The VP Choice that Lost the Presidency for McCain - Page 7 - AznLover.com

AutomaticBzooty · 08-30-2008, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lazybot

Kinda feels like McCain just nominated Erin Brockovich for Vice President, doesn't it?

DiesIrae · 08-30-2008, 02:24 PM

I think Palin might have been a good choice for VP had McCain been younger and healthier. I actually think she's a decent politician, BUT the fact that she does have so little administrative experience and foreign policy experience makes her a very tricky choice in this regard. If McCain kicks it (which is somewhat more likely than Obama doing so), we'd have a politically inexperienced mother of 5, who also has a disabled baby to take care of, running the country.

In a different time, Palin might have been an astute VP choice...but right now, I think Obama made the better choice by picking someone who is very politically savvy and has very good foreign policy ideas, instead of pandering to just one section of the voting populace by picking the first female name to cross his desk.

Rublev · 08-30-2008, 04:12 PM

To add to the points I made in my previous post here yesterday:

Quote:

"It's a slam dunk" said delegate Cathie Adams, Republican National Committeewoman-elect and president of the Texas Eagle Forum. "I think that people who are concerned about 'How conservative is Mr. McCain' are now going to say, 'If he can make a choice of Sarah Palin, then he can be trusted with our conservative ideals.' " The Eagle Forum is an affiliate of Phyllis Schlafly's national organization of arch-conservatives.

In our article (July 2008) we argued that "Some have seen McCain's strength rooted in his ability to appeal as a moderate conservative--one who might attract independent, and even some more conservative, Democratic voters. The embrace of the Hagee endorsement, however, suggests that McCain considers the Christian Right vote more crucial to his success than the independent/moderate vote."

But there were a number of indications that McCain was seeking to woo the Christian Right. Trial balloons suggesting Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee were top contenders for the VP slot were one indication that the Christian Right needed some attention, given substantial lack of enthusiasm for McCain.
Chip Berlet: McCain VP Pick Shores Up Christian Right Base

If people followed the last two Bush victories, then they should remember the role of the Christian right. It's really not news. Also, as the adage goes, money talks, bullshit walks. Nowhere does this apply more than in a presidential election when Obama has proven to be such a great fundraiser.

Quote:

“No one is closer to the oil indusry than Governor Palin, ” Sierra Club executive director Carl Pope said in a written statement. “Along with her support for drilling in the Artic Wildife Refuge and off our coasts, she also opposes a windfall proft tax on the richest oil companies.”
[snip]
Far from being too cozy with oil companies, such companies have been “less than pleased with John McCain’s political positions,” Bounds added, citing McCain’s vote against the 2005 Energy Bill. McCain has called that bill “irresponsible” in its concessions to business interests.

McCain also has a record of opposing efforts to open certain public lands to drilling and of supporting proposals seeking to tackle global warming.

But in June, he made a public split with environmentalists and reversed his long-standing opposition to the federal ban on offshore drilling. At the same time, donations to the McCain campaign from oil and gas industry executives and employees rose to $1.1 million to McCain in June, compared with $208,000 in May, and $283,000 the month before.

Shared Views but Also Contrasts in McCain, Palin Energy Policies - America’s Election HQ

[waiting for the attack dogs to come up with the dirt on Palin though]

bobbyFcuzin · 08-30-2008, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oistrakh

So your point is that Obama was mayor of a town with more people? Or that Obama was governor of a state with more people? Or maybe that Obama was student council president of a high school class with more than 5,000 people??

uh, i never mentioned obama once...
my point is that it's stupid to just list a number of years of experience and compare the two by sheer numbers without even considering the quality of the experience. on a comparative level, her first 12 years of "experience" is hardly worth mentioning when you're managing a town the size of a high school...

