McCain Picks Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as Running Mate

[Matt Molnar]

Nice move, will draw a lot of Hillary voters to McCain.

[lijk604]

Or a lot of people to say...WHO????
It's a very interesting choice to say the least.
The debates are going to be something you cant miss this year.

[moose135]

Nice move, will draw a lot of Hillary voters to McCain.
I don't see it - other than being a woman, she has nothing in common with Hillary's positions. The bigger fear is that Hillary supporters will stay home on election day, but based on her convention speech, I think she will be able to get them out to vote.

[Matt Molnar]

Or a lot of people to say...WHO????
True. Who even knew Alaska had a governor?! :mrgreen:

[Matt Molnar]

Nice move, will draw a lot of Hillary voters to McCain.
I don't see it - other than being a woman, she has nothing in common with Hillary's positions. The bigger fear is that Hillary supporters will stay home on election day, but based on her convention speech, I think she will be able to get them out to vote.
What I meant to say was FEMALE Hillary supporters. Positions, shmositions. If you asked a random sample of female Hillary supporters to talk about some of her key positions, I'd bet half of them would either get them wrong or not know at all...they love her just because she's arguably the most famous/powerful woman in the country. Also very important, Hill is best buds with McCain...which will make some consider "how bad can he be if Hill likes him?"

[Matt Molnar]

It's interesting to me that both VP candidates are from tiny states...Delaware being 46th in population and Alaska being 48th, each having only 3 electoral votes.

Tin foil hat wearers (and Vladimir Putin) will probably accuse McCain of choosing the Alaskan as a hostile message to our neighbors 50 miles across the Bering Strait. Oops, does the fact that I thought of that make me a tin foil hat wearer?

[moose135]

What I meant to say was FEMALE Hillary supporters. Positions, shmositions. If you asked a random sample of female Hillary supporters to talk about some of her key positions, I'd bet half of them would either get them wrong or not know at all...they love her just because she's arguably the most famous/powerful woman in the country. Also very important, Hill is best buds with McCain...which will make some consider "how bad can he be if Hill likes him?"

I knew what you meant. I still don't see it, unless they are going to blindly vote for any ticket with a woman on it.

[bonanzabucks]

I knew what you meant. I still don't see it, unless they are going to blindly vote for any ticket with a woman on it.

Would you expect anything less from a woman? lol

[AirtrafficController]

Very smart choice by McCain. This will bring some youth to his campaign and attract some Hillary supporters as Matt mentioned before.

[Gerard]

>Nice move, will draw a lot of Hillary voters to McCain.

I dont see this either. Sure, after Obama bypassed Hillary and chose Biden as his running mate many Clinton supporters felt betrayed and angrily denounced
Obama and said they would now vote for MCCain. If you think clearly about it that is just a little ridiculous since the views of Clinton and the Democratic party
are opposite to those of McCain. It was more like a child who throws a temper tantrum because he doesnt get what he wants. After some screaming and acting out
he comes around after a comforting and reassuring talk from his parents. This is what Hillary did the other night at the convention (as did hubby Bill). Like Moose said, either they will vote for Obama or not vote at all but I dont see them running to the other side just because a woman is the VP candidate.
WHICH I dont get. Sorry, she may be a capable politician in Alaska, a good person, wonderful mother but with ZERO national/international experience do we
really want her as the 2nd most powerful person in this country if God forbid something happens to MCCain? With Biden I have much more confidence.
Off my soapbox now.

[Matt Molnar]

The more I read about this woman, the more it sounds like McCain has no intention of winning.

[Midnight Mike]

She is a very impressive lady and has a rep. of being a change-maker and a reformer. McCain has threw down the gavel at Obama.

[bonanzabucks]

The more I read about this woman, the more it sounds like McCain has no intention of winning.

Could go either way. It's a risky pick for him, but it totally fits with his personality. Only McCain would choose a candidate like this. He really slammed Obama with this choice. This will truly be the most historic election ever and whomever wins will be making history. As well, with this pick he takes away Obama's biggest strength -- enthusiasm. I can see a lot of people being very enthusiastic about her, especially women.

