CNN: It's McCain and Palin

  • News
  • Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date
In summary, John McCain has chosen Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate. Palin is a relatively unknown politician who has only been in office for two years. She is a Republican and is likely to be a strong supporter of the oil industry. The VP debate is likely to be interesting, as Biden is likely to bully Palin.
  • #141
Math Is Hard said:
I heard her name come up about a month ago as a possibility but then after that, not another peep. They did a good job keeping the surprise under wraps.
From what I've heard, it was a surprise to her too! :tongue2:

Apparently McCain bypassed the normal procedure of investigating her.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #142
isly ilwott said:
Any one of the three others on the tickets would be a better President than Obama.
You never cease to keep me amused. Thanks!
 
  • #143
Evo said:
You hear all this talk about how Palin will help get the women's vote. I seriously doubt that. Who are these people that seem to think women are mindless sheeples? I'm personally appalled by her. She follows a religious belief of keeping women in their place as set forth in the bible and would take away a woman's right to choose (abortion). I believe that it should be "a woman's right to choose", it's not that a woman would be forced to have an abortion, she doesn't even believe that women should have a choice. She's what I would call a "throwback".

PUMAs will vote for McCain-Palin. In fact, they have some snazzy campaign slogans expressing their emotion over the Democratic primary results:

Dammit, I’m mad!

Surely there can be other good "Palin-dromes" as the campaign progresses.

PUMAs comparing Hillary to Ferraro: Gerry paved the way for Hillary. That took 24 years. Hillary paved the way for Sarah. That took two days!
 
Last edited:
  • #144
BobG said:
PUMAs will vote for McCain-Palin. In fact, they have some snazzy campaign slogans expressing their emotion over the Democratic primary results:
I think a lot would have voted for McCain, but I think (as one PUMA was interviewed after the Palin announcement said, she would not be voting for McCain now) that this is going to turn a lot of them away as they are feminists first and would not approve of her. Still there are ones that are just stupid, IMO. To vote for someone you disagree with on most levels, which I would assume if they were in agreement with Hillary, has got to be pure idiocy. I think this is going to slap some sense back into a lot of them. What kind of numbers do the PUMA's claim to have? I saw a couple of them on tv and they were rather frightening, they were just a hair away from screaming.
 
Last edited:
  • #145
Evo said:
I think a lot would have voted for McCain, but I think (as one PUMA was interviewed after the Palin announcement said, she would not be voting for McCain now) that this is going to turn a lot of them away as they are feminists first and would not approve of her. Still there are ones that are just stupid, IMO. To vote for someone you disagree with on most levels, which I would assume if they were in agreement with Hillary, has got to be pure idiocy. I think this is going to slap some sense back into a lot of them. What kind of numbers do the PUMA's claim to have? I saw a couple of them on tv and they were rather frightening, they were just a hair away from screaming.
These people will vote democrat regardless of what they say, or regardless of what is done to them by the democrat party. This is the true definition of sheeple. There vote was cast in cement many moons ago.
 
  • #146
BobG said:
He who laughs at the misfortune of others understands the meaning of life?

Mmmm, I can relate to that. :rofl:
You know Bob, if anyone could convince me of voting for someone I didn't agree with, it would be you. You seem to be the most level headed poster in P&WA and I wish there was some kind of medal I could give you. But then people that don't like me would turn on you, so maybe you're better off if I ignore you. :wink:
 
  • #147
Evo said:
I think a lot would have voted for McCain, but I think (as one PUMA was interviewed after the Palin announcement said, she would not be voting for McCain now) that this is going to turn a lot of them away as they are feminists first and would not approve of her. Still there are ones that are just stupid, IMO. To vote for someone you disagree with on most levels, which I would assume if they were in agreement with Hillary, has got to be pure idiocy. I think this is going to slap some sense back into a lot of them. What kind of numbers do the PUMA's claim to have? I saw a couple of them on tv and they were rather frightening, they were just a hair away from screaming.

