If they are going with a woman VP (which I am all for), isn’t Whitman a better choice at this time?
Palin can gain more experience as the GOP builds credibility with women, and then in the next decade we have Palin, Jindal, and Pawlenty in the bullpen. All with extensive executive experience.
I’ve resigned myself to the fact that Palin will be on the shortlist. She could be a horiffic pick, or a brilliant Veep. If Mac does select her, he needs to have someone (quietly) get her up to speed on foreign policy before the selection. The last thing he needs is “gosh, I’m so happy to be here” Veep, with awfully questionable Commander in Chief credentials, having a “Musharraff who?” moment.
Whitman isn’t as invigorating as Palin. That said, I like Sarah Palin a lot (I’m thinking about asking her to the eighth grade dance) and as much as I want to see her advance now, I think she needs to give it 4-6 years. The Stevens/Begich senate seat opens up again in six- coincidentally, when her second term as governor would end. And maybe I’ll have enough experience under my belt by then to work on her campaign.
For those not too familiar with the “Naughty Alaskan Librarian”, check out this clip from the Late Late Show in which the governor earns ‘three thumbs up’ from Craig Ferguson…
#6, I think the media will fall in love with her. She’s the one person who might take some of the spotlight away from Snobama. C’mon Matt, she’s going to be great if she’s choosen. She’s not a baffoon like W.
Here’s an important piece of advice: If it looks like it’s going to be McCain/Palin anyway (and that should be a “no brainer” for Team McCain), McCain should announce NOW or VERY SOON, rather than later towards the convention. There’s currently a growing chorus for Obama/Hillary (as VP) ticket (in fact the Dems are likely aware of the Palin phenomenon). If the GOP waits while movement for Hillary as VP grows — even worse until after it is solidified that Hillary will/could be VP pick — selecting Palin will be portrayed by Dems/liberal media more as a reaction by GOP selecting its own female (overshawdoing Palin’s own remarkable assets), rather than McCain taking the lead on this. Selecting Palin now or early (contrary to the punditocracy) will mean McCain will be seen as driving the course of this campaign overwhelmingly, and the DEMS will be seen as merely reacting. And, there’s absoultely no down-side to this because even if Hillary is a no-go as VP for Obama, the GOP gains by acting early. McCain the maverick. Palin the maverick. Do it now!
There’s no reason, and actually substantial negative, in McCain waiting to see what the Dems do first insofar as his picking Palin as VP, because, no matter who Obama picks, Palin is by far (and I mean far) the best pick for McCain and the GOP, especially in this time of GOP woes. The GOP can be seen as the party of real ‘change’ (albeit I hate that mantra, change, change, bla bla), while not really having to change from GOP core conservative values, which Palin more than represents.
In light of the current oil/energy situation, as well as the disaffected female Hillary voters situation, and growing focus on McCain’s age and health, Palin is more than perfect — now.
Who said she’s a buffoon? But, she does happen to be an ALASKAN Governor halfway through her first term, who’s showcased no particular interest in national issues or national politics. Tim Pawlenty, in contrast, has been more active internationally then any other Governor in the country, making multiple trips to Iraq and Afganistan (more then the Dems’ presumptive nominee), to China, to Bosnia, to Kosovo, and he’s spent 15 years as the leading Minnesota advocate for military affairs. Add to this the fact that he’s the co-chair of McCain’s campaign, and has stumped for him all throughout the country, and you have a candidate who is not only prepared to be President should the worst happen to McCain (and I don’t think Palin meets this qualification), but is compared to campaign for McCain from day one. Aside from Romney, Rudy, and Huck, Pawlenty is the safest possibility from a “prepared to speak about pressing national and international issues” perspective. Palin is one of the least safe possibilities.
Matt, I think you’re overstating Pawlenty’s qualifications and understating Palin’s. A trade trip doesn’t not give you a definite foreign-policy advantage. If that were true, we should be talking about President Ventura, who was far more popular overseas and did far more trade trips. The MS poll is interesting. Snobama is energizing the AA community. I still think he’ll take a white male. We need to win in Nov and Palin is the one person who’ll energenize an otherwise prosaic ticket (if Pawlenty gets on the ticket). She’ll also grab a sizable portion of the femisist vote.
Billy, I can’t think of anything better to further the right-to-life cause than having the first woman vp, pres as a pro-life woman. Especially one who choose to have a child with a disability.
I know it’s too soon. I know she just had a kid. I know we need her in Alaska. But ever since I read this, I can’t stop thinking about it. Palin excites me in a way that Ridge or Rudy or whoever just can’t (insert jokes here). Seriously though, she’s the one candidate who could rally the base, charm the MSM, and appeal to Hillary Democrats all at once.
