I've pointed out elsewhere that being mayor of New York City is a bigger job than being governor of Alaska. And she's only been at it a year and a half.

Posted August 29, 2008 1:51 PM by Xopher

$0.02: I was very surprised that he chose a woman running mate. Given her political inexperience, and the differences between her limited experience and what would be expected of her as VP, his decision seems crazy. It he trying to win over the still-disenchanted Hillary supporters?

I also don't really get his adoption of the "maverick" thing. Is it to make him seem younger? I don't want a maverick in the white house; I'd rather have someone dependable. And then he makes a decision like this, all flashy and surprising and "see? he does respect women," and I'm left with my jaw hanging wondering, "...wtf?!"

Posted August 29, 2008 2:00 PM by Avedaggio

I'm really stunned by this choice. Some interesting background from a former Alaskan reporter here .

Posted August 29, 2008 2:01 PM by Ronit

Plus, she hates polar bears. How can anyone in good conscience vote for someone who doesn't like polar bears?

Think of the bears, everyone. Think of the bears.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:01 PM by Avedaggio

She also has a history of pandering to the creationist camp (this from a debate during her gubernatorial election campaign:

"'Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both.'

and

That was how she was brought up, she said. Her father was a public school science teacher.

"My dad did talk a lot about his theories of evolution," she said. "He would show us fossils and say, 'How old do you think these are?' "

Asked for her personal views on evolution, Palin said, "I believe we have a creator."

She would not say whether her belief also allowed her to accept the theory of evolution as fact.

"I'm not going to pretend I know how all this came to be," she said.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:04 PM by glaurung_quena

Avadaggio at #2: "[Is] he trying to win over the still-disenchanted Hillary supporters?" I'm not, nor can I be by virtue of non-citizenship, be involved in US politics, but as soon as I read that he chose a woman, that was my first thought.

Cynical? Maybe.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:04 PM by Zeynep

Well, since he's trying to appeal to people who take Geraldine Ferraro seriously, he may get both their votes with this pick.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:04 PM by Ken Houghton

Question: Who would McCain really have to nominate as VP to get you to vote for him?

My A: I’m thinking Twain as VP would do it for me. No no, not Mark Twain, he’s younger, smarter, wittier than McCain and a world class curmudgeon to boot, that wouldn’t end well at all. I meant Shania. She’d totally rock my vote, and she’d be a huge hit on the foreign leader circuit, single-handedly repairing foreign relations in a way Biden never could!

Posted August 29, 2008 2:09 PM by Lance Weber

Mayor of a town of nearly 9,000 people.

Not that it makes much difference either way, but it was only about 5500 at the time she was mayor of it.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:09 PM by DBratman

But she has executive experience! (McCain, of course, has none; and if Obama can lean on Biden for wise counsel, McCain can surely lean on ...)

And as she brought up in her own speech, she's commander of the Alaska National Guard!

This sounds really impressive. It just doesn't mean much.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:11 PM by DBratman

Not that it makes much difference either way, but it was only about 5500 at the time she was mayor of it.

I can fix that.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:12 PM by James D. Macdonald

Is anyone else visualizing the phone ringing at 3:00 am?

Someone picks up the handset and a woman says in the voiceover, "Uh, he died. Is there, um, can I help you?"

Posted August 29, 2008 2:13 PM by hope

It's actually a pretty solid pick, worryingly enough. It shores McCain up with the insane right-wing of the Republican party while putting forward a blue-collar woman candidate with a vague background.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:14 PM by Total

[FX: boop, beep, bap... ring, ring] "Mitt? this is John..."

[FX: kerlunk]

"Dammit..."

[FX: beep, boop, bap... ring, ring] "Mike, this is John..."

[FX: crash]

[Sighs] "Hail Mary, Full of Grace..."

FX: bap, boop, beep... ring, ring]"Sarah? We haven't met, but I'm John McCain..."

Posted August 29, 2008 2:15 PM by Niall McAuley

And her foreign policy experience is... Canada?

Posted August 29, 2008 2:15 PM by Connie H.

By picking Palin (CNN keeps saying McCain has "tapped" her for VP; omg) as his VP candidate, doesn't this somewhat create a problem for him to attack Obama on his inexperience?

After all, a first term governor of Alaska, the state with the least population, is hardly the person I'd want to be next in line to run the US should McCain's heart stop beating. Obama has at least sat in on Congressional hearings on foreign affairs and other matters of national import; Palin got to hold big fish in her hands, and make appearances at the Alaskan State Fair.

She does bring the pro-life, pro-gun, pro-drill pro-oil, and pro-family vote, though. Oh, wait; those were already going to vote for McCain. Will she bring disaffected Clinton voters over to her side? Only if they look no further than Palin's gender, IMO. McCain and his handlers don't think they're that shallow, do they?

Posted August 29, 2008 2:18 PM by John L

Gah, not happy. The anti-abortion thing really cheeses me off.

McCain himself makes me not want to vote for him...I say this as a repub.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:20 PM by Michelle

The fact that's she's a union member will offend a large subset of Republicans, I think.

I'm expecting a large number of Huckabee's supporters to walk, as they don't want any women in public office (they didn't just hate Hillary). I spent part of the growing up years in Arkansas, so I'm familiar with the type...

Posted August 29, 2008 2:21 PM by Robert Glaub

I think McCain got confused. I think he thought he was picking Michael Palin; he knows how popular Monty Python was and thinks that's a huge untapped set of voters.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:23 PM by Linkmeister

Comparing governing Alaska to running New York City on population alone doesn't work; I suspect Michael Bloomberg would have as long a learning curve on dealing with Native Corporations, let alone the wildlife issues, as Palin would have with, say, transportation issues in a dense metropolitan area or the demands of the arts establishment. And scoffing at the magnitude and complexity of those Alaskan issues may be funny but it's not particularly well-informed.

That said, and all Laura Roslin joking aside, the worst thing about this appointment is the pong of "any woman at all" about it. I suspect that no one in the McCain camp knows her very well, and no one in the GOP has been paying attention to what she's actually like. Alaska issues get more coverage in my neck of the woods than anywhere else in the lower 48, and that's not saying much. She's young and cute and conservative, but there are issues of both intelligence and personality which are going to be exposed rather quickly.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:27 PM by JESR

As a woman I feel *profoundly* insulted, and I've been an Obama supporter since the Austin debate. The least McCain could do was find some woman with a resume longer than fits on a postit note. The only way I can possibly read it is "token token, who's got the token?"

Posted August 29, 2008 2:28 PM by joann

The problem with her as a pro-family candidate is that she has an infant son, and a disabled one at that. A certain proportion of the Republican demographic is going to think she should be home caring for him.

Of course, that slice of voters is unlikely to switch to Obama, so I suppose they're safe to offend?

