Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Boing!
If the cliche that "the guy leading in the polls on Labor Day wins" holds out, say hello to President Obama. USA Today/Gallup:
In the head-to-head race between the candidates, Obama now leads 50 percent-43 percent among registered voters. In the USA TODAY poll taken Aug. 21-23, the Illinois senator held a four-point lead.
Obama and his running mate Joe Biden now lead McCain and Sarah Palin 48 percent to 40 percent.
CNN sees the race moving from a 47/47 tie to a functional tie with Obama up one. All the polls bring good news for Democrats: Obama way up on "who can handle the economy," tied on Iraq, down in unexperienced, leading McCain on strong leader. I don't see the Palin pick changing that for McCain. If the argument for Palin is that she is as or a little more experienced than Obama, that doesn't change the fact that she was the first major pick McCain has made. Given the same choice, Obama went for a stolid 36-year senator over wet-behind-the-ears types like the governor of Virginia.
I saw the new polls while having [well, not] lunch [but whatever 3:34 p.m. Thai food could be designated] with some Colorado McCain delegates. They shrugged it off.
"The debates are going to matter," delegate Summer Vanderbilt said. "What's going to happen when the Democrats find their candidate can't speak without a teleprompter?"
Vanderbilt told me she'd gotten Ron Paul supporters' DVDs in the mail, encouraging her to switch her vote in the convention hall. "I'm a very conservative Republican," she said. "Not a libertarian."
I do think the polls underrate how much happier the base is, post-Palin.
shrike|9.1.08 @ 5:42PM|#
This is just too good.
Bill Bennett just blew up on CNN concerning the Palin Babygate
story.
What did this country do before blowhards like him defined our
morality for us?
Get thee back to the casino, Bill!
|9.1.08 @ 6:00PM|#
Good reporting. You somehow neglect Rasmussen, the last few
elections' most accurate pollster:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/general_election_match_up_history
which shows essentially identical numbers pre-and post
convention.
Also, you fail to note, in spite of following the election day to
day, the gallup tracking poll that switched from registered voters
to likely voters just before the Democratic convention, back to
registered voters immediately after. It was well noted when the
gallup poll suddenly showed a drop for Obama pre-convention. They
switch it back to registered - pow instant bounce.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/109954/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Maintains-6Point-Lead-49-43.aspx
Keep up the cheerleading.
|9.1.08 @ 6:13PM|#
Bill Bennett just blew up on CNN concerning the Palin
Babygate story.
Perhaps because ill individuals such as yourself and formerly "live
and let live" lefties are showing themselves to be such raging
hypocrites?
Who'dathunk that there'd be a whole host of right-on "progressive"
Volken telling Sarah Palin to get back in the kitchen while
simultaneously reveling in a personal affair like it's their own
fucking episode of Desperate Housewives.
Jesus Christ on a Cracker.
|9.1.08 @ 6:35PM|#
AGO, yeah ditto. The leftie hypocrisy is getting damned old, and it's only been two days since they started their barefoot/pregnant meme. They sure love to dish out accusations of hypocrisy at the tap of a foot, but couldn't see it on their own side if it were a rotten septic tank that just collapsed underneath them.
Diane|9.1.08 @ 6:36PM|#
Now that we know the tramp daughter is pregnant the only question is whether the father is the brother or the grandfather.McSame will pay for his slap in the face to all real women.
|9.1.08 @ 7:07PM|#
Keep in mind that there have traditionally been convention
bounced and VP bounces. The rising poll numbers for Obama reflect
the net of his convention bounce plus his BP bounce minus McCain's
VP bounce.
leading McCain on strong leader
If Obama keeps that in place, ballgame.
JDM,
The Gallup poll shows Obama one point ahead for several days
pre-convention, and 6-8 points ahead since the convention. As you
say, both sets of numbers are RVs, so that's apples-to-apples.
|9.1.08 @ 7:09PM|#
Perhaps because ill individuals such as yourself and
formerly "live and let live" lefties are showing themselves to be
such raging hypocrites?
Yeah, that's it. They guy with the "Book of Virtues" and huge
gambling debts just can't tolerate hypocrisy.
Poor wingnuts, those mean ol' lefties just won't...you know...stop
them from freaking out on television.
jkp|9.1.08 @ 7:11PM|#
Yep, nothing but good old-fashioned live-and-let-live
libertarians in this comment thread.
