GOP VP thread: Palin is the pick

I read the book, Love it. I watched the movie. Loved it.

The Watergate break-in was reported before the Republican convention. For Crissakes, it was in the Post two days after the initial arrests. Many, if not all of the details, were in the Post and Times before the election. McGovern still couldn't get it done.

Get the timeline right.

 

I fully believe this is the best pick he could have made to throw away the election. She is a terrible pick and there is no way that she is fit to run the USA in the event, god forbid, that something happens to McCain. I think McCain is diluted IF the thinking is that women will blindly support any woman just because she is a woman. Most of the women I know who were Hillary fans, would never think of supporting Palin because of her conservative views.

 

The initial break in story was buried inside the Metro section, if memory serves. It wasn't A-1.

 

I'm well aware of the timelines. I followed the story from day one.

I know when it all happened and I can tell you that it was NOT a major issue during the election. The Republican attack dogs went on the offensive, trying to discredit the Post for months leading up to the election.

The Washington Post was one of the few papers who reported on it and at the time the Post had nowhere near the influence it has now (rightly or wrongly)

Yes, it was reported as news but it didn't become big time news until well after the election was over.

 

for my massachusetts friends: upon further reflection, this reminds me more and more of when paul cellucci picked an unproven state representative, jane swift, to be his running mate for governor. cellucci high-tailed it out of town when he was named ambassador by bush...swift took over and maybe was one of the worst governors in the state's history.

 

Judging from the initial polling - if McCain wanted Palin to help him with women it is a massive fail. Men like the pick more than women.
FROM 538.com
These numbers pretty much speak for themselves, but men have a favorable impression of Palin by a 35-point margin, whereas women have a favorable impression of her by an 18-point margin. Conversely, by a 23-point margin, women do not think Palin is ready to be President, whereas Palin lost this question among men by a considerably smaller 6-point magrin.

Why does this gap exist? Don't know, but it may simply be a matter of ideology. Men are generally a bit more conservative than women, and opinions of Palin are very strongly determined by ideology. Conservatives have a favorable impression of her by a 79-8 margin, but this falls to 43-35 among moderates and 26-46 among liberals. Likewise, by a 48-22 margin, conservatives think she's ready to be President, but she loses this question 23-54 among moderates and 9-67 among liberals.
And the column by Politico is must reading:http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12997.html

 

This is proof that the old man is senile. He'd only met her once. This is worse than the dems picking Ferraro years ago.

 

Exponentially worse . . . since Ferraro was a symbolic sacrificial lamb on a ticket which had ZERO shot to prevail.

 

Speed dating for Veeps.

 

Um, maybe I'm wrong... but I think there's a much, much more basic reason that men have a more favorable impression of Palin than women, and it ain't a matter of ideology.

 

THIS JUST IN.... This ticket has a zero shot to prevail too.

 

Fox News analyst Kirsten Powers defends the Palin selection.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08302008/news/columnists/a_brilliant_trap_makes_dems_the_male_cha_126765.htm?page=0