Personally, I think it's a good pick. She is exactly what the Republican Party needs. She's young, attractive, female, down-to-earth and has a lot of energy. Phil mentioned that the Republican Party was like a sports team that relies on old veterans and doesn't draft anyone new. So, they get older and older and worse. This is like a new draft pick that will bring some life into the party and attract a whole new scope of voters the Republican Party would have never thought of attracting. Then again, only McCain would have chosen someone like this. Had it been any other candidate, you would have seen a typical middle-aged/older WASP male who would have zero clue how to relate to everyday people.

As well, look at the choices he had? I liked Lieberman, but the rest of the party didn't. He was probably the smartest of the candidates. Pawlenty is just the typical WASP and would have been the "safe" choice, but would have generated zero enthusiasm. Romney? Pu-leease. lol This guy was a joke. He's so greasy that even a frying pan would be jealous. What is it with Mass. politicians and their sleaziness? And economic credentials? He ran a hedge fund. They're part of the reason we're in an economic mess now. Besides, you think the party base would get behind a Mormon? No way!

I don't know, should be interesting. But while I think she's a good choice for VP and exactly what the Republican Party and McCain needs, I would not feel comfortable with her being president. Say something happens to McCain, would you feel comfortable with someone who two years ago was just a mayor of some town with just 6,000 people? Not me.

Still, depending on what some of McCain's policies are with certain issues (nothing to do with the economy or foreign relations), I may consider voting for him after this choice. It's bold and shows he has balls. I totally respect that. And, like I said, only he would have selected someone like this.

[Matt Molnar]

http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/7997/avatar137793xt4.jpg

[Tom_Turner]

She's more articulate from what I've heard than many of the cadavers the National Republican party has the inclination to throw up there in contests the past years..

I wish we could get a few more economists in the Senate instead of lawyers..

Tom

[adam613]

I wish we could get a few more economists in the Senate instead of lawyers..

Smartest political idea I've heard in months...

[bonanzabucks]

I wish we could get a few more economists in the Senate instead of lawyers..

Smartest political idea I've heard in months...

Phil Gramm was an economist. He's considered the father of the "Enron Loophole", where his wife was a member of the board of directors. This law is probably what's responsible for oil doubling the last year...

He also lobbied for less regulations for easing restrictions on predatory lending tactics, which is how we got into the subprime crisis.

For an economist, he sure did a lot of good! *sarcasm*

[moose135]

You know, she might do better not to lie to the American public right off the bat...

From her remarks (http://www.johnmccain.com/about/governorpalin.htm) after being introduced by John McCain:

And I've championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. In fact, I told Congress thanks, but no thanks, on that "Bridge to Nowhere." If our state wanted a bridge, I said, we'd build it ourselves.

Yet, this NY Times story (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/17/politics/17spend.html?ei=5090&en=56cda4ccca5699cf&ex=1289883600&adxnnl=1&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1220198590-jxrawXXf/o14zGu+bY41GA) shows that in November 2005, more than one year before she became governor, Congress cut funding earmarked for that bridge:

WASHINGTON, Nov. 16 - Congressional Republicans decided Wednesday to take a legislative wrecking ball to two Alaskan bridge projects that had demolished the party's reputation for fiscal austerity.

Straining to show new dedication to lower spending, House and Senate negotiators took the rare step of eliminating a requirement that $442 million be spent to build the two bridges, spans that became cemented in the national consciousness as "bridges to nowhere" because of the remote territory and small populations involved.

The change will not save the federal government any money. Instead, the $442 million will be turned over to the state with no strings attached, allowing lawmakers and the governor there to parcel it out for transportation projects as they see fit, including the bridges should they so choose.

