Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
first!and tricky wording on that poll.
I object! Why no option for "The choice is between McCain and Obama. Everything else is a side-show."
People who like Palin watch TV shows like "Dirty Jobs", "Deadliest Catch", and occasionally "Mythbusters".Asking whether Sarah Palin helps John McCain is no-brainer right now-Yes!One needs a crystal ball to see what November will bring. t the very least, Palin reveved things up a bit, wouldn't you say?
I've had a fantasy about refreshing your blog constantly through the day and posting "first" in all your threads...
I think she is a great choice, but I voted 3 because while both 1 and 3 are true, 3 is more universal.
I think ChickenLittle's point's right - the "cold lght of day" question is, what's the veep debate going to look like? If biden acts like Joe Biden, I think that she'll wipe the floor with him, but it depends on how the questions are structured and whether Biden can be sufficiently self-disciplined.She really needs to look for the opportunity to get in a shot at Biden about how something isn't above his pay grade even if Senator Biden seems to think it is.UWS guy said... "I've had a fantasy about refreshing your blog constantly through the day and posting 'first' in all your threads..."We've really got to work on your imaginative ambition. Most people reserve "fantasy" for bagging that perfect buck, or finally being able to afford whatever cool car people are into these days, or an evening with Summer Glau and a bottle of Baileys.
There's enough good and bad to spin it whichever way you like, and only time will tell.That’s true. So very true.So Bissage offers a spin of a different sort.Link.Was that a good spin?Bad?Heck, don’t ask me.It’s too soon to tell.
What's "summer glau"?...googling...ah...who....
Yesterday I was slinking around KOS to see what the angry children thought. They had a poll similar to yours. It named all the candidates. The children must have been really mad or they did not take their meds. They listed Palin as "Sarah Who?".
"Summer Glau tits"
woops, that was suppose to be in google.
This is really a trick SAT-type question. There are more right-leaning voters in the population, by a large measure, than left leaning. So, all else being equal, 1 has to be the correct answer.That bit about "there's enough good and bad to spin it" shtick is a great parody of post-Boomer, slacker speak. All social science, no math. It explains why the Boomers did much better on the SATs.
The liberal media attack has begun. it is subtle and of course pure hypocrisy; they would never deman or insult women, especially women of substance. If this is the best they can do to criticize Palin, then women should rise up in fury.One page of the Chicago Sun Times had the headline- Former Beauty Contestenant...
The future is unknowable. You can only play the probabanalities and hope a black swan does not shit upon you....I would guess Palin will be a big help. She makes a terrific first impression. She's the kind of person for whom you wish good things to happen. That's half the battle... Maybe in an interview she'll think Terre Haute is in Illinois, and the press will portray her as brain dead. Right now so far so good. But see what happens. I voted 3....Incidentally it is amazing to see the facility with which the left and the right reversed their positions on the values of experience.
No question on that, William. However, I give the slight nod on that one to the right, because it is at least somewhat defensible to say "experience is less important in the VP than for President" than it is to say the opposite.As for me, I said all along that what I want to see is authenticity and also an intolerance for corruption. That's why Palin's choice moved me.
Their using the same standard MSM attacks on Palin they used on Reagan:1)When Reagan ran for POTUS in '76 and '80 they'd continually call him inexperienced and a "Hollywood Actor" simply disregarding the fact that he'd been a successful Governor of Calf for 8 years. So they'll do the same with Palin. Ignore she's a governor and call her a "Small town Mayor" or "beauty queen".2) Call her a "Right-wing extremist" just like Reagan3) Pounce on every gaffe or misstatement to show she's not very smart or just too ignorant to be taken seriously. CF; Reagan and Quayle.4) She doesn't have the experience to be C-in-C or do Foreign Policy. The same charge was made against That Hollywood actor from California. I think the inexperience charge against both Obama and Palin is bullshit. But liberals are the biggest hypocrites in the world and are never intellectually consistent or honest. Their motto never changes: "Just win, baby".
rcocean said: But liberals are the biggest hypocrites in the world and are never intellectually consistent or honest. Their motto never changes: "Just win, baby"They forget that motto when talking about Iraq- hypocrites!
http://taweb.com/content/FR_Picts/McWhatshisname_PALIN.jpgThat is the view from religious conservativesI would say it helps shore up that group 100%
This is really a trick SAT-type question. There are more right-leaning voters in the population, by a large measure, than left leaning. Not if you go by public opinion for funding of stem cell research, abortion rights, support for increase in the minimum wage, opposition to the Iraq war, legal recognition of same sex couples, universal health care, etc.
