Who will be McCain's Vice President?
 

Will it be Lieberman? Giuliani? Alaska gov. Sarah Palin? Mike Huckabee? Romney?

Do you think he will pick someone from outside Washington? Young or Old? Religious or center-leaning?

Who do you want to see him pick?


I think Sarah Palin would be the most interesting choice. It would make all the females that were supporting Hilary just because of her gender think about switching sides (Hilary could run again in 4 years if Obama loses too). In reality I think he will pick Huckabee.

Romney might be a smart choice for a GOP campaign. He'll probably want someone more conservative and religious than he appears, but not ultra-religious like Huckabee. He and Leiberman seem to be buddies (shudders), but picking a Republican in Democrat's clothing could lose him a lot of hard core Republicans, which seem to be his base.

Who do I want him to pick? Dennis Kucinich! :thumbsup:

Could be Lieberman, Bobby Jindal, or how about Powell or Rice?

Any of these would give McCain an instant minority boost to counter Obama.

Powell would be a brilliant choice, but he'd probably turn it down.

Rice is interesting, but I always get the impression that people don't like her. I mean it's obvious why liberals don't like her, and irrelevant, but a lot of my conservative friends don't trust her. I'll have to ask why. Moreover, I'm not sure if she could do the job if anything happened to McCain. Powell? Absolutely. Leiberman? Maybe. Rice? I honestly don't think so.

I think McCain has to decide if he wants to appeal to the conservative base of the party with a social conservative or broaden his appeal to independents.

In the first scenario, someone like former congressman John Kasich of Ohio (swing state) who is a social and fiscal conservative. In the other scenario, someone like Tom Ridge, former governor of Penn (another swing state).

But most likely, IMO, it will be Romney.
-----Added 23/8/2008 at 06 : 03 : 03-----
There is still a rumor that Powell will speak at the Democratic convention on Wednesday night (national security night) and endorse Obama.

Never mind - error!

Its a safe bet it wont be Pat Buchanan....lol

In a recent article on World Net Daily, Buchanan described McCain's top foreign policy adviser (who was a lobbyist for the Repub of Georgia) as a neocon war monger....a dual loyalist, a foreign agent whose assignment is to get America committed to spilling the blood of her sons for client regimes.

It's going to be Romney. I don't think there is a better choice because he brings economic knowledge as well has been vetted A LOT during the primaries.

If McCain wants to guarantee victory, select Hillary, HAHA. I don't think that would happen in a million years, but who knows.

If McCain chooses a pro-lifer like Lieberman or Ridge, he's going to lost a lot of the evangelical vote.

Well having Rice, Powell or Jindal would equalize the whole race issue. Obama would lose the whole "minority" novelty and the contest could get back to real issues. Rice is a highly educated, competent woman. Of course many people don't like her. Hillary suffers from the same problem.

Hmm...Hillary-Rice ticket...interesting..... Wonder if Oprah would endorse them...

In a dream world Powell would run. :) But I highly doubt it.

I don't believe it really matters who McCain's VP choice is... Obama will win handily regardless.

With that said... it will most likely be Romney.

Just out of curiosity what would your dream Republican ticket look like?

I'm not a Republican. My dream candidate would be non-partisan or apolitical.

I guess since we're dealing with real as opposed to ideal... I could live with something like a Lieberman / Powell (or vice versa) ticket.

I think Ron Paul is a shoe in for the republican VP spot.

So here's Ron Paul with a pancake on his head.

Attachment 17813

Do not be surprised if McCain brings in a true darkhorse that no one even thought of.... former mayor of Cleveland, former Ohio governor, presently US Senator representing Ohio, George Voinivch.

Voinivich has an extreme bipartisan following in Ohio, a state McCain needs to win.

Both are mavericks, both are trying to shake up and redesign the GOP name.

Voinivich , IHO, McCain's strongest move. He rebuilt Cleveland, he was an extremely good governor in Ohio that was able to work well with both parties.

He's pro-life, so the GOP can rest easily. But he has voted NO with Dems to extend Bush's tax cuts Vote 118: H R 4297 . He has voted with Dems on numerous issues, Vote 157: S 2611: Would tighten border security and establish guest worker and "path to citizenship" programs, Vote 229: On the Cloture Motion: Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Motion to Proceed to Consider H.R.5970; Estate Tax and Extension of Tax Relief Act of 2006, Vote 177: H R 6331: Shall H.R. 6331 Pass, the objections of the President of the United States to the contrary notwithstanding?; Medicare Improvement for Patients and Providers Act of 2008.

