Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This blog is for students in Ms. Aby's 12th grade AP US Government class at Jefferson High School in Bloomington, MN. It is for students to post their thoughts on the 2008 presidential campaign. Students should be respectful & think of this forum as an extension of their classroom. The instructor has the same expectations for classroom discussion & blog posts. These posts will be graded for both their academic merit & for their appropriateness.
Presidential Campaign Blog
Objectives:
*To become proficient in the candidates & campaign methods in the 2008 presidential election
*To have an intelligent dialogue regarding the election with your peers
*To become more comfortable with an emerging technology in the field of political science (blogging)
Student Tasks:
*To have an email account to do this assignment. If you do not have one please see the instructor for help.
*Student will need to do their own independent research using online sources.
*To post a minimum of 4 times your own independent comment on the 4 questions/topics the teacher posts throughout the quarter. Your post should offer a unique contribution to the discussion. Your post should offer analysis as well as evidence to substantiate your viewpoint. Your post should include links to your evidence.
*To post a minimum of 4 times in response to other students. Your post should either be a concurring opinion (add to the argument by offering relevant points & new sources to develop that argument) or you can dissent with a peer. Your post should offer analysis as well as evidence to substantiate your viewpoint. Your post should include links to your evidence.
*A post should be a full paragraph and use correct grammar and spelling. Your posts should comment on or attack the argument of a peer – not the peer her or himself. There is an expectation by the instructor & the administration that the same standards for behavior & respect at school apply to the blog.
*To post online in a timely manner. The posts will be due on a series of due dates. Students need to post by the due date in order for the conversation to be able to continue on track. Late posts will not receive half credit.
*Students are not required to represent their own personal opinions. You can play “devil’s advocate” in order to challenge each other & move the conversation forward. It is the instructor’s belief that all sides of the argument be understood in order to appreciate the complexity of the issue.
* Students should not use text message language in their posts. This is an academic blog and should use formal language.
Site Recommendations (please pass on other sites you’d recommend!):
Washington Post (washingtonpost.com)
LA Times (latimes.com)
New York Times (nytimes.com)
BBC (bbc.co.uk)
The Guardian (guardian.co.uk)
Aljazeera (english.aljazeera.net/English)
Newspapers internationally & domestically (refdesk.com/paper.html)
The teacher will grade the student’s blog posts holistically. In addition, the individual student will choose which posts (1 original post & 1 response post) to submit for grading.
The criteria for evaluating includes: the organization of information, consideration of alternatives, disciplinary content, elaborated written communication, research, amount of contributions, & the quality of writing.
*To become proficient in the candidates & campaign methods in the 2008 presidential election
*To have an intelligent dialogue regarding the election with your peers
*To become more comfortable with an emerging technology in the field of political science (blogging)
Student Tasks:
*To have an email account to do this assignment. If you do not have one please see the instructor for help.
*Student will need to do their own independent research using online sources.
*To post a minimum of 4 times your own independent comment on the 4 questions/topics the teacher posts throughout the quarter. Your post should offer a unique contribution to the discussion. Your post should offer analysis as well as evidence to substantiate your viewpoint. Your post should include links to your evidence.
*To post a minimum of 4 times in response to other students. Your post should either be a concurring opinion (add to the argument by offering relevant points & new sources to develop that argument) or you can dissent with a peer. Your post should offer analysis as well as evidence to substantiate your viewpoint. Your post should include links to your evidence.
*A post should be a full paragraph and use correct grammar and spelling. Your posts should comment on or attack the argument of a peer – not the peer her or himself. There is an expectation by the instructor & the administration that the same standards for behavior & respect at school apply to the blog.
*To post online in a timely manner. The posts will be due on a series of due dates. Students need to post by the due date in order for the conversation to be able to continue on track. Late posts will not receive half credit.
*Students are not required to represent their own personal opinions. You can play “devil’s advocate” in order to challenge each other & move the conversation forward. It is the instructor’s belief that all sides of the argument be understood in order to appreciate the complexity of the issue.
* Students should not use text message language in their posts. This is an academic blog and should use formal language.
Site Recommendations (please pass on other sites you’d recommend!):
Washington Post (washingtonpost.com)
LA Times (latimes.com)
New York Times (nytimes.com)
BBC (bbc.co.uk)
The Guardian (guardian.co.uk)
Aljazeera (english.aljazeera.net/English)
Newspapers internationally & domestically (refdesk.com/paper.html)
The teacher will grade the student’s blog posts holistically. In addition, the individual student will choose which posts (1 original post & 1 response post) to submit for grading.
The criteria for evaluating includes: the organization of information, consideration of alternatives, disciplinary content, elaborated written communication, research, amount of contributions, & the quality of writing.
33 comments:
In response to Kassie:
I agree with your arguments about the effects that Biden has on Obama's campaign. The claims that Obama doesn't have enough experience have nearly dissapeared since Biden has become his running mate (1). The VP choice of Palin also makes the argument of lack of experience harm both parties in this election. I also think you provide good factual evidence about what Biden has done as a senator in Washington and why his actions have won him the respect of many people and politicians. The Vice Presidential Debate also showed the American people that Biden has the experience and a fresh perspective that differs from the current system with Bush (2).
A problem is, some our your sources are biased. Websites like “biden.senate.gov/senator/” and “ www.obamapedia.org” are created to generate more support for Biden and Obama. Most news sources have some sort of bias, but websites like these are for the supporters of their respective candidates. They do provide accurate information, but I think more credible and non-partisan sources should be used to make a stronger argument. People who are evaluating this election want to know what non-partisan news sources think about the candidates, not what Obama supporters think about Obama.
While gaining female support, or specifically votes from women who supported Clinton, was one of McCain's central reason for adding Palin to the ticket, this has proved to be futile. A Wall Street Journal article reported that choosing Governor Palin as running mate to McCain is not convincing women to vote for Republican, but actually convincing women to vote for Obama (3). Women who had supported Clinton in the primaries, are saying they supported her on policy issues along with her strong presence and speaking style (3). They don't find these same characteristics in Palin, so they have decided to vote for Obama (3). Palin record as a maverick in Alaska and policy changes may have been positive, but since they are limited to Alaska they remain relatively unknown to the public, whereas Biden's policy choices have had an effect on all Americans.
I also think that the Republican's abusive overuse of the word “maverick” has decreased support. Seriously though, the element of surprise that initially came from choosing Palin to run on the ticket, was a short lived boost to the McCain campaign.
I agree that a major reason for McCain's declining support is in part because of Palin's lack of experience, but I also think that a major reason for Palin's decline in popularity is her excessive amounts of bad publicity. Saturday Night Live is making a habit of poking fun at Palin for her habits and the potentially incriminating things she says (4). The publicity has been getting increasingly negative as the election draws near. Hustler is even trying to produce a pornographic movie about Palin called “Nailin' Paylin” (5). No, I'm not kidding. Since Palin's debut the media has been watching her every move and used every action and statement against her (6). McCain's campaign is inevitably paying the price. However the American people are insanely amused, and this election is turning out to be the strangest in our history. There is still strong support for McCain and Palin, despite all the satire in our media.
I agree that Biden was in general, a good choice for Obama. There are disagreements on policy between them, but they do work well enough together to appeal to the American public. I'm also not a fan of Palin, but McCain and Palin also make a strong team for the Republicans. Palin acts as a connecting to Republican social interests, while McCain can act as a policy maker for foreign policy and economic interests. This election is a battle between to strong candidates, and attention on vice presidential candidates has never been this high before.