Posted August 29, 2008 2:29 PM by abi

Someone on a comment thread pointed out that the Alaska legislature is only in session for 3 months every year. So her ability to maneuver politically as President of the Senate is probably non-existent. She's a purely political choice, chosen for her "story," for the image. She's bringing a type, not skills, to the ticket. She's meant to appeal to Republican moderates. This from Russ Douthat at The Atlantic:

"I'm pretty excited, I have to say. This could, of course, turn out to be an enormous debacle if she isn't ready for prime time. But for now, Sarah Palin looks like a perfect face for the sort of Republican Party I want to support: She's a pro-life working mom; she's tough on corruption and government waste without being a doctrinaire Norquistian on taxes; she's more supportive of gay rights than the current GOP orthodoxy (while stopping short of backing same-sex marriage); she has a more conservationist record than your typical GOP pol, but supports drilling in ANWR; she's an evangelical but she isn't a southern evangelical ... and if McCain loses, she can run at the top of a Palin-Jindal ticket in 2012!"

Will it work? Frankly, I don't think so. For one thing, her appeal to the moderates is going to make the hard-core conservatives very suspicious and unhappy. As for that so-called "appeal": does McCain really think that women candidates are somehow interchangeable? (People like Hillary so they'll like Sarah Palin -- and they'll overlook the fact that she's a Republican, anti-choice, etc.) Also, picking her gives the Obama camp freedom to mention McCain's age, and to bring it up over and over again.

Did I mention she's a Republican?

Posted August 29, 2008 2:30 PM by Lizzy L

abi @ #22

Not really. They're more likely to stay home than vote McCain if they're offended enough.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:32 PM by SisterCoyote

Linkmeister @ 19... he thought he was picking Michael Palin

"It's...!"

Posted August 29, 2008 2:32 PM by Serge

Concerning the length of Palin's resume, there's this to note:

The last time the Republicans nominated an incumbent governor for vice-president, he too had been in office for less than two years, and his previous experience like Palin's had been in local government rather than legislative.

His name was Agnew.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:33 PM by DBratman

If this is a bid for Clinton voters, it looks like an incredibly transparent and cynical one. No way are Clinton supporters going to fall for it, especially with neither McCain nor Palin being pro-choice [at the moment].

Posted August 29, 2008 2:33 PM by Emily H.

We are all neglecting her most important qualification: winning the "Miss Congeniality" title in the Miss Alaska contest. So, um, she's used to losing.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:33 PM by Bob Webber

John @16 - you said what's been bugging me (except you said it more clearly and with a dig at CNN, which gets bonus points).

What also vanishes from the McCain arsenal are the digs at Michelle Obama for following the campaign trail when she should, you know, be at home with her children.

I think putting Palin on the ballot is a frighteningly brilliant move from a pandering-to-the-masses perspective. She's young (for a VP candidate) and a mother of 5 (which is surely enough kids for any pro-lifer especially as she deliberately kept the one with Downs Syndrome), attractive but not TOO attractive, articulate, not willing to come out against creationists (whatever she does herself think on the issue) - and she's happy to play second fiddle to the old white guy who served his country. She's mirroring the Religious Right's dream relationship AND she's going to pick up the women voters who would vote for a woman over everyone else AND she'll get the lower-class-racist vote - or at least won't stand in the way of that vote.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:33 PM by Tracey S. Rosenberg

#19 Linkmeister: he thought he was picking Michael Palin; he knows how popular Monty Python was ...

Actually, one of my personal anti-McCain talking points is this: back in his 2000 campaign for president, he was completely baffled why there were so many Dead Parrot jokes and snickers when he strode out from backstage to the strains of his campaign's theme music... He had no idea that he'd picked the Monty Python march.

He doesn't even have the excuse of not having lived through the Monty Python era. He's just that out of touch.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:35 PM by Madeline F

John 16: CNN keeps saying McCain has "tapped" her for VP

That's it! He saw her and said "I'd tap that" and his aides thought he meant he was selecting her as Veep! Then it was too late to turn back. What could he do, admit he was making a sexist, objectifying remark about a woman—other than his wife, I mean?

Posted August 29, 2008 2:35 PM by Xopher

Question: Who would McCain really have to nominate as VP to get you to vote for him?

Well, since I don't want McCain as President, his VP selection would have to be someone who was reliable, solid, canny, pragmatic, a man or woman of the people, and able to assassinate McCain without evidence before taking office. I'm thinking Vlad Taltos would be the best choice here, but I'm open to other possibilities.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:36 PM by Clifton Royston

abi 22: One must remember the Republican capacity for cognitive dissonance. Disabled son or no. Phyllis Schlafly, a woman with a husband and children, went around the country for years lecturing on how women should stay home and take care of their husbands and children, and none of her supporters seemed to find a problem with this.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:36 PM by DBratman

Palin was practically the only woman he could find who was more conservative than he was.

But if all that mattered was someone with more social conservative credentials, then it's odd he didn't go for Huckabee. Some of those social conservatives would never vote for a woman in the first place.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:36 PM by Laurie Mann

It's...!

Posted August 29, 2008 2:37 PM by Serge

Dbratman @33 - but as we all learned from The Handmaid's Tale, once we live in Gilead then the women who preached will all go home and be housewives and be completely happy. So it's okay!

Posted August 29, 2008 2:38 PM by Tracey S. Rosenberg

From what I'm reading, she's a sop to the evangelicals. PETA will have a field day, because she has vetoed a bill to prevent wolves from being hunted from helicopters. (In this case, I'll be cheering PETA on.)

And she's under investigation for trying to have her sister's ex-husband fired from his job as a State Trooper.

She's no Hillary Clinton...and her anti-choice stance will not endear her to Clinton's supporters.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:39 PM by Lori Coulson

John L. Last I checked, Wyoming is the state with the least population.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:40 PM by Terry Karney

Is there something fiendishly clever about this pick, or are they just flailing?

Does she help bring in the Christian right vote, or the extreme right-wingers who can't stand McCain? Something like that?

Do they figure the media and the Democrats already had a response lined up for any of the usual choices, so what the hell, let's confuse them?

I mean, if the Democrats nominated someone with her resume, can you imagine what the media would be saying?

Posted August 29, 2008 2:40 PM by Scraps

Scraps @ 39... Is there something fiendishly clever about this pick, or are they just flailing?

"Mr. Blackadder, I have a cunning plan."

Posted August 29, 2008 2:42 PM by Serge

she deliberately kept the one with Downs Syndrome (Tracey S. Rosenberg at #29)

As opposed to having an abortion, or perhaps just drowning the baby at birth, which would have been a "non-pandering" way to react to a Downs Syndrome pregnancy?

Sorry, but your phraseology just pushed my buttons bigtime. If that isn't what you meant, I apologize for being extremely rude. If that is what you meant -- WTF?

Posted August 29, 2008 2:43 PM by Lizzy L

Timor mortis conturbat me.

This is plausibly McCain -- in defiance of the actuarial odds, which aren't what one could describe as good -- insisting on a VP pick that flatly assumes he's not going to die in office.

