Hay guyz I wanna join in the political discussion once and awhile too.
Anyway, according to CNN (for what it’s worth) it’s Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
I guess we’ll see how this turns out. It’ll get those pundits talking, anyway. Not like they need the encouragement.
Possible slogan: Delivers what the Democrats can’t offer XD
I watched today Obama’s acceptance speech and I liked the following part.
I mean, that’s about 10 times more sensible than Tipper.
edit: speech
edit2: So it seems she’s been governor of Alaska for two years and mayor of a small town before that. It would make a funny contrast with McCain’s attacks on Obama for inexperience.
And man, she is a fucking MILF! She was like, Ms. Alaska in 1988 or something.
Saw this when I was flipping through the channels this morning. At first, I was thinking, “What is this?” and then it hit me as to what they were talking about. Hadn’t ever heard of her before now, but I’m curious as to how this may play out. Apparently, she likes guns and enforces the death penalty…(about time!)
On an another note, she doesn’t look too bad at all… Good move on McCain’s part?
Can someone please explain to me why women are just only now starting to pop into major league politics in America? When other countries have had women leaders back when dinosaurs still roamed the earth? It just really seems hypocritical to me. >_>
Uhhh because our country is filled with rednecks?
Oh, right. :thud:
There’s a huge difference.
Obama is inexperienced and is at the top of the ticket. When the situation gets down to the wire, he’s the one who’s going to have to make the tough decisions; not Joe Biden. Obama had to pick Biden in light of the Georgian conflict highlighting his lack of foreign policy credentials; the fact that he was on vacation at the time, and the fact that the McCain campaign finally, finally, took advantage of a situation. They worked the heck out of it. The VP slot was crucial to Obama because it was the first real judgement he’s actually made that is of consequence; would he focus on the idea of change or actually choose someone of substance to plug up some of his flaws? He chose the right choice; Biden is a lot more substantive than Bayh or Kaine.
McCain could take a chance because he’s experienced and at the top of the ticket. He doesn’t have to prove that he’s capable of bucking his party or of actually creating bipartisanship. He’s got a record you can look at to prove that. Obama couldn’t afford to choose somoene who complemented his own ideals or his Washington outsider persona because he needed steak to his sizzle. McCain already has the experience; he chose someone who had the kind of reform-minded policies he had.
It helps that Goverrnor Palin has actually done something. She fought for ethics reform. She played a huge role in the oil committee in Alaska and when revenue increased dramatically for the oil companies there she paid the residents back. She fought against pork-barreling projects like the Bridge to Nowhere. She fought against her own party when Ted Stevens voted for that project. Not only does she have an actual record, she’s actually pretty compelling. She’s also got two more years of executive experience than Obama - who has none.
The news media is of course being disingenous. Had McCain chosen Romney or Pawlenty, the presumed frontrunners for the VP slot, we would still be having this conversation; they were successful Governors and foreign policy is not usually a huge state issue, so this problem of experience on the foreign policy front for McCain’s VP was always going to be there unless he chose Lieberman; that choice would have done wonders if solidifying the Jewish vote was a prime concern and if foreign policy was a gap for McCain. But neither are big problems for the McCain campaign, they might as well have chosen someone who has really shown an ability to stand up for reform within their own party. There’s also the fact that the conservative base would have gone crazy had McCain chosen Lieberman.
The only real problem is the fact that in the Lower 48, we don’t know much about this lady. This can be an asset to the McCain campaign; had McCain chosen Romney, Obama would have had a wealth of primary ads accusing McCain of this and that or demonstarating a part of his voting record that was designed to dissuade voters. The media got to question Obama about the choice and all he coudl do is return to the old “more with the same” phrase that I must have heard a thousand times watching the Democratic convention; why was that all he could do? It’s because he doesn’t know her.
McCain and Palin need to move very quickly and very effectively to frame Palin’s identity and capitalize on this. We aren’t going to get any Clinton supporters from this choice but the social conversative principles that keeps those voters from supporting her are really electrifying the base that McCain needed. Had Palin been chosen back when the Texas Republican Convention had been around, the people in that place would have gone crazy over he after they knew her policy stances.
McCain has caught us all off guard; if he can get Palin out in the limelight, educate her on foreign policy and on the economic factors and get her out for a few interviews before the Democrats slam her as some hockey mom we can recoup from Obama’s boost from the DNC.
This choice augments McCain’s call for substantive reform rather than the radical change of the Obama camp. It can only work if McCain and Palin move quickly to inform the American public about what she’s all about. The tabula rasa of Obama applies to Palin; let’s see what they put on it.
With Palin on the ticket we have a reassured base. If she frames her argument well enough, she can do what Clinton and Bush did - tell the country that despite their lack of foreign policy credentials, they were knowledgable about the issues and prepared for the job. If she performs well in the debate against Joe Biden we’ve got a winner on our hands. She can’t pull a Dan Quayle. We can’t afford it. McCain and Obama get three shots to make their case; Palin gets one. McCain is counting on her. I’m counting on her. America is counting on her. She’s got one shot.