(1)http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/csmstaff/2008/1008/obama-wins-round-2-in-patchwork-nation-as-experience-disappears-as-an-issue/
(2)http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20081007/OPINION04/810070355/-1/NEWS04
(3)http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122341711146712845.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
(4)http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/palin-hillary-open/656281/
(5)http://www.tmz.com/2008/10/03/nailin-palin/
(6)http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathlyn-and-gay-hendricks/body-politics-sarah-palin_b_132785.html
* I think Huffington Post, TMZ, and Saturday Night Live tend to lean liberal, but I site them to explain Palin's bad publicity not for factual arguments.
I really enjoyed your post Tiffany. You did a great job connecting to Kassie's argument and making several of your own! And yes it is legit to reference SNL if it is to discuss how a candidate is portrayed as opposed to using it as a basis for facts.
This is in response to Amanda’s post.
I agree that this year’s VP debates have been a significant impact especially in media coverage. This year the VP debates drew in about 70 million, the second most watched political debate ever. (1) The Obama-McCain first debate only drew in 52.4 million viewers, while the second debate drew in 63.2 million viewers. (1) I agree that the reason that Obama picked Biden for the VP candidate was because of Biden’s long understanding of foreign policy in which balances out Obama’s experiences of foreign policy. Biden showed clear evidence on the amount of his understanding in foreign policy at the VP debate compared to Palin. (4) Lately it can be seen that McCain’s attack of experience as an issue has vanished from discussions. (2) I also agree with your reason of why McCain picked Palin was for more media coverage. Palin does bring a new face in this race. No one has ever really heard of her until the VP nomination, in which led people to want to know her more bringing mass media attention. Also because she is a woman it was probably intended that putting a woman on the ticket would be enough to attract disaffected Hilary Clinton supporters, but it has been seen proven wrong. (3) McCain hoped that she would help win over the millions of mostly white middle class women who had voted for Sen. Clinton in the primaries, but it has been seen more of an opposite effect persuading them to support Sen. Obama. (3) I don’t agree with the claims that women don’t like is because of her looks but because of lack of experience and policy differences. According to a Wall Street poll, 51% of women said they plan to vote fore Sen. Obama, compared with 41% for Sen. McCain. (3) Democratic pollster Celinda Lake said, “Gender may have gotten women’s attention, but it’s agenda that gets their vote.” (3) I don’t agree that McCain’s choice of Palin, people aren’t going to vote for her because of her media attention but for her agenda, and overall the people don’t necessarily agree with her agendas.
Overall I agree with all of your reasons of the significant of the VP nominations and the reason they were picked.
(1) http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5irCWkOK7mXeHKYSxW_Ux2TISdKQwD93MLP701
(2) http://www.csmonitor.com/patchworknation/csmstaff/2008/1008/obama-wins-round-2-in-patchwork-nation-as-experience-disappears-as-an-issue/
(3) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122341711146712845.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
(4) http://news-info.wustl.edu/news/page/normal/12626.html
In response to A.J.’s post:
I agree with how you said that Biden was a good addition to the Democratic ticket because of his experience; I even wrote a lot of your same points in my own post. I also agree with your position on Palin being a risky decision for the Republicans, but I’m not sure if I can see how it will pay off at this point in time. Also, even though we’re talking about conservatives, I don’t necessarily think that nominating her was risky because she is a woman. After all, Hilary Clinton vied for a long period of time in order to get the Democratic nomination, and she had a good chance of winning it; one would think that by this point in time, people are beginning to move past the lines that race and gender draw in politics, which we have especially seen in this election. Also, I wanted to correct you when you said that Palin is the first woman to be running for vice president; not to be nitpicky or anything, but that was actually Geraldine Ferraro, who ran as Walter Mondale’s VP candidate in 1984 (http://plus.aol.com/aol/reference/Ferraro/Geraldine_Anne_Ferraro?flv=1.) However, I think it’s interesting that you brought up the point of Palin’s living out of the continental U.S. as a possible roadblock to her doing well in the election. I think that’s a good point, because I’m sure people in Alaska must have a way of living that differs at least a little bit from ours. After all, there are a lot of people outside of Minnesota who don’t know what hotdish is. So this may make it difficult for her to relate to people within the continental U.S., depending on just how different lifestyles here and there are. Finally, I’m not so sure how being super conservative like Palin is in this election will be that beneficial; I believe that McCain’s moderate views are actually to his advantage, since the majority of America is composed of political moderates. The only downside of voting for McCain for most moderates, then, is your other point about his age and the fact that he could possibly die in office, which I agree is a weak point in his campaign. I think that that is something that could really end up deterring voters from choosing him, which I find kind of disappointing even though I support Obama. But if McCain is a moderate and he gains the presidency and keeps it for a few years before he possibly ends up dying, it would be difficult to adjust to Palin as president since she is so much more conservative than McCain, and also since foreign policy is not one of her strong points, and I think that it would be difficult to have faith in her in this day and age because of that. So overall, I think you are right about Biden and partly right about Palin.
Regarding emberg’s post, I agree with you that the vice presidents are very important to this election. With all his illnesses, the trauma with being a POW (which I’m pretty sure could make anyone at least a little mentally unstable)(1), and age, I’m not sure he will last the whole term if elected. If McCain and Palin do, I hope he will because I seriously do not want Palin as president.
She was doing pretty well in getting support from conservatives and some of the women at the beginning. She was good at directing hostilities towards who she paints as the “bad guys: Obama, the one that associates himself with terrorists, and the “arrogant, greedy and corrupt mavens of Wall-Street”, who are the cause of the current state of our economy. In a speech, she said, “And with serious reforms to change Washington, John McCain is going to turn your anger into action.”(4) To me, it kind of sounds like she’s speaking to a potential mob.
I still don’t think she was that great of a choice, though. You said that she “appeals to many women who supported Hillary Clinton”. I think it may have been because she is a women, but I think that it was more out of spite when Obama won the candidacy (2). Although, now that Sen. Clinton is actively helping campaign with Biden (3), I think a lot of those voters will go back to voting Democrat.
Biden has had little coverage while Palin has been all over the media. A lot of them were negative. There were allegations of her abusing her power by firing a state employee for personal reasons(5). There’ve been multiple skits about her on SNL, whose viewer ratings rose dramatically, which made her look ignorant and a lot of negative press coverage all over.
As all the hateful ads and accusations going back and forth between the candidates, people are growing angrier. It’ll be kind of scary to see the results of this election. Either way, I think there is a possibility of riots or other acts of violence breaking out.
