Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2008 9:19:55 GMT -5
Let me phrase it another way: "Oh my GOD! Barack Obama said there were 57 states, does not know what language they speak in Afghanistan and told everyone in Israel that he is the chairman of a Senate committee on which he doesn't even serve. The man is completely ignorant, dumb and unqualified." (Or, alternatively, would you like a list of about 1,000 Joe Biden gaffes too?) Credible? You tell me. Boz - Here's the difference as far as I'm concerned: Obama's been on the national stage for about 4 years now. In that time, he's had some gaffes but on the whole, he's demonstrated his intellect, his grasp of a range of issues, etc. Same for Biden - more goofs than you can probably count in 25+ years, but also more than enough demonstration of substantive knowledge. Palin's only had 2 months, but it's been 2 months with close to zero substantive policy knowledge demonstrated, and more "Oops" moments than we should want to see. I know no one's perfect, but I think there are some in the Republican Party who won't allow themselves to see Palin's flaws. Can we fast-forward 6 days so we can talk hoops? |
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Nov 11, 2008 10:55:25 GMT -5
Sarah Palin is giving a "Looking Toward The Future" address at the Republican Governors Association meeting this week. She is not going away. Will she be a Presidential candidate again? Who knows? (Did you honestly think that Obama would become President THIS year four years ago? If you say yes, I am going to call you a liar....but in a friendly way.  ) But she is going to be a player in the national party, I have little doubt about that. Again, if you are still judging her from some initial interviews, I don't think you have been paying attention lately. I am NOT trying to argue a lack of flaws; I am trying to argue that she has progressed a lot in a matter of a couple of months. It is demonstrative of someone who is smart. And all I'm really trying to do -- and I think all ed was trying to do -- is dispel this "dumb" myth. |
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Nov 11, 2008 11:38:08 GMT -5
Sorta OT, but there are reports now (I'll see if I can find the link) that Bobby Jindal asked not to be vetted for the VP nomination because he didn't think McCain would win. If true, it confirms my long suspicion that he's very smart and someone liberals should fear down the road (as a political competitor, not because he's inherently scary).
|
|
mchoya
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 377
|
Post by mchoya on Nov 11, 2008 11:45:40 GMT -5
Sorta OT, but there are reports now (I'll see if I can find the link) that Bobby Jindal asked not to be vetted for the VP nomination because he didn't think McCain would win. If true, it confirms my long suspicion that he's very smart and someone liberals should fear down the road (as a political competitor, not because he's inherently scary). |
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Nov 11, 2008 11:58:25 GMT -5
That he was not vetted is not news, I don't think. I could be wrong, but I'm almost sure I remember Jindal saying himself in the late summer that he had not been vetted.
The reasons WHY he wasn't vetted? Now, THAT could be news. I think of every Republican in the nation, Bobby Jindal was probably the only one who was in a no-lose situation. He is a very popular governor (contrary to the McCain campaign, I don't think Palin was the MOST popular governor; Jindal's approval rating reached 80 percent this year, I think), and he is liked by fiscal conservatives as well as social conservatives. If McCain won, he's only 36 (which makes me wonder what I've done with my life) and could say he wasn't ready to be VP. McCain loses and -- as this Post report states -- he can run in 4 or 8 years completely free of both the Bush presidency and two losing Republican election cycles.
He's a little lacking in the charisma factor, but he's got time to work on that. As Bando states, he's a formidable politician and well positioned to be a leader in the party.
If he want's to be President, he best thing he can do is stay a governor. Don't run for a Senate seat. Republican Senators never, ever win.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Nov 11, 2008 12:23:56 GMT -5
His greatest asset thus far IMHO has been his competency. He is undoubtedly a very good governor. Running on some message in 4 or 8 years (depending on how the Obama presidency goes; I don't see him running against a popular incumbent) of "small government doesn't mean weak government", he'll be able to distance himself from the Bush era Republicans while still hewing to standard conservative dogma. Which, of course, is a potentially winning combination.
I don't know about this. Before this election, the conventional wisdom was Senators period never ever win. Then both parties nominated Senators. There's only been 43 presidents, so it's very hard to draw any real conclusions from such a small data set, although that doesn't stop people from trying.
|
|
) But she is going to be a player in the national party, I have little doubt about that. 