She might have to work on her Fargo like voice. At times it can get a tad annoying, but for the VP it’s not really a big deal.
I doubt she’ll be picked, but at least considering her and other women will help.
One thing is that the party and McCain may recognize that they don’t want to pick a VP who’s defeat in November could ruin a potential future nominee.
I think it’s pretty clear that Romney and Huckabee are already getting ready for 2012. Pawlenty and Jindal would seem to be contenders as well. A few others. Given everything and the tendency for the GOP to nominate the next in line and the safe choice, Palin has no chance whatsoever of ever being the nominee so she could be put on a ticket without worrying about hurting someone’s chances down the road.
And, if by some miracle McCain/Palin were to win, you’d have the GOP lucked into potentially having the first woman president and opening up a whole new demographic of support. So it’s a win-win from that perspective.
I also think Meg Whitman would be a good choice, although I don’t know if the rich, corporate CEO type is a good fit this cycle. Also, Whiteman has no political experience at all. Fiorina late of HP has been mentioned also but her tenure was somewhat controversial and her 20+M golden parachute won’t help. I also have trouble seeing a VP or even P named Carly, seems a bit too girlish.
In the end, though, I think it will be one of Huck, Romney or Pawlenty.
I think it’s mistaken to say that Palin will have no chance of ever being the nominee. She’s a genuinely charismatic woman and will almost certainly win re-election in a walk in 2010. If I were handicapping 2012, assuming we lose this year and none of these folks are John McCain’s running mate (and assuming that running mate doesn’t seek the nomination himself), I’d come up with something like this: 30% chance Pawlenty’s the nominee, 20% chance Palin’s the nominee, 15% chance Romney’s the nominee, 10% chance Huckabee’s the nominee, and 10% chance Jindal’s the nominee, with a 15% wild card pick. And Palin and Jindal are only so low because it’s not clear that either will run.
Look at the history of who the GOP nominates: Dewey, Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain.
They’re all guys who have been on the national scene for years. Who have name recognition and that next in line/legacy quality, big state governors, VPs, etc…
Against someone with the name ID and fundraising prowess of a Romney who already has the beltway/NR/talk radio crowd behind him, a Huckabee who has a lock on the evangelical/social conservative wing and will only build on that, some of the other names mentioned.
Alaska isn’t exactly a state where nat’l leaders come from. I don’t think there’s ever been anyone on any nat’l ticket from there or even seriously considered, or in any congressional leadership or even any nat’l profile.
20% chance I think is way too high. I’d say her chance is more along the lines of what a Richardson had in this years dem primary, basically nothing.
You think Romney only has a 15% chance? I put him and Huck at least at even money.
Does Palin pass the CIC test on the day she is named?
At the beginning of these primaries I believe only three candidates from both parties combined accomplished that feat: McCain, Biden, and Richardson. By the end more had done so, but my point is that its a very high threshold.
Going back in time one can point to really only one successful ticket where the VP was questionable, Bush-Quayle, but Bush did not have McCain’s health concerns.
Two years into any office is way too short of a time to look at approval ratings — let’s check Jindal, Palin, Crist, etc. at the end of their first term — or even better — at the end of two terms. I am not sure of much, but of this I am fairly certain: Mcain et al will not pick anyone with two years of experience — if he did (and I am fairly certain he will not) Jindal will be a much stronger temptation than anyone else.
As I have said all along — like it or not — there are probably only three potential VP candidates: Romney, Huckabee and Pawlenty — in no particular order. Pawlenty neutralizes (and satisfies rule # 1 — do no harm); each of Romney and Huckabee brings strengths and weaknesses — but either are probably more of a net benefit than Pawlenty. I cascade every few days which of the three it will be (today I lean toward Pawlenty; two days ago Romney; last week Huckabee); and so it will go on until McCain selects.
mccain/palin is our best ticket. i overlooked her for a long time thinking she was just a pretty face, but she is actually a very accomplished, experienced candidate (far more experience then obama). background on palin:
Education : Wasilla High graduate, 1982; University of Idaho graduate, B.S. Communications – Journalism, 1987
Political and Government Positions : Governor of Alaska; Wasilla City Mayor; Wasilla City Council; President, Alaska Conference of Mayors; Alaska Municipal League Board; Chairman, Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission; Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission
Business and Professional Positions : Sigma Beta Delta Honor Society, APU ; Valley Hospital Association Board; former American Management Association; Alaska Outdoor Council; Alaska Miner’s Association; Alaska Resource Development Council; Youth Court Steering Committee;
Service Organizations : Lifetime NRA Member; Iditarod PTA; former Salvation Army Board; Various Chambers of Commerce; Valley Youth Sports Coach, Hockey Team Manager; Honorary Member, Rotary
she is a media darling in waiting, someone who knows how to communicate and handle the press, has a maverick streak as well as a strong conservative record, she is a strong female role model, and magnet for young women and women’s rights groups, a soccer mom’s dream candidate with a son serving in the military. and considering obama just ruined millions of women’s dream of seeing a woman president, palin could attract millions of dem leaning women. a war hero and a beauty queen, what better to win over middle america????
