Loading ...
Veepstakes Update, Alaska Governor Edition
- Filed under: Republicans '08
- Date: May 30,2008
Recently I listed a number of people who were possible candidates to be John McCain's running mate. One name I did mention was Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. I didn't have a whole to say about her except a mention in passing. Now we hear from the Weekly Standard via Wizbang that the man heading up McCain's search (no, it isn't Dick Cheney) is in Alaska. He probably isn't there on vacation. Palin is currently a hot topic in the blogosphere, see here, here, and here for some examples. From the Standard:
There's only one reason the person heading McCain's search would be there – to meet with Alaska Governor Sarah Palin about the Vice President position.
This comes on the heels of McCain's Memorial Day weekend barbecue attended by Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, former White House budget director Rob Portman, and Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman. Supposedly that was in informal affair, not a vetting session, but it appears that the VP selection game is very much afoot.
Sarah Palin is a Christian conservative and a budget-cutting fiscal hawk. She is also against "pork barrel" projects, much like McCain. She recently vetoed $269 million in spending, something I sure haven't seen out of Washington in a long, long time. Palin ran in the GOP primary in 2006 against the incumbent Governor Frank Murkowski. Murkowski was always a popular senator there but found troubles when he relocated to Juneau. Palin ran against the corrupt Republican hierarchy of Alaska’s power structure – and won. The Alaskan establishment hates her and the people of her state love her. Her approval ratings at home are consistently in the 80's and higher. Her appeal, unlike that of others who are being talked about, is all about who she is and what she has done in Alaska – not about where she is from.
I think this would be a real gamble – but with a real upside potential. But with any risk, it could backfire. There is no question that McCain is going to try and paint Obama as inexperienced, and rightly so I would add. Adding Palin to the ticket undercuts that argument in my eyes. Palin’s been governor for two years – less time than Obama has used his Senate seat as a springboard for his current activities. I view her as a "swing for the fences" type pick; a pick you make when you feel you are down or maybe close to even in the polls and need something that adds a real spark (kind of like how Mondull picked Ferraro in 1984). We will know quite a bit about where McCain really thinks he stands vs. Obama headed into the election based on this selection. This would be a blatant signal (chosing Palin) to disgruntled to Hillary supporters and no one knows how it would be recieved. Some speculate it may force Obama into taking a woman as well…..
Now, if she could just get rid of Ted Stevens we would be on to something. If the pick is Palin, I would advise McCain to break from tradition and do it ASAP. It forces Obama's hand and if he picks a female it makes him look like he is copying. If he chooses first, say Clinton or Sebelius from Kansas, then some of the appeal is already gone and critics will say we did it just because they did it. As of late, McCain has been able to control the general election campaign, and this would continue it. But McCain typically doesn't take advice from people like me (conservatives). Again, I will not be profiling potential Democrat picks because they will like whoever it is just because Obama picks them and says he/she is the best choice.
When I wrote about Cheney above, I just realized I have not seen him in the news in weeks. I can't remember the last time I saw him anywhere.
Have a good weekend. Liberals included.
21 Responses for "Veepstakes Update, Alaska Governor Edition"
Palin’s got more real experience, qualfications and actual accomplishment then Obama and Hillary combined, so Palin’s selection as Veep won’t detract from hammering Obama’s lack of it.
I’d say this, if it looks like it’s going to be McCain/Palin anyway (and that should be a “no brainer” for Team McCain), McCain should announce NOW or VERY SOON, rather than later towards the convention. There’s currently a growing chorus for Obama/Hillary (as VP) ticket (in fact the Dems are likely aware of the Palin phenomenon). If the GOP waits while movement for Hillary as VP grows — even worse until after it is solidified that Hillary will/could be VP pick — selecting Palin will be portrayed by Dems/liberal media more as a reaction by GOP selecting its own female (overshawdoing Palin’s own remarkable assets), rather than McCain taking the lead on this. Selecting Palin now or early (contrary to the punditocracy) will mean McCain will be seen as driving the course of this campaign overwhelmingly, and the DEMS will be seen as merely reacting. And, there’s absoultely no down-side to this because even if Hillary is a no-go as VP for Obama, the GOP gains by acting early. McCain the maverick. Palin the maverick. Do it now!