Combined with some other similar groups, their estimate is around 10% of Clinton supporters (1.8 million). (Party Unity Means Action - they changed their name).

Just as one might ask how many Feminists for Life members supported Clinton in spite of her views on abortion, you could also ask how many PUMAs will support a McCain-Palin ticket in spite of their views on abortion. The only power any minority political group has is to show they're willing to throw an election rather than have their viewpoints ignored.

It rarely works. The election is rarely close enough for the defectors to matter. Once in a while, though, the party they left wishes they hadn't.
 
  • #148
isly ilwott said:
You see, I'm not worried about Obama's lack of experience either.
...
Obama is still wet behind the ears.
Do you know what you mean when you type those words up?

And speaking of lousy judgment, how about that McCain huh? And I thought George Bush was clueless about the Middle East.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0209/24/lkl.00.html

CALLER: Being a veteran yourself, Mr. McCain, how do you feel about going to war a third time?

MCCAIN: I thank you for the question because that keeps me awake at night. Because I know that as successful as I believe we will be, and I believe that the success will be fairly easy, we will still lose some American young men or women. And that's a great tragedy. But I also believe that these young men and women, as they go into war, are fully understanding that they will be possibly saving the lives of possibly millions of people, including possibly millions of their fellow citizens, because there is very little doubt that if Saddam Hussein acquired a nuclear weapon and the means to deliver it, that he would attack the United States of America.
Freaking funny!

For a change, can we have someone that is capable of a little thought, please?
 
  • #149
Just saw Palin give another speech. Yipes!
She repeated the first speech almost word for word.
The speech writers must be off for Labor Day.
She's still wearing those high tec Spectacles though, so everything is going to be all right!
 
  • #150
Actually, the counter to Palin on the ticket is pretty straight forward.

Hillary Clinton is going to have to play a key role in the Obama campaign and go on a serious attack against Palin.

Will she do it? There's some risk to her own political career if she attacks too hard.

If she's accepted that she had her only real shot at the Presidency, then she probably will. She sets the table for other Democratic candidates like Napolitano or Sebelius. (This would be best for a number of reasons, not least that succeeding a husband isn't exactly the best feminist message - it looks too much like a Bill Clinton 3rd term instead of the first woman President.)

Of course, 2000 should have been McCain's only real shot and look at where we are today. It's not 100% given that this is Clinton's only shot. She might not want to make her most ardent supporters mad.
 
  • #151
BobG said:
Hillary Clinton is going to have to play a key role in the Obama campaign and go on a serious attack against Palin.

Will she do it? There's some risk to her own political career if she attacks too hard.
The Clintons take offense easily, and they hold a grudge. The recent revelation the Palin couldn't bring herself to support Clinton because of Clinton's "whining" is not going to endear the two. If anything can bring Clinton back into play, it's retribution for that slight.
 
  • #152
BobG said:
Actually, the counter to Palin on the ticket is pretty straight forward.

Hillary Clinton is going to have to play a key role in the Obama campaign and go on a serious attack against Palin.

Will she do it? There's some risk to her own political career if she attacks too hard.

If they go after each other too viciously it's going to be viewed as a "catfight". That's just going to be bad for everybody.
 
  • #153
One question for everybody to ponder. If McCain had chosen a young man with no experience in federal government and less than 2 years experience as a governor of a thinly-populated state as his running mate, what would people think of that? Would they be saying "great choice, John"? I think not.

It seems to me that the driving "qualification" of Palin is her gender, and that amounts to pandering on the part of the McCain campaign. Do they think that Hil-lovers will vote for McCain just because there's a (creationist/evangelical/pro-life/pro gun-rights) woman on the ticket? Don't at least some of Clinton's die-hards believe that experience is important? They seemed to make that case whenever they blustered about Obama being inexperienced and Clinton being "ready on day one". One of those ladies (a neighbor in her late 60's) is still talking about Obama "stealing" Clinton's nomination, though I haven't spoken to her since McCain chose Palin.
 
