Palin Speaks
Given that Sarah Palin has spent the last five days in virtual hiding, you'd expect a respectful, cautious speech, yes?
Umm, no. She is in the final stages of a jeremiad against Obama, one that is personal and mocking. She called him elitist and charged him with a familiar attack: that his positions are based on political expediency, not the benefit of the country.
I'll update the post as I get the text. It's really quite shocking. Two words spring to mind: glass houses.
We'll see... Your thoughts? Discuss.
[Update. Selected text after the jump.]
Selected sections from the Palin speech:
Characterizing Obama as anti-rural:
"Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska I was mayor of my hometown. And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involved. I guess -- I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities."
"I might add that, in small towns, we don't quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they're listening and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren't listening. No, we tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco."
On her now dubious "reformer" cred:
"This was the spirit that brought me to the governor's office when I took on the old politics as usual in Juneau, when I stood up to the special interests, and the lobbyists, and the Big Oil companies, and the good-old boys. Suddenly, I realized that sudden and relentless reform never sits well with entrenched interests and power-brokers. That's why true reform is so hard to achieve."
"I came to office promising to control spending, by request if possible, but by veto, if necessary.... Our state budget is under control. We have a surplus. And I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending, nearly $500 million in vetoes."
"We suspended the state fuel tax and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress, "Thanks, but no thanks," on that Bridge to Nowhere. If our state wanted to build a bridge, we were going to build it ourselves."
She also went pointedly (and dubiously) after Obama:
"And now, I've noticed a pattern with our opponent, and maybe you have, too. We've all heard his dramatic speeches before devoted followers, and there is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or even a reform, not even in the State Senate. This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting and never use the word "victory," except when he's talking about his own campaign."
"But when the cloud of rhetoric has passed, when the roar of the crowd fades away, when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot. When that happens, what exactly is our opponent's plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet?"
"The answer -- the answer is to make government bigger, and take more of your money, and give you more orders from Washington, and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world."
Full transcript here.
|
September 3, 2008 |
Jeff Alworth | Comments (120 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Sponsored Advertising
Comments
Posted by: No Experience, No Problem | Sep 3, 2008 8:15:38 PM
Obama's convention bounce will be over in a week.
Posted by: Jim H | Sep 3, 2008 8:15:40 PM
Too bad Monday's show was cut short - maybe if they had heard more about the official theme (Serving A Cause Greater Than One's Own Self-Interest) they might be a little ashamed of belitting Obama's community service. Oh wait, look who I'm talking about. I guess it wouldn't matter.
Posted by: LT | Sep 3, 2008 8:24:03 PM
She chose to go for the red meat to please the base. Obviously she doesn't want the votes of community organizers, people who aren't impressed with sarcasm, or people who know Obama's work on ethics and nuclear nonproliferation. And apparently she believes people working low income, part time, temp. etc. jobs will believe "he wants to raise your taxes" applies to them, not to the wealthy.
Posted by: Dan | Sep 3, 2008 8:31:34 PM
That was a FANTASTIC speech! She exceeded all expectations and will have no problem going head to head with Biden.
But what do I know? I can barely type while clinging to my guns and religion...
Posted by: Dan | Sep 3, 2008 8:33:08 PM
Ok...that "Caribou Barbie" thing was really funny. I'm still voting for her, but that was a great line, Kristin. Well played.
Posted by: Unrepentant Liberal | Sep 3, 2008 8:33:59 PM
It's not a good sign for the repubs if your campaign is in 'bunker mentality,' while the convention is still going on. A McCain convention bump? I don't think so.
There are still scandals yet to be uncovered. She will spend the next two months defending herself.
Refight the culture wars? How 70's is that?
Posted by: Kelley | Sep 3, 2008 8:37:53 PM
Well, the Repubs accomplished something tonight. Until now I was content to volunteer behind the scenes but now I'll be way out front. I'm literally shaking. I've tried several times -- both on the radio and TV -- to listen to this women. But I can't. I'm truly worried now. The idea that America could possibly be led by this pair freaks me out. I'm a woman; I believe women could be great presidents. But the moral superiority virtually dripping off Palin tonight disgusts me. She's not funny. She's demeaning. Perhaps I'm biased, but bulldog Biden did not stoop to ridiculing or belittling McCain -- he just said he's wrong. Palin reminds me of the "beautiful people" in high school who was never kind, just snarky. She absolutely does not represent me and I don't want her near a position where she could have to talk to heads of foreign states, or appointing supreme court judges.
