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.