1) http://www.johnmccain.com/About/
2.) http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/angry-clinton-s.html
3.) http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/12/campaign.wrap/index.html?iref=mpstoryview
4.) http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/12/palin-draws-a-line-between-good-guys-and-bad-guys/
5) http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/11/palin.investigation/index.html
JAQI
I do agree that Palin is a huge factor in the McCain page but I would also like to disagree with you about how there is nothing about Obama and Biden. I actually think Obama made a strategic move picking Biden as his running mate. Obama as we all know does not have as much experience in politics (but that doesn’t mean he might not be the man for the job). However, Biden does have experience in politics, 35 years in the senate. I agree with you that his pick was average, and a little boring, and yes McCain took a risk with Palin. But just because Obama wasn’t exciting or risky with his choice doesn’t mean it was not a smart political move. Biden is an expert on international affairs and also on foreign policy. He also is the man to go to with environmental issues (such as better cars, renewable resources etc). I think that Biden was a smart choice for Obama to balance out his inexperience. However, many could argue that Palin brings the inexperience to the Republican campaign. She was the governor of Alaska, but many believe that might not be enough political experience to assist in the leading of our country. I think that you might have just only found research from biased sites if you couldn’t find anything about Biden. I mean he isn’t making all the headlines, but that is just because he has the experience, and doesn’t have the “scandals” or “interesting family stories” Palin does. The SNL skit was poking fun, like they all do and yes more “young” people watch that Obama has support for. I think that the sites which you only found stuff on Palin might be a tad bias, because there are many other news sites providing information about Biden and the key role he can play in Obama’s campaign.
1)http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3712.shtml
2) http://www.kolotv.com/blogs/masterblogpage/28127869.html
3) http://www.grist.org/feature/2007/08/29/biden_factsheet/
4) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/08/23/DI2008082300849.html
5) http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?
Angel
I agree with what you're saying on both Biden and Palin. I also agree that McCain would have had a better chance of winning the election with Pawlenty as his vice president. However I don't think that Palin's lack of foriegn affairs work should be held against her she's new and unused to such a huge spotlight being on her and she is working on improving her ability of handling foreign policy issues (1). Biden while having more experience with foreign policy doesn't help my confidence in having a president who lacks experience with foreign policy. Obama has never had to deal with foriegn policy either so how are we going to trust him with our country either.
1.http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/04/AR2008090403557.html
In response to Savann:
I agree with most of the things Savann states about Palin, however we have a few differences. I agree with Savann that she will gain support from people who have disabled family or friends because of her own life and her stance about the disabled. I also agree that her pro-equal rights stance will attract some women voters.
I do not agree with mentioning Palin’s pregnant teenage daughter; however I do believe that it will affect some voter’s views of her. I also do not agree with her statement that Palin will bring in the support of women, because it is shown that many women dislike Palin (1). I disagree with her opinion that some men will vote for her just because of her appearance, I believe that most men take politics fairly seriously and hopefully they are not so shallow when it comes to an issue as serious as the governing of our country. Continuing on the appearance issue, the fact that she is a woman is actually making a bad impact on some women (1). I also believe that Palin is repeating her signature phrases like hockey mom and joe six pack to show Americans that she is just like the rest of us, and that it does not really show inability to run the country. Although she may not have as much experience as people would like, she is running to be Vice President to McCain, who is extremely experienced. Plus, Obama does not have as much experience as others, but he has a great amount of support. This goes to show that as long as there is some good experience somewhere in the ticket (in Obama’s case it is with Biden), that a new face can be a good thing. Also, after watching the Vice Presidential debate, in my opinion she can hold her own ground pretty well. Although Biden is an experienced politician and did very well, she countered his attacks and clearly stated her stances on important issues and loyally put in a few good words for McCain (3).
While I do not necessarily believe she was the absolute best choice for McCain’s Vice Presidential candidate, I disagree that she was a bad choice. She has many good qualities and stances on issues as Savann herself pointed out. For example, her top priorities in office in Alaska were energy development, ethics reform, education and workforce development, public health and safety, and transportation and infrastructure development (2). These are very good priorities that show voters that she takes governing seriously and knows how to handle a heavy workload. Her experience with non-renewable energy is very valuable, especially with our energy situation at the current time.
(1) CNN.com “Why some women hate Sarah Palin”
(2) http://www.johnmccain.com/about/governorpalin.htm
(3) VP debate
I am responding to lauren the wise’s post. I agree with you on your first point that both VP candidates are great complements to the presidential nominees. Biden is a very respectable and experienced guy who is very good in foreign policy, complementing Obama’s lack of experience in politics and foreign policy (1). He has been in politics for almost as long as John McCain has it seems. Also, his age might even be a bit reassuring to the older voters and get some of them from the Republican side if they can rely on him to help guide Obama if he needs it (2). Many also say that Obama already has the presidency as long as he doesn’t make a major mistake, and Biden is a solid and safe pick (3). This makes him an almost perfect pick for Obama, like you were saying, and I think he is the best choice that they could have made to help Obama. Also, I agree that Palin was a very surprising pick to be the Republican VP candidate, but I think that she will have a more positive effect than you think. She may not be very experienced, but as you said, she has done a lot of good things up in Alaska like dealing with the oil companies (5). With the controversy over oil, she does have some experience with the big issues, especially the energy crisis. Also, I think that without her McCain would have a fairly boring campaign, and her addition brings a lot of attention to the Republicans. Sometimes it will be negative like some of her interviews, but also other times it will be positive like during the VP debate, where she seemed to exceed many expectations, and some even say that she beat Biden (4). That makes me think that the “microphone” isn’t as bad for her as you say. I think that the microphone actually brings some personality too her, which I guess could sometimes be good or bad depending on the situation. So I think that her addition to the Republican ticket was a great way to bring attention and a new face, and even a new gender, to the Republican side. SO I generally agree with what you said about the decision of the VP candidates, and how they both are good complements to their running mates. (I also liked how you had a shorter post.)
Sources:
1) http://www.barackobama.com/learn/meet_joe.php
2)http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/vice.presidential.debate/index.html
3) http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10624895
4) http://hotair.com/archives/2008/10/03/vp-debate-analysis-palin-hits-home-run/
5) http://www.johnmccain.com/about/governorpalin.htm
In response to the politics machine (Che greene)…
I do have to agree with the fact that Sarah Palin does in fact look like a positive choice for McCain’s VP. I think that a lot of people will be attracted to the fact that she is so conservative, and the fact that there is a certain buzz over the fact that she came out of know where. And it does seem that she is bringing in a number of votes. I also have to agree that voters will be and are attracted to how she appears on TV. But I think that if people we actually look at her background and actually research her politics before the nomination people would turn from Palin and relies that she is not ready for this big of a part in the Government, especially if McCain does actually pass. Go look at http://gov.state.ak.us/bio.html, it’s a bio about her. After you read that tell me that see is actually a good pick.
In response to Che Greene:
I would like to disagree with your statement that Palin is an overall plus to McCain’s campaign. While I do think she increased his publicity and media coverage in a good way at the beginning of the race, I believe that has taken a turn for the worse. Palin’s antics make her so easy to poke at, which gets a lot of publicity and is entertaining, but is not exactly helpful when associated with the President of the United States (1). Palin is all over the news, but it is for nothing positive to do with the presidency. All we hear about is her funny accent, her good looks, and her ignorant remarks she makes about Obama and politics in general (2). I think overall her publicity is hurting her and McCain because it is just emphasizing her lack of experience, which again brings hypocrisy to McCain’s argument against Obama (2). While these characteristics, such as her good looks and relatable personality like Chelsea points out, can be viewed as positive, as the race has progressed they have done more harm than good. Publicity like the SNL skits making fun of Palin and certain things she was quoted on (Obama “palling” around with terrorists) makes Americans’ fear her ability to work in the professional world of politics, and especially to lead our country if McCain were to die (3). I know looking at it that way is pessimistic, but if that thought scares many Americans then many of them will probably also think twice about voting McCain into the White House.
1. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/10/mccain-ad-the-wolves-are-out-against-palin
2. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/palin-obama-is-palling-around-with-terrorist
3.http://www.starbulletin.com/editorials/20081005_The_Palin_Effect.html
Jill:
I agree with your points about Sarah Palin and I think that you could have also stated that her aggressiveness and bloodhound nature is a big asset to counteract with McCain’s more reserved style of public speaking. I really liked your fact about the gender gap and that Hillary Clinton won 18 million votes in the primary and according to the New York Times, during her first speech, she immediately appealed to disappointed Hilary voters, so I agree with your point that his decision will decrease the gender gap (1).
I also agreed that Biden adds much to Obama’s campaign. I especially agree with your point that he brings along much experience that some fear Obama lacks and the Washington Post agrees with you as well (2). Another thing that Biden brings to Obama’s campaign is his experience in foreign policy, an area the Obama isn’t as experienced in (2). Finally, your comment about Biden appealing to the blue collar, small town, working class was right on according to the NPR (3).
I agree that both of the Vice Presidential nominations were crucial decisions and that both Obama and McCain chose running-mates that would balance out their campaigns. Sarah Palin with youth and passion and Biden with experience and appeals to groups that Obama would have problems with.
Sources:
1. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/30/us/politics/30veep.html?_r=1&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/H/Hulse,%20Carl&oref=slogin
2. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/08/23/DI2008082300849.html
3. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93906339
BJOR-IN! This is in response to your post on the vice presidential nominations. I agree with you one hundred percent on the fact that Obama picked someone who was experienced to be his running mate, in order to balance out the ticket. I found it very interesting when you pointed out that Palin was gaining support from Hillary’s following. I had never thought about it from that perspective. I was interested in the reaction of Clinton supporters to the news of Palin running so I looked at a Hillary Clinton forum. (1) Most readers were very excited posting things like, “It couldn't be a better pick... and the world will see what a fool BHO is for not picking Hillary. 'nough said.” Or “Hope its Palin, I would vote twice just to stick it to Obama.” And “'m actually very excited that women will get some serious respect in this race.” I know that a forum is no place to get reliable information, but it gave me the perspective of Hillary supporters. The attitudes I found certainly did back up your point. I read a whole page of the forum, and not one person said they would stay voting Democratic.
On another note, I think that the last comment you used was sort of weak. “Is this really who the Republican Party (and the American people) wants to be one heart-attack away from the presidency ?” I think that it is unfair to pull the heart-attack or assassination card. No one can predict what is going to happen in the future, and only negative things can come from negativity. There is no evidence that McCain is unhealthy. (2) A team of doctors from the Mayo Clinic declared Friday that there appears to be no physical reason why Sen. John McCain, the 71-year-old presumed Republican presidential candidate, could not carry out the duties of the office.” Therefore, we can only assume that he is in good physical condition until further notice.
(1)http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=26179
(2) http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/05/23/mccain.health.records/
Response to Jen:
I agree with almost everything Jen said. She wrote that there is a lot of publicity around this election’s VP candidates due to McCain’s age and health problems. I definitely think this is true and that lately there has been much more media attention on the vice presidential nominees rather than the presidential ones. I feel like I almost know more about Palin than I do about McCain. With all of the SNL skits, news stories, magazine articles, etc. on Palin and whether she is qualified have really brought a lot of attention to the McCain campaign, which is just what he wanted. I think that one of the major strengths Palin brings to the table is her experience with the environment, (1) but I completely agree with Jen when she said that her main advantage is her likeable personality. (2) She seems very relatable and friendly to many Americans, she is someone they would like to have over for dinner. (2) But is she someone they would like as a president? Her ratings have dropped from 80% to 68% in a month, as people began to realize that she very well could become president if McCain were elected. (3) This is still an extremely high likeability rating, but there is a strong argument that being liked is not a good substitute for being capable. (4) Although she may not have all the experience in the world, she is still attracting a lot of voters to the McCain campaign. She appeals to conservatives while McCain gets many of the Independents. (5) She also appeals to Catholics with her anti-abortion approach and many busy moms due to her understanding of their economic and lifestyle needs.
I also agree with Jen’s point on how Obama and Biden balance each other out. Obama has the charisma and people skills that Biden may lack. Biden has the experience and expertise in foreign policy that Obama does not have. Biden has been in the Senate since he was 29 and is chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. (7) He will help show people that together, the two are ready to run the country and solve whatever problems are thrown at them. Some people think that Obama’s choice of picking Biden shows his confidence, because he is accepting that Biden will be better at things than he is. (6) Others say that picking Biden made the ticket too liberal which could hurt them in the election most people are centrists. Biden was named the third most liberal senator in the country and Obama was the most liberal. (6) To gain even more support, Obama should have chosen a more moderate VP. Another downfall of the choice is that the two have often budded heads on important issues in the past, such as a force resolution in Iraq. (6)
Jen and I can both agree on our belief that the Vice Presidential candidates are and will continue to play a huge rule in this election. McCain and Obama have been very close in the polls, so they will have to turn to their VP candidates for help and the extra push they need to gain more voters. I think that both presidential candidates made
well-thought out decisions to widen their appeal. I think that both of them have positives and negatives to their choices, but will overall help their campaigns.
1.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/29/sarah-palin-on-the-enviro_n_122382.html
2.http://media.www.hillsdalecollegian.com/media/storage/paper1270/news/2008/09/04/Opinion/Hip-And.Historic.The.Reasons.To.Fully.Endorse.Sarah.Palin-3416326.shtml
3.http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/09/palin-tanks-in-polls-down-to-just-68.html
4. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/3/142935/850/216/619147
5.http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/09/separate_realities.html
6.http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints/stories/DN-balance_26edi.ART.State.Edition1.4d4d60e.html
7.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26010055/
In response to Molly, I disagree that McCain made a good choice by picking Palin as his runningmate. While I agree that Palin stands for a lot of issues that Americans value, I just don’t think she has the skill and experience to implement solutions to those problems in an effective way. The main problem with McCain’s selection is that candidates have to speak, and Palin has hardly been doing it at all, and when she does speak, she doesn’t do it very well (1). Compared to Biden’s 100 interviews so far, Palin has done 3 (1)and within those interviews she has only managed to give reporters disjointed and baffling answers (5). She comes off as kind of aloof with her folksy sayings and mannerisms that makes it hard to imagine her in the White House (3), and the unprofessional winks she displayed during the vice presidential debates were distasteful. In addition to the debates, she completely blew her interview with Katie Couric, unable to name a single supreme court case except Roe v. Wade (5). These are the interviews on which Americans are basing their votes, and it would have been a better decision for McCain to pick a vice presidential candidate who has had success at tackling them. While I agree that Palin is able to draw in those conservative republicans, I think that McCain would have gotten their votes regardless of who he chose as his runningmate because of his platform and experience. It is the independent voters that McCain needs to attract, and Biden appears much more qualified for the job than Palin, which could have been a contributing factor to the fact that Palin’s disapproval ratings among independents have increased ten percent (1). I believe it would have been wiser for McCain to choose Tim Pawlenty, as it would have attracted the swing voters in the Midwest. While Palin was at first a pleasant surprise and seen as a fascinating story, she is now being viewed more and more harshly as she is considered a candidate for office (2). Her unfamiliarity with the Bush Doctrine, her inability to cooperate with the Troopergate scandal, and her stretching of the truth in the Bridge to Nowhere project have left Americans wondering how she would function in the White House, being only a heartbeat away from the president (2). With the news of the Troopergate scandal that Palin misused her power as governor to try and get her former brother-in-law fired (4), Palin’s approval ratings have dropped significantly among Democrats and Independents (3). I think that because the election is going to be so close, McCain should have chosen someone with more experience and who was better with the media, because those things are basically what drive campaigns in this day and age.