How did he vote on Bolton?
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2005/04...ote-on-bolton/


I truly believe, Voinivich would be McCain's best choice. I think that a McCain-Voinivich ticket would be unbeatable by Obama. It would be enough to get moderates from both sides to take notice, it would be an Independent's dream and there is no dirt on Voinivich, the man is truly a decent man. I have had issues with his voting record but unlike some..... cough Biden cough...... he stands up for what he believes and doesn't back down or sell out.

This was written in January of this year,

Martin Gottlieb: McCain, Voinovich: Distant brothers
So don't be surprised..... I have a feeling Voinivich maybe on that list and it maybe only Voinivich's decision that keeps him off.

pan....I would be very surprised...no, shocked and stunned beyond belief.

While Voinovich is a well-respected policy wonk, right up there with Biden, he is probably one of the dullest members of the Senate and not what you want and need on the campaign trail. And, I dont see anything in your article that would suggest that McCain and Voinovich have any interest in working together.

The articulate and young pretty boy from OH, John Kasich, would be much more formidable.

Kasich sucks. Too GOP. May help him in parts of Ohio, but those parts he'd already have locked up. Voinivich would bring ALL of Ohio. And dull or not, Voinivich has a lot of respect on both sides of the aisle and is not a puppet.

Course if McCain truly wants young, pretty boy, strong on beliefs..... he could switch parties and nominate my personal favorite senator and politician.... the one and only SHERROD BROWN..... IF Obama had chosen Brown... I'd be wearing Obama pins, have Obama/BROWN bumperstickers and be the biggest fundraiser for that ticket they'd have in Ohio......

perhaps I could do it for McCain/Brown...... stop laughing........ it's possible in my reality.

Plus, boring and unassuming maybe the contrast needed for the supposed hot headed, publicity hound, maverick McCain needs.

Can't be Romney. Nobody really likes him and he's like the only guy in politics richer than McCain. After house-gate (I've got McCain owning 8 houses in the office pool!) McCain cannot choose another moneybags.

It will probably be Cheney... ;)

From an interview McCain had with Stephen Hayes in 2005 (who was writing Cheney's biography at the time):

Asked whether he’d be interested in Cheney had the vice president not already have served under Bush for two terms, McCain said: “I don’t know if I would want him as vice president. He and I have the same strengths. But to serve in other capacities? Hell, yeah.”

With Cheney's popularity even lower than Bush's (less than 20% in one recent poll).....now that would make a great ad!

I think you'll be quite amazed when the actual elections take place. It will be close.

You're completely off base here. Romney is a very good conservative VP choice. I don't know what you mean by nobody. Do some research first.

Last time I checked, Obama was fairly well off too. Kerry was extremely rich. It's a double standard that Obama is trying to make John McCain's success seem like a bad thing. Since when was success bad?

When you are an evil money-grubbing Republican, of course.

It is not that he is rich it is that he doesn't understand the needs of the lower and middle classes. He doesn't understand what it is like to struggle to make mortgage payments, he doesn't know what its like to pump your own gas, last year McCain spent $270,000 on maids and butlers for his houses, etc. He seems to be out of touch with realities outside of his rich circle. Obama on the other hand group up poor, he worked with the poor in Chicago, he understands what these people are feeling.

Another quotable are last year his wife said "Private jets are the only way to travel around the midwest (paraphrased)". It must be nice to get to fly everywhere but some of us have to drive and are struggling with the cost of gas. It costs me $600 a plane ticket to fly home.

Last I checked Obama frequently travels on private jets too. John Kerry always flies on private jets, has multiple houses, and is possibly wealthier than McCain, yet no one tried to vilify him when he was running. This is why I don't like many tactics of the left. Everything to them is a double standard, just about everything they accuse conservatives of, there are liberals that are far more guilty of, yet they can do no wrong.

The polls always show what the American voter cares about. Since Obama started making a deal about this stupid house issue, McCain has actually pulled even with him in the polls. So it really shows that although you might think not knowing how many houses you have (and in reality, they're mostly houses owned by his wife) people don't really care. It doesn't mean he's out of touch, it just means he doesn't know.

It amazes how Obama's cult of personality trumpets any minor thing he does, and blindfolds his followers from any negative thing he does. Fortunately for the country, many of the independents do not swoon for him, and will vote for or against him based on ISSUES not his celebrity.
-----Added 26/8/2008 at 08 : 34 : 02-----
:shakehead:

So I'm assuming money grubbing Democrats is acceptable. Notice none of them are attacked from the right for being successful. I find it ironic how those on the left can talk about "the American Dream" when they seem to overtly attack those who are living it. You can't have it both ways!

