Sarah Palin - Stupidest VP decision ever?

College Confidential Community
121

<p>Baelor you need to relax. Since every single thing I made has been substantiated by political analysts I actually do feel very secure in my views...james carvell on Larry King Live basically said the same stuff, except much better. He made the point how she is so rediculous underqualified for this job(not event two years as governor)...and the question that he posted and one that I echo is she really the best the republicans have to offer? Because if she is, than it is a sad sad day for our country.
On a final note Baelor you do need to get over yourself. Life experience does not make someone more qualified to make judgements or state their oppinions...Do I think I am smart, yes, do I think I know a lot about politics yes, will I state my oppion YES. So how about you take that age argument and shove it, since with your "life experience" I think you need to realize different perspectives on life.. From your posts (underage drinking, afraid of wearing a towel, and now this) I think you need to realize that there is a difference between people stating their oppion and being arrogant. I believe that Mcains judgement is fatally flawed and I can care less that he does this for a career....since in our great democracy that doesn't make him any more qualified to make judgements or voice oppionions than I do...</p>

<p>

Yes it is outragous, that you think politicians are infinitely more knowledgable than people by the simple fact that they were elected to an office. Why should we question our leaders? I mean they all know more than us? Bush was right to go into Iraq? He MUST HAVE KNOWN STUFF WE DIDN't? Hitler was right in ww2? WHo are we to judge someone, when we don't know what went on in his head and his advisors. Your point is so rediculously stupid its scary....If the only person who can make judgements about facts is someone who is in power than it is a sad day for any democracy...</p>

122

<p>I'm not going to try and get in on this arguement, but I agree with Baelor.</p>

123

<p>Baelor's not saying that we high schoolers aren't qualified to speak our minds about politics or anything...all it is that vehemently denouncing some political decision or politician without knowing much and based on bias, is a little too unfitting.</p>

<p>He's saying that politicians live politics and have experiences, and probably know a hell lot more than us regarding that field; and with some people obsessively flattering themselves here and thinking themselves to be #1 godstatus with their "intellectual" opinions, I agree with what he's saying..</p>

<p>Nothing to do with strictly obeying our leaders or who's smarter than who.</p>

124

<p>Bescraze, here are some articles from realclearpolitics.com (links to them, at least):</p>

<p>Politics</a> and Power Blog: vanityfair.com</p>

<p>Commentary:</a> Palin is brilliant, but risky, VP choice - CNN.com</p>

<p>RealClearPolitics</a> - Articles - How Palin Could Help</p>

<p>Let</a> Palin Be Palin</p>

<p>Alter:</a> Why Sarah Palin Is Likely to Belly-Flop | Newsweek Politics: Conventions | Newsweek.com</p>

<p>Sally</a> Quinn: Palin's Pregnancy Problem - On Faith at washingtonpost.com</p>

<p>RealClearPolitics</a> - Articles - Dems Shouldn't Underestimate Palin</p>

<p>RealClearPolitics</a> - Articles - Northern Underexposure</p>

<p>FT.com</a> / Columnists / Clive Crook - McCain?s gamble on Palin is shrewd</p>

<p>These</a> rookies not ready for big league</p>

<p>ABC</a> News: $10 Million Woman: Palin a Hit with GOP Donors</p>

<p>All respectable opinions. All of them are different. All of them interesting. Which one is right? Do they even know? No, given that at least one of the opinions is wrong. They get paid to write about this, and we don't. Does that mean we can't be right? Of course not, we definitely can.</p>

<p>But everyone is operating on a total dearth of information. People were making totally absurd claims about McCain's vetting process until he released a statement detailing what exactly was behind the decision.</p>

<p>People are making claims about Hillary supporters before ANY poll results have come in. We have NOTHING here, yet people are somehow making extreme statements that have absolutely no basis in reality.</p>

<p>"On a final note Baelor you do need to get over yourself."</p>

<p>Why? Have I put myself on a totally different plane than you? Not really, I don't think. I admit my own inexperience and inability to know what exactly is going on in McCain's inner circle, which is why I refrain from suggesting that I do.</p>

<p>"Life experience does not make someone more qualified to make judgements or state their oppinions..."</p>

<p>Not true, in general. Our knowledge is totally limited. Right now, I am a completely unforgiving person who is incredibly judgmental toward the actions of others. Is this outlook understandable given my life? Yes, because I haven't had a huge betrayal of trust or shocking trauma that occurred because of a lack of responsibility (in other words, I judge the dumb mistakes of others and have zero remorse because I've never been in a position that would cause me to reconsider this statement). I'm not saying that you have this problem, or any for that matter. But the viewpoints and outlook of my parents are vastly different from my own because they have experienced so much more.</p>