There’s no reason, and actually substantial negative, in McCain waiting to see what the Dems do first insofar as his picking Palin as VP, because, no matter who Obama picks, Palin is by far (and I mean far) the best pick for McCain and the GOP, especially in this time of GOP woes. The GOP can be seen as the party of real ‘change’ (albeit I hate that mantra, change, change, bla bla), while not really having to change from GOP core conservative values, which Palin more than represents.
In light of the current oil/energy situation, as well as the disaffected female Hillary voters situation, and growing focus on McCain’s age and health, Palin is more than perfect — now.
(Perhaps Team McCain is already on to this.)
Ben I think you may be right on why McCain will not pick her.
Palin would be a wise choice, nothing to add to what ted said
First things first, I just updated the Widowfield piece a couple of posts below with the latest news.
I am warming to the Palin idea….but like I said I really worry about the experience thing, or at least the perception of it. If she had been elected before Obama, I would for sure be for the pick.
Good points Ted.
Shouldn't McCain wait until Obama has picked his white guy veep before announcing the lovely yet tough governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, as his runningmate.
Are you aware of the fact that Sarah Palin-Chavez proposed and pushed through the largest socialistic tax increase in the history of the world? It’s a 400% increase on the state’s #1 taxpayer that funds roughly 90% of the state’s budget. (See ACES)
Speaking of budgets… do you know that she increased the fy09 operating budget by 23%?
And what do you think of her left-wing socialist energy rebate debit card for $100.00 and utility reductions for every Alaskan resident? And people wonder why she has high approval ratings… ha! If you can’t figure that out, you’ve never been to Alaska were people love free money from the government!!!
Palin is NOT a fiscal conservative.
There’s been noted buzz of late on rising GOP star Louisiana Gov Bobby Jindal as a McCain prospective Veep. Certainly Jindal is more than very good, However, I believe there’s some “strategerie” going on here. The “real” beneficiary of the Jindal talk is the other rising GOP star, Alaska Gov Sarah Palin. Palin’s got everything that Jindal has (new/exciting, wildly popular, ethics and spending reformer, core conservative etc.) and more — mother of 5 w/remarkable bio, she’s 8 yrs older than Jindal, Alaska energy issue, and set to garner the disenfranchised female Hillary voter (I don’t believe Dem leaders can dump Obama).
Getting Jindal’s name out first — at Team McCain’s BBQ for instance — sets the stage for the obvious choice, Palin. For example, albeit Rush Limbaugh introduced Palin’s name, and later Jindal’s as good Veep choices, of late Rush has been praising the name of Jindal while on his very same shows discussing at great length the frustrated female Hillary voter and the global warming hysteria/need for energy development, without mentioning Palin’s name as the obvious beneficiary of those two issues. Rush walks a fine line, introducing Palin, yet can’t, at least yet, reiterate much, knowing that his praises may be counter-productive to many a swing, moderate and/or formerly Dem voter (who’s against Obama and switching to McCain). Moreover, while I feel that Palin has more real accomplishment, experience and qualification than Obama (and Hillary combined, albeit w/Obama the bar is pretty low), the only potential argument against Palin is she’s a newbie to the national scene. By having Jindal out there first as a VP prospect “passing” the “experience” and “new to the national scene” test, implicitly passes Palin as well. (For that matter Palin’s got as much if not more experience and accomplishment than Florida Gov Crist who’s only been Gov for 2 yrs — and the media has been touting Crist as a VP prospect.)
That’s my thinking at least.
It certainly would break precedent to name a VP candidate so soon and one from a state with so little electoral power.
I don't think that disaffected Hillary voters are so hungry for a woman (on a ticket from either party) that they will vote for just anybody. Let's give women some credit please.
Ben:
Thanks for linking to my post. There have been several comments left, of note is Ted's latest comments. He makes some good points.
There is also a comment that I think is left by one of the entrenched elitists from Alaska. So, if Palin is the choice they are going to go after her for several things. I think they are all paper thin, though. The biggest issue is the one you have already mentioned and that would be her inexperience. However, there is so much more that she brings to the table. I think the inexperience issue may become minor in the grand scheme of things.
Plus, she is H A W T ! ! !
Palin would work and I admire her, but I still say Sanford. He would be a good fund raising asset and is very attractive himself.
I agree with anne. GOP'ers who think that true Democrats, specifically women, would leap at the "stay the course" third term of George W. Bush with Palin added to the 71 year old McSame ticket…..are grasping for straws.
Pitiful, really.
Tying McCain to the third term of Bush is not working. He is not considered part of the damaged Republican brand.
Gary, I am starting to agree with you on this.
Reverend:
A Bush third term? I'll take that over Barack Hussein O'Carter!
This is much to do about nothing. People pick on the top of the ticket and national trends. VP wont matter.
Those trying to paint McCain as another GWB term need to consider something very important: Congress, controlled by Liberal Dems, have a consistently lower approval rating than GWB. That doesn't exactly make them the standard bearer, now does it? Congressional "Change" is what we need.
McCain has bucked the typical Republican establishment for years, that was their main beef with him as nominee. He will work for AMERICA. We are all Americans. He is not going to please everyone and not everyone will like him. But considering the consequences, He is the best shot we have at maintaining the America we love.
I'm sorry Gwen….on two of the most important issues for Americans….Iraq/foreign policy and the economy….McCain is identical to Bush and in fact, is more extreme.
The question to voters is this: Do you want Roe overturned so that female members of your family will no longer have control over their own reproductive choices? If so, vote for McCain. If not, vote Obama.
We're only one conservative Supreme Court justice away and McCain, seeking to guarantee the evangelical vote, has declared an absolutist view by saying his running mate had to be pro-life. His vision of a great justice is Stripsearch Sam Alito.
A vote for McCain is not only a vote for the third term of Bush on Iraq, foreign policy, and the economy…but it's also a vote to overturn a woman's right to choose.
Ben has a funny….
"He is not considered part of the damaged Republican brand."
Would that be the brand that McCain had to suck-up to in order to get this far? The Republican brand has been damaged by wars of adventurism which McCain fully supported and wants to expand upon. Or could you be referring to the torture part of the damage to the brand? McCain clearly supports waterboarding, but only if the president directly orders it. Or is McCain not part of the damaged GOP brand because he once voted against Bush tax cuts….but now wants them all extended?
Your sentence should have read, "He is considered part of the damaged Republican brand." Just one little word change.
McCain is not considered by many voters – voters who are paying no attention right now – as part of the damaged Republican brand. It is hard for many of us to believe, but there are millions upon millions who are paying zero attention right now to anything. They know McCain is running and they know Obama is running. Other than that they know little. Except the image of maverick for McCain and Obama's church. I cant even tell you the number of people who still come up to me – for real – and ask if I have heard about Wright because they just have. These are people who pay little attention until around Halloween – but their mind is already made up on Obama.
Gary is right, if Democrats are going to keep saying McCain will be Bush's third term and using trash like "McSame" then we might have to start more of the Carter – Obama name merger.
The poor Reverend is getting desparate, readying to label any democrat who doesn't support Obama as "untrue" and dragging out the old ham handed scare tactic of Roe vs. Wade being overturned. He doesn't seem to respect the ladies much.
Reverend,
With all due respect, A woman's right to choose (Roe v. Wade) should not be a presidential litmus test. That should be a matter of one's own conscience. McCain has not agreed with Bush on Iraq, quite the opposite :http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-11-05-mccain-usat_x.htm
A blogger from our group wrote :
McCain stated that U.S. should send at least 15,000 more troops or risk the most serious American defeat on the global stage since Vietnam. McCain also said "The simple truth is that we do not have sufficient force in Iraq to meet our military objectives." McCain had continuously made similar advices since then. The advices were completed ignored.
Rev.,
McCain and almost every other member of congress agreed to the invasion. We are there, the question is how do we succeed and withdraw. Your guy has it all wrong and doesn't have a clue. At least McCain could see from the beginning there were problems with the strategy and voiced those concerns, regardless of the consequences politically.
And I would also like to point out that McCain doesn't "suck up" to anyone. Just ask Ben and other conservatives that are still leery of him, he does what it takes to get things done, working with both sides of the isle. You should research more before making such idiot statements like that one.
Now, you guys have a good day!
That is kind of ironic. The guy pretends to be a reverend and yet he is pro-abortion (or at least using abortion as an argument why people should vote for his flawed candidate). Actually, sad or pathetic would be better words than ironic.
Leave a comment