GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Oct 19, 2008 11:34:56 GMT -5
I'd give Palin an incomplete or an F. She really didn't do anything other than be the straight man, and she didn't actually make fun of herself at all and show she has a sense of humor - which is generally the point of an SNL appearance. Barack wasn't much better - neither of them were in the league of Hillary or McCain. Huckabee was kinda wooden. I'd go : McCain A Hillary B+ Rudy Giuliani B+ Huckabee B- Obama D Palin INC/F I agree. This is more proof that soccer/hockey moms are NEVER funny. Ever. I would rather spend three months getting the Clockwork Orange treatment with reruns of "It's a Living" on continuous loop than listen to a pack of mommies crack jokes.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Oct 20, 2008 18:10:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) on Oct 21, 2008 7:25:12 GMT -5
That's a tortured interpretation of that article.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Oct 21, 2008 8:48:21 GMT -5
One thing Sarah Palin's NOT doing at her rallies?
Undermining her own running mate.
You keep talkin', Joe Biden. You keep it up, you might just be able to talk your way into this being a close election.
Yeesh.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2008 10:23:03 GMT -5
One thing Sarah Palin's NOT doing at her rallies? Undermining her own running mate. You keep talkin', Joe Biden. You keep it up, you might just be able to talk your way into this being a close election. Yeesh. Well, she IS undermining her own campaign's tactics: "If I called all the shots, and if I could wave a magic wand," Palin said, "I would be sitting at a kitchen table with more and more Americans, talking to them about our plan to get the economy back on track and winning the war, and not having to rely on the old conventional ways of campaigning that includes those robocalls, and includes spending so much money on the television ads that, I think, is kind of draining out there in terms of Americans' attention span. "They get a bit irritated with just being inundated," she continued, "and you're seeing a lot of that of course with the huge amounts of money that Barack Obama is able to spend on his ads and his robocalls also." politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/19/palin-says-voters-irritated-by-robocalls/
|
|
quickplay
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 733
|
Post by quickplay on Oct 21, 2008 10:44:46 GMT -5
One thing Sarah Palin's NOT doing at her rallies? Undermining her own running mate. You keep talkin', Joe Biden. You keep it up, you might just be able to talk your way into this being a close election. Yeesh. www.slate.com/id/2202658/Is she guaranteed at least a solid chance of a strong political future due to the love she gets from the base, or is this an all or nothing chance for her? If not elected, where does she go from here (politically, not think tank or punditry land...)?
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Oct 21, 2008 11:02:50 GMT -5
Two points:
1. Disagreement is not the same as undermining. Palin is pretty clearly working the base with her disagreements, which are really not as major as Slate would have you believe.
If you really think that Joe Biden's case is equivalent and he didn't completely screw the pooch with his comments yesterday, I think you are being willfully obtuse. I don't think he's not making any appearances today out of respect for Obama's grandmother, do you? Heck, even Mika Brzyzyzzysnsdlkdnsski was basically calling him an idiot.
2. Politically, if McCain doesn't win this election, Palin probably has a Senate seat she can win with little problem if she wants it. Either that or she'll continue as governor while looking at possibilities for 2012.
|
|
nodak89
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Roy Roy Royyyyy!!!