<p>Second, the authorities on particular subject matters are clearly more qualified to make judgments about things that fall within their realm. Is an economist more qualified than a Theater Arts major to make claims about the presidential candidates' economic policies? Of course. Are political pundits and politicians more qualified than middle-school students to explore trends, reasoning, and predictions? Yes. This doesn't mean that we can't have opinions about things that don't require vast knowledge. I can have a well-formed opinion on abortion, gay marriage, euthanasia, privacy rights, etc. because those don't always depend on information that is gained through experience or study in an academic and long-lasting setting. However, I am not qualified to explain the reasoning behind McCain's VP choice because 1) I don't know, and 2) I haven't been around long enough or been paid long enough as someone involved in politics to have experienced this and understand how it all fits together.</p>

<p>"Do I think I am smart, yes, do I think I know a lot about politics yes, will I state my oppion YES."</p>

<p>I never claimed otherwise.</p>

<p>"So how about you take that age argument and shove it, since with your "life experience" I think you need to realize different perspectives on life.."</p>

<p>What on earth are you talking about? I never said that I was any more qualified than you. In fact, I have repeatedly stated that I am NOT qualified. I understand different opinions. Given that I'm a political minority of, oh, ONE in a school with 500+ students, I am definitely exposed to different viewpoints and intolerance. What is your point here, anyway?</p>

<p>"From your posts (underage drinking, afraid of wearing a towel, and now this) I think you need to realize that there is a difference between people stating their oppion and being arrogant."</p>

<p>Of course there is. I state my opinion and am arrogant (a character flaw that I secretly enjoy yet want to fix at the same time). I understand this. Again, what is your point?</p>

<p>"I believe that Mcains judgement is fatally flawed and I can care less that he does this for a career....since in our great democracy that doesn't make him any more qualified to make judgements or voice oppionions than I do..."</p>

<p>I'll let this statement speak for itself. For the record: He does this for a living. His image rests on the actions he takes. Yours doesn't. So no, you are not as qualified as he is.</p>

<p>"Your point is so rediculously stupid its scary....If the only person who can make judgements about facts is someone who is in power than it is a sad day for any democracy..."</p>

<p>I enjoy the insults regarding my intelligence, particularly because you misspelled "rediculously," "judgments," and forgot the apostrophe in "it's." </p>

<p>You can disagree/agree with the Iraq War and have a supported opinion. Let's examine why:</p>

<p>1) It has happened for a lengthy amount of time, so there is a plethora of information available</p>

<p>2) We are not discussing Bush's motives or inner desires, nor are we discussing the implications and uncertain future of the war</p>

<p>3) A lot of information is available to the public (although I'm sure some is still kept secret).</p>

<p>Now consider the IMPLICATIONS and MOTIVES and RESULTS of the Palin VP choice. We are not discussing her VIEWS, experience, or anything, but how this choice will affect the ticket.</p>

<p>1) There is no information available, beyond a few polls that disagree with each other in a significant manner.</p>

<p>2) We are discussing an issue that has zero precedent (I can't even name a situation that was remotely similar), and we are not politicians or pundits who have lived long enough to see this situation reproduced or have done enough research to form an opinion.</p>

<p>3) All the reasons behind the choice were not revealed at first, and still aren't clear. Thus the statements, "Purely for political gain." and "Totally for the country" are completely unsupported. Yes, she's a woman, but there's no other politician like her. Was she meant to draw away Hillary supporters? Work well with McCain? Something else? Both? What? We don't know, period. We can think that we do, but we are not in a position to take extreme or judgmental positions about this.</p>

125

<p>
[quote]
We are not discussing her VIEWS, experience, or anything, but how this choice will affect the ticket.

[/quote]

Actually I discussed all three. I discussed her views and how at odds they are with hillary supporters, her lack of any meaningful experience(exspecially in foreign policy) and I made an educated guess upon the impact her selection will have on the final result (I did say at the end that this will go down depending on how it ends as either the best vp choice in recent history or the worst)...look at page 6 or so...
Now adressed your 3 points.
1. People make educated guesses all the time, we will see if I am right, but based on all of the abundant evidence as mentioned before I bet my guess is on (fyi in the most recent poll its like 48-41 Obama ahead)
2) There is always a precedent, yet I admit its harder to find here....and I detest the view that only politicians and pundits can voice their oppinions on this (what is this an elitist oligarchy thing)....I know the facts as well as any pundit (dare I say more than some after hearing how stupid some republican comments are on this subject) since it is all public knowledge now..
3) Actually they were. NYT came out and said Mcain really really wanted Lieberman or Ridge, but on sample polling it seemed his base just could not stand them...so he was forced into choosing somebody else. He chose someone who could spin the historical election back on Obama(ie a woman), someone who could appeal to Hilary voters (probably won't) and someone who is seen as a reformer or agent of change(however false it is)...these facts have been widely reported and Mcains behavior as well as hers have substantiated them (did you see her acceptance speech?)....</p>