Looking objectively, I think most would agree that both sides are equally guilty.

No one vilified Kerry (remember the Swiftboaters?) or his wife? Obama has not been vilified for being a "secret Muslim" or other equally outrageous charges about his patriotism? Or portraying Michelle Obama as an "angry black woman."

You dont think the right, most notably Limbaugh, Hannety, Fox News, et al, dont use the same tactics or apply double standards that you find so offensive? Hell, Limbaugh invented and mastered the tactics in modern day mass communications.

I agree the focus should be on issues and facts.. but lets no try to make the silly argument that taking the lower road is one-sided.

You might start with stopping the bullshit about a cult of personality and blindfolded and swooning followers.....or money grubbing Democrats.
-----Added 26/8/2008 at 08 : 54 : 09-----
Or equally baseless claims that Obama wants to turn the US into a European style socialist state or destroy the world's greatest health care system.

Did you even check if they never attacked Teresa before posting or did you just try and poll that out of your butt?

Cindy’s fortune: An asset and a liability - Kenneth P. Vogel - Politico.com
Kerry's Wife: Above Suspicion?, WS: Why Won't Teresa Heinz Kerry Release Her Tax Returns? - CBS News
Remember the John Kerry flip flop add where they showed him sailing? One of the things they were attacking was Teresa's money. They successfully painted Kerry as an elitist. This year McCain tried to do the same to Obama.
McCain tried to push the Obama is an elitist card and now it is biting him in the butt. He and Republicans are reaping what he sowed.

Now well were at it do we want to talk about the ridiculous attacks on Michelle Obama?

How is that for your hypocritical double standard?

Look here's one thing we can agree on. Attacks on spouses are WRONG. I don't believe Rush's and Sean's attacks on Michelle Obama were justified.

That being said, don't bring up the elitist aspect. Obama and Kerry both certainly talked down to the crowd. McCain talks to the crowd. Every Obama speech seems like a pep rally for himself. McCain seems fairly humble in my view.

I have never seen Obama talk down to the crowd. Please provide examples.

Yes... while someone's perceptions may seem well founded, it would be hard to point to an example of Obama "talking down" to a crowd. His crowds are diverse in intelligence as any political crowd and they seem to love what he says. I could also see how an opposition supporter may have negative perceptions of how McCain communicates to his audiences.

Is Darth Vader a valid response?

The latest name I heard was Joe Mott from Youngstown, Ohio. Who knew?

Well after reading what I wrote, I think I misspoke. I meant to say insults not talks down.

My example "all you need is inflate your tires and get regular tuneups and you'll save as much oil as you would get from drilling." Isn't that a little insulting?

Why not... "Barry, I am your fah-thah"

First he didn't say it way. He said there are many things we can do to save gas now and not increase supply 6 years ago. Then he gave an example of inflating tires. Which is true! It has been estimated that people will save an average of around 3% gas by properly inflating your tires. Hell even McCain admitted Obama was right on the tire inflation.

It seems like all you have are republican talking points. You should try getting your news from more diverse sources. I make it a point to read the following websites daily:

CBS news, Fox news, Daily KOS, Redstate, Election Projection, and Electoral Vote.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/ar...829354,00.html
-----Added 26/8/2008 at 10 : 10 : 21-----
Already been mentioned.

Calling Obama rich in the same way that Romney and McCain are is ludicrous. McCain is the son of an admiral who went to the Naval Academy and spent years earning relatively large salaries in Congress and the Senate. He also married an incredibly wealthy heiress, and now can't even remember how many houses he owns.

Mitt Romney is the son of the former Governor of Michigan. Mitt turned into a brilliant businessman and made unfathomable amounts of money. He then became the governor of Massachusetts.

Barack Obama was raised partially abroad and partially in Hawaii and partially in Kansas. The one constant in his life was that his family's economic situation ran from working class to poverty-level (occasionally, he was fed with the assistance of food stamps). He was a brilliant student and politician, and managed to earn his way to the Ivy Leagues, a coveted position at the University of Chicago Law School, the state of Illinois's legislative bodies, the U.S. Senate, and now the Democratic nomination for President. He also wrote two well-received books, which recently (as in the last 4 years) allow him to claim a wealthy, but far from ultra-rich, income.

McCain and Romney were scions of powerful families, and each are currently worth hundreds of millions of dollars more than Barack Obama. I'm not saying that any of these facts prove that McCain or Romney are elitist, or that Obama isn't. But it certainly seems ridiculous to suggest that only the latter is, and if you can make a case for any of those three to be "out of touch with average Americans," well, it probably isn't Obama.