Menmon #23: “Going back in time one can point to really only one successful ticket where the VP was questionable, Bush-Quayle,”
Nixon and Agnew.
In 1952, Nixon was quite young (39) and had only served a year and a half in the Senate when nominated (following two terms in the House).
Agnew was worse. He had served four years at the county government level (representing a district in suburban Baltimore) and then been elected governor in 1966 — serving a year and a half before being nominated for VP.
No chance. This is like selecting a Supreme Court judge. Lip service is always paid to those who aren’t under serious consideration. Especially people like women.
It’s very simple. McCain’s major argument is that Obama is not ready. Ergo he can’t choose anyone with even loss foreign policy experience. Especially when he’s so old.
I don’t think McCain’s major argument is that Obama is not ready. It’s that McCain is a true agent of reform while Obama is a phony. McCain has a record of bi-partisanship and reform, while Obama has only rhetoric. Palin and Jindal have records of establishing high ethical standards and not suffering those who have lower ethical standards. Both are true reform agents. Therefore, either one would make a lot of sense, though I suspect that Jindal would be much better when actually arguing policy.
palin has a record of reform, is a military mom, and has all the intangibles needed to drive up excitement. for those arguing foreign policy, tell me, what experience do romney, pawlenty, or huckabee have in foreign policy?? none. palin is a governor just like them, the difference being she could could attract millions of new voters that they couldn’t. now i think those 3 are all good picks, but none of them will spark excitement or buzz around mccain. huck and mitt are well known, and pawlenty is the favortie ‘safe’ pick.
the unconventional is conventional this year. old rules don’t apply. the maverick and his gal-governor can win. period.
Sarah Palin would be a much better choice than some of the other names that have been mentioned – Romney and Huckabee (neither of whom are seriously being considered by Senator McCain) – but probably not the best choice.
Even though I have my disagreements with him I am become a big fan of Senator Joe Lieberman for VP. Now I am not nearly as far to the right as many who post frequently on race42008.com (I’m more of a center-right Libertarian than a conservative, at least as defined by today’s “conservatives”). My support for Lieberman is based on a couple of factors. The first obviously being his top-notch integrity.
The second reason is far more political. Everyone knows Senator McCain is probably going to be a one-term president (by his choosing) thus why not choose someone who he knows and trusts to not have a personal agenda. If he choses, for example, Willard Romney, he spends 4 years with a VP more interested in his political future than that of the current president, he gives Romney a leg up for 2012 (which, believe me, he doesn’t want to do) and misses out on the valuable input that a statesman like Senator Lieberman could provide. He gets someone he trusts and with whom he has a good working relationship (this will play more of a role than typical politicians running for President). By choosing someone like Lieberman he reinforces the fact that he is not President George W. Bush II and avoids criticism that he is going to end up beholden to certain elements (the religious right, for example) of the party that are unpopular with the majority of the country the way he would if he were to chose a Mike Huckabee, for example.
As much as many of you on here will hate to admit it, this election is going to be a battle for the center-left of the country. There are elements of the left that are uncomfortable with the far-left B. Hussein Obama. Some of the die hards on the far right may stay home, but by no means are they large enough a number to determine the outcome of an election. If McCain wants someone who will be both a good VP and help him electorally he should choose Senator Joe Lieberman.
Jindal was on CNN and Fox this evening for no reason other than to give a test performance as a surrogate. Whether McCain is seriously considering him may be in dispute but it clearly appears Jindal thinks of himself as a potential veep. Personally I think the age contrast is too great.
Guys/Gals lets wait til 2011 to start throwing around Palin’s name as possible presidential contender. She was just elected governor 2 years ago. 4 years from now I think she’d make a great runing mate for either Romney, or someone else.
“the unconventional is conventional this year. old rules don’t apply. the maverick and his gal-governor can win. period.”
I tend to agree with this. I like her position on the issues. She’s well rounded and has a lot of common sense. I’ve heard her speak and I think she can match any foreign affairs “expertise” that either Romney or Huckabee has (particularly Huckabee).
palin has been in executive office twice as long as mitt. and considering all the voters we lose because of mormonism and flip-flops, her ability to win millions of women pretty much end the palin vs romney arguement.