<p>In conclusion, it seems to me that you do not follow this quite as closely as some and would like to make a blanket statement about our insights to detract from our arguments...</p>

<p>On a final note, Palin has a 17 year old pregnant daughter. You want hipocrisy, what would the republicans be saying about a democrat with this. Family values....what a joke...</p>

<p>Lets not even get into the whole experience argument....</p>

126

<p>"Actually I discussed all three."</p>

<p>The only part with which I have a problem is discussing the whole implications, etc.</p>

<p>"I discussed her views and how at odds they are with hillary supporters, her lack of any meaningful experience(exspecially in foreign policy) and I made an educated guess upon the impact her selection will have on the final result (I did say at the end that this will go down depending on how it ends as either the best vp choice in recent history or the worst)...look at page 6 or so...""</p>

<p>Yes, but you're also making the assumption that you know McCain's motives.</p>

<p>"1. People make educated guesses all the time, we will see if I am right, but based on all of the abundant evidence as mentioned before I bet my guess is on (fyi in the most recent poll its like 48-41 Obama ahead)"</p>

<p>I would hardly call any guesses "educated" in this case, especially those by laymen. In fact, some of the pundits are making such baseless claims that even their guesses are completely random.</p>

<p>And I am aware of the polls. Check the other thread, that one is giving a huge edge to Obama that none of the others are.</p>

<p>"2) There is always a precedent, yet I admit its harder to find here....and I detest the view that only politicians and pundits can voice their oppinions on this (what is this an elitist oligarchy thing)...."</p>

<p>I'm not saying that only they can voice their opinions. I'm saying that they are better qualified to make predictions, whether or not they are right. They are paid to know about this. We are not. Major difference. We can preface our statements with things like, "Well, as far as I can tell, ..." and "In my limited experience, ..." but it's very clear that our opinions are not based on the same information as theirs.</p>

<p>"I know the facts as well as any pundit (dare I say more than some after hearing how stupid some republican comments are on this subject) since it is all public knowledge now.."</p>

<p>Okay then...You know what, I actually think that I'll respond minimally so that your statement can stand out and work against you.</p>

<p>1) No, you are simply wrong. You do not know as much about McCain, Palin, and others as those who have been studying at least some of them for years, and know them personally or professionally.</p>

<p>2) Your bigotry reflects worse on you than it does on the terrible Republican pundits you so vehemently hate.</p>

<p>3) It's not all public knowledge, because we keep getting new information.</p>

<p>"NYT came out and said Mcain really really wanted Lieberman or Ridge, but on sample polling it seemed his base just could not stand them...so he was forced into choosing somebody else."</p>

<p>Interesting, because I heard the decision was based on pressure from the likes of Rove. See how little the supposed information really means?</p>

<p>"He chose someone who could spin the historical election back on Obama(ie a woman),"</p>

<p>Prove it.</p>

<p>"someone who could appeal to Hilary voters (probably won't)"</p>

<p>Prove both counts.</p>

<p>"and someone who is seen as a reformer or agent of change(however false it is)..."</p>

<p>Prove it.</p>

<p>You see the problem here? I could claim that it's not because she's a woman, but rather that their personalities mesh well and she has the same views. I don't believe this, but it's just as credible as your own analysis. Do we know McCain's thought process? No. Do we know how well she was vetted (not to be confused with how often McCain met her)? No. Do we know why he made the decision he did with absolute certainty? No. So please stop pretending that you do.</p>

<p>"these facts have been widely reported and Mcains behavior as well as hers have substantiated them (did you see her acceptance speech?)...."</p>

<p>Of course I did. They are not facts, for one. Her acceptance speech included a shoutout to Clinton. I could only take away the belief that that was some factor in her selection. But what about all the others? How much did her gender factor in? What other reasons did McCain have? We know NOTHING.</p>

<p>"In conclusion, it seems to me that you do not follow this quite as closely as some and would like to make a blanket statement about our insights to detract from our arguments..."</p>

<p>Haha. Man, you just keep deconstructing your points all by yourself. I ahve followed this move VERY closely. That's why I know that NO ONE (read: ABSOLUTELY no one) can make predictions or judgments in any basis of fact beyond poll numbers (which are affected by the DNC). So why don't you stop the completely unfounded accusations, and start substantiating your points?</p>

<p>"On a final note, Palin has a 17 year old pregnant daughter. You want hipocrisy, what would the republicans be saying about a democrat with this. Family values....what a joke..."</p>