P.S. Forseti:

A) OK, I was being flip about nobody liking Romney. But seriously, there's hardly a groundswell of support for his VP consideration.

B) John McCain has certainly accomplished a lot in his life. But let's not call his wealth a "success," unless you consider getting a sugar mommy a resume-builder. The guy married into a fortune.

That's success isn't it? :lol:

To be honest, McCain probably didn't know how many houses he had because many of them belonged to his wife. So, moot argument on the Democrat's side.

My advice to both parties. Stop the bickering and get to the issues. I still don't know what McCain's full economic policy is and I still don't know what Obama's full foreign policy is.

And neither have elaborated on their health care policy since the primaries. Hello people!!! Aren't those the big issues of this election?
-----Added 26/8/2008 at 11 : 36 : 21-----
Time Magazine... very diverse source :shakehead:

By the way, I listen to conservative talk radio, npr, watch cnn, fox news. Is that diverse enough?

...no.. I don't feel insulted. Then again, I was hugged when I was a kid.

Well I felt his saying that was insulting the intelligence of the crowd. He's assuming no one has properly inflated tires and no one takes their cars for service. Now I'm sure some people drive with near flats and don't change their filters and oil, I'd be willing to bet most people take care of their cars.

You'd be surprised. I mean, I'm a car guy myself, but I bet it was news to most people. There's a reason why energy conservation ads have ridiculously simple tips all over them - people don't think about these things unless they have to.

Well, you got me there. I suppose I'd consider it a grand achievement if I married super-rich!

Nonetheless, the fact that the uncounted multitude of houses may belong to his wife doesn't matter - the underlying point, the reason that Democrats have harped on this issue, is that it underlines just how rich and how not-average joe the McCains are. The fact that doing so undermines the GOP attacks on Obama that claim he's elitist is icing on the cake. And, frankly, this is politics. No politician running for president should be unable to answer this question.

As for the issues...well, Obama has approximately one gazillion positions laid out very clearly on his website. If the thorough summaries on his positions aren't enough, the site helpfully includes links to his relevant speeches on the bottom of the page, as well as links to pdfs that describe in greater depth his positions on issues such as "Read Obama’s Plan for a 21st Century Military" or "Read Barack Obama’s Plan to Actively Engage China."

For Obama's plan for Iraq, btw, you could just go ask Iraq President Maliki, who basically endorsed it and agreed with Bush to enact Obama's plan, plus about a year more of occupation.

As far as healthcare...well, I can't imagine there's any more to explain after the primaries. I'm pretty sure I heard Obama discuss every inch of his proposals. But I'm pretty eager to hear him compare his proposals to McCains in the debates...

For the record, from a GAO report (pdf):

More than one quarter of cars and about a third of light trucks have one or more tires underinflated 8 psi or more below the recommended level.

The Department of Energy’s designated economist on this issue indicated that, of the 130 billion gallons of fuel that the Transportation Research Board (TRB) estimated were used in passenger cars and light trucks in 2005, about 1.2 billion gallons were wasted as a result of driving on underinflated tires.

Thats a helluva lot of wasted gas!
-----Added 27/8/2008 at 01 : 21 : 06-----
I agree their respective healthcare plans have been laid out pretty well....at least the underlying basics.

McCain's wants to give $2500 individual tax credit ($5000 for families) to buy health insurance outside of the work place....and pay for it by cutting the current tax incentives to employers...which would adversely impact employed-based health plans....and someone should tell him you cant buy comprehensive family health insurance for $5000/year (the average cost of family health care coverage is about $12,000/yr).

Obama wants to cover all kids w/o insurance by including them in SCHIP and strengthen employer-based plans with additional tax incentives to employers to keep premiums (employees share) from increasing and to provide a program for small businesses w/o plans to join pools to provide coverage to employees. He would pay for it with the significantly increased revenue generated by restoring the tax rate on the top 1% to pre-2000 levels (as currently required by law)....but he is spreading that anticipated increased tax revenue kinda thin to pay for alot of programs and initiatives.

Wow. I have never seen those numbers before.
-----Added 27/8/2008 at 07 : 37 : 52-----
I really liked the Saddleback forum because we got to compare them quasi-side by side. I am looking forward to the debates!

Attack what the article says not the source especially when the source isn't generally considered bias.
-----Added 27/8/2008 at 12 : 22 : 10-----
Thanks for finding that report dc_dux.
-----Added 27/8/2008 at 04 : 17 : 38-----
Here is a good example of how out of touch McCain is.


He thinks people wouldn't take a job for $50 an hour for unskilled labor...