Biden will nail Palin at the first debate. He will start talking about our unshakable commitment to "the only democracy in the Middle East," "our shared values, "our plucky ally," and how Biden, like Bill Clinton, would gladly "grab a rifle and die for Israel." Then when Palin, as a woman of character, would refuse to pander so effusively in return, he would in effect call her an anti-Semite.
Here's an entertaining comparison of the Palin and Obama records. I'm surprised that these guys failed to note that Obama began running for President of the United States after just 150 days of service in the United States Senate, and that he has been absent from the Senate for the greater part of the past two years. LOL!
Laughing out loud @ 12:53 PM.
I can't vote because I need a choice that isn't there: -- what really matters is what the moderates and independents think of the Palin pick, not what left-leaning or right-leaning voters think.
If right-leaning voters think Palin was a great choice and left-leaning voters think Palin was a disastrous choice, what does that mean?Or to put it another way: If right-leaving voters think that Palin is left-leaning on some issues, and if left-leaning voters think that Palin is a disaster for them, and so they wish she were in Jericho, and if the contrapositive of the first conditional clause in this sentence has an indeterminate truth value, then how many blondes does it takes to write a really, really stupid poll question?Answer: one. Bonus points if you can name her.
Re: Simon's comment about Biden wiping the floor with Palin in a debate.Yes.The actual dynamics of the debate will remind us too uncomfortably of GHW Bush going against Geraldine Ferraro in '84.His resumé included VP, of course, but even so, Biden comes from a similar perspective as Bush did. A strong on foreign-policy, seignorial gentleman, not just competent but with the weight of experience falling off his shoulders.Compare him to Gerry Ferraro, that feisty New Yorker Italian-American, but whose strongsuit wasn't debate, and it was a mauling by Bush.But it's the same reason Obama didn't do well in the Saddleback Forum, and has less foreign policy experience than does John McCain. Add to that Obama can't give a straight answer, without overthinking it like Kerry did (he might offend a potential voter!) and it might be interesting to see what happens.I actually think Ferraro hurt Mondale in '84. But Palin helps McCain in '08. Why? Because of the specifics of this election.McCain just gave the Conservatives what they wanted (a strong Conservative) and obviously, the liberals will not be happy with that.Is that poll-worthy?Cheers,Victoria
From Instapundit's poll, a comment:I'm liking that chess metaphor. Obama pushed a pawn a space forward to defend the king, McCain zoomed his queen to the center of the board. A gamewinning strategy, if your opponent can't set up an interlocking defense across the board right quick.As Insty might say, heh.
Two thought-provoking posts by Jim Lindgren at the Volokh Conspiracy,: Stuntz on Experience and Accomplishments and Experience and Sarah Palin, can be found here. Lindgren lives in what was once Obama's State Senate district in Illinois, voted for Obama in the past, and has posted a series of compelling, well-researched and meticulously-documented posts about Obama.
Biden will nail Palin at the first debate.Ewwww.
What does it matter what left-leaning voters think? What, they were thinking of voting for McCain until he made this pick? Or wait, let me guess, they were thinking of sitting out the election until McCain made this "disastrous" pick?McCain has motivated a previously apathetic, even actively disgruntled, base. That's a positive step. Ok, so Obama's supporters don't like Palin. There's a shocker. But what matters is that a lot of people who didn't like McCain DO like Palin. It is going to help Republican turnout, if nothing else.
Sarah Palin is going to be America's sweetheart - everybody's kid sister. Look cross eyed at her and you're dead.
America's sweetheart, indeed. That is why this will backfire. She is not running for Miss Congeniality. Or American Idol. She is running for likely-President, and anyone who is sober and worries about national security will have to reject McCin's reckless choice.
Dear True Patriot,Hey, bub. That's my daughter. Care to say that to my face?Regards,Roy
It's interesting that the day after, the MSM have scrambled to battle stations in a desperate hunt for something with which to sink her. The pretence of professional journalism, I suppose, is something that must give way to helping Obama.
Roy,That would take courage. And "True Patrot" comments anonymously, so you can infer how much courage he has.
Simon,Been sleeping the past eight months?
Blake, no, I'm just surprised by how blatantly and shamelessly they've shilled for the Obama campaign in the last 24 hours, as if they know Obama's response was weak and they're trying to provide a better version.
