Palin '12

With all of the work she's done in 2008, will we see Palin again in '12? Her campaign would look radically different than the McCain/Palin campaign--McCain attempted to appeal to the center with his liberal policy positions and distance from Bush. Palin, on the other hand, would have a much more conservative campaign. She would run on decentralization, conservative social values, and free-market capitalism. 

Why would that work? Well if the next 4 years is, as some people fear, a move towards American socialism (really?), then backlash from that would help a conservative ticket in 2012. If we see too much government involvement, too much tax increase, too much spending, and too much government interference with the economy, then Palin's campaign could conceivably be effective. 

Yes, it is a scary thought. How the woman who can see Russia and would have walked with dinosaurs 5,000 years ago could be the most powerful person in the world.... Is beyond me. Good thing we have to wait 4 more years to find out if it could happen. 

On another not, sadly Prop 8 passed in California. This is the first time in California's history that a law has restricted, not enhanced civil rights. Hopefully it will go to the Supreme Court, but the system takes a long time to work through. Fortunately, Prop 4 was defeated for the third time. Maybe it will stop popping up on the ballot so often. 

Yet Another Update

95% of California precincts have reported their results. 

Yes on Prop 8 is ahead 4 points, 52-48%, by about 500,000 votes.

No on Prop 4 is also ahead 4 points, 52-48%, by about 500,000 votes.

Props Update

For recent election updates, go here.

With almost 60% of precincts reporting, Yes on 8 is winning 53-47% and No on 4 is winning 52-48%.

Some Advice for Republicans

This video gives suggestions to the Republican party in the political future:

"The Republican party shouldn't allow the right wing to control it" was the essential advice given. Does that mean McCain would have won if he hadn't chosen Palin? McCain was the poster boy of a centered Republican; he disaffected voters by having liberal policies. I want to know how this Democratic strategist would have changed McCain's campaign based on her advice.

Interesting.

Getting a Little Worried, But There's Still Hope

42% of California precincts are reporting on Prop 8. Yes still leads 52-48% and is up by just over 200,000 votes.

40% of precincts are reporting on Prop 4, and No is leading 52-48% and is up by less than 200,000 votes.

It's getting close. It's 11:22PM West Coast time, and a lot of the rest of the country is staying up to see the results of these propositions. California could determine how other states treat gay marriage; it could be the trend setter either way Prop 8 ends up. California could also fall to the proven dangers of limiting abortions for minors, if Prop 4 passes. Prop 4, in other forms, has been turned down twice before, and hopefully the third time will deter its opponents. 

We'll have to wait and see.

Update 4 (&8)

With only 13% of precincts reporting, Yes on Prop 8 is winning 55-45%. 

:(

With 12% reporting, No on 4 is winning 51-49%

:)

COME ON CALIFORNIA!!!

-------

It's now 10:17. With 27% of precincts reporting, Yes on 8 is winning 53-47%.

With 22% of precincts reporting, No on 4 is winning 52-48%.

Update 3

It's now 9:08, and McCain has conceded. Barack Obama will be the first black President of the United States. 

Democrats are taking over; they have control of the House and Senate.

Stock markets in other countries are rising.

Palin will not address the country tonight.

I'm still waiting on results for California's Props 4&8... and crossing my fingers. Arizona banned gay marriage, Arkansas banned gay couples from adopting children, Nebraska ended affirmative action, and South Dakota passed abortion limits. But Colorado stopped Amendment 48: Human life at moment of conception. Let's just hope California doesn't follow the trend tonight.

Update 2

It is now 5:11, and the score is Obama 77 college votes to McCain's 34.

I have to leave for the next 3.5 hours for a volleyball game, and by that time, we could have a new President.

But in more entertaining news, I got a call from one of my friends working at the polls for No on 4&8. He's standing next to another one of my male friends, and they've been called homosexuals, in more profane terms, all afternoon. Oh, the joys Election Day holds. 

Updates!

CNN's political ticker reports that 72% of first time voters are voting for Obama; they make up 10% of the voting population today.

As of now, 4PM California time, no states have declared a winner (according to NYTimes). New Hampshire, Kentucky, and Indiana have begun to report, but all under 10% of the votes. Most East Coast states' polls have closed, so it will only be a matter of a few hours until this gets really exciting!

More updates soon.

Election Day!

I woke up at 6 this morning so I could hold signs 100 feet away from a polling site for three hours. And as boring as it sounds, those three hours were far from boring. We ended up standing across from a church, and No on 4&8 signs probably weren't welcome to members of that church. In general, we got a lot of support. A lot of honks, thank yous for being present, and questions about 4 and 8.

On the other hand, we were flipped off a lot, shouted at, and called names. We had one guy come around about seven times telling us why we should vote Yes on 8, telling us a story of a little boy who was killed and therefore gays shouldn't marry. He drove by in his truck later, which had McCain/Palin and Yes on 8 posters duct-taped to it... classy. He put on his McCain mask and shouted, "Guess who the next President is going to be!" Were we really supposed to answer that? One of us did, and he shouted back, "He'll die twenty minutes after inauguration." And Yes-man replied,  "Good! Guess who's going to be President when he dies?" 

So our spokesman again shouted back, "Palin thought dinosaurs were around 5,000 years ago. People were around then." And our trusty Yes-man thoughtfully responded, "Guess where she got that from, the BIBLE!" We were dumbfounded, and had no comeback. Did he seriously just reference dinosaurs in the Bible?

I learned a lot today:

1. Don't park in front of people's driveways, even if you're voting. They will bitch about it in front of their kids, not hesitating to use a string of profanities. 

