A President is as good as the staff he picks around him. After all Bush's mistakes were not made by him entirely but by his advisers and people around him he trusted. So the same will be of Obama or McCain if they win. A Vice President does absolutely nothing in office, let's not beat around the bush (no pun intended). But they are perceived as a part of the Presidency. Cheny was accepted by Repubs even though he was never envisioned as a Prez because he added Defense background. So even if the person is not picked to be Prez down the road their background still has to be relevant. McCain chose a person with no public face for the most part, very little experience handling NATIONAL issues and NO experience handling issues related to Iraq and the War on Terror. You can say the same about Obama but Palin now makes the repubs look like hypocrites. She also has very cosnervative beliefes which makes it hard to win those light conservatives who are left of right. It was not a good choice given several impressive female Republican alternatives that would be applauded. People are simply posting their partisan beliefs. I am a true independent so I am saying these things not because I support Obama or do not like McCain, I dislike both equally with no party affiliation. So my objective comment is that McCain jumped the shark and the weakness of his pick will be evident by late September and it will be too late to recover from that. McCain can win the election on other areas but on VP v. VP, he handed the Dems a gimme. Again I am truly objective as I dislike both sides equally.
A little too far simplistic for me. Given Cheney's extremely strong influence in policy-making ( along with Karl Rove ), I would suggest that we would not have gone into Iraq had Cheney not been Bush's VP. Cheney had a very strong part in this Administration's policy creation, and implementing their neo-con agenda with the Wolfowitz's of the world who I might add were quite mistaken. Don't kid yourself. These days, the VP position is a lot more significant than you make it out to be.
You must be on crack. Sarah Palin is PRO-LIFE with no exceptions for rape or incest. In fact, she is an ultra-Conservative that makes John Mc Cain look pretty damn Liberal. And you think that the Hillary feminists will flock to Palin? Time to put down the crack pipe, Son.
Really now? You obviously haven't looked at Mc Cain's voting record in the Senate - - - as opposed to what he is now running on as a Presidential Candidate. This guy has "flip-flopped" on issue after issue more than the kid at your local Burger King working the fry-olator. do you even have a clue how Mc Cain's views have changed with the wind>? Hello??? On another note . . . Tell me, would you and your wife ENTRUST your 16 year old daughter with someone that you have met ONLY TWICE, should you and your wife die in an auto accident? I think not. Guess what? John Mc Cain just entrusted our great Country of 300 million people and the lives of thousands of military men and women and their families with a person that he has only met with TWICE . . . and one that does not have an ounce of foreign policy background. Congratulations John. You just handed our Country over to a total stranger. How responsible of you. ( Note: I'm a Republican saying this )
Concrete ideas and real concepts? Please feel free to tell me what John Mc Cain's health care policy is? I dare you.
Why would anyone put the emphasis on being TOUGH ??? What does TOUGH have to do with anything significant in so far as developing sound economic, foreign, and domestic policy? We've already seen what TOUGH has done for this Country in so far as Bush's foreign policy and blindly going into Iraq for what was supposed to be ( according to Rumsfeld ) a brief military exercise that lasts no more than 6-months. I'd take SMART - - - like former Herbert Walker Bush National Security Advisor, General Brent Scowcroft over "tough" any day of the week.
Like it or not, much of this election will come down to race and gender. I do not agree with her stance on no abortions in any cases at all, i.e. rape or incest, as I'm sure many women will not. But I still believe that all the aforementioned qualities will indeed attract many women from the Dem side. Besides, she walks the walk, as evidenced by going ahead with giving birth to a child they knew had Down's Syndrome. You can't say she doesn't stick to her principles. What are Obama's principles for that matter? What example does he have that can exemplify that he is a man of principle?
Your logic doesn't make any sense. Your claims lack any logical foundation and/or connection. For example, what in the world does "sticking" to principles have anything to do with race and gender, let alone appealing to Democratic women voters? Please feel free to stand outside of a local Democratic Committee Town Hall and advertise that you are PRO-LIFE. Then let me know how many women show up. You have no clue.
All of you guys keep making this assumption that McCain is trying to woo Democrat women. Of course the Janet Reno's of the world aren't going to suddenly pull McCain. That's not the idea. The hope is to get some of those female independents away from Obama. Naturally a pro-life woman gets a "pass" from some pro-choice women that a male lifer wouldn't. A lot of people don't know it but men actually poll a tad more pro-choice than women. I'd guess it's because men poll more libertarian than women on EVERY choice issue ranging from birth to guns. Ardent femi-nazis wouldn't vote GOP if McCain had picked Gloria Steinem or Erica Jong. That's not the demographic in play though.