Don't want to exaggerate but I did not think our country could get worse than this. Now I see possibilities... Can a guest author please dedicate a column to cogent, pragmatic talking points I can use as I now actively engage everyone in working to defeat McCain/Palin? Otherwise, it'll just be an emotional rant!
Posted by: Charlie Burr | Sep 3, 2008 8:42:21 PM
Just as the first President Bush didn't hesitate to go after President Clinton's family during the 92 campaign, Palin -- playing the traditional VP attack dog role -- didn't stop at just going after Joe Biden and Barack Obama. Palin's negative, sarcastic and condescending remarks also targeted Michelle Obama but did little to address Palin's threshold issue: her readiness to serve as president when necessary. New face, old politics.
As for the theme of the last 24 hours, show me a campaign obsessed with media bashing and I'll show you a campaign destined to win trophy for second place.
Posted by: Jeff Alworth | Sep 3, 2008 8:42:22 PM
She exceeded all expectations and will have no problem going head to head with Biden.
Careful what you wish for, Dan. By attacking Obama pretty harshly (and earlier calling Hillary a whiner), she won't be able to play the "sexist" card in the debate. It's not the first time a Republican has growled "bring 'em on" and lived to regret it.
Posted by: Jenni Simonis | Sep 3, 2008 8:42:27 PM
I posted my thoughts on the bit I was able to bring myself to watch here: http://www.blogfororegon.com/2008/09/giuliani_iraq_and_its_not_1980s
Posted by: Steve Bucknum | Sep 3, 2008 8:48:41 PM
The greatest weakness the Democratic Party has, and I call it shooting ourselves in the foot, is the continuing abandonment of rural American in the arena's of policy and attention.
Sarah Palin has gone after this weakness. Tonights speech has done permanent harm to the Obama/Biden's campaign's ability to grow rural voters. I think I just saw four years work in rural Oregon undone in one speech.
Posted by: Jay Bozievich | Sep 3, 2008 9:01:37 PM
There are three main tasks for a VP nominee:
1. Unite the party behind the ticket
2. Deliver a key state or at least their home state
3. Serve as the attack dog against the other ticket(s)
Let's look at Palin and Biden so far on those in reverse order:
3. Attack the other ticket: Biden check, Palin check
2. Deliver a key state: Delaware and Alaska? Obviously both already solid in each camp so both fail this task
1. Unite the party: Biden? still hearing upset Hillary delegates about her being passed over, Palin? Did you watch the initial response to her tonight?
So far, Palin is one up on Biden. It is still early in the first quarter of the game.
Posted by: Buckman Res | Sep 3, 2008 9:10:45 PM
So much for Palin the Pushover. She skillfully delivered her lines with confidence, poise, and humor.
Better hope they can dig up some dirt on her in Alaska or it could be a long campaign.
Posted by: Joey Pants | Sep 3, 2008 9:12:35 PM
If you're looking for an excuse to read Nixonland by Rick Perlstein...here it is.
Palin's speech is straight from the Nixon playbook...prey on class resentment, posture as a sympathetic victim. The only creature missing tonight was Checkers.
Those of you who forsee the end of polarized politics; your Republican friends haven't read the memo. And, I'm afraid, I think they may be onto something.
Any of you who might POSSIBLY think that Palin represents some kind of feminist breakthrough...oy. Let's start with the evidence that she is, apparently, more popular among men than women. http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/women-more-skeptical-of-palin-than-men.html
Even if Obama wins, I am deeply saddened by all of this.
Posted by: Kristin | Sep 3, 2008 9:14:01 PM
With due respect, I'm not so sure about the rural vote...
My dad grew up in Havre, Montana. He moved to Bigfork, Montana...brief stay in Portland, then moved to Lincoln, Montana (home of the Unibomber), then Wasilla, Alaska, then Barrow, Alaska and now lives in a place that isn't really a town in Alaska -- 50 miles from Nome.