It is also my belief that Matt Welch should be fired.
|9.1.08 @ 7:11PM|#
I'd keep an eye on the polls over the next few days. My suspicion is that Obama got a modest bounce, but it's been undone by McCain's pick of Palin. I think in a week McCain might have a slight lead, if the GOP convention goes well.
|9.1.08 @ 7:13PM|#
Diane as an Obama supporter let me be the first to say: please shut the fuck up, leave here and don't come back.
|9.1.08 @ 7:18PM|#
The rising poll numbers for Obama reflect the net of his
convention bounce plus his BP bounce minus McCain's VP
bounce.
And looks like McCain is about to have his opportunity to generate
a convention bounce dampened down . . .
|9.1.08 @ 7:19PM|#
"The debates are going to matter," delegate Summer
Vanderbilt said. "What's going to happen when the Democrats find
their candidate can't speak without a teleprompter?"
You see a lot of this wistful thinking. The people engaging in it
seem to have forgotten the primary campaign.
Over the course of the 137 debates the Democrats had, Obama
improved from also-ran status to basically tying Clinton. It was
only the very last debate, which was something like a month and a
half after all the other debates, where he performed poorly.
McCain's not so hot as a speaker, even under the best of
circumstances. Kerry's performance in 2004 is thought to have moved
the polls 2-4 points, and that was probably the biggest set of
blowouts in the history of televised presidential debates. Maybe
McCain can come out the better in a series of debates with Obama,
but there is no way it is going to be as lopsided a set of
victories as last time.
|9.1.08 @ 7:25PM|#
Is it just me, or are there so many "moving targets" ( Gustav,Palin,DNC bounce) , that the polls are actually irrelevant for a few more days?
|9.1.08 @ 7:25PM|#
McCain debated the North Vietnamese for 5 1/2 years. In fact, he debated one guy right into drawing a cross on the ground, that's how good he is! He was a POW doncha know?
|9.1.08 @ 7:31PM|#
"The debates are going to matter," delegate Summer Vanderbilt
said. "What's going to happen when the Democrats find their
candidate can't speak without a teleprompter?"
Is this person delusional? Is Leiberman going to be there to help
Obama sort out all the things he shouldn't be expected to know in a
post 911 world? If this represents the norm, then the Republicans
are seriously underestimating their opponent.
Dwayne Mayor|9.1.08 @ 7:46PM|#
McCain will rid himself of this Palin baggage very soon. I don't see this circus continuing for much longer. She will quietly step down to "tend to the family" and McCain will get another chance to actually make a sensible pick.
Col. Mustard|9.1.08 @ 7:57PM|#
Now that Obama has stooped so low as to attack Palin's underage daughters via surrogates the Democrats might want to think of getting a new candidate for the top of the ticket.One with experience this time.
|9.1.08 @ 8:10PM|#
Not that anyone cares about an anonymous random Internet loon
corecting himself but
the gallup tracking poll that switched from registered voters
to likely voters just before the Democratic convention [then back
to registered after]
didn't actually happen. The gallup tracking poll does show an Obama
bounce as well. I blame misreporting by the realclearpolitics.com
poll aggregating page. Which, I swear without proof, was putting an
"LV" next to the gallup tracking poll for a week or so.
I officially downgrade this offense from "fraudulent cheerleading"
to "cheerleading"
You win this round reason Democrats. Savor it well.
|9.1.08 @ 8:17PM|#
"Diane" is a patent false-flag poster. And, based on looking at Daily Kos, ThinkProgress, and other leftwing sites, it appears that 90%+ of the posters are raising the issue in the context of pointing out the hypocrisy of rightwingers who would be ripping bloody chunks out of Obama and announcing that America was going to collapse as a new Sodom if he had a pregnant, unwed, teenage daughter.
voxpo|9.1.08 @ 8:18PM|#
"live and let live"
It should go without saying, but you can "let live" and yet mock,
jeer, jest, parody, protest, shun and denounce.
|9.1.08 @ 8:18PM|#
The real question is: what is happening in the battleground
states? What 3 states will decide this election?
In my mind: Ohio, Michigan, Colorado. I think PA will go to
Obama.
|9.1.08 @ 8:19PM|#
The Republicans can't change the ticket now. That would be a disaster. "Republicans in Turmoil." They've just got to make the best of it.
|9.1.08 @ 8:24PM|#
Sean - add Virginia to that list.
Michigan should go Democratic. Ohio (as always) will be too close
to call...
|9.1.08 @ 8:31PM|#
Hey Optimist-
I wonder how the Palin choice will play out in these battleground
states?
|9.1.08 @ 9:02PM|#
Nevada has to go on the list. Michigan needs to come off. It's a safe Democratic state.
|9.1.08 @ 9:15PM|#
Florida is in play as well.