2. Lines are long, bring a book. 

3. Even if you think you're standing 100 feet away from a polling site, if someone complains, you'll probably have to move unless you have a measuring tape. 

4. Don't stop in the middle of the road with Yes-man trying to explain to a confused voter what Prop 4 and 8 say.

5. If you say good morning first, even people who flick you off will say good morning too.

6. Old women are either super liberal or super conservative; you can never be sure.

All Eyes on U.S.

The world is looking to us and watching our elections as closely as we are. Under world news sections, Campaign ’08 shows up. Tomorrow we choose the most powerful person in the world. And today, the Presidential candidates are attending 10 rallies in 4 time zones.

McCain is pushing hard. He told Indianapolis that “Mac is back” (see this NYTimes article). And Obama is pushing back, addressing a crowd booing McCain’s economic plan, saying, “You don’t need to boo. You need to vote.”

So who is it going to be?

Well, according to PoliticalWire, even Karl Rove is predicting Obama to be the most powerful person in the world. Most polls support Obama’s win. He leads from 2-13% in most polls (see here).

On the other hand, Arianna Huffington declared the Internet the winner of the 2008 election cycle. I agree, the Internet has overall positive approval ratings and represents all of the voices of a democracy. 

By this time tomorrow, all eyes will be on watching every internet, television, and radio leak. We may know who is the winner, we may not. We may have unprecedented voter turnout, we may not. We may encounter problems at polls, we probably will. Tomorrow will be predictable, and it will be unpredictable. It's a paradox, but hey... That's American politics.

Numbers, Numbers, Numbers

In the Gallup Polls today, Obama is leading in Registered Voters 52%-41%, Likely Voters (Expanded) 52%-43%, and Likely Voters (Traditional) 51%-43%. Interestingly, consumer confidence has gone up one point, and is now at 6% positive to 75% negative; it’s getting close.

The first thing I noticed on the Gallup site was this title: “Little Evidence in Surge of Youth Vote.” Turns out that the level of interest in this year’s election is no higher than in 2004. This year, 18-29 year olds make up 12% of Gallup’s likely voters, as opposed to 13% in 2004.

Gallup reports the implications as this:

“While Gallup data do suggest that voter turnout among young people will be high this year (as it was in 2004) compared to historical turnout rates, the data do not suggest that it will be appreciably higher than in 2004. Even if more young voters are registered this year, they do not appear to be any more interested in the campaign or in voting in the election than they were in 2004.”

I find these numbers incredibly hard to believe. Maybe I have too much faith in my age group. Maybe it’s being surrounded by diehard Obama fans 24/7. I just can’t imagine that with all of the excitement surrounding this year’s election, that there’s going to be less turnout than years passed. Or maybe percentage-wise, people my age will turnout in the same ratio they have before, but in sheer numbers, there will be higher turnout this year. There’s just absolutely no way that the level of enthusiasm I’ve seen plague our campus results in no higher turnout. 

Negative Waste

Is trash talking useful? In the long run, yes. It’s informative and acts as a check on candidate’s claims. But I’ve been getting irritated when every speech is only half information and half bashing (cough PALIN cough). 

CNN reports that Palin spent her weekend in Flordia, addressing the 3 million seniors over 65. The article was critical of Palin’s negative turn in her speech, saying Obama exploited seniors’ fears, and calling his tax plan “phony.”

The most irritating thing reported in the article was this:

“Palin also continued to repeat a claim, which has been debunked, that ‘according to an independent analysis, our opponent's new policies will destroy nearly 6 million jobs over the next decade.’ She later made the same claim at rallies in Central Florida and Raleigh, North Carolina.

I mean come on! You’ve been proved wrong, you can’t keep telling the public the same lie. Well, I guess you can and that’s American politics, but at least try to be a little more inconspicuous.I’d much rather hear why your plan is BETTER, not why the Democrat’s plan sucks. But you can’t always get what you want. Most Americans disapprove of negative campaigning, yet we can’t get enough of it. We’re watching the crash on the side of the road, with no empathy and a lot of time wasted waiting in traffic. We’re a consumer culture; we eat up anything that entertains us. Palin’s negative campaigning isn’t exactly what we want, but it’s getting us talking about her, and it’s giving her exposure in the media. Three days before the election, it has to be an all out effort.  

Pumpkin Palin and Prop 8

With all of the Prop 8 information floating around our campus, it’s interesting to see the presidential candidates’ opinions on it. For non-California voters, Prop 8 would amend the California constitution to make gay marriage illegal. Prop 8 would be the first time civil rights were limited in California (see here for more information).It’s such an important proposition, because both sides know that if California goes gay, the rest of the country will follow.

A New York Times article outlines the differences between Obama’s and McCain’s disapproval of gay marriage. Fortunately, neither supports a ban on gay marriage, but both also would rather have civil unions rather than gay marriage.

Obama bases his opposition on religion—as a proud Christian, he believes that “marriage is a sacred union.” McCain on the other hand, bases his opposition on “generational and cultural experiences,” according to his advisors.

In California, Obama has spoken against Prop 8 and its opponents. McCain agrees with Prop 8, but as a federalist republican, would not support a federal amendment to ban gay marriage.

Sarah Palin follows McCain’s disapproval of gay marriage and support for Prop 8, but probably for reasons other than the generational gap. Now, I can’t speak for Palin, but I assume that stems from her conservative religious views. My question is, if the biggest reason to oppose gay marriage is because of religion, what happened to a separation of church/state? I thought we were trying to get religion out of politics. Or even the argument, “I can’t even imagine myself doing that!” Well duh, don’t do it then. But look at history: we banned persons of color from marrying whites, and look how well that turned out. I’m a product of an interracial marriage, and I look back on those laws and see how ridiculous they were. Hopefully, generations from now will look back on the days when homosexual couples weren’t able to get married and raise a family together, and see how ridiculous it was.