He also knows Sarah Palin very well...went snowmobiling with her...was a volunteer for her husband's races...he had lunch with her weekly when he lived in Wasilla.
He is voted for Reagan, twice. He voted for Bush.
He is outraged that Palin is on the ticket -- he KNOWS she does not have the experience to run this country.
Posted by: Nadja S | Sep 3, 2008 9:22:05 PM
Well, she was the feisty backwoods-person, wasn't she? I thought she sounded like an extremist. But she talked the good talk that the crazed Republican conventioneers wanted to hear - - content-free, full of jibes and jeers, and good ol' homespun talk. Gosh, bully for her.
After listening to the speeches tonight, I am struck at how militaristic the Republicans sound. And when they talk about "reform" and "change," I want to fall off my chair. They've held the country for 8 years - -they HAD plenty of time for reform.
Posted by: Jenni Simonis | Sep 3, 2008 9:27:22 PM
With Guilian's transcript now online, I had to update my blog posting... he's even more of an idiot than I thought. Has the man never heard of Wikipedia? It took me about 5 seconds to find multiple occasions where Obama led something.
Posted by: joel dan walls | Sep 3, 2008 9:28:41 PM
Mr. Bucknum raises a pertinent point about Democrats and rural voters, but what exactly is it that Palin did, and that Obama/Biden have NOT done, that makes him think Palin is such a genius?
I think there are some rather clear points on which to attack Palin in the eyes of swing voters:
--her total opposition to reproductive rights
--her slavish obedience to the worst of the "Christian" right-wing's social policy goals, including not just the anti-abortion routine, but also promoting creationism, book banning, and so on.
--her hypocrisy about lobbying for earmarks while claiming to oppose them
--her anti-environmental stands
and so on.
Look, folks, Palin has appointed herself as GOP pit bull, we can dispense with the nicey-nicey stuff.
Meanwhile, the Obama-loathing "Democratic" and "progressive" websites such as this, this, and this, are wetting themselves with delight about Palin's speech.
Posted by: Dena | Sep 3, 2008 9:38:35 PM
Per Jay's 3 key tasks of a VP nominee. Biden was born in Scranton PA and has quite a history there. Definitely a key state.
I am afraid Joey is right. And while I desperately want to take the leap of faith that the Obama campaign has by discouraging fundraising for 527's, these kinds of speeches are the kind that concern me. It was petty, vindictive and will be received very positively by all of those people's who's politics are shaped by bumper stickers and Lars Larson. The utter disdain that was displayed for education and community service under the battle cry of elitism was bone chilling. They have nothing but contempt for people who have achieved considerable educational goals and for people who's "job" is serving other people. They think reading and history is for pussies. Do advanced degrees from highly regarded universities make you a better human being ? Of course not. Does it mean those individuals are more highly educated than others ? Your damn F@#$ing straight they do. I know I am going off on a rant about this elitism charge but I just can barely stand it any longer. Since when did we want our national leaders to be dumbasses ? Don't Americans want leaders who are way frickin' smarter then the rest of us ?
Guilani came across as just a bitter, pissed off loser.
Posted by: Charlie Burr | Sep 3, 2008 9:39:56 PM
Not to beat the 1992 comparison into the ground, but I remember very clearly hearing pundits talk about how well that convention's red meat was going to work firing up the Republican base. I have no doubt that Republican base voters are pumped up about Palin and the ticket, I just think they're not connecting at all with moderate and undecided voters.
What does Sarah Palin and the Republican convention offer working families squeezed by the Bush economy? Not a whole helluva lot.
Posted by: Bob B | Sep 3, 2008 9:48:58 PM
I must have missed the respect paid to Palin and McCain from the left over the past week. Hilarious to see offense of sarcasm in a left wing blog.
Posted by: Coyote | Sep 3, 2008 9:49:30 PM
Sarcastic? Condescending? Disdain?
Yeesh, I thought you were talking about Ann Richards' key note speech.
Posted by: admiral_naismith | Sep 3, 2008 9:50:42 PM
Admit it. They grafted press-on nails, mall hair and a whole lot of make up onto Dick Cheney to try to pass him off as a human being.
