Monday Morning Poll: Tuesday Morning Edition

Tuesday, September 2nd, 2008

Due to the holiday.

Digg it |  reddit | |  Fark

28 Responses to “Monday Morning Poll: Tuesday Morning Edition”

  1. #1 |  jwh | 

    Anything to upset the dems……..what?!? A woman besides Hillary might be on the ticket? Heaven forbid…….

  2. #2 |  Thomas Blair | 

    F. All of the above.

    It was a smart move that may tip the election to McCain because it was simultaneously a bone to evangelicals and an affirmative-action pick to attract Hillary voters. She’s about the best realistic hope for libertarians, but because she’s just another politician, I could care less about the women.

    Business as usual.

  3. #3 |  claude | 

    She’ll make a perfect poster child. She is a politician who is a staunch supporter of abstinence only education while having a pregnant teenage daughter at home. Priceless.

  4. #4 |  Alien | 

    I was coming to say All of the Above when I see that Thomas Blair in #2 beat me to the punch.

  5. #5 |  Lee | 

    People REALLY think Palin was a good pick?

    Completely Off topic for the thread…

    WTF is going on in St Paul? I all for smashing hippies heads but this is getting a bit out of hand.

  6. #6 |  bobzbob | 

    While mayor: built a 20 million dollar publicly operated ice rink and fitness center (that is losing money), lobbied congress and recieved $27million in earmarks. While governor: supported the 250 million “bridge to nowhere”, then changed her mind but kept the money and spent it on other pork projects. Palin also believes that religion should be taught in schools (creationism) and belongs to an organization that believes that women should not have access to abortion or the most common form of birth control (FFL opposes the pill)

    Why do people keep saying she is a libertarian?

  7. #7 |  solarjetman | 

    It is an attempt to kill two birds with one stone; he believes she’ll motivate the base with her solid social conservative credentials and that liberal women will vote for her in spite of opposition to her politics simply because she’s a woman. The first is accurate; the second is insulting.

  8. #8 |  Mike T | 

    If she’s underqualified, then McCain, Obama and Biden are flat out not qualified at all because none of them have held an executive political office. Saying that being a Senator or legislator at the state level is qualification is like saying that being a civilian employee of the DoD makes you kinda-sorta qualified to lead a battalion into battle.

  9. #9 |  Lee | 

    I believe a couple of former Presidents have commented that no one is ever prepared to be President. I actually think that is probably true.

    Probably the best qualification would be a stint as a VP, which has not turned out very well in modern times.

    Modern Presidents that were former VPs

    Bush Sr
    (I’m sure i’m missing one, but I can’t think of him)

  10. #10 |  Mike T | 

    Teddy Roosevelt.

  11. #11 |  j a higginbotham | 

    Need to choose more than one.

  12. #12 |  B | 

    Other: all of the first three. (And by “masterstroke” I mean I think it was a good move to the end of getting elected, not good statesmanship necessarily.)

  13. #13 |  j.d. | 

    really? how can any of you say this is a masterstroke???

    every republican I’ve talked to in the past few days about this, and explained to them the serious consequences of this pick made them realize they were getting caught up in the same hooplah of hope that they criticized obama for.

    ultimately, the facts indicate that this pick was to win an election, not run a government. Worse, there have been several reports that explain McCain was still wanting to pick Lieberman up until this past week, only bowing to his advisors not to do so. Right, what a maverick he is. The most irresponsible pick since dan quayle.

  14. #14 |  Thomas Blair | 


    Why do people keep saying she is a libertarian?

    I don’t know that anyone is saying that. I, for one, said that she’s about the best realistic hope a libertarian has for getting his ideology represented on a major party ticket. I don’t think anyone is under the delusion that this woman actually represents a culture of liberty or a “night watchman” state.

  15. #15 |  Tokin42 | 

    Tactically it was a brilliant pick. Shores up the base (which McCain had issues with), attracts moderates, and might even draw some of the Hillary supporters. Friday the press did nothing but cover this pick instead of talking about the Obama speech the night before, completely cut Obama’s legs out from under him.

  16. #16 |  Windypundit | 

    I don’t know enough to figure out the politics, but if we pretend for a moment that McCain should be picking someone who could be president, she seems way underqualified. This does not bode well for McCain’s ability to choose his cabinet, national security advisor, etc.

  17. #17 |  Jim | 

    The argument that she is more qualified than McCain, Obama and Biden is just stupid even putting aside any views on the issues. To make a crude equivalence with the private sector she has been manager of a McDonalds franchise then moved on to become the district manager of a small Walmart region and is asking to become the Senior VP of Ops for GM or GE. The other three have been high level consultants that have worked day in day out with the issues facing the corporation, they might not have had hire fire power over the company they work with but they have been key advisers and decision and strategy makers. But more than that the 3 of them have all set up huge ad hoc organizations on their own right and have gone through numerous interviews while she was just appointed to the position with little to no background checks.