On an unrelated note, Palin looks amazing as a pumpkin.

Post-Election Palin

Fox News reported today that win or lose on Tuesday, Palin will be around for a long time. She believes, essentially, that she's put up with enough crap from the media, voters, and almost everyone else around her that come Tuesday, she'll keep pushing for more. 

A lot of the criticism Palin has received along the campaign trail is what she claims is double standards of sexism. Palin is criticized for her wardrobe, and doubted because she has a family. To address this, she said simply, she'd probably face the same thing that a male candidate would miss when he's away from his family for a couple of days. 

That reminds me of the Vice Presidential debate, where Palin was trying to USE her family to gain sympathy: she's a working mom with lots of kids and a granddaughter on the way. Unfortunately for her, Biden shot back with a background story of his own family, and even choked up for a bit. It was Palin's mistake to not address this during the debate, but it confuses me more now to hear Palin complaining that she's being held to double standards.

Wasn't she the one bringing up family in the debate? Biden simply could not understand what it was like to raise a family as a mother, except that he did know what it's like to be a single parent. Whoops, Palin! Wasn't Palin the one to bring up her hockey mom status? And yes, Palin, male candidates get criticized for their $400 haircuts just as much as you do (Thanks, Kerry).

Even if she doesn't win on Tuesday, Palin should be looking forward to a future of criticism of every part of her life, whether it is a double standard or not.

Polls for Prom Queens

The Wall Street Journal brings up a good point: we’re getting addicted to polls.

We watch them constantly, analyze them for mistakes and biases, and then spread the gossip. If someone isn’t convinced this election is more of a high school prom queen competition than any other election cycle, then just look to our obsession with polling. Every little thing that a candidate does, or some even that happens on the national level, can be explained through poll results. “Obama is up in Florida? Well, that’s because Palin spent so much RNC money on her clothes.” And we pick apart the sources of our gossip, too. “I look at the Drudge Report every single morning and spend three hours talking about how much Drudge sucks.” This makes as much sense to me as making following around the girl who starts rumors in your fifth period geometry class.

We forward emails, we send links, we print polls out, we highlight them, we talk about them, we argue about them, and we even exaggerate them. We can’t stop checking them, and can’t stop using them to prove other people wrong. We get excited when our candidate does well, and frustrated when he can’t seem to capture a state. We make up reasons why certain demographics are voting one way, or explain it away as the poll’s bias. We love polls. And that love consumes us.

But would we be America without some sort of celebrity obsession? This election has given us the resources and opportunities to become addicted to polls, through websites like Pollster.com, RealClearPolitics.com, and FiveThirtyEight.com. We can gauge how popular the candidates are and worthy of that sparkling tiara.

Record Turnout Predicted

CNN reported Wednesday that 2.2 million people have voted using absentee ballots, which could be a signal for record numbers of participation in the election. Usually, early voting is indicative of turnout on Election Day, so we can look forward to a high level turnout.

I’m wondering if early voting has anything to do with a widespread attempt to avoid crowded polls, or an impatience/anticipation to cast votes, or even a laziness to head to the polls. In a society that values immediacy and direct results, it makes sense that we would want find out who wins already. We know which ticket we’re voting for, and our decision isn’t going to change in the next two weeks.

 

CAN WE JUST GET THIS OVER WITH ALREADY?

Palin's New Clothes

Controversy has erupted over the price Palin pays to look good. Why do we care how much Palin is paying, if it’s coming out of her own pocket?

Because it’s not. A Politico article reported that the RNC has invested $150,000 in Palin’s wardrobe, which has upset Republican donors.

It started with the infamous Japanese glasses, at $375 per pair. It went on to a shopping spree at Saks Fifth Avenue for about $50,000 and $75,000 at Neiman Marcus, according to a Washington Post article.

This is interesting to me, because it plays with the lines of legality regarding campaign finance, which is supposed to be McCain’s strong policy stance—just look at McCain/Feingold, or BCRA, and his acceptance of public funding in the GE, when Obama turned it down.

Anyway, it’s too bad for Palin that she’s getting criticized for her clothes. The campaign announced that Palin will donate the clothes to charity once the election is over, so essentially she only gets to look good for less than two more weeks. Yes, GOP, I too would rather have a well-dressed Vice Presidential nominee than a well dressed Vice President.

The bright side is, the Republican Party will be forced to unite in the face of criticism. But that’s the same logic as, “negative ads teach voters more about candidates than policy ads”: does that mean we should continue it?

Why do we criticize John Kerry when he gets $400 haircuts, or when Hilary Clinton spends $6,000 on a makeover? They are under public scrutiny almost every minute of every hour of every day for years, and under even more scrutiny if they get into office. Maybe it costs that much to make you look like you’re not working on 2.5 hours of sleep, or you haven’t eaten anything but coffee and muffins in the last 34 hours. I’ve never been on the campaign trail, so I wouldn’t be able to tell you what lengths I would go to ensure that there isn’t an article in the New York Times about my four grey hairs, or the bags underneath my eyes, or the worry lines that seem to have appeared out of nowhere. But spending donors money on knee high boots? Sorry Palin, I know those boots were made for walking, but not for walking over your Party’s donors.

Will the REAL America please stand up?

Yesterday, Palin apologized for the misunderstandings that arose by her use of the terms “pro-American areas” and “the real America” in her North Carolina speech this weekend, according to a CNN interview.

