Greg Smith and Associates
8/18-22/08; 600 LV, 4%
Mode: Live Telephone Interviews
McCain 52, Obama 29
Sen: Risch (R) 41, LaRocco (D) 30, Rammell (i) 3
What, no polls for Wyoming today?
Posted on August 28, 2008 3:09 PM
Oh no! There's goes Obama's chances for 50 state sweep.
Posted on August 28, 2008 3:15 PM
Way to go my home state... 50 state sweep for Odumbo???? Atleast we in Idaho are not that dumb.
Posted on August 28, 2008 3:34 PM
Believe it or not... the Senate race in Idaho is being closely watched. Republican "Larry" Craig (remember him?) is not running for re-election. Democrat "Larry" LaRocco actually has a chance.
This "Larry" ID was a humorous issue where Obama/LaRocco buttons were printed up but the manufacturer used the picture of "Larry" Craig.
Posted on August 28, 2008 3:36 PM
How about Obama/Jefferson buttons for Louisiana? Is slick Willie J. trying to hitch a ride on BOs coattails?
Posted on August 28, 2008 3:49 PM
Wow, McCain is 16% down from Bush '04 in Idaho--the same kind of slide we're seeing in MT and ND. McCain needs a lessen from W on how the West is won.
Posted on August 28, 2008 3:59 PM
I don't know a thing about this pollster, but it would appear the Idaho Senate seat has officially entered the "bears watching" list. This is three different pollsters all showing essentially the same results: Risch around 41 percent and LaRocco around 30 with the third-party conservative pulling in the mid-single digits.
About 600,000 ballots were cast in Idaho in 2004 (Idaho Sec. of State), and there's been about 2 percent annual population growth there this decade (census.gov). So figure on 625,000 ballots this time. With three candidates, the Democrat could win with 40 percent of that, or 250,000 votes.
The Democratic candidate for governor in 2006 got about 200,000 votes. Can Obama and LaRocco increase turnout by 25 percent and make it happen? Voter turnout statewide in 2006 (off-year) was 60 percent, and in 2004, it was 75 percent and 75 percent is a 25 percent increase from 60 percent.
I don't know a thing about Idaho, but if the third-party candidate splits votes away from Risch, there could be a real fight here.
Posted on August 28, 2008 4:06 PM
The Idaho Senate seat has officially entered the "bears watching" list. This makes three different pollsters all showing essentially the same results: Risch around 41 percent and LaRocco around 30 with the third-party conservative pulling in the mid-single digits.
The Democratic candidate for governor in 2006 got about 200,000 votes. Can Obama and LaRocco increase turnout by 25 percent and make it happen? Voter turnout statewide in 2006 (off-year) was 60 percent, and in 2004, it was 75 percent and 75 percent is a 25 percent increase from 60 percent. So: yes. They can get 250,000 Democratic votes.
As far as the third-party candidate, here's what we know: Ron Paul did very well in Idaho. The results in the primary were McCain 70 percent and Ron Paul 24 percent.
So, let's imagine LaRocca's ceiling is 40 percent, and the conservative/ Republican/ libertarian majority comprises 60 percent of the state. For Risch to win, he'd need 41 percent of all votes -- equalling 68 percent of the that center-right majority. Seeing how the Ron Paul types seem to have about a quarter of the center-right majority, Risch seems like he's in good shape. But if Rammell runs a good campaign -- and he's got as much money as LaRocca does ($250000) on hand ...
Posted on August 28, 2008 4:20 PM
Sorry about the double-post. Is it possible to delete my first one? It was a draft, and I didn't know I was posting it.
Posted on August 28, 2008 4:22 PM
You cannot compare these polls for McCain/Obama to Bush's 2004 election unless you account for the undecided voters (in this case 15% undecided and 14% either). That is 19% voters unaccounted for. Think about it.
Posted on August 28, 2008 6:33 PM
I'm Greg Smith, President of Greg Smith & Associates who did the Idaho U.S. Senate poll about which you are reading.
I'd enjoy corresponding, or for that matter send you a copy of this and a Presidential poll we did earlier in the week (also in Idaho). To that end, my e-mail address is:
Look forwrad to hearing from you!
Posted on August 28, 2008 7:09 PM
How hypocritical can you get. All the Hollywood stars show up at the stadium for the speech. Wasn't this suppose to be about the common people that need wealth redistribution? Oprah Winfrey shows up with thick sunglasses with diamond studs on the side embroidered Obama. Does Hollywood get it? One would think that this extravaganza might just be Obama's undoing. The presidency of these United States belong to the people it represents. This kind of affair makes it look like a kingdom for the elite. It seems that the Obama campaign didn't learn from the Europe debacle. Also congratulations to Mr. Obama for making history tonight.
Posted on August 28, 2008 8:52 PM
I don't know what decade you are living in. This isn't a rich/poor election. Hollywood is influence. Although Oprah is freaking rich she is a normal person in many ways and has one of the most watched television shows. This event is supposed to be fun and not some sort of speech to the proletariat about taking up arms to fight against the man. Obama's campaign is grassroots and very unconventional with a lot of technology influencing his fund raising.
Posted on August 28, 2008 9:57 PM
I feel bad for the guy. This was a poorly written speech. He couldn't deliver it with any energy. Perhaps I was expecting to much but this speech was all over the map and he was very difficult to follow.
Posted on August 28, 2008 10:59 PM
I give up. I have to concede to all the doubters. Anyone that says Obama is not a "rock star". you are wrong. Obama is the biggist "rock star" on the planet.
Posted on August 28, 2008 11:06 PM
I very much enjoyed the claws of Obama's attacks something I've been waiting for, for some time. McCain and his similarities to Bush seem to be sticking more and more everyday. I can't wait to see McCain's convention. McCain just doesn't have the energy to provide a platform.
Posted on August 28, 2008 11:23 PM
Oh yeah, like the DNC is gonna be shaking in its boots because they have a candidate that people love.
If memory serves me right, Republicans elected a President not too long ago that was a film actor. Celebrity... huh...
Posted on August 28, 2008 11:42 PM
Hey, I just gave my personal observations. You can take it any way you want. I'm not a republican.
Posted on August 28, 2008 11:51 PM
I expected a much better speech from Obama... especially after Hillary's great performance. Where's the feeling?
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:10 AM
Repigs, especially John Sidney McCain III, are not celebrities?
If celebrity is defined as an appearance on a TV show, made for TV movie, or movie for theater release, John McCain, since 1998, has appeared in at least 47 different 'titled shows', and on some shows he's appeared multiple times (for instance, 12 times on The Daily Show, 8 times on Letterman, 9 times on Larry King, 10 times on Leno).
And how much does Senator John Sidney McCain III respect women?
He once 'joked' about Chelsea Clinton at a Republican fundraiser, saying "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno." He later apologized. It would have been better if he hadn't said that at all, though.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:51 AM
Chelsea Clinton is ugly.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:29 AM
Sergei Groinka said...
"Chelsea Clinton is ugly."
Spoken like a real chauvinist, as in "Prejudiced belief in the superiority of one's own gender, group, or kind" definition of that word.
You really should not speak things that uphold the stereotype that the Republicans are chauvinists, Sergei. Besides, even if she does not look like a supermodel, I'm sure she is more intelligent than most of the posters here, especially the Republicans whose posts here uphold that stereotype of that party.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:02 AM
how can anyone take you guys seriously when no matter what you always try to spin every that obama does as negative. you dont even give an honest opinion. it s just bash obama. i thought maybe you were only not voting for obama because you didnt like his policies.i could respect that. but all im seeing on here is hateful tirade after hateful tirade. you dotn even objectively look at the polls. objectively even i can see that neither candidate is on solid ground in the polls. but you wont do it no matter how the polls look. so to me you have a no real insight ino this election. just hateful rhetoric.
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:36 AM
No one is bashing Obama. We are just pointing out that he is just too inexperienced to become the president. US economy is in some serious trouble. I don't think Obama has enough knowledge of national economy like Romney or McCain. Obama is quite intelligent and hardworking. Agreed. But to be the president of US, a lot more is required.
Posted on August 29, 2008 7:11 AM
I'm glad we're discussing the Idaho polling here so thoroughly.
Posted on August 29, 2008 9:31 AM
Posted on August 29, 2008 10:42 AM
Odd with so much focus on Obama's inexperience, that McCain goes out to find someone with less experience than Obama. Why not KB Huthinson if he's looking for a female running mate? Can't wait to see Biden destroy Ms. Palin in the VP debate.
Posted on August 29, 2008 11:01 AM
Hello backfire VP choice. Well at least McCain gets to hold on to Alaska.
Posted on August 29, 2008 11:13 AM
What a smart move for McCain! I can't wait to see the next Alaska polls. In Alaska, Obama is toast!
Posted on August 29, 2008 11:28 AM
Good Morning Sergei-
Did you see the news? Now what were you saying about experience?
Posted on August 29, 2008 11:31 AM
Does McCain think he is going to get Hillary supporters by picking Palin? Hillary supporters didn't just want any woman. Hell, if picking a woman was such a great idea, Walter Mondale would have been President. No, Hillary supporters wanted Hillary to be vice-president, not just any unqualified woman.
Posted on August 29, 2008 11:32 AM
I think I saw her in that Herbal Essences Commercial. You know that stuffy librarian that takes down her hair and takes off her glasses and shouts, "YES YES YES!"
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:02 PM
Let's be positive about this. McCain with this announcement has finally told a funny joke!