Quote:

Originally Posted by oistrakh

Also, denigrating the entire state of Alaska is hardly a smart strategy when trying to gain votes. I doubt Obama and Biden will be dumb enough to say "Palin's experience doesn't count because Alaska has no people and solving their issues is trivial, and in any case they're more Russian than American anyway".

it's not about denigrating the state of alaska, it's about people actually knowing how much different the state is compared to the lower 49. being a leader in alaska, you face very different problems than the rest of america, so there's likely to be a handful of issues that she has never even encountered

oistrakh · 08-30-2008, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbyFcuzin

uh, i never mentioned obama once...
my point is that it's stupid to just list a number of years of experience and compare the two by sheer numbers without even considering the quality of the experience. on a comparative level, her first 12 years of "experience" is hardly worth mentioning when you're managing a town the size of a high school...

Hmmm... So how many high schools did Obama manage? You want to throw out all of that experience, yet Obama didn't do any of it, did he? He hasn't LED anything. If it's trivial, how come Obama can't say he did it? And once again, keep in mind that we are now comparing a VP candidate to a Presidential candidate ... if this is what the debate has been reduced to, the Republicans will win.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbyFcuzin

it's not about denigrating the state of alaska, it's about people actually knowing how much different the state is compared to the lower 49. being a leader in alaska, you face very different problems than the rest of america, so there's likely to be a handful of issues that she has never even encountered

So, you're telling me you've lived in Alaska then and are very well-informed on the issues that affect Alaska? What are these "very different" problems? Can you point out some specific things that Palin did while serving the state of Alaska that differ from what she might have been doing if she had served in one of the other 49 states? What are some issues she's "never even encountered"?

Btw, we can play this game with Obama's Illinois senate experience, too. How many national parks has Obama had to try and protect from foresters while serving the state of Illinois? Every state is different from every other state, this argument is not going to go far. It's far more productive to focus on ISSUES rather than trying to claim one candidate has "more real experience" than another.

ratbert1009ca · 08-30-2008, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oistrakh

Hmmm... So how many high schools did Obama manage? You want to throw out all of that experience, yet Obama didn't do any of it, did he? He hasn't LED anything..

He had been a community organizer (leading and coordinating community leaders) in the south side of Chicago. I can bet that the population there is greater then 10000 people. Dude maybe people have made fun of Palin's acommplishments as Mayor, but seriously do you really equate managing a small town the size of a highschool equals the tasks of organizing communities in a city the size of Chicago? One of the main hubs of the U.S.A?

Quote:

we are now comparing a VP candidate to a Presidential candidate ..

Quite right indeed, different jobs.

In my opinion (and you can certainly disagree), the president's task is to provide leadership, vision, inspiration and a direction for the nation first of all. Second on a practical level its to surround himself with top notch people who can advise him. Because the president, one single man can not literally do anything to change the country, but its through setting a course and providing the motivation that the "troops" carry out the task that needs to be done. The other is that NO ONE knows all things, but someone with good judgement and a keen intellect will be able to recognize good advice and take it. That is what we need from a leader. The job of the president isnt to train the vice president to be the next president, its the job of the vice president to advise and help the president carry out his/her plan for the country.

Quote:

If it's trivial, how come Obama can't say he did it?

How can you even ask that with any seriousness. Not everyone can have the same experiences even if its trivial. McCain never ran a small town as Mayor either so what is your point?

oistrakh · 08-30-2008, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbert1009ca

Not everyone can have the same experiences even if its trivial. McCain never ran a small town as Mayor either so what is your point?

OK, this is the last time that I will post on this thread, since I've already said this over and over again. Attacking Palin for her "lack of experience" only serves to highlight Obama's own lack of experience. Any argument that is used to attack Palin's credentials can also be used to attack Obama's. I have demonstrated this many times, and the Republicans will be happy to do so as well. Sure, the Democrats will be able to successfully say that Obama is more experienced than Palin ... but why are we comparing Palin to Obama again??? Why aren't we comparing Obama to McCain? There is nothing but a pyrrhic victory in proclaiming that Obama has more experience than Palin for Democrats; they need to beat McCain. Obama's only real weakness is his lack of experience. Articles like the one that spawned this thread in the first place only emphasize this, via Palin. If the Democrats want to win the election, they need to ignore the experience questions and instead focus on ISSUES.

