After last night's speech by Obama, I didn't think there was any way he could lose the election. Regardless of how he came across to Republicans over 40 and die hard FOX News watchers, I was convinced that he would be perceived by swing voters and most of those under 40 as mirroring their hearts.
But in an ingenious move, McCain has named Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, as his running mate. Absolutely ingenious! I thought he'd probably appoint Romney, which wouldn't have gained him hardly anyone except maybe some Libertarian defectors. I can see some Clinton supporters going for her.
At the same time, most Clinton supporters could only vote for Palin/McCain if they were, as one pundit put it, "post-rational." Palin has a stronger pro-life position than McCain does, and most of Clinton's most radical supporters are completely on the opposite end of the spectrum.
One way or another, I'll be happy if I have a woman to consider in the presidential election in 8 years.
:-)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I agree whoelheardedly! But, they are already trying to "pull up dirt"!
I guess the Clinton supporters will have to choose which priority is greater...their commitment to equality of women or their commitment to liberal values...
That will be interesting, won't it?
Why do you think that Palin is qualified to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency of the USA? Seriously.
If "pull up dirt" means questioning someone's qualifications for such an important position, so be it. Why shouldn't the voters be encouraged to know more about her?
Jose, I really don't know if she is competent or not--although I'm sure she will be run through the machine like crazy in the days to come. My starting points are:
1. Surely McCain and his helpers are not stupid. Surely this woman is formidable.
Maybe that's a bad assumption and we'll find out.
2. I'm more interested in competency than experience. The arguments against Obama that target his experience have never bothered me. His answers to questions seem to show depth of understanding and awareness of issues whether one agrees with him or not.
If Palin can do the same, I'll extend the same philosophy to her.
On the other hand, I have no political experience and I think I would have made a better president on foreign policy than Bush...
jose',
Palin supposedly had something to do with "job discrimination", by using her influence to undermine a relative's position. That is the "dirt" being slung around.
As far as qualifications, that is a matter of opinion...She does have executive experience at the State level, but has no "insider" experience ala Washington. Some believe that being an outsider to Washington, but executive experience,is positive, as she would less likely have political "pay-backs" to those who have served "her" interests, that is, if she had been in Washington. Her position in the VP position would highly qualify her for executive office at a later date...She has obviously proved that she is a person of principle.
Obama, on the other hand, has experience in the Senate at the State and national levels, but does this give him enough experience to "rule the nation"...? Some believe so, as he is eloquent in speech...and waxes well in image...He is "open" to change and preys on the "common folk" as to the "politics of Washington, as if it will change when he is in office...it will not change except in giving favoritism to certain political positions...Politics after all is the "debate' of "ideals"...and "ideals" are what our foundation is on...
Post a Comment