Sunday, August 31, 2008

Losing sleep over Palin?

Roger Kimball has some more thoughts on Palin.

William Kristol, in a splendid piece in The Weekly Standard, gets it just right. Palin is a frightening “spectre” to the Left precisely because she is everything they despise: “a working woman who’s a proud wife and mother; a traditionalist in important matters who’s broken through all kinds of barriers; a reformer who’s a Republican; a challenger of a corrupt good-old-boy establishment who’s a conservative; a successful woman whose life is unapologetically grounded in religious belief; a lady who’s a leader.”


Which is why Palin should cast herself as a leader first and a woman second. That's part of Jonah Goldberg advice to Palin: Hit the left-wing feminists

It also seems that Palin's reformer streak is what attracted McCain to her, and according to the Washington Post she was someone McCain had wanted for a while. That she was a woman was just icing on the cake, and that she was an attractive woman was a cheery on top.


I spoke to a savvy, politically connected friend yesterday who told me that MSM journalists were already packing into planes, trains, and automobiles to hie themselves thither to Alaska in order to prospect for the gold of D.O.P.–dirt on Palin. Well, good luck to ‘em. What the Clinton’s called (and, even more, what they practiced) “the politics of personal destruction” is never pretty. But I suspect that, like most gold prospectors of yore, they will come up empty handed in this case. The only thing I’ve heard is the story about her getting her unstable brother-in-law fired: not much there for the fourth estate, especially since Palin has been so cooperative with the inquiry that they haven’t even had to issue a subpoena.

In the larger sense, of course, it is a good thing for the public to learn more about Sarah Palin, her origins, her passions, her associates, her behavior as a young politician. The same scrutiny should be directed towards Obama, McCain, and Biden. I suspect most people will like what they discover about Sarah Palin. Will they like what they discover about Obama? How do you spell “Tony Rezko”? What do you know about Jeremiah Wright? Would you want your daughter–or your President–consorting with Bill “the bomber” Ayers?


I agree, go and investigate Palin's past. That's the job of the media. They're supposed to investigate and dig around.

But... will the same people eager to delve into Palin's past, be willing to do the same for Obama?

The reaction to Stanley Kurtz's investigation, seems to indicate some of Obama's supporters don't want that kind of balance.

Trap

Harvey of IMAO.us explains why he loves the Palin Choice.

It makes Dems say some pretty funny things.
Original Moveon.Org email:

I think she's far too inexperienced to be in this position. I'm all for a woman in the White House, but not one who hasn't done anything to deserve it. There are far many other women who have worked their way up and have much more experience that would have been better choices. This is a patronizing decision on John McCain's part- and insulting to females everywhere that he would assume he'll get our vote by putting "A Woman" in that position.—Jennifer M., Anchorage, AK


To which Harvey modified very slightly:

I think he's far too inexperienced to be in this position. I'm all for an African-American in the White House, but not one who hasn't done anything to deserve it. There are far many other African-Americans who have worked their way up and have much more experience that would have been better choices. This is a patronizing decision on the Democratic Party's part - and insulting to African-Americans everywhere that they would assume they'll get our vote by putting "An African-American" in that position.


This is exactly what Victor Davis Hanson meant when he talked about the trap the Palin pick can be to uncareful Dems.

Rasmussen: Obama’s convention bounce gone

From Ed Morrissey at Hot Air

After squandering a double-digit lead this summer, nothing Obama has done shows that he can make a comeback on his own. He barely survived the primaries after taking the momentum from Hillary in February, and now he’s lost it to McCain. The more America sees of Barack Obama, the more they appear to like John McCain, and now the Republicans have the opportunity to seize the momentumn for good this week.


This goes in line with the Zogby poll that came out earlier.

One wonders who else had such a "dead cat" bounce.

Saturday, August 30, 2008

Prediction: Palin will make or break the race for McCain

It occurs to me that this election's outcome largely rests on one person. The performance of which will be critical .
If Sarah Palin doesn't handle the pressure and can be successfully called a "Quayle" then it's over for McCain. If she can handle it and does real well (which I'm betting on) It's a knife to Obama's heart. Her very existence proves him wrong.

