Thread: a theory on Palin

hmmm, positively Rovian.

Comment from a reader of NYT.com:

What possible, logical explanation could there be for choosing someone so ill-equiped for such an important role? For making a choice so inappropriate that it seems surreal?

The only explanation is equally surreal: Sarah Palin was never meant to actually be on the ballot. She is nothing more than an elaborate red herring, chosen with or without her knowledge, to be replaced at the eleventh hour after the media and the public have spent precious days distracted, agitated and alarmed. Palin bows out, sympathetically citing "family reasons" setting the stage for McCain to decisively make a "bold" (read appropriate) choice of a new running mate. He looks heroic, she looks heroic, and crucial undecided voters breath a huge sigh of relief. In fact, not having Palin on the ticket is such a huge relief, and comes so late in the election that they don't have time to remember or be reminded about the other reasons they had been wavering about voting for McCain.

This is undoubtedly a very cynical thought. But the last eight years and two elections have taught me to be very cynical. And very wary. I fear Swift Boat will look like the amateur hour by the time this is over.

Some people (not you, the quote writer) are really fucking paranoid. They actually believe that this could be thought out and enacted so carefully. By such moronic actors.

I dunno, Rove is Machiavellian, not moronic, and he and his peeps are balls deep in this campaign...

They're flailing. I know he has a nice W-L record, but he's not that good.

He played a large part in making a war hero into a coward and a draft dodging cheerleader into the POTUS, among other coups in his career. He's good at his trade. Damn good.
He could have seen this as a win-win. If she doesn't get found out, they're in like flynn on her wave of popularity with the masses and the whackos. If she gets found out (as is happening now), just replace her with someone semi-competent and McCain gets the sympathy vote, Fox spins it like he was pro-women for giving her a shot, Palin saves face by "doing the right thing for her family," AND people aren't so scared to vote for the old guy anymore.

Dude, this is a woman who made Katie Kouric look smart. Know what I mean?

Originally Posted by natty dread

He played a large part in making a war hero into a coward and a draft dodging cheerleader into the POTUS, among other coups in his career. He's good at his trade. Damn good.
He could have seen this as a win-win. If she doesn't get found out, they're in like flynn on her wave of popularity with the masses and the whackos. If she gets found out (as is happening now), just replace her with someone semi-competent and McCain gets the sympathy vote, Fox spins it like he was pro-women for giving her a shot, Palin saves face by "doing the right thing for her family," AND people aren't so scared to vote for the old guy anymore.

I'd like to think the voting public isn't stupid enough to see through something like that (but then the 2-term draft dodging cheerleader thing comes up...). However, look how his campagin suspension and return to Washington ploy went over. Not well. Plus, Palin dropping out late only reinforces the notion that McCain exercised poor judgment in choosing her without vetting her properly.

If it should happen, the Dems should counter the next day with Biden stepping aside and Hillary stepping in.

Originally Posted by natty dread

Comment from a reader of NYT.com:

What possible, logical explanation could there be for choosing someone so ill-equiped for such an important role? For making a choice so inappropriate that it seems surreal?

What's surreal is listening to each side describe the other.

The people on the other side of the aisle are saying the same thing about Obama; talking about "buyers remorse" on the part of the Dems and constantly making reference to how Obama is out of his league.

The same people who voted for Bush twice.

Originally Posted by Rubicon

The people on the other side of the aisle are saying the same thing about Obama; talking about "buyers remorse" on the part of the Dems and constantly making reference to how Obama is out of his league.

Some people may "try" to say that, but any comparison between Obama and Palin is a joke. He was president of Harvard Law review (if you dont know what that means.....it means he is really frickin smart). She went took 6 years, and three schools to graduate undergrad (Hawaii and Idaho). By the way McCain was 3rd from last in his class in College.

Why do would people vote for two slacker, idiots? Dont you want an intellegent person making decisions about this country.

Originally Posted by Rubicon

What's surreal is listening to each side describe the other.

The people on the other side of the aisle are saying the same thing about Obama; talking about "buyers remorse" on the part of the Dems and constantly making reference to how Obama is out of his league.

Not quite. Obama doesnt have any of his former campaign advisors calling for his VP to step down. The only "notable" dem I've heard say anything negative about Obama was that European banking princess that called Obama "elitist".

Originally Posted by Huckwheat

Some people may "try" to say that, but any comparison between Obama and Palin is a joke. He was president of Harvard Law review (if you dont know what that means.....it means he is really frickin smart). She went took 6 years, and three schools to graduate undergrad (Hawaii and Idaho). By the way McCain was 3rd from last in his class in College.

Why do would people vote for two slacker, idiots? Dont you want an intellegent person making decisions about this country.

Originally Posted by Mathematics

Not quite. Obama doesnt have any of his former campaign advisors calling for his VP to step down. The only "notable" dem I've heard say anything negative about Obama was that European banking princess that called Obama "elitist".

