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.
  • #491
For information only for any that didn't see the cover of the National Enquirer:

http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm157/THESPREADIT/nationalenquirersarahpalinstorycove.jpg

This is what the references have been to.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #492
Ivan Seeking said:
I would call that command experience, not executive experience. We elect civilians, not soldiers.



Governer of a state of 660,000... That is considered a small city where I come from.

Not to be nitpicky, but a city of 660,000 is huge! Only Texas (6) and California (4) have more than one city that big. In fact, there's only 19 cities in the whole US that big.

Together, the 19 cities of 660,000 or bigger comprise 10% of the US population. Hence the reasoning that comments like Giuliani's might work well for 90% of the population.

Okay, that's probably an exaggeration since the cities over 500,000 are pretty big, too. That's another 15 cities. Taking pot shots at the big city folks still goes over well with around 85% of the US population.

When it comes to perception, most people would consider being Governor of Alaska the equivalent of being Governor of Texas or Governor of Arkansas if Republicans didn't feel nervous enough to toss being mayor of a city of 9,000 in there (and I think a lot of Republicans running the campaign are definitely nervous about her - most of them are big city folks, themselves).
 
  • #493
BobG said:
Not to be nitpicky, but a city of 660,000 is huge! Only Texas (6) and California (4) have more than one city that big.

I grew up in California [Los Angeles area]. In either case, we are talking about a State that has the population of a city.

The irony for me that adminstrative experience is the least of my concerns. Obama will have peons for those duties. The job of the President is to stay focused on the big problems; not to be a bean counter. In fact, that is one trait that really worried me about Hillary: Her range of [philosophical] vision was too limited.
 
Last edited:
  • #496
BobG said:
Not to be nitpicky, but a city of 660,000 is huge! Only Texas (6) and California (4) have more than one city that big.

Not really. Those numbers are artifacts of the dated delineation of city limits, and the fact that lots of the population growth over the past decades has been in the suburbs and exurbs, which often lie outside the city limits. If you instead account by metropolitan statistical areas, which depend only on population density and economic interaction, you'll find that there are more than 80 metropolitan areas in the US with populations that exceed 600,000. Those 80+ MSA's easily account for an overwhelming majority of the US population. I.e., Alaska is a state with a population comparable to the Wichita metro area:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_United_States_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas
 
  • #497
BobG said:
When it comes to perception, most people would consider being Governor of Alaska the equivalent of being Governor of Texas or Governor of Arkansas

Arkansas, sure: like Alaska, it's an insignificant backwater that is heavily dependent on Federal largesse. But Texas? Not even close. Texas is one of the largest, fastest-growing, most influential states in the Union.
 
  • #499
Though the bumps are both pretty small, it isn't too surprising that Obama's was bigger - he's the more energetic public speaker and Democrats respond more to that type of thing anyway.

We'll see how it settles-out over the next week or two.

[edit] In any case, I like USA Today's "Poll Tracker" because it puts them all on one graph. Interestingly, it doesn't show a convention bump for either of them (though they are a couple of days behind): http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/poll-tracker.htm
 
  • #500
LightbulbSun said:
Election polls are bogus, I hope you realize this.
Bogus? As opposed to non bogus polls? Explain why you think these polls are any different than any other opinion polls.
 
  • #501
Evo said:
Bogus? As opposed to non bogus polls? Explain why you think these polls are any different than any other opinion polls.

To the extent that there are 60 days to election I think we all expect that today's poll doesn't express the will of the electorate when votes are cast. That's the only poll that does count.

Not measured are the intangibles like whether sexism or racism will play a silent part in this year's go round. Or whether the people polled will actually vote.

I think it was Gallup that selected Dewey over Truman so ... go figure.
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:aMXPENG8syEJ:www.pbs.org/fmc/timeline/e1948election.htm+gallup+dewey+truman&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

But you may be sure that if McCain were leading, it would be proof for the right wing that it represented a clear mandate of acceptance of McCain/Palin.
 