Are you aware of the fact that Sarah Palin-Chavez proposed and pushed through the largest socialistic tax increase in the history of the world? It’s a 400% increase on the state’s #1 taxpayer that funds roughly 90% of the state’s budget. (See ACES)
Speaking of budgets… do you know that she increased the fy09 operating budget by 23%?
And what do you think of her left-wing socialist energy rebate debit card for $100.00 and utility reductions for every Alaskan resident? And people wonder why she has high approval ratings… ha! If you can’t figure that out, you’ve never been to Alaska were people love free money from the government!!!
“palin has been in executive office twice as long as mitt. and considering all the voters we lose because of mormonism and flip-flops, her ability to win millions of women pretty much end the palin vs romney arguement.”
Can Palin raise the kind of money that Romney can? I doubt it, you are also overlooking the fact that Romney not only puts Michigan in play but can help McCain hold Colorado,Nevada and he can help in New Hampshire.
There’s been noted buzz of late on rising GOP star Louisiana Gov Bobby Jindal as a McCain prospective Veep. Certainly Jindal is more than very good, However, I believe there’s some “strategerie” going on here. The “real” beneficiary of the Jindal talk is the other rising GOP star, Alaska Gov Sarah Palin. Palin’s got everything that Jindal has (new/exciting, wildly popular, ethics and spending reformer, core conservative etc.) and more — mother of 5 w/remarkable bio, she’s 8 yrs older than Jindal, Alaska energy issue, and set to garner the disenfranchised female Hillary voter (I don’t believe Dem leaders can dump Obama).
Getting Jindal’s name out first — at Team McCain’s BBQ for instance — sets the stage for the obvious choice, Palin. For example, albeit Rush Limbaugh introduced Palin’s name, and later Jindal’s as good Veep choices, of late Rush has been praising the name of Jindal while on his very same shows discussing at great length the frustrated female Hillary voter and the global warming hysteria/need for energy development, without mentioning Palin’s name as the obvious beneficiary of those two issues. Rush walks a fine line, introducing Palin, yet can’t, at least yet, reiterate much, knowing that his praises may be counter-productive to many a swing, moderate and/or formerly Dem voter (who’s against Obama and switching to McCain). Moreover, while I feel that Palin has more real accomplishment, experience and qualification than Obama (and Hillary combined, albeit w/Obama the bar is pretty low), the only potential argument against Palin is she’s a newbie to the national scene. By having Jindal out there first as a VP prospect “passing” the “experience” and “new to the national scene” test, implicitly passes Palin as well. (For that matter Palin’s got as much if not more experience and accomplishment than Florida Gov Crist who’s only been Gov for 2 yrs — and the media has been touting Crist as a VP prospect.)
Re: Mitt’s money and fundraising prowess: Doesn’t the fact that McCain is taking public money for the general-election campaign partially negate Mitt’s obvious financial advantages over virtually any other prospective VP?
Mitt’s biggest advantages are that he’s vetted, known and completely credible. We know he won’t blow up, and his economic/business knowledge is attractive.
Re Jindal and Palin: Both are wonderful, but Jindal is much stronger on knowledge and policy. He has dealt with state, national and international issues; Palin has dealt mostly with energy issues. Plus, while Palin may help with the female vote, Jindal adds appeal to the non-Hispanic immigrant communities and Asian communities. Plus, he doesn’t have a newborn right at the moment.
Personally, I think Jindal, Romney and Palin (in any order) are McCain’s best possible choices, both politically and governmentally.
May 29th, 2008 at 10:38 am
If they are going with a woman VP (which I am all for), isn’t Whitman a better choice at this time?
Palin can gain more experience as the GOP builds credibility with women, and then in the next decade we have Palin, Jindal, and Pawlenty in the bullpen. All with extensive executive experience.
May 29th, 2008 at 10:38 am
I’ve resigned myself to the fact that Palin will be on the shortlist. She could be a horiffic pick, or a brilliant Veep. If Mac does select her, he needs to have someone (quietly) get her up to speed on foreign policy before the selection. The last thing he needs is “gosh, I’m so happy to be here” Veep, with awfully questionable Commander in Chief credentials, having a “Musharraff who?” moment.
May 29th, 2008 at 10:49 am
Whitman isn’t as invigorating as Palin. That said, I like Sarah Palin a lot (I’m thinking about asking her to the eighth grade dance) and as much as I want to see her advance now, I think she needs to give it 4-6 years. The Stevens/Begich senate seat opens up again in six- coincidentally, when her second term as governor would end. And maybe I’ll have enough experience under my belt by then to work on her campaign.
May 29th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Thanks for posting that!
May 29th, 2008 at 11:04 am
Guess I need to look at her record and background now. I know nothing other than what people have said here.