One might justly suppose that says a whole lot about both their capacities for mature and dispassionate judgement, right there.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:44 PM by Graydon

I'm actually quite ticked about this choice, not because of her, but because of the skewed pressure it brings.

If I vote for Obama, I'm a sexist. If I vote for McCain, I'm a racist.

Bah. I'm a Democrat, been registered as a Democrat all my life. I'm voting Democrat. If that makes me a sexist, so be it.

Bah.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:45 PM by Gerri

Scraps - I'm going with 'fiendishly clever' (though not without risk). Would anyone care 1/17th as much if he'd gone with expectations and picked Romney? Snooze.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:46 PM by Tracey S. Rosenberg

Actually, it just clicked. I don't know what McCain may be thinking, but I think for the rest of the party it's really damn simple. They don't expect her to draw any votes. She's a scapegoat, a sacrificial lamb.

Her selection says to me that the Republican committee and strategists have concluded that they're going to lose this one, period, no matter what they do. McCain will be tainted, but the RNC didn't want him anyway, and by the next national election he'll be that much older and further into irrelevance. But anyone who runs with him as VP will be tainted with the loss and unelectable thereafter; therefore they will be happy to run someone with absolutely no relevance to the national party or politics. When McCain loses, they can write her off and continue with business as usual.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:49 PM by Clifton Royston

Laurie Mann @ #34 writes:
Palin was practically the only woman he could find who was more conservative than he was.

That, and she's:

A) A former beauty queen, like both his wives, and
B) Shorter than him

As someone on DailyKos said: "Palin? She's young enough to be his next wife!"

Posted August 29, 2008 2:51 PM by Niall McAuley

Scraps @ 39
She helps bring in the Christian right vote. Her name has been floated a number of times from the evangelical base. And, since she's also a woman, she's a two-fer.
In addition, her lack of national exposure is an asset. At least once the decision was made to give the VP nomination to someone from the X-tian right, it became an asset. She doesn't have a record that actively scares people.
The Cheney wing of the party will return to their normal position of having an unelected advisor running things. Cheney's visibility is unusual.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:53 PM by Steve Downey

Also, the other computer user currently home has located a VPILF site already.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:53 PM by JESR

Lizzy - sorry, I was sloppy there. I recently read Martha Beck's book on having a son with Downs Syndrome and she discussed how, during her pregnancy, she was overwhelmingly pressured to 'get rid of it' by having an abortion - Palin, like Beck, chose not to do this, but to keep the child.

I suspect that Palin's decision will not only be approved of within the pro-life movement but be seen to act as an additional 'up yours' to what many right-wing Christians seem to think is a medical establishment which promotes 'designer abortions'.

Posted August 29, 2008 2:55 PM by Tracey S. Rosenberg

I don't think Palin is a gesture to the unhappy Hillary Clinton supporters. I think she's a gesture to the unhappy Harriet Miers supporters.

Posted August 29, 2008 3:00 PM by Dave Lartigue

Tracey at 49, thank you. I think you are correct. And I liked that Beck book also...

Posted August 29, 2008 3:02 PM by Lizzy L

I'm just astonished that McCain's campaign would pick a running-mate who is right in the middle of an abuse of power investigation.

When I first heard the vague details, I thought it obviously couldn't be that big of a deal. I mean, it couldn't possibly amount to much, right? A major political party's VP vetting couldn't be that incompetent, right?

But the more I read about it, the more convinced I am that this is going to be a real problem for McCain. I mean, I could see it not amounting to much if the special investigator had already issued his report and she had been cleared. But he hasn't. It's still just hanging out there. Worse, she and a number of her staff at first issued strong denials that there had been any pressuring phone calls to Monegan. Then a CD of a telephone conversation emerges with a conversation showing exactly that.

The Alaska Legislature allocated "no more than $100,000" for the special investigator to complete his investigation. You can bet your sweet Polar Bear Bippy there is going to be a hell of a lot more than $100K spent on this investigation, now, when you add up the Dem's opposition research, and the networks, and god knows who else... if there's anything out there, it's coming soon.

You know what this reminds me of? The thing that really and truly destroyed Geraldine Ferraro's chance at helping her ticket were the sleazy dealings of her husband.

From what I've read, it seems that somehow Palin's husband might have been diddling around in this mess along with the Governor's staff.

I bet you one whole American dollar that the Husband Problem is what's going to happen to Palin too.

Posted August 29, 2008 3:02 PM by Michael Weholt

Clifton Royston @ 45 - It may be even worse. If they're writing this one off, then they also get to say, "See? Woman on ticket = kiss of death. Don't do that again."

Posted August 29, 2008 3:02 PM by Jill Smith

Laurie Mann @34: But if all that mattered was someone with more social conservative credentials, then it's odd he didn't go for Huckabee.

I guess because of his occasional forays into economic populism. The GOP business establishment wouldn't like it if a McCain/Huckabee ticket would win, McCain would die, and then they'd have to put up with the second coming of William Jennings Bryan as President.

Posted August 29, 2008 3:05 PM by Raphael

Avedaggio@#4:

Stephen Colbert's just gonna love her!

Posted August 29, 2008 3:08 PM by Skwid

She's got an interesting mix of credentials to appeal to various (somewhat incompatible groups):

* Young
* Female
* Husband is a union member
* Evangelical
* Strongly anti-choice
* Pro-gun
* Pro ANWR drilling
* Governor
* Son in the military (and about to be deployed, on 9/11, which is an odd date but she managed to repeat it 6 times in her introduction of her family).

Posted August 29, 2008 3:18 PM by Judith

@8: Shania has a slight eligibility problem, since she was born in Ontario (Canada, not California)...

Otherwise, she WOULD be a rocking choice :)

Posted August 29, 2008 3:25 PM by Mike G.

Her children are named Track, Bristol, Willow , Piper, and Trig.

Really. Trig's full name is Trig Paxson Van Palin.

Posted August 29, 2008 3:29 PM by Nina Katarina

On the "abuse of power" thing, Mike Wooten (the person she allegedly wanted fired) was her ex-brother-in-law, who had apparently threatened to kill her father. (According to "reliable" Wikipedia). Assuming this is accurate for the moment...

She either did try to get him fired, or didn't. If she didn't, no issue.

If she did, I don't think the Democrats want to go there on how she should have gone about it with more bureaucratic punctilio. That way lies Mike Dukakis's response to what he'd do if his wife was raped.

All she would have to do is say "That moron threatened to kill my father so I wanted his ass fired," and 90% of America would nod in agreement.

Posted August 29, 2008 3:31 PM by DaveL

Damn, Nina, that child named Willow gets the Buffy vote too!

It is a cunning plan!

Posted August 29, 2008 3:34 PM by Linkmeister

Does she help bring in the Christian right vote, or the extreme right-wingers who can't stand McCain?

She helps a lot with the pro-lifers, who are (to put it nicely) unenthusiastic about McCain.

Warning: rude epithets in following anecdote.