What exactly does pro-American mean? Does that mean that the other parts of the country are anti-American, or just neutral? If small, rural towns are examples of America at its finest, then are big cities America at its worst?

Or is “the real America” inclusive only of the parts that will vote for the McCain/Palin ticket, and the “fake America” is voting for Obama/Biden? And if the Democratic ticket wins, will they be leading a fake, anti-American America?

Does being a secessionist, and believing Alaska should be its own country make you anti-American? In that case, her husband should reevaluate his level of Americanness.

So, you can see why her comments have been problematic. I’m not sure many voters like to be referred to as anti-American just because they aren’t from a small town, aren’t in the military, don’t work in factories, or aren’t voting for McCain. Sure, it may have energized small town voters, but her comments pissed everyone else off.

To clarify, Palin MEANT that “the best of America isn’t confined to our nations capitol,” according to spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt. Palin didn’t mean to offend so many people with her real, pro-American comments.

Then again, a lot of offensive remarks are unintentional. Does this give her leeway? We’ll see in twelve days!

Where's my October Surprise?

October Surprises have been significant in elections past, like Johnson’s announcement of halting bombing in Vietnam, or the release of an al-Qaeda tape five days before the 2004 elections.

This year, I feel like I’ve been ripped off. This election has been filled with so much Freak Show that I was looking forward to October. Well, it’s almost three weeks into October and I’m still waiting. Granted, if it happens, it’ll probably be in the last week of October, but I’m still antsy!

Unfortunately, The San Diego Union Tribune reported that, “Longtime political analyst Stuart Rothenberg said last week that only a major terrorist attack or some personal scandal involving Obama could ‘force the American public to take a collective pause’.”

Maybe the surprise is that there is no surprise, which would be as anti-climactic as Palin’s boring Cold Open. 

Super-influential Super-stars

Let’s go back to that celebrity thing: why the hell do we care how they vote? Okay, so it makes sense if famous politicians endorse particular candidates (like Powell announcing his endorsement of Obama this past weekend, or Lieberman’s endorsement of McCain). But should the views of the elite have a profound impact on the way we vote?

Yes and no. Yes, because generally (with exceptions, of course) politicians know how the government works, and can tell when a policy or candidate will be effective. And no, their interests may differ from ours. Why would I support a candidate that wants to tax me, a college student going into severe debt, and not the celebrity with his own talk show making millions of dollars an episode? Good question.

By the way, polls show that neither Palin’s SNL appearance or Colin Powell’s Obama endorsement had a profound impact on numbers. 

Palin Opens Cold in a Cold Open

SNL hasn’t reported higher ratings in 14 years than when Palin appeared on Saturday night. I'm not sure why, she was probably the least interesting person I've seen on SNL... ever. Maybe her presence legitimized her as a target of their jokes, or made it "okay" to tease her. Even though SNL was way tame in comparison to the previous three cold opens featuring Tina Fey as Palin.

Not that I didn't enjoy her appearance. My two favorite parts: 1) when Alec Baldwin mistakes Palin for Tina Fey and ends up trash talking her, then Palin responds and says Stephen Baldwin is her favorite Baldwin (he’s a conservative Chrisitian) and 2) the Palin rap.

But why would Palin agree to do an appearance on a show that has mocked her three times already during this election season? It worked for former President Clinton, who showed up on MTV and played his saxophone on TV. Palin is the relatable candidate, and by appearing on SNL, she’s appealing to a more diverse audience than the usual conservative Republican base that she already controls. It’s comforting to see a candidate with an easy-going side, rather than a negative attacker of the opposing ticket. She even danced to the Palin rap, which included “All the mavericks in the house, put your hands up! All the plumbers in the house, pull your pants up!” (in reference to the now famous Joe the Plumber of the final Presidential debate).

While some people think Palin’s appearance helped the Republican ticket, not everyone agrees. An ABC News article quotes Bob Thompson, a professor at SUNY, as saying, "I think the work she needs to do is not the kind on a comedy show. It would be great if she could go on a snobby serious discussion show and blow everybody away. You ultimately want to distance her from Tina Fey, not point out how similar they are." Will the jokes backfire? In some sense, they already have. Fey’s impersonations have created a caricature of Palin has become increasingly popular and influential. But then again, maybe Palin will start to gain sympathizers who feel she’s getting picked on.

 

Either way, if it was a politically savvy or if it was foolish, it still made me chuckle. 

Presidential Dance Off

My lacrosse coach once made our team perform our “go-to” in front of our entire team. A go-to is the dance move or moves you can fall back on at a club or dance when you A) run out of moves, or B) are trying to attract a dance partner. Go-tos are important, but not static. They can change depending on the situation, or what shoes you wear that night.

Earlier this week, Fox News reported that McCain is unveiling a new stump speech, the go-to of candidates. So McCain either A) ran out of moves, or B) is trying to attract voters.

Rather than a sprint to the finish line, maybe this is a signal that the Republican ticket is grasping at straws. They’re about six points down with only three weeks to go. Is this sudden shift in stump speech telling of the McCain/Palin ticket’s breakdown?

Or could this be the turning point for the Republican ticket? US News & World Report said his new speech has received positive coverage.

And as Obama is “measuring his drapes” McCain says, “But they forgot to let you decide. My friends, we’ve got them just where we want them.”

My go-to has always been pretty effective, but sometimes they just don’t cut it. We’ll see how low McCain has to limbo in this dance-off for votes.

Ouch! Palin bump turns into a bruise.

Yahoo! Polls report that McCain’s decline in public image polls are also reflected in Palin’s decline in public image. Last month, people who said Palin made them more likely to vote for McCain exceeded those who said they were less likely by 14 points. This month, it is down to 3 points.