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:09 PM
Heh, I know you guys would slam her, but its a great move. I heard Obama gave a speech last night or soemthing? McCain took his steam. Palin is a solid conservative, good looking woman. I saw a talking head fro mthe Obama campaign this morning and he was stumbling on what to say, he had no idea how to attack Palin. A former mayor, current governor, conservative, pro gun rights, pro life, lots of kids, one of whom volunteered for military service. Sorry guys, but the wildcard pick has Obama a little shocked.....and every station is talking about Palin and no one is talking about Obama's speech.......McCain did what he wanted to do.
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:11 PM
Reading some other blogs this mroning, the left is attacking Palin's experience.....are you kidding? She has more expereince than the top of your ticket. Mayor, governor, those are executive level seats. For Obama to make the argument of a lack of expereince should be an SNL skit. The fact that that was your first reaction says you know this pick is bad news for the Obamanation. First impressions are a big win for McCain.....could change as time goes on, but its a winner for him now...and he totally took the legs out of Obama's speech last night.
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:22 PM
note the sexist already from the obama fans...
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:23 PM
The only question is whether Hillary's fiercely pro-choice supporters are gonna jump on the bandwagon with this fiercely pro-life nobody. My money says no. It should help the GOP pick up Alaska's 3 electoral votes. Not sure what it will do for the important states like OH, PA, and MI though.
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:25 PM
I love how people are making an argument that Palin has more qualifications than Obama. So if Obama is wildly underqualified for the job, she is less wildly underqualified?
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:29 PM
Heheh, again you bring up expereince....hilarious. Something you said all along doesn't matter, now its the most important thing.....do you need a rag to wipe off the egg? The left looks totally foolish making that argument. Please keep it up.
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:31 PM
The Obama campaign can call me if they need advice (which I doubt). What was McCain's strongest argument against Obama? the one that reasonated with independents? It was his lack of experience. Just read Sergei's post on this thread. McCain can never use that argument again.
Palin does not yet have two years tenure as Alaska's governor. Before that she was mayor of Wasilla, pop. 9000! McCain is a 72 year old cancer survivor. If McCain became seriously ill, do you believe that Sarah Palin would be qualified to lead this nation?
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:43 PM
heheh, i don't mean to laugh, but your expereince argument cracks me up. All I can say is, PLEASE run with that.
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:46 PM
Mayor of a town of 9,000 people and Governor of a state without any political clout. Experience indeed. The burden of proof lays on McCain to prove to America that she has the tenacity to govern more than 1 million people (Sorry Alaska).
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:47 PM
Stillow, if you're the right speaking, then the right looks totally foolish saying Obama doesn't have enough experience and then picking a woman who has less experience than he does to be the VP, one step away from the presidency.
Much as the right would like this to be a "brilliant choice", personally I am relieved that it is not Pawlenty, which would have put Minnesota in play.
I am much more confident, now, that Obama will be winning this election.
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:48 PM
What is Palin's experience on foreign affairs? Does being the mayor of Wasilla, Alaska uniquely qualify her as Commander and Chief to lead the fight againt the global war on terror and deal with resurging Russia. She is in tight with big oil, so I guess that's one important qualification to being a GOP nominee. A predict a bump for McCain, and then a landslide win for Obama in November. I thought it would be close before today.
uhhh, Obama is the TOP of the ticket with no expereince. Palin has exectuive expereince, you can trash Alaska all you like, but last I checked its still a state. As VP she can learn more expereince under McCain....but like I said, I beg you to keep hammering her on expereince. It working, really, it is.
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:52 PM
You guys are destorying yourselves. You are slamming her on expereince as #2 o nthe ticket....and Obama has less expereince and he is #1.....you guys are either totally desperate, or you need new kool aid. I guess she could have been an community organzor, but was mayor instead......c'mon...keep it up, your destorying your own guy and don't even realize it.
Posted on August 29, 2008 12:54 PM
Saying we are destroying ourselves is laughable. Its your burden to prove her experience.
Last I checked her experience is
1) not very impressive as she governed a town of no more than 9,000 people.
2) Governed a state for 1 and a half years that doesn't reflect very similar values to the rest of the Country.
3) There has yet to be any sort of comparison of HOW her experience is more constructive than Obama's. She hasn't been in the fire of more contentious politics.
4) 0, none, not an iouta of foreign policy experience. Hell, less than Obama's by infinity.
5) Totally nullifies so many arguments McCain had over Obama. Sorry but the comparisons there even if you don't agree with them.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:01 PM
No dude, we're just pointing how your best argument against Obama is now totally off the table. Lol at 'as VP she can learn more experience under McCain'. She's like the Karate Kid, and he's Miagi.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:02 PM
LOL! Stillow, you're too funny! Right, we're destroying our own guy! McCain's the one making the case that Obama doesn't have enough experience, not the other way around. He just undercut his own argument. I don't see any rational logic coming from you, but don't let that stop you, dude. Let it rip! :)
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:04 PM
She can learn the vice presidency lolz. Will she take night classes before McCain croaks and graduate on time?
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:06 PM
Bill Kristol called this pick two months ago, but he was laughed at. I don't know what to make of this pick yet. However, I had rather the first woman president or the first black president for that matter come from the GOP. The reasoning is obvious. The candidate would be conservative and more acceptable as to the defense of this country. Also the candidate would have some religious backing which would be definitely needed.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:09 PM
You guys are now comparing Obama's expereince to Palins?
C'mon, you ugys are bloggers, you know how this stuff works. McCain has set Obama up. If Obama slams her on expereince like you guys, he makes himself look lame, because he has the same level of expereince if not less. the only difference is he is the top of the ticket, she is the #2.
Trust me, Obama isn't stupid, he will not attack her o nthis front because its like shooting himself i nthe leg. I realize your initial response is rpoabbly not the official response, I am sure the alking point swill be relased on her today soemtime which will have much stronger arguments against her. But the expereince front is a failure for you guys....you can't slam the #2, when she has more expereince than the #1 on your side and expect the people to not see how lame that looks.
My advice to you, is wait for the talking points and stop digging yourselves a hole. I assure you, Obama will not make expereince an issue.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:10 PM
Who says Obama has to make her experience evident? Clearly the media will make this an issue as the blogging community is already abuzz about it. The blogging community make McCain's AGE an issue and it got media coverage without any serious attacks from Obama. Palin wasn't vetted and so she'll be thrown to the dogs to discover her by the media. The writing is on the wall. She'll be vetted for experience like everyone in this campaign if Obama wanted to or not. The difference is Obama has been able to at least make a case about it for over a year. Palin has 2 months.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:14 PM
I turned the channel over to MSNBC. I couldn't believe that Andrea Mitchell was already slamming Palin. Boy, those people on that channel have given surrogacy a new definition.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:23 PM
Aside from MSNBC most other networks other than Fox have said that she's either a liability or an extreme risk.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:26 PM
Andrea Mitchell is in lust with Obama.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:28 PM
"Palin has exectuive expereince"
This is getting embarrassing. Alaska has one of the smallest populations of any state and it isn't clear that she was qualified to be governor of Alaska.
I just read that she believes that Creationism should be taught in public schools. After eight years of having an anti-science administration now we hear that it going to be MORE OF THE SAME. McCain chose a right wing nut to be one heartbeat away from the presidentcy! That's great!
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:30 PM
Obama up 8 in latest Gallup Poll. Time to put these last eight abysmal George Bush years behind us and look forward to some real change in Washington.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:33 PM
Obama does not have any "foreign policy" experience (like Palin) so he says instead that he has "good" judgement. McCain has been going after Obama's "judgement" and not his experience. Pay attention.
Palin has administrative experience in governance. She had been full time governor since her election. Whereas, Obama has been campaigning almost since the day he became U.S. Senator. Do the math. Obama looks AWOL compared to Palin.
So is Obama now going to mock Palin as Annie Oakely? I hope so. This choice is a big plus for McCain in the West. And also in Indian Country... Palin's husband is Native Alaskan. Her husband being a union member (Steelworkers) and a commercial fisherman does not hurt with the blue collar vote.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:34 PM
At 12:54 you posted a comment claiming that Palin has more experience than Obama. Please explain.
Obama has served for twice as long in national office as Palin, and for a much larger state. Prior to this service, he was in the Illinois Senate for 8 years.
Palin has served for less than 2 years as governor of one of the smallest states in the country. Prior to this service, she was the mayor of a very small town.
Her speech was solid (better than McCain's introduction of her--which may become a problem for him). But did she come across as presidential? And is she qualified to be president if the 72-year-old McCain dies or loses his faculties?
Palin likely takes AK off the table; Obama may redirect money from this state--perhaps to MT, where he likes his chances. See:
There is no reason to think that the first-term governor of AK--a small, distant, and eccentric state--will help McCain a great deal in any states other than AK. The recent M-D poll of FL found that she did not help McCain there. See:
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:36 PM
I wonder how long Obama's post-convention bounce will last? These chain of events (VP choice, GOP convention) have not happened before.
Let's praise Palin for all the accomplishments of Alaska that probably were due to the last governor like a budget surplus which Alaska typically always has (hello $1,500 annual residence rebate). I'll give her fighting corruption and taxing oil companies (Hmm seems very similar to an Obama policy frankly).
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:37 PM
Palin does strengthen the base, I'll give that to McCain. Obviously, the question was whether to try to win more moderates or hope to energize the base. This pick doesn't get any more moderates on his side, but will it get more of the base to vote to offset that? Only time will tell.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:40 PM
Again....you guys can trash Alaska all you want. The fact is that she is a elected governor. You need to do better than trashing Alaska.
Of course the media will begin to say lame stuff like she might be a liability. The media, most of them anyway is i nthe bag for Obama and they need to help him out on this.
So far the rags on palin are:
1. No expereince...and loser issue if Obama tries to tackle it.
2. Alaska sucks.
3. Small towns suck.
Ok guys, I think you did your job, Palin is horrible.
