In summary:
1) The problems in taking Hillary as VP are starting to become apparent, as well as the lack of positives from getting a seat-filler like Biden.
2) Palin undercut the Dem's convention bounce, reengergized the McCain camp, and got Obama to go after the bottom of his rival's ticket.
3) The media went after Palin showing naked bias and is experienceing a backlash.
Read the link to find more detail.
He also predicts that Obama will go more negative in an attempt to stop this.
Rand Simberg reminds that Hillary does have issues and would have had problems being on the ticket as VP.
Such as her negatives (with different groups than Obama's negatives), Clintonian baggage, and Clintonian spotlight.
"What was a mistake, though was dissing her and her supporters by making it clear that he had never even considered doing so. If he'd been smarter, he'd have at least gone through the motions of vetting her and making it looks as though she was on the list. As it was, it was just one more finger in their collective face."
Speaking of going negative:
Glen Reynolds links to a comment Obama said, involving, lipstick, pigs and the republican ticket. Some choice bits
MORE: A reader emails: "Surely a man smart enough to be elected president should have foreseen how these remarks would be taken. Don’t Harvard law grads know the impact of words?" Everybody stumbles now and then. I say, don't make any more of it than if McCain had said something similar.
On the other hand, reader Alin Corle emails: "I think if you look at the entire quote, you realize that Obama was referring to Palin in the 'pig' comment. In the next phrase, as reported by Politico.com, Obama referred to 'old fish' wrapped in a paper of change that still stinks, a clear personal attack on McCain. I think both comments taken together are quite outrageous."
Meanwhile, Barry Dauphin writes: "Obama was inelegant in his comment. He was referring to Palin. Although it was not a good comment, getting hysterical about it is not smart. Put it this way, Obama's comment was hardly post partisan. He's usually a better speaker than this. He and his campaign must be quite rattled. They are playing to their base instead of going after independents. Why are they doing that, unless they are worried about their base? Do they have internal polling showing things to be worse for them than the MSM is reporting?"
Emphasis added.
No comments:
Post a Comment