Posted by: KTDM | Sep 3, 2008 9:52:32 PM
Steve,
Buck up Oregon cowboy. I'm from the midwest, and don't be so sure that all of rural America is sold on this show of rural affection and country music. Obama has been extremely savvy when it comes to supporting farm subsidies and ethanol for midwest farmers...and McCain may have shot himself in the foot in that regard by saying the subsidies should be rolled back and that ethanol is a failed program. Although I agree w/McCain on some of these points, anyone who understands the farm bill knows that you cannot simply roll these back, and it would never happen with McCain with our current agricultural system--it's very complicated, and farmers don't take too kindly to those kinds of top-down prescriptions, when they have more than enough challenges putting food on our plates. And while I agree with McCain that ethanol is a failed program (and I suspect Obama does too), Obama has been wisely strategic, and I'm grateful for that now. I am certain that many farmers, including those in Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota...and hopefully Pennsylvania & Ohio, see that point. But those who have commented on the rural-urban divide in America between Democrats and Republicans are correct...when we ignore these divisions and create greater ones by stereotyping rural citizens, to our peril, and we are acting in much in the same way that the Republicans did tonight by labeling Democrats as elite. America loves its rural image more than it loves its rural realities and will do anything it can to prop up frontier ideals...
Posted by: Bob | Sep 3, 2008 9:56:25 PM
she won't be able to play the "sexist" card in the debate.
I doubt she had that in mind. If she were to try, she wouldn't be any more successful as Hillary.
prey on class resentment
Isn't that the Democratic economic plan?
Posted by: Dena | Sep 3, 2008 9:58:56 PM
If Ann Richards were here she'd wipe the floor with Palin and be sipping on some ice tea before Palin caught her breath.
Palin wasn't disrespected at the DNC because she wasn't VP candidate yet. Obama has frequently given a nod to McCain's service and clearly you didn't watch his address because he devoted a rather significant portion of his speech declaring that the election should be about issues. ( Unlike McCain's campaign manager yesterday)Obama stated that he would not question McCain's patriotism or motives.
Posted by: LT | Sep 3, 2008 10:01:52 PM
Steve, sorry you see it that way. I just think she was highly sarcastic---and I give anyone in any part of this state who cares about it credit for being able to read articles or research whether what she said was true. She badmouthed community organizing. Is that going to win over people who help out in their communities? She said mayors do more good than community organizers. Is that really true in every town in America? Or do some towns and cities need community organizers because the mayor only cares about the rich and powerful?
If it is true that the verbal potshots and wisecracks were what hurt Novick in rural areas (and I think that was part of it) she's several times more sarcastic. McCain supports the troops because he wants victory---and no one in a military family will know he was absent for the vote on the GI Bill? Reportedly more people who list the military as their occupation contribute to Obama than McCain.
Obama is going to raise everyone's taxes? My last 3 jobs were temporary and I doubt that very much. Maybe this is part of the "you don't count if your income is below a certain level" mentality which only gave Bush tax cuts to upper income people. I suspect many other voters feel the same way. I wonder how many actually watched the speech--ratings will be interesting.
But the real interesting thing is this from the Washington Post
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/03/noonan_and_murphy_meet_the_hot.html
Someone who knows how to do it might want to find the video in that blog on You Tube and post it here. Peggy Noonan, the Reagan speech writer, and Mike Murphy, the McCain 2000 camapign manager, had just finished a spot with Chuck Todd, the NBC political guy. Video was no longer showing but the microphone was still hot.
According to the article ( I didn't hear it) Peggy Noonan said "it is over". She also said some choice things about how McCain didn't pick Palin because she was qualified, but because of a narrative--and something (garbled) about how Republicans aren't always very good about that.
Murphy says the strength of McCain was that he was without cynicism, and this was a cynical move (said sadly). The clip has what sounds like Murphy saying he comes from of blue-state Gov. races like Whitman where you don't try stuff like that. Stuff like this might work in Texas, but not elsewhere (may be misquoted--written from memory).
I was a delegate to the 1984 Dem. National Convention. Geraldine's speech was tough on Reagan policies, but no personal zingers. Made me proud to re-read it just now. Lots more substance than this.
People in the 1984 convention lobby after the speeches were saying "it is over" about Mondale.