Mark Halperin and John Harris’ The Way to Win describes the most important Trade Secret during the Presidential Election: The presidential candidate who better keeps control of his public image wins the election. The McCain/Palin ticket is letting the image of supposed honest politics slip away quickly.

Of course, the image quote applies to ‘her’, too, but the McCain/Palin ticket is failing evenly, on both sides of the ticket. If I had to guess, I’d attribute this to the spike in negative ads. The Republican is making a last ditch attempt to grasp at straws to get more support. Some advice? Negative ads disaffect voters! No one wants to see you clawing at Obama’s face, while he stands there and takes it, ESPECIALLY if you have the facts wrong (Obama was 8 years old when Ayers was notorious; there is little plausibility they were working together, no matter how hard you try to link them).

Palin, stop focusing your speeches on Obama bashing! America barely knows you, and we don’t want to know you as “that woman who wasn’t qualified and was too busy letting her audience call Obama a terrorist to tell us what she believes in.”

You have 18 days to get in control of your image. Ready, set, go!

Side note: the picture above is from moremuslimthanobama.com. Hilarious.

Would McCain vote for Palin?

In last night’s final presidential debate, Senator Obama and Senator McCain were asked the question: Why would the country be better off if your running mate became president?

McCain’s answer included this: Americans have gotten to know Sarah Palin, they know she’s a role model… for women.

If Obama had said, “Joe Biden is a role model… for men,” I think that would have surprised a few people. Just because Palin is a woman doesn’t mean she can’t be a role model for boys and men, too.

This is just paraphrasing, but McCain says:

“She cuts taxes, she reforms, she knows about energy, she reforms, and she’s a breath of fresh air. Did I mention that she is a reformer? And she has a special needs child, I’m proud of her. And her husband is a manly man.”

McCain, did you forget to answer the question? What happens if she becomes president? She can only be fresh breath for so long. Is Palin ready to be the President?

According to a PBS poll, the results are split. This isn’t an accurate poll, so take the results with a grain of salt. Palin’s approval ratings have significantly lowered since the Republican National Convention. As we learn more about her, can we say that we have more confidence that she can lead our country as one of the most powerful people in the world if something were to happen to John McCain?

Does John McCain even think that Palin can lead if he died? Just watch his face:

PUMA attacks Palin!!!!

In an interview with CNN, Hilary Clinton discussed her opinion on a woman in the White House. She said,

“Well, I would like to see the very first woman in the White House who I agree with and who I think has policies that would really fulfill the goals that I have for our country. Of course it's exciting to have a woman on the ticket. The Democrats had a vice presidential candidate as a woman back in 1984. The Republicans did it this year. But that, in and of itself, is not enough reason, and really no one will shatter that ceiling until we have a woman serving as president or vice president. But I am going to be supporting women and men with whom I agree -- who I believe have the right policies and the right ideas about what's best for America.”

Despite the “Palin bump” and what some seemed to see as a shift in party support because of the introduction of a woman on the ticket, Palin’s nomination actually helped to reunify the Democratic Party. Many people thought that women would vote for Palin to see a woman in office, despite her “anti-woman” record and policies. Former Clinton supporters have seen the danger of electing the McCain/Palin ticket, and chose to support Obama in response, after their boycott of support because of their disappointment in Clinton’s loss.

The “Puma Effect”, as explained here, was comprised of Clinton supporters who had boycotted Obama. PUMA stands for “Party Unity My Ass,” and it had hurt Obama in the early summer. Strangely, it’s the Pumas that have supported Obama that have pushed him ahead in polls in key states.

 

What's the difference between Palin and a Puma?

Lipstick? 

Celebs Gone Political

Matt Damon has been in some pretty awesome movies, and therefore I value his opinion on politics. Joking, but here’s the video:

What most people got out of it was the comparison of Palin’s campaign to a bad Disney movie. The trailer:

 I think it’s interesting how a lot of people do value celebrity opinion. They have connections in high places; they must understand the political arena. Or, celebrities actually KNOW politicians, and so they must know their true character. Celebrities have money; they must want to spend it supporting the right candidate. I want to be like Angelina Jolie, so I’ll adopt a bunch of babies and vote for the candidate she votes for.

Who knows why people listen to Matt Damon. Sure, he makes some good points, but why value his opinion over a political scientist?

Maybe it’s because Matt Damon has never looked like an idiot debating on network television. Matt Damon isn’t bashing his ideology into my head and telling me what I want, how I want it, and why I want it. Or maybe I don’t watch the news, I only watch entertainment television, so that’s what I’m exposed to. What ever the reason, I think that how some of us overlook the opinions of academics speaks to this huge disconnect we feel with the media. The media are the ones supposed to be HELPING us make our decisions, not causing our apathy.

When Victoria Beckham influences my choice of shoe more than CNN, I can sleep at night. But when she influences my choice of candidate, I think I’d rather eat my shoe. And when I think of how many people look to Entertainment Tonight to get their political news, I want to stick their shoes in unpleasant places.

And lastly, to address the Democratic bias of Celebrity Politics, Republicans say this:

"It's not surprising that the Barack Obama and his celebrity supporters continue to tear down Gov. Palin with little more than blatant name-calling. It's clear they're threatened by a candidate who actually has a record of achieving reform and change, while Barack Obama just talks about it." – Maria Comella, spokesperson for Palin.

Oh Maria, don't get too offended. I don't care what they say about Palin, I only care what kind of shoes she wears. 

Feminists for Life or Women Against the Right to Abortion?