McCain outplayed Obama today.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:44 PM
On a different note, McCain's strategy--announcing a surprise VP pick the day after the Dem convention--was excellent. This strategic move should step on Obama's bounce (8 points according to today's Gallup tracker), stopping it from growing any larger. Whether or not McCain gets his own bounce will depend on his convention. If Palin gives a great speech next week, and McCain gives a mediocre one....
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:45 PM
Pawlenty would have been the better choice. He would have gotten MN and the base. I don't know if Hillary supporters are going to bite on this when Hillary supporters attacked Obama for experience.
It is in the details... read "executive" experience. Obama has ZERO.
But Palin in 2007 did visit Alaskan troops in Kuwait. Hmmm. McCain had to bully Obama to finally visit the Middle East.
Palin gives the West back to McCain. Westerners know who she is.
P.S. Alaska is NOT one of the smallest states in America. At over 656,425 square miles, Alaska is more than twice the size of Texas and is the LARGEST state.
Maybe you were talking about population. What does that matter in context of Obama? He has NEVER governed a town, county, or state.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:46 PM
Oh I get it. The McCain campaign never said Obama lacked experience. Well, thanks for spinning, sorry, explaining that.
You would have defended his choice if he had picked a KANGAROO, wouldn't you.
You guys are hilarious today! Keep going, I love it.
Hmm...Nobody said Alaska sucks. Nobody said small towns suck. Nobody even said Palin sucks. What I see is people saying that none of those things equates to the kind of experience that John McCain says Obama needs in order to be president.
Obama doesn't have to trash Palin. McCain, with this pick, has trashed her himself. It looks, simply, like a hail-mary play to try to get Hillary supporters. IMO, that play is likely to backfire badly.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:51 PM
I traveled to Mexico once and talked to a local. Hope that'll be on my resume when I become Vice Pres as Foreign Policy experience.
The west isn't going to fall in line behind this. At best McCain retains Alaska and possibly Montana because of gun rights. Noone has heard of this person, she's an unknown.
"What does it matter in the context of Obama? He has NEVER governed a town, county or state."
Umm...neither has McCain.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:54 PM
Speaking of someone who has never governed a town, country, or state. Ladies and Gentleman, I give you John McCain. But he has spent many years in the Senate being on the wrong side of important issues like health care and alternative energy.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:55 PM
How does 1 1/2 years of "executive experience" as a governor trump Obama's 8 years in state senate and 4 years in the national senate? Palin if inaugurated would be the person with the least amount of public office experience to be president since George Washington. (I'm kidding though, but truly she'd be on the top 5 list).
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:56 PM
Have we all been transported to the land of Oz? The left is slamming her on expereince, which is more than Obama's. Who's time i nthe senate is much less than two years since he's never there! She was elected mayor, but small towns don't count. She is elected governor, but Alaska is a small state, so it doesn't count.
You guys are desperate....apparantly small towns do cont sicne Obama is in Beaver right now.
She's a military mom with a son in active service....
This was a old fashioned politcal setup by McCain, he wants Obama and his minions to attack her on expereince, because it makes expereince a centerfront issue. Where Obama isn't even i nthe ball park with McCain....this is right out of the playbook...and Obama and all you supporters of his are falling right into it.
I suggest again, wait for the talking points. The expereince thing hurts Obama, not helps him.
Posted on August 29, 2008 1:58 PM
Clearly the Palin pick has fired up Stillow! I guess that's what McCain was looking for.
Okay, Stillow. I give up. You're right. Fantastic VP pick. :)
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:00 PM
"How does 1 1/2 years of "executive experience" as a governor trump Obama's 8 years in state senate and 4 years in the national senate? "
let's see .. the illinios senate is a part time, seasonal job ( 5 months a year, 3 days a week during those months). Obama never made a decision on that time.
4 years in the seante? .. during which time he
ran for president and did nothing else.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:02 PM
It is a lot worse than the question of Palin's lack of qualifications. This decision seriously brings into question McCain's judgement. That he believes that this person is qualified to be president shows that McCain's decision making skills are highly questionable. This was his first executive decision! WOW!
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:04 PM
Fine I'll listen. What were Palin's accomplishments in the past 1 and 1/2 years that OVERWHELM Obama's experience since we aren't talking about number of years anymore but work on the ground. Your essay can't be more than 3 pages long lol.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:07 PM
"This is getting embarrassing. Alaska has one of the smallest populations of any state and it isn't clear that she was qualified to be governor of Alaska.:
gee, are you all the ones who defended the other small A state..arkansas.. .CLinton...remember?
keep talking Obama fans.. you're destiny is in revealing what you actually believe.
.. that obama is inexperienced..
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:08 PM
I think the history mostly went this way:
Hillary ---attack experience---> Obama
McCain ---attack experience---> Obama
McCain ---picks Palin----
Obama ---You were talking about my experience?----> McCain
The argument is a double edged sword. Either Palin and Obama have enough experience, or they don't. They are both new on the scene and if you are going to attack Obama on experience then everyone deserves to attack Palin's experience and McCain's lack of judgment.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:15 PM
I admit, I am taking satisfaction in watching you guys grasp for straws. She energizes the party. The GOp has the stigma of being for rich old white guys, McCain being true to his history brings in a fresh, young face. The expereince thing is a total loser for Obama to attack, I hope he does, but he isn't stupid, so he won't. In 1984 the lady had no chance to win agaisnt Reagan. This will be the first time in history,a woman will be on the ticket of a team that actually can win. You lefties thought you had a monopoly on these types of thing. She is young, has a good american story to tell, a military mom....its a solid pick. She is going to aggrivate the left to no end...she's conservative so she appeals to the base....she can present conservatives to younger people and women......Obama wanted Romney, I assure you....based on all your lackluster comments about expereince, the size of Alaska, you totally have no actaul argument against at this time. That will change of course when the points come out on her, but McCain did what he planned to do, steal the thunder, generate discussion.
Keep grasping lefties.....keep grasping...
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:16 PM
Commenters who are talking about the small size of AK are indeed talking about its population (it has only 3 EVs--and EVs do "matter").
As for Palin helping McCain in the West, it's possible. However, as someone who lives in the West, I can tell you that her name-recognition is not high here. Nor is AK representative of western states.
Finally, posts above have established that Obama has more experience than Palin. People can continue to write that she has more experience; but saying something doesn't make it so.
Obviously, McCain still has the most experience--he's 72! The reason McCain's VP pick is surprising is that it undercuts McCain's argument that Obama does not have enough experience. Clearly, McCain believes that Palin does have enough experience to be president--he has chosen her to be only a heartbeat away from the presidency. If she has enough experience, then Obama does too.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:19 PM
I wasn't trashing Alaska. Actually I love Alaska. But, from what I have read so far Palin isn't qualified to sit on a school board, much less be a governor. That was my point. She doesn't believe in science. That alone should disqualify her.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:20 PM
Keep dreaming neocons keep dreaming. It's hard to deal with hypocrisy but as a party that has touted family values and undergone over a dozen domestic related scandals in the past two years I'm sure you're used to it.
The polls will tell the reaction. I await next week with glee even if it in fact does bounce McCain.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:21 PM
Just an fyi on the population of Alaska, Biden is from Delaware which is "barely" bigger in population than Alaska, like less than 100,000 I think. Should we slam Biden for being in such a small state too?
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:22 PM
VERY GOOD point... Stillow.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:23 PM
FINALLY, much better.....that is what I was waiting for, the liberal nonsense attacks, she doesn't beleive in science.....now you're starting to get it....next I want to hear she brings down women, opposes choice, and is just a gun carrying animal killing right wing neo con.............
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:25 PM
Biden helps Obama in PA, which has 21 EVs (and where Biden is campaigning today).
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:27 PM
Well I think when we recognize that Biden has experience you can bring to the Bank as a Senior Senator that its something you want. You couldn't bring Palin to Money Tree without 3 forms of ID. Biden reflects many of the values of the Northeast. To say anything that Palin reflects values of anything other than Alaska (a state proud of its independent natured people) is stretching it like her resume.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:30 PM
Hey... zotz... Alaskans give Palin 80% postive rating. (AND why are you trying to inject religion into the mix?)
Hey... faithopelove... Read/listen very carefully... McCain is not using the "experience" argument. McCain is using the "judgement" argument because Obama admitted he did not have as much experience but had better judgement (Obama's same argument against Hillary). Get it?
McCain's base is energized. That is what he needed. And if Obamanation keeps bashing Palin with misogynistic comments (on all the blogs) then many more women will come to Palin's defense because they already witnessed Obamanation doing the same to Hillary.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:31 PM
Since you missed my 1:30 post this is what I said,
"I just read that she believes that Creationism should be taught in public schools. After eight years of having an anti-science administration now we hear that it going to be MORE OF THE SAME. McCain chose a right wing nut to be one heartbeat away from the presidentcy! That's great!"
By the way federal law prohibits the teaching of Creationism as a science.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:32 PM
I guess you guys are having an off day. Maybe because its a long weekend. I'm a righty, no question, but I expected real attacks against plain. Expereince, Alaska being small, these are weak and you all know it. Maybe on Tuesday when we all get back you wil lbe refreshed and have some real stuff. I want the liberal attack machine to slam her huge....so I can watch it all backfire. Tell her she is a war monger and her son being in active duty is a dog and pony show. I mean, I want the real good stuff from you guys.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:34 PM
I watched Joe Biden last year. I watched him on CSpan when he was the chair of FR and when Lugar was the chair. He isn't all that hes advertised to be. I found him seriously lacking. He can be brilliant at times but he is short on substance. Anyway thats my take on him. His claim to fame of breaking Iraq into three countries was a hair brained scheme. He seems to be susceptible to that kind of sexed up stuff.