Unless proven otherwise, I'm going to be on the lookout for other comparisons to 1984. Palin gave up the shrinking violet role and now no one can say "Biden better be careful that he doesn't seem to be browbeating a woman". I look for more Bentsen debating Quayle.
I think this time they have the woman VP nominee, and the Senator who has made quite a name for himself in DC.
But we have the great orator with stage presence, and the VP who is an old Washington hand. As I recall, those trips home on Amtrak prevent Biden from the Washington social circuit where Palin implied Obama and Biden spend all of their time.
Posted by: Bridget | Sep 3, 2008 10:10:38 PM
So, I'd like to hear what undecided voters thought of this speech tonight. Where can I find this?
I found her to be snarky in tone and short on content. I wish she would have borrowed Meg or even Carly's speech instead. They, at least, were articulate (though I don't agree with them).
Sigh.
Posted by: Gregor | Sep 3, 2008 10:16:43 PM
Randi Rhodes has a lot of dirt on Palin. According to Randi, Palin took that little town of Wasilla from the black to $22 million in the hole. Her mother-in-law ran to succeed her as mayor after she reached the term limit and Palin supported the opposition! Palin apparently headed a 527 in favor of Ted Stevens, although she claims not to know him. In fact, a lobbying firm she hired was headed by the son of a ... Ted Stevens' son. As for the Bridge to Nowhere Palin is so fond of declining, she was for it before she was against it.
Here's the best one. McCain has published his list of earmarks that he found wasteful over the years. Hitting the mark on three separate occassions ... Wasilla, Alaska.
Palin is a bold faced liar. Dick Cheny in a skirt. She will be working in the shadows, right where she's been hiding these past two days before the speech. As for the investigation into her abuse of power, she's hiding behind counsel at this time.
That brings us to the vetting issue. Why did the McCannibal ignore the fact that she was under investigation, if she WAS vetted. The possibility exists that she was not in order to keep the surprise. Answer: That was one of her qualifications. Their response will likely be contemptuous of laws and government. It smells like Rove was here. As for giving the McCannibals a chance to answer for themselves, my guess is they will not comment on an ongoing investigation.
Posted by: Bill R. | Sep 3, 2008 10:37:26 PM
It is reminiscent of 1992 and Pat Buchanan's declaration of cultural warfare. The Republican party has painted itself into the extremist corner. Criminalize abortion, marginalize gays, war with Iran, dismantle environmental protections, torture and more torture, no to universal health care, sell out to the oil companies, and try to divide the country on social issues as much as possible to distract people from the economic collapse we are heading for. 1992 didn't play well for the Repugs.
Posted by: Katy | Sep 3, 2008 10:40:19 PM
She did a great job of rallying the R base tonight. She did an even better job of rallying the Democrats.
How creepy is the random chanting of "U.S.A." or "drill baby dril?" This convention makes the Republicans seem so out of touch with America.
Posted by: Luke | Sep 3, 2008 10:49:18 PM
I have no problem with Palin poking fun at his "community organizing." To Obama, this meant greasy poll climbing for his unrivled ambition.
His personal contributions were about 1.5X higher than my own, with an income about 10X higher. Clearly, his heart was in it for the people, and not for his career.
Posted by: ruralandpissed | Sep 3, 2008 10:49:38 PM
As a rural Oregonian, I'm not one bit impressed with Palin's rhetoric. There's no silver bullet 'drill now' crap that will save us from falling housing and property values, high gas prices, and the havoc wreaked by the trillion dollar mistake in Iraq. Stunning how the R's at the convention refuse to own Bush's economic legacy and act like we should give them the White House again like we're a bunch of idiots who can't remember the last eight years.
Palin delivered lots of red meat one liners for the conservative base, but that's about the only people clapping tonight I suspect. And sarcasm doesn't substitute for experience. I don't think this will win over any one who wasn't already going to vote for McCain anyway. Better yet, the R's are still so disorganized just two months out (even Tom Delay admits it). The Obama campaign and Howard Dean are years ahead of the McCain people in registering voters in both rural and urban areas alike.
The most nauseating moment of the night for me came during Giuliani's speech when ABC (not sure if this was on the other channels) panned to the crowd chanting 'drill, baby, drill.' Chanting the loudest out front was some guy in an expensive pin-stripe suit, and slicked back hair, practically frothing at the mouth. Real salt of the earth.
