Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin

[Fat Strat]

Please don't take this as dragging the issue on or anything, but just more information as it comes out about Sarah Palin. Sorry if this is considered egging anyone on or trying to viciously turn anyone against the woman, but this is just what I read:

In fact, as Palin's cultural views become better known -- she oppose abortion in all cases and opposes the use of birth control pills and condoms even among married couples -- she will undoubtedly scare the hell out of the soccer moms and 98% of Hillary voters.

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/2008/09/0 ... gourevitch

The source you site doesn't include the above text. Where'd you get it?

[PujolJunkie]

Please don't take this as dragging the issue on or anything, but just more information as it comes out about Sarah Palin. Sorry if this is considered egging anyone on or trying to viciously turn anyone against the woman, but this is just what I read:

In fact, as Palin's cultural views become better known -- she oppose abortion in all cases and opposes the use of birth control pills and condoms even among married couples -- she will undoubtedly scare the hell out of the soccer moms and 98% of Hillary voters.

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/2008/09/0 ... gourevitch

The source you site doesn't include the above text. Where'd you get it?

Bah. I forgot to include the source for the first article. It was quoted on Political Wire. I'll see if I can find the link for it.

[PujolJunkie]

Okay, here we go. Once again, not trying to tear anyone down. But these are the facts that I've found about Sarah Palin and where she stands on the issues. These ARE negative issues, I'm not denying that. But for those supporters who think she's wonderful, some of this may be alarming even to you:

Palin is a member of Feminists for Life of America -- a venerable but little known pro-life group that focuses on the pro-woman reasons for opposing abortion.

Source: http://www.lifenews.com/nat4237.html

http://www.feministsforlife.org/taf/199 ... r97-98.pdf

From page 16 of the above newsletter:

“birth control counselling and abortion often indirectly contribute to the victim’s sense of shame, guilt, and blame for what is happening, since she is told to “take control” and “be responsible” for her “sexual activity,” implying that this situation is indeed within her power to control.”

http://broadsideonline.com/3-26-2007/op ... ed_002.htm

“The new pro-choice/pro-life battle is over the right of Americans to use birth control and Feminists for Life has clearly taken its side. By not supporting contraception, Feminists for Life backs an agenda that has failed everywhere it is been tried.”

From The Nation:

I got similarly evasive answers when I asked why FFL didn't promote birth control, and when I asked if FFL considered the pill an "abortifacient." She did tell me that "birth control doesn't work" for swing-shift nurses because they lose track of their body clock--interesting, if true--or for teenagers, which I know to be false. "We just want to focus on meeting the everyday needs of women," she told me. But when I asked how the everyday needs of women with unwanted pregnancies would be served by encouraging them to bear children and place them for adoption, Foster didn't answer. Instead, she extolled the benefits of open adoption.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050829/pollitt

She's also for censoring library books and didn't even support John McCain in the primaries.

I'm sorry if this is deemed as finding reasons to dislike her, but come ON, people.

EDIT: Supports aerial hunting of wolves, despite the fact that it's outlawed by congress. She's using a loophole.

http://www.wral.com/golo/blogpost/3458085/

Husband on the BP payroll

http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=6965360

And despite the fact that Mrs. Palin has scrubbed(erased all evidence) of indicted Senator Ted Stevens endorsement, it's still on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o46YdvT3lwQ&e

[Radbird]

I like reading this blog on msnbc. The latest entry is on Palin's selection, including

- The case for Palin
- The case against Palin
- The vetting question
- The age factor
- The bottom line

From the bottom line paragraph:

McCain loves to gamble, he's actually someone very fond of dice games, and there's no doubt he's rolling the dice with Palin. A word of warning to Dems, courtesy of Peter Hart: Don't get overly gleeful about all the downsides of this pick. If anything, realize McCain may be falling in a 20-year pattern of shocking picks that end up not backfiring, like Spiro Agnew in '68 or Quayle in '88. Palin may actually be the GOP's destiny. Go figure.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/ ... 10137.aspx

[BW23]

Palin wants women to be responsible for their own actions? Shocking.

That won't sit well with Democrats.

[MrSaigon]

Not that I care, but this thread should probably be retitled the 'vs. McCain/Palin Thread' or the 'Obama/Biden Thread.'

I will say this my dad is pretty hard-core Republican and he is pretty happy with the Palin nod, which is notable because he isn't crazy about McCain.

I'm very interested in politics as culture and (bizarre) science, but the thing about being apathetic about it and not really taking a position, is that people like my father or my Obama supporting friends is that they just assume that if I'm not with them I'm against them; therefore, I usually end up either a minority enslaving corporate good ole boy, or a commie forcing abortions upon your unwed teenage daughters at gay weddings.