  • #154
Harry S. Truman stepped up to the plate and made a major decision about a bomb, that just a week or two earlier he had no knowledge of, he was virtually unknown, and had a long list of failed enterprises, and yes maybe a little more exposure to battle, WWI.
Overall I think he was one of our better presidents.

I don't see much yet, that says she can't meet the challenge if the needs arise.

Besides she is just so good looking:!)
 
  • #155
turbo-1 said:
One question for everybody to ponder. If McCain had chosen a young man with no experience in federal government and less than 2 years experience as a governor of a thinly-populated state as his running mate, what would people think of that? Would they be saying "great choice, John"? I think not.

It seems to me that the driving "qualification" of Palin is her gender, and that amounts to pandering on the part of the McCain campaign. Do they think that Hil-lovers will vote for McCain just because there's a (creationist/evangelical/pro-life/pro gun-rights) woman on the ticket? Don't at least some of Clinton's die-hards believe that experience is important? They seemed to make that case whenever they blustered about Obama being inexperienced and Clinton being "ready on day one". One of those ladies (a neighbor in her late 60's) is still talking about Obama "stealing" Clinton's nomination, though I haven't spoken to her since McCain chose Palin.

Oh, I think the pandering is beyond obvious.

Call me crazy, but I was sensing some sentiment for a while that if you weren't supporting Obama, you were maybe just a little bit racist. So, now you get a choice: you can either be a racist or a sexist. :smile:
 
  • #156
Her religious beliefs are what is scary to me. I personally do not want a Vice-President, much less a President that speaks in tongues.
 
  • #157
Evo said:
Her religious beliefs are what is scary to me. I personally do not want a Vice-President, much less a President that speaks in tongues.

I'm cool with that. But snake-handling is where I draw the line.
 
  • #158
Evo said:
From what I've heard, it was a surprise to her too! :tongue2:

Apparently McCain bypassed the normal procedure of investigating her.
He used Wikipedia?
 
  • #159
BobG said:
Hillary Clinton is going to have to play a key role in the Obama campaign and go on a serious attack against Palin.

Will she do it? There's some risk to her own political career if she attacks too hard.

As far as Palin goes, I think she is vulnerable from simple exposure. For her more will surely be less. It may not need Hilary as a counterbalance at all. She is apparently not a deep thinker with her faith based science beliefs and I'd say that the more she is called upon to answer the more two dimensional and clueless that she will be seen. One Phil Graham moment from her and their chances will be incinerated to burnt marshmallow.

Unfortunately I think whatever she does the fundamentalist base will continue to think she is just dandy.
 
  • #160
Math Is Hard said:
Oh, I think the pandering is beyond obvious.

Call me crazy, but I was sensing some sentiment for a while that if you weren't supporting Obama, you were maybe just a little bit racist. So, now you get a choice: you can either be a racist or a sexist. :smile:

Unfortunately I think there will be racial fallout in the numbers. And it's not that any that may be against him are racist, but I am certain there will be an element of that in some parts of the country, and some will latch on to some reason other than racism not to vote for him. I think it's regrettable.

As to Palin though I think her fundamentalist views will make it easy not to support her without any reference to sexism.
 
  • #161
Evo said:
I wish there was some kind of medal I could give you. But then people that don't like me would turn on you, so maybe you're better off if I ignore you. :wink:
No one can turn on Bob. He's unturnonable! :biggrin:
 
  • #162
Gokul43201 said:
No one can turn on Bob. He's unturnonable! :biggrin:

omg :rofl:
 
  • #163
LowlyPion said:
As to Palin though I think her fundamentalist views will make it easy not to support her without any reference to sexism.
We know that Obama has been going to church regularly for at least 20 years yet no one here is condemning that.

As an atheist, I find it strange that people are so quick to condemn the religious right while making excuses for the religious left.:rolleyes: At least, if I had to sit through a sermon, I get the feeling I would rather sit through one at Palin's church than at Obama's.
 