Just in case you don't want to do the math that is $104,000 a year. I think the dems should put this video in its entirety in some adds quickly. Some were claiming Obama is arrogant and talking down to people how about McCain here? He even tells them they they won't be able to do it!

Who was the audience McCain was speaking to?

the AFL-CIO Building and Construction Trades Department (BCTD)

What's this in reference to? A 20-second clip doesn't offer enough.

It's hard to see what the context was there.

20 seconds is not enough to know anything about the context of this. What was he responding to? What is the labor he is asking one to do? Too many questions that go unanswered in that 20 second blurb to understand what he is talking about.

If he is talking about hard labor in Yuma during the whole Summer season.... he's right, there aren't very many I know of here in the US that would be able to work a whole Summer doing hard labor in Yuma, no matter what the pay.

Show the whole interaction that went on, then ask for people to respond.

To just show this and say "see he's out of touch" or "see he's an elitist" is bull pucky. I'm sure someone can find a 20 second blurb of Obama going off about something.. and without any context or knowledge of what he is responding to make it look like something it isn't.
-----Added 27/8/2008 at 10 : 01 : 51-----
It does to those who want to bash him and can't find anything else that they think will work.

$50 an hour is more than my wife and I make together (by a large margin). I find it hard to believe there wouldn't be a tun of people willing to do "hard labor" picking lettuce for that price. Even when he said it the crowd was yelling they would do it and he got mad at them and yelled at them saying they "can't do it". If Obama said this people would be asking us why does he hate America.
-----Added 27/8/2008 at 10 : 19 : 27-----
If you think only democrats are outraged look at comments by freepers:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1615112/posts

they are some of the most conservative people around.
-----Added 27/8/2008 at 10 : 21 : 09-----
Here is some context

Out of curiosity, is that $50/hr in terms of what the worker sees, what the worker sees after tax, or what the employer pays? ie. considering overhead, benefits, fica, etc?

/back to my rock.

I'm guessing before taxes, but $104,000 pre-tax income is extremely high for unskilled labor

It's either going to be Romney (wasn't he Rush's favorite?) or a crowd-pleasing social conservative.

I've worked in the summer (outside) in Yuma for less than $50/hr for a few weeks. I've worked in the south with humidity for less than $50/hr too.

Maybe I'll be the VP...I'll be at the speech on Friday to hear what he has to say. And it sounds like McCain may actually make the announcement count and be interesting. (Instead of a text message to a few people at 4am...Obama should have gone on the O'reilly Factor or Sat. Night Live or something to announce Biden...)

I think Romney looks good on the surface, but he's another Rich Guy, and his Mormonism would not play well in the Bible Belt, where I expect McCain to have the greatest success.

Another guy on the short list, Tim Pawlenty, is an Evangelical Christian, which is right up their alley. But I think Biden would cheerfully eat him for lunch in a debate.

Colin Powell is 71 or so, which puts him out of the picture.

Then there's Lieberman, but I doubt that his Judaism would play much better than Romney's Mormonism. He's also pro-choice, while McCain has recently reiterated his pro-life stance, even in cases of rape.

It's really not looking good on that side of the aisle, IMO.

McCain won't pick Lieberman. That's suicide for his campaign. Much of the evangelical vote has made it clear that if McCain picked a pro-choice VP, he would lose their vote.

That being said, I think Pawlenty and Romney would be the best choices. I don't think Romney's Mormonism will really hurt the ticket much, and his economic experience will bring in votes from Michigan and Ohio.

Romney is worth a quarter of a billion dollars. McCain is worth $25-$38 million. Expect to hear that frequently, along with McCain snippets about $50 wages and a $1 million networth being "middle income".

All democrats need is video of McCain or Romney trying to figure out how to buy socks.

Here is a bit more context

He was responding to someone in the audience yelling pay them the right wages. So his $50 mark does not seem to be that he misspoke.

He stated the whole season. I would have lasted a week or 2 but the whole Summer..... not for 50, not for 100. I can withstand alot, but not that.

I still say it looks like both are trying to degrade themselves and their supporters. I honestly look at both of these guys and the things they say and wonder why we have allowed such idiots, such elitist, asses who proudly show that they have their own agendas and the country be damned. Both are so f'n slimy and nuts that I can only hope and pray McCain chooses a strng man who has great pride and vision in this country and can lead.

These are the most pathetic presidential nominees I have ever seen or heard of.

People can and will do a lot more than they are given credit for. When I was 16 I worked 8 hour shifts bringing carts in from Sam's Club in the Phoenix summer for $5/hour. That just as difficult as picking lettuce in Yuma. People work outside all the time in Arizona and very few of them get paid $50/hour.