Posted by: Bill R. | Sep 3, 2008 10:57:05 PM
From Bill Schneider at CNN:
"This speech is about mockery – and I wonder whether that’s appealing to voters. I really think this tone is going to turn a lot of voters off – it’s ugly, it’s bitter, it’s nasty. There is a bullying tone to this speech, and to Romney’s speech, and I just don’t think it works.
Even less appealing: “When they gave up on Iraq, they gave up on America”? Now that’s insulting.
What they’re doing is re-running the 2004 campaign, which the Republicans won on the issue of terrorism. He’s saying the war on terror should be the supreme issue – but for most voters it’s the economy"
Posted by: Stacy6 | Sep 3, 2008 11:13:57 PM
Lies, cynicism, hypocrisy, and lots of it.
They sneered that Obama was "inexperienced" despite his eight years in the Illinois congress and four years in the US Senate...until Palin became Same McLame's VP. They claim that McCain has never run a company, despite the fact that he's essentially been running an organization with a multimillion dollar budget and hundreds of employees for over a year.
Hillary was a "whiner" for complaining about sexism in the media until Palin came under media scrutiny. Then, to even question her background was "sexist".
I think I've figured out what "Country First" means to the GOP, after hearing all the screeching about "put the country ahead of the party". It's like every rethuglican initiative over the last eight years: Clear Skies = increased pollution, No Child Left Behind = lots of children left behind, and "Country First" means "GOP First". Don't let all that patriotic lip service fool you.
Posted by: johnnie | Sep 3, 2008 11:14:07 PM
Steve- your right on. Walked into a rural grocery store a day after her initial speech in Ohio and everyone was talking about her in a positive way. She connects with ruralites. Go to rural Oregon, walk through the stores and look around, especially to the women and you'll see what I mean.
One of the most effective lines rural Oregon will eat up:
""Here's how I look at the choice Americans face in this election. In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change."
Kirsten - Tell your Dad not to worry. She will be in 8 years. Also, I am sure as your Dad is aware she's more prepared right now than Obama and in one year into an McCain administration she'll be more ready than Biden. As any rural person knows, you don't draw assumptions of a person's leadership abilities from riding snow machines together or private conversations. Everyone understand things change...that kid you graduated HS with a couple years ago, goes into the world, creates a business (Microsoft), becomes a hero saving people in Iraq (many young men have heroic medals serving their countries over the many years), etc., etc. People change quickly, ruralites understand this well. Lastly, the people who are closest to Sarah (family and people in her AK adminstration) has for days now said to not worry about her or her family, any perceived lack of experience, etc. and that she'll Wow them even though she's never been on a national stage. Pretty bold statements in my opinion but she easily delivered. CNBC has some lenghtly interviews that indicate she is just as effective to a reporter. Imagine an Oregon governor of any party going through what she did over the past week and delivering like that. A good perspective for this audience would be to compare this speech to Obama's '04 convention speech but she had a higher bar (VP speech) and under a greater microscope.
Oh, LT, not so fast. Noonan's comments appear to be spliced and twisted by some Obama campaign staff who moonlights on NBC. Here's Noonan in her own words:
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/declarations.html
You can believe and NBC staffer's cutting or Noonan. Rural Oregon will side with Noonan.
Some free advice. Don't let Palin drive you Libs nuts. Clinton drove conservatives, including me, nuts. She is a phenomenon. Few, if any could have done what she did tonight. Just Deal, my friends, just Deal...
Posted by: Kevin | Sep 3, 2008 11:14:21 PM
I have no doubt that Republican base voters are pumped up about Palin and the ticket, I just think they're not connecting at all with moderate and undecided voters.
Charlie makes a valid point.
Last I heard there are what... 29% of Americans registered as Republicans? Given what it was just a few years ago, I'd say that there's not a whole lot more fat they could lose until they're down to the solid, knee-jerk base.
I'm no math whiz but 29% sounds like a losing proposition.
Posted by: Harry | Sep 3, 2008 11:18:34 PM
"Even less appealing: “When they gave up on Iraq, they gave up on America”? Now that’s insulting."