There has been some discussion about Palin shoring up McCain's base. Yet McCain did not need help in this area. The reason pre-convention polls were close was that McCain had secured his base (getting about 9 out of 10 Republicans) and Obama had not (getting only about 8 out of 10 Democrats). One specific example: a recent CO poll showed McCain getting 96% of the Republican vote.
Palin may actually hurt McCain with his base due to the sad reality of sexism. A Gallup poll found 12% of Americans unwilling to vote for a woman. 18% of conservatives were unwilling to vote for a woman. Many conservative evangelicals do not believe that women should have authority over men. See:
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:38 PM
"Well I think when we recognize that Biden has experience you can bring to the Bank as a Senior Senator that its something you want"
don't you mean Master Card, Bankrupcty "reform" and voting for Patriot Act 2...
all of which Biden supports.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:40 PM
Keep waiting for the backfire while ignoring the shot and you'll sure win this election. This is an easy scenario for Obama to have all the great women in the democratic party and Biden deal with. If its about powerful women, the democrats win the party. Elizabeth Dole, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, and Snowe won't be able to keep up with Hillary, Pelosi, McCaskill, and Seblius on the attack.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:41 PM
Your getting better with the anti science thing. I know the party of tolerance, choice and inclusion only wants to teach one side of modern day theory on "creation". Give me some more, you know she is a hunter too right? Does that help you, I need an attack on the 2nd ammendment.
Whether you agree with Biden's policies or not is different from knowing nothing about Palin or the fact she's had no time to accomplish anything than minutes at a town hall board meeting.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:43 PM
I will send the Obama campaign a $1,000 if they would please put Pelosi out there big time to attack Palin. That is a great idea. San Fran values are totally how most women feel....it would be great to see a modern day hero like Pelosi out there on the stump big time slamming palin.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:46 PM
Welcome to having one of your own females become demonized like Pelosi Stillow if that's what you really believe.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:49 PM
Above, you deny that McCain has been questioning Obama's experience. Here is the McCain camp's response to Obama's speech last night:
"Tonight, Americans witnessed a misleading speech that was so fundamentally at odds with the meager record of Barack Obama. When the temple comes down, the fireworks end, and the words are over, the facts remain: Senator Obama still has no record of bipartisanship, still opposes offshore drilling, still voted to raise taxes on those making just $42,000 per year, and still voted against funds for American troops in harm's way. The fact remains: Barack Obama is still not ready to be President."
Note especially the last line.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:53 PM
First, there is only one side to "Creation". Its called evolution, and its a scientific fact. Any official who advocates ID or creationsim in schools is either a fool or pandering to fools.
Second, just as Palin was elected by the people of Alaska, so has Pelosi been elected by the People of her district. Not to mention the fact that she was elected by the members of her party, the majority party, to lead Congress. If one is worthy of respect then so is the other. That aside, its not Pelosi you have to worry about. Its Hillary.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:55 PM
The spin here is making me dizzy. Alaska has more people than Delaware. She visited Kuwait once. It will make Indians go GOP. It will be a big boost in the West. All too funny.
Please someone explain how this helps McCain on the number one issue in the Country, the economy. Obama already has the edge. I can't wait to see Ms. Wasilla Alaska take that back, and help push John "I really don't understand the economy" into the WH.
Posted on August 29, 2008 2:57 PM
A discussion on creation is way off topic here. Science I beleive is still looking for the "missing link" connecting humans to primates. I agree evolution should be taught along with "Intelligent Design".....I do not beleive life is random and the Earth just one day popped into existance....its cool if you do, I simply think there was a design and a prupose to it. Way off topic though.
I beg you guys to put Pelosi out there....Hillary will be effective..........if she wants to, she still wants 2012!
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:02 PM
To me this seems like a strange choice. Not Palin herself but the McCain's campaign strategy. All summer the republican's strategy has been an attempt to paint Obama as not experenced/qualified to be CinC. This choice significantly undermines this approach. Meanwhile the democrats strategy has been to tie McCain inescapably to Bush. Despite McCain winning his nomination early he has not really pushed hard back against this. If he was trying to run on a maverick/independent/post partison ticket surely he should of aggressively argued for his maverick image. So either this is a throw away move, (surely a mistake), or it the start of a new strategy (admitting the campaign's earlier strategy was a mistake.) We shall hopefully see in the upcoming convention which it is.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:03 PM
Look, Creationism isn't even the "intelligent design" theory that parades around as an alternative scientific explanation to evolution (even though there is no scientific evidence to back up intelligent design, unlike evolution).
No, Creationism is the idea that the Adam and Eve story in the bible should be taken literally. Not even the Vatican purports this to be the case, so I don't see how Palin could square this with mainstream voters.
Yeah, she's Catholic, but in case nobody was watching there is intense distrust between Catholics and Fundamental Protestants in this country.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:04 PM
That is how ignoratn some people are. American Indians vote for both Democrats and Republicans who watch out for their interests. In fact, McCain is well-regarded in Indian Country.
Sarah Palin is a FISCAL CONSERVATIVE... aka reign in government spending and focus on the priorities. No earmarks and special interests. She has already earned her reputation with the Alaska State budget. How many budgets has Obama balanced? ZERO.
More importantly, Palin is well-versed in energy issues and has taken positions to fight global warming. Energy is the economy.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:06 PM
I am going to lunch, but I expect you lefties to have real arguments againt Palin....I kinda enjoy throwing in creationism in there. But give me some meat. Slam he ron abortion and guns.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:08 PM
READ this AGAIN... McCain has used Obama's argument back on him. Obama admits he has less experience but instead has good judgement. McCain is campaigning against Obama's judgement.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:09 PM
Its funny how Joe Biden was always blaming the NeoCons for all that was wrong in government. He did that because of the prefix Neo. When you first hear it, you think of Neo Nazi which sounds terrible. He counts on his audiences of working class people not knowing the meaning of NeoCon. The word if you can call it that means new conservative. Neo means new. Con is short for conservative.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:10 PM
Sure... the fundamental Protestants are so suspicious of Palin that they are dancing in the streets right now.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:11 PM
FYI... Palin is considered a "maverick" and in fact enforces McCain brand. You can read Wikipedia, do a Google search, or wait until her story unfolds in the media... but "maverick" is right on target.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:14 PM
@Stillow: Enjoy your lunch! Think about ways to convince us that Palin was a good choice!
@KipTin: I've read it a few times, but McCain didn't use Obama's argument for anything. McCain just shot down his OWN argument. McCain says experience matters. It is his number one argument. And then, his VP pick has less experience than Obama. You don't have to try to win any arguments on this board. It's McCain losing his own argument. Why are you arguing with us? It's McCain you have the beef with.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:15 PM
This just in: 38 million people watch Obama's speech last night. It could be more, but Nielsen doesn't have an estimate for PBS or C-SPAN viewers.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:20 PM
NO record on the issues? OMG... what a horrible thing to say about an opponent:
1. No bipartisanship exhibited.
2. No against off shore oil drilling.
3. Voted for raising taxes.
4. Voted against troop funding.
"Barack Obama is still not ready to be President."
Of course not, he is making bad decisions/using bad judgement... ergo not ready. (I could not find the word "experience.")
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:22 PM
I think that Palin has more of the right experience to be VP... but that is not going to change the minds of the Obamanation.
But think about this. Why does any VP candidate have to have MORE experience than either of the Presidential candidates? Using the Obama tactic...You are actually dismissing/belittling Obama by comparing him to Palin. (The same way that Bill Clinton compared Obama to Jesse Jackson.) HA! HA! HA! Foisted on your own petard.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:28 PM
number of budgest obama has created ... Zero
number of budgets obama has implimented....zero
number of final decisions obama has made ....zero..
palin has him beat on all accounts.
as does McCain from his years in the military.
obama ... biden..
no leadership experience
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:32 PM
I have no beef with McCain. I think he made a brilliant choice for VP and reinforces his "maverick" brand. I like Biden, but I thought that Obama's choice made Obama look weak.
My beef is with Obamanation who ripped Hillary (and Geraldine Ferraro) apart in order to build up their messiah... and now are ripping Sarah Palin apart without knowledge of the facts. It shows a really mean (and sometimes misogynistic) streak toward any woman who might topple Obama off his pedestal.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:33 PM
I wonder if she is as "mavericky" as McCain, who was mavericky enough to vote with Bush 90% of the time. Of course, it's difficult to know since she lacks any records whatsoever. Maybe if I search the Wasilla Town Hall meeting minutes I will find something. I'll check and see if they have them posted on the internets tubes in Alaska and get back to you.
Lot's of people here playing the sexist card, and playing it from the bottom of the deck I might add.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:34 PM
Let's be real about Palin. She was the pick for one, and only one reason...because she is a woman.
This is a purely strategic choice, but it flies in the face of McCain's attacks on Obama's experience.
Then as far as ethics goes, if you don't think that Palin's troopergate scandel has legs, check out this story complete with transcripts and audio:
I suppose Palin might get a pass on trying to get this trooper fired, but to then turn around after 2 dozen contacts from her office in regard to this particular trooper, she then fired the public safety commissioner.
There is an audio recording of Frank Bailey, Gov. Sarah Palin's director of boards and commissions on the phone with Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan regarding this trooper. It was clearly about the trooper, though it takes a couple of minutes before he gets into that part of the conversation.
She was caught red-handed, and this will be a big issue. It's also not like McCain didn't know about this. He passed up many candidates with extensive experience, including governors Huckabee and Romney, for Palin for the sole fact that she was a woman.