Boondocksaints · 08-30-2008, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oistrakh

OK, this is the last time that I will post on this thread, since I've already said this over and over again. Attacking Palin for her "lack of experience" only serves to highlight Obama's own lack of experience. Any argument that is used to attack Palin's credentials can also be used to attack Obama's. I have demonstrated this many times, and the Republicans will be happy to do so as well. Sure, the Democrats will be able to successfully say that Obama is more experienced than Palin ... but why are we comparing Palin to Obama again??? Why aren't we comparing Obama to McCain? There is nothing but a pyrrhic victory in proclaiming that Obama has more experience than Palin for Democrats; they need to beat McCain. Obama's only real weakness is his lack of experience. Articles like the one that spawned this thread in the first place only emphasize this, via Palin. If the Democrats want to win the election, they need to ignore the experience questions and instead focus on ISSUES.

I have to respectfully disagree with this^^^. The GOP will constantly knock Obama for lack of experience REGARDLESS of whatever the Dems do. That is their best line of attack because if there was a true comparison of the issues themselves- McCain will lose and lose badly. All we are going to see repeated over and over like a mantra is lack of experience, lack of experience.

It is not going to serve the Dems by just ignoring it. Similar to how Kerry got swift boated. When he didn't respond, that devastated his chances. No- the Dems must go on the attack and fight just as dirty- which they've failed to do so far.

Instead, they should point out the hypocrisy of the GOP by highlighting Palin's own lack of experience. A stint as the mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, a town of less than 8000, and barely two years as governor of a state with more grizzly bears than people? Gimme a freaking break. Palin IS FAR LESS QUALIFIED THAN OBAMA.

ratbert1009ca · 08-30-2008, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boondocksaints

Gimme a freaking break. Palin IS FAR LESS QUALIFIED THAN OBAMA.

I think thats the key word there, not so much as length of "experience".

White Tigress · 08-30-2008, 11:19 PM

Hm... well, I was going to play safe and keep my mouth shut, but hey - why not throw in my two cents?

Granted, McCain was never my choice in a Republican candidate. Or rather, he's not my IDEAL choice. But hey, this is who the party chose, and frankly I don't feel that Obama is ready to be a leader.

Do I think McCain will win? To be honest, I'm really not sure. For a while, I thought the Republican ballot was sunk ever since the Obama Girl showed up on MySpace or YouTube or whatever internet pit she crawled out of. For a good long time he had the youth ballot - a powerful but finicky voter population.

Then came time for the running mate decision, and he chose Biden. Here we had a candidate that prided himself on being a breath of fresh air, so to speak - not being a seasoned "career politician," as it were. And who does he choose for a running mate? A classic, textbook definiton of "career politician." Obama really took a hit in choosing Biden, in my opinion.

McCain had to choose a running mate at some point. I was kinda hoping for Huckabee myself, or even Romney. I'll admit, choosing Palin is a move right out of left field. But McCain's made his move, just as Obama has.

I think it's peculiar that a lot of folks seem to be making a fuss over Palin being inexperienced, when Obama is no more experienced than she is. The offices are different, sure, and to be honest I'm still not entirely sure I like the idea of an inexperienced VP. However, I am FAR more comfortable with an inexperienced VP than an inexperienced President of the United States.

And for me, that's what it all comes down to. Who would make the better leader? Obama has a lot of ideals, goals, and aspirations - not bad, in and of themselves, but they aren't the be-all end-all either. If this country gets into a major crisis - which, considering the last several years, seems to be the norm these days - who is going to do what they can to get us out with as little damage as possible? Obama wants to talk - talking only goes so far. McCain seems like the type who knows how and when to take action.

... But that's just my humble opinion. heh...

In any case, I don't think it would be wise to count your chickens before they hatch. I try not to make predictions, being that 90% of the time my predictions end up not coming together. For example, I had expected Hillary to take the nomination (before Obama showed up). Later I expected her to be Obama's running mate - hey, it would have been the "safe" choice, and probably the most strategic in his short political career thus far.

That being said, I'm still expecting Obama to win - he still has a loyal fan following to work with, after all, and more than a month to go. But I've been wrong before. So, who knows?