What a joke.

The lettuce season in Yuma is in the winter when it is not so hot. There are people in this country that work very hard and have very hard jobs that pay very little. McCain said Americans are unable to work as hard as Mexicans and went as far to say we "can't" do the job. That is very unpatriotic way more than saying for the first time in my life i'm truly proud of America.....

Looks like it's going to be Tim Pawlenty, so start practicing the proper pronouncing of "Pawlenty".

Well, it won't be as hilariously terrible a pick as Lieberman or Romney would have, so I gotta give McCain that. This reminds me very much of how McCain became the GOP candidate: the field was so awful that eventually people whittled away the guys with the most obviously unacceptable flaws. In the primary, that meant getting rid of Romney (the lyingest cyborg on earth), Rudy (crazy), Thompson (old and didn't really care to run very much), Huckabee (way too conservative socially and not 100% in line with the tax jihad folks), Paul (crazy/the only one not crazy on the topic of Iraq), etc.

Now, McCain had to eliminate Lieberman (Jewish and pro-choice and old), Ridge (pro-choice), Crist (at the very least, metrosexual), Rudy (crazy), Romney (cyborg, plus his richness really makes him and McCain seem out-of-touch), etc.

Pawlenty is boring and has no name recognition. He might - might - put Minnesota in play, although I doubt it. If it is him, I think McCain made the right choice. Doesn't mean he'll make a great running mate.

P.S.

I think Obama was also kind of screwed by his choice of running mates. Biden won't shut up and worked on the hideous bankruptcy bill, Edwards is an adulterer, Hillary could never be chosen after that primary, Bayh and Kaine and all the other bland white guys would have been the ultimate cop-out for the "change" campaign, Sebelius is awesome but a bad speaker, Gore is unavailable, etc. The major difference is that Obama is pretty awesome, while McCain is a compromise.

Edit: Just read this, and thought it was a funny line:

Pawlenty would make a great 21st century republican VP; he hasn't a shred of integrity in his body.

I really think it will be Bobby Jindal. His real first name is Piyush. That would be a huge plus for McCain.

It depends on Gustav.

Not happening. Sounds like it's Palin of Alaska. McCain and the GOP powers are wise to put a female there. Of course, it is to be announced in Ohio today..... still time for Voinivich.

And that plane from Anchorage could have been anyone. It's kind of really shooting in the dark to assume it was Palin.

Pawlenty indicates he's not McCain's veep choice - Yahoo! News

-----Added 29/8/2008 at 09 : 41 : 30-----
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...nggovpalin.jpg

Governor Palin with Alaska's At-large U.S. Representative Don Young

http://www.insurgent49.com/sarah_palin.jpg

OOOOO what a hotty...... McCain is definitely getting the 18-25 yr old male vote there.......and the prepubescent males.... if they could vote. lol

This would definitely get some of the Hillary voters.

Of course Wiki says this:

Sarah Palin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Apparently Sarah Palin is back stage at the McCain rally. This is according to FOX news getting a tip from an event worker. If this is true, McCain has played his cards well. The news is all about McCain and his VP choice... barely any mention in the media of Obama's big event since early this morning. If it is Palin, she'll be the big buzz in the headlines for days to come effectively deflating any residual boost from Obama's nomination extravaganza.

It's been confirmed. Palin it is.

A very strange pick indeed, if it turns out to be the case.

A candidates with virtually no political experience - just over one year as governor and mayor of a small town prior to that....no economic experience (McCain's weakness) and even less foreign policy experience.

The idea she may attract some Clinton females voters is nonsense. She is an anti-choice activist and has little to offer those voters in terms of health care and children/family policy or other social issues that match their core beliefs.

I agree it may create a buzz for a few days, but not necessarily in a good way.

McCain's choice today would make or break him. Every news agency I listen to, read, watch, focussed today on who McCain's choice is NOT the Messiah's speech.

So if McCain chose a so so pick or someone that was hohum.... it would break him.... he'd be fighting an uphill battle and have no momentum.

However, if he picks the right person, picks someone with great charisma and is super strong..... he just overshadowed everything the DNC did the last few days. He wiped out the Messiah's sermon on the mount because the talk will be ALL about his running mate.

And .... the best part is IF it is Palin..... Hillary will go nuts. Nuts enough to maybe run 3rd party.

McCain just played a trump card and destroyed Obama. Obama will have a very hard time overcoming this.

Our first Female president will be Palin....... unless Hillary runs NOW.

pan and otto...we must be watching different news or reading different papers.