“All abortions should be banned except when the mother’s health is in danger. That includes cases of rape and incest. Abortion is an atrocity.”

Well, according to Palin and the Feminists for Life (FFL), an organization that argues that being a pro-life feminists isn’t as paradoxical as it seems. Palin has been a member since 2006.

For the rest us, it’s hard to separate anti-abortion from anti-feminism. It seems like feminism is necessarily tied to the right for women to control their own bodies. How can Palin support an ideology that forces a victim of rape to carry her unwanted child to term? Did Palin choose to keep her son diagnosed with Down syndrome for political purposes? I doubt that is the case, but these are questions on voters’ minds, especially since one in five Clinton supporters are voting for Palin. Does it make sense that just because Palin is a woman, she should be supported by women? It depends on your definition and degree of feminism. With such a plurality of feminisms, it depends on to what degree you believe Palin will progress gender equality in office. If taking away a woman’s right to abortion isn’t your idea of progressing women’s equality, then you should probably reconsider your decision to vote for Palin just because she can give birth.

The Maverick Drinking Game

Anyone taking shots for any time Palin said “maverick” would have been six-shots in by the end of the VP Debate. Add Biden’s criticism of McCain as a maverick, and you’d add nine more shots. But by the end of the debate, you didn’t have to be drunk to have lost sense of the word “maverick.”

Who won? For Palin, the debate wasn’t about winning. Her goal was to survive, and in that sense, it was a successful debate. She held her own with the more experienced Biden. And although she avoided some questions and fell into her talking-point comfort zone (energy, energy, and energy), she did well in avoiding embarrassing herself as well.

Good training, McCain campaign.

The VP debate was quicker, and more interesting than the Presidential debate. Biden was on top of his facts, legitimizing his cocky style (how many times does Joe Biden need to refer to himself as Joe Biden? Let’s avoid the third person, Joe Biden). In all, both candidates met their expectations, a success for both candidates. The VP debate may not have altered the Presidential race significantly, but it’s reassuring to know that America isn’t a heartbeat away from getting screwed over. 

I was impressed by the difference in Palin's performance from her interviews to the debate. She seemed to finally have a foundation of understanding (although an unstable foundation) on a number of policy issues, not just oil. After all, a maverick needs to know the conventions before they can be unconventional ("maverick" SHOT!)

VP Showdown

It’s right v left. It’s GOP v Dems. It’s woman v man. It’s young v old. It’s innovation v experience. It’s Palin v Biden. 

The stage for the Vice Presidential debates is not set on even ground. Not in the same way that McCain had to stand on a stool, but in the expectations set for the VP picks. Biden is experienced, smart, quick, witty, and aware of national issues. Palin has no debate experience on the national level, and after her interview performances, she has set low expectations.

Is this part of the McCain/Palin strategy? Palin sandbags interviews, but at the last minute astounds the nation by her performance in the VP debates! Palin conquers the confdent and experienced Biden in a historical upset! Sounds like some horse race pieces, but fits with the pattern of daring moves by the McCain campaign. 

What we need to keep an eye out for are the VP nominee’s pitfalls. For Biden (according to the NY Times), it’s his “legendary loquaciousness”. He loves to rip on Republicans, but will need to tread lightly during the second national debate with a female nominee. For Palin (according to the CS Monitor), it’s her evasion of answering questions she’s unfamiliar with. Her network interviews have shown us her penchant for the “nonanswer”.

Both candidates have lots to gain. With a strong understanding of their ticket’s policy positions, the ability to articulate them, and a capability to relate to the crowd, either candidate could reinforce support for their party’s Presidential nominee. Any slip-ups, hesitations, gaffes, or obliviousness could seriously hinder their ticket.

Good luck Palin and Biden, we’ll be watching closely.

For a video on VP debate style, go here!

Palin:0 SNL:2

If only Palin would do a little better during her interviews, give the media more chances to see her shine, or present herself as a strong leader independent of McCain, maybe Saturday Night Live would stop picking on her. 

Palin's interview with Katie Couric was not easy to watch. I take that back, it was easy to watch if you're a Palin-hater. She stumbled, avoided hard questions, and even told Couric she'd "get back to ya."

Does this have anything to do with McCain canceling on David Letterman? According to McCain, no. He had to rush back to Washington to put his campaign on pause and deal with the financial crisis.  But I'm sure getting teased about Palin's lack of interview skills was at least on the list of reasons he didn't show. Letterman was pretty harsh on the last-minute ditch, but our focus here is on Palin.

And SNL.

The genius of Tina Fey is captured in her Palin character. But even though everyone love's Fey's impression of Palin, Fey announced that she would really like to stop impersonating Palin on November 5. 

What makes the least sense to me is how the McCain campaign allows Palin very few interview chances, especially with the vice presidential debates so close. They argue that Palin has very little debate experience, and needs the debate setup to be altered to tailor her experience. Yet she can be gaining experience answering probing questions by interviewing. Paradoxes of the McCain/Palin ticket. 

I think I'll be watching yet another Tina Fey opening on Saturday Night Live very soon.

Legally Blonde 4: Palin in the White House

So maybe Sarah Palin isn’t blonde. But this NYTimes Op/Ed points out some very interesting similarities.

Could Sarah Palin be Washington’s Elle Woods?

Consider these points:

Elle Woods seemed superficial; she was blonde and beautiful and no one took her seriously. Sarah Palin was a beauty queen.

Elle Woods is met with skepticism at Harvard; her peers and professors alike doubt her abilities. Sarah Palin has met skeptics.

Elle Woods keeps a secret for her client. Sarah Palin doesn’t do interviews.