The conventional media/left expectation for the VP debates... oh that can be so wonderful. Remember, Biden was against the Trans-Alaskan pipeline. So, she knows her state would be poorer by billions and the US's energy hole would be even deeper if Biden got his way.

Jonah Goldberg has thoughts along that line.

I've been thinking about it and I think the bottom line on Palin is pretty simple. If she does a good job at the convention and survives about three weeks of serious media scrutiny — no horrible gaffes, no unforgivable I-don't-knows to gotchya questions (fair and unfair), no botched hostile interviews — she will emerge as the single most inspired VP pick in modern memory and she will give the Democrats migraines for a long time to come, assuming there are no terrible skeletons we don't know about. But, if she screws up in the next three weeks, gives the press and the late night comedians sufficient fodder to Quayelize her, she'll be seen as anything from a liability to an outright horrible pick. That's it.


Roger Kimbal has some thoughts on the style differences between the two campaigns.

There is a big difference in style between the McCain and Obama campaigns. If you go to Obama’s web site, you'll find lots of complaints about the smears,“outrageous lies,” etc. supposedly perpetrated by the other side. An example? The most recent is the hysterical attack on the journalist Stanley Kurtz who has been looking into Obama’s early political career, not least his association with the terrorist Bill Ayers. In fact, Stanley Kurtz is simply doing what political journalists do: filling out the historical record and illuminating the origins, associates, and early career of a man who has put himself forward to be President of the United States.

On the McCain web site, by contrast, there is no whining about how unfair the other side treats him. Obama asks us to “believe in” him; McCain asks us to consider what is best for the country. For him, action, not belief is the issue. (A lot could be written, in fact, about Obama’s quasi-religious rhetoric: it’s one thing to ask people to believe that one candidate has the better vision for the country; it is quite another for a candidate to ask us to believe in him and his vision.)

Watching Sarah Palin’s speech yesterday I found myself almost feeling sorry for Barack Obama and Joe Biden. Almost. Here they are campaigning on “change” and optimism and the common man and transcending politics as usual. And their campaign is the same old business and usual, Chicago-style swamp politics. If it were an athletic contest, McCain/Palin would probably have to play with some sort of handicap. But it wouldn’t matter. Even with a steep handcap they would eat Obama and Biden for lunch. The carnage will not be pretty. But perhaps it will finally get the message through to the DNC: you don’t win elections by vapid talk about change. You win them by sound policies that offer change where change is needed and continuity where change would be irresponsible.


Victor Davis Hanson spots a 3rd trap door for the Obama camp.

We are supposed to believe that a first- term Alaskan governor is less qualified for the second spot than a first-term Illinois Senator is for the Presidency—who once again just announced to the nation that he is ready to invade nuclear Islamic Pakistan to get bin Laden, who wanted all troops out of Iraq by March 2008, and who once dismissed Iran as a small threat. Next in their wisdom they will go after Gov. Palin's husband—and therein re-invite comparison with Michelle's wise declarations.

Again, I think the irony is lost—that as old-pro McCain matches the experience of old-pro Biden, so too fresh -face Palin emphasizes fresh-face Obama, but, then, one is supposed to be our President, the other the Vice President. And whereas McCain was suggesting that the Presidential nominee was too inexperienced and thus subject to charges of partianship, now the Obama team will be making just those charges against Palin, and thus by comparison making McCain's original case against themselves.



I don't know if they'll be stupid enough to go after Gov. Palin's husband, but it would not shock me.

Palin Reactions

Ed Morrissey rounds up some of the charges against her coming from the left.
They're not the most... wisely thought out talking points.
Some of them are downright insulting, and many open up unflattering comparisons to Obama himself.

RedState goes through and compares Obama and Palin on "experience".

Of course the short answer to "Does Palin have foreign-policy experience for the VP slot?" is given by Rober (the other) McCain. "John Edwards 2004"

It's nice to see the Dems hold their opponents to a much higher standard than they're willing to be.

Also, if Palin has made you want to donate to the McCain/Palin cause then you won't be alone. So far they've raised $7 million. In one day. But you better hurry as you have until Tuesday to make a donation.

