The Worst Vice-Presidential Nominee in U.S. History

Apologies. I missed that while I was multi-tasking (that means I was throwing my dog's ball, making home-made ice cream and bouncing back and forth to my laptop).

I think Palin's selection was a brilliant chess move by McCain. All the Democrats seized the poisoned pawn by talking about her inexperience, which allows McCain to exploit the vast gap between his experience level and Obama's. As several other posters have noted, the VP does not set policy -- the President does.

Therefore, although Biden is far more capable of stepping in behind Obama than Palin is for McCain, it demonstrates a serious weakness at the top. Palin has time to learn international politics from McCain, but Obama has no time at all because his backup has all the experience.

In the interim, Palin (although not yet proven) may well pull in enough women voters to change the result from Obama to McCain. What can win hearts faster than a sharp, savvy woman jousting on issues while burping a baby on her shoulder?

On the last point, you are correct. At only 44 Palin has more administrative experience than McCain, Obama, Biden and Hillary combined.

 

At least you clearly agree that McCain put his political ambition over his country. So much for Mr. Patriot Straight Talk Express.

 

Well, of course. You are very politically naive if you think a politician can accomplish his/her stated goals without being elected. Obama to his credit did the same thing in selecting Biden.

 

Wait a second - there's a good chance that McCain ain't going to make it to his 80th b-day which means Palin could be president - far more likely than Biden becoming president.

also, it was republicans who made the experience issue a major topic....and if people discount senate experience as important, and only governers should be leading a ticket, should palin be the lead on the ticket and McCain the VP?

I just think that McCain can no longer make Obama's experience a question now after picking Palin - you agree with this right?

 

First, only Presidents elected in zero years (Tecumseh's curse) have failed to survive their Presidencies. Reagan broke the assassination mold, although he was shot. Bush is two months shy of coming through unscathed.

Second, although I absolutely wish no ill on anyone, especially McCain, I think I would prefer Palin as President. She's certainly tough enough and reputedly is a very fast learner. I think she would lean on the experts for advice and then chart her own course. To me, she is the good Hillary as opposed to the actual, evil Hillary. We've had vice presidents who were truly ill-prepared to serve. I think she would make us all proud.

Again, on the experience issue McCain trumps Obama. Biden trumps Palin. The difference is that McCain and Obama lead their respective tickets. Ergo, experience becomes the strong ally of McCain. I think Senate leadership is almost as good as gubernatorial experience, but Republicans can point to Obama's 143-day tenure, most of which has been on the campaign trail. His more compelling "experience" is directing a successful campaign against the Clintons. Also, regarding her spot on the ticket, see my response above.

No. I don't. See my previous explanation on that.

 

I agree! It's very bad pick not just for republicans, but for the country.


She will soon be exposed.

 

I find this to be fascinating, because I have no clue how she would be as President - good or bad. What do you think her attitude would be toward use of force? Policy on Iraq withdrawal? How would she handle Iran? Afghanistan? Pakistan? Russia?

I don't see how we can make a judgement either way without knowing evena little bit about any of these things. Sure, she would listen to her advisors, but that's the case for everyone. Bush was a perfect example of that - if you have bad advisors, they can lead you down the wrong path. We have no idea who her advisors would be, so I don't see how we can judge based on that either.

 

Where does 143 days come from?

 

this Pick is going for the uneducated Hillary vote and to bring out the base.


Spin the pick all you want, but this is a bad pick for the country.There was no reason THIS women be on the ticket ....Nothing about this move is putting your country first.

 

I don't even smoke, but what ever you on please pass that.

 

I neither smoke nor drink nor pop non-prescribed pills. I do inject four times a day, but that's only insulin.

 

IIRC, someone on the board calculated how many working days Obama has in as a U.S. senator. Obviously, that changes every day except for now while all of Congress is on vacation. With that, I say goodnight. I'll see ya'll tomorrow.

 

That's fuzzy math. Every senator has a staff that works year-round, whether Congress is in session or not. Every senator has to campaign, whether they're running for president or not. It's part of the job. Just because they're not on the senate floor does not mean that they aren't working.

Besides that, nobody is giving him any credit to the 8 years of service as a state senator from Chicago.

 

Oh Please!

How does that begin to compare to running an ATV shop and being governor of a state with a population the size of El Paso and an economy almost as large as Rhode Island?

EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE

 

KBH is not appealing at all unless you are a mainstream conservative. Unpleasant personality on top. I do think the Pailin pick is better than her (or Mitt).

I think Susan Collins or Snowe would have really made things interesting (maybe Liz Dole or Murkusky if they could get through vetting clean), McCain could have competed for the moderates (particularly women). McCain-Liberman would have been scary in a general election too.

I seriously don't think McCain and his group adequately factored in what happened last election, with Democrats having about an 11% advantage. Repubs are not going to win on ideology/conservative policies and the kind of social conservative/ corporate-economic-libertarianism/ neocon foreign policy coalition that got GWB a 3 point or so win versus Kerry. McCain's best shot was to play to the middle and try to triumph on experience. I nice bonus would be to have gotten some Hillary supporterss to go for a pro-choice or abortion neutral women as a VP, Palin isn't going to accomplish either of the latter--it wasn't like most anti-abortion folks were voting for Hillary in the 1st place.

I do have to admit I can't yet say Palin is the worst, I remember Gen. Stockdale, RIP.

 

You don't remember him too well -- he was Admiral Stockdale.

 

The Alaskan House and Senate have a majority that's a coalition of liberal Republicans and Democrats that elected the House and Senate leadership. They are nominally Republicans, but they are the leaders of the Democratic Party. Palin has butted heads with them for her entire term because of their corruption. With her 85% approval rating, this is political sour grapes. It's the equivalent of the Dixiecrats bashing Humphrey.

 

Is Palin a flip-flopping double-talking panderer?

http://www.maroonspoon.com/wx/gustav.html

Palin "bridge to nowhere" line angers many Alaskans
Mon Sep 1, 2008 3:44pm EDT

By Yereth Rosen

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (Reuters) - It garnered big applause in her first speech as Republican John McCain's vice presidential pick, but Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's assertion that she rejected Congressional funds for the so-called "bridge to nowhere" has upset many Alaskans.

During her first speech after being named as McCain's surprise pick as a running mate, Palin said she had told Congress "'thanks but no thanks' on that bridge to nowhere."

In the city Ketchikan, the planned site of the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere," political leaders of both parties said the claim was false and a betrayal of their community, because she had supported the bridge and the earmark for it secured by Alaska's Congressional delegation during her run for governor.

The bridge, a span from the city to Gravina Island, home to only a few dozen people, secured a $223 million earmark in 2005. The pricey designation raised a furor and critics, including McCain, used the bridge as an example of wasteful federal spending on politicians' pet projects.

When she was running for governor in 2006, Palin said she was insulted by the term "bridge to nowhere," according to Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein, a Democrat, and Mike Elerding, a Republican who was Palin's campaign coordinator in the southeast Alaska city.

"People are learning that she pandered to us by saying, I'm for this' ... and then when she found it was politically advantageous for her nationally, abruptly she starts using the very term that she said was insulting," Weinstein said.

Palin's spokeswoman in Alaska was not immediately available to comment.

National fury over the bridge caused Congress to remove the earmark designation, but Alaska was still granted an equivalent amount of transportation money to be used at its own discretion.

Last year, Palin announced she was stopping state work on the controversial project, earning her admirers from earmark critics and budget hawks from around the nation. The move also thrust her into the spotlight as a reform-minded newcomer.

The state, however, never gave back any of the money that was originally earmarked for the Gravina Island bridge, said Weinstein and Elerding.

In fact, the Palin administration has spent "tens of millions of dollars" in federal funds to start building a road on Gravina Island that is supposed to link up to the yet-to-be-built bridge, Weinstein said.

"She said 'thanks but no thanks,' but they kept the money," said Elerding about her applause line.

Former state House Speaker Gail Phillips, a Republican who represented the Kenai Peninsula city of Homer, is also critical about Palin's reversal on the bridge issue.

"You don't tell a group of Alaskans you support something and then go to someplace else and say you oppose it," said Phillips, who supported Palin's opponent, Democrat Tony Knowles, in the 2006 gubernatorial race.

A press release issued by the governor on September 21, 2007 said she decided to cancel state work on the project because of rising cost estimates.

"It's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Palin said in the news release. "Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here."

(Editing by Daisuke Wakabayashi and Sandra Maler)

 

From what I've read so far, it doesn't sound like her state is too pleased with her, this being one of the main reasons...

 

A Heartbeat Away