  • #164
Cyrus said:
She is trying out for a job. Why shouldn't they be weighted?

At least McCain went to the Naval Academy and was a Naval Aviator. The Naval Academy isn't for idiots.

Even if you want to argue McCain got there because of his father (which I won't argue), at least he was exposed to people of a very high caliber and teachers that demanded much from him.

Honestly, school of Journalism from Idaho?....What award winning journalists ever came out of that place?

Ben Franklin never went to any ivy league school(heck he never finished elementary school) and he is considered one of the more knowledgeable founding fathers of the constitution. He was also a polymath. Don't think just because a political figure never attended an ivy league school , that they will not make a good president. Dubya's ivy league education didn't helped make Bush a good president.
 
  • #165
Evo said:
You hear all this talk about how Palin will help get the women's vote. I seriously doubt that. Who are these people that seem to think women are mindless sheeples? I'm personally appalled by her. She follows a religious belief of keeping women in their place as set forth in the bible and would take away a woman's right to choose (abortion). I believe that it should be "a woman's right to choose", it's not that a woman would be forced to have an abortion, she doesn't even believe that women should have a choice. She's what I would call a "throwback".

I not so sure about women, but I know Obama received a large chunk of the black vote(95 %) , just because he is half black(and a democrat). And when Romney was running for the republican nomination, he won the Utah primaries because of the large Mormon population; Same goes for Huckabee when he garnered a large portion of the evangelical vote. Whether we like to admit it or not , the background(whether it be because of the persons racial, religious or any other affliation) of a presidential candidate does have an impact over the way a person will vote. That is why it is soo hard for an atheist or non-religious person to run for president since 70 % of americans say they are religious.
 
  • #166
Benzoate said:
I not so sure about women, but I know Obama received a large chunk of the black vote(95 %) , just because he is half black(and a democrat). And when Romney was running for the republican nomination, he won the Utah primaries because of the large Mormon population; Same goes for Huckabee when he garnered a large portion of the evangelical vote. Whether we like to admit it or not , the background(whether it be because of the persons racial, religious or any other affliation) of a presidential candidate does have an impact over the way a person will vote. That is why it is soo hard for an atheist or non-religious person to run for president since 70 % of americans say they are religious.

I thought it was well over 70%...?
 
  • #167
grant9076 said:
We know that Obama has been going to church regularly for at least 20 years yet no one here is condemning that.
And you know this from reading how many threads?

But in any case, I have no idea how "regularly" he has been going, nor do I what you mean when you use that word. In any case, over a third of all Americans attend church at least once a month and over half attend at least a few times a year.

Anyway, there's a difference between attending church and being a proponent of creationism.

As an atheist, I find it strange that people are so quick to condemn the religious right while making excuses for the religious left.:rolleyes:
As people that work in science, we are quick to condemn creationists and other such crackpots.

At least, if I had to sit through a sermon, I get the feeling I would rather sit through one at Palin's church than at Obama's.

How much do you know about Palin's Church? What if you found out it followed say, a Dominionist theology?

lisab said:
I thought it was well over 70%...?
About 75% attend church and nearly 80% believe in a God.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=408
 
  • #168
Mississippi's Republican governor will not attend the RNC with a possible cat5 hurricane bearing down on his state, but he has had the foresight to invite McCain and Palin down for a briefing on Sunday, so they can look presidential and concerned. With all the stuff that the local authorities may have to deal with, what is the point of inviting VIPs and tying up resources like state and local police, dispatchers, etc who will have to provide escort services, security details, etc? Won't Mississippi's police have their hands full with people who are evacuating and/or trying to secure their properties?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080831/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_mccain_gustav;_ylt=ArmSv45qu_.yTYGAg43_Hras0NUE
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #169
turbo-1 said:
With all the stuff that the local authorities may have to deal with, what is the point of inviting VIPs and tying up resources like state and local police, dispatchers, etc who will have to provide escort services, security details, etc? Won't Mississippi's police have their hands full with people who are evacuating and/or trying to secure their properties?