1.) http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/03/mann.ct.palin/
2.) http://www.blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/09/16/palin-s-favorability-ratings-begin-to-falter.aspx
3.) http://www.miamiherald.com/692/story/708049.html
4.) Gov. Palin Abused Authority. Star Tribune Oct. 11, 2008
5.)http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/mini/CTVNews/20081002/Biden_Palin_081002/20081002?s_name=uselection2008&no_ads=
Jessie
I agree with you that Palin brings a lot of publicity to the McCain ticket. I like how you used the word spunky. I don’t hear that word used commonly or in a long time. As you said though, the publicity may not necessarily be positive. It is certainly not all positive in the case with Palin. For example, Palin was given the honor of dropping the puck for a Philadelphia Flyers game. In the video of her dropping the puck, it was hard to tell whether the fans were cheering or booing (1). I think that there was both cheering and booing, but it seemed like the booing was louder and more distinct. That might be because booing is more easily heard. You are right that Palin has little experience. In a poll by ABC, about 60% of people do not think that Palin is qualified to become vice president and only 35% think she is qualified to become President (2). It seems like Palin is becoming more of a negative for the McCain Campaign than a positive. The ABC polls also show that now 32% of voters say the selection of Palin will make them less likely to support McCain (2). This is up from 19% (2). It seems as the country gets to know Palin better and learn about her past, the less support voters seem to have, and there are more doubts raised about her qualifications and abilities.
I think that Biden was a safe choice for Obama. He has the experience, as you said, being in politics for 35 years (3). He will help make up for Obama’s inexperience, especially in areas like foreign policy (4). I don’t think that Biden will interfere with Obama’s theme of change even though he has been in politics for 35 years. Biden doesn’t draw a lot of media attention since he is a stereotypical politician like you said. No one questions his qualifications for vice presidency or even presidency though.
1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxjqUjKCkcM
2) http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/Politics/story?id=5930646&page=1
3) http://www.grist.org/feature/2007/08/29/biden_factsheet/
4) http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3712.shtml
In response to Willie:
I initially agreed that Biden was a wise decision for Obama, but reading more into it, I’m beginning to see more negatives. While Biden does have the experience that Obama definitely lacks, this almost works against him (1). Obama’s whole campaign centers around change and one must question if Biden can bring that since he has been in Washington for 6 terms (1). How can Obama promote change in government if his running mate as been around since Nixon was president and hasn’t done anything notable (2)? While Biden seems to have experience in international affairs as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, (something Obama needs) he isn’t considered an expert in this area as he was awarded the chairmanship position because of his seniority, not because of his expertise in that area (2). Also, Biden and Obama are northern liberals, which doesn’t cater to the majority of Americans that are moderates (2). Also Obama and Biden completely disagree on the war in Iraq (2). Biden and Hillary Clinton both voted to go to war and Obama focused a lot of his campaign on criticizing Clinton for that very decision (2). In considering Clinton as VP pick, I don’t think she would have been that great of a choice either (3). Yes, Hillary would have helped to keep the Democrats more united and appeal to women, but I honestly think that Bill Clinton affected her popularity (3). While he was very popular as president, he attacked Obama that some viewed as having racial overtones and some neutral Democrats even claimed that he was fracturing the party with these attacks (3). Also, in a little more than a year his approval rating went down 9 points (3).
I still stand by Palin as McCain’s VP pick. I also am confused as to why Obama supporters are arguing that should something happen to McCain that Palin isn’t ready for office, when Obama clearly lacks experience and he is running for president, not VP (4). In terms of executive experience Obama has none while Palin has 2 years as governor of Alaska and mayor for 10 years (4). While Obama did chair a Senate subcommittee on Europe, he never called it into session (4). Obama has no military affairs experience and Palin was the Commander in Chief of the Alaska National Guard and her son is enlisted in the U.S. Army (4). I think Palin also helps McCain’s campaign by stealing some of the thunder from Obama’s “change” slogan. Palin is sure to bring change as she is a Washington outsider and she exposed legal violations and conflicts in Alaskan Republican leaders (4). I think this shows her willingness to shake things up, even if it is within her own party. As far as legislative records, Obama once again pales in comparison. Palin passed an ethics reform bill, cut budgetary spending, and prevented a “bridge to nowhere” that would have cost $400 million in taxes (4). Obama, on the other hand chose to vote “present” over 100 times as an Illinois senator (4). While Palin has been criticized for her lack of foreign policy experience, Obama has about the same amount as she does (5). The fact that many worry that she could become president without this foreign policy experience should remember that she would still have McCain’s foreign policy team and would have gained some experience as VP (5). Obviously gender will play a role in her as VP pick, but I don’t think she was chosen solely to gain women’s support, I think she was mainly chosen as a breath of fresh air and for her reform history (5).
1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/28/joe-biden-obamas-vice-pre_n_115457.html
2. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-oped0828lipsonaug28,0,7288642.story
3. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/04/clinton.poll/
4. http://sharprightturn.wordpress.com/2008/08/31/palin-vs-obama-lets-talk-about-experience-and-background-shall-we/
5. http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2008/09/02/obama-vs-palin-on-experience/
Zhang-
I agree with you that this election is indeed a historical one. As they seem to say at every election: This is the most important election in American History!
I heard an interesting analogy the other day about Palin’s nomination to the VP spot. It compared her nomination to taking out a sub-prime mortgage on a house she can’t afford. In other words, she obviously isn’t qualified or informed enough to be up for the spot. 2 examples of why she doesn’t know what she’s talking about:
First: from a Couric-Palin interview
COURIC: “Why isn’t it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries? Allow them to spend more and put more money into the economy? Instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?”
PALIN: “That’s why I say, I like ever American I’m speaking with were ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the tax payers looking to bailout.
But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up the economy– Helping the — Oh, it’s got to be about job creation too. Shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americas.
And trade we’ve got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive scary thing. But 1 in 5 jobs being created in the trade sector today. We’ve got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation.
This bailout is a part of that.”
WHAT!!?!?!?!?! (that’s me talking)
Another part of the same interview:
“Couric: You’ve cited Alaska’s proximity to Russia as part of your foreign policy experience. What did you mean by that?
Sarah Palin:
That Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and, on our other side, the land-boundary that we have with Canada. It’s funny that a comment like that was kinda made to … I don’t know, you know … reporters.
Couric: Mocked?
Palin: Yeah, mocked, I guess that’s the word, yeah.
Couric: Well, explain to me why that enhances your foreign-policy credentials.
Palin: Well, it certainly does, because our, our next-door neighbors are foreign countries, there in the state that I am the executive of. And there…
Couric: Have you ever been involved in any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?
Palin: We have trade missions back and forth, we do. It’s very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia. As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where do they go? It’s Alaska. It’s just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there, they are right next to our state.”