The Palin pick might play well in CO. Too early to tell.
cuntivore|9.1.08 @ 9:45PM|#
Over the course of the 137 debates the Democrats had, Obama
improved from also-ran status to basically tying
Clinton.
That wasn't because of the debates...and he definitely wasn't
considered an "also ran" when the campaign began back in early 2007
-- he was considered one of the main threats to HRC along with
Edwards.
Unless you want to acknowledge McCain's rise from dead-in-the-water
status in mid-2007 to party nominee as a product of his superior
debate skills.
BDB|9.1.08 @ 9:52PM|#
cuntivore -
They hate Palin according to focus groups. Also, she was a
Buchananite. The Jewish voters aren't going to like that.
SIV|9.1.08 @ 9:59PM|#
North FLA should love Palin, excepting the Bolsheviks in
Tallahassee.
Palin wasn't a Buchananite.
Dwayne Mayor|9.1.08 @ 10:01PM|#
I'm not so sure. Why couldn't she just say that she doesn't want her family subjected to such media scrutiny and she felt the need to bow out for their sake? Everyone wins. McCain generated some excitement in his base, grabbed some media attention, and can then move forward with a real choice. I see this is the only hope for my party.
|9.1.08 @ 10:03PM|#
Dwayne, you poor soul. Maybe you need to find a new party.
Besides, there aren't any better choices, unless by some miracle
McCain lights a spark in Colin Powell or something.
|9.1.08 @ 10:07PM|#
She wasn't a Buchananite BDB. You need to keep your Palin smears straight. The one for today is son Track impregnated Bristol and was sent to the Army. Sarah Palin then pretended to give birth to the baby. Get on the right page man!
Eric Dondero|9.1.08 @ 10:19PM|#
ABC News is now attacking Sarah Palin for her ties to third
parties in Alaska. They're focusing in on her "membership" in the
Alaska Indepdence Party. But other blogs are mentioning her support
from the Libertarian Party, as well.
Watch for the liberal media to slam Palin for being a "libertarian"
in the days to come.
BDB|9.1.08 @ 10:23PM|#
If he had picked Bobby Jindal he would be being lauded right now for his great judgement.
|9.1.08 @ 10:54PM|#
No worries BDB. No, she wasn't a Buchananite. She welcomed him to visit to her town while she was mayor and wore a campaign button. She later wrote a letter to the local paper explaining she wasn't a supporter, she was just welcoming him. The records from the time indicate she was a Forbes supporter. There's no evidence she ever volunteered or gave money to his campaigns except Pat's say-so. And how would even remember some mayor from a tiny town in Alaska? (His sister and advisor Bay denies it.) Easy mistake to make man. Don't trust content from Pat Buchanan or Florida Representative Wexler (who was also pushing this a couple of days ago.)
Kip|9.1.08 @ 11:03PM|#
"Now that we know the tramp daughter is pregnant the only
question is whether the father is the brother or the
grandfather.McSame will pay for his slap in the face to all real
women."
Project much, Diane?
The Drooler|9.1.08 @ 11:11PM|#
"Why couldn't she just say that she doesn't want her family
subjected to such media scrutiny and she felt the need to bow out
for their sake?"
Because both she and McCain were aware of the "issue" before she
was tapped. Also, it was no secret in her hometown.
Mummud\'s Mommadidajohn|9.2.08 @ 12:40AM|#
Meanwhile, Back at the World
Dutch intel: US to strike Iran in coming weeks
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1220186494776&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Face it. Bush hasnothing to lose.
SIV|9.2.08 @ 1:37AM|#
Watch for the liberal media to slam Palin for being a
"libertarian" in the days to come.
That is the kind of smear that could make me vote Republican even
with McCain on top of the ticket.*
*I can vote or not for whoever the Fuck I want to including Obama.
Doesn't matter a damn bit as I live in GA and if this State doesn't
go McCain/Palin you can call it a DemocRAT landslide.
Tom Walls|9.2.08 @ 2:23AM|#
I am gonna bust a gut!
Episiarch | September 1, 2008, 7:25pm | #
McCain debated the North Vietnamese for 5 1/2 years. In fact, he
debated one guy right into drawing a cross on the ground, that's
how good he is!
Speaking of busted, there was a photo of Palin sitting on a bed in
a dorm room wearing a shirt that read "I may be broke, but I'm not
flat busted!" Very cute.
|9.2.08 @ 7:24AM|#
Jack wrote: "And, based on looking at Daily Kos, ThinkProgress,
and other leftwing sites, it appears that 90%+ of the posters are
raising the issue in the context of pointing out the hypocrisy of
rightwingers who would be ripping bloody chunks out of Obama and
announcing that America was going to collapse as a new Sodom if he
had a pregnant, unwed, teenage daughter."
Personally, I don't really care that she has a pregnant
daughter.
What got me about the 'Trig-is-really-Bristol's-baby' story was not
that it was Bristol's baby, but the part where Bristol was taken
out of school for 'mono' for 6 months like some kind of leper, then
the baby was secretly adopted by the mother.
That strikes me as the kind of shame-driven behavior that leads
many girls to get abortions. Given that Palin is against abortion,
you'd think she'd see that it would be a good idea to get rid of,
and not indulge in, the kind of thing that creates demand for
abortions in the first place.
Admittedly, that's quite a nuanced complaint.
Gengis|9.2.08 @ 7:46AM|#
And hey, if the lying communist gig ever gets old, you can always go to work lopping people's heads off!
cuntivore|9.2.08 @ 8:23AM|#
Jon H, that particular "nuanced complaint" has zero basis in
fact. A sophisticated lie is still a lie.
90%+ of the posters are raising the issue in the context of
pointing out the hypocrisy of rightwingers who would be ripping
bloody chunks out of Obama and announcing that America was going to
collapse as a new Sodom if he had a pregnant, unwed, teenage
daughter.
There's just no pleasing those people. If the right wing had
denounced Palin over this, they would be painted as closed-minded
zealots. If they ignore it and embrace her anyway, they're
hypocrites, because they're acting inconsistent with some
hypothetical about Obama.
|9.2.08 @ 8:51AM|#
That is the kind of smear that could make me vote Republican
even with McCain on top of the ticket
Wow, you're easy. I bet the GOP wishes other voters were as easily
manuevered into the counting-ceiling-tiles position. (And that
Palin's daughter had been less so.)
"live and let live" It should go without saying, but you can
"let live" and yet mock, jeer, jest, parody, protest, shun and
denounce.
Um, not really. The "let live" in "live and let live" doesn't mean
simply "don't murder," it means something like "tolerate" or "allow
to live in peace without moral badgering or condemnation." The
actions you list, especially jeering, protesting, denouncing and
shunning (shunning? are you serious??), are the exact
opposite of "live and let live."
|9.2.08 @ 8:58AM|#
There's just no pleasing those people. If the right wing had
denounced Palin over this, they would be painted as closed-minded
zealots. If they ignore it and embrace her anyway, they're
hypocrites, because they're acting inconsistent with some
hypothetical about Obama.
It's not too hard to figure out: right-wing views on cultural
issues are wrong, so when they live up to them they are wrong. If
they decide not to live up to them in cases when it benefits them
to ignore their own views, they are hypocrites. Thus, your
conclusion that "there is no pleasing [their critics]" is not
warranted. You leave out an obvious alternative: the critics would
be "pleased" if these right-wing nutjobs gave up their rigid,
close-minded moral positions.
cuntivore|9.2.08 @ 9:26AM|#
Ethan, the problem is that you have no evidence of how
right-wingers would behave if Obama had an unmarried pregnant
daughter. You're just assuming.
I'm all for pointing out hypocrisy when someone doesn't practice
what they actually preach. I just have a problem with accusing
someone of hypocrisy for not practicing what you think they would
preach in some hypothetical situation.
cuntivore|9.2.08 @ 9:30AM|#
This "hypocrisy" angle is simply a crude technique for lefties to bring up this story without appearing to violate their belief that unmarried pregnancy is A-OK. And even if that angle was true of a hypothetical right-winger, that doesn't really hurt Palin, does it? And we all know that's the goal here.
|9.2.08 @ 9:37AM|#
the problem is that you have no evidence of how
right-wingers would behave if Obama had an unmarried pregnant
daughter. You're just assuming.
No, it's a conclusion based on their past behavior and upon the
general principle that political types will use anything against
their opponents, particulary in a presidential race and
particularly when doing so highlights the very differences they
wish to illuminate between their world view and their
opponent's.
|9.2.08 @ 9:46AM|#
This "hypocrisy" angle is simply a crude technique for
lefties to bring up this story without appearing to violate their
belief that unmarried pregnancy is A-OK. And even if that angle was
true of a hypothetical right-winger, that doesn't really hurt
Palin, does it? And we all know that's the goal here.