It was only after it became clear that Congress would not fund the bridge did she decide to cancel the project, as seen in this statement from Alaska state news archive (http://74.125.95.104/search?q=cache:RL3FJAhN1ksJ:gov.state.ak.us/archive.php%3Fid%3D623%26type%3D1+%22Ketchikan+des ires+a+better+way+to+reach+the+airport,+but+the+%2 4398+million+bridge+is+not+the+answer&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us&client=firefox-a)

September 21, 2007, Juneau, Alaska - Governor Sarah Palin today directed the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities to look for the most fiscally responsible alternative for access to the Ketchikan airport and Gravina Island instead of proceeding any further with the proposed $398 million bridge.

“Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer,” said Governor Palin. “Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it’s clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island,”
So I guess she was for the bridge, before she was against the bridge.

Speaking of earmarks in the Federal budget, here's what Governor Palin (http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/aug/29/palin-setting-earmarks-opinion-straight/) had to say in March, 2008:

I am not among those who have said "earmarks are nothing more than pork projects being shoveled home by an overeager congressional delegation." I recognize that Congress, which exercises the power of the purse, has the constitutional responsibility to put its mark on the federal budget, including adding funds that the president has not proposed.

Accordingly, my administration has recommended funding for specific projects and programs when there is an important federal purpose and strong citizen support. This year, we have requested 31 earmarks, down from 54 in 2007. Of these, 27 involve continuing or previous appropriations and four are new requests. The total dollar amount of these requests has been reduced from approximately $550 million in the previous year to just less than $200 million.
Seems that puts her at odds with John McCain, champion of the fight to end all earmarks, as noted in his Campaign Press Release (http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/PressReleases/53697F3B-1BCE-4E35-A224-F909F02CB419.htm) in March 2008:

ARLINGTON, VA -- U.S. Senator John McCain today issued the following statement calling for a stop to earmarks:

"I am proud to have fought against the practice of earmarking and wasteful pork-barrel spending. It has often been a lonely fight, but one I know is worth winning. I am encouraged by some of my Democratic colleagues' new-found enthusiasm for suspending this practice for a year. I hope their recent commitments do not wane once they step off the campaign trail. I believe we must end this process, which has diverted billions in taxpayer dollars to needless projects, once and for all. If voters give me the pen, I will veto every single pork-barrel bill Congress sends me.
In fact, McCain tells Fox News (http://thinkprogress.org/2008/01/06/mccain-earmark/) during a televised debate earlier this year, that he has never asked for or received earmarks while in Congress:

And I’m proud to tell you, Chris, in 24 years as a member of Congress, I have never asked for nor received a single earmark or pork barrel project for my state and I guarantee you I’ll veto those bills. I’ll ask for the line item veto and I’ll veto them and I’ll make the authors of them famous.
Apparently, McCain has a short memory. In 2006, he sponsored a $10 million appropriation for the University of Arizona to fund an academic center honoring late Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/18/politics/18earmark.html). That came just three years after another project (http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-05-15-mccainland_N.htm) McCain championed, $14 million to purchase land as a buffer around Luke AFB. Interestingly, the largest single landowner who sold to the Air Force in that deal was a company that has contributed to McCain's campaigns for the past 10 years.

I guess McCain was for earmarks before he was against earmarks. I guess the two of them aren't that different after all.

By the way, according to Anchorage Daily News (http://www.adn.com/front/story/511471.html):

Meanwhile, [Ketchikan Mayor Bob] Weinstein noted, the state is continuing to build a road on Gravina Island to an empty beach where the bridge would have gone -- because federal money for the access road, unlike the bridge money, would have otherwise been returned to the federal government.
That sounds like sound fiscal policy to me.

[mirrodie]

You know, she might do better not to lie to the American public right off the bat...

Why not? At least she'd be putting it out there that she's honestly a liar. A true politician. :borat:


She is a very impressive lady and has a rep. of being a change-maker and a reformer. McCain has threw down the gavel at Obama.


Personally, I like the MILF, er, um, VPILF. :mrgreen: She caters to a younger audience.