(Back to me now!) Ok, so perhaps it’s unfair of me to use Palin against herself. Then again, it’s simply too easy (complete transcripts of Couric-Palin interviews can be found at cbs.com). To be fair, Palin was more on top of the issues in the VP debate than in the interviews, yet many argue that this was simply a matter of rehearsal and defaulting back to the talking points she knows (4).
So let’s look at the facts. Her “foreign policy experience” involves Alaska keeping an eye on Russia *cough*. Her “executive experience” involves being Governor of Waseca, Alaska, population 7,000 (how many Joe six-packs there I wonder?)(1). I also have to question her judgment. Before having her son with disabilities, she cut special needs funding by %62 (3). Does it need to be HER problem before it becomes a problem of the country?
How “ingenious” was McCain in choosing Palin as a running mate? I think that what it comes down to is if McCain, a 72 year old man who’s not getting any younger a)gets elected and b)can’t continue his role as the president for whatever reasons (health or otherwise), is Palin ready? The answer is no. The nation agrees. As the country discovers more and more about this mysterious Palin from Alaska, support for McCain drops. Obama now leads by a ten point margin over McCain and he is more popular with women than he ever was (2).
I agree with you that Biden was a safe, predictable, and somewhat boring choice for VP. I would have much preferred Hillary as a running mate. She was well-spoken, intelligent, and quite experienced. Ah well, if horses were wishes…
Maverick? *chug*
(1)http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=49
(2)www.gallup.com
(3)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qTx7Z00NyU (a CNN story)
(4) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/opinion/03fri1.html?em
In response to Bremily…
While I agree with your analysis of Biden, I feel some of your statements about Sarah Palin are…bad…I’m trying to think of a smarter word…
You say that having a bearskin draped across her couch in her office shows lack of concern about the environment. One could argue that there is no better way to experience the environment than to totally immerse yourself in it? If the media is telling the truth, Palin’s life has been spent loving the environment, just because she hunts doesn’t make her any less of an environment lover than the tree-huggers, she just loves it differently. Also, I’d like to share some facts with you about drilling in ANWR. First of all, all of Alaska would not be “ripped apart”. The current bill being debated would only allow for drilling in 2,000 acres (which sounds like a lot, but you have to remember that 19 million acres would be left untouched, which is roughly the size of New York and California combined) (1). Also, the “natural beauty” would not be touched; the place where drilling has been proposed is along the featureless coastline, nowhere near the beautiful snowcapped peaks and grassy plains you see in pictures of Alaska (1). One could argue that the barren wasteland is beautiful, but let’s face it, no one is rushing up there to go camping or spend a week camping along the coastline. Going back to the environment/animals, which Palin is concerned about, is a factor for most people concerned about ANWR, the impact would be minimal, even beneficial in some situations. If drilling in ANWR goes anything like the drilling in Prudhoe Bay (a town in the northern-most part of Alaska where drilling has already begun), the caribou can look forward to a population rise (3). You can find picture of wildlife surrounding the current drilling sites in the summer (I tried to paste in pictures...but it didn't work, oh well). Palin’s support of drilling in Alaska shows that she is a good governor who listens to her constituents because most Alaskans also support drilling in ANWR (2). According to polls, 75% of Alaskans are all for tapping into the oil reserves that lie below their state, including those who live in close proximity to the proposed drilling area (1). Also, by supporting drilling in ANWR, Palin is looking out for Americans because drilling in ANWR could potentially create 700,000 new jobs that have no chance of being sent overseas for cheaper labor, thereby helping to improve our economy (2). In an era where so many people are so frustrated with the current republican president, McCain and the Republican party made a wise choice when they picked Palin, who although is indeed a republican and very conservative, has fought against republican party members her entire political career (4). However, to be perfectly honest with you, I’m not really sure how I feel about any candidate, vice presidential and otherwise. While all the facts and my feelings about ANWR are true, my opinions of Palin were just for arguments’ sake.
(1) http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,179005,00.html
(1) http://www.thelandofthefree.net/conservativeopinion/2008/05/29/drilling-in-anwr-the-facts-that-are-conveniently-ignored/
(3) http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002225669_murkowski31.html
(4) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/30/us/politics/30palin.html
My dearest friend Twany,
I am writing in response to your vice presidential post. I disagree with your stance that Obama’s selection of Biden was an average choice. Senator Biden’s accomplishments, which you list, include his 35 years in the senate, his many allies across the aisle, and his foreign policy experience (1). His international affairs experience and his commitment to environmentalist and renewable energy sources (2) adds to the Obama campaign. His blue-collar background validates himself to some Democratic voters who have been reluctant to embrace the Democratic presidential nominee (3). While I agree with your point that Biden is just an average politician who brings nothing special to the campaign, I think that is why Obama chose him. He needed a solid, reputable politician who would make up for his lack of experience, and that is what he got.
On the Republican side I disagree with you that Palin will help the ticket. Her conservatism alienates many moderate republicans and her and McCain’s differing stances on certain issues may confuse voters. Her different stance on sexual education (5), drilling in ANWR, and global warming (6) appeals to a different base, but divides the party. While religion may be a factor, I don’t feel that it will play as big of a role as you describe. According to your data, they vote Republican no matter what, so it doesn’t matter that Palin was chosen. I think Palin’s lack of national exposure, and experience on the national level (only two years as Alaskan governor) (4) will be harmful to the campaign. In these troubled times Americans are looking for experienced leaders who know how to work in Washington.
Overall I feel like you do that the two campaigns are matching each others moves with an inexperienced politician, and an experienced one. I guess we will have to wait until November to see which combination America chooses.
1. http://biden.senate.gov/senator/
2. http://www.grist.org/feature/2007/08/29/biden_factsheet
3. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/28/us/politics/28DEMSDAY.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
4. http://gov.state.ak.us/bio.html
5. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/120742.php
6. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/6035372.html
First of all - asampson you are quite entertaining. However, I have to object to your attack that a problem needs to be her problem before it becomes the nation's problem. My very slow computer wouldn't load the Youtube video, but even if she did cut spending before she had her son, I still admire her actions after the fact. I really think that people are most genuine in their efforts when they are able to empathize rather than merely sympathize, and it is my personal experience that sincerity and staunch belief in any cause achieve the best results.
Back to my original response -
Megan –
I enjoyed your post a lot. There were many points you brought up that I realised I had always thought as well, but just had never found the right words to voice my opinion or the right articles to back it up. I agree with your statement that Biden was a wise choice because of their common backgrounds and similar passions [2]. I also found it interesting to see that Biden has been labeled as a populist-leaning liberal which balances out the necessary moderation of Obama’s campaign [1]. The Slate article you cited interested me the most, however. After reading it, I actually was left with a more negative image of Biden than I had going in. I think the article was slightly more liberal because it painted Biden in such a down-to-earth, real person, but I thought that many of his thoughtless remarks and gaffes show a flawed character [3]. I don’t think that it is okay for anyone to get away with such racist remarks like “you cannot go to a 7-eleven or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent” or “Obama is the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and and a nice-looking guy” [3]. To me, remarks like this are inexcusable even if Obama did cover for him by saying that he meant well. However, I do think that any of his message gaffes or policy slip-ups are understandable. Considering that he against Obama and had different stances, I personally think it’s amazing that he still has enough energy to campaign. I probably would’ve collapsed from exhaustion and sleep deprivation. The added stress of never slipping into my old opinions would knock me out. Any attacks against that I don’t agree with, but any racist remarks are not okay with me. America is a very diverse country with an upcoming minority majority. I don’t think the Obama campaign can afford to have a quick-tongued Vice President nominee, both because of our country’s diversity and the importance of global relations.