You sure seem to be doing a lot of the mind-reading you claim is
unwarranted when performed by others. I suppose there is a
hypocrisy angle here, but I won't bring it up as I know how much
you hate it when people do that.
|9.2.08 @ 9:51AM|#
If the cliche that "the guy leading in the polls on Labor
Day wins" holds out, say hello to President Obama.
Do the polls supporting this cliche include post-Labor Day
conventions? It seems like the real data point might actually be -
the guy leading after the convention bounces damp out wins the
election.
On babygate, I think this is another opportunity for error for the
Dems. Anyone on the fence (hell, anyone with much in the way of
human decency) is likely to be repelled by the Dem/media assault on
a pregnant teenager, which is how this is going to come off.
Out in the real world, lots of people know "good" families that
have trouble with their kids. The real question isn't, did your
daughter get in trouble. The real question is, how did your family
deal with it. All I see on this story is that the family is being
very supportive, and the daughter plans to marry the father. Any
grinding on this story is going to blow back.
Obama understands this; that's why his followers would be well
advised to take his lead. I thought his response was very classy;
reminding folks that his mother was eighteen when he was born.
Dwayne Mayor|9.2.08 @ 10:36AM|#
I don't think so RC Dean. Most people who apply a moment of
reflective thought to this place the blame on Palin not on the
media for doing their job. She knew good and well her unwed
17-year-old child was pregnant and she knew it would have national
spotlight if she accepted the VP nomination. The attack is not on
her daughter but on the mother and her parenting/moralistic
preaching/ and exploiting her family when it suits her. It's about
exposing the hypocrisy of the right who say one thing and do
another.
They say pro-life and then bomb the dickens out of other countries.
They say "family values" but then Palin demonstrates her own
household is out of order and out of control. They say Palin is
such a saint for keeping the Down Syndrome baby and yet she
abandons the 4-month old infant to go stomping around the country
for her septuagenarian pimp. And if they win, she has relegated the
baby to a nanny and sucking at the tit of the father's breast for
the next eight years. This is all about hypocrisy and character not
Bristol getting knocked up for lord knows how long.
|9.2.08 @ 11:30AM|#
Now that it is obvious that Palin will not deliver the Hilary
vote she is already baggage. Her abuse of power at the gubenetorial
level will haunt her and McSame.
Her families lack of a moral compass will, like it or not, reflect
upon her (Palin).
I can't wait til they roll out McSame for one of the debates when
the questions are not pre-canned for the GOP so they can decide
what McSame will say. He's good at jokes off the cuff, but to speak
intellegently, he's a bit short (sic).
Potts|9.2.08 @ 11:34AM|#
yet she abandons the 4-month old infant to go stomping
around the country for her septuagenarian pimp.
I'll agree 100% that Palin is yet another example of a righty
blowhard hypocrite, but as a friend pointed out to me last night
when I made the same argument about the kid, there's no reason why
her husband can't take care of it. Leave her alone, she seems to be
doing more than her fair share of sinking the GOP's chances without
our help.
|9.2.08 @ 11:56AM|#
The media is waaay overblowing this issue, but is that
surprising? It's a presidential campaign, for crying out
loud.
Palin has no one to blame for the attention being drawn to Bristol
but herself. She knows the price for presidential ambitions is the
same level of scrutiny.
|9.2.08 @ 12:03PM|#
McCain's biggest problem going into the election was that the
Republican base, especially the evangelicals, hates his guts. Now
with the Palin pick and the Democrats obsession with the sex life
of a 17 year old, the base feels that it is their God given duty to
vote for McCain. McCain has totally solidified his base.
The thing with Palin's daughter is really gross. So what if Palin
thinks teenagers shouldn't have sex. Most people teenage daughters
would agree. In addition, maybe the girl used contraceptives and
they failed. Lots of people who support traditional sex ed and hand
out condoms to their 14 year olds, daughter's still get pregnant.
Do we really want to go there? Is this girl supposed to tell the
world how and why she had sex and what her contraceptive habits are
in order to defend her mother against charges of hypocrisy? The
whole thing is just gross.
My favorite argument in this whole thing is the "Palin knew her
daughter was pregnant and should not have accepted the VP spot
because of it". Why? Who the fuck cares if her daughter is or is
not pregnant? All that argument is saying is that Palin should have
known that old perverts like Andrew Sullivan and nutcases on Kos
would as much as call her daughter a whore and drag her threw the
mud and Palin is clearly responsible for their behavior.