Ed Morrissey responds to a Time piece by Michael Grunwald and Jay Newton-Small.
Time: Why is everyone surprised by Palin pick?

Ed agrees.

McCain had several options open to him in this choice, but none of them would have addressed all of the points that Palin does. Tim Pawlenty is a Washington outsider and an Everyman too, but fortunately Minnesota has not been plagued with official corruption, and Pawlenty has not had to crusade for massive reform. He has governed as an effective and strong center-right leader, but doesn’t have the dynamism of Palin. Mitt Romney, who would have been my first choice, has a proven track record in both private and public sectors of strong leadership, but his compromises as governor of Massachusetts already had people calling him a flip-flopper on key points like abortion. Also, Romney isn’t exactly an Everyman; although he is a Washington outsider, his wealth hardly gives the impression of one.

Palin is, in a way, Pawlenty with a ferocious record of reform. She went after her own party’s state chair and exposed his corruption at the Oil and Natural Gas Commission. Palin defied Ted Stevens and Don Young in refusing to accept the Bridge to Nowhere and told them that Alaska can build its own bridges. Otherwise, like Pawlenty, she enjoys and excels in sports, has a young family, and prior to entering the governor’s mansion lived in a solidly middle-class home. Palin is, as Pawlenty often points out, more Sam’s Club than country club.


As stated before, Palin has a big risk. If she can't handle the pressure or gives a big gaff, she can easily sink the McCain campaign. On the other hand, she's already had a great effect given the donations, enthusiasm from the base, the obvious and more than partially cynical female angle and her social and libertarian cred.

The timing also cut Obama's convention off at the knees. In one move, his speech and the whole convention are old news.

In that case, it may have been better if his speech reached out to more than just his base. Obama speech bounce: nil

Meanwhile Ed Morrissey (who I've gone back to three times today) has some comments on "The Man Trap"

This trap has two doors, as Powers notes, and the Obama campaign and its supporters fell through both of them. First, it didn’t take long to speak dismissively of Palin as a “beauty queen” and a “small-town” hick, even though she governs the state of Alaska and has a favorability rating in the 80s. No one actually came out and called her “Sweetie”, but to women who resented the Obama campaign’s real and imagined sexist slights against Hillary Clinton, it was deja vu all over again.

The bigger trap, though, was the knee-jerk attack on Palin’s experience. Calling her a “small-town mayor” only underscored Obama’s own woeful lack of experience. Two years as Governor trumps a year as Senator before running for the presidency, and having been an executive in Wasila trumps having been a “community organizer” in Chicago’s South Side. Further, Palin has a record of attacking her own party’s machine to effect real reform in Alaska, where Obama never lifted a finger to support reform of the Chicago political machine while in Illinois, and had one of its fixers, Tony Rezko, raising money for him most of his career.


The most you can say is that "McCain was wrong to highlight experience given his own pick for VP." But most of the Obamabots are saying "Palin doesn't have enough experience."

Knee-jerk is right. The Obama camp's initial response to Palin was not thought through. In their quest to not be "Swiftboated" they lash out quickly and without thinking. This makes them predictable, and as we saw, one can use that to set traps.

Ed asks:
Did McCain set Obama up to fall into this trap? If so, then perhaps that more than anything demonstrates how poor a candidate Obama is and how much more masterful McCain can be. Would you rather have the man who set the trap dealing with our enemies abroad, or the man who fell into it?

Friday, August 29, 2008

More on Palin

Ed Morrissey writes on "What Palin does for McCain, and to Obama."

Politically, this puts Obama in a very tough position. The Democrats had prepared to launch a full assault on McCain’s running mate, but having Palin as a target creates one large headache. If they go after her like they went after Hillary Clinton, Obama risks alienating women all over again. If they don’t go after her like they went after Hillary, he risks alienating Hillary supporters, who will see this as a sign of disrespect for Hillary.


Go to the link for the four upsides.

1 Boost like no other choice, and buried Obama's acceptance speech.

2 Re-energize the base.

3 A key choice in the energy issue.

4 An actual record of reform. Instead of just rhetoric. She challenged and defeated the incumbent Republican Governor and won.