What I find disturbing about McCains choice is how he blasts Obama for lack of experience and yet choses an inexperienced VP, and hence, spare president, Godforbid something happen to McCain. And Obama picks an experienced VP. At this point, McCain shot himself in the foot regarding his allegations of Obama's inexperience.


Lastly,

I still don't see it, unless they are going to blindly vote for any ticket with a woman on it.


Let's hope that is not the case. If women would now blindly vote McCain simply because the veep has breasts, it would forever seal the notion that women are indecisive dumb creatures with funbags who do not know what they want.

I just asked the woman that I love and spend my life with if she'd vote accordingly. "Hell no. There are issues at hand" was the answer.


McCain-Palin.....You think McCain would hit it?

[Mateo]

Last time I checked most Hillary supporters were Democrats, and are unlikely to be moved by a female candidate who's a bit further to the right than McCain is. Soft Dems and independent women (the 2s and 3s, as they're known), may take a look at the ticket that includes a woman, but then when they look at the woman, they'll gravitate towards the Democrats. Palin is more a move to shore up the base and energize the (somewhat-deflated) religious right rather than play towards independents.

EDIT: My apologies; she was not Buchanan's chair in Alaska in 2000, it appears she was only a supporter.

[Midnight Mike]

What I find disturbing about McCains choice is how he blasts Obama for lack of experience and yet choses an inexperienced VP, and hence, spare president, Godforbid something happen to McCain. And Obama picks an experienced VP. At this point, McCain shot himself in the foot regarding his allegations of Obama's inexperience.


Well, this is a what the Democrats lose, as Gov. Sarah Palin was a Mayor & a Governor, while Obama's main accomplisment is barely 3 years in the US Senate......

So, yes, McCain can continue to attack Obama on his lack of experience, now, the Democrats have a problem in that they can not attack Gov. Palin on her lack of foreign policy experience.....

Forget picking an experienced VP to run with an inexperienced President, I want an experienced President! Biden should be on top of the ticket, with Obama as the inexperienced VP.....


Senator Obama -
US Senate
Elected in November - 2004


Gov. Palin -
2 terms as Mayor (1996-2002)
Elected in as Governor on December 04, 2006

Another person that thinks Senator Obama does not have experience
112KQfOuOcc

[moose135]

You can't make this stuff up. When running for governor, she gave the following response in a candidates' questionnaire: (http://eagleforumalaska.blogspot.com/2006/07/2006-gubernatorial-candidate.html)


Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?

SP: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.
Except that the Pledge of Allegiance wasn't written until 1892 (I don't think many of the Founding Fathers were around by then) and the words "Under God" were added in 1954 in response to Communism in the Soviet Union.

[Matt Molnar]

Last night I was chatting with my upstairs neighbor, a native Alaskan, and more importantly her mom who is visiting from Juneau..and as it turns out she's Alaska's state travel manager! She had some dirt, sort of...

Pros:
She says Palin has been a great governor, in large part thanks to a number of pretty large tax rebate checks she's been mailing out which always makes people happy.
She likes her story, apparently she toppled some pretty big names in the Alaskan Repub party on her way to becoming governor.
She was in favor of Palin's stance on the "Bridge to Nowhere", which Palin originally supported but later scrapped after the Feds cut funding in half.

Major con:
Palin has been quietly moving more and more state offices from the capitol in Juneau to Anchorage. Why? Because Palin never actually moved to the capitol! She still lives with her family in Wasilia, which is about a 40 minute drive from Anchorage...an 18 HOUR drive from Juneau. There was actually a ballot referendum to move the capital to Wasilia in the mid 90s, but it failed. Rather than move, or launch another attempt to officially move the capitol, she's simply been moving more operations closer to her home. Juneau doesn't have much going for it other than being the capitol, so if too many operations are shifted, the city is going to have a rough time, according to my new friend.

[mirrodie]

Hey, MidnightMike, you want experience? Looks like Palin's daughter is a frontrunner. :borat: