A comment to the last post reads: "I'd love you hear your ideas on how Obama-Biden can neutralize this republican shot in the arm, while still courting women voters. Also, how comfortable are you of Palin's ability to lead the country? Did McCain show a lack of judgment in this regard?"
A "Republican shot in the arm" indeed. John McCain needed precisely a shot in the arm. When I heard the news about Palin I was outside a panel at APSA in Boston. So I got to tell a few people as they came out and get their assessments. The first person I told had a reaction which was mine precisely: "Oh, so McCain does want to win!" The next was also interesting: he thought Palin could turn into a liability, a Geraldine Ferraro all over agin.
I think both are right. I think McCain had to go outside the box, outside of the Romney/Pawlenty yawn-fest. McCain can not back into the White House, these summer polls notwithstanding. When asked for my pick the evening before, I said that Romney/Pawlenty would not surprise me, but that Palin or Huckabee would show that McCain wants to win. The reason Huckabee would have been better is because he is a tested campaigner. He has experience in the bright lights. He can bring in a lot of votes and excitement in corners of the GOP.
On Meet the Press this morning, the comatose Andrea Mitchell opined about Palin:
She is not appealing to the same women who were really voting or supporting Hillary Clinton on ideological issues, but they think that they can peel off some of these working class women, not college-educated, who--the blue collar women who were voting for Hillary Clinton and may be more conservative on social causes.
That's right. So much of national politics comes down to culture. True-blue Hillary ideologues are not going to support McCain over Palin. But Palin does have cultural bona-fides to appeal to the lower-class Dems who supported Hillary but not because of her feminist roots.
This evening I got the feeling that it's all downhill for McCain-Palin. I just think everything has gone so well this weekend for them. I mean, Palin got such a great reception, that I think it will become apparent, even relatively quickly, that she can't meet the high expectations. She's going to make gaffes. She's just going to. McCain's team better start planning now what to do when that happens. Her showing up and giving McCain a fresh face and incredible backstory will only last so long. And what happens when wears off? The press will gleefully tear her apart. Precisely what Hillary was hoping they would do to Obama. But Obama is a white-wine liberal, a Harvard Law man. He is one of the elites' own. Palin's angle is appealing to the working stiffs. The conclusion to this syllogism should be crystal-clear: the press will have no compunction in tearing her to shreds when given the opportunity.
So Obama/Biden should bide their time and focus on looking presidential. Obama had an edge on Hillary--he looked presidential. I forget who it was who had a sister teaching politics, I believe, and who insisted at the beginning of the primary season that "America will elect a black man first before they'll elect a woman--you watch and see." We watched and saw it happen on the Democratic side. The press is ga-ga right now for the Alaskan beauty queen. But the novelty will wear off. Again: then what? McCain's choice was more important than Obama's because McCain's a geezer. No one in their right mind would ever dream of insisting that Palin is qualified to be president. And the argument, "So Obama isn't either," would hold good for me two years ago--it doesn't hold now. Obama earned the right to be president with his grueling slug-fest that deposed the reigning heavyweight champion of the Democratic Party. Campaigning is a lot like what you have to do as president. So don't tell me Obama isn't ready, he is. Palin will have two months of very hard campaigning before the election. She can't grow into it. There's no room for error. If she really did try to get her sister's ex fired, that could be the October-surprise of all October-surprises.
The one thing McCain was smart about was getting a solid conservative, to generate excitement with the base that he just doesn't generate on his own. Today on MTP, Mitchell also said:
And in terms of the abortion issue, it has so fired up the base. The evangelical base, the, you know, the foundation of what John McCain needs, the people who came out in Ohio and elected George, you know, George Walker Bush, this is the, the key group that now is so energized. They were sitting on their hands, they were not excited about the other alternatives. They would have completely rebelled with Joe Lieberman.
Mitchell, of all people, was actually more in tune that Republican "strategist" Mike Murphy, who said:
[I]f we get into a social issues debate with those particular swing voters, we're in big trouble. I believe that McCain cannot win in this environment without ticket splitters, people who vote for him for president but vote Democrat down the ticket. He may need as many as one out of five of his ultimate voters to be a ticket splitter. So the question is in a bad base year for Republicans, if we get caught on pure base issues--I agree, the evangelical vote loves her, but I, to the point I said earlier, I'd rather have lukewarm evangelicals and a whole lot of voters.