rcocean said... Their using the same standard MSM attacks on Palin they used on Reagan:1)When Reagan ran for POTUS in '76 and '80 they'd continually call him inexperienced and a "Hollywood Actor" simply disregarding the fact that he'd been a successful Governor of Calf for 8 years. So they'll do the same with Palin. Ignore she's a governor and call her a "Small town Mayor" or "beauty queen".Rcocean is committing a logical fallacy in assuming that if someone has a certain profession or Office and does well, then all with the same title, being equivalent...will do the same.If JFK with 14 years in Congress could run and be elected as Senator, then anyone elected Senator is just as qualified to run for President from Day 1. (Edwards and Obama's argument).If Treasury Secretary Paulson got there because he worked finances and budget, then we know that the Mom at home - working household budget and finances in "the toughest job in the world (as panderers call it)" - are all qualified to be Treasury Secretary.Rcocean - I think the inexperience charge against both Obama and Palin is bullshit.Then I assume that you are also open to throwing out experience as a factor selecting people in other demanding jobs?======================Even without McCains age and cancer history, we are in a lull where we have had Presidents in reasonably good health and with continuity in office ever since Reagan getting shot....but if you look at the last 12 Presidents and a Sarah Palin type backup...3 VPs had to take over permanently.In addition, there were failed assassination attempts on 4 others. Truman, Ford, Reagan, Dubya (someone threw a grenade at Bush in Georgia that failed to go off).Also, 3 VPs had to become acting Presidents for reasonably longperiods of time, take the nuclear football...when Presidents became incapacitated.Richard Nixon was acting President for almost two months after Ike's massive 1955 heart attack. Then for about 4 days later when Ike had a colon operation, then for 3-10 days depending on who discussed it - after Eisenhower suffered a moderate stroke in 1957.LBJ was unable to do duties and Humphrey took over for 3 days when LBJ had emergency gall bladder surgery. And throughout LBJ's time, he and his doctors feared any day could bring a new, massive heart attack like he suffered in the mid-50s. During his Presidency, LBJ suffered dehabilitating bouts of angina that left him unable to work for hours at a time.Luck meant the 2nd "Big One" fortunately waited until LBJ was almost a year out of office, in late 1969. The 3rd one killed him in 1973.Besides nearly dying in his 1981 shooting, Reagan was unable to fully work and execute his duties as President for almost 3 weeks. The public was not made aware of this until the 90s, and legal scholars say Bush I failed in his duty to trigger the 25th Amendment. Though he did later when Reagan was disabled for 3 days for a colon cancer operation.And besides death, Nixon's resignation from office, medical incapacitations, you had Clinton's impeachment and the significant possibility that the VP would take over if the dynamics and polls had shifted against Clinton.6 of the last 12 Presidents had VPs take over for them permanently or for an extended time. 3 others besides Reagan had the specter of the VP coming in if the assassin had been better...And Clinton and his impeachment makes for 10 of the last 12 Presidents where the fitness of the VP to take over was a matter that hit home with the public at certain times..McCains Dad and grandfather died of heart attacks in their mid-70s. He has a history of getting through two lethal melanoma cancers - a condition though that doctors say unfortunately recurs in such patients with new lesions or "hides out" dormant for years then switches on again and spreads aggressively. Though McCain is in less and less risk of the latter as time goes by since the 2nd melanoma was cut out of his face and lymph glands. (Why his left cheek is so bulgy - glands for removing lymph fluid there are gone).The unfortunate truth is that on top of McCains age and medical vulnerabilies, the last 65 years have shown that in 10 of 12 Presidencies VPs have taken over permanently or temporarily, or there was a significant risk to the President through assassination attempts or impeachment.That Sarah Palin is ready to be President does not rest on the unlikely event she has to take over - but even outside Mccains high risk factors - the high probability (83.3%) she will have to take over for death, prolonged medical incapacitation, a resignation, or would have had to take over in a near-miss accident or assassination attempt...
True patriot said... America's sweetheart, indeed. That is why this will backfire. She is not running for Miss Congeniality. Or American Idol. She is running for likely-President, and anyone who is sober and worries about national security will have to reject McCin's reckless choice.Damn straight. Any responsible person will vote for BO as Rock Star in Chief.:: horse fart ::
Am I comfortable with Palin? Heck, no.But the idea that the choice for people upset over Palin's lack of experience is Obama . . . I mean, seriously, people. At least she's not the top of the ticket.
Dac wrote:I would say it helps shore up that group 100%Absolutely. During a recent rally in Minnesota, the crowd stood on its feet and cheered for a solid 3 minutes. She wasn't there. That was just when the speaker mentioned her name.I can only speak from what I've seen around me, but my conservative Republican friends are ecstatic.BTW, dac, thanks for the poster! You've been h/t'ed. :)
A better poll question would be, "Are 78% of InstaPundit readers smoking money crack?"
Sarah Palin has a helluva lot more experience than John Edwards did. Why wasn't his experience questioned like her is? The media and the Dems are astonishingly sexist.
Richard said... then how many blondes does it takes to write a really, really stupid poll question?Answer: one. Bonus points if you can name her.Hillary Clinton
Мультфильмы онлайнЭлектронная почта без регистрации
Post a Comment