Elle Woods had very little legal experience, yet overtook her professor’s case and won, when the odds were against her. Sarah Palin has little experience.

Maybe Palin’s naivety and lack of experience will be the catalyst Washington needs to change. Palin could be the big pink bow in a room full of balding, white-haired heads. Maybe America needs a break from the traditional and start moving away from historically effective and towards change.

But life isn’t always like Elle’s.

“Real life is different, of course, from Hollywood fantasy. Incompetence has consequences, political and personal. Glorifying or glamorizing the sense of just not being up to the tasks of life has consequences, too. It means that any woman who exudes competence will necessarily be excluded from the circle of sisterhood. We can’t afford any more of that.” –Judith Warner

The Strategy of Hiding

Are the media the only ones complaining? Do voters not care if Palin has only done three network interviews, while Biden has agreed to dozens of interviews?

That's what the Republican Party wants us to believe: Palin doesn't have to legitimize her candidacy, because voters know she's capable. It's the media that wants to take Palin down!

What is the strategy behind this?

Maybe the McCain campaign is being cautious: in that case, is Palin really fit for the Presidency?

I like to think that the people controlling our country (or potentially controlling) are smarter than that. Maybe I'm too optimistic, but it helps me get through the day.

Just look at how much more hype Palin's interviews get than Biden's. We get excited when we get the opportunity to see Palin. We're addicted to her, whether we support her or not. The McCain campaign is exploiting our celebrity-like obsession with Palin by keeping her hidden and giving us sneak peaks at her potential.

Is this strategy working? It's frustrating the media, which may be part of McCain's strategy anyway. Either way, Palin is being talked about.

And any press is good press, right?

Debates are the most fun part of campaigning.

Thank you youdecide.com!

September 26, 2008: Presidential debate with foreign policy focus, University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS

October 2, 2008: Vice Presidential debate, Washington University, St. Louis, MO

October 7, 2008: Presidential debate in a town hall format, Belmont University, Nashville, TN

October 15, 2008: Presidential debate with domestic policy focus, Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY

Each debate will begin at 9pm eastern, 6pm pacific time and last for 90 minutes. They will be aired on every major broadcast network such as CBS, NBC, ABC, and FOX. They will also be aired on cable outlets such as Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, and many others.

Countdown to Palin's debate: only 9 more days!!

Energizing the Base

Evangelical Christians overwhelmingly support Palin’s religiosity, large family, pro-life stance, and creationistic views. According to the Washington Post, socially conservative voters will not only turn out in larger numbers, but also be more active in the campaign because of Palin. This makes me wonder how we can value the separation of church and state so highly, yet push for a candidate whose values are saturated in the religious experience.

But who am I to say that humankind makes greenhouse gases, or a woman’s body should be under her own control?

Ironically, Palin’s pro-life stance, which includes instances of rape and incest, doesn’t apply to her views of lives in the Middle East. PressTV explores the link between the Christian Right and the Zionist movement, or Israeli occupation of Palestine.

While some people disagree that the War in Iraq is a “task from God,” evangelicals can identify with Palin’s conservative views.  This is not to say that all evangelicals will vote for Palin. Increasing numbers of “freestyle” evangelicals are moving away from the evangelical “bloc.” While they may be socially conservative, they may be politically liberal.

It used to be that securing the evangelical vote would strengthen a candidate’s, generally of the Republican ticket, chances. This isn’t the case any more, but maybe Palin will intensify evangelical identity and produce yet another powerful voting bloc in 2008.

Get Out Her Vote Video

Palin is anti-abortion.

I am not.

Watch this video.

The Source of the Bounce

According to politicalwire.com, the polls as of September 12 showed a very tight race:

AP/Ipsos: McCain 46%, Obama 45%

Diageo/Hotline: Obama 45%, McCain 44%

Gallup Daily: McCain 48%, Obama 45%

Rasmussen: McCain 48%, Obama 45%

Research 2000: Obama 47%, McCain 46%

 

Likewise, a Newsweek poll (http://www.newsweek.com/id/158627) showed a dead even between the candidates. The Newsweek poll noted that the Republican ticket is “Buoyed by the Republican convention and overwhelming partisan enthusiasm for his choice of Sarah Palin as [McCain’s] running mate.”

But what does that bump mean? Is the race closer because of Palin’s entry?

Maybe, but maybe not. It seems as though Palin has only strengthened the Republican base, rather than drawn undecideds to the Republican ticket. Newsweek reported that in July, only 39% of McCain voters supported him strongly, whereas now, 71% of McCain voters support him strongly.

The biggest bounce group the Republicans are seeing is white women. McCain was backed by 5% in July, and is now up to 53% by added a woman to his ticket.

What struck me most about the bump in white women were these numbers:

“Overall, a majority of voters (52 percent) have a favorable opinion of Palin, even if they are not familiar with some of the details in her record. Fifty-seven percent of registered voters did not know that Palin opposes abortion even in instances of rape and incest. Sixty-nine percent did not know that she favors teaching creationism in public schools. Asked if Palin shares their view on abortion, 43 percent of white women said yes, 41 percent said no and 16 percent did not know.”

However, only 29% of voters said Palin makes them more likely to support McCain, and 22% said Palin makes them less likely to support McCain.

Overall, I think that Palin’s addition to the Republican ticket did surprise people. It reenergized the Republican base, and enhanced enthusiasm for the ticket. However, once the shock subsides, it will be a tough and interesting battle between the presidential candidates, and Palin and Biden will be on the sidelines cheering with the rest of us.