I'm not making any comment on the validity of either side's claims. I'm just noting that the dems are describing the repub "new face", and the repubs are describing the dem "new face" in terms so completely different from how their own party describes them that you would think they are talking about two entirely different people. It's all very odd to watch.

If Palin is on the ticket, I won't vote for McCain, even though I believe his "change" rhetoric, and I am more in line with what he has to say on the issues that are important to me than Barry.

I wish that Hilary was Obama's runningmate. Then, I would be able to vote for him with confidence.

Originally Posted by Rubicon

What's surreal is listening to each side describe the other.

The people on the other side of the aisle are saying the same thing about Obama; talking about "buyers remorse" on the part of the Dems and constantly making reference to how Obama is out of his league.

When a man makes his run based on donations and outdoes McCain in campaign finances, then McCain has to cheat to get more money, this buyer's remorse must be the fireside chat you republicans make up to console yourselves while wondering how Palin got there, just like everyone else is wondering.

Originally Posted by schindlerpiste

If Palin is on the ticket, I won't vote for McCain, even though I believe his "change" rhetoric, and I am more in line with what he has to say on the issues that are important to me than Barry.

I wish that Hilary was Obama's runningmate. Then, I would be able to vote for him with confidence.

Hillary's the same kind of lobby whore McCain is.

Originally Posted by splat

you republicans...

If by "republican" you mean those of us who favor smaller government, less government intrusion in our lives, and federal fiscal responsibility, then, that's me. After that, most of my views lean far more left than right.

Don't mistake my opposition to Obama as blanket support for the other side.

Originally Posted by Rubicon

What's surreal is listening to each side describe the other.

The people on the other side of the aisle are saying the same thing about Obama; talking about "buyers remorse" on the part of the Dems and constantly making reference to how Obama is out of his league.

One link at least, please?

Originally Posted by Rubicon

If by "republican" you mean those of us who favor smaller government, less government intrusion in our lives, and federal fiscal responsibility, then, that's me.

Well, some day your Prince may come, my dear, because this hasn't happened in the Republican Party since oh....

1945... unless you include Carter and Clinton (Demon-crats.)

Originally Posted by Rubicon

If by "republican" you mean those of us who favor smaller government, less government intrusion in our lives, and federal fiscal responsibility, then, that's me.

it might be you, but it sure as hell ain't republican.

Originally Posted by Rubicon

If by "republican" you mean those of us who favor smaller government, less government intrusion in our lives, and federal fiscal responsibility, then, that's me. After that, most of my views lean far more left than right.

Don't mistake my opposition to Obama as blanket support for the other side.

Fair enough. And I hold those same views you mentioned. After watching the guberment expand exponentially and privacy all but disappear under Bush, there's no way in hell I'll be voting for McCain to take over the charge of the forces of evil. I believe the presidency is simply a puppet position for McCain He strikes me as just dumb and vain enough for the job. Got that endearing deer in the headlights look like Dubya. As if they are out of their bodies.

Originally Posted by Rubicon

If by "republican" you mean those of us who favor smaller government, less government intrusion in our lives, and federal fiscal responsibility, then, that's me. ...

As was noted above, that might be you - but it is not the Republican party of today. Not the Bush administration. And it would not be a MCain or Palin administration.

"smaller government" - pick your metric. How could it get bigger after the past 8 years? And how did McCain slow that cancerous growth down? Executive branch theft of power via abuse of the regulatory process in general and signing orders in particular?

"less government intrusion in our lives" - warrantless wiretaps? Government owning the banking system? Legal protections for civil rights disappearing? Undermining reproductive rights? Do these seems like a trend toward "less government..."?

"federal fiscal responsibility" - Bush & his Republican pals probably have the worst track record since, well since forever. Deficit. Debt. Financial system meltdown. Collapse of dollar. Bogus tax cuts funded by borrowing from China.

Your statement of values and the Republican reality seem irreconcilable. Me = confused.

Originally Posted by Tippster

One link at least, please?

ohhh fo christ sake...just do a google search for 'obama buyer's remorse' and you'll get 70,000 hits.

Originally Posted by Tippster

Well, some day your Prince may come, my dear, because this hasn't happened in the Republican Party since oh....

Yeahyeahyeah, don't remind me.

Since Hoover?

Originally Posted by Rubicon

Yeahyeahyeah, don't remind me.

So you know the score; you gonna act on it, or vote McSame & keep livin' with that cognitive dissonance*?

* That's 'leetist-talk for "hypocrisy."

I can only hope people everywhere are as fired up about this election as people are here.

Originally Posted by spindrift

Your statement of values and the Republican reality seem irreconcilable.

They are, which is why I am not a republican and have never voted for a republican presidential candidate. Third parties have always gotten my vote.

Me = confused.

I never said I was a republican. But if they actually embraced the ideas they claimed to 25 years ago(and kept the far right religious nuts in the basement and didn't talk about them when company came over), I would be.