Posts: 1,881
|
Post by nodak89 on Oct 21, 2008 11:06:26 GMT -5
If you really think that Joe Biden's case is equivalent and he didn't completely screw the pooch with his comments yesterday, I think you are being willfully obtuse. I don't think he's not making any appearances today out of respect for Obama's grandmother, do you? Heck, even Mika Brzyzyzzysnsdlkdnsski was basically calling him an idiot. Biden blathered idiotic on that one. If the Republicans had said that, there would be moral outrage about fear-mongering. Now that Joe the Senator said it, it's fair game. Doofus.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Oct 21, 2008 11:16:18 GMT -5
Two points: 1. Disagreement is not the same as undermining. Palin is pretty clearly working the base with her disagreements, which are really not as major as Slate would have you believe. If you really think that Joe Biden's case is equivalent and he didn't completely screw the pooch with his comments yesterday, I think you are being willfully obtuse. I don't think he's not making any appearances today out of respect for Obama's grandmother, do you? Heck, even Mika Brzyzyzzysnsdlkdnsski was basically calling him an idiot. 2. Politically, if McCain doesn't win this election, Palin probably has a Senate seat she can win with little problem if she wants it. Either that or she'll continue as governor while looking at possibilities for 2012. She'll probably run for governor again in 2010. Problem with the Senate is she'd either have to wait six years to go after Ted's seat (or, he wins reelection and dies in office, which would open a seat) or try and take down Lisa Murkowski, another Republican and one that's pretty well respected, even if her dad wasn't (and was beaten by Palin in '06). Murkowski's not a good candidate to run against, b/c she's not in the kind of trouble that Young and Stevens are (or her dad was), she's got a ranking membership on energy & commerce and I'm not sure Palin can pull off running against a sitting senator from her party with her popularity dropping down into the 60s (still high, but not "do whatever you want" high like it was earlier). And she'd have to choose b/w the Senate seat and winning reelection as Gov (where she'd much more likely to win).
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Oct 21, 2008 11:25:51 GMT -5
I was basing this on the assumption that Stevens will be gone, but you're right, I forgot that his election was this year, so that seat will probably not be available to her. My mistake.
I agree, I don't think she goes after Murkowski.
|
|
quickplay
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 733
|
Post by quickplay on Oct 21, 2008 11:27:26 GMT -5
Now I think that what Biden said is a pretty stupid thing to say on a campaign trail, whether or not the general idea of what he's saying is correct. But what exactly about that undermines Obama's message?
I do think that Palin is in fact undermining McCain, not just disagreeing. By staking an opposite position on main points of his campaign, she's not supporting the policy ideas that the administration she is going to be a part of would like to implement. I think to say that is merely disagreeing and not undermining is a selective interpretation of the words. However, this is not to say that even if you'd agree it's undermining that it is horrible for the campaign or the end of the world, it's not. Just that this Drudge-shock headline is bunk.
Also not exactly sure how this is fear-mongering. Normally fear-mongering works by saying that something bad would happen if the other guy is elected, not your own administration. Stupid? Yes. Fear-mongering? Ehh
As far as Palin's future political career, I brought it up because I don't see what direction she would really take it on a national level [edited: "don't see what direction" not exactly what I meant. More like unsure of"]. Her 'freshness' to national politics has been a great charge to the Republican base, but she has proved to have little in the way of ideas about how things work outside of state-level politics (and not in an 'insider elite' way, in a practical way). She no doubt might have a future as an Alaskan senator, and she would be a good red meat Republican. As far as 2012, I think a LOT would have to change for her to be ready.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2008 11:48:50 GMT -5
Two points: 1. Disagreement is not the same as undermining. Palin is pretty clearly working the base with her disagreements, which are really not as major as Slate would have you believe. If you really think that Joe Biden's case is equivalent and he didn't completely screw the pooch with his comments yesterday, I think you are being willfully obtuse. I don't think he's not making any appearances today out of respect for Obama's grandmother, do you? Heck, even Mika Brzyzyzzysnsdlkdnsski was basically calling him an idiot. 2. Politically, if McCain doesn't win this election, Palin probably has a Senate seat she can win with little problem if she wants it. Either that or she'll continue as governor while looking at possibilities for 2012. I'm not letting Biden off the hook my any means. Agree completely with nodak's comments above. Seems to me that the Pres and VP nominees not being on the same page about hoe to campaign with 2 weeks remaining is something that should stay in the clubhouse, that's all.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Oct 21, 2008 13:35:23 GMT -5
I'd like to make an observation on Sarah Palin. In previous posts I said she was very intelligent and some disagreed with that saying she has offered little in the way of deep thought. I agree but I think it is not her intelligence but her lack of knowledge of the issues of national consequence. In other words I'm saying she's very intelligent but has not had the exposure and has not sufficiently studied national issues so far. She has been too busy raising a family and serving as mayor and as governor. That is why I have said that, given a couple of years as VP, she is intelligent enough to become highly qualified to become President.