===
Yes. Almost as insulting as Harry Reid's: "The war is over. We lost."
And Obama's: "It is a Civil War. We need to get out now."
======
" I really think this tone is going to turn a lot of voters off – it’s ugly, it’s bitter, it’s nasty. "
---
Yes, that is what America thought of Obama's henchmen in the MSM and his campaign that went after, with bloodthirst, Palin's 4 month old baby (who your team said was actually the daughter's baby... until you outted the daughter's pregnancy).
That all backfired big time on Obama, the liberal MSM, and Democrats in general.
Democrats new slogan: We are ugly, we are bitter, we are nasty.
Posted by: Stacy6 | Sep 3, 2008 11:22:14 PM
Sorry, Harry, when we see a rethuglican talking about Democrats, we know they're really talking about themselves. And we also know that it's not your new slogan - you folks have been ugly, bitter, and nasty for years.
Like when McCain joked about teenaged Chelsea Clinton being a dog. Classy.
Posted by: David Wright | Sep 3, 2008 11:27:23 PM
Interesting comments here.
I think perhaps many of you missed the point of Palin's speech tonight.
It wasn't to win over Democratic converts, which ain't ever gonna happen for her anyhow.
It wasn't really even to fire up the conservative base, which is already plenty fired up just to have her on the ticket (seriously, $10M in a few days for McCain?)
It was to demonstrate that Sarah Palin is a regular person who is obviously not out-of-touch with middle America (as so many politicians of both parties certainly are). And, it was to paint a clear distinction of values between Obama/Biden and McCain/Palin.
In other words, her target was the "mushy middle" who actually decide every election.
Now, I'm not an undecided voter by any means, but neither am I a Republican partisan. I'm an independent (fiscal conservative, social liberal) who supported Kerry in 2004, but would vote for McCain this year no matter who he chose as his running mate. I admit that his selection of Palin, while understandable from an electoral strategy point of view, was disconcerting. So I was ready to hold my nose and vote for him without much enthusiasm -- not because I particularly care about Palin, but because I worry that she'll turn off the rest of the country.
After watching Palin's speech tonight, I'm actually fired up. I think she gave a fantastic performance, and (as distinctly contrasted with Romney and Giuliani, the other speakers I saw this evening) came off as an immensely sympathetic, scrappy underdog who was able to fight back (justifiably) when attacked.
In short, while I can't speak for undecideds, I have to think that she made a favorable impression tonight. The fact checkers will be able to rip apart her speech, as they doubtless will with McCain, and as they certainly were also able to do with Biden and Obama. Virtually all political speeches contain "embellishments" if not out-and-out falsehoods.
But for a lot of people, it's not going to be about who is factually correct -- it's going to be about who "feels" right. Colbert's brilliantly satirical "truthiness" is far more real than it should be, and setting aside for a moment whether she actually deserves the job, I think she at least opened the door with her target audience to seriously consider her for the job.
No question that some other aspects of the RNC were rather distasteful to those other than the party faithful. Romney was appalling, Giuliani was just rather mean.
But Palin's performance rose substantially above that.
Turns out she's actually going to be a force to be reckoned with after all. Should make for an interesting next couple of months...
Posted by: johnnie | Sep 3, 2008 11:29:54 PM
Kevin,
What was the registration amount pre-Bush?
Undecideds? If they still are undecided in this year then they aren't sold on Obama. There is a reason Obama runs well below the generic Dem ticket and it isn't the undecided's fault. Palin connects with Regan Dems. The reasons:
- The media says she doesn't.
- The speech wasn't ugly or bitter, it was rural (Obama nor the media knows bitter). The Truman line as spot on and is effective with undecideds.
and
- She's a woman who is more of a man than metrosexuals in urban cities.
Posted by: johnnie | Sep 3, 2008 11:38:26 PM
One more thing - the reason it won't be considered bitter by any standards:
"I think that her sarcasm won't be received poorly at all by the vast majority of America. After what she's gone through these last few days, I think the perception will be that she earned the right to hit back. And hit back she did — masterfully."
It's her against the Beltway now...(Thank you DailyKos and the NYT) and that will give her leeway for people to allow her to be sarcastic and hit back - hard.