It reminds me of a friend's comment when Mark Earley, running for governor as a Republican, sent out a gay-baiting piece of campaign literature in October. "If you're running, as a Republican, for governor of Virginia, and it's October, and you STILL don't have the fag-basher vote in the bag--you've got problems."

Posted August 29, 2008 3:37 PM by SamChevre

Wooten had also tased his 11-year-old son during the course of the divorce. He's no saint.

Thing is, if Palin had ordered her subordinates to go after every policeman in Alaska with domestic violence convictions on their record, and gotten them all disciplined or fired (I have no idea if there are others, but even in a small state like Alaska there probably all), she would have been lauded, brilliant, a feminist hero. But she only went after the one who had affected her personally. That's abuse of power.

Posted August 29, 2008 3:37 PM by Nina Katarina

I think this is a great pick! It practically guarantees Obama '08 :)
1. Palin's major lack of experience will take McCain's Obama-inexperience card... particularly relevant because McCain is so old.
2. Speaking of age, the Veep pick will allow that topic to be brought up over and over and over again.
3. Something will come of this dubious involvement with the PD, I can feel it.
Scandals in election season... mmm the media is licking their chomps!

Posted August 29, 2008 3:40 PM by jenny

#59 DaveL: ...All she would have to do is say "That moron threatened to kill my father so I wanted his ass fired," and 90% of America would nod in agreement.

Maybe.

From what I've read, there's no question her ex-brother-in-law was a real piece of work, but his firing is not the issue. It's the firing of Monegan, Wooten's boss, that's the issue.

A couple of weeks before she fired Monegan she praised his work on some sort of state board or commission or something (having to do with bootlegging in rural Alaska, I believe). Then she fires his ass a couple of weeks later for doing a lousy job of what she just praised him for doing a good job at.

But you could be right. It all depends on what the networks and cable channels and Dems come up with. If there is something bad going on, and the cable channels or the networks keep pressing the issue, this could hang over her for the next two months. Even if nothing gets resolved, it's going to keep our Intrepid Journalists digging and bringing it up and talking about it.

I just thinks it's got the potential to turn into a nightmare for the GOP.

Posted August 29, 2008 3:40 PM by Michael Weholt

Nothing against Ms. Palin. But her as president would be a disaster roughly equivalent to -my- election as president which would, I assure you, be quite the disaster. There's inexperienced, and then there's "dude. the white house. it's WHITE!" inexperienced. Nothing to do with intelligence, ability, or anything else; were Sen. McCain to stroke out and die, folks like Putin and Kim Jong Il and I'm a Dinner Jacket would eat the lunch of ANY person that new to the field, and leave that person asking if their guest would like dessert, too.

At least Obama has looked over a few shoulders and READ a treaty or two, and the more-experienced individual in his pairing is second-in command and therefore replaceable should -he- stroke out and die.

Unfortunately, I fear will be a great number of people who will look at the idea of a Fundamentalist in the White House and assume God will look after her and this great nation of ours should she find herself in the big chair. "Look how well President Bush is doing, and -he- didn't have much of a clue, either," I think they'll say.

I do hope I'm wrong.

Posted August 29, 2008 3:41 PM by jon

Clifton Royston @ 32

Vlad comes with a little too much baggage for my liking. I'm not thrilled with the idea of exchanging Dick Cheney as éminence grise for Sethra Lavode.

Posted August 29, 2008 3:44 PM by Bruce Cohen (SpeakerToManagers)

Bruce @66 --

Sethra at least admits her undead state.

Posted August 29, 2008 3:50 PM by Graydon

She's the McCain campaign's Hail Mary play.

So far it's worked well. This is all anybody and the chattering class is talking about today.

The chattering class is not talking about the Katrina disaster (today's the third anniversary). It is not talking about Gustav and the reThug's consideration of postponement of theirCON.

It certainly isn't talking about last night, which had so much to like and to talk about. The contrast, for instance, between Mrs. Biden (short, blonde, been in D.C. for how long? a grandmother) and Michelle ( tall, not blonde, a young mom -- and how occasionally a stunned expression would escape to appear on her public face, and how the two who are probably going to be in each other's company a lot in the next 67 days -- and maybe the next 4 years, will get to know each other.

Love, C.

Posted August 29, 2008 3:54 PM by Constance

Guys, she also helps a lot with the Western vote. New Mexico and Colorado are in play, and their 14 electoral votes could flip this. Every voter in the West is probably pretty sick of a bunch of snotty East-coasters (and the occasional Southerner) telling them that DC knows better what to do with Western land. All this "whole state smaller than the city of Oakland" stuff is great, but if it goes farther, into "who cares what those flyover rubes think anyway" it's going to be a major problem for Democratic prospects in moderate states.

Posted August 29, 2008 3:54 PM by Madeline F

Can anyone enumerate the things that "executive experience" is said to bring? Or the skills that it requires? Are there other ways to get those skills, such as by running a campaign, or a company?

I'm probably just being thrown by the term, which I don't recall being so extensively used before this election.

(Which is a clear marker of an invented talking point term, I know.)

Posted August 29, 2008 3:59 PM by abi

I agree that picking Palin is a way for the RNC to wash their hands of the whole election. It's a trifecta:

    1. McCain goes down, along with the whole "the voters want a maverick" argument.

    2. "See, running a woman is a bad idea."

    3. "The party did as much as it could, too bad that jerk McCain picked a criminal

       to run with."

Also, this way Huckabee gets to run in 2012 without any baggage from the 2008 election.

Posted August 29, 2008 4:01 PM by Bruce Cohen (SpeakerToManagers)

Actually, it just clicked. I don't know what McCain may be thinking, but I think for the rest of the party it's really damn simple. They don't expect her to draw any votes. She's a scapegoat, a sacrificial lamb.Actually, it just clicked. I don't know what McCain may be thinking, but I think for the rest of the party it's really damn simple. They don't expect her to draw any votes. She's a scapegoat, a sacrificial lamb.

No, she's really not. As others have already pointed out, she helps McCain with the right wing of the party, she helps in the West, she makes a play at reducing the gender gap for the GOP, she's got blue-collar credentials, etc.

Posted August 29, 2008 4:02 PM by Total

Also, looking at Senate prospects, as I first did in February: three of the states Democrats are looking to pick up to get a 60-seat majority in the Senate are Alaska, Colorado, and New Mexico.

A fourth is New Hampshire, and it's my impression that New Hampshire also has a strong "don't tread on me" streak.

Palin will play up her "Western independence" and that may get more Western Repubs out to vote, hurting Democratic prospects in the Senate, too.

I'm really not happy about this pick.

Posted August 29, 2008 4:05 PM by Madeline F

Madeline F- I suspect I'm way further west than you are, and a whole lot closer to Alaska, and I don't see her doing anything except hurting the GOP in the western states I know the most about- except for Idaho, which is so red it flouresces. I suspect that the more people know about her as a politician, the less good she's going to do.