The question of where she goes from here is a good one. If she really wanted to be considered for President in 2012 or 2016, assuming Obama wins this year, ideally she would move to Washington and find a way to become more familiar with the issues of the day. Maybe she could find a way for Newt to tutor her.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,468
|
Post by TC on Oct 21, 2008 13:48:40 GMT -5
Why would Newt want to become the Cyrano de Bergerac to Palin's Christian when he is the smart one?
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Oct 21, 2008 14:22:55 GMT -5
I'd like to make an observation on Sarah Palin. In previous posts I said she was very intelligent and some disagreed with that saying she has offered little in the way of deep thought. I agree but I think it is not her intelligence but her lack of knowledge of the issues of national consequence. In other words I'm saying she's very intelligent but has not had the exposure and has not sufficiently studied national issues so far. She has been too busy raising a family and serving as mayor and as governor. That is why I have said that, given a couple of years as VP, she is intelligent enough to become highly qualified to become President. The question of where she goes from here is a good one. If she really wanted to be considered for President in 2012 or 2016, assuming Obama wins this year, ideally she would move to Washington and find a way to become more familiar with the issues of the day. Maybe she could find a way for Newt to tutor her. I don't think she'd necessarily have to move to Washington, but yes, she'd have to become more knowledgeable about national and foreign affairs. Perhaps she could get a spot at some think tank, or with the NRCC.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Oct 21, 2008 19:52:47 GMT -5
She could alternatively become the chairwoman of the RNC, although she would probably have to leave quickly if she started actively campaigning for the Presidency. The better course may be to get behind some sort of issue group and create a platform that way, then she could go around the country on sponsored lectures, guest appearances, and the like to keep her name out there.
|
|
Jack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,411
|
Post by Jack on Oct 21, 2008 19:54:46 GMT -5
Well she certainly will at least leave the campaign with a lovely parting gift- a $150,000 wardrobe: www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14805.html Joe Six-Pack might not even recognize her, but she will fit right in at those Georgetown cocktail parties.
|
|
RBHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,139
|
Post by RBHoya on Oct 21, 2008 20:01:23 GMT -5
The Republican National Committee appears to have spent more than $150,000 to clothe and accessorize vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and her family since her surprise pick by John McCain in late August. According to financial disclosure records, the accessorizing began in early September and included bills from Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York for a combined $49,425.74. The records also document a couple of big-time shopping trips to Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis, including one $75,062.63 spree in early September. The RNC also spent $4,716.49 on hair and makeup through September after reporting no such costs in August. Vice President Barbie!
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Oct 22, 2008 11:00:29 GMT -5
Well she certainly will at least leave the campaign with a lovely parting gift- a $150,000 wardrobe: www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14805.html Joe Six-Pack might not even recognize her, but she will fit right in at those Georgetown cocktail parties. I actually don't think this is a big deal. You need a lot of good clothes to run on a national ticket, what with being in front of large crowds and on television all the time. And women's clothes generally cost more than men's. It's not at all surprising to me that an Alaska politician needed a big wardrobe update to run for national office.
|
|
|
Post by Coast2CoastHoya on Oct 22, 2008 11:11:47 GMT -5
I agree with bando. This is a non-issue, just like Edwards' haircut was a non-issue. It's interesting to see how much is being spent, though. Just goes to show the widening disparity between power-to-purchase between haves and have-nots. For better or worse (worse, IMO) the American public---led by the media---is so appearance-conscious that clothes do matter now. Just look at the treatment Hillary Clinton got in the primaries.
|
|