I’ve contributed financially to the campaign. I’ve served the party as a delegate and Sergeant-at-arms. As soon as possible, I’m going to start working for the local party headquarters any way I can. I believe in McCain and I believe in Palin. We can’t lose this election. I’ll do all I can and hope Palin and McCain will do the same.
Wait a second, women have had a voice in politics since our countries inception. They simply didn’t hold the highest offices and quite honestly it’s not like most countries can boast too much about their own progress.
Women have shaped American politics a great deal. The Grimke sisters, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Sojourner Truth, the huge abilitionist movment has a great debt to the women of this country. Perhaps the most prestigious leader of the restitution movement after the Civil War for former slaves was a woman. This history of women has always been tied to the higher echelons of political power; they exerted influence in a variety of ways but they were powerful in changing how America worked.
I don’t know any country in the world that, in 1972, had a black woman running for President and winning primaries. The history is hidden but folks like Shirley Chisholm enrich the tapestry of American history and women are an essential part of that in every thread, including politics.
Or, you know, you could just be dismissive and say we’re all rednecks and ignore that history. It’s your choice.
Woah, when did I reach 1,000 posts again? Gosh, wish I had noticed…
Well, I heard about this yesterday afternoon in my US History II class(the teach gives some current events every day at the beginning of class). And I have just a few things to say, McCain has firstsies now.
Originally, Obama only had firstsies, has he was going to be the first black president if he won. Now, if McCain wins, we’re going to get our first woman VP. See, both have firstsies(sorry for the name of it, it’s just what was used for us yesterday in class).
Also, there could be quite a good amount of women out there that still have a feminist stand, and with Palin on McCain’s ticket, he could very well attract a few of them. There is also the fact that she’s young that could attract younger voters.
Side Note:McCain will be the oldest president sworn in if he succeeds. The oldest president right now is Ronald Reagen, who was 70 I believe. So, because of this he might not appeal to younger voters.
The feminist bent would have worked, if Palin wasn’t the social conservative of social convservatives. Palin has no exceptions for abortion for instance; none.
That’s just what I heard though, I’ll check it out myself.
This wasn’t a play made mostly as a means to get Clinton voters. If it was, it was very stupid. We won’t get Clinton voters. If you voted for Clinton in the primaries, but vote for McCain in the general election, you either had a fundamental shift in beliefs or are just spiteful. I wish that there were that many people who would do that…
.
No, I don’t deny that women have done great things in history, but that’s not my point here. All textbook banner-waving feminism aside, only old white guys up until now have held office in the US. I think that speaks volumes about our country when countries like Britain, Finland, Norway, and even freaking India have had female leaders before us.
And we had Kim Campbell!
Just…
…just sayin’…
See, that’s an argument FOR the US not having women in power.
yeah those fuckin’ nebraskans :thud::thud::thud::thud::thud::thud:
It depresses me that, in determining who should lead the sole global superpower, the chance to provide an ego boost to feminists enters the equation. Does this make me old-fashioned, perhaps an “old white guy”? I value strength of personality, cunning, and decisiveness. Whatever the value of metaphorically shattering a metaphorical glass ceiling, I find it petty in comparison.
This is not a facade to hide the fact that I am biased against non-old white guys. I plan to vote for Obama. He shows all the traits I listed above, and one more: authenticity. I’ve grown so sick of candidates who tell me what they think I want to hear; who speak in “folksy” language because they think I speak that way, and therefore must want the leader of the Western hemisphere to speak that way; and who justify their policies not by a realistic assessment of their potential impact, but by platitudes to “democracy” and “freedom.” He strikes me as a political <i>person</i>, not a political figure.
As for Sarah Palin, I have nothing against her. Her willingness to make budget cuts and dismiss uncooperative officials impresses me. Her environmental record concerns me, but I suppose that’s inevitable for an Alaskan Republican.
Pretty much what Xwing said. McCain’s pick completely turns me off. But then, I wasn’t hot on him to begin with anyway.
McCain is the top of the ticket, sure. But he’s also a 72 y/o man with cancer problems in his past and she’s the one to grasp the reigns if something happens. She has two years of executive experience in the 700-thousand strong state of Alaska and she was picked to be VP; you may find this more important than 8 years in the senate of a 13mil state, 4 years in the US senate and actually winning the nomination of one of the two parties, against a Clinton, and raising more funds than all his opponents. Let’s even forget she was saying she needs someone to tell her what the veep job entails a few days/weeks ago. You said
So, your country’s in a mess (in a great part caused the Republicans) and the second-in-charge-to-be you support is someone with no idea about foreign policy or economics?
Teddy Roosevelt was 42. JFK was 43. Clinton and Grant were 46. Those aren’t old ages.
So, your country’s in a mess (in a great part caused the Republicans) and the second-in-charge-to-be you support is someone with no idea about foreign policy or economics?
The same thing could probably be said about Obama. Americans don’t actually have much of a choice, it seems…