And as for the comparisons to Agnew: well, I can hope we all learned from that experience, can't I?

Posted August 29, 2008 4:11 PM by JESR

abi @ 70

All the "informed"* opinion on the experience issue has been that there aren't any other jobs like POTUS, including CEO of a Fortune 100 company, so the question is really moot. Unless, of course, you're CEO of a large corporation with a really big security department (the kind with tanks and nukes), that runs its own banks, espionage services, and prisons.

This is just an extension of the old "you're too young" arguments that were used against JFK and Bill Clinton.**

* IMHO
** Those arguments are symptomatic of a real change in US society; everyone's calling Palin a "young woman" when 44 used to be considered solidly middle-aged. I guess that's just relative to a 72-yo who doesn't want people to remember what the auctuaries say about his odds of living another 4 years.

Posted August 29, 2008 4:13 PM by Bruce Cohen (SpeakerToManagers)

Something just occurred to me... We're talking about McCain's and his veep, but not about the fact that, for the first time ever in American History, a black man is now officially running for President of the United States.

Posted August 29, 2008 4:14 PM by Serge

Madeline F. #69: Yeah, but McCain's already from Arizona, and not in a token way, either -- and if McCain doesn't have the Western vote sewn up by now, to paraphrase someone above....

Posted August 29, 2008 4:15 PM by Connie H.

JESR @ 74

And as for the comparisons to Agnew: well, I can hope we all learned from that experience, can't I?

If we'd learned anything, the last 8 years wouldn't have happened. Which I wouldn't mind at all.

Re: Palin getting the West: I'm just south of you, Julia, and I agree that this won't help the Republicans much out here. The Bush administration has been stomping all over the rights and needs of the western states, and the voters have noticed.* Getting someone in from Alaska (not a place that many US Westerners think of as part of their region) isn't going to make them think better of someone who won't blanket disavow the Bush legacy.

* Example: a lot of small towns in the forest regions of Washington and Oregon are about to go under because the Repubs refused to vote to renew the money they used to get to replace timber revenue, even though our Congresspeople brought it up three separate times.

Posted August 29, 2008 4:22 PM by Bruce Cohen (SpeakerToManagers)

#74 JESR: Well, my LJ userinfo says that I'm in Oakland, CA. I spent the first 18 years of my life in Denver, Colorado, though, and I'm still in touch with my family back there, on both sides of politics. From what I've seen of the Pacific Coast, it's not the West, except for the inland areas which are overwhelmed population-wise and largely voiceless. I have met left-coasters who disagree, though.

#77 Connie H.: Hoom, good point. That encourages me somewhat. Though McCain has spent so many years in DC that he's out of touch. Still, a ray of sunshine, thanks.

Posted August 29, 2008 4:22 PM by Madeline F

I'd vote for Sethra Lavode. We could use someone who can plan past the next election.

Posted August 29, 2008 4:30 PM by Max Kaehn

There are so many comments I want to respond to, I've lost track of them.

JESR@20:"the worst thing about this appointment is the pong of "any woman at all" about it" Yeah.

joann@21: Me too, and I'd feel particularly insulted if I were a Hillary supporter.

Dave Lartigue@ 50: I, too, thought of Harriet Miers, and how quickly she was the nominee, then not. This smacks of the same kind of "oops" decision.

Stephen Colbert? How about Tina Fey? The resemblance has already been noted: Tina Fey's Wilderness Twin

I just googled VPILF+Palin and got 1460 hits. (UPDATE: 1480 now)

Another beauty queen? Give me a break. Seeing McCain standing between Palin and his wife makes him look like a dirty old man.

This is farce. What are the Republicans thinking?

Posted August 29, 2008 4:54 PM by mary

Serge @ #76 We're talking about McCain's and his veep, but not about the fact that, for the first time ever in American History, a black man is now officially running for President of the United States.

Exactly. This announcement and the VP choice were done to block Obama's momentum coming out of the convention. Had it been any of the known short listers, there would have been a bit less attention paid to the choice. It seems to have been done to maximize short term gain, without regard to viability for the rest of the election cycle or beyond.

Posted August 29, 2008 5:02 PM by Arthur D.

John McCain made the wrong choice, experience is important. He passed up two Republican women who are experienced and both have been on Forbes Magazine's World's 100 Most Powerful Women.

Maine’s Senator Olympia J. Snowe:

In 2006 Time Magazine named her one of the top ten U.S. Senators. Calling her “The Caretaker,” Time magazine wrote of Snowe: “Because of her centrist views and eagerness to get beyond partisan point scoring, Maine Republican Olympia Snowe is in the center of every policy debate in Washington., but while Snowe is a major player on national issues, she is also known as one of the most effective advocates for her constituents.”

Texas’s Kay Bailey Hutchinson:

Senator Hutchison has played a vital role in shaping America's defense policy and fulfilling our nation's promises to our veterans as former Chairman and now Ranking Member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and as a member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense . She introduced and passed legislation creating an Overseas Basing Commission, which conducted a comprehensive review of the U.S. military's global footprint to help ensure that our Armed Forces are prepared to meet 21st century threats. She currently serves as Chairman of the Board of Visitors for the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. She received the National Military Family Association Award for Service to Military Families, 2001

Being from Arizona I know about McCain and we can't be nice with him. He is a mean man, the Clintons' are more Christian than he or I for that matter. I would never have forgiven him for the mean, nasty joke he told about their daughter and our Attorney General at the time. He pushed a woman in a wheelchair and the complaints were ignored by the Republican Ethics Committee. Being in a wheelchair myself I know how vulnerable we feel in our chairs; McCain should have paid for that mistake but everyone always excuses him because he was a POW and we have to be lenient about his temper tantrums, like some little boy. If he can't control his temper with a women in a wheelchair visiting his office about a POW Bill, then I surely don't want him near the button in the White House.

One link is: McCain Assaulted a Woman in a Wheelchair
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/26/11526/0229/950/542130

just Google: John McCain, temper......hundreds of links will pop up.

another is: A wheel-chair bound woman asked McCain about the Community Choice Act, a piece of legislation for disabled Americans that would give individuals greater freedom on where to live. “What that would do is it would end the institutional bias,” the questioner said, then asked him if he would consider supporting it.
“I will not,” McCain responded, “because I don’t think it’s the right kind of legislation.” A trio of people in wheelchairs left the room shortly after his response.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/07/07/tough-questions-at-mccains-first-town-hall-meeting/trackback/

Why didn't he tell why he didn't like it?

The Republicans have had the Congress, the White House and the Supreme Court. They will never do anything about abortion because they need it to rally the Republicans.

John McCain is wrong for President!

Posted August 29, 2008 5:21 PM by argonaut

Can anyone imagine how she will look when she debates Biden on, well, anything? He doesn't have to attack what she says, all he'll have to do is mention his experience and accomplishments, and keep hammering on how little experience SHE has.