I also agree with your stance on Palin’s effect on the ticket. I thought it interesting that you feel a broader base may alienate certain voters. I wasn’t quite sure which controversial issues you put most emphasis on, but I think that drilling in ANWR is a significant issue [4]. Her role as governor of Alaska lends an interesting side to her stance. Palin’s support of drilling is the smallest voice among all of the candidates of both parties. Generally, I think a little disagreement between a ticket is healthy because debate should spark new plans and compromise. This does not change in this circumstance. I think that Palin has invaluable expertise in the energy area and McCain would do well to listen to some of her ideas. Simultaneously, however, there is a part of me that thinks too strong of support for drilling might drive the environmentalists away from the Republican party and to the Democratic party. This is especially important because the Democrats have a pretty strong stance on environmentalism; this stems from their need to draw any votes they may have lost to the Green Party.
I was interested by your support of Lieberman as a VP nominee. I had never thought of this before, but it does make sense. It would definitely help to draw the support of many independent voters; considering that an increasing number of American voters identify themselves as independent, this may tip the scale. However, I think that as a former Democrat, Lieberman may have lost the support of the stronger conservatives. Since McCain already is a maverick and very moderate, I might be afraid that his choosing a moderate and slightly liberal runningmate might lose some votes to more hard-core conservative third parties in protest.
[1] – http://www.ontheissues.org/Joe_Biden.htm
[2] – http://www.barackobama.com/learn/meet_joe.php
[3] – http://www.slate.com/id/2200302
[4] - http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/6035372.html
I agree with Emily Berglunds post.
Palin was a great pick for McCain because she is many things he is not. She appeals to many of the swing voters because she is more conservative than he is (1). She is the first woman to ever be on the Republican ticket (1), and this may appeal to the gender gap (2). It seems the goal of this was to get Clinton supporters (2). I think as discussed in class today, it may have also been an attempted to get media coverage. Palins nomination shocked many people, because NO ONE knew who she was...and within the next few days after the announcement, every media source ran stories on her.
Biden was also cruical for the Obama campaign. Biden has experiance - as a senator, and in foreign policy, a weak area of Obama. Biden also appeals to the blue collar/working class that Obama has been struggling with. (3)
According to an article on NPR, the VP candidates will matter in this election (4). The debate will be a key point in the election (4). It is also possible Palin can pick up some Hillary supporters - which would be huge for McCain (4). I personally think we are just going to have to wait and see how the next few weeks shake out..and finally, the election on Nov 4th to see if the VP picks really did influence voters!
(1)http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/29/AR2008082903558.html
(2) Palins Star Rises - Cnn.com
(3) Analysis: Biden's role is filling gaps and taking shots - CNN.com
(4)http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94459851
This is in response to Megan.
I agree with you that Senator Lieberman would have been a good choice for McCain because it would show bipartisan support and distance him form the McCain administration. However, I think Palin was a more practical choice. Though McCain may not agree with her on all the issues, it is important to appeal to the social conservative republican base (1). Lieberman has a strong pro-choice record, which is a major social conservative issue (2). Without the social conservatives, I think McCain would be even farther behind in the polls. I think Lieberman would have helped McCain with the independents, but I think he had more assured conservative votes with Sarah Palin.
However, I think the vice presidents will play an important role in the campaign. Biden adds important foreign policy experience to Obama and Sarah Palin reinforces McCain’s record. Both also serve as more outlets to attack the other candidate’s positions. I disagree that the debate will eliminate any further influence. Voters are still concerned with Palin’s inexperience should McCain be unable to perform his duties as president (3). Both Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson became president curing critical times when it was important to have experience (3). Even if voters do not consciously consider Biden and Palin, Obama and McCain have connections that depend on the vice-presidential picks.
(1) http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/14/huckabee-mccain-vice-presidential-pick-should-be-anti-abortion/
(2) http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=53278
(3) http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-10-02-voa24.cfm
In response to the former creation of Alec’s mind:
I’m sensing a little bit of bias when you, Alec, speak of the almighty Gov. Palin. I am not one to think that the other side is evil, unless that other side happens to allow racist talk and death chants at their rallies (3). But that is just Palin’s Alaskan hockey-mom charm, right? But seriously, your polling report data is very telling. The fact that moderates are trusting her less and less and people don’t believe she has the experience to run the country is the opposite of what John McCain was looking for (1, common sense). But I don’t necessarily think that it is unexpected by the McCain campaign. They would have known she was a gamble. But the McCain campaign’s main problem in choosing her was that they were pandering to the wrong demographic. Regardless of how happy the evangelicals and the rest of the conservative base were with the moderate McCain, they would have voted for him because they don’t want Obama to win. It turns out now that McCain’s shortcomings are his economic policies and his age leaving Palin close to the Presidency.
When it comes to Biden, I think that at a certain point it is hard not to see that this election was Obama’s to lose. He could have chosen any one of his competition, besides maybe Kucinich (cause he gives people that unclean feeling), to bolster the experience on the ticket. Obviously, Bill Richardson would have done a great job as VP also, and Obama not choosing him is a very interesting to speculate. As would Hillary Clinton have been a solid choice. But voters have forgiven him for beating Hillary, not choosing her as VP, and choosing that verbose guy from NJ as his running mate.
This is the point I’m trying to make. The consensus among the media, regardless of what they had said about the VP choices, is that this election is about the economy. People are voting based on what they think that Republican’s and Democrat’s policies are and what they have seen from the big GW (President George Walker Bush). And the media and much of society has successfully painted the problems in America on the Republicans, so McCain was really a non-factor. So back to Alec. I think the VPs are really should be a non-factor at this point, except that they act as a surrogate to the presidential candidates on the campaign trail. Palin touts McCain and sows doubt in the minds about Obama, and the Biden, the opposite. But then again, it scares people that Palin could be elected to the second highest position in the land with little experience (4).
Check out the article (4). It is from the conservative National Review, so they are already biased that way, but the author thinks Palin is dragging down the McCain ticket. Hmmm. Warrants some concern.
I started writing this a while ago so sorry to those of you I didn't respond to.
(1) http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08.htm
(2) Regularly watching CNN, Fox News and their coverage of each other (kind of)
(3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVFWahLTdUo&feature=related
(4) http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiMDhjYTU1NmI5Y2MwZjg2MWNiMWMyYTUxZDkwNTE
Sorry about the spelling and grammar mistakes.