This will backfire on McCain.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:36 PM
Are you saying that McCain's line "Obama is still not ready to be President" is not an attack on Obama's experience?
How do you explain the results of the poll to which I linked (finding 18% of conservatives unwilling to vote for a woman)? Given that this website is about polls, I don't understand why your comments rarely use or address polling data.
Returning to the subject of Palin's impact on Western states, here is a link to a map that shows the country's male-female population:
Note that CO and NV are two of the few states that have more men than women.
Also, a Nevada focus group found that Obama's speech last night gained him votes there:
Romney probably would have helped McCain more in NV than Palin will.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:41 PM
Plus, Palin only has about six years of governmental experience, where as Obama has about a decade, plus his three years of being a community organizer.
Did anyone mention yet that Obama has the about same amount of experience as Abe Lincoln had when he took office?
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:47 PM
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:50 PM
I could not find the word "judgment."
Feel free to try to address the polls and other data I've shared any time.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:52 PM
Don't bother arguing with KipTin/Undecided/NickBerry/Nicolle on this site. She is a pundit in training, and if you say "white" she will instinctively say "black" every single time. Every single time. Period.
It took her about 5 minutes to start parroting lines from this afternoon's Republican talking points on Palin. It's pointless.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:57 PM
Paid Community organizer? Just as directly tied to the Presidency as the PTA, City Council, and Mayor.
Posted on August 29, 2008 3:58 PM
Well, McCain pretty well already has the white man's vote...but do you really think that white guys will not vote for a woman who hunts and fishes? It is a dream come true for most. Are you sure you live in the West? You really seem out of touch.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:00 PM
Don't we all do that? We're all partisans on here. You guys jumped on Palin right away....no difference. We are partisan bloggers.
I know you guys don't like her, but Palin is a great choice, enrgizes us on the right, brings a new face to the party, a young fresh look. Just like Obama brought to your side.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:02 PM
FYI... brambster... I have AGAIN reported you for cyber-stalking/cyber-harassment. After your stated threat last week, I expected you would have gotten a warning about your very illegal behavior. Cease and desist.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:07 PM
We're not "bloggers", we're commenters on a site about polling.
Parroting talking points on either side is not a useful exercise.
Maybe if people have something useful to say that will help further everyone's understanding, that might be helpful, but most of what goes on here is not.
I posted relevant information about Palin's Troopergate scandal before this became a well publicized issue because it will further people's understanding, and I do believe it will become a big issue.
That's a bit more useful than knowing that you consider her to have a "young fresh look". If that truly mattered to you then it would seem that McCain was an old un-fresh look, and Presidents obviously matter more than VP's. So this is really useless partisin information, and nothing more than a personal opinion which clearly would have loved any pick of McCain's in the first place.
I shouldn't have even replied honestly. You are among several posters that I generally skip over reading.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:13 PM
Very balanced Stillow. I'll give you credit for being one of the sane partisans on this site :)
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:14 PM
You are hopelessly delusional. 'Nuff said.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:15 PM
In response to "She is a pundit in training, and if you say "white" she will instinctively say "black" every single time."
How ironic. You are the Obama supporter. And it is you who says "black" every time.
FYI... I already know a lot about Sarah Palin because I pay attention. I am voting against Obama because I pay attention. I do not need to personally disparage (and obsess about) other posters because I base my arguments on FACTS. And if that is being pundit-like, then so be it.
P.S. KipTin and Undecided is me. I never denied that. Nickberry/Nicolle is someone (or more than one) else. You really are exhibiting signs of a serious disorder.
Well then perhaps you should skip over more often...most of your comments are insane.
Troopergate as you cal lit is a valid topic to discuss.
But please, feel free to skip over, no one will hold anything against you my misguided fellow commenter.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:19 PM
Regarding "Troopergate"... that is not Palin's doing but of someone in her administration. It is being fully investigated by the state legislature and her office has fully cooperated.
By the way, that trooper brother-in-law tasered his 11-year old and much more. I think even if Palin was involved in "Troopergate" that most people would take her side.
Thanks brambster for providing more "evidence" of your unhealthy obsession. Duly reported.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:24 PM
All politicans have there baggage. The left certainly should attack the trooper story...its much more effective than expereince.
I am astonished listeing to leftists come out today on the news and say Palin lacks expereince....they are playing right into McCain's hand. This is exactly what he wanted them to do. I don't think they realize most voters are gonna say, wait a minute, you are slamming palin for VP, the #2 for lack of expereince, but you want us to vote for Obama, the #1 who has just as little if not less?
Its a classic move by McCain, have your enemy attack himself on your terms.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:26 PM
Yeah, sure Nicolle. The trooper that threatened Palin's sister-in-law a few years ago is in fact still on the job, and the person that got fired is actually the only person that did the right thing by not responding to the repeated political pressure of 24 phone calls to fire this guy. When Palin didn't get results, she fired the commissioner.
So since when did firing innocent parties justified? Shouldn't this guy get a big round of applause for standing up for due process and the law?
No, the public won't take her side for a firing of the head of the state troopers. It's also likely that the guy before Monegan stepped down instead of taking action.
There is also more than just this one recording that exists. Most such calls were recorded, and are in the possession of the investigator appointed by the Legislature. Most of the phone calls came from Palin's chief of staff.
Now I'm all for idiots like this trooper being removed from his job, but there was a process, and he went through that process, and when Palin wasn't happy about it, she immediately went after him following being elected governor and she didn't let other people's jobs and rights get in the way after they refused to respond to political pressure.
Do you think for a second that the press won't run with this? In reality it doesn't matter, the press will do what they do, I'm just pointing out what is likely to be heard real soon, and this will include the audio tapes of the actual phone calls...2 dozen of them. Monegan might also be a hot commodity for shows like 60 minutes.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:30 PM
I view the argument different Stillow. Its a double edged sword to critics of Obama's experience when they accept Palin's lack of experience. It's inconsistent if not a gap in the logic of these supposed critics. I think this move highlights McCain's judgment if Palin wouldn't pass the experience test. We've been debating experience forever so to bring someone in with at least questionable experience is going to bring some of these things to light.
I don't really view this as a trap but a risk. I can see the benefits for McCain but surely you must recognize the potential threats of having a VP like this as well when it comes to McCain's overall argument.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:35 PM
OK, so Hillary's base will be drawn to an ultra conservative VP just because she is a woman. Well, I'd really love to see the polling on that question.
What you are saying is that the issues don't really matter and that their decision will come down to gender pride. I have always thought of women as practically minded people that make decisions based on issues, not emotion. Hillary did have a special connection to millions but that was because of who she was, not merely her gender.
OK, if that's what you want to bet the ranch on
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:39 PM
We all know the vp doesn't really matter to much, people vote for president. That is why it gives the big edge to McCain. If people vote for president...and Obama's people are all out there slamming expereince, it hurts Obama...not so muchMcCain, because the real choice is for prsident. I have to imagine when he and his staff sit down to find an attack strategy against Palin,the expereince thing will go away.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:40 PM
I remember in the 80's the left labeled Reagan an "ultra conservative"....not sure it worked out to well then...and it won't this time either. Conservatives simply outnumber liberals, at least for now. Women will connect with her story....and being a mother of a serving soldier makes it tough for the left to label her a war monger and just wants to send kids off to wars. She's gonna connect with people....go check out some pro hillry blogs right now, there are a lot of them saying they wanted palin as the choice....since the indy's still aren't sold on Obama.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:46 PM
I'm pretty much coming to a conclusion that experience is just going to go away as an issue and this initial blow against McCain is that point that apparently experience doesn't matter anymore. Not really an argument that Palin isn't qualified. I think she's being used as a spectacle as a point. Hopefully we'll get back to an issue based election in the next couple weeks after this stuff blows off.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:49 PM
Here is some more data (I will be pleasantly surprised if KipTin does more than ignore it).
NV, NM, CO--western swing states all--have never had a female governor. Other swing states that have never had a female governor include IA, MO, IN, PA, VA, NC, GA, and FL. See:
In addition, IA has never sent a woman to Congress. See:
Sadly, as is the case with racism, sexism remains a problem in this country. Both the Obama-Biden ticket and the McCain-Palin ticket will struggle in some parts of the country because of these evils.
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:51 PM
In all honesty, nobody at this point knows how this will turn out. I think the only hard fact is that McCain will look ridiculous if he keeps going after Obama on experience. If McCain doesn't get a big jump and be ahead in 1 week, he is in serious trouble because it will say the gamble lost. On the other hand if he does have the lead, Obama has 2 months two chip away at him and his questionable first big decision as potential President.
What, no polls out today? We have to keep on looking at this silly Idaho poll?
Posted on August 29, 2008 4:58 PM
Experience does matter, it just comes in varying degrees.
I think that we can all agree that a person that only holds a B.S. in Journalism, who's previous political experience includes being the Mayor of a town of 8,000 and then 1 1/2 years as governor of a very small state (population) that has an economy so far removed from that of any other state, is not qualified to be president.
Maybe Obama doesn't reach the threshold for some, but Palin doesn't reach that threshold for far more (unless you just simply move the bar for partisan reasons).
Palin was picked for one reason and one reason only...because she is a woman. It's that simple. It is also that hollow. I really don't think this will end up working to McCain's advantage regardless of everything else.
And as for that false label of Palin being a maveric, that's also an odd claim. She was elected in a state long dominated by Republicans where they became so entrenched that the former governor was under investigation (chief of staff plead guilty), their senior Senator is under indictment, their other senator was a nepotism pick (former governor's daughter), and their representative is about to be indited. For a time that made Palin the longest serving state-wide Republican that wasn't under investigation or closely tied with those that are, but she is now of course under investigation too. That's hardly befitting of the maverick label.