This pick of an inexperienced women who shares few political values with probably half the women in the country will destroy Obama?.....only in your dreams, pan.

I know you guys want to see someone take Obama down. but I honestly dont see how an objective observer would believe that this pick would result in that person.

Edit: In answer to Pan

You really think so? She's almost a nobody. One year as a governor. From a state that holds no cards.

I think many conservatives are going to run from her pro-gay stance and others will think he picked her just because of the Hillary factor. In fact, I think Hillary will destroy her in campaigning for Barack.

Well of course newspapers have a significant delay, so afternoon and evening editions would be more indicative.

I've been watching MSNBC, the most Obama-friendly news channel... mostly hubbub on who McCain's VP choice would be, very little on Obama. Since the choice of Palin broke, wall-to-wall McCain / Palin issues.

Brilliant move by McCain yanking media coverage away from Obama...no "basking in the glow" for the anointed one. However, a very risky move for the republicans going with such an unknown and inexperienced running mate.

Unless wikipedia's description of her politics is grossly inaccurate (which it may be), I don't really see the point of this nomination. She comes pre-packaged with an abuse of power scandal (not really what anyone coming after the Bush-Cheney ticket needs) and comes up a big fucking goose-egg on all of the social policy issues that Clinton represented as a female candidate.

Sure there's going to be a lot of press about it, and why not? But I don't really see how this is likely to be the "end of the election." Seems a very strange choice to me-one calculated to gain immediate attention without taking into account the big picture situation. She may very well be the most electable woman in the Republican community (she might also not be, I have no idea) but she's no replacement for disenfranchised Clinton supporters who don't know what to make of BO.

Also, I don't really think it's an enormous loss to the dems to not have 100% attention on the nomination speeches of last night. They're all puffery and nonsense, and they know that. The people who care(d) were all paying attention and got swept up in the message. You don't get swing votes with nomination speeches or coverage.

I think many Independents will have serious doubts about such an inexperienced person being a heart beat away from the presidency when the country is facing so many complex national and international issues.....asking themselves in such a scenario, who do I want to be a heart beat away - Biden or Palin?

Bottom line though is VP nominations rarely, if ever, swing or have much significant impact on an election.

I think everybody knew he would announce this morning. Typical politics. People don't vote for convention speeches. Undecideds make up their minds during debates.

Other than the fact she's a she, I don't see at all how this helps McCain. If she were a man, GOP party leaders would be burning McCain at the stake right now. There's enough about her to campaign against that she'd never be a good candidate on her own.

Conservative Christian? That's not America. One year governor? of Alaska? The average conservative Christian doesn't even know Alaska is a state. Mother of 5? When does she have time to be governor? Who raises her kids? Especially one with Down's Syndrome.

And that's a whole other kettle. Why go through fertility treatments when you already have four kids and are well beyond the age of high risk pregnancy? What kind of judgement is that?

I think McCain just stepped in a polar bear trap.

Amazing... talking points have been issued!

And you are an extremely objective observer..... right DC???? :rolleyes::shakehead:

Is she a perfect pick? No. But it shifts the momentum from Obama.

You want to talk about scandals, abuses of power? Look in Biden's closet. Don't think you really want to go there.

I find it funny, people here are talking about experience but support Obama who's own VP choice said he was inexperienced. LOL.

You have an inexperienced man, who believes his own press and believes he is the second coming, running for president and a rich old white guy who has quite a few scandals and couldn't get a vote in the primaries, running against a rich old white man with much experience and a woman that is strong in her beliefs and has charisma.

There you have it.

You say the GOP has an rich old white guy running..... well who do you have for a VP choice?

I will absolutely vote for a GOP presidential candidate for the first time in my life...... unless, unless Hillary runs. Then..... then I will vote for Hillary.

As opposed to buzz words like marxist, messiah, cult following?
-----Added 29/8/2008 at 11 : 24 : 08-----
Nope...I never claimed to be.

But I can step out of the box to make objective judgments. It doesnt take much to make an assessment that her standing on core social issues that are of utmost importance to Clinton women supporters are further right than McCain.

"This just in... Obama's plane just left Denver... and now back to the news"

Um... no. You must be fantasizing.

Jesus christ, this is SMART to you? Look at what the stories are saying--how weird this choice is. I mean dear god: McCain could shoot himself in the head and grab the headlines for a week or more too.

Don't you see, he now has to RUN with this woman? Her positions contain significant mismatches against his, she has WAY less experience than Obama does and is actually YOUNGER than Obama--so now the old "not ready to lead" saw is out the window--and no state in the nation has fewer electoral votes than hers (although a few, including Vermont, North Dakota, and the District of Colombia tie for least). And she's ALREADY got an active pseudo-scandal working in her state administration. That may turn out to be nothing, but even so, where the hell were McCain's vetters?? Literally ALL she has going for her is her vagina.