She's eye candy that helps give McCain the appearance of being younger than he really is. He'll be seen over and over with her, and except for the occasional (well coached) comment she'll be there to just look nice. Her personal views and beliefs match well with the core Republican voter, and (they hope) her gender will pull angry Hillary voters over to their side.

Yeah, right. They're dreaming if that's truly what they thought.

Posted August 29, 2008 5:25 PM by John L

>Can anyone enumerate the things that "executive
> experience" is said to bring?

Getting subordinates motivated to do things.
The pressure of being responsible for outcomes rather than just being a Monday-morning quarterback.
Showing you can handle the stress of a job. (This is why governors usually beat Senators for the Presidency; governorship is Presidency-in-miniature, while Senatorial status... isn't.)

> Or the skills that it requires? Are there other
> ways to get those skills, such as by running a
> campaign, or a company?

Some of them, probably. And some of our greatest Presidents have learned them on the job (Lincoln, for instance).

Posted August 29, 2008 5:29 PM by Tony Zbaraschuk

Trophy VP.

I can't claim it, it's a hilariously apt comment found on this blog of an Alaskan guy who's apparently been writing for months about how Palin has been screwing up there.

Posted August 29, 2008 5:38 PM by Madeline F

BTW, I just want to get a prediction in here before it is too late...

I watched Palin's speech, with McCain standing right next to her.

Now... I don't know what McCain was really looking at while he was standing next to and just behind her, but I'm telling you it looked exactly like the whole time he was standing there eying the Governor's ass.

My prediction is: you are going to be seeing that shtick on Jon Stewart tonight, and maybe Letterman, and maybe SNL Weekend News (or whatever they call that segment).

I swear to gawd it was both hilarious and creepy. You just watch. You are going to be seeing on a screen near you.

Posted August 29, 2008 5:40 PM by Michael Weholt

Well, Palin is an attractive woman; McCain checking her out just shows how youthful he truly is!

Besides, he's got the past history of straying outside his marriage vows, so he's just repeating his old habits, right?

When I heard Palin was his VP choice, I kept thinking "nah, this has to be a joke, no one on his staff could be THAT naive, could they?". She brings NOTHING to his candidacy other than "see, we've got a minority running for office too!".

Posted August 29, 2008 5:51 PM by John L

Madeline @ #86, it is a funny crack. The guy who wrote it lost the gubernatorial election to Palin in 2006.

Posted August 29, 2008 5:53 PM by Linkmeister

Ah! The aforementioned blog is written by a guy named Andrew Halcro, who ran as an independent against Palin and Knowles in the 2006 gubernatorial election and won 9.5% of the vote. Wikipedia says, "He was widely regarded as the winner of the several debates in which he participated with Republican Sarah Palin and Democrat Tony Knowles."

Posted August 29, 2008 5:54 PM by Madeline F

Reading through this thread, I just had a really horrible thought. Others have mentioned how the Palin selection is taking away all the momentum for Obama and Biden coming out of the Democratic convention. What if that's the the sole purpose for the Palin selection? The media spends the long, Labor Day weekend (and possibly next week if the GOP convention is postponed because of Hurricane Gustav) talking about Palin. Then they go into the convention and it's "discovered" that her actions in the firing of the commissioner of public safety were totally inappropriate. So she withdraws as VP candidate, McCain chooses someone else, and the GOP gets to have its cake and eat it too. The Dems lose any advantage they should have had coming out of Denver and the GOP would have a new "surprise" VP candiate for the media to obsess about coming out of the GOP convention.

Tell me I'm wrong, please.

Posted August 29, 2008 5:56 PM by Laina

Clifton #45: Are you saying Palin is the Republicans' Ferrarro? That's sort of broadly plausible, but I'm not sure I buy that McCain's campaign has given up on his chances of election. More likely, his campaign was looking for a woman to draw Hillary supporters, but one who would not alienate any more of his base than was necessary, which meant she had to be solidly in the religious conservative camp.

And honestly, this is a monumentally stupid strategy. Enthusiastic, committed Democrats who campaigned for Hillary may very well have been talking about voting McCain, but I don't buy that they're going to do so in any kind of large numbers. Being a registered party member, volunteering for a campaign or donating money, and being deeply interested in the primaries are all strongly related with being much more partisan than the average American. It's going to take more, IMO, than some disappointment at Hillary losing and concern that the Democratic establishment and Obama campaign were insufficiently critical of some sexist BS floating around to get large numbers of those folks to cast a vote for a Republican. The best McCain could hope for from those voters is to get them to stay home or vote Green, and once they're in the voting booth in a swing state, I'd hate to bet on them doing even that.

McCain's age (which is impolite to discuss), his health history (which is impolite to discuss), and perhaps even his combat stress/PTSD issues (which are *really* impolite to discuss) make his VP choice terribly important, the VP needed to be someone with a realistic hope of stepping into the job quickly. Someone like Biden, or Lieberman, or Cheney, or Kemp, or Gore. This pick seems to me much more like choosing Quayle, or even Edwards--someone who just didn't seem like he could have picked up the job in the middle of the term, after some tragedy befell the president.

Posted August 29, 2008 5:58 PM by albatross

Hmnh. Guess Colin Powell was busy. Or, more likely, smart.

Now *that* would have thrown the cat among the pigeons. Oh well - it's in the realm of alternate history now.

Posted August 29, 2008 6:00 PM by vian

John L, #16: They might. Given the amount of recent media speculation and blithering about "disenchanted Hillary supporters who are going to vote for McCain instead of Obama," it's not a completely unexpected move. Where it falls flat is that I continue to be convinced that the whole PUMA thing is a put-up job, designed to make the numbers look a lot stronger than they really are. And if I'm right, then McCain just got fooled by his own side's dirty trick. Can you say "poetic justice"?

SisterCoyote, #24: That's a result not to be sneezed at. Every Republican butt that stays in the armchair instead of heading out to the polling place is two fewer votes that we have to field. (Cynical? Who, me?)

Nina Katarina, #58: Ye ghods and little fishes! She could have a whole section of the Bad Baby Names website all to herself!

Arthur, #82: It seems to have been done to maximize short term gain, without regard to viability for the rest of the election cycle or beyond.

And doesn't that sound awfully familiar?

Posted August 29, 2008 6:01 PM by Lee

Well, she's not an obvious choice, and I'm a little surprised they would pick someone with a home state scandal threatening to break over her. I sense that experience isn't going to be a big factor in this election... Hmmmm....

Checking the stats: Snowe and Hutchinson are about the right age to be prez, normally. Running down the senators, Collins in Maine is up for re-election and might not want to bet the farm. Murkowski in Alaska seems problematic for a variety of reasons. Dole of NC is too old (gad-- Hillary vs. Liz: that would have been a weird re-run, er, match-up).

Governors: Besides Palin, we have Rell (CT) -- not a chance the party would swallow her. Lingle (HI) has some issues too. After that we would have to go to retirees, such as Whitman of NJ and Hull of AZ.