Heh, all I can ask is that you guys please keep talking about expereince. Cutting your nose off to spite your face. Every dem is out there talking about Obama's biggest vulnrability right now....and they are doing it attacking the #2 spot. This is simply politics 101. Keep trashing her expereince, trash Alaska.....I can gaurantee the expereince talks hurts Obama waaaay more than McCain. Keep talking about it, don't let it go away.
I am still taken back by how the left is destorying itself. There's a reason your party is known for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.....because you destory yourselves. I can see McCain sitting in his chair right now just laughing....as he allows the Dems to do his job for him.
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:09 PM
These are all negative and fear mongering tactics inherited by Karl Rove. The Dems are smarter for it and have caught on. Experience is on the minds of everyone and it won't go away. We are beginning to challenge McCain's experience as fallow ground with choices like Palin.
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:21 PM
As usual.. more ignorance... Palin beat out the good ol' boy Republican in the GOP primary (aka incumbent Governor Murkowski) and then the former Democratic governor Tony Knowles in the general who far outspent her. So again how is that her election was a gimmee?
At least read Wikipedia before making unsubstantiated remarks about Palin.
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:24 PM
I am with you Palin reflects your views, you can't ask for better than that.
The serial woman exploiter McCain has done very well, desperate pick, though. She's not dumb, she knows her stuff and has a point of view, she is not presidential material, not yet, but hey, we can start sending women to back street abortionists, put some more people in jail, Why not?
McCain is unelectable.
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:26 PM
Obama has met with and discussed policy with Sarkozy, Gordon Brown, Merkel, Barak, al-Malaki, and debated military strategy with General Petraeus.
To try to counter that with Palin's one year eight months executive experience in Juneau, Alaska and say that shows that she has more experience than Obama you are either spinning or you are a lot dumber than I thought you were.
And I don't think you're dumb so it must be spin.
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:31 PM
Its not fear tactics, the left jumped all over Palin right away....McCain is just letting them go on the attack, it just so happens that those attacks avtually highlight Obama's weakness....nothing negative about it....if the left didn't jump all over Palin, this issue would be nothing.
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:35 PM
Oh... dear faithhopelove... You do not know much about women's suffrage in the U.S.-- do you?
Western states were the first to give women the vote:
1912 Michigan, Kansas, Oregon, Arizona
1920 19th Amendment ratified giving all American women the vote.
How is that for "sexism" since it was the male electorate that had to vote FOR women's suffrage.
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:38 PM
You are "still" missing the point. The election isn't Palin vs. Obama. The veeps job is to attack the other guy and to take the heat. Remember in 92 when the GOP attacked Hillary? Well doing so left Bill alone for the most part and he walked right into the WH....Everyone's attacking palin using Obama's weakness. like I said, your party has a history of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory....can't you see this?
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:40 PM
Ol' Cafferty on CNN is convinced that all his emails against Palin represent the American electorate. He does not have a clue that the Obamanation was given orders to launch the protest. (Just like they did this week against WGN radio.) One "racist" Obama supporter made a comment about Palin being selected to get the Eskimo vote. (Wow.. dumb and dumber... the emailer and Cafferty for airing it.)
Not Rovian politics--- but rather a good show of Old Chicago politics. Hard to tell the difference, init?
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:43 PM
The issue is McCain's judgement and opportunism
He is a serial exploiter so this should not have been a surprise.
Sarah Palin with the benefit of quadruple oil receipts in Alaska has been able to reduce the tax burden on the 600,000 people who live there substantially. Very impressive, can't understand why any body pays tax in Alaska, do you?
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:44 PM
Yes, she's what the base wanted. Maybe one of these days you and I can find a poltical point to agree on next.....
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:47 PM
The sleaze of MSNBC never stops. These people must be desperate to stay in business. Hardball's Mathews said that Palin is the pitchfork candidate. To me, this is totally unacceptable behavior for him. They have been given over to total Obama loony land.
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:48 PM
Matthews and Olberman are the perfect example of not only left wing media bias, but also left wing elitism. Those two are nothing but smug liberal loons. In most areas of the nation they are fully discreditied as any but pro Obama pundits pretending to be commentators.
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:51 PM
Considering Obama just very recently (July) "met with and discussed policy with Sarkozy, Gordon Brown, Merkel, Barak, al-Malaki, and debated military strategy with General Petraeus", maybe Palin could do her own "Big Adventure" across the pond and "catch up" to equal Obama's foreign policy "experience."
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:52 PM
CNBC has a brilliant interview with her made last Monday, which is well worth watching!
She is very knowledgeable on energy, comes across far better than she did in Ohio today.
I do not agree with her social values and she is naive, I hate the fact that she is being ruthlessly exploited, She's very bright though!!
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:53 PM
Sorry you feel that way, by all accounts she is very independent thinker. Bright people usually don't get suckered into being exploited. Many could argue Biden is being exploited for his expereince???? That has no legs....she was a great choice.
Posted on August 29, 2008 5:58 PM
Palin distributed some of the extra oil revenue to Alaskan residents to pay for their higher energy costs (transportation/heating). So what is wrong with that?
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:01 PM
McCain is a serial exploiter of women, let's see what her position is on equal pay for women.
Wouldn't be on the ticket, but for Hillary not being on the ticket, Biden deserves his slot.
Great choice, I agree. She'll be on the bench for 4 years, in the unlikely event of a McCain victory.
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:08 PM
We don't have to attack her because women are going to do that. Clinton will be attacking McCain but you are going to hear a female chorus denouncing Palin on the issues. You can already see women on tv expressing their resentment at this obvious attempt to pander to women. Many are saying it is an insult to their intelligence, which it is, definately.
Eventually she will have to answer the pandering charge. It is not like 1984 because this time the attacks will be coming from Democratic women, not the men.
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:10 PM
* Joe Biden's Son Beau received more votes than Palin did in 2006.
* Barack Obama has received more votes in his political career than has John McCain in the same time.
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:13 PM
Well everyone, have a good long weekend...we'll see how the polling goes next week and pick it up again.
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:19 PM
The only women on tv that are attacking Palin are the political established extreme liberal minded elitists. Those want their abortion privileges at all costs. Sometimes one would think that this is their only reason for living. They don't like women like Palin who have children, engage in life outside the dome, and who take responsibility for their own lives. I'm sure that she will also be attacked by the Rosie O'Donnels' and Ellen Degeneous's of the world also. You know those tv ?? types.
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:21 PM
Then Obama should have picked Beau Biden.Tsk, such a missed opportunity.
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:23 PM
She has been asked to run for the office of Vice President of the United States by her political party.
It's not naive to accept that, is it? Is she there by rights, on merit or because of a desperate game changing roll of the dice?
In no way does this undermine her intelligence or have any thing to do with her not being naive. or the fact that she's a great pick!
My beef is with McCain.
@kiptin If I was running Alaska whose residents actually own the energy rights, nobody would pay tax and there would be the finest medical and education free at the point of demand etc. for all Alaskans.
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:24 PM
Congresswoman Debbie Shultz was just on David Gregory's show and she said it was "insulting" that McCain would choose Palin in an attempt to appeal to Hillary's supporters.
You guys clearly don't understand how women think. If they think that they are being patronized (which this clearly is) then you will see a real emotional reaction that will blow McCain out of the political water.
Yesterday I had my doubts about Obama's chances but after this bone-head move by McCain I trhink it will be a landslide for Obama.
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:26 PM
Are you arguing that there is no more sexism because of women's suffrage?
NV and NM did not make your list.
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:29 PM
What is this "equal pay for women?" That is already law. You are just repeating misleading Obama talking points.
I mentioned the Chicago WGN radio talk show above and Cafferty as targets of Obama tactics. Here is another one (regarding the Ayers ad by American Issues Project)--
"The Obama campaign... has mounted a campaign to combat the advertisement by encouraging supporters to make phone calls and write emails to TV stations airing the commercial, alleging it is both false and illegal. The campaign says its supporters have sent about 93,000 emails to the Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc., which owns many of the stations running the spot."
I would not be surprised if they use this tactic on voting day like the GOP did in a former election (and got caught).
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:30 PM
I am saying that you arbitrarily assign sexism as a reason for no female governors in certain states without ANY basis to do so... i.e. misleading correlation.
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:33 PM
Come on now....of course women supporters of Obama are going to say that....why is that even news. That's like saying the sky is blue. Boxer came out and slammed her too....well of course she's gonna do that. Lots of liberal famele poltiicans will...Palin is going after them, she is going after independent women and energizing conservative women......come on....you know how this game works.
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:34 PM
Wow, zotz... I watched the same spot, and all I heard was the Florida Congresswoman spouting the Obama talking points. By the way, women are a diverse bunch, and therefore one cannot stereotypically say that all women think a certain way.
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:38 PM
Pat Buchanan made a good point (same David Gregory show) that Palin can go among the social conservatives, etc. which frees McCain to play to the center. That energizes the base and let's McCain concentrate on direct confrontation with Obama. (Obama is doing similar with Biden.)
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:42 PM
the polls are going to be extra extra interesting, I was a tad disappointed by the tracker bounces today!
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:45 PM
One thing about the Palin nomination is that the McCain campaign will have to devote at least a week or more to introduce her to the American public. And since she's such an unknown, it will take even longer to start to get non-campaign spin information out to the public. There could be information coming out for two months (the last week of October/first weekend of November) that needs to be 'explained' (read politically-spun by the McCain campaign) that will eat into the time McCain's campaign could use to sell his policies, not spent spinning Palin's 'qualifications'.