Except that Haley Barbour is a good soldier in the Republican party. These kinds of photo ops are grist for the Rove news clip mill. As the former head of the RNC he knows who butters his bread.

So what if people are inconvenienced? They have conservatives to get elected.
 
  • #170
LowlyPion said:
Except that Haley Barbour is a good soldier in the Republican party. These kinds of photo ops are grist for the Rove news clip mill. As the former head of the RNC he knows who butters his bread.

So what if people are inconvenienced? They have conservatives to get elected.
I hope Jackson is top-heavy in cops, dispatchers, and other public-safety personnel, because when people with SS protection roll into town, they place a strain on such services even when everything is going hunky-dory. Gustav may not play nice with Mississippi, and Monday-morning quarterbacking by local officials who felt overwhelmed by a high-profile VIP visit on top of possible mandatory evacuations of coastal areas, pre-positioning medical resources, food, water, ice, etc in advance of a storm... er, well, let's say that those people who work around the clock to provide public safety services in potential emergencies may not be real charitable about the McCain/Palin visit after the fact, especially if it placed undue strains on their resources. McCain should reconsider this trip so this doesn't blow up in his face.
 
  • #171
lisab said:
I thought it was well over 70%...?

I thought so too. But according to a survey taken , 30 % of the people surveyed say they don't go to church or have any religious belief they practice. I guess the remaining 30 % would be composed of athiests , people apathetic to religion, and people who identified themselves as "spiritual"

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/24/us/24religion.html?hp
 
  • #172
grant9076 said:
As an atheist, I find it strange that people are so quick to condemn the religious right while making excuses for the religious left.

The difference of course is that Obama is not apparently OK with allowing Intelligent Design discussions to creep into public education. Nor is he against a woman's right to decide about carrying a baby to term, nor against stem cell research. Nor against gay marriages.

I'm all for letting people believe whatever they want about Creation and conception. I am not alright however with having such theories and extreme moral judgments bleed into mainstream social policy by fiat. I take it as a fundamental of the US system that the many should be free of the tyranny of the few and the few should be free of the tyranny of the many. What they do within their sects is my choice to join or ignore. Their attempts to impose their beliefs on me is intolerable.

grant9076 said:
At least, if I had to sit through a sermon, I get the feeling I would rather sit through one at Palin's church than at Obama's.

I will remain pretty skeptical of this assertion if you are an atheist. I imagine that if you were, you would keep that a secret there in Wasilla, lest an exorcism ensue.
 
  • #173
When in Juneau Palin attends the Juneau Christian Center. For non church goers the trend has been to a music format that attracts the younger generation. Song books are out, big screen LCD's which display the words are in.

Praise songs, such as the one in the link repeat the same verse of a song over and over.



The link is from a Christmas service at Juneau Christian Center. The lady in the foreground with her hands in the air is not directing the music.

Palin's home church is Curch On The Rock in Wasilla.

http://churchontherockak.org/video/index.html

They seem to be pretty informal which is also a trend.

Just to keep peace in the family I attend Church occasionally with my wife at a Southern Baptist Church that has over six thousand members.

For old geezers like me they even have ear plugs available because the music at the Baptist church is deafening. It is like this link only worse.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #174
Evo said:
Here is the problem I have with her, and it seems perhaps the reason she was chosen?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/cvn_palin_evangelicals
Ok, but if McCain's calculus is that he's lost already lost your particular demographic (and he's right? I believe you said you're voting Obama) then he's correct to target evangelicals with his VP selection - just from a political standpoint.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #175
If they really want to get the conservative vote, they should release pics of Palin cooking and cleaning in an apron.
 

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
29
Replies
1K
Views
84K
  • General Discussion
5
Replies
153
Views
16K
Replies
17
Views
7K
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • General Discussion
3
Replies
73
Views
10K
  • General Discussion
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
99
Views
76K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
8K
Back
Top