I can't fathom what the McCain campaign thinks it's doing here. This choice is just bizarre. The only thing they did right was, as you say, otto, the timing.

Obama just brought a MASSIVE piece of firepower into his campaign. McCain brought in an arguably tained puffball. I think I hear echoes of Harriet Myers' SCOTUS nomination....

This is not a good argument to put forth if you are an Obama supporter.

Uh... what? A term as a U.S. Senator is less experience than one year as governor of a state that pretty much runs itself?

I mean really, I was all for Hillary, but this choice just seems stupid.

Obama is toast. There are Republicans as well as Democrats who were willing to vote for Hillary solely because of her gender. How is Obama going to try to smear her now? Her age? Lack of experience? :lol:

Let the pandering begin.

Gonad...you dont see how this completely undercuts McCain's argument that Obama is not ready for the job....when his own choice for VP is even less ready?

Now, I'm making a gross generalization, but the kind of women I know who would vote for a woman "just because she's a woman" would stop that the instant they found out how ridiculously conservative Palin is on all social issues. It's pretty much that simple. Whatever value she may have as a woman is all but decimated because her social policy has its roots in the 1950s.

Prior to McCain's VP selection I had no intention of voting for him and I assumed he would pick Romney. With Palin on the ticket I am likely to vote for McCain and I may get involved as a volunteer. I like the fact that she is as far away from inside the beltway as you can get, I like her youth in contrast to McCain's age, I like that she is a governor rather than a legislator, I like that she is from an "oil" state, I like her conservative credentials, I like that she is active and has interests outside of politics, and she seems to be a winner.

In the last 12 hours or so, we really see the contrast between the two parties. On one hand we get the words and fireworks from Obama talking about change while everyone around him is the old guard (Clinton, Gore, Biden, Pelosi, Clinton, Kerry, Carter, etc.) And the first major decision by McCain is to bring in new blood. Empty words compared to action. I have to side with action.

Look at it this way...... Obama will have to turn to his VP Biden, who couldn't buy a vote, to answer questions on Iraq, on foreign policy, on what goes on in the world that doesn't revolve around his ego.

Meanwhile, McCain can train his VP on how to be bipartisan, on foreign policy, and what it takes to be a true leader.

Gee...... what a choice there.

Where are you Hillary???????

Is that McCain's argument or was it Biden's? Was it McCain's argument or was it Clinton's?

Quoted for truth. :thumbsup::thumbsup:

God.... I am scared now, Ace and I agree. :oogle:

Um, how about her being PRO-LIFE??? If you think the average Hillary-feminazi is going to vote for an evangelical pro-lifer, take another look at your avatar and think again.

Why are people making the assumption that McCain picked her because she is going to get the Clinton female vote. Liberal women are still going to be liberal at the end of the day. Perhaps, he picked her because he did not like the others that were on the media's list. It was clear to me that McCain did not like Romney, I would have saw it as dishonest if he had picked Romney as a running mate. And, again I think the mentality of being a governor is more important than being a legislator for executive office.

ace...I understand how the pick may help with conservative-leaning votes like you (and I am not saying that in a disparaging way).

I just done see any rationale for how it will help with Independent swing voters, particularly women who dont share her social policy positions.

What's that saying about a broken clock, so we can expect to agree at least one more time.

Why are you putting so much stock in the VP choice, ace and pan? VPs are notoriously meaningless and ineffectual. Cheney may be a fairly strong exception to that rule, but that had everything to do with Bush's weakness as a leader. I don't think either Obama or McCain will be the type of president that is going to cede as much power to his veep as we've seen recently, so other than looking good on paper, I don't see where they bring a lot to the table.

If you weren't going to vote for McCain beforehand, I don't think his package has changed a lot because of Palin. He is still the same guy with the same goals. He brought in someone with great conservative credentials, as you noted, but I don't think she's going to have much impact on his policy or direction.

A short list of issues swing voters may find important that she can help bring clarity to:

Oil exploration
Environment
Health and Family issues
Being the parent of a child in the military
Second Amendment rights

I doubt the abortion issue will be the deciding factor for most independents. I think the VP debates will show a big contrast, my bets will be on her.

what a terrible pick for McCain

She's in the tank for BP. You think that'll win her votes?

Being from an oil state, maybe. Beholden to an oil company? No.

If you recall in my post that you responded to, I said