This is the failed median-voter model of elections which has been so thoroughly disproven in the last two presidential elections. Of course, each election is a new situation, and if any election would follow a median-voter model, it would be this one. But it is insanity for Republicans to be more concerned with the lakefront set--these largely mythical independent voters, who will probably go with the tide and vote Obama anyway--than the lower-class cultural voters and married people, who vote in much larger numbers anyway. Focus on the base, get them excited--this sound principle has not gone out the window no matter who is running.
David Gregory (who I'd see in my Starbucks when I used to live in DC) said:
A lot of the working-class voters in states like West Virginia or Ohio, where she was debuted, or Pennsylvania were Democrats primarily for economic issues if not social issues. Obama still has an advantage there, even if he hasn't grabbed the issue completely. I think Sarah Palin helps John McCain get it.
Well, there's no freaking way Obama's going to win West Virginia. Obama has given up on it completely--he hasn't even opened up a campaign office there yet. This is why Hillary would have been a better nominee--WVA and Arkansas would be states she could move into the Democratic column, but Obama doesn't have a chance.
Here's the ultimate truth about Palin: she's an affirmative action pick. She undercuts McCain's "experience" and "judgment" motifs. This is not clear now, but it will be when Palin's novelty fades. Voters can sense gimmicks. They can sense desparation. McCain is desparate to win, but Palin is a gimmick. She's a prop. Unless she has a flawless two months, in which case it was a brilliant move. I doubt it. But then again, I doubted that the inexperienced Obama could muscle his way to the top of the greasy pole.
House GOP loses key fundraising advantage
1 week ago
5 comments:
Now that MY excitement has worn off, I think this is the better analysis. Still, I'd love it to be proven wrong. I think the wildcard is her appeal to the working class stiffs. IF the Republicans can do a good job making the (soon to be) withering media criticism of her seem like an elites vs. average Joe type of thing -- a big "if" -- maybe she works in the end. But I think she neutralizes McCain's best attack on Obama, i.e. that he's just a empty-suit celebrity. Because that's all Palin is, too (albeit a more-like-your-average-person celebrity).
I'm glad you're finally back and posting!
A lot of people are asking themselves whether Palin would have been selected if she were a man. I think it's a bit of an unfair question. First of all, the fact that she's a woman obviously and without a doubt had something to do with her selection. But I don't think you can make the case that it was the only reason McCain chose her.
Imagine if Bobby Jindal, whom many conservatives were pushing, were the running mate. He is similarly low on 'experience,' but he would be hailed for what he is - a rising star within the party, a load of potential, one who won a difficult election by a large margin, etc. You can say all these things about Palin (or Obama, for that matter), but her womanhood (or whatever you want to call it) gets in the way. She ought to be viewed as someone with a ton of potential, who took on established republicans in Alaska and won, who knows the oil and gas industry, and so on.
You mention that Obama's long run for president proves that he's ready to be president, which I think I kind of agree with, even though that sort of points to one of the worst things about politics in our age. It's true that the presidency is all about perceptions and image, and most Americans seem to think of it as a largely figurehead position (which is why every election cycle you see some idiot promoting a 9-yr-old for president, or why people say Oprah should be pres.) The important lesson is that the strengths and weaknesses displayed in the campaign are what's necessary to govern, more than actual political experience. Political nominees have to be charming, likable, sympathetic, someone we can relate to (part of why Bush defied all logic to beat Gore in 2000). I think that's where Palin's strengths are, provided she can hold up. The fire hose of the national media has already been turned on full force and she's going to have to withstand it and come out on top for two full months, which will be tough.
I'm one of those people who are extremely excited about her nomination but also fearful of the liability that such a gamble produces. I'm praying that she'll remain who I think she is, namely an interesting, compelling, fresh-faced and honest outsider who has the courage and the political savvy to survive to and win in November.
Alaska, being so far removed from the mainland U.S. should not be onr of the 50 states. Selecting Palin as the VP Candidate only strengthens the Democratic argument that D.C. should have 2 senators and a voting Representative in congress.
The person that told you Obama would run for President is also the person who told you that a black man would become President of the US before a woman.
Palin is being used. She is not going to attract true women voters.
Palin is simply more qualified than Obama. What has he accomplished as a community organizer, state senator, or the U.S. senate? He has not headed a committee, sponsor a law, or brought down a unethical politician. To his credit he has won the Democratic primary. I will concede that his biggest accomplishment is that he is an astute politician.
As for whether Palin would have picked if she was a woman. Democrat Geraldine Ferraro made the comment that Obama would not have made it as far in the primary if he was not an African American. Look what happened to her. Journalist and pundits are afraid to ask the hard questions.
Post a Comment