Contact
Subscribe


Geraldine Ferraro Has An Interesting Choice This November

Aug 29, 2008
By .
Politics & Current Events

Presumably John McCain, if he wins, is a one-term President.  Presumably that means that Alaska governor Sarah Palin, now confirmed as the Republican vice presidential nominee, is on the fast track to the 2012 nomination.

How will Geraldine Ferraro vote?

Update: Although BigTentDemocrat at TalkLeft has been wrong about nearly everything this election cycle, I think his advice to fellow Democrats is trenchant.  The people (already) arguing loudest about this choice made up their minds months ago, or always vote for one party.

But the people who will decide this election make up their minds at the last minute, and they are easily irritated by people who made up their minds months ago.

Second update: At Powerline, where they're always wrong about everything, the disappointment is tremendous.  Therefore, this was an excellent choice on McCain's part.

Third update: Could this have been simple pandering to get the Eskimo-American vote? Is America ready for an Eskimo as first, well second … gentleman?

Fourth update via Instapundit: AP Analysis: Palin's age, inexperience rival Obama's. Heh.

Last 5 posts by Patrick

10 Comments
Tags

10 Comments

  1. Ken  •  Aug 29, 2008 @8:10 am

    A bold and interesting choice by McCain. I think it's terrifically cool that one ticket has an African-American and the other ticket has a woman — that a milestone will be reached no matter what the outcome.

    She has, if possible, less relevant experience than Obama. It will be interesting to see how that plays out. (And the dynamic of the Vice-Presidential debates will change. In still-"chivalrous" America, Biden's attack-dog style may not play well used against a woman.)

    Early impression: it's not like I'm a single-issue voter on teh gay or anything, but I thought this was rather moderate for a Republican:

    She opposes same-sex marriage, but she has stated that she has gay friends and is receptive to gay and lesbian concerns about discrimination.[12] While the previous administration did not implement same-sex benefits, Palin complied with a state Supreme Court order and signed them into law.[32]

    She supported a democratic advisory vote from the public on whether there should be a constitutional amendment on the matter.[33] Alaska was one of the first U.S. states to pass a constitutional ban on gay marriage, in 1998, along with Hawaii.[34]

    Palin's first veto was used to block legislation that would have barred the state from granting benefits to gay state employees and their partners. In effect, her veto granted State of Alaska benefits to same-sex couples. The veto occurred after Palin consulted with Alaska's attorney general on the constitutionality of the legislation.

  2. Reed  •  Aug 29, 2008 @8:13 am

    So, how does McCain credibly continue to attack Obama for his lack of experience when he's chosen a vice-president (a "72-year old heartbeat away from the presidency") who is younger than and has even less experience than Obama?

  3. Ken  •  Aug 29, 2008 @8:15 am

    Well, Reed, what you have to realize is that HEY LOOK TWO HOMOS KISSING! EWWWWW!

  4. Derrick  •  Aug 29, 2008 @8:34 am

    I think it's a bullshit pick. It's a blatant pander, and not even a good one.

  5. Patrick  •  Aug 29, 2008 @8:46 am

    Reed, what does this do to Obama's argument that a vote for McCain is a vote against history and against change?

    It does smack of tokenism, though I like what little I know about her. Of course, if he had to have a woman and experience, he'd have chosen Elizabeth Dole or Condoleezza Rice, and lost my vote.

    Either way, it's on. This will be a fun election, rather more enjoyable than any I can recall.

  6. Amy in NC  •  Aug 29, 2008 @9:32 am

    She is a far right anti-choice pro-drilling conservative. Being a woman doesn't come close to qualifying her for the job or my vote.

  7. Derrick  •  Aug 29, 2008 @9:53 am

    I can't get over that fact that this STINKS of a blatant pander to Hillarycrats (aka, the idiots) and social conservative.

    From a political "voters n' shit" viewpoint, it's brilliant. It shut up the people who were bitching and potentailly attracted some indies. But from a "omg the prez is out and now the VP is in charge", it's a head scratcher.

  8. Ezra  •  Aug 29, 2008 @11:12 am

    I have to agree with Amy about Palin's abortion and environmental qualifications. In fact, as soon as Ralph Reed called it a great pick I was pretty sure I wasn't going to be too happy. Then again, I doubt I was the target market for this pick.

    I'll be interested to see what her sense of ethics (which seems, given her willingness to stand up to ethics abuses in Alaska, pretty strong) has to say about the current administration.

  9. Patrick  •  Aug 29, 2008 @11:48 am

    The pot-smoking social libertarians at Reason, with reservations, seem most pleased with Palin.

  10. Scott  •  Aug 29, 2008 @4:56 pm

    This choice was odd and surprising for a lot of reasons. An inexperienced, conservative politician from Alaska who is anti-environment & pro-oil but anti-oil company. She's also controlling and tends not to delegate well. Journalists say that she tends to over-simplify things, although she is purportedly quite intelligent. Does any of this sound as familiar to you as it does to me?

    Yet I have a hard time thinking that any of this would matter if she were a he. Taken just on her accomplishments, Sarah would not figure into the presidential equation. Her acceptance speech didn't impress me, particularly when she openly pandered to Hillary and her 18 million cracks (an unintended but hilarious nickname for her supporters).

    I continue to like McCain circa 2000 much better than the current version.