May 29th, 2008 at 11:29 am
For those not too familiar with the “Naughty Alaskan Librarian”, check out this clip from the Late Late Show in which the governor earns ‘three thumbs up’ from Craig Ferguson…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh-lW2opLyQ
May 29th, 2008 at 11:40 am
#6, I think the media will fall in love with her. She’s the one person who might take some of the spotlight away from Snobama. C’mon Matt, she’s going to be great if she’s choosen. She’s not a baffoon like W.
May 29th, 2008 at 11:42 am
Here’s an important piece of advice: If it looks like it’s going to be McCain/Palin anyway (and that should be a “no brainer” for Team McCain), McCain should announce NOW or VERY SOON, rather than later towards the convention. There’s currently a growing chorus for Obama/Hillary (as VP) ticket (in fact the Dems are likely aware of the Palin phenomenon). If the GOP waits while movement for Hillary as VP grows — even worse until after it is solidified that Hillary will/could be VP pick — selecting Palin will be portrayed by Dems/liberal media more as a reaction by GOP selecting its own female (overshawdoing Palin’s own remarkable assets), rather than McCain taking the lead on this. Selecting Palin now or early (contrary to the punditocracy) will mean McCain will be seen as driving the course of this campaign overwhelmingly, and the DEMS will be seen as merely reacting. And, there’s absoultely no down-side to this because even if Hillary is a no-go as VP for Obama, the GOP gains by acting early. McCain the maverick. Palin the maverick. Do it now!
There’s no reason, and actually substantial negative, in McCain waiting to see what the Dems do first insofar as his picking Palin as VP, because, no matter who Obama picks, Palin is by far (and I mean far) the best pick for McCain and the GOP, especially in this time of GOP woes. The GOP can be seen as the party of real ‘change’ (albeit I hate that mantra, change, change, bla bla), while not really having to change from GOP core conservative values, which Palin more than represents.
In light of the current oil/energy situation, as well as the disaffected female Hillary voters situation, and growing focus on McCain’s age and health, Palin is more than perfect — now.
(Perhaps Team McCain is already on to this.)
May 29th, 2008 at 11:43 am
I am all for a 100% pro-life woman VP
May 29th, 2008 at 11:50 am
IR-MN,
Who said she’s a buffoon? But, she does happen to be an ALASKAN Governor halfway through her first term, who’s showcased no particular interest in national issues or national politics. Tim Pawlenty, in contrast, has been more active internationally then any other Governor in the country, making multiple trips to Iraq and Afganistan (more then the Dems’ presumptive nominee), to China, to Bosnia, to Kosovo, and he’s spent 15 years as the leading Minnesota advocate for military affairs. Add to this the fact that he’s the co-chair of McCain’s campaign, and has stumped for him all throughout the country, and you have a candidate who is not only prepared to be President should the worst happen to McCain (and I don’t think Palin meets this qualification), but is compared to campaign for McCain from day one. Aside from Romney, Rudy, and Huck, Pawlenty is the safest possibility from a “prepared to speak about pressing national and international issues” perspective. Palin is one of the least safe possibilities.
May 29th, 2008 at 11:51 am
is prepared to campaign*
May 29th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Matt, I think you’re overstating Pawlenty’s qualifications and understating Palin’s. A trade trip doesn’t not give you a definite foreign-policy advantage. If that were true, we should be talking about President Ventura, who was far more popular overseas and did far more trade trips. The MS poll is interesting. Snobama is energizing the AA community. I still think he’ll take a white male. We need to win in Nov and Palin is the one person who’ll energenize an otherwise prosaic ticket (if Pawlenty gets on the ticket). She’ll also grab a sizable portion of the femisist vote.
Billy, I can’t think of anything better to further the right-to-life cause than having the first woman vp, pres as a pro-life woman. Especially one who choose to have a child with a disability.
May 29th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
I know it’s too soon. I know she just had a kid. I know we need her in Alaska. But ever since I read this, I can’t stop thinking about it. Palin excites me in a way that Ridge or Rudy or whoever just can’t (insert jokes here). Seriously though, she’s the one candidate who could rally the base, charm the MSM, and appeal to Hillary Democrats all at once.
May 29th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
She might have to work on her Fargo like voice. At times it can get a tad annoying, but for the VP it’s not really a big deal.
I doubt she’ll be picked, but at least considering her and other women will help.
One thing is that the party and McCain may recognize that they don’t want to pick a VP who’s defeat in November could ruin a potential future nominee.
I think it’s pretty clear that Romney and Huckabee are already getting ready for 2012. Pawlenty and Jindal would seem to be contenders as well. A few others. Given everything and the tendency for the GOP to nominate the next in line and the safe choice, Palin has no chance whatsoever of ever being the nominee so she could be put on a ticket without worrying about hurting someone’s chances down the road.
