<p>The unconscionable thing is that Sarah Palin may be even stupider and more ignorant than George W. Bush. At least Bush had his daddy to teach him some things now and then.</p>
<p>Boy, I would be really humiliated if I had claimed that Palin was a qualified candidate after seeing her on Katie Couric...that was so incredibly painful and hilarious. How could somebody still support her after seeing that?</p>
<p>How democratic. We have proof in the White House right now that any idiot can become the president of the United States. Why not vice president as well? It's all quite surreal. Except it's real.</p>
<p>A bad performance on Thursday and Palin becomes Sheagleton.</p>
<p>What may be scarier is a decent performance on Thursday, and given low expectations from recent media coverage, Palin becomes a viable candidate.</p>
<p>^
That's probably what's going to happen. She can stay broad, drop some names. The exchange times are very limited, no interaction between the candidates.</p>
<p>She won't bomb. She'll be passable and the conservatives will be invigorated.</p>
<p>We have fallen to the point that we value mediocrity so we never have to challenge our own sense of self. Keep in mind, less than 15% of Americans have a Bachelor's degree. </p>
<p>This is such a sad decade in our history. If someone follows the new 11th Commandment, Thou Shalt Not Abort, they are given carte blanche to lie, lead thousands of noble soldiers to their murders, and be given responsibilities far beyond their capacity.</p>
<p>When I signed on AOL a few days ago - the headline was "Sarah Palin's Former Supporters Believe she Should Withdraw." There was a little further discussion indicating that there is increasing pressure for Palin to withdraw. Does anyone think that could happen? What would the time table be and who would be the best replacement? </p>
<p>Palin was an awful choice for VP. Tina Fey's immitations of her are unfortunately spot on. I would have loved to have seen a qualified woman as the VP candidate and would have cast my vote for McCain. At this point, it almost seems irresponsible to vote for the McCain/Palin ticket, although Obama is not necessarily a better choice. I think many Americans believe that neither choice is correct. A well-rehearsed Palin/Biden debate won't take the place of experience, judgment and intelligence.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think many Americans believe that neither choice is correct
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Actually, the latest polls show that a majority of Americans believe that Obama/Biden is the right choice. I don't know where you are getting your numbers from.</p>
<p>I did not say that the "majority" of Americans believe that neither choice is correct. I said many Americans. A simple read of the news indicates that there are many Americans who are disheartened by McCain's choice of Palin, and opposed to Obama's lack of experience and spending proposals. The latest polls reflect the current opinions of the people who are polled, not the the opinions of every single American.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The latest polls reflect the current opinions of the people who are polled
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Um, no. They're supposed to be an accurate cross-section of the American public. Obviously, they're not always 100% right, but if one candidate is consistently ahead (like Obama has been), you can safely say that if every person in America were to be polled, Obama would come out ahead.</p>
<p>A poll reflects the majority. The word "many" is not measured by the polls. Bottom line, Palin is not experienced enough and either is Obama. In answer to the OP, yes, Palin is a terrible choice for VP, but, in my opinion and in the opinion of many other people (not measured by the polls - just simply a statement using "many") Obama is not qualified for this important job. Lastly, even if "many" was measured by the polls, the polls are so close and changing constantly - neither candidate is the clear winner at this point. We need better candidates and if Palin steps down, the republican ticket will undoubtedly improve. Your sarcasm nbachris2788 is really unnecessary.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Palin is not experienced enough and [n]either is Obama.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>While that is a valid point, in defense of Obama:</p>
<ol>
<li> Obama has taken on the three most powerful political machines in our country and come out on top or is in control: Chicago, the Clintons, and the Republican attack machine.<br></li>
</ol>
<p>Say what you will, but he has proven himself very politically capable and able to make the U.S. viable again to people around the world due to his global popularity that far exceeds his popularity domestically.</p>
<ol>
<li> The most qualified administration on paper in modern history was this Bush administration. Its ample experience ran our government with the same level of lies, manipulation, and secrecy that McCain is running his campaign and hiding Palin. Not to mention the profound incompetence that has been the hallmark of Bush's administration and the many, many times Cheney was flatout wrong (despite his reassuring fatherly demeanor).</li>
</ol>
<p>
[quote]