When you pick an unknown, with a finite period to introduce that person, it's a real gamble. And with the polls showing that McCain has a narrow path to victory, while Obama has many more options, it shows, to me, that McCain is a gambler. But that's to be figured, since most gamblers are considered mavericks.
Just remember, when you gamble, you always run the risk of losing, and many more people lose in gambling than win, especially when it's winner take all.
Posted on August 29, 2008 6:54 PM
Fair enough about the possibility of a "misleading correlation"--it's only one possible correlation.
Posted on August 29, 2008 7:21 PM
In July, Larry Kudlow of CNBC’s “Kudlow & Co.” asked her about the possibility of becoming McCain ticket mate.
Palin replied: “[A]s 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.”
Also, from the [London] TimesOnLine:
The state of Alaska has filed a lawsuit against the US government in an effort to overturn the animal’s “at risk” status, says The New York Times. Sarah Palin, Alaska’s Republican governor, claims that giving polar bears protection under the Endangered Species Act will delay offshore oil and gas exploration. “The decision to list the polar bear was not based on the best scientific data available,” said Palin. And this from someone who doesn't believe in science and the scientific method???
It's not her gender. No, it's her beliefs, policies, and lack of relevant experience.
But maybe her title of Miss Congeniality and runner-up status as Miss Alaska is what qualifies her?
Or maybe her ability to hide the 'Sarah Barracuda' nickname she had in high school in order to win that Miss Congeniality title?
Posted on August 29, 2008 7:25 PM
Campbell Brown couldn't hide her delight at the prospects of a VP Palin. Also the blogs at the liberal NYTimes are very active with a lot of democrats turning into Palin supporters.
Posted on August 29, 2008 7:28 PM
Came back because one blogger put forward that Palin indeed has experience in foreign affairs because of her working with the Canadian government on several issue. How easily it is to forget our Canadian neighbor.
I am still looking for some evidence that Obama has even been to Canada. Apparently he has never been south of our border, so how about north?
Posted on August 29, 2008 7:31 PM
Obama's speech last night indicated that he would like to see more homosexuality in our culture. This is clearly an objectionable view, but it is one that is shared by the elitist who rule the democrat party. He should be questioned regarding his comments and asked why he has this view. Why doesn't he promote natural family values? He needs to answer this question.
Posted on August 29, 2008 7:48 PM
"Obama's speech last night indicated that he would like to see more homosexuality in our culture."
Posted on August 29, 2008 7:53 PM
In his speech last night, Obama basically endorsed gay marriage. You can't dispute that.
Posted on August 29, 2008 7:59 PM
I would prefer to see less bigots in our culture. I would prefer that people like you have no involvement in the personal lives of others. PERSONAL LIVES!
The Republican Party is the party of bigots, racists and religious zealots. It's not by accident, they shape their platform around this intolerable behavior. I'm sure that any Hillary supporters that are dumb enough to think that adding a woman to the ticket is the next best thing to Hillary will find great company.
Posted on August 29, 2008 8:06 PM
"Obama's speech last night indicated that he would like to see more homosexuality in our culture."
Could you provide us with an exact quote, IN CONTEXT, please? I'm sure you understand the concept of 'in context'.
But then again, since all you do is do is neo-con (or as some see it, neo-fascist) spin, spin, spin, maybe you don't understand the concept of 'in context'.
Posted on August 29, 2008 8:22 PM
You don't know me at all, but I sure know your type. This woman was chosen to get the conservative base of the republican party aroused. It wasn't about HRC and the womens vote. If the republicans come out and vote, they win same as in 2004. The democrat party has lost all sense of morality and common decency just to win elections. It has no core values at all. They seemingly hate women who hold regular jobs or want to be housewives, have children, or men who like firearms or serve in the military. They think that they are so intelligent and everyone born below the Mason Dixon line is so stupid. They are in for a rude awakening.
Posted on August 29, 2008 8:25 PM
Yeah sure player. That's why that "woman" was chosen and then mentioned not just Ferraro and Clinton, but also the "18 million cracks in the ceiling". It had nothing to do with Hillary supporters at all...not!
Posted on August 29, 2008 8:38 PM
For someone who is from the 'law and order' party, the party that says it is for 'personal rights', the party that says it is for 'property rights', it seems that the McCain campaign is sure doing a lot of illegal pirating of intellectual property rights.
Just ask Jackson Browne and Van Halen.
Or maybe because the word 'intellectual' is in there, they don't think 'property rights' is applicable?
Posted on August 29, 2008 8:53 PM
Um... Obama's speech was about the right for same sex couples to see each other in the hospital which under the law they can't currently. He didn't condone gay marriage. Get your facts straight Player. Spin Spin Spin!
Posted on August 29, 2008 8:58 PM
And I find I missed one:
Posted on August 29, 2008 8:59 PM
You haven't backed up your 7:59 pm assertion yet. Since you haven't, it is presumed you can't.
Posted on August 29, 2008 9:44 PM
Anyone can see anyone else in the hospital if they want. They don't have to be a certain sex. In plain speak, there is no law against it. They want marriage rights like a married couple. This is the part that is against the law. This was all code words that says he supports same sex marriage.
Posted on August 29, 2008 9:45 PM
Your so called 'code words' just means that you don't have evidence to prove your point, and you won't.
Hey Mike, great link! I thought that it was great that Mellencamp told McCain to stop using his tunes - Republicans have been told this so many times by so many musicians that they're going to end up being banned from using anything except maybe the Addams family theme. "They're creepy and they're spooky..."
Posted on August 29, 2008 10:25 PM
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that Palin is the worst VP pick since Thomas Eagleton in 1972.
I don't think that Palin is an offensive candidate in any way, and she definitely has an appeal to her, and with the fact that she is a woman, that was probably good for 1 to 3 points for McCain over the long-term. I'm sure that this was the real strategy. The message will publicly be that she is a Washington outsider, and the whisper will be that you can vote for a Woman despite Hillary being out.
I do believe however that the pick will backfire on McCain and here's why:
1) The lack of experience and qualifications is laughable. Having been a mayor of a town of 8,000 less than 2 years ago highlights this much more than not. Having only a B.A. in journalism doesn't suggest merit, and Alaska is of course not just a small state, but a state that has an economy so far removed from the norm that experience there isn't worth much. This lack of experience not only makes McCain's best and strongest argument against Obama completely hypocritical, it actually makes McCain more vulnerable.
2) The "bridge to nowhere" and the Alaska Republican establishment will only be highlighted even more as a result. Palin claimed that she was against the bridge to nowhere today in here coming out speech, but the facts say differently. She is on record in 2006 not only supporting the project, but also suggesting that it get done before the Republicans lost control of the House and Senate. So there was an eagerness to get such earmarks. Palin only changed her tune after Congress stipulated that the $200 million couldn't be used for the bridge, but they still sent the money to the state anyway. She canceled the project because it was about $360 million underfunded, not because she was against it. I suppose that it was best to claim she was against it as a first salvo since it would surely come up, but this will surely come up in a very public way. Palin was not only endorsed by Ted Stevens, she featured that endorsement in her own campaign commercial. Ted Stevens is not only the current poster boy for Republican corruption, he is also the long-term poster boy for earmarks with Alaska receiving far more in dollars per capita than any other state. FAR MORE. And considering the oil wealth and how that is funneled into the state, they were the least in need. She didn't run against her party, she sought their endorsements when she ran against a Republican governor that was already under investigation and sure to lose in the general election, and she used the support of the rest of the establishment to win.
3) Pandering to Hillary supporters with an inexperienced pro-life, big oil woman with bear skins on the floor of her office will be seen as an insult to the real PUMA's out there. Real PUMA's will see that she is merely a Hillary harlequin, and will recognize the pandering, and that will just make more of an issue out of what women's rights really mean. It's hard to believe that in 2008 McCain would tokenize women in this way.
4) The inexperience and lack of name recognition of Palin will in fact result in McCain being blamed by the radical right groups for his failings, and these people have no problem attacking their own. So any failure in the polls by McCain over the next couple of months will cause the mummers (which already started) to rise to shouts of incompetence on the part of McCain to choose an experienced conservative candidate. I would expect that this charge will be led by evangelicals since they were never very happy with McCain in the first place.
5) The biggest one is the Troopergate scandal. Making one call to get someone fired is questionable, but between Palin, her husband, and multiple high level staff and other elected officials call 24 or so times in order to pressure not only her own selected official, but also a lieutenant in the state troopers to deal with this guy is very damning. It only makes it more so damming that there are recordings of many of the phone calls. Firing the commissioner may have been her privilege, but firing a commissioner for not caving into improper abuse of power is very objectionable if not illegal (Bush did the same exact thing with federal prosecutors if you don't remember).
The worst part of this however is that the investigator is due to report by October 31st, just 5 days before the general election. This makes the pick sheer stupidity.
It is really a totally clueless pick. I don't think he was considering any picks that would have turned out 'great', but he did kill his best attack against Obama. If McCain can't make Obama unacceptable, he loses no matter what because McCain will never win in 2008 by trying to be the most acceptable candidate.
I figure this may take anywhere from days to a month for this to start to be seen in earnest, but I definitely expect that it will become an issue for McCain.
Regardless, I think Obama already proved himself the clear leader yesterday and the odds-on favorite to win, but McCain could have done better.