And, if by some miracle McCain/Palin were to win, you’d have the GOP lucked into potentially having the first woman president and opening up a whole new demographic of support. So it’s a win-win from that perspective.
I also think Meg Whitman would be a good choice, although I don’t know if the rich, corporate CEO type is a good fit this cycle. Also, Whiteman has no political experience at all. Fiorina late of HP has been mentioned also but her tenure was somewhat controversial and her 20+M golden parachute won’t help. I also have trouble seeing a VP or even P named Carly, seems a bit too girlish.
In the end, though, I think it will be one of Huck, Romney or Pawlenty.
May 29th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Trivia;
Which of these two were the last to visit the Persian Gulf region and meet with US military, Obama or Palin?
Answer – Palin. (I also like the fact that her son is about to be deployed to Iraq).
May 29th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Trivia;
Which of these two have a clear, understandable, and acceptable energy policy, Obama or Palin?
Answer – Palin.
May 29th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
#13, just think of “the fierce urgency of now” and you’ll be fine.
May 29th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
jim,
I think it’s mistaken to say that Palin will have no chance of ever being the nominee. She’s a genuinely charismatic woman and will almost certainly win re-election in a walk in 2010. If I were handicapping 2012, assuming we lose this year and none of these folks are John McCain’s running mate (and assuming that running mate doesn’t seek the nomination himself), I’d come up with something like this: 30% chance Pawlenty’s the nominee, 20% chance Palin’s the nominee, 15% chance Romney’s the nominee, 10% chance Huckabee’s the nominee, and 10% chance Jindal’s the nominee, with a 15% wild card pick. And Palin and Jindal are only so low because it’s not clear that either will run.
May 29th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
She is fantastic in front of the camera. The best I have seen, maybe since Reagan. That is a special ability.
May 29th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
If we’re going to count trade meetings as foreign policy experience, Palin measures up quite well:
http://gov.state.ak.us/large_photo.php?id=115
http://gov.state.ak.us/large_photo.php?id=105
And don’t forget that trip to Kuwait last year.
May 29th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Matthew,
Look at the history of who the GOP nominates: Dewey, Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain.
They’re all guys who have been on the national scene for years. Who have name recognition and that next in line/legacy quality, big state governors, VPs, etc…
Against someone with the name ID and fundraising prowess of a Romney who already has the beltway/NR/talk radio crowd behind him, a Huckabee who has a lock on the evangelical/social conservative wing and will only build on that, some of the other names mentioned.
Alaska isn’t exactly a state where nat’l leaders come from. I don’t think there’s ever been anyone on any nat’l ticket from there or even seriously considered, or in any congressional leadership or even any nat’l profile.
20% chance I think is way too high. I’d say her chance is more along the lines of what a Richardson had in this years dem primary, basically nothing.
You think Romney only has a 15% chance? I put him and Huck at least at even money.
May 29th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Matthew,
I do not care what state the candidate comes from, if she has a 90% approval rating, then there is something to look at.
May 29th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Does Palin pass the CIC test on the day she is named?
At the beginning of these primaries I believe only three candidates from both parties combined accomplished that feat: McCain, Biden, and Richardson. By the end more had done so, but my point is that its a very high threshold.
Going back in time one can point to really only one successful ticket where the VP was questionable, Bush-Quayle, but Bush did not have McCain’s health concerns.
May 29th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Two years into any office is way too short of a time to look at approval ratings — let’s check Jindal, Palin, Crist, etc. at the end of their first term — or even better — at the end of two terms. I am not sure of much, but of this I am fairly certain: Mcain et al will not pick anyone with two years of experience — if he did (and I am fairly certain he will not) Jindal will be a much stronger temptation than anyone else.
As I have said all along — like it or not — there are probably only three potential VP candidates: Romney, Huckabee and Pawlenty — in no particular order. Pawlenty neutralizes (and satisfies rule # 1 — do no harm); each of Romney and Huckabee brings strengths and weaknesses — but either are probably more of a net benefit than Pawlenty. I cascade every few days which of the three it will be (today I lean toward Pawlenty; two days ago Romney; last week Huckabee); and so it will go on until McCain selects.