In response to Jaqi.. (I know you already have a response but I already started this one a few days ago and I wanted to finish it)
All right, I’m going to have to disagree with you that the outcome of this presidential election is resting on the vice presidential candidates. But! I will agree that Palin is a HUGE factor in McCain’s campaign. Palin is basking in the spotlight of the media. I conducted a basic search on for both Sarah Palin and Joe Biden on Google News. There were 181,579 results for Sarah Palin, compared to 73,307 for Biden (1). This was just in the last month! I think that this is both a negative and a positive for the McCain campaign. Much of the news coverage that Palin is getting is not beneficial to her image. For example, CNN displays an article entitled “Palin Mistakenly Scolds her Own Supporters” (2). Not too appealing to undecided voters. But at the same time, Palin is drawing positive press. The same CNN quick link bar offers an article in which she directly stands up to a leftist group she feels is skewing the election (3). I think undecided viewers would see that as a positive—someone who wants their opinions heard and isn’t succumbing to sexual stereotypes. One of the hotter issues dealing with Palin right now, is that of her potentially unlawful behaviors in firing Commissioner Walt Monegan (4). To me, this is an event that has the capability to permanently tarnish Palin’s reputation, including, obviously, McCain. I think that a lot of the people who support Palin support her because of her appearance as a relatable person, and I don’t think those people would support somebody who has participated in unlawful behaviors.
1. http://news.google.com/
2. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/13/palin-mistakenly-scolds-her-own-supporters/
3. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/13/palin-we-cant-let-leftist-groupssteal-this-election/
4. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/09/palin.investigation/index.html#cnnSTCText
Tiffany, I found your post very interesting and I thought your closing remark was very appropriate for the post as well. I agree with your point of view in regards to Governor Palin, however I slightly disagree about Biden being a poor choice for Senator Obama. I think that the differences the two have will strengthen Obama’s presidency more than harm it. Biden brings a more wise and tenured aspect to the team while Obama brings the young fresh view. Even though these differences could be harmful to the ticket, I think they will actually give the White House more balance. Your post also made me take a new perspective on McCain’s choice of Palin for vice president. Up until now, I have viewed his choice as a disastrous one. In your post you said that “Palin is facing so much scandal and bad press that she has probably done more harm to McCain's campaign than help.” I mostly agree with you, however if we think about it from a different perspective and acknowledge how much free publicity McCain is getting because of Palin, the decision could be seen as a good one. By no means do I want Palin or McCain in the White House, however I think McCain definitely had a strategy in choosing Governor Palin and the abundant press was part of it (1). Imagine what the current state of affairs would be like right now if he would have chosen another old, well-known “maverick”. He might not have as much bad press but also no one would care. Palin has brought the McCain campaign from just another old man running for the presidency to a huge media fest that every American has an opinion on (2). I think that you also brought up a good point in talking about Biden and the truth factor. Biden has publicly said many things that are not exactly accurate, these misleading statements balance out with Palin’s bad press after her one on one interviews with Katie Couric and Charlie Gibson. Both VP candidates have made themselves known to the public, they will both make a difference at the polls(4).
(1) http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3851.shtml
(2) http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/sarah-palin-phenomenon-doomed/story.aspx?guid=%7BE68FE5D2-7747-4170-B7DC-8EEC17B4D6F5%7D
(3) http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/05/opinion/pollpositions/main4157343.shtml
(4) http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080302/NEWS07/803020583
In response to Kyle’s post I would agree with choosing 65 year-old Joe Biden was a very good decision on Obama’s part because Biden has a lot of political experience from being in the Senate since about age 30 (1). He is extremely experienced in foreign policy issues, and so he is the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee (2). I would also agree with this point. For example, he worked to get Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic to sign into NATO and pass the chemical weapons treaty to reduce the fear of nuclear war (3).I would also had to agree with this statement that Kyle made. o combat this criticism, he has tried to establish the image of him being a maverick, and chose Palin who is shown as another maverick. For example, McCain and Palin have both fought against special interests, lobbyists, and Big Oil companies, despite the ways other politicians have acted (4). I would have to agree with this statement too. I also agree with Obama decisions to pick Biden as his vice president. I would have to disagree with the statements that Kyle made about McCain picking Palin has his vice president because I believe that was very good choice.
1. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/us/politics/24biden.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=why%20obama%20chose%20biden%20as%20running%20mate&st=cse&oref=slogin 2. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/19/biden-busts-his-own-buzz/?scp=1&sq=biden%20intervention%20in%20georgia&st=cse 3. http://www.barackobama.com/learn/meet_joe.php 4. http://www.johnmccain.com/about/governorpalin.htm
Okay I just have a question in response to Emily Berglund's response to my post: If drilling in Alaska is such a good thing, then why are some people against it? I'm not saying you're wrong, Emily, I'm just honestly curious. There can't just be pros to an issue, otherwise it wouldn't be an issue. Anyone can answer this if they want to, I just want to know why some people don't approve - I admit I may not be as well informed as some people, but I'd like to know what the disadvantages of drilling in Alaska are, because there must be some.
In response to Erik:
I agree that the vice presidents have become even more important. In the two days after McCain announced Palin as his running mate, he received $8.8 million in campaign contributions [1]. I also think that McCain chose Palin, a woman, to gain the votes of women around the country. Americans support her policy in many fields like the ones you cited; she also is pro-life, does not support stem cell research, and is anti-gay rights, which puts her squarely in line with more socially conservative Republicans [2]. I disagree with your statement that she ‘was able to speak’; I personally dislike her ‘folksy’ accent and she seems either too coached or not knowledgeable enough about the issues. I agree that she is not ready to run the country should John McCain die in office; as one of the oldest presidents our nation would have, I believe we need to consider the possibility and be prepared for the worst. I do not think that Sarah Palin would be prepared if that time came.
I agree that Biden is crucial to the question of the conflict in the Middle East. His foreign policy experience will ensure that Obama has a good advisor with strong connections in the Senate. I also agree that the legislation Biden has supported in the past strongly goes with the issues of today’s campaigning. I think that if Biden continues to stress his experience, he will only bring good things to Obama’s overall campaign.
1. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/09/whatever-his-re.html
2. http://www.ontheissues.org/sarah_Palin.htm
In response to Will’s argument:
I agree with your explanations on why the V.P. candidates were chosen. However I disagree with your stance on the Republican Party, and I want to point a few things out. You said Palin is not experienced enough to be president, and so you are scared of the possibility of Palin taking over if something were to happen to McCain during his time in office. I want to point out that the office of president is an executive office, and that Palin has more executive experience than Obama. She is a governor, she is chair of the National Governors Association (NGA) Natural Resources Committee, she was in the Wasilla City Council, and she served two terms as the Mayor of Wasilla (2). Similar to McCain, she has a history of fighting against the influence of special interest groups, lobbyists, and oil companies, all of them being contributors to the issues our country faces today (2). Obama’s experience is being a member of the Veteran’s Affairs Committee, and serving as a senator for not even a whole term yet (1). Liberals attack Palin for her lack of experience, but she is only the V.P. Even if she did become president, she still has a lot more experience in executive offices than Obama who has less experience in office in general, and is running directly for office of the president. If Biden were the one running for president that would be fine by me because he has a good record and a lot of experience, so I trust that he knows what he is doing. If you support the Democratic Party because you have a more liberal view on politics, that’s alright. However, I think your opinion sounds like it is influenced too much by attack ads that the Democrats are using. McCain and Palin have already proven that they can and will fight for change, so don’t buy into the idea of McCain being “more of the same.” Also, if you are voting based on the argument that we are in trouble if Palin takes over, then you should reconsider your opinion. Either pair could possibly make a great presidential team, but the Republicans are overall more experienced and qualified for the job than the Democrats.
Sources:
1. http://www.barackobama.com/learn/meet_barack.php
2. http://www.johnmccain.com/about/governorpalin.htm?sid=google&t=palin&r=gop
Post a Comment