On a side note, I think John McCain should start watching ABC. No, not for the news coverage. One show ABC piloted, called “Commander-in-Chief,” produced a scenario in which a conservative presidential candidate, in an effort to get women voters, picked an inexperienced woman as his VP. He died, and she had to take over. Sound familiar, McCain?

Identity or Ideology?

It’s interesting how we’re supposed to ignore private life, and focus on the policies of the candidates. But a lot of critics of Republicans' strategy point out that their strategy is putting a lot of emphasis on biography, rather than policy. McCain is playing up his experience in foreign policy and heroism in the Vietnam War, an area in which Obama/Biden is severely lacking. Palin is playing up her womanhood, another area in which Obama/Biden is lacking.

We've even begun to look at clothes. Are there seriously articles written about how much Cindy McCain's outfit cost? (Yes--Vanity Fair). Yes, I want my President to be well dressed, but why am I watching a video on what the candidates are wearing? Here’s a CNN video on Palin’s style:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/showbiz/2008/09/05/Sarah.palins.style.cnn

This video explores how many are talking about Palin’s fashion style instead of her policy. And just in case you're interested, Palin's designer glasses were name-dropped. There's also a  sound clip from Palin’s speech: “The difference between a pitbull and a hockey mom? Lipstick.”

Play up your womanhood, Palin. It's working.

As for biography, do I care that Palin’s daughter is unwed and pregnant? Maybe no, that’s her body and her right to choose what enters and exits. Maybe yes, if Palin can’t lead her own family’s morals, how is she going to lead a country to morality? If her abstinence-only policy didn’t work at home, how does she expect it to work in our schools?

Playing up social roles and biography seem to be a distraction from policy. Some women may choose to change history by putting a woman in the White House and may forget that Palin is anti-abortion.

But these images aren’t DISTRACTING us from policy. They’re set up so that we become empathetic with the candidates. It’s a matter of identity politics. Not everyone votes along the lines of identification, but a lot of people do. When every other presidential election offers rich, white males verses two other rich, white males, identity politics doesn’t come into play nearly as much as when it’s black male and white male verses white male and white woman.

The question is, when do individuals decide to vote with their political ideology and when do they vote with their political identity? In exploring the dilemma facing black republicans, Manav Tanneeru and John Blake show that it’s not a clear-cut line, but rather a personal decision that takes into account history, background, etc. to make their decisions.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/04/obama.black.republicans/index.html

For example, some black Republicans are starting to call themselves “Hip-Hop Republicans,” explored in this video: http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-64205.

Democrats are criticizing Republicans for putting too much of an emphasis on biography and images rather than policy and a plan for change. But maybe Republicans are getting it right. Democrats no longer have the history-changing ticket; history will be made with either party. Polls have shown that white women have been shifting support to McCain, ever since he announced Palin as his VP. So it’s up to the voters: policy or personality?

Politics' Dirty Diaper needs to be changed.

"In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change." –Sarah Palin (RNC VP Nomination Acceptance Speech)

Both campaigns are running on change. That poses a question: If both parties are going to be a NEW and DIFFERENT type of leadership, what’s in office now?

So instead of change, we’ll call it reform.

“[The] McCain-Palin plan is to reform Republicanism by keeping Republicans in control of the White House and most of the powerful posts in the federal government. That’ll show them.”

Gail Collins, in an Op-Ed column for the NY Times, highlights one of the biggest criticisms of the Republican platform: you can toss “change” into a speech in ever other sentence, but words don’t mean action. McCain has voted with Bush 90% of the time. On the other hand, Palin put the Alaskan governor’s private jet on Ebay.

Reform.

But notably, Palin significantly changed Alaska’s “excess” spending and its financial state as governor. She crossed party lines to reform Alaskan politics.

And since both parties are calling for bipartisanship, reform shouldn’t be left within individual parties, but throughout Washington, too. Dirty campaigning? Let’s take the old ways of negative ads, personal attacks, and direct jabs and reform them, too.

"Victory in Iraq is finally in sight; he wants to forfeit."

“Al-Qaida terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America; he's worried that someone won't read them their rights.”

"Government is too big; he wants to grow it."

Maybe party lines will be harder to cross than we thought. Last week, Palin put on her lipstick, took off her gloves, and is ready to knock some teeth out. Preferably polar bear teeth. 

Sarah Palin Accepts Nomination

Last night, Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin accepted the Republican nomination for Vice Presidency. It was hard to hate her. She used her journalistic and beauty pageant experience to address an audience infatuated with her endearing family and hockey mom jokes.

http://cdn1.ustream.tv/swf/4/viewer.25.swf?vid=685569

She directly attacked her critics, including the media that has poked around a little too much into her personal life. Obama agreed, saying, “I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories. You know my mother had me when she was 18, and how a family deals with issues and, you know, teenage children, that shouldn't be the topic of our politics and I hope that anybody who is supporting me understands that's off limits.”

Despite Obama’s urging to lay off of Palin’s personal life, Palin throws in a few jabs at Obama. Critics of Palin questioned her experience, and she reciprocates it by questioning Obama’s (“I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,’ except that you have actual responsibilities”).

In a race where political identity plays such a strong role, Palin identified herself as a woman, mother of a soldier and disabled child, wife of a blue-collar worker, daughter, hockey mom, governor of Alaska, and former mayor. Adding Palin to the ticket grabbed the attention and support of evangelicals and rural citizens, but will likely also sway the disbled vote, military vote (although McCain doesn’t need too much help there), and even some women who want to see a woman in the White House (despite her pro-life stance).

With the evolution of media technology, voters are able to see candidates in a more personal and private light than ever before. So how much will biography and identification play a part in this election? We’ll find out in exactly two months.