<p>Wow...Can you vote? I certainly hope not.</p>

<p>There was my ad hominem. I've used it up.</p>

127

<p>your rediculous. Nothing is 100% clear in politics, you use whats there and you make judgements. The idea that you don't even see Palin's pick as a move to get disaffected clinton voters and appeal to Mcains base just shows how stupid the discussion is. Hey you know what, I have never been to the moon so how do I know we can actually get there? You need to believe some things....the world isn't 100% black and white and your posts always suggest absolutes. If you want to live like that be my guest, but than your never going to have much information, because nothing is completely laid out like you seek...</p>

<p>I know your conservative but Palin in the end of the day is an extremely underqualified candidate and that is something you cannot reject. Is she really the most qualified woman in the republican party, not a chance (someone mentioned Olympaid Snow or whatever her name is as a fantastic alternative) If you want a woman like her a beat away from the presidency than thats on you. All I know is that if Mcain wins I am either moving to Europe or San Francisco since they both are like a different world...where people (liberals) actually care about other people. Shocking idea I know......</p>

128

<p>Baelor, ever think about using the quote system for once? x.X</p>

129

<p>Did John McCain not know or not care? Either way is bad judgement.</p>

130

<p>


</p>

<p>No kidding. But what are you using? We have literally nothing beyond her background and poll numbers that happened right after the DNC convention. Obama's bounce was less than predicted, but those predictions could have been off in the first place. Show me the polls among female voters. Show me a comparable scenario so we can look at what happened there.</p>

<p>"Use what you have" in this case is "Make near-random assertion" when you consider what we have: nothing.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>I didn't say that at all. I said that was probably one of many causes. You clearly didn't read my post, so I don't understand why you're even responding.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Is the information available? Yes. Do I know much information? Yes. I mean, what are you saying?</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>I hope that you do. That way, you can show everyone what you really think about democracy and the process of voting. Pray tell, why are you still here? Weren't you one of the people who was moving to Canada if Bush were reelected? That must have been someone else, I'm sorry.</p>

<p>And you clearly have not lived in the same Europe I have for five years. They do not care about other people any more than we do.</p>

<p>I suggest you take a crash course in French Politics. The Front National, the third largest party, is very much similar to the ultra-conservatives here. And guess which party's in power? The UMP, the conservative one (although more like moderate here). Know before you speak.</p>

131

<p>
[quote]
I like her story more than Obama's. She's goofy, calling her husband, "first dude". Warm lady. Basketball star, hunting lady, working class, sweet

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I didn't realize you wanted a sitcom mom for a VP.</p>

132

<p>


</p>

<p>Interesting. I don't want a sitcom mom either. Nor do I want an American Dream come true for a President.</p>

133

<p><a href="http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/DonaldDouglas/Americaneocon/dukakis_tank_7_2.jpg%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j186/DonaldDouglas/Americaneocon/dukakis_tank_7_2.jpg&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I think that the kind of person that we elect matters. America voted for a rowdy dumbie before, they can't elect these two gaffe-prone doofuses again.</p>

<p>Political</a> Punch</p>

134

<p>Okay, going back to the HP joke: Can someone explain to me how Biden is Snape?</p>

<p>He's Snape because:
1) Snape is old and has lots of experience at Hogwarts
2) He's seemingly anti-Dumbledore, but (SPOILER WARNING!!!) in the 7th book you find out he's Dumbledore's greatest ally. This is similar to how Biden apparently didn't like Obama, but is now his VP. </p>

<p>It was either going to be Snape or McGonagall, but Biden isn't a woman, so I went with Snape.</p>

135

<p>Some think Bush Senior's choosing Dan Quayle was stupid, but it was actually supremely effective impeachment insurance (re Iran Contragate). McCain doesn't need impeachment insurance.</p>

136

<p>lol...This is all my friend and I were talking about during a assembly today...
I feel like McCain's choice of Palin was also a semi-desperate attempt to be in the history books somehow. This way he'll always be the first candidate to choose a woman vp candidate...</p>

137

<p>^^^Nope, look up Geraldine Ferrera</p>

138

<p>everytime i think about palin, my heart sinks..please the rest of america, don't vote mccain and palin in...</p>

139

<p>YouTube</a> - Sarah Palin Speaks at Rally in Sterling Heights, MI - 9/5/08
Whatever, she'll hunt you like a moose
jk
:)</p>

140

<p>I wonder how any of the presidential candidate will be practical in making all the promises a reality. This is because nowadays the competition between both depend upon their words delivered in their speeches. Each word out of the mouth must be to the best of implementation.This is what the people of the United States should have in mind before taking any decision while casting a vote.</p>