Palin is not experienced enough and [n]either is Obama.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's what Biden and the rest of the administration are for. Obama, throughout these last 20-or-so months, has displayed great leadership, knowledge, judgment, and conciliatory skills. If he was so inexperienced, then voters in the primaries had plenty of chances to weed him out. But they didn't, and he got a vote of confidence from over 18 million people.</p>
<p>Being "popular" is not evidence of success or political capability. I thought Obama's performance in the debate was weak. I wonder how he would stand up to a belligerent foreign leader when it seemed like he caved to McCain. I wanted to like Obama, but the debate demonstrated to me that McCain understands the issues, has been against numerous Bush administration proposals, and has the experience to make the right decisions. I just wish he had not selected Palin as his VP.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The word "many" is not measured by the polls. Bottom line, Palin is not experienced enough and either is Obama. In answer to the OP, yes, Palin is a terrible choice for VP, but, in my opinion and in the opinion of many other people (not measured by the polls - just simply a statement using "many")
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, and "many" people also voted for George McGovern. Tens of thousands, in fact.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Being "popular" is not evidence of success or political capability. I thought Obama's performance in the debate was weak. I wonder how he would stand up to a belligerent foreign leader when it seemed like he caved to McCain. I wanted to like Obama, but the debate demonstrated to me that McCain understands the issues, has been against numerous Bush administration proposals, and has the experience to make the right decisions. I just wish he had not selected Palin as his VP.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, being popular is not. But an ability to earn the respect of people around the world - from the Middle East to Western Europe - opens massive doors for diplomacy and trade negotiations in a way our New England Cowboy-In-Chief and McCain never could.</p>
<p>I think the perception by some people that Obama came off as weak is indicative of the overall worldview people hold who are drawn to each candidate.</p>
<p>McCain is a product of the military/industrial complex and has been conditioned to resolve issues with violence first - thus, the singing about bombing Iran and denigrating Spain. So, when people see him acting aggressively they interpret that as strong in a classic machismo sort of a way. </p>
<p>I think there's a massive new consciousness emerging into the mainstream world that Obama has tapped into. Perhaps driven by an economy more rooted in intellectual nuance, it is not only redefining masculinity, it is redefining our very definition of strength. In this new worldview, the stronger is the one who can empathize and intellectually grasp the nuance of situations, not just beat his chest and threaten others.</p>
<p>So, I can understand why people attracted to the older consciousness would interpret McCain as stronger. But, I think ultimately it's a mindset on its way out.</p>
<p>How anyone could defend the Palin pick after the Couric interview is beyond me. McCain had one shot to pick the person he'd be comfortable with as his right-hand person, to take over as POTUS in case he keeled over (which isn't too unlikely). And faced with what I'd believe to be a pretty damn important consideration, he chooses Palin? Really... vote pandering at its lowest. </p>
<p>And while Obama relatively does not have that much experience, it's no contest between him and Sarah Palin. 3.5 years senator in a turbulent time in American politics (pop. 12.8 million), 7 year as state senator (district of approx. 200,000), community organizer and professor of constitutional law for 12 years (a fact I think is too often overlooked). He's certainly not as ancient as McCain, but chose his VP wisely in supplementing his weaker points. Palin is not just new to Washington, she's new to politics! Her claim to foreign policy experience is Alaska's proximity to Russia. </p>
<p>How do American's buy into this...?</p>
<p>I just want to see how she will handle herself with the Debating machine that is Joe Biden. </p>
<p>If Tonight is not destined to be good ol' quality programming, I don't know what is.</p>
<p>I'm bringing popcorn!</p>
<p>As much as I think SP's cerebral ceiling is embarrassing low, I don't expect much unusual to happen tonight. They will have her so schooled for this debate (and the format is usually so safe), that she will probably stick to the script and do a decent job. I liked Biden's directness in the pres debates, and he's been around the block, but he is less controlled and could give us an eyebrow-raising moment or two. </p>
<p>It is hard to understand the way some people celebrate SP's mediocrity (which may be illustrated tonight), as if it somehow makes her more suited for dealing with complex issues in a way that will benefit the common citizen. I might rather have SP over for a beer at my back-yard barbeque, but that doesn't mean I want to see her anywhere near the white house.</p>