Oh, and the Special Needs promise....don't underestimate that - she won McCain bigtime votes from people who'd never vote for Bushie.
Posted by: edison | Sep 3, 2008 11:54:29 PM
Attention Republicans: This VP thing? It's nothing. Really. It was good for a couple of newscycles and now it's over. It was something for the talking-heads to, well ... talk about. Neither VP candidate will decide this election, so let's get back to what's real: McCain vs Obama. And on that, Obama wins in November.
Next topic?
Posted by: Chris Lowe | Sep 4, 2008 12:02:11 AM
As a couple of others have said, the question is how this will play with independents and undecideds.
I came away with three impressions. On Palin, 1) she's a good speaker and 2) she's a glib and facile liar. E.g. the claim that Obama has never written or put forward any legislation. Or the one about all of the taxes Obama supposedly has said he will raise, that he hasn't. Or the one about him not having any energy program. And of course the typical one of making it sound as if repeal of the Bush tax breaks for the ultra-rich, characterized as a tax increase "on the American people" will lead to higher taxes for most Americans or average Americans, which it won't. Or the "as someone familiar with the North Slope of Alaska, I can tell you there's lot's of oil and natural gas in our own territory," when the amounts are small compared to U.S. consumption esp. over time.
The third thing applies to both Palin's speech and what I heard of Giuliani's. Both were composed of a whole lot of thrown together one-liners really did not hang together and sometimes were mutually contradictory. E.g. "I went after big oil" vs. "we need to drill now" as if that isn't a huge bone thrown to big oil. Or the attacks on unions vs. Todd Palin as a proud member of the United Steel Workers. I guess they think people won't notice, that they'll focus on the one-liners that appeal to them.
But clearly the threw their weight very strongly into being against government, period. Is the American electorate really that much against government? Or will Obama be able to draw a contrast saying "Here is your choice -- a government that works with you us all to solve problems that we have to tackle together, or one that says "I've got mine, so good luck with all that"?
Media comment I saw was substantially to the effect that a weak speech could have been a disaster for McCain by calling his judgment into question in choosing Palin, but that the speech was strong enough that he won't face that question based on it.
Posted by: Bill McDonald | Sep 4, 2008 1:14:23 AM
One of the things I hate about many Republican supporters is that they refuse to see anything without running it through their prism of talking points.
I'm an Obama supporter but I'm not so entrenched in my anti-Bush sentiment that I can't admit Sarah Palin did great tonight.
If we don't keep it real, we'll be in big trouble.
I saw a political star tonight. She made every other speaker at the convention seem like a boring dud, and McCain will have trouble following her tomorrow night.
She was great.
Posted by: Ian | Sep 4, 2008 2:26:30 AM
I hate to point this out to our republican friends but she has truck load of baggage. Yes that is right I am not talking about the crap she stuffs in a suit case. This is one slow motion train wreck I am going to enjoy watching.
Posted by: Agave King | Sep 4, 2008 5:58:42 AM
I must admit I didn't have Gov. Palin pegged for doing the hatchet work. But Jeff's right: now that she's proven that she can throw punches, she has to be able to take them without whining (she set the bar too high for herself when she reprimanded Hillary for whining about unfair media treatment). And this is a candidate who has not fielded questions from the national media/campaign beat reporters. Vacation is over.
And, strategically, I find it fascinating that McCain is going to let the experience argument play-out by staking his position that a first-term Governor is more qualified than a State Legislator and U.S. Senator. There is no turning back on this point.
And, as I wrote yesterday, what is so maverick about a War & Taxes platform?
Posted by: Bill R. | Sep 4, 2008 6:34:11 AM
So, are the McSame people going to keep playing the sexism/victim card when Palin is attacked, after her display of partisan poison last night? Palin- sexism, McSame- POW. Oh the victimization! It's wearing thin.
Note: The presence of any individual above does not imply an endorsement by BlueOregon. The selection of faces shown is done by Facebook. Visit BlueOregon on Facebook.







Posted by: Bronson James | Sep 3, 2008 8:06:10 PM
Maybe this night's speeches are rallying the base on the right, but I think it's rallying the base on the left more. This is insulting and over the top in mocking tone.