OK, I'm still not sure; but one has to wonder whether the two more obvious choices were asked and said no.

Posted August 29, 2008 6:04 PM by C. Wingate

Google News' top headline:

Experts: Palin chosen for women's votes

Thank you, USA Today.

Posted August 29, 2008 6:07 PM by Tracey S. Rosenberg

C. Wingate #95:

The rumors I keep hearing are that Hutchinson wants to be governor at some nebulous point in the future.

Posted August 29, 2008 6:15 PM by joann

The sacrificial lamb theory sounds plausible to me, but I'm going to float a couple of more.

One is that they haven't accepted that they're going to lose, they're intending to lose to leave Obama holding the bag.

Another is my background theory that the current administration is chaotic evil. They don't like planning and they mostly don't do it. If they do something that looks like it doesn't make sense, it may well not make sense.

Meanwhile, the outside world is more complicated and fraught than it's ever been. Aside from Russia, China, India, nukes, climate change, the Middle East (various), and financial crisis (have I missed anything?), there isn't much going on. We *really* can't afford a stupid or ignorant administration.

Posted August 29, 2008 6:15 PM by Nancy Lebovitz

C. Wingate @ #95, I don't know what issues you found that you think accrue to Lingle. Out here she's regarded as a nice but fairly ineffectual governor (not surprisingly, since the legislature is overwhelmingly Democratic).

Posted August 29, 2008 6:17 PM by Linkmeister

Laina #91:

That would be a strategy on a par with planning a wintertime invasion of Russia, making McCain look incompetent and indecisive, and leaving him dumping someone who's well-liked by a part of his base he really needs to get elected.

Posted August 29, 2008 6:18 PM by albatross

It's Palin and McCain
Yes, Palin and McCain
One is a lightweight, the other's insane
They're candidates you see
To rule o'er you and me
They're Repubs,
They're Palin and McCain, Cain, Cain, Cain
Cain, Cain, Cain, Cain
Cain

Before each night is done
Their plan will be unfurled
By the dawning of the sun
They'll take over the world.

They're Palin and McCain
Yes, Palin and McCain
Their twilight campaign
Is easy to explain.
To prove their right-wing worth
They'll overthrow the Earth
They're Repubs
They're Palin and McCain, Cain, Cain, Cain
Cain, Cain, Cain, Cain
Narf!

(Tune: Pinky and the Brain theme song)

Posted August 29, 2008 6:18 PM by James D. Macdonald

Madeline F, I'm the kind of westerner who grew up thinking anything east of the Cascade Crest was "back east:" fifth generation western Washington stumpfarmer. The "Intermountain West" or what my academic side wants to call "basin and range" is less a unified polity now than it was twenty years ago; Denver is not Colorado Springs is not Boulder and none of them are Phoenix, Tuscon, Flagstaff, Las Vegas, Reno, Salt Lake City, Provo, Boise, Coeur d'Alene, Laramie, nor most especially Missoula, Butte, or White Sulfur Springs. Bruce mentioned the problems in small towns in the upper left hand corner where timber impact money has been withdrawn; there are local manifestations up and down the rural parts of the West where the drive for "small government" has translated into specific and particular local disasters.

I find myself musing, also, at how the "how many houses" issue works away at McCain's support in Idaho, Wyoming and Montana, where summer house people drive up land values and thence property taxes, do not become members of communities in any useful fashion, and have become shorthand for unwanted and destructive change.

Posted August 29, 2008 6:21 PM by JESR

'Trophy Veep', were the words around my parent's house this morning, as we gleefully swilled coffee, and discussed the delicious way in which McCain shot himself in the foot when he selected Our Fair Governor.

She is an astonishing liability. And I for one am so very pleased.

Posted August 29, 2008 6:28 PM by Sarah E

Bruce #75:

If you believe that, would you vote for someone for president who'd previously done nothing more impressive than, say, successfully manage a Wal-Mart? That is, do you really think that experience is entirely irrelevant to the presidency?

There's surely no exact match for being president, but there are some jobs (governor, especially of a large state, mayor of a large city, years of experience in the senate or house, CEO of a large company, high-ranking military commander, cabinet-level positions or the tier of appointments just below them) that seem like they have some relevance to your qualifications as president. Not everyone has had one of those jobs; some people have had several. I find it hard to think that Bill Richardson, frex, wouldn't have arrived at the White House much more equipped to do the job than Barrack Obama will.

abi #70:

I think the experience issue gets into a few different questions:

a. Has this person ever actually run a large organization? The president will be managing a large organization, dealing with subordinates and bureaucracy and all the lovely aspects of the agency problem and the Peter Principle and such. If this is his first time dealing with this kind of problem, it's reasonable to think he might do it badly.

b. Does this person know the kind of stuff he needs to know, to be president? Has he dealt with budgeting of a large organization? With congressional budget battles? With the whole process of writing and getting laws passed? With foreign policy issues? With military issues? Will he be a captive to his advisors on these issues, or will he be able to draw on his own experience as well? (I think this lack was a major weakness of the current president.)

c. Does this person have the right kind of personal contacts to do the job? Does he have contacts he can trust to explain stuff to him, people from whom he can call in favors? Does he have personal relationships with people in the military, the justice dept., etc.? (I think this lack was a major weakness of Carter.)

Bill Clinton got a certain amount of criticism for having relatively little international or federal experience. George W Bush got a fair bit of criticism for being relatively light on experience, as well. Both men chose VPs based partly on that lack of experience, I think. Obama's choice of Biden seems to me to follow the same pattern--Biden is someone whose years of experience in Washington lend him (and by association, Obama) some credibility that he'll be able to handle what comes up.

I don't think there's anything unreaonable about worrying about these questions, or that they're just talking points. Being the president looks to be a pretty hard job, and it sure seems plausible that never having tried to run anything larger than your presidential campaign before might make that hard job still harder. We've just spent the last eight years finding out how it works out to have a guy who's not very qualified for the job trying to do it. When 9/11 hit, might we have seen better choices made by a guy who'd faced a few more crises and challenges in a position of authority?

Posted August 29, 2008 6:47 PM by albatross

After thinking about this some more, I have concluded it is a novel choice. As in: post-apocalyptic novel.

You know... like when the end of civilization comes and the survivors struggle to rebuild society and its institutions and so they reconstitute the Christian States of America or something and elect as the President the local postal carrier and maybe a popular member of the local city council as Vice President.

Well, it isn't as if living in Bush America hasn't been a little like living in the End Times. It probably shouldn't surprise us too much that McCain would pick Palin.

Posted August 29, 2008 6:49 PM by Michael Weholt

Jim @101
ROTFLMAO!! It's a good thing I wasn't drinking anything when I read that. And I knew whose theme song it was before I got to the end of the first verse.

Maybe we need to put *that* on YouTube. What an earworm.

Posted August 29, 2008 6:54 PM by Magenta Griffith

Maybe we need to put *that* on YouTube. What an earworm.

