Um, all you Pro Abstinence people, you do realize you base all your BS on the Bible. And what is in the Bible? A WOMAN WHO WAS ABSTINENT AND STILL GOT PREGNANT!

So really you should teach that Abstinence is 99.999% effective.

Anyways, so this woman is such a good mother she let her under 18 year old daughter sleep around and get pregnant? Great leadership there... Reminds me of Jamie Lynn Spears mom.

my feeling is this will play badly for the GOP. I think we will see it reflecting negatively in opinion polls.

whats palin going to do drag everyone to D.C or leave them hundreds of miles away in alaska. Looks like she's putting her career before her family. Not good.

time will tell if this was a good decision. Also i dont agree with her forcing those kids to get married.

[edit on 2-9-2008 by yeti101]

Originally posted by vor78
The only people that it will hurt her with are the big city elites, liberals, etc...people who look down their noses at the thousands of rural and semi-rural towns all across this country.

I'm not so sure. I think many Americans will have a hard time pulling the lever. I figured Clinton would have had a tough go of it, and she'd have much more experience, connections and the liberal base rooting her on all the way. I think it's doubly tough for a woman to do it on the GoP side. Especially one whom has such limited experience. McCain is no spring chicken which (imo) makes is VP pick that much more important.

McCain did not make this pick in order to appeal to the segment of the left that thinks that way.

What about the segment on the right? Is it your opinion that a woman with little to no foreign policy experience is an easier sell to the right and/or middle? Other than her 'family values' positions what does she bring to the table? I know that the GoP Powers That Be have got game, so I'm still waiting for the other shoe to drop... still, I can't help but think that this was a miscalculation.

I think that blue collar and working class people will view them very positively.

She's likeable, sure. But, presidential? I think that's a much tougher.

It will be a signal that finally, we may get a government that is of the people, for the people and by the people. I think she'll go over very, very well with the average, everyday American once they start getting to know her, hear about her background, and realize that she's actually a very strong, intelligent woman who has worked hard and come a very long way in life. It'll be a very big plus, I believe.

Perhaps. I say the 'family values' votes were already secure. I don't see what all she brings to the table that will impress/swing the undecideds. Worse case scenario, God forbid, something happens to McCain, can she run the country/be the most powerful person in the free world? On what grounds? 'Cause she's likable and the average Joe can relate to her? Tough sell. I think conservatives and independents will have a tough time going there without something more. I'm just not seeing it yet.


But, on topic, should she step down over this pregnancy thing? No, of course not. Says nothing about her ability to be VP or the PoTUS in waiting, imo.


Could they use this as an excuse to switch picks? Risky. Unlikely.


Seems she wasn't properly vetted, though (which is odd) and I still doubt the behind-the-scenes guys think the pick was a wise one. So maybe. It's an interesting idea... ultimately having nothing to do with her daughter's pregnancy but it does give an out (she has to be there for her family now, she asked to be replaced, whatever, etc..)

Originally posted by saturnine_sweet


Don't you find it a bit silly to put so much emphasis on experience, when the "experienced" politicians we have, have terrible policies, like our current foreign policy, our current taxation policies, our current economic policies, etc etc?

Which of those 'terrible policies' you've just listed do you think will change significantly under a McCain-Palin administration? Do you have any concerns that Palin may not be best suited for getting those policy changes done. . . much less running the country should needs be?

I could care less if someone had NEVER been a politician and they were running for president, as long as they can show me a clear, workable plan to make this country better.

Sure, who wouldn't agree? But, she's not writing any of the policy.

Lest you forget, we have something called a constitution. It provides all necessary guidelines for governing. All a candidate needs is respect for that guidance and the intelligence to apply it. And we have mountains of proof that most "experienced" politicians have neither of those attributes.

Only if... we shall see.


On topic: If there's any chance of the ol' VP switcheroo we'll see clear signs soon. They'll be testing the waters during the convention, no doubt.

No. They are calling this a "compressed convention". Looks like the GOP base is ok right now. Working at getting the Hillary dems from what I can see.

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin

Every conservative in the nation isnt what is going to get mccain elected.

If that were the case, then a democratic president would NEVER exist.

Palin is not what McCain needs to draw in the swing voters

Actually, if not for Ross Perot running in 1992 and 1996 there might not have been a Democratic president since 1976 when Carter won after Watergate.

Yes, Palin's nomination and the instantaneous attacks against her have rallied the conservative base like I haven't seen since Reagan. Conservatives were only luke warm to Bush in 2004, but they have been energized by Palin.

The bottom line is Americans in general would rather the government have less intrusion and control on their lives than more. Obama wants to micromanage your life down to what temperature you set your thermostat and how much air you put in your tires. People don't like that, especially here in PA.