She isn't without her problems, but so far, her positives seem be larger.

This is change you can believe in, and not change that amounts to all talk. McCain changed the trajectory of the race today by stealing Obama’s strength and turning it against him. Obama provided that opening by picking Biden as his running mate, and McCain was smart enough to take advantage of the opening.


Once again the McCain camp understands the OODA Loop.
Observe, Orient, Decide, Act.

If you can run the loop faster than your opponent you control the tempo and they are forced to play catch-up and be reactive. This is called getting "inside" the loop.

And here's the video of their speech.
More from Morrissey: Now Obama wants Experience?

During the entire primary campaign, Obama kept telling voters that his judgment overruled his lack of experience. Now, suddenly, it doesn’t — but that puts Barack Obama at the same level as Sarah Palin, or even below, as Palin has the executive experience that Obama lacks. Moreover, Palin has spent her time in politics actually accomplishing reform and challenging the political machine in her own party. Did Obama do that?


As I said before, bad move on Obama's part.
He could have come against her in a better way than that.

It's Sarah Palin

Here's a good point.
We're two hours away from McCain's ceremony with his running mate, and nobody has any idea. We've got conflicting reports on who's in Ohio, and whether a woman who looked like Palin was on a flight from Alaska.
Maybe a guy that can keep his running mate choice this secret would, as president, keep national security secrets off the NYTimes' front page.


Also Mcain manages to have the announcement go off only a couple hours before his Friday speech.
Obama's pick leaked in the dead of the night, for a Saturday speech.

So it's Palin? Not bad at all.

More on her experience
Her executive experience, meanwhile, while brief is really pretty impressive—she seems to be a tough and serious manager. With her in the second spot, McCain can still push the "is he ready" question, though perhaps a little less effectively, and it would be hard for Obama's folks to argue in response that, well, McCain's vice presidential pick is not any more experienced than Obama is.


And unlike for the dems the more inexperienced one is at the bottom of the ticket. Though one has to note that she has more executive experience than the other three candidates combined.
This is also a good move by McCain's camp to knock much of the wind out of Obama's post-speech sails.

And how does Obama's camp respond?

Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency. Governor Palin shares John McCain's commitment to overturning Roe v. Wade, the agenda of Big Oil and continuing George Bush's failed economic policies — that's not the change we need, it's just more of the same.


Mocking her for being a former mayor when she's currently a governor does not seem to be a wise move.
I mean it'd be like calling Obama a former Ill. Legislator.
It's like they're trying to make Obama look sexist and stupid. Are they trying to piss off everyone that lives in a small town?

They used judgment which was good, but they shouldn't have touched her experience that just makes one question how Obama can say that.

Instead they should have done something like this "We are pleased that Sen. McCain realizes that judgment is more important than experience, and thus picked a VP who's judgment he valued over any experience. Regrettably, his choice shows a lack of judgment on his part and her part."

There. Was that so hard?
If you do that then McCain looks bad and the campaign can go back to judgment.

This also makes Obama's camp look unsportsmanlike. Last night McCain gave a personal message to congratulate Obama on formally getting the nomination.

Ace of Spades has some thoughts too.


Victor Davis Hanson has some thoughts on the choice. Read them all. He's got some good thoughts on it.
This one struck me.
4. In a Zen way it raises the inexperience issue, inviting Obama to critique a fresh VP as "inexperienced" and thereby automatically turn the same scrutiny to his as-thin-or-even-thinner resume for the more important job."

This is exactly what is happening. Obama and his supporters are being very critical saying that you can't have an inexperienced, token, pick that's got a thin resume in... the Naval Observatory.
But why then, is it okay to have someone with at the very most only slightly more governmental (and infinitely less executive experience) experience in the White House?

The smart thing would be to way to undercut McCain's statement of experience, is to act as if McCain has conceded to their point. Digging in and fighting like this is just a poor move.

It raises questions of why Obama went with Biden? If not for his long time experience in Washington.

That being said. Palin has to keep from making any gaffes and perform well.