WCSox

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Sep 2, 2008 -> 08:10 AM) Which is a shame, because minorities in this country pretty much owe their civil rights to LBJ. For all the flowery talk that Kennedy gave, he never planned on delivering more than that. Excellent point. Kennedy completely balked at following through with that, as he didn't want to alienate the Dixiecrats.

I identify myself as a Reagan/Goldwater/Gingrich fiscal conservative. I'm a registered Republican, but don't always vote that way (e.g., Gore in 2000). The breakdown... Economy/Taxes - Supported the Bush tax cuts, but was appalled at the massive spending. This is where Bush/Cheney went horribly wrong and I'm glad that we have the opportunity to rectify this with McCain/Palin. I support keeping taxes on business low to help support job creation/sustainability, but wouldn't be terribly opposed to a *modest* income tax increase for the upper-middle and upper classes. I'd also be in favor of a slight further shift of the tax burden from income to sales. Entitlements - Strongly support welfare for those in need, but not as a lifestyle for the irresponsible. Despite the obvious triangulation, I give Clinton props for the Welfare Reform Act. Also support the expansion of Medicare and Medicaid, but do not support fully-socialized health care. The vast tax revenue needed to support it would result in mass layoffs, and free health care doesn't mean that much when one is living on a park bench. It would also result in health care rationing, increased illegal immigration, and would bring drug development to a halt. I don't have a comprehensive solution, but I'd support tighter oversight of the insurance industry and would imprison/deport illegal immigrants after they use our emergency rooms. Washington has pilfered Social Security for too long and the money needs to be moved to private accounts. National Security - Would supplement the Border Patrol with the Army and would give them the authority to engage the corrupt Mexican police/military when they aid drug-traffickers. Would continue to keep our military strong. Cracking down on businesses that hire illegals (crippling demand) would also be helpful. Gay Marriage - The government needs to stop sanctioning "marriages" and should instead allow for legally-equal civil unions for both heterosexual and homosexual couples. The word "marriage" needs to be given back to the religious institutions. Abortion - Catholic and completely against it in my household. Strongly against partial-birth abortions, but am not interested in any sort of general ban. The gray area should be decided by the states. Environment - I'm pro-business and also financially-support conservation efforts. That may sound like a strange combination, but it's a necessary one IMO.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 04:42 PM) Has she even been over seas to meet with World Leaders? It's like they held a raffle at the local church and her name was pulled. I find it funny that you mention church. I could respond to that, but the joke pretty much writes itself. No, Palin hasn't gone on a World Publicity Tour with Brian Williams and Katie Couric. Does that make Obama a foreign affairs expert?

QUOTE (lostfan @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 03:38 PM) I personally think the experience thing is overrated and there shouldn't be so much weight attached to it. It's about policies, leadership, approach, ideas, and so on. All of that is more important than experience. It matters to an extent, but I've never seen Obama as massively unqualified in terms of experience.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 03:35 PM) So if McCain were to lose his life somehow during his 1st term we would have a President who is an expert at nothing. And your alternative is putting somebody who is an "expert at nothing" in the Oval Office right away? The "McCain is old and is going to die" argument is as trite as it is flawed.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 03:33 PM) Probably. The only way that it makes sense is if he wants to change strategies entirely. The "experience" card was only part of his strategy. Keep in mind that Obama's voting record and associations over the years paint him as a pretty far-left guy, and McCain's been going after him on those issues for a while now.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 03:28 PM) Ok. Let me attempt to rephrase the logic again. This VP pick does NOT give Obama something to attack McCain with. He (directly, anyway) is not going to attack her for being inexperienced. McCain attacks Obama routinely for being inexperienced. IF he plans to continue using that line of attack, then this pick does not make sense, because he effectively nullified that argument by picking someone who fits the same profile. Therefore, unless they simply don't care as has been suggested in this thread, the reason for the pick is something of a head-scratcher. I completely agree that McCain can no longer play that card. Instead, he'll play the "judgement" card and attack Obama's liberal voting record.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 03:17 PM) Relatively inexperienced vs no experience. That's completely inaccurate. Obama has little more experience than Palin. That's completely irrelevant, given that McCain is an expert in national security. Obama doesn't have any experience in that area as well, hence his selection of Biden.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 03:10 PM) Especially if the person running as the President on your ticket would be the oldest 1st term President in U.S. history if he were to win. So, let me get this straight: A relatively inexperienced Obama - who will DEFINITELY occupy the Oval Office, if elected - gets a free pass. But a relatively inexperienced Palin - who will only sit in the Oval Office in the unlikely event of McCain dropping dead - is a flawed choice? I can tell that the Obama-maniacs are nervous right now.

QUOTE (WilliamTell @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 02:57 PM) I see where you're coming from. I was just pointing out that she has at least some experience, even if it's brief. My feeling is that she could've benefited from a couple more years experience as governor before stepping into this role. That said, people who know her tend to characterize her as very intelligent, sharp, energetic, and charismatic. Of course, a lot of those people are biased Republicans, so I guess that we'll have to wait until the debates to see. After watching Romney and his massive financial reserves lose to McCain in the primary, my feeling is that the GOP sees her as a rising star and is prepping her for a run in 2012 or 2016.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 02:47 PM) It's true that there haven't been too many senators jump to President in history, but much of this I believe has to do with the Senate not being popularly elected until the 20th century. And if you were to look at it then, we have had a lot of our presidents move into the presidency that HAVE been senators. LBJ, Nixon, Kennedy and Truman. And certainly LBJ's time in the senate was invaluable to him in pushing through his legislation. Carter on the other hand had executive experience, but the Georgia legislature held little power vs. their governor, and Carter had little idea how to deal with the legislature. So in these cases I think it's fair to say that both of these positions are distinguished and prepare the president in different ways. Term limits are a bit part of it as well. Senators (and Congressmen) do not have term limits and often have a very long voting trail that can be heavily-scrutinized (particularly for flip-flopping). Gubernatorial voting records are often more limited.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 01:27 PM) Personally, unless either candidate embarrasses themselves during the last three months of the campaign... there's not much that the VP does to change anything like this. I don't think that's completely true. Regarding your Hispanic vote comment, McCain may have attracted their vote by picking a (hypothetical) Hispanic running-mate. Similarly, I think that Palin could garner votes from a number of soccer-mom moderates. Especially when Clinton surrogates are actively working to undermine Obama. I have no idea how many moderates Palin will sway, but she has a possibility to impact the election. And speaking of Hispanics, I completely agree that Republicans will have trouble attracting their votes this year.

QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 02:12 PM) Obama only said that Iran isn't as big a threat as the Soviet Union by the way. That's still not a very smart thing to say, especially when Iran is developing nukes, threatening to use them on Israel, and has significant influence on global energy prices. Hence the "judgement" issue.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 02:09 PM) Ya know, strange as this sounds, I would have liked Huckabee. He's got a positivistic appeal, like Obama has, and that is something that most of the GOP candidates lacked. Its something that appeals to the masses. And as a Governor, I got the impression he actually was pretty good at compromise with his legislature of both parties. Plus he has executive experience, and was moderate on the environment and energy, which works well with McCain too. Huckabee is not ideal of course - he's got some issues. But I think he would have been more valuable than Romney, or Palin. If demographics weren't a consideration, I agree. But he may not have garnered the soccer mom vote, which is what almost certainly tipped it towards Palin.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 02:02 PM) How does Sarah Palin attract a large blue collar vote? Her and her family are not multi-millionaires, they don't have Ivy League educations, her husband works as a fisherman, they have several children, they hunt, they're not socially liberal, etc. That's a big chunk of the blue collar demographic.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 01:54 PM) I'd have to think that an individual's odds of living another year decrease significantly after the age of 70. My unbiased opinion is that 67 is the magic number. :oldrolleyes They're both relatively old and it's silly to argue that one is more of a health risk than the other.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 01:45 PM) I'll be honest...I haven't been hearing a lot of talk that Obama shows poor judgment. Experience was his big achilles heal. You must've missed the Bill Ayers ads, the massive media criticism over his association with Jeremiah Wright, and the ads where Obama dismisses Iran as a "tiny country." You're absolutely right that McCain played the "experience" card and can no longer do so. My argument is that was more important for McCain to distance himself from Bush and attract the blue-collar vote. I believe that he addressed both this morning.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 01:47 PM) I'm sure you dismiss it as a bad pick if the roles were reversed and Obama picked someone with her credentials and McCain picked someone with a wealth of experience. No, I wouldn't. I told my wife last weekend that Biden was the smart pick for Obama, because he could deliver where Obama couldn't. I told her this morning that Palin was the smart pick for McCain, for the very same reason.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 01:39 PM) Well, I guess it's good that Obama is twenty years his junior then and health records fit on one page. Vice Presidents dying doesn't lead to a new leader of anything other than their duties in the Senate. I'm not sure what your point is, other than the fact that Obama is significantly less experienced than Biden, but is a slam-dunk to be sitting in the Oval Office if elected. It would literally take a tragedy for Palin to occupy that chair. So are you saying that there's a good chance that McCain will suddenly drop dead in the next four years? His 96-year-old mother, who has been on the road campaigning for him, sort of suggests otherwise. Geez, even Dick Cheney is still alive and fully-functioning.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 01:35 PM) I don't think it will play well with most of the independents - that is why I think its a bad move. She is VERY conservative, especially on social issues. Nowadays, the independents are mostly socially moderate or liberal. And the Clinton-supporting women they are theoretically targetting will not necessarily be attracted to Palin as a candidate, given her opposite stances to Hillary. I really see this as a loser pick on most (though not all) levels. I think he made a mistake here. While most of the Clinton-supporting women tend to not be NRA members, most are working women (many with children) who can identify with a VP with five kids (one of them being an infant). Many of these same soccer moms voted for Bush, who is no less socially conservative. And keep in mind that Obama has not been polling well (for a Democrat) in this demographic. I'm sure that the truth is more complex than either of us have outlined, but I woudln't simply dismiss it as a bad pick.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 01:21 PM) I think the jury's still out on that one. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think it's much of a stretch to speculate that Palin will garner him more votes than Romney or Pawlenty would've.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 01:20 PM) You can make this argument if you acknowledge that Obama is where he is today by proving to people that he belongs by convincing them of his policies and knowledge in the economy and foreign policy for months while running a huge nationwide campaign, he did not get tapped on the shoulder suddenly to be second in line to the presidency. Obama is where he is today for a number of reasons, but those don't include a supreme knowledge of the economy or foreign policy. BTW, you DO know that Biden will be 67 in November, right? I don't see how he's any less of a health risk than McCain.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 12:04 PM) The point with her experience is that it can knock the wind out of the sails of McCain's attacks on Obama over the same issue. That's probably fine with the McCain campaign, because Obama arguably has more of a judgement issue than an experience issue. Obama's section of Biden may have taken that issue off the table anyway. The Palin selection also erodes Obama's arguments that McCain has no identity with blue collar workers and that a McCain administration would be Bush, Part III. Palin ain't exactly Dick Cheney. McCain is basically trying to beat Obama at his own game. I'm not saying that it'll work, but his chances of winning are MUCH better today than they were last night.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 11:19 AM) about half of the country that was supporting him before his VP was even picked. So, if the country doesn't have a problem with a guy with no substantial executive experience running for President, I doubt that they'll much mind somebody with executive experience (albeit slightly less overall government experience) running for Vice President.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 29, 2008 -> 10:27 AM) How long will this "reformer" tag last considering she's in a scandal? Although I suppose McCain's "maverick" has played for a while. Good point, but that depends on whether the "scandal" has any validity. Given that she was just vetted with a fine-toothed comb, the McCain campaign obviously thinks that it probably doesn't.