May 29th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
mccain/palin is our best ticket. i overlooked her for a long time thinking she was just a pretty face, but she is actually a very accomplished, experienced candidate (far more experience then obama). background on palin:
Education : Wasilla High graduate, 1982; University of Idaho graduate, B.S. Communications – Journalism, 1987
Political and Government Positions : Governor of Alaska; Wasilla City Mayor; Wasilla City Council; President, Alaska Conference of Mayors; Alaska Municipal League Board; Chairman, Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission; Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission
Business and Professional Positions : Sigma Beta Delta Honor Society, APU ; Valley Hospital Association Board; former American Management Association; Alaska Outdoor Council; Alaska Miner’s Association; Alaska Resource Development Council; Youth Court Steering Committee;
Service Organizations : Lifetime NRA Member; Iditarod PTA; former Salvation Army Board; Various Chambers of Commerce; Valley Youth Sports Coach, Hockey Team Manager; Honorary Member, Rotary
she is a media darling in waiting, someone who knows how to communicate and handle the press, has a maverick streak as well as a strong conservative record, she is a strong female role model, and magnet for young women and women’s rights groups, a soccer mom’s dream candidate with a son serving in the military. and considering obama just ruined millions of women’s dream of seeing a woman president, palin could attract millions of dem leaning women. a war hero and a beauty queen, what better to win over middle america????
May 29th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Menmon #23: “Going back in time one can point to really only one successful ticket where the VP was questionable, Bush-Quayle,”
Nixon and Agnew.
In 1952, Nixon was quite young (39) and had only served a year and a half in the Senate when nominated (following two terms in the House).
Agnew was worse. He had served four years at the county government level (representing a district in suburban Baltimore) and then been elected governor in 1966 — serving a year and a half before being nominated for VP.
Not very strong credentials for either of them.
May 29th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Interestingly, I thought about Nixon and Agnew but Nixon had distinguished himself in the House with his HUAC activities. He also was a veteran.
Agnew did have a short resume. Interesting fact: Some delegates at the convention wanted to replace Agnew with George Romney.
May 29th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
No chance. This is like selecting a Supreme Court judge. Lip service is always paid to those who aren’t under serious consideration. Especially people like women.
It’s very simple. McCain’s major argument is that Obama is not ready. Ergo he can’t choose anyone with even loss foreign policy experience. Especially when he’s so old.
May 29th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
I don’t think McCain’s major argument is that Obama is not ready. It’s that McCain is a true agent of reform while Obama is a phony. McCain has a record of bi-partisanship and reform, while Obama has only rhetoric. Palin and Jindal have records of establishing high ethical standards and not suffering those who have lower ethical standards. Both are true reform agents. Therefore, either one would make a lot of sense, though I suspect that Jindal would be much better when actually arguing policy.
May 29th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
palin has a record of reform, is a military mom, and has all the intangibles needed to drive up excitement. for those arguing foreign policy, tell me, what experience do romney, pawlenty, or huckabee have in foreign policy?? none. palin is a governor just like them, the difference being she could could attract millions of new voters that they couldn’t. now i think those 3 are all good picks, but none of them will spark excitement or buzz around mccain. huck and mitt are well known, and pawlenty is the favortie ‘safe’ pick.
the unconventional is conventional this year. old rules don’t apply. the maverick and his gal-governor can win. period.
May 29th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Sarah Palin would be a much better choice than some of the other names that have been mentioned – Romney and Huckabee (neither of whom are seriously being considered by Senator McCain) – but probably not the best choice.
Even though I have my disagreements with him I am become a big fan of Senator Joe Lieberman for VP. Now I am not nearly as far to the right as many who post frequently on race42008.com (I’m more of a center-right Libertarian than a conservative, at least as defined by today’s “conservatives”). My support for Lieberman is based on a couple of factors. The first obviously being his top-notch integrity.
The second reason is far more political. Everyone knows Senator McCain is probably going to be a one-term president (by his choosing) thus why not choose someone who he knows and trusts to not have a personal agenda. If he choses, for example, Willard Romney, he spends 4 years with a VP more interested in his political future than that of the current president, he gives Romney a leg up for 2012 (which, believe me, he doesn’t want to do) and misses out on the valuable input that a statesman like Senator Lieberman could provide. He gets someone he trusts and with whom he has a good working relationship (this will play more of a role than typical politicians running for President). By choosing someone like Lieberman he reinforces the fact that he is not President George W. Bush II and avoids criticism that he is going to end up beholden to certain elements (the religious right, for example) of the party that are unpopular with the majority of the country the way he would if he were to chose a Mike Huckabee, for example.
As much as many of you on here will hate to admit it, this election is going to be a battle for the center-left of the country. There are elements of the left that are uncomfortable with the far-left B. Hussein Obama. Some of the die hards on the far right may stay home, but by no means are they large enough a number to determine the outcome of an election. If McCain wants someone who will be both a good VP and help him electorally he should choose Senator Joe Lieberman.
May 29th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
President John McCain
Vice President Sarah Palin
Sec. of State Joseph Lieberman
Sec. of Defense Thomas Ridge
Attorney General Rudolph Giuliani
May 29th, 2008 at 7:22 pm
I really like her biography. I could vote for her.
