in such a way that everyone will believe it. For McCain, the media has done nothing but down play his age. the media has painted a picture of McCain with one foot on a banana peel and his other foot in the grave. As far as the media is concerned, they see McCain keeling over as soon as he accepts the Presidency if he wins. So, we turn our attention to Palin. What does she bring since the media is shoveling the dirt on McCains casket and the general public believe the media is right? Shovel in hand to dump the next load of dirt. We see two old dogs (McCain/Biden) and acknowledge two old school politicians. We then see Obama as fresh faced and not influenced by the old school politics. We see the same in Palin. Really an odd mismatch. It is obvious that Obama picked Biden for his International knowledge (and his cursing ablility as well). Lets face it, the largest issue for Obama is his lack of International knowledge (in domestic IMO as well). McCain has a good grasp on International affairs(although a loose cannon IMO). It is clearly evident that Palin was picked for the womens vote and swinging Hillary supporters. A bold move but one I do not think will work. If these two debate, I will be watching, should be interesting. But, all in all, does the VP really matter? The VP just always seems to be back up if the president is killed or disabled, etc. Not much else. Really, what has Chaney done in 8 years? Last time Chaney was in the news he had blasted off his buddies ear while hunting. Not much more than that I can recall. What did Al Gore do in 8 years as VP. Not much. Hell, Hillary did more then Al every did. So, it looks to me like a write-in vote for me. I think I will pick Hillary and see what it gets me.

A lot of what was said here is true. She does have executive experience (though not very much), but she has no exposure to national issues. The debate is needed to reveal how much she understands in international issues. I would be extremely concerned with a VP whos international experience is no more than my own. She would need to prove to me that other nations would take her seriously, and that she knows of international issues with more depth than a staffers briefing sheet.

That said she's already better than Bush. The conventions have and will continue to reveal that everyone in politics give speaches better than our current president.

What if he did not pick her because she is a woman, but for her accomplishments and because she has more executive experience than Obama and Biden combined?

In my opinion it is even more offensive to make the assumption she was picked first because of her gender, rather then her accomplishment or her integrity.

Candidates don't pick running mates for their experience or skills, but because they think that choice will help them get elected. Way back in 1864 Abraham Lincoln dumped Hannibal Hamlin and went with Andrew Johnson specifically because Johnson was a southern Democrat and would help bring in that vote.

Be offended if you want, but at that level it's all about getting into the office, and not much to do with anything real.

Oh, I am not offended.I think the whole drama is a total no brainer, because Gender/Race should not be an issue in the first place.

No, it shouldn't. But it is, and probably always will be, because in politics you don't have to prove your right, just that the other guy's wrong.

Kind of like religion.

True words.

Then you really don't have the first clue about American politics.

This was a great choice, and Obama is plenty worried. The point of the VP choice is first and foremost, "do no harm." At best VPs usually help win a tricky State. That's IT. They are picked for entirely tactical/political reasons.

She's a far better pick than any of the other names floated before. She has the base energized—a weakness in McCain since he is not hyper conservative. That was the Rove strategy (which works, but only by slim margins). Energize the conservative base, and win by a gnat's eyelash in a 50/50 election.

Romney would have been accepted by the base, but they were never really jazzed about him.

As for the novelty of a woman, it is NOT about winning a few votes by women, but Obama does have a problem with female voters. He beats McCain among women, but only by a few percent. Democrats normally beat Republicans buy 10-15%, EASY. That was before Palin. McCain is already strong with women for a Republican, so Palin is not a factor.


She does NOT back adding creationism to the schools, sorry. She said that if it comes up in class (say a student asks about it) it should not be forbidden to discuss it (one way or the other, as it is now). She explicitly said she is against adding it to the curriculum.

Abortion? Well, with unmarried women, abortion is a knee jerk issue. It's far more up in the air with married women. I'm in neither camp (I'm pragmatically sort of on both sides at different times in the pregnancy), but I have to say, I was far less pro-choice after even the first sonogram of my daughter at 11 weeks than I was the day before that.


Surely the nominee in selecting a VP must ask themselves the "What if" question. When McCain asked himself that question what was he thinking!? How on earth does someone who was no more than a mayor of a town with 7-8,000 people less than 2 years ago be a 'heart-beat' away from leading the free world and convince McCain, who places much emphasis on commander in chief qualities, that she is the one?[/QUOTE]

Obama is unprepared to be President. Having executive experience (Governor) is FAR different than being a Senator, much less a junior senator. Obama when asked a simple question suggested the answer was "above my pay grade." As President, you have to make decisions, not avoid them (he votes "Present" in the Senate a lot (and as a state legislator he did), and lately he doesn't even make the votes.).

Harping on her experience is a loser for the democrats, by all means keep at it.

Senatorial decision making is stretched over very long time spans compared to Presidential ones. Senate experience is great, but I'd argue that it takes longer to gain a given level of executive experience in the Senate per unit time than in actual executive positions. It's simple, look at the number of decisions a Senator makes per year. Ignore the unthinking party line votes, or Bills to honor someone. Look at Bills that require actual thought (not just political stuff). Writing bills helps, too. At most maybe a handful of actual decisions per year in the Senate on average (other than deciding how to raise money for reelection). Really active Senators might make a dozen or more decisions a year!

Obama was a not terribly active Senator for 2 years, then went AWOL to run for President. Palin made more decisions her first month as Governor, I'd wager.

Good points tater!!! I would have trouble justifying you wrong on any point you have made.

My "strategic" thoughts about this selection are that the GOP is looking to Palin more long run than short though (which may be Very Smart!). Get ehr into the spot-light now and if she does well with public opinion in general, she can be a serious asset moving forward--even if the GOP loses this election.

My personal feelings about her? I'm trying to be neutral at this time (and doing it well IMO). I want to hear her in debates and with more time, more will be revealed about her leadership capabilities etc. I do believe she's intelligent--she didn't get to this point politically just by being pretty.

She's in the spot light. It's really up to her what happens now...

btw--Good to see you still around tater :up:

Peto

Some good points Tater. I would also like to point out on the abortion issue. One can not say Palin does not stand behind her beliefs. She knew her unborn child was to have Downs. Studies show 9 out of 10 women who know their unborn child will have Downs will abort. Palin carried the child full term and delivered. I'm sure quite a few here would be hard pressed to knowingly take on another life that will require extra attention and patience for the rest of their life. I would say she has some true grit when she could have had an easy out of a life long commitment.

Creationism, what she ment and as Tater pointed out, she was fine with teaching it in the classroom but that decision should be made at the local level.

McCain and dying. There once was a great President by the name of Roosevelt. FDR was a victim of polo. Most times he was pictured with his son who would hold his arm and make him steady. Of times pictured behind a desk to hide his wheelchair. He had what most thought as a crack for a VP. That VP was Harry Truman. Harry did a fine job after FDR passed. So, is McCains age and picking Palin really such a bad thing?

He got hit on the head with a mallet :lol:.

(Sorry AVG. I couldn't resist ;) ).

Never being one to leave a nit unpicked.

FDR actually suffered from Guillain-Barré syndrome, not poliomyelitis.

Oops:88) ...but hey you knew what I ment:-?

Yes I did! :up:

Nit picking is ok...unless it is my wife. You get my point though. Is there really an issue with McCains age? I think the cracks who attempt to assasinate are more of a worry for me the McCains age. Let Obama keep up with his political hounds talking of demetia and being lost. Continuing that attack might prove to lose Obama votes.

I looked up Guillain-Barre Syndrome....it is a nasty disease. Yet, FDR ran a country!