    This pick is disastrous for the McCain ticket. She helps with the base but that is all. Every poll and focus group since the announcement has shown her to dud with independents, undecideds and women at these where done before the whos the mommy rumors and yesterdays revelations and the press not even getting into gear about their vetting with Gustuv and the convention.

  18. #18 |  Mike T | 

    I don’t know enough to figure out the politics, but if we pretend for a moment that McCain should be picking someone who could be president, she seems way underqualified. This does not bode well for McCain’s ability to choose his cabinet, national security advisor, etc.

    She’s actually been a mayor and governor. McCain was a naval officer how many decades ago, and has not wielded executive power since. By any reasonable standard, Obama and McCain are both completely unqualified to be President if relevant work experience is required to be qualified for the Presidency.

    Besides, Obama’s choice of Biden was a clear-cut indication that he would be an authoritarian, establishment President despite his rhetoric to the contrary.

  19. #19 |  claude | 

    Looks like this might get better for her. Apparently Palin and her hubby eloped to get married and their first born came 8 months later. Oops. I knew that windows calculator would come in handy some day.

    (i personally dont give a shit about the pregnant kid or the pre-marital thing, i just find it ironic when speaking of a party that promotes their superior moral values from a high horse)

  20. #20 |  j.d. | 

    I think the best analogy of all of this so far is made by Jack Hunter of the Charleston City Paper.

    “Voting for McCain because of Palin is like buying a ticket to see Hannah Montana because Jimmy Hendrix is on guitar. No matter how great Hendrix is, he’s still having to play crappy Hannah tunes.”

  21. #21 |  Les | 

    I, for one, said that she’s about the best realistic hope a libertarian has for getting his ideology represented on a major party ticket.

    As bobzbob pointed out above, there’s really no evidence that she represents anything resembling libertarian ideology.

  22. #22 |  claude | 

    #20, i dont know if that is a good analogy. I would gladly buy a ticket for hannah montana if jimi hendrix was on guitar. Jimi can make any music sound good. :D

  23. #23 |  scott | 

    I’d much rather that Palin becomes President, even if McCain were to die on day 1, than have Obama for any amount of time. There is no way she could do a worse job than he.

  24. #24 |  Matt | 

    I don’t know that anyone is saying that. I, for one, said that she’s about the best realistic hope a libertarian has for getting his ideology represented on a major party ticket.

    Can’t say I really agree with that. She seems pretty run-of-the-mill on issues of taxation/regulation/economic liberty. Her rep as an anti-pork crusader seems to be overblown, if not in fact completely invented. On social issues, well, everyone seems to regard her as a bone to the religious right, so that ought to tell you something. On drug issues, maybe she’s better than the average republican–but do you foresee John McCain getting behind drug policy reform?

    Anyway, as I mentioned before, her job is to backstop McCain. She’s not going to be setting policy. Hell, I’d be pretty surprised if she even influenced it to any meaningful degree. So really, you’re still getting John McCain and the GOP. If you think that’s better than Obama, great, but Palin really shouldn’t be the deciding factor.

    As for the experience issue–I don’t know how relevant it really is. I mean, how good of a job is Bush doing right now w/ his 7+ years experience actually being the President?

  25. #25 |  Matt | 

    Also, I would imagine that it’s pretty easy to come across as something of a libertarian in a state like Alaska, w/ its tiny population and massive petrol economic base.

  26. #26 |  ktc2 | 

    You should be cautious about using the word “stroke” in any sentence with McCain. I think he’s had a few too many already.

  27. #27 |  ktc2 | 

    And yeah to #3. She shows exactly what abstinence only gets you.

  28. #28 |  xyz123 | 

    how can it be anything *but* a masterstroke?

    we’re talking about his selection for vice president, that most useless of jobs. the appendix of politics. the tonsils of the ticket. NObody gives a crap about the VP; nobody votes for a president on the basis of who the VP nominee is. their job is to go to second-tier funerals; nobody cares about their opinions. when they throw the veeps a bone and let them debate, infomercials and test patterns get better ratings.

    until now.

    with the palin selection, mccain has:
    * bumped obama off the map during his own convention
    * energized his base: “an actual conservative! and she’s a babe!”
    * given hillary puma’s a tangible reason to vote for him
    * goaded the MSM into full-blown, instantaneous ‘attack the bitch’ mode, thus undoubtedly infuriating lots of women, which means he’ll get some of their votes, when before, he wouldn’t
    * goaded the MSM into openly displaying their hypocrisy towards women: “it’s *wrong* to attack the children of politicians, unless she’s a republican!”
    * did i mention energizing his base? i know several folks who were going to sit the election out, but will now vote for “palin/dumbass.”
    * aaaand, she’ll be a fundraising goddess.

    can this be said of any other recent VP nominee?