May 29th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Jindal was on CNN and Fox this evening for no reason other than to give a test performance as a surrogate. Whether McCain is seriously considering him may be in dispute but it clearly appears Jindal thinks of himself as a potential veep. Personally I think the age contrast is too great.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:04 am
Guys/Gals lets wait til 2011 to start throwing around Palin’s name as possible presidential contender. She was just elected governor 2 years ago. 4 years from now I think she’d make a great runing mate for either Romney, or someone else.
May 30th, 2008 at 9:50 am
“the unconventional is conventional this year. old rules don’t apply. the maverick and his gal-governor can win. period.”
I tend to agree with this. I like her position on the issues. She’s well rounded and has a lot of common sense. I’ve heard her speak and I think she can match any foreign affairs “expertise” that either Romney or Huckabee has (particularly Huckabee).
May 30th, 2008 at 9:54 am
palin has been in executive office twice as long as mitt. and considering all the voters we lose because of mormonism and flip-flops, her ability to win millions of women pretty much end the palin vs romney arguement.
May 30th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
I think I am warming up to Palin. at first I was against her selection, but the more I read, the more I think she would be a good pick.
May 30th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Are you aware of the fact that Sarah Palin-Chavez proposed and pushed through the largest socialistic tax increase in the history of the world? It’s a 400% increase on the state’s #1 taxpayer that funds roughly 90% of the state’s budget. (See ACES)
Speaking of budgets… do you know that she increased the fy09 operating budget by 23%?
And what do you think of her left-wing socialist energy rebate debit card for $100.00 and utility reductions for every Alaskan resident? And people wonder why she has high approval ratings… ha! If you can’t figure that out, you’ve never been to Alaska were people love free money from the government!!!
Oh, and… you may want to read this: http://community.adn.com/adn/node/124285
May 30th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
“palin has been in executive office twice as long as mitt. and considering all the voters we lose because of mormonism and flip-flops, her ability to win millions of women pretty much end the palin vs romney arguement.”
Can Palin raise the kind of money that Romney can? I doubt it, you are also overlooking the fact that Romney not only puts Michigan in play but can help McCain hold Colorado,Nevada and he can help in New Hampshire.
May 30th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
There’s been noted buzz of late on rising GOP star Louisiana Gov Bobby Jindal as a McCain prospective Veep. Certainly Jindal is more than very good, However, I believe there’s some “strategerie” going on here. The “real” beneficiary of the Jindal talk is the other rising GOP star, Alaska Gov Sarah Palin. Palin’s got everything that Jindal has (new/exciting, wildly popular, ethics and spending reformer, core conservative etc.) and more — mother of 5 w/remarkable bio, she’s 8 yrs older than Jindal, Alaska energy issue, and set to garner the disenfranchised female Hillary voter (I don’t believe Dem leaders can dump Obama).
Getting Jindal’s name out first — at Team McCain’s BBQ for instance — sets the stage for the obvious choice, Palin. For example, albeit Rush Limbaugh introduced Palin’s name, and later Jindal’s as good Veep choices, of late Rush has been praising the name of Jindal while on his very same shows discussing at great length the frustrated female Hillary voter and the global warming hysteria/need for energy development, without mentioning Palin’s name as the obvious beneficiary of those two issues. Rush walks a fine line, introducing Palin, yet can’t, at least yet, reiterate much, knowing that his praises may be counter-productive to many a swing, moderate and/or formerly Dem voter (who’s against Obama and switching to McCain). Moreover, while I feel that Palin has more real accomplishment, experience and qualification than Obama (and Hillary combined, albeit w/Obama the bar is pretty low), the only potential argument against Palin is she’s a newbie to the national scene. By having Jindal out there first as a VP prospect “passing” the “experience” and “new to the national scene” test, implicitly passes Palin as well. (For that matter Palin’s got as much if not more experience and accomplishment than Florida Gov Crist who’s only been Gov for 2 yrs — and the media has been touting Crist as a VP prospect.)
That’s my thinking at least.
May 30th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
Re: Mitt’s money and fundraising prowess: Doesn’t the fact that McCain is taking public money for the general-election campaign partially negate Mitt’s obvious financial advantages over virtually any other prospective VP?
Mitt’s biggest advantages are that he’s vetted, known and completely credible. We know he won’t blow up, and his economic/business knowledge is attractive.
Re Jindal and Palin: Both are wonderful, but Jindal is much stronger on knowledge and policy. He has dealt with state, national and international issues; Palin has dealt mostly with energy issues. Plus, while Palin may help with the female vote, Jindal adds appeal to the non-Hispanic immigrant communities and Asian communities. Plus, he doesn’t have a newborn right at the moment.
Personally, I think Jindal, Romney and Palin (in any order) are McCain’s best possible choices, both politically and governmentally.