If anyone has the audiovisual and musical chops to do it, they're welcome to it.

Posted August 29, 2008 7:02 PM by James D. Macdonald

Does anyone know if it's possible for a Blogspot blog to change its URL and keep its same content? I just found Draft Sarah Palin for VP, which has apparently been around since July 2007--unless it's a new site with faked dates or an old site with a new URL to fit the new situation, hence my question.

Posted August 29, 2008 7:03 PM by Liza

ABC News just reported that McCain had wanted Lieberman for his VP all along, but was talked out of selecting him on Sunday because of the conflict he'd give Republicans due to his abortion views.

So, McCain went over his remaining choices, discarded all of them, interviewed Palin on Wednesday, and decided within 24 hours she would be his VP. That sounds like he made that decision on his own, without any vetting or advice, all because she was considered a "maverick" and he wanted to "shake things up".

I wonder how he'll feel when he finds out she's a lightweight in anything voters are interested in, such as foreign policy, defense, health issues, the economy, etc, etc.

Posted August 29, 2008 7:07 PM by John L

Linkmeister @ 99, C. Wingate @ 95: The main issue I can see them seeing with Lingle is that she's not all that Republican - in the sense that she's not one of the hard right Republicans who took over the party. IIRC, she's lukewarm pro-choice, she's not rabidly anti-gay, she mostly works with the Democratic legislature instead of denouncing them as commies, etc. I think in some ways she's fairly typical of what small-town Republicans used to be like. That would never fly. Oh, and she's not married. That might Raise Questions.

Posted August 29, 2008 7:08 PM by Clifton Royston

Jim, I nearly lost my dinner over that!

Yes, yes, let's get it up on YouTube soon. I think Patrick is still playing in a band, right?

(There's a great rumor in more salacious parts of the Internet saying Palin's baby is really her daughter's - that, mysteriously, Palin didn't look pregnant until she suddenly turned up seven months pregnant. If it's true, this is kind of like the Cheneys never admitting that their daughter is gay.)

Posted August 29, 2008 7:13 PM by Laurie Mann

With John McCain's age, there's a decent chance that he won't live out his first term, much less a second. If he wins, and then passes away, the thought of Sarah Palin dealing with Putin and Iran and North Korea terrifies me...

Posted August 29, 2008 7:17 PM by Robert Glaub

Something to keep in mind.

McCain Thinks He's Losing. And not just losing, but losing badly. There are SO many ways this nomination can end up backfiring on him. Enough that no sane candidate would have made it unless they were feeling desperate.

(Constance at #68 referred to the nomination as a Hail Mary play. Sounds like a good description to me.)

(This doesn't mean it might not possibly work out well. Sometimes drawing to an inside straight does work but the odds are against it.)

Posted August 29, 2008 7:18 PM by Michael I

I think Palin already has some pretty significant Youtube problems

That video is edited in a fairly biased fashion, but the full quote doesn't actually present her in a much better light:

As for that VP talk all the time, I’ll tell you, I still can’t answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day? I’m used to being very productive and working real hard in an administration. We want to make sure that that VP slot would be a fruitful type of position, especially for Alaskans and for the things that we’re trying to accomplish up here for the rest of the U.S., before I can even start addressing that question.

Posted August 29, 2008 7:23 PM by Red (Chris Holdredge)

vian #93: Colin Powell was discussed as a Presidential candidate 9 years ago. He said that his wife vetoed the idea because she didn't want him to get assassinated.

As for Palin herself, she's a train wreck, but I have a horrible feeling that either the only people who care wouldn't vote for Obama anyway, or that she'll be replaced at the convention with someone who will look spectacular by comparison.

Posted August 29, 2008 7:28 PM by Aliza

On sacrificial lamb versus getting votes from [various segments of the American electorate]; assuming that she was chosen by a shadowy group of Machivellian Republicans, why not both? Improve your chance of winning AND consolidate your control of the party if you lose.

All that said, the version John L puts forward @109 sounds pretty plausible to me.

Posted August 29, 2008 7:30 PM by Neil Willcox

Speculations...she's going to be attractive to conservative rural voters. Her looks will probably be an asset in getting people's attention, and that might help turning out the R voters. She's not a loser like W. Bush, as far as can be told, and anyone who takes on raising a Down's Syndrome child either can afford servants or is pretty tough--caring for a developmentally disabled child is a lot of work. On the other hand, she's probably a religious fanatic like Bush, and her anti-abortion stance indicates a lack of empathy. I wonder if she was one of the "in" girls in high school, and I wonder if she still has that attitude of superiority. Based on these speculations, I think she could be quite a lot of trouble.

Posted August 29, 2008 7:41 PM by Randolph

Yeah, I don't buy the "sacrificial lamb" model at all. John's #109 is consistent with other stuff we've seen from McCain, and Michael I's #113 seems spot on--McCain's people (and Obama's) probably have a reasonably good idea what the next few months are likely to look like, and how the election is likely to fall out. If they're taking desperate measures, it's probably because they think things are desperate. (On the other hand, it doesn't pay to underestimate the total amount of dumb in the world. Most of the big political campaigns pulled some boneheaded stunts for various mostly bad reasons this year. Why not one more?)

Posted August 29, 2008 7:42 PM by albatross

John L, #109: Oh, my. What that sounds like to me is that his dick made that decision! "Trophy Veep" indeed...

Posted August 29, 2008 7:43 PM by Lee

I have been depressed at the comments in some of my favourite online spots.

"Palin is an obvious choice because of all of the Clinton supporters who will vote for a woman, whoever that woman is. "

"Those who put down Palin make their sexism clear: a woman in politics is OK, but only if it's a liberal woman."

I feel ill. Can I turn off the internet until it's over?

Posted August 29, 2008 7:46 PM by sylvia

Palin is a terrible VP pick by any sane criteria... but as a public relations move--and assuming the political media are the public in question--she's brilliant. When I heard the news, my first thought was that the media are going to love her. Sometimes she disagrees with the party line... why, she's a maverick! And she's a self-described "soccer mom!" Just like a Hollywood movie where the good-hearted PTA mom, through some wacky contrivance, finds herself in the White House and ends up outsmarting the cynical professional politicians with her ordinary aw-shucks folksy wisdom... or that'll be the spin, anyway; look for coverage to be somehow at once both admiring and faintly condescending. The press hasn't had a potential pal like this since the 2000 election, when they met that down-home regular guy who gave them Dove bars, and designer water, and was so much fun to have a beer with.

Not that they aren't still in love with McCain himself. If Obama had given an interview like this the media would have come down on him like a ton of Talky Tina dolls, and not let up until 2009. McCain gets a "Get Out of Embarrassment Free" card. As usual.

Posted August 29, 2008 7:51 PM by Wesley

Pretty good recap of the ongoing investigation of Palin's abuse of power problem here.

Posted August 29, 2008 7:52 PM by Michael Weholt