  • #502
I checked electoral-vote.com today and it had Obama winning by a larger lead than in the past four or five days I've looked at it:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

I then checked "this day in 2004" and saw Bush in the lead by a smaller margin than Obama's current lead:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2004/Pres/Maps/Sep05.html

So this gives me hope, as I lean towards Obama (I'm not even voting for him, though, and in front of my home, on the grass, you will see a yard sign for nader).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #503
LowlyPion said:
For information only for any that didn't see the cover of the National Enquirer:

http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm157/THESPREADIT/nationalenquirersarahpalinstorycove.jpg

This is what the references have been to.
Now that fair dinkum is defined up thread to mean anything at all, relevant or not, I choose to include
NASA MOON WALKER ALIEN COVER UP
Former NASA astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell, an Apollo 14 moon-walking vet alleges extraterrestrial contact has been covered up for sixty years!
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/nasa_moon_walker_edgar_mitchell_alien_cover_up/celebrity/65204
Hey they were right about Edwards.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #504
OrbitalPower said:
I checked electoral-vote.com today and it had Obama winning by a larger lead than in the past four or five days I've looked at it:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

I then checked "this day in 2004" and saw Bush in the lead by a smaller margin than Obama's current lead:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2004/Pres/Maps/Sep05.html

So this gives me hope, as I lean towards Obama (I'm not even voting for him, though, and in front of my home, on the grass, you will see a yard sign for nader).

Just curious, op (not original poster!)...why won't you vote for Obama, especially since he's earned your, um, lean :wink: ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #505
OrbitalPower said:
So this gives me hope, as I lean towards Obama (I'm not even voting for him, though, and in front of my home, on the grass, you will see a yard sign for nader).

I could never vote for Nader. I consider him a bit too selfish and eager for limelight, lacking in pragmatism, without any hope of ever doing anything, but being an election year gad fly. I recognize his rights of course to run as he wishes, just as he must as well recognize he will have to live without my vote.

For me it will always boil down to his tipping Florida to Bush by siphoning Gore votes. If he truly believed in his stated agendas, he did more damage to those agendas than any good his candidacy has ever accomplished. I've no question in my mind the world has NOT been a better place since that inauspicious start to the Bush term in office.
 
  • #506
lisab said:
Just curious, op (not original poster!)...why won't you vote for Obama, especially since he's earned your, um, lean :wink: ?

If it was solely out of those two I would probably vote for Obama. However, he hasn't spoken up, or has even voted the other way, on a lot of the key issues I care about. He has played to the religious right a bit and I'm not sure if he's as big of reformer as he claims to be. Biden as well voted for some of the same Bush attacks on civil liberties and democracy.

There are a few other candidates in the race, although they only poll at 3 and 4%. Still, I believe the American people should have more voices and choices when it comes to candidates and parties, especially since the two party duopoly is looking more and more like a one party figure with two talking heads.

And besides, I'm in a "safe state" anyway. :wink:
 
  • #507
LowlyPion said:
I could never vote for Nader. I consider him a bit too selfish and eager for limelight, lacking in pragmatism, without any hope of ever doing anything, but being an election year gad fly. I recognize his rights of course to run as he wishes, just as he must as well recognize he will have to live without my vote.

For me it will always boil down to his tipping Florida to Bush by siphoning Gore votes. If he truly believed in his stated agendas, he did more damage to those agendas than any good his candidacy has ever accomplished. I've no question in my mind the world has NOT been a better place since that inauspicious start to the Bush term in office.

I believe this has been analyzed dozens of times and I think a majority of Nader's voters would have stayed him on election day and another large faction were conservatives, as "Republicans for Nader" was bigger in Florida than other places.

And some people think that Gore did win in Florida, anyway, despite Nader's precense (as well as the few thousand votes the other left-wing third parties got, it wasn't just the Greens down there).

I think third parties can be good because they help raise issues many of the official candidates aren't talking about. This is true with regards to women's rights, the farmer's progressive populist movement, and so on. Taking on the entrenched corporate interests is the social movement of our times in my opinion and Barack I don't think is as good as he could be.
 
  • #508
The people who think Nader cost Gore the election in 2000 might get their justice, though, because Bob Barr and the Libertarians could tip a few states to Obama if the race is close enough.
 
  • #509
OrbitalPower said:
I think third parties can be good because they help raise issues many of the official candidates aren't talking about. This is true with regards to women's rights, the farmer's progressive populist movement, and so on. Taking on the entrenched corporate interests is the social movement of our times in my opinion and Barack I don't think is as good as he could be.

I don't disagree with what you say, it's just that I lost respect for Nader the man, given that even a little effort on his part could have actually changed the world. Should Gore have worked to get more votes there? Probably. Was the loss his responsibility? Probably. It all is what it is. Nothing to do about it now ... except I do get to vote against Nader at every election.
 
  • #510
OrbitalPower said:
The people who think Nader cost Gore the election in 2000 might get their justice, though, because Bob Barr and the Libertarians could tip a few states to Obama if the race is close enough.

I think this would be small consolation. Bush as the talking head for Cheney Rove is far the worse outcome than if McCain had been President those first 4 years. Though admittedly I think keeping McCain from office with this Palin woman next in line, would be best, since such a possibility apparently presents some outcomes more dangerous than having had Bust the last 8 years.
 
  • #511
Here is a rundown on some of the Palin scandals from the NY Daily News:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/republican_race/toplists/sarah_palin_scandalwatch_whats_true_whats_false/sarah_palin_scandalwatch_whats_true_whats_false.html

Fired the librarian for not banning certain books?
NYDailyNews said:
ALLEGATION: Tried to censor public library

VERDICT: SOME TRUTH. Palin, as mayor of Wasilla, discussed the possibility of banning some books. Palin fired the town librarian, but rehired her after residents voiced disapproval. Palin later told a local newspaper that her discussion about book banning was "rhetorical."


Makes it hard to believe that she didn't intervene inappropriately in the Monegan forced resignation.
 
  • #512
LightbulbSun said:
Election polls are bogus, I hope you realize this.

Yes, this is why candidates, and in particular, political strategists, are so interested in polling data.
 
  • #513
The problem I have with polls comes when they get disseminated a few days before an election, or even on the day of an election. People may or may not go to the polls based on some poll that may or may not be correct, or maybe even purposely falsified.

Giving election results before before all polling places are closed I would consider to be inappropriate also.
 
  • #514
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/516967.html
It's the season for Alaskans to be rewarded just for living here, and this year's take is extra sweet: $3,269, a record share of the state's oil wealth combined with a special cash payout to help with stratospheric energy prices.
I know it would have happened any way but it still must be nice to cut checks for the people you want voting for you. I wonder if Obama or Biden could get away with giving away money.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #515
Regarding the Wasilla Librarian,

http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/515512.html

Regarding Subpoenas being issued by the legislature in regard to the legislative investigation into Monegan being pressured to resign after refusing to fire Palin's ex-brother in law.

http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/517681.html

Apparently the latest Palin tactic to remove the case from the legislative process to a panel of her own appointees is failing. I see the subpoenas as the legislature's response to Palin's attempt to suborn their authority to the investigation. Palin herself was not subpoenaed, as they were offering her the opportunity to give her account by phone or by being deposed on the campaign trail at her convenience. (But of course that could change if she never finds the time.) And they have dcided to move up the release of whatever report so as not to appear on the eve of the national election.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #516
TheStatutoryApe said:
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/516967.html

I know it would have happened any way but it still must be nice to cut checks for the people you want voting for you. I wonder if Obama or Biden could get away with giving away money.
:confused: Giving away money is the primary selling point of democratic candiates!

Regardless - I don't see your point here. Alaskans always get money. Are you suggesting that if positions were reversed, Obama or Biden would get slammed for it? Absurd.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #517
Alaskan GOP are trying to remove the legislator leading the Palin ethics investigation, saying that he has politicized the investigation.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/157439
 
  • #518
turbo-1 said:
Alaskan GOP are trying to remove the legislator leading the Palin ethics investigation, saying that he has politicized the investigation.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/157439

Yes, but as he has pointed out in the piece I posted a link to, the Independent Counsel looking into the matter is the one asking the questions and writing the report.

Hollis_French said:
"The key point here is, I'm not doing the investigation. Steve Branchflower is," French said, adding Branchflower is free to reach any conclusions the facts support.

Apparently French is moving the date of the report up 3 weeks, so as not to appear to be a "just before the election" backstabbing. (Maybe just a month before one?)

And of course it is politicized. It was all politics back in July as well when it was begun. And before that it was apparently vindictive politics and some kind of twisted part of a family feud.

But the investigation was begun well before her selection by McCain. And Palin's attempt to subvert the Legislative process now with the recent disingenuous complaint against herself, to try and grab jurisdiction doesn't look good at all. (Shades of Nixon's sorry attempts to stonewall Special Prosecutor Cox by firing him and the Attorney General he rode into town on?)

Just think if Palin had cooperated as she said she would, it could be over by now even.

I must say these machinations certainly look at odds with the "Refom" image McCain/Palin want to project. Sadly it looks like the same business as usual cover-ups that Washington DC has become all too familiar with.
 
  • #519
Evo said:
Bogus? As opposed to non bogus polls? Explain why you think these polls are any different than any other opinion polls.

A) They're not as scientific as surveys.
B) Surveys will ask questions in different ways to control for the "intangible" factors, which polls do not do.

C) Surveys will write down what the person says instead of checking their answer off as "other" if they don't choose from one of their predetermined answers.

D) Polls will twist questions any way they want to just to skew public perception.

For more information about polls, visit the following links:

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/readpoll.html"

http://www.veoh.com/videos/v15836386ZYfpPMcW"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #520
LightbulbSun said:
A) They're not as scientific as surveys.

Fwiw, the Gallup polls at least do apply some methodology to the gathering of their data. If you are interested here are their criteria, and how they attempt to normalize their data with appropriate population selection.:
http://media.gallup.com/PDF/FAQ/HowArePolls.pdf

As to today's Poll numbers - which I imagine you breathlessly await, it's Obama 47% and McCain 45%.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110047/Gallup-Daily-Obamas-Lead-Shrinks-Points.aspx
 
  • #521
  • #522
russ_watters said:
:confused: Giving away money is the primary selling point of democratic candiates!
True! Like tax cuts and credits funded by China and Japan. The dems just love to give those away.
 
  • #523
LightbulbSun said:
A) They're not as scientific as surveys.
B) Surveys will ask questions in different ways to control for the "intangible" factors, which polls do not do.

C) Surveys will write down what the person says instead of checking their answer off as "other" if they don't choose from one of their predetermined answers.

D) Polls will twist questions any way they want to just to skew public perception.

For more information about polls, visit the following links:

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/readpoll.html"

http://www.veoh.com/videos/v15836386ZYfpPMcW"
Yes, an opinion I found believable: accuracy is not the pollsters primary motivation until a week or two before the election when their polls get checked against results and their reputations are at stake; prior to that they're temptation to shape opinions rather than measure them is overwhelming for many.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #524
Gokul43201 said:
True! Like tax cuts and credits funded by China and Japan. The dems just love to give those away.
One does not 'give away' a tax cut, unless you presuppose that the money is primarily the governments to begin with.
 
  • #525
mheslep said:
One does not 'give away' a tax cut, unless you presuppose that the money is primarily the governments to begin with.
Government prints the money - it's theirs. It's a bit like Ceasar and his coins. :biggrin: And there was some bloke way back when who said - give unto Ceasar, what is Ceasar's, give unto the higher authority what is his or His as the case maybe. :rofl:
 

Similar threads

Sarah Palin: It Came from Wasilla
    • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
2K
News Carly Fiorina: McCain/Palin couldn't run a corporation
    • General Discussion
Replies
13
Views
3K
News Palin pick an insult to our intelligence
    • General Discussion
29
Replies
1K
Views
84K
News Romney's VP pic prediction
    • General Discussion
5
Replies
153
Views
16K
Is Sarah Palin a Hypocrite on Teen Pregnancy Support?
    • General Discussion
Replies
17
Views
7K
News McCain is Aware of and Concerned About the Hope of Americans
    • General Discussion
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
News Why angry women will not vote for McCain
    • General Discussion
3
Replies
73
Views
10K
News The Power of the Vice President
    • General Discussion
Replies
11
Views
3K
Breaking the Taboo: Black Women and White Men Relationships
    • General Discussion
3
Replies
99
Views
76K
News Bush Honest & Trustworthy Until How Many Lies?
    • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
8K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top