The upside of this is that the more people talk about this, the
more the election becomes about the culture war and the less it is
about things like the economy and foreign policy. The culture war
is such a winning issue for the Dems? Strange times we live in.
rationalist|9.2.08 @ 12:20PM|#
It's not too hard to figure out: right-wing views on cultural issues are wrong, so when they live up to them they are wrong. If they decide not to live up to them in cases when it benefits them to ignore their own views, they are hypocrites. Thus, your conclusion that "there is no pleasing [their critics]" is not warranted. You leave out an obvious alternative: the critics would be "pleased" if these right-wing nutjobs gave up their rigid, close-minded moral positions.
Bingo, brother. The only way to fight back those religious heathens against liberalism is to shout them down with their own hypocrisy. You see, irrational people have irrational ideals, e.g. of your mythical "Christ." If you do not live up to that ideal, then you are a bad person under your own belief system. No belief system is correct, so only your own matters. Of course, yours is wrong if you can't live up to it, and in addition you're a bad person for not doing so. QED.
|9.2.08 @ 12:23PM|#
"If you do not live up to that ideal, then you are a bad person
under your own belief system. No "
If you are going to rip on a religion at least understand what it
is. The fundemental tenent of Christianity is that everyone fails
to live up to the ideal because they are born with sin. We are all
sinners and need God's forgivness through Christ. You are
presenting a straw man.
|9.2.08 @ 12:36PM|#
I'd say that a candidate who is still solidifying his base on September 2 is in a bit of a rough spot.
|9.2.08 @ 12:41PM|#
It is a long time until election Joe and there hasn't been a Republican Convention yet. I seem to remember every Democratic candidate in my life time being up big around this time. The media chocking on Obama's cock tends to pay off more in August and less in October and November.
rationalist|9.2.08 @ 12:41PM|#
John: No, I'm imitating a straw man.
Be wewy, wewy quiet. I'm hunting Leftists. If you keep interjecting
with facts, you're either going to drive them away or make it hard
to trap them.
|9.2.08 @ 1:00PM|#
It is almost exactly two months until the election, John.
The Republican convention began yesterday, though admittedly, it
was easy to miss.
You seem to remember wrong, because Kerry, Gore, Dukakis, Mondale,
and Carter were losing at this point in the race. Hence, the Labor
Day headline.
|9.2.08 @ 1:09PM|#
My apologies rationalist.
Joe,
Most people who are not movement convservatives, Kos nutcases or
old perverts like Sullivan, start paying attention about the time
of the convention and make up their minds based on the speeches at
the convention and the debates. Time will tell. McCain may give a
lousy speech on Thursday. Palin really may be Dan Quayle. Or McCain
may give a great speech and Palin may be anything but Dan
Quayle.
The Palin pick definitely took care of McCain's problems with his
base. Can he make the sell with everyone else? I don't know. But,
the election is decided in September and October, unless it is 1984
or 1964 and a complete blowout.
|9.2.08 @ 2:30PM|#
I'd say that a candidate who is still solidifying his base
on September 2 is in a bit of a rough spot.
Given Obama's persistent difficulties with blue collar Dems, I
would have to agree.
This election is turning out to be more interesting in some ways
than I thought it would. The depressing thing is that nearly
everyone seems to agree that suburban women hold the balance of
power.
|9.2.08 @ 2:39PM|#
Most people who apply a moment of reflective thought to this
place the blame on Palin not on the media for doing their
job.
Its a little odd for Dems to be blaming the parent of a pregnant
teenager, no? And for them to think they can bait Repubs/social
conservatives into doing so shows a pretty shocking disregard for
the little people in flyover country, who, as I noted, aren't as
stupid as apparatchiks like to think.
She knew good and well her unwed 17-year-old child was pregnant
and she knew it would have national spotlight if she accepted the
VP nomination.
Maybe it was naive of her not to forsee the kind of vicious attacks
that the Dems have launched at her and her family, I'll grant you
that.
The attack is not on her daughter but on the mother and her
parenting/moralistic preaching/ and exploiting her family when it
suits her.
Well, show me a politican who doesn't "exploit" their family. And
point wasn't that the attacks were on the daughter, but that they
were going to come off that way to people. In any event, I think
you're going to have a hard time portraying Sarah Palin as
"moralistic/preaching", or getting anyone to believe she is a bad
parent. Attempts to do so will blow back.
It's about exposing the hypocrisy of the right who say one
thing and do another.
How so? What has Sarah Palin said that has been contradicted by how
she's handled her daughter's pregnancy?
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245