Would President Palin allow Alaska to secede from the USA?

Gallup daily tracking poll has Obama up by 6.

 

Some of the classic gem comments from the posted link in this thread:

Was this woman vetted? What else of her fringe-extremist activities will the public come to know? This is a very irresponsible choice for a 72 year old man with a history of cancer and other health problems.

Posted by: Michael | Sep 1, 2008 8:35:58 PM

So I guess its alaska first, country second, daughter third, newborn 4th, grandchild 5th?

Im just trying to figure out the order of her priorities

Posted by: Mom of 3 | Sep 1, 2008 8:35:55 PM

McCain spent today at a disaster relief agency - I wonder if he got any help there.

Posted by: ShockNAwe | Sep 1, 2008 8:34:57 PM

I thought the faking pregancy comments were rude. Then I looked at the links and saw the photos. OMG
What is the republican party doing?

Posted by: Amy | Sep 1, 2008 8:34:26 PM

All I can say, is thank god McCain didn't pick a really qualified republican woman. Honestly, I was worried about Kay Bailey Hutchinson or Susan Collins, but since they are both pro-choice, that's a big no-no for the GOP. Palin getting the nod was about three things.

1 - Babe factor
2 - Right wing NUT CASE to make the religious right happy since they don't really like McCain
3 - Pathetic attempt to get Hilary votes

Mccain gambled big time, and in secret most within the GOP are asking ,what is the old man thinking? But it's very funny to see all the right wing talking heads on tv trying to polish a turd with Palin. They have to stick the their script, talking about what a bold choice it was, and I laugh some more.

The left won't have to attack her, she'll just open her mouth and make herself out to be a twit who knows nothing.



Posted by: Filthy Pig | Sep 1, 2008 8:32:19 PM

 

No it won't, it's poorly timed with the hurricane(s) and the convention, and it's not a real issue to start with. It's certainly nothing compared to the budding disaster for Obama that is Dr Khalid al Mansour.

 

I also attended an AA meeting to support a friend and out of curiousity... it did not mean that I was an alcoholic (never have been), or that I "needed" it.

I was curious to see how they approached an issue.



Same scenario for Palin here. She attended.


You paint the picture that immediately she's a Confederate Rebel.


At risk of being a T_J here...


TIRED

 

First, opposes sex ed in schools and teenage daughter gets knocked up.

Second, hires lawyer for Trooper Gate - media is too busy with Gustav and the RNC to even touch this one yet...can't wait!

Third, member of secessionist party less than 15 years ago.

Fourth, (I forgot this one) she hasn't faced the media scrutiny of a presidential campaign...what's going to happen when she's asked tough questions about her views and past?

The hits keep coming.

 

Do you have your head up McCain's behind or what?

 

What happened to the double digits?


REALITY HIT

 

See, that would make sense unless you became a member of AA. There's kinda've a crucial difference between attending AA meetings and joining AA.

 

Here's the electoral college graph taking out "leaning" states (less than 5% margins that are statistical ties):



For comparison, here's 2004:



The stability this year is pretty stunning. Even more impressive is that out of CO, NV, MT, SD, ND, NH, OH, VA, NC, and FL, Obama needs 9 electoral votes to win (these are all the states that are too-close-to-call). McCain needs 94. What McCain has going for him right now is that he's slightly ahead in many of these - but he needs a virtual sweep to win.

If you want to know where the race stands today, that's basically it.

 

I knew you'd bring up that point...

I once signed up to receive a newsletter from the Libertarian Party... the year was 1988... I still receive the newsletter at my Dad's address... twenty years later, and I'm counted in their numbers as a "member."

All because I showed interests, and took more than one step.



Now... I'd agree she took more steps... but the idea is also this...

Members can be a part of something and not believe or stand for every single issue or stance of the group.


I am a member of a major group or two, some you hear about in the news sometimes... but that does not mean I'm in "lock step" (wow it was fun to use a liberalism on here) with every move my groups make.


In fact, some groups I maintain memberships with I do so just to make sure and vote as a voice of reason... Sometimes my side wins.

Nitpick her on this if you will... which many have and will continue to do.. but I don't see her as an Anti-American at all.


I see her as well within her rights to be actively involved, and informed in the mood and tenor of her state's politics.

I see this as a "so what."

Read what you want to see.

 

Maybe a Church with a crazy pastor, for example?

 

Wow, this story made the homepage of ABCNews.com. I assumed it would be more of a fringe thing. This is really becoming a disaster of a VP rollout. Some blog mentioned that no one would have thought that Biden would be considered the stable, safe one of the VP picks.

 

That is true. You can be a member of an insitution and not fully be a slave to every belief the group holds. You've essantially defeated the Rev. Wright junk and the "Islamic associations" that have been the brunt of attacks focused on Obama, so yay for double-edged swords.

With that said, I find your second argument hard to buy, it'd be easy to gauge a certain group's mood without becoming a member. I wouldn't exactly applaud a Canadian politician joining the secessionist Parti Quebecois just out of "curiosity" when he could've just picked up the papers.

 

I think this is another non-issue, and shame on ABC for running it on their site as the top story (!).

But the GOP problem is as follows: the media in 2008 is all about making money. And right now, people are famished for info on this relative outsider, Palin. So what will people want to watch? Yes, salacious, weird, bullcrap about Palin. Ugh.

Entirely predictable, so I'm still not sure why you (McCain) do this, with so many other excellent republican women ready to serve. Can it really all boil down to the abortion issue? Maybe. For what it's worth, Alaska is about as far from DC as you can get, so it's be hard to find more of an "outsider."

 

That's an easy simple answer: John McCain's JUDGEMENT SUCKS!

 

Yes. Touche' -


BTW- I've always thought the Trinity Church argument was kind of stupid anyway.


Not every Catholic likes the Pope either... I've heard some say.

 

Now we are REALLY finding common ground!

 

If you are a moderate voter who really hadn't made up made up your mind about this election, I don't know how good you could feel about a candidate who made such a big decision so carelessly. The Republicans only started vetting her *after* McCain selected her! What a bunch of amateurs...it's almost like McCain wants to lose.

 

Gentlemen and ladies, I don't like to start threads in D&D but if one of you guys don't beat me to it, I might do a snap poll on:

Do you think Palin will withdraw from being McCain's VP choice?

Right now, I think there is a decent chance. If more stuff keeps getting trudged up, she's gone and the reason will be she "doesn't want to be a distraction" to the issues fueling McCain's run for the presidency. IF any rumors come out about her considering withdrawing, this case is closed. Clearly it would have to happen before her speech at the GOP convention. If Palin gives that speech, then she's in for the long haul.

BTW, CNN mentioned they were told McCain's people were going to Alaska to do more vetting.

 

I think admitting they screwed up would guarantee a loss, as all questions on McCain's "judgment" get answered. So I think for better or worse, she stays and they hope there are no major skeletons.