[clement]

Catching up again...

- I don't think the Palin choice has much of an impact on Biden's role. Sure, during the debate he will have to be careful in his approach in attacking Palin. But in reality, he doesn't need to attack her at all. He just needs to remain focused on McCain. They will only be in the same room one time in the next 2 months. That's the only situation he has to be concerned about (with respect to Palin) and I'm sure all his handlers will be coaching him on exactly what to say and what not to say. If he can't handle that, he was a horrible choice for VP.

- I also feel this choice is much more indicting of John McCain than Palin. It was arguably a foolish, irresponsible choice. This is the way the Democrats need to frame their comments about the choice, rather than attacking Palin herself. This choice and Obama's choice of Biden are not comparable. Obama was perceived by many voters as having a weakness on experience and foreign policy and so he shored up his ticket by picking someone who has strengths in these areas. Palin doesn't provide any complementarity to McCain's perceived weaknesses. Both choices were politically motivated, but one fixes a problem, the other can't really be framed in any way other than an attempt to grab votes. And I agree with those who say that it will succeed at shoring up the conservative base (especially evangelicals), but will not succeed at drawing moderate women to McCain. I think as moderates get to know her better, she will lose him as many votes as she gains for him.

- So I don't think she's going to be the thing that puts McCain over the top in terms of votes. If she somehow manages to capture the imagination of a large constituency of Americans in a way that Obama did, then she will obviously help, but I just don't see that happening. First of all, a person who captures the imagination in the way that Obama has doesn't come along very often. And the few clips I've seen of Palin (both new and old) tell me that she doesn't have the natural charisma to do that overnight. Obama's ascension was created by him and gathered momentum over the course of 4 years... he was not hand-picked from obscurity by one person. In the end, I think that this choice will end up being a lot like the Geraldine Ferraro choice. It generates a lot of discussion for a couple of weeks and then it goes back to being a race between the two presidential candidates.

- I really don't think the arguments about Palin's many years of executive experience as mayor of will stick with anyone other than people who were already supporting McCain. The fact that she went from Mayor of a village to governor is a phenomenal story. But to make the leap from governor of a very small and unique state to potentially being thrust into the presidency should at the very least be cause of concern for most people. That concern (among undecideds) will at least offset any positives she brings.

- I'm sure there are many people saying that they will vote for Obama because he's black, especially young people. I'm also sure that people who will not vote for Obama because he's black, will not go around saying so outside of a meeting of your local klan chapter. Also racism (and sexism) is often much more subtle and not so overt. People who would swear that they don't have a racist bone in their bodies behave in ways that are prejudicial all the time without even knowing it. And when I say 'people' I'm talking about just about everyone.

- I'm in the camp that thinks it would be a great thing for the country if we would elect a black man president. I also think the same thing if we would elect a woman president. Both of these things need to happen at some point and the sooner the better. That doesn't mean that it would be the only factor I would consider, because I can't see myself ever voting for JC Watts or Elizabeth Dole, but if they managed to be the first ones to make this kind of history, I'd at least be pleased to know that we as a country had gotten past this hump. I could see myself being persuaded a bit to cross aisles though if someone like Colin Powell or Olympia Snowe were the Republican nominee. But neither of these would affect my vote if it were only for the vice-presidency.

[clement]

Palin wants women to be responsible for their own actions? Shocking.

That won't sit well with Democrats.

On the contrary. In most people's minds, using protection or learning about different birth control options to avoid unwanted or unplanned pregnancies is behaving responsibly. Government restricting these kinds of things is the ultimate removal of responsibility and putting it squarely on the state.

I'm personally anti-abortion. I just don't think it should be criminalized, therefore I'm pro-choice. And even among most people who put themselves in the pro-life camp, things like using condoms and having access to information about different birth control options are not perceived as bad things.

[MrSaigon]

- Palin doesn't provide any complementarity to McCain's perceived weaknesses.

She's pretty dang conservative, especially on the incindiary issues. That will help McCain, I think anyway, because he isn't republican enough for republicans.
edit: but they were going to grind their teeth and vote for him anyway, so I guess you're right. It will just make them feel a little better about it.

[Radbird]

- Palin doesn't provide any complementarity to McCain's perceived weaknesses.

She's pretty dang conservative, especially on the incindiary issues. That will help McCain, I think anyway, because he isn't republican enough for republicans.
edit: but they were going to grind their teeth and vote for him anyway, so I guess you're right. It will just make them feel a little better about it.

Yeah, but they'd vote for him anyway, given the choices available, wouldn't they?