Quote from traderNik:
Excellent point. All the other candidates are known to be capable of extempore speech. Palin reads some text cobbled together by the Republican brain trust and people are claiming that 'A Star is Born'!!
Meanwhile, she's still under at least two investigations and has hired an attorney to deal with her legal troubles.
Quote from Pa(b)st Prime:
Dumb point. An Obama speech like the one at the DNC (which he read off a prompter btw) is nothing more than a "greatest hits" of his prior 8 zillion campaign speeches.
Quote from traderNik:
37.2 million people saw her speak. Biden? 21.5 million. Obama? 38 million. It'll be interesting if she gets more than McCain tonight.
Quote from traderNik:
Re: her legal issues, we'll have to wait and see. I guess the bigger question is - why in the hell did they pick a candidate with legal issues? There are at least two other women who would have been better if they wanted a woman on the ticket.
The answer is that wanted her for her far-right views on abortion and other issues, in order to placate the disenfranchised wing of the Republican party.
However, the Republicans seem to want it both ways. On one hand, they say the top of the ticket matters and the fact that Palin as President (in an emergency) is absurd doesn't matter. On the other hand they seem to feel that her far-right views will make a difference to people. Not sure how that works.
37.2 million people saw her speak. Biden? 21.5 million. Obama? 38 million. It'll be interesting if she gets more than McCain tonight.
Hmmm... I suppose she does have an 'appealing' resume (appealing for Republicans, and to be honest, appealing to me too - I kind of like ballsy women who reach for power) but compelling is a different word and implies something different. Were they 'compelled' to pick her? One thing is for sure, she's a balance to the 'Obama as rock star' rap, even down to her semi-sordid personal issues, which seem de rigueur for rock stars these daysQuote from Pa(b)st Prime:
Certainly Palin was picked because of gender. But just any old broad wasn't going to do. She's real. That's the appeal. No knock against the Carly's and Kay's but Palin has one of the most compelling resumes in national politics since TR.
What you said about the middle ground not being stable might be true, especially for pols running for office. However, I would assume that if Roe vs. Wade is repealed, the vast majority of those on both the right and left would come out strongly in favour of an exceptio that allows for the termination of pregnancies for 14 year-old kids who have been raped. No one is arguing that to force a child to carry to term a rape-fetus is beyond barbaric (no one, that is, except the religious extremists on the far right who, like religious extremists everywhere, are capable of immense cruelty). She should come out and say so. If she is too worried about how that 'tests' then she's just another power-hungry pol who has no moral compass whatsoever and is just trumpeting the message that she thinks her 'constituents' want to hear.Quote from Pa(b)st Prime:
This gives me a quick opp to talk about the abortion issue with you. While I'm sure Palin is sincere in her "rape or incest" stand it's much the same way with Obama spearheading (there's that subliminal word again) Born Alive.
Believe this: If Palins pro-life stance had tested as some immense loser position she'd be back in AK right now.
Quote from traderNik:
Hmmm... I suppose she does have an 'appealing' resume (appealing for Republicans, and to be honest, appealing to me too - I kind of like ballsy women who reach for power) but compelling is a different word and implies something different. Were they 'compelled' to pick her? One thing is for sure, she's a balance to the 'Obama as rock star' rap, even down to her semi-sordid personal issues, which seem de rigueur for rock stars these days
What you said about the middle ground not being stable might be true, especially for pols running for office. However, I would assume that if Roe vs. Wade is repealed, the vast majority of those on both the right and left would come out strongly in favour of an exceptio that allows for the termination of pregnancies for 14 year-old kids who have been raped. No one is arguing that to force a child to carry to term a rape-fetus is beyond barbaric (no one, that is, except the religious extremists on the far right who, like religious extremists everywhere, are capable of immense cruelty). She should come out and say so. If she is too worried about how that 'tests' then she's just another power-hungry pol who has no moral compass whatsoever and is just trumpeting the message that she thinks her 'constituents' want to hear.