Posted on August 29, 2008 11:36 PM
why do you guys even bother talking to kiptin and stillow. they wouldnt care if a smurf mccains vp it would be a smart choice. the truth noone knows if this will give mccain the win or not. the assumption that women will suddenly run to his side because he picked a woman is frankly insulting and sexist. in fact many hillary supporters have said just that. and as far as the base is concerned noone knows if this strenghtened the base or not. no more than anyone knows if the dems are truly unified. assumptions are dangerous things.i dont presume to know the outcome of this race. all i know is whom im voting for. and im beginning to wonder if that is necessary. i love my country but it is becomings every election is becoming more divisive and petty. and i dont want to hear that mccain or obama will cross party lines. we know its not true based solely on how we all (myself included) have acted on here. all of us have been doing nothing but drinking the kool-aid. not willing to see the other sides view. acting as if our candidate can do no wrong and the others candidate can do nothing right. its sad. what ever happened to friendly debate.
Posted on August 30, 2008 2:05 AM
I think there's a lot of anger on all sides this time around. There's an experiment in which rats in a cage are randomly shocked, through the floor of the cage. With no way to control the shocks (which are uncomfortable but not injurious, in case you were worried), the rats begin fighting each other. When the rats can press a bar that turns off the shocks when they happen, they coexist peacefully, despite still being shocked. There's more to it, but I'm working from memory.
We're the rats. This country is the cage. The shocks come from economic problems, terrorism, war, stultifying media excesses, extreme weather, etc., and there's no general sense that anything is under our control. All but the luckiest suffer similar shocks, but different groups have different opinions as to whose fault it is.
In the largest sense, Walt Kelly's Pogo quote "We have met the enemy and he is us" pretty much says it for me, but the Bush/Cheney crowd have made careers out of jingoism, and continually try to undermine any public sense of the need for meaningful reform. They're pandering to the mutual antipathies in our often-shocked culture, while they themselves look down on the poor saps stuck in the rat race.
One reason Obama's charisma is derided as mere celebrity by the cynical strategists is that it threatens to unify a public that desperately wants to feel a sense of purpose and control. It's an old game. Bush's long-forgotten claim to be a uniter would be laughable if there weren't so much blood on his hands now.
For all their confusion and ineptitude, Dems have a perfect negative model of government in the GOP pattern we've seen for eight brutal years. The question isn't "Is Obama who we think he is, or who he says he is?" Its "Can Obama be the person we need him to be?" Cynics would say "No, and nobody else can, either." But without hope we're just a bunch of pissed-off rats in a cage of our own devising.
Posted on August 30, 2008 8:03 AM
wow, obama knocked back t page 13...
Posted on August 30, 2008 9:25 AM
Um same sex couples can only stay during visiting hours as they are not recognized as spouses Player. This is what Obama was talking about. Whatever CODE you are talking about is fear mongering and Rovian tactics on your part.
Posted on August 30, 2008 11:23 AM
With tears in my eyes I read the earth-shaking news about Governor Palin! THE NEXT VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!! What brilliant strategy! What dramatic vision! Women by the tens of millions will now flock to the Republican ticket. Barack HUSSEIN Obama will regret the shameful treatment he handed out to the Clintons and all will realize the respect that John McCain has for the women of America.
This is the GAME CHANGER! The turning point of the election! We remember how well this strategy worked for President Water Mondale when he chose Geraldine Ferraro as his... uhhh.... Oooops!
Posted on August 30, 2008 11:58 AM
In his speech the other night, when Obama dared McCain to follow Osama Bin Laden to his cave, what did he mean? First of all, how does Obama know that Osama Bin Laden is hiding in a cave? He could be in Paris for all we know. I bet that I know what he meant, but like Vandrop said, I couldn't prove it. Its probably a Muslim thing.
Posted on August 30, 2008 5:31 PM
Thank you for the commentary on the Shock Doctrine. Finally, something other than mind-numbing commentary on this blog.
Posted on August 30, 2008 6:29 PM
"Anyone can see anyone else in the hospital if they want."
Just ONE of many times that a person was denied visitation rights in a hospital, even when the couple was registered as domestic partners in California and the party attempting to visit had a Power of Attorney to make health care decisions for the other partner:
And when the General Assembly passed a law to make sure that partners could visit each other in the hospital, the Repig Governor vetoed the bill on the grounds that the legislation threatened "the sanctity of traditional marriage."
Take your Reich-wing talking points elsewhere.
Posted on August 30, 2008 7:00 PM
You obviously didn't read my entire post. Anyhow, you just made my point. You cannot make health decisions for another person unless you are the legal guardian or spouse of that person. Your domestic partnership doesn't have the guarantee of a heterosexual marriage. Obama' code is that he would try to push same sex domestic relationships into the same thing as heterosexual marriage. You can't do it. States all over the US have voted to ban it. I suspect that California voters might overturn their recent court decision on same sex marriage this election. I understand that its on the ballot. I thought that it was a weird thing for Obama to promise. I'm sure his entire speech will be dissected in the next few weeks. We'll see how the public takes it. And really, you Obama supporters need to get off this name calling. It shows your immaturity.
Posted on August 30, 2008 7:48 PM
You should make a movie called the Obama Code. I'm sure it would be a great movie and as true as everything in the Davinci Code.
Posted on August 30, 2008 7:55 PM
"You obviously didn't read my entire post."
I didn't have to. All I had to read was your very first words, which I proved were patently false. To remind you, those first words were, "Anyone can see anyone else in the hospital if they want."
Further, when someone has the Power of Attorney to make medical decisions for another person, it is a legally binding document, naming a person to be legal guardian under certain circumstances. Yet, the officials in the article I linked not only questioned, but defied that legally binding Power of Attorney, by not allowing a person with Power of Attorney to make medical decisions to actually use that Power of Attorney to make a medical decision.
Remember, a Power of Attorney is a legal document, naming a specific person to be the legal guardian in certain situations. In this case, the hospital (figuratively) spit on the person who was the legal guardian of the patient.
You were hoisted, by your own words, on your own petard. Live with it.
Posted on August 30, 2008 11:50 PM
I suggest that you try reading things with an open mind. You obviously like to have an opinion about something and look for things that confirm what you suspect. Maybe you are just trying to be smart or something. You seem to have an angry opinion about something so your reasoning ability is probably a little low. Like you said, you didn't have to read what I wrote. That is where you go wrong.
Posted on August 31, 2008 1:12 AM
Just checked back in... Basil your "rat" experiment may work on rats, but such "behaviorism" theories are archaic, especially when discovered that such does not transfer to human behavior-- and also makes bad analogy/metaphor.
Posted on August 31, 2008 1:15 AM
Are you denying that you stated "Anyone can see anyone else in the hospital if they want."?
Can you provide proof that 'anyone can see anyone else in the hospital if they want'?
I have provided proof that someone with a legal document that DOES allow that person to visit and make medical decisions for another person (thus was their medical legal guardian) was denied access to the patient, and thus was not allowed to make medical decisions for that other person. It is up to you to disprove what I have proven.
Or are you of the mindset "I have made my decision, don't confuse me with the facts"? It is quite apparent that IS your mindset.
Posted on August 31, 2008 1:38 AM
Pavlov's "conditional reflex" experiments with dogs are quite old now (carried out in the 1890s and early 1900s), but they are not considered archaic by behavioral psychiatrists.
My challenging you on your post will result in a conditional reflex on your part, whether you post as a result or not. You've conditioned yourself to react to certain types of messages as an attack on you or your candidate, thus you have a conditional reflex whenever someone makes a post that you perceive as such, whether that was the intent of the post or not.
Posted on August 31, 2008 1:53 AM
human behavior can be manipulated by certain stimuli. and you can be conditioned to respond to something or someone. if this was not the case then there would be no need for campaigns or commercials. the whole point of these thing are to create a desired reponse from you.it is very reason why campaigns use talking points or slogans. to honestly think that human behavior cannot be controlled or manipulated is insane.
Posted on August 31, 2008 2:28 AM
". . . to honestly think that human behavior cannot be controlled or manipulated is insane."
The neo-fascists, like Stillow, niTpiK, player, etc. know this, but hope that others don't know or don't remember.
And to think that they say they know so, so much about business, yet they tear down one of the main pillars of business, namely the use of advertisement, whether in print, radio, television, or word of mouth. After all, advertisement is predicated on the concept of manipulating people's thinking into buying things that they would not otherwise consider buying, or (in the case of necessities) at least to buy that business's product and not the competitor's product.
Posted on August 31, 2008 2:59 AM
Wow... the "experts" here dismissing the last 20 years of cognitive science. Those behaviorial theories (e.g. Pavlov) have been tossed when it comes to humans, and sometimes do not even hold up with animals.
Mike in Maryland had NO idea what "conditional reflex" means. (Actually responding to another's rhetoric on a blog thread is directly related to a "situational model" that requires logic and reasoning.)
saywhat90 contends that humans "can be manipulated by certain stimuli. and you can be conditioned to respond to something or someone." Yes, it is called "torture."
Hilarious, Obamanation thinks that voters are a bunch of trained rats. (Now that is elitist, init?) FYI: Even trained rats eventually outsmart the "experiment."
Obamanation gets very upset when voters engage in free choice and that choice is not for the "ONE."
Posted on August 31, 2008 12:27 PM
Regarding advertising (which is a segment of marketing). Marketing uses cognitive theories for effective advertising. One well-used theory is "connectivism" where the advertising "primes" concepts and ideas already in a viewers mind. This in not "manipulation" but rather an energizing of existing thoughts. People are not as "stupid" as Mike in Maryland makes them out to be.
Posted on August 31, 2008 12:45 PM
You post as if you know so much - what are your qualifications?
Where did you earn a degree in any of the psych areas?
What do you know about marketing and advertising, and where did you learn it?
Or are you just throwing out 'conventional wisdom' that has no basis in scientific study?
Posted on August 31, 2008 6:30 PM
Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)
Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.
Please email us to report offensive comments.
See our comment policy here. Note that we require commenters to share their email address via Typekey. We will never share your email address with anyone without your explicit permission.
MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR