Sarah Palin's Palin problem

[SirSaxa]

Sept 30, 2008 10:47:17 GMT -5 Boz said:

Former McCain campaign manager Mike Murphy has written a hilarious article about debate prep:

www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1844162,00.html

This is funny no matter which side of the aisle you are on.

Thanks Boz... I did get a kick out of that one. I could easily see the following happening!

The campaign staffs are equally exhausted and by now more than a little frustrated with the candidate they have come to both love and hate. Put them all in a room together... and you have the perfect recipe for disaster: the staffers discover great catharsis in firing increasingly nasty "prep" questions at the candidates, who in turn become more and more itchy under fire until finally exploding with a gusher of recriminations at their staffs for failing to prepare them for so many impossible questions.

[The Stig]

I second the thanks. That last story about the "secret debate prep" was gold!

[StPetersburgHoya (Inactive)]

More of the Palin interview. She doesn't do any of that elitist reading - except for "vast variety " and "all of them" - when will Katie Couric stop asking gotcha questions like "what do you read?"

[StPetersburgHoya (Inactive)]

More amazing information from Palin:

Transcript from CBS:

Couric: If a 15-year-old is raped by her father, do you believe it should be illegal for her to get an abortion, and why?

Palin: I am pro-life. And I'm unapologetic in my position that I am pro-life. And I understand there are good people on both sides of the abortion debate. In fact, good people in my own family have differing views on abortion, and when it should be allowed. Do I respect people's opinions on this. Now, I would counsel to choose life. I would also like to see a culture of life in this country. But I would also like to take it one step further. Not just saying I am pro-life and I want fewer and fewer abortions in this country, but I want them, those women who find themselves in circumstances that are absolutely less than ideal, for them to be supported, and adoptions made easier.

Couric: But ideally, you think it should be illegal for a girl who was raped or the victim of incest to get an abortion?

Palin: I'm saying that, personally, I would counsel the person to choose life, despite horrific, horrific circumstances that this person would find themselves in. And, um, if you're asking, though, kind of foundationally here, should anyone end up in jail for having an … abortion, absolutely not. That's nothing I would ever support.


Couric: Some people have credited the morning-after pill for decreasing the number of abortions. How do you feel about the morning-after pill?

Palin: Well, I am all for contraception. And I am all for preventative measures that are legal and save, and should be taken, but Katie, again, I am one to believe that life starts at the moment of conception. And I would like to see …

Couric: And so you don't believe in the morning-after pill?

Palin: ... I would like to see fewer and fewer abortions in this world. And again, I haven't spoken with anyone who disagrees with my position on that.

Couric: I'm sorry, I just want to ask you again. Do you not support or do you condone or condemn the morning-after pill.

Palin: Personally, and this isn't McCain-Palin policy …

Couric: No, that's OK, I'm just asking you.

Palin: But personally, I would not choose to participate in that kind of contraception.

[AustinHoya03]

Sept 30, 2008 21:02:02 GMT -5 StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) said:

Palin: I'm saying that, personally, I would counsel the person to choose life, despite horrific, horrific circumstances that this person would find themselves in. And, um, if you're asking, though, kind of foundationally here, should anyone end up in jail for having an … abortion, absolutely not. That's nothing I would ever support.

That sounds pretty close to "safe, legal, and rare."

Hillary, is that you?

ON EDIT: Someone please respond and let me know I'm not thinking crazy here. Either Palin is trying to reclaim the Clinton position on abortion for the pro-life camp, or she said she's pro-choice in this interview, approximately 10 seconds after saying she's unapologetically pro-life. (Or, more accurately, she enunciated what David Foster Wallace once called the only reasonable position on abortion -- to be both pro-life and pro-choice.)

[DFW HOYA]

Sept 30, 2008 21:02:02 GMT -5 StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) said:

More amazing information from Palin:

This line of thinking may not play on the Upper West Side or in McLean, but Palin's views resonate with a lot of evangelical (or in her case, Pentecostal) Protestants who take this issue very seriously, and a lot more Catholics than you'd probably guess.

At this point, CBS has to be a little complicit in casually dropping these snippets for media consumtpion, but Couric's bealeaguered newscast probably sees a publicity boost....but she probably leaves for 60 Minutes next spring anyway.

[jerseyhoya34]

The problem is that the time has since passed for Palin to turn into the Republican's Obama along those lines. There just is not enough there after the pick was examined in the light of day. We realized the lack of depth of her record and her seeming inability to articulate positions relevant and germane to true debates. Recent revelations about dinosaurs roaming the earth with humans and the like only reinforces the image out there. There's an extent to which reasonable Americans will object to her candidacy on this basis just as there will always be adherents to fringe positions who value her flirtations with a secessionist movement and the like.

[AustinHoya03]

Sept 30, 2008 21:08:21 GMT -5 DFW HOYA said:

Palin's views resonate with a lot of evangelical (or in her case, Pentecostal) Protestants who take this issue very seriously

What views? Palin hasn't enunciated a clear viewpoint in any of these interviews. Tripping over one's own words + reciting talking points + misstating the long-held view of you and your own party on abortion (an issue you have pinned your political career on) is not the equivalent of any view.

Abortion DOESN'T MATTER in this (or any) presidential contest, so her view, even if she had one, would be irrelevant anyway. What this interview shows to me is that she has a fundamental misunderstanding of her own party's wedge issue. If she can't even stumble through her own divisive talking points right, what's she going to do as VP? Oh wait, I think I know. She'll stumble through some more divisive talking points. Gotta love the R strategy in the era of the permanent campaign.

[StPetersburgHoya (Inactive)]

Sept 30, 2008 21:08:01 GMT -5 AustinHoya03 said:

Sept 30, 2008 21:02:02 GMT -5 StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) said:

Palin: I'm saying that, personally, I would counsel the person to choose life, despite horrific, horrific circumstances that this person would find themselves in. And, um, if you're asking, though, kind of foundationally here, should anyone end up in jail for having an … abortion, absolutely not. That's nothing I would ever support.

That sounds pretty close to "safe, legal, and rare."

Hillary, is that you?

ON EDIT: Someone please respond and let me know I'm not thinking crazy here. Either Palin is trying to reclaim the Clinton position on abortion for the pro-life camp, or she said she's pro-choice in this interview, approximately 10 seconds after saying she's unapologetically pro-life. (Or, more accurately, she enunciated what David Foster Wallace once called the only reasonable position on abortion -- to be both pro-life and pro-choice.)

That'd sort of be my point - she thinks she's being pro-life but comes off as either saying she's against abortion in the case of rape or incest or that she is pro-choice in some circumstances - its incredibly unclear from her quote. She was given something that is supposed to be wrote doctrine for the right and can't even articulate that talking point.

[AustinHoya03]

Sept 30, 2008 22:58:56 GMT -5 StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) said:

That'd sort of be my point - she thinks she's being pro-life but comes off as either saying she's against abortion in the case of rape or incest or that she is pro-choice in some circumstances - its incredibly unclear from her quote. She was given something that is supposed to be wrote doctrine for the right and can't even articulate that talking point.

Thanks, St. Pete. Every fourth November I wonder if I'm losing it.

Palin really isn't going to be able to backtrack on this one, unless she says she flat-out misspoke. The only other possible explanation is that she would want a violation of a law prohibiting abortion to be a fineable only offense, which is tantamount to saying only the rich can have abortions.

Really, I'm still flabbergasted. She's been running on the wedge issue of abortion since she was on the ballot for Mayor of Wasilla. She was alive when Roe v. Wade was decided (granted, she was 9, but it's not like the issue went away by the time she became a teenager). And she apparently doesn't understand which side of the issue she's on.

Really wondering what kc, Boz, hifi, and ed think about this.

[HoyaNyr320]

Sept 30, 2008 23:11:28 GMT -5 AustinHoya03 said:

Really wondering what kc, Boz, hifi, and ed think about this.

This is just a guess here- but I bet that Palin will say that she believes the doctor should go to jail if Roe v. Wade is reversed an a state makes abortions illegal. That is, after her handlers tell her to say it.

[SirSaxa]

Sept 30, 2008 21:08:21 GMT -5 DFW HOYA said:

Sept 30, 2008 21:02:02 GMT -5 StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) said:

More amazing information from Palin:

This line of thinking may not play on the Upper West Side or in McLean, but Palin's views resonate with a lot of evangelical (or in her case, Pentecostal) Protestants who take this issue very seriously, and a lot more Catholics than you'd probably guess.

At this point, CBS has to be a little complicit in casually dropping these snippets for media consumtpion, but Couric's bealeaguered newscast probably sees a publicity boost....but she probably leaves for 60 Minutes next spring anyway.

DFW, I really appreciate your creation of this board... its been awesome for Hoya fans.

But I have to ask you, what is up with all the snarky comments on "Upper West Side", NYC, NYC/Washington Bubble, and all the other negative statements you make about NY and the East Coast. I don't read a lot of put downs of Rubes from Texas or elsewhere on here. Do you really believe it is acceptable to make such snide comments based on regional affiliations?

Somehow if people were talking down about folks from Alabama, or Mississippi, I don't think you would find it acceptable.

And... why are you criticizing CBS? They are "complicit" in this? "complicit"? In what? That Palin embarrassed herself by being utterly incapable of handling even the most basic and obvious questions? That isn't CBS' fault. Of course they want to publicize it. They are a media company. That's what they do. It is newsworthy.

No one has criticized Palin because she is FROM Alaska. She's the one doing the critizing of the media, Washington, NYC, and all the rest.... just as YOU do.

And BTW, St. Pete wasn't criticizing her anti-abortion stance, he was criticizing her inability to speak clearly about an issue that is supposed to be a core belief of hers.

It amazes me that someone who seems so offended by regional biases expresses them so freely and easily himself.

[hoyatables]

Palin's answer is reminiscent of Dukakis's fumbling answer on the death penalty in '88. Too bad someone didn't wait to spring the question on Thursday night during the debate.

[EasyEd]

First off, Austin, if you believe abortion doesn't matter in this or any presidential election, I think you are sadly mistaken.

Second, Palin clearly said she is pro-life and she does not support abortion for a 13 year old raped by her father.

Third, she clearly said she does not support the punishment of sending a person to jail in the above case.

Any other interpretaton of what she said is way off the mark.

Finally, I'm still waiting for Obama to be subjected to this sort of questioning, with follow-up. When is someone from the mainstream media going to ask him probing questions on his support for partial-birth abortion or for letting a baby die after a failed abortion? And I don't mean asking a soft question on these two items but probing questions with follow-up questions which force him to answer the questions in full. DFW is correct in saying CBS may be complicit in this treatment of Palin, particularly since we have seen no such treatment of Obama.

[Bando]

Oct 1, 2008 10:00:54 GMT -5 EasyEd said:

First off, Austin, if you believe abortion doesn't matter in this or any presidential election, I think you are sadly mistaken.

Second, Palin clearly said she is pro-life and she does not support abortion for a 13 year old raped by her father.

Third, she clearly said she does not support the punishment of sending a person to jail in the above case.

Any other interpretaton of what she said is way off the mark.

Finally, I'm still waiting for Obama to be subjected to this sort of questioning, with follow-up. When is someone from the mainstream media going to ask him probing questions on his support for partial-birth abortion or for letting a baby die after a failed abortion? And I don't mean asking a soft question on these two items but probing questions with follow-up questions which force him to answer the questions in full. DFW is correct in saying CBS may be complicit in this treatment of Palin, particularly since we have seen no such treatment of Obama.

So wait, you want abortion to be illegal, but you don't want women who have abortions under such a scenario to go to jail? How does that make any sort of logical sense as an argument?

Also, basic questions asking your positions on the issues of the day as well as what newspapers and magazines you read are not "gotcha" questions. They're things you should have a handle on if you want to be president. Your attempts to blame CBS for Palin's extreme unpreparedness and lack of intellectual heft is shameless.

[Boz]

I doubt that most of those here who would consider themselves Democrats or liberals have actually read the Republican Party platform (God knows, I haven't read the Democratic Party platform).

www.gop.com/2008Platform/Values.htm

If you do though, you'll realize that Palin's answer was consistent with it. I know it's fun for liberals to demonize conservatives as those who want to put teenage girls who have abortions in jail, and to relegate abortions to rusty coat hangers in back alleys, but it's not what the party stands for. Read the above, read Palin's response, and tell me what's inconsistent.

True, she did not mention a human life amendment in her answer, but that's about the only thing she didn't say that doesn't follow the platform explicitly (and to be fair, she wasn't asked about that).

I'm not going to sit here and say that her Couric interview was great; it was definitely a bad performance. But I think Democrats and liberals better watch themselves here. They are trying to paint Palin as a know-nothing. She is not that. And the majority of Americans don't believe that about her.

Now, if she tanks on Thursday? Yes, I think that will be a real problem. But her interviews for the most part haven't been horrible (I know you all don't count the ones she has done with conservative media, but that doesn't mean people aren't seeing or hearing those). There was maybe one or two bad moments in the Gibson interview, but otherwise she did pretty well. The Couric interview sucked, but you know, Joe Biden's Couric interview kinda' sucked too.

Oh, and one more thing. All this news the last couple of days about how conservatives are doubting her? (I don't count Ms. Parker who is NOT a conservative, not at all). I would think Democrats would know better by now. If you can't sniff a Rovian tactic on that, you haven't learned anything. All that stuff is doing is setting her up to do well on Thursday.

But it does all come down to her. If she performs well on Thursday, this whole "Palin is unqualified" meme is going to go the way of so many of the other attacks against her. If she doesn't? Well, like I said, that will a difficult challenge to overcome in four weeks.

In any case, I prefer Palin's position to that of a candidate who considers a child to be a "punishment."

(sorry, I have resisted being snarky for a while, but I can't help myself on this one)

[Bando]

Oct 1, 2008 10:22:10 GMT -5 Boz said:

I doubt that most of those here who would consider themselves Democrats or liberals have actually read the Republican Party platform (God knows, I haven't read the Democratic Party platform).

www.gop.com/2008Platform/Values.htm

If you do though, you'll realize that Palin's answer was consistent with it. I know it's fun for liberals to demonize conservatives as those who want to put teenage girls who have abortions in jail, and to relegate abortions to rusty coat hangers in back alleys, but it's not what the party stands for. Read the above, read Palin's response, and tell me what's inconsistent.

True, she did not mention a human life amendment in her answer, but that's about the only thing she didn't say that doesn't follow the platform explicitly (and to be fair, she wasn't asked about that).

I'm not going to sit here and say that her Couric interview was great; it was definitely a bad performance. But I think Democrats and liberals better watch themselves here. They are trying to paint Palin as a know-nothing. She is not that. And the majority of Americans don't believe that about her.

Now, if she tanks on Thursday? Yes, I think that will be a real problem. But her interviews for the most part haven't been horrible (I know you all don't count the ones she has done with conservative media, but that doesn't mean people aren't seeing or hearing those). There was maybe one or two bad moments in the Gibson interview, but otherwise she did pretty well. The Couric interview sucked, but you know, Joe Biden's Couric interview kinda' sucked too.

Oh, and one more thing. All this news the last couple of days about how conservatives are doubting her? (I don't count Ms. Parker who is NOT a conservative, not at all). I would think Democrats would know better by now. If you can't sniff a Rovian tactic on that, you haven't learned anything. All that stuff is doing is setting her up to do well on Thursday.

But it does all come down to her. If she performs well on Thursday, this whole "Palin is unqualified" meme is going to go the way of so many of the other attacks against her. If she doesn't? Well, like I said, that will a difficult challenge to overcome in four weeks.

In any case, I prefer Palin's position to that of a candidate who considers a child to be a "punishment."

(sorry, I have resisted being snarky for a while, but I can't help myself on this one)

But isn't it true that the bar is so lowered here that Palin simply speaking in complete sentences is going to be seen as "doing well"?

[TC]

Oct 1, 2008 10:22:10 GMT -5 Boz said:

I'm not going to sit here and say that her Couric interview was great; it was definitely a bad performance. But I think Democrats and liberals better watch themselves here. They are trying to paint Palin as a know-nothing. She is not that. And the majority of Americans don't believe that about her.

You've been warning everyone about the "great Palin backlash" for a month now - while, at the same time through all this, Palin's favorability rating has plummeted. And to be fair, there have been no attack ads on Palin, there's been very little talk of her from Obama or Biden - the negative stuff is grassroots and due to mistakes in the vetting process and in the handling of Palin - and her own media mistakes.

Look, I think Palin is going to "win" this debate simply by going out and not leaving a visible puddle of drool on the podium - the expectation is that low. However, I'm not sure that matters to many other than the Republican base. Sarah Palin is not going to fix the economy.

[Boz]

Is Joe Biden going to fix it then?

Don't underestimate the value of speaking in complete sentences. I can cite 19 months of examples of Obama having a difficult time with the same thing when he doesn't have a script in front of him.

But, our snarky back and forth barbs aside, I think you are missing the point. Palin's performance on Thursday is not going to change the opinion of any Obama supporters. It is also not, unless she tanks miserably, going to change the mind of any McCain supporters.

If she can show to undecided voters that she is knowledgable and competent, she succeeds. If she can't do that, she fails. I don't want to overestimate the importance of the #2 people on the ticket, but in this case, if she fails, I think it's likely that she takes McCain down with her.

[kchoya]

Oct 1, 2008 10:58:51 GMT -5 TC said:

Oct 1, 2008 10:22:10 GMT -5 Boz said:

I'm not going to sit here and say that her Couric interview was great; it was definitely a bad performance. But I think Democrats and liberals better watch themselves here. They are trying to paint Palin as a know-nothing. She is not that. And the majority of Americans don't believe that about her.

You've been warning everyone about the "great Palin backlash" for a month now - while, at the same time through all this, Palin's favorability rating has plummeted. And to be fair, there have been no attack ads on Palin, there's been very little talk of her from Obama or Biden - the negative stuff is grassroots and due to mistakes in the vetting process and in the handling of Palin - and her own media mistakes.

Look, I think Palin is going to "win" this debate simply by going out and not leaving a visible puddle of drool on the podium - the expectation is that low. However, I'm not sure that matters to many other than the Republican base. Sarah Palin is not going to fix the economy.

Why does the